Champagneblade
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2010
- Messages
- 10,728
- Reaction score
- 27,279
Slav was an expensive mistake simply because to be successful you commit to giving him all he wants up front and he will fashion a decent, effective team for you. If you are not all in on him then you just don't go there. Clearly making the best of what he has isn't his strong point. He's happy to jump towards the end result but isn't strong at 'making do' on the way there. Hence 4 at the back, one lone striker and space for wide midfielders. All part of his plan, but for which we are ill equipped in terms of personnel without a huge and expensive turnover of players, taking hits to sizeable investments along the way.
Rather than be starry eyed or pressured to go for a name, we should have stuck with the Plan which was developing under Chris. It could continue without Chris as well and we could have been a lot further through this if we'd just appointed Hecky in January in hindsight.
The Plan
If you're not going to outspend teams then you have to have a differentiator. The formation and way of playing we have exploited over the past few years is the closest we have to it. Nobody else plays or has consistently mastered overlapping centre backs. Some might dabble but Basham and O'Connell are the experts. You can add back in there the Duffy role too. To get the kids, the U23s all on this page too was something that I really liked that Chris did. It makes the path to the first team a smoother one. So back to playing 3-4-1-2 at all levels from today is what I'd expect.
You then have a clear pathway with players on a development track to replace more senior players and you rely far less on transfers and the fees which come with them. You certainly don't then need to entertain wholesale changes every time a coach steps aside because the way of playing remains the same and therefore the required changes are fewer.
The way of playing becomes your identity, akin to what they do at say Ajax. The advantage here is that by investing in staff you also look to have a conveyor belt of like minded coaches who will retain this identity. Not so different to the boot room of Bill Shankly, Joe Fagan etc or to a lower level how Brentford nurtured Thomas Franck.
If you want United World to truly prosper, you roll out the same there. You create a uniqueness to your playing style where you are the expert and main exponent and this flows through all the clubs.
You also have to get the buy in of players that they may be required to commit to time in France or Belgium to aid in their development and to aid the other clubs.
The Problem with the Plan
This requires a very single minded approach from the Board and not to deviate if results go against you in the short term. As a fan it asks for a lot of patience. Something fans are not strong in.
It also requires the right personnel in place. It explains why Hecky has such a long contract. He's a very well educated guy is Heckingbottom and he can also probably see his role changing over time. He would effectively have oversight of Football affairs and whilst initially it is him taking the first team his role may evolve to more of a Director of Football Affairs over time.
As you are focussed more on the internal development from the 3 academies and movement between the three (which seems to work for Watford and Udinese) this means external recruitment, which will be lesser, needs to be on the money. So Mitch is still here. Is he up to that role? Just how much say did he have in McBurnie being seen as a physical target man for 17-20m? What made him think Callum Robinson was good to play in a front two rather than a three? What input did he have on Burke, with his lack of composure being a viable centre forward option? How much had he seen Brewster to suggest 23m would be a fee that would repay itself? Are the Board able to get and retain the right staff, especially in recruitment?
Overall if this is the plan, then I can certainly buy into the logic.
My concern is the discipline, perseverance and adherence to the principles required to make it work in a network of three principal clubs requires strong and focused leadership and I'm not convinced there is enough expertise to roll this out.
Rather than be starry eyed or pressured to go for a name, we should have stuck with the Plan which was developing under Chris. It could continue without Chris as well and we could have been a lot further through this if we'd just appointed Hecky in January in hindsight.
The Plan
If you're not going to outspend teams then you have to have a differentiator. The formation and way of playing we have exploited over the past few years is the closest we have to it. Nobody else plays or has consistently mastered overlapping centre backs. Some might dabble but Basham and O'Connell are the experts. You can add back in there the Duffy role too. To get the kids, the U23s all on this page too was something that I really liked that Chris did. It makes the path to the first team a smoother one. So back to playing 3-4-1-2 at all levels from today is what I'd expect.
You then have a clear pathway with players on a development track to replace more senior players and you rely far less on transfers and the fees which come with them. You certainly don't then need to entertain wholesale changes every time a coach steps aside because the way of playing remains the same and therefore the required changes are fewer.
The way of playing becomes your identity, akin to what they do at say Ajax. The advantage here is that by investing in staff you also look to have a conveyor belt of like minded coaches who will retain this identity. Not so different to the boot room of Bill Shankly, Joe Fagan etc or to a lower level how Brentford nurtured Thomas Franck.
If you want United World to truly prosper, you roll out the same there. You create a uniqueness to your playing style where you are the expert and main exponent and this flows through all the clubs.
You also have to get the buy in of players that they may be required to commit to time in France or Belgium to aid in their development and to aid the other clubs.
The Problem with the Plan
This requires a very single minded approach from the Board and not to deviate if results go against you in the short term. As a fan it asks for a lot of patience. Something fans are not strong in.
It also requires the right personnel in place. It explains why Hecky has such a long contract. He's a very well educated guy is Heckingbottom and he can also probably see his role changing over time. He would effectively have oversight of Football affairs and whilst initially it is him taking the first team his role may evolve to more of a Director of Football Affairs over time.
As you are focussed more on the internal development from the 3 academies and movement between the three (which seems to work for Watford and Udinese) this means external recruitment, which will be lesser, needs to be on the money. So Mitch is still here. Is he up to that role? Just how much say did he have in McBurnie being seen as a physical target man for 17-20m? What made him think Callum Robinson was good to play in a front two rather than a three? What input did he have on Burke, with his lack of composure being a viable centre forward option? How much had he seen Brewster to suggest 23m would be a fee that would repay itself? Are the Board able to get and retain the right staff, especially in recruitment?
Overall if this is the plan, then I can certainly buy into the logic.
My concern is the discipline, perseverance and adherence to the principles required to make it work in a network of three principal clubs requires strong and focused leadership and I'm not convinced there is enough expertise to roll this out.
Last edited: