Pat Murphy on Mel Morris

[Rev]

35 minutes ago, McLovin said:

Because I don't want to and don't have a firm enough passion to do so. Again it isn't rocket science if normal people from Twitter have had the opportunity to become professional scouts. Bris said himself he did a bit of scouting on the side. 

I base my opinions like a lot of people on here, read what the fans of their previous clubs have to say on other forums and what I've seen of them if we have been able to play them. Stats are part of it, I know the people from squawka put a lot of effort into that aspect but unfortunately I can't afford going around the world and watch players play and watch players play live and quite frankly I wouldn't want to unless it was my professional job to do so. You still haven't answered my question that if it was so hard then why is Mel Morris employing family members to do it? A lot of people laugh at the use of football manager but many high profile clubs use it.

Mel Morris does not employ family members to do scouting.

His stepson volunteers on the 'own the region' scheme, a small part of this involves identifying any promising youngsters he sees as part of the scheme.

[GboroRam]

46 minutes ago, McLovin said:

Because I don't want to and don't have a firm enough passion to do so. Again it isn't rocket science if normal people from Twitter have had the opportunity to become professional scouts. Bris said himself he did a bit of scouting on the side. 

I could have been a professional football scout but I had a paper round.

And are we sure Bris wasn't scouting for boys?

[G STAR RAM]

1 hour ago, McLovin said:

Because I don't want to and don't have a firm enough passion to do so. Again it isn't rocket science if normal people from Twitter have had the opportunity to become professional scouts. Bris said himself he did a bit of scouting on the side. 

I base my opinions like a lot of people on here, read what the fans of their previous clubs have to say on other forums and what I've seen of them if we have been able to play them. Stats are part of it, I know the people from squawka put a lot of effort into that aspect but unfortunately I can't afford going around the world and watch players play and watch players play live and quite frankly I wouldn't want to unless it was my professional job to do so. You still haven't answered my question that if it was so hard then why is Mel Morris employing family members to do it? A lot of people laugh at the use of football manager but many high profile clubs use it.

But you point out that such a crucial part of buying a player is making sure that they fit into the team and understand the philosophy.

So imagine my surprise when I see quotes from you such as 'Blackamans goals speak for themselves...' when someone suggested he was a one season wonder who would not fit in.

We can all say that we would better at someone else's job but it's meaningless words without any evidence. The only evidence I have on your judgement of players is on here. From what I can see, all of the players that you are now saying are bad recruitment are players that you seemed delighted when we signed. 

I have not answered the question re MMs family member because I have no idea what role they are employed to do, give me that information and I will happily give my opinion.

[Alph]

Anyone can be a scout

It involves stupid hours, lots of travel, your own money and you need clubs to take on players to make any real money. 

[G STAR RAM]

1 hour ago, reveldevil said:

Mel Morris does not employ family members to do scouting.

His stepson volunteers on the 'own the region' scheme, a small part of this involves identifying any promising youngsters he sees as part of the scheme.

I got the impression that one of his lads was part of the recruitment team but on the analytics side of things. May be completely wrong there though. 

[GboroRam]

[Bris Vegas]

4 hours ago, David said:

Been doing the same this morning....

This is not a pop at you Bris at all, if you look in the Nathan Tyson signing thread you will find some gems from me!

The summer of 2015 is what comes under the microscope a lot, £30m wasted, yet at the time most were reasonably happy, Bris and Sage called out a couple of signings Weimann and Bent and Ince, the majority were happy. 

In the topic where I've quoted Bris there's a poll on expectations, 9 members out of 172 believed we should be top 6, 71 top 2. How can that be possible with a unbalanced squad?

Of course people can be critical now, there is absolutely nothing wrong in changing your mind after seeing them play, but saying you can do better is ridiculous and shows a complete lack of understanding of the game you claim to be so knowledgable of.

As I've said earlier, writing names on a bit of paper is easy, every single one of us can do that even Boycie, probably not fair example to use with his experience in writing trains down on a pad, but who else was given a Argos at Xmas and asked to write a list for Santa? Santa then ultimately got to select from that list what to buy. 

Football is a little more complecated than that, clubs have to agree to sell, a fee negotiated, the player has to want to come, you might have to battle with another club, he might demand too much money, he could be a right ******** off the pitch, the worst in training you will ever see. 

To say you can do this from a TV set in Mexico or if you didn't have a 9 to 5 job is ridiculious it really is, especially how hindsight is used so much in some cases. It's that kind of arrogance which is seeing replies like these. Nobody likes a know it all. Let's just be football fans for a change, watch the game we love without embarrassing ourselves as much as possible.

Saying that can I just put it on record that I could be a better astronaught than those up there now, prove me wrong. If I wasn't scared of heights or had this forum to moderate I would be awesome.

In the summer of 2015 we had just finished 8th, having led the Championship table for 2/3 of the season before stutteering at the end largely due to injuries to key players.

With Martin and Thorne back, we pretty much had the same XI which led the Championship. Top six at the very least had to be the aim, as regardless of our awful recruitment, we still had our core players.

Since that summer, we've sold the likes of Buxton, Hendrick, Dawkins, Ward while Martin was loaned out, and in return we brought in Camara, Blackman, Vydra and Anya (for about £20m), four players who don't fit. Added to those that didn't fit in 2015, and the departures of those who did, now you can see we've got such an unbalanced squad.

In 2015/16 we didn't so much. Look at the team which beat Hull 0-2 in the second leg of the playoffs. It still had our core players in Keogh, Hendrick, Hughes, Bryson, Russell, Christie and Martin. Carson, Olsson, Shackell and Weimann were the other four with the first two not really having any negative affect on style.

The thing is though, I've explained on here beforehand why these players we've brought in are confusing signings. It's not a case of me just drawing up a list ofplayers and saying 'let's buy them'. I haven't done that. I've specifically mentioned why we have such an unbalanced squad and stated pre-signing these players why we shouldn't do it.

You're saying I'm critical now... I was critical before signing them. That's the key difference here. It's not just using hindsight, it's understanding why these players would struggle here before they even arrive.

Like I mentioned. You can buy a player who fits the role you're looking for in the system you play and he turns out to be a bomb (completely inadequate). I find that acceptable. What I don't find acceptable is buying 'good' players on massive wages just because they're available and then trying to shoehorn them into a system when they clearly don't fit. I asked this countless times before these players arrived. Why are we signing them?

Let somebody else spend their money on them. Aston Villa are making a good case for worst recruitment over the past few seasons alongside us. So much money on 'good players' with no system in place.

Again, you didn't read my post properly. What I can do from Mexico and from a TV is identify specific player types who fit a system. I can do that, as I have done that. I mentioned in the 'Why appoint Pearson thread' about the strengths/weaknesses of our squad and how they can't play the system and style of football which Pearson was aiming for. I mentioned that very clearly without going to watch a live game in England for going on 8 years!

You may call it arrogance. But I'm right, and I know I am. I don't need to watch live games to understand systems and player roles. Yeah, I couldn't handle negotiations, understand the general happiness of a player, know the demand for said player from Mexico. Where have I claimed I could? 

But what I could do is identify the type of players we should be looking for. Some may not come, some may not be good enough for where we want to go. But I could identify players who fit the system.

No idea what your astronaught reference is trying to prove? Like I said, I could have identified better players for Derby over the past 24 months than those who arrived.

 

[bigbadbob]

On 24 March 2017 at 15:51, Bris Vegas said:

I can't coach, as having ideas and implementing them are very different.

I couldn't manage, as no matter how much sense I talk, back in 2015 they were never going to hire a 26-year-old with no management, in any business, experience.

Chairman, nah. Lack the experience especially when it comes to off-field matters.

DOF, scout or on-pitch related advisor, absoloutely. Get me on the recruitment team. I see how systems work, how you need specific player types to form a functioning team. Evidently I know more than our previous recruitment teams over the past few years. I may be arrogant in saying it, but I do. 

Oh, you actually meant for it.

[sage]

8 hours ago, David said:

Which manager would we have been recruited the players for? That's the problem.

As much as people blame the signings, we have a squad assembled from several managers now, doesn't surprise me not many have worked out.

There hasn't been any consistentcy in the formation or style of play, many have been shoehorned into positions to fill a gap. 

Bradley Johnson has been LB, LW, CM, DM, was getting hammered early on until he managed to nail down a position.

You can argue the recruitment team didn't cover the positions or type of player needed but as we've been told, the manager has the final say in signings so even if we think we could compile a better list, doesn't mean you would see them in a Derby shirt. 

Were the recruitment team sent out for specific players, was they given a list of criteria or did they have total freedom? Which players were on the list that managers rejected, without all this I find it difficult to point the finger of blame to one specific area.

Recruitment/manager for the signings

Exectutive team that decide on a manager and his departure.

No scapegoats, stick them all together as they are all equally responsible given the information we do know. It hasn't been good enough.

I was making an overall point about our recruitment. It has been awful.

I think the Pearson signings can be explained in terms of a different system certainly. Clement's only to some extent. 

McClaren has made plenty of shockers.

In terms of blame, unless we signed players without the approval of managers and/or the managers had no input into what type of player they wanted then they must take a large chunk of the blame. 

MM and SR have allowed to overspend and the recruitment team haven't found good value for money targets.

Without knowing the exact mechanism it is impossible to accurately apportion blame. 

However we have often bought the wrong kind of player. We have on occasions got our priorities wrong. We have very often overpaid in terms of fee and salary. We have occasionally bought players who just arent good enough. 

For the record i have never cast myself as a potential scout etc I've just been critical of several signings as we have signed them and took a load of stick.

Why why why, i don't know.

[i-Ram]

9 hours ago, David said:

Saying that can I just put it on record that I could be a better astronaught than those up there now, prove me wrong. If I wasn't scared of heights or had this forum to moderate I would be awesome.

@Boycie once told me you were a Space Cadet and l wondered what he meant. Watch him deny it.

[Boycie]

2 minutes ago, i-Ram said:

@Boycie once told me you were a Space Cadet and l wondered what he meant. Watch him deny it.

Girl guide I said.

[RoyMac5]

4 hours ago, sage said:

I think the Pearson signings can be explained in terms of a different system certainly. Clement's only to some extent. 

McClaren has made plenty of shockers.

Like who? Particularly to the tune of £12m?!

[archied]

Reading this ,here's my over simplified view , yep anybody could be a scout ,, being a very good scout not so easy

[sage]

3 hours ago, RoyMac5 said:

Like who? Particularly to the tune of £12m?!

Why do you mention £12m ? The Pearson comparison was in terms of buying for a different system. Not in money spent.

Anyway...Weimann. Shitton. Albentiosa.  Bent. Best (loan). Buying Nugent insteading of loaning. 

The biggest cock up was loaning Bent when we needed cover for Martin. Then when Martin and Eustace got injured loaning Lingard instead of a target man and a DCM. Went from 2nd to 8th. Shocker. 

[sunnyhill60]

I suspect £12m was mentioned because McClaren's permanent signings were comparatively frugal and even those that didn't work out like Albentosa saw us recoup the money spent. As indeed we did when Rowett signed Shotton after loaning him.

Lingard was signed before Martin was injured and Bent was doing fine until he too got injured. In the April we had all 3 CDMs out injured and both centre-forwards.

How do you know Nugent was available to loan? In any event I suspect we will get good value for what we we signed him for.

Shocker is a more appropriate description of the business we did in January  and summer 2016

[sage]

7 minutes ago, sunnyhill60 said:

I suspect £12m was mentioned because McClaren's permanent signings were comparatively frugal and even those that didn't work out like Albentosa saw us recoup the money spent. As indeed we did when Rowett signed Shotton after loaning him.

Lingard was signed before Martin was injured and Bent was doing fine until he too got injured. In the April we had all 3 CDMs out injured and both centre-forwards.

How do you know Nugent was available to loan? In any event I suspect we will get good value for what we we signed him for.

Shocker is a more appropriate description of the business we did in January  and summer 2016

Taking us from 2nd to 8th in 3 months wasn't shocking?

We played a 4 1 4 1 formation and he didnt get cover or replacements for the defensive and attacking 1s. We didnt need more wingers. 

He didn't sign anyone as poor as Blackman and Camara (thanks Clement) and didn't overspend like Johnson, Butterfield, Vydra and Anya but he made strategic mistakes.

I don't know if Nugent was available for loan. I would have loaned him but not bought him.

It is obvious that Nugent was our last signing before having to reduce the size of the squad. If that was all i had left it wouldn't have gone on a 31yr old who had barely played all season and wasn't sufficiently different to what we had.

[cannable]

1 hour ago, sage said:

Why do you mention £12m ? The Pearson comparison was in terms of buying for a different system. Not in money spent.

Anyway...Weimann. Shitton. Albentiosa.  Bent. Best (loan). Buying Nugent insteading of loaning. 

The biggest cock up was loaning Bent when we needed cover for Martin. Then when Martin and Eustace got injured loaning Lingard instead of a target man and a DCM. Went from 2nd to 8th. Shocker. 

That transfer window I'd have gone for Savies on loan. Not a like for like with Martin but he was a striker that was at least technical, although he showed it in a different way to Martin. Still reckon he'd have done the job. Even Kenwyn Jones would have done a job. 

Cant fault us on the DM thing (in terms of recruitment at least). Come the 13th of January 2015 we thought we'd have to fit DM's for the run in. We rushed George back and Omar got knackered the game after. 

Sheer stupidity from McClaren to give George 130 minutes of football in four days.

[sage]

54 minutes ago, cannable said:

That transfer window I'd have gone for Savies on loan. Not a like for like with Martin but he was a striker that was at least technical, although he showed it in a different way to Martin. Still reckon he'd have done the job. Even Kenwyn Jones would have done a job. 

Cant fault us on the DM thing (in terms of recruitment at least). Come the 13th of January 2015 we thought we'd have to fit DM's for the run in. We rushed George back and Omar got knackered the game after. 

Sheer stupidity from McClaren to give George 130 minutes of football in four days.

I agree with you on the CF front. Savies or Danny Graham. Anyone who could have led the line.

I would disagree about the dcm though. Eustace got injured in training after the Ipswich game on 10th Jan. On the 17th Mascarell's defemsive weakness was exposed v Forest at home. We signed Lingard on 2nd February. We already had Ince, Russell, Ward and Dawkins. 

Thorne was never going to be properly fit and able to play 90 mins week in out till April at best. 

We should have signed a dcm who could actually defend. Obviously Mascarell's injury compounded this error but it was an error nonetheless. 

[Bris Vegas]

Bournemouth lost Yann Kermorgant for a few weeks and immediately loaned in Kenweyne Jones from Cardiff as a like-for-like replacement. He was evidently available, we completely overlooked him in favour of Bent.

McClaren's failure to bring in cover for Martin or the holding midfield position was inexplicable.

Bent's goal scoring record was very good, but it paled in comparison to a player who could lead the line and give us that out-ball which we desperately lacked during that wretched run of form.

 

[DRBee]

6 hours ago, sage said:

Why do you mention £12m ? The Pearson comparison was in terms of buying for a different system. Not in money spent.

Anyway...Weimann. Shitton. Albentiosa.  Bent. Best (loan). Buying Nugent insteading of loaning. 

The biggest cock up was loaning Bent when we needed cover for Martin. Then when Martin and Eustace got injured loaning Lingard instead of a target man and a DCM. Went from 2nd to 8th. Shocker. 

At least get your facts straight before you spout off ....... Weimann was signed a month AFTER MacClaren was sacked .