Moxey's Pay off

[daly 501]

MONEY and MOXEY Pay Offs

[nutty nigel 7,534]

Parma''s question is interesting. For me Steve Stone was the man. Experience is the only thing Moxey had that Steve Stone didn''t. But even then Steve had some experience of doing the CE job here and even more fiance experience at our club.

[City 2nd 191]

Rustyboy wrote the following post at 2017-11-02 1:38 PM:

So how much did we pay to get Webber?

Did we have to pay anything. Didn’t he resign his position at Huddersfield some time before taking up NCFC post?

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="Parma Hams gone mouldy"]A more interesting question is why the current structure was not implemented at that time and Moxey appointed instead.

Parma[/quote]

[Y]

[daly 501]

Feedthewolf

Tell me which of the above we got, or are getting value for the outlay we have incurred

PS Not drunk and not a Daily Star reader

[Lessingham Canary 99]

@ ParmaA more interesting question is why the current structure was not implemented at that time and Moxey appointed instead.

Maybe there was a realisation after the arrival of Moxey that finding the right CEO was going to be very difficult, and someone that could drive the level of changes needed suddenly brought the realisation that Steve Stone could do a lot of what a CEO would do, but to really impact the footballing side a new structure was needed, One thing i''m glad they arrived at this point and appear to be embracing it.

[king canary 7,606]

Maybe Alex Neil had no interest in working in that sort of structure?

[It's Character Forming 1,160]

[quote user="daly"]MONEY and MOXEY Pay Offs[/quote]

 

Indeed.  So your point is basically that our club should only make successful signings.  Now, why hasn''t anyone else thought of that ?

[Woodman 92]

[quote user="king canary"]Maybe Alex Neil had no interest in working in that sort of structure?[/quote]

The way he left the club literally hours after delivering a pre-match press conference, suggested all was not well between him and the Board! Who knows if that was to do with a new structure, but I can''t see someone of his personality wanting to work with a ''Sporting Director''.

[king canary 7,606]

@icf

Ypu could make an argument that is a business leader makes consistently poor appointments then questions must be asked.

[It's Character Forming 1,160]

While I agree KC, I don''t see a record of consistently poor appointments here - a pretty average mix of good and bad.

 

Moxey - yes, clearly somethings gone wrong when someone has been appointed at such a senior level and has been let go after such a short period, but City are hardly alone in that happening and it''s not part of a consistently bad record.

 

Ditto for our player signings - for all the bad signings listed by daly above, you can easily point to more successful ones too.  which is true for any football club.

[SwindonCanary 455]

I doubt if he''s getting anything like that sort of money now he''s with Burton Albion !

[king canary 7,606]

The Moxey hiring just felt like a very typical move by our owners. Spend money on a headhunter to eventually appoint someone sacked and despised by fans of his previous club for failure that was already (I believe) somehow connected to Delia and MWJ.

[capricorn1 18]

king canary wrote the following post at 03/11/2017 10:37 AM:

The Moxey hiring just felt like a very typical move by our owners. Spend money on a headhunter to eventually appoint someone sacked and despised by fans of his previous club for failure that was already (I believe) somehow connected to Delia and MWJ.

Well he wasn''t sacked, new owners came in and he was replaced under their new structure. While he was certainly a polarising figure at Wolves it could be argued that he did a good job given what he had to work with, the measure of success or failure isn''t the fans opinion!

I''m not sure what the opinion of the Wolves fans has to do with h is future appointment anywhere. It''s not a CEO''s job to be popular with the fans, leave that to the players. McNally wasn''t universally liked here but if you take his entire era in to account, he did a bloody good job.

[Badger 2,405]

Parma Ham''s gone mouldy - "A more interesting question is why the current structure was not implemented at that time and Moxey appointed instead.

Parma"Good question - possible reasons?1. King

Canary''s point about AN probably not being keen may have held some sway -

British managers traditionally don''t like sporting directors of DOFs.2.

Combined with the above, they probably felt that our best chance of

getting back up was in the first year. They seemed to think that we''d

done it once under AN and could do it again - at the time, I hoped the

same. Given this decision, they probably chose to remain with the CEO

model to be less disruptive - restructures take time and can distract

from what they perceived was the best opportunity of a return to the PL.Only guessing - but it would seem quite logical to me.

[nutty nigel 7,534]

None of us know who votes what way in board meetings because once a decision is made it''s treated as unanimous. However to claim that Moxey was a typical Smith and Jones appointment flies in the face of all the previous appointments folk have claimed as typical Smith and Jones. In fact the only scenario it fits is the daft mantra that everything that doesn''t work out is down to them and anything that works has nothing to do with them.

Surely it''s far more likely the so called little old Norwich appointment of Steve Stone fits more with the popular conception of a typical Smith & Jones appointment?

What has been reported is that it was ''head hunters'' that drove the Moxey appointment and it was Delia in particular who was determined that we would have these changes to the club''s structure after Moxey. We are told that some in the boardroom were cautious and that Delia usually accepts the majority view. However the following quotes are attributed to Delia : -

"It''s my name they shout when things go wrong. They shout ''Delia Delia sort it out'' so I am going to have to".

[Parma Ham's gone mouldy 2,220]

Indeed Badger. Why?

Parma

[Yorkshire Canary 118]

The amount of money this club flushes down the bog is mind numbing

[Rustyboy 2]

[quote user="City 2nd"]Rustyboy wrote the following post at 2017-11-02 1:38 PM:

So how much did we pay to get Webber?

Did we have to pay anything. Didn’t he resign his position at Huddersfield some time before taking up NCFC post?[/quote]

Thanks, I didn''t know that, do we know why he left Huddersfield?

[PurpleCanary 5,561]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]None of us know who votes what way in board meetings because once a decision is made it''s treated as unanimous. However to claim that Moxey was a typical Smith and Jones appointment flies in the face of all the previous appointments folk have claimed as typical Smith and Jones. In fact the only scenario it fits is the daft mantra that everything that doesn''t work out is down to them and anything that works has nothing to do with them.

Surely it''s far more likely the so called little old Norwich appointment of Steve Stone fits more with the popular conception of a typical Smith & Jones appointment?

What has been reported is that it was ''head hunters'' that drove the Moxey appointment and it was Delia in particular who was determined that we would have these changes to the club''s structure after Moxey. We are told that some in the boardroom were cautious and that Delia usually accepts the majority view. However the following quotes are attributed to Delia : -

"It''s my name they shout when things go wrong. They shout ''Delia Delia sort it out'' so I am going to have to".[/quote]That was part of the Mick Dennis line, nutty, talking up Delia''s role as originator of and prime mover in the management restructuring. On closer examination Dennis acknowledged she probably was not the first to suggest the idea, since Balls had been told by people in the game several months earlier that having a sporting director was the way to go. I suspect Webber''s name may even have cropped up in those conversations. The strong likelihood is that it was Balls who came up with the plan and pushed it, but got Delia''s backing.You are right that Moxey was the antithesis  of a little old Norwich choice, not least since as far as I know he had no previous connection with the club or any of the directors. That didn''t stop some posters saying it was, for reasons beyond comprehension, tantamount to nepotism.

[It's Character Forming 1,160]

Yes I think it was similar to McNally in that sense - i.e. that was the departure from the previous approach (Doncaster being promoted from company secretary etc) ?  and most of us accept the McNally appointment was pretty successful really.  So I don''t see how one can sensibly point to the Moxey signing as typical.

 

I seem to remember AN saying in interviews ,when he had recently joined us, that it was important for him to feel in full control.  So he might not have said so specifically, but that would certainly point to him not being happy with a restructuring along the lines we have now.

[nutty nigel 7,534]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="nutty nigel"]None of us know who votes what way in board meetings because once a decision is made it''s treated as unanimous. However to claim that Moxey was a typical Smith and Jones appointment flies in the face of all the previous appointments folk have claimed as typical Smith and Jones. In fact the only scenario it fits is the daft mantra that everything that doesn''t work out is down to them and anything that works has nothing to do with them.

Surely it''s far more likely the so called little old Norwich appointment of Steve Stone fits more with the popular conception of a typical Smith & Jones appointment?

What has been reported is that it was ''head hunters'' that drove the Moxey appointment and it was Delia in particular who was determined that we would have these changes to the club''s structure after Moxey. We are told that some in the boardroom were cautious and that Delia usually accepts the majority view. However the following quotes are attributed to Delia : -

"It''s my name they shout when things go wrong. They shout ''Delia Delia sort it out'' so I am going to have to".[/quote]That was part of the Mick Dennis line, nutty, talking up Delia''s role as originator of and prime mover in the management restructuring. On closer examination Dennis acknowledged she probably was not the first to suggest the idea, since Balls had been told by people in the game several months earlier that having a sporting director was the way to go. I suspect Webber''s name may even have cropped up in those conversations. The strong likelihood is that it was Balls who came up with the plan and pushed it, but got Delia''s backing.You are right that Moxey was the antithesis  of a little old Norwich choice, not least since as far as I know he had no previous connection with the club or any of the directors. That didn''t stop some posters saying it was, for reasons beyond comprehension, tantamount to nepotism.[/quote]

Their have been two appointments in the last decade that I would say were the opposite of what folk like to call Delia''s little ol'' Norwich appointments. Moxey is one and Roeder the other. Both cases had a similar outcome. Who appointed them? As I said we will never know for sure but we do know that the board decided to go down the headhunter route with Moxey. Whether that was unanimous we will never know but once it''s policy it''s as good as unanimous. Roeder''s greatest supporters left the board soon after he went. That could be coincidence but there''s a bit too much smoke for me. However once it became policy the board decision might as well have been unanimous.

[nutty nigel 7,534]

[quote user="Its Character Forming"]

Yes I think it was similar to McNally in that sense - i.e. that was the departure from the previous approach (Doncaster being promoted from company secretary etc) ?  and most of us accept the McNally appointment was pretty successful really.  So I don''t see how one can sensibly point to the Moxey signing as typical.

 

I seem to remember AN saying in interviews ,when he had recently joined us, that it was important for him to feel in full control.  So he might not have said so specifically, but that would certainly point to him not being happy with a restructuring along the lines we have now.

[/quote]

McNally was the owners choice. Of that there can be no doubt. Moxey was a board decision so we''ll never know.

[Bill 1,788]

That was part of the Mick Dennis line, nutty,

talking up Delia''s role as originator of and prime mover in the

management restructuring. On closer examination Dennis acknowledged she

probably was not the first to suggest the idea, since Balls had been

told by people in the game several months earlier that having a sporting

director was the way to go. I suspect Webber''s name may even have

cropped up in those conversations. The strong likelihood is that it was

Balls who came up with the plan and pushed it, but got Delia''s backing.I would think that there has not so much been a change in direction but a narrower focus. The club had long been focusing on the cadamy and youth players. McNally had stated some while back that our position would most likely be one of a ''yo yo'' club.From one I have seen it is the tactics that have changed rather than the strategy.Webber and Farke have both stated that they want players who are TOTALLY committed. That was not what we had last season. Too many egos and a belief that they were better (bigger) than the clubThe response has been to firstly adjust to the true size of the club. We are not PL top third. Secondly players and the acadamy need to deliver. Which has meant those not deliverying equal to what their cost is have (and will be) moved on.  Excess PL money allowed the club to perhaps become complacent, if not extravagent (as with Chase). I suspect Balls involvement has come from being involved in bigger budgets (literaly) and knowing when drastic change at a personal level is needed.Nothing suspect, underhand or all the other suggestions that float about either.