At what point to the board need to be seriously questioned?

rgb said:
  • vapid (adj.)
offering nothing that is stimulating or challenging; bland

  • jejune (adj.)
naive, simplistic, and superficial.
'their entirely predictable and usually jejune opinions'

  • trite (adj.)
of a remark or idea) lacking originality or freshness; dull on account of overuse.
'this point may now seem obvious and trite'
Click to expand...

tick
tick
tick
another waz hat-trick
 
Red Sky said:
Regarding Eddie- how many inadequate players did he 'stockpile' AFTER promotion who weren't PL standard? Are we blaming the board for those signings but giving Eddie the credit for the good ones? Is that how this works?
Click to expand...

You've got it.
 
At what point to the board need to be seriously questioned?


Ask Redharry.

We were only reminiscing about the 9-0 at Lincoln yesterday.

After the game two of The Stupid Few got into the directors lounge and gave Harold Walker and other directors some serious stick.

The following day Walker resigned.

The rest as they say, is history.
We went downhill financially from that day onwards until Max appeared.


I put it to redharry that, had Walker not been so cruelly driven out by his abuse and stayed, then AFCB could have been in the EPL 30 years ago. :grinning:
 
Red Sky said:
Regarding Eddie- how many inadequate players did he 'stockpile' AFTER promotion who weren't PL standard? Are we blaming the board for those signings but giving Eddie the credit for the good ones? Is that how this works?
Click to expand...
Of course....lets forget Smith, Ibe, that bloke from AC Milan, Dystan. the American who was loaned to Scotland, that bloke from Stoke who seemingly never kicked a football before.....Eddie did some things well agreed but was relegated with the best squad we had ever assembled and his football in the last two seasons of his reign was turgid...at best
 
What we dont know is the context of Max's finances in January compared to now in light of the Ukraine war for instance. We have no way of knowing if this has hampered his spending power or not so maybe the position of the club today is not what we expected when we appointed Parker.
 
  • Like
Reactions: drd
Red Sky said:
Regarding Eddie- how many inadequate players did he 'stockpile' AFTER promotion who weren't PL standard? Are we blaming the board for those signings but giving Eddie the credit for the good ones? Is that how this works?
Click to expand...

On the flip side, how many non-premier league standard players did they allow Parker to stockpile? The only ones that could possibly fit the bill are...

Marcondes
Lowe
Dembele

Surely he's not including Hill in this?
 
Red Sky said:
Regarding Eddie- how many inadequate players did he 'stockpile' AFTER promotion who weren't PL standard? Are we blaming the board for those signings but giving Eddie the credit for the good ones? Is that how this works?
Click to expand...

This is another factor, we may still be paying for overspending in the past. On the flip side, how on earth did Eddie and JT convince Sheffield United to spend 10 million on Mousset? Got a decent amount for Mings too. 6 million for Grabban wasn't bad either.
 
SlowDownDerek said:
On the flip side, how many non-premier league standard players did they allow Parker to stockpile? The only ones that could possibly fit the bill are...

Marcondes
Lowe
Dembele

Surely he's not including Hill in this?
Click to expand...

Hill cost 1.5 million. Comparatively expensive for the current return. We badly need to get him out on loan.
 
Well thought out post
KingKieffer said:
•Let Parker stockpile players on long contracts last season who clearly aren’t PL standard. Left in a position on deadline day where we are desperately trying to offload some of them to make room for new recruits.
Click to expand...
It's a fair point. Dembele, Marcondes and Lowe likely are not up to the required standard. Hill is one for the future, Christie and Moore are PL untried but PL TBD. While Parker might have ok'd the signings, it would have been the board that figured out the contracts.
Blame: Recruitment/Blake***

***Signing some loanees last season to get us over the line was not a bad idea though

KingKieffer said:
•Kept Parker on all Summer despite the fact he clearly had expectations in the window that couldn’t be matched, resulting in him constantly publicly bemoaning the lack of quality in the squad and making it difficult for us to convince potential new recruits that we can be competitive in this league (as per Kris Temple tweet today.)
Click to expand...
Just taking this point by itself - I get the feeling the owner pulled the trigger on this one. if the owner wants rid I imagine Blake needed to go along with it, no matter when that was. However, adding the context of Parkers comments over the summer this decision probably should have been made sooner by the board.
Blame: Blake

KingKieffer said:
•Employed a manager in the first place who had previous for demanding heavy squad investment, investment that even the fourth wealthiest owner in the country couldn’t match. Pursued him for over a year anyway, even to go as far to offer the job to two completely inexperienced coaches in the meantime as a stop gap, all during a pivotal first season back in the championship in which promotion should have been easily attainable with the squad available. Then are surprised when upon promotion, said manager expects investment in the squad. Did they not think to have some kind of conversation about longer term plans when appointing the guy?
Click to expand...
I am going to assume that they wanted Parker the manager. Progressive, young, a promotion under his belt and (I imagine) happy within the framework currently in place in terms of recruitment. If there was a miscommunication at that time then fine, but if Parker took the job knowing up front that the wage bill/expenses was going to be slashed, and the goal of sustainability clearly defined then that's on Parker. Also, Parker chose 4-3-3 and I assume ok'd players to fit that system, if he wants to change that up to something else, is that really recruitments fault - they are working within the owners guidelines.
Blame: Too many unknowns, and we may never know but IMHO Parker mostly?


KingKieffer said:
•Signed players in positions this summer that were already well stocked and left little room for recruits in areas we actually need to strengthen (signing 2 centre mids despite having 4 on the books already and a right back despite already having 2 on the books.) Assembling a very disjointed squad with very little attacking threat.
Click to expand...
This is baffling to me - but based ont he article below, if it is anything like the Hughes/Howe relationship then Parker is the one ok'ing on these signings. However I would also assume that Parker has rquested specific positions to be strengthened and a priority for that
Blame: Parker/Recruitment


AFCB - Official Club Website
 
Last edited:
I think that by all accounts the board are doing exactly what the owner is asking of them.
That’s their job. Clearly Max is doing things differently to the last time we were in the PL and I think that this new approach is more in line with what most AFCB fans want.

Run a tight ship, hang onto as much of the PL windfall as possible and invest in good young players and ensure that we always have the quality to compete for honours in the Championship.
Occasionally we might end up with a team strong enough to maintain PL status for a few seasons but if not, always be competitive in the Championship.

Or are you still expecting us to spunk a fortune to ensure PL survival for a brief spell, like we did last time and at the end have nothing to show for it ?

I am really digging the new approach personally. As long as the off-field progress continues and as long as we continue to play decent football at a decent level, I’m happy.
 
KingKieffer said:
There is a poster on here (we all know who) who has long held the view that Eddie carried the club while he was here and that since he has departed the incompetence of those around him has really been shown up. Let’s examine the evidence:

•Let Parker stockpile players on long contracts last season who clearly aren’t PL standard. Left in a position on deadline day where we are desperately trying to offload some of them to make room for new recruits.

•Kept Parker on all Summer despite the fact he clearly had expectations in the window that couldn’t be matched, resulting in him constantly publicly bemoaning the lack of quality in the squad and making it difficult for us to convince potential new recruits that we can be competitive in this league (as per Kris Temple tweet today.)

•Employed a manager in the first place who had previous for demanding heavy squad investment, investment that even the fourth wealthiest owner in the country couldn’t match. Pursued him for over a year anyway, even to go as far to offer the job to two completely inexperienced coaches in the meantime as a stop gap, all during a pivotal first season back in the championship in which promotion should have been easily attainable with the squad available. Then are surprised when upon promotion, said manager expects investment in the squad. Did they not think to have some kind of conversation about longer term plans when appointing the guy?

•Signed players in positions this summer that were already well stocked and left little room for recruits in areas we actually need to strengthen (signing 2 centre mids despite having 4 on the books already and a right back despite already having 2 on the books.) Assembling a very disjointed squad with very little attacking threat.

And that’s just this summer! Im struggling to come to any conclusion other than the board have completely and utterly f*****d this Summer, I’m not sure it could have panned out any worse. Their decision making, both short and longer term, has left us in a position in which it is virtually impossible for us to be properly competitive. I’m sure some of you will point to four points on the board but can those of you who choose to do so also please point out to me one genuine goal scoring chance we have created from open play in the first 5 games? There isn’t one, not even one. We don’t have even close to the attacking threat to compete properly at this level.

Im sure some will also refer to the promotion last season, and tell me that Blake and Hughes deserve credit for this. But it was Eddie’s signings who got us promoted! Solanke, Billing, Lerma, Kelly etc. We were still living off of his legacy.

I think the rest of this board needs to wake up and smell the coffee, the poster who constantly bemoans the board is right.
Click to expand...
Well you're having a good couple of weeks Waz.

First we had the Narcissist Post of The Year and now we have this, the most Naive Post of The Year.

Congratulations!
 
Sleepy Cherry said:
Parker himself said he switched his phone off for the summer, so maybe this didn't all come to a head before pre-season. How much had we spent when we were first promoted (genuine question as I can't remember?) Maybe the board/Max thought let's see if we can spend some and stay up and then spend more as with Eddie? Then the decision to invest in the new training facilities. That is obviously seen as a bigger priority at the moment than spending lots on the squad. Would be nice to see a bit more spent, but it's Max's money and he's already spent lots on us, so kind of fair enough too. If we did a Forest, that would be irresponsible. Let's also just wait to see what happens before the deadline. There might be some surprises still.[/QUOTE

When we won at Chelsea in 2015-16 the starting 11 for us cost 7 million. But Callum was injured I think so roughly promotion squad cost 10 million???
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

;