📝 Tobi Adebayo-Rowling Signs

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ThaiPie

I'm wondering if this is the nephew of BBC's Dotun Adebayo, who hosts the brilliant late night World Football Phone-in. If it is, it will do our profile no harm at all.

---

Good spot. I think you are right there, it is his nephew. Its is an excellent programme well worth a listen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by queenslandpie

I still find it flabbergasting how many fans do not understand the recruitment / coaching / player policy its been explained about 8000 times. No brothers Reedtz are not signing players no the manager is not signing players yes we have a recruitment team analysing and signing players coach ( NOT MANAGER) coaches them and picks the team. Brothers Reedtz pay the bills and dictate policy. How hard is that to understand? If I can get it over here......

Of course coach will cast his eye over it but when there is no coach he can't can he and the show must go on. Who is to say that any potential incoming coach or even IB before he left is / has not cast his eye over the latest signing which on the surface appears to be a sensible upgrade on DKE.

It isn't going to change so if you do not like it you are supporting the wrong club.

---

:star::star:

How is it possible for a manager to watch possible recruits playing for other teams while he's watching his own players playing? It only makes sense that someone else, hereby called "The Recruitist", is doing the watching of other teams and even he can only refer his recommendations to the owner/paymaster/moneybags.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Carlton_Pie

Why can't some get their head around this? It's not uncommon for football clubs to be set up in this fashion.

---

Because we only know what we know.

And at Notts, we've only ever had success under an old-school manager with a big character - Sirrell, Warnock, Big Sam. Someone who could rally the troops.

Something about having a head coach just feels strange to me. I'm not saying it's wrong. My feeling is that if the setup above the head coach is right, and the coach himself is decent, it should yield results over time. But with an old-school manager, the potential for immediate success OR failure seems higher.

The obvious huge benefit of our new approach is continuity. It doesn't matter so much if a manager leaves. The new one will pick up the baton and carry on in the same direction. Before, we'd lurch from one manager to another, several times a season, each with their own style. We went from one managerial extreme to another, and back again - Derry-Moniz-Fullarton, for example.

At least this way we won't end up having to rebuild constantly, waiting around for players nobody wants to run up their contract.

I’ve actually seen this guy play. Whilst I wasn’t particularly watching him he did look like the kind of guy to replace Richardson…but more developed and better defensively.

And he’s fast….very fast.

Excellent posts from QLD and Slack. Agree fully with both.

I'm not sure it can be explained any better than it already has, and I think deep down most of us know why some fans struggle with the (new) approach / concept.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slack_pie

Because we only know what we know.

And at Notts, we've only ever had success under an old-school manager with a big character - Sirrell, Warnock, Big Sam. Someone who could rally the troops.

Something about having a head coach just feels strange to me.

---

I often wondered if with the title Head coach you lose some authority with some players.

Moniz insisted before he took the job he had to be called Manager I can't remember the reason he gave Ray Trew but I thought they were sound at the time.

But what do I know I've been supporting the wrong team all my life (NOT)s

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slack_pie

Because we only know what we know.

And at Notts, we've only ever had success under an old-school manager with a big character - Sirrell, Warnock, Big Sam. Someone who could rally the troops.

Something about having a head coach just feels strange to me. I'm not saying it's wrong. My feeling is that if the setup above the head coach is right, and the coach himself is decent, it should yield results over time. But with an old-school manager, the potential for immediate success OR failure seems higher.

The obvious huge benefit of our new approach is continuity. It doesn't matter so much if a manager leaves. The new one will pick up the baton and carry on in the same direction. Before, we'd lurch from one manager to another, several times a season, each with their own style. We went from one managerial extreme to another, and back again - Derry-Moniz-Fullarton, for example.

At least this way we won't end up having to rebuild constantly, waiting around for players nobody wants to run up their contract.

---

Exactly. It's just a bit of a shift mentally away from those models that served us well in the past, but also created a lot of instability financially & just generally within the club.

It seems that the bros feel that to create this stable platform for a financially sustainable club, then this structure will serve us well in the long term. These days managers & players come and go so quickly, so it can be hard to consistently build on what was before. Hopefully this model gives us that.

Getting compo for the manager, and potentially selling a player this summer, whilst not ideal, also feeds back into the club and helps it in the long run. I can't imagine how much money we wasted over the years with previous approaches. Just madness really.

I have just watched highlights of three Ebbsfleet games with TAR playing and he seems like a clone of Richardson. Played well forward as a wing back and doesn't look massively aware defensively, but good delivery when going forward. Looks very pacey, but that is at a level lower.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by since41

I often wondered if with the title Head coach you lose some authority with some players.

Moniz insisted before he took the job he had to be called Manager I can't remember the reason he gave Ray Trew but I thought they were sound at the time.

But what do I know I've been supporting the wrong team all my life (NOT)s

---

That's my feeling too. As a fan, I just feel less connected to a head coach than I do a manager, whom I know would be calling all the shots both on and off the field. A head coach has less authority. That could affect fans' and players' perception of them beyond someone who knows about tactics and training.

Good managers are good leaders. The two things are virtually synonymous. Good coaches aren't necessarily good leaders. But is it possible to be successful and fully motivated without a true leader in the dugout?