The longer he's in charge of Operations at Fulham it proves Tony Khan is using Fulham as an experiment to promote his analytics company TruMedia
He has used the model at Jacksonville Jaguars and has had some success this year with them winning their division. This must have increased the value of both the Jaguars and TruMedia.
According to reports on Teamtalk he is now looking to Scotland for a manager who would fit this analytics model rather than a manager who would be in charge of recruitment and players
This is madness and when will he realise that solely using analytics does not work for football and the English leagues as it does for American Football. There are so many variables in the English game.
Players such as Lee Clark. Louis Saha. Luis Boa Morte and Steve Finnan were not signed by analytics but by good scouting. Good scouts are worth their weight in gold so this who we should be looking to sign rather than a manager prepared to promote analytics and try and prove TK right which will never work in our leagues.
The sooner he realises his project has failed and changes course the better.
https://www.teamtalk.com/news/exclusive-fulham-turn-to-scotland-in-search-for-next-boss
Doesn't appear to be working in American Football either with the Jags bottom of their group
Don't think we have a scouting system at 1st team level any more.
Quote from: 3rdgenfan on February 25, 2019, 08:54:30 AM
The longer he's in charge of Operations at Fulham it proves Tony Khan is using Fulham as an experiment to promote his analytics company TruMedia
He has used the model at Jacksonville Jaguars and has had some success this year with them winning their division. This must have increased the value of both the Jaguars and TruMedia.
According to reports on Teamtalk he is now looking to Scotland for a manager who would fit this analytics model rather than a manager who would be in charge of recruitment and players
This is madness and when will he realise that solely using analytics does not work for football and the English leagues as it does for American Football. There are so many variables in the English game.
Players such as Lee Clark. Louis Saha. Luis Boa Morte and Steve Finnan were not signed by analytics but by good scouting. Good scouts are worth their weight in gold so this who we should be looking to sign rather than a manager prepared to promote analytics and try and prove TK right which will never work in our leagues.
The sooner he realises his project has failed and changes course the better.
https://www.teamtalk.com/news/exclusive-fulham-turn-to-scotland-in-search-for-next-boss
But we don't solely rely on analytics do we? At least not according to any information I have ever seen presented (that isn't from an angry fan). Or, if you know this to be true, can you please present some form of evidence?
It is possible to fail for many reasons, and usually there are many factors combined in producing results as bad as ours. Analytics may be one factor, but in my opinion surely not the only one.
different scenario in American Football, don't the bottom side get first pick of the new draft players?
We can all see this isn't working but TK will not change his path as it would mean admitting failure and the failure of his company.
There are very few top class or suitable managers that would join us under the analytics system as it is their reputations as managers that would suffer and I don't blame them. Not looking good for a a replacement for CR
Quote from: Sting of the North on February 25, 2019, 09:37:20 AM
Quote from: 3rdgenfan on February 25, 2019, 08:54:30 AM
The longer he's in charge of Operations at Fulham it proves Tony Khan is using Fulham as an experiment to promote his analytics company TruMedia
He has used the model at Jacksonville Jaguars and has had some success this year with them winning their division. This must have increased the value of both the Jaguars and TruMedia.
According to reports on Teamtalk he is now looking to Scotland for a manager who would fit this analytics model rather than a manager who would be in charge of recruitment and players
This is madness and when will he realise that solely using analytics does not work for football and the English leagues as it does for American Football. There are so many variables in the English game.
Players such as Lee Clark. Louis Saha. Luis Boa Morte and Steve Finnan were not signed by analytics but by good scouting. Good scouts are worth their weight in gold so this who we should be looking to sign rather than a manager prepared to promote analytics and try and prove TK right which will never work in our leagues.
The sooner he realises his project has failed and changes course the better.
https://www.teamtalk.com/news/exclusive-fulham-turn-to-scotland-in-search-for-next-boss
But we don't solely rely on analytics do we? At least not according to any information I have ever seen presented (that isn't from an angry fan). Or, if you know this to be true, can you please present some form of evidence?
It is possible to fail for many reasons, and usually there are many factors combined in producing results as bad as ours. Analytics may be one factor, but in my opinion surely not the only one.
I think the "exclusive" report on TeamTalk, if it can be believed, points to TK wanting the next manager to fit his analytics profile
Of all the PL clubs, only Cardiff do not use the 2 ticked boxes in recruitment. We just do it worse than the others.
The FFC team of 2001/02 squad costs double this squad as a percentage of revenue and they will get less double the amount of points this team will get (provided FFC reaches 23 points). In terms of spending well, this squad is about even with that one just proving you cannot build a squad overnight (or even a year) with money and expect great results. Maybe going down and bouncing up was TK plan B at the start of the season, if it was and the plan B works it maybe pure genius.
Quote from: 3rdgenfan on February 25, 2019, 09:42:24 AM
Quote from: Sting of the North on February 25, 2019, 09:37:20 AM
Quote from: 3rdgenfan on February 25, 2019, 08:54:30 AM
The longer he's in charge of Operations at Fulham it proves Tony Khan is using Fulham as an experiment to promote his analytics company TruMedia
He has used the model at Jacksonville Jaguars and has had some success this year with them winning their division. This must have increased the value of both the Jaguars and TruMedia.
According to reports on Teamtalk he is now looking to Scotland for a manager who would fit this analytics model rather than a manager who would be in charge of recruitment and players
This is madness and when will he realise that solely using analytics does not work for football and the English leagues as it does for American Football. There are so many variables in the English game.
Players such as Lee Clark. Louis Saha. Luis Boa Morte and Steve Finnan were not signed by analytics but by good scouting. Good scouts are worth their weight in gold so this who we should be looking to sign rather than a manager prepared to promote analytics and try and prove TK right which will never work in our leagues.
The sooner he realises his project has failed and changes course the better.
https://www.teamtalk.com/news/exclusive-fulham-turn-to-scotland-in-search-for-next-boss
But we don't solely rely on analytics do we? At least not according to any information I have ever seen presented (that isn't from an angry fan). Or, if you know this to be true, can you please present some form of evidence?
It is possible to fail for many reasons, and usually there are many factors combined in producing results as bad as ours. Analytics may be one factor, but in my opinion surely not the only one.
I think the "exclusive" report on TeamTalk, if it can be believed, points to TK wanting the next manager to fit his analytics profile
Ok. Even if true, still doesn't mean that we rely solely on analytics.
Quote from: The Rational Fan on February 25, 2019, 09:48:45 AM
The FFC team of 2001/02 squad costs double this squad as a percentage of revenue and will get double the amount of points. In terms of spending well, this squad is about even with that one just proving you cannot build a squad overnight (or even a year) with money and expect great results. If TK goes down with this squad and keeps almost all of them plus adds to it and we get promoted, the plan maybe pure genius.
Unless it was part of the plan to be non-competitive and get relegated, I feel that in any case the term "pure genius" is a tad too much even if the long run would prove this year would form a valuable part of the foundation of a successful PL team. However, I agree that it may not have been as bad as it looks.
The bottom line of 'TruMedia' and other analytics is that everybody has access to the same data, the same social media networks covering individual and independent scouting, the same media coverage of games, and the same potential to construct almost infinite algorithms with which to manipulate all that information, good, bad and indifferent, to whatever degree they wish. Baseball analytics started almost one hundred and seventy years ago, in 1850, with BoxScore, statistics meant to give baseball fans a feel of the game as it played out, without direct reporting of events in words. Baseball with hitters and pitchers is like cricket which lends itself to the cricket scorecard idea of relaying a match as it is played out with batters and bowlers. American football also lends itself to neatly packaged actions with lots of space between them, with players defined by the actions taking place on the pitch.
Football is largely continuous action with players, although largely defined by task and role, free to do whatever they have to do to win a game with defenders scoring goals and attackers clearing balls from their own goal line. The main reporting stats for much of the last century was a report of the score at HT and FT, the goal scorers and the gate. Fuller match reports would cover many games although comprehensive coverage has been increasingly focused on fewer and fewer teams, and lower leagues in the English pyramid have virtually disappeared from most coverage.
TK's commercial ventures are his own affair but I do believe FFC's Board should be questioning just how much time he has left to concentrate on FFC matters on a day to day basis seeing as he is in charge of quite a lot of the main activity of playing football. Perhaps most people never miss him.
Quote from: grandad on February 25, 2019, 09:45:11 AM
Of all the PL clubs, only Cardiff do not use the 2 ticked boxes in recruitment. We just do it worse than the others.
I don't really think we use two ticks. Slavisa regularly made a point he had little say.
The only tick that I reckon matters is that the player meets the stats test. If he doesn't, I reckon we don't sign him.
If reports are to believed the key element of our transfer system is the analytics.
Personally I do not care how it is done but for 11 transfer windows in a row it has been a shambolic failure and TK has been in charge of it ior fundamental to it whether he had a relvavnt title or not all this time as far as I can see.
Choosing a manager on analytics is bizarre. Analytics is a good thing but a very secondary thing. I loathe what is happening at the club at the moment. The arrogance of the Khan's, the nepotism and the shocking US style PR.
Even SK, who I had respected, has now been caught by his own PR. Saying he would support the manager in the January transfer and then not supporting him at all has been quite a staggering kick in the teeth to long term season ticket holders, short term season ticket holders, long term supporters and recent arrival supporters alike, in short all of us that pay our money or have an interest in the club.
I was here for Clay and Bulstrode but we were vulnerable then. This is self inflicted madness from an owner that refuses to learn or is just indulging his offspring because he can. I hate the fact there are posters that defend this madness, or try to trip up ordinary mortals on the MB, by forensically picking up on a word out of place or a minor factual inaccuracy.
What is without doubt is the club is massively underachieving because we make the same errors over and over and have a transfer policy that is guaranteed to fail as evidenced by 11 successive flawed attempts.
If the Khan's want to make Fulham a success, and I no longer think that is the case, they would move TK sideways and keep him away from any team matter, and bring in top proffesionals to run the club such as MAF did with Kegan. I will not offer a name at this time because I have done it before. I do not want to have to watch League one football but at the moment that is more likely than a swift return. The fact we keep a joke manager just to save TK's face is grounds for a refund on our season tickets.... next season prices better be very reduced bsed on the dross offered this time.
Just my opinion.
ALG they won't be reducing prices,no chance!!
"Choosoa manager on analytics is bizarre"
Why is it?
Depends on the question you are looking to answer. Tell me ALG01(although your style is reminiscent of someone who left recently) how would you pick a manager without looking at any stats on them at all?
Of course you could pick someone who has no record... And I'm not against that... But if you are looking at someone who has previously managed you will look at their records.
You might want to know how many promotions they have had?
What their record is paying a particular type of football.
Their record of promoting youth.
Average age of lineups
Any number of stats and information to make a choice.
Just by picking a a manger who has a 41% win record for example is a use of stats.
But if course it doesn't fit agendas does it to actually admit its required. Stats bad is the message.
Numbers are important but are only part of the story.
As has been said, all clubs and their backroom staff have access to broadly the same numbers. What matters is how they are interpreted in the context in which they are being considered.
Different sport, of course, but I think there is an analogy with horse racing, where everyone contemplating a bet can access essentially the same data, whether racing history as per the form book, or ratings generated by the various specialists employed by the Racing Post, Timeform etc. But with near universal access to masses of potentially relevant data the market (the collectivity of people who have considered a race and whatever associated data they regard as relevant) only gets it right about 30% of the time - the percentage of races won by the favourite. And the "expert" tipsters whose selections adorn the racing pages of the Post and daily newspapers mostly don't make a level stakes profit on their "naps" over a season or achieve a winning percentage above the 20-30% range.
Some using essentially the same data would be embarrassed not to achieve a 50% winning percentage, while the best get over 80%. Why? Because they can interpret the near universally available data very much more effectively than the rest.
So no reason to throw out "analytics" as useless - I'm sure they are not. But they need to be tools on which good judges can draw in making their judgements about how well a given player will fit the team, given the way the team is being set up to play, and be able to work effectively with the existing players. The likes of Tigana and RH showed what can be done by good judges. Players like Saha and BH were players who were respectively seen as a failure in UK football or not worth consideration, but fitted precisely the way those two managers set up the team when in charge, and have become Club legends. There is, I think, some evidence that Mitrovic was signed almost wholly on J's say so, and if he stays (unlikely as we are clearly going to be a Championship side next season) he'd likely have joined Saha and BH in terms of much respected Fulham players.
If, as seems likely, analytics are in the driving seat rather than being tools a manager with good judgement can draw upon, then the results can be predicted to be similar to the bank balance of the punter who blindly backs favourites or follows one or other of the daily newspaper tipsters long term - ie heading in a downward direction.
Last time we were looking for a manager we were inexplicably keen on the totally underwhelming Steve Clark. Now I'm hearing we're in for him again - presumably that's who the OP is referring to. Sorry but we do we even need to have a discussion about what a stupid approach this is?
Quote from: Statto on February 25, 2019, 10:48:43 AM
Last time we were looking for a manager we were inexplicably keen on the totally underwhelming Steve Clark. Now I'm hearing we're in for him again - presumably that's who the OP is referring to. Sorry but we do we even need to have a discussion about what a stupid approach this is?
was told yesterday its not true about Clarke.
Quote from: MJG on February 25, 2019, 10:50:21 AM
Quote from: Statto on February 25, 2019, 10:48:43 AM
Last time we were looking for a manager we were inexplicably keen on the totally underwhelming Steve Clark. Now I'm hearing we're in for him again - presumably that's who the OP is referring to. Sorry but we do we even need to have a discussion about what a stupid approach this is?
was told yesterday its not true about Clarke.
If Bristol City fail to get promoted an approach to Lee Johnson may be worth while. Born and bred in Fulham
Quote from: MJG on February 25, 2019, 10:25:23 AM
"Choose a manager on analytics is bizarre"
Why is it?
You know about analytics, MJG, probably better than any one else on here, but do they have categories for professionalism, responsibility, morality, knowledge, charisma, personality, man-management ability, quality and care. Apparently not in view of the number of 'bad' appointments made in the whole football spectrum. And the trouble with that is further compounded by the fact nobody seems to pick the flaws up during interviews, or general conversations when little snippets or suspicions of doubts are most likely found. I have always believed that you have to charm the right personnel through reception first and then engage with them in can do and cannot do exercises to maintain (A) the level of your expectations and (B) the level of their expectations. Expectations are fluid in as much as ambition and reality have to come together at some point in the future for success to be achieved. In other words the dialogue constructs a pathway between two points and suggests the length of time it may take for the journey.
I see charisma as a quality for a Club's leader to seduce potential employees (whatever their skill set is) to consider FFC as a first choice and not as 'second best'. To do that the leader must already be first choice because otherwise the whole process is flawed. I get the sense that the Khans may have realised their shortcomings when they engaged the 'panel approach' prior to Symons's appointment and perhaps should have stuck with him longer than they did. I also believe the Khans found SJ's professionalism and phlegmatic approach unfathomable and awkward since it gave little away in both good times and bad times. He just got on with it. Surely that would have come across in interview and conversations, language issues or not. Ranieri is totally different to Jokanovic in personality and may have some of the traits that the Khans admire but are pretty useless when it comes to being in charge of FFC.
Ranieri found his best fit at Leicester but his credentials do not say he'll be as successful again even at lower level. However, he is here, and in many ways it is always better the devil you know. I don't think the Khans ever understood Jokanovic's philosophy of work and that is why they never truly backed him. Perhaps they may be seduced into backing Ranieri and turning him into an FFC hero given time and full support. The Khans will also be aware that their record in sacking managers at FFC and finding worse is almost identical to what has happened this season. They may want a chance to prove that, given time, Ranieri could be a success story. I'd rather they didn't take that chance but I can also see their point of view.
Watford have a scout who solely scouts managers.
There is constant succession planning being thought out there, and the profile of head coach is a mix of characteristics, stats and scouted results which I assume would include behaviour and authority.
You would think we would have the same thing going on considering appointing Slav was 2 months wasted, and Claudio's appointment goes completely against the qualities of the squad. Surely a scouting system on managers would identify the right character with the right philosophy at the right time?
Quote from: toshes mate on February 25, 2019, 11:18:22 AM
Quote from: MJG on February 25, 2019, 10:25:23 AM
"Choose a manager on analytics is bizarre"
Why is it?
You know about analytics, MJG, probably better than any one else on here, but do they have categories for professionalism, responsibility, morality, knowledge, charisma, personality, man-management ability, quality and care. Apparently not in view of the number of 'bad' appointments made in the whole football spectrum. And the trouble with that is further compounded by the fact nobody seems to pick the flaws up during interviews, or general conversations when little snippets or suspicions of doubts are most likely found. I have always believed that you have to charm the right personnel through reception first and then engage with them in can do and cannot do exercises to maintain (A) the level of your expectations and (B) the level of their expectations. Expectations are fluid in as much as ambition and reality have to come together at some point in the future for success to be achieved. In other words the dialogue constructs a pathway between two points and suggests the length of time it may take for the journey.
I see charisma as a quality for a Club's leader to seduce potential employees (whatever their skill set is) to consider FFC as a first choice and not as 'second best'. To do that the leader must already be first choice because otherwise the whole process is flawed. I get the sense that the Khans may have realised their shortcomings when they engaged the 'panel approach' prior to Symons's appointment and perhaps should have stuck with him longer than they did. I also believe the Khans found SJ's professionalism and phlegmatic approach unfathomable and awkward since it gave little away in both good times and bad times. He just got on with it. Surely that would have come across in interview and conversations, language issues or not. Ranieri is totally different to Jokanovic in personality and may have some of the traits that the Khans admire but are pretty useless when it comes to being in charge of FFC.
Ranieri found his best fit at Leicester but his credentials do not say he'll be as successful again even at lower level. However, he is here, and in many ways it is always better the devil you know. I don't think the Khans ever understood Jokanovic's philosophy of work and that is why they never truly backed him. Perhaps they may be seduced into backing Ranieri and turning him into an FFC hero given time and full support. The Khans will also be aware that their record in sacking managers at FFC and finding worse is almost identical to what has happened this season. They may want a chance to prove that, given time, Ranieri could be a success story. I'd rather they didn't take that chance but I can also see their point of view.
I'd not expect any one an to be employed just in stats and there is no way that will happen. But it used.
Might surprise people to learn that Southampton employed a stats company to come up with a list of potential managers who fitted a crtiera and this led to their current manager... One which a few had named as a possible coach for us.
Quote from: MJG on February 25, 2019, 11:57:50 AM
Quote from: toshes mate on February 25, 2019, 11:18:22 AM
Quote from: MJG on February 25, 2019, 10:25:23 AM
"Choose a manager on analytics is bizarre"
Why is it?
You know about analytics, MJG, probably better than any one else on here, but do they have categories for professionalism, responsibility, morality, knowledge, charisma, personality, man-management ability, quality and care. Apparently not in view of the number of 'bad' appointments made in the whole football spectrum. And the trouble with that is further compounded by the fact nobody seems to pick the flaws up during interviews, or general conversations when little snippets or suspicions of doubts are most likely found. I have always believed that you have to charm the right personnel through reception first and then engage with them in can do and cannot do exercises to maintain (A) the level of your expectations and (B) the level of their expectations. Expectations are fluid in as much as ambition and reality have to come together at some point in the future for success to be achieved. In other words the dialogue constructs a pathway between two points and suggests the length of time it may take for the journey.
I see charisma as a quality for a Club's leader to seduce potential employees (whatever their skill set is) to consider FFC as a first choice and not as 'second best'. To do that the leader must already be first choice because otherwise the whole process is flawed. I get the sense that the Khans may have realised their shortcomings when they engaged the 'panel approach' prior to Symons's appointment and perhaps should have stuck with him longer than they did. I also believe the Khans found SJ's professionalism and phlegmatic approach unfathomable and awkward since it gave little away in both good times and bad times. He just got on with it. Surely that would have come across in interview and conversations, language issues or not. Ranieri is totally different to Jokanovic in personality and may have some of the traits that the Khans admire but are pretty useless when it comes to being in charge of FFC.
Ranieri found his best fit at Leicester but his credentials do not say he'll be as successful again even at lower level. However, he is here, and in many ways it is always better the devil you know. I don't think the Khans ever understood Jokanovic's philosophy of work and that is why they never truly backed him. Perhaps they may be seduced into backing Ranieri and turning him into an FFC hero given time and full support. The Khans will also be aware that their record in sacking managers at FFC and finding worse is almost identical to what has happened this season. They may want a chance to prove that, given time, Ranieri could be a success story. I'd rather they didn't take that chance but I can also see their point of view.
I'd not expect any one an to be employed just in stats and there is no way that will happen. But it used.
Might surprise people to learn that Southampton employed a stats company to come up with a list of potential managers who fitted a crtiera and this led to their current manager... One which a few had named as a possible coach for us.
Of course 'stats' will be employed, after all, prior to information technology, you'd be asked to apply either in writing or via an application form which, on many occasions, requested supporting information. And so no one can eliminate the relevance of empirical evidence with or without the assistance of information technology. Profiling is, after all, a very prosperous enterprise for those gifted with its several techniques, but it doesn't always lead to the right conclusion(s).
Quote from: Newry FFC on February 25, 2019, 11:41:50 AM
Watford have a scout who solely scouts managers.
There is constant succession planning being thought out there, and the profile of head coach is a mix of characteristics, stats and scouted results which I assume would include behaviour and authority.
You would think we would have the same thing going on considering appointing Slav was 2 months wasted, and Claudio's appointment goes completely against the qualities of the squad. Surely a scouting system on managers would identify the right character with the right philosophy at the right time?
Absolutely concur with this as the only way to achieving a collection of all the tools you need to give yourself the best chance of making the best choice.
Quote from: Newry FFC on February 25, 2019, 11:41:50 AM
Watford have a scout who solely scouts managers.
I bet that makes the new Manager feel comfortable, knowing that the Club has a scout looking for your replacement only a few weeks after you have been appointed!
Mind you, once you appoint someone, you can sit with your feet up for at least a few months while still cashing your monthly cheque.
What a strange job.... unless they also do something else as well....sell match-day programmes perhaps :)
Quote from: Fulham Tup North on February 25, 2019, 12:53:58 PM
Quote from: Newry FFC on February 25, 2019, 11:41:50 AM
Watford have a scout who solely scouts managers.
I bet that makes the new Manager feel comfortable, knowing that the Club has a scout looking for your replacement only a few weeks after you have been appointed!
Mind you, once you appoint someone, you can sit with your feet up for at least a few months while still cashing your monthly cheque.
What a strange job.... unless they also do something else as well....sell match-day programmes perhaps :)
LOL.
I suspect he/she maintains a database exclusively for coaches, managers etc., from their scouting ventures and observations which will be ongoing process of updating like any other database project. I would also imagine there would be, in a similar way to TK's media project, a chance of considerable income from consultancy work via recommendations etc.
Quote from: MJG on February 25, 2019, 10:25:23 AM
"Choosoa manager on analytics is bizarre"
Why is it?
Depends on the question you are looking to answer. Tell me ALG01(although your style is reminiscent of someone who left recently) how would you pick a manager without looking at any stats on them at all?
Of course you could pick someone who has no record... And I'm not against that... But if you are looking at someone who has previously managed you will look at their records.
You might want to know how many promotions they have had?
What their record is paying a particular type of football.
Their record of promoting youth.
Average age of lineups
Any number of stats and information to make a choice.
Just by picking a a manger who has a 41% win record for example is a use of stats.
But if course it doesn't fit agendas does it to actually admit its required. Stats bad is the message.
Obviously what you say re stats is the sensible end of using the raw data as a weapon in ones armory and none of us would dispute that. Based on what I have gleaned from our leaders, and the issue with TK and his analytics company and seeing the lack of success we have had, to continue that approach, and that is what I meant, is bizarre if you want to succeed.
But further than that the choice of manager is a subtle thing. They may have a poor win record, a poor record on getting teams promoted but if they get the best from their squad that is all you can ask. You need somebody whose face fits. For example I always thought Sanchez was badly dealt with because the fans did not want him from day one, so that was always likely to end in tears, poor results sealed his fate, but somebody else would have been given longer. Since I was a boy I thought the managerial appointment was key to success, MacDonald and Adams being the absolute proof of what a new man can achieve with essentially the same squad. So stats are very low down the pecking order in terms of that appointment.
I did know CR was a massive error from the moment he was appointed and he has exceeded my worst fears. I did think we should have kept Slav a few more games but now we will never know if that was a correct assertion but I do not know who we should get for next season. I am pretty sure we should not be getting one of the usual suspects, and my feeling is we would be better off with a younger hungry British manager looking for a big chance. Providing they can deal with the transfer policy which in the end will pull the rug from all of them.
To me the first thing that needs to be done is what MAF did, get a top experienced person (Keegan was a masterstroke) and let them run the football side of things.
Quote from: ALG01 on February 25, 2019, 01:23:02 PM
Quote from: MJG on February 25, 2019, 10:25:23 AM
"Choosoa manager on analytics is bizarre"
Why is it?
Depends on the question you are looking to answer. Tell me ALG01(although your style is reminiscent of someone who left recently) how would you pick a manager without looking at any stats on them at all?
Of course you could pick someone who has no record... And I'm not against that... But if you are looking at someone who has previously managed you will look at their records.
You might want to know how many promotions they have had?
What their record is paying a particular type of football.
Their record of promoting youth.
Average age of lineups
Any number of stats and information to make a choice.
Just by picking a a manger who has a 41% win record for example is a use of stats.
But if course it doesn't fit agendas does it to actually admit its required. Stats bad is the message.
Obviously what you say re stats is the sensible end of using the raw data as a weapon in ones armory and none of us would dispute that. Based on what I have gleaned from our leaders, and the issue with TK and his analytics company and seeing the lack of success we have had, to continue that approach, and that is what I meant, is bizarre if you want to succeed.
But further than that the choice of manager is a subtle thing. They may have a poor win record, a poor record on getting teams promoted but if they get the best from their squad that is all you can ask. You need somebody whose face fits. For example I always thought Sanchez was badly dealt with because the fans did not want him from day one, so that was always likely to end in tears, poor results sealed his fate, but somebody else would have been given longer. Since I was a boy I thought the managerial appointment was key to success, MacDonald and Adams being the absolute proof of what a new man can achieve with essentially the same squad. So stats are very low down the pecking order in terms of that appointment.
I did know CR was a massive error from the moment he was appointed and he has exceeded my worst fears. I did think we should have kept Slav a few more games but now we will never know if that was a correct assertion but I do not know who we should get for next season. I am pretty sure we should not be getting one of the usual suspects, and my feeling is we would be better off with a younger hungry British manager looking for a big chance. Providing they can deal with the transfer policy which in the end will pull the rug from all of them.
To me the first thing that needs to be done is what MAF did, get a top experienced person (Keegan was a masterstroke) and let them run the football side of things.
I totally agree with you comments regarding an experienced Director of Football. However I think it should be someone who has an amount of managerial and playing time and someone under the age of 50.
A younger DOF could bring in new ideas. I would like to see someone like Lee Clark. Even though he wasn't overly successful in his managerial career he would have the best interests at heart for Fulham and would make an excellent Director of Football much like in the vein of Kevin Keegan.
Quote from: toshes mate on February 25, 2019, 01:02:14 PM
Quote from: Fulham Tup North on February 25, 2019, 12:53:58 PM
Quote from: Newry FFC on February 25, 2019, 11:41:50 AM
Watford have a scout who solely scouts managers.
I bet that makes the new Manager feel comfortable, knowing that the Club has a scout looking for your replacement only a few weeks after you have been appointed!
Mind you, once you appoint someone, you can sit with your feet up for at least a few months while still cashing your monthly cheque.
What a strange job.... unless they also do something else as well....sell match-day programmes perhaps :)
LOL.
I suspect he/she maintains a database exclusively for coaches, managers etc., from their scouting ventures and observations which will be ongoing process of updating like any other database project. I would also imagine there would be, in a similar way to TK's media project, a chance of considerable income from consultancy work via recommendations etc.
No offence to NEwry FFC but I'm really struggling to believe that statement.
Firstly what does this "scout" do for the 23 months in every 24 or so where they're not looking to change the manager any time soon? As FTN says - sell programmes? !
Secondly, whilst MJG has identified a handful of metrics above, that really is all there is to consider for a manager. Unlike assessing a player, it's not a complicated analysis and you don't need a computer (a pen and one side of A4 will do) or an expert to do it. So how on earth does he justify a salary?
Do we have a link? Any detail or evidence?
Quote from: toshes mate on February 25, 2019, 01:02:14 PM
Quote from: Fulham Tup North on February 25, 2019, 12:53:58 PM
Quote from: Newry FFC on February 25, 2019, 11:41:50 AM
Watford have a scout who solely scouts managers.
I bet that makes the new Manager feel comfortable, knowing that the Club has a scout looking for your replacement only a few weeks after you have been appointed!
Mind you, once you appoint someone, you can sit with your feet up for at least a few months while still cashing your monthly cheque.
What a strange job.... unless they also do something else as well....sell match-day programmes perhaps :)
LOL.
I suspect he/she maintains a database exclusively for coaches, managers etc., from their scouting ventures and observations which will be ongoing process of updating like any other database project. I would also imagine there would be, in a similar way to TK's media project, a chance of considerable income from consultancy work via recommendations etc.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/41710640
Take a read at this link, looking at the frequency of manager changes and how it doesn't cause chaos when it happens. Also re the depth of scouting: a list of 10 players per position to fit into the current ethos of the coaches, who are recruited to a specific model
Quote from: Newry FFC on February 25, 2019, 02:00:00 PM
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/41710640
Take a read at this link, looking at the frequency of manager changes and how it doesn't cause chaos when it happens. Also re the depth of scouting: a list of 10 players per position to fit into the current ethos of the coaches, who are recruited to a specific model
Where does it say they have a scout just for managers?
Also, a list of 10 players per position - I was doing that on Championship Manager in about 2001 and no one from the BBC wrote an article about it... like 99% of this stats business it really does just sound like money for old rope to me
Quote from: 3rdgenfan on February 25, 2019, 01:54:11 PM
Quote from: ALG01 on February 25, 2019, 01:23:02 PM
Quote from: MJG on February 25, 2019, 10:25:23 AM
"Choosoa manager on analytics is bizarre"
Why is it?
Depends on the question you are looking to answer. Tell me ALG01(although your style is reminiscent of someone who left recently) how would you pick a manager without looking at any stats on them at all?
Of course you could pick someone who has no record... And I'm not against that... But if you are looking at someone who has previously managed you will look at their records.
You might want to know how many promotions they have had?
What their record is paying a particular type of football.
Their record of promoting youth.
Average age of lineups
Any number of stats and information to make a choice.
Just by picking a a manger who has a 41% win record for example is a use of stats.
But if course it doesn't fit agendas does it to actually admit its required. Stats bad is the message.
Obviously what you say re stats is the sensible end of using the raw data as a weapon in ones armory and none of us would dispute that. Based on what I have gleaned from our leaders, and the issue with TK and his analytics company and seeing the lack of success we have had, to continue that approach, and that is what I meant, is bizarre if you want to succeed.
But further than that the choice of manager is a subtle thing. They may have a poor win record, a poor record on getting teams promoted but if they get the best from their squad that is all you can ask. You need somebody whose face fits. For example I always thought Sanchez was badly dealt with because the fans did not want him from day one, so that was always likely to end in tears, poor results sealed his fate, but somebody else would have been given longer. Since I was a boy I thought the managerial appointment was key to success, MacDonald and Adams being the absolute proof of what a new man can achieve with essentially the same squad. So stats are very low down the pecking order in terms of that appointment.
I did know CR was a massive error from the moment he was appointed and he has exceeded my worst fears. I did think we should have kept Slav a few more games but now we will never know if that was a correct assertion but I do not know who we should get for next season. I am pretty sure we should not be getting one of the usual suspects, and my feeling is we would be better off with a younger hungry British manager looking for a big chance. Providing they can deal with the transfer policy which in the end will pull the rug from all of them.
To me the first thing that needs to be done is what MAF did, get a top experienced person (Keegan was a masterstroke) and let them run the football side of things.
I totally agree with you comments regarding an experienced Director of Football. However I think it should be someone who has an amount of managerial and playing time and someone under the age of 50.
A younger DOF could bring in new ideas. I would like to see someone like Lee Clark. Even though he wasn't overly successful in his managerial career he would have the best interests at heart for Fulham and would make an excellent Director of Football much like in the vein of Kevin Keegan.
So, apart from apparently have Fulham's best interest at heart (one would expect that no? I am sure the same goes for TK) and not so far being overly successful in his managerial career, what leads you to believe that he would make an excellent DoF for Fulham?
Quote from: Sting of the North on February 25, 2019, 02:13:15 PM
Quote from: 3rdgenfan on February 25, 2019, 01:54:11 PM
Quote from: ALG01 on February 25, 2019, 01:23:02 PM
Quote from: MJG on February 25, 2019, 10:25:23 AM
"Choosoa manager on analytics is bizarre"
Why is it?
Depends on the question you are looking to answer. Tell me ALG01(although your style is reminiscent of someone who left recently) how would you pick a manager without looking at any stats on them at all?
Of course you could pick someone who has no record... And I'm not against that... But if you are looking at someone who has previously managed you will look at their records.
You might want to know how many promotions they have had?
What their record is paying a particular type of football.
Their record of promoting youth.
Average age of lineups
Any number of stats and information to make a choice.
Just by picking a a manger who has a 41% win record for example is a use of stats.
But if course it doesn't fit agendas does it to actually admit its required. Stats bad is the message.
Obviously what you say re stats is the sensible end of using the raw data as a weapon in ones armory and none of us would dispute that. Based on what I have gleaned from our leaders, and the issue with TK and his analytics company and seeing the lack of success we have had, to continue that approach, and that is what I meant, is bizarre if you want to succeed.
But further than that the choice of manager is a subtle thing. They may have a poor win record, a poor record on getting teams promoted but if they get the best from their squad that is all you can ask. You need somebody whose face fits. For example I always thought Sanchez was badly dealt with because the fans did not want him from day one, so that was always likely to end in tears, poor results sealed his fate, but somebody else would have been given longer. Since I was a boy I thought the managerial appointment was key to success, MacDonald and Adams being the absolute proof of what a new man can achieve with essentially the same squad. So stats are very low down the pecking order in terms of that appointment.
I did know CR was a massive error from the moment he was appointed and he has exceeded my worst fears. I did think we should have kept Slav a few more games but now we will never know if that was a correct assertion but I do not know who we should get for next season. I am pretty sure we should not be getting one of the usual suspects, and my feeling is we would be better off with a younger hungry British manager looking for a big chance. Providing they can deal with the transfer policy which in the end will pull the rug from all of them.
To me the first thing that needs to be done is what MAF did, get a top experienced person (Keegan was a masterstroke) and let them run the football side of things.
I totally agree with you comments regarding an experienced Director of Football. However I think it should be someone who has an amount of managerial and playing time and someone under the age of 50.
A younger DOF could bring in new ideas. I would like to see someone like Lee Clark. Even though he wasn't overly successful in his managerial career he would have the best interests at heart for Fulham and would make an excellent Director of Football much like in the vein of Kevin Keegan.
So, apart from apparently have Fulham's best interest at heart (one would expect that no? I am sure the same goes for TK) and not so far being overly successful in his managerial career, what leads you to believe that he would make an excellent DoF for Fulham?
I know it wan't my suggestion but Lee Clarke may be a good choice as a candidate to consider. He knows the place and the psyche, has managed (not all that well but this job is different) and could be a 'thinking outside the box' person that might just work. Who would have believed one M. Adams would be quite so good at the job when he took over.
Quote from: Statto on February 25, 2019, 02:03:50 PM
Quote from: Newry FFC on February 25, 2019, 02:00:00 PM
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/41710640
Take a read at this link, looking at the frequency of manager changes and how it doesn't cause chaos when it happens. Also re the depth of scouting: a list of 10 players per position to fit into the current ethos of the coaches, who are recruited to a specific model
Where does it say they have a scout just for managers?
Also, a list of 10 players per position - I was doing that on Championship Manager in about 2001 and no one from the BBC wrote an article about it... like 99% of this stats business it really does just sound like money for old rope to me
In terms of the original data and data analysis it is literally a premium paid by every single club accessing the same data and downloading to their own accessing device. Of course individually they can attempt to add to or improve upon the original material and then render it in many different ways via spreadsheets or database applications. The data covers coaching and other specialisms. People like TK, driven by 'Moneyball' ideology, seek to come up with something original and successful. In TK's case his role suggests a conflict of interests. On the subject of the data itself and the collation of it by so called experts I would suggest it largely is money for old rope because the algorithms will give the same answer to the same question wherever it is asked. However a unique algorithm may give a different answer but the efficacy of that answer relies on the algorithm being sensible and appropriate and not in use anywhere else. The chances of someone in everyday use coming up with a unique algorithm must be millions to one against but that may be lost on people who don't understand what computer's do or what computer people do to make their fame and fortune (largely repetition of unoriginal ideas). Hollywood makes a movie out of the written material, a legend is created and everybody goes 'wow' ....
Quote from: ALG01 on February 25, 2019, 02:18:19 PM
I know it wan't my suggestion but Lee Clarke may be a good choice as a candidate to consider. He knows the place and the psyche, has managed (not all that well but this job is different) and could be a 'thinking outside the box' person that might just work. Who would have believed one M. Adams would be quite so good at the job when he took over.
Again, sure maybe that would work. But why exactly? I mean, so far one of the main reasons seem to be that this is at least not the same job that he has not been successful at. Thus, I still fail to understand what is so great about him. So, he spent a few seasons here 15 odd years ago which apparently translates to knowing the place and the psyche. If those are the criteria, then there would be a host of candidates I believe, since we surely have many ex players that have not been overly successful in their post playing days. What sets Clark apart from any of them? Not saying that it couldn't work, just don't really see the rationale behind this at all.
I should add that I am not being cynical in my last post.
Quote from: Sting of the North on February 25, 2019, 02:41:39 PM
Quote from: ALG01 on February 25, 2019, 02:18:19 PM
I know it wan't my suggestion but Lee Clarke may be a good choice as a candidate to consider. He knows the place and the psyche, has managed (not all that well but this job is different) and could be a 'thinking outside the box' person that might just work. Who would have believed one M. Adams would be quite so good at the job when he took over.
Again, sure maybe that would work. But why exactly? I mean, so far one of the main reasons seem to be that this is at least not the same job that he has not been successful at. Thus, I still fail to understand what is so great about him. So, he spent a few seasons here 15 odd years ago which apparently translates to knowing the place and the psyche. If those are the criteria, then there would be a host of candidates I believe, since we surely have many ex players that have not been overly successful in their post playing days. What sets Clark apart from any of them? Not saying that it couldn't work, just don't really see the rationale behind this at all.
To be honest Lee Clark doesn't have to do much to be better than what we have already does he?
Quote from: toshes mate on February 25, 2019, 02:49:56 PM
Quote from: Sting of the North on February 25, 2019, 02:41:39 PM
Quote from: ALG01 on February 25, 2019, 02:18:19 PM
I know it wan't my suggestion but Lee Clarke may be a good choice as a candidate to consider. He knows the place and the psyche, has managed (not all that well but this job is different) and could be a 'thinking outside the box' person that might just work. Who would have believed one M. Adams would be quite so good at the job when he took over.
Again, sure maybe that would work. But why exactly? I mean, so far one of the main reasons seem to be that this is at least not the same job that he has not been successful at. Thus, I still fail to understand what is so great about him. So, he spent a few seasons here 15 odd years ago which apparently translates to knowing the place and the psyche. If those are the criteria, then there would be a host of candidates I believe, since we surely have many ex players that have not been overly successful in their post playing days. What sets Clark apart from any of them? Not saying that it couldn't work, just don't really see the rationale behind this at all.
To be honest Lee Clark doesn't have to do much to be better than what we have already does he?
That could be an argument, but I for one would hope that our ambitions if we hire someone new would be a bit higher than just finding someone that is a little less bad at his job than the people currently occupying the job is said to be.
Quote from: Sting of the North on February 25, 2019, 02:41:39 PM
Quote from: ALG01 on February 25, 2019, 02:18:19 PM
I know it wan't my suggestion but Lee Clarke may be a good choice as a candidate to consider. He knows the place and the psyche, has managed (not all that well but this job is different) and could be a 'thinking outside the box' person that might just work. Who would have believed one M. Adams would be quite so good at the job when he took over.
Again, sure maybe that would work. But why exactly? I mean, so far one of the main reasons seem to be that this is at least not the same job that he has not been successful at. Thus, I still fail to understand what is so great about him. So, he spent a few seasons here 15 odd years ago which apparently translates to knowing the place and the psyche. If those are the criteria, then there would be a host of candidates I believe, since we surely have many ex players that have not been overly successful in their post playing days. What sets Clark apart from any of them? Not saying that it couldn't work, just don't really see the rationale behind this at all.
For me he seems like the right soprt of candidate, whether he himself is correct I am not sure, I would have to interview him but... the reason is he is an ex player and an ex Fulham player too so knows that much about what it is like. He has been a manager and did well for a while so I think he may also have an eye for a player and he seems to talk reasonably well (if I remember correctly) and that also counts. Plus I think because of his playing career he will have the respect of the players. I think he has the right sort of credentials that are worth considering, that is not the same as he is the man. Sometimes it is just instinct that says good idea and my instinct says so with this suggestion.
Quote from: ALG01 on February 25, 2019, 03:18:29 PM
Quote from: Sting of the North on February 25, 2019, 02:41:39 PM
Quote from: ALG01 on February 25, 2019, 02:18:19 PM
I know it wan't my suggestion but Lee Clarke may be a good choice as a candidate to consider. He knows the place and the psyche, has managed (not all that well but this job is different) and could be a 'thinking outside the box' person that might just work. Who would have believed one M. Adams would be quite so good at the job when he took over.
Again, sure maybe that would work. But why exactly? I mean, so far one of the main reasons seem to be that this is at least not the same job that he has not been successful at. Thus, I still fail to understand what is so great about him. So, he spent a few seasons here 15 odd years ago which apparently translates to knowing the place and the psyche. If those are the criteria, then there would be a host of candidates I believe, since we surely have many ex players that have not been overly successful in their post playing days. What sets Clark apart from any of them? Not saying that it couldn't work, just don't really see the rationale behind this at all.
For me he seems like the right soprt of candidate, whether he himself is correct I am not sure, I would have to interview him but... the reason is he is an ex player and an ex Fulham player too so knows that much about what it is like. He has been a manager and did well for a while so I think he may also have an eye for a player and he seems to talk reasonably well (if I remember correctly) and that also counts. Plus I think because of his playing career he will have the respect of the players. I think he has the right sort of credentials that are worth considering, that is not the same as he is the man. Sometimes it is just instinct that says good idea and my instinct says so with this suggestion.
Fair enough
