The time its taking to get a manager in

[cr3_bear 14,792]

Board are a fucking shambles . Hanging murty out to dry aswell . just fed up with it all this week after spending all last week thinking maybe something has to come up today .the more it goes on the more I expect us to sign some underwhelming name 

[Blue Avenger 22,567]

3 hours ago, KWBear said:

I think the likelihood is that the board may well have had grand ambitions to appoint a "big name", but have gone fucking running to the hills when told what it will cost to attract someone of a competent and proven quality. 

I dare say we are somewhere around the middle of the list of candidates as we progressively move down it towards an affordable level. 

The absolute fucking shocking and horrendously predictable thing about this whole debacle is that we will end up with some cunt like Tommy Wright after spending the last three weeks pissing around meeting with cunts who are well in excess of our financial reach. 

All in all, it is a glaring display of fucking utter incompetence, and with King calling the shots, what the FUCK is he doing sat on his arse in south africa? he didnt meet warburton, and look how that turned out. 

Get over here you sleekit bastard and take charge. YOU asked for this so YOU fucking fix it. 

He does have a tendency to shirk responsibility and not take ownership.

These are very trying times for us and his lack of visible leadership is bordering on neglect if not incompetence. He leads this great institution and is needed now. Even the most incompetent would show face and even king is not that much of a fool. This long distance relationship is just not working and something just aint right and I just don't mean these new appointments.

[Malvern 11,329]

It will take us years to get the quality freebie manager in. Or an ex player.

[Turnberry18 3,204]

The next manager could very well possibly be announced before the end of the season, and then maybe not taking charge till the summer; that is what it's looking like, that they would assess the squad, and have time to draw up plans for next season. Perhaps that's the preferred option for the board.

[weshallnotbemoved! 714]

They are waiting to see how many coins they find down the back of their couches first.

[ianferguson 2,619]

5 hours ago, NeoGeo7 said:

Nope, the board are just incompetent.

How easy is it to get likes ? ,mention board and incompetent in the same short sentence and bingo ?.

[ianferguson 2,619]

2 hours ago, cr3_bear said:

Board are a fucking shambles . Hanging murty out to dry aswell . just fed up with it all this week after spending all last week thinking maybe something has to come up today .the more it goes on the more I expect us to sign some underwhelming name 

Have a little patience, sadly the players are doing a more efficient job of hanging Murty out to dry.

[BigDak 781]

Fuck sake. If I didn't know any better I'd say this site was 75% taig infested. Maybe they're just taking the time to get the right men on board. Even if we did beat the sheep worriers to second and won the SC how many of you wouldn't think this season was a complete fuck up anyway? I'd rather they took their time and got the right folk on board. If they did rush to get someone and it was the wrong someone then we're back to where we were. 

[BigDak 781]

1 hour ago, ianferguson said:

How easy is it to get likes ? ,mention board and incompetent in the same short sentence and bingo ?.

Ironically I liked this 

[Bertent 2,081]

7 hours ago, GallantPioneer said:

I dont follow

thats obvious

[Bertent 2,081]

4 hours ago, ianferguson said:

How easy is it to get likes ? ,mention board and incompetent in the same short sentence and bingo ?.

Well no one will ever accuse you of like whoring. Board whoring is another matter. 

[ianferguson 2,619]

1 minute ago, Bertent said:

Well no one will ever accuse you of like whoring. Board whoring is another matter. 

I've been accused of FAR worse things. My point wasn't about "like whoring", it was how popular it is to kick the board on RM.

[Bertent 2,081]

2 minutes ago, ianferguson said:

I've been accused of FAR worse things. My point wasn't about "like whoring", it was how popular it is to kick the board on RM.

Reality is an alien concept on some forums, I blame the love of ties, blazers and the nice little earners from the blue pound. 

[AGC123 1,179]

Never really been A DOF fan but if that is the route we are going down then it is essential that they are in place first before a manager is appointed. But this needs to happen asap murty was happy working with the youth now he is being saddled with a job that requires not only a manager but a statesmen.

 

i wonder if marc had been more transparent could it have worked? So many games post match you wished he would rip into the players. Great coach terrible manager i think the history books will say.    

[Thewhitesettler 2,711]

12 hours ago, NeoGeo7 said:

Nope, the board are just incompetent.

Should've just locked the thread after this comment, everything else is just gossip, and rumours, started by guys like me, with way too much time on our hands.?

[The_Corinthian 74]

9 hours ago, George Goudie said:

Have seen this mentioned a few times and I'm not even sure what it means. Manager is just a job, you could have 15 of them if you wanted to, whether Warburton has a case for his dismissal or not is irrelevant to hiring someone else.

Reason we don't have someone in already is because this board are reactionary and behind the curve. They knew they were getting rid of Warburton and yet hadn't the foggiest idea who they were bringing in.

 

`Reactionary` sounds to me like `socialist patter`. What school did you go tae, pal?

[Thewhitesettler 2,711]

Can we afford a decent manager? If Ally was getting £750 000+ per annum, how much will a decent manager cost?

[K.A.I 36,183]

I don't even think we are taking a long time (so far) .. it was about 3-weeks ago Warburton left and we have (wrongly IMO) went down the director of football route who (again wrongly) will have a major say in picking the manager.

These things take time. Especially if we want the right people. 

I've no faith in these appointments to be honest but the time-frame isn't a long time either. I think it seems longer than what it is due to Murty being shite and not wanting to be there and us craving an interim as each game seems like big tasks coming thick and fast while we're playing catch-up to Aberdeen. 

[TheCutch 4,340]

28 minutes ago, K.A.I said:

I don't even think we are taking a long time (so far) .. it was about 3-weeks ago Warburton left and we have (wrongly IMO) went down the director of football route who (again wrongly) will have a major say in picking the manager.

These things take time. Especially if we want the right people.

I've no faith in these appointments to be honest but the time-frame isn't a long time either. I think it seems longer than what it is due to Murty being shite and not wanting to be there and us craving an interim as each game seems like big tasks coming thick and fast while we're playing catch-up to Aberdeen.

The part in bold K.A.I.

I have seen you mention this on a couple of occasions now mate, and am a bit confused on your stance on this part. I appreciate you don't fancy the DOF route and that is certainly splitting our fans opinions at the moment.

However, as we are going down that route, would you not rather have someone with a football background making the call than our board members who have not got a clue about football?

If it was Wilson for example, he has a history in football, and especially football recruitment at a high level. Would you not rather he played a major part in choosing our next manager rather than it being left to Murray, Robertson, Gilligan, Park etc..?

I am yet to be convinced either way on the DOF route, but I certainly would prefer someone like Wilson making this massive decision rather than the incompetents we have in charge.

[K.A.I 36,183]

Just now, TheCutch said:

The part in bold K.A.I.

I have seen you mention this on a couple of occasions now mate, and am a bit confused on your stance on this part. I appreciate you don't fancy the DOF route and that is certainly splitting our fans opinions at the moment.

However, as we are going down that route, would you not rather have someone with a football background making the call than our board members who have not got a clue about football?

If it was Wilson for example, he has a history in football, and especially football recruitment at a high level. Would you not rather he played a major part in choosing our next manager rather than it being left to Murray, Robertson, Gilligan, Park etc..?

I am yet to be convinced either way on the DOF route, but I certainly would prefer someone like Wilson making this massive decision rather than the incompetents we have in charge.

If we were only bringing in (for example) Ross Wilson to appoint a manager on a one-off consultancy type role then it's fine. But it's not.

We are going to be paying a handsome salary to run the football side of things when all we need is a manager (a good manager).

We are going down this route for all the wrong reasons and have to in essence make 2 successful appointments for it to come off. It's an experiment and a luxury - we are beyond that stage.

What happens if (and these figures are guess work) ... we go for Frank De Boer and the salary he wants is about 300k short of what we can afford for our budget and we've appointed a DOF on 300k per year.

What happens is for example a Frank De Boer comes in and doesn't like Ross Wilson's ideas and doesn't think he can work with him?

How's the director of football working out at Hearts with Cathro and Levein? 

Do Celtic have a DOF? they're doing OK.

The board are appointing a DOF for all the wrong reasons - mainly to take the heat off them when it comes to them knowing fuck-all about football (like you rightly point out)

It has disaster written all over it. An expensive disaster at that. 

[TheCutch 4,340]

2 minutes ago, K.A.I said:

If we were only bringing in (for example) Ross Wilson to appoint a manager on a one-off consultancy type role then it's fine. But it's not.

We are going to be paying a handsome salary to run the football side of things when all we need is a manager (a good manager).

We are going down this route for all the wrong reasons and have to in essence make 2 successful appointments for it to come off. It's an experiment and a luxury - we are beyond that stage.

What happens if (and these figures are guess work) ... we go for Frank De Boer and the salary he wants is about 300k short of what we can afford for our budget and we've appointed a DOF on 300k per year.

What happens is for example a Frank De Boer comes in and doesn't like Ross Wilson's ideas and doesn't think he can work with him?

How's the director of football working out at Hearts with Cathro and Levein?

Do Celtic have a DOF? they're doing OK.

The board are appointing a DOF for all the wrong reasons - mainly to take the heat off them when it comes to them knowing fuck-all about football (like you rightly point out)

It has disaster written all over it. An expensive disaster at that.

I appreciate all that, and I ahve the same concerns as yourself about the DOF route (albeit I am a little more curious about it)

My point was though, that you seemed to suggest that when we do bring in our choice of DOF, that he shouldn't be making the decision on who the manager should be.

Do you think that? Or have I misunderstood your stance on that part?

[K.A.I 36,183]

2 minutes ago, TheCutch said:

I appreciate all that, and I ahve the same concerns as yourself about the DOF route (albeit I am a little more curious about it)

My point was though, that you seemed to suggest that when we do bring in our choice of DOF, that he shouldn't be making the decision on who the manager should be.

Do you think that? Or have I misunderstood your stance on that part?

If that's part of a DOF's remit then he should do it. Still makes us having a DOF wrong in my eyes as we're past the experiment stage. 

Even if your pro-DOF, you're still assuming that this board are going to appoint the right person, to then appoint the right person who will between all 3 of them (the board, the manager and the DOF) making the right decisions all the time together going forward.

The more I think about it and type this stuff out the more I just think shit. 

 

[TheCutch 4,340]

2 minutes ago, K.A.I said:

If that's part of a DOF's remit then he should do it. Still makes us having a DOF wrong in my eyes as we're past the experiment stage.

Even if your pro-DOF, you're still assuming that this board are going to appoint the right person, to then appoint the right person who will between all 3 of them (the board, the manager and the DOF) making the right decisions all the time together going forward.

The more I think about it and type this stuff out the more I just think shit.

 

My main concern isn't about getting a DOF exactly, but more about getting the CORRECT one in.

Your experiment line is bang on the money imo, and I believed that when this approach was mentioned that we would appoint someone with good experience in the role.

It looks like it will be Wilson though, and he seems a very popular choice on here. It is beyond question that the guy has been succesful in the role he has at Southampton and his previous positions, but that role as far as I am aware has NEVER been as a DOF (I may be proven wrong on that by someone)

That is where the major part of the risk is in my eyes. We will be bringing in a guy (who could turn out to be brilliant btw) to take on the position for the first time in his career. We all believe that Ibrox is no place for managers to learn their trade, so the same should apply in this role as well.

Time will tell I suppose, and I am generally one of the more lenient supporters with regards to giving people a chance to prove their worth. But these are MASSIVE appointments in our history, and I am very nervous that this board will mess it up again.

[K.A.I 36,183]

1 minute ago, TheCutch said:

My main concern isn't about getting a DOF exactly, but more about getting the CORRECT one in.

Your experiment line is bang on the money imo, and I believed that when this approach was mentioned that we would appoint someone with good experience in the role.

It looks like it will be Wilson though, and he seems a very popular choice on here. It is beyond question that the guy has been succesful in the role he has at Southampton and his previous positions, but that role as far as I am aware has NEVER been as a DOF (I may be proven wrong on that by someone)

That is where the major part of the risk is in my eyes. We will be bringing in a guy (who could turn out to be brilliant btw) to take on the position for the first time in his career. We all believe that Ibrox is no place for managers to learn their trade, so the same should apply in this role as well.

Time will tell I suppose, and I am generally one of the more lenient supporters with regards to giving people a chance to prove their worth. But these are MASSIVE appointments in our history, and I am very nervous that this board will mess it up again.

He's a popular choice on here because some folk think Southampton are like Real Madrid or something these days - Mulholland was wanted by Southampton so he must be amazing, Murty was a coach at Southampton so he must be amazing ... Ross Wilson is a guy at Southampton so he must make an amazing DOF for us.

If the board can't be trusted to appoint the right manager on their own, then what makes anyone think they can appoint the right DOF on their own?

There's a common denominator here - the board. 

[sandyinroyalblue 16,478]

A half decent interim manager to see us through the next couple of months would have bought the board more time to find a permanent DOF and manager/coach.

Just to leave Murty in charge in the meantime has increased the pressure they are under to find a new management team and probably increased the chances they'll make a poor appointment by doing it in haste.