Steve Walsh - no longer our Director of Football

[eddy]

Oh aye, absolutely not a place for them.

Especially not when United have had sustained success for 30 years and similar Chelsea for say the last 12. Both implemented a DoF or a role in that nature.

But yeah, absolutely not a place for them.

They have also had the most money to spend on players in the same timeframe

 

[Billy Dean]

Oh aye, absolutely not a place for them.

Especially not when United have had sustained success for 30 years and similar Chelsea for say the last 12. Both implemented a DoF or a role in that nature.

But yeah, absolutely not a place for them.

United had sustained sucesss because of Ferguson, likewise Chelsea due to Mourinho and then all the other world class managers they've had.

There's a DoF at Saints mate and they're a very well run club.

But okay.

A well run mediocre club.

Pick better examples lads.

 

[DualityNSNO]

United had sustained sucesss because of Ferguson, likewise Chelsea due to Mourinho and then all the other world class managers they've had.



A well run mediocre club.

Pick better examples lads.

So we should look at others instead of making it work for us?

Nah, how about we are the first in something, again, then?

 

[BlueToff]

United had sustained sucesss because of Ferguson, likewise Chelsea due to Mourinho and then all the other world class managers they've had.



A well run mediocre club.

Pick better examples lads.

Three consecutive top eight finishes (two of those under Koeman) - breaking their record points tally each time and always improving.

It can work, and @Connor has proven it does at less 'mediocre' clubs yet you chose to ignore that.

There is literally no issue with Walsh and these stories of a strained relationship are coming from nowhere except the usual posters on here - which seem to be ignoring everything that says otherwise.

 

[Billy Dean]

Three consecutive top eight finishes (two of those under Koeman) - breaking their record points tally each time and always improving.

It can work, and @Connor has proven it does at less 'mediocre' clubs yet you chose to ignore that.

There is literally no issue with Walsh and these stories of a strained relationship are coming from nowhere except the usual posters on here - which seem to be ignoring everything that says otherwise.

I didn't ignore it. Read my post again.

My issue is that Walsh is picking up a salary that would be better used put to our transfer kitty or into the salary of a better manager than Koeman.

 

[BlueToff]

I didn't ignore it. Read my post again.

My issue is that Walsh is picking up a salary that would be better used put to our transfer kitty or into the salary of a better manager than Koeman.

Shrugged it off as coincidence then... Though yes there are other factors.

And well not really.

What better manager could we have got than Koeman?

We tried with Emery - who has struggled to adapt in France anyway - and he turned us down. Koeman was always our first and most realistic choice and he's been very good for us so far.

Koeman is also used to operating at clubs who use a DoF model. He's happy to set the style of player he wants and work at a club who have a 'long term' style set in place. This is just the start of that for us. I don't see where the issues are...

 

[Lanolin]

I've heard Klopp has tried to poison John Henry on three or four occasions. You might say he hasn't but none of us know. He probably hasn't but stating either as a matter of fact is pointless.

You do realise you just proved his point, right? If somebody was putting that scenario forward as a genuine accusation you couldn't refute it absolutely because you don't know. You can't in this instance either, for the same reason.

I have no reason to believe that Walsh and Koeman don't get on, but nor do I have any evidence that they're best mates who agree on everything. Maybe it would be best if people didn't just make statements as if they're facts when they don't know either way?

 

[jackyboy]

Someone in my work has said he's heard we are strongly going after Mahrez, probably utter nonsense. Yet with the Walsh connection maybe not.

 

[DualityNSNO]

I didn't ignore it. Read my post again.

My issue is that Walsh is picking up a salary that would be better used put to our transfer kitty or into the salary of a better manager than Koeman.

Do you really think he's raking in 50k a week or something though? lol

 

[Steve0]

You do realise you just proved his point, right? If somebody was putting that scenario forward as a genuine accusation you couldn't refute it absolutely because you don't know. You can't in this instance either, for the same reason.

I have no reason to believe that Walsh and Koeman don't get on, but nor do I have any evidence that they're best mates who agree on everything. Maybe it would be best if people didn't just make statements as if they're facts when they don't know either way?

One statement has a greater burden of proof.

Also nobody has said they're best mates who agree on everything.

It wouldn't be a good thing if they agreed on everything anyway as it'd mean one of them wasn't needed.

 

[Lanolin]

One statement has a greater burden of proof.

Also nobody has said they're best mates who agree on everything.

It wouldn't be a good thing if they agreed on everything anyway as it'd mean one of them wasn't needed.

But people are saying 'there is no issue' when they are absolutely not in a position to do so. Saying 'there doesn't seem to be any reason to...' or 'I haven't seen anything to suggest that' is fine, but we've got people effectively saying 'no you are wrong, there is no issue'.

As I said, I have no reason to believe that there is an issue, but nor did I have any reason to believe that Barkley's contract situation would get to this stage, that all the positive talk of last summer would end with us signing Valencia on loan and getting knocked back by Sissoko, or that our academy director would just disappear into thin air a couple of months after arriving to a huge fanfare. You can guarantee though, that if anybody raised these issues prior to them happening that someone who sees everything through blue tinted specs would have come along and pooh-poohed it because they can't accept that everything might not be rosy all the time.

 

[Steve0]

But people are saying 'there is no issue' when they are absolutely not in a position to do so. Saying 'there doesn't seem to be any reason to...' or 'I haven't seen anything to suggest that' is fine, but we've got people effectively saying 'no you are wrong, there is no issue'.

As I said, I have no reason to believe that there is an issue, but nor did I have any reason to believe that Barkley's contract situation would get to this stage, that all the positive talk of last summer would end with us signing Valencia on loan and getting knocked back by Sissoko, or that our academy director would just disappear into thin air a couple of months after arriving to a huge fanfare. You can guarantee though, that if anybody raised these issues prior to them happening that someone who sees everything through blue tinted specs would have come along and pooh-poohed it because they can't accept that everything might not be rosy all the time.

Barkley and his agent have overvalued him. We've offered a contract to match his worth, he wants more. However it doesn't look like there's a slew of clubs clamouring after his signature.

We didn't just get Valencia on loan did we?

Disappeared into thin air? What does that even mean?

 

[Lanolin]

Barkley and his agent have overvalued him. We've offered a contract to match his worth, he wants more. However it doesn't look like there's a slew of clubs clamouring after his signature.

We didn't just get Valencia on loan did we?

Disappeared into thin air? What does that even mean?

We're going off topic here, I was just attempting to point out that it doesn't really help anyone when people come on here making statements as if they're facts when they don't know the ins and outs.

You appear to think that I'm trying to suggest we have major issues but I'm not at all. The examples I used were not an attempt at hinting at something sinister, I was simply using them to highlight that sometimes people are quick to assume everything is fine when it isn't. But seeing as you ask, I'll answer the points.

1. You're assuming again, and putting the blame on those outside the club when you have no evidence to suggest that's the case - you're not catching on very quickly.
2. No we didn't just get Valencia on loan, but then I didn't say we did, did I? The point was that throughout the summer people kept saying 'don't panic, everythings fine, we're going to sign loads of boss players'. We didn't, and both the manager and major shareholder went on record as saying it had been a disappointment.
3. It's a pretty well known figure of speech, I'm surprised you haven't come across it before. In case you're not aware, the academy director left his post very suddenly and unexpectedly so the idiom seemed an apt one to use.

 

[orly]

To be be fair to Vacation Steve, he won't know what the transfer budget is until Lukaku is sold , so it's really harsh to expect him to have got the big signings sorted

 

[bluestevon]

I didn't ignore it. Read my post again.

My issue is that Walsh is picking up a salary that would be better used put to our transfer kitty or into the salary of a better manager than Koeman.

To all intents and purposes Paul Mitchell at Spurs was the director of football - just under a different title as head of recruitment, nearly every one of the current spurs team was recruited during his tenure - he left last January