Who should replace Frank Lampard?

[FOXINPEACE]

May I make a suggestion.........?

 

[GrandOldTeam]

I wasn't really talking about the Brands bit there - we know he didn't do large parts of the job he was supposed to be doing, whether that's his fault or the board's is open to debate

I think it's unfair, but understandable, to lob Thelwell into the mix with the board and what came before.

Thelwell is accountable to the board and Moshiri.

Lampard is accountable to Thelwell, the board and Moshiri.

In reality, it's Moshiri's ball and the board are all just coasting - posing next to Allardyce, Benitez, or whoever else.

When you said 'Lampard was appointed before Thelwell last year, there was no implementation of any sort of overarching plan at DOF level at that point' which is the point I disagreed with. The board told us there was a very clear plan in 2018, and 2019. Why should I believe their new plan - which in reality is just a new DOF, is any more sound than their previous efforts?

On another point entirely, who says Thelwell is the right man? I expressed concern on here in June that neither he, or Lampard have a proven record with transfers. I understand Jorge Mendes ran the show at Wolves, not Thelwell. And Lampard had a shocker with Derby in the market, and is on record as saying he didn't do transfers at Chelsea but "probably had a veto"

 

[davek]

I completely disagree in principle, but in practice under this owner and board I don't think either model would have made any difference whatsoever becase at the end of the day Moshiri and his mates would have signed whatever players they wanted anyway

I dont think Moshiri has by and large bought players. The DoF's have. The problem with that sytem is the lack of responsibility it encourages. No one ever fully carries the can for the mess if one takes place. Look at us on here arguing about Lampard or Thelwell and who it was that bought players A/B/C...and it was the same with Brands and Silva and Brands and Ancelotti and Brands and Benitez.

If a manager has control of the spending we can see pretty quickly if they're up to snuff. There's no hiding place. IMO we've been sacking some managers because they have to deal with the players others bought - certainly Silva fits that bill.

 

[Furey1878]

That DoF post has been the downfall of this club.

We never needed it and we should have been giving managers complete control on who came and left the club. The DoF model has led to enormous waste that has finally caught up with us. There would never have been this manager churn if they;d all had the say so on incomings and outgoings...apart from Koeman who was a complete duffer and did have effective control, but he's an outlier IMO.

Respectfully disagree somewhat Dave. I don't think it's the DoF model that has harmed us, it's been out refusal to properly employ it. Manager's, the board and Moshiri have all had their say in transfers which as amplified the mess when managers have gone. If we had a proper DoF model, the changing of coaches in theory wouldn't matter too much because we are always recruiting with the same style in mind.

Now I'm not saying that we should keep the DoF model. One thing I wil say is that if we aren't gonna do it properly then we shouldn't bother with this halfway house approach. My fear about ditching it though is what top level coach these days wants the complete control role as a manager these days? I doubt many do.

 

[ToffeeTim]

I dont think Moshiri has by and large bought players. The DoF's have. The problem with that sytem is the lack of responsibility it encourages. No one ever fully carries the can for the mess if one takes place. Look at us on here arguing about Lampard or Thelwell and who it was that bought players A/B/C...and it was the same with Brands and Silva and Brands and Ancelotti and Brands and Benitez.

If a manager has control of the spending we can see pretty quickly if they're up to snuff. There's no hiding place. IMO we've been sacking some managers because they have to deal with the players others brought - certainly Silva fits that bill.

We signed players last January while we had no DOF and were managerless. Someone made those decisions.

Anwar El Ghazi comes to mind. He played 10 minutes of football and no one appeared to want him.

 

[brieverton]

That DoF post has been the downfall of this club.

We never needed it and we should have been giving managers complete control on who came and left the club. The DoF model has led to enormous waste that has finally caught up with us. There would never have been this manager churn if they;d all had the say so on incomings and outgoings...apart from Koeman who was a complete duffer and did have effective control, but he's an outlier IMO.

I think its more Moshiri et al have made any DOF position untenable and unworkable. Every club has one to a greater or lesser extent, the days of managers attending games every week and engaging in player transfer negotiations are long gone.

You'd need a very strong-willed and clear-minded individual to do the job properly at Everton, and that won't happen. The board we have are like the trustees at a male-only golf club. Nothing that rattles anyone cage will be tolerated.

It's yes sir and yes sir only.

 

[mccole]

I forgot about Gallardo. Never happen in a trillion years tho.

I think he could be our Poch.

 

[Furey1878]

I dont think Moshiri has by and large bought players. The DoF's have. The problem with that sytem is the lack of responsibility it encourages. No one ever fully carries the can for the mess if one takes place. Look at us on here arguing about Lampard or Thelwell and who it was that bought players A/B/C...and it was the same with Brands and Silva and Brands and Ancelotti and Brands and Benitez.

If a manager has control of the spending we can see pretty quickly if they're up to snuff. There's no hiding place. IMO we've been sacking some managers because they have to deal with the players others bought - certainly Silva fits that bill.

Agree with this. Silva is a great example, was completely sold down the river in the summer 2019 window.

 

[toffeeblue9]

Thelwell is accountable to the board and Moshiri.

Lampard is accountable to Thelwell, the board and Moshiri.

In reality, it's Moshiri's ball and the board are all just coasting - posing next to Allardyce, Benitez, or whoever else.

Well, you said 'Lampard was appointed before Thelwell last year, there was no implementation of any sort of overarching plan at DOF level at that point' which is the point I disagreed with. The board told us there was a very clear plan in 2018, and 2019. Why should I believe their new plan - which in reality is just a new DOF, is any more sound than their previous efforts?

On another point entirely, who says Thelwell is the right man? I expressed concern on here in June that neither he, or Lampard have a proven record with transfers. I understand Jorge Mendes ran the show at Wolves, not Thelwell. And Lampard had a shocker with Derby in the market, and is on record as saying he didn't do transfers at Chelsea but "probably had a veto"

Fair point - it's much more difficult to judge the performance of a DOF. Transfers is one department they're responsible for. Like the first team. That's a bit of a grey area while we still lack a head of recruitment, but I accept your point that Thelwell might not necessarily be the man for the job. It'll take some time before we can really evaluate that.

I accept your point re the board, but we know Thelwell has been busy restructuring and appointing people etc. Whether that's any more successful than what came before, we don't know. My main concern here is that if Lampard is sacked, allowing Moshiri to do his usual "flavour of the month" thing undermines everything the club has said they're doing for the last year. Whoever comes in needs to at least fit with the bigger plan.

 

[blue to the bone]

May I make a suggestion.........?

A job swap..
Done

 

[davek]

Respectfully disagree somewhat Dave. I don't think it's the DoF model that has harmed us, it's been out refusal to properly employ it. Manager's, the board and Moshiri have all had their say in transfers which as amplified the mess when managers have gone. If we had a proper DoF model, the changing of coaches in theory wouldn't matter too much because we are always recruiting with the same style in mind.

Now I'm not saying that we should keep the DoF model. One thing I wil say is that if we aren't gonna do it properly then we shouldn't bother with this halfway house approach. My fear about ditching it though is what top level coach these days wants the complete control role as a manager these days? I doubt many do.

For a fraction of the cost we could have had the Wolves model: get players and managers in hired by someone like Mendes.

That - despite where Wolves are right now - was a logical plan.

 

[dutchblue54]

I dont think Moshiri has by and large bought players. The DoF's have. The problem with that sytem is the lack of responsibility it encourages. No one ever fully carries the can for the mess if one takes place. Look at us on here arguing about Lampard or Thelwell and who it was that bought players A/B/C...and it was the same with Brands and Silva and Brands and Ancelotti and Brands and Benitez.

If a manager has control of the spending we can see pretty quickly if they're up to snuff. There's no hiding place. IMO we've been sacking some managers because they have to deal with the players others bought - certainly Silva fits that bill.

not entirely sure mate that Moshiri has no say in buying players. Remember Brands came out when he said they often did not buy the players he suggested. Also i read the biography of Koeman's agent. Apparently in that time this guy was also in direct contact with Bill/Moshiri about transfers. And later we had the story that Moshiri's agent has a big say in our transfers. So it is either the DoF, manager or the owner through agents who are behind signings. It is why we are in such a mess i guess

 

[GrandOldTeam]

Fair point - it's much more difficult to judge the performance of a DOF. Transfers is one department they're responsible for. Like the first team. That's a bit of a grey area while we still lack a head of recruitment, but I accept your point that Thelwell might not necessarily be the man for the job. It'll take some time before we can really evaluate that.

I accept your point re the board, but we know Thelwell has been busy restructuring and appointing people etc. Whether that's any more successful than what came before, we don't know. My main concern here is that if Lampard is sacked, allowing Moshiri to do his usual "flavour of the month" thing undermines everything the club has said they're doing for the last year. Whoever comes in needs to at least fit with the bigger plan.

You're right - we wont know if he's doing the right thing, but what concerns me most is this current board certainly wont know because they've got it wrong time and time again. As I said, note when they give Brands a new contract to when they sacked him.

What we do all know by now, surely... is we have a Chairman, a CEO... a board of directors of a failing organisation.

When there's years of negligence and misdirection in any private business - the board can blag their owner or shareholders they're addressing concerns, but it's reshuffling deckchairs on the titanic.

 

[davek]

not entirely sure mate that Moshiri has no say in buying players. Remember Brands came out when he said they often did not buy the players he suggested. Also i read the biography of Koeman's agent. Apparently in that time this guy was also in direct contact with Bill/Moshiri about transfers. And later we had the story that Moshiri's agent has a big say in our transfers. So it is either the DoF, manager or the owner through agents who are behind signings. It is why we are in such a mess i guess

He had a say in Tosun arriving. Who else?

 

[4737carlin]

I dont think Moshiri has by and large bought players. The DoF's have. The problem with that sytem is the lack of responsibility it encourages. No one ever fully carries the can for the mess if one takes place. Look at us on here arguing about Lampard or Thelwell and who it was that bought players A/B/C...and it was the same with Brands and Silva and Brands and Ancelotti and Brands and Benitez.

If a manager has control of the spending we can see pretty quickly if they're up to snuff. There's no hiding place. IMO we've been sacking some managers because they have to deal with the players others bought - certainly Silva fits that bill.

Moshiri has without doubt bought players, and i dont mean paid for them, along with his agent mates such as Kia, also i do wonder if Usmanovs Nephew had a hand in any

This is one of our problems we have, i could be wrong but right now we might actually have players bought by 7 managers, 3 DOF's and a crazy owner, 11 individuals could have a hand in the squad, and we wonder why they dont gel