Homepage Update: Wine, Gravy and working with what you've got

Status
Not open for further replies.
ClausThomsen submitted an update to GrandOldTeam's homepage

Wine, Gravy and working with what you've got
SteveWalsh.jpg



Welcome to Big Sam's Bar. Might I interest you in a pint of fine wine?



I'd be quite happy with that but it's when the glass gets empty and our waiter for the evening brings out the gravy boat for chasers and insists we finish all of it that we naturally start looking for a way out. There is however no exit. Big Dunc's stood by the door with his arms folded and there is only the prospect of mouthful after mouthful of Big Sam's lumpy meat sauce in our immediate future.

And now we're looking for someone, anyone, to blame as we cough up the vile brown mess inside us.

Wine and Gravy? Who's stocking this bar? Step forward Director of Football Steve Walsh.

Back in 2016 Mosh swaggered over to the Champions gaff at King Power Stadium, pulled out his money clip and just took what he wanted. The guy who followed him back up the M6 was Steve Walsh. A man who reportedly played a big part in recruiting the main men in that utterly weird season.

The aforementioned main men were Mahrez, Vardy and Kante. The trio were rightly heralded as the stand out performers in Leicester's stranger than fiction Premier League winning campaign. But how good were these signings at the start of their Leicester careers?

Mahrez joined Leicester on 11 Jan 2014. He spent a month or so making substitute appearances in the Championship before being considered ready to start games and he finished the season with 19 appearances and 3 goals. His first Premier League appearance was 16 August 2014 with his first goal coming two months later. He ended his first PL season with 4 goals and 3 assists in 30 appearances.

The following year, a full season and half since signing is when we see the Mahrez that blew teams away in Leicester's title winning season.

Vardy joined in May 2012 and managed 4 goals in 26 games. There was a period of poor form, sections of the support considering him not good enough to make the step from Conference to Championship and the player doubting himself and considering quitting football altogether. He was persuaded to stay by Leicester manager Nigel Pearson and his assistant Craig Shakespeare.

2013/14 saw Vardy bag 16 Championship goals and win Player's Player of The Year as Leicester finished top and got promoted to the PL. During 15/16 in his first PL season he showed some spells of decent form but he finished with an unimpressive 5 goals in 34 games.

Like Mahrez it was the following 16/17 season, after 4 years at Leicester, that he came into his own.

Kante? Alright then. He signed in August 2015 and was pretty much boss right away.

So what's the point in all this?

Walsh has been here a little under two years. Quite correctly there are question marks over several of the players brought in during his spell as DOF but given the issues that the club has had at managerial level, combined with the relatively short time some of the players have been here, is Walsh attracting a little bit too much culpability?

Do we know precisely what Walsh's role is and how much trust is given to his judgement? How much say so or trust is placed with Walsh when it comes to pricing up and pushing through potentially costly deals? Is Walsh's recruitment actually a legitimate reason for such a poor season?

A major contributing factor, according to Allardyce, is the consistency levels of the players. But where do they find consistency at a club like 2017-18 Everton? We have wildly varying team selections from game to game, no settled gameplan and are on our 3rd manager of the season. Unsworth may only have been caretaker but it was quite clear he had the opportunity to make the job his for a longer spell. The likes of Klassen, Vlasic and Sandro already have the difficulty of adjusting to a new club, new league and new country without that as well.

Under such rudderless uncertaintly are they supposed to adapt quicker than Mahrez and Vardy managed but do so at a higher level? Or are they genuinely poor buys by Walsh?

There are the signings with established Premier League experience who you'd think should adapt better of course even with the upheavals. Walsh's first window saw us go for the likes of Gana Gueye. It was an underwhelming signing on the face of it but the Senegalese dynamo took us all by surprise, was a stand-out performer and was seen as an early example of what Walsh could bring.

Bolassie was a big signing who (still) divides opinion but suffered a bad injury and was out for the season and Williams was maybe perceived as a very adequate stop-gap while the DOF got his feet under the table...so much for that.

Morgan Schneiderlin also came to Merseyside in January but I think we can assume RonKo was the lead on that signing so it's maybe less relevant to the Walsh issue. A solid first season followed for Koeman's merry men and it all seemed quite rosy. We weren't gonna sweep the league aside but there was a sense of purpose and the right direction.

And then came the initially optimism inducing Summer transfer window of 2017. I've already mentioned the signings from other abroad so onto the other signings in that window.

The first few performances from Michael Keane suggested a very good signing, but something is going drastically wrong for him during his Everton spell. Jordan Pickford is arguably one of the best signings we've made in years and will hopefully continue to do well for years to come.

All the headlines were around Gylfi Sigurdsson and Wayne Rooney. Players with obvious quality and while Rooney brings a few question marks he also brings a wealth of winning experience and while sceptical I was more than willing to hope for the best as our boy wonder finally came home. Sigurdsson's move turned into a soap opera with the price a particular talking point in the press and a sticking point for the clubs involved. Who was arguing for so long over the £5M-10M or whatever the difference was? Another reason to wonder exactly how much say our DoF has in actually directing football related stuff.

Both have been moved around, switched and dropped with no apparent long term tactical plan which you feel should tie in with recruitment. Walsh's fault again or is there a problem with too many people pulling in different directions?

There was another signing that summer as well. Rather peculiar it was as well.

Given it was likely that 33 year old Leighton Baines might not be fit to play 90 minutes in every game in a Europa League season there was an obvious need for cover or preferably competition at LB. Was it Walsh's decision not to register Garbutt, send Galloway out on loan and muddle along playing Southampton's unwanted third choice right-back at left-back?

I certainly don't know but I'm confident in saying that Koeman might have had something to say about it. It's definitely had a detrimental impact on our performances this season.

For all we know Walsh could have presented a list of LB's as lengthy, well structured and ultimately flexible as Big Sam's cummerbund would have to be. It would be bizzare and condemning if a man with so much scouting experience couldn't find a target or two in a critical position.

Is the right player already lined up for this coming summer who for one reason or another couldn't come in January or the start of the season?
Was there a reluctance to throw money at a temporary fix given this season being written off? Is Cuco himself considered to be that temporary fix?
Are the same people who turned the Sigurdsson deal into an Icelandic saga stopping a LB deal getting done?

Mosh only knows.

On a positive note we also shouldn't forget that signings have been made with an eye on the future. There's much wailing over the move of Ademola Lookman on loan to Leipzig which would suggest many rate him as a good signing. Dominic Calvert-Lewin is a very low cost signing who has come to the first team earlier than expected and shown signs of further promise way beyond his sub £1.5-2M price tag. Do we ignore these because they don't fit the "Walsh Out" shout?

Walsh has also been at the club while there have been less notable U23 signings such as Nathan Markelo, Henry Onyekuru, Boris Mathis, Josh Bowler, Lewis Gibson and Dennis Adeniran who all came in for around £10M combined give or take an undisclosed fee or three. How do these players ultimately pan out? It's still very early for them and if just one goes on to do well it's very little money very well spent.

So, has Walsh failed in his role? Has Walsh himself been failed by others? Or is it all a longer term project with the inevitable bumps in the track along the way?

Whatever the reason for the failings in the January window it has been and gone. There's a couple of new bottles on the shelf but it's Big Sam behind the bar and he really doesn't look like he'll be serving up any new drinks. He's sticking with what he's familiar with.

Salt, gravy and then the lemon.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Good article mate. That's the first serious approach to the subject of Walsh I've read.

I think you might be right in being cautious over his record here and not chucking it in the bin entirely. If Koeman had done his job and provided a replacement to Lukaku immediately he left and not look frantically on the last day things may have been very diferent now...and at the time I also stated that I suspected this was Koeman's plan: to go with a pop gun attack and have the goals spread across the team and have no real replacement for Lukaku...a plan that went horrendoulsy wrong and cost him his job.

All that said, I have two reservations about Walsh and his appointment/role:

1/ is he a strong enough character to be a DoF? Most, I believe, are pretty hard nosed operators who exert real control over squad affairs and their relations with managers...even those like Koeman, who seems to have been untouchable/uncontrolled under Walsh.

2/ the very role itself I believe is alien to this club and many others. Fans may be reacting more to that than the man himself. They undoubtedly spell confusion about who is making decisions and that in and of itself produces frustration with whomever is in that post at any one time. For me, we dont require a D0F. We require a good manager left to his own recruitment and a CEO brought in to sort out commercial streams and the stadium scheme.
 
1/ is he a strong enough character to be a DoF? Most, I believe, are pretty hard nosed operators who exert real control over squad affairs and their relations with managers...even those like Koeman, who seems to have been untouchable/uncontrolled under Walsh.

It's a different role with a different title but compare him to the likes of Ed Woodward at Man Utd. The pull of a club like Utd surely helps things along but rewind to his first window there and the only signing was the long running Fellaini deal, the handling of which was was largely criticised and saw plenty of calls for Woodward's head.

The last couple of seasons however has seen Utd acquire a lot of big name players in some huge transfer deals. Pogba, Mata, Ibrahimovic, Matic, Sanchez and Lukaku. When push comes to shove though he seems capable of pushing through massive deals.

Do we have that person at Everton? I'm not at all sure Walsh has the same kind of authority to loosen the purse strings and sanction the truly big deals. Does he have total control of transfers or is he a glorified Chief Scout with a hotline to those handling the money.

2/ the very role itself I believe is alien to this club and many others. Fans may be reacting more to that than the man himself. They undoubtedly spell confusion about who is making decisions and that in and of itself produces frustration with whomever is in that post at any one time. For me, we dont require a D0F. We require a good manager left to his own recruitment and a CEO brought in to sort out commercial streams and the stadium scheme.

Is he there to shape an overall footballing system which is then dictated to the coach/manager or is he there to serve the managers requirements? Does he go out and find the type of players that the manager says he wants or does he bring players in and it's up to the manager to make it work?

It could be a managers preference to have a DOF. There are definitely managers, mainly continental or of the younger generations, who see themselves as tacticians or coaches first and foremost and don't wish to have the added burden of recruitment. Rather than saying I want Player X it may be a case of saying I want a player who can play a certain role and brings certain qualities, now go find him.

The likes of Alex Ferguson or Wenger having total control is maybe seen as unusual now and something from a bygone era.
 

It's a different role with a different title but compare him to the likes of Ed Woodward at Man Utd. The pull of a club like Utd surely helps things along but rewind to his first window there and the only signing was the long running Fellaini deal, the handling of which was was largely criticised and saw plenty of calls for Woodward's head.

The last couple of seasons however has seen Utd acquire a lot of big name players in some huge transfer deals. Pogba, Mata, Ibrahimovic, Matic, Sanchez and Lukaku. When push comes to shove though he seems capable of pushing through massive deals.

Do we have that person at Everton? I'm not at all sure Walsh has the same kind of authority to loosen the purse strings and sanction the truly big deals. Does he have total control of transfers or is he a glorified Chief Scout with a hotline to those handling the money.



Is he there to shape an overall footballing system which is then dictated to the coach/manager or is he there to serve the managers requirements? Does he go out and find the type of players that the manager says he wants or does he bring players in and it's up to the manager to make it work?

It could be a managers preference to have a DOF. There are definitely managers, mainly continental or of the younger generations, who see themselves as tacticians or coaches first and foremost and don't wish to have the added burden of recruitment. Rather than saying I want Player X it may be a case of saying I want a player who can play a certain role and brings certain qualities, now go find him.

The likes of Alex Ferguson or Wenger having total control is maybe seen as unusual now and something from a bygone era.
On the United comparison: I think Woodward is a CEO rather than DoF. He might deal in transfers but he's not a football man in the sense he *knows* the game from the inside and can gave that credibility for his judgement on player recruitment - that's deferred to the manager and his staff. In most cases I know the DoF is a former player. Walsh is too and that can lead to conflict over who is right on a player assessment.

On the DoF role more generally: yes, in other clubs with managers used to the system and who dont have the ego to clash with club plans on overall playing strategy it could be workable. However, when things start going a bit wrong the tensions inherent to two people working in roughly the same area of the club (or at least who have a huge impact on the performance of one and other) it can unravel very quickly. I also think the DoF becomes plausible only when there is a massive club involved. The division of labour becomes more acceptable because of the demands for success, and the reality is that the organisation requires an army of people employed to acquire and assess players for their suitability in keeping a club at the top and the coaching role is necessarily singular: dealing with the array of talent the club can attract and using all their available time finding a formula to stay at the top and perfecting strategies to do that. We're not in that bracket.
 
Reckon a lot are confused to what his role entails. Is he just a chief scout? Does he direct the style of football desired? How much input does he have in signings? If any. If not, what exactly is the point of Walsh.
I believe a lot of anger directed towards him is down to the fact that, as of now, and to all apparent information, he seems to be unaccountable for any of the issues. Koeman went quickly enough, but no obvious culpability for Walsh?
Senior management at the club is woefully deficient, which wouldn't help, and only when Bill n Bob are shot will anyone at all at the club get to stand on their own merits. All are issues lead to their mismanagement and amateurish dabblings in the affairs of the club, on and off the pitch.
 
Reckon a lot are confused to what his role entails. Is he just a chief scout? Does he direct the style of football desired? How much input does he have in signings? If any. If not, what exactly is the point of Walsh.
I believe a lot of anger directed towards him is down to the fact that, as of now, and to all apparent information, he seems to be unaccountable for any of the issues. Koeman went quickly enough, but no obvious culpability for Walsh?
Senior management at the club is woefully deficient, which wouldn't help, and only when Bill n Bob are shot will anyone at all at the club get to stand on their own merits. All are issues lead to their mismanagement and amateurish dabblings in the affairs of the club, on and off the pitch.
His case hasn't been helped by the fact we now have two people in charge of the playing side who he is longstanding friends of. The appointment of Allardyce and Shakespeare has poisoned the well for him. Most will just see that again as a man who has a pliant character rather than one with his own voice and plan for the club.

I think he's finished here.
 
Good article, it's the way I feel about Walsh too. Our fans are moaning about him NOT finding gems, but no offence, the gems aren't going to go straight into the team. Nothing to suggest Sandro and onyekuru don't turn out to be massive bargains over the next few years.

It's too early to just write him straight off. Maybe he's not a dof, but id like us to keep him in some capacity. We did a lot of buying for the here and now, but maybe all his potential signings will turn out boss.
 
On the United comparison: I think Woodward is a CEO rather than DoF. He might deal in transfers but he's not a football man in the sense he *knows* the game from the inside and can gave that credibility for his judgement on player recruitment - that's deferred to the manager and his staff. In most cases I know the DoF is a former player. Walsh is too and that can lead to conflict over who is right on a player assessment.

On the DoF role more generally: yes, in other clubs with managers used to the system and who dont have the ego to clash with club plans on overall playing strategy it could be workable. However, when things start going a bit wrong the tensions inherent to two people working in roughly the same area of the club (or at least who have a huge impact on the performance of one and other) it can unravel very quickly. I also think the DoF becomes plausible only when there is a massive club involved. The division of labour becomes more acceptable because of the demands for success, and the reality is that the organisation requires an army of people employed to acquire and assess players for their suitability in keeping a club at the top and the coaching role is necessarily singular: dealing with the array of talent the club can attract and using all their available time finding a formula to stay at the top and perfecting strategies to do that. We're not in that bracket.

I know Woodward is a CEO with a different role to Walsh but my concern is whether we have the quality of people at the club who are capable of delivering on deals for players who are recommended by Walsh? Or if Walsh's recommendations are trusted enough to go all out on? A lot of the fanbase seem to have decided he's a big problem but I'm not convinced our transfer failings are down to him solely, if at all.

I'd slightly disagree on the clubs requirements for a DOF being dependent on standing or size. At the start of the season we had a Europa League campaign to play for as well domestic honours. That would suggest that our manager would have a workload in excess of a lot of other managers in the league so the need to divide labour would be just as applicable perhaps? Acquiring and assessing players properly is time consuming regardless of where you are in the league and if you are a club of comparatively lesser financial resource then the need to do it thoroughly is maybe even greater.

And if the ultimate long term aim is to return to the top table of European football is it not better to get the model up and running as soon as possible?
 

Good article mate. That's the first serious approach to the subject of Walsh I've read.

I think you might be right in being cautious over his record here and not chucking it in the bin entirely. If Koeman had done his job and provided a replacement to Lukaku immediately he left and not look frantically on the last day things may have been very diferent now...and at the time I also stated that I suspected this was Koeman's plan: to go with a pop gun attack and have the goals spread across the team and have no real replacement for Lukaku...a plan that went horrendoulsy wrong and cost him his job.

All that said, I have two reservations about Walsh and his appointment/role:

1/ is he a strong enough character to be a DoF? Most, I believe, are pretty hard nosed operators who exert real control over squad affairs and their relations with managers...even those like Koeman, who seems to have been untouchable/uncontrolled under Walsh.

2/ the very role itself I believe is alien to this club and many others. Fans may be reacting more to that than the man himself. They undoubtedly spell confusion about who is making decisions and that in and of itself produces frustration with whomever is in that post at any one time. For me, we dont require a D0F. We require a good manager left to his own recruitment and a CEO brought in to sort out commercial streams and the stadium scheme.
If we are not going to go down the DOF role, then we need a far better scouting network than what the club has at the moment. Recruitment has been a problem with this club for a long time now and that is not just Walsh's fault, we clearly don't have a very wide or good scouting setup imo. Personally i like the DOF model as it allows the coach/manager to just get on with working with the team. I can see advantages and disadvantages with both setups, although i do think some people are slightly down on it because we have a guy who is way out of his depth with it.
 
His case hasn't been helped by the fact we now have two people in charge of the playing side who he is longstanding friends of. The appointment of Allardyce and Shakespeare has poisoned the well for him. Most will just see that again as a man who has a pliant character rather than one with his own voice and plan for the club.

I think he's finished here.

I would add that that is just what Bill wanted, Allardyce knows the boardroom shenanigans 'game' well and is happy to go along as long as he is rewarded accordingly.
 
I know Woodward is a CEO with a different role to Walsh but my concern is whether we have the quality of people at the club who are capable of delivering on deals for players who are recommended by Walsh? Or if Walsh's recommendations are trusted enough to go all out on? A lot of the fanbase seem to have decided he's a big problem but I'm not convinced our transfer failings are down to him solely, if at all.

I'd slightly disagree on the clubs requirements for a DOF being dependent on standing or size. At the start of the season we had a Europa League campaign to play for as well domestic honours. That would suggest that our manager would have a workload in excess of a lot of other managers in the league so the need to divide labour would be just as applicable perhaps? Acquiring and assessing players properly is time consuming regardless of where you are in the league and if you are a club of comparatively lesser financial resource then the need to do it thoroughly is maybe even greater.

And if the ultimate long term aim is to return to the top table of European football is it not better to get the model up and running as soon as possible?

That's a good point, but the need for a striker was known for many months and ignored, surely his remit isn't just gems for the future?
 
That's a good point, but the need for a striker was known for many months and ignored, surely his remit isn't just gems for the future?

I fully agree which makes me question whether he is given much say. If Koeman was insistent on the "Pop Gun Attack" as @davek suggests then Walsh could have had a list as long as his arm yet been ignored. And if we did actually want to get a striker in summer then I find it easier to believe that there were failings in pushing a deal through rather than trouble with Walsh finding targets.

The second scenario points to failings not necessarily of Walsh's doing. All speculation though and it could just be he's performed badly in certain aspects of his role.
 
As has been said, we needed a forward and have done from the start of the season and we buy a player who seemingly isn't capable of playing at the level required. We needed a left back and didn't get one. Walcott was a good buy but he was hardly an unknown quantity.
Now there may be mitigating circumstances as to why Walsh failed to deliver what we needed but he still failed. When you look at the players we have bought recently and how many of them are playing well in the first eleven you see something is not working with our transfer strategy.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top