Leicester City For Sale (Ongoing Thread)

[Lillehamring]

6 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

First pro Rudkin I have seen on the forum, if you can't see how he is massively responsible for the catastrophic decline of the club then you are an ostrich. 

And once again the point is completely missed.  I'm not pro-rudkin, i'm pro-common sense.

 

I don't want to get into a debate about rudkin - but it is a fact that, as poor a DoF as he was, he sharees in the responsibilty for our decline, but...

fans were blaming him for things that he literally had nothing to do with.  This is my point about how fans look for simple explanations to explain complex problems.  There were many many reasons for our decline, but because rudkin was bad at his job, fans adopted him as a figure to blame for almost every single problem, regardless of whether it was his remit or not.  So, no, not-pro-rudkin, at all.

 

In the same way they have adopted seagrave as a talisman of performance inadequacies.  It's easier for people to rationalise all the personal, physical & psychological reasons why a player underperforms by churning out the old "segrave is just like a spa/hotel" etc.

[Fox92]

5 minutes ago, Lillehamring said:

And once again the point is completely missed.  I'm not pro-rudkin, i'm pro-common sense.

 

I don't want to get into a debate about rudkin - but it is a fact that, as poor a DoF as he was, he sharees in the responsibilty for our decline, but...

fans were blaming him for things that he literally had nothing to do with.  This is my point about how fans look for simple explanations to explain complex problems.  There were many many reasons for our decline, but because rudkin was bad at his job, fans adopted him as a figure to blame for almost every single problem, regardless of whether it was his remit or not.  So, no, not-pro-rudkin, at all.

 

In the same way they have adopted seagrave as a talisman of performance inadequacies.  It's easier for people to rationalise all the personal, physical & psychological reasons why a player underperforms by churning out the old "segrave is just like a spa/hotel" etc.

What like?

 

Most people were/are frustrated with wages and contract lengths that were handed out to practically anybody. That surely falls on the DOF. 

[Lillehamring]

10 minutes ago, LCFCCHRIS said:

The "pros" have done so much better over the last 5 seasons. Real top notch operators. 

Give a random fan who is heavily into football manager a shot I reckon on balance they'd pick better players than this lot have

Because here on foxes talk for example we've consistently identified quality signings?  we're not even capable of agreeing if a player is amazing or dreadful.  And i can guarantee that any player mention in a fans forum has probably already been well researched by the club.

 

the problem our 'pros' have had over the last five years is not the result of incompetence or a lack of recourses, it's because the shop we've been shopping in is føkking terrible - 

 

Anyone can " pick better players than this lot have" - but the problem is getting said players to sign for us, even if we can afford to bring them in.

 

I genuinely can't believe i'm debating this with a person who thinks that 'playing' FM is an adequate qualification for having a job in a pro-sports requitement team.  mental.

[Lillehamring]

Just now, Fox92 said:

What like?

 

Most people were/are frustrated with wages and contract lengths that were handed out to practically anybody. That surely falls on the DOF. 

As i said, i don't want to get into a debate about rudkin.  And i haven't personally collated a list of every ridiculous thing he's been blamed for, so i don't have specific examples to hand.

[LCFCCHRIS]

4 minutes ago, Lillehamring said:

Because here on foxes talk for example we've consistently identified quality signings?  we're not even capable of agreeing if a player is amazing or dreadful.  And i can guarantee that any player mention in a fans forum has probably already been well researched by the club.

 

the problem our 'pros' have had over the last five years is not the result of incompetence or a lack of recourses, it's because the shop we've been shopping in is føkking terrible - 

 

Anyone can " pick better players than this lot have" - but the problem is getting said players to sign for us, even if we can afford to bring them in.

 

I genuinely can't believe i'm debating this with a person who thinks that 'playing' FM is an adequate qualification for having a job in a pro-sports requitement team.  mental.

Jordan Ayew, De Córdoba Reid,  Faes, Souttar, Skipp for stupid money and wages, incredible diligence, WOW! That's what your "Pro" sports recruitment team got you. 

 

You came out scathing against a guy suggesting involving the fans for input, not singlehandedly handling the entire recruitment.  

 

Besides even if we take your strawman at face value, the "pros" recruitment has failed. You think a clued up fan's would also. By your logic they are level in terms of performance. 

Edited 27 August by LCFCCHRIS

[Chelmofox]

1 minute ago, LCFCCHRIS said:

Jordan Ayew, De Córdoba Reid,  Faes, Souttar, Skipp for stupid money and wages, incredible diligence, WOW! That's what your "Pro" sports recruitment team got you. 

 

You came out scathing against a guy suggesting involving the fans for input, not singlehandedly handling the entire recruitment.  

 

Besides even if we take your strawman at face value, the "pros" recruitment has failed. You think a clued up fan's would also. By your logic they are level in terms of performance. 

I good team that uses data and analytics doesnt buy those players. Thats the point.

[Lillehamring]

1 minute ago, LCFCCHRIS said:

Jordan Ayew, De Córdoba Reid,  Faes, Souttar, Skipp for stupid money and wages, incredible diligence, WOW! That's what your "Pro" sports recruitment team. 

 

Their recruitment has failed. You think a clued up fan's would also. By your logic they are level in terms of performance. 

Maybe the reality of our situation was that that was the best we could get? 

All those players came with a good pedigree/reputation - you can't predict how a signing is going to perform.  It's very easy in hindsight to label these as bad signings - but again the question is, as bad as they were, is it possible that they were as good as we could get. 

 

It's also very easy to hypothetically argue that fans would have done better.  i suspect that if you go back to the individual threads of those players, there will be fans who have commended those signings.  most fans, at least on here, have completely unrealistic ideas of players we can afford/attract. 

 

And, with respect, i don't think you understand my logic - apart from anything else how can something that doesn't exist (fan recruitment) with something that does exist (pro-recruitment) - that's your logic, not mine.

[Lillehamring]

7 minutes ago, Chelmofox said:

I good team that uses data and analytics doesnt buy those players. Thats the point.

Unless data and analytics reveals that these are the best options available to us?  That's more to the point.

[LCFCCHRIS]

1 minute ago, Lillehamring said:

Maybe the reality of our situation was that that was the best we could get? 

All those players came with a good pedigree/reputation - you can't predict how a signing is going to perform.  It's very easy in hindsight to label these as bad signings - but again the question is, as bad as they were, is it possible that they were as good as we could get. 

 

It's also very easy to hypothetically argue that fans would have done better.  i suspect that if you go back to the individual threads of those players, there will be fans who have commended those signings.  most fans, at least on here, have completely unrealistic ideas of players we can afford/attract. 

 

And, with respect, i don't think you understand my logic - apart from anything else how can something that doesn't exist (fan recruitment) with something that does exist (pro-recruitment) - that's your logic, not mine.

I think they were universally bemoaned. Look back on the Skipp thread, it was a shrug of the shoulders at best and dismay at worst. 

 

We

Spent

20M 

On

Skipp.

 

Case closed. 

[deep blue]

39 minutes ago, jammie82uk said:

Yes we were but we certainly had some luck as well, Mahrez wasn’t the player we originally scouted and wanted, same with Kante, we signed Leo Ulloa partly based on our players opinion, we have also had an incredible list of poor signings as well for decent money spent 

Mahrez and Kante were not the original targets, but had the scouts not been at the match or didn't have the acumen to identify class when they saw it then we wouldn't have switched our interest to those players,

 

Signing players on the recommendation of agencies, which is the route we appear to have adopted over the last few years, is no replacement for proper scouting.

[BrummieFOX]

25 minutes ago, Lillehamring said:

And once again the point is completely missed.  I'm not pro-rudkin, i'm pro-common sense.

 

I don't want to get into a debate about rudkin - but it is a fact that, as poor a DoF as he was, he sharees in the responsibilty for our decline, but...

fans were blaming him for things that he literally had nothing to do with.  This is my point about how fans look for simple explanations to explain complex problems.  There were many many reasons for our decline, but because rudkin was bad at his job, fans adopted him as a figure to blame for almost every single problem, regardless of whether it was his remit or not.  So, no, not-pro-rudkin, at all.

 

In the same way they have adopted seagrave as a talisman of performance inadequacies.  It's easier for people to rationalise all the personal, physical & psychological reasons why a player underperforms by churning out the old "segrave is just like a spa/hotel" etc.

I think even the most staunch KP Out (myself included) understand that Rudkin isn't responsible for everything that's gone wrong. But at the same time you're never going to get an entire fan base regularly repeating all the intricacies of a failing football club and pinpoint exactly who is responsible for what.

 

I think it's quite a valid position to simply point the finger at Top and Rudkin as the reason for our failure. Same with Seagrave, its a proxy for everything you've listed. 

[Nickaj]

3 hours ago, VLC86 said:

Incorrect, they become an issue when the cost to run them significantly dwarfs the clubs income.

 

It becomes a management issue yes but retains its value on the balance sheet as a company asset

[Pliskin]

2 hours ago, VLC86 said:

Incorrect, they become an issue when the cost to run them significantly dwarfs the clubs income.

But that’s when a good business model comes in, with a competent team to implement it..

[Lesta Legend]

30 minutes ago, Chelmofox said:

I good team that uses data and analytics doesnt buy those players. Thats the point.

Exactly and there is no way, non at all that these players would have been highlighted within any form of data that made them the right profile of player we needed, absolute nonsense to suggest otherwise. 

[DAS Boot]

23 minutes ago, LCFCCHRIS said:

I think they were universally bemoaned. Look back on the Skipp thread, it was a shrug of the shoulders at best and dismay at worst. 

 

We

Spent

20M 

On

Skipp.

 

Case closed. 

This really doesn't get mentioned enough.

 

Brexit levels of stupidity.  

 

£20m.  Just look at the number and think of the player.

 

It makes no sense.

[murphy]

2 hours ago, Lillehamring said:

The fixation with Seagrave is the same as the fixation with Rudkin - a lot of our fans can't deal with the fact that what has happened is the result of many different factors, they need to have something to focus their anger on - Rudkin is most people's go-to scapegoat, his anonymity and the lack of actual understanding of his role makes it easy to blame him for everything relating to transfers, contracts etc - even things that have nothing to do with him, even now when he is no longer the DoF, fans on here are still quick to drag him out as the reson for anything they don't like.  Likewise, seagrave has been set up as the scapegoat for the lack of energy and commitment of the players - rather than blaming the apathy of the players it is much easier to create this image of seagrave as the root of everything wrong with performance.

Come off it.  

 

As director of football, Rudkin is the most senior person on the footballing side of the club. The buck stops with him.

 

Managers have come and gone but he has remained as the one constant throughout our decline. Please don't be fooled by the sleight of hand restructuring.  Our new director of football reports directly to Rudkin.  He is still overseeing the football operation.

 

He is very much involved in recruitment along with Glover and the manager of the day.  We have heard directly from players who could scarcely believe their luck in face to face contract negotiations with Rudkin.  

 

Crap recruitment and ridiculous contracts (aswell as allowing players to run them down) are the main causes of where we are and all roads lead back to Rudkin.

[Silebyfox_89]

1 hour ago, Lillehamring said:

As i said, i don't want to get into a debate about rudkin.  And i haven't personally collated a list of every ridiculous thing he's been blamed for, so i don't have specific examples to hand.

Happy to accuse fans for blaming Rudkin for issues he's not responsible for but doesn't give examples. Right ok.

WUM right here 

[reynard]

1 hour ago, Lillehamring said:

Maybe the reality of our situation was that that was the best we could get? 

All those players came with a good pedigree/reputation - you can't predict how a signing is going to perform.  It's very easy in hindsight to label these as bad signings - but again the question is, as bad as they were, is it possible that they were as good as we could get. 

 

It's also very easy to hypothetically argue that fans would have done better.  i suspect that if you go back to the individual threads of those players, there will be fans who have commended those signings.  most fans, at least on here, have completely unrealistic ideas of players we can afford/attract. 

 

And, with respect, i don't think you understand my logic - apart from anything else how can something that doesn't exist (fan recruitment) with something that does exist (pro-recruitment) - that's your logic, not mine.

Just a general question. Do you believe that a Director of Football, at any club, should be held responsible for the football side of said football club?  Please answer yes or no only.

 

If no, who should ultimately be held responsible?

[Ric Flair]

2 hours ago, Lillehamring said:

And once again the point is completely missed.  I'm not pro-rudkin, i'm pro-common sense.

 

I don't want to get into a debate about rudkin - but it is a fact that, as poor a DoF as he was, he sharees in the responsibilty for our decline, but...

fans were blaming him for things that he literally had nothing to do with.  This is my point about how fans look for simple explanations to explain complex problems.  There were many many reasons for our decline, but because rudkin was bad at his job, fans adopted him as a figure to blame for almost every single problem, regardless of whether it was his remit or not.  So, no, not-pro-rudkin, at all.

 

In the same way they have adopted seagrave as a talisman of performance inadequacies.  It's easier for people to rationalise all the personal, physical & psychological reasons why a player underperforms by churning out the old "segrave is just like a spa/hotel" etc.

He's also been praised by the club for things that he hadn't anything to do with either. Can't be the buyer and the seller here son, it's insufferable. 

[winteriscoming]

If as Top has previously stated and which I completely disagree with Rudkin gets some credit for winning the premiership then surely by the same logic he should be held accountable for back to back relegation’s. 

[dmayne7]

2 hours ago, Lillehamring said:

And once again the point is completely missed.  I'm not pro-rudkin, i'm pro-common sense.

 

I don't want to get into a debate about rudkin - but it is a fact that, as poor a DoF as he was, he sharees in the responsibilty for our decline, but...

fans were blaming him for things that he literally had nothing to do with.  This is my point about how fans look for simple explanations to explain complex problems.  There were many many reasons for our decline, but because rudkin was bad at his job, fans adopted him as a figure to blame for almost every single problem, regardless of whether it was his remit or not.  So, no, not-pro-rudkin, at all.

 

In the same way they have adopted seagrave as a talisman of performance inadequacies.  It's easier for people to rationalise all the personal, physical & psychological reasons why a player underperforms by churning out the old "segrave is just like a spa/hotel" etc.

This would be a totally fair comment if the club ever gave us any transparency of who does what. It's been speculation the whole time so who do you think people will blame? The management of the club brought that on themselves.

[Lillehamring]

2 hours ago, BrummieFOX said:

I think even the most staunch KP Out (myself included) understand that Rudkin isn't responsible for everything that's gone wrong. But at the same time you're never going to get an entire fan base regularly repeating all the intricacies of a failing football club and pinpoint exactly who is responsible for what.

 

I think it's quite a valid position to simply point the finger at Top and Rudkin as the reason for our failure. Same with Seagrave, its a proxy for everything you've listed. 

Each to their own - personally, i'd rather be realistic and look at the bigger picture than stamp my feet and say 'If it wasn't for Rudkin we'd be playing in europe right now' as many fans do.

[woznotwos]

Most of my circle have come to the conclusion that to many signings have been agency led. Regardless , where we are now is through gross incompetency. One positive the young lads are getting a go and the Ipswich game was closer than the result suggested . Its gave me hope for the weekend. 

[Unabomber]

1 minute ago, Lillehamring said:

Each to their own - personally, i'd rather be realistic and look at the bigger picture than stamp my feet and say 'If it wasn't for Rudkin we'd be playing in europe right now' as many fans do.

I blame top more than Rudkin as he had the power to sack the moron. Such an easy win for him and it shows how much of a terrible owner he is. 

[Lillehamring]

36 minutes ago, reynard said:

Just a general question. Do you believe that a Director of Football, at any club, should be held responsible for the football side of said football club?  Please answer yes or no only.

 

If no, who should ultimately be held responsible?

Yes he should and it hasn't helped us that he hasn't.

 

However, I don't believe that the situation we are in is purely because of one element, that it  is purely down to the actions of one individual.  This is my point.  We are not where we are JUST because of Rudkin, the players have not serially underperformed JUST because we moved to seagrave.