Who could blame Mike Garlick wanting to get out. He's worked miracles along with Kilby and Dyche, yet he gets slagged off every window.arise_sir_charge wrote: ↑Fri Sep 25, 2020 8:03 amA few further observations, all those being sceptical appear to forget that the man they trust implicitly, Mike Garlick is the man that appears to be looking to get out! Equally, they appear to trust him to run the club but not sell the club.
DCWat is right in that the moneyball aspect can only be money ball in the event it is less mainstream. However, a moneyball style project that brings through a conveyor belt of sellable talent is certainly a model that could work with a club like ours. It’s how we have always existed albeit without the technology aspect, this would just be giving us the technology and funds to continue that model in a market that has got ahead of us. Even the hidden gems come at a premium these days.
As for buying untapped talent, it only makes money if you sell them for a profit, and if you sell your best players eventually you get relegated. What happens when the untapped talent then turn you down.
I'd also ask what is the bench mark. Do we buy players for 5 million with the intention of selling them for 20, or buy them for 20m with the intention of selling for 60. Because there is a world of difference between the two.
Somewhere on this thread ot was compared to Brentfords model of recruitment, I'd ask where are Brentford , and where could they have been if they hadn't sold all those players they unearthed.
It doesn't matter how good the players are, if time isn't given for someone to mould them into a team. That's a lot harder to do if we operate on a conveyor belt of players.
Do these Americans understand that, are they willing to give a manager time to continue success on the pitch, before they look for success off it.
There are a lot of unanswered questions to all of this, and it concerns me that what they see as success is a million miles away from what we as fans call success.