I hate them so much

14 hours ago, axman2526 said:

Ok, putting my new positive outlook to one side here.

 

I want to know if there is one person on this forum willing to defend these terrible, terrible directors?

Anyone? Lavia out indefinitely and they refuse to recall Santos and Lesley to help out Caicedo, and our team. 

Cause lord knows all we have without Lavia is Caicedo, the rest of the options we have are not midfielders of PL level.

These two are to sporting directors what Herod was to childcare.

12 hours ago, Deino said:

They are good scouts but are awful team builders.

Their job isn't supposed to be cherrypicking talented youth to be raised, farmed and sold. 

Their job is to build winning teams year in year out.

How tf is it that hard to get that through their skulls?

I don't think their goal is to build a title winning squad. 

3 minutes ago, Bob stark said:

I don't think their goal is to build a title winning squad. 

Agreed.

Our plan as Eghbali said is to be "Brighton" of top club. So far so good, paez, palmer, jackson, santos, madueke, gusto are definitely worth far more that what we signed them. We are also paying less salary than under Roman. We finished 6th and was unlucky not to finish in top 4 last season(number wise say we should have) and imo we will get top 4 this season. 

The multi club model is also working. Santos, Petrovic and Sarr.

What happen when the plan lead to crazy season ? As we saw last season, it is coaching and tactic issue. Mudyrk can actually play, it is the coach. Enzo can actually defend, it is the coach. Manager plays a lb on LW, it is not squad issue, it is coaching issue. 

3 hours ago, Bob stark said:

I don't think their goal is to build a title winning squad. 

 

3 hours ago, axman2526 said:

Agreed.

Jesus f**king christ.

I think they're sh*te but they obviously want to win things, it would make the players even more profitable. What kind of backwards logic would falling into mid table obscurity be to any of their investments. Did we spend 220M on two CM's for the profit?

56 minutes ago, Ukraine Bolt said:

I think they're sh*te but they obviously want to win things, it would make the players even more profitable. What kind of backwards logic would falling into mid table obscurity be to any of their investments. Did we spend 220M on two CM's for the profit?

Time will tell because those two are not compatible and we lack control whenever you stick the pair in the middle. Playing a £105m midfielder as a RB is also not a long term solution, something has to give.

1 hour ago, ducavis said:

Time will tell because those two are not compatible and we lack control whenever you stick the pair in the middle. Playing a £105m midfielder as a RB is also not a long term solution, something has to give.

I don't disagree but it clearly proves they want to win things if they're willing to spend that much.

15 hours ago, Ukraine Bolt said:

I think they're sh*te but they obviously want to win things, it would make the players even more profitable. What kind of backwards logic would falling into mid table obscurity be to any of their investments. Did we spend 220M on two CM's for the profit?

No big team want to be a mid table team, everything will collapse 

18 hours ago, ducavis said:

Time will tell because those two are not compatible and we lack control whenever you stick the pair in the middle. Playing a £105m midfielder as a RB is also not a long term solution, something has to give.

It is funny that we can say the same thing for all of our signing. 

Individually, almost all of them are excellent but not sure they are compatible 

 

Edited January 24, 20251 yr by Bob stark

Tweedle Dum and Tweedle Twat

5 hours ago, Bob stark said:

No big team want to be a mid table team, everything will collapse 

What will collapse? Are we the big team in this scenario? Confused.

28 minutes ago, Ukraine Bolt said:

What will collapse? Are we the big team in this scenario? Confused.

Chelsea will collapse. Revenue wise we are one of the top 6 (big margin compare to other 14) and we are 4th in term payroll. Now imagine if we continue finishing in midtable, the whole thing will collapse

 

3 minutes ago, Bob stark said:

Chelsea will collapse. Revenue wise we are one of the top 6 (big margin compare to other 14) and we are 4th in term payroll. Now imagine if we continue finishing in midtable, the whole thing will collapse

 

I imagine this is why we've chopped away at all the high earners (Sterling, Nkunku, Chilwell) though. We definitely need CL football going forward, no shirt sponsor likely not helped us once again. 

38 minutes ago, Ukraine Bolt said:

I imagine this is why we've chopped away at all the high earners (Sterling, Nkunku, Chilwell) though. We definitely need CL football going forward, no shirt sponsor likely not helped us once again. 

Yes and yes that cl money will be good. 

Eghbali tbf has been pretty clear about their plan for us. Keep salary down, try to get value from multi club model and develop player. 

 

 

11 minutes ago, Bob stark said:

Yes and yes that cl money will be good. 

Eghbali tbf has been pretty clear about their plan for us. Keep salary down, try to get value from multi club model and develop player. 

 

 

And sign every winger in in the world.

Donkeys 

Bornemouth recruit and sign better players than these two...

The monkey only follows what the organ grinder commands 

Twats - eghbali and this lot.. running the club.. signing and spending energy on Felix when we needed to close osimhen.. signing a back up keeper when we already had 3 of them in petrovic Kepa and Sanchez.. the disaster brothers from Monaco and binning chalobah.. signing kdh who brings nothing to the club .. clulesss 

We are excessive with everything, we even have two blokes doing one job.. 

Im sure there are some other clubs with more than one sporting director but i would also think they might be doing a better job.

Weve got loads of goalkeepers and not an elite level one anywhere to be seen

weve got loads of wingers

we got few strikers and none of which are top notch

weve got defenders in the wrong place (at another club) until recently

oh and they let possibly one of the best managers of all time in the womens game slip away 

Complete and utter Incompetence.

Another point to raise on them.

How much research dud they put in to Maresca? How detailed were their talks with him on how he wanted to play, where he saw our strengths and weaknesses for his system?

Maresca has been fairly consistent sticking with his formation, his tactics. Stubbornly so in some cases.

We heard a bit about how he could get the best out of Enzo Fernandez, but was he asked what he needed our wingers to do? Where he saw Cole Palmer play? What he needed from the full backs etc?

Because, when you look at who we already had signed, and then went on to sign after Maresca came in, how did we help him?

 

Did we give him a ball playing goalkeeper? No, and both Maresca and Leicester fans said this was a big deal. We left him with Sanchez.

How about fullbacks that can invert in to the midfield or number 10? We had Cucu before he came in, and an frequently injured James, plus Gusto who has proven he cannot do that job.

Who did we add? Veiga, slow as Disasi and unable to invert?

Palmer moved to 10 because Maresca wants more defensive work from his wide men than Poch did. Has nullified our best player, and sidelined Nkunku and Carney.

On top of that we added Felix who Maresca had no use for. And had we not secured the deadline day loan of Sancho we would now have only Neto and Madueke (and George I guess) who is willing to play wide.

Then there is the pre maresca issue, a top striker to relegate Nico to the bench. Still nada on that.

Honestly with big lumps like Veiga, Disasi, Tosin etc as options we should have appointed Sean Dyche. He would have played Palmer in his correct role at least.

In regard to Winstanley, apparently it was Tony Bloom who did all the heavy legwork at Brighton when it came to the analytics, so not sure Winstanley was ever the big win our owners thought it was. Laurence Stewart apparently convinced Winstanley to sign Disasi, so it's not ideal is it. The only higher up I've heard good things mentioned about, is Joe Shields. 

1 hour ago, axman2526 said:

Another point to raise on them.

How much research dud they put in to Maresca? How detailed were their talks with him on how he wanted to play, where he saw our strengths and weaknesses for his system?

Maresca has been fairly consistent sticking with his formation, his tactics. Stubbornly so in some cases.

We heard a bit about how he could get the best out of Enzo Fernandez, but was he asked what he needed our wingers to do? Where he saw Cole Palmer play? What he needed from the full backs etc?

Because, when you look at who we already had signed, and then went on to sign after Maresca came in, how did we help him?

 

Did we give him a ball playing goalkeeper? No, and both Maresca and Leicester fans said this was a big deal. We left him with Sanchez.

How about fullbacks that can invert in to the midfield or number 10? We had Cucu before he came in, and an frequently injured James, plus Gusto who has proven he cannot do that job.

Who did we add? Veiga, slow as Disasi and unable to invert?

Palmer moved to 10 because Maresca wants more defensive work from his wide men than Poch did. Has nullified our best player, and sidelined Nkunku and Carney.

On top of that we added Felix who Maresca had no use for. And had we not secured the deadline day loan of Sancho we would now have only Neto and Madueke (and George I guess) who is willing to play wide.

Then there is the pre maresca issue, a top striker to relegate Nico to the bench. Still nada on that.

Honestly with big lumps like Veiga, Disasi, Tosin etc as options we should have appointed Sean Dyche. He would have played Palmer in his correct role at least.

Or perhaps they should have stuck with Poch and worked out their differences.