Sunderland surpassing us is worse than you think, because it's based on a Friedkin failure.

[Jebus_lives]

The key people are, Moyes (Final decision maker) Smith (Head Scout) Kinnear (Money person) and Hammond (Contract negotiator)

Smith and his team are going to scout players based on the data and playing style of the manager. Some of the recent names linked would suggest they are actually doing that for a change no matter how disheartening some of the names may seem.

I think this is bang on in terms of recruitment team and current targets. I also, as I have said in another thread, think Moyes has final say but only on the players the club select for him.

I hope it's a smoother process this year.

 

[Milkman]

Ok finished!

I agree!

 

[riddick]

Fair play mate, tbf I prob wouldn’t have.

I know it’s a bit of a joke at the moment about “experienced players” and Moyes.

But when you look at teams that finished ahead of us or in Europe, Sunderland brought in Xhaka, Brentford - Henderson, Brighton - brought Grob back in, in Jan while also rocking with Wellbeck and Milner in their squads.

When you look at it objectively and the influence of some of those players on their clubs finishing higher up the table or qualifying Europe- the lesson for me is to be open minded on good players regardless of age.

And all those teams used those experienced players WITH youth. Something Davey has no interest or experience with

 

[Neiler]

And all those teams used those experienced players WITH youth. Something Davey has no interest or experience with

The average age of his signings since his return is 23.9 mate mate.

That’s actually being kind Grealish I included we don’t own and Tom King is essentially a training buddy.

But look there’s millions of Moyes threads.

The point I was making really was being open minded on good players as opposed to being to hung up on age.

 

[James Patrick]

And all those teams used those experienced players WITH youth. Something Davey has no interest or experience with

Villa have one of the oldest squads in the Premier League.

 

[Zatara]

You're welcome. I read this forum almost daily, so I'm happy to provide info. I started following Everton since the Friedkin's takeover out of curiosity for the Roma implications and I like both the team and this place.
D'Amico is Gasperini's choice. Gasperini has some serious political skill, one must admit. He sidelined Ranieri, who's a fan favourite, a legend, and now he's become the boss in Trigoria. He's choosing everyone, from the medical staff to the DoF. But before him, the boss was Ranieri, who came here, led the team to 5th place after an awful start with De Rossi and Juric, and then chose the new manager, acting as the Friedkins' personal advisor. He's chosen all the staff and board members Gasperini is currently replacing. Gasperini and Ranieri did clash all season long, with Ranieri ultimately trying to humiliate Gasperini by saying he was his 4th choice but other managers said no. This happened while Roma was fiercely battling for the 4th place and needed unity. The sparkle of this feud was Gasperini's distrust towards Ranieri-chosen DoF Massara and disagreements over the transfer market management.
So what's the pattern here?

Let's face the hard truth. The Friedkins know absolutely nothing about football. Nothing whatsoever. So they're in constant need of someone who can manage things for them on field. They're great financially speaking, but when it comes to football...they're like the Merovingians. They rely on someone, a Pepin of Herstal of some sort. A mayor of the palace. And stick with him until external pressure/bad results/political maneuvers compel them to oust him. So you're left with the hope that they finally find someone who can last. But it's survival of the fittest with a lot of internal backstabbing.
They're absentee owners. Yes, they're showing their faces sometimes in Rome, and I read here they don't do the same in Liverpool. But coming here twice a year won't let them oversee anything. Gasperini as I said has political skills to his side, because he's constantly lobbying to have Ryan in Rome. Each time he gets interviewed, he says he'd love to make quick decisions with Ryan by his side.

What does this mean for Everton?

As I said last year, they're financially sound and won't get the club into trouble, I'm sure. Among the Americans buying each and every European club, they're absolutely not the worst. Look at what's happening at Milan. it's June the 2nd and they have no DoF, no CeO, no manager. A nightmare.

But...when it comes to football, the Friedkins are dependent on the one they choose as mayor of the palace. You have to hope he's a knowledgeable, competent, morally sound individual. Frankly, this isn't the best of lives, as an organisation should be managed by scientific criteria, not by creating environments in which various people compete for the leadership. I hope they'll find the right people for both clubs, but remember that they're like the Glazers. The best owners until they had Ferguson who was in charge of everything.

Then there's the off-pitch business, and there they shine. They're doing great things in Rome, supporting the new stadium endeavor with an investment of 1 billion euros, finding new sponsors etc. They're succeeding in doing something we're trying to do since the 80s: subduing Italian bureaucracy to build a home for Roma. And I know they facilitated Hill Dikinson's opening.

Roma got rid of Ghisolfi and put all faith in Ranieri and then Gasperini.

Everton got rid of Thelwell and put all faith in Moyes.

Two errors imo.

 

[johnjoeefc]

Xhaka made all the difference for them. Without him they may well have gone down. I didnt see too much else in their approach that got me overly excited

 

[raiseyoureyebrow4thewin!]

You're welcome. I read this forum almost daily, so I'm happy to provide info. I started following Everton since the Friedkin's takeover out of curiosity for the Roma implications and I like both the team and this place.
D'Amico is Gasperini's choice. Gasperini has some serious political skill, one must admit. He sidelined Ranieri, who's a fan favourite, a legend, and now he's become the boss in Trigoria. He's choosing everyone, from the medical staff to the DoF. But before him, the boss was Ranieri, who came here, led the team to 5th place after an awful start with De Rossi and Juric, and then chose the new manager, acting as the Friedkins' personal advisor. He's chosen all the staff and board members Gasperini is currently replacing. Gasperini and Ranieri did clash all season long, with Ranieri ultimately trying to humiliate Gasperini by saying he was his 4th choice but other managers said no. This happened while Roma was fiercely battling for the 4th place and needed unity. The sparkle of this feud was Gasperini's distrust towards Ranieri-chosen DoF Massara and disagreements over the transfer market management.
So what's the pattern here?

Let's face the hard truth. The Friedkins know absolutely nothing about football. Nothing whatsoever. So they're in constant need of someone who can manage things for them on field. They're great financially speaking, but when it comes to football...they're like the Merovingians. They rely on someone, a Pepin of Herstal of some sort. A mayor of the palace. And stick with him until external pressure/bad results/political maneuvers compel them to oust him. So you're left with the hope that they finally find someone who can last. But it's survival of the fittest with a lot of internal backstabbing.
They're absentee owners. Yes, they're showing their faces sometimes in Rome, and I read here they don't do the same in Liverpool. But coming here twice a year won't let them oversee anything. Gasperini as I said has political skills to his side, because he's constantly lobbying to have Ryan in Rome. Each time he gets interviewed, he says he'd love to make quick decisions with Ryan by his side.

What does this mean for Everton?

As I said last year, they're financially sound and won't get the club into trouble, I'm sure. Among the Americans buying each and every European club, they're absolutely not the worst. Look at what's happening at Milan. it's June the 2nd and they have no DoF, no CeO, no manager. A nightmare.

But...when it comes to football, the Friedkins are dependent on the one they choose as mayor of the palace. You have to hope he's a knowledgeable, competent, morally sound individual. Frankly, this isn't the best of lives, as an organisation should be managed by scientific criteria, not by creating environments in which various people compete for the leadership. I hope they'll find the right people for both clubs, but remember that they're like the Glazers. The best owners until they had Ferguson who was in charge of everything.

Then there's the off-pitch business, and there they shine. They're doing great things in Rome, supporting the new stadium endeavor with an investment of 1 billion euros, finding new sponsors etc. They're succeeding in doing something we're trying to do since the 80s: subduing Italian bureaucracy to build a home for Roma. And I know they facilitated Hill Dikinson's opening.

thank you for the excellent post mate, and welcome.
amazing that u come in here almost daily too...

by the way what do you think of mayor moyes

 

[Khalekan]

Roma have champions league football, a progressive manager and an engaged visible owner demonstrably supporting their transfer strategy.

We’ve got upper deck golf and loaded hotdogs.

Don’t forget the blue doughnuts.

 

[Eggs]

….nonsense of a thread, Friedkin have been here far too short a time to judge progression. Sunderland had a terrific season, bought very well in the summer but I’ve been around too long to see teams finish above us one season then drop into the wilderness soon after.

 

[thebluenosebolt]

If our players had been arsed the last 3 games of the season, we would of been in Sunderland position. Good points raised though.

 

[Timbucktoo]

I think Wolves and Burnley came up and got into Europe in their first season not so long ago, only for the wheels to come off the bandwagon the following season and send them back down.

 

[st.domingo]

You're welcome. I read this forum almost daily, so I'm happy to provide info. I started following Everton since the Friedkin's takeover out of curiosity for the Roma implications and I like both the team and this place.
D'Amico is Gasperini's choice. Gasperini has some serious political skill, one must admit. He sidelined Ranieri, who's a fan favourite, a legend, and now he's become the boss in Trigoria. He's choosing everyone, from the medical staff to the DoF. But before him, the boss was Ranieri, who came here, led the team to 5th place after an awful start with De Rossi and Juric, and then chose the new manager, acting as the Friedkins' personal advisor. He's chosen all the staff and board members Gasperini is currently replacing. Gasperini and Ranieri did clash all season long, with Ranieri ultimately trying to humiliate Gasperini by saying he was his 4th choice but other managers said no. This happened while Roma was fiercely battling for the 4th place and needed unity. The sparkle of this feud was Gasperini's distrust towards Ranieri-chosen DoF Massara and disagreements over the transfer market management.
So what's the pattern here?

Let's face the hard truth. The Friedkins know absolutely nothing about football. Nothing whatsoever. So they're in constant need of someone who can manage things for them on field. They're great financially speaking, but when it comes to football...they're like the Merovingians. They rely on someone, a Pepin of Herstal of some sort. A mayor of the palace. And stick with him until external pressure/bad results/political maneuvers compel them to oust him. So you're left with the hope that they finally find someone who can last. But it's survival of the fittest with a lot of internal backstabbing.
They're absentee owners. Yes, they're showing their faces sometimes in Rome, and I read here they don't do the same in Liverpool. But coming here twice a year won't let them oversee anything. Gasperini as I said has political skills to his side, because he's constantly lobbying to have Ryan in Rome. Each time he gets interviewed, he says he'd love to make quick decisions with Ryan by his side.

What does this mean for Everton?

As I said last year, they're financially sound and won't get the club into trouble, I'm sure. Among the Americans buying each and every European club, they're absolutely not the worst. Look at what's happening at Milan. it's June the 2nd and they have no DoF, no CeO, no manager. A nightmare.

But...when it comes to football, the Friedkins are dependent on the one they choose as mayor of the palace. You have to hope he's a knowledgeable, competent, morally sound individual. Frankly, this isn't the best of lives, as an organisation should be managed by scientific criteria, not by creating environments in which various people compete for the leadership. I hope they'll find the right people for both clubs, but remember that they're like the Glazers. The best owners until they had Ferguson who was in charge of everything.

Then there's the off-pitch business, and there they shine. They're doing great things in Rome, supporting the new stadium endeavor with an investment of 1 billion euros, finding new sponsors etc. They're succeeding in doing something we're trying to do since the 80s: subduing Italian bureaucracy to build a home for Roma. And I know they facilitated Hill Dikinson's opening.

I think you’ve just outlined the real reason why DM is going nowhere fast - he’s the real chief and they wouldn’t have a scooby (a) whether he’s actually doing a good job under the circumstances or not and (b) how to replace him.

 

[Marius57]

When digging for information on various club models, along with the Friedkin's more nuanced history with Roma, a telling fact appeared. Sunderland's newly appointed Director of Football, who built a team almost overnight, that surpassed us in literal months, was built by Florent Ghisolfi who was let go by Roma last June. Ghisolfi had had a short spell at the club, I would assume the appointment of Gasperini led to his downfall. Ghisolfi a month later was Sunderland's head which means their signings came within months of him having the job. Now Sunderland sit on their way to Europe with young talents all across the squad.

I think this is all very telling and concerning for multiple reasons for us. I am doing some armchair psychology but Ghisolfi, a young DoF was met with an emboldened personality like Gasperini. The parallels with Gasperini and Moyes I think are obvious, despite one of those managers being much better than the other. They are bold, harsh personality led managers who kind of dictate their approach and agenda, and the club follows suit. This IMO is also true with the Friedkins ex Roma hires in Mourinho, even De Rossi and Ranieri.

If you take that profile as non negotiable profile, I think Gasperini was a interesting if not good hire by Roma. If this was a casualty the Friedkins had to make to get him, there is an argument it was reasonable. I think though Gasperini is also a hire kind of staving off the need for modernity in Roma's structure. They recently poached Tony D'Amico from Atalanta as Director of Football, clearly someone with pedigree in his own right and a history with Gasperini. Maybe they have arrived at a good structure despite not the best process.

Everton looks very similar in lots of ways to how Roma is now set up albeit the budget version. Moyes came in, had ties to Kinnear who came in shortly after. The difference is Kinnear has not uncovered global talents like Atalanta has. And Moyes is half the coach Gasperini is. So a similar old fashioned approach kind of falls apart if you don't have excellent talents that supersede that process at the core.

What I worry for us is that evidence of a modern model was likely present with Ghisolfi at Roma, later demonstrated at Sunderland, and yet the Friedkins comfortably rejected it. One way or the other the Friedkins either question Sunderlands model as a pathway, or questioned Ghisolfi's legitimacy in achieving it. Sunderland's success shows that both those calculations I would argue were and are wrong.

In all this noise around Moyes, I think all this is relevant, because he isn't just a manager, he is the gravitational pull to which the club makes decisions. That isnt that dissimilar of Roma with Gasperini. And if the only way for us to have success is to get a Gasperini I think thats very unlikely or filled with a lot of possible pitfalls that mirror of lot of Moshiri's mistakes in over emboldening managers.

The Friedkins would be wise to take some notes on Ghisolfi's success and what was I think an oversight on their part. Personally I think Sunderland seems more replicable than Roma's approach. Regardless Moyes, Kinnear and the manager recruitment model currently isn't really checking the box in either.

Think you have got the comparisons wrong.

Moyes isn’t meant to be the Gasperini hire. He was meant to be the Ranieri hire. Come in as someone that knows the club and the fans as a short term fix from the mistakes of previous. The issue was that Dyche left us in such a precarious position and bottled his job that Moyes could demand more years than ranieri took.

And ultimately, it seems more than reasonable that Ghisolfi was moved on and replaced considering Roma then finished 3rd which is their best finish in like 8 seasons.

 

[14_dollars]

Don’t forget the blue doughnuts.

Keane and Tarkowski?