Brentford flying up the table to the top two - may I say 'technical'? 19:51 - Jun 30 with 4123 views | unstableblue | Brentford are flying They are just such a contrast to the hapless direction and leadership we have endured under Marcus. There's a rather lazy refrain on here 'oh but they dissolved their academy'... there is much more to it, in that they pick up Premier League cast off youths and play them in a high standard development lead, but more importantly they had a clear strategy and they implemented. We have had no definitive strategy, which would have been more academy focussed, and we have not cascaded it through the club's operation. We have had no decent CEO/Chief Exec, and critically we've had no technical leadership structure. That technical structure if in place at Town would have hired not one single of the manager's Marcus has brought to the club - not one. As none of them had/has the attributes to play the progressive, technical, football the fans actually want and an enduring structure demands. Marcus was badly advised from the start - if he'd got the Cheif Exec right, who'd then hired the technical leaders around an interchangeable manager, we'd be in the Premiership. Total shambles. Good on Brentford, moving into a smart stadium, developed through a clever STRATEGY! No strategy, no principles, no objectives Marcus - its 2020 man! |  |
| |  |
Brentford flying up the table to the top two - may I say 'technical'? on 08:03 - Jul 1 with 1728 views | Mullet |
Brentford flying up the table to the top two - may I say 'technical'? on 21:45 - Jun 30 by patrickswell | There’s also the inconvenient truth for some people that Mick was signing young and hungry players, as well as bringing through the best of the Academy boys circa 2017 only to see it go up in smoke due to injuries, Evans’s indifference and the fact that in some eyes, he was only ever 2 defeats or a 0-0 draw at home from mass discontent. It’s a sick joke that the “progressive” manager even tore up Evans’s vague aspirations in order to pursue his own vision of a squad who could run for 90 minutes, but nothing more and that the clean-up’s being done by someone who can’t see further ahead than the next 24 hours. |
The OP is one of many with a guilty conscience to say the least. A lot of people who fancy themselves as knowing more about the game than a "dinosaur" like Mick have been left light years behind him thanks to their arrogance and hubris. It's unfortunate the rest of us are tied to that fate too. Imagine if Dozzell had not got injured in that Brum game. He'd likely be in the Prem now given the trajectory he was on after a full season under the tutelage of Mick and Skuse et al. As with Nydam and Bishop it's cruel that one setback becomes a domino effect and in the mean time, successive "managers" have failed to do so at a great cost. Look at all the people we've sold since and who developed them into better players and bigger assets. It was all very technical back then. |  |
|  |
Brentford flying up the table to the top two - may I say 'technical'? on 08:27 - Jul 1 with 1702 views | SenatorBlue | I think take the word “technical” out, and your all making the same point. Clubs tend to best sustain periods of success today, when they establish a vision/strategy, and invest in a stable (longer term) knowledgeable and experienced structure to implement it; be that DOF and Player Recruitment/Development. As is mentioned, even with this in place, they do always fall regardless at some point, such is the nature and ebb and flow of football, but it’s how far and for how long you fall. With a structure in place the risk of a sustained fall are lowered (albeit still possible, with poor recruitment in the structure and managers). At Ipswich we’ve never put the structure in place under ME. Because the managers appointed wouldn’t work under that structure. The manager (and owner) are king at Ipswich. This is why throughout the ME reign we have seen both volatility is the vision/strategy and an endless decline, bar Mick’s brief upward foray. This is why we worry now - no one can see a route back upwards, or believes there is one. We have a vision/strategy that moves every season, albeit I do actually agree with the latest incarnation of this; (playing style, focus on bringing youth through, and recruitment of players at an age with the potential to develop or sell at a profit). But we don’t have the structure to implement. We instead always rely upon the high risk variable (the manager) and the team they each bring in, who’s recruitment relies on ME and an assortment of non invested advisors. That’s it, or that is all it appears to be (who knows). I believe the main blocker to having this structure is because ME has an exceptionally poor financial investment on his hands, and is reluctant to hand the running of that investment over to anyone other than himself. I get that - I think I’d be the same if I was shelling out £3m-£6m every year. Anyway here’s to a freak 2020/21 season that makes all of the above total nonsense. I’d love that, more than anything. |  | |  |
Brentford flying up the table to the top two - may I say 'technical'? on 09:00 - Jul 1 with 1665 views | tractorboy1978 |
Brentford flying up the table to the top two - may I say 'technical'? on 08:27 - Jul 1 by SenatorBlue | I think take the word “technical” out, and your all making the same point. Clubs tend to best sustain periods of success today, when they establish a vision/strategy, and invest in a stable (longer term) knowledgeable and experienced structure to implement it; be that DOF and Player Recruitment/Development. As is mentioned, even with this in place, they do always fall regardless at some point, such is the nature and ebb and flow of football, but it’s how far and for how long you fall. With a structure in place the risk of a sustained fall are lowered (albeit still possible, with poor recruitment in the structure and managers). At Ipswich we’ve never put the structure in place under ME. Because the managers appointed wouldn’t work under that structure. The manager (and owner) are king at Ipswich. This is why throughout the ME reign we have seen both volatility is the vision/strategy and an endless decline, bar Mick’s brief upward foray. This is why we worry now - no one can see a route back upwards, or believes there is one. We have a vision/strategy that moves every season, albeit I do actually agree with the latest incarnation of this; (playing style, focus on bringing youth through, and recruitment of players at an age with the potential to develop or sell at a profit). But we don’t have the structure to implement. We instead always rely upon the high risk variable (the manager) and the team they each bring in, who’s recruitment relies on ME and an assortment of non invested advisors. That’s it, or that is all it appears to be (who knows). I believe the main blocker to having this structure is because ME has an exceptionally poor financial investment on his hands, and is reluctant to hand the running of that investment over to anyone other than himself. I get that - I think I’d be the same if I was shelling out £3m-£6m every year. Anyway here’s to a freak 2020/21 season that makes all of the above total nonsense. I’d love that, more than anything. |
I've always said that I have no issue with Evans not being willing to throw in vast sums of money (how can I?!) but I have a massive problem with his management of the club. Not putting a proper structure in place (scouting system, DoF) from day 1 with competent people in those roles has IMO been the biggest contributor to our downfall. It's also in the long run ended up costing Evans more money - think how much has been wasted to eventually see us wound up in L1. Your 5th paragraph is what we should be doing and is what they trot out in the '5 point plan' but is that being implemented? 1. I still can't tell you what our playing style is. 2. The average age of our playing squad last season was 26.5 which is the 18th oldest in the division. 3. We signed KVY but we've not seen any evidence of a thorough strategy for signing the right 'type' of players |  | |  |
Brentford flying up the table to the top two - may I say 'technical'? on 09:16 - Jul 1 with 1643 views | TheTrueBlue1878 |
Brentford flying up the table to the top two - may I say 'technical'? on 07:32 - Jul 1 by C_HealyIsAPleasure | Because it’s a made up meaningless term that the OP has used to describe Liverpool, Coventry, Rotherham, Brentford and Lincoln (amongst others), clubs with completely different styles and approaches. Essentially they seem to think it’s a synonym for good Whenever this is pointed out a tantrum ensues It’s quite admirable in some ways |
It's not meaningless...? "relating to the knowledge and methods of a particular subject or job" - technical It means a lot, we are polar opposite to this. |  |
|  |
Brentford flying up the table to the top two - may I say 'technical'? on 09:21 - Jul 1 with 1627 views | TheTrueBlue1878 |
Brentford flying up the table to the top two - may I say 'technical'? on 08:03 - Jul 1 by Mullet | The OP is one of many with a guilty conscience to say the least. A lot of people who fancy themselves as knowing more about the game than a "dinosaur" like Mick have been left light years behind him thanks to their arrogance and hubris. It's unfortunate the rest of us are tied to that fate too. Imagine if Dozzell had not got injured in that Brum game. He'd likely be in the Prem now given the trajectory he was on after a full season under the tutelage of Mick and Skuse et al. As with Nydam and Bishop it's cruel that one setback becomes a domino effect and in the mean time, successive "managers" have failed to do so at a great cost. Look at all the people we've sold since and who developed them into better players and bigger assets. It was all very technical back then. |
Every coin has two sides, it depends which side you want to see. Mick was good in some aspects of the market, but not consistent; Mings McGoldrick Webster Waghorn Murphy In Contrast.... Larsen Toure Tommy Oar Piotr Malryzck Paul Digby Giles Coke Kevin Foley Stephen Gleeson Conor Sammon |  |
|  |
Brentford flying up the table to the top two - may I say 'technical'? on 09:23 - Jul 1 with 1625 views | IpswichKnight | I get wjy we might want a Director of Football but a lot of managers will not work under one Mick would never have worked under one, I can't see Lampard would have or Graham Potter, if we bring one in we will be reducing the size of the talent pool of managers even more when we have very little to chose from in the first place. |  | |  |
Brentford flying up the table to the top two - may I say 'technical'? on 09:35 - Jul 1 with 1617 views | C_HealyIsAPleasure |
Brentford flying up the table to the top two - may I say 'technical'? on 09:16 - Jul 1 by TheTrueBlue1878 | It's not meaningless...? "relating to the knowledge and methods of a particular subject or job" - technical It means a lot, we are polar opposite to this. |
The OP talks about technical as a football style So you’re saying you want a football style with knowledge and methods of a football style Which is meaningless twaddle |  |
|  |
Brentford flying up the table to the top two - may I say 'technical'? on 10:06 - Jul 1 with 1597 views | Mullet |
Brentford flying up the table to the top two - may I say 'technical'? on 09:21 - Jul 1 by TheTrueBlue1878 | Every coin has two sides, it depends which side you want to see. Mick was good in some aspects of the market, but not consistent; Mings McGoldrick Webster Waghorn Murphy In Contrast.... Larsen Toure Tommy Oar Piotr Malryzck Paul Digby Giles Coke Kevin Foley Stephen Gleeson Conor Sammon |
Or you could look at both sides, and see they are not the same and what incredibly good value we were getting. Especially as you've massively shortened the "good" list by about 3 or 4 magnitudes to show your bias. Let alone leaving out playing style, success and all the rest of it. Something the OP was one of several notorious for it too. |  |
|  | Login to get fewer ads
Brentford flying up the table to the top two - may I say 'technical'? on 10:10 - Jul 1 with 1588 views | Libero |
Brentford flying up the table to the top two - may I say 'technical'? on 08:03 - Jul 1 by Mullet | The OP is one of many with a guilty conscience to say the least. A lot of people who fancy themselves as knowing more about the game than a "dinosaur" like Mick have been left light years behind him thanks to their arrogance and hubris. It's unfortunate the rest of us are tied to that fate too. Imagine if Dozzell had not got injured in that Brum game. He'd likely be in the Prem now given the trajectory he was on after a full season under the tutelage of Mick and Skuse et al. As with Nydam and Bishop it's cruel that one setback becomes a domino effect and in the mean time, successive "managers" have failed to do so at a great cost. Look at all the people we've sold since and who developed them into better players and bigger assets. It was all very technical back then. |
Teddy Bishop's back to full fitness next month. |  | |  |
Brentford flying up the table to the top two - may I say 'technical'? on 10:25 - Jul 1 with 1574 views | LankHenners |
Brentford flying up the table to the top two - may I say 'technical'? on 09:21 - Jul 1 by TheTrueBlue1878 | Every coin has two sides, it depends which side you want to see. Mick was good in some aspects of the market, but not consistent; Mings McGoldrick Webster Waghorn Murphy In Contrast.... Larsen Toure Tommy Oar Piotr Malryzck Paul Digby Giles Coke Kevin Foley Stephen Gleeson Conor Sammon |
A couple of points - when you’re given the budget Mick was then you haven’t got a lot of room for manoeuvre so naturally not everyone you sign is going to be a hit. Also, with the exception of Oar (and even then it’s hardly Mick’s fault he decided he wasn’t keen on playing after we signed him), all those players in your second list were brought in to compliment the squad just to add some depth. The first list (which is missing a few) is made up of players brought in to be first team regulars, all of which did well. When it came to those types of players, Mick’s recruitment was excellent. In fact, Douglas is probably the only ‘first team player’ he brought in that was a disappointment. |  |
|  |
Brentford flying up the table to the top two - may I say 'technical'? on 11:00 - Jul 1 with 1552 views | Herbivore |
Brentford flying up the table to the top two - may I say 'technical'? on 09:21 - Jul 1 by TheTrueBlue1878 | Every coin has two sides, it depends which side you want to see. Mick was good in some aspects of the market, but not consistent; Mings McGoldrick Webster Waghorn Murphy In Contrast.... Larsen Toure Tommy Oar Piotr Malryzck Paul Digby Giles Coke Kevin Foley Stephen Gleeson Conor Sammon |
When your transfer budget is a bag of marbles and some belly button fluff you are going to have plenty of misses. On the whole his transfer dealings here were excellent. Our net spend under him was minus several million and the only reason we didn't have a fire sale last summer was because of sell ons for players he'd signed and developed and in some cases sold on with said sell ons. |  |
|  |
Brentford flying up the table to the top two - may I say 'technical'? on 11:02 - Jul 1 with 1551 views | Herbivore | Can I just ask for clarity, would we do okay with a non technical structure in place or does it absolutely have to be a technical one? And what exactly is the difference? |  |
|  |
Brentford flying up the table to the top two - may I say 'technical'? on 11:25 - Jul 1 with 1539 views | ElephantintheRoom |
Brentford flying up the table to the top two - may I say 'technical'? on 11:02 - Jul 1 by Herbivore | Can I just ask for clarity, would we do okay with a non technical structure in place or does it absolutely have to be a technical one? And what exactly is the difference? |
The snag with all the right-on modern structures is that it cant really work at a small town club where the owner is only there for the money. You'd be better off with a no nonsense Neil Warnock and no interference. Whilst it is OK to laud Brentford at present, this is only because the stars have alligned and it is 'their' time. A few years ago you could make the same argument for why cant Town be run like Swansea, Wigan, Bolton, Blackpool, Stoke, Boro insert club overachieving for a few years here. Brentford will shortly mess up a few signings whilst selling their best players and sink from whence they came. Those of a certain age can remember Leyton Orient in the top division at Portman Road. They were run pretty well back then too. |  |
|  |
Brentford flying up the table to the top two - may I say 'technical'? on 11:33 - Jul 1 with 1524 views | C_HealyIsAPleasure |
Brentford flying up the table to the top two - may I say 'technical'? on 10:25 - Jul 1 by LankHenners | A couple of points - when you’re given the budget Mick was then you haven’t got a lot of room for manoeuvre so naturally not everyone you sign is going to be a hit. Also, with the exception of Oar (and even then it’s hardly Mick’s fault he decided he wasn’t keen on playing after we signed him), all those players in your second list were brought in to compliment the squad just to add some depth. The first list (which is missing a few) is made up of players brought in to be first team regulars, all of which did well. When it came to those types of players, Mick’s recruitment was excellent. In fact, Douglas is probably the only ‘first team player’ he brought in that was a disappointment. |
I think you’ve forgotten Cameron Stewart however I completely agree with your general point Have posted on here before that Mick’s signings basically fell into 2 categories - those that were key additions commanding a decent portion of the budget (either in fees or wages) and cheap squad filler/punts Of his permanent signings (loans are a bit more tricky to judge) I would argue that the following fall into the former category - McGoldrick, Murphy, Skuse, Berra, S. Hunt, Stewart, Sears, Pitman, Knudsen, Douglas, Webster, Ward, Adeyemi, Garner, Huws and Waghorn Of those, the majority were massive hits with only Stewart and Douglas proving unmitigated disasters. Ward and Pitman arguably didn’t really work out but still contributed, Huws was a calculated injury gamble and Adeyemi I would argue was a good signing who’s injuries couldn’t be foreseen. In short it was an excellent hit rate The cheaper filler was obviously a lot more hit and miss but then that was to be expected when shopping in that market and even then he uncovered some gems - Mings, Varney, Anderson, Tabb etc spring to mind It still baffles me that anyone can think his recruitment was anything other than excellent given the constraints he was operating within, particularly given what came both before and after |  |
|  |
Brentford flying up the table to the top two - may I say 'technical'? on 11:35 - Jul 1 with 1520 views | C_HealyIsAPleasure |
Brentford flying up the table to the top two - may I say 'technical'? on 11:25 - Jul 1 by ElephantintheRoom | The snag with all the right-on modern structures is that it cant really work at a small town club where the owner is only there for the money. You'd be better off with a no nonsense Neil Warnock and no interference. Whilst it is OK to laud Brentford at present, this is only because the stars have alligned and it is 'their' time. A few years ago you could make the same argument for why cant Town be run like Swansea, Wigan, Bolton, Blackpool, Stoke, Boro insert club overachieving for a few years here. Brentford will shortly mess up a few signings whilst selling their best players and sink from whence they came. Those of a certain age can remember Leyton Orient in the top division at Portman Road. They were run pretty well back then too. |
Yes, it would be awful to have a few years of overachievement before slipping back to our level, rather than just slipping back, wouldn’t it? |  |
|  |
Brentford flying up the table to the top two - may I say 'technical'? on 11:42 - Jul 1 with 1511 views | tractorboy1978 |
Brentford flying up the table to the top two - may I say 'technical'? on 11:25 - Jul 1 by ElephantintheRoom | The snag with all the right-on modern structures is that it cant really work at a small town club where the owner is only there for the money. You'd be better off with a no nonsense Neil Warnock and no interference. Whilst it is OK to laud Brentford at present, this is only because the stars have alligned and it is 'their' time. A few years ago you could make the same argument for why cant Town be run like Swansea, Wigan, Bolton, Blackpool, Stoke, Boro insert club overachieving for a few years here. Brentford will shortly mess up a few signings whilst selling their best players and sink from whence they came. Those of a certain age can remember Leyton Orient in the top division at Portman Road. They were run pretty well back then too. |
Brentford have been selling their best players for years and somehow replacing them with players that turn out to be even better at a fraction of the price. It's an incredible model that they've built. |  | |  |
Brentford flying up the table to the top two - may I say 'technical'? on 11:56 - Jul 1 with 1500 views | LankHenners |
Brentford flying up the table to the top two - may I say 'technical'? on 11:33 - Jul 1 by C_HealyIsAPleasure | I think you’ve forgotten Cameron Stewart however I completely agree with your general point Have posted on here before that Mick’s signings basically fell into 2 categories - those that were key additions commanding a decent portion of the budget (either in fees or wages) and cheap squad filler/punts Of his permanent signings (loans are a bit more tricky to judge) I would argue that the following fall into the former category - McGoldrick, Murphy, Skuse, Berra, S. Hunt, Stewart, Sears, Pitman, Knudsen, Douglas, Webster, Ward, Adeyemi, Garner, Huws and Waghorn Of those, the majority were massive hits with only Stewart and Douglas proving unmitigated disasters. Ward and Pitman arguably didn’t really work out but still contributed, Huws was a calculated injury gamble and Adeyemi I would argue was a good signing who’s injuries couldn’t be foreseen. In short it was an excellent hit rate The cheaper filler was obviously a lot more hit and miss but then that was to be expected when shopping in that market and even then he uncovered some gems - Mings, Varney, Anderson, Tabb etc spring to mind It still baffles me that anyone can think his recruitment was anything other than excellent given the constraints he was operating within, particularly given what came both before and after |
Ah yeah, I had. Yes, very odd (well, it's not that surprising) that some refuse to see what a good job was done by Mick (in conjunction with Dave Bowman, who should have been used more by Mick's successors) given that his sides at the very least were comfortably mid-table when they weren't either in or knocking on the door of the playoffs. As you say, even some of the filler players made good contributions - Kevin Bru was another one who didn't rip up trees but became a good squad player in the season we finished 6th. Ironically, the only time since you could say a transfer period has been some form of 'good' (relative to the situation we're in) was last summer and the manager subsequently cocked everything up. |  |
|  |
| |