Next manager

[Brochred]

8 hours ago, Blow.Up.Sheep said:

we could do a helluva lot worse than going for Scott Brown.
Ok maybe not with Lennon or Robson but he would need somebody along side him, is that Leven or maybe Tony Doc. I dinna ken but out of the names being thrown around and mentioned early doors Brooner could be a decent shout and maybe even a realistic one. The motherwell boss surely will not walk away already, would he. and Robinson would be Goodwin (take 2)
So for me I would be happy with Brown 

PS
By the way, Ange Postecoglu is still on the dole 

I'm so relieved you've moved on from Lennon. Postecoglu would not happen but he has proven himself to be a winning manager wherever he has been, except his last 10 week gig or whatever it was at Forest so he would be a definite yes from me . Absolute no to Robinson but the Motherwell guy seems to be worth a punt. No matter who we get, I'm sure the players will let him down as well

[redordead]

I think brown is a decent shout as his own man.  Has done well at Ayr.

My outside punt would be my beloved Gary naismith. Great job at east fife then moved to a basket case at QOS.

Then came to stenny, steadied the ship, won their first title in 140yrs in bottom tier. Straight into play offs last year and sitting at the top of the league this year on a shoestring with a host of full time teams in league one.

Knows how to get results and rebuild a squad every year. Yes it's a couple of leagues up but I don't know if a more consistently performing Scottish manager. Which uses wingers BTW. He also had a career that demands respect from anyone in our squad. 

Just a stray thought away from the guys sacked twenty times and won nothing.

[Panda]

13 hours ago, Blow.Up.Sheep said:

I would be tempted to go for Scott Brown 

 

11 hours ago, Blow.Up.Sheep said:

we could do a helluva lot worse than going for Scott Brown.

 

1 hour ago, redordead said:

I think brown is a decent shout as his own man.  Has done well at Ayr.

The holidays are over. Sober up.

 

[Panda]

Watched the Lutz interview with RedTV.

A summary:-

- Performances over last four games were pivotal in deciding to sack Thelin.
- Personality of next manager: He needs to "reflect a certain emotion and a certain fire, which I think is extremely important to get this team going and get the players behind you"
- Won't put time scale on appointing new manager. "Could be six days, could be six weeks, could be six months."
- ⁠Says he told the players they have six months to prove themselves 
- Paraphrasing him slightly (11:15) but he basically says Aberdeen have lots of good individuals but not a good team.
- Among the names who have already applied, he says "there is some big names, some surprising names, there is some terrible names"
- Said "don't be surprised if we are looking for more Scottish players in the transfer market"
- Confirms Alfie Dorrington has returned to Tottenham (don't think it was ever officially announced) and "a few more players will leave in the next few days"

[blinlemon]

Canna see it trailed elsewhere on here, but for anyone without Red TV, Pingu’s interview with Mal Panton is honest, insightful, and has given me a virtual shot of enthusiasm. He’s speaking the language we need to hear. YouTube link….

 

[ErchiePlum]

"there is some big names, some surprising names, there is some terrible names"

Once we get new manager appointed someone needs to take Lutz out to the pub , get him pissed and get somes names under the 3 categories noted below.

big ,surprising and terrible

[tlg1903]

57 minutes ago, Panda said:

Watched the Lutz interview with RedTV.

A summary:-

- Performances over last four games were pivotal in deciding to sack Thelin.
- Personality of next manager: He needs to "reflect a certain emotion and a certain fire, which I think is extremely important to get this team going and get the players behind you"
- Won't put time scale on appointing new manager. "Could be six days, could be six weeks, could be six months."
- ⁠Says he told the players they have six months to prove themselves 
- Paraphrasing him slightly (11:15) but he basically says Aberdeen have lots of good individuals but not a good team.
- Among the names who have already applied, he says "there is some big names, some surprising names, there is some terrible names"
- Said "don't be surprised if we are looking for more Scottish players in the transfer market"
- Confirms Alfie Dorrington has returned to Tottenham (don't think it was ever officially announced) and "a few more players will leave in the next few days"

What is going on with the walls where they did the interview?  Reminded me of that episode of south park where the internet goes down. 

[OrlandoDon]

Apologies for posting the video in the other chain, just saw this. He’s really interesting, and I do like his take on Scottish identity. Hope that promising David Watson!

does suggest jimmy was too nice and we weren’t even trying hard enough. My question was fitness as we don’t really press and that was one of the core attributes of our identity. 

wonder if there’s a place for shinnie in the new coaching staff?

[Radiored]

1 hour ago, OrlandoDon said:

wonder if there’s a place for shinnie in the new coaching staff?

My thoughts also ... Obviously has at least another season in those 'gone' legs ... obviously influential on the park ... as a captain should be .... and even when he occasionally gives less than 95%, it still beats the 110% of most others.

A new 2 year contract as a player/assistant coach would benefit the player and club IMHO.

Returning to the 'captain' thing ... I believe the role of club captain, especially a successful club captain, is as good a grounding as any for a future club manager/coach. 

In which case, Ah would be in favour o' givin' Scott Broon a shot ... with Leven still on board, and Shinnie transitioning from player/captain/assistant coach ... to future manager/head coach ... even, eventually,  if not with the Dons.

[Goldie03]

9 hours ago, Panda said:

Watched the Lutz interview with RedTV.

A summary:-

- Performances over last four games were pivotal in deciding to sack Thelin.
- Personality of next manager: He needs to "reflect a certain emotion and a certain fire, which I think is extremely important to get this team going and get the players behind you"
- Won't put time scale on appointing new manager. "Could be six days, could be six weeks, could be six months."
- ⁠Says he told the players they have six months to prove themselves 
- Paraphrasing him slightly (11:15) but he basically says Aberdeen have lots of good individuals but not a good team.
- Among the names who have already applied, he says "there is some big names, some surprising names, there is some terrible names"
- Said "don't be surprised if we are looking for more Scottish players in the transfer market"
- Confirms Alfie Dorrington has returned to Tottenham (don't think it was ever officially announced) and "a few more players will leave in the next few days"

Good summing up Panda it was great to hear him say the right things and the players defo are gonna have to work hard.

Makes me feel more optimistic for the rest of the season.

Unfortunately going into the office today and sitting beside Hearts and Falkirk fans aaaargh. 

[Brochred]

12 hours ago, Panda said:

Watched the Lutz interview with RedTV.

A summary:-

- Performances over last four games were pivotal in deciding to sack Thelin.
- Personality of next manager: He needs to "reflect a certain emotion and a certain fire, which I think is extremely important to get this team going and get the players behind you"
- Won't put time scale on appointing new manager. "Could be six days, could be six weeks, could be six months."
- ⁠Says he told the players they have six months to prove themselves 
- Paraphrasing him slightly (11:15) but he basically says Aberdeen have lots of good individuals but not a good team.
- Among the names who have already applied, he says "there is some big names, some surprising names, there is some terrible names"
- Said "don't be surprised if we are looking for more Scottish players in the transfer market"
- Confirms Alfie Dorrington has returned to Tottenham (don't think it was ever officially announced) and "a few more players will leave in the next few days"

Also stated "if we are showponying around and not really getting the effort on to the pitch" I think there is a clear reference to someone there...

[Mason89]

16 hours ago, redordead said:

I think brown is a decent shout as his own man.  Has done well at Ayr.

My outside punt would be my beloved Gary naismith. Great job at east fife then moved to a basket case at QOS.

Then came to stenny, steadied the ship, won their first title in 140yrs in bottom tier. Straight into play offs last year and sitting at the top of the league this year on a shoestring with a host of full time teams in league one.

Knows how to get results and rebuild a squad every year. Yes it's a couple of leagues up but I don't know if a more consistently performing Scottish manager. Which uses wingers BTW. He also had a career that demands respect from anyone in our squad. 

Just a stray thought away from the guys sacked twenty times and won nothing.

Do you watch a fair bit of Stenny? My friends boy plays for them - Mikey Anderson

Always  thought he could play up a level 

[OrlandoDon]

1 hour ago, Brochred said:

Also stated "if we are showponying around and not really getting the effort on to the pitch" I think there is a clear reference to someone there...

I don’t really think so, we have a number of players like that. I think he’s just meaning that for every strachan and weir we need a cooper and Simpson.

he was clear that players will be going soon, wonder who?? Our loaners are aouchiche and karlsson, both who, like it or not, do contribute. Hope they stay and are more productive under leven/new manager.

[wokinginashearerwonderland]

Loots talks a great game but the whole director of football new age crap worries me and the bloke might as well just manage the team himself.  You only have to look down the road at Amorim's last press conference to see what will probably happen.  The new manager ain't got any say as to how the team is going to play, ain't got no say on which players are in his squad but if he loses then he gets fired.  Great gig.  It's like cutting off Luke Littler's right hand and asking him to just crack on. 

[OrlandoDon]

36 minutes ago, wokinginashearerwonderland said:

Loots talks a great game but the whole director of football new age crap worries me and the bloke might as well just manage the team himself.  You only have to look down the road at Amorim's last press conference to see what will probably happen.  The new manager ain't got any say as to how the team is going to play, ain't got no say on which players are in his squad but if he loses then he gets fired.  Great gig.  It's like cutting off Luke Littler's right hand and asking him to just crack on. 

Don’t agree. ‘Old’ football the manager did everything. Now the manager is the coach, being asked to spend all of his time doing what he does best, coach. There is not one model for every club, and the manager role can vary slightly. Other folks do the scouting and signing of players. You also sign a manager who aligns with your/the clubs philosophy, which is correct in my option. You referenced Amorim, a very bizarre hire because he didn’t align. A manager/coach should  know his role and is not bigger than the club.

its how it is with most sports in the states, the manager is ‘only’ the coach with the old manager job split between other ‘experts.’

[wee toon red]

8 minutes ago, OrlandoDon said:

Don’t agree. ‘Old’ football the manager did everything. Now the manager is the coach, being asked to spend all of his time doing what he does best, coach. There is not one model for every club, and the manager role can vary slightly. Other folks do the scouting and signing of players. You also sign a manager who aligns with your/the clubs philosophy, which is correct in my option. You referenced Amorim, a very bizarre hire because he didn’t align. A manager/coach should  know his role and is not bigger than the club.

its how it is with most sports in the states, the manager is ‘only’ the coach with the old manager job split between other ‘experts.’

It drives me nuts these days when you read things like "manager such and such spent £x thousands/millions in the summer" when, quite clearly, more or less no big clubs give the person in charge of training and picking the team carte blanche to even pick signings, let alone negotiate wages, fees etc.

Amorim is the latest example: he didn't spend £200m in the summer, Man Utd did. If it had just been up to Amorim, he'd probably have signed four completely different players to the ones the club did.

It'll have been similar with Jimmy. The sooner folk get their heads around that being the way football works these days, the better.

[RicoS321]

3 minutes ago, OrlandoDon said:

Don’t agree. ‘Old’ football the manager did everything. Now the manager is the coach, being asked to spend all of his time doing what he does best, coach. There is not one model for every club, and the manager role can vary slightly. Other folks do the scouting and signing of players. You also sign a manager who aligns with your/the clubs philosophy, which is correct in my option. You referenced Amorim, a very bizarre hire because he didn’t align. A manager/coach should  know his role and is not bigger than the club.

its how it is with most sports in the states, the manager is ‘only’ the coach with the old manager job split between other ‘experts.’

Obviously I couldn't give a fuck about the English pish, but agree with this. You can see how well McInnes is doing with the recruitment largely taken away from him. The problem is that if every other club has a team of analysts doing the recruitment then they're likely to see a better return over time - probably. You're also not going to get a good manager who'll want to spend days trawling data too. There's a ceiling to it, and we reached that with McInnes, who was spread far too thin with us. 

The sporting director is just the guy that pins together the recruitment, the sports science, youth team and the manager. He makes sure that the high level goals are being met and everything is staying in balance. Clearly what happened in the summer should never happen under a competent sporting director. He'd have questioned the recruitment of too many similar players, the lack of athletic midfielder, as well as insisting on space for youth. He holds all departments to account. 

[RicoS321]

10 minutes ago, wee toon red said:

It drives me nuts these days when you read things like "manager such and such spent £x thousands/millions in the summer" when, quite clearly, more or less no big clubs give the person in charge of training and picking the team carte blanche to even pick signings, let alone negotiate wages, fees etc

Yep, Cormack has been ably assisted by the idiot BBC pundit in this regard, who constantly go on about Thelin "been backed". He hasn't. Backing either comes in the form of giving him the keys and the money, or having a structure in place to allow him to do his job. It doesn't come in the form of £X expenditure. Just shelling out cash isn't backing anymore than giving someone a hundred lottery tickets and telling them to buy a hoose with it is.

It's the fourth manager in a row who can leave saying that the club didn't allow them to fulfill their potential. I don't think any of them would have made for the perfect manager, but under no circumstances should Dons fans buy into the nonsense narrative that they were "backed". 

Edited yesterday at 15:41 by RicoS321

[TheDonbytheDee]

1 hour ago, wokinginashearerwonderland said:

Loots talks a great game but the whole director of football new age crap worries me and the bloke might as well just manage the team himself.  You only have to look down the road at Amorim's last press conference to see what will probably happen.  The new manager ain't got any say as to how the team is going to play, ain't got no say on which players are in his squad but if he loses then he gets fired.  Great gig.  It's like cutting off Luke Littler's right hand and asking him to just crack on. 

I'm with you. I think I get the point of it at the really big clubs, but not in Scotland. To be fair, I'm not one who bothers too much about the running of the club and only really care about what I see on the pitch when I go to see them. The rest is just noise really.

It's modern fitba and the American influence in it, which can fuck right off.

The old ways might have been the bad way, but the new way will never add further stars to the jersey either. 

I've nothing against Lutz, but as soon as the next manager comes in and suffers a defeat, he will be getting it in the neck too.

[wokinginashearerwonderland]

2 hours ago, OrlandoDon said:

You also sign a manager who aligns with your/the clubs philosophy, which is correct in my option.

I get the theory but it's a mighty restrictive policy and also makes life easier for your rivals.  Does that mean you play the same system and same way in a European tie against Barcelona where you will have little of the ball as you would in a league cup tie versus Dumbarton just because that's your philosophy?  Can we not have a six foot six striker that we go long to when we play against a small side or have a couple of nippy wingers that we can chuck on and play a different way when we play a side with a couple of slow full backs?  There is no need to be so rigid in the thinking, football changes season to season.  The club philosophy thing is modern day buzz word shite that chairman seem to churn out in the same way that they fire managers who win but don't have a nice playing style and a year later they find their club fighting relegation. 

    

2 hours ago, OrlandoDon said:

Don’t agree. ‘Old’ football the manager did everything. Now the manager is the coach, being asked to spend all of his time doing what he does best, coach.

You are spot it, it absolutely is and there are numerous examples of it not working.  It is normally a manager ending up with a player he does not want who has been forced on him.  At the level we are at it really should not be that difficult.  We should only need 3 or 4 new players in a transfer window, a manager with a decent eye for a player could easily deal with that. I am not suggesting the manager is involved in negotiating transfer fees or wages but he could easily be the one picking the players he wants in his squad if they are guys that are known to him.

 

[tlg1903]

3 hours ago, RicoS321 said:

Obviously I couldn't give a fuck about the English pish, but agree with this. You can see how well McInnes is doing with the recruitment largely taken away from him. The problem is that if every other club has a team of analysts doing the recruitment then they're likely to see a better return over time - probably. You're also not going to get a good manager who'll want to spend days trawling data too. There's a ceiling to it, and we reached that with McInnes, who was spread far too thin with us. 

The sporting director is just the guy that pins together the recruitment, the sports science, youth team and the manager. He makes sure that the high level goals are being met and everything is staying in balance. Clearly what happened in the summer should never happen under a competent sporting director. He'd have questioned the recruitment of too many similar players, the lack of athletic midfielder, as well as insisting on space for youth. He holds all departments to account. 

One thing I don't think get's mentioned enough with McInnes is how underfunded he was by Cormack compared to every other hire under his regime.  Clearly Cormack wanted his own manager in which, given his investment, is fair enough.  I can't be the only Dons fan to have wondered how unstale things might have become under Derek if he was given the same budget to play with though.  

[RicoS321]

1 hour ago, wokinginashearerwonderland said:

I get the theory but it's a mighty restrictive policy and also makes life easier for your rivals.  Does that mean you play the same system and same way in a European tie against Barcelona where you will have little of the ball as you would in a league cup tie versus Dumbarton just because that's your philosophy?  Can we not have a six foot six striker that we go long to when we play against a small side or have a couple of nippy wingers that we can chuck on and play a different way when we play a side with a couple of slow full backs?  There is no need to be so rigid in the thinking, football changes season to season.  The club philosophy thing is modern day buzz word shite that chairman seem to churn out in the same way that they fire managers who win but don't have a nice playing style and a year later they find their club fighting relegation. 

    

You are spot it, it absolutely is and there are numerous examples of it not working.  It is normally a manager ending up with a player he does not want who has been forced on him.  At the level we are at it really should not be that difficult.  We should only need 3 or 4 new players in a transfer window, a manager with a decent eye for a player could easily deal with that. I am not suggesting the manager is involved in negotiating transfer fees or wages but he could easily be the one picking the players he wants in his squad if they are guys that are known to him.

 

I think the philosophy thing is just a framework with room to manoeuvre. The idea is that you adopt a system from youth to first team, and you coach attributes that fit into that. If a particular manager chooses to be a zealot then that usually ends badly. On the other hand, if a manager chooses to play pragmatic, stuffy shite in perpetuity then they also get the boot. It sort of makes sense, it means that you're signing for a system and when you change manager you know the type of manager to look for. Most of what I just said applied to managers without the framework too of course, McInnes had a style very clearly. If it's clearly defined, then at least it can be subject to review within. It's something that is a nice to have though and should be subject to regular review and change. It's easy to say that it's modern fitba pish, but then in the same breath suggest that we shouldn't sign Robinson (for example) because of his style of play. 

I can't remember the last time we ever just needed 3 or 4 players in a window. It doesn't work like that. If you need 4 players then you sign between 6 and 8. You also need to make sure there's a constant stream going out the way. Contracts don't work to suit one in one out, players get injured long term, players leave for money etc. The biggest problem, though, is the transition between managers. All the knowledge, contacts etc go with them. That should be the property of the club. That's why the change has taken place. 

As I said previously, McInnes gave us the ceiling in that model. It was clear when he began to struggle that he didn't have any way to recover it. One shite window spiralled into many, and he was signing guys based on their games against us. There are so many examples of atrocious signings where someone in house should have had a veto (Storey, Tansey, Main a quick sample). 

In reality, a club of our size should have a collaborative model that allows the manager to pick two or three, and the recruitment team to do all the legwork. However, both sides should be open to scrutiny, with the final say going to someone with the authority and responsibility. Hence the sporting director.

 

[RicoS321]

16 minutes ago, tlg1903 said:

One thing I don't think get's mentioned enough with McInnes is how underfunded he was by Cormack compared to every other hire under his regime.  Clearly Cormack wanted his own manager in which, given his investment, is fair enough.  I can't be the only Dons fan to have wondered how unstale things might have become under Derek if he was given the same budget to play with though.  

I wouldn't have given McInnes the same budget (not directly to him I mean), but I said at the time that he should have been given the full setup of sporting director, proper recruitment team etc (that he now has at Hearts). He was clearly a decent coach, with weaknesses in recruitment and youth development. The separation of those areas would have given him a huge boost in my opinion. I just don't believe that a manager can make good judgement calls on players when they're spending most of their days coaching. It's easyish for the first couple of seasons when you can call on talent that you have seen previously or contacts that you have, but the longer you are at a club then these avenues become a little less useful. A contact might change club or role. A player who was good two years ago might not be quite the same. McInnes obviously had the one off bonanza of being able to pick the best of the rest too, with the other challengers liquidated, administered or Butchered.

[redordead]

7 hours ago, Mason89 said:

Do you watch a fair bit of Stenny? My friends boy plays for them - Mikey Anderson

Always  thought he could play up a level 

I do, Mikey has turned into a right good player. Does all the hard work. Great ball winner and has a bit of quality. 

[OrlandoDon]

4 hours ago, RicoS321 said:

I think the philosophy thing is just a framework with room to manoeuvre. The idea is that you adopt a system from youth to first team, and you coach attributes that fit into that. If a particular manager chooses to be a zealot then that usually ends badly. On the other hand, if a manager chooses to play pragmatic, stuffy shite in perpetuity then they also get the boot. It sort of makes sense, it means that you're signing for a system and when you change manager you know the type of manager to look for. Most of what I just said applied to managers without the framework too of course, McInnes had a style very clearly. If it's clearly defined, then at least it can be subject to review within. It's something that is a nice to have though and should be subject to regular review and change. It's easy to say that it's modern fitba pish, but then in the same breath suggest that we shouldn't sign Robinson (for example) because of his style of play. 

I can't remember the last time we ever just needed 3 or 4 players in a window. It doesn't work like that. If you need 4 players then you sign between 6 and 8. You also need to make sure there's a constant stream going out the way. Contracts don't work to suit one in one out, players get injured long term, players leave for money etc. The biggest problem, though, is the transition between managers. All the knowledge, contacts etc go with them. That should be the property of the club. That's why the change has taken place. 

As I said previously, McInnes gave us the ceiling in that model. It was clear when he began to struggle that he didn't have any way to recover it. One shite window spiralled into many, and he was signing guys based on their games against us. There are so many examples of atrocious signings where someone in house should have had a veto (Storey, Tansey, Main a quick sample). 

In reality, a club of our size should have a collaborative model that allows the manager to pick two or three, and the recruitment team to do all the legwork. However, both sides should be open to scrutiny, with the final say going to someone with the authority and responsibility. Hence the sporting director.

 

It varies. When I moved to the states I started coaching here, I was god because I had an accent and talked a good game. I had a coaching license, very rare here. I coached how I wanted, where I wanted, any formation, signed any players, created game schedules etc. I did team budget, I did everything. 
when I ‘retired’ from coaching 2 years ago my last gig was an academy. The club signed the players and I was given players, the club dictated my squad size and make up, I was told formations to play, style to play, my league and tournament was scheduled for me. I had very little say. My top players were quite often taken from my team to play with older/better teams, and I didn’t have a say. It was positional too, when the ball goes to x position he should be doing this etc. I was just the coach implementing their plan.

The only job I’ve ever been fired from was a coaching gig, my team were state champions, u16 boys, and the club hired a Director of Coaching, fired me because he didn’t like how I coached (despite behind heavily licensed an more qualified than him), I didn’t follow his Brazilian methods and coach his way. I had Brazilians, English kids, a Scottish kid, a German, and some Central Americans, as well as eastern European Americans. I argued we were a mix of cultures so my style would reflect that. Not what he wanted, an not what many pro teams want. They want you to implement their system.

I understand where the game is going, but it certainly takes away creativity and individuality to an extent. Is it easy to play against, maybe, scout maybe, but if you are a well oiled machine you’ll be hard to beat. Arsenal have/had such a passing reputation, that was/is taught at all levels.

Most top clubs dictate from the top down, teams at all play the same or similar style, same or similar formations, same positional coaching so that players can move seamlessly from team and age group. Very much how many pro clubs operate. Lobban should join the first team and things shouldn’t be much different and he adapts easily to fit the system.

think lutz will go this way, the manager has to fit the club philosophy and identity. I don’t think the club hired well in Thelin or recruitment folks given the lack of Scots and what lutz said, I do believe lutz and cormack want that aggressive passion and Scottish blood in the team and have seem what the lack of that can do. 
im rambling but think i understand what we are doing. We’re def hiring a coach to implement a system, not giving a manager a lot of power.

Edited 23 hours ago by OrlandoDon