The board don’t all agree on Jones, so maybe not as close as some think
Not really a surprise when one would imagine jones would want control whereas Scott won’t allow that otherwise he’s out of a job so probably advising not to proceed
The board don’t all agree on Jones, so maybe not as close as some think
Not really a surprise when one would imagine jones would want control whereas Scott won’t allow that otherwise he’s out of a job so probably advising not to proceed
Interestingly it is Scott got Jones..
Do you know what reservations the board have about Jones?
The board don’t all agree on Jones, so maybe not as close as some think
Not really a surprise when one would imagine jones would want control whereas Scott won’t allow that otherwise he’s out of a job so probably advising not to proceed
Interestingly it is Scott got Jones..
Can you clarify this? You're saying you've heard Jones is Scott's choice? Or the opposite?
- Nathan Jones 6/4 - Nigel Pearson 3/1 - Neil Warnock 4/1 - Michael Duff 5/1 - John Eustace 5/1 - Mark Bonner 10/1 - Gareth Ainsworth 14/1 - 16/1 bar
27th January morning update…
- Nathan Jones 1/2 - Alex Neil 7/2 - Neil Warnock 6/1 - Michael Duff 6/1 - Nigel Pearson 8/1 - John Eustace 10/1 - 20/1 bar
28th January update…
- Nathan Jones 2/1 - Mark Warburton 2/1 - Gary Rowett 4/1 - Alex Neil 6/1 - Michael Duff 8/1 - Neil Warnock 8/1 - Nigel Pearson 10/1 - John Eustace 12/1 - 20/1 bar
29th January update, unchanged from 24 hours ago
30th January…
- Nathan Jones 4/7 - Mark Warburton 4/1 - Gary Rowett 4/1 - Alex Neil 8/1 - Neil Warnock 10/1 - Michael Duff 10/1 - Nigel Pearson 12/1 - Darren Moore 14/1 - 20/1 bar
can't be any of those named. None are from Manchester.
Not to say it won’t be Jones, still a good chance, but there is someone else who they want to interview
Another one of their mates no doubt. Amazing how they can’t agree on Nathan Jones, a manager who has genuine pedigree at our level and whose last job was in the Premier League, but could agree that Michael Appleton was the man to lead us to glory.
If Scott's decisions are no longer being sanctioned without scrutiny, he can't be surprised but must feel undermined
You're making an assumption that his decisions on managerial appointments haven't always been with scrutiny.
First team men's manager is a key role, possibly THE key role on the football side (Sorry Karen) so I would expect the rest of the UK directors to have an interest and sign off on who is chosen.
Whether that has changed or whether the US money men are now having an input we don't know.
After two failures Scott and the rest of the UK directors will most likely be under more scrutiny from the money men than before.
Or it could just be that Scott wants Jones and the others are saying "let's speak to Lee Johnson first and then we can decide".
Personally, I think in a well functioning leadership team it is should be good to discuss big decisions and get consensus.
Not that I'm sure we have a well functioning leadership team.
PS Putting Lee Johnson's name in the hat was just a joke....or was it?
The board don’t all agree on Jones, so maybe not as close as some think
Not really a surprise when one would imagine jones would want control whereas Scott won’t allow that otherwise he’s out of a job so probably advising not to proceed
Interestingly it is Scott got Jones..
Can you clarify this? You're saying you've heard Jones is Scott's choice? Or the opposite?
Scott’s choice.. but not all agree.. doesn’t mean it won’t happen.
If Scott's decisions are no longer being sanctioned without scrutiny, he can't be surprised but must feel undermined
You're making an assumption that his decisions on managerial appointments haven't always been with scrutiny.
First team men's manager is a key role, possibly THE key role on the football side (Sorry Karen) so I would expect the rest of the UK directors to have an interest and sign off on who is chosen.
Whether that has changed or whether the US money men are now having an input we don't know.
After two failures Scott and the rest of the UK directors will most likely be under more scrutiny from the money men than before.
Or it could just be that Scott wants Jones and the others are saying "let's speak to Lee Johnson first and then we can decide".
Personally, I think in a well functioning leadership team it is should be good to discuss big decisions and get consensus.
Not that I'm sure we have a well functioning leadership team.
PS Putting Lee Johnson's name in the hat was just a joke....or was it?
The board don’t all agree on Jones, so maybe not as close as some think
Not really a surprise when one would imagine jones would want control whereas Scott won’t allow that otherwise he’s out of a job so probably advising not to proceed
Interestingly it is Scott got Jones..
Can you clarify this? You're saying you've heard Jones is Scott's choice? Or the opposite?
Scott’s choice.. but not all agree.. doesn’t mean it won’t happen.
If Scott's decisions are no longer being sanctioned without scrutiny, he can't be surprised but must feel undermined
You're making an assumption that his decisions on managerial appointments haven't always been with scrutiny.
First team men's manager is a key role, possibly THE key role on the football side (Sorry Karen) so I would expect the rest of the UK directors to have an interest and sign off on who is chosen.
Whether that has changed or whether the US money men are now having an input we don't know.
After two failures Scott and the rest of the UK directors will most likely be under more scrutiny from the money men than before.
Or it could just be that Scott wants Jones and the others are saying "let's speak to Lee Johnson first and then we can decide".
Personally, I think in a well functioning leadership team it is should be good to discuss big decisions and get consensus.
Not that I'm sure we have a well functioning leadership team.
PS Putting Lee Johnson's name in the hat was just a joke....or was it?
Not a chance with Lee Johnson..
Would probably all thought the same with Appleton?
We’ve been here so many times before with so many different owners. Makes you think we’ll actually end up with another middle of the road plodder like Appleton or Holden, not a more dynamic Nathan Jones, Gary Rowett appointment.
Do they just want yes men or a guy who has the minerals to drag us up and out of this league?
Why can't they put £10 million on Richard Madeley at 25-1, appoint him and collect the £250 million winnings. Sack Madeley after one game, pay him off with a 'drink', buy the Valley and Sparrows Lane and have money to straighten the club out. Now that's what I would call gambling responsibly.
If Scott's decisions are no longer being sanctioned without scrutiny, he can't be surprised but must feel undermined
You're making an assumption that his decisions on managerial appointments haven't always been with scrutiny.
First team men's manager is a key role, possibly THE key role on the football side (Sorry Karen) so I would expect the rest of the UK directors to have an interest and sign off on who is chosen.
Whether that has changed or whether the US money men are now having an input we don't know.
After two failures Scott and the rest of the UK directors will most likely be under more scrutiny from the money men than before.
Or it could just be that Scott wants Jones and the others are saying "let's speak to Lee Johnson first and then we can decide".
Personally, I think in a well functioning leadership team it is should be good to discuss big decisions and get consensus.
Not that I'm sure we have a well functioning leadership team.
PS Putting Lee Johnson's name in the hat was just a joke....or was it?
Not a chance with Lee Johnson..
I'd go back and check with your source if I was you
Would expect an announcement tomorrow as the last second interview was this morning .. that would give them the last day of the window if they wanted a couple in ..
plenty of time for the new manager to get his own players in.
Didn’t one of the SMT say judge us at the end of the window by what we have done.
Think he was really referring to players in an out rather than manager sacked.
The board don’t all agree on Jones, so maybe not as close as some think
Not really a surprise when one would imagine jones would want control whereas Scott won’t allow that otherwise he’s out of a job so probably advising not to proceed
Interestingly it is Scott got Jones..
Do you know what reservations the board have about Jones?
If Scott's decisions are no longer being sanctioned without scrutiny, he can't be surprised but must feel undermined
You're making an assumption that his decisions on managerial appointments haven't always been with scrutiny.
First team men's manager is a key role, possibly THE key role on the football side (Sorry Karen) so I would expect the rest of the UK directors to have an interest and sign off on who is chosen.
Whether that has changed or whether the US money men are now having an input we don't know.
After two failures Scott and the rest of the UK directors will most likely be under more scrutiny from the money men than before.
Or it could just be that Scott wants Jones and the others are saying "let's speak to Lee Johnson first and then we can decide".
Personally, I think in a well functioning leadership team it is should be good to discuss big decisions and get consensus.
Not that I'm sure we have a well functioning leadership team.
PS Putting Lee Johnson's name in the hat was just a joke....or was it?
Not a chance with Lee Johnson..
I'd go back and check with your source if I was you
I struggle to think of managers I dislike more than Lee Johnson, plus I think that would condemn us to league 2
Comments
Vernon Kay is good at playing away.
Richard Madeley might be able to steal the odd win.
First team men's manager is a key role, possibly THE key role on the football side (Sorry Karen) so I would expect the rest of the UK directors to have an interest and sign off on who is chosen.
Whether that has changed or whether the US money men are now having an input we don't know.
After two failures Scott and the rest of the UK directors will most likely be under more scrutiny from the money men than before.
Or it could just be that Scott wants Jones and the others are saying "let's speak to Lee Johnson first and then we can decide".
Personally, I think in a well functioning leadership team it is should be good to discuss big decisions and get consensus.
Not that I'm sure we have a well functioning leadership team.
PS Putting Lee Johnson's name in the hat was just a joke....or was it?
I find the description on the various announcements less than claer as to who our board comprises.
It could be a combination of all/any of the below (I think):
Managing Director: James Rodwell (Chairman)
Group Finance Director: Ed Warrick
Technical Director: Andy Scott
Non-Executive Director: Paul Elliott CBE MBE
Non-Executive Director: Gavin CarterSporting Director Simon Lenagan
Steve Sutherland (as member of SMT)
PLUS the 'co-owners':
Co-Owners:
Gabriel Brener and family
Joshua Friedman and family
Warren Rosenfeld and family
ACA Football Partners
Munir Javeri
Charlie Methven
Marc Boyan
Makes you think we’ll actually end up with another middle of the road plodder like Appleton or Holden, not a more dynamic Nathan Jones, Gary Rowett appointment.
Now that's what I would call gambling responsibly.
Think he was really referring to players in an out rather than manager sacked.
Probably either incompetence, a poor process or that he's only just become available (Moore).
These posts don't live on this thread! Ffs!