Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Canary On The Wire

So help me make some sense of this?

Recommended Posts

So allegedly we go out in pursuit of a manager and approach those with apparently radically different ideals. If Malky and Zola, for example, were both actual candidates, one has a very regimented philosophy, the other very fluid.

This doesn''t fit with McNally saying the manager would be signed up to adhere to a club philosophy if we were already chasing managers with radically different philosophies.

It also appears to make no sense that we have Adams in place who we know likes fast counter-attacking football where the squad suits it, and have appointed Joe Royle to advise on a club philosophy that can''t have been put in place yet as we don''t yet have a technical director to oversee it.

By the time our setup is complete we''ll have Adams, Robson, Royle, Holt, McNally AND the Technical Director all micromanaging the football side.

If it works, it could be excellent. But it just seems like there''s too many cooks...and that''s not counting Delia!

Someone explain how the pieces fit to form a cohesive team? If Robson, Holt and Adams coach, if Royle is just an advisor to Adams why hire him?

It seems like confused thinking with what the Board saying it wants to do colliding with what it appears to be doing.

I want to be wrong and until proven otherwise as a supporter I give my full backing to the appointments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, there is absolutely no need for a Technical Director as no doubt Joe Royle will be able to fulfill those duties as a ''football consultant'', and I believe that that is the plan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The club philosophy McNally was referring too is almost certainly not to the specifics of the managers tactics.

Sure it will include the play style, he probably wants (or thinks) the Norwich way to be exciting. And then the focus will be on the type of players, work ethic etc.

And I think the more people involved the better, because look at all the big teams. They have huge catalogues of staff and it does them no harm, you''d assume the reason most smaller teams only have a manager and a couple of coaches is because of cost and available options. But if we''ve got the money to have those three guys, Joe Royle and then maybe another as Technical Director (is that role definitely still being filled? I kind of assumed Joe Royle was here instead of that.)

Anyway as long as they all know there roles and get along it can surely only be a positive thing. Failing if they aren''t up to the job or can''t work together, but pretty sure they all can so i''m feeling very positive about the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There''ll still be a technical director. Not the same thing as football consultant.

That''s exactly my point though. There seems to be confused thinking about the roles, and we don''t know if they can work together. If the ''Norwich Way'' (urgh) includes the play style then the manager''s tactics need to adhere to the playing style being taught throughout the club or else the end product suffers. So either the club knew who the TD would be when they appointed Adams or else it seems like a shot in the dark.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For those saying Royle is the TD

(taken from the City Confirm Coaching Team article on the official site)

"The Club plan to announce the new technical director shortly and are currently interviewing a number of candidates for the position of director of recruitment."

Read more at http://www.canaries.co.uk/news/article/city-confirm-coaching-team-1593403.aspx#eI06Zzk3qbSdby9J.99

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Canary On The Wire"]So allegedly we go out in pursuit of a manager and approach those with apparently radically different ideals. If Malky and Zola, for example, were both actual candidates, one has a very regimented philosophy, the other very fluid.

This doesn''t fit with McNally saying the manager would be signed up to adhere to a club philosophy if we were already chasing managers with radically different philosophies.

It also appears to make no sense that we have Adams in place who we know likes fast counter-attacking football where the squad suits it, and have appointed Joe Royle to advise on a club philosophy that can''t have been put in place yet as we don''t yet have a technical director to oversee it.

By the time our setup is complete we''ll have Adams, Robson, Royle, Holt, McNally AND the Technical Director all micromanaging the football side.

If it works, it could be excellent. But it just seems like there''s too many cooks...and that''s not counting Delia!

Someone explain how the pieces fit to form a cohesive team? If Robson, Holt and Adams coach, if Royle is just an advisor to Adams why hire him?

It seems like confused thinking with what the Board saying it wants to do colliding with what it appears to be doing.

I want to be wrong and until proven otherwise as a supporter I give my full backing to the appointments.[/quote]It may become clearer, but it looks as if two of your questions can be answered.Firstly, with Royle already talking to Adams AND McNally about transfers then it does seem, as I suspected, that Royle is going to be a director of football, even if the club don''t call him that. Those two and the chief scout (to be appointed) will be the ones overseeing the club philosophy.So the the technical director will be more of a Colney dogsbody, dealing with diet and fitness and all that sports science stuff.Secondly, which follows on, Royle will not just be an adviser to Adams. He will - already is, through McNally - deal with the directors.It is a structure that makes sense to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Your post falls down at the first hurdle as it appears to rely on assuming that Malky and Zola were candidates, which has never been confirmed by either those individuals or the club.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Purple:

If what you say is true it makes more sense.

Though if Royle is to be a DoF (calling him football consultant deflects attention away from some of the bad PR associated with the term) and if Parma Ham is right about the wheel coming full circle.... This suggests someone previously employed by the club. Did we have someone in that role before (dealing with the sports science side) who could be set to return??

To the poster posting about Malky and Zola, my post doesn''t ''fall down'' as I''m not arguing they were approached. If they weren''t, then all the better, as the Board''s thinking looks less confused. I want Adams to have been the only candidate which may in fact have been the case.

If it was it places a lot of faith in him though, as his tactics and coaching need to be able to carry through the club philosophy- which would explain Royle''s presence if they are working to an agreed blueprint.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We can argue till the cows come home and in truth there is no way of knowing if Adams is the right choice, if the set up is correct or if any other manager would have done a better job!

 

The arguement for the cheap option also has little sway, how do we know if we had got Lennon in with his staff and demands it would be any better than we will get with Adams......cheap has nothing to do with it!

 

What we have lacked for two seasons is Norwich City, Indentity, Passion, Organisation and Accountablity.

 

We have a young dynamic manager who will accept nothing less than the players to want to be here, to give blood for his cause and to give there all for our club. We will see a mixture of youth and experience and those who say we can''t attract big signings, well do you really wan''t more Elmander, RVW''s to come here and take their huge wage for not much product?

 

I''m fully behind this appointment now and see in Royal & Holt a move back to a differnt idiology, a move back to Norwich City and if it doesn''t work well there are never any guarantees in life, but at least we gave it a go!

 

Come on, let''s wait to see what comes of this before we all become negative nellies!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Canary On The Wire"]Purple:

If what you say is true it makes more sense.

Though if Royle is to be a DoF (calling him football consultant deflects attention away from some of the bad PR associated with the term) and if Parma Ham is right about the wheel coming full circle.... This suggests someone previously employed by the club. Did we have someone in that role before (dealing with the sports science side) who could be set to return??

To the poster posting about Malky and Zola, my post doesn''t ''fall down'' as I''m not arguing they were approached. If they weren''t, then all the better, as the Board''s thinking looks less confused. I want Adams to have been the only candidate which may in fact have been the case.

If it was it places a lot of faith in him though, as his tactics and coaching need to be able to carry through the club philosophy- which would explain Royle''s presence if they are working to an agreed blueprint.[/quote]We shall see if it pans out the way I have suggested, but it does make sense, both in terms of utilising Royle''s vast store of knowledge and experience and, as I said, in what has already been going on behind the scenes before the official appointment.As to Parma''s "full circle" comment, which I saw, I am not sure if he there is referring to the TD or more to Royle as this de facto director of football. If the latter, then his prediction has come true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The system that we are setting up is similar to the one that Chelsea operate.

I believe we will now have three first team coaches, a technical director (Joe Royle, semantics aside), and a head coach (Neil Adams), and no formal Assistant Manager.

Chelsea have four first team coaches, a technical director, and a head coach. They don''t have anybody with the job title ''Assistant Manager'', and we now don''t either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Royle is not the TD, he will add his long mangerial experience to guide Adams and HoltThat role will be fulfilled by someone who will be tasked to sort out many of the off field matters (ishooooooooooooooooos) ie keeping the players up to the standard required injury, nutrition, welfare etcAdams and Holt''s roles will be that developing and preparing the players for each game, as well as managing the games ie tactics, subs etcCan''t see why this is causing such panic and distress amongst so many on here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you''re right, then it works. If the transfer plans work, and the right players fit the template we should have a successful system and a good season. I think this ''football consultant'' thing from left field threw my understanding of how it works.

(Didn''t Parma post the full circle thing after Royle''s appointment though?)

Thanks for allaying my fears.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Canary On The Wire"]If you''re right, then it works. If the transfer plans work, and the right players fit the template we should have a successful system and a good season. I think this ''football consultant'' thing from left field threw my understanding of how it works.

(Didn''t Parma post the full circle thing after Royle''s appointment though?)

Thanks for allaying my fears.[/quote]Parma posted that on May 25, so before Royle was announced. But if Royle, as we now know, was already at work then that would fit in with the idea that he was the person Parma was talking about. It is just, in that case, that Parma thought his job title would be technical director, which was the one being mentioned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fair enough. Final picking of brains:

McNally never mentioned Royle''s role at all:

The Canaries are hoping to name their chosen candidate in the role next week, with the technical director to be part of a new FOUR-SEAT football board.

“In terms of the structure, we have got a football management board in place now that I will chair,” said City chief executive David McNally. “The manager is on that board alongside a head of recruitment responsible for identifying players, and then a technical director – who I stress is not a director of football.

Which would be McNally, Adams, Director of Recruitment, and the Technical Director (which he said would look after sports science aspects etc)

So why have they deviated from the original structure?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Canary On The Wire"]Fair enough. Final picking of brains:

McNally never mentioned Royle''s role at all:

The Canaries are hoping to name their chosen candidate in the role next week, with the technical director to be part of a new FOUR-SEAT football board.

“In terms of the structure, we have got a football management board in place now that I will chair,” said City chief executive David McNally. “The manager is on that board alongside a head of recruitment responsible for identifying players, and then a technical director – who I stress is not a director of football.

Which would be McNally, Adams, Director of Recruitment, and the Technical Director (which he said would look after sports science aspects etc)

So why have they deviated from the original structure?[/quote]That is a very good question. I can think of two answers. One is that I am entirely wrong about how this will work. The other is that when McNally outlined that structure the club hadn''t counted on being able to get someone of Royle''s stature in the game. Either because they just hadn''t or because at that point Royle was still only an idea in Adams'' head that he hadn''t put to the directors. Once Royle agreed to join then the structure as originally outlined didn''t make sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Adams most recent interview re: Royle has him down as backroom staff, suggesting no deviation from the structure as he isn''t officially on the management board.

Curious that they wouldn''t put someone of Royle''s stature on that Board though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Canary On The Wire"]Did we have someone in that role before (dealing with the sports science side) who could be set to return??[/quote]Maybe a return for Dave Carolan perhaps?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well I pleased I am not the only one having difficulty getting my head round this.

My concern is around the term "consultant". Now consultants tend to advise from outside the organisation. Which could explain why Royle is not on the management board as he imay not be an employee of the club as such. Albeit he could attend management board meetings to advise.

Also consultants can and frequently do advise more than one organisation concurrently. So could he also have an iron in the fire at Everton still? I am probably overthinking this as in a business such as football I would have thought there must be a conflict of interest in such an arrangement. But I do find the term consultant unusual for an internal job title.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
When Brendan Rodgers was appointed Watford manager they also appointed Frank Lampard Snr in the position of ''Football Consultant'', because it was his first senior job. He chose Lampard as he knew him well.

When he left for Reading he took Lampard Snr with him.

Looks like an identical situation, and Rodgers hasn''t turned out too bad. Obviously Adams just wants a calm experienced head to fall back on when he needs advice.

If Brendan Rodgers thinks that it is the way to go then I''m all for it - he has gone a lot further than Lambert ever will with his ''head of football operations''.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="GrantsMoustache"]When Brendan Rodgers was appointed Watford manager they also appointed Frank Lampard Snr in the position of ''Football Consultant'', because it was his first senior job. He chose Lampard as he knew him well.

When he left for Reading he took Lampard Snr with him.

Looks like an identical situation, and Rodgers hasn''t turned out too bad. Obviously Adams just wants a calm experienced head to fall back on when he needs advice.

If Brendan Rodgers thinks that it is the way to go then I''m all for it - he has gone a lot further than Lambert ever will with his ''head of football operations''.[/quote]Didn''t know that. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

management board ?management board mettings ?I think some on here are confusing themselves unnecessarilythe club know what they are doing, those involved know what they are doing so why all this guff ?let get on with it and judge them on the results

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="City1st"]management board ?management board mettings ?I think some on here are confusing themselves unnecessarilythe club know what they are doing, those involved know what they are doing so why all this guff ?let get on with it and judge them on the results[/quote]Because we''re BOARD!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="GrantsMoustache"]At least if this turns into a disaster the club can pull off another cheapo internal appointment and give Royle the job.[/quote]

Never a true word, spoken in jest........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
City1st I''m not entirely sure what your point is if you even have one.

We have a four-seat management board as outlined by McNally, soon to be completed by a Technical Director and a Director of Recruitment.

Joe Royle does not fit into this blueprint. Working out where he fits in the jigsaw of our club''s brave new dawn is of interest to those who are not passionate casuals.

Given the amount of ''guff'' prevalent on this board, I think you''re wasting your time here.

I don''t expect a reply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Canary On The Wire"]City1st I''m not entirely sure what your point is if you even have one.

We have a four-seat management board as outlined by McNally, soon to be completed by a Technical Director and a Director of Recruitment.

Joe Royle does not fit into this blueprint. Working out where he fits in the jigsaw of our club''s brave new dawn is of interest to those who are not passionate casuals.

Given the amount of ''guff'' prevalent on this board, I think you''re wasting your time here.

I don''t expect a reply.[/quote]

I would see Royle''s role as a kind of mentor - a sounding board and someone who Adams can bounce ideas off.  Anyone who  works in a job and not knowing all the ins and outs of it - and is lucky enough to have someone within the organisation they can turn to and can trust, for help -will appreciate the idea of it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My point isn''t that Royle won''t be useful or even that I don''t understand what he''s here to do because I do LDC.

My point is McNally said there would be a four-seat management board, himself, Adams, the Technical Director, and a Director of Recruitment- I initially thought Royle had been added to this, deviating from the plan as outlined by McNally

As Adams has apparently said Royle as Football Consultant is a member of the backroom staff and not on the management board itself.

That''s odd given his experience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...