News:

Use a VPN to stream games Safely and Securely 🔒
A Virtual Private Network can also allow you to
watch games Not being broadcast in the UK For
more Information and how to Sign Up go to
https://go.nordvpn.net/SH4FE

Main Menu


Director of Football versus Manager old chestnut

Started by YoungsBitter, December 10, 2017, 11:05:08 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

FulhamStu

Time and time again we are told Jokanovic is involved in transfers and we have been through the process on a number of threads so I am not going to repeat it all.  Suffice to say, Jokanovic will say what he wants, ie type of player etc, he then has a veto if he doesn't want said player.  What he doesn't do is identify players, but can and does make recommendations which may or may not get recruited.  StefJo was a Slav recommendation.

Slav is not responsible for recruitment, but is involved in the process.

As for over 28 year players, we can sign these players but Khan junior has to approve, which he would anyway.  It's just our model does not focus on these players as we are looking for players with value going forward.

I honestly don't understand why anyone has a problem with this model, it makes perfect sense.
What is odd is why the club thought signing multiple wingers and no centre back was a good idea.  Why Slav didn't veto the 5th winger I don't know.  As for the strikers, well they just haven't worked and that happens.

toshes mate

Quote from: MJG on December 12, 2017, 06:44:17 AM
We have been down route two on numerous occasions and I really can't see us doing that any time soon with regards allowing a manager/head coach full control on who he wants and who he gets rid of.
Perhaps you were mislead by 'my whole team decisions' expression, for which I apologise.  What I meant was whole team as in whole FFC which is why I didn't say SJ in charge.  I don't think he'd want it even if it was offered.  A better solution would be CEO adhering to 'whole team majority decisions' which was what I imagine happened in the good old days or not as the case may be. 

toshes mate

Quote from: FulhamStu on December 12, 2017, 08:19:01 AM
What is odd is why the club thought signing multiple wingers and no centre back was a good idea.  Why Slav didn't veto the 5th winger I don't know.  As for the strikers, well they just haven't worked and that happens.
A veto only has a point when you have a player who is already suited to the role you want him for and the 'newbie' is clearly not up to that standard.   It is a classic case of SJ saying a role is already perfectly well covered (as in Aluko and Malone) so get me better or the equivalent of. The process is wholly flawed otherwise why were Malone and Aluko allowed to go without suitable replacement? 

The process doesn't need vetoes it needs majority decision and much more hard work done by the whole recruitment team of which SJ is not a part.


FulhamStu

#23
Quote from: toshes mate on December 12, 2017, 08:34:43 AM
Quote from: FulhamStu on December 12, 2017, 08:19:01 AM
What is odd is why the club thought signing multiple wingers and no centre back was a good idea.  Why Slav didn't veto the 5th winger I don't know.  As for the strikers, well they just haven't worked and that happens.
A veto only has a point when you have a player who is already suited to the role you want him for and the 'newbie' is clearly not up to that standard.   It is a classic case of SJ saying a role is already perfectly well covered (as in Aluko and Malone) so get me better or the equivalent of. The process is wholly flawed otherwise why were Malone and Aluko allowed to go without suitable replacement? 

The process doesn't need vetoes it needs majority decision and much more hard work done by the whole recruitment team of which SJ is not a part.

You know perfectly well why they went.

1. Aluko wanted a 4 year contract taking him to 32 years old and to be our highest paid player.

2. Malone was offered Premier League football and I expect wages.

We were offered excellent money for player we paid nothing for a year ago, suppose that was bad business was it ?

We got Soares to replace Malone, and Ojo plus Mollo plus Graham to replace Aluko for nothing giving us a net £12M profit to spend on desperately required strikers.  Soares has clearly not worked out and looks like a bad mistake however Ojo has been good.  The problem is also Fonte has not worked and we didn't get a upgrade at centre half.

Like most things in football it's easy to be wise and smart after the event, transfers are always a risk, Fulham make plenty as do all clubs.


toshes mate

@FulhamStu
I don't at all know why they went and you using well oiled anecdotes doesn't justify anything.

Fulham always have been a selling club but you do not sell key first team players unless you know you can replace them or have replaced them with better, neither of these requirements having been met with Malone and arguably inadequately met with Aluko.

Or is football all about how much money you make?  If that is so then surely getting into the PL and staying there would be the real earner.  Another reason for sticking with Malone and Aluko.   Fulham could have been a lot more sustainable without squandering money on Fonte and Kamara by letting two good squad players go so very, very easily.

RaySmith

I'm nor sure how we could have kept  Aluko and Malone, but, as said, we got good money for them and replacements.

I feel that Kamara, and even Fonte could work out - they have both improved, particularly kamara, while Soares has hardly featured in the senior squad, but is supposed to have fitness issues - so he  could possibly come good.


toshes mate

Odoi has been the best of the attempts to replace 'Malone' and was already with us.  Problem is that with injuries to Ream or Kalas mean he cannot cover both central and wide defenders.  In other words the sale of Malone was short sighted and the stated replacement hasn't figured much at all for whatever reason in almost five months.  The Aluko situation has not been a like-for-like otherwise Ojo/Graham would have slotted in from the start.  We have struggled and only Ayite and Kebano have really shown the necessary skill sets to suit the playing style of the side in the wider positions.

No doubt a more settled core team without the injury problems would have been a better place to settle in the newbies but again selling twenty percent of your first team squad rather than at least trying to retain them has made the injury toll show up as an even greater problem than it may otherwise have been.   How fit were Malone and Aluko last season and this?

It is short sighted dealings that have blighted the season to date and the recruitment must take the blame for that.

Marcel_Gecov

Quote from: toshes mate on December 12, 2017, 09:53:43 AM
@FulhamStu
I don't at all know why they went and you using well oiled anecdotes doesn't justify anything.

Fulham always have been a selling club but you do not sell key first team players unless you know you can replace them or have replaced them with better, neither of these requirements having been met with Malone and arguably inadequately met with Aluko.

Or is football all about how much money you make?  If that is so then surely getting into the PL and staying there would be the real earner.  Another reason for sticking with Malone and Aluko.   Fulham could have been a lot more sustainable without squandering money on Fonte and Kamara by letting two good squad players go so very, very easily.

But when you look at subsequent facts is our squad genuinely weaker? Aluko has scored 2 in 16 this seasom whilst Ojo has 3 in 10 - as a direct comparison we have traded upwards based on this year. Aluko scored 8 in 47 last year, if we extrapolate Ojo's goals over the same amount of games you are looking at 14-15. This is clearly an upgrade on goals. On assists, they are about square. Obviously this is all pie in the sky and Ojo could be wiped out for the season next match however this transfer hasn't worked out badly so far.


toshes mate

I'd really like to believe the squad will come good once Piazon and Ayite are back and available, and Johansen's persistent injury is sorted.  They did the business last time and we know they are capable of the desired results.  That is where I differ from you with Malone and Aluko - we knew what we were getting from them and played to that.  By all means back them up with players like Ojo, Soares, but don't sell them until you know the newbies have what it takes.  When you have something that works you keep it until you have something better, but you don't sell a good time keeper for one that tells the time accurately only twice a day. 


filham

Quote from: VancouverWhite on December 12, 2017, 04:45:03 AM
Quote from: YoungsBitter on December 10, 2017, 11:05:08 PM
However the issue still remains that we have a Coach who recently with poor subs and some stubborn selection decisions has lost us games

So last year we finished with 22 wins, 14 draws and 10 losses on the back of his "poor subs" and "stubborn selection decisions". 

This year, 7W 8D 6L

We don't really have a stacked team of world beaters so for me, looking at it objectively, he's still performing well. 

I think this season's figures are similar to what Kit had when we gave him the sack, am I not right.

Marcel_Gecov

Quote from: Statto on December 12, 2017, 12:03:40 PM
Quote from: FulhamStu on December 12, 2017, 08:19:01 AM
Suffice to say, Jokanovic will say what he wants, ie type of player etc, he then has a veto if he doesn't want said player.  What he doesn't do is identify players, but can and does make recommendations which may or may not get recruited. 

Without, as you say, repeating previous discussion, there's a lot of assumption in your explanation there about how the system works in practical terms, and even if all those assumptions are correct, still a lot of gaps and ambiguity in that explanation. It all sounds to me like Jokanovic has a say in transfers in much the same way that citizens in Hong Kong have a say in their elections.

I think this is correct. But may be due to the nature of his relationship with Kline which was poisonous and none of us know whether they were even on speaking terms over the summer. Joka may well have 'game of throne'd' a situation to get rid of Kline and improve his old 'power' without the club (this has to be the case otherwise you'd surely just walk). It's all speculation anyway, and only in Jan will we start to see answers. I am interested to see whether the process changes in Jan.  The key indicator for me will be whether Joka speaks out on transfers again, if he doesn't, we can assume things have changed.

FFC1987

This years squad is weaker if you take into account the starting 11. Our best 11 last year trumps this years starting 11 and that's the point of the squad. Creating the most competitive starting 11. Its more unbalanced hence why I think we're seeing strange lineups with no strikers etc.


Twig

Quote from: filham on December 12, 2017, 11:56:13 AM
Quote from: VancouverWhite on December 12, 2017, 04:45:03 AM
Quote from: YoungsBitter on December 10, 2017, 11:05:08 PM
However the issue still remains that we have a Coach who recently with poor subs and some stubborn selection decisions has lost us games

So last year we finished with 22 wins, 14 draws and 10 losses on the back of his "poor subs" and "stubborn selection decisions". 

This year, 7W 8D 6L

We don't really have a stacked team of world beaters so for me, looking at it objectively, he's still performing well. 

I think this season's figures are similar to what Kit had when we gave him the sack, am I not right.

Not sure but I think it is similar to last year W8 D8 L5

FulhamStu

Quote from: Statto on December 12, 2017, 12:03:40 PM
Quote from: FulhamStu on December 12, 2017, 08:19:01 AM
Suffice to say, Jokanovic will say what he wants, ie type of player etc, he then has a veto if he doesn't want said player.  What he doesn't do is identify players, but can and does make recommendations which may or may not get recruited. 

Statto, I am repeating what Tony Khan has said on a number of occasions.  You can choose not believe him if you like, but that's what he said.

As for the Malone and Aluko debate, if money were no object, yes I would have liked them both to stay.  All clubs, even Man U sell when they have too (Ronaldo), it's not a case of selling and not buying, we spent the £12M on Fonte and Kamara, that's been the problem.  Yes I think we still have money to spend if the right players become avail because we have not over net spent.
I guess my main issue is I would not have made Aluko our highest paid player and given him a 4 year contract whereas Toshes Mate presumably would have.  We did fail to properly replace Malone because Soares has so far not worked out, I was hoping Soares would have been an upgrade as I expect the club were, also suspect the clubs priority was Sessegnon, who we all want to see played further forward but have a no 3on his back which probably tells you all you need to know.   Good debate.

Without, as you say, repeating previous discussion, there's a lot of assumption in your explanation there about how the system works in practical terms, and even if all those assumptions are correct, still a lot of gaps and ambiguity in that explanation. It all sounds to me like Jokanovic has a say in transfers in much the same way that citizens in Hong Kong have a say in their elections.

FulhamStu

Sorry above reply was to Satto's point below my reply and previous discussion with Toshes mate.


bill taylors apprentice

My response to some of the comments above ............

The so called poor substitutions and stubborn team selections is a a bit of a red herring, I.e. a distraction!

A blind man can see we have a stronger squad but weaker starting eleven.

I accept the realities of life mean the loss of Malone and Aluko for the reasons given and its normal the Manager/Head Coach can be overruled in such cases.

But I refuse to accept the Head Coach has a veto on signings, therefore he has been presented with players strongly recommended by Kline and pushed trough by Khan Jnr that to one degree or another he doesn't rate.

There were excellent players in the Tigana promotion side who were almost ever presents that year and important in our success but struggled to maintain their position in the PL, so the age thing is another mistake.

I would love to see a list of signings that Slav was on board with and those he would have vetoed given the chance.

Woolly Mammoth

Quote from: bill taylors apprentice on December 12, 2017, 01:51:50 PM
My response to some of the comments above ............

I would love to see a list of signings that Slav was on board with and those he would have vetoed given the chance.

So would I, but I fear any lists you mention, have been shredded.
Its not the man in the fight, it's the fight in the man.  🐘

Never forget your Roots.

Jims Dentist

Quote from: Woolly Mammoth on December 14, 2017, 03:06:52 AM
Quote from: bill taylors apprentice on December 12, 2017, 01:51:50 PM
My response to some of the comments above ............

I would love to see a list of signings that Slav was on board with and those he would have vetoed given the chance.

So would I, but I fear any lists you mention, have been shredded.
Quote from: Woolly Mammoth on December 14, 2017, 03:06:52 AM
Quote from: bill taylors apprentice on December 12, 2017, 01:51:50 PM
My response to some of the comments above ............

I would love to see a list of signings that Slav was on board with and those he would have vetoed given the chance.

So would I, but I fear any lists you mention, have been shredded.
If the FST meetings are supposedly  such an open exchange of views and information we should be asking for this sort of information, but I feel that the club officials that attend the events are given a very easy ride.



MJG

Quote from: Jims Dentist on December 14, 2017, 08:01:30 PM
Quote from: Woolly Mammoth on December 14, 2017, 03:06:52 AM
Quote from: bill taylors apprentice on December 12, 2017, 01:51:50 PM
My response to some of the comments above ............

I would love to see a list of signings that Slav was on board with and those he would have vetoed given the chance.

So would I, but I fear any lists you mention, have been shredded.
Quote from: Woolly Mammoth on December 14, 2017, 03:06:52 AM
Quote from: bill taylors apprentice on December 12, 2017, 01:51:50 PM
My response to some of the comments above ............

I would love to see a list of signings that Slav was on board with and those he would have vetoed given the chance.

So would I, but I fear any lists you mention, have been shredded.
If the FST meetings are supposedly  such an open exchange of views and information we should be asking for this sort of information, but I feel that the club officials that attend the events are given a very easy ride.
they are not, but that's up to you to believe or not.
We have asked for similar lists  and while they may give one or two away.. Johansen for example as being a Slav pick, they are not going to produce a list as you request.
Just the views of a long term fan