Stuart Webber Has Been Reported Missing.

[TIL 1010 4,801]

1 hour ago, hogesar said:

 

Well, in the same argument he will say generating £35 million for buendia only leaves £25 million, and then he could argue he invested in young players who could yet realise their potential. So there's a chance there was no money pi$$ed up a wall, just not spent correctly for Premier League survival.

You must remind me who coined the expression ' pi$$ed £100million up the wall ' and take note that for your words shall you be condemmed ( from the bible ).

Anywway i would love Webber to say something, anything at all to justify wasting a very large amount this seasons transfer budget unless of course you think we have seen value for money.

[Monty13 2,252]

Even at this point I think one interview where he showed some humility on his performance this season and showed some commitment and passion for continuing this project and he’d have a lot of people still onside.

I’m just genuinely not sure if he’s willing to or actually feels either.

[komakino 275]

The biggest criticism of Webber is that he never buys players that will keep us up once we got there. Instead he buys (too many) Championship level players instead, which just adds fuel to the fire that the club has no interest in EPL and are happy to bob along at Championship level. 

Webber is like Magic Alex, the infamous hanger on/fraud friend of the Beatles. They thought he could do all sorts of things and got paid for it, but turned out he could not do anything, but was still kept as part of the furniture anyway. 

[Google Bot 3,329]

9 minutes ago, komakino said:

I think Adams would be better suited to Smith

I just don't see Adams equipped to draw out a ~5 year plan and pulling the strings at this club from a top down perspective where he's bringing in the talent and leaving it to a head coach to manage - that's part of the job title as it stands, it's a massive responsibility and arguably takes an ego to succeed and push a club like us to the top level.

If instated, Adams may prefer to play it safe and let S&S dictate signings they need, which would undermine his own job role at the club.

One thing I respected about Webber was how he'd put a stake in the ground, be bold with it and that everyone was pushing towards that same goal. I can't imagine Adams speaking so bold as to what his plans are and how he will take the club forward.  In fact I see himself, Smith & Shakespeare as people that prefer the old school structure.

[komakino 275]

11 minutes ago, Google Bot said:

I just don't see Adams equipped to draw out a ~5 year plan and pulling the strings at this club from a top down perspective where he's bringing in the talent and leaving it to a head coach to manage - that's part of the job title as it stands, it's a massive responsibility and arguably takes an ego to succeed and push a club like us to the top level.

If instated, Adams may prefer to play it safe and let S&S dictate signings they need, which would undermine his own job role at the club.

One thing I respected about Webber was how he'd put a stake in the ground, be bold with it and that everyone was pushing towards that same goal. I can't imagine Adams speaking so bold as to what his plans are and how he will take the club forward.  In fact I see himself, Smith & Shakespeare as people that prefer the old school structure.

I actually like the idea of Adams being less hands on than Webber. No manager should have players forced upon them that they do not want and Webber did that to Farke. 

Smith and Adams should work together to identify targets and prioritise those targets. Many do not come off, but at least Smith will have his players. Let Adams do all the donkey work to get those targets. 

Webber got too full of himself and thought he was far better than he actually was. He consequently bought the worst intake of players I can remember and is clearly in a position beyond his capability. 

 

Edited May 24, 2022 by komakino

[hogesar 9,760]

41 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

You must remind me who coined the expression ' pi$$ed £100million up the wall ' and take note that for your words shall you be condemmed ( from the bible ).

Anywway i would love Webber to say something, anything at all to justify wasting a very large amount this seasons transfer budget unless of course you think we have seen value for money.

No, I don't think we've seen value for money. But Webber, maybe purposefully, hedged his bets again here. Instead of a Naismith and Klose where we would never see a return due to age, he's spent it on young players who could yet end up generating a profit, as distant as that seems right now. I'm sure it'll form part of his defence.

[komakino 275]

14 minutes ago, hogesar said:

No, I don't think we've seen value for money. But Webber, maybe purposefully, hedged his bets again here. Instead of a Naismith and Klose where we would never see a return due to age, he's spent it on young players who could yet end up generating a profit, as distant as that seems right now. I'm sure it'll form part of his defence.

The players that were needed to be bought were players that would keep us up, not young, substandard players with a hypothetical increase in value in the future. You can see why we get the criticism nationally if we keep buying players that aren't good enough for the Top Tier. One or Two gambles, I can understand, but we needed direct replacements for Emi and Skipp and he failed miserably. 

Edited May 24, 2022 by komakino

[hogesar 9,760]

Just now, komakino said:

The players that were needed to be bought were players that would keep us up, not young, substandard players with a hypothetical increase in value in the future. He can see why we get the criticism nationally if we keep buying players that aren't good enough for the Top Tier. One or Two gambles, I can understand, but we needed direct replacements for Emi and Skipp and he failed miserably. 

I agree.

In his defence, with limited funds he may felt obliged to take the less-risky approach of younger players who 'might' have made the step up but would otherwise be effective at the level below. Then the argument switches to owners / funding etc.

[Google Bot 3,329]

11 minutes ago, komakino said:

I actually like the idea of Adams being less hands on than Webber. No manager should have players forced upon them that they do not want and Webber did that to Farke. 

Yes, I prefer that approach too.   But the model we have in place differs in that the sporting director has absolute say on players and direction and the head coach manages training and matchday line-ups.

If we have that structure in place, but are not utilising it, then we may as well just go back to having Managers & Assistants at the club who work with the chairman/chief exec.

This is why I think Adams is a damned appointment. I'd much prefer it if he went back into the youth development or scouting, and Smith became manager.  We'd be putting round pegs in round holes then! 🙂

[king canary 7,680]

16 minutes ago, hogesar said:

I agree.

In his defence, with limited funds he may felt obliged to take the less-risky approach of younger players who 'might' have made the step up but would otherwise be effective at the level below. Then the argument switches to owners / funding etc.

He clearly always needs to be thinking resale value with the majority of players he signs.

Saying that it has felt in recent years he's employed a 'throw enough **** and see what sticks' approach. I'd like to see a summer where we just added 3 or 4 players to the first team squad rather than the 8 or 9 that seems to happen each year as I think it is leading to us having a somewhat bloated squad of players.

[norfolkngood 1,091]

12 hours ago, Monty13 said:

Did they only look at people to recruit just before signing them? I’d have hoped the majority of work on a shortlist would have been done before Scott left in August.

Norwich had all their signings and targets all looked at and scouted way before the start of window 

[Monty13 2,252]

1 hour ago, norfolkngood said:

Norwich had all their signings and targets all looked at and scouted way before the start of window 

That’s what I would of thought too, so Scott’s departure shouldn’t have caused massive disruption as suggested. It was over to Webber at that point.

[norfolkngood 1,091]

16 minutes ago, Monty13 said:

That’s what I would of thought too, so Scott’s departure shouldn’t have caused massive disruption as suggested. It was over to Webber at that point.

exactly , now i do not know if we got our targets or we went down the list but everything was sorted out and some agreed well in advance 

 

[Parma Ham's gone mouldy 2,243]

2 hours ago, hogesar said:

No, I don't think we've seen value for money. But Webber, maybe purposefully, hedged his bets again here. Instead of a Naismith and Klose where we would never see a return due to age, he's spent it on young players who could yet end up generating a profit, as distant as that seems right now. I'm sure it'll form part of his defence.

Totally right Hoggy, though it’s not quite as it was presented, not quite ‘before he had no gun, now he has bazookas and tanks’….

Webber has a difficult job at the top level with our very limited finances. It is perfectly reasonable to intimate ‘this is part of our longer term growth strategy, the Buendia’s of tomorrow, the Dortmund-esque young player pathway, our model et al….

But we don’t have to guess here, we can see what happened. The intention has now revealed itself.

The big money on Rashica-Sargent-Tzolis was only therefore one bazooka (Rashica), one back-up half bazooka (Sargent) and tomorrow investment purchase Tzolis (patience). That’s fine.

Now back to those bazookas that Farke had…

He had lost Buendia-Skipp, obviously risking negating Pukki and weakening us pre-season.

Rashica swap for Buendia? Maybe at a push you could believe it. Structurally we are still much weaker than previous year. 

So then what? We’ll add 4 x loan players. We can’t afford to buy, so we’ll do it that way. Bazookas? Kabak looked first back-up from the off (so not a Bazooka), Williams is solid (though we just paid £8m for Dimi so this not super-key. Not really a Bazooka, Buendia-Skipp not yet qualitatively amortised). Normann a good player, bit of an injury record, can shoot, we fancy him. Not super defensive, though energetic. Getting there, still behind last year’s team for quality though…)

The answer? The bazooka? It must have been Gilmour. We must have believed all the hype. We must have been sure that he could affect games  strongly at this level. 

As Smith said ‘the players we have are possession-oriented (in a league where we have to defend every week)’

So there you have it. We believed in Gilmour to the extent that we thought we’d always have the ball, pop it around, create a nice pocket of space  between defence and midfield, link and see winger-types driving into three-quarter spaces from wide, then supporting Pukki. 
 

We have seen none of that. It was flawed belief. There were no bazookas. 

Now here is the question Hoggy: go back and re-read all of the above with a clear head. On reflection was it a reasonable thought process? Was the belief well-founded?

Now that is somebody’s job. That is somebody’s responsibility. 

Parma 

Edited May 24, 2022 by Parma Ham's gone mouldy

[slaphead 17]

Saw a pair of clampons at the bottom of st james hill on mousehold.

[Dean Coneys boots 1,406]

7 hours ago, norfolkngood said:

Norwich had all their signings and targets all looked at and scouted way before the start of window 

We didn’t land our targets- that’s a big part of the problem. We ended up over paying in the bargain bins 

[cambridgeshire canary 6,823]

6 minutes ago, Dean Coneys boots said:

We didn’t land our targets- that’s a big part of the problem. We ended up over paying in the bargain bins 

Ajer being a good example. Hope he enjoys being midtable.

[komakino 275]

9 minutes ago, Dean Coneys boots said:

We didn’t land our targets- that’s a big part of the problem. We ended up over paying in the bargain bins 

We certainly did not land our targets. But was it all about wages? 

Players have seen the lack of ambition here, so it is going to be even harder to recruit the right players - even if we can pay the wages. 

Edited May 24, 2022 by komakino

[norfolkngood 1,091]

1 hour ago, Dean Coneys boots said:

We didn’t land our targets- that’s a big part of the problem. We ended up over paying in the bargain bins 

you are right i think maybe a lot of our No1 targets went elsewhere

i think some of our signings  must have been No10 on the list by the look of it ! 

[City 2nd 191]

On 23/05/2022 at 18:51, Mike w said:

Where are you ???

Mountain climbing!

[FenwayFrank 2,469]

4 hours ago, slaphead said:

Saw a pair of clampons at the bottom of st james hill on mousehold.

I think you mean strap ons 

[Norfolk Dan 308]

On 23/05/2022 at 17:53, TIL 1010 said:

Late to the party on this one... But... 

That looks like a 70% Stuart Webber... 

10% is training for Everest... Where is the other 20% ? 

[Mengo 825]

Nobody found him yet ? Has anybody looked inside the Soccerbot.  You never know. 🙃

 

[Yellow and Green 335]

I'm going out on a limb to defend him.

1) He's been pretty consistent with his interviews. Once after the summer transfer window, once after the January transfer window* and once at the end of the season. I honestly don't get why we expect him to speak before the end of the season. 

*I guess he didn't speak this Jan was because a) we didn't sign anyone and b) he spoke when we hired Smith

2) The last time he was directly involved in first team business (apart from sacking Farke/hiring Smith) was 10 months ago, when the summer transfer window closed. At that time, the fanbase was in a positive mood, crowing about the new players. As we spent all our money in the summer, he was basically powerless to change anything. He's essentially had to sit there, watch it all fall apart and take abuse all season.

Speaking at the end of the season is the right thing to do. He can't say 'we got the recruitment wrong', whilst the players still have a game to play. 

Whilst the recruitment/performances have been bad, the PR has been woeful, which has made everything so much worse. It literally seems like the club is falling apart. How much of this is Webber's fault (Times intrview aside) is debatable but they need to sort it out next season.

[yellow_belly 226]

45 minutes ago, Yellow and Green said:

I'm going out on a limb to defend him.

1) He's been pretty consistent with his interviews. Once after the summer transfer window, once after the January transfer window* and once at the end of the season. I honestly don't get why we expect him to speak before the end of the season. 

*I guess he didn't speak this Jan was because a) we didn't sign anyone and b) he spoke when we hired Smith

2) The last time he was directly involved in first team business (apart from sacking Farke/hiring Smith) was 10 months ago, when the summer transfer window closed. At that time, the fanbase was in a positive mood, crowing about the new players. As we spent all our money in the summer, he was basically powerless to change anything. He's essentially had to sit there, watch it all fall apart and take abuse all season.

Speaking at the end of the season is the right thing to do. He can't say 'we got the recruitment wrong', whilst the players still have a game to play. 

Whilst the recruitment/performances have been bad, the PR has been woeful, which has made everything so much worse. It literally seems like the club is falling apart. How much of this is Webber's fault (Times intrview aside) is debatable but they need to sort it out next season.

Thanks Stu.

 

The season is now over and with every day that Stu is silent… his credibility diminishes even more.

Time to speak and receive your public whipping .

[Danke bitte 967]

24 minutes ago, yellow_belly said:

Thanks Stu.

 

The season is now over and with every day that Stu is silent… his credibility diminishes even more.

Time to speak and receive your public whipping .

But if he’s not speaking to Archant then who will he address?? He’s hardly going to offer MFW an exclusive interview.

[yellow_belly 226]

10 minutes ago, Danke bitte said:

But if he’s not speaking to Archant then who will he address?? He’s hardly going to offer MFW an exclusive interview.

He will speak via canaries tv, being interviewed by an employee.

[yellow_belly 226]

11 minutes ago, Danke bitte said:

But if he’s not speaking to Archant then who will he address?? He’s hardly going to offer MFW an exclusive interview.

The man child should grow up.

[Mello Yello 2,303]

Look, if Stu was at any other Prem club I'm pretty sure their Owners and Support would let him pursue his outside interests and would also give him their blessing.....Even when the club's struggling or in free-fall, people should be entitled to a sabbatical....  

[Channon’s Windmill 335]

Just waiting for a Times article to appear any day now from our Stu. Local press null and void and the clubs official website appears to not function😉