Many can talk about Luzon being sacked, or even resigning....but in all honesty where will that get us? Be real - who on earth would want to be manager at Charlton at the moment? I doubt any half decent manager would willingly leave their club and come to us. I doubt the Charlton Manager(s) are paid a lot. They have very little say or control over signings. The squad is thin, and contains at least half a doesn't players that are just too cr@p for the championship. The fans are walking away in droves, turning their backs on the club they've supported for years. As usual, there will be minimal investment come January..........I mean come on, who in their right mind would want to manage us? The only person willing to be manager of our club at the moment is someone who wants to pick up a salary each month and is happy to be told what to do in the hope they pull a few good results out of the bag and get offered the role long term, or get offered a job elsewhere off the back of it. Either of those options aren't going to be good for us.
I'm afraid, that whilst I think Luzon is a total plonker and I would like to see him gone, it's not going to make a blind bit of difference. We still have an owner who hasn't got a clue about English football. A director who hasn't got a clue about English football. A medical team that seem in no rush to get any player back on the pitch, and half team full of players who couldn't give a toss about playing for us, it's just a job and they just want their wages at the end of the month.
One positive worth mentioning.....living near to Southend, over recent weeks, I've started taking my sons there instead of Charlton on a Saturday. Pigott (on loan from Charlton) is a good player! Passionate, hard working, talented and scores goals......so when we get relegated this season, he may get a game for us.
Luzon is a not the cause of the issues but his tactical naivety is an issue. He has no experience of this league and needs to go. Playing Bergdich as a right winger is ludicrous, finishing the game with Holmes-Dennis another left back on the right wing on his debut was plain stupidity!
Only Oscar Garcia had experience of this league for Watford last season... Alex Neil had no experience in England for Norwich?
I look at managers in a similar way to how I look at players. How good are they when things are going well and of equal importance, how good are they when things are not going well. With players you can remove them from the team in most circumstances provided you have adequate alternatives but that could mean a significant rotation of players, match to match.
For a manager it's crucial that they 'perform' when the going gets tough, especially when the situation is not necessarily of their direct making. Curbs was a master it limiting bad runs. I see Luzon as a similar type of manager to Pardew. They are momentum managers rather than pure coaches. They get the team moving forward and are able to maintain that momentum with impressive results but inevitably, events will occur that stop that momentum and they struggle as there is no base level of coaching to fall back on. Of course, at Charlton, Pardew never go the momentum going as he has done at other clubs.
I think the current run of bad results tells you more about Luzon than the early season success. There is nothing to change it around and the players know it. And I don't think injured players returning will make a huge difference now that the team's performance level has nose-dived. As a comparison, watching Norwich run rings round Newcastle showed a team with spirit and attacking aspirations and although they were 'thrashed' 6-2 there is something to build on whilst at The Valley there is a void.
Many over the tenure of this administration have commented on the employment of 4 head coaches.
On what basis, when assessing our experience since Jan 3, 2014, do people think a 5th will make any meaningful difference?
I do not suggest Mr Luzon is an unfulfilled genius but who really thinks throwing another "driver" under the bus, at this stage, will provide more than a temporary respite as we travel our currently quasi surreal football journey.
I respect, because of Tuesdays' opposition, many may have travelled to the Valley with some aspiration but was surprised there was any expectation for the game last weekend. I applaud the fortitude and appreciate the optimism but for a 2nd season we are going into games with, among other shortfalls, the glaring omission of an experienced "championship" forward line able to present a focal point for our attack and a physical challenge to opposing defences. It appears we simply cannot afford one.
We started the season with 3 senior forwards (Reza arrived by default). In reality none had more than a passing acquaintance with the Championship. Makienoks' injury has had an undue impact as there was no viable back up option. His absence immediately necessitated a change of playing style.
You can operate without such a focus but it is notably harder with an ever changing team, inexperienced not only in years but in the championship. 12 of the current extended 1st team squad had barely set foot in a championship match before this season.
It appears many still have to learn to compete in the Championship they must earn the right to play each & every game It is physically & mentally demanding on a sustained basis, is sometimes nasty and will unrelentingly test your physical, technical & natural ability to perform.
If the club is not prepared to invest in a viable squad structure it will adversely impact the skills of any Head Coach invariably leading to increasingly irrational and on occasion positively "bonkers" team selections.
The manner in which the squads have been constructed over the past 2 seasons has displayed an almost deliberate naivety.
Did we learn nothing from the protracted absence of Henderson last season? At times the lack of experience shines through like a proverbial beacon. As a CEO steadfastly inured to balancing the books it is ironic her administration appears blind to the same principle in constructing the football side of the business. A key principle of any professional team sport is the balance of the playing assets at your disposal.
Last seasons "plan" brought the Peeters dalliance to a shuddering halt and turned the potential major asset of Vetokele into a passenger. This seasons' "plan" seems to have placed undue pressure on SM to return before ready and produces the sort of approach seen at Reading and the Tuesday night shambles.
At Reading we could all live in hope an 18yr old highly promising novice (where inconsistency will prevail) and a midfielder who had spent over a season recovering from injury were going to provide effective attacking outlets but we can hardly be surprised a) when it does not happen b) the head coach makes adjustments to settle for a less ambitious Plan B.
Plan C on Tuesday came under quite a different category - it followed the "pin the tail on the donkey team selection, shut your eyes, cross your fingers and stick them in ears methodology. I am told it can work.
It is a real concern the executive maintains a positive expectation of what is a palpably flawed "football plan" (no matter how praiseworthy the business concept). The "current bump in the road" truly resembles a DVD of Season 2014/15 on a loop. If the "grand design for a glittering future" is built around such a process then so be it, but the essence of good management and progress is to learn from your mistakes.
Anyone with even a modest exposure to the game recognises managing injuries is part and parcel of team sport. You, of course, have to have first managed your budget to allow for such contingencies.
Tuesdays' "brain fart" apart, this head coach, just as his predecessors did and his successors will, needs support.
I have made much of other clubs "rolling the dice" by spending exorbitant sums in a desperate race for promotion. However the "churning" of the head coach and playing staff in search of the right combination to prove your particular business model was "right all along" displays its own arrogance while pursuing an equally perverse "game of chance".
That we are again scouring the unattached market for "trialists" like Ameobi and Doyley, means as with Chappell & Murray, as with Slater & Jiminez someone again has their numbers wrong. The "sustainability" project is under capitalised. Duchatelet has 3 choices. He can maintain the "status quo" and increasingly risk stagnation /deterioration. He can revisit the funding requirements to stabilize the position. He can effectively walk away. None of which I suggest offers us any real light at the end of what appears to be a long and increasingly dark tunnel.
If this executive wishes to deliver a completely different business model then for heavens sake define what it is, what it will look like and how long it will take to deliver. If unable to determine any of those elements then against what benchmarks are they working?.
Are we awaiting the current crop of under 15's or Under 14s to take us to glory? If so, then say so and be done with it.
Perhaps then we can all either realign our expectations or our leisure time.
As a postscript I offer the following for consideration (feel free to correct the detail).
If Doyley signs he will be the 92nd player contracted to the club under RD. 92 players churned in 93 weeks. Less a football club more a football factory. Is it any wonder those who have supported Charlton over many decades now struggle to relate to it?
Cast your eyes across the following and you can make your own determination as to whether the club under this regime in football terms is now better positioned to deliver progress going forward.
For me, with the monies already spent, were I the investor assessing if our playing staff was fit for purpose, while I can acknowledge the potential, it is at present an uncomfortable read.
Many over the tenure of this administration have commented on the employment of 4 head coaches.
On what basis, when assessing our experience since Jan 3, 2014, do people think a 5th will make any meaningful difference?
I do not suggest Mr Luzon is an unfulfilled genius but who really thinks throwing another "driver" under the bus, at this stage, will provide more than a temporary respite as we travel our currently quasi surreal football journey.
I respect, because of Tuesdays' opposition, many may have travelled to the Valley with some aspiration but was surprised there was any expectation for the game last weekend. I applaud the fortitude and appreciate the optimism but for a 2nd season we are going into games with, among other shortfalls, the glaring omission of an experienced "championship" forward line able to present a focal point for our attack and a physical challenge to opposing defences. It appears we simply cannot afford one.
We started the season with 3 senior forwards (Reza arrived by default). In reality none had more than a passing acquaintance with the Championship. Makienoks' injury has had an undue impact as there was no viable back up option. His absence immediately necessitated a change of playing style.
You can operate without such a focus but it is notably harder with an ever changing team, inexperienced not only in years but in the championship. 12 of the current extended 1st team squad had barely set foot in a championship match before this season.
It appears many still have to learn to compete in the Championship they must earn the right to play each & every game It is physically & mentally demanding on a sustained basis, is sometimes nasty and will unrelentingly test your physical, technical & natural ability to perform.
If the club is not prepared to invest in a viable squad structure it will adversely impact the skills of any Head Coach invariably leading to increasingly irrational and on occasion positively "bonkers" team selections.
The manner in which the squads have been constructed over the past 2 seasons has displayed an almost deliberate naivety.
Did we learn nothing from the protracted absence of Henderson last season? At times the lack of experience shines through like a proverbial beacon. As a CEO steadfastly inured to balancing the books it is ironic her administration appears blind to the same principle in constructing the football side of the business. A key principle of any professional team sport is the balance of the playing assets at your disposal.
Last seasons "plan" brought the Peeters dalliance to a shuddering halt and turned the potential major asset of Vetokele into a passenger. This seasons' "plan" seems to have placed undue pressure on SM to return before ready and produces the sort of approach seen at Reading and the Tuesday night shambles.
At Reading we could all live in hope an 18yr old highly promising novice (where inconsistency will prevail) and a midfielder who had spent over a season recovering from injury were going to provide effective attacking outlets but we can hardly be surprised a) when it does not happen b) the head coach makes adjustments to settle for a less ambitious Plan B.
Plan C on Tuesday came under quite a different category - it followed the "pin the tail on the donkey team selection, shut your eyes, cross your fingers and stick them in ears methodology. I am told it can work.
It is a real concern the executive maintains a positive expectation of what is a palpably flawed "football plan" (no matter how praiseworthy the business concept). The "current bump in the road" truly resembles a DVD of Season 2014/15 on a loop. If the "grand design for a glittering future" is built around such a process then so be it, but the essence of good management and progress is to learn from your mistakes.
Anyone with even a modest exposure to the game recognises managing injuries is part and parcel of team sport. You, of course, have to have first managed your budget to allow for such contingencies. I have made much of other clubs "rolling the dice" by spending exorbitant sums in a desperate race for promotion. However the "churning" of the head coach and playing staff in search of the right combination to prove your particular business model was "right all along" displays its own arrogance while pursuing an equally perverse "game of chance".
That we are again scouring the unattached market for "trialists" like Ameobi and Doyley, means as with Chappell & Murray, as with Slater & Jiminez someone again has their numbers wrong. The "sustainability" project is under capitalised. Duchatelet has 3 choices. He can maintain the "status quo" and increasingly risk stagnation /deterioration. He can revisit the funding requirements to stabilize the position. He can effectively walk away. None of which I suggest offers us any real light at the end of what appears to be a long and increasingly dark tunnel.
If this executive wishes to deliver a completely different business model then for heavens sake define what it is, what it will look like and how long it will take to deliver. If unable to determine any of those elements then against what benchmarks are they working?.
Are we awaiting the current crop of under 15's or Under 14s to take us to glory? If so, then say so and be done with it.
Perhaps then we can all either realign our expectations or our leisure time.
As a postscript I offer the following for consideration (feel free to correct the detail).
If Doyley signs he will be the 92nd player contracted to the club under RD. 92 players churned in 93 weeks. Less a football club more a football factory. Is it any wonder those who have supported Charlton over many decades now struggle to relate to it?
Cast your eyes across the following and you can make your own determination as to whether the club under this regime in football terms is now better positioned to deliver progress going forward.
For me, with the monies already spent, were I the investor assessing if our playing staff was fit for purpose, while I can acknowledge the potential, it is at present an uncomfortable read.
After the dreaded "Vote of Confidence" in tuesday's SLP to Luzon, it now transpires that the addicks hierarchy are believed to have held talks regarding Luzon's future following tuesday's defeat. Source: SLP
After the dreaded "Vote of Confidence" in tuesday's SLP to Luzon, it now transpires that the addicks hierarchy are believed to have held talks regarding Luzon's future following tuesday's defeat. Source: SLP
Whenever I doubt my thoughts, he always sums up my feelings, in the most superb manner.
As I said at the outset. RD has us down as a football swap shop & Grapevine has set this out quite brilliantly.
As you say, are we to wait 5 years, in the vein hope that some 14 year old kids will become our saviours ? Even if we do produce them, they'll be sold before playing for a full season.
So what do we have? Nothing ?
Like you say I'm no fan of Luzon, but it's not his fault, anymore than it was Powell's and possibly Peeters'.
What did the fans achieve tonight That was the youngest Charlton side I have seen start a match ... what else can Luzon do the injury list is horrendous add to it Gudmunnson and Watt now
What could he do, for a start he could organise them and send them out inspired and set up not to concede.
Instead we looked absolutely disorganised and beaten before the first whistle blew, no pride, no fight,no guts and hopefully no Luzon.
Dont think it was in his master plan to give away a free kick and so concede a goal in the first minute with a wall deciding not to jump, when that happened, the fans instantly started booing so heads dropped straight away
Be nice to know what his master plan was with 3 left backs in the team.
Cast your eyes across the following and you can make your own determination as to whether the club under this regime in football terms is now better positioned to deliver progress going forward.
For me, with the monies already spent, were I the investor assessing if our playing staff was fit for purpose, while I can acknowledge the potential, it is at present an uncomfortable read.
Feely, Gower, Green & Hollands whose Charlton careers were effectively at an end by Jan 2014 are excluded.
It's a long list but how does it compare to other clubs? Players move clubs far more regularly than they used to. I think it's more down to modern football than it is RD.
Looking at players used by each Championship club in 14/15 the average was 32 and we used 34. We're also a club willing to give youngsters a chance so you might expect it to be slightly higher than clubs that don't tend to do that. We were slightly above the average of 33 in 13/14 using 35 players.
Of course we may have used more players in total when you combine those two seasons but we always had one of the smaller budgets which means less signings on long term contracts and more short term fixes to ensure survival in the league.
In that list there's also a lot of u21s that haven't played for the first team. Being an U21 rather than reserve league we need a decent sized squad of that age group which is why we top it up with signings - Aribo, Ansah, Browne, Cumberbatch, Daniel, Monlouis, Munns, Obileye and Staunton. We were doing that before RD bought the club. Smith is another (though he made two cup appearances for us) and Koc was loaned here, for whatever reason, to play for our U21s.
That's 11 and there's a further 19 from our academy that have at most made a handful of first team appearances - Azeez, Barnes, Charles-Cook, Edwards, Gerard, Hanlan, Holmes-Denns, Kelly, Kennnedy, Lapslie, Lennon, Mitov, Muldoon, Osborne, Phillips, Pyke, Sho-Silva, Thomas and Umerah.
That puts the list at around 60 players. RD or not there were always going to be a lot of changes due to contracts running out, many being players that didn't deserve new deals, others that wanted to move on and loanees that for various reasons didn't become permanent signings.
Although teams that win promotion tend to use less (Bournemouth with 24, though Watford used 31) they also tend to build those squads over a few seasons. Perhaps RD/KM now see that as the summer signings excluding Makienok all came in on longer term contracts. The issue is they've underestimated how expensive a strong Championship squad is, which is why we're over budget but at least 2/3 players short of what we needed at the start of the season.
I'd say they've also underestimated the importance of experience in and around a squad. They don't even have to be proven Championship players at the peak of their careers. A few more experienced squad players might have added something in the way players like Hughes and Euell did when we won League 1. We have two players in their 30s in Jackson and Diarra and after that the next oldest are Henderson, Kashi, Bergdich and Moussa, two that have had injury problems since signing and another two that are new to this country and league.
Maybe that explains why we were looking at Doyley and Ameobi. Doyley has mainly played as a right back and would presumably mainly provide cover for Solly. Could he add more to the dressing room than he adds on the pitch? He's made over 400 appearances for Watford, all while they were a Championship club aside from a season in the Premier League.
I'm not saying I'm pro RD, after all as someone said we were 22nd when he took over and we're in the same position now. I don't think the high number of first team players is unusual for an average Championship side and it's not something to solely blame RD and KM for, we're far from the only club like it.
Luzon isn't the problem, anyone with a brain should realise that.
A new manager won't get any better performances out of these players, especially with the injury crisis we're in.
but would a new manager get worse performances .... are they playing anywhere to near the maximum of their ability regularly enough
Would you rather RD pays £1m to pay off Luzon and get a new manager in, or £1m on new players in jan? He's clearly set a budget and the squad must be the priority.
He needs to think about some virement in that budget or else we are fecked.
Cast your eyes across the following and you can make your own determination as to whether the club under this regime in football terms is now better positioned to deliver progress going forward.
For me, with the monies already spent, were I the investor assessing if our playing staff was fit for purpose, while I can acknowledge the potential, it is at present an uncomfortable read.
Feely, Gower, Green & Hollands whose Charlton careers were effectively at an end by Jan 2014 are excluded.
It's a long list but how does it compare to other clubs? Players move clubs far more regularly than they used to. I think it's more down to modern football than it is RD.
Looking at players used by each Championship club in 14/15 the average was 32 and we used 34. We're also a club willing to give youngsters a chance so you might expect it to be slightly higher than clubs that don't tend to do that. We were slightly above the average of 33 in 13/14 using 35 players.
Of course we may have used more players in total when you combine those two seasons but we always had one of the smaller budgets which means less signings on long term contracts and more short term fixes to ensure survival in the league.
In that list there's also a lot of u21s that haven't played for the first team. Being an U21 rather than reserve league we need a decent sized squad of that age group which is why we top it up with signings - Aribo, Ansah, Browne, Cumberbatch, Daniel, Monlouis, Munns, Obileye and Staunton. We were doing that before RD bought the club. Smith is another (though he made two cup appearances for us) and Koc was loaned here, for whatever reason, to play for our U21s.
That's 11 and there's a further 19 from our academy that have at most made a handful of first team appearances - Azeez, Barnes, Charles-Cook, Edwards, Gerard, Hanlan, Holmes-Denns, Kelly, Kennnedy, Lapslie, Lennon, Mitov, Muldoon, Osborne, Phillips, Pyke, Sho-Silva, Thomas and Umerah.
That puts the list at around 60 players. RD or not there were always going to be a lot of changes due to contracts running out, many being players that didn't deserve new deals, others that wanted to move on and loanees that for various reasons didn't become permanent signings.
Although teams that win promotion tend to use less (Bournemouth with 24, though Watford used 31) they also tend to build those squads over a few seasons. Perhaps RD/KM now see that as the summer signings excluding Makienok all came in on longer term contracts. The issue is they've underestimated how expensive a strong Championship squad is, which is why we're over budget but at least 2/3 players short of what we needed at the start of the season.
I'd say they've also underestimated the importance of experience in and around a squad. They don't even have to be proven Championship players at the peak of their careers. A few more experienced squad players might have added something in the way players like Hughes and Euell did when we won League 1. We have two players in their 30s in Jackson and Diarra and after that the next oldest are Henderson, Kashi, Bergdich and Moussa, two that have had injury problems since signing and another two that are new to this country and league.
Maybe that explains why we were looking at Doyley and Ameobi. Doyley has mainly played as a right back and would presumably mainly provide cover for Solly. Could he add more to the dressing room than he adds on the pitch? He's made over 400 appearances for Watford, all while they were a Championship club aside from a season in the Premier League.
I'm not saying I'm pro RD, after all as someone said we were 22nd when he took over and we're in the same position now. I don't think the high number of first team players is unusual for an average Championship side and it's not something to solely blame RD and KM for, we're far from the only club like it.
In the end you get what you are prepared to pay for.
If it is true that we have the third lowest budget in the Championship then we really belong in League One. Roland's strategy of surviving by selling makes more sense in that division. From RD's point of view he may be fairly relaxed about relegation. Gates would go down, but not by that much from where we are now, whereas the playing costs would fall substantially. He would also be able to raise funds by selling JBG, Bauer and maybe a few others without having to replace them with players of the same quality.
KM would say that as we are a 'family club' it does not matter that we have no aspirations. We could knock around the lower divisions like Orient do, a peripheral London club surviving on a shoestring.
Cast your eyes across the following and you can make your own determination as to whether the club under this regime in football terms is now better positioned to deliver progress going forward.
For me, with the monies already spent, were I the investor assessing if our playing staff was fit for purpose, while I can acknowledge the potential, it is at present an uncomfortable read.
Feely, Gower, Green & Hollands whose Charlton careers were effectively at an end by Jan 2014 are excluded.
It's a long list but how does it compare to other clubs? Players move clubs far more regularly than they used to. I think it's more down to modern football than it is RD.
Looking at players used by each Championship club in 14/15 the average was 32 and we used 34. We're also a club willing to give youngsters a chance so you might expect it to be slightly higher than clubs that don't tend to do that. We were slightly above the average of 33 in 13/14 using 35 players.
Of course we may have used more players in total when you combine those two seasons but we always had one of the smaller budgets which means less signings on long term contracts and more short term fixes to ensure survival in the league.
In that list there's also a lot of u21s that haven't played for the first team. Being an U21 rather than reserve league we need a decent sized squad of that age group which is why we top it up with signings - Aribo, Ansah, Browne, Cumberbatch, Daniel, Monlouis, Munns, Obileye and Staunton. We were doing that before RD bought the club. Smith is another (though he made two cup appearances for us) and Koc was loaned here, for whatever reason, to play for our U21s.
That's 11 and there's a further 19 from our academy that have at most made a handful of first team appearances - Azeez, Barnes, Charles-Cook, Edwards, Gerard, Hanlan, Holmes-Denns, Kelly, Kennnedy, Lapslie, Lennon, Mitov, Muldoon, Osborne, Phillips, Pyke, Sho-Silva, Thomas and Umerah.
That puts the list at around 60 players. RD or not there were always going to be a lot of changes due to contracts running out, many being players that didn't deserve new deals, others that wanted to move on and loanees that for various reasons didn't become permanent signings.
Although teams that win promotion tend to use less (Bournemouth with 24, though Watford used 31) they also tend to build those squads over a few seasons. Perhaps RD/KM now see that as the summer signings excluding Makienok all came in on longer term contracts. The issue is they've underestimated how expensive a strong Championship squad is, which is why we're over budget but at least 2/3 players short of what we needed at the start of the season.
I'd say they've also underestimated the importance of experience in and around a squad. They don't even have to be proven Championship players at the peak of their careers. A few more experienced squad players might have added something in the way players like Hughes and Euell did when we won League 1. We have two players in their 30s in Jackson and Diarra and after that the next oldest are Henderson, Kashi, Bergdich and Moussa, two that have had injury problems since signing and another two that are new to this country and league.
Maybe that explains why we were looking at Doyley and Ameobi. Doyley has mainly played as a right back and would presumably mainly provide cover for Solly. Could he add more to the dressing room than he adds on the pitch? He's made over 400 appearances for Watford, all while they were a Championship club aside from a season in the Premier League.
I'm not saying I'm pro RD, after all as someone said we were 22nd when he took over and we're in the same position now. I don't think the high number of first team players is unusual for an average Championship side and it's not something to solely blame RD and KM for, we're far from the only club like it.
In the end you get what you are prepared to pay for.
If it is true that we have the third lowest budget in the Championship then we really belong in League One. Roland's strategy of surviving by selling makes more sense in that division. From RD's point of view he may be fairly relaxed about relegation. Gates would go down, but not by that much from where we are now, whereas the playing costs would fall substantially. He would also be able to raise funds by selling JBG, Bauer and maybe a few others without having to replace them with players of the same quality.
KM would say that as we are a 'family club' it does not matter that we have no aspirations. We could knock around the lower divisions like Orient do, a peripheral London club surviving on a shoestring.
You lose £3-4m in TV revenue and PL solidarity money simply by going down, a hefty chunk of ticket sales to visiting supporters and, given the mutinous mood, I would guess a good £1m in home ticket receipts, all with very little corresponding cost saving. Let's round it off at a reduction of £5m net. Good luck saving that out of the budget through lower playing costs.
Sure, you can sell your better players, once, but you lose the £5m every year. Carry on digging, Roland.
Comments
I'm afraid, that whilst I think Luzon is a total plonker and I would like to see him gone, it's not going to make a blind bit of difference. We still have an owner who hasn't got a clue about English football. A director who hasn't got a clue about English football. A medical team that seem in no rush to get any player back on the pitch, and half team full of players who couldn't give a toss about playing for us, it's just a job and they just want their wages at the end of the month.
One positive worth mentioning.....living near to Southend, over recent weeks, I've started taking my sons there instead of Charlton on a Saturday. Pigott (on loan from Charlton) is a good player! Passionate, hard working, talented and scores goals......so when we get relegated this season, he may get a game for us.
For a manager it's crucial that they 'perform' when the going gets tough, especially when the situation is not necessarily of their direct making. Curbs was a master it limiting bad runs. I see Luzon as a similar type of manager to Pardew. They are momentum managers rather than pure coaches. They get the team moving forward and are able to maintain that momentum with impressive results but inevitably, events will occur that stop that momentum and they struggle as there is no base level of coaching to fall back on. Of course, at Charlton, Pardew never go the momentum going as he has done at other clubs.
I think the current run of bad results tells you more about Luzon than the early season success. There is nothing to change it around and the players know it. And I don't think injured players returning will make a huge difference now that the team's performance level has nose-dived. As a comparison, watching Norwich run rings round Newcastle showed a team with spirit and attacking aspirations and although they were 'thrashed' 6-2 there is something to build on whilst at The Valley there is a void.
On what basis, when assessing our experience since Jan 3, 2014, do people think a 5th will make any meaningful difference?
I do not suggest Mr Luzon is an unfulfilled genius but who really thinks throwing another "driver" under the bus, at this stage, will provide more than a temporary respite as we travel our currently quasi surreal football journey.
I respect, because of Tuesdays' opposition, many may have travelled to the Valley with some aspiration but was surprised there was any expectation for the game last weekend. I applaud the fortitude and appreciate the optimism but for a 2nd season we are going into games with, among other shortfalls, the glaring omission of an experienced "championship" forward line able to present a focal point for our attack and a physical challenge to opposing defences. It appears we simply cannot afford one.
We started the season with 3 senior forwards (Reza arrived by default). In reality none had more than a passing acquaintance with the Championship. Makienoks' injury has had an undue impact as there was no viable back up option. His absence immediately necessitated a change of playing style.
You can operate without such a focus but it is notably harder with an ever changing team, inexperienced not only in years but in the championship. 12 of the current extended 1st team squad had barely set foot in a championship match before this season.
It appears many still have to learn to compete in the Championship they must earn the right to play each & every game It is physically & mentally demanding on a sustained basis, is sometimes nasty and will unrelentingly test your physical, technical & natural ability to perform.
If the club is not prepared to invest in a viable squad structure it will adversely impact the skills of any Head Coach invariably leading to increasingly irrational and on occasion positively "bonkers" team selections.
The manner in which the squads have been constructed over the past 2 seasons has displayed an almost deliberate naivety.
Did we learn nothing from the protracted absence of Henderson last season? At times the lack of experience shines through like a proverbial beacon. As a CEO steadfastly inured to balancing the books it is ironic her administration appears blind to the same principle in constructing the football side of the business. A key principle of any professional team sport is the balance of the playing assets at your disposal.
Last seasons "plan" brought the Peeters dalliance to a shuddering halt and turned the potential major asset of Vetokele into a passenger. This seasons' "plan" seems to have placed undue pressure on SM to return before ready and produces the sort of approach seen at Reading and the Tuesday night shambles.
At Reading we could all live in hope an 18yr old highly promising novice (where inconsistency will prevail) and a midfielder who had spent over a season recovering from injury were going to provide effective attacking outlets but we can hardly be surprised a) when it does not happen b) the head coach makes adjustments to settle for a less ambitious Plan B.
Plan C on Tuesday came under quite a different category - it followed the "pin the tail on the donkey team selection, shut your eyes, cross your fingers and stick them in ears methodology. I am told it can work.
It is a real concern the executive maintains a positive expectation of what is a palpably flawed "football plan" (no matter how praiseworthy the business concept). The "current bump in the road" truly resembles a DVD of Season 2014/15 on a loop. If the "grand design for a glittering future" is built around such a process then so be it, but the essence of good management and progress is to learn from your mistakes.
Anyone with even a modest exposure to the game recognises managing injuries is part and parcel of team sport. You, of course, have to have first managed your budget to allow for such contingencies.
Tuesdays' "brain fart" apart, this head coach, just as his predecessors did and his successors will, needs support.
I have made much of other clubs "rolling the dice" by spending exorbitant sums in a desperate race for promotion. However the "churning" of the head coach and playing staff in search of the right combination to prove your particular business model was "right all along" displays its own arrogance while pursuing an equally perverse "game of chance".
That we are again scouring the unattached market for "trialists" like Ameobi and Doyley, means as with Chappell & Murray, as with Slater & Jiminez someone again has their numbers wrong. The "sustainability" project is under capitalised. Duchatelet has 3 choices. He can maintain the "status quo" and increasingly risk stagnation /deterioration. He can revisit the funding requirements to stabilize the position. He can effectively walk away. None of which I suggest offers us any real light at the end of what appears to be a long and increasingly dark tunnel.
If this executive wishes to deliver a completely different business model then for heavens sake define what it is, what it will look like and how long it will take to deliver. If unable to determine any of those elements then against what benchmarks are they working?.
Are we awaiting the current crop of under 15's or Under 14s to take us to glory? If so, then say so and be done with it.
Perhaps then we can all either realign our expectations or our leisure time.
As a postscript I offer the following for consideration (feel free to correct the detail).
If Doyley signs he will be the 92nd player contracted to the club under RD. 92 players churned in 93 weeks. Less a football club more a football factory. Is it any wonder those who have supported Charlton over many decades now struggle to relate to it?
Cast your eyes across the following and you can make your own determination as to whether the club under this regime in football terms is now better positioned to deliver progress going forward.
For me, with the monies already spent, were I the investor assessing if our playing staff was fit for purpose, while I can acknowledge the potential, it is at present an uncomfortable read.
1. Ahearne-Grant 2. Ajdarevic 3. Alnwick 4. Ansah 5. Aribo 6. Azeez 7. Ba 8. Barnes 9. Bauer 10. Ben-Haim 11. Bergdich 12. Berg Gudmundsson 13. Bikey Amougou 14. Browne 15. Bulot 16. Buyens. 17. Cebellos 18. Charles - Cook 19. Church 20. J Cook 21. Coquelin 22. Cort 23. Cousins 24. Cumberbatch 25. Daniel 26. Dervite 27. Diarra 28. Dmitrovic 29. Eagles 30. Edwards 31. Etheridge 32. Evina 33. Fox 34. Gerard 35. Ghoochannejhad 36. Gomez 37. Hamer 38. Hanlon 39. Harriott 40. Henderson 41. Holmes-Dennis 42. Hughes 43. Jackson 44. Johnson 45. Kashi 46. Kelly 47. Kennedy 48. Kermorgant 49. Koc 50. Lapsie 51. Lennon 52. Lepoint 53. McAleny 54. Makienok 55. Mitov 56. Monlouis 57. Morrison 58. Moussa 59. Muldoon 60. Munns 61. Nego 62. Obika 63. Obileye 64. Onyewu 65. Osbourne 66. Parzysek 67. Petrucci 68. Phillips 69. Piggot 70. Pope 71. Poyet 72. Pritchard 73. Pyke 74. Sarr 75. Sho Silva 76. Smith 77. Solly 78. Sordell 79. Staunton 80. Stephens 81. Thomas 82. Thuram 83. Tucudean 84. Tudgay 85. Umerah 86. Veljkovic 87. Vetokele 88. Watt 89. Wiggins 90. Wilson 91. Wood
92. Doyley ?
Feely, Gower, Green & Hollands whose Charlton careers were effectively at an end by Jan 2014 are excluded.
Amazing effort! I had to delete a chunk from my quote as it was so long.
Whenever I doubt my thoughts, he always sums up my feelings, in the most superb manner.
As I said at the outset. RD has us down as a football swap shop & Grapevine has set this out quite brilliantly.
As you say, are we to wait 5 years, in the vein hope that some 14 year old kids will become our saviours ?
Even if we do produce them, they'll be sold before playing for a full season.
So what do we have? Nothing ?
Like you say I'm no fan of Luzon, but it's not his fault, anymore than it was Powell's and possibly Peeters'.
Brilliant post Grapevine. You have helped make total sense of what have been, so far, just random negative thoughts about the team I love. Thank you.
Looking at players used by each Championship club in 14/15 the average was 32 and we used 34. We're also a club willing to give youngsters a chance so you might expect it to be slightly higher than clubs that don't tend to do that. We were slightly above the average of 33 in 13/14 using 35 players.
http://www.football-lineups.com/tourn/The_Championship_2014-2015/Stats/Players_Used/
http://www.football-lineups.com/tourn/The_Championship_2013-2014/stats/players_used/
Of course we may have used more players in total when you combine those two seasons but we always had one of the smaller budgets which means less signings on long term contracts and more short term fixes to ensure survival in the league.
In that list there's also a lot of u21s that haven't played for the first team. Being an U21 rather than reserve league we need a decent sized squad of that age group which is why we top it up with signings - Aribo, Ansah, Browne, Cumberbatch, Daniel, Monlouis, Munns, Obileye and Staunton. We were doing that before RD bought the club. Smith is another (though he made two cup appearances for us) and Koc was loaned here, for whatever reason, to play for our U21s.
That's 11 and there's a further 19 from our academy that have at most made a handful of first team appearances - Azeez, Barnes, Charles-Cook, Edwards, Gerard, Hanlan, Holmes-Denns, Kelly, Kennnedy, Lapslie, Lennon, Mitov, Muldoon, Osborne, Phillips, Pyke, Sho-Silva, Thomas and Umerah.
That puts the list at around 60 players. RD or not there were always going to be a lot of changes due to contracts running out, many being players that didn't deserve new deals, others that wanted to move on and loanees that for various reasons didn't become permanent signings.
Although teams that win promotion tend to use less (Bournemouth with 24, though Watford used 31) they also tend to build those squads over a few seasons. Perhaps RD/KM now see that as the summer signings excluding Makienok all came in on longer term contracts. The issue is they've underestimated how expensive a strong Championship squad is, which is why we're over budget but at least 2/3 players short of what we needed at the start of the season.
I'd say they've also underestimated the importance of experience in and around a squad. They don't even have to be proven Championship players at the peak of their careers. A few more experienced squad players might have added something in the way players like Hughes and Euell did when we won League 1. We have two players in their 30s in Jackson and Diarra and after that the next oldest are Henderson, Kashi, Bergdich and Moussa, two that have had injury problems since signing and another two that are new to this country and league.
Maybe that explains why we were looking at Doyley and Ameobi. Doyley has mainly played as a right back and would presumably mainly provide cover for Solly. Could he add more to the dressing room than he adds on the pitch? He's made over 400 appearances for Watford, all while they were a Championship club aside from a season in the Premier League.
I'm not saying I'm pro RD, after all as someone said we were 22nd when he took over and we're in the same position now. I don't think the high number of first team players is unusual for an average Championship side and it's not something to solely blame RD and KM for, we're far from the only club like it.
If it is true that we have the third lowest budget in the Championship then we really belong in League One. Roland's strategy of surviving by selling makes more sense in that division. From RD's point of view he may be fairly relaxed about relegation. Gates would go down, but not by that much from where we are now, whereas the playing costs would fall substantially. He would also be able to raise funds by selling JBG, Bauer and maybe a few others without having to replace them with players of the same quality.
KM would say that as we are a 'family club' it does not matter that we have no aspirations. We could knock around the lower divisions like Orient do, a peripheral London club surviving on a shoestring.
Sure, you can sell your better players, once, but you lose the £5m every year. Carry on digging, Roland.