Budge update on Sporting Director role

[soonbe110]

1 hour ago, martoon said:

 

It's also worth pointing out that Levein's presence, in whatever capacity, is toxic to many. It's not a petty dislike, hatred or personal, he's just been shite, for far too long. 

 

I hate falling out with fellow Jambos on here, I really do, but there is one man who is causing all this friction. 

 

Why does his complete removal trouble his defenders so much?

Disagree. Some on here make it sound a very petty dislike, hatred and personal. My reasoning - he is no longer involved in first team ,hasn’t been for nearly 6 weeks, but those same posters have to name him in almost every post they make. 

[Guest ToqueJambo]

6 minutes ago, Geoff Kilpatrick said:

Wow. Not what I said at all. If Stendel is happy with the coaching set up at present then that's fine. What people are saying re Daly, Fox et al is the concern that they have been imposed on Stendel. That is all.

 

Imposed suggests Stendel isn't happy with it? In which case, why take the job? He seems a guy in demand and it sounds like we had to work hard to persuade him to give Scottish football a shot. Are you seriously saying the coaching staff weren't discussed?

 

Don't you think Stendel might want to assess the coaches first, like the players? And he will need support in the short term, even just basic training set-up support. He arrived at Barnsley and worked with their coaches as well as bringing in his own. Dale Tonge was already there and Stendel promoted him.

Edited December 11, 2019 by ToqueJambo

[soonbe110]

1 hour ago, martoon said:

 

It's also worth pointing out that Levein's presence, in whatever capacity, is toxic to many. It's not a petty dislike, hatred or personal, he's just been shite, for far too long. 

 

I hate falling out with fellow Jambos on here, I really do, but there is one man who is causing all this friction. 

 

Why does his complete removal trouble his defenders so much?

Why does finding the right role for him trouble his detractors so much? 

[Guest ToqueJambo]

5 minutes ago, Geoff Kilpatrick said:

Is that it?

 

You might want to google "what does a sporting director do"

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Just now, ToqueJambo said:

 

Imposed suggests Stendel isn't happy with it? In which case, why take the job? He seems a guy in demand and it sounds like we had to work hard to persuade him to give Scottish football a shot. Are you seriously saying the coaching staff weren't discussed?

No. I AM NOT. I am paraphrasing for OTHERS.

 

Hopefully capitals helps you comprehend.

[soonbe110]

1 hour ago, OTT said:

What do you want? We've got an open position and two guys filling it without having to pay extra. Levein ****ed up on the first team royally. He did give youth a chance throughout his tenure and I have no reason to doubt his ability working in the background on youth. Austin's analysis is why he has been employed by both the Mexican and Northern Irish set ups as well as St Mirren. 

 

We've not got the sort of money to allow an overnight transformation and I'd rather Stendel focused entirely on the first team. 

 

We got the manager we all wanted so for ****s sake take a breath. 

Sensible post 

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

1 minute ago, ToqueJambo said:

 

You might want to google "what does a sporting director do"

You might want to find more pertinent reasons for us having one.

[Boab]

Just now, soonbe110 said:

Why does finding the right role for him trouble his detractors so much? 

People are thinking door rather than role !

 

[martoon]

Just now, soonbe110 said:

Why does finding the right role for him trouble his detractors so much? 

 

Because there isn't one. 

 

Feck me, that was easy. 

 

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

3 minutes ago, soonbe110 said:

Why does finding the right role for him trouble his detractors so much? 

Why does he need a role at HMFC?

[soonbe110]

1 hour ago, Geoff Kilpatrick said:

So let's say there is a bid for Michael Smith in January. Who's making the decision to accept that bid? Then, if accepted, who's signing the replscement?

1. Stendel. 2. Stendel recommends, McPhee negotiates the next guys contract. Pretty straightforward. Could be Stendel tells McPhee what he wants, McPhee looks for available candidates, Stendel decides, McPhee negotiates. Again pretty straightforward. What is it that people aren’t getting? 

[Guest ToqueJambo]

4 minutes ago, Geoff Kilpatrick said:

No. I AM NOT. I am paraphrasing for OTHERS.

 

Hopefully capitals helps you comprehend.

 

Why reply for other people?

[Guest ToqueJambo]

3 minutes ago, Geoff Kilpatrick said:

You might want to find more pertinent reasons for us having one.

 

How about the fact they are a fixture in German clubs, where Stendel is from?

[soonbe110]

1 hour ago, Cruickshank for Scotland said:

You’re right the friction over Levein is only on here!

The vast majority of Hearts fans going by the atmosphere in the stadium, at work, in the pub, other social media, etc, want Levein out the Club totally!

Have only heard that on here. Vast majority are just happy we have a new first team manager. 

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

1 minute ago, ToqueJambo said:

 

Why reply for other people?

Why do you? Anyway, do you get what people are saying about the backroom team? They are all tainted by the failure so people are keen to clean house. Personally, as long as Stendel is content I'm not bothered.

[Norm]

1 hour ago, Geoff Kilpatrick said:

Let's say you are correct in that. What advantage does MacPhee have over Stendel by the same token?

None, really. But at this point in time, I'd rather he was 100% focused on getting the players to buy in to his ideas and getting used to Scottish football, than having to pay attention to contract negotiations and player recruitment. 

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

2 minutes ago, ToqueJambo said:

 

How about the fact they are a fixture in German clubs, where Stendel is from?

Fair enough. Are loans managers common in Germany too, just as one other example of our bloated staffing?

 

It's why I suggested extending Gary Naysmith's remit and having done with it.

[soonbe110]

50 minutes ago, GinRummy said:

Surely that hardly happens anywhere though?

Certainly doesn’t happen at Spurs, Arsenal, Man City, Chelsea

[BackOfTheNet]

1 hour ago, Barack said:

Hopefully, someone just asks the pertinent questions at the AGM. Hopefully, get the right answers. Then hopefully, maybe slavering ****ers can shut the **** up for the rest of the season & support the manager.

 

 

Very much this.

[soonbe110]

31 minutes ago, GinRummy said:

I hope she doesn’t though I think she will. He’ll be too tempted to get too involved with the first team imo.

Maybe, but he has maybe learned his lesson. To be honest I think Stendel will have a huge say in who is SD. And if he is happy with Levein it’s ok with me. If he isn’t it’s ok with me. The relationship between manager and SD is critical. 

[BackOfTheNet]

1 hour ago, ToqueJambo said:

 

No. Stendel decides if he wants to keep Smith or if he could use that money elsewhere. Stendel decides the replacement. The SD handles all the red tape and negotiations. Why is this so hard for some people to understand?

Happens at 90% of football clubs. Think some folk still think it’s 1986.

[soonbe110]

31 minutes ago, Geoff Kilpatrick said:

Posters on here want Stendel to have his choice of backroom team. That is all.

He is getting that. Timing is the issue at the moment. Fixed by Feb 1 

[Guest ToqueJambo]

1 minute ago, Geoff Kilpatrick said:

Why do you? Anyway, do you get what people are saying about the backroom team? They are all tainted by the failure so people are keen to clean house. Personally, as long as Stendel is content I'm not bothered.

 

No. I don't see them as all tainted.  Keyword: backroom.  Using the "all tainted" rationale, aren't all the players tainted too?

 

 I like McPhee and would be fine if he stays as SD or coach/analyst if Stendel wants but am also not bothered if he leaves either unless it hampers Stendel in some way. I have no clue what the other coaches are like, what they are asked do day to day or how they are assessed. I thought Fox was highly rated as a coach, as is Kirk. Daly seems to be on the way out. I couldn't give a flying **** who the goalie coach is but always assumed Gordon would arrive eventually. I would also like Gary Locke to be a Hearts coach again if he can replicate the job he did with Sergio.

[sadj]

37 minutes ago, Geoff Kilpatrick said:

Because I'm looking at his career prior to HMFC! 

 

Personally, I don't think we need the role but if we are going to appoint one I don't think MacPhee is best suited to it. 

we don’t need the role because...?

[Adam_the_legend]

45 minutes ago, BackOfTheNet said:

Like what? She said that until a new SD is found that the role will be shared amongst two people already at the club rather than by no one. What did she say contrary to that?

“Austin will be doing part of that job and Craig will be doing another part of it. They could continue in that. If I find somebody I think will be absolutely perfect for taking on what in my mind is the sporting director’s role, then Austin, myself and Craig will have to sit down and talk about it.”

 

it’s there in black and white. She is clearly not ruling out keeping this set up permanently. 

[sadj]

1 minute ago, ToqueJambo said:

 

No. I don't see them as all tainted.  Keyword: backroom.  Using the "all tainted" rationale, aren't all the players tainted too?

 

 I like McPhee and would be fine if he stays as SD or coach/analyst if Stendel wants but am also not bothered if he leaves either unless it hampers Stendel in some way. I have no clue what the other coaches are like, what they are asked do day to day or how they are assessed. I thought Fox was highly rated as a coach, as is Kirk. Daly seems to be on the way out. I couldn't give a flying **** who the goalie coach is but always assumed Gordon would arrive eventually. I would also like Gary Locke to be a Hearts coach again if he can replicate the job he did with Sergio.

A good GK coach is important too. Dundee Utd had an amazing one in the mid 80s was eye opening...

[soonbe110]

27 minutes ago, Geoff Kilpatrick said:

Is that it?

You used the word ‘advantage’ I gave you one. 

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

1 minute ago, sadj said:

we don’t need the role because...?

The functions of the role appear to be contract negotiation and video analysis according to Budge's comments. I don't think that merits a full-time job, personally. So if they don't want the football manager doing it then merge the functions into Gary Naysmith's role. That's why.

[soonbe110]

27 minutes ago, ToqueJambo said:

 

I don't get what the fuss is. The pack has just been shuffled until we have everyone in place. It's no different to a reserve coach taking over first team duties. I disagree about McPhee. From the start I think he's been our post-Levein SD in training. I'll be surprised if he doesn't get it tbh but I do think Budge is being swayed by the general "get rid of the lot of them" feeling around Hearts right now and is seeing who else is available. If she does as good a job finding an SD as she did with Stendel - who fits every single criteria we had at the start including what fans wanted - then I'm looking forward to see who comes in. If it's McPhee that means him and Stendel created a good working relationship which is important.

 

Most SDs don't have the experience you seem to want in our SD before they take on the role. Thomas Flogel and Takis Fyssas for example both seem to have stepped into that role direct from coaching. For what it's worth Fyssas was my top SD choice from ages ago.

Agree with your post. She is searching externally but also giving Stendel the chance to give an input re two internal candidates.  Yet again, sensible approach to a tricky challenge. If either Levein or McPhee get the job then Stendel will have supported their appointment so we should be happy.  
But, as usual, some are not. 

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

3 minutes ago, ToqueJambo said:

 

No. I don't see them as all tainted.  Keyword: backroom.  Using the "all tainted" rationale, aren't all the players tainted too?

 

 I like McPhee and would be fine if he stays as SD or coach/analyst if Stendel wants but am also not bothered if he leaves either unless it hampers Stendel in some way. I have no clue what the other coaches are like, what they are asked do day to day or how they are assessed. I thought Fox was highly rated as a coach, as is Kirk. Daly seems to be on the way out. I couldn't give a flying **** who the goalie coach is but always assumed Gordon would arrive eventually. I would also like Gary Locke to be a Hearts coach again if he can replicate the job he did with Sergio.

About 90% of them, yes!

 

@sadj was banging on about Daly and Fox being the "problem" when Levein was struggling as manager, just as one example. Personally, passing the buck onto those who put out the cones is pretty weak, IMO.

[Guest ToqueJambo]

Just now, Geoff Kilpatrick said:

The functions of the role appear to be contract negotiation and video analysis according to Budge's comments. I don't think that merits a full-time job, personally. So if they don't want the football manager doing it then merge the functions into Gary Naysmith's role. That's why.

 

No, these are the short term needs. She's explained elsewhere why she wants a split SD and head coach role, both reporting directly to her. You can find it yourself online.

 

Am I the only person who took this article as a positive? We're clearly planning some recruitment in January without waiting for an SD.

[Guest ToqueJambo]

4 minutes ago, Adam_the_legend said:

“Austin will be doing part of that job and Craig will be doing another part of it. They could continue in that. If I find somebody I think will be absolutely perfect for taking on what in my mind is the sporting director’s role, then Austin, myself and Craig will have to sit down and talk about it.”

 

it’s there in black and white. She is clearly not ruling out keeping this set up permanently. 

 

Did you miss the part about their contracts being up at the end of the season?

[portobellojambo1]

19 minutes ago, Geoff Kilpatrick said:

Wow. Not what I said at all. If Stendel is happy with the coaching set up at present then that's fine. What people are saying re Daly, Fox et al is the concern that they have been imposed on Stendel. That is all.

 

The two coaches he wanted to bring with him and who aren't yet here will hopefully arrive soon Geoff. And I think at that point the coaches, such as Fox and Daly, will leave the club. The fact that Levein and McPhee will be sharing the duties of recruitment in the short term, and I hope it a very short term, is very worrying to me, other than it may well signal the departure of John Murray from the club. They, in fact all three, were involved in the arrival of the players who for the last 2 years near enough neither Levein nor McPhee has been able to manage successfully from the position of manager/temporary manager. Going forward any scouts we have should be going out and looking at players (i.e. we revert away from the implementation under the project of many players being signed on the back of watching 10/15 minute videos) on the request of the manager, those where good reports come back should only be signed on the basis of a decision by the manager and the existing administration staff can deal with drafting up any and all paperwork that needs completed. I don't care what anyone says, the position of Director of Football has proven to be a failure and a club our size doesn't need a Sporting Director.

[martoon]

6 minutes ago, soonbe110 said:

Disagree. Some on here make it sound a very petty dislike, hatred and personal. My reasoning - he is no longer involved in first team ,hasn’t been for nearly 6 weeks, but those same posters have to name him in almost every post they make. 

 

Some on here make it sound like they're hopelessly devoted to him. His detractors are matched post for post by his defenders.

 

I know why I want him out, completely (the reasons are clear so don't deflect by asking why) but why do you, and others, want him in? 

 

His shortcomings, failures and incompetence are front and central and visible to the naked eye.

 

His virtues and usefulness aren't. 

 

 

[martoon]

24 minutes ago, Boab said:

People are thinking door rather than role !

 

 

Very good, bud. 

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

2 minutes ago, ToqueJambo said:

 

No, these are the short term needs. She's explained elsewhere why she wants a split SD and head coach role, both reporting directly to her. You can find it yourself online.

 

Am I the only person who took this article as a positive? We're clearly planning some recruitment in January without waiting for an SD.

I would expect another topsy-turvy transfer window, irrespective of a SD.

[Guest ToqueJambo]

2 minutes ago, soonbe110 said:

Agree with your post. She is searching externally but also giving Stendel the chance to give an input re two internal candidates.  Yet again, sensible approach to a tricky challenge. If either Levein or McPhee get the job then Stendel will have supported their appointment so we should be happy.  
But, as usual, some are not. 

 

I very much doubt Levein will get it. I would definitely question Budge's sanity in that respect. It would be a repeat of the "the right man is here all along" thing and look at the flak she got for that. And she definitely sacked him as DoF and got him off the Board at the same time as HC. I would have liked things to turn out differently for Levein but he's 100% away at the end of the season. 

 

[Norm]

12 minutes ago, Geoff Kilpatrick said:

Fair enough. Are loans managers common in Germany too, just as one other example of our bloated staffing?

 

It's why I suggested extending Gary Naysmith's remit and having done with it.

I wouldn't have thought loan managers would be common in Germany, mainly because you have the B teams playing competitive football, so your youth players are already getting game time within the club. 

[Guest ToqueJambo]

5 minutes ago, portobellojambo1 said:

 

The two coaches he wanted to bring with him and who aren't yet here will hopefully arrive soon Geoff. And I think at that point the coaches, such as Fox and Daly, will leave the club. The fact that Levein and McPhee will be sharing the duties of recruitment in the short term, and I hope it a very short term, is very worrying to me, other than it may well signal the departure of John Murray from the club. They, in fact all three, were involved in the arrival of the players who for the last 2 years near enough neither Levein nor McPhee has been able to manage successfully from the position of manager/temporary manager. Going forward any scouts we have should be going out and looking at players (i.e. we revert away from the implementation under the project of many players being signed on the back of watching 10/15 minute videos) on the request of the manager, those where good reports come back should only be signed on the basis of a decision by the manager and the existing administration staff can deal with drafting up any and all paperwork that needs completed. I don't care what anyone says, the position of Director of Football has proven to be a failure and a club our size doesn't need a Sporting Director.

 

Even non league clubs have them these days.

 

https://www.thenonleaguefootballpaper.com/features/27351/mark-fogarty-non-league-clubs-should-embrace-the-role-of-sporting-director/

Edited December 11, 2019 by ToqueJambo

[Guest ToqueJambo]

4 minutes ago, Geoff Kilpatrick said:

I would expect another topsy-turvy transfer window, irrespective of a SD.

 

The last one was quite enjoyable. Best one since Neilson's first.

[soonbe110]

30 minutes ago, Boab said:

People are thinking door rather than role !

 

Some are, some see value in him continuing behind the scenes. 

[soonbe110]

31 minutes ago, martoon said:

 

Because there isn't one. 

 

Feck me, that was easy. 

 

Your opinion isn’t always correct. Neither is mine. I believe there is. 

[BackOfTheNet]

7 minutes ago, ToqueJambo said:

 

No, these are the short term needs. She's explained elsewhere why she wants a split SD and head coach role, both reporting directly to her. You can find it yourself online.

 

Am I the only person who took this article as a positive? We're clearly planning some recruitment in January without waiting for an SD.

I did too, don’t worry. It would’ve been seen as positive too if Barry Anderson or his Editor hadn’t chosen to go down that path with the headline. If they left that tiny paragraph in the article with no headline or tag line bringing attention to it you would’ve only had a few people here saying “did anyone notice in the article it said... surely this can’t mean...?” Most wouldn’t have noticed, just like most haven’t actually read the article but jumped to conclusions from the headline I’d imagine.

[portobellojambo1]

5 minutes ago, ToqueJambo said:

 

Even non league clubs have them these days.

 

https://www.thenonleaguefootballpaper.com/features/27351/mark-fogarty-non-league-clubs-should-embrace-the-role-of-sporting-director/

 

In his defence he says can help, doesn't say definitely do help. However, if it is a route we choose to go down and Stendel is comfortable with it I can live with that, but I'd hope the person appointed is someone who has no connection with the club at the moment.

Edited December 11, 2019 by portobellojambo1

[soonbe110]

19 minutes ago, BackOfTheNet said:

Happens at 90% of football clubs. Think some folk still think it’s 1986.

Hannover 86 rings a bell. 

[sadj]

11 minutes ago, Geoff Kilpatrick said:

The functions of the role appear to be contract negotiation and video analysis according to Budge's comments. I don't think that merits a full-time job, personally. So if they don't want the football manager doing it then merge the functions into Gary Naysmith's role. That's why.

which comments? Havent seen that. I agree that Naysmiths role should be part time or should have other duties (it may already). If its video analysis then that is undoubtably a strong point of AM so to say he wouldn’t be good is wrong. That doesn’t mean he would be good at the same time. 

[soonbe110]

16 minutes ago, Adam_the_legend said:

“Austin will be doing part of that job and Craig will be doing another part of it. They could continue in that. If I find somebody I think will be absolutely perfect for taking on what in my mind is the sporting director’s role, then Austin, myself and Craig will have to sit down and talk about it.”

 

it’s there in black and white. She is clearly not ruling out keeping this set up permanently. 

Sensible approach. May not find the right person at the right salary.  

[Norm]

Just now, soonbe110 said:

Hannover 86 rings a bell. 

Don't know why. Hannover 96, on the other hand...... 

[Guest ToqueJambo]

Just now, sadj said:

which comments? Havent seen that. I agree that Naysmiths role should be part time or should have other duties (it may already). If its video analysis then that is undoubtably a strong point of AM so to say he wouldn’t be good is wrong. That doesn’t mean he would be good at the same time. 

 

I thought Naysmith's was a PT role already.

 

Hey, at least we don't have a dedicated throw-in coach like Liverpool!

[soonbe110]

15 minutes ago, Geoff Kilpatrick said:

The functions of the role appear to be contract negotiation and video analysis according to Budge's comments. I don't think that merits a full-time job, personally. So if they don't want the football manager doing it then merge the functions into Gary Naysmith's role. That's why.

She also said managing key relationships eg Man City. You surely don’t think she should have  read out the full job descriptions yesterday do you ?