Pod interview with Tony Khan

[Sting of the North]

Maybe we can just respect each others opinions without calling out "whiners" or "moaners" or "sycophants" or "fanboys". It would be nice if this forum could keep holding a higher standard than the average internet forum where people keep insulting each other. It is perfectly possible to disagree with someone without resorting to labeling them in a negative way. If one cannot find better arguments, maybe time to rethink?

[wormbridge]

I get the feeling from reading through the comments that a lot of you guys have not actually listened to the interview.  You heard it for sure, but listened to it, that is a completely different story.

It's almost like politics.  People believe what they believe and interpret things through that lens.   

[wormbridge]

Maybe we can just respect each others opinions without calling out "whiners" or "moaners" or "sycophants" or "fanboys". It would be nice if this forum could keep holding a higher standard than the average internet forum where people keep insulting each other. It is perfectly possible to disagree with someone without resorting to labeling them in a negative way. If one cannot find better arguments, maybe time to rethink?

yes, 100%  We had someone on TiFF digging out Tony Khan for taking credit for Mitro when the interview clearly says that it was others who had done the groundwork.  I pointed this out and got abuse.  It's a very weird dynamic.  Internet discussion, eh?

[Dr Quinzel]

Found it in me to listen. I feel worse than before. Arrogant and naïve don't make a good mixture.

Just washed over the multiple jobs aspect as though it hasn't already affected us. I wish the interviewers had been allowed free reign, or had been able to make logical retorts on many of his points where he evidenced his naivety, but appreciate they'd never have got the interview if they had done so.

I imagine a lot of people will think even less of him now, and the fanboys will continue to live with their blinkers on.

But most of these jobs are the same analytics once the base programs are built its just feeding in info and looking at the result many a business person will sit on the broad of Directors of many companies and not have to be fully hands on. I doubt TK inputs all the data himself he will just look at the results at the end

DoFO is more than just clicking go each day on a stats machine - a data analyst is a full time job, let alone DoFO.

[colinwhite]

Well ive been called afew things in my time but psycophant is a new one on me ! Either way uncalled for and out of order.

[wormbridge]

By all accounts Tony Khan took over transfers fully in the summer of 2016. So every signing from Floyd Ayite onwards is "his".

Here's our spending versus points tally in every season since then, compared to our peers (the other six clubs closest to our final league position)

Is Tony Khan the antichrist? No
Is he a horrible person? No (albeit he comes across as arrogant, egotistical and naive IMO)
Are we worse than every other football club in the entire football league every season? No

Do we consistently perform poorly compared to most of our peer clubs? Yes

Also probably worth noting that of the clubs below us in these tables, Norwich and Middlesbrough both changed their head of recruitment at the end of the season in question

I don't know that you can just pluck points per million as any meaningful metric.  Certainly financial outlay is important and certainly we're not going to be the most efficient, but there's a hell of a lot more to capture if going down this road, especially for the Premiership where we arrived with half a squad and had to catch up fast.

[Dr Quinzel]

Maybe we can just respect each others opinions without calling out "whiners" or "moaners" or "sycophants" or "fanboys". It would be nice if this forum could keep holding a higher standard than the average internet forum where people keep insulting each other. It is perfectly possible to disagree with someone without resorting to labeling them in a negative way. If one cannot find better arguments, maybe time to rethink?

yes, 100%  We had someone on TiFF digging out Tony Khan for taking credit for Mitro when the interview clearly says that it was others who had done the groundwork.  I pointed this out and got abuse.  It's a very weird dynamic.  Internet discussion, eh?

It's weird how it's always you that is on the receiving end.

[wormbridge]

Maybe we can just respect each others opinions without calling out "whiners" or "moaners" or "sycophants" or "fanboys". It would be nice if this forum could keep holding a higher standard than the average internet forum where people keep insulting each other. It is perfectly possible to disagree with someone without resorting to labeling them in a negative way. If one cannot find better arguments, maybe time to rethink?

yes, 100%  We had someone on TiFF digging out Tony Khan for taking credit for Mitro when the interview clearly says that it was others who had done the groundwork.  I pointed this out and got abuse.  It's a very weird dynamic.  Internet discussion, eh?

It's weird how it's always you that is on the receiving end.

if that's sarcasm I'm always happy to learn how to conduct myself better!

[YoungsBitter]

By all accounts Tony Khan took over transfers fully in the summer of 2016. So every signing from Floyd Ayite onwards is "his".

Here's our spending versus points tally in every season since then, compared to our peers (the other six clubs closest to our final league position)

Is Tony Khan the antichrist? No
Is he a horrible person? No (albeit he comes across as arrogant, egotistical and naive IMO)
Are we worse than every other football club in the entire football league every season? No

Do we consistently perform poorly compared to most of our peer clubs? Yes

Also probably worth noting that of the clubs below us in these tables, Norwich and Middlesbrough both changed their head of recruitment at the end of the season in question

I don't know that you can just pluck points per million as any meaningful metric.  Certainly financial outlay is important and certainly we're not going to be the most efficient, but there's a hell of a lot more to capture if going down this road, especially for the Premiership where we arrived with half a squad and had to catch up fast.

This is so arbitrary, almost as if someone is trying to find data to support a prexisting thought. Also this is completely ignoring the contracts and salaries, which are fixed over long periods of time. So are they included? if so do you back out contracts agreed before the season in question so its only new commitments? but that does not work as the success is due to all players, newly committed to or before. Is it net spend? as presumably you can spend more if you have more income? More fundamentally the squad is an ongoing work with costs embedded and value realizable through sales that changes over time.
Tony Khan, love him or hate him, has built as of today a squad with lots of sell on value, at a low average age, with lots of Championship and now Premiership experience. Who can argue we are not better off today than when the Khan's bought the team?

[Dr Quinzel]

'Who can argue we are not better off today than when the Khan's bought the team?'

A quick look at the league we've spent most of their tenure in, and the two years they've had in the PL suggests there's a very easy argument to be made. Granted, they inherited a declining team run on a model I wouldn't prefer, but to suggest a team who had multiple seasons in Europe and 13 straight in the top flight is now better off after 2 relegations and 4 in the Championship seems odd to me.

[snarks]

In a nutshell those who see Fulham as a premiership club as they were under MAF when he sold it.

I should add I'm pro the Khans

[Statto]

I don't know that you can just pluck points per million as any meaningful metric.  Certainly financial outlay is important and certainly we're not going to be the most efficient, but there's a hell of a lot more to capture if going down this road, especially for the Premiership where we arrived with half a squad and had to catch up fast.

This is so arbitrary, almost as if someone is trying to find data to support a prexisting thought. Also this is completely ignoring the contracts and salaries, which are fixed over long periods of time. So are they included? if so do you back out contracts agreed before the season in question so its only new commitments? but that does not work as the success is due to all players, newly committed to or before. Is it net spend? as presumably you can spend more if you have more income? More fundamentally the squad is an ongoing work with costs embedded and value realizable through sales that changes over time.
Tony Khan, love him or hate him, has built as of today a squad with lots of sell on value, at a low average age, with lots of Championship and now Premiership experience. Who can argue we are not better off today than when the Khan's bought the team?

I think you both make valid points about the imperfections of this analysis. The reality is just that neither I, nor evidently anyone else, has had the time thus far to go into a lot more detail.

However I object to the comments that this isn't "meaningful", or that it's "arbitrary" and "trying to find data to support a prexisting thought". If you've a better approach in mind that will reflect well on TK, by all means go ahead with that and post your findings.   

That won't happen of course, because as is painfully clear to anyone who bothers to conduct any half-intelligent analysis of the data with a reasonable level of granularity, it will reflect poorly on TK. That's why the defences of TK on this forum invariably rely on cursory (at best) analyses and intuitive judgments.

So I entirely agree that looking at spending over 3 yrs instead of 1 yr, and taking into account wages and sale proceeds, would be ideal, if one had the time to do it. But is that suddenly going to show that, comparing financial outlay and success achieved, we're better run than peer clubs like Huddersfield, Cardiff, Norwich, Villa, Brighton, Burnley and Wolves? No.

And as I said on the rare occasions another club has done as poorly as us on those metrics, in most cases they've immediately overhauled their transfer staff and structure.   

[Statto]

People believe what they believe and interpret things through that lens.   

I see this sort of comment a lot both in politics and debates about Tony Khan. Has it crossed your mind that perhaps the comment itself is your "belief" and "lens"? Perhaps the opposing arguments you dismiss as driven by entrenched belief, are actually based by objective reasoning, and you just can't accept that? 

[toshes mate]

Maybe we can just respect each others opinions without calling out "whiners" or "moaners" or "sycophants" or "fanboys". It would be nice if this forum could keep holding a higher standard than the average internet forum where people keep insulting each other. It is perfectly possible to disagree with someone without resorting to labeling them in a negative way. If one cannot find better arguments, maybe time to rethink?

On the other hand colinwhite's use of 'psychophant' (above) is a real gem of a comment.  I think it is case of if the mud sticks.

[aaronmcguigan]

Fun drinking game. Down a shot everytime Tony says "Ummm..." and you'll be passed out before he mentions taking credit for the Mitro deal.

In all seriousness, Tony needs some decent mates or a reality check. With the Jags and Fulham, he's jumping through hoops for daddy. He works from morning to night , missing friends weddings, and if a friend wants to see him they have to come to his work.
All this trying to please daddy is pointless. If I was him I'd focus on the wrestling which he is powering on with , and have a bit of work life balance. Or even better, install Tony as owner, so his workload is lessened but his operation of analytics carries on .
In a few years Shahid will bow out, and Tony will get the sole keys to the cottage anyway.

[toshes mate]

I get the feeling from reading through the comments that a lot of you guys have not actually listened to the interview.  You heard it for sure, but listened to it, that is a completely different story.

It's almost like politics.  People believe what they believe and interpret things through that lens.   

For sure we all do it either in the interests of proving we have open minds or it suits us to show we have minds totally made up.  But listening is tough to do. It takes considerable energy, demands concentration, and requires using memory very efficiently. One hour (the length of the podcast) is getting close to kind of limit most 'normal' people have without a break.  We are an easily distracted species that is prone to hearing something and wanting to pigeon hole the sound immediately rather than have our minds gently nurtured into understanding what we may have just heard.   

[wormbridge]

People believe what they believe and interpret things through that lens.   

I see this sort of comment a lot both in politics and debates about Tony Khan. Has it crossed your mind that perhaps the comment itself is your "belief" and "lens"? Perhaps the opposing arguments you dismiss as driven by entrenched belief, are actually based by objective reasoning, and you just can't accept that?

Well people are taking opposing things from the podcast despite all hearing the same words.   And confirmation is a very well known bias that we're all prone to.  So I don't think I'm saying anything too outlandish am I?

It's not a question of not accepting things.  I can disagree, though, right?  People all over the Fulham boards are allowed to insult Tony Khan and question his suitability for the role he has, but if someone like me thinks he's broadly on the right lines and doesn't deserve all the poo he gets, well then that seems to rub people up the wrong way. 

[toshes mate]

In all seriousness, Tony needs some decent mates or a reality check. With the Jags and Fulham, he's jumping through hoops for daddy. He works from morning to night , missing friends weddings, and if a friend wants to see him they have to come to his work.

You echo my thoughts exactly because that is the time, and possibly the only time, IMHO, that Tony reveals to us the real him, and nothing but the true him.  He is, by choice, immersed in his work and so what is it he is avoiding by so doing?   I'd be interested to know that just as insight.   

[Statto]

People believe what they believe and interpret things through that lens.   

I see this sort of comment a lot both in politics and debates about Tony Khan. Has it crossed your mind that perhaps the comment itself is your "belief" and "lens"? Perhaps the opposing arguments you dismiss as driven by entrenched belief, are actually based by objective reasoning, and you just can't accept that?

Well people are taking opposing things from the podcast despite all hearing the same words.   And confirmation is a very well known bias that we're all prone to.  So I don't think I'm saying anything too outlandish am I?

It's not a question of not accepting things.  I can disagree, though, right?  People all over the Fulham boards are allowed to insult Tony Khan and question his suitability for the role he has, but if someone like me thinks he's broadly on the right lines and doesn't deserve all the poo he gets, well then that seems to rub people up the wrong way. 

If you're talking about specific statements that some people have clearly misinterpreted due to their own bias, then I entirely sympathise with you there.

But the comment you made is one I often hear used to make broader, unfair generalisations, eg "Group A only voted for B because of their entrenched, misguided belief in C"

For example, there's plenty of empirical data and other reasonable evidence to support the "People all over the Fulham boards [who] insult Tony Khan and question his suitability for the role he has", so if you were just to dismiss all those posts as "people believing what they want to believe", that would obviously be very wrong.

[toshes mate]

People believe what they believe and interpret things through that lens.   

I see this sort of comment a lot both in politics and debates about Tony Khan. Has it crossed your mind that perhaps the comment itself is your "belief" and "lens"? Perhaps the opposing arguments you dismiss as driven by entrenched belief, are actually based by objective reasoning, and you just can't accept that?

Well people are taking opposing things from the podcast despite all hearing the same words.   And confirmation is a very well known bias that we're all prone to.  So I don't think I'm saying anything too outlandish am I?

It's not a question of not accepting things.  I can disagree, though, right?  People all over the Fulham boards are allowed to insult Tony Khan and question his suitability for the role he has, but if someone like me thinks he's broadly on the right lines and doesn't deserve all the poo he gets, well then that seems to rub people up the wrong way. 

You are quite correct.  It could be called virtue signalling to those already in the camp we get shovelled into regardless of whether we still have an open mind but just wish to express ourselves at this moment in time.