The ousting of Daniel (COYS)

[vegassd]

Personally, I’d like us to keep a good bit of pressure on still - but I think that’s unlikely amid the feel good factor. That’s totally understandable but I don’t want it to bite us on the bum again.

I would hope that there is pressure on the board at all times. The infrastructure is in place, and the cost of being a fan is sky high, so there should always be pressure on the board to deliver.

How that pressure is expressed obviously differs between fans, which is to be expected. And the definition of "deliver" is going to be different as well. But I would hope that even the most pro-Levy supporters would want the club to be running to a strategy, trying to be sustainable, and communicating with fans.

I'm not too fussed about who the executive personnel are myself. We are going to be owned by a shady billionaire, and our chairman will be a soulless corporate character or a mad playboy wannabe one way or another. So for me, I'm more concerned about the strategy part rather than who is sitting at the top table.

 

[Cream]

I personally think Levy is inept. He's now an old guy making the same mistakes we've seen for a quarter of a century. He thinks he's a master strategist but in reality he's always been a reactive person.

There is an argument that the fool is banking on the ffp rules being applied more stringently in 2 years whereupon he can cash in on the stadium naming rights and catch a leg up over rivals with greater spending power then. But again that's more hope than reality as we know clubs will find a way to circumnavigate these rules.

He should have sold Kane early doors. Taken the stadium money and backed Ange properly. This would still have been a year late. But it was a button he should have pressed. He just isn't a very competent steward of our club. And our money.

He has made a fortune for himself and the corrupt uncle Joe. So there is that I guess.

 

[brasil_spur]

I personally think Levy is inept. He's now an old guy making the same mistakes we've seen for a quarter of a century. He thinks he's a master strategist but in reality he's always been a reactive person.

There is an argument that the fool is banking on the ffp rules being applied more stringently in 2 years whereupon he can cash in on the stadium naming rights and catch a leg up over rivals with greater spending power then. But again that's more hope than reality as we know clubs will find a way to circumnavigate these rules.

He should have sold Kane early doors. Taken the stadium money and backed Ange properly. This would still have been a year late. But it was a button he should have pressed. He just isn't a very competent steward of our club. And our money.

He has made a fortune for himself and the corrupt uncle Joe. So there is that I guess.

This.

He's done a lot of very good things for this club, but he doesn't have any clue how to take us to the next level. As far as I can tell his opinion is to do more of the same and try to do it a bit better. There's hope that Munn comes in and sets him straight. And we've seen with changes on the recruitment side we've gone from signing 4 players like Ndombele, Lo Celso, Reguilon and Bergwijn for a combined €150m to signing 6 players like Sarr, Bissouma, Udogie, Solomon, Kulusevski and Maddison for a combined €150m.

If we can continue this into January (we've signed two players in January in each of the last two Jan windows) and then into next summer (when we'll hopefully need a bigger squad of quality players for Europe) then I think on the playing side we're heading in the right direction.

In terms of the Ange appointment - he got that very right. Yes Conte, Nuno and to a lesser extent Mourinho were shit decisions, but credit where credit is due on Ange, who at the time wasn't a leading candidate amongst the fans.

All the above however will only keep us in the top 4-5 (CL) spots and maybe get us some silverware, at last.

This summer was always going to be tough give how much there was to do with Kane leaving, but he dropped the ball by not getting in another CB.

Let's see if he sorts this out in January with the addition of a new CB and ideally another midfielder as a replacement for PEH, who will go in Jan or next summer. That's really the objective that has to be hit in Jan.

Then the summer will be the next big test for him, as he will need to spend big on a striker. The hope is that Son has a decent season as ST and so we look less desperate going into the summer and can then put all our efforts into landing the right person early on and without having our pants pulled down.

For for me I'd still like Levy to go, but I'd settle for Munn actually coming in and taking on all the footballing side, assuming Ange gets backed as needed in Jan and then the summer.

 

[DJS]

Levy lacks the long term vision on playing side.

If we are doing well he tends to just settle for keeping side as is and adding couple of cheap bargains.

Its only when we get up shit street due to negligence of squad that we then tend to pull something out of the bag and then usually another area in squad is still left weak.

Time will tell as we did make some good signings this summer, but he still fucked up the Kane years and can never be forgiven for that and we shall see next summer if he continues to back Ange or starts pissing him off like previous managers, as tbh Ange seems ambitious and probably won’t tolerate it.

 

[LeSoupeKitchen]

It was the very basis of the Nazi campaign against jewish people in Nazi Germany.

Again, its been pointed out by why it's offensive BY JEWISH PEOPLE On numerous occasions.

That's not your right to define why it isn't.

You're now trying to double down and gaslight it.

It's been quite clearly stated why I find it offensive, on multiple occasions.

If you consciously use the term, then I'm sorry you are being anti semitic.

We’re definitely in agree to disagree territory. Sorry to derail the thread and revisit this but I think it’s important to talk about these things so wanted to reply. For the record I am Jewish and am fully aware of the history of using “parasite” as an insult.

I’m uncomfortable with both of these scenarios:

• Specifically choosing to call Levy a “parasite” due to him being Jewish.
• Specifically choosing to NOT call Levy a “parasite” due to him being Jewish.

The statements seem contradictory but the point I’m trying to make is that I’m uncomfortable with the idea that him being Jewish should influence anything someone posts.

I could understand it if there was a push to stop the term “parasite” being used full stop. But it is a common term used to describe the actions of someone that benefits at the expense of others. Within SC it has been used to describe Tanguy, Bale (from the perspective of Madrid fans), Jorge Mendes, Borris Johnson, and even Sol Campbell (and many more). This might seem a bit crazy, but it actually bothers me more how Sol was called a “parasite” as the term doesn’t apply and it was used with all the hate and venom that is likely rooted in antisemitism.

To labour the point, I found it uncomfortable when Martin Tyler compared Son’s challenge last season to martial arts as it's likely the comment was motivated by Son being Asian. However, if commentators commonly referred to the foul that Son did (pull a player back) as “martial arts” then I would be uncomfortable with the idea of consciously not saying it for players of Asian descent.

All that said, you are clearly uncomfortable with the term being used in the thread and I truly believe that should be respected (and I’m sure will be by people who have seen your posts).

 

[jimbo]

If not being able to sell Sanchez was the reason we couldn't sign another central defender this summer, and I think it was a reason why we couldn't last January as well, then that impediment has been removed. It would signal a welcome change in how the 'football operations' are being run if we now look to agree the transfer of Kelly, or whoever our chosen target is, outside of the window ready for them to join us on Jan 1st - as Liverpool did with van Dijk.

If we wait until January to start our transfer business then it will be our customary late-window dealings and I think that would be a bad sign, one that suggests very little is going to be different at the club no matter who we appoint to which role.

 

[DJS]

If not being able to sell Sanchez was the reason we couldn't sign another central defender this summer, and I think it was a reason why we couldn't last January as well, then that impediment has been removed. It would signal a welcome change in how the 'football operations' are being run if we now look to agree the transfer of Kelly, or whoever our chosen target is, outside of the window ready for them to join us on Jan 1st - as Liverpool did with van Dijk.

If we wait until January to start our transfer business then it will be our customary late-window dealings and I think that would be a bad sign, one that suggests very little is going to be different at the club no matter who we appoint to which role.

And Dier contract will expire next summer so finally looks like we‘re clearing out some space to refresh our centre backs properly!

Plus Tanganga out on loan so maybe he’ll secure a permanent deal? (Losing track lol).

It is leaving us a little short, but really like seeing Phillips on bench and that we’re actually trying different options rather than same tired ones.

 

[fishhhandaricecake]

Not defending Levy at all as we all know where his faults lie but this last decade net spend table is interesting reading.

 

[vegassd]

Not defending Levy at all as we all know where his faults lie but this last decade net spend table is interesting reading.

Realistically it is a collection of numbers that people can use to make almost any argument they want. I think a data set that shows Everton, Palace and Bournemouth above Bayern Munich and Real Madrid has to lead to questions about how the data is useful at all.

That's not a dig at you btw - just my general thoughts on net spend!!! Too much context is missed in my opinion.

Perhaps one "interesting" thing would be that I think our net spend for the last 5 years is about £520m. So the other 5 years from that table is basically zero for us! Fits with Poch's time of managing on a budget, plus the zero spend windows.

 

[newbie]

Not defending Levy at all as we all know where his faults lie but this last decade net spend table is interesting reading.

View attachment 131755

Does that make it worse?

Still gaps in the squad, too many shocking signings, no forward thinking, rubbish Due diligence.

The Due diligence list is pretty shocking

 

[Dillspur]

In terms of the Ange appointment - he got that very right. Yes Conte, Nuno and to a lesser extent Mourinho were shit decisions, but credit where credit is due on Ange, who at the time wasn't a leading candidate amongst the fans.

Not sure I can give him credit for appointing Ange. It seemed that he initially wanted Tuchel, then once Bayern moved for him Nagelsmann and then Slot. Ange felt like plan D, and at the moment it feels like he lucked out. But, I will give him credit for not going for Poch

 

[Led's Zeppelin]

Not sure I can give him credit for appointing Ange. It seemed that he initially wanted Tuchel, then once Bayern moved for him Nagelsmann and then Slot. Ange felt like plan D, and at the moment it feels like he lucked out. But, I will give him credit for not going for Poch

It seems to me that there was a short-list of 4. Do we really know what order they came in?

More to the point, and honesty without hindsight would be helpful here, how many of us would have had Ange on our short-list?

 

[azza]

This logic really confuses me. It is his job to get the appointment right, so he deserves a well done on doing his job. He has got it wrong the last 3 times. If i fucked up the key part of my job 3 times I would probably get sacked. When I do my job properly I might get a thank you, well done from the Board but mainly I would get my salary and I accept that.
Seems many people hold him to a different standard.

 

[fishhhandaricecake]

Not sure I can give him credit for appointing Ange. It seemed that he initially wanted Tuchel, then once Bayern moved for him Nagelsmann and then Slot. Ange felt like plan D, and at the moment it feels like he lucked out. But, I will give him credit for not going for Poch

I think he can be given credit for the Ange hire just as he can be criticised for Conte, Nuno, Jose, poor signings and poor/lack of any proper plan or strategy until very recently.

 

[Dillspur]

It seems to me that there was a short-list of 4. Do we really know what order they came in?

More to the point, and honesty without hindsight would be helpful here, how many of us would have had Ange on our short-list?

TBF this time last year, you could argue that he got the Conte appointment right. He may well have been on the list, but we got to him because he was the cheap option.

 

[Led's Zeppelin]

TBF this time last year, you could argue that he got the Conte appointment right. He may well have been on the list, but we got to him because he was the cheap option.

Did we? Okay.


He doesn’t usually take the cheap option with managerial appointments, paying off the vast contracts of the old ones and hiring new ones on equally huge fortunes, so maybe he did the wise thing this time.

 

[Dillspur]

Did we? Okay.


He doesn’t usually take the cheap option with managerial appointments, paying off the vast contracts of the old ones and hiring new ones on equally huge fortunes, so maybe he did the wise thing this time.

I'm not disagreeing with you regarding paying for managers, I'm just saying in this case Ange was the cheapest option. It was reported that he didn't like Nagelsmann's requirements, granted we don't really know what they were but we know Bayern were after a decent fee, and so were Feyenoord. So yeah, Ange WAS the cheap option.

 

[Led's Zeppelin]

I'm not disagreeing with you regarding paying for managers, I'm just saying in this case Ange was the cheapest option. It was reported that he didn't like Nagelsmann's requirements, granted we don't really know what they were but we know Bayern were after a decent fee, and so were Feyenoord. So yeah, Ange WAS the cheap option.

Perhaps he was less expensive that the others. But that doesn’t mean that’s the reason he was selected, does it?

 

[alfie103]

Perhaps he was less expensive that the others. But that doesn’t mean that’s the reason he was selected, does it?

It might not have been but it certainly seemed he was 3rd or 4th choice after Tuchel(?), Nagelsmann and Slot. I still think we need to give it a bit more time before we can call Ange a success, he has started well but it is still early.

 

[Led's Zeppelin]

It might not have been but it certainly seemed he was 3rd or 4th choice after Tuchel(?), Nagelsmann and Slot. I still think we need to give it a bit more time before we can call Ange a success, he has started well but it is still early.

This is how it’s going to work isnt it?

If he fails, Levy gets the blame .

If he succeeds, well, he was only 4th choice, so no credit there.

There’s enough to question levy on, very seriously indeed. But this particular line that some are taking seems like desperation to me.