Question Managerial experience and contacts.

[onceknownasrab]

Do you think that given our managers profile, compared to many lower league managers, and his experience, we appear to have our fair share of aspiring young players/fitness finding experienced players featuring from top level clubs? I had assumed when PB came that this could be a beneficial dimension to his appointment but by in large have been underwhelmed.

 

[rigsby]

PB doesn't get first pick. The only thing that counts in modern football is cash. When he rings a players agent the first question will be "what is your wage limit". If none of the 20+ L1 and L2 clubs offering more money are not interested then the agent might get back to PB.

As we all know good forwards are scarcer than defenders and mid-fielders. So when a young, intelligent,pacey, fox in the box, wins his headers, brings other into play, can hold the ball up when we are under pressure, stays onside and bangs in 30 goals a season becomes available then they often do get abetter offer than SUFC can come up with. That applies to players on loan as well as full time signings.

 

[Barry.C]

Do you think that given our managers profile, compared to many lower league managers, and his experience, we appear to have our fair share of aspiring young players/fitness finding experienced players featuring from top level clubs? I had assumed when PB came that this could be a beneficial dimension to his appointment but by in large have been underwhelmed.

Largely agree with this OKAR, Overall I am a Phil fan, but have been surprised and disappointed around who has brought to the club especially upfront. His contacts must be quite exceptional for this level, Many of us thought we would be gaining from his mateship with Big Sam in particular and no doubt other ex colleagues in the Premiership and beyond. However I was pleased with his early building of a decent background team , although wonder also about the calibre of our scouting arrangements?

 

[Barry.C]

Rigsby you know I dont share the same view with you at all on the point about everything revolving around cash. I take your point about how important it is though and the role of agents. Some teams in our league spent no money on agents fees, Bury for one . Practically all the leading goalscorers cost nothing in the sense of the majority signing on for free or on loan. We are not therefore always last to the plate because we cant afford it. I do believe we are a bit slow to act at times though . We are just below mid table in terms of spend on fees to agents i.e approx £44,000. This does not suggest it is the major impediment. I also think we are either very poor at assessing strikers or exceptionally unlucky?

 

[onceknownasrab]

PB doesn't get first pick. The only thing that counts in modern football is cash. When he rings a players agent the first question will be "what is your wage limit". If none of the 20+ L1 and L2 clubs offering more money are not interested then the agent might get back to PB.

As we all know good forwards are scarcer than defenders and mid-fielders. So when a young, intelligent,pacey, fox in the box, wins his headers, brings other into play, can hold the ball up when were under pressure, stays onside and bangs in 30 goals a season becomes available then they often do get abetter offer than SUFC can come up with. That applies to players on loan as well as full time signings.

i understand that but we are not looking for or ever likely to find a 30 goal a season player offered for loan to us. There are a lot of players out there that could benefit from a spell with us and equally benefit us. As for cost, the deal with loan players, is often beneficial to the receiving club in that the salary is nought or negligible.

With PB's experience i would have thought a lot of clubs would see it as a good move for their fringe/younger players. There is the possibility we don't get offered many loan forwards because they saw how Shaq was handled and our general forward play.

It's just me musing but it does seem odd.

 

[Barry.C]

Just a rider, Gills Boss Justin Edinburgh intends to keep agents fees to a minimum. Figures released last week showed Gills paid just £27, 125 to agents between October 2014 and September 2015, the eight lowest in the league. They have 6 strikers. Edinburgh said he believes agents have a role to play but keeps fees to a minimum. He said " there are ENOUGH good players out there that we shouldnt be having to pay agents"
Gillingham have just extended the loan of Dominic Samual 21 year old striker on loan from Reading 2 He is getting better every game and has given us that focal point up front that perhaps we didnt have He allows strikers Cody Mac Donald, Luke Norris and Rory Donnelly to play off him. Samual , free on Loan as is top goalscorer Donnelly

 

[spoons]

Surely Horton should have added to chances of finding players with his wide experience, but I have absolutely no idea what he is doing at the club. Brown raved about the scouting he had available to him a while ago.
I think the club do manage to get players but seem unable to develop them.
It may be that Pigott, Hunt and Mooney come good in the New Year and all will come good.:happy:

 

[rigsby]

Lots of points to answer. The fact you can sign a player for free means teams like Gillingham can still offer more wages. You still have to pay wages for a loan player. The Elliott Lee situation was very unlucky and West Ham could have made us pay for 3 months wages as he was injured whilst with us. With the their under 21 players earning £5k a week that means PBs connection to big Sam at least saved us £60k

I think we have made good signings this season we have just had one of our worst for injuries. So far we have done much better than most predicted, at times with 6 or 7 second choice players. If we had been in the bottom 4 then maybe Ron would have give the go ahead for a new striker but with Hunt back on the scene and us in the top 10 why would he.

Of course Ron wants to protect his best asset. If he had allowed PB the funds for another decent forward then we would be as high as Burton or Walsall and PB would be at QPR or Brentford earning several times his current salary.

 

[onceknownasrab]

Lots of points to answer. The fact you can sign a player for free means teams like Gillingham can still offer more wages. You still have to pay wages for a loan player. The Elliott Lee situation was very unlucky and West Ham could have made us pay for 3 months wages as he was injured whilst with us. With the their under 21 players earning £5k a week that means PBs connection to big Sam at least saved us £60k

I think we have made good signings this season we have just had one of our worst for injuries. So far we have done much better than most predicted, at times with 6 or 7 second choice players. If we had been in the bottom 4 then maybe Ron would have give the go ahead for a new striker but with Hunt back on the scene and us in the top 10 why would he.

Of course Ron wants to protect his best asset. If he had allowed PB the funds for another decent forward then we would be as high as Burton or Walsall and PB would be at QPR or Brentford earning several times his current salary.

To be honest I do not quite understand your point about paying loanees wages when many are paid in full by their parent club.

 

[onceknownasrab]

http://soccersouls.com/2014/05/11/exploring-the-loan-system-in-football-the-ups-downs-and-the-facts/ This article makes a good point about players loaned to 'lesser' clubs. If the club does not have a good backroom staff will the player learn enough on loan? Do we have a backroom that is going to teach a loan striker anything much?

 

[manor15]

http://soccersouls.com/2014/05/11/exploring-the-loan-system-in-football-the-ups-downs-and-the-facts/ This article makes a good point about players loaned to 'lesser' clubs. If the club does not have a good backroom staff will the player learn enough on loan? Do we have a backroom that is going to teach a loan striker anything much?

Cauley Woodrow and Britt Assombalonga both have both done alright after going back to their parent clubs.

 

[onceknownasrab]

Cauley Woodrow and Britt Assombalonga both have both done alright after going back to their parent clubs.

Britt was a player that possessed plenty of ability. He scored wherever he went and was good enough to produce regardless of the coaching staff. Woodrow has done ok but who knows how much his progress was stifled while at Blues? He certainly did not have the best of times with us.

 

[Feathers]

Over the last few seasons we have had more than our fair share of loanees and a number of people questioning whether that is the best way to build a club.

This year we have only 2 loanees (Piggot and Rhea) and guess what we have questions about whether we know have enough players on loan!

I have nothing against bringing in players on loan when needed but would much rather build as we currently are with a core our own players.

 

[onceknownasrab]

Over the last few seasons we have had more than our fair share of loanees and a number of people questioning whether that is the best way to build a club.

This year we have only 2 loanees (Piggot and Rhea) and guess what we have questions about whether we know have enough players on loan!

I have nothing against bringing in players on loan when needed but would much rather build as we currently are with a core our own players.

Absolutely right. I would love to have a side that is primarily our own players. However, for some time, we have been light in attack and, if identifying the right permanent signing or persuading the right permanent signing,is a problem then I am sure we could have benefited with an alternative 'style' on the bench, loan or not.

I don't know why we have so few options up top. That's why I am asking opinions.

 

[rigsby]

To be honest I do not quite understand your point about paying loanees wages when many are paid in full by their parent club.

Deals are different but I think you'll find there are not many where the player comes free. If they were, then the parent club would make demands that we might not agree to.

For example the deal for one of the loanees last season was as follows... If he played we paid 1/3rd of his wages, Sub 2/3rds and if he didn't play then we paid his full wage. Hence we can't have a Gary Hooper because at £27k per week if he was injured whilst playing for us the club would be bankrupt.

Likewise when Barnard went to Stevenage they would have to pay us money

 

[Feathers]

Absolutely right. I would love to have a side that is primarily our own players. However, for some time, we have been light in attack and, if identifying the right permanent signing or persuading the right permanent signing,is a problem then I am sure we could have benefited with an alternative 'style' on the bench, loan or not.

I don't know why we have so few options up top. That's why I am asking opinions.

I agree that we are light up front and if we were to get a loan player in then forward with a bit of pace would be top of my shopping list. Apart from the start of the season though the teams overall scoring record has not been too bad and we have actually lost points due to errors at the back.

PB often refers to his attacking players (rather than forwards) when naming the team including the likes of Weston, Worrall, Hurst, Payne, and McClaughlin. Maybe he is looking for these type of players rather than out and out strikers? Weston and Payne can certainly play as "forwards" if not "strikers".

It is noticeable that we have an excellent team spirit this year with players like Hurst, Atkinson, Payne, and Thompson biding their time and stepping up when required. I would be reluctant to see loanees coming in a potentially upsetting this.

 

[rlb999]

It's all a load of nonsense. Will a team do better with an experienced manager, as opposed to an inexperienced manager? Will an experienced manager have better contacts? There are umpteen examples of each. Tilson (inexperienced) did very well at bringing people in when in theory he should have had poor contacts. Whelan (you'd imagine) should have good contacts but that didn't do him much good. Say Brown goes tomorrow - are we better going with an inexperienced club man (Maher) or someone who's won promotion from this league 3 times? And what if Coughlan won his first 3 games as caretaker - does that mean we should go with him?
You can't assume that because someone has managed higher up he'll bring in a better quality of player. Ryan Leonard is one of the best finds of recent years (arguably) - he was a kid on a free from Devon - not much pedigree there. Now if it's overpaid kids with big ego's you want I can understand why you may feel Brown hasn't recruited enough. But that's not what I'd be after for my club.

 

[onceknownasrab]

It's all a load of nonsense. Will a team do better with an experienced manager, as opposed to an inexperienced manager? Will an experienced manager have better contacts? There are umpteen examples of each. Tilson (inexperienced) did very well at bringing people in when in theory he should have had poor contacts. Whelan (you'd imagine) should have good contacts but that didn't do him much good. Say Brown goes tomorrow - are we better going with an inexperienced club man (Maher) or someone who's won promotion from this league 3 times? And what if Coughlan won his first 3 games as caretaker - does that mean we should go with him?
You can't assume that because someone has managed higher up he'll bring in a better quality of player. Ryan Leonard is one of the best finds of recent years (arguably) - he was a kid on a free from Devon - not much pedigree there. Now if it's overpaid kids with big ego's you want I can understand why you may feel Brown hasn't recruited enough. But that's not what I'd be after for my club.

Well I disagree with much of that but thats football. Mates and nepotism play a big role in any business. As for Leonard, he was signed by Sturrock, who was also RL's manager at Plymouth and so knew him well. That in itself is about contacts. Not all young players from higher divisions are 'overpaid kids.' there are a lot of genuine, aspiring players that want the chance to play and accept loan deals to further their career.

 

[Feathers]

It's all a load of nonsense. Will a team do better with an experienced manager, as opposed to an inexperienced manager? Will an experienced manager have better contacts? There are umpteen examples of each. Tilson (inexperienced) did very well at bringing people in when in theory he should have had poor contacts. Whelan (you'd imagine) should have good contacts but that didn't do him much good. Say Brown goes tomorrow - are we better going with an inexperienced club man (Maher) or someone who's won promotion from this league 3 times? And what if Coughlan won his first 3 games as caretaker - does that mean we should go with him?
You can't assume that because someone has managed higher up he'll bring in a better quality of player. Ryan Leonard is one of the best finds of recent years (arguably) - he was a kid on a free from Devon - not much pedigree there. Now if it's overpaid kids with big ego's you want I can understand why you may feel Brown hasn't recruited enough. But that's not what I'd be after for my club.

It can be overstated but contacts do make a difference. The team that Sturrock built in such a short time relied heavily on players he had previously worked with, including that unknown kid from Devon.

Phil Brown being Phil Brown was also instrumental in signing Noel Hunt both in terms of knowing Mick McCarthy at Ipswich and the fact that Noel's brother Stephen had previously played under Brown.

 

[manor15]

Britt was a player that possessed plenty of ability. He scored wherever he went and was good enough to produce regardless of the coaching staff. Woodrow has done ok but who knows how much his progress was stifled while at Blues? He certainly did not have the best of times with us.

Definitely right there, and I agree that as a young striker I'm not sure our current coaching set up (or style of play) would excite me, but those kinds of examples of players going on to do well afterwards would influence it a bit.

Thing is, under Brown, on loan we've only really had Woodrow, who didn't have the best time here and was called back early, and Coultihurst, who struggled as well. Britt was here at the very start of Brown's time here but not enough for him to be able to take any credit.