...would you rather have than Shahid Khan? Knowing full well that included with Mr. Khan's ownership comes the locked in role of Tony Khan as director of football for as long as he wants it.
My answer? Not one. The Khan's are premiere league level owners running a Championship side. We are lucky.
They are going to get things wrong...and the squad may not even get promoted this season...but I've watched a lot of English football clubs over the past 5 years, and as far as owners go the Khans generally stand a class above most other ownership groups.
Agree 100%
In our 7th season, two relegations, two near relegations, losing one of the best managers, chucking £100 m down the pan, not having a defence at the start of the season, not having prper full backs now.... having a nepotistic approach to a specialist role.... more like a national league approach to management.
It's an interesting question in my opinion. It is also related to FFC, and just looking at the few contributions here there appears to be no consensus (I think, but no one has bothered to suggest a better owner yet so maybe all are in agreement). Sounds like a good topic on an FFC forum.
On topic, I unfortunately have to say that I know very little of most owners (also, do you mean in the Championship or anywhere?). Thus I am not sure if I have any good suggestions on the top of my head.
And the evidence fails me too.
In our 7th season, two relegations, two near relegations, losing one of the best managers, chucking £100 m down the pan, not having a defence at the start of the season, not having prper full backs now.... having a nepotistic approach to a specialist role.... more like a national league approach to management.
[/quote]
So, which of the other 23 owner/ownership groups would you prefer? Cause if you're going to ...
1)cherry pick the bad and overlook the good
2)not say who you'd prefer as an alternative so we can strike up a discussion
...you're not devaluing my thread. You're devaluing your opinion.
Khan's are great - we are 3rd in the Championship and I spent years following us at the bottom end of the leagues..playing in front of a few thousand in a ground that was over grown with dodgy players that were average at best...I like this now.
I love them. I know it opens me up for all sorts of slings and bullets but I do.
Redeveloping the ground and guaranteeing our home at the cottage is more than any owner in my 42 years of being a fan has.
For that they get my complete support. There is a big difference between ignorance but best intention, willing to keep learning, wanting better and evil manipulative greedy owners.
Ours are on the right side.
Regardless of what's going on behind the scenes I am very impressed with the turnaround in transfer activity this season. The output at least has improved considerably and this loan to buy option is a real bit of genius.
I think Khan Senior is a very shrewd owner. It was always the son that was the sticking point. He seems to have turned it around. No social media outbursts either.
Not sure how much the average poster on this forum knows about the other 23 clubs' owners, but personally I'd struggle even to name more than a couple, and couldn't tell you anything about them.
Comparing the Khans to other owners I do know beyond the other 23 in the Championship, I certainly still rank them below Al Fayed, and would be tempted by Wolves' owners, Fosun, who seem to bring just as much (if not more) money but with the added bonus of Mendes as DoF rather than the baggage of TK.
Fundamentally, having delivered on the stadium, and with TK having done such a fantastic job this year, I suspect that even if I was to learn more about the other 23 championship clubs' owners, most (probably all) of them would be worse than the Khans. But even that comes with the caveat that it has taken the Khans 6 years to become the good owners they are now. For at least the first 3-4 years they were poor.
Good question. All I know is that I dont want Khan to sell Fulham. At first we questioned his intentions for buying Fulham but I think he has answered those with his actions and willingness to spend. He has been unlucky and made some poor decisions too, but as far as owners go he is one of the better ones.
A lot of people have suggested that Mr Khan Senior had no interest in the club and that the new stand would never get built. Well it's going up now. The new training ground at Motspur Park will soon be developed and soon we may well be a premier league club again. I am quite happy with the way things are unfolding and fully support the Khan's
Quote from: ALG01 on January 18, 2020, 09:34:36 PM
In our 7th season, two relegations, two near relegations, losing one of the best managers, chucking £100 m down the pan, not having a defence at the start of the season, not having prper full backs now.... having a nepotistic approach to a specialist role.... more like a national league approach to management.
Promotion，Wembley, Investment, New stand, Stability.
Have a day off pal, we've just won a game
As an aside I'd be fascinated in what incentivises a billionaire to buy a football team - there must be financial benefits of some sort in a tax loop hole etc amongst benefits to citizenship which make it appeal...
That said it was evident that shahid bought the club to expand his growing empire and as a way to boost the profile of himself (which undoubtedly improves business development), but also that of former investments - we were also good value for money option.
Nice part of London, in London, on the river, premier league for 14 years or so by then, a lot of history, and a lot that could be improved relatively easily..
That said though - whilst I'm fundamentally happy to have them as owners and believe one day they'll finally get how to manage a football club and things will click into place - and as things stand they're one of the better owners - they essentially had no clue how to run a football club, what to do or seemingly much about how soccer works full stop and it's taken them a lot longer to learn the lessons they should've learnt by now - 3 managers in a season? Throwing cash at expensive players with no idea of how they'll fit work ethic wise or to a league etc..
Alfayed was wonderful for the first and middle part of his ownership but lost interest towards the end and was the reason we were initially relegated from the Premier. Khan had his pants pulled down early doors and has been on a learning curve ever since.
Khan is delivering the new stand which is probably the most significant thing to happened to Fulham in recent history, is pouring hundreds of millions into the football side of things, and can afford to write of huge losses to maintain our current level of player. Tony Khan is rather like a kid in a sweet shop and has certainly made mistakes, however is clear to me he loves the club, is doing his best and like his Dad is learning to make better decisions. Bringing in players to any football club is always a bit hit and miss but the recent focus on improving the defence was the right thing to do and credit has to be given for that.
Bottom line, Khan has a lot of money, is prepared to spend it on our club, he is committed and I believe loves his investment which makes him a top man in my book. Best owner in the championship ? most probably is, yes.
Quote from: FulhamStu on January 19, 2020, 08:58:33 AM
Alfayed was wonderful for the first and middle part of his ownership but lost interest towards the end and was the reason we were initially relegated from the Premier.
Khan bought something with a use by date and ignored it. It's not the seller's fault Khan got food poisoning.
The khans are our owners ,and although they have made mistakes ,have their hearts in the right place and i believe we are very fortunate to have them,which is at least in part due to al Fayed . If they can learn from those mistakes we could be on a very positive course.please god .
Growing up in Fulham I never dreamed of owners that would back Fulham financially like "Mohamed Al Fayed" and "Shahid & Tony Khan". We are truly blessed. If "The Khans" are a two for one package, overall its a great package. :wine:
The Khans have been the best kind of bad owners at times i.e. they have invested in the club but wasted money on too many dud players.
The errors have been painful and mainly unnecessary but so many clubs have had rouge's, idiots and con men and our bad times have never looked like being as bad as many other clubs.
I think we are now in a good place and they are fast approaching being as good as MAF.
I don't think anyone could argue that the khans haven't been good owners, pumping money into the club, overseeing a promotion, even building a new stand, and still investing heavily.
As for Tony - i think his negative influence as DOF has been overestimated. All he's done wrong is to head a stats and conventional scouting team, that has bought some expensive foreign players who were unsuccessful. But he and his team team has also bought a number of players who have been very successful, while his father has financed these expensive acquisitions, despite FFP.
I like Shad Khan, always have. As well as his clear willingness to make long term investments in the club's infrastructure, I also like him as a person. He is something of a philanthropist and unlike most NFL owners he took a more measured attitude to CK over the "taking the knee" demonstration.
I wasn't happy with the nepotism and am still against it but it's his club and at least his son seems to be learning.
Best owners in the division? I don't know enough about the others, but on balance I wouldn't swop them.
As Bruce Forsyth would say "He's my favourite"!
Quote from: Statto on January 19, 2020, 10:23:30 AM
Quote from: FulhamStu on January 19, 2020, 08:58:33 AM
Alfayed was wonderful for the first and middle part of his ownership but lost interest towards the end and was the reason we were initially relegated from the Premier.
Khan bought something with a use by date and ignored it. It's not the seller's fault Khan got food poisoning.
Mo played a blinder when he sold, and gave us excellent new owners. It took them a few years to work things out but I now believe we are on the right track football wise and nobody can dispute that the new Riverside Stand is not happening now !
Quote from: Twig on January 19, 2020, 03:12:54 PM
I wasn't happy with the nepotism and am still against it but it's his club and at least his son seems to be learning.
Five Reason's why Tony being DOF might not be Nepotism
1. Tony Khan could be considered the co-owner of the club and employing yourself is not nepotism.
2. Tony Khan could be considered the future owner of the club and it is acceptable to give an executive position to the future chairman.
3. Tony Khan could be considered the owner's liaison officer, statistical officer or financial officer, all of which he is fairly qualified.
4. As the DOF position doesn't command a salary, other options would cost more and the owner might not be willing to pay for better.
5. As Tony Khan's DOF position doesn't command a salary, could he in fact be the best available person of those willing to work for free.
Quote from: ALG01 on January 18, 2020, 09:34:36 PM
In our 7th season, two relegations, two near relegations, losing one of the best managers, chucking £100 m down the pan, not having a defence at the start of the season, not having prper full backs now.... having a nepotistic approach to a specialist role.... more like a national league approach to management.
Yea! Bloody yanks.
Quote from: AnOldBrownie on January 18, 2020, 08:40:46 PM
...would you rather have than Shahid Khan? Knowing full well that included with Mr. Khan's ownership comes the locked in role of Tony Khan as director of football for as long as he wants it.
My answer? Not one. The Khan's are premiere league level owners running a Championship side. We are lucky.
They are going to get things wrong...and the squad may not even get promoted this season...but I've watched a lot of English football clubs over the past 5 years, and as far as owners go the Khans generally stand a class above most other ownership groups.
Quote from: The Rational Fan on January 19, 2020, 04:55:31 PM
Quote from: Twig on January 19, 2020, 03:12:54 PM
I wasn't happy with the nepotism and am still against it but it's his club and at least his son seems to be learning.
Five Reason's why Tony being DOF might not be Nepotism
1. Tony Khan could be considered the co-owner of the club and employing yourself is not nepotism.
2. Tony Khan could be considered the future owner of the club and it is acceptable to give an executive position to the future chairman.
3. Tony Khan could be considered the owner's liaison officer, statistical officer or financial officer, all of which he is fairly qualified.
4. As the DOF position doesn't command a salary, other options would cost more and the owner might not be willing to pay for better.
5. As Tony Khan's DOF position doesn't command a salary, could he in fact be the best available person of those willing to work for free.
My professional advice to you TRF, if you ever considered becoming a Barrister or a Queens Council or a Defence Lawyer.
Please do not rely on it for your main income.
I like Shad Khan, always have. As well as his clear willingness to make long term investments in the club's infrastructure, I also like him as a person. He is something of a philanthropist and unlike most NFL owners he took a more measured attitude to CK over the "taking the knee" demonstration.
I wasn't happy with the nepotism and am still against it but it's his club and at least his son seems to be learning.
Best owners in the division? I don't know enough about the others, but on balance I wouldn't swop them.
A very accurate and balanced view in my opinion
TK has undoubtedly improved ... but if he hadn't have been the owners son then I doubt he would have survived as DOF on his previous performance. Nepotism , or even the possibility of it, is something to be avoided at all costs.
Let us just be grateful though that things gave got better
Quote from: Woolly Mammoth on January 20, 2020, 08:57:09 PM
Quote from: The Rational Fan on January 19, 2020, 04:55:31 PM
Quote from: Twig on January 19, 2020, 03:12:54 PM
I wasn't happy with the nepotism and am still against it but it's his club and at least his son seems to be learning.
Five Reason's why Tony being DOF might not be Nepotism
1. Tony Khan could be considered the co-owner of the club and employing yourself is not nepotism.
2. Tony Khan could be considered the future owner of the club and it is acceptable to give an executive position to the future chairman.
3. Tony Khan could be considered the owner's liaison officer, statistical officer or financial officer, all of which he is fairly qualified.
4. As the DOF position doesn't command a salary, other options would cost more and the owner might not be willing to pay for better.
5. As Tony Khan's DOF position doesn't command a salary, could he in fact be the best available person of those willing to work for free.
My professional advice to you TRF, if you ever considered becoming a Barrister or a Queens Council or a Defence Lawyer.
Please do not rely on it for your main income.
My grandfather and uncle were both Queens Council and they said the same thing. I took their advice. Although I stick by points above, to accuse Shahid Khan of nepotism, then you have to prove that Tony Khan is not a co-owner, not the future chairman and not the best person for the job given the salary level of zero. Courts would probably find Tony Khan is the best DOF that doesn't earn a salary of even claim expensive from the club, and you get what you pay for.
A lawyer is a person who writes a 10,000-word document and calls it a "brief." —Franz Kafka
"A Lawyer will do anything to win a case, sometimes he will even tell the truth." —Patrick Murray
I rest my case
It strikes me that football has got a long way out of kilter if the OP thinks ownership is the be all and end all of a well run football club. It is a team sport and like any team sport it requires the whole line-up from boardroom to the more menial jobs to be singing from the same hymn sheet. If it wasn't for the Khans buying from MAF then who else would have had a punt. Owners choose clubs to own and not the other way around and so the question is a bit of a red herring with no rational answer. Some of the comments above (and I don't need to point them out to you) should kind of tell you just how irrational the question is.
Quote from: The Rational Fan on January 19, 2020, 04:55:31 PM
4. As the DOF position doesn't command a salary, other options would cost more and the owner might not be willing to pay for better.
5. As Tony Khan's DOF position doesn't command a salary, could he in fact be the best available person of those willing to work for free.
He may not take a salary but last year TK cost us a place in the Premier League. That was worth what, £120m? Probably makes him the most expensive DoF in world football...
I'm not overly bothered by ownership unless they're openly asset stripping. The worst thing you can put on the Khans is that they're slightly incompetent.
Quote from: The Rational Fan on January 20, 2020, 09:30:42 PM
Quote from: Woolly Mammoth on January 20, 2020, 08:57:09 PM
Quote from: The Rational Fan on January 19, 2020, 04:55:31 PM
Quote from: Twig on January 19, 2020, 03:12:54 PM
I wasn't happy with the nepotism and am still against it but it's his club and at least his son seems to be learning.
Five Reason's why Tony being DOF might not be Nepotism
1. Tony Khan could be considered the co-owner of the club and employing yourself is not nepotism.
2. Tony Khan could be considered the future owner of the club and it is acceptable to give an executive position to the future chairman.
3. Tony Khan could be considered the owner's liaison officer, statistical officer or financial officer, all of which he is fairly qualified.
4. As the DOF position doesn't command a salary, other options would cost more and the owner might not be willing to pay for better.
5. As Tony Khan's DOF position doesn't command a salary, could he in fact be the best available person of those willing to work for free.
My professional advice to you TRF, if you ever considered becoming a Barrister or a Queens Council or a Defence Lawyer.
Please do not rely on it for your main income.
My grandfather and uncle were both Queens Council and they said the same thing. I took their advice. Although I stick by points above, to accuse Shahid Khan of nepotism, then you have to prove that Tony Khan is not a co-owner, not the future chairman and not the best person for the job given the salary level of zero. Courts would probably find Tony Khan is the best DOF that doesn't earn a salary of even claim expensive from the club, and you get what you pay for.
I haven't got to prove he is guilty, he has to prove he is innocent, which means he has about as much chance as some bloke called Guido Fawkes had in 1605.
As for the courts and the judges, they would probably let TK go on a technicality, as they seem to let everyone else go except the little old lady feeding the pigeons.
Quote from: Statto on January 20, 2020, 10:35:16 PM
Quote from: The Rational Fan on January 19, 2020, 04:55:31 PM
4. As the DOF position doesn't command a salary, other options would cost more and the owner might not be willing to pay for better.
5. As Tony Khan's DOF position doesn't command a salary, could he in fact be the best available person of those willing to work for free.
He may not take a salary but last year TK cost us a place in the Premier League. That was worth what, £120m? Probably makes him the most expensive DoF in world football...
Sorry your wrong in terms of lost revenue, Tony Khan is not even the most expensive DOF in the Premier League surely that title goes to either Ed Woodward or Sunderland's DOF. Out of Sunderland's 37 of the last 40 signings lost money; plus Jack Rodwell proved to be a much bigger mistake than any of our players.
Our DOF convinced the owner to give him enough money to buy players for 36-42 points, so Toby Khan did very well there already better than Ed Woodward. Then, he bought a squad that probably only good enough to get 32-36 points but frankly the squad was good enough to beat Brighton, Cardiff and Huddersfield in the first half of season so Tony Khan shouldnt get all the blame.
No one thinks Tony Khan is the smartest DOF in terms of football and realistically he is probably a touch below average, but i think he wants the club to win trophies more than give him an income, he is the best DOF at getting the owner to back him (proven to corelate to 76% of DOF success) and in the other 24% of his job he is only slightly below average (Aston Villas DOF is not much better) and is clearly improving quickly.
Quote from: The Rational Fan on January 20, 2020, 09:30:42 PM
Quote from: Woolly Mammoth on January 20, 2020, 08:57:09 PM
Quote from: The Rational Fan on January 19, 2020, 04:55:31 PM
Quote from: Twig on January 19, 2020, 03:12:54 PM
I wasn't happy with the nepotism and am still against it but it's his club and at least his son seems to be learning.
Five Reason's why Tony being DOF might not be Nepotism
1. Tony Khan could be considered the co-owner of the club and employing yourself is not nepotism.
2. Tony Khan could be considered the future owner of the club and it is acceptable to give an executive position to the future chairman.
3. Tony Khan could be considered the owner's liaison officer, statistical officer or financial officer, all of which he is fairly qualified.
4. As the DOF position doesn't command a salary, other options would cost more and the owner might not be willing to pay for better.
5. As Tony Khan's DOF position doesn't command a salary, could he in fact be the best available person of those willing to work for free.
My professional advice to you TRF, if you ever considered becoming a Barrister or a Queens Council or a Defence Lawyer.
Please do not rely on it for your main income.
My grandfather and uncle were both Queens Council and they said the same thing. I took their advice. Although I stick by points above, to accuse Shahid Khan of nepotism, then you have to prove that Tony Khan is not a co-owner, not the future chairman and not the best person for the job given the salary level of zero. Courts would probably find Tony Khan is the best DOF that doesn't earn a salary of even claim expensive from the club, and you get what you pay for.
Lol... having gone down a similar route to you in my earlier years as claiming other indirect family successes as as justifying my own intellect let me tell you - their success is not yours, neither is their ability to intellectually discern... on top of which no one and I repeat no one has as perfect decision making process, even more so when it comes to an industry they are voyeurs of and not actual participants. No matter the success of relatives materially and in ways you've been brought up to value there are millions who has just as elevated intellects, lifestyles and earnings who have achieved it from a completely different set of principles and values.
Tony Khan if not related to shahid Khan would very likely not have even properly registered Fulham as a club let alone got a job here, which he now balances with two or three others. It's nepotism - but based on the idea that if you have a certain education/brain or ability to learn critically think then you can do a job..
Quote from: General on January 20, 2020, 11:30:38 PM
Tony Khan if not related to shahid Khan would very likely not have even properly registered Fulham as a club let alone got a job here, which he now balances with two or three others. It's nepotism - but based on the idea that if you have a certain education/brain or ability to learn critically think then you can do a job..
Ok, if you want to take legal action against Shahid Khan (69 years old) for nepotism and force him to sack Tony Khan go ahead, but rest assured one day Tony Khan will own Fulham and Fulham will be begging him to invest more money and some property developer will be promising to pay him money if council approves apartments on Craven Cottage. After we hurt his ego, hope TK as owner chooses to protect the club and save the club rather than cash in.
Quote from: ALG01 on January 18, 2020, 09:34:36 PM
In our 7th season, two relegations, two near relegations, losing one of the best managers, chucking £100 m down the pan, not having a defence at the start of the season, not having prper full backs now.... having a nepotistic approach to a specialist role.... more like a national league approach to management.
Gobbledygook.
Quote from: ALG01 on January 18, 2020, 09:34:36 PM
In our 7th season, two relegations, two near relegations, losing one of the best managers, chucking £100 m down the pan, not having a defence at the start of the season, not having prper full backs now.... having a nepotistic approach to a specialist role.... more like a national league approach to management.
Yes it does appear that way, and there is a pattern, at least his best mate the one he covered up for, for the best part of two seasons the odious CK eventually walked the plank.
Quote from: Lyle from Hangeland on January 21, 2020, 06:21:28 AM
Quote from: ALG01 on January 18, 2020, 09:34:36 PM
In our 7th season, two relegations, two near relegations, losing one of the best managers, chucking £100 m down the pan, not having a defence at the start of the season, not having prper full backs now.... having a nepotistic approach to a specialist role.... more like a national league approach to management.
Gobbledygook.
The Khans have given £212,288,682 more than they have taken from Fulham, and you are worried they wasted some of the £120 m spent in the summer of 2018. Besides I reckon the players bought are still worth near £90m that Mitro 32m, Anguissa 25m, Seri 12m, Bryan 10m, Mawson 8m, Fabri 2m and MLM 1m, so that 30m wasted (i.e. 0.5% of Shahid Khan's fortune lost or 14% of all the money they have given to Fulham FC).
TK is DOF because his father owns the club, and he can appoint who he wants.
Football isn't accountable like most businesses, with a board of directors, and shareholders, making the decisions, it's unique, though in any business the owner can, and often does, appoint family members in top positions.
Does anyone really think those at the top, and who rule us, in business and life generally are there through merit, and are the best most capable, superior in intellect to everyone else? It's not what you know, but who you know, and what school you went to, and who your dad is, that get and keep you at the top of the greasy pole.
But having said that, I think TK has generally done a decent job - he's probably had more successes in overseeing our transfer policy than failures. And who can say how someone else would have done when we entered the Prem? It's all if's and but's, and we were only in the Prem anyway because of the Khans backing, and are lucky they didn't abandon us after our, unexpected (to them presumably - they thought they were buying an established Prem club ) relegation.
That's my thoughts on it anyway. Time to move on from the Prem disaster anyway, which came after our great success under the Khans in gaining promotion, and look to the future, and at the moment, we seems to have the makings of a good team, that can hopefully achieve things, and make up for the disappointments of the recent past.
"Nepotism" is employing a relative in a position that is not in the best interest of the owner's objective for the business. Many family businesses employees their sons or daughters to give their children employment, which is fine as long as that is the owner's objective for the business. Of course, that means if the "owner's objective for the business" is to give Tony Khan experience until he's ready for "Flexi N Gate", then it is not nepotism.
Without knowing Shahid Khan's objectives for Fulham FC, you cannot know if it is nepotism. I think I am correct to assume that "employing TK" is one of SK objectives and if so its not nepotism to employ Tony Khan.
The arguments about the negative effects of nepotism should only be raised when they are observed in a business and considered to be dangerous to that business, those it employs, and its customers. The notion that Khan Snr can do what he likes is true only because of certain factors. For example, A) his fortune is so very large; B) Football is a loss making enterprise for most; C) Football is unsustainable through gate money at is current levels of expenditure; D) Employees would suffer huge losses if football was subjected to moral rationale. Football is a mess because authority can mix media income with live income to make its case at the top of the game, but hasn't a clue about getting the game on a better footing at grass roots. When the foundations give way the whole house will collapse.
Khan Jnr damaged FFC by embarking on an enterprise within an enterprise - classic nepotism - without having the skill base or humility to do it in a professional way. That begs questions about Khan Snr.
Of course all questions can be dismissed because Khan Snr has loads of money and doesn't have to care about anyone other than his son.
Quote from: The Rational Fan on January 21, 2020, 08:22:32 AM
"Nepotism" is employing a relative in a position that is not in the best interest of the owner's objective for the business. Many family businesses employees their sons or daughters to give their children employment, which is fine as long as that is the owner's objective for the business. Of course, that means if the "owner's objective for the business" is to give Tony Khan experience until he's ready for "Flexi N Gate", then it is not nepotism.
Without knowing Shahid Khan's objectives for Fulham FC, you cannot know if it is nepotism. I think I am correct to assume that "employing TK" is one of SK objectives and if so its not nepotism to employ Tony Khan.
In that case there could be no concept of nepotism because where any business owner employs a person because they're his relative, rather than the best person for the job, the only explanation can be that it's his "objective for the business" to give them employment.
Of course in the real world, you cannot just take a business like a football club, that's been around much longer than you, with tens of thousands of fans, hundreds of employees and various other stakeholders and give it new objectives that only serve you.
Fulham's objective is successful football. The irony of all this is I believe Shahid Khan would fundamentally agree with that and it's only you that comes out with these odd arguments to the contrary.
Quote from: The Rational Fan on January 21, 2020, 08:22:32 AM
"Nepotism" is employing a relative in a position that is not in the best interest of the owner's objective for the business.
Nepotism is nepotism, period. It occurs when you favour a relative over a more serious process of competitive recruiting. Should TK and CK have been allowed anywhere near FFC? Would they have been allowed anywhere near FFC had SK not made such a dog's dinner of finding suitable people to manage the various factions of the business when he first arrived and was not going to do it himself?
I believe that Khan senior thought his son probably could do a good job in the role - why wouldn't he want Fulham to be successful, after investing so much money in it.
So he entrusted a family member, with some experience of a stats approach, and very enthusiastic, with the buying of players - though presumably Khan senior has to sign the spending off?
The proof or not of the transfer policy can be clearly seen obviously.
And i think it has been generally successful - compared to other clubs, who all have records of expensive flops.
Also, at least Khan senior still seems prepared to invest in the team, despite FFP, and some past expensive failures
Quote from: RaySmith on January 21, 2020, 10:14:24 AM
The proof or not of the transfer policy can be clearly seen obviously.
The notion of proof in such circumstances is a fallacy since you cannot compare like with like without having a parallel universe with a different recruiter in situ. If you consider such ill advised reasoning very carefully you begin to understand why so many falsehoods are allowed to fester in all walks of life. It is all very subjective.