Fan Forum (not this one)

[YorkshireRam]

7 minutes ago, Loughborough Ram said:

But people aren't backing him.

Personally I'm backing David Clowes, who has taken a decision to keep him on, and he knows a lot more about the situation than all of us on here put together.

Surely it's even more strange that with, as you say, little to no information or context, people are condemning him.

Not at all, he was in charge of finances during one of the dodgiest financial periods in our history which ended with an administration process which nearly drove our club to liquidation... I honestly believe in those circumstances, an explanation should be provided as to why he's been retained, because it really doesn't look good on paper and fans are right to be sceptical.

[Tamworthram]

13 minutes ago, YorkshireRam said:

Whataboutism isn't really making the point you think it is here... When a company goes into administration, the reality is that the CEO doesn't ordinarily get the luxury of retaining their position. The captain usually has to go down with the ship. It's not about whether he stood up to Mel, it's why in this case, when the club is having a complete overhaul, the CEO and former CFO who presided over one of the most dodgy financial periods in the club's history, has kept his job when that defies the usual process?

I've wondered whether Clowes retaining him could simply be due to the fact he knows where the skeletons are, and that knowledge may still be needed to properly rectify the issues and stabilise the club short-term... Plus, all the talk of Pearce really trying to keep the club going during admin- he was probably trying to save his job and retain a wage, that was likely entirely borne out of self interest, rather than a genuine compassion for the club and its fans. 

I just find it strange that with little to no information or context we have on the matter, so many are backing him at this point, even though he was literally Mel's right-hand man...

 

The only person really backing him is DC by keeping him on. DC must know a lot more about what actually went on before and during administration than the rest of us and presumably has seen enough qualities in SP to trust him at least for the time being. For all we know, DC might think Pearce is the right man to help take us forward or he might be thinking he needs to keep him on until the club really has stabilised and a suitable replacement can be found.

[RadioactiveWaste]

8 minutes ago, YorkshireRam said:

Not at all, he was in charge of finances during one of the dodgiest financial periods in our history which ended with an administration process which nearly drove our club to liquidation... I honestly believe in those circumstances, an explanation should be provided as to why he's been retained, because it really doesn't look good on paper and fans are right to be sceptical.

We'd never get anything in public beyond "his knowledge, skills and abilities make him best candidate for the job"

I've said above, just some sort of recognition of that things were wrong would help. Wouldn't change my mind, but would feel less smouldering towards him.

But I remain suspicious that's not really the whole truth of why he's still here....

[Animal is a Ram]

My mod cap is on here.

I understand that SP has become the representation of the Mel era. I knew someone who was at the club during the early days of the admin period, and he didn't exactly cover himself in glory. That said, we have to be VERY careful what we're saying here.

There's so much we don't know about Mel's tenure and even less that is known about SPs role and influence in it.

I think we have to move on. Clowes trusts him. That's enough for me.

Props to him for being front and centre at the Fans Forum, considering what's being put on here.

[trappatoni]

31 minutes ago, Loughborough Ram said:

The demand for everybody to know everything these days is ridiculous and in many cases unworkable.

If we become successful in the next few years will you put it down to the work done by Stephen Pearce? No of course you wouldn't. 

He is part of the whole and if David Clowes thinks that he is the best man for the job then our opinions really count for nothing, which is as it should be.

 

But we can still have opinions.   David Clowes bought the club not the right for all of his decisions to pass unchallenged.  

 

Even under Clowes I dont see the evidence we are a forward thinking club - either Pearce has been part of the mess we are in or he's been a puppet for the owners' decisions - either way he should go. 

Edited September 15, 2023 by trappatoni

[Stive Pesley]

7 minutes ago, Animal is a Ram said:

Props to him for being front and centre at the Fans Forum, considering what's being put on here.

And that remains my sole (on-topic!) point here.

He was front and centre, but all he really did was make a pre-prepared, vague speech that he thought we be a sop to the fans, and when directly questioned about his own role in what went on, simply made a second attempt at his pre-prepared speech

I think everyone on here asking questions of him would have piped down if he'd had the cojones to hold his hands up and speak honestly

Bottom line - if you want the fans to trust you then don't act like a slippery eel

[duncanjwitham]

12 hours ago, Loughborough Ram said:

Of course he does for the time being.

He is relatively fresh into the job and is under real pressure from a very demanding fan base, so for him to be putting time into developing players for 3, 4 or even 5 years time would be selfless in the extreme.

I'm sure that he would love to have a team of academy graduates ready to call on, but for the time being his priority has to be getting a squad together to be successful now, especially as he doesn't have the resources available to to buy first team players let alone plough money into the 18s and 21s

If he still has no interest in the youth teams in a couple of years time, then criticise him but at the moment it just looks like another convenient stick to beat him with

 

1 hour ago, Tamworthram said:

In an ideal world you’re right but sadly managers have to focus on the here and now and what will keep them in their job. Warne won’t be remembered for the condition he left the academy in. A successful academy won’t protect him from the sack nor will a failing one cause him to lose his job. He’ll be remembered for how successful he is with the first team. He’ll also know how long he remains manager of Derby is almost entirely dependent on how successful the first team is. I know it’s a little cynical but I’m not sure how much your legacy counts. I’ve thought about this before when attending retirement events for senior people I’ve really respected. The feeling for a few weeks is “they did a great job whilst they were here” but sadly, they are soon almost forgotten as their replacement introduces their ways, imposes their personality and takes responsibility or praise for the failures and successes under their tenure.

I want to be clear that I'm not talking specifically about Warne here but about managers in general, but the whole idea of managers caring about their legacy is just absolute peak-level idiocy.  Should we really be hindering the long-term future of the club, by not giving our expensively trained academy players the chance, purely so a current employee can secure a legacy for themselves? It's ridiculous.

It should be written into managers contracts that developing youth players is a fundamental part of their job, and if they aren't doing it, they should be sacked.  If you want a genuinely successful academy, you cannot have a manager just not bothering with it for a couple of years, it has to be a fundamental part of the club, with a route from youth teams into the first team planned out for years to come.  Those 17 year olds that don't get some first team exposure and few minutes here and there won't turn into the 19 year olds that start half a dozen games in a season, and then they won't turn into those 21 year olds that start 35 games a season for you.  You can't just start and stop using an academy at random, and still expect to churn out good players.  It has to be a long-term project, and it has to be one that outlasts any manager that we appoint.

People wonder why we're stuck at Championship and now League One level, and why we struggle to get really good academy players through to the first team, and it's stupid stuff like this that's at least part of it.  We can't compete with the massive clubs on finances to buy players, so we should be producing our own.  That's how we get to the Prem and stay there, and we should be doing everything we can to make it happen.  

[Stive Pesley]

35 minutes ago, maxjam said:

I trust David Clowes and the people now running the club however, we're back on an even financial keel and our reputation with the EFL has improved, if they think Stephen Pearce is doing a good job, I'll trust their judgement

It's a bit of a case of "once bitten..." here though

Look back in the forums a couple of years and you'll find people saying almost word-for-word what you say above, but replace Clowes name with Mel Morris

It was only 2019 when Pearce and Morris sat there at a fan forum saying all was good with the EFL, all was good with FFP and the club were moving in the right direction. We all know what happened next

While Pearce is still at the club AND still refuses to acknowledge his role in what happened, then I find it very hard to trust anything he says

[YorkshireRam]

9 minutes ago, Animal is a Ram said:

My mod cap is on here.

I understand that SP has become the representation of the Mel era. I knew someone who was at the club during the early days of the admin period, and he didn't exactly cover himself in glory. That said, we have to be VERY careful what we're saying here.

There's so much we don't know about Mel's tenure and even less that is known about SPs role and influence in it.

I think we have to move on. Clowes trusts him. That's enough for me.

Props to him for being front and centre at the Fans Forum, considering what's being put on here.

Don't these two points sort of contradict each other though? What happened during his tenure, plus these whispers we keep hearing of potentially poor conduct behind the scenes... but we're just supposed to brush past that and act like he's magically the right man for the job now?

It's the type of situation that requires clarification of some sort. I understand NDAs being in place and a no-holds barred explanation being completely off the table; but if you boil it all down to just the basic facts, his retention doesn't really make sense when almost every other aspect of the club has been overhauled. And if the NDA is so strict that any type of clarification can't be offered while the scepticism is obviously going to be present, I'd say that'd be another point against keeping him on- why would you want a CEO the fans are immediately wary and sceptical of? 

[FlyBritishMidland]

41 minutes ago, Loughborough Ram said:

The demand for everybody to know everything these days is ridiculous and in many cases unworkable.

If we become successful in the next few years will you put it down to the work done by Stephen Pearce? No of course you wouldn't. 

He is part of the whole and if David Clowes thinks that he is the best man for the job then our opinions really count for nothing, which is as it should be.

In the interview that David Clowes did with Radio Derby in the summer he said something like (and I’m paraphrasing) “Stephen Pearce is very good at his job and is being allowed to do his job”.  I think that’s quite telling and also gives an insight as to how MM may have ran the club in a controlling way.

[trappatoni]

Yes a cat A academy in this division must be almost unprecedented - possibly unique?   It's a huge expense and only makes sense if the manager full buys into the project.   

 

That said there is the caveat that the academy was gutted so perhaps right now the talent isnt there - but set against that the talent only has to break into a L1 side. 

 

Medium term though we absolutely have to have a manager who looks to the academy players.  It's why IF Warne goes I'd at least consider Warburton.  I know he felt bitter Forest sacked him when he was bringing through youth which subsequent managers benefited from. 

[Animal is a Ram]

3 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

It's a bit of a case of "once bitten..." here though

Look back in the forums a couple of years and you'll find people saying almost word-for-word what you say above, but replace Clowes name with Mel Morris

It was only 2019 when Pearce and Morris sat there at a fan forum saying all was good with the EFL, all was good with FFP and the club were moving in the right direction. We all know what happened next

While Pearce is still at the club AND still refuses to acknowledge his role in what happened, then I find it very hard to trust anything he says

I was guilty of this. Will happily hold my hands up to this.

But there wasn't, at the time, much, if any evidence (that I can recall) to suggest the contrary. Other than spending silly fees on players - but that wasn't unique to Derby County.

There may not be all that much SP can say, with the NDAs. I know that's going to be dismissed as an easy excuse, but what can you do?

[maxjam]

23 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

It's a bit of a case of "once bitten..." here though

Look back in the forums a couple of years and you'll find people saying almost word-for-word what you say above, but replace Clowes name with Mel Morris

It was only 2019 when Pearce and Morris sat there at a fan forum saying all was good with the EFL, all was good with FFP and the club were moving in the right direction. We all know what happened next

While Pearce is still at the club AND still refuses to acknowledge his role in what happened, then I find it very hard to trust anything he says

If David Clowes starts firing all and sundry, battling the FA, cheekily admitting to trying to find financial loopholes, spending millions on players with inflated wages then yes I'll agree - but he has been very measured in his first year at the helm and the club has made great strides.

I also don't think handing Paul Warne a 4yr contract was a bad thing as others have highlighted.  It shows a pragmatic and long term approach to rebuilding both the first team and the academy.  The alternative would have seen us sack PW for finishing 7th last year and me starting to look nervously at my first paragraph.

Whilst I understand the caution and distrust, lets not mention MM in the same breath as David Clowes.  One courted the limelight, famous ex-pro's and gave grand press conferences talking about 'The Derby Way'.  The other has quietly put the club on an even keel financially and is rebuilding our reputation with the EFL and other clubs.  He has also been working with Stephen Pearce for well over a year now so I assume he knows more about him than any of us do.

[RadioactiveWaste]

17 minutes ago, trappatoni said:

Yes a cat A academy in this division must be almost unprecedented - possibly unique?   It's a huge expense and only makes sense if the manager full buys into the project.   

 

That said there is the caveat that the academy was gutted so perhaps right now the talent isnt there - but set against that the talent only has to break into a L1 side. 

 

Medium term though we absolutely have to have a manager who looks to the academy players.  It's why IF Warne goes I'd at least consider Warburton.  I know he felt bitter Forest sacked him when he was bringing through youth which subsequent managers benefited from. 

Didn't Sunderland have a Cat A academy in League 1 as well? I could be wrong on that but I seem to remember the Sunderland academy was good a few years ago?

[Animal is a Ram]

15 minutes ago, YorkshireRam said:

Don't these two points sort of contradict each other though? What happened during his tenure, plus these whispers we keep hearing of potentially poor conduct behind the scenes... but we're just supposed to brush past that and act like he's magically the right man for the job now?

It's the type of situation that requires clarification of some sort. I understand NDAs being in place and a no-holds barred explanation being completely off the table; but if you boil it all down to just the basic facts, his retention doesn't really make sense when almost every other aspect of the club has been overhauled. And if the NDA is so strict that any type of clarification can't be offered while the scepticism is obviously going to be present, I'd say that'd be another point against keeping him on- why would you want a CEO the fans are immediately wary and sceptical of? 

The conduct I'm referring to was nothing to do with the actual running of the club in or out of admin. Just poor communication to staff - something that Curtis Davies made comment on, that the club (read: administrators) not talking to the staff, players or otherwise. Again, without knowing all the details, it's nigh on impossible to comment.

Again. I fully understand fans not being happy that SP is still in post, or even involved in the club. It didn't sit all that well with me at the start, but if you're new to football club ownership and need quick knowledge, who better?

I'm hoping a book gets written. I doubt it ever will

[Ghost of Clough]

18 minutes ago, duncanjwitham said:

 

I want to be clear that I'm not talking specifically about Warne here but about managers in general, but the whole idea of managers caring about their legacy is just absolute peak-level idiocy.  Should we really be hindering the long-term future of the club, by not giving our expensively trained academy players the chance, purely so a current employee can secure a legacy for themselves? It's ridiculous.

It should be written into managers contracts that developing youth players is a fundamental part of their job, and if they aren't doing it, they should be sacked.  If you want a genuinely successful academy, you cannot have a manager just not bothering with it for a couple of years, it has to be a fundamental part of the club, with a route from youth teams into the first team planned out for years to come.  Those 17 year olds that don't get some first team exposure and few minutes here and there won't turn into the 19 year olds that start half a dozen games in a season, and then they won't turn into those 21 year olds that start 35 games a season for you.  You can't just start and stop using an academy at random, and still expect to churn out good players.  It has to be a long-term project, and it has to be one that outlasts any manager that we appoint.

People wonder why we're stuck at Championship and now League One level, and why we struggle to get really good academy players through to the first team, and it's stupid stuff like this that's at least part of it.  We can't compete with the massive clubs on finances to buy players, so we should be producing our own.  That's how we get to the Prem and stay there, and we should be doing everything we can to make it happen.  

This is what I'm a strong advocate of. From Warne's comments it seems they have to be L1 standard now or he won't use them at all because he doesn't "trust" them.

A comment that sticks in my mind is Lampard when discussing Bogle. We wanted to loan him out in the summer of 2018, but there were no takers as he had no first team experience to put himself in the shop window. It was a common theme after Clough's departure, with few youngsters getting that first taste of football at the right stage in their development. 

An example would be Springett. He wasn't at a suitable level for us last season, but even in 21/22 he was given 3 games in the PL, followed by a couple more games in 22/23 before we picked him up in January. Teden Mengi had his 6 minute appearance for Man Utd in the Europa League the season prior to coming to us on loan. It's a very common approach for Cat 1 clubs to take.

There's a big difference between giving a player 5 minutes at the end of the game and giving him a start. It may only be 5 minutes, but it's 5 minutes less that an aging player needs to put in, keeping him fresher for future games. I get the impression Warne doesn't recognise that. But, it's not surprising when he's never been involved with a high level academy before, with the peak of his playing and managerial career being at Rotherham.

[jimtastic56]

45 minutes ago, duncanjwitham said:

 

I want to be clear that I'm not talking specifically about Warne here but about managers in general, but the whole idea of managers caring about their legacy is just absolute peak-level idiocy.  Should we really be hindering the long-term future of the club, by not giving our expensively trained academy players the chance, purely so a current employee can secure a legacy for themselves? It's ridiculous.

It should be written into managers contracts that developing youth players is a fundamental part of their job, and if they aren't doing it, they should be sacked.  If you want a genuinely successful academy, you cannot have a manager just not bothering with it for a couple of years, it has to be a fundamental part of the club, with a route from youth teams into the first team planned out for years to come.  Those 17 year olds that don't get some first team exposure and few minutes here and there won't turn into the 19 year olds that start half a dozen games in a season, and then they won't turn into those 21 year olds that start 35 games a season for you.  You can't just start and stop using an academy at random, and still expect to churn out good players.  It has to be a long-term project, and it has to be one that outlasts any manager that we appoint.

People wonder why we're stuck at Championship and now League One level, and why we struggle to get really good academy players through to the first team, and it's stupid stuff like this that's at least part of it.  We can't compete with the massive clubs on finances to buy players, so we should be producing our own.  That's how we get to the Prem and stay there, and we should be doing everything we can to make it happen.  

Agree with you . Florists have dragged almost £100 million from academy players in recent years. A lot of them local lads who have been sent out on loan to League one teams as part of their education. We could “Fast track “ them into the team and get the ball rolling . Interesting if  Warne gives Brown a chance and if he can improve the player.

[Leeds Ram]

2 hours ago, Loughborough Ram said:

I am not in anyway defending Pearce but I'd be interested to know how many of the Johnny big b*ll*cks on here, with expert financial acumen, and ability to be a ceo, would have given Mel Morris what for, and absolutely disobeyed him and the majority of his decisions.

My guess would be, approximately, zero. Its easy to talk a good game on a Internet chat room, it's another when everything rests on your decisions, and you will actually be proven right or wrong instead of dealing in hypetheticals 

I would have walked out the club if I disagreed that badly with what Mel has done and let the local media know what was going on.  I wouldn't have misled the fans, gone along with the media strategy that everything was hunky dory until administration was abruptly announced or let it meltdown on my watch like Pearce did. I have in the past walked away from the potential for paid work because I have disagreed with the ethos of the employers so I have some experience in making the calculation between a pay cheque and my moral compass albeit on a much lower level. 

Edited September 15, 2023 by Leeds Ram

[Leeds Ram]

1 hour ago, The Scarlet Pimpernel said:

I would imagine David Clowes has all the answers to my original question and with that information has decided to keep Pearce in position. Mel caused admin by refusing to fund the club anymore. The amortisation as used by Derby was within the original rules. As I say, what did he actually do wrong?

Being a leading member of the managerial infrastructure leading to the club functionally going bust isn't enough for you?

[Foreveram]

1 hour ago, trappatoni said:

Yes a cat A academy in this division must be almost unprecedented - possibly unique?   It's a huge expense and only makes sense if the manager full buys into the project.   

 

That said there is the caveat that the academy was gutted so perhaps right now the talent isnt there - but set against that the talent only has to break into a L1 side. 

 

Medium term though we absolutely have to have a manager who looks to the academy players.  It's why IF Warne goes I'd at least consider Warburton.  I know he felt bitter Forest sacked him when he was bringing through youth which subsequent managers benefited from. 

Readings academy is cat 1.