Jump to content

Richard O’Kelly


alreadyexists

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, VillaChris said:

He was Dean's number 2 at Walsall for a good few years aswell. I can assure you with the penny pinching way Jeff Bonser (Walsall owner) runs things there was certainly no "system" or "structure" at that club!

Was a bit of sarcasm mate, I've seen the suggestion made so many times I've decided to beat posters to it. ;)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another decent man for Dean. His departure was inevitable. We employed two assistant coaches to Dean. One was his man and the other was a club assistant coach. Richard O'Kelly is pretty much everything Dean isn't. Good combination for you. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, A'Villan said:

I think I know what you're saying.

The analogy I used in another thread is apt. An architect can draw up different plans for different jobs and they will still be effective as long as the principles of the trade are followed.

Likewise, a builder doesn't need to be an architect to follow the plans and understand the practicalities of the task at hand, they share the same language. Following the principles of the trade should ensure a fairly successful build. Regardless of the fact that different projects will offer unique challenges they all require fresh eyes, a sharp mind and a concerted effort.

Some constructs are more detailed, complicated and demanding than others, and I will wait to see how Smith fares as he steps in to new territory, but I am quite confident he will at least be a noticeable improvement on what we saw under Bruce. Hopefully that is enough to gain promotion.

Comparisons to Lambert are too pessimistic for me and while there is potential for parallels to arise I feel like the hierarchy and circumstances are nothing alike.

From the mouth of the 'architect' at Brentford, the difference in their model to other clubs is that they scrapped the academy in favour of a B Team which would yield more finance as academy players were too young for professional contracts and would get poached for nothing, whereas the data analytics model enabled them to identify players abroad whose skill set and league are of a quality equal or greater than what Brentford have but due to the country they play in are worth a fee affordable for Brentford.

Add to this the head coach deals only with day to day strategy like training and match day preparation, the director of football deals with medium-term strategy like transfers and succession planning and the board deal with long term strategy and objectives. They all liaison with one another and have input in decisions. Everything is tailored to the goals established from the top.

Like the architect and the builder, they are all speaking the same language and understand the roles of the other to a degree that allows them to function successfully.

As @TrentVilla has made mention of, there was deliberate wording in the title of our announcement for Smith's appointment. Head Coach. We have also recently employed a director of football who has enjoyed success at the highest level. Same goes for our CEO. I can't speak for Sawiris but Edens seems down to earth with ambitions where the sky is the limit. Seems to take the time to inform himself so that he can be effectively involved in the process. So it would seem like Villa is also setting up for a system where autonomy is spread and the model reliant on effective teamwork and the highest of standards from top to bottom.

That's how it seems to me.

So are you putting Dean Smith in the role of a builder because management is far more complex and multi-dimensional than just following an 'architect's plans and structures'. 

The manager has to be an architect himself and it's the actual quality a manager possesses rather than any 'external structures' which will be the crucial determining factor on whether a manager succeeds or fails.  

You could place 10 random managers in a 'quality structure' for wildly varying results. Place 1 quality manager in 10 random 'structures' and you can bank on some degree of success most if not every time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Michael118 said:

So are you putting Dean Smith in the role of a builder because management is far more complex and multi-dimensional than just following an 'architect's plans and structures'. 

The manager has to be an architect himself and it's the actual quality a manager possesses rather than any 'external structures' which will be the crucial determining factor on whether a manager succeeds or fails.  

You could place 10 random managers in a 'quality structure' for wildly varying results. Place 1 quality manager in 10 random 'structures' and you can bank on some degree of success most if not every time.

I take it then that you have never worked on a building site in any skilled capacity. Would this be correct?

Edit: I don't want to derail the thread. It's just an analogy to illustrate that if you are competent in your profession you understand the ins and outs of the various roles that need to come together to make a project happen. You are free to come to your own conclusions but I think you are missing my point.

Edited by A'Villan
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, A'Villan said:

I take it then that you have never worked on a building site in any skilled capacity. Would this be correct?

A manager is the heart and soul of a team, not just a 'cog in the wheel'. I think there is an overemphasis on having the right structures in place and following a certain set of ''guidelines and principles to success', when the most important factor for success is simply identifying quality and potential in key areas, getting those people on board and allowing them to do what they do best. It should be a fairly simple process in the right hands.

Edited by Michael118
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Michael118 said:

A manager is the heart and soul of a team, not just a 'cog in the wheel'. I think there is an overemphasis on having the right structures in place and following a certain set of ''guidelines and principles to success', when the most important factor for success is simply identifying quality and potential in key areas, getting those people on board and allowing them to do what they do best. It should be a fairly simple process in the right hands.

The best always make it look easy, mate.

You are obviously quite passionate about football, perhaps less so about construction.

I could be the one mistaken but I feel like you may not have interpreted my post as it was intended.

Ingenuity is invaluable in any endeavour. As is quality and potential like you mention. We are not at odds on this.

What you mention as the process which should take place is in itself a set of guidelines and principles, is it not?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, A'Villan said:

The best always make it look easy, mate.

You are obviously quite passionate about football, perhaps less so about construction.

I could be the one mistaken but I feel like you may not have interpreted my post as it was intended.

Ingenuity is invaluable in any endeavour. As is quality and potential like you mention. We are not at odds on this.

What you mention as the process which should take place is in itself a set of guidelines and principles, is it not?

No, it's just a natural process. When it's successful others try and replicate it but it rarely works because they put what they believe are the right 'structures' and 'principles' in place but what they're missing is the same level of insight or inspiration behind it. It's not something which can be replicated with any degree of certainty by external measures or standards. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, gwi1890 said:

This is the first time we have ever had a Head Coach at the club ....

I’m not so sure, I heard that Doris the tea lady had an unofficial title as the coach of giving head, or more commonly termed Head Coach. She was extremely passionate and committed to the role, and often finished the work of others. 

Edited by villan-scott
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Stinglikeabee said:

Another decent man for Dean. His departure was inevitable. We employed two assistant coaches to Dean. One was his man and the other was a club assistant coach. Richard O'Kelly is pretty much everything Dean isn't. Good combination for you. 

What is Thomas Frank like.

Is there any chance of us getting him as well do you think is he close to Dean Smith?

Also is there any sports science people and coaches at Brentford which are influential when it comes to analytics and technical training.

I've always been impressed with Brentford's movement on and off the ball along with passing.

 

Edited by AshVilla
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, AshVilla said:

What is Thomas Frank like.

Is there any chance of us getting him as well do you think is he close to Dean Smith?

Also is there any sports science people and coaches at Brentford which are influential when it comes to analytics and technical training.

I've always been impressed with Brentford's movement on and off the ball along with passing.

 

Bloody hell, movement off the ball. Now there's a forgotten art at the Villa. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â