Hawkswood Posted yesterday at 09:44 Posted yesterday at 09:44 https://www.theguardian.com/football/2026/jan/06/ruben-amorim-manchester-united-jason-wilcox?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other 10
sockeye Posted yesterday at 09:51 Posted yesterday at 09:51 Feels like what happens on the pitch is almost secondary now compared to what happens off it
Turkish Posted yesterday at 09:53 Posted yesterday at 09:53 Very good article that, love the way they describe Jason Wilcox 😂 10
Rebel Posted yesterday at 10:01 Posted yesterday at 10:01 I have to admit I am not a Jason Wilcox fan. I don't think he's anywhere near as clever or as good as he thinks he is. Just copying Manchester City's masterplan at another club in a different league and with different environmental factors doesn't make you clever - it makes you a bit stupid really. 6
Miltonaggro Posted yesterday at 10:05 Posted yesterday at 10:05 (edited) Thing is, Sport Republic were complete novices when they bought SFC, so they sensible thing would have been to take some time to stabilise and learn the ropes. Instead they’ve tried to impose their ‘philosophy’ (Ankerson’s philosophy) on a club in a downward spiral from their first full season. Over their time the philosophy clearly loved by Ankerson now looks outdated and flat, and would probably never have worked at a provincial club with limited players like Saints anyway, certainly not in a condensed timescale whilst selling any talent to balance the annual books. Wilcox likely knew this when he briefly came on board, so SFC merely a shop window. Only question left is whether Solak will finally wake up to what has been an avoidable disaster (better late than never) and cut out the disease, or be forever remembered in the industry as a negligent and careless idiot. Edited yesterday at 12:24 by Miltonaggro 6
beatlesaint Posted yesterday at 10:06 Posted yesterday at 10:06 Pretty savage in condemnation of Wilcox, very amusing. 2
Doctoroncall Posted yesterday at 10:08 Posted yesterday at 10:08 And This article on the right selection and selection process. 2
danjosaint Posted yesterday at 10:25 Posted yesterday at 10:25 Both really good articles and a lot rings true
ant Posted yesterday at 10:26 Posted yesterday at 10:26 It's OK to attempt being a 'disruptor', but when all evidence - over a prolonged period - points to you being wrong... Well, only a fool would persist on that path. Self-belief only takes you so far. 1
scumbag Posted yesterday at 10:32 Posted yesterday at 10:32 'The real thinkers of this sport – men like Jason Wilcox – simply operate at a level beyond our own prosaic understanding.' This is it really...every part of your senses as a human being tells you that what you are seeing is a steaming pile of horseshit, but we're wrong, and its because we dont really 'understand'. 5
coalman Posted yesterday at 13:53 Posted yesterday at 13:53 Disruption and moonshots are phrases used by people with a high opinion of themselves who think the rules don't apply to them and want to take shortcuts. I remember reading a piece by the guy who built all of Google's infrastructure where he explained that all the stuff that looked like magic from the outside was the net result of relentless incremental improvement and hard work. https://web.archive.org/web/20230922113630/https:/rework.withgoogle.com/blog/the-roofshot-manifesto/
Turkish Posted yesterday at 13:56 Posted yesterday at 13:56 3 hours ago, scumbag said: 'The real thinkers of this sport – men like Ramus Ankersen – simply operate at a level beyond our own prosaic understanding.' This is it really...every part of your senses as a human being tells you that what you are seeing is a steaming pile of horseshit, but we're wrong, and its because we dont really 'understand'. Agreed
Tommy Mulgrew Posted yesterday at 14:06 Posted yesterday at 14:06 9 minutes ago, coalman said: he explained that all the stuff that looked like magic from the outside was the net result of relentless incremental improvement and hard work Exactly what we did under Cortese. I remember us being successful, too. Remarkable, isn’t it? How unlike us now! 😩 1
adrian lord Posted yesterday at 14:14 Posted yesterday at 14:14 (edited) Very good article. Can be applied to many corporate settings, not just football. The technical experts with the knowledge and expertise and skills degraded and scapegoated while the Midwit executive and managerial class prosper. Edited yesterday at 14:15 by adrian lord 5
bugenhagen Posted 21 hours ago Posted 21 hours ago I liked this bit: If coaches were once chefs, they are now more akin to Deliveroo drivers: not really responsible for the food, but still ultimately answerable if it arrives cold or leaks out of the box. 2
benali-shorts Posted 21 hours ago Posted 21 hours ago The downside of American ownership of football; overestimating the competence of football business management people 1
Hawkswood Posted 21 hours ago Author Posted 21 hours ago Theres so much of the articles that chime with Saints but for me the thing that stands out ( one of the many) is the teams tactics being dictated to by sporting directors or chairman. There has been many a murmuring on here, some would label it a conspiracy theory about the boardroom getting involved in how we play rather than leave it to the manager, but here we have articles essentially reinforcing the point that, yes, there is meddling in how a team sets up and plays by members of the board. It just becomes a plaything for them. 1
BarberSaint Posted 20 hours ago Posted 20 hours ago 3 hours ago, adrian lord said: Very good article. Can be applied to many corporate settings, not just football. The technical experts with the knowledge and expertise and skills degraded and scapegoated while the Midwit executive and managerial class prosper. Indeed.
suewhistle Posted 17 hours ago Posted 17 hours ago 10 hours ago, scumbag said: 'The real thinkers of this sport – men like Jason Wilcox – simply operate at a level beyond our own prosaic understanding.' This is it really...every part of your senses as a human being tells you that what you are seeing is a steaming pile of horseshit, but we're wrong, and its because we dont really 'understand'. Obviously the writer is on our side because he's taking the piss out of the idea..
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now