PDA

View Full Version : The Big Picture



Baker9
16-05-2011, 09:11 AM
For years now the talk has been about being third in the league and most seem to have completely dismissed the concept of us ever actually winning the league.

I hope and believe that the Board has decided that a major shift in strategy is required. That strategy is likely to be a three year plan based around building from scratch (the old way doesn’t work). All good strategies involve risk and what we are doing is without doubt risky but we last won the league nearly 60 years ago and enough said about the cup. For crying out loud, we have got to do something different!

Our manager has nerves of steel and is hugely ambitious. If there is a plan, his job is to deliver that plan and he is doing so ruthlessly. Good for him. All his signings old and new will feature heavily next season and the team he will build will be good enough for a top six place. In years to come Calderwood’s revolution may be seen as one of the most significant periods in the history of the club, and we might well challenge for the title in 2012-13. Enjoy the ride.

smurf
16-05-2011, 09:21 AM
What have we witnessed that backs any of this up or in any shape or form gives this a shred of credibility?

Speedway
16-05-2011, 09:23 AM
What have we witnessed that backs any of this up or in any shape or form gives this a shred of credibility?

All of it.

smurf
16-05-2011, 09:24 AM
All of it.

Apart from results?

HUTCHYHIBBY
16-05-2011, 09:37 AM
We might be challenging for the title in 2012-2013. Come on B9, I mean, seriously! I know there isnt a queue of people lining up to takeover, but, without major investment from somewhere nothing is going to change much at ER. Could be one of the longest transitional periods in football that we are going through.

Speedway
16-05-2011, 09:43 AM
Apart from results?

Including.

Baker9
16-05-2011, 09:45 AM
Apart from results?

There seems to have been little evidence in the past of strategic thinking from the board and the board thinking on the playing side has been short term and reactive.

The Calderwood appointment and the patient attitude towards it suggests a shift to longer term thinking.

There has been what seems to be a significant board reshuffle with more direct board emphasis on the 'football' side.

Our resuilts have been horrendous and yet seem to have been accepted better compared to in the past. Even on this board there is an air of underlying belief that something significant is happening. I for one welcome it all and the results are part of the pain of major change.

Beefster
16-05-2011, 10:19 AM
All of it.

Except for any evidence that there has been a major shift in strategy from those running the club. Unless someone can point to the evidence?

I'm not commenting on whether a change would be a good or bad thing but I'm not sure how someone can say that they believe that the Board have put a majorly amended strategy in place without any evidence.

Beefster
16-05-2011, 10:21 AM
There seems to have been little evidence in the past of strategic thinking from the board and the board thinking on the playing side has been short term and reactive.

The Calderwood appointment and the patient attitude towards it suggests a shift to longer term thinking.

There has been what seems to be a significant board reshuffle with more direct board emphasis on the 'football' side.

Our resuilts have been horrendous and yet seem to have been accepted better compared to in the past. Even on this board there is an air of underlying belief that something significant is happening. I for one welcome it all and the results are part of the pain of major change.

He's been in place for 7 months. I wouldn't be counting any chickens just yet.

Edit: A significant board reshuffle? Am I missing something?

Baker9
16-05-2011, 10:34 AM
Except for any evidence that there has been a major shift in strategy from those running the club. Unless someone can point to the evidence?

I'm not commenting on whether a change would be a good or bad thing but I'm not sure how someone can say that they believe that the Board have put a majorly amended strategy in place without any evidence.

This board is unlikely to publish its strategy and I am making an assumption that there is one. That assumption is based on my personal experiences of involvement in strategic corporate issues. I am not privy to what happens at Easter Road but I feel sure that something significant has happened.

The 7 months that the manager has been here is about a third of what he should be allowed to deliver the strategy. If the results are as bad after a dozen games into next season, he will be removed. I think results will be much better.

SmokieJoe
16-05-2011, 10:36 AM
For years now the talk has been about being third in the league and most seem to have completely dismissed the concept of us ever actually winning the league.

I hope and believe that the Board has decided that a major shift in strategy is required. That strategy is likely to be a three year plan based around building from scratch (the old way doesn’t work). All good strategies involve risk and what we are doing is without doubt risky but we last won the league nearly 60 years ago and enough said about the cup. For crying out loud, we have got to do something different!

Our manager has nerves of steel and is hugely ambitious. If there is a plan, his job is to deliver that plan and he is doing so ruthlessly. Good for him. All his signings old and new will feature heavily next season and the team he will build will be good enough for a top six place. In years to come Calderwood’s revolution may be seen as one of the most significant periods in the history of the club, and we might well challenge for the title in 2012-13. Enjoy the ride.

Unfortunately, if my memory serves correct, the arrival of David Murray and Greame Souness in '86 was it hearalded the demise of almost any one getting their mits on the league trophy. the yams came closest that season only because the big bigotus spending spree had not yet gone into full flow. I also remember Celtic having board issuse around then, correct me if i'm wrong. but since his sending off at ER, and the yams (lmfao) final day ( all praise Albert Kidd, ahem..Sir Albert) no one has even been close in the lead up to Easter.

So third seems an appropriate target i would say.

Beefster
16-05-2011, 10:43 AM
This board is unlikely to publish its strategy and I am making an assumption that there is one. That assumption is based on my personal experiences of involvement in strategic corporate issues. I am not privy to what happens at Easter Road but I feel sure that something significant has happened.

The 7 months that the manager has been here is about a third of what he should be allowed to deliver the strategy. If the results are as bad after a dozen games into next season, he will be removed. I think results will be much better.

So he needs 2 years (which I agree with btw), the Board have changed their strategy to accomodate this but they'll remove him a year if results don't improve?

I agree with you about Calderwood being at the risk of the 'mutual consent' a few months into the new season, if no improvement. I'm disputing that the Board have changed their strategy - come pressure, they'll bin the manager as quickly as they have anyone else. Everyone with experience in strategy can tell you what they should be doing - that doesn't mean that they are.

Edit: They should have learnt after Collins and Mixu but, as soon as a difficult AGM was approaching, they removed Hughes pronto.

Baker9
16-05-2011, 10:50 AM
Unfortunately, if my memory serves correct, the arrival of David Murray and Greame Souness in '86 was it hearalded the demise of almost any one getting their mits on the league trophy. the yams came closest that season only because the big bigotus spending spree had not yet gone into full flow. I also remember Celtic having board issuse around then, correct me if i'm wrong. but since his sending off at ER, and the yams (lmfao) final day ( all praise Albert Kidd, ahem..Sir Albert) no one has even been close in the lead up to Easter.

So third seems an appropriate target i would say.

Under the old financial regimes, maybe. There will be nothing like that amount of money around in future and we should develop a belief that we can have a crack. Maybe thats the plan or maybe the cup. Great if that ambition exists.

SmokieJoe
16-05-2011, 10:58 AM
Under the old financial regimes, maybe. There will be nothing like that amount of money around in future and we should develop a belief that we can have a crack. Maybe thats the plan or maybe the cup. Great if that ambition exists.

Nothing against ambition, belief or hope. I do remember this being our worst finish in the league for many years. Financial constraints, yes agree there, but the OF have had their worst bums on seats season for many a year, and they can increase their home gate by the amount of our average gate this season, easily. So to say that the big money spending of the OF is dead and gone? maybe, but the wages they can pay? their lowest paid first team squad member will be paid more than the highest first team player at ER. There will always be the gulf that their is i'm sure.

ScottB
16-05-2011, 10:59 AM
So he needs 2 years (which I agree with btw), the Board have changed their strategy to accomodate this but they'll remove him a year if results don't improve?

I agree with you about Calderwood being at the risk of the 'mutual consent' a few months into the new season, if no improvement. I'm disputing that the Board have changed their strategy - come pressure, they'll bin the manager as quickly as they have anyone else. Everyone with experience in strategy can tell you what they should be doing - that doesn't mean that they are.

Edit: They should have learnt after Collins and Mixu but, as soon as a difficult AGM was approaching, they removed Hughes pronto.

Yes but if your chief man is failing to implement said strategy, giving him however much longer to continue to fail to implement it won't help will it.

Hughes position had become untenable. So far CC has shown signs of promise and made good signings. I don't dread the prospect of a whole team signed by him, I would be dreading Yogi doing that kind of rebuild.

Beefster
16-05-2011, 11:04 AM
Yes but if your chief man is failing to implement said strategy, giving him however much longer to continue to fail to implement it won't help will it.

Hughes position had become untenable. So far CC has shown signs of promise and made good signings. I don't dread the prospect of a whole team signed by him, I would be dreading Yogi doing that kind of rebuild.

I'm not arguing against Hughes' removal - I just thought the timing was spineless from the Board.

Baker9
16-05-2011, 11:04 AM
So he needs 2 years (which I agree with btw), the Board have changed their strategy to accomodate this but they'll remove him a year if results don't improve?I agree with you about Calderwood being at the risk of the 'mutual consent' a few months into the new season, if no improvement. I'm disputing that the Board have changed their strategy - come pressure, they'll bin the manager as quickly as they have anyone else. Everyone with experience in strategy can tell you what they should be doing - that doesn't mean that they are.

Edit: They should have learnt after Collins and Mixu but, as soon as a difficult AGM was approaching, they removed Hughes pronto.

Every strategy needs regular review and if properly set out will have interim goals. It seems reasonable that if there are not measured signs of improvement well into the new season then adjustments are needed. Calderwood should go if it is obvious there is no improvement around 10 games into the new season. The level of expected improvement would probably be 'in the top six' by a certain time.

Hughes is a different type of manager. Calderwood is potentially better for the longer term.

Baker9
16-05-2011, 11:13 AM
Nothing against ambition, belief or hope. I do remember this being our worst finish in the league for many years. Financial constraints, yes agree there, but the OF have had their worst bums on seats season for many a year, and they can increase their home gate by the amount of our average gate this season, easily. So to say that the big money spending of the OF is dead and gone? maybe, but the wages they can pay? their lowest paid first team squad member will be paid more than the highest first team player at ER. There will always be the gulf that their is i'm sure.

I agree that there will always be that gulf but I can't accept that we should lie down and get our tummies tickled by the OF every year. They really are not that good! We are unlikely to ever compete financially so what can we do? Answer - exactly what we seem to be doing. Thank goodness we appear to be doing something. I am not sure whether it is ambition, belief or hope but I feel something positive.

Sammy7nil
16-05-2011, 11:34 AM
Unfortunately, if my memory serves correct, the arrival of David Murray and Greame Souness in '86 was it hearalded the demise of almost any one getting their mits on the league trophy. the yams came closest that season only because the big bigotus spending spree had not yet gone into full flow. I also remember Celtic having board issuse around then, correct me if i'm wrong. but since his sending off at ER, and the yams (lmfao) final day ( all praise Albert Kidd, ahem..Sir Albert) no one has even been close in the lead up to Easter.


So third seems an appropriate target i would say.

Did Aberdeen not miss out on the last day of the season ? Lost 2 - 0 at Hunbrox when a draw would do.