David

Why are you posting a reply after the game to a comment I made about us getting a draw? You on the drink or something?

It wasn't that long ago people were waxing lyrical about how good he was.

Yes, we will. A draw tonight will see us split the first two fixtures against County after our draw with them at Fir Park. In the position we're in, what we don't want to be doing is losing. That's the bare minimum. A win is preferable obviously, but drawing away to Ross County (or any of the teams around us for that matter) isn't a disaster. It's just not the results of a team pushing for top six is all.

A draw tonight, while not the result we'd like, is perfectly acceptable. It keeps County on 14 points, and keeps us in 8th. A loss, however, isn't what we want to see.

If there's one thing Kettlewell knows how to do, it's play the media game. He's obligated to speak to the media, but he's not obligated to say or do anything that could give the opposition an insight into his planning, make it look like he's panicking or losing the plot, or say anything that could upset the players and cause an issue in the dressing room. I guarantee what he says publicly and privately are two different things.

Davies hasn't held a management position in almost ten years now. I'd imagine that at least part of the reason for that is his antics in his last job. The secret filming of journalists at Forest press conferences, blanket media bans, long-serving club staff sacked without explanation, his cousin and agent joining the club in a senior role after being suspended as a solicitor, arguing with photographers during games, and a five-game touchline ban imposed for using abusive language to a match official. He's pretty much not been considered for many jobs outside the Hearts one over five years ago I think.

Fair enough. I'd go for someone like Enrico Maaßen. Done well at FC Drochtersen, SV Rodinghausen, and with Borussia Dortmund II. He fell short when given his first Bundesliga job with Augsburg and was sacked in October, so I think he'd be a realistic choice considering where he is in his career. 39 years old, winning percentages with his previous clubs of 48.28%, 64.38%, and 53.95% before Augsburg. Speaks fluent English, plays an expansive, attacking brand of football, and is well suited to working on a small budget and bringing through youth players in the German lower leagues, plus he has contacts at Dortmund which could be useful if we're looking for loan talent. He'd perhaps see us as a window to a job down south in the English Championship if he did well.

That's a difficult question to answer. How much money is he earning? What bonuses are tied to his contract? Who's available that would accept those salary and bonus terms? What aims have been set by the board? We'd need more information to answer. Unless you're meaning for those who want him out to just throw a name out there? One thing I'm fairly certain of, considering who we've hired in the past, is that there will be candidates with more experience and know-how willing to take the job. Who they are? Again, the information above will dictate that.

I'm basing my confidence in us hopefully appointing someone who has a better track record than Kettlewell. He's really done nothing in management to warrant any confidence in his abilities. Granted, he's a terrific talker and he sounds good when a camera is on him, which is why he is probably better suited to radio or Sportscene. You're right, it is a gamble. But there are levels of potential success in gambling. The way I see it, he's not going to succeed at Motherwell. The only real question is, will he be let go before he gets another transfer window? Or after it? I'd be extremely surprised if he's in the dugout at the end of the season.

I agree. Sadly, I have zero faith in our current recruitment team or manager to get it right in January. I really hope I'm wrong, but I think we're going to head into January doing what we always do. Panic buying. Some snappy dresser from the Norwegian 3rd tier.

While I give him some credit for that, he was a huge beneficiary of Van Veen hitting some mental freak form, and also it wasn't his team. Once he was given sole control and was given the chance to shape the squad how he wanted it, we've all seen the results. It was the same at Ross County. Once he got sole control and was given the transfer window to do business it all came apart.

You mean get him to play in midfield? Because he's not shown anything in management to suggest he knows about winning or defending. His record at Fleetwood is similar to Kettlewell at County.

Not being funny here, but when you say you think he can become a success at Motherwell, what are you basing that on? His record as a top-flight manager isn't good. He failed at Ross County when he got the job on his own, and once he got a transfer window at Motherwell he hasn't really done a great job here either.

I didn't actually mean that as an insult, I was being honest, it is too many words to scroll past! As I said in my previous post, I have a love for the analytics and data. I happily admit that I can drone on about it. Just be thankful you're not one of my mates in the pub! 😂

Sorry mate, too many sentences for you to scroll past?

I know, I apologise 😂 Analytics and stats are something I do for a job, so when you couple it with football I could talk (or type!) for hours.

Someone like Turnbull in Italy would be a revelation I think. He has all the qualities to succeed there, and funnily enough the very things that Celtic fans use to play him down as a quality player are why he would succeed. His first "negative" for Scottish football is that he doesn't "run his socks off" enough for the Celtic fans. He could have half the actual ability, but so long as they saw him charging down players and jumping with his back to them while they calmly pass the ball the other way, or saw him chasing down lost causes they'd be happy enough. That's a quality in their eyes. His ability to read the game and his in-game intelligence would make him a great fit for Serie A, where players are expected to do more than run and put in effort. Even with his limited games this season, he's ranked in the 99th percentile for goals scored per 90 minutes played, xG (expected goals) per 90 minutes played, and has a successful pass completion rate of 87%, which all adds up to him being a proper candidate for a club in Serie A, especially when you consider how the game is played there.

Dealing with predators wanting to steal all our best players and personnel would be a great problem to have. It would certainly be preferable to what we have at the moment, which is no one wanting any of our players. You'd actually be surprised how many clubs, especially in Scotland, simply don't use these tactics though. There's a very strong "jobs for the boys" and "that's how we've always done things" mentality. We saw that with how the Ian Cathro experiment went at Hearts. He wasn't taken seriously because he wasn't a former player, and didn't have the "right connections" in the Scottish game. I acknowledge that the job as the actual coach may not have suited him and maybe even come too early, but the way he was undermined at the club, and generally treated like a joke by the Scottish media and the usual "run his socks off, honest professional" Sportscene crowd tells us all we need to know. Someone who was the Head of Dundee United's youth academy at the age of 22, worked as an analytics expert and coach at clubs like Spurs, Wolves, Newcastle, and Valencia and was very highly regarded by the likes of Nuno Espirito Santo, and Rafa Benitez was deemed not good enough by the likes of Jon Daly and Kris Boyd, which means he had to go. The players didn't buy in and he hit a wall. Breaking that mentality in Scottish football isn't easy, and I don't think any club has done it successfully yet. For me, it's more about establishing a system and way of playing and using that as the building blocks for the entire project. Everything has to fit within that system. A manager who buys into that particular way of playing, and players who do the same. When a manager or player moves on, you replace them with someone who has similar attributes (or the potential to have similar attributes) and the whole process continues. What this removes is situations like we see every time we appoint a new manager. For example, Kettlewell doesn't want to use wingers or "number 10" type players, so he comes in and rips up the squad to suit how he wants to play. If he doesn't get the results we hope over the next month and he gets sacked, what then? We appoint a manager who maybe does want to use wingers and those number 10 type players, but who isn't keen on the likes of Theo Bair or Jon Obika. The problem is, we got rid of the players he'd have liked, and have Theo Bair on a two-year deal, which isn't ideal and will require some financial outlay to fix. So, come the summer he has to completely change everything all over again. Ideally, we'd have a certain way of playing, and a list of up & coming managers from the lower leagues of Scotland, Ireland, Wales, and elsewhere in Europe who fit that bill. We can then move for any one of them if and when needed, safe in the knowledge that the very reason they're on that list to begin with is that they already have the attributes and employ the playing style we use, so the transition should be relatively seamless. The clubs I mentioned utilise that system, and again, I'm not saying we can shop for coaches or players in the same pool as Brighton or even Bodø/Glimt, but we can do what they have done and put a system and plan in place, then recruit accordingly. Our market won't be as polished or talented as theirs. Also, again, nothing is 100% guaranteed, but it's certainly more likely to work than just appointing whoever isn't tied down to a Sportscene appearance contract that season. But yeah, the idea is to make sure that no player or manager is irreplaceable. If we sign someone who does really well and we sell them on for profit then great, and if a signing doesn't work out we can cut the guy loose and move forward with a player who can easily be plugged into the system. Utilising an analytics-driven system should see us statistically be successful enough in our recruitment to fulfil the "sell one player per season" target. We will. We don't have to, but we will, I agree. Simply because along with someone who has made a decent wedge of cash in whatever industry and who chooses to own a football club tends to come a mentality for success and forward progression. We lack that at the moment I think. I believe the board and people working on it are doing their best, but it's not the same as having someone with real business acumen running the show.

And yet I said... Surely to God you can see the point I'm making here? That if we smarten up and start utilising (or utilising correctly) some of the data and analytics available to us we wouldn't have to keep taking "a punt" on players as much. There is no 100% success rate in the football transfer market. None. But... if we at least try to improve in that regard we could see a higher success rate than we do now. I'm sorry, but the recent transfer business we've done can be described as lazy at best, and absolutely criminal at worst. Yes, and we can't. Which is all the more reason to rely on more than "hanging our hat" on someone, or "taking a punt" on others. If anything we should be more careful than Brighton are. And yet, it doesn't seem that way. I absolutely 100% guarantee that if the club did its due diligence it would have found another option better than Bair for the money we're paying him. Like I said, he's pretty much set to provide us with an average of four goals in a season where he gets more starts than he doesn't. He comes to us with virtually zero sell-on potential as well. The very fact that our recruitment team and manager looked at his record, and the accompanying data sets and concluded that he was worth a two-year deal is mind-boggling and makes me question their judgement. That's true, we won't be attracting the very best analytical minds to the club, but let's not get crazy and think we'd need to outlay millions to incorporate that kind of department. A junior analytics team member will be able to pull the same information as his or her counterpart at Manchester City. The actual raw data isn't tiered based on finance. The information is there at a basic level. Sure, a bit more spending would allow for some extra facilities to really deep dive into the numbers, but in all honesty, we can get by without that. It's a nice to have, but not a need to have at our level. Where the real talent comes into play is in how the data is interpreted. We could have the best data analyst in the world, but if he provides the information on someone like Theo Bair but our footballing department decides to go on a gut feeling of "hanging their hat" on him, or they fancy a project to turn someone who isn't a footballer into a footballer, then it won't matter a jot. I honestly believe that our problem lies not really with the players, because they're just doing what is asked of them to the ability they have. It's the recruitment department and to a lesser degree the manager. And also whoever is responsible for both hiring them and their continued employment at the club. Okay, would you rather I compared us to Bodø/Glimt instead? Average attendance of around 5,000, a stadium that holds just over 8,000. They're a club who have implemented an analytics-first approach and since 2018 they haven't looked back. In fact, they've managed to gradually increase their playing budget based on player sales down to the recruitment tactics they use. they brought in Aasmund Bjørkan initially as manager, but he then moved upstairs as Chief Analyst and Sporting Director, with Kjetil Knutsen taking over as manager. They're now selling players for anywhere between €2 million to €8 million. And are using the exact same recruitment systems and parameters to basically "rinse and repeat" the process. Is it 100% successful? No. No system is. Is it providing a higher rate of success than "taking a punt?" Absolutely. You'd be surprised how little relatively speaking it would actually cost. You'd probably be looking at the following: Director/Head of Analytics: Oversees the entire analytics department. Develop the overall analytics strategy aligned with the club's objectives. Collaborates with coaching staff and other departments to integrate analytics into decision-making processes. Data Analysts: Collect and analyse data related to player performance, team tactics, and opposition analysis. Use statistical models and machine learning techniques to derive insights. Provide reports and visualisations to help coaches and management make informed decisions. Performance Analysts: Focus on analysing in-game performance data. Provide real-time insights during matches to support coaches in making tactical adjustments. Work closely with the coaching staff to evaluate player performance and identify areas for improvement. So, between 3-5 people. Again, a club like Motherwell could be looking at entry-level data analysts and performance analysts. We wouldn't be competing with clubs higher up the food chain for experienced candidates with a track record. What I can pretty much guarantee you is that the entire department mentioned above would cost less per year than what we'll be shelling out on panic buys in January. However, you need buy-in from the people who run the club and the management team. If there's resistance to this kind of approach from "football people" who prefer to go on their gut, or what their favoured agent is selling them each summer, then it won't work. Just like I mentioned with Bodø/Glimt, you need people in positions of power who are relatively young (at least mentally), up to speed on technology and data implementation, and who are progressive thinkers. Maybe even people who aren't from a traditional football background. If we're happy to remain a "wee rollercoaster" of a club, which hires managers who want players who "run their socks off" and are "honest professionals" and all that tired, cliche bullshit then we'll pretty much just continue doing what we've always done. Anyway, I think we all know the club most likely isn't going to go down this route. They have a hard enough time communicating via email with Well Society members, so the chances of those in power wrapping their heads around any of the above is slim to none. It's been an interesting discussion though, so thanks to those who took part!

Well, there's also Bailey Rice. And Stuart McKinstry. Again, maybe They would have left regardless. At the end of the day, money does talk, but, we certainly do ourselves no favours at the moment with how we're using our youth system. Like I said, we're punting players out on loan to sit on the bench in the lower leagues. That's not good business. Or a good look. I wouldn't be surprised if youngsters are coming up who would maybe have entertained the idea of coming to Motherwell who are now looking elsewhere for the reasons I mentioned. Which is the point I've made about three times, and yet.... You then go on to mention their finances as if we don't already know the gulf in the clubs. Weird. At absolutely no point have I mentioned us having anywhere near the money they do to buy players. Yes, the chances of failure are higher, but again, I would absolutely love to know which analytics or data supported a move for Theo Bair. Seriously. When a guy sitting in his living room with his laptop can access information that suggests that Bair is more than likely to provide 4 or so goals at Motherwell if he starts regularly, and that the Scottish Premier League is above his ability level, you'd like to think that the club can afford to access that same information? I hate to toot my own horn, but I said before he kicked a ball that absolutely every data set pointed to him being a waste of whatever money we are paying him. For two years. The problem I also have is that when we say "take a punt" we're basically going on the kind of approach that clubs used back in the day when a decision was made based on some part-time scout who drives a Cortina heading to a game to watch someone and take some notes with a biro and a pad out of Woolworths. Times have changed. I guarantee you that Brighton aren't "taking a punt" on someone based on nothing. £5 million or not, they'll be doing their due diligence and utilising the analytics to make sure the player is at least a fit and has some chance of success. Again, as I said, there will be instances when money talks, and there's not much we can do about that. But...we can also do a lot to clean up our act as to how we're treating the youngsters at our club. Because when a kid is coming through, or when we're one of a few clubs pitching him, his parents and his representative, what we don't want is for their agent to say "Well, Motherwell of late have punted their youngsters to the depths of the Scottish leagues to sit on the bench for part-time clubs, and they also sign absolute dross and play them rather than give youth a shot. Oh, and they don't really have any kind of playing philosophy or plan or pathway for youth to get into the first team. Let's see what the other clubs have to offer." Throw the above into the mix and it makes it quite difficult for the club to use the argument of "we don't have as much money to give you, but there's a clear and present pathway for you at our club, which includes a continuity at the club from youth to senior level, and any loans we sanction will be done with you getting playing time firmly in mind." Then maybe they should look to change their approach from "taking a punt" on the likes of Theo Bair to a more measured, analytical approach? It's not 100% guaranteed success, but by fuck it would stand more chance of succeeding than what we've done of late. At this point we're carrying out the footballing equivalent of throwing shite against a wall and seeing what might stick.

I primarily mentioned Brighton because they are in a similar position to us, relatively speaking. They are competing with clubs who have far and away more money to spend than they do. While they've spent vast amounts of money in comparison to us, they haven't when compared to clubs they're competing with regularly. That they are punching above their weight (I hate that term, but still) cannot be argued against. What we need to do is look at modernising the club from the top down. As much as I appreciate the work that the people we have running the club have done, it's pretty plain to see that we're not getting anywhere under the current leadership. I had hoped when Burrows moved on that we'd see a younger guy come in with some fresh ideas. That's not happened. In fact, we've seen no one appointed from the outside. It's not just Brighton who are implementing a modern approach to football and seeing the benefits. There are clubs all over Europe who are doing it. Bodø/Glimt are another good example. A club that has invested in data analytics and a sizable rebuild behind the scenes in personnel and approach, and are now reaping the rewards after their return to the Norwegian top flight in 2018. And I'm sure you'll be able to find some areas they haven't done well in and use that as a reason why we can't do it, but the truth is, there are clubs all over Europe who are at least trying to change the way they go about their business. Why can't we be one of them? He has been good for sure, but I think his abilities have shone even brighter because he's being compared to absolute dogshit like Theo Bair. That we're basically relying on a 20-year-old kid who'd played less than 20 first-team games when he arrived here isn't ideal. While loan signings are definitely important, they should not be the spine of our side. We need to be using the technical resources I mentioned previously to bring in players from markets that aren't quite as high up the priority list for clubs with more money. The more money a club has to spend, the more they're interested in the finished article. We need to be a club where a player can become that finished article, or close to it, before moving on. What we should not be doing is making signings like we have of late. Seriously, I'd love to know the reasoning behind handing a two-year contract to Theo Bair. What data backed up this move? I'd be interested in seeing that because everything I've looked at told me that we should expect nothing different to what he'd done at every other club he's played at. Again, I said it months ago. The data suggests we can expect around 4 goals for the season if he gets regular starts. Obika. What was the thinking there? The data suggests we could expect a player who may look good in flashes but who is too injury-prone to do much of value. I could go on, but you get the picture. This all suggests to me that we're absolutely not looking at the data and the information available to us when making signings. We're panic buying because there is no strategy, there is no plan, there is no long-term vision in place. It wouldn't take millions of pounds to change the way we're approaching transfers at the moment. There are players dotted throughout the past 5 years or so that are good examples. You know who they are, as we've all discussed them at length here. And I know, the general consensus is that when a bigger club comes in we just have to shrug our shoulders and say "Ah well, they can offer more money. That's how it goes." But, there are things we can do to make the club more attractive to young players. Clear Development Pathway: Outline a clear and well-defined pathway for player development within the club. Highlight opportunities for youth players to train with the first team or participate in competitive matches. First-Team Opportunities: Demonstrate a commitment to providing genuine opportunities for youth players to break into the first team. Illustrate instances where young players have successfully transitioned to regular first-team football. We don't do this well enough in my opinion. We're too quick to fire players out on loan to clubs lower down the pecking order in Scotland, only to play absolute dross in their place. If I was a young player like Mark Ferrie or Robbie Mahon looking at the club just now, seeing that they deem me not good enough at the moment while playing who we have? I'd be looking for ways to exit the club as quickly as possible for new opportunities. Robbie Mahon in particular is looking very good at Edinburgh City, winning some MOTM awards, scoring three goals and providing two assists. But, we have brought in a manager who's decided we don't use wingers, so he's got about as much chance of playing for Motherwell as I have. So yeah, I think we're failing big-time here. Not only have we been reportedly slow when it comes to offering a contract to youth players, but we're not really giving them much reason to want to sign those deals either. We're signing absolute dross that will get game time ahead of the youth players, for the most part, changing managers consistently which is bringing with it a total change in approach and philosophy, which adds to little to no consistency. I like Kettlewell as a pundit, but why we brought someone in who had a completely different approach to that of the previous manager right after we made a bunch of signings to suit the former's style of play is beyond me. It all makes zero sense. There's no long-term vision and approach, and when you can't sell that to a young player or his family/agent, you're always going to have a hard time convincing them to stay. If their future will consist of being shunted out on loan to Stenhousemuir or Cowdenbeath I'm not sure you'll have them buying into the plan. Even worse, this season we've seen the likes of Robbie Garcia and Ewan Wilson hardly feature for Cowdenbeath and Stirling. I have to ask then. What's the point? We always hear about clubs wanting to send their young players out on loan to destinations that will benefit them and give them game time. Why aren't we doing that? What possible benefit will either of those lads get from sitting on the bench at those clubs? They'd be as well staying at Motherwell where the training facilities are better. It's already a difficult job convincing young players and their families to stick it out at Motherwell when they're being offered more money elsewhere, but when you throw all of the above into the mix? That makes it even harder. It all reeks of amateurism, sadly.

Then maybe the answer is to continue as we have been over the past few years? I imagine there'll be a glut of panic buys this January as usual, and we might even be watching a team managed by Stevie Frail if results don't go our way over the next month or so. Then we get to the summer and rinse and repeat.

There is always room for improvement, and as I said, we could be looking to make those improvements rather than doing the exact same thing we always do, which is throwing money away every January trying to rectify ridiculous mistakes made the previous summer. Saying that it's easier with hundreds of millions of pounds to throw at it is a cop-out in my opinion. Sure, we won't be attracting the real top-level youth talent that those clubs you mention can, but we could look at the way they go about their business and adapt it to fit within our financial capabilities. Some of it will not be doable, but a lot of it will be, or at least a version of it. A club our size has to box clever, otherwise we will come undone at some point. We cannot continue the process of throwing shite against the wall every summer and hoping some of it sticks. That's not sustainable. One area that is a real leveller when used correctly is data analytics. We could be doing way better in that department, with the following being areas I personally think we could improve. Integrate Analytics into Decision-Making: Embed data-driven decision-making into the club's culture. This means utilizing analytics not only in player recruitment but also in tactical analysis, injury prevention, and performance optimization. Invest in Analytics Tools: Even with limited resources, invest in basic analytics tools that can provide valuable insights. This may include software for performance analysis, player tracking, and statistical modelling. Collaborate with Experts: Consider partnerships with external data analytics experts or firms. This can be a cost-effective way to access advanced analytics capabilities without the need for an in-house team. Focus on Market Inefficiencies: Smaller clubs can benefit from identifying market inefficiencies that larger clubs might overlook. This could involve targeting players from specific regions, leagues, or age groups where value can be found at a lower cost. Monitor Player Progression: Use analytics to track the development of players within the club. This involves not only assessing first-team players but also monitoring the progress of youth academy prospects. Feedback Loop: Establish a feedback loop that involves continuous evaluation and refinement of the analytics process. Learn from both successful and unsuccessful player acquisitions to improve the effectiveness of future recruitment efforts. Adapt to Changing Trends: Stay abreast of advancements in sports analytics and be flexible in adapting strategies to changing trends. This adaptability is crucial in maximizing the benefits of data analytics in a dynamic football landscape. I know that some of the above may already be in place, but quite honestly, I've seen very little evidence of this being the case. We could be way better in this area. And we don't need to spend a fortune to get there. I'm not an expert on Brighton, and I never said they were perfect in all aspects. I'm sure they're doing what every team down there is doing, which is spending a lot of money on players. They have to in order to compete with the best teams in the world, but they are also well-known for their ability to identify talent on the upswing before the bigger clubs recognise them. We could certainly look to do that, albeit at a lower level. From my research, there wasn't an astronomical amount spent on their youth development or analytics in relation to the league they're in and their competition. There's a ceiling in what those who are experts in that area are paid. It's not as if a Head of Analytics at Brighton is on £5 million a year or anything. The only nonsense is your claiming that any attempt to be "forward thinking and ambitious" costs serious cash and would have us bankrupt and out of business. That's absolute nonsense. You refuse to see that there's a middle ground between constantly chasing our tail and trying to rectify poorly thought-out signings and managerial appointments and spending our way to oblivion like John Boyle did. Absolutely no one I've seen on this forum is advocating for us to spend silly money on players past their best like we did during that era. What we're talking about is looking to change things up and focus on avenues that won't cost a fortune, and that should help us put not just a better team on the park but also set us on a road to being a more consistent, healthy club. Make no mistake, the points I mention above can be implemented at a club like Motherwell, and we wouldn't need to break the bank to do so. In reality, we're likely spending the money in other, less effective ways already.

Indeed I do not! But, if I can identify those very basic points off the top of my head on an internet forum, surely the club could find someone who's actually qualified and skilled to do it? 😂

No, not examples of a smaller club than Motherwell, I said "other smaller clubs," as in clubs like Motherwell, who are smaller than many in their division. Well, context is a significant factor here. Although Brighton might be willing to invest £30 million in a player, they find themselves in direct competition with teams capable of spending upwards of £80 million on a single player. Brighton's wage bill ranks 14th among the 20 teams in the league, providing a clear perspective on the circumstantial challenges they face. Smaller clubs like Brighton succeed not because of their financial prowess but due to their well-structured systems and unique approaches. Examples of this include: Data Analytics and Scouting: Effective use of data analytics in scouting helps identify players with specific attributes that align with the team's playing style. Brighton has been known for employing a data-driven approach, using analytics to identify players who can contribute significantly to the team. On this point, I feel we've been really poor. I mean, the data analytics were right there for Theo Bair. It didn't take an advanced system to work out how he's likely to perform. I said before a ball was kicked that if he gets regular starts for us we can likely expect maybe 4 goals. Someone dropped the ball big-time on that signing. The fact he was given a 2-year deal was borderline criminal. Youth Development: Developing a strong youth academy can be a cost-effective way to produce talented players who can contribute to the first team or be sold for a profit. Brighton's commitment to youth development can be seen in their efforts to nurture talent from a young age. Our clubs management of our youth department hasn't been the best. We've seen a lot of players leave when they could have been approached earlier about signing a new deal and so on. That's not to say that every young player will want to sign a deal, but I feel we've missed the boat on a few of our players due to us not being on top of things and allowing other clubs to swoop in and take advantage. Strategic Managerial Appointments: Appointing managers with a proven track record of success in developing teams and getting the best out of players. Stability in coaching staff can contribute to long-term success by providing continuity and a consistent playing style. Again, this is a criteria we should be looking at from a lower level. Which managers are doing a good job in the lower reaches of the English, Welsh, or Irish leagues? Who has shown that they can develop a team, improve players, and work with youth? An important facet of this section is that the manager needs a competent recruitment and analytics team working with him. Do we have that? I'm not so sure. Which is why I'm not 100% sure that the manager is entirely to blame. Team Cohesion and Tactical Consistency: Building a cohesive team with a strong sense of identity and a consistent playing style can lead to better on-field performance. Maintaining tactical consistency, even with changes in personnel, helps players adapt quickly and enhances team performance. This is something that is a hallmark of Brighton's success, and it really isn't down to finance. They were linked with all manner of different, well-known coaches when Potter left, but they brought in De Zerbi. Their Chief Exec actually said the main reason for his appointment was that he was a "cultural and technical" fit. Sure, he's different in some ways but has a similar philosophy in most areas, which means he doesn't need to completely tear up the squad and start again to fit his own style. Anyway, a lengthy post, but I think it's important to stress that we can't (and shouldn't) just shrug our shoulders and say "Well, we signed Bair and Obika because we can only afford £20 and a Curly Wurly." There are a lot of areas we could be better in that don't require tons of money. We can, with some proper oversight, become one of the clubs that catch tomorrow's much sought-after analytics, strategic and tactical geniuses before they hit the radar of bigger clubs. Same with youth players and the management team we have at that level.