The NSWE Board

[A'Villan]

29 minutes ago, blandy said:

I agree. Good post. They lost the plot the last 6 months or so, in s reckless gamble. No argument. My point isn’t that the Xia execution of it was correct, or whatever, merely that I don’t know if there’s a plan now, or if so what it is, or if actions are consistent with any such plan. I doubt anyone does.

Speaking from a position of ignorance, I would suggest the plan is to do as I suggested with my garden analogy.

In this video Wes Edens talks about ambition and change of personnel in order to reach objectives that you have for your club.

He discusses having high standards in the video. We have appointed a winner of the UEFA Cup, La Liga and Europa League, Pitarch. Former Managing Director of both Liverpool and Chelsea, Purslow. Winner of the Premier League, Champions League, you name it, John Terry. All to be senior managerial figures at our club. Then we welcome Dean Smith into the fold who has the right approach, knowledge of our current division and a love of the club.

From everything I have read and heard about Edens, he is serious in his ambition to take his clubs to the very top.

Video goes for 1 minute.

 

[A'Villan]

An interview from July in regards to Aston Villa:

 

[Unused Sub]

According to Companies House, another 41 million worth of shares has been allotted.

Any Ideas: buying out Dr X? running costs?

[AntrimBlack]

Purslow, Pitarch, Smith and Terry.

Not bad for a Championship side.

I think they have done well.

And this did not just happen since Bruce was sacked, this has been some time in the making.

Not words, just action, with these guys.

[villan-scott]

I wasn’t sure where to post this article - accurate and honest (except maybe the reference to Henry & Faria turning us down, I don’t see how it’s possible to move to appoint Smith so quickly after the alleged declination). Let’s hope this is now our time, and the decision makers really do know what they’re doing. 

 

[villa4europe]

on the declining of the job - 

i get a phone call from a recruitment agency headhunter, got an interesting opportunity with an up and coming company in the midlands...no im ok thanks mate im happy where i am

have i declined the job? or have i declined the opportunity? i would still have to go through the interview process and prove myself suitable and capable

the faria tweet from henry winter said just as much, informal chat about whether or not he was interested, he said he wasnt, we didn't offer him anything other than an opportunity to talk to our guys

maybe because of the way players are scouted and bought almost as commodities rather than applicants and job seekers people assume managers are the same but i would expect it to be more comparable to the real world and involve processes such as applications and interviews, i like to think someone at the club wheeled out the "where do you see yourself in 5 years" question to dean smith

[AntrimBlack]

1 hour ago, villan-scott said:

I wasn’t sure where to post this article - accurate and honest (except maybe the reference to Henry & Faria turning us down, I don’t see how it’s possible to move to appoint Smith so quickly after the alleged declination). Let’s hope this is now our time, and the decision makers really do know what they’re doing. 

 

Not accurate and honest in my opinion, since I do not believe Smith was third choice.

He was more likely to be one of a swathe of people being under consideration and has come out on top.

And he was probably already appointed before Faria's name appeared on the scene, possibly even largely committed before Bruce was sacked. Appointing a manager does not happen quickly. They were probably preparing for Bruce's exit to happen during the international break.

I think the suggestion that the owners fell into this appointment by accident is a bit much, when they are disparaging two wealthy multi billionaires with vast business experience and no doubt expensive consultants to guide them.

The article is mostly just rubbish.

[romavillan]

I reckon they were after Smith from the get go, they needed to get Pitarch on board with that idea and appoint him first. Then they would have had to agree terms with Brentford and Smith and O'Kelly. When they got shot of the coaches here after Bruce went I reckon they knew how it was going to pan out. I doubt Smith was anything but first choice, as mentioned above I don't see how there is time for them to get seriously far enough down the road with Henry OR (let alone and) Faria then get knocked back and start sounding out Smith etc in time to appoint Smith, Terry and Pitarch together. I don't see how that's possible, just negotiating with Brentford for Smith could easily have been more drawn out than it has been.

Also I love the late night triple announcement, lots of mutterings casting them and the club in a bad light about being knocked back by different managers, it taking too long etc. Which they squashed at the earliest available opportunity. 

Can't see what's not to like so far.

[villan-scott]

35 minutes ago, AntrimBlack said:

Not accurate and honest in my opinion, since I do not believe Smith was third choice.

He was more likely to be one of a swathe of people being under consideration and has come out on top.

And he was probably already appointed before Faria's name appeared on the scene, possibly even largely committed before Bruce was sacked. Appointing a manager does not happen quickly. They were probably preparing for Bruce's exit to happen during the international break.

I think the suggestion that the owners fell into this appointment by accident is a bit much, when they are disparaging two wealthy multi billionaires with vast business experience and no doubt expensive consultants to guide them.

The article is mostly just rubbish.

I know. That’s why in my post I said I disagreed with the points on Henry and Faria. That seemed to be public face saving on their part. 

Perhaps, when I said honest and accurate, it was more in line with the criticism of Bruce and our failings there, as opposed to the jist of the whole article, that Smith happened by accident. I certainly don’t agree with that. 

[sidcow]

I think the board wanted Smith from the get go. 

Certainly the discussions, package and settlement negotiations and contracts would have easily taken a week or more to put together, I would guess they were already in contact before Bruce went. 

They very clearly always meant to put in place a modern system with Director of Football, and a philosophy to run through the club from top to bottom. 

I think Smith fits that bill perfectly and has much experience of working in such a set up. 

They are going about things in a highly professional manner with no press leaks or nonsense spouted on social media and I like it.  I like it a lot. 

[sne]

2 minutes ago, sidcow said:

I think the board wanted Smith from the get go. 

Certainly the discussions, package and settlement negotiations and contracts would have easily taken a week or more to put together, I would guess they were already in contact before Bruce went. 

They very clearly always meant to put in place a modern system with Director of Football, and a philosophy to run through the club from top to bottom. 

I think Smith fits that bill perfectly and has much experience of working in such a set up. 

They are going about things in a highly professional manner with no press leaks or nonsense spouted on social media and I like it.  I like it a lot. 

I think Smith fits well into that system.

I don't think he should be the one to build it thou.

And I expect he wont be. Be really interesting to see what other people they bring in.

[briny_ear]

On 12/10/2018 at 14:12, AntrimBlack said:

Not accurate and honest in my opinion, since I do not believe Smith was third choice.

He was more likely to be one of a swathe of people being under consideration and has come out on top.

And he was probably already appointed before Faria's name appeared on the scene, possibly even largely committed before Bruce was sacked. Appointing a manager does not happen quickly. They were probably preparing for Bruce's exit to happen during the international break.

I think the suggestion that the owners fell into this appointment by accident is a bit much, when they are disparaging two wealthy multi billionaires with vast business experience and no doubt expensive consultants to guide them.

The article is mostly just rubbish.

It would certainly show great disrespect to disparage two wealthy multi billionaires. That would never do. Multi billionaires have contributed so much good to this world and we Villa fans have had particularly good experiences of billionaires over the past 15 years or so. 

[AntrimBlack]

28 minutes ago, briny_ear said:

It would certainly show great disrespect to disparage two wealthy multi billionaires. That would never do. Multi billionaires have contributed so much good to this world and we Villa fans have had particularly good experiences of billionaires over the past 15 years or so. 

A journalist disparaging two multi billionaires with vast business experience and expensive consultants to guide them, by suggesting that they fell into the appointment of the new manager by accident?

I think you have just railed against the `multi billionaires', in stead of considering what I was saying. 

I am not debating the rights and wrongs of being a multi billionaire, only the stance the journalist was taking in relation to our club, which I strongly resent.

[Morley_crosses_to_Withe]

There could have easily been a lag between what the press knew and what was actually happening. An alternative scenario might have been that we did consider Henry, and maybe even make some form of contact, but then the Monaco gig came up along and he rejected us to talk with them. Meanwhile, in the press, the story was still that Henry was the main target; all the reporting was heavily lagging.

The Faria approach wouldn’t have taken long at all; a five minute phone call and a polite rejection. 

So then we approach Brentford for Dean Smith. Given how much of a well run club they are, it could be that they were already prepared for an approach, and already had a contingency plan in place, so dealing with them probably wouldn’t have taken long at all. 

I just can’t believe there was no contact whatsoever with Henry or his representatives. I think at the very least, we fluttered our eye lids in his direction, and made it clear we were interested, even if there was no formal approach. 

Faria - who knows! But Henry Winter seems adamant about it and even suggested people could email him if they felt so inclined to find out more. 

I think Smith was most definitely in the top pool of candidates, but necessarily the first choice within that top pool. It’s all opinions as I doubt we’ll ever find out for sure. 

Not that it matters anyway. How we arrived at the recruitment of Dean Smith is of no importance, it’s whether he turns out to be a successful choice is what matters.

Edited October 13, 2018 by Morley_crosses_to_Withe

[briny_ear]

The fact that it’s being reported on the press as a last minute panic appointment does suggest it is a bit of a PR  disaster, whatever the realities of how the appointment went.

We have ave a good history of PR disasters so it’s not such a shock.

Edited October 13, 2018 by briny_ear

[romavillan]

1 hour ago, briny_ear said:

The fact that it’s being reported on the press as a last minute panic appointment does suggest it is a bit of a PR  disaster, whatever the realities of how the appointment went.

We have ave a good history of PR disasters so it’s not such a shock.

Where is it being reported s a last minute panic appointment?

[limpid]

1 hour ago, briny_ear said:

The fact that it’s being reported on the press as a last minute panic appointment does suggest it is a bit of a PR  disaster, whatever the realities of how the appointment went.

We have ave a good history of PR disasters so it’s not such a shock.

I've not checked, but wasn't this the quickest managerial appointment we've made other than when Doug phoned Gregory after Little resigned?

Why do we care how the press spin it?

[Vive_La_Villa]

2 hours ago, briny_ear said:

The fact that it’s being reported on the press as a last minute panic appointment does suggest it is a bit of a PR  disaster, whatever the realities of how the appointment went.

We have ave a good history of PR disasters so it’s not such a shock.

PR disaster ? Very shrewd appointments in a timely manner more like. Unless you agree with those that feel sacking Streve Bruce was a mistake....

[Mark Albrighton]

Having properly heard Purslow for the first time today, I’ve come away thinking he appears to be considered but confident about the task in hand. What he said today regarding the January transfer window and the financial side of things was welcome.

I was a little bit conscious that there hadn’t been much noise being made from the board (prior to Bruce’s sacking). What I have heard has been positive and I don’t expect updates every week or anything like that. I agree with the idea that it’s generally better when we don’t hear from the owners/board. 

It’s just that following the owners unveiling, there appeared to be an eagerness from the board’s representatives to engage with supporters, learning about supporters groups etc. I think I read that on here and various Villa related sources. To the best of my knowledge nothing further has happened with this. I think that’s what I was more curious about, things of that nature. Maybe that’s in the works or on the back burner while everyone gets to grips with things.

[A'Villan]

On 14/10/2018 at 04:32, Morley_crosses_to_Withe said:

There could have easily been a lag between what the press knew and what was actually happening. An alternative scenario might have been that we did consider Henry, and maybe even make some form of contact, but then the Monaco gig came up along and he rejected us to talk with them. Meanwhile, in the press, the story was still that Henry was the main target; all the reporting was heavily lagging.

The Faria approach wouldn’t have taken long at all; a five minute phone call and a polite rejection. 

So then we approach Brentford for Dean Smith. Given how much of a well run club they are, it could be that they were already prepared for an approach, and already had a contingency plan in place, so dealing with them probably wouldn’t have taken long at all. 

I just can’t believe there was no contact whatsoever with Henry or his representatives. I think at the very least, we fluttered our eye lids in his direction, and made it clear we were interested, even if there was no formal approach. 

Faria - who knows! But Henry Winter seems adamant about it and even suggested people could email him if they felt so inclined to find out more. 

I think Smith was most definitely in the top pool of candidates, but necessarily the first choice within that top pool. It’s all opinions as I doubt we’ll ever find out for sure. 

Not that it matters anyway. How we arrived at the recruitment of Dean Smith is of no importance, it’s whether he turns out to be a successful choice is what matters.

This is well-reasoned.

The press would run whatever they considered to be a story that has some perceived feasibility to it in order to appease the desire for information from their readers. End of.

Making sure the information they publish was concrete at the time of it's submission is desirable but not essential because credibility is often secondary to perceived exclusivity in the press. Especially now in the days of twitter and the like. Authenticity as a merit is lost to hype and speculation.

Another aspect of the press is those that want the information for publishing often pander to and appease the wishes of the people who can provide them with the content for their article, even more so to those who provide the funding for it to take place, so publications are rarely providing impartial or unbiased narratives for a set of events.

Whatever fuels the fire for sales and traffic as opposed to providing an insightful, balanced, and diverse approach to reporting is commonplace. The lack of integrity from publishers only increases tension, conflict and ignorance by adhering to certain narratives. Allegiance to profit is prioritised over asking the questions that evoke understanding, introspection and a sense of community.

Back to the coverage of our appointment. I think Faria, Henry and Smith are all people I am happy for the club to explore as potential managers at this stage of our journey. I think there would almost definitely be some truth in the interest of all mentioned, but even saying that is speculative on my end. I'm quite confident that all three fit the mould of Wes Edens' first head coach appointment at the Milwaukee Bucks, that as well what I discern as partially truthful and accurate reporting is the rationale there.

However I would suggest that how we arrived at the recruitment of Dean Smith is very important. It lays the foundation for where the club is headed. Even in the event he was third choice there needs to be an understanding and expectation of how we are going to operate with this man occupying a pivotal role within our club. Personally I don't look at it like he was third choice or first choice. I see it as there being a myriad of reasons why things played out in the way in which they did, in the end the mutual interest was strongest with DS and for that reason I hope it turns out to be a fruitful partnership and certainly do not lament missing out on any other potential appointment.

Cohesion and congruence is paramount to a functional team and I believe our current owners understand this, at least Edens does. While DS won't be offered any leniency in regard to the security of his role should he fail to assimilate and fulfill the duties expected of him, I believe he will be very well supported from start to finish.