Williams is Favourite [New Head Coach speculation thread]

[Bohinen]

Where we are tearing out pictures of our preferred next HC from the Argos catalogue for out list to Santa

More like our Mum has kicked our Dad out of the house and started a relationship with a fundamentalist Christian who is against Christmas being commercialised, so now we're having an imagination Christmas, like on the Simpsons.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DVf88LuHTPo

[upthemaggies]

Just noticed that the betting odds have been updated. Nobody now less than 5/1, they're accepting bets on Alves again but not Williams. So if we go with Betvictor then either Luke Williams is still on holiday and they're just waiting for his return to announce it or they've had multiple meetings, they want Luke back, Luke wants to return but they still haven't reached an agreement on a contract and/or how much say LW will now have.

[marky]

85 pages, numerous favourites three weeks and still no one has a clue what is happening. Really not sure if this is a good thing or not.

[Boomerangpie]

85 pages, numerous favourites three weeks and still no one has a clue what is happening. Really not sure if this is a good thing or not.

I find it funny and it?s a good reminder about ITK

[MagpieNate]

85 pages, numerous favourites three weeks and still no one has a clue what is happening. Really not sure if this is a good thing or not.

I?ve given up on expecting an update and more interested to see if this thread reaches 1000 replies before the announcement.

[51Magpie]

...more interested to see if this thread reaches 1000 replies before the announcement.

What odds can you get on that I wonder?

[slack_pie]

There is nothing wrong with being innovative but things like ?multiple? head coaches or coaches is a recipe for failure.

You can only ever have one boss imo as if we have a group of 3 who gets the final call and then who is responsible for poor results ?

Football is a simple sport really so keep it simple 11 players on the pitch and one head coach/manager is the starting point.

I agree. My concern is they are spending weeks "restructuring the football department" with some sort of outside-the-box idea that no other team at this level is doing, but the pressure is then on for it to deliver results fast. There's a danger in overcomplicating things. Being an innovative trailblazer is great if it works, but you look stupid if it doesn't.

Many fans just feel like we need to appoint an experienced coach with proven success at this level, then recruit three or four genuine first-teamers. Everything else is in place for success. We can't afford another wasted season on another experiment.

But yeah, let's see what they actually have planned. It's all just speculation at this point.

[Boomerangpie]

Many fans understandably want an experienced coach with proven success at this level, then they want 4 or 5 quality experienced no risk 1st team players. The problem is many fans understandably aren?t concerned about the financial side of things, let?s be honest they don?t care about budgets. They don?t care about sell on potential because they never want the club to sell their best/ better players. They think short term only. If you go down that route the chances of short term success is increased but you are soon going to run into trouble pretty soon.

I don?t know the owners but I don?t think they?ve got into the costly world of football ownership to pump in millions and millions each year to do things the traditional old fashioned way like the majority.

To date the evidence shows they want to do things different, left field , take calculated risks both on and off field. So far it?s worked both on and off field.

I say bros carry on?.

[PedroTheFisherman66]

Many fans understandably want an experienced coach with proven success at this level, then they want 4 or 5 quality experienced no risk 1st team players. The problem is many fans understandably aren?t concerned about the financial side of things, let?s be honest they don?t care about budgets. They don?t care about sell on potential because they never want the club to sell their best/ better players. They think short term only. If you go down that route the chances of short term success is increased but you are soon going to run into trouble pretty soon.

I don?t know the owners but I don?t think they?ve got into the costly world of football ownership to pump in millions and millions each year to do things the traditional old fashioned way like the majority.

To date the evidence shows they want to do things different, left field , take calculated risks both on and off field. So far it?s worked both on and off field.

I say bros carry on?.

It gets on my t17s when people seem to want to revert to the old tried and tested ways. Get an old experienced coach and several journey men in and Bingo, promotion!. We have trodden that road many times with little success and worse still it took us to the verge of bankruptcy.
So far the brothers model has bought us continued succes,with players and managers alike desired by others, so much so they want to pay cash to lure them away from us. I'm not worried one little bit about the way we are progressing and have no concerns about the new manager they appoint.it seems these owners know what they are doing,Long may it continue.

[woodthorpepieeater]

I completely agree. I think the brothers have earned the right to try something different. Would we even have a club if it wasn't for them.

[MetalMagpie62]

The “experienced” manger model didn’t work under the trew and hardy days, or ever considering we left the football league before the bros model so why would it now, since the bros have taken control we are going one way upwards, stop moaning and wait if you read things properly it appears it’s all done and dusted it’s either visa wait that takes at least 3 weeks for a manager or holidays

[upthemaggies]

It worked for previous owners when they let the manager get on with things, it stopped working for previous owners when they started interfering.

In 6 years under the current owners we've only once finished where we should have done, 2nd to Wrexham in 2023. Every other season we've finished below at least one smaller club. We've not once overachieved and still yet to finish as high as Hardy did.

[SmiffyPie]

It worked for previous owners when they let the manager get on with things, it stopped working for previous owners when they started interfering.

In 6 years under the current owners we've only once finished where we should have done, 2nd to Wrexham in 2023. Every other season we've finished below at least one smaller club. We've not once overachieved and still yet to finish as high as Hardy did.

Pros and Cons for both systems but I would have thought that the happy medium would be manager (I refuses to call him/her coach!) states the type of player needed and the required attributes the player should have, HR gets on the case, HR notifies the manager of a shortlist of likely players and the manager makes the final decision (that's assuming the HR has applied any financial restrictions to his short list) HR then starts the recruiting process. That is probably what the current system is but without the critical selection made by the manager?

[upthemaggies]

Pros and Cons for both systems but I would have thought that the happy medium would be manager (I refuses to call him/her coach!) states the type of player needed and the required attributes the player should have, HR gets on the case, HR notifies the manager of a shortlist of likely players and the manager makes the final decision (that's assuming the HR has applied any financial restrictions to his short list) HR then starts the recruiting process. That is probably what the current system is but without the critical selection made by the manager?

If I were a player, I'd find it more difficult to respect a manager (or head coach) who is clearly having to defer to some other member of staff sat in an office. It also must make some degree of difference to a player if he thinks the manager rated and wanted him in the first place, as opposed to having no say in the matter.

[SmiffyPie]

If I were a player, I'd find it more difficult to respect a manager (or head coach) who is clearly having to defer to some other member of staff sat in an office. It also must make some degree of difference to a player if he thinks the manager rated and wanted him in the first place, as opposed to having no say in the matter.

Agree entirely. This recruit by committee malarky may be cost efficient but, as you suggest, it reduces the managers status and authority somewhat.