Jump to content

Paul Mitchell (Sporting Director)


54

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, cosmic said:

Could Howe and Mitchell be staging this whilst giving reporters the drug they are craving for? Whilst bigger stuff is brewing in the background or taking the heat off the of delays of the "imminent" stadium & training ground plans?

 

Nope :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, macphisto said:

I don't understand people using the example of nearly selling Gordon to illustrate how our strategy wasn't fit for purpose. It was the very same strategy that lead to us buying Gordan in the first place. 

Our stated ambitions, from our owners themselves, was to be the best in the world.

 

The best in the world are not shopping their Salahs, their Haalands, their Sakas, at the eleventh hour to be PSR compliant. We were willing to trade Gordon for Joe Gomez - does that sound like a functional system to you?

 

Identifying Gordon was top class from our management. But PSR is also a game of selling. We've had effectively zero outgoing transfer business save Minteh, and even that almost didn't get done because we waited so late. Perhaps that's because management feels we don't have assets worth selling, or it might be because they've overlooked the importance of funding your business with outgoings.

 

In either case, that is a strategy not fit for purpose of a club that wants to be the very best, and we should be applauding that we finally have someone with the balls to say it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm increasingly dying to know the details of summer 2023. It just doesn't make sense at all in hindsight. We were going to buy Pedro in August '22 and then changed course and spent more than double on Isak. Then we bought Gordon in January. We had pushed things to the financial limit and knew we had to make a profit in 2023/24.

 

On the plus side we had SELA starting and Champions League qualification. The unexpected CL money could have been the get out of PSR jail free card, but it almost seems like it became a noose. It's like we felt we had to buy more players and lose no one in order to compete in four competitions and, while I have tremendous sympathy for how the season actually played out, the entire plan seems flawed no matter what is presented as the intended solution. The blame for that has to mostly lie with Eales, Ashworth, and Staveley.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, timeEd32 said:

I'm increasingly dying to know the details of summer 2023. It just doesn't make sense at all in hindsight. We were going to buy Pedro in August '22 and then changed course and spent more than double on Isak. Then we bought Gordon in January. We had pushed things to the financial limit and knew we had to make a profit in 2023/24.

 

On the plus side we had SELA starting and Champions League qualification. The unexpected CL money could have been the get out of PSR jail free card, but it almost seems like it became a noose. It's like we felt we had to buy more players and lose no one in order to compete in four competitions and, while I have tremendous sympathy for how the season actually played out, the entire plan seems flawed no matter what is presented as the intended solution. The blame for that has to mostly lie with Eales, Ashworth, and Staveley.

 

Yeah exactly, we don't know what led us to sail so close to the PSR wind really. Maybe they all just wanted to aim high and assumed they could deal with the income aspect later. 

 

Bad planning however you look at it, but I think when people here our transfer strategy wasn't 'fit for purpose' it hits home strangely when basically every signing has been a complete success. 

 

Anyway, they'll sort it now so I guess future windows will go fine. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, timeEd32 said:

I'm increasingly dying to know the details of summer 2023. It just doesn't make sense at all in hindsight. We were going to buy Pedro in August '22 and then changed course and spent more than double on Isak. Then we bought Gordon in January. We had pushed things to the financial limit and knew we had to make a profit in 2023/24.

 

On the plus side we had SELA starting and Champions League qualification. The unexpected CL money could have been the get out of PSR jail free card, but it almost seems like it became a noose. It's like we felt we had to buy more players and lose no one in order to compete in four competitions and, while I have tremendous sympathy for how the season actually played out, the entire plan seems flawed no matter what is presented as the intended solution. The blame for that has to mostly lie with Eales, Ashworth, and Staveley.

 

6 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

 

Yeah exactly, we don't know what led us to sail so close to the PSR wind really. Maybe they all just wanted to aim high and assumed they could deal with the income aspect later. 

 

Bad planning however you look at it, but I think when people here our transfer strategy wasn't 'fit for purpose' it hits home strangely when basically every signing has been a complete success. 

 

Anyway, they'll sort it now so I guess future windows will go fine. 

You've both nailed it. I think we as a fanbase need to stop taking these comments so personally. The lad has been brought in by PIF to make sure we don't have such a debacle in the future, and he's basically said as much. Nowhere did he say the lads brought it weren't mint. We have a high hit rate with transfers, but as we know, there's more to it than bringing in mint players.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I never thought Mitchell saying it wasn't fit for purpose meant the players we bought are poor.

 

It surprised me that Eddie, who I consider switched on, took it as that. 

 

If we keep trading in the way we were, the clubs fucked. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Weezertron said:

I never thought Mitchell saying it wasn't fit for purpose meant the players we bought are poor.

 

It surprised me that Eddie, who I consider switched on, took it as that. 

 

If we keep trading in the way we were, the clubs fucked. 

 

 

 

Was Eddie asked about Mitchell's comments or hid recruitment record?

Link to post
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Weezertron said:

I never thought Mitchell saying it wasn't fit for purpose meant the players we bought are poor.

 

It surprised me that Eddie, who I consider switched on, took it as that. 

 

If we keep trading in the way we were, the clubs fucked. 

 

 


I’m not sure Eddie did take it as that TBH, he was just answering a question posed in a particular way. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

55 minutes ago, RodneyCisse said:

Anyone know why sky bbc and the rest are running with this civil war theme and a massive amount of unrest?

 

Because they know it will get people wound up as most are easy bait. In short, they're lazy and love pumping the narrative regardless of validity. 'Journalism' has been shite in the UK for decades, it's just worse now with clickbait and rage driving views. I guess the alternative for many of them is ceasing to exist, so this is what we get. I honestly enjoy the rise of some of the more level headed streamers and data based analysis social media/youtube has brought us. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, The Prophet said:

He loves the tension. LOVES it.

To be fair I thought Eddie specifically mentioning the board (when talking about unification) was sending a message.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Lush Vlad said:

Just seen he’s turned off his replies. Such an annoying, doom mongering cunt. Absolutely revels in the drama and always with the negative slant with his tone and approach. 


Yeah he does my head in, constantly craving a negative story

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...