Franco Baldini

[Gutter Boy]

Are you suggesting both managers had/have no input in the players being bought or have no interest thereof?

I'm not referring to who does the contractual part / negotiations - more the identifying of targets

A bit of both.

Why on earth would we want Poch to know about League 1 midfielders (Alli) or centre backs in the German second division (Wimmer)?

Poch's focus has to 100% be on our squad. One of his assistants looks at opposition scouting, so he'll even be delegating that to an appropriate person.

Poch should be saying - 'I need a quick transitioning allrounder to give me a like-for-like alternative to Mason', and Baldini and co. either say 'ok, here's Deli Alli', or 'Harry Winks will be ready next season'. That's how it should work

The scouting setup, which we have been strengthening this season

This is key, and IMO will be Baldini's legacy. Our scouting setup was badly neglected in the gap between Comolli and Baldini, and is now being substantially repaired.

We've recruited Mitchell (from Southampton), MacKenzie (Leicester), Metcalf (Brighton) and Esparraga (Malaga) as senior scouts since Christmas, to really beef up our weaponry.

 

[braineclipse]

Seeing that the German 51% model would never be tolerated in the PL - I would imagine an approach where the manager selects his transfer targets would be a good starting point. We have done great work with the Academy lately and that should by all means continue, even to the extent of generating bottom half decent players for reasonable profit. Personally, I quite enjoy Swansea and Saints' respective models.

Two clubs with a fairly well defined "head coach, not manager" setup. Two clubs that, like us, have outperformed their financial expectations. Two clubs that have relatively successfully transitioned from one head coach to another in part (imo) thanks to their setup that doesn't give all the power to a single manager.

Care to outline Baldini's pros so far vs cons?

In addition - how do you feel about the DOF and Levy picking the transfers instead of our managers? This is well documented since the Jol era - do you think this is the right approach to long term success? The only common denominator throughout all these 'wasted' managers remains ENIC. One of their biggest mistakes to date remains booting AVB too early, imv

It's extremely difficult to judge someone in Baldini's role over a short period of time like this from the outside. I'm assuming the Bale money spent is your main concern? But we have no real way of knowing which of those players were targeted primarily by Baldini and who were AVB's targets. We have no idea of knowing what went on in the transfer committee discussions.

It's also the case that Baldini's job involves a lot more than first team signings. We've strengthen our scouting setup, we've brought in Pochettino and we've signed some very exciting younger players. All of those it's just way too early to attempt to make a judgement on from the outside.

I'm not a very strong supporter of Baldini at this point, for me the jury is most definitely still out. I will question quite strongly anyone whose opinion is made up on Baldini one way or the other, I just think it's way too soon. At this point I don't particularly care if he stays or goes come the summer, primarily because I trust Levy to make a good decision. Unlike us Levy does know what went on behind closed doors, he does know what input Baldini has given on our various signings and he does know exactly what Baldini's role is. He also know how far along some of his non-transfer jobs are coming along. Like or dislike Levy, but I've never seen anyone have a go at Levy for keeping staff around for too long (possible exception being Sherwood I suppose).

I think you have to acknowledge that we have outperformed our financial expectations under ENIC.

 

[The Ghost Of Tom Joad]

Common sense, as this is how most top level clubs operate. In England there's still quite a few clubs stuck in the dark ages, but most of the PL have started to change and employ a DoF/chief exec to lighten the burden from the chairman.

Again - do you have access to Executive-level information in terms of what Baldini's role entails with Spurs? Assuming that is a negatory - I somehow fail to see how such sweeping statements can be generalised and presented as fact. Number of 'top' clubs do not employ a DOF by the way. In any case - my argument is more around Baldini's suitability more so that the DOF success in general at Spurs - something which has yielded great results in the past under Comolli.

Players signed on one person's insistence, without at least getting someone else's opinion, should be and most likely is very rare.

It has been the case in the past under Comolli - and alarmingly, similar signs have emerged last summer with the arrival of Stambouli for example.

I don't get why signings have to be scrutinized to the degree they are and someone blamed and sacked. There will always be failures, for whatever reason, but we do quite well. Better than most. If we sack Baldini we'll just find someone else to do his job, but our transfer strategies and way of identifying targets will still be the same.

I strongly believe signings should be approved / identified as suitable by the manager after such have been presented by the DOF/ CS - do you believe that to be unreasonable in a 'top level club'?

 

[The Ghost Of Tom Joad]

A bit of both.

Why on earth would we want Poch to know about League 1 midfielders (Alli) or centre backs in the German second division (Wimmer)?

I don't expect him to know about League 1 midfielders - however I absolutely do expect him to veto / approve any incoming signings, having studied in detail all information presented.

We've recruited Mitchell (from Southampton), MacKenzie (Leicester), Metcalf (Brighton) and Esparraga (Malaga) as senior scouts since Christmas, to really beef up our weaponry.

This is fantastic news as already outlined numerous times, repairing the 'damage' under Redknapp can take years - however and where does Baldini fit into all this?

 

[Jordinho]

I strongly believe signings should be approved / identified as suitable by the manager after such have been presented by the DOF/ CS - do you believe that to be unreasonable in a 'top level club'?

The manager to be in charge of identifying targets? Highly unreasonable.

To say no to a player he does not believe will be of benefit to the team? Very reasonable.

Signing players as squad options even if the manager isn't super keen I see no problem with providing they fit certain criteria, ie. value likely to increase, wages are reasonable, their style is a fit with ours and he's open to giving them a chance to prove themselves. Therefore it's also important to hire coaches who care more about working with the players at their disposal than constantly be demanding new signings.

 

[The Ghost Of Tom Joad]

Two clubs with a fairly well defined "head coach, not manager" setup. Two clubs that, like us, have outperformed their financial expectations. Two clubs that have relatively successfully transitioned from one head coach to another in part (imo) thanks to their setup that doesn't give all the power to a single manager.



It's extremely difficult to judge someone in Baldini's role over a short period of time like this from the outside. I'm assuming the Bale money spent is your main concern? But we have no real way of knowing which of those players were targeted primarily by Baldini and who were AVB's targets. We have no idea of knowing what went on in the transfer committee discussions.

It's also the case that Baldini's job involves a lot more than first team signings. We've strengthen our scouting setup, we've brought in Pochettino and we've signed some very exciting younger players. All of those it's just way too early to attempt to make a judgement on from the outside.

I'm not a very strong supporter of Baldini at this point, for me the jury is most definitely still out. I will question quite strongly anyone whose opinion is made up on Baldini one way or the other, I just think it's way too soon. At this point I don't particularly care if he stays or goes come the summer, primarily because I trust Levy to make a good decision. Unlike us Levy does know what went on behind closed doors, he does know what input Baldini has given on our various signings and he does know exactly what Baldini's role is. He also know how far along some of his non-transfer jobs are coming along. Like or dislike Levy, but I've never seen anyone have a go at Levy for keeping staff around for too long (possible exception being Sherwood I suppose).

I think you have to acknowledge that we have outperformed our financial expectations under ENIC.

I don't disagree with much of this - however, it remains of paramount importance to avoid the Comolli coup d'etait which saw us implode to a very low level. Did you know we had approached Ramos even before the season had started - and Jol was well aware? We need a sustainable setup which involves all levels, and mostly Poch's input in terms of 'No, I do not think we need the player you've identified, period'

 

[Jordinho]

I don't expect him to know about League 1 midfielders - however I absolutely do expect him to veto / approve any incoming signings, having studied in detail all information presented.

This is fantastic news as already outlined numerous time, repairing the 'damage' under Redknapp can take years - however and where does Baldini fit into all this?

He is above the scouts in the structure. He oversees the whole of our footballing operations: Academy, scouts, first team, medical staff, coaching staff. From your complaints I gather you see him as some sort of supreme decision maker. He's involved in the process of signing players, but I don't think he has the final say on things. Players go through the transfer committee, a lot of other things will go through Levy or the board before it gets done.

 

[The Ghost Of Tom Joad]

The manager to be in charge of identifying targets? Highly unreasonable.

To say no to a player he does not believe will be of benefit to the team? Very reasonable.

Signing players as squad options even if the manager isn't super keen I see no problem with providing they fit certain criteria, ie. value likely to increase, wages are reasonable, their style is a fit with ours and he's open to giving them a chance to prove themselves. Therefore it's also important to hire coaches who care more about working with the players at their disposal than constantly be demanding new signings.

He most certainly can have input and most definitely be able to veto any signing he feels inappropriate.

Who's suggesting consistently demanding players btw? Do you believe Baldini and Levy should make the signings and Poch then force to make it work on the field?

 

[Jordinho]

He most certainly can have input and most definitely be able to veto any signing he feels inappropriate.

Who's suggesting consistently demanding players btw? Do you believe Baldini and Levy should make the signings and Poch then force to make it work on the field?

The traditional old school types like Redknapp, Bruce, Pulis all sign players on whims, recommendation from agent buddies or other stupid reasons. I want the coach to identify what areas need strengthening and the scouts and DoF to come up with suggestions based on ongoing scouting. We can't wait until we need someone and then go look. Sometimes a deal will come up that is too good to turn down, then it's the coach's job to make it work. I'm very much in favour of the head coach approach. His job is to fashion a team of the players at his disposal. There should obviously be a more nuanced review of performance than purely results (or successful signings in the DoF's case).

 

[braineclipse]

I don't disagree with much of this - however, it remains of paramount importance to avoid the Comolli coup d'etait which saw us implode to a very low level. Did you know we had approached Ramos even before the season had started - and Jol was well aware? We need a sustainable setup which involves all levels, and mostly Poch's input in terms of 'No, I do not think we need the player you've identified, period'

Have you changed your opinion a bit then? Because I believe what I wrote was in direct disagreement with your first post in this thread.

He most certainly can have input and most definitely be able to veto any signing he feels inappropriate.

Who's suggesting consistently demanding players btw? Do you believe Baldini and Levy should make the signings and Poch then force to make it work on the field?

You seem to be reading stuff into Jordinho's posts that he's definitely not writing. He specifically said that it's reasonable for a head coach to say no to a player he doesn't believe will be of benefit and this is what you ask?

 

[The Ghost Of Tom Joad]

Have you changed your opinion a bit then? Because I believe what I wrote was in direct disagreement with your first post in this thread.

I think Baldini should walk, nothing has changed. Can you be more specific?

 

[Jordinho]

I think Baldini should walk, nothing has changed. Can you be more specific?

But how will that change anything? We don't really know what goes on behind closed doors. He could be doing all kinds of important work that we never hear about.

 

[The Ghost Of Tom Joad]

The traditional old school types like Redknapp, Bruce, Pulis all sign players on whims, recommendation from agent buddies or other stupid reasons. I want the coach to identify what areas need strengthening and the scouts and DoF to come up with suggestions based on ongoing scouting.

Agreed 100%. Having said that - a problem usually emerges when the manager ask for Scheinderlin and eventually receives Stambouli whom in return is never used and merely concludes few years later as a massive waste of wages. Rather save the money instead?

We can't wait until we need someone and then go look. Sometimes a deal will come up that is too good to turn down, then it's the coach's job to make it work. I'm very much in favour of the head coach approach. His job is to fashion a team of the players at his disposal. There should obviously be a more nuanced review of performance than purely results (or successful signings in the DoF's case).

That is also valid - possibly the same way someone like Alli has been landed. How would you personally review Baldini out of 10 so far, out if interest?

 

[braineclipse]

I think Baldini should walk, nothing has changed. Can you be more specific?

I said I think the jury is still out (at least from the outside, Levy should have course have made up his mind already) and that making any strong decision on Baldini at this point is premature.

 

[Jordinho]

Agreed 100%. Having said that - a problem usually emerges when the manager ask for Scheinderlin and eventually receives Stambouli whom in return is never used and merely concludes few years later as a massive waste of wages. Rather save the money instead?

Rather than save 10 million in the bank and pay taxes, we invest in a player with the hopes of a later return in terms of first team player or a profit.

That is also valid - possibly the same way someone like Alli has been landed. How would you personally review Baldini out of 10 so far, out if interest?

I think it's really hard to rate him as we don't know the extent of his responsibilities. We have been able to close deals for incoming players a lot quicker since his arrival...

 

[The Ghost Of Tom Joad]

I said I think the jury is still out (at least from the outside, Levy should have course have made up his mind already) and that making any strong decision on Baldini at this point is premature.

I didn't disagree with some of the valid assumptions you've made to substantiate you argument. Apologies, should have clarified

 

[braineclipse]

To rate him out of 10 wouldn't it be a good idea to first define what that rating is based on and how it's evaluated?

 

[The Ghost Of Tom Joad]

Rather than save 10 million in the bank and pay taxes, we invest in a player with the hopes of a later return in terms of first team player or a profit.

Taxes would be far less than his wages. Even so - even if it means 0 first-team impact? I think this strategy has never yielded much success as far as we are concerned. I much rather have 1 Depay / Muniain than 3 Chadlis

 

[The Ghost Of Tom Joad]

To rate him out of 10 wouldn't it be a good idea to first define what that rating is based on and how it's evaluated?

I thought based on the previous posts - that has been well established? Is he beyond reprimand?

 

[braineclipse]

I thought based on the previous posts - that has been well established? Is he beyond reprimand?

Care to sum up what you base your rating on and how you evaluate it seeing as you've actually made up your mind on him?

He's obviously not beyond reprimand. This is not usually what people mean when they say "I think the jury is out", is it??? I don't quite know how I could have been much clearer...