The Perfect Storm Engulfs Ibrox

[chilledbear 16]

Of course they want and should have a say. That's what they are there to do,....but IMO it's about making the right/consistent decisions within a plan/framework/strategy rather than simply reacting with a tendency to go from the rough on one side of the fairway to a bunker, on the other.

 

If the boardroom dynamic is 'difficult' and not conducive to decisive leadership/feasibility at a time when it is desperately needed, then surely something would have to change.

 

That isn't aimed at any particular person(s),... but surely the collective need to somehow address this.

 

From the outside looking in, the core of leadership throughout the club seems to be lacking.

 

From a joined-up strategy coming from the boardroom..........to a hard-nosed & competent CEO to implement it on a daily basis...........to the communications coming from the club............to a first team operation wrt managerial appt. (Pedro) and two summer transfer windows.

 

As another poster pointed out, there are potentially positive things happening that could be regarded as part of a longterm strategy, eg. DoF, new scouting operation, recent advertisment looking for Comms & marketing director....but the current focus is on the first team and after a good start (15/16), we've been all over the place.

 

It does need to change and the Directors need to have a look at themselves. Robertson who should be making the decisions seems to be yes man, and looks as if he runs everything past the directors/king.

 

Whether this is true or not, but seems likely going with the accounts.

 

'Aberdeens' Commercial Dept bring in more revenue than Rangers Commercial Dept does.'

 

How the heck can this happen!!

[Bluedell 5,356]

The board are accountable for everything at the club. They decide on the management, coaches and ultimately the direction the club is heading both on and off the park. I remember when Advocaat took over and he basically had to buy a completely new squad, had no youth coming through and no scouting network to speak of. That doesn't point to me as a club run very well.

 

The direction was NIAR. That was achieved.

 

At the end of the 1996/7 season, we had just won our 9th title in a row, we had just introduced Barry Ferguson into the first team (so the claim that we had no youth coming through is incorrect) and had £28.5m in the bank, but some claim it was badly run club.

[Bluedell 5,356]

It does need to change and the Directors need to have a look at themselves. Robertson who should be making the decisions seems to be yes man, and looks as if he runs everything past the directors/king.

 

If Robertson runs everything past the board then it's because he's told to do it. The board detail what flexibility he has and what his decision remit is.

[buster. 4,809]

The way I see things is that Pedro was becoming more and more belligerent with his comments,some making no sense at all,and personally at the end was happy to see him go.

Murty was again appointed interim manager and as such had to be given rein to pick his team.

The common denominator to most on here is Miller,who I used to think was what we needed,either being used or not by both.

As the board do not pick the team it was left to both to pick the side as they saw fit and really neither have been proved right.

To me now the best thing Miller could do is step down from playing.

 

I think in his heart of hearts, Pedro knew it was only a matter of time from before the SPFL kicked off.

 

Some of his comments towards the end seemed as much designed to hasten the process as to deepen siege mentality.

 

To have any chance of working, a siege mentality can't have a significant 'enemy within' and even back when PC took over, there seemed to be a number of players who weren't fully on board and/or knew their futures weren't at the club under Pedro.

 

There was a metaphorical 'cull', which isn't at all unusual when a new manager comes in but in this case there seemed to be acrimony in it, or at least reaching the public view because of various leaks. The 'cull' eventually saw a good number leave but Miller got a new contract.

 

In late April, PC eventually offered Miller an extension after a fairly robust media push on the back of some decent performances.

(When Keith Jackson starts a 'campaign' of sorts you know it's in exchange for something).

 

We can speculate that no Miller may have given Pedro a better chance to succeed but the real issue is that the club would almost certainly have had a better chance in 2017/18 if we'd had gone about the managerial appointment in a more 'professional manner' than what AJ seemed to term as "institutional failure".

Edited November 28, 2017 by buster.

[Ser Barristan Selmy 222]

The direction was NIAR. That was achieved.

I believe the direction was to be successful in Europe too. That wasn't achieved. And if we'd been bringing through youth and had a decent scouting network in place, we wouldn't have needed Advocaat to come in and blow mental money buying a whole new squad. If our soul direction was just to get to NIAR (largely against very weak opposition) with no regard for what came beyond that, then that's typical of the boom and bust nature that's personified our club and particularly the Murray era. Club's should be thinking what is happening 10, 15 and 20 years down the line.

 

At the end of the 1996/7 season, we had just won our 9th title in a row, we had just introduced Barry Ferguson into the first team (so the claim that we had no youth coming through is incorrect) and had £28.5m in the bank, but some claim it was badly run club.

And in the 96/97 season we also finished bottom of our CL group, below Grasshopper - losing 5/6 games. Barry Ferguson was one player - I was talking about youth in general. Fair enough we had money in the bank, but it didn't get spent very productively.

[buster. 4,809]

Perhaps a question to the older bears but who can remember the last time you felt we had a competent board running the club with a long term plan for our future? I can't recall one in my lifetime. This current board is just more of what we're used to.

 

Over the decades football has increasingly become more business orientated with the sport itself relegated to becoming 'a vehicle'.

 

Some of Sir Duped's decisions from back in the day have led the club down a route where survival became an issue and we haven't yet fully recovered.

 

Today the expectation levels and subsequent 'gambles' to quickly bridge large gaps mean that focus will remain off, as well as on-field for the forseeable.

[chilledbear 16]

If Robertson runs everything past the board then it's because he's told to do it. The board detail what flexibility he has and what his decision remit is.

 

 

Do you think someone in his position should have more leeway to make decisions? Is he the right man for the position?

 

I'm not sure we will solve the issues on the field, without looking at the decision making off the field.

[buster. 4,809]

Do you think someone in his position should have more leeway to make decisions? Is he the right man for the position?

 

I'm not sure we will solve the issues on the field, without looking at the decision making off the field.

 

Unpleasent though it is, you only have to look at Celtic to see that an effective, hard-nosed CEO who undoubtedly has been given a powerful remit can work, but if you look at their model you also see that to become really successful,...you need to get it right at the various levels.

 

An effective and powerful CEO implementing a joined-up longterm strategy with a relatively poor first team manager doesn't cut it...but if you appoint a good one (ie. Rodgers) then it comes together or at least it does within a local enviroment.

 

-------------

 

The fact Celtic are so lauded after repeatedly getting tanked in Europe only illustrates the 'business orientation' of what used to be a sport, ie. CL money.

 

--------------

 

Whilst on the other side of the city, it's relevant to this thread to point at how they manage the media.

Edited November 28, 2017 by buster.

[Bluedell 5,356]

Do you think someone in his position should have more leeway to make decisions? Is he the right man for the position?

 

I'm not sure we will solve the issues on the field, without looking at the decision making off the field.

 

In terms of the decision making, I'm more interested in what the decisions are than who makes them. For example, I think we should be a lot more proactive when dealing with the press, but whether that's being directed from the board or the MD isn't that much of an issue, other than I want one of them to agree with me.

 

The current make-up of the board are people who have invested a lot in the club recently so they will want their say on various things so to turn round and say just give us your cash but have no sway on when we pick the next manager is unrealistic.

 

I'm not sure whether Robertson is the right man. I don't think he's doing as bad a job as many are suggesting but I don't think much of the criticism aimed towards the running of the club is his fault. It was interesting to see Bain's performance improve once Murray stepped away and perhaps Robertson may do the same.

[MacK1950 2,250]

Aberdeen might have a better commercial success just now but they were never saddled with Fatman.

Think now that he is gone things should improve.