Meeting with Ben and Patrick

Part 2

Head Coach
The title of Lee Johnson's position is irrelevant. Mr Cryne is right, if it was changed to manager it would make no difference. It's his duties that are important and we've finally got an admission that those have changed compared to managers we have employed in the past. Why they didn't tell us this in the first place, god only knows. In America and Europe and increasingly in the UK, when clubs adopt this model, they also appoint a director of football. An experienced football man to oversee the duties traditionally taken care of by a manager, but not a head coach. We haven't got one. The board are doing it. Lawyers and accountants. How's that working out?

Mr Cryne states that "He (Ben Mansford) is not responsible for results on the field." However, he goes on to say, "We appointed Lee as head coach as opposed to manager because what we said was he’s a young man, just finished playing football. We should not attach to him the full trappings of “manager” which means more than coaching the first team. It means taking on board the other things a manager does like taking a brief in relation to the academy, taking responsibilities in relation to some things that are done by Ben, like looking after the contracts and contract terms and player welfare outside playing matters." If Ben Mansford is taking over the responsibilities that were previously undertaken by the manager, then he is, partly at least, responsible for the results on the field. A director of football would be held accountable for the results on the field and as Ben Mansford appears to have taken on the role then he must be responsible too. You can't take away the responsibilities of a role but none of the blame.


Head of Recruitment

The reason many of us knew we even had someone at the club with such a title was due to an interview with Lee Johnson on Radio Sheffield. A meeting was taking place with the board, the owner, the manager and this head of recruitment. We desperately needed to bring in players, not in to the academy, in to the first team. If he's only concerned with recruitment in to the academy, why did Lee Johnson specifically state he would be attending this meeting?

All segmented, out of context and re-interpreted.

 

Re: very long (as ever) part 1

Excellent analysis.

 

Re: Part 2

I've got one more to add to your list. If a significant part of the strategy to make us financially viable is to develop our own young players through the academy, then wouldn't it be a good idea to understand their commercial value?

 

Jay.

Beautiful. Just beautiful

 

Re: Part 2

I've been sat here waiting for you to post. Wonderful.

 

Re: Part 2

 

Re: Part 2

I'll bet your mrs loves it when you go through her shopping lists.

Seriously, that is a really good read, but perhaps a bit pedantic. But you really did not need me to tell you that did you. It contains lots of detail that I had missed, and I am grateful for that. But I think that there is an elephant in the room that no-one has mentioned, and that is the academy.

The academy has been at the core of our strategy ever since John Dennis spent £6 on the capital expenditure that created the Corner Stand, the North Stand and the indoor training area. He also levelled the training pitches, floodlit them and created an all weather surface and seating for fans. Although, not all of the cost can be attributed to the Academy, a seating area of less than half the size of the North Stand would be more than adequate for seating away fans for 95% of the time.

The current cost of running the academy were recently described as more than £500k pa. Shortly after it was finished, John Dennis said the running costs would be £1m pa. I guess the truth is somewhere between those figures. The thing is, I reckon that the academy has cost us £11m to run since it was set up, excluding any contribution to the capital costs. I can only see about £5.6m of income from player sales. Therefore, even if Everton sell John Stones for £40m, and we get 15% of £37m, we are still only breaking even. At the minute, I reckon that we are down by £5.5m over the life of the academy.

I call it the elephant in the room because nobody wants to talk about it. No-one wants to mention it at these meetings, and no-one wants to ask what effect it has on our budgets. We have a £5m annual budget and 10% of it seems not to be accounted for or questioned in terms of value for money. The only reference in the notes of the meeting is the remark that we have hired somebody extra to scout for kids, presumably because the current crop are not good enough. Everybody on here complains about Lee Johnson, and nobody wonders whether the part of his budget that is beyond his control is washing down the drain.

 

Thanks mate. I only just realized that I had a double post, but I was having Wi-Fi issue in the hotel at the time.

You're definitely not on Ignore. No one is.

 

Why do you think Ben and Watkins have no idea about football. Watkins was on the board for Man u for however long and Ben's whole career has been in football... he was a qualified lawyer specialising in sports law, then a football agent...? dont get people who just say random statements with nothing to back it up with.

 

Being an agent doesn't mean he knows about football "the game" though does it? He will know about football "the business"