Pod interview with Tony Khan

[Nero]

I think we've reached the conclusion of the argument as to whether Tony Khan's stat based system doesn't work by using stats to prove his stats don't work.
Before TK we would buy a player based on scouting. Then the club would have to work out whether we could afford the fee and his wages. Then a medical to ascertain his fitness (didn't we reject a forward from Villa due to a weak knee?) Both a form of stats I'd argue.
We're just going round in circles. Neither camp will persuade the other their thinking is skewed.
Let's have a vote and let the stat decide :)

TK - Brexit whats the difference

[Statto]

Anyone else find it funny that we are using stats to try and prove stats used by TK dont work

Nope. You're equating criticism of Tony Khan with criticism of the general use of stats in player recruitment. I'm fine with stats. The other clubs mentioned above will all have used them to some degree. Evidently TK is just crap at applying stats.

[bill taylors apprentice]

Well done Statto, I think you have just proven that it isn't the amount you spend it is the performance of the team that justifies the spend.  TK needs to do another podcast, explain to all his listeners why his system didn't bring that to fruition and whether or not his system was at fault.  (I am being deliberately provocative but I'd love to hear him try to explain it away, with a thoroughly decent interviewer of course.)

think he explained it when he said the previous manager didnt go to the scouting meetings, how he meant to know what type of player the manager wants and how it will fit into the manager's system. He brought purely on stats and info from the scouts, The the previous manager doesn't say yes he's a good player but has not the type i need i don't need another creative forward i need a deep lying playmaker. It doesnt mean he brought bad players just prehaps the wrong type as the manager didnt brother to have an input

Seems plausible, Nero, but I think you know it is BS.  In the podcast TK says 'I think I had a good relationship with SJ' and for two seasons SJ's absence from those sessions gave us a near miss and then promotion.  Only one season gave us terrible outcome.  As long as SJ had been given time then he would have turned TK's **** up around a third time.  It may have kept us up; it may not have done. TK's BS explains nothing.

I agree with Toshes mate!
I remember clearly being told the HC has a tick and is included in the process and nothing happens without his agreement.
Of course, if the HC is not getting his picks to the final vote then its likely he will eventually say "If I'm not really being included in the recruitment, my tick is then irelevant and my view on who I need is not taken seriously then I have better things to do"
Obviously that's an assumption but looking at the history and whats been said by those involved over time I think its a pretty good assumption.
TK's comment about the previous HC's not wishing to be involved is 1st rate BS!

[toshes mate]

So does it mean if we spent 412m we would have won the league?

Anyone else find it funny that we are using stats to try and prove stats used by TK dont work

It proves that team performance is everything in justifying expenditure.  It isn't a stat that needs to be proven since it has always been a fact of football life.  The fact that computer systems using (apparently, so the people using them claim) sophisticated mathematics prove their worth also dodges the fact that the same sophisticated mathematics have been around for 500 years and have always been used in finding the most probable solutions to matters involving apparently random outcomes. 

Probability is the action of finding the point of regression to the mean of a series of random events/outcomes.  If you take a coin toss with a perfect coin the probability of heads occurring is even or 50/50 or 0.5 probability where 0 means it'll never happen and 1 means it will certainly happen.  What probability means at 0.9 is that nine times out of ten (or 900 out of thousand and so on) the event's outcome should happen as predicted. It doesn't definitely prove it will happen the very next time an event happens, or even several events after that, because it takes very large numbers indeed before an event regresses to its mean (0.9 in this case) and even then it may be just the one time in forever it does so.  Probability is the art of finding out how unlikely something is to happen so that you can then find how likely it will be to happen, or vice versa.   But all events being measured are totally random in their outcomes i.e. a tossed coin may land on heads a thousand or more times before it comes up tails since it is a random outcome.

[Nero]

Well done Statto, I think you have just proven that it isn't the amount you spend it is the performance of the team that justifies the spend.  TK needs to do another podcast, explain to all his listeners why his system didn't bring that to fruition and whether or not his system was at fault.  (I am being deliberately provocative but I'd love to hear him try to explain it away, with a thoroughly decent interviewer of course.)

think he explained it when he said the previous manager didnt go to the scouting meetings, how he meant to know what type of player the manager wants and how it will fit into the manager's system. He brought purely on stats and info from the scouts, The the previous manager doesn't say yes he's a good player but has not the type i need i don't need another creative forward i need a deep lying playmaker. It doesnt mean he brought bad players just prehaps the wrong type as the manager didnt brother to have an input

Seems plausible, Nero, but I think you know it is BS.  In the podcast TK says 'I think I had a good relationship with SJ' and for two seasons SJ's absence from those sessions gave us a near miss and then promotion.  Only one season gave us terrible outcome.  As long as SJ had been given time then he would have turned TK's **** up around a third time.  It may have kept us up; it may not have done. TK's BS explains nothing.

I agree with Toshes mate!
I remember clearly being told the HC has a tick and is included in the process and nothing happens without his agreement.
Of course, if the HC is not getting his picks to the final vote then its likely he will eventually say "If I'm not really being included in the recruitment, my tick is then irelevant and my view on who I need is not taken seriously then I have better things to do"
Obviously that's an assumption but looking at the history and whats been said by those involved over time I think its a pretty good assumption.
TK's comment about the previous HC's not wishing to be involved is 1st rate BS!

Or perhaps the HC was included and then threw his teddy out of the cot over the Herrea deal which TK has explained why we didnt sign him and then didn't want to be included !!

[Dr Quinzel]

So does it mean if we spent 412m we would have won the league?

Anyone else find it funny that we are using stats to try and prove stats used by TK dont work

Aren't most saying it's not stats used, but the man using them?

[The Rational Fan]

History of Events

When Tony Khan asked his father to be DoF without experience, SK said "yes, my son".
When Tony Khan as DoF asked his father to buy Mitrovoic, SK said "yes, my son".
When Tony Khan as DoF asked his father to give him £100m for players, SK said "yes, my son".

The Future DoF

If Fulham sacks Tony Khan, when new DoF asks for something then what will Shahid Khan say?

If we hire a new DoF and Shahid Khan says "yes to everything the DoF wants" things will be probably go better, at least until he makes a mistake and blows the money like most DoFs eventually do.

If we hire a new DoF and Shahid Khan says "no to everything the DoF wants" things will be very dark indeed. If you don't believe me this can happen, then ask a Newcastle or Sunderland or Blackburn or Bolton or Wigan or Leeds or Aston Villa fan.

As a Fan, "Yes, my son" is better than "No, my experienced DoF". I frankly see many advantages having a DoF that is a multi-billionaires son, especially if daddy will bail him out of his mistakes.

Well, I do understand what you are saying this time and strangely there is a perverse logic to your post.

Personally i do not agree that is the correct approach.
My whole issue is does TK have what it takes to succeed as DOF at Fulham and so far the answer is clearly no.

I know you are unable/unwilling to to bring yourself to say TK has no talent for the job and I can only repeat, without his father being a very rich man he would not have the job and his lack of talent has cost us dear in so many ways. Imagine he was talented and had access to his dad's money, we would be top 6 in the prem, not relegated.

We're discussing what is the best way to spend Tony Khan's future inheritance. Currently, the Khans are giving Tony Khan's inheritance to Fulham and the DoF (Tony Khan) is spending some of it wisely and losing some of it too. You are suggesting the Khans should give continue to Tony Khan's inheritance to Fulham, but a new DoF with more football experience should spend it instead. Has anyone checked with the Khans about this plan?

No doubt that could work, but equally it could go horribly wrong, if Tony Khan's inheritance is not given to Fulham when he is not DoF. For those that hope Tony Khan's inheritance is used to fund another DoF and show what a experienced DoF can do with Tony Khan's inheritance, i do not share your optimism. And, I doubt Tony Khan will be thanking SK for sacking him as DoF, so that Tony Khan can have a better run Football Club to inherit.

Be Grateful that now, Fulham is in "one of the best leagues in the world" with plenty of expensive players and more ongoing investment expected, just enjoy the ride and see where the DoF lead us. And it could be a lot worse, in fact without the Khans money we could be already worse than Coventry, Sunderland, Bolton, Wigan, QPR and other, with their money as long 20% is spent wisely we should be in the Championship (and TK is doing better than way better 20% wise spending).

[toshes mate]

We're discussing what is the best way to spend Tony Khan's future inheritance. Currently, the Khans are giving Tony Khan's inheritance to Fulham and the DoF (Tony Khan) is spending some of it wisely and losing some of it too. You are suggesting the Khans should give continue to Tony Khan's inheritance to Fulham, but a new DoF with more football experience should spend it instead. Has anyone checked with the Khans about this plan?

No doubt that could work, but equally it could go horribly wrong, if Tony Khan's inheritance is not given to Fulham when he is not DoF. For those that hope Tony Khan's inheritance is used to fund another DoF and show what a experienced DoF can do with Tony Khan's inheritance, i do not share your optimism. And, I doubt Tony Khan will be thanking SK for sacking him as DoF, so that Tony Khan can have a better run Football Club to inherit.

Be Grateful that now, Fulham is in "one of the best leagues in the world" with plenty of expensive players and more ongoing investment expected, just enjoy the ride and see where the DoF lead us. And it could be a lot worse, in fact without the Khans money we could be already worse than Coventry, Sunderland, Bolton, Wigan, QPR and other, with their money as long 20% is spent wisely we should be in the Championship (and TK is doing better than way better 20% wise spending).

The object of any private business is to make it as successful as is possible.  In football at a game by game level that is about winning games, since winning games and being successful attracts new customers.  To win games you must first have a football professional in charge of the process of recruiting or already having a match playing squad with a better than even chance of competing against your competitors, the other private businesses selling football.  That same football professional will also be tasked with developing and honing that squad to become, over time, consistent winners.  That would suggest that whoever is the money broker is subservient to the football professional since he is investing in or staking his money on his own skill of having selected that person on merit against all other potentials.  That is a trust relationship.

What we appear to have at FFC is a central figure who wishes to control all aspects of the business and only entrust the football professional with team coaching and match day selection.  It doesn't appear to have worked the way it was supposed to since the 'investor' has been fickle in his skill of selecting the right person for the job and has a vested interest in deflecting dissenting comment about his recruitment selections.  That is where the problem lies and it is harming the business success factor regardless of any perceived value in knowing there are billions of dollars waiting to be inherited at some point in the future.  Are you not guilty of missing this point and how would you remedy it? 

[The Rational Fan]

.....To win games you must first have a football professional in charge of the process of recruiting or already having a match playing squad with a better than even chance of competing against your competitors, the other private businesses selling football.....  That would suggest that whoever is the money broker is subservient to the football professional since he is investing in or staking his money on his own skill of having selected that person on merit against all other potentials.  That is a trust relationship.

What we appear to have at FFC is a central figure who wishes to control all aspects of the business and only entrust the football professional with team coaching and match day selection.  It doesn't appear to have worked the way it was supposed to since the 'investor' has been fickle in his skill of selecting the right person for the job and has a vested interest in deflecting dissenting comment about his recruitment selections.  That is where the problem lies and it is harming the business success factor regardless of any perceived value in knowing there are billions of dollars waiting to be inherited at some point in the future.  Are you not guilty of missing this point and how would you remedy it?

I understand the point that if the recruitment was run by a experience professional, then the money given from the owner to the DoF will probably go further. But that assumes, the owner gives the experience professional the same money as he gives his son. Last time, an experience professional (i think MJG) run the summer transfer window Shahid Khan gave him £7.8m and last time Tony Khan run the summer transfer window Shahid Khan gave him £104m. As a fan, which is better MJG spending £8m or TK spending £104m?

[toshes mate]

.....To win games you must first have a football professional in charge of the process of recruiting or already having a match playing squad with a better than even chance of competing against your competitors, the other private businesses selling football.....  That would suggest that whoever is the money broker is subservient to the football professional since he is investing in or staking his money on his own skill of having selected that person on merit against all other potentials.  That is a trust relationship.

What we appear to have at FFC is a central figure who wishes to control all aspects of the business and only entrust the football professional with team coaching and match day selection.  It doesn't appear to have worked the way it was supposed to since the 'investor' has been fickle in his skill of selecting the right person for the job and has a vested interest in deflecting dissenting comment about his recruitment selections.  That is where the problem lies and it is harming the business success factor regardless of any perceived value in knowing there are billions of dollars waiting to be inherited at some point in the future.  Are you not guilty of missing this point and how would you remedy it?

I understand the point that if the recruitment was run by a experience professional, then the money given from the owner to the DoF will probably go further. But that assumes, the owner gives the experience professional the same money as he gives his son. Last time, an experience professional (i think MJG) run recruitment Shahid Khan gave him £7.8m and last time Tony Khan run recruitment Shahid Khan gave him £104m. Which is better MJG with £8m or TK with £104m?

But if what you imply is true then Shahid Khan has no interest in seeing FFC as a successful business.   We are reduced to his son's 'toy' which is what his son's major critics fear most since he has not demonstrated the skill sets he claims he has and has squander the only success FFC have had in his father's entire tenure here.   Surely that is a dangerously risky relationship.  It also points to the mistaken belief Shahid Khan must have for the pre-TK as DoF era at FFC in as much as he blames everybody but himself for failures in a business he apparently doesn't care about except as a 'toy' for his boy.

[The Rational Fan]

.....To win games you must first have a football professional in charge of the process of recruiting or already having a match playing squad with a better than even chance of competing against your competitors, the other private businesses selling football.....  That would suggest that whoever is the money broker is subservient to the football professional since he is investing in or staking his money on his own skill of having selected that person on merit against all other potentials.  That is a trust relationship.

What we appear to have at FFC is a central figure who wishes to control all aspects of the business and only entrust the football professional with team coaching and match day selection.  It doesn't appear to have worked the way it was supposed to since the 'investor' has been fickle in his skill of selecting the right person for the job and has a vested interest in deflecting dissenting comment about his recruitment selections.  That is where the problem lies and it is harming the business success factor regardless of any perceived value in knowing there are billions of dollars waiting to be inherited at some point in the future.  Are you not guilty of missing this point and how would you remedy it?

I understand the point that if the recruitment was run by a experience professional, then the money given from the owner to the DoF will probably go further. But that assumes, the owner gives the experience professional the same money as he gives his son. Last time, an experience professional (i think MJG) run recruitment Shahid Khan gave him £7.8m and last time Tony Khan run recruitment Shahid Khan gave him £104m. Which is better MJG with £8m or TK with £104m?

But if what you imply is true then Shahid Khan has no interest in seeing FFC as a successful business.   We are reduced to his son's 'toy' which is what his son's major critics fear most since he has not demonstrated the skill sets he claims he has and has squander the only success FFC have had in his father's entire tenure here.   Surely that is a dangerously risky relationship.  It also points to the mistaken belief Shahid Khan must have for the pre-TK as DoF era at FFC in as much as he blames everybody but himself for failures in a business he apparently doesn't care about except as a 'toy' for his boy.

That's much too Black and White, but Shahid Khan is investing the absolute maximum allowed to give his son every chance of being a successful DoF.

[toshes mate]

.....To win games you must first have a football professional in charge of the process of recruiting or already having a match playing squad with a better than even chance of competing against your competitors, the other private businesses selling football.....  That would suggest that whoever is the money broker is subservient to the football professional since he is investing in or staking his money on his own skill of having selected that person on merit against all other potentials.  That is a trust relationship.

What we appear to have at FFC is a central figure who wishes to control all aspects of the business and only entrust the football professional with team coaching and match day selection.  It doesn't appear to have worked the way it was supposed to since the 'investor' has been fickle in his skill of selecting the right person for the job and has a vested interest in deflecting dissenting comment about his recruitment selections.  That is where the problem lies and it is harming the business success factor regardless of any perceived value in knowing there are billions of dollars waiting to be inherited at some point in the future.  Are you not guilty of missing this point and how would you remedy it?

I understand the point that if the recruitment was run by a experience professional, then the money given from the owner to the DoF will probably go further. But that assumes, the owner gives the experience professional the same money as he gives his son. Last time, an experience professional (i think MJG) run recruitment Shahid Khan gave him £7.8m and last time Tony Khan run recruitment Shahid Khan gave him £104m. Which is better MJG with £8m or TK with £104m?

But if what you imply is true then Shahid Khan has no interest in seeing FFC as a successful business.   We are reduced to his son's 'toy' which is what his son's major critics fear most since he has not demonstrated the skill sets he claims he has and has squander the only success FFC have had in his father's entire tenure here.   Surely that is a dangerously risky relationship.  It also points to the mistaken belief Shahid Khan must have for the pre-TK as DoF era at FFC in as much as he blames everybody but himself for failures in a business he apparently doesn't care about except as a 'toy' for his boy.

That's much too Black and White, but Shahid Khan is investing the absolute maximum allowed to give his son every chance of being a successful DoF.

And your stance isn't blacker and whiter than mine?  Your view is that as long as TK is here we are okay and if he goes we are not - I think on a previous thread you mention the asset strippers appearing.
You need to deal with opinion a bit better than that, TRF.

[The Rational Fan]

And your stance isn't blacker and whiter than mine?  Your view is that as long as TK is here we are okay and if he goes we are not - I think on a previous thread you mention the asset strippers appearing.
You need to deal with opinion a bit better than that, TRF.

Maybe true, I think i said or at least should have said "if he goes, then we are at risk of asset strippers appearing especially if we aren't doing well" and yes i am fairly certain if TK stays we will spend most of our time in the top two leagues, but may from time to time driff into League One briefly which is ok given our history. My fear is getting stuck in the bottom two leagues and then getting asset stripped.

[ALG01]

History of Events

When Tony Khan asked his father to be DoF without experience, SK said "yes, my son".
When Tony Khan as DoF asked his father to buy Mitrovoic, SK said "yes, my son".
When Tony Khan as DoF asked his father to give him £100m for players, SK said "yes, my son".

The Future DoF

If Fulham sacks Tony Khan, when new DoF asks for something then what will Shahid Khan say?

If we hire a new DoF and Shahid Khan says "yes to everything the DoF wants" things will be probably go better, at least until he makes a mistake and blows the money like most DoFs eventually do.

If we hire a new DoF and Shahid Khan says "no to everything the DoF wants" things will be very dark indeed. If you don't believe me this can happen, then ask a Newcastle or Sunderland or Blackburn or Bolton or Wigan or Leeds or Aston Villa fan.

As a Fan, "Yes, my son" is better than "No, my experienced DoF". I frankly see many advantages having a DoF that is a multi-billionaires son, especially if daddy will bail him out of his mistakes.

Well, I do understand what you are saying this time and strangely there is a perverse logic to your post.

Personally i do not agree that is the correct approach.
My whole issue is does TK have what it takes to succeed as DOF at Fulham and so far the answer is clearly no.

I know you are unable/unwilling to to bring yourself to say TK has no talent for the job and I can only repeat, without his father being a very rich man he would not have the job and his lack of talent has cost us dear in so many ways. Imagine he was talented and had access to his dad's money, we would be top 6 in the prem, not relegated.

We're discussing what is the best way to spend Tony Khan's future inheritance. Currently, the Khans are giving Tony Khan's inheritance to Fulham and the DoF (Tony Khan) is spending some of it wisely and losing some of it too. You are suggesting the Khans should give continue to Tony Khan's inheritance to Fulham, but a new DoF with more football experience should spend it instead. Has anyone checked with the Khans about this plan?

No doubt that could work, but equally it could go horribly wrong, if Tony Khan's inheritance is not given to Fulham when he is not DoF. For those that hope Tony Khan's inheritance is used to fund another DoF and show what a experienced DoF can do with Tony Khan's inheritance, i do not share your optimism. And, I doubt Tony Khan will be thanking SK for sacking him as DoF, so that Tony Khan can have a better run Football Club to inherit.

Be Grateful that now, Fulham is in "one of the best leagues in the world" with plenty of expensive players and more ongoing investment expected, just enjoy the ride and see where the DoF lead us. And it could be a lot worse, in fact without the Khans money we could be already worse than Coventry, Sunderland, Bolton, Wigan, QPR and other, with their money as long 20% is spent wisely we should be in the Championship (and TK is doing better than way better 20% wise spending).

No we are not discussing the best way to spend TK's inheritance, well I wasn't anyway.
I was discussing the podcast and commenting the man is in denial regarding is part in last season's debacle.
If the Khan's remain in situ they will continue to hemorrhage money and potential take us down into the next division. Since they arrived we have been getting worse, without slav we would never have managed to get to the Prem. TK is useless at the job and it is very frustrating that he does not do us all a faviour and just move sideways.

I do look at sunderland and coventry in particular and see we have management of that calibre. It doesn't need to be this way. SK has masses of money that he seems willing to invest, so why not spend it well rather than flush it down the pan as his sonm seems happy to do.

Your defence of the owner's son is staggering. You seem happy to accept him because he has a rich dad, rather than say he has a rich dad and they cannot see that with a small change of approach we could have matched wolves last season. but they prefer to lose than admit their crackpot approach is wrong.

[Dr Quinzel]

'discussing the best way to spend Tony Khan's future inheritance'.  :005: :005: :005: :005:

Why do some of us value ourselves and the club so little, that we're willing to discuss our club in these terms.

[Lyle from Hangeland]

Since Mohamed al Fayed bought FFC, FFC has literally been some rich guy's toy.

If Fulham isn't some rich guy's toy, Fulham isn't a Premier League club and won't ever be.

[Statto]

If Fulham isn't some rich guy's toy, Fulham isn't a Premier League club and won't ever be.

Oh do stop embarrassing yourself Lyle.
You can start by referring to Fulham as plural not singular

[Lyle from Hangeland]

If Fulham isn't some rich guy's toy, Fulham isn't a Premier League club and won't ever be.

Oh do stop embarrassing yourself Lyle.
You can start by referring to Fulham as plural not singular

Haha... you've got no argument that you're a fan of a club long owned by successive sugar daddies.

Thank you Mohamed al Fayed! Thank you Shahid Khan!

[Woolly Mammoth]

.....To win games you must first have a football professional in charge of the process of recruiting or already having a match playing squad with a better than even chance of competing against your competitors, the other private businesses selling football.....  That would suggest that whoever is the money broker is subservient to the football professional since he is investing in or staking his money on his own skill of having selected that person on merit against all other potentials.  That is a trust relationship.

What we appear to have at FFC is a central figure who wishes to control all aspects of the business and only entrust the football professional with team coaching and match day selection.  It doesn't appear to have worked the way it was supposed to since the 'investor' has been fickle in his skill of selecting the right person for the job and has a vested interest in deflecting dissenting comment about his recruitment selections.  That is where the problem lies and it is harming the business success factor regardless of any perceived value in knowing there are billions of dollars waiting to be inherited at some point in the future.  Are you not guilty of missing this point and how would you remedy it?

I understand the point that if the recruitment was run by a experience professional, then the money given from the owner to the DoF will probably go further. But that assumes, the owner gives the experience professional the same money as he gives his son. Last time, an experience professional (i think MJG) run recruitment Shahid Khan gave him £7.8m and last time Tony Khan run recruitment Shahid Khan gave him £104m. Which is better MJG with £8m or TK with £104m?

But if what you imply is true then Shahid Khan has no interest in seeing FFC as a successful business.   We are reduced to his son's 'toy' which is what his son's major critics fear most since he has not demonstrated the skill sets he claims he has and has squander the only success FFC have had in his father's entire tenure here.   Surely that is a dangerously risky relationship.  It also points to the mistaken belief Shahid Khan must have for the pre-TK as DoF era at FFC in as much as he blames everybody but himself for failures in a business he apparently doesn't care about except as a 'toy' for his boy.

That's much too Black and White, but Shahid Khan is investing the absolute maximum allowed to give his son every chance of being a successful DoF.

And your stance isn't blacker and whiter than mine?  Your view is that as long as TK is here we are okay and if he goes we are not - I think on a previous thread you mention the asset strippers appearing.
You need to deal with opinion a bit better than that, TRF.

The sooner the owners son is sent back from where he came, cloud cuckoo land, the sooner Fulham FC can start being a proper football club that can be a fortress at the Cottage again, where we were once hard to beat. TK wouldn't know anything about that as he was knee high to a grass hopper in those days. Now he is a flaming embarrassment, and until he slings his Hook his presence will continue to be toxic, and Fulham FC will become becalmed and continue to underachieve with a soft underbelly.

[Matt10]

Pretty sure if Johansen isn't signed by TK, our unbeaten 23 never happens, and neither does the promotion. He was our leader in assists. Slav also played him as a False-9 in our 1-0 loss to Sunderland before our streak started.

Just saying. There are a lot of "If this, then that" statements that can be made regarding recruiting. To me, the bigger issue was hiring Ranieri to replace Slav. That's not just TK's call of course, but still, I'm sure he had to give his say in the matter. We played a system that relied heavily on specific individuals, and once we started to gel with them, the likes of Mawson and Kamara went down in their own ways.