PDA

View Full Version : John Collins on Hibs



PaulSmith
25-10-2011, 05:13 PM
The former Monaco and Fulham man said: "There can only be one boss at any football club and the main man has always got to be the manager - not the chairman or the directors or the chief executive.
"The most important person at any football club is the manager and he has got to be in total control of every football aspect, every decision that is made - what coaches come and go, what scouts come and go. I don't know if that has been the case at Hibs in the last few years."
From STV.news.

I wonder what on earth he could mean?

3pm
25-10-2011, 05:26 PM
Another one who should shut his puss.

Future17
25-10-2011, 05:46 PM
The former Monaco and Fulham man said: "There can only be one boss at any football club and the main man has always got to be the manager - not the chairman or the directors or the chief executive.
"The most important person at any football club is the manager and he has got to be in total control of every football aspect, every decision that is made - what coaches come and go, what scouts come and go. I don't know if that has been the case at Hibs in the last few years."
From STV.news.

I wonder what on earth he could mean?

He's probably right in principle but a lot of football "aspects", including the ones he's used as examples, also have a business/financial aspect to them.

I liked Collins and I wish he was still manager, but I don't believe he left the club because somebody was interfering with decisions which were purely related to football.

NORTHERNHIBBY
25-10-2011, 05:47 PM
Probably means that when you are dropping off the football radar you will do or say anything to draw attention to yourself.

basehibby
25-10-2011, 06:15 PM
Another one who should shut his puss.

:confused: WTF for???

Personally I'm always interested in the POV of ex-managers who retain an interest in Hibs - it's true that Yogi maybe over indulges in that respect but you can't really say that for Collins.

Besides - unlike Yogi, Collins signed no confidentiality agreement to my knowledge so is under no compunction to "shut his pus" whatsoever!

KeithTheHibby
25-10-2011, 06:16 PM
Another one who should shut his puss.

He speaks a lot of sense does our JC, unlike the last manager in the ER hotseat.

Riordans Boots
25-10-2011, 06:19 PM
He speaks a lot of sense does our JC, unlike the last manager in the ER hotseat.


:agree:

3pm
25-10-2011, 06:23 PM
:confused: WTF for???

Personally I'm always interested in the POV of ex-managers who retain an interest in Hibs - it's true that Yogi maybe over indulges in that respect but you can't really say that for Collins.

Besides - unlike Yogi, Collins signed no confidentiality agreement to my knowledge so is under no compunction to "shut his pus" whatsoever!

He's gone. He has no need to comment.

Same as Hughes.

The Falcon
25-10-2011, 06:23 PM
The former Monaco and Fulham man said: "There can only be one boss at any football club and the main man has always got to be the manager - not the chairman or the directors or the chief executive.
"The most important person at any football club is the manager and he has got to be in total control of every football aspect, every decision that is made - what coaches come and go, what scouts come and go. I don't know if that has been the case at Hibs in the last few years."
From STV.news.

I wonder what on earth he could mean?


He says he dosent know so I would imagine if he did know he would then say so.

HibsMax
25-10-2011, 06:25 PM
I agree with JC to an extent but there is no way that the most important person at the club is the manager. It's a TEAM organisation. It only works (properly) when all the moving parts mesh well with one another. It's like saying that the engine is the most important part of a car. I think the wheels might have something to say about that. :wink:

blackpoolhibs
25-10-2011, 06:28 PM
He says he dosent know so I would imagine if he did know he would then say so.

I would say he does know, but is too frightened to say anything, as it would make him look stupid. Yet another who says a little bit of nothing, whats the problem John, just tell us?

greenlex
25-10-2011, 06:32 PM
I would say he does know, but is too frightened to say anything, as it would make him look stupid. Yet another who says a little bit of nothing, whats the problem John, just tell us?

I agree G. If there is a major problem that s prohibiting us moving forward on the football front spit it out man.

Argylehibby
25-10-2011, 06:36 PM
If the CEO left the manager to decide what the budget was for players and wages I would think that most clubs would be in the same position that Rangers and Hearts are in just now! Thankfully I dont think our club allows the manager that much freedom.

Did we oust any coaches or scouts while JC was the boss, if so, perhaps the point he is making is that he, or one of the managers since him, have seen someone leave they wanted to keep on because the CEO thought differently?

The Falcon
25-10-2011, 06:36 PM
I would say he does know, but is too frightened to say anything, as it would make him look stupid. Yet another who says a little bit of nothing, whats the problem John, just tell us?

I dont think he's frightened of anything BH so I suspect he's not really got much to say.

The Falcon
25-10-2011, 06:38 PM
If the CEO left the manager to decide what the budget was for players and wages I would think that most clubs would be in the same position that Rangers and Hearts are in just now! Thankfully I dont think our club allows the manager that much freedom.

Did we oust any coaches or scouts while JC was the boss, if so, perhaps the point he is making is that he, or one of the managers since him, have seen someone leave they wanted to keep on because the CEO thought differently?


Did he not bring in Gareth Evans who is still here?

blackpoolhibs
25-10-2011, 06:39 PM
I agree G. If there is a major problem that s prohibiting us moving forward on the football front spit it out man.

Personally i feel its all about appointing the right manager. I could manage us if the club would give me unlimited funds as Collins wanted.

If Petrie is not giving the managers support, tell us. If Petrie is telling managers who they can or cant bring in tell us? FFS man up ya bunch of pricks, tell the story or stop whining about it. :rolleyes:

matty_f
25-10-2011, 06:40 PM
I would say he does know, but is too frightened to say anything, as it would make him look stupid. Yet another who says a little bit of nothing, whats the problem John, just tell us?

Totally agree with this, I'm fed up of the innuendo from the managers - if the board are a significant problem and are actually hindering the manager, then we need to know so that we can make informed decisions to act (or not!) on the info.

yekimevol
25-10-2011, 06:44 PM
Another one who should shut his puss.

:top marks
i would have listened to the guy if he was successful at his next job witch he wasn't so he is just another sour person talking about our beloved club.

.Sean.
25-10-2011, 06:47 PM
Well said Johnny Collins.

yekimevol
25-10-2011, 06:49 PM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/15450534.stm

s (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/15450534.stm)aying we need to attack from the off and that teams lose when they sit back against the old firm.

ivans hat trick was all counter attack and the 3-0 last season was mostly counter attack.

matty_f
25-10-2011, 06:49 PM
Well said Johnny Collins.

It's not really well said, though. It's not even well implied!

If he's got a gripe and thinks there are genuine problems, then he should go the whole hog and spit it out. Coming out with wee nod and a wink statements helps nobody.

The Falcon
25-10-2011, 06:49 PM
Personally i feel its all about appointing the right manager. I could manage us if the club would give me unlimited funds as Collins wanted.


Scary thought but pretty much. :agree:


If Petrie is not giving the managers support, tell us. If Petrie is telling managers who they can or cant bring in tell us? FFS man up ya bunch of pricks, tell the story or stop whining about it. :rolleyes:


Again there seems to be plenty players coming and going so while we may not be spending Zillions we appear to be supporting each and every incumbent.

The bit in bold again :agree:

KeithTheHibby
25-10-2011, 07:06 PM
Personally i feel its all about appointing the right manager. I could manage us if the club would give me unlimited funds as Collins wanted.

If Petrie is not giving the managers support, tell us. If Petrie is telling managers who they can or cant bring in tell us? FFS man up ya bunch of pricks, tell the story or stop whining about it. :rolleyes:


Under JC we took in more money in that period than any other manager so what JC was after would have been relative to the income surely??

I may be wrong but the only players I can remember JC being after for Gow, Hammell and Naismith with only the latter being pie in the sky.

HFC 0-7
25-10-2011, 07:06 PM
It's not really well said, though. It's not even well implied!

If he's got a gripe and thinks there are genuine problems, then he should go the whole hog and spit it out. Coming out with wee nod and a wink statements helps nobody.

If he is ever wanting to go back into management I dont think going the whole hog and ripping into chairmen and CEO's etc will make him that appealing for any chairman etc looking to appoint a manager. Your right in that what he says doesnt clear anything up but remember he has probably been asked a question about it, what can he say? No comment? then everyone will rip into him saying whats going on there then. He could lie and say everything is rosey and the way hibs work is the correct way or he could leave it open for people to make their own interpretation.

blackpoolhibs
25-10-2011, 07:12 PM
Under JC we took in more money in that period than any other manager so what JC was after would have been relative to the income surely??

I may be wrong but the only players I can remember JC being after for Gow, Hammell and Naismith with only the latter being pie in the sky.
Barry robson was another. He *****ed just under 1m on players we got nothing from either on the park or in fees. Instead of saying nothing but insinuating lots, why won't he and the others man up and spill the beans if its so bad they still feel aggrieved?

Beefster
25-10-2011, 07:14 PM
Totally agree with this, I'm fed up of the innuendo from the managers - if the board are a significant problem and are actually hindering the manager, then we need to know so that we can make informed decisions to act (or not!) on the info.

There obviously is a problem with the structure of the club. The three previous managers wouldn't keep implying/alluding/innuendo....ing that there is if there wasn't.

We've all heard the stories about scouts reporting direct to members of the Board, signings being instigated by Board members and so on so it doesn't come as any great surprise.

Kaiser1962
25-10-2011, 07:29 PM
There obviously is a problem with the structure of the club. The three previous managers wouldn't keep implying/alluding/innuendo....ing that there is if there wasn't.

We've all heard the stories about scouts reporting direct to members of the Board, signings being instigated by Board members and so on so it doesn't come as any great surprise.


Is that what Collins said?

ballengeich
25-10-2011, 07:34 PM
I may be wrong but the only players I can remember JC being after for Gow, Hammell and Naismith with only the latter being pie in the sky.

Gow moved to Rangers and also had an offer from Wolves so he was pie in the sky too.

smurf
25-10-2011, 07:39 PM
It's not really well said, though. It's not even well implied!

If he's got a gripe and thinks there are genuine problems, then he should go the whole hog and spit it out. Coming out with wee nod and a wink statements helps nobody.

Unless he's retiring from the game you know he can't!

hibsbollah
25-10-2011, 07:40 PM
He speaks a lot of sense does our JC, unlike the last manager in the ER hotseat. :agree:

Broken Gnome
25-10-2011, 07:42 PM
Jamie Smith was another.

Hibs financial position now means it would have been a massive risk to really push for higher-level signings, given speculating to accumulate in Scotland has an obvious glass ceiling. As admirable as Collins' ambition was, he sorely lacked realism. The revolt etc are unconnected to this obviously.

KeithTheHibby
25-10-2011, 07:45 PM
Barry robson was another. He *****ed just under 1m on players we got nothing from either on the park or in fees. Instead of saying nothing but insinuating lots, why won't he and the others man up and spill the beans if its so bad they still feel aggrieved?


Perhaps they feel it is not their place to speak out??

Collins was shat on from a great height and not backed by the board when it mattered. The other 2 since them got their books because they were not up to the job.

The Falcon
25-10-2011, 07:51 PM
Perhaps they feel it is not their place to speak out??

Collins was shat on from a great height and not backed by the board when it mattered. The other 2 since them got their books because they were not up to the job.

In what way?

matty_f
25-10-2011, 07:57 PM
If he is ever wanting to go back into management I dont think going the whole hog and ripping into chairmen and CEO's etc will make him that appealing for any chairman etc looking to appoint a manager. Your right in that what he says doesnt clear anything up but remember he has probably been asked a question about it, what can he say? No comment? then everyone will rip into him saying whats going on there then. He could lie and say everything is rosey and the way hibs work is the correct way or he could leave it open for people to make their own interpretation.

Why can't he say anything if he's wanting to get back into management elsewhere? Plenty of outspoken managers are still in work, well, the good ones are. I don't see how being clear about what he's saying is an issue would be detrimental to his career prospects. I really doubt that Petrie is influential enough in the game to prevent JC getting a job elsewhere, and I doubt anyone outside of Hibs really cares enough about how his relationship with the board is/was.


There obviously is a problem with the structure of the club. The three previous managers wouldn't keep implying/alluding/innuendo....ing that there is if there wasn't.

We've all heard the stories about scouts reporting direct to members of the Board, signings being instigated by Board members and so on so it doesn't come as any great surprise.

I think there could be a problem with the structure at the club, and I think that's why it's recently been re-structured. However, Williamson never mentioned problems, Mowbray never...

Collins, Mixu, and Yogi are all big enough and experienced enough to come out and say what hindered them, if indeed, anything did. At least then the club would have a right of reply, however all this innuendo and hinting just fuels the fire for those that are already of the opinion that the board are the spawn of Satan.

Now they may well be the problem, I'm more than prepared to accept that is a possibility, however it would help us all out a lot if someone actually told us what the problems are rather than leaving it for folk to add arms and legs to the suggestions.


Unless he's retiring from the game you know he can't!

What a lot of bollocks! Why can't he? Is Petrie going to make sure he never works in this town again or some other nonsense?

KeithTheHibby
25-10-2011, 08:00 PM
In what way?

The infamous meeting between players and chairman behind his back for a start!

Peevemor
25-10-2011, 08:00 PM
If Collins had had ultimate control when he was at Hibs, then he would have wasted even more money on crap players.

blackpoolhibs
25-10-2011, 08:13 PM
Perhaps they feel it is not their place to speak out??

Collins was shat on from a great height and not backed by the board when it mattered. The other 2 since them got their books because they were not up to the job.

If its not his place to speak out, why is he saying nothing now but implying lots? And shat on,where?

The Falcon
25-10-2011, 08:14 PM
The infamous meeting between players and chairman behind his back for a start!

Followed by a public apology by the captain, a statement from Collins (who remained in place a further 8 months) saying that he was being fully backed and certain players who were emptied shortly afterwards, one immediately. While a mistake may have been made with the location of the meeting subsequent events suggested it was who Collins wielded the axe and came out on top.

What else?

Springbank
25-10-2011, 08:18 PM
Collins is 100% right - the key employee at any football club (from Man U/Barca down) is the man in the dug out.

He needs authority…witness the backing Man City gave Mancini this month compared with the way our board reacted to the whinging players who failed to win the double07 that was in their gift in Collins' cup winning year.

The manager needs to be given that authority…it's not all about money.

FWIW Collins took in huge cash for Hibs, needing to replace a host of positions (in answer to the post above that seemed to say he *****ed £1m on a host of duds). Collins said (quite reasonably in my view) he wanted to spend half the money he'd brought in for KT, Broonie, Whittaker etc.

That money would have bought Naismith, Robson, Hammell and Jamie Smith. Collins was proved right, in a way, when 8 months later the first two both went for double the prices Collins was looking to buy them for in 2007. It would have made Hibs more money, in short, to spend on quality whilst banking half the Broonie/KT/Whit monies.

Either way, JC is right to say that the manager is the no1 key position of employment at any football club

nortonhibby
25-10-2011, 08:23 PM
I would say he does know, but is too frightened to say anything, as it would make him look stupid. Yet another who says a little bit of nothing, whats the problem John, just tell us?

I suspect he has issues with RP He is a good pundit on TV Now his manager career is over.

Peevemor
25-10-2011, 08:31 PM
Collins is 100% right - the key employee at any football club (from Man U/Barca down) is the man in the dug out.

A wee example - Jim Jeffries nearly put Hearts out of business after the pieman let him negotiate player contracts.


He needs authority…witness the backing Man City gave Mancini this month compared with the way our board reacted to the whinging players who failed to win the double07 that was in their gift in Collins' cup winning year.

How did the board react? They backed JC did they not?


The manager needs to be given that authority…it's not all about money.

FWIW Collins took in huge cash for Hibs, needing to replace a host of positions (in answer to the post above that seemed to say he *****ed £1m on a host of duds).

So it was Collins that brought the cash in and not Petrie? Everyone on here says that Petrie decides everything - does he or doesn't he?


Collins said (quite reasonably in my view) he wanted to spend half the money he'd brought in for KT, Broonie, Whittaker etc.

That money would have bought Naismith, Robson, Hammell and Jamie Smith. Collins was proved right, in a way, when 8 months later the first two both went for double the prices Collins was looking to buy them for in 2007. It would have made Hibs more money, in short, to spend on quality whilst banking half the Broonie/KT/Whit monies.

What a lot of naive pish! Getting £3M or whatever to spend on transfer fees (which is what he wanted) isn't even half the story, you have to be able to pay the wages too. Players who command large transfer fees generally get paid more than Hibs can afford.


Either way, JC is right to say that the manager is the no1 key position of employment at any football club

Maybe, but unfortunately he isn't very good.

The Falcon
25-10-2011, 08:33 PM
Either way, JC is right to say that the manager is the no1 key position of employment at any football club



The manager is one of a number of key positions in a modern football club. When Fergie compared the job he was doing to that of Villas-Boas at the same age it was an insight into how things have changed.

BEEJ
25-10-2011, 08:53 PM
Barry robson was another.

He *****ed just under 1m on players we got nothing from either on the park or in fees. Instead of saying nothing but insinuating lots, why won't he and the others man up and spill the beans if its so bad they still feel aggrieved?
JC paid fees for just three players; AoB and Maka, who between them cost the club around £0.5m in transfer fees and MAC who cost a nominal fee (£20k - £40k).

The figure you recall from the accounts of just under £1m would have included the transfer fee that was, after much wrangling, finally paid to Raja Casblanca for Zemmama. Zemmama, was, of course, Mowbray's signing.

So in fact JC probably spent no more than £600k on players but during his reign as Manager the club took in around £9m in transfer fees for Thomson, Brown, Whittaker and Sproule. Much of that income could have been put down to JC's posturing on player value and on his talking them up.

JC's ventures into the transfer market were largely disastrous; but he cannot be accused of having spent lavishly. I also very much doubt that all his 'golden targets' named earlier in this thread would have been either asked for or expected at the same time. Some would have been alternatives.

Hibercelona
25-10-2011, 09:15 PM
People keep going on about the few "bad signings" that Collins made.

Well these signings were never going to look in a team full of daft wee laddies who didn't want to put the extra effort into improving their game in the first place.

JC had the correct mentality, the players present at the club at that time did not.

If we had given JC more time, we'd be in a far better situation now than we are. But we didn't keep him, the board sacked him because the poor wee lambs were being "worked too hard". :rolleyes:

Peevemor
25-10-2011, 09:22 PM
People keep going on about the few "bad signings" that Collins made.

Well these signings were never going to look in a team full of daft wee laddies who didn't want to put the extra effort into improving their game in the first place.

JC had the correct mentality, the players present at the club at that time did not.

If we had given JC more time, we'd be in a far better situation now than we are. But we didn't keep him, the board sacked him because the poor wee lambs were being "worked too hard". :rolleyes:

So which of his signings went on to bigger and better things?

Dr Jimmy
25-10-2011, 09:23 PM
JC is a Hibs legend, one of the best players we have ever had, won us a cup (only the 3rd in my lifetime and I am old :-() and for those reasons I will defend him ahead of a ****in accountant who is overseeing our demise.

Hibercelona
25-10-2011, 09:26 PM
So which of his signings went on to bigger and better things?

The teams that these players have moved on to look far better than us at the moment IMO.

nortonhibby
25-10-2011, 09:29 PM
JC is a Hibs legend, one of the best players we have ever had, won us a cup (only the 3rd in my lifetime and I am old :-() and for those reasons I will defend him ahead of a ****in accountant who is overseeing our demise.

3 cups i recall 2 league cups and im late 40s what other cup famous 5 stuff ?

Ray_
25-10-2011, 09:30 PM
Personally i feel its all about appointing the right manager. I could manage us if the club would give me unlimited funds as Collins wanted.

If Petrie is not giving the managers support, tell us. If Petrie is telling managers who they can or cant bring in tell us? FFS man up ya bunch of pricks, tell the story or stop whining about it. :rolleyes:

Did he not get Petrie to hold out for a more realistic fee for the players & as such pulled in far larger fee's for Thomson & Brown and we also lost both our full backs, all in the space of about nine months.

As far as telling it straight, he would have to be really stupid to do that, what employer would hire somebody knowing they were capable of hanging out the dirty washing?

Ray_
25-10-2011, 09:31 PM
3 cups i recall 2 league cups and im late 40s what other cup famous 5 stuff ?


The best of the lot, 1972.

Peevemor
25-10-2011, 09:31 PM
The teams that these players have moved on to look far better than us at the moment IMO.

Crap answer.

Dr Jimmy
25-10-2011, 09:35 PM
3 cups i recall 2 league cups and im late 40s what other cup famous 5 stuff ? Are u being serious? Stanton and O'Rourke jog your memory?

Ray_
25-10-2011, 09:35 PM
The manager is one of a number of key positions in a modern football club. When Fergie compared the job he was doing to that of Villas-Boas at the same age it was an insight into how things have changed.

The job may have changed, but it is still by far the most important position in the club, you only have to go back to TM's time to see that as it was his input that brought the crowds & record amount of cash to the club, not the performance of the accountant, who became busy selling off the team to pay for past F up's.

matty_f
25-10-2011, 09:35 PM
I believe Maka went on to Swansea.At the end of his Swansea deal he was offered a new improved deal but he refused that deal.He went on trial with,a Belgian or Dutch team.Didn't work out.Until a couple of weeks ago was back training with Swansea....Now,I'm struggling to verify this because of a spelling issue but I think he might have just been signed by a Bundesliga team :confused:

I wouldn't say he's gone on to bigger and better things. Maybe if he'd played even semi-regularly for Swansea, there'd be a case to answer but being back up to someone then not getting another deal (my recollection is that he wasn't offered terms at Swansea at all, never mind improved terms) doesn't really count.

What about the rest of Collins' signings?

Peevemor
25-10-2011, 09:36 PM
I believe Maka went on to Swansea.At the end of his Swansea deal he was offered a new improved deal but he refused that deal.He went on trial with,a Belgian or Dutch team.Didn't work out.Until a couple of weeks ago was back training with Swansea....Now,I'm struggling to verify this because of a spelling issue but I think he might have just been signed by a Bundesliga team :confused:

Yves Makabu-Ma-Kalambay is currently a free agent.

The_Horde
25-10-2011, 09:38 PM
Barry robson was another. He *****ed just under 1m on players we got nothing from either on the park or in fees. Instead of saying nothing but insinuating lots, why won't he and the others man up and spill the beans if its so bad they still feel aggrieved?

Also he was after Wes Hoolahan and Graham Dorrans! How good would they have been?

cabbageandribs1875
25-10-2011, 09:39 PM
3 cups i recall 2 league cups and im late 40s what other cup famous 5 stuff ?


so your old enough to have saw us lift 3 league cups then ? 72,91,2007

Future17
25-10-2011, 09:39 PM
I agree with JC to an extent but there is no way that the most important person at the club is the manager. It's a TEAM organisation. It only works (properly) when all the moving parts mesh well with one another. It's like saying that the engine is the most important part of a car. I think the wheels might have something to say about that. :wink:

It's a very principled point but not true. For long-term consistency and success in football, the manager is the most important person at a club and that's been indisputably proven over countless years in countless countries.


Personally i feel its all about appointing the right manager. I could manage us if the club would give me unlimited funds as Collins wanted.If Petrie is not giving the managers support, tell us. If Petrie is telling managers who they can or cant bring in tell us? FFS man up ya bunch of pricks, tell the story or stop whining about it. :rolleyes:

No you couldn't. Or, more accurately, you could manage us, but having unlimited funds wouldn't guarantee you could do so successfully. Another example of underestimating the importance of a good manager.

Dirkster23
25-10-2011, 09:41 PM
I believe Maka went on to Swansea.At the end of his Swansea deal he was offered a new improved deal but he refused that deal.He went on trial with,a Belgian or Dutch team.Didn't work out.Until a couple of weeks ago was back training with Swansea....Now,I'm struggling to verify this because of a spelling issue but I think he might have just been signed by a Bundesliga team :confused:

Looks like he's signed for Mechelen in Belgium, who are in the bottom half of their league.

Peevemor
25-10-2011, 09:43 PM
Looks like he's signed for Mechelen in Belgium, who are in the bottom half of their league.

Well found. :agree:

Sir David Gray
25-10-2011, 09:57 PM
So which of his signings went on to bigger and better things?

None.

Clayton Donaldson-Crewe and then Brentford.
Filipe Morais-Inverness, St Johnstone and then Oldham.
Alan O'Brien-Swindon and then Yeovil.
Patrick Noubissie-Livingston, Dundee, Ayia Napa and then Kettering.
Mickael Antoine Curier-Dundee, Hamilton, Ermis Aradippou and then Ethnikos Achnas.
Brian Kerr-Inverness, Dundee and then Arbroath.
Thierry Gathuessi-Inverness, Raith Rovers and then Sriwijaya.
Yves Makalambay-Swansea.

Really only Makalambay can claim to have gone on to better things and even then he only sat on Swansea's bench for the majority of the time.

Collins' player identification skills were woeful.

Sioux
25-10-2011, 09:58 PM
People keep going on about the few "bad signings" that Collins made.

Well these signings were never going to look in a team full of daft wee laddies who didn't want to put the extra effort into improving their game in the first place.

JC had the correct mentality, the players present at the club at that time did not.

If we had given JC more time, we'd be in a far better situation now than we are. But we didn't keep him, the board sacked him because the poor wee lambs were being "worked too hard". :rolleyes:

Are you on drugs? JC walked out!

Peevemor
25-10-2011, 10:04 PM
None.

Clayton Donaldson-Crewe and then Brentford.
Filipe Morais-Inverness, St Johnstone and then Oldham.
Alan O'Brien-Swindon and then Yeovil.
Patrick Noubissie-Livingston, Dundee, Ayia Napa and then Kettering.
Mickael Antoine Curier-Dundee, Hamilton, Ermis Aradippou and then Ethnikos Achnas.
Brian Kerr-Inverness, Dundee and then Arbroath.
Thierry Gathuessi-Inverness, Raith Rovers and then Sriwijaya.
Yves Makalambay-Swansea.

Really only Makalambay can claim to have gone on to better things and even then he only sat on Swansea's bench for the majority of the time.

Collins' player identification skills were woeful.

Amazing how all those great players have been unlucky with their teamates' attitudes wherever they've been!

(((Fergus)))
25-10-2011, 10:15 PM
Looks like he's signed for Mechelen in Belgium, who are in the bottom half of their league.

http://www.kvmechelen.be/site/player.php?plid=128

Hibbyradge
25-10-2011, 10:19 PM
Man City, Chelsea and even the Yams would disagree with JC.

essexhibee
25-10-2011, 10:29 PM
Lovely bloke met him at Edinburgh airport once. Think he brought in duds due to having no money, might be wrong but I dont remember the purse strings being loosened for him? Tried to make players professional athletes but a little hard work and they didn't like it.

killie-hibby
25-10-2011, 10:36 PM
If the CEO left the manager to decide what the budget was for players and wages I would think that most clubs would be in the same position that Rangers and Hearts are in just now! Thankfully I dont think our club allows the manager that much freedom.

Did we oust any coaches or scouts while JC was the boss, if so, perhaps the point he is making is that he, or one of the managers since him, have seen someone leave they wanted to keep on because the CEO thought differently?



It is not that JC wanted to keep someone. The point is that he MP,JH and CC have been unable to get rid of someone.

jacomo
25-10-2011, 11:14 PM
Under JC we took in more money in that period than any other manager so what JC was after would have been relative to the income surely??

I may be wrong but the only players I can remember JC being after for Gow, Hammell and Naismith with only the latter being pie in the sky.

Seem to remember Barry Robson being mentioned too.

Recruitment was definitely JC's blind spot - and it's a little ironic, given his comments about the need for a manager to be completely in charge. He'd have benefited from having a Director of Football responsible for identifying and signing players working alongside him.

Doesn't change the fact that he was an excellent coach and tactically brilliant at times.

KeithTheHibby
26-10-2011, 08:31 AM
Amongst all the slating that JC took for the players he brought in I firmly believe that people are overlooking the fact that this was his first job in management?

Another important factor is how his team performed compared to Calderwoods, I don't recollect JC's team being anywhere near the bottom of the league as consistently as CC's yet Calderwood is more experienced.

KeithTheHibby
26-10-2011, 08:32 AM
If its not his place to speak out, why is he saying nothing now but implying lots? And shat on,where?

By the board.

KeithTheHibby
26-10-2011, 08:37 AM
Followed by a public apology by the captain, a statement from Collins (who remained in place a further 8 months) saying that he was being fully backed and certain players who were emptied shortly afterwards, one immediately. While a mistake may have been made with the location of the meeting subsequent events suggested it was who Collins wielded the axe and came out on top.

What else?

So that makes it ok for the meeting to have happened in the first place then??

The damage was done at that point and no matter how it was patched up I seriously doubt JC would have had much respect for his superiors.

Purple & Green
26-10-2011, 08:38 AM
the manager and he has got to be in total control of every football aspect, every decision that is made - what coaches come and go, what scouts come and go. I don't know if that has been the case at Hibs in the last few years."

I'd normally agree with JC, but on this one he's completely wrong - plain and simple. There should be one person responsible for all football/performance aspects within a club, but that should not be the manager. That should be the remit of the performance director/director of coaching.

It's clearly madness to allow your manager to decide every football aspect, because the average shelf life of a manager at a club is less than two years. Should every new manager have the freedom to change every football aspect? Of course not - that would lead to massive turnover of key staff and killing continuity. What if the manager is poached, what if he's sacked, what if he decides one day that he's not happy with the player acquisitions and decides to resign - where does that leave the club and all the staff that he's brought in?

There's every chance what he said has been taken out of context, but if it hasn't he's clearly wrong.

blackpoolhibs
26-10-2011, 08:48 AM
By the board.

Dont see it myself, the players were pissed off with his attitude towards them, and the next people in line was the board. Can you tell me where the board did anything that backed the players, and not Collins?

Petrie and the board backed him after the meeting, they told the players Collins was in charge. Petrie had to listen to their grievances, although if he'd sent them packing it would have made the situation worse imo. But he listened and backed Collins.

Collins had the team playing well for a while, but when he left we were average, and he'd brought a lot of that averageness to the club. He imo spat his dummy out because he could not get his own way, he was not allowed to bring in players who would want £15k a week, irrespective of those players MAYBE being sold on in the future, we cant afford those types of wages, no matter what money we have brought in.

Collins is financially secure for life, its easy for him to walk away like he did. I'm sure a job with a smaller club would be very easy for him to get, but he does not seem that interested.

ScottB
26-10-2011, 09:11 AM
The former Monaco and Fulham man said: "There can only be one boss at any football club and the main man has always got to be the manager - not the chairman or the directors or the chief executive.
"The most important person at any football club is the manager and he has got to be in total control of every football aspect, every decision that is made - what coaches come and go, what scouts come and go. I don't know if that has been the case at Hibs in the last few years."
From STV.news.

I wonder what on earth he could mean?

In principal, yes indeed, in practice, at a club that will always have a high turnover of managers one way or the other, I'm not so sure.

We all want continuity, but we are never going to get that from a manager, Sir Alex style, staying in charge for years on end, so I can see an argument for the club hiring in coaches / scouts and what not for the long haul, separately from managers. That is not to say that the current number 1 shouldn't be allowed to bring in his own number 2 if he likes, but I'd think it pretty common at clubs our size not to change the entire coaching / scouting staff every time the manager goes.

Beefster
26-10-2011, 09:12 AM
Is that what Collins said?

I think you misunderstood what I wrote. I didn't say that Collins had said that. I said that we have all heard/read the stories about the structure/working practices of the club.

Bad Martini
26-10-2011, 11:29 AM
The former Monaco and Fulham man said: "There can only be one boss at any football club and the main man has always got to be the manager - not the chairman or the directors or the chief executive.
"The most important person at any football club is the manager and he has got to be in total control of every football aspect, every decision that is made - what coaches come and go, what scouts come and go. I don't know if that has been the case at Hibs in the last few years."
From STV.news.

I wonder what on earth he could mean?

Collins is not that far away from arguably the most charismatic and one of the finest football managers ever line of thought on this matter:

"At a football club, there's a holy trinity - the players, the manager and the supporters. Directors don't come into it. They are only there to sign the cheques".

...such thinking didnt do Shankly any harm now did it?


FACT: You can blame Johnny for what you like. You can even blame Mixu, Yogi and the current numpty in the seat. OR, you can look at who put them all there and you can make up your own mind.........

The board arent above questionning and that includes Petrie. He put them all there. He has a big influence on who comes (and moreover who goes when £££ is right) and he can take a big ****ing slice of the blame as to why we've moved on in every regard over the last few years EXCEPT, on the pitch.

And I for one would rather hear Collins views on the matter than a financially motivated "custodian". Collins is a fitba player. He won us a cup and his attitude for the cabbage was above question. Fair doo's. He was heavy handed and arrogant with it BUT, his motives, were a fit team who could win games. And we did achieve that many many times....

ENDOF

ScottB
26-10-2011, 12:25 PM
Collins is not that far away from arguably the most charismatic and one of the finest football managers ever line of thought on this matter:

"At a football club, there's a holy trinity - the players, the manager and the supporters. Directors don't come into it. They are only there to sign the cheques".

...such thinking didnt do Shankly any harm now did it?


FACT: You can blame Johnny for what you like. You can even blame Mixu, Yogi and the current numpty in the seat. OR, you can look at who put them all there and you can make up your own mind.........

The board arent above questionning and that includes Petrie. He put them all there. He has a big influence on who comes (and moreover who goes when £££ is right) and he can take a big ****ing slice of the blame as to why we've moved on in every regard over the last few years EXCEPT, on the pitch.

And I for one would rather hear Collins views on the matter than a financially motivated "custodian". Collins is a fitba player. He won us a cup and his attitude for the cabbage was above question. Fair doo's. He was heavy handed and arrogant with it BUT, his motives, were a fit team who could win games. And we did achieve that many many times....

ENDOF

I disagree, times have changed.

Look at Barcelona, which is simply THE model for how a club should do things. They have coaches throughout from kids to the first team, all hired to coach to the clubs vision of how things should be. When Pep leaves do you think that will change? Do you think the next Barca manager would get to come in and tear all that up to do what he likes? Of course not.

Having a central vision and ethos for the club from a footballing perspective, along with continuity in the backroom staff is no bad thing. Our issue is that we seem to have kept folk who aren't doing their jobs well enough in place for too long now.

The Falcon
26-10-2011, 01:02 PM
. But we didn't keep him, the board sacked him because the poor wee lambs were being "worked too hard". :rolleyes:


Utter drivel. Really.

The Falcon
26-10-2011, 01:12 PM
Did he not get Petrie to hold out for a more realistic fee for the players & as such pulled in far larger fee's for Thomson & Brown and we also lost both our full backs, all in the space of about nine months.

As far as telling it straight, he would have to be really stupid to do that, what employer would hire somebody knowing they were capable of hanging out the dirty washing?

The players concerned wanted to leave and the two of them worked together to get the best deal for Hibs, the way it should be and is despite many claims to the contrary.

Collins walked so there is no "mutual consent" confidentiality clause restricting what he says, the one that Yogi hides behind.



The best of the lot, 1972.


Totally. I was 9 and thought days like that would happen all the time.

The Falcon
26-10-2011, 01:19 PM
The job may have changed, but it is still by far the most important position in the club, you only have to go back to TM's time to see that as it was his input that brought the crowds & record amount of cash to the club, not the performance of the accountant, who became busy selling off the team to pay for past F up's.

TM didnt identify or sign the players that moved for the big money. He may have played them in the first team but they had been there a number of years prior to TM arriving at ER and many others put in long hours making Brown, KT, Fletch, GOC, Riordan and Whittaker the players they became. TM may have had a role in their development but his role was relatively small.

The Falcon
26-10-2011, 01:22 PM
It is not that JC wanted to keep someone. The point is that he MP,JH and CC have been unable to get rid of someone.

He got rid of Michael Stewart pretty quickly.

Ray_
26-10-2011, 01:40 PM
TM didnt identify or sign the players that moved for the big money. He may have played them in the first team but they had been there a number of years prior to TM arriving at ER and many others put in long hours making Brown, KT, Fletch, GOC, Riordan and Whittaker the players they became. TM may have had a role in their development but his role was relatively small.

Murphy was certainly his signing & he brought us a fair amount.

The point I was making is that TM was the one responsible for the football that captured the imagination of the support, so much so, the club gained by selling record amount of season tickets, merchandise & hospitality packages, as well as that, they received more cash through the gate receipts than ever before. Williamson had the same players at his disposal & he certainly never managed to compliment them with his own signings or have them playing in the manner that brought all this cash to the club.

Petrie's part in all that was employing TM, a point he never got sick of telling us, through his tales about the check list, my own take is that we were very lucky TM applied for the job, as I very much doubt he would have been head hunted.

Future17
26-10-2011, 01:43 PM
I disagree, times have changed.

Look at Barcelona, which is simply THE model for how a club should do things. They have coaches throughout from kids to the first team, all hired to coach to the clubs vision of how things should be. When Pep leaves do you think that will change? Do you think the next Barca manager would get to come in and tear all that up to do what he likes? Of course not.

Having a central vision and ethos for the club from a footballing perspective, along with continuity in the backroom staff is no bad thing. Our issue is that we seem to have kept folk who aren't doing their jobs well enough in place for too long now.

That may be true, but there is a difference between being important and being the most important.

Everything about a football club - be it "vision", "ethos" or background stuff like finances - should be focussed on putting a team on the park that is:

a) successful
b) entertaining
or, in some cases
c) representative of the area, race, nationality, or whatever else the club may have been established for the purpose of representing

Accordingly, when it comes to the team on the park and achieving these objectives, the most important person is the manager.

greenlex
26-10-2011, 02:10 PM
TM didnt identify or sign the players that moved for the big money. He may have played them in the first team but they had been there a number of years prior to TM arriving at ER and many others put in long hours making Brown, KT, Fletch, GOC, Riordan and Whittaker the players they became. TM may have had a role in their development but his role was relatively small.

Can I just point out that Riordan has made us relatively little in terms of transfer money. :greengrin

The Falcon
26-10-2011, 03:40 PM
Murphy was certainly his signing & he brought us a fair amount.

The point I was making is that TM was the one responsible for the football that captured the imagination of the support, so much so, the club gained by selling record amount of season tickets, merchandise & hospitality packages, as well as that, they received more cash through the gate receipts than ever before. Williamson had the same players at his disposal & he certainly never managed to compliment them with his own signings or have them playing in the manner that brought all this cash to the club.

Petrie's part in all that was employing TM, a point he never got sick of telling us, through his tales about the check list, my own take is that we were very lucky TM applied for the job, as I very much doubt he would have been head hunted.

My point was that all the hard work with those players was done long before TM ever came near ER. Season tickets were at a high because the players we, as a club, had worked hard to develop were complemented by some decent signings like Murphy. Jones went for fee and Sproule was punted by Collins suspiciously quickly after the players "mutiny".

The Falcon
26-10-2011, 03:42 PM
Can I just point out that Riordan has made us relatively little in terms of transfer money. :greengrin


You can.

NORTHERNHIBBY
26-10-2011, 04:14 PM
i am surprised that Collins is still trading on this. Big mistakes were made on the football side and the boardroom side when he was in charge. For my money, he was the right candidate but at the wrong time. Warmimg to the players revolt was a huge mistake by RP and one that I think he regrets now. But the penny pinching that Collins eludes to really riles with me. I would not have let him near the tea money after he wasted all that cash on AOB.

Ray_
26-10-2011, 04:22 PM
My point was that all the hard work with those players was done long before TM ever came near ER. Season tickets were at a high because the players we, as a club, had worked hard to develop were complemented by some decent signings like Murphy. Jones went for fee and Sproule was punted by Collins suspiciously quickly after the players "mutiny".


The players that were developed by the club were available to the previous managers, if it was as easy for TM as your suggesting, why then didn't Williamson get the same reaction from the team & thereafter, the public.

Following on from your argument, if it is mainly to do with the club & not the manager, I take it that it is the club's fault we have been doing so poorly the last 3-4 years, as we clearly haven't managed to sustain the success of the golden generation, which was Petrie's master plan, only he clearly and neglectfully overlooked the fact that we hadn't had a similar bunch of talented youngsters since the late sixties.

When I think about the youngsters that came through at the end of the sixties, they done a square route of FA until Eddie Turnbull joined the club, aided with a few signings, he then moulded them in to the TT's, does it sound a little familiar with TM & the golden generation?

Ray_
26-10-2011, 04:29 PM
i am surprised that Collins is still trading on this. Big mistakes were made on the football side and the boardroom side when he was in charge. For my money, he was the right candidate but at the wrong time. Warmimg to the players revolt was a huge mistake by RP and one that I think he regrets now. But the penny pinching that Collins eludes to really riles with me. I would not have let him near the tea money after he wasted all that cash on AOB.

Thankfully the board didn't feel the same way about Willie Mac after the disastrous signing of Jim Blair, for what was a huge amount of money at the time, he also brought in the likes of Arthur Duncan, Erich Scheadler, Johnny Graham & Gordon Marshall, who were all successful at varying degree's.

Manager's are not infallible when signing players, Fergie took years to replace Schmeichel & Newcastle rated him high enough to offer him a new contract.

The Falcon
26-10-2011, 06:15 PM
The players that were developed by the club were available to the previous managers, if it was as easy for TM as your suggesting, why then didn't Williamson get the same reaction from the team & thereafter, the public.

Following on from your argument, if it is mainly to do with the club & not the manager, I take it that it is the club's fault we have been doing so poorly the last 3-4 years, as we clearly haven't managed to sustain the success of the golden generation, which was Petrie's master plan, only he clearly and neglectfully overlooked the fact that we hadn't had a similar bunch of talented youngsters since the late sixties.

When I think about the youngsters that came through at the end of the sixties, they done a square route of FA until Eddie Turnbull joined the club, aided with a few signings, he then moulded them in to the TT's, does it sound a little familiar with TM & the golden generation?


It is a combination of many factor's at the time. A talented group coming through together and many years of decent coaching. When Mowbray took over they were just coming to the fore and Mowbray benefitted from, in some cases, over ten years of development work. When Mowbray joined the club GOC had just turned 21, Deeks was 20, Brown was 19, Katie 20, Fletcher was 17 and Whittaker was also 20. Are you suggesting that because Bobby didnt play Fletch at 15 he somehow failed where Mowbray succeeded? If it was all down to Mowbray why didnt it work for him at Celtic?

Ray_
26-10-2011, 08:09 PM
It is a combination of many factor's at the time. A talented group coming through together and many years of decent coaching. When Mowbray took over they were just coming to the fore and Mowbray benefitted from, in some cases, over ten years of development work. When Mowbray joined the club GOC had just turned 21, Deeks was 20, Brown was 19, Katie 20, Fletcher was 17 and Whittaker was also 20. Are you suggesting that because Bobby didnt play Fletch at 15 he somehow failed where Mowbray succeeded? If it was all down to Mowbray why didnt it work for him at Celtic?

Why use Fletch as an argument, he rarely played under TM, as for the rest, just coming to the fore!!! I thought they had been pretty guff myself, game against an admin inflicted Livingston team said enough & from Williamson's team, Mowbray was further hindered by the loss of Andersson & Doumbe, two of the most consistent performers of that team. To start the new season the way Hibs did was as totally unexpected as it was wonderful to see & the public responded accordingly.

I notice you aren't saying anything about Petrie's fatally flawed plan of a constant stream of young talent that was going to match the players that come through during the mid 00's.

fatbloke
26-10-2011, 09:10 PM
If the CEO left the manager to decide what the budget was for players and wages I would think that most clubs would be in the same position that Rangers and Hearts are in just now!

what top of the league for one and undefeated against your greatest rivals for a long time for the other. Hmmm.

The Falcon
26-10-2011, 09:13 PM
Why use Fletch as an argument, he rarely played under TM, as for the rest, just coming to the fore!!! I thought they had been pretty guff myself, game against an admin inflicted Livingston team said enough & from Williamson's team, Mowbray was further hindered by the loss of Andersson & Doumbe, two of the most consistent performers of that team. To start the new season the way Hibs did was as totally unexpected as it was wonderful to see & the public responded accordingly.

I notice you aren't saying anything about Petrie's fatally flawed plan of a constant stream of young talent that was going to match the players that come through during the mid 00's.

Fletch played more under Mowbray than Hogg, Murray, Sproule or Jones. He also played more often under Mowbray than Riordan, Brown, Thomson or Whittaker were under Williamson.

They had only just been placed in admin when we played them in the final and the players they had, they couldnt afford, and that put them in admin whilst we were trying to stay afloat. Admin had not affected the playing side with the first team squad still intact.

But dont let the facts get in the way of you're slag fest. Crack on.

You take care now.

Ray_
26-10-2011, 10:54 PM
Fletch played more under Mowbray than Hogg, Murray, Sproule or Jones. He also played more often under Mowbray than Riordan, Brown, Thomson or Whittaker were under Williamson.

They had only just been placed in admin when we played them in the final and the players they had, they couldnt afford, and that put them in admin whilst we were trying to stay afloat. Admin had not affected the playing side with the first team squad still intact.

But dont let the facts get in the way of you're slag fest. Crack on.

You take care now.

OK I made a mistake about Fletcher, however, in Williamson's last season Riordan played 34 games, Brown 36, Thomson 23 & Whit's 26 while Garry O'Connor had played over 80 times before TM joined the club, so when I said that TM made far better use of those players its not as far out as you are trying to imply, in fact I don't even know why I'm even bothering to answer you, there are more than enough examples that prove the team manager is THE job that matters in a club, you & your pal on the board must be part the select very few that can't see it.

As for Livi, they went into admin at the beginning of Feb & the cup final was in the middle of March, although they kept MOST of the first team, the likes Stuart Lovell, Marvin Andrews and Oscar Rubio took pay cuts, far from being ideal preparation for a major cup final & in case you can't remember, Hibs were the overwhelming favourites.

Slag fest, wake up & smell the coffee, as well as being a p poor team, with the assets away, we are again in serious debt and haemorrhaging cash with a diminishing customer base & as unremarkable as it sounds, Petrie's conveyor belt of young talent is nowhere to be seen, great stuff.

blackpoolhibs
26-10-2011, 10:57 PM
OK I made a mistake about Fletcher, however, in Williamson's last season Riordan played 34 games, Brown 36, Thomson 23 & Whit's 26 while Garry O'Connor had played over 80 times before TM joined the club, so when I said that TM made far better use of those players its not as far out as you are trying to imply, in fact I don't even know why I'm even bothering to answer you, there are more than enough examples that prove the team manager is THE job that matters in a club.

As for Livi, they went into admin at the beginning of Feb & the cup final was in the middle of March, although they kept MOST of the first team, the likes Stuart Lovell, Marvin Andrews and Oscar Rubio took pay cuts, far from being ideal preparation for a major cup final & in case you can't remember, Hibs were the overwhelming favourites.

Slag fest, wake up & smell the coffee, as well as being a p poor team, with the assets away, we are again in serious debt and haemorrhaging cash with a diminishing customer base, great stuff.

Not true, if i remember correctly we were 11/8 and Livi were 6/4. There was nothing in it.

Ray_
26-10-2011, 11:07 PM
Not true, if i remember correctly we were 11/8 and Livi were 6/4. There was nothing in it.

Perhaps my memory is failing me on this, didn't we hammer them a week or so before and were big fav's for the final or was that just the 91 final?

shamo9
26-10-2011, 11:18 PM
Perhaps my memory is failing me on this, didn't we hammer them a week or so before and were big fav's for the final or was that just the 91 final?

Nope, they'd beaten us twice that season and were above us in the league at the time. While we did finish one point above them in the end, it didn't stop them spanking us 4-1 on the last day.

We were favourites in our, and the media's, heads due to beating the Old Firm in previous rounds, but in reality they had a much more experienced team. I remember with clarity how they upset us 2-0 during Joe Baker's tribute match during the same season. Not as bad as Turnbull's one, but getting there.

Ray_
26-10-2011, 11:28 PM
Nope, they'd beaten us twice that season and were above us in the league at the time. While we did finish one point above them in the end, it didn't stop them spanking us 4-1 on the last day.

We were favourites in our, and the media's, heads due to beating the Old Firm in previous rounds, but in reality they had a much more experienced team. I remember with clarity how they upset us 2-0 during Joe Baker's tribute match during the same season. Not as bad as Turnbull's one, but getting there.

Thanks for that, if that's the case, then to be honest, it further enhances Mowbray's positive impact on the club, the following season.

shamo9
27-10-2011, 01:25 AM
Thanks for that, if that's the case, then to be honest, it further enhances Mowbray's positive impact on the club, the following season.

Perhaps, but I've always felt Bobby deserved a crumb of credit for laying the groundwork. He steadied the ship to the point where we were always competing to try and get in the top six, on a significantly smaller budget than the teams around us I might add. When Mowbray came in, not only did he have a "highly promising young team" as most of the media dubbed us, but Livi, Dundee, Motherwell and the rest were beginning to count the cost for their frivolous spending.

When you look at how threadbare our squad was back then; it puts todays lot to shame, no question. Colin Murdock and Tom McManus were the senior members of the defensive and forward line respectively. The midfield lost the old heads of Ian Murray and Grant Brebnar to serious injuries for the second half of the season, with Kevin Nicol, Alan Ried and a teenaged Kevin Thomson replacing them.

I'm not suggesting Bobby was a good Hibernian manager by any stretch, just that from this vantage point (11/12), it doesn't seem as bad as it once did. Sad times. Need a trip to the cinema to cheer me up.

Kaiser1962
27-10-2011, 07:54 AM
Perhaps, but I've always felt Bobby deserved a crumb of credit for laying the groundwork.

:agree:

Bobby had a thankless task IMO. He was replacing a legend (if I recall he walked down the tunnel at home to St. Johnstone to the entire stadium singing "there's only one Sauzee") ) which followed the reasonably big spending McLeish era which contributed to a big debt. Bobby was not allowed to sign any Sauzee or Zittelli types with European experience and had to make do and mend with what he had already at the club. This he did.

To have so many player's (KT, SB, GOC, DR, SW, SF) coming through the ranks at same time, and go on to international honours, was a one off unlikely to be repeated. I agree that Mowbray made good use of these players but for folk to have a pop at BW because he didnt achieve the same success is grossly unfair as the players were only beginning to gain first team experience. The development of those players was down to a lot of work long before Mowbray (or Williamson) were at the club, with a significant amount of good fortune involved in that they were there, we identified them, we developed them and they all stayed realyively incident free while at Hibs. Where else have such a crop came through at the same time? There will be examples but they will be as rare as a Yam in a shower. Things were great until reality kicked in and they outgrew Hibs.

To put that period into perspective the recent U-19 double winning team, which would suggest they were the best in the land by some margin, have barely caused a ripple.

FWIW I also believe that JC would have achieved the same results as Mowbray if he'd followed Williamson, although I am not so sure that either Yogi or CC would have. Horses for courses and all that.

ScottB
27-10-2011, 08:32 AM
:agree:

Bobby had a thankless task IMO. He was replacing a legend (if I recall he walked down the tunnel at home to St. Johnstone to the entire stadium singing "there's only one Sauzee") ) which followed the reasonably big spending McLeish era which contributed to a big debt. Bobby was not allowed to sign any Sauzee or Zittelli types with European experience and had to make do and mend with what he had already at the club. This he did.

To have so many player's (KT, SB, GOC, DR, SW, SF) coming through the ranks at same time, and go on to international honours, was a one off unlikely to be repeated. I agree that Mowbray made good use of these players but for folk to have a pop at BW because he didnt achieve the same success is grossly unfair as the players were only beginning to gain first team experience. The development of those players was down to a lot of work long before Mowbray (or Williamson) were at the club, with a significant amount of good fortune involved in that they were there, we identified them, we developed them and they all stayed realyively incident free while at Hibs. Where else have such a crop came through at the same time? There will be examples but they will be as rare as a Yam in a shower. Things were great until reality kicked in and they outgrew Hibs.

To put that period into perspective the recent U-19 double winning team, which would suggest they were the best in the land by some margin, have barely caused a ripple.

FWIW I also believe that JC would have achieved the same results as Mowbray if he'd followed Williamson, although I am not so sure that either Yogi or CC would have. Horses for courses and all that.

Frankly, Mowbray lucked into the squad he had at the club, and for me, under achieved. Had he the capacity to sign a keeper capable of catching a ball we may have actually won something. Ultimately, with the best squad we've had in a long time, Mowbray got us one 3rd place. Just because the quality on show was better, doesn't make him the mangerial messiah some folk like to think.

AlbertK86
27-10-2011, 08:43 AM
Frankly, Mowbray lucked into the squad he had at the club, and for me, under achieved. Had he the capacity to sign a keeper capable of catching a ball we may have actually won something. Ultimately, with the best squad we've had in a long time, Mowbray got us one 3rd place. Just because the quality on show was better, doesn't make him the mangerial messiah some folk like to think.

He's doing no bad with Boro now in a league far superior to the SPL

ScottB
27-10-2011, 09:11 AM
He's doing no bad with Boro now in a league far superior to the SPL

Doesn't mean he didn't underachieve with us though does it? With as good a crop of players we could ever hope to produce, he delivered one third place and no cups. All the while we had a defence almost as leaky as this one and he kept offering contracts to the singular worst goalkeeper in the history of professional football.

We played some nice stuff under Mowbray sure, but I'm not gonna break out the green tinted specs and gush over him.

Posh Swanny
27-10-2011, 09:13 AM
Every week I give the wife (who holds the purse strings but has no idea about quality food) a list of things to buy from Tesco. She goes along and invariably only ever comes back with 30% of the items on the list, which is fair enough as we probably couldn't afford them all. But an example of her choice reasoning would be that the Finest Garlic Ciabatta that I put on the list wasn't worth the £2.99 that Tesco were wanting for it but that the 12-pack of Value pork pies for £2.99 was fine. I wouldn't mind but I REALLY like those ciabattas and, even worse, when the kids moan that the pork pies are rank and why can't they have nice things like Tesco Finest Garlic Ciabatta - the wife pipes up with "well your Dad put pork pies on the list and we couldn't afford the ciabattas".

I have an interesting life eh?! :wink:

Kaiser1962
27-10-2011, 09:56 AM
He's doing no bad with Boro now in a league far superior to the SPL

Yet he didn't do so well at Celtic. :dunno:

basehibby
27-10-2011, 12:43 PM
People keep going on about the few "bad signings" that Collins made.

Well these signings were never going to look in a team full of daft wee laddies who didn't want to put the extra effort into improving their game in the first place.

JC had the correct mentality, the players present at the club at that time did not.

If we had given JC more time, we'd be in a far better situation now than we are. But we didn't keep him, the board sacked him because the poor wee lambs were being "worked too hard". :rolleyes:



Collins wasn't sacked - he walked, citing excessive penny pinching from the board as his reason.

On that subject I don't see how anybody can argue that penny pinching has not happened at Hibs - the example quoted as the straw that broke the camel's back at the time of Collins' departure was RP expecting a targetted left back to take a PAY CUT to join Hibs shortly after pocketing c £1.3M for David Murphy. The left back - Stevie Hammel IIRC - went on to join Motherwell so I find it hard to believe his wage demands were sky high.

With few exceptions, this approach seems to have run through our transfer policy consistently ever since, with key players yielding big transfer fees and the manager of the day left to "replace" them with last minute loan deals or never-heard-of freebies. The hope of course has been to uncover diamonds in the dust, but that's not something you can rely upon to build a team and, ultimately, that's how we've got to where we are now.

Kaiser1962
28-10-2011, 07:51 AM
I think you misunderstood what I wrote. I didn't say that Collins had said that. I said that we have all heard/read the stories about the structure/working practices of the club.


I did and offer my apologies Mr. B.


At the second bit in bold I found it interesting that Lennon has little involvement in the Scott Brown contract negotiations and this seems to be normal practice these days, certainly at the larger clubs.

I know there are many other comments from ER about different things but one of the biggest gripes/innuendo has been aimed at how and who does the signing negotiations. And given Yogi's comments the other week does anybody think he wouldn't take the Celtic job because he wouldnt get to do the contract negotiations?

Captain Trips
28-10-2011, 09:30 AM
Collins wasn't sacked - he walked, citing excessive penny pinching from the board as his reason.

On that subject I don't see how anybody can argue that penny pinching has not happened at Hibs - the example quoted as the straw that broke the camel's back at the time of Collins' departure was RP expecting a targetted left back to take a PAY CUT to join Hibs shortly after pocketing c £1.3M for David Murphy. The left back - Stevie Hammel IIRC - went on to join Motherwell so I find it hard to believe his wage demands were sky high.

With few exceptions, this approach seems to have run through our transfer policy consistently ever since, with key players yielding big transfer fees and the manager of the day left to "replace" them with last minute loan deals or never-heard-of freebies. The hope of course has been to uncover diamonds in the dust, but that's not something you can rely upon to build a team and, ultimately, that's how we've got to where we are now.

I agree, and if that is how you are going to run club then you are heading for well what has happened. If you do that the manager and his scouts have to be top drawer to get away with it, I think it appears they arent.

BEEJ
28-10-2011, 12:05 PM
I know there are many other comments from ER about different things but one of the biggest gripes/innuendo has been aimed at how and who does the signing negotiations. And given Yogi's comments the other week does anybody think he wouldn't take the Celtic job because he wouldnt get to do the contract negotiations?
An important distinction to be made here.

There is the dialogue with a player that first 'sets the parameters of a deal' - discussions which would address length of contract, indicative salary and other parts of a potential package (house, car etc). This dialogue is what brings the player to the table as a potential signing.

Then there are the more detailed negotiations which must be worked through with the player and his agent before a contract is finally signed. This would involve going through the contract clause by clause, crossing every 't' and dotting every 'i'.

I don't think any right-minded football supporter (of any club) expects or would wish their Manager to engage in the latter. Not the Manager's specialism, not at all what he is paid to spend his time on. Complete waste of everyone's time.

However, the dialogue that potentially brings players to the point of entering into those negotiations must (IMHO) rest with the Manager. And within that dialogue the Manager must be able to decide the share of his player budget that he is going to allocate to this player based on what he believes that player will bring to the team. That would be normal practice.

The question at Hibs is not "who conducts the detailed negotiations" but "who has that initial dialogue with the player which sets out the framework of a potential deal".

Kaiser1962
28-10-2011, 02:40 PM
However, the dialogue that potentially brings players to the point of entering into those negotiations must (IMHO) rest with the Manager. And within that dialogue the Manager must be able to decide the share of his player budget that he is going to allocate to this player based on what he believes that player will bring to the team. That would be normal practice.

The question at Hibs is not "who conducts the detailed negotiations" but "who has that initial dialogue with the player which sets out the framework of a potential deal".


Good post Beej and I agree with it.

Given the amount of ex-Falkirk players Yogi signed or targeted you could surmise it was Yogi who did the bit in bold. Difficult to imagine that AOB was anything other than a management decision given the link to TC, and given the amount of the available budget that deal swallowed up. You can also see Calderwoods hand in most of his signings and Adams in the signing of Jimmy Scott. GOC and Ivan can be argued about, and have been, but does anyone really know ? I would be very dissapointed if any manager allowed players to be signed without any input into the decision.


I notice Lennon commented that if the negotiations were between only him and Scott Brown he thinks there would have been agreement a long time ago. And its worth pointing out that while the manager does not do the actual negotiating neither does the player. Changed days indeed and you have to wonder how successful guys like Jim McLean would be in the present day.

Cropley10
28-10-2011, 02:51 PM
Collins wasn't sacked - he walked, citing excessive penny pinching from the board as his reason.

On that subject I don't see how anybody can argue that penny pinching has not happened at Hibs - the example quoted as the straw that broke the camel's back at the time of Collins' departure was RP expecting a targetted left back to take a PAY CUT to join Hibs shortly after pocketing c £1.3M for David Murphy. The left back - Stevie Hammel IIRC - went on to join Motherwell so I find it hard to believe his wage demands were sky high.

With few exceptions, this approach seems to have run through our transfer policy consistently ever since, with key players yielding big transfer fees and the manager of the day left to "replace" them with last minute loan deals or never-heard-of freebies. The hope of course has been to uncover diamonds in the dust, but that's not something you can rely upon to build a team and, ultimately, that's how we've got to where we are now.

And co-incidentally that's why there's no-one (other than GOC, who is here to rehab for a year only) who is worth anything.

Our Board oversaw a policy of generally selling our decent players, then relying on a 'wing and a prayer' to see if we could find anyone to fill their position. We've not had a LB since Murphy left.

Kaiser1962
28-10-2011, 02:59 PM
And co-incidentally that's why there's no-one (other than GOC, who is here to rehab for a year only) who is worth anything.

Our Board oversaw a policy of generally selling our decent players, then relying on a 'wing and a prayer' to see if we could find anyone to fill their position. We've not had a LB since Murphy left.


We've been here before C10. Many times.

BEEJ
28-10-2011, 04:41 PM
Good post Beej and I agree with it.

Given the amount of ex-Falkirk players Yogi signed or targeted you could surmise it was Yogi who did the bit in bold. Difficult to imagine that AOB was anything other than a management decision given the link to TC, and given the amount of the available budget that deal swallowed up. You can also see Calderwoods hand in most of his signings and Adams in the signing of Jimmy Scott. GOC and Ivan can be argued about, and have been, but does anyone really know ? I would be very dissapointed if any manager allowed players to be signed without any input into the decision.
Yes, these players might well have been identified and targeted by their respective Managers. One would certainly hope so.

The subtle point is, who had the dialogue with them around the broad parameters of any package? Was that the Manager or was 'anything with a £ sign in front of it' the remit of RP?


I notice Lennon commented that if the negotiations were between only him and Scott Brown he thinks there would have been agreement a long time ago. And its worth pointing out that while the manager does not do the actual negotiating neither does the player. Changed days indeed and you have to wonder how successful guys like Jim McLean would be in the present day.
He would have struggled, no doubt. :wink:

Kaiser1962
29-10-2011, 07:20 AM
The subtle point is, who had the dialogue with them around the broad parameters of any package? Was that the Manager or was 'anything with a £ sign in front of it' the remit of RP?

As this thread is about Collins it would difficult to imagine that, given the portion of the budget allocated to the signings of AOB and MaKalamby, that Collins (and Craig) had anything other than a significant input.

blackpoolhibs
29-10-2011, 07:47 AM
Why is Petries meeting regarded as undermining Collins? And just what did Petrie do that backed the players, not the manager?

Kaiser1962
29-10-2011, 11:13 PM
Why is Petries meeting regarded as undermining Collins? And just what did Petrie do that backed the players, not the manager?


Overwhelmed with the response BH.

Stonewall
30-10-2011, 08:19 AM
Collins wasn't sacked - he walked, citing excessive penny pinching from the board as his reason.

On that subject I don't see how anybody can argue that penny pinching has not happened at Hibs - the example quoted as the straw that broke the camel's back at the time of Collins' departure was RP expecting a targetted left back to take a PAY CUT to join Hibs shortly after pocketing c £1.3M for David Murphy. The left back - Stevie Hammel IIRC - went on to join Motherwell so I find it hard to believe his wage demands were sky high.

With few exceptions, this approach seems to have run through our transfer policy consistently ever since, with key players yielding big transfer fees and the manager of the day left to "replace" them with last minute loan deals or never-heard-of freebies. The hope of course has been to uncover diamonds in the dust, but that's not something you can rely upon to build a team and, ultimately, that's how we've got to where we are now.

Or alternatively given Collins' poor signing record and unconvinced of his ability to turn the poor run of form around, Petrie refused to sanction any additional spending and used the issue of Hammil to manoeuvre Collins out of the door.

Your analysis of our transfer policy is correct. I disagree with your conclusion though. It's more a case of successive managers not using their budget well. Other clubs of our size manage.

I hear a lot about Petrie's penny pinching (whatever that means) but little hard evidence. Constant repetition doesn't make it a fact. For what it's worth I think Petrie did a great job sorting out our finances and the club's infrastructure. I do not believe he has the leadership and visionary qualities to take the club to the next stage.

Broken Gnome
30-10-2011, 10:19 AM
Frankly, Mowbray lucked into the squad he had at the club, and for me, under achieved. Had he the capacity to sign a keeper capable of catching a ball we may have actually won something. Ultimately, with the best squad we've had in a long time, Mowbray got us one 3rd place. Just because the quality on show was better, doesn't make him the mangerial messiah some folk like to think.

In some ways Mowbray was a bit unlucky too. The peak of Hibs' potential was 2005/06 I reckon - Riordan's last season, O'Connor still there, Fletcher becoming a more integral part of the side, relative embarrassment of riches in centre midfield.... Shame that coincided with Hearts seeing the biggest investment ever seen in Edinburgh football.

Yes, Mowbray wasn't perfect and we lost games we shouldn't have, amid the odd appalling performance. I would give him a massive amount of credit for the way O'Connor, Brown and Thomson progressed as players though. Remember O'Connor was extremely wayward at times under Williamson, and while Brown for example has obvious potential he was extremely raw and prone to a hot-head moment on a weekly basis. Would he have become the same player under any other manager as Mowbray? Perhaps, but I would certainly doubt Williamson's ability to do that. That Brown, O'Connor, Sproule (very much Sproule actually, considering where he came from) and Thomson moved for big money is very much to do with Mowbray. We could and probably should have achieved more, a Scottish Cup certainly, but to say that Mowbray lucked his way into that group of players is unfair as he had a huge part in developing them as individuals.

hibs0666
30-10-2011, 10:41 AM
Perhaps my memory is failing me on this, didn't we hammer them a week or so before and were big fav's for the final or was that just the 91 final?

You're taking a bit of a trouncing on this thread. :wink:

Livingston had last played Hibs in January and had won 1-0. At the time of the cup final Livingston were above Hibs in the league.

Ray_
30-10-2011, 12:06 PM
You're taking a bit of a trouncing on this thread. :wink:

Livingston had last played Hibs in January and had won 1-0. At the time of the cup final Livingston were above Hibs in the league.

Yip, apathy well & truly sunk in, even affecting the memory, you are a few days late with your contribution however as I was corrected a few days ago :greengrin & to be honest, forgetting the incidentals, the crux of the matter was the team manager being the most important role in a club & nothing that's been said has convinced me otherwise.

Kaiser1962
30-10-2011, 12:27 PM
Yip, apathy well & truly sunk in, even affecting the memory, you are a few days late with your contribution however as I was corrected a few days ago :greengrin & to be honest, forgetting the incidentals, the crux of the matter was the team manager being the most important role in a club & nothing that's been said has convinced me otherwise.


I think 40 years ago the manager at a club was God. In the last 30 years or so, and particularly post Bosman, this has changed beyond all recognition from the Turnbull/Stein era to the stage we are at today, whilst the manager still has a pivotal and crucial role to play, it's more of a team effort with many people involved. The references to the so called "golden generation", and the amount of coaches at all levels, scouts, youth coaches, youth managers, academy managers, reserve team coaches, first team coaches and first team managers that were involved in their development only serve to underpin that point. Given the turnover of mangers at ALL clubs, and the demands by the supporters for success, the hierarchical infrastructure of a club cannot be dismantled and rebuilt every time someone either gets the boot or moves on to better paid employment.

hibs0666
30-10-2011, 12:48 PM
Yip, apathy well & truly sunk in, even affecting the memory, you are a few days late with your contribution however as I was corrected a few days ago :greengrin & to be honest, forgetting the incidentals, the crux of the matter was the team manager being the most important role in a club & nothing that's been said has convinced me otherwise.

Football is a team game both on and off the park.

Ray_
30-10-2011, 02:33 PM
I think 40 years ago the manager at a club was God. In the last 30 years or so, and particularly post Bosman, this has changed beyond all recognition from the Turnbull/Stein era to the stage we are at today, whilst the manager still has a pivotal and crucial role to play, it's more of a team effort with many people involved. The references to the so called "golden generation", and the amount of coaches at all levels, scouts, youth coaches, youth managers, academy managers, reserve team coaches, first team coaches and first team managers that were involved in their development only serve to underpin that point. Given the turnover of mangers at ALL clubs, and the demands by the supporters for success, the hierarchical infrastructure of a club cannot be dismantled and rebuilt every time someone either gets the boot or moves on to better paid employment.

If everything in place was so great why was it not sustained? I have said many times that the "Golden Generation" was something that happens from time to time [last time at Hibs forty years ago almost] & although good grounding is a must at a club like ours, we are a long way before we can be considered even remotely along the lines of Ajax, Scottish football collectively doesn't produce that amount of talented youngsters.

With regards to the rest, Hibs are in a fantastic position, why is it then that all those so called lesser teams are doing better than us?

Just of the top of my head, Fergie made all the difference to Aberdeen & Man Utd, McLean at Utd, Wenger reshaped Arsenal, Mourinho made Chelsea in to winners, Dalglish had a dramatic affect on Liverpool, Smith pulled Rangers back from their French disaster, Redknapp totally reinvented bottom club Spurs & O'Neil at Celtic won over Rangers stranglehold on Scottish football. Those teams have been the most dominant in English & Scottish football over the last thirty years & they have one thing in common, guess what that is, just looking at Duffy & McLeish at Hibs should be enough to see how vital the team managers position is!

Kaiser1962
30-10-2011, 03:18 PM
If everything in place was so great why was it not sustained? I have said many times that the "Golden Generation" was something that happens from time to time [last time at Hibs forty years ago almost] & although good grounding is a must at a club like ours, we are a long way before we can be considered even remotely along the lines of Ajax, Scottish football collectively doesn't produce that amount of talented youngsters.

With regards to the rest, Hibs are in a fantastic position, why is it then that all those so called lesser teams are doing better than us?

Just of the top of my head, Fergie made all the difference to Aberdeen & Man Utd, McLean at Utd, Wenger reshaped Arsenal, Mourinho made Chelsea in to winners, Dalglish had a dramatic affect on Liverpool, Smith pulled Rangers back from their French disaster, Redknapp totally reinvented bottom club Spurs & O'Neil at Celtic won over Rangers stranglehold on Scottish football. Those teams have been the most dominant in English & Scottish football over the last thirty years & they have one thing in common, guess what that is, just looking at Duffy & McLeish at Hibs should be enough to see how vital the team managers position is!


They are only doing better than us lately, as in the last couple of seasons, overall we do better than them.

Of course a Fergie, Wenger or Mourinho make a difference but guys like that are few and far between and cost a lot of money. Like players do and you get what you can afford.

At what point did I say the managers position is not an important one? Redknapp has made a difference at Spurs but is he the most important person there? Was he the most important person at Pompey?

Ray_
30-10-2011, 04:09 PM
They are only doing better than us lately, as in the last couple of seasons, overall we do better than them.

Of course a Fergie, Wenger or Mourinho make a difference but guys like that are few and far between and cost a lot of money. Like players do and you get what you can afford.

At what point did I say the managers position is not an important one? Redknapp has made a difference at Spurs but is he the most important person there? Was he the most important person at Pompey?

If what you are saying was true, we would rarely be out the top four/five, as the jams, sheep & ourselves are relatively equal in status & the rest lower.

Levy was there when Spurs were bottom, that says something, doesn't it?

Yes those guys are the best in the business, but to a lesser degree, football clubs in the UK are usually defined by the success the manager brings them & they need SUPPORTED by the board.

nortonhibby
30-10-2011, 04:48 PM
If everything in place was so great why was it not sustained? I have said many times that the "Golden Generation" was something that happens from time to time [last time at Hibs forty years ago almost] & although good grounding is a must at a club like ours, we are a long way before we can be considered even remotely along the lines of Ajax, Scottish football collectively doesn't produce that amount of talented youngsters.

With regards to the rest, Hibs are in a fantastic position, why is it then that all those so called lesser teams are doing better than us?

Just of the top of my head, Fergie made all the difference to Aberdeen & Man Utd, McLean at Utd, Wenger reshaped Arsenal, Mourinho made Chelsea in to winners, Dalglish had a dramatic affect on Liverpool, Smith pulled Rangers back from their French disaster, Redknapp totally reinvented bottom club Spurs & O'Neil at Celtic won over Rangers stranglehold on Scottish football. Those teams have been the most dominant in English & Scottish football over the last thirty years & they have one thing in common, guess what that is, just looking at Duffy & McLeish at Hibs should be enough to see how vital the team managers position is!

But Duffy thinks he got emtied to early he recently quoted on the radio " I Got sacked for less " when discussing CCs record.

As if to state he needed more time to get things right:confused:

Kaiser1962
30-10-2011, 05:40 PM
If what you are saying was true, we would rarely be out the top four/five, as the jams, sheep & ourselves are relatively equal in status & the rest lower.

Levy was there when Spurs were bottom, that says something, doesn't it?

Yes those guys are the best in the business, but to a lesser degree, football clubs in the UK are usually defined by the success the manager brings them & they need SUPPORTED by the board.

Since the inception of the SPL 7 clubs are ever present and Hibs are a season less. In overall points we come in 6th having played a season less. When you take an average points per game played, to adjust for us having played 36 games less than the others, we are 4th overall. We are 4th overall in goals scored in the SPL despite playing 36 games less but when you take an average goals per game we are 3rd. We have the fourth best defensive record and have the 4th best percentage of games won (and lost).

Caversham Green
30-10-2011, 05:42 PM
Since the inception of the SPL 7 clubs are ever present and Hibs are a season less. In overall points we come in 6th having played a season less. When you take an average points per game played, to adjust for us having played 36 games less than the others, we are 4th overall. We are 4th overall in goals scored in the SPL despite playing 36 games less but when you take an average goals per game we are 3rd. We have the fourth best defensive record and have the 4th best percentage of games won (and lost).

And they call accountants boring. :greengrin

ScottB
30-10-2011, 05:45 PM
Since the inception of the SPL 7 clubs are ever present and Hibs are a season less. In overall points we come in 6th having played a season less. When you take an average points per game played, to adjust for us having played 36 games less than the others, we are 4th overall. We are 4th overall in goals scored in the SPL despite playing 36 games less but when you take an average goals per game we are 3rd. We have the fourth best defensive record and have the 4th best percentage of games won (and lost).

Which ultimately makes our record worse, clearly we are capable of finishing 3rd / 4th on a regular basis, but we never do.

As always, our inability to be consistent strikes.

Kaiser1962
30-10-2011, 05:46 PM
And they call accountants boring. :greengrin

I would add that in the timescale covered we have had the 5th largest income and spent the 5th largest amount on wages:greengrin

Kaiser1962
30-10-2011, 05:52 PM
Which ultimately makes our record worse, clearly we are capable of finishing 3rd / 4th on a regular basis, but we never do.

As always, our inability to be consistent strikes.


Rangers and Celtic have both had 13 top four finishes (usually top 2 except for the time that the yams finished 2nd), Hearts have had 7, Aberdeen 5 and we're next on 4. What is interesting (or not CG:greengrin) is that this directly relates to the tables for money in/ money spent on wages for the same period.

nortonhibby
30-10-2011, 07:34 PM
I would add that in the timescale covered we have had the 5th largest income and spent the 5th largest amount on wages:greengrin

RP ? Is it you ?:taxi

Kaiser1962
30-10-2011, 07:46 PM
RP ? Is it you ?:taxi


Fat Jim? Is that you?

BEEJ
30-10-2011, 11:03 PM
Since the inception of the SPL 7 clubs are ever present and Hibs are a season less. In overall points we come in 6th having played a season less. When you take an average points per game played, to adjust for us having played 36 games less than the others, we are 4th overall. We are 4th overall in goals scored in the SPL despite playing 36 games less but when you take an average goals per game we are 3rd. We have the fourth best defensive record and have the 4th best percentage of games won (and lost).
Mr Spin, do you have a source for all these stats? :wink:

Given that we finished 12th (or 10th) in one of the seasons we must have been motoring in all the other seasons to rank 4th overall in SPL history in terms of points per game played.

(Not to mention that adding in the 36 games missed during our 'adventure' in Division One at the same average points rate per game in other seasons is something of a heroic assumption.)

Kaiser1962
31-10-2011, 12:05 AM
Mr Spin, do you have a source for all these stats? :wink:

Given that we finished 12th (or 10th) in one of the seasons we must have been motoring in all the other seasons to rank 4th overall in SPL history in terms of points per game played.

(Not to mention that adding in the 36 games missed during our 'adventure' in Division One at the same average points rate per game in other seasons is something of a heroic assumption.)


Did you actually read my post? When did I say the games in the first division were included? They are not. They are all games in the SPL. The stats are all on the SPL website.

Since promotion from the first division we have finished 6,3,10,7,8,3,4,6,6,6,4, and 10. We have not finished 12th in the SPL. Aberdeen should have been relegated in 99/00 and Motherwell finished bottom in 02/03. Aberdeen can thank reconstruction and Motherwell can thank Falkirk.

We are fourth because other teams have bad spells as well, just like we are having.

Ray_
31-10-2011, 07:59 AM
Did you actually read my post? When did I say the games in the first division were included? They are not. They are all games in the SPL. The stats are all on the SPL website.

Since promotion from the first division we have finished 6,3,10,7,8,3,4,6,6,6,4, and 10. We have not finished 12th in the SPL. Aberdeen should have been relegated in 99/00 and Motherwell finished bottom in 02/03. Aberdeen can thank reconstruction and Motherwell can thank Falkirk.

We are fourth because other teams have bad spells as well, just like we are having.

Well going by the stats, we have failed to achieve our status [3-5] 8 out of the last 12 years & it looks unlikely again this season!

The Falcon
31-10-2011, 08:13 AM
If everything in place was so great why was it not sustained? I have said many times that the "Golden Generation" was something that happens from time to time [last time at Hibs forty years ago almost] & although good grounding is a must at a club like ours, we are a long way before we can be considered even remotely along the lines of Ajax, Scottish football collectively doesn't produce that amount of talented youngsters.

With regards to the rest, Hibs are in a fantastic position, why is it then that all those so called lesser teams are doing better than us?

Just of the top of my head, Fergie made all the difference to Aberdeen & Man Utd, McLean at Utd, Wenger reshaped Arsenal, Mourinho made Chelsea in to winners, Dalglish had a dramatic affect on Liverpool, Smith pulled Rangers back from their French disaster, Redknapp totally reinvented bottom club Spurs & O'Neil at Celtic won over Rangers stranglehold on Scottish football. Those teams have been the most dominant in English & Scottish football over the last thirty years & they have one thing in common, guess what that is, just looking at Duffy & McLeish at Hibs should be enough to see how vital the team managers position is!

Do you think we would have been able to sign those players today given the national competitiveness for young players signatures? Back then there was not the vast wages differential that there is today when we cant even outbid Hearts on personal terms. Wages in Scotland and England were pretty similar and the contract situation was entirely different. In the seventies Bonnyrigg Rose were a good source of players for Hibs in the seventies, when was the last time we signed anybody from them?

On the line about Smith would you say that Lennon pulled Celtic back from the disaster that was Tony Mowbray? :hmmm:

Hibs On Tour
31-10-2011, 08:17 AM
Well going by the stats, we have failed to achieve our status [3-5] 8 out of the last 12 years & it looks unlikely again this season!

:agree:

Which means that our average position over the last 12 years is... 6th, rather than 4th. So outside our projected aims, Kaiser. Epic fail, no? Other teams don't come into it, ours does. Our average position in the league over the period you mention is 6th. Playing pretty figures with the rest of it doesn't actually change that... :wink:

Kaiser1962
31-10-2011, 08:35 AM
Well going by the stats, we have failed to achieve our status [3-5] 8 out of the last 12 years & it looks unlikely again this season!


:agree:

Which means that our average position over the last 12 years is... 6th, rather than 4th. So outside our projected aims, Kaiser. Epic fail, no? Other teams don't come into it, ours does. Our average position in the league over the period you mention is 6th. Playing pretty figures with the rest of it doesn't actually change that... :wink:


Neither have Celtic or Hearts by those criteria and Rangers are over achievers.

When taken over the whole period you get a more accurate picture overall as others bad seasons are factored in.

Ray_
31-10-2011, 09:16 AM
Do you think we would have been able to sign those players today given the national competitiveness for young players signatures? Back then there was not the vast wages differential that there is today when we cant even outbid Hearts on personal terms. Wages in Scotland and England were pretty similar and the contract situation was entirely different. In the seventies Bonnyrigg Rose were a good source of players for Hibs in the seventies, when was the last time we signed anybody from them?

On the line about Smith would you say that Lennon pulled Celtic back from the disaster that was Tony Mowbray? :hmmm:

Where is the large amount of young Scottish talent down South that Scottish clubs failed to sign? I would say you had more examples of English clubs signing up Scottish youngsters back in the sixties. Hibs previous period signing an abundance of class youngsters came in the sixties, I would say the seventies were pretty lean. Regarding Lennon how can he compare with Smith? Celtic not winning the league is a disaster to them.

BEEJ
31-10-2011, 01:01 PM
Did you actually read my post? When did I say the games in the first division were included? They are not. They are all games in the SPL. The stats are all on the SPL website.
Yes, I did. You stated:


When you take an average points per game played, to adjust for us having played 36 games less than the others, we are 4th overall.

It's only a true comparison if applied across the same number of games as a lot can happen in a season. So implicitly you are assuming that we would have performed to a certain decent standard in the SPL during our 'missing' season.


Since promotion from the first division we have finished 6,3,10,7,8,3,4,6,6,6,4, and 10.
So we have finished in the top five in the SPL only 4 times out of 12 attempts. And on one other occasion we didn't even make the starting line-up.

"Lies, damned lies and statistics" springs to mind. :greengrin


We have not finished 12th in the SPL.
Fine. Could not recall how many teams were in the SPL the year we went down - hence the use of 'or'.

Thanks for the source. :aok: I'll go and have a look myself when I get a moment.

The Falcon
31-10-2011, 02:29 PM
Yes, I did. You stated:

"When you take an average points per game played, to adjust for us having played 36 games less than the others, we are 4th overall."

It's only a true comparison if applied across the same number of games as a lot can happen in a season. So implicitly you are assuming that we would have performed to a certain decent standard in the SPL during our 'missing' season.

The sentence before the one you quote is "In overall points we come in 6th having played a season less" then you're quote "When you take an average points per game played, to adjust for us having played 36 games less than the others, we are 4th overall."


Seems clear enough to me. I think you are guilty of taking the man's sentence out of context in that the immediately preceding sentence qualifies the second, the one which you selected to prove the man made a statement that he clearly didnt.

That being your statement "(Not to mention that adding in the 36 games missed during our 'adventure' in Division One at the same average points rate per game in other seasons is something of a heroic assumption.)" I dont think he did that.




Fine. Could not recall how many teams were in the SPL the year we went down - hence the use of 'or'.

There were ten. I looked it up.

BEEJ
31-10-2011, 05:21 PM
The sentence before the one you quote is "In overall points we come in 6th having played a season less" then you're quote "When you take an average points per game played, to adjust for us having played 36 games less than the others, we are 4th overall."


Seems clear enough to me. I think you are guilty of taking the man's sentence out of context in that the immediately preceding sentence qualifies the second, the one which you selected to prove the man made a statement that he clearly didnt.

That being your statement "(Not to mention that adding in the 36 games missed during our 'adventure' in Division One at the same average points rate per game in other seasons is something of a heroic assumption.)" I dont think he did that.
Wow! :greengrin

I can only infer from the level of detail you are venturing into here that you have me down as a died-in-the-wool member of the D&G camp and so you're going to great lengths to defend the positive stats presented by Kaiser earlier in this thread.

Let me pose this scenario. Imagine a team was promoted to the SPL for the first time just two seasons ago and in each of those two seasons it had finished fourth. Would you accept as statistically valid the average points per SPL game figure for that team in comparison to others, given that they had featured in so few SPL campaigns? If not, why not?

By the same measure then an average points per game figure is only a truly relevant comparator when the teams being compared have actually played the same number of fixtures. To make assumptions by 'averaging up' to bridge the gap is, shall we say, stretching it a bit.

That's really all I was saying. A bit of banter, really.

And for the record, I'm not really of the D&G camp - although I could be persuaded by the argument that Hibernian Football Club has underperformed over the years relative to the resources at its disposal. Hence my closer than usual scrutiny of the stat in question.


There were ten. I looked it up.
Bully for you. Kaiser stated this earlier and I was not denying that he was correct on this point; I was only stating in my post that I had left the option open as I was unsure (and had not the time to look it up). So what is your gripe here? :wink:

Kaiser1962
31-10-2011, 05:50 PM
Ok. Lets ignore the inaugural SPL season which we weren't in and take the last 12 in which we, and 7 others, have been ever present. All clubs played 454 games with the points as follows.

Celtic 1075 pts; Rangers 1025; Hearts 688; Hibs 599; Aberdeen 581; Killie 564; Motherwell 551; Dundee United 541.

In goals scored over those 454 games

Celtic 1040; Rangers 995; Hibs 623; Hearts 604; Well 557; Killie 542; Aberdeen 531 and United 524.

Goal difference over the 454 games

Celtic +678; Rangers +636; Hearts +76; Hibs -19; Aberdeen -96; Kilmarnock -126; Motherwell -133; Dundee United -161.


I would add that the income and wages tables placings mirror each other and, from largest to smallest are

Celtic; Rangers; Hearts; Aberdeen; Hibs; Kilmarnock; Dundee United and Motherwell.


:greengrin

BEEJ
31-10-2011, 11:11 PM
Ok. Lets ignore the inaugural SPL season which we weren't in and take the last 12 in which we, and 7 others, have been ever present. All clubs played 454 games with the points as follows.

Celtic 1075 pts; Rangers 1025; Hearts 688; Hibs 599; Aberdeen 581; Killie 564; Motherwell 551; Dundee United 541.

In goals scored over those 454 games

Celtic 1040; Rangers 995; Hibs 623; Hearts 604; Well 557; Killie 542; Aberdeen 531 and United 524.

Goal difference over the 454 games

Celtic +678; Rangers +636; Hearts +76; Hibs -19; Aberdeen -96; Kilmarnock -126; Motherwell -133; Dundee United -161.


I would add that the income and wages tables placings mirror each other and, from largest to smallest are

Celtic; Rangers; Hearts; Aberdeen; Hibs; Kilmarnock; Dundee United and Motherwell.


:greengrin
Now that's much better! :applause: :agree:

And yet it's also true that we have finished in the top five in the SPL only 4 times out of those 12 seasons. Go figure.

So the lesson to us all is presumably that:

> it get no better than what we have endured over the last 12 years;
> set your expectations accordingly;
> stop moaning and get on with it.

Or are we to expect better going forward having devoted so much time, effort and expense into building the club's infrastructure for (one can only imagine) future success?

:dunno:

Kaiser1962
01-11-2011, 08:19 AM
Now that's much better! :applause: :agree:

:na na:



Or are we to expect better going forward having devoted so much time, effort and expense into building the club's infrastructure for (one can only imagine) future success?

:dunno:

Thats a good point and I, for one, always expect better. What is quite worrying is the amount of comments about clubs with less "consistently" doing better than us. They dont. But it would appear they take turns.

That Hibs are fourth overall underpins this and you can trot out the old cliches like "the table doesn't lie" or that "you get the league placing you deserve" but that does not mask the fact that Hibs are having a very poor spell at the moment.

Hearts have overspent by around £60m to acquire less than two thirds of the points Celtic have and have also outspent Hibs on wages by £35.1m, in the Romanov era alone, to garner less than 15% more points.

Glass ceiling anyone?

Ray_
01-11-2011, 08:39 AM
:na na:




Thats a good point and I, for one, always expect better. What is quite worrying is the amount of comments about clubs with less "consistently" doing better than us. They dont. But it would appear they take turns.

That said Hibs are fourth overall and you can trot out the old cliches like "the table doesn't lie" or that "you get the league placing you deserve" but that does not mask the fact that Hibs are having a very poor spell at the moment.

Hearts have overspent by around £60m to acquire less than two thirds of the points Celtic have and have also outspent Hibs by £35.1m, in the Romanov era alone, to garner less than 15% more points.

Glass ceiling anyone?

If you are using Hearts as an example then you are really struggling, very few clubs [if any] have been in the position where they were under Burley & then sack the manager, but even with that, we are not restricting the league position to third.

What is all this guff anyway? If Man City accumulate enough points this season to have a better aggregate over two season's than Man U, do they get last years title as well? No, of course not.

Hibs status in Scottish football is anywhere between 3 & 5 and we have only achieved that target four times in twelve years, having a higher points aggregate over a period of time, doesn't get you in to Europe nor does it give you more payment in terms of league position!

sesoim
01-11-2011, 03:07 PM
The former Monaco and Fulham man said: "There can only be one boss at any football club and the main man has always got to be the manager - not the chairman or the directors or the chief executive.
"The most important person at any football club is the manager and he has got to be in total control of every football aspect, every decision that is made - what coaches come and go, what scouts come and go. I don't know if that has been the case at Hibs in the last few years."
From STV.news.

I wonder what on earth he could mean?



I totally agree. Mr Calderwood, step aside so Mr Brown can get on with picking the team, sorting the defence etc without any interference!

Kaiser1962
01-11-2011, 05:19 PM
What is all this guff anyway?

Whats guff about it? Those are the figures which show that, over the same amount of games, we have performed better than our rivals. No guff about it. Hearts are used as an example because you say we should be "3-5" and given that the overall tables almost directly relate and reflect the expenditure levels of each club it would be very difficult for Hibs, or anybody else, to break into the top three regularly. Dundee United did it recently , and won the cup followed by a fourth place finish, but as their players profiles, and therefore their wage expectation, were raised their income did not rise accordingly (and young Thomson refused to take the hit) players moved on and United's performances have suffered as a result. So they begin again.

Incidentally those were only two "top four" finishes United have mustered in the SPL so, if you took the last two seasons in isolation, they would be more successful that Hearts, Hibs and Aberdeen. Which is why you need to have a look at the whole period for a measure of consistency.


Now, Hibs being "overwhelming favourites" in the final against Livi, that we did "hammer" them the week before, or that Fletch "rarely" played under Mowbray. Sorry Ray. but thats guff :greengrin

Ray_
01-11-2011, 06:12 PM
Whats guff about it? Those are the figures which show that, over the same amount of games, we have performed better than our rivals. No guff about it. Hearts are used as an example because you say we should be "3-5" and given that the overall tables almost directly relate and reflect the expenditure levels of each club it would be very difficult for Hibs, or anybody else, to break into the top three regularly. Dundee United did it recently , and won the cup followed by a fourth place finish, but as their players profiles, and therefore their wage expectation, were raised their income did not rise accordingly (and young Thomson refused to take the hit) players moved on and United's performances have suffered as a result. So they begin again.

Incidentally those were only two "top four" finishes United have mustered in the SPL so, if you took the last two seasons in isolation, they would be more successful that Hearts, Hibs and Aberdeen. Which is why you need to have a look at the whole period for a measure of consistency.


Now, Hibs being "overwhelming favourites" in the final against Livi, that we did "hammer" them the week before, or that Fletch "rarely" played under Mowbray. Sorry Ray. but thats guff :greengrin

That may be guff, which I admitted, but what's not guff is the fact that for eight of the past twelve season's we have under performed in the league even going for 4-5.:na na:

Kaiser1962
01-11-2011, 09:32 PM
That may be guff, which I admitted, but what's not guff is the fact that for eight of the past twelve season's we have under performed in the league even going for 4-5.:na na:


Sir! I admire your indefatigability! :aok:

Ray_
01-11-2011, 09:36 PM
Sir! I admire your indefatigability! :aok:

I blame my diet!