Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Methven, Rodwell and Scott have to go NOW.
Comments
-
He doesn't.carly burn said:shirty5 said:
Remind me of his percentage againcarly burn said:Methven is the owner??
Same as the rest of them. 5% +.
I'll wager he owns more than the majority of them.
5%+ of fu*k all isn't a lot .0 -
Yes.guinnessaddick said:
Did he put any of his own money in to get a share?AFKABartram said:
Whose now got himself a nice salaried position toocarly burn said:Methven is the owner??0 -
It's time to find out....Airman Brown said:It’s all about The Valley, not personalities, but you do need people who care. The US owners have serious clout, but are they that bothered?0 -
When its said, we have the 4th highest budget in league one, is that player budget, or is the SMT included in that?2
-
Right now Ted Lasso would do a better job!fenaddick said:
And do they have the right connections to make appointments? We know that CM brokered the deal so what happens if the board decide Rodwell and Scott have to go? I would imagine CM puts forward some more of his mates for the roles and it's a gamble to see if they're any more competent.Airman Brown said:It’s all about The Valley, not personalities, but you do need people who care. The US owners have serious clout, but are they that bothered?
In reality we're a small piece of investment for the main three and so only warrant a small amount of time. That means it's unlikely they've formed many connections with "football people" so don't have others to go to for advice. I know Brener had been involved in MLS but that's a totally different prospect to L1 football0 -
LargeAddick said:
You’d think Gavin Carter as a fan and an investor would be the man to speak directly to the other investors. I assume he knows them, has spoken to them, met them but who knows?Rob said:Do the US big hitters have anyone on the ground around the Valley/Sparrows Lane who could report back to them with ‘honest’ assessments of how things are going? Because I for one would have been screaming weeks ago that this just isn’t working. It’s just so obvious to see. Would anybody feel able to do that though without jeopardising their own position.
He knows one of the families at least since before the takeover happened, that's how he got involved. He also was disappointed that Tommy Sandgaard decided to sell which says something about his judgement.7 -
drawnablank said:Aside from all the justifiable irritation/ anger at the playing side of things, we’re getting into blame everyone territory and I don’t see much facts but a lot “it must be’s”.
Does anyone on here actually know what Scott has been doing this season? Does anyone know what his day to day has actually looked like? Does anyone know what players he has actually suggested?I’m not talking assumptions, I’m talking having actual cold stone facts.
I think there would be quite a surprise if you did.
I know what he did last season because he told us a few weeks into the season, his direct quote being...
"That’s my job now, to make sure we have the strong foundation built to get promoted and stay in the Championship and progress even further, challenge at the top of that."
He then recruited Appleton and when that failed he recruited Jones. We then had our worst season in 98 years.
What he does now is immaterial. He has failed and needs binning.15 -
Yes, but ultimately, he is responsible for hiring and managing the people responsible for the football side (Scott and Rodwell). He’s decided and I’m sure defended keeping them in post through this catastrophic reign. If I were the owners I’d be asking myself if I trusted Charlie to appoint better people.killerandflash said:
Methven isn't responsible for the playing side, that's Scott and Rodwell.fenaddick said:
He sort of is though. NJ will have had to present the style of play he wants to make and the type of players he would bring in during his interview(s)killerandflash said:For all his faults, the responsibility for the dreadful football on display doesn't rest with Methven, as he's not responsible for the bizarre formations, crude 1980s Wimbledon tactics and signing Nathan Jones' old boys.
And even with the latter 2, it's not as if Jones said he was going to deliver ineffective hoofball in his interview.
We have much better players than Crawley. But badly coached and managed.0 -
Playing budget estimated by CM to be 4th, wages 5th.Mendonca In Asdas said:When its said, we have the 4th highest budget in league one, is that player budget, or is the SMT included in that?1 - Sponsored links:
-
Playing style and mentality of a club with a bottom 4 budget.Henry Irving said:
Playing budget estimated by CM to be 4th, wages 5th.Mendonca In Asdas said:When its said, we have the 4th highest budget in league one, is that player budget, or is the SMT included in that?5 -
I’ve always said that the title “CEO” in a pro football club is a joke, and largely adopted by charlatans, because a CEO in a proper company is ultimately responsible for delivery of the P&L account. That can’t really happen in most clubs since they rely on the owners to fund it. It doesnt stop modern football “CEOs” arguing for and getting huge salaries because they have “benchmarked” themselves against real CEOs. That’s also why you get £2m p.a. for running the shitshow, literally, that is Thames Water.seth plum said:OK.
If it isn’t Methven (the football isn’t down to me) responsible for the disintegration and joylessness of our club, who was the exact person who told Brian Cole to lead the Kevin Nolan tribute in the way it happened?I believe that particular non football buck stops with Methven, and if I am right it reveals him to be an utter see you next Tuesday.
If not Methven then who?
Anyway, Methven is “CEO” despite initally saying that he wouldn’t be, because he learnt at Sunderland that he’s not very good at it. That’s on record. On an issue that causes serious reputational damage, the buck stops with the CEO, regardless of whether they were involved in the decision.Unfortunately if there’s one thing PR people are good at, it is wriggling out of any accountability for anything. Thats why advertising people hate them, despite the rest of the public assuming they are one and the same.11 -
PragueAddick said:
I’ve always said that the title “CEO” in a pro football club is a joke, and largely adopted by charlatans, because a CEO in a proper company is ultimately responsible for delivery of the P&L account. That can’t really happen in most clubs since they rely on the owners to fund it. It doesnt stop modern football “CEOs” arguing for and getting huge salaries because they have “benchmarked” themselves against real CEOs. That’s also why you get £2m p.a. for running the shitshow, literally, that is Thames Water.seth plum said:OK.
If it isn’t Methven (the football isn’t down to me) responsible for the disintegration and joylessness of our club, who was the exact person who told Brian Cole to lead the Kevin Nolan tribute in the way it happened?I believe that particular non football buck stops with Methven, and if I am right it reveals him to be an utter see you next Tuesday.
If not Methven then who?
Anyway, Methven is “CEO” despite initally saying that he wouldn’t be, because he learnt at Sunderland that he’s not very good at it. That’s on record. On an issue that causes serious reputational damage, the buck stops with the CEO, regardless of whether they were involved in the decision.Unfortunately if there’s one thing PR people are good at, it is wriggling out of any accountability for anything. Thats why advertising people hate them, despite the rest of the public assuming they are one and the same.
Agreed. The best set-up at a football club is the owner as the Chairman with a COO running the commercial side and a DoF running the playing side.
9 -
Watched a podcast a few weeks ago when Charlie boy commented that it was funny/odd that supporters believe that the club belongs to them. Just clarifies exactly how they view supporters.4
-
Really?MikeBaileysFanClub said:Watched a podcast a few weeks ago when Charlie boy commented that it was funny/odd that supporters believe that the club belongs to them. Just clarifies exactly how they view supporters.
Straight out of the Meire book that!
Methven is kind of a mixture of all the shit we've endured in the past.
Little sprinkling of Southall. Touch of Meire. Dollop of Sandgaard.15 -
Rodwell and Scott's cockiness at the Bromley Meeting a year ago have shown this pair up for what they are.6
-
I remember Karl Pilkington talking about what superhero he would like to be in an episode and he suggested Bullshit Man. So whenever anybody says things that are BS he appears and calls it out. He would be very busy with our SMT. I have never heard so much of it and when Rodwell speaks it isn't even subtle. You don't even need a super power.3
-
I bet we’re top of the underachievers table.Henry Irving said:
Playing budget estimated by CM to be 4th, wages 5th.Mendonca In Asdas said:When its said, we have the 4th highest budget in league one, is that player budget, or is the SMT included in that?0 -
Great post! I mean, Methven came here with a terrible reputation already. We were told to ignore Sunderland fans as they were bitter but hey, it’s played out as exactly as we were warned. Catastrophic league form, bragging about football acumen, which now looks foolish and a growing contempt for the fans. He has to go!PragueAddick said:
I’ve always said that the title “CEO” in a pro football club is a joke, and largely adopted by charlatans, because a CEO in a proper company is ultimately responsible for delivery of the P&L account. That can’t really happen in most clubs since they rely on the owners to fund it. It doesnt stop modern football “CEOs” arguing for and getting huge salaries because they have “benchmarked” themselves against real CEOs. That’s also why you get £2m p.a. for running the shitshow, literally, that is Thames Water.seth plum said:OK.
If it isn’t Methven (the football isn’t down to me) responsible for the disintegration and joylessness of our club, who was the exact person who told Brian Cole to lead the Kevin Nolan tribute in the way it happened?I believe that particular non football buck stops with Methven, and if I am right it reveals him to be an utter see you next Tuesday.
If not Methven then who?
Anyway, Methven is “CEO” despite initally saying that he wouldn’t be, because he learnt at Sunderland that he’s not very good at it. That’s on record. On an issue that causes serious reputational damage, the buck stops with the CEO, regardless of whether they were involved in the decision.Unfortunately if there’s one thing PR people are good at, it is wriggling out of any accountability for anything. Thats why advertising people hate them, despite the rest of the public assuming they are one and the same.6 -
I have wondered whether Carter knew Methven before this takeover ?Athletico Charlton said:LargeAddick said:
You’d think Gavin Carter as a fan and an investor would be the man to speak directly to the other investors. I assume he knows them, has spoken to them, met them but who knows?Rob said:Do the US big hitters have anyone on the ground around the Valley/Sparrows Lane who could report back to them with ‘honest’ assessments of how things are going? Because I for one would have been screaming weeks ago that this just isn’t working. It’s just so obvious to see. Would anybody feel able to do that though without jeopardising their own position.
He knows one of the families at least since before the takeover happened, that's how he got involved. He also was disappointed that Tommy Sandgaard decided to sell which says something about his judgement.0 - Sponsored links:
-
From what was said at Bromley Addicks, no he didn't.charltonbob said:
I have wondered whether Carter knew Methven before this takeover ?Athletico Charlton said:LargeAddick said:
You’d think Gavin Carter as a fan and an investor would be the man to speak directly to the other investors. I assume he knows them, has spoken to them, met them but who knows?Rob said:Do the US big hitters have anyone on the ground around the Valley/Sparrows Lane who could report back to them with ‘honest’ assessments of how things are going? Because I for one would have been screaming weeks ago that this just isn’t working. It’s just so obvious to see. Would anybody feel able to do that though without jeopardising their own position.
He knows one of the families at least since before the takeover happened, that's how he got involved. He also was disappointed that Tommy Sandgaard decided to sell which says something about his judgement.1 -
Is Carter’s appointment as Non-Exec Chairman an indication that the investors are not happy with the SMT’s performance? Could we see the SMT be managed out of the business? I do hope so, I certainly don’t trust them in making the next management appointment, or any further recruitment.5
-
Same as what squirrel face said.MikeBaileysFanClub said:Watched a podcast a few weeks ago when Charlie boy commented that it was funny/odd that supporters believe that the club belongs to them. Just clarifies exactly how they view supporters.0 -
To which the proper response is, without the fans you don’t have a business. Particularly when you don’t own the assets either.22
-
What did he actually say? Fucking moron if he said thatMikeBaileysFanClub said:Watched a podcast a few weeks ago when Charlie boy commented that it was funny/odd that supporters believe that the club belongs to them. Just clarifies exactly how they view supporters.2 -
Very sensible … so won’t happy at Charlton at the momentbobmunro said:PragueAddick said:
I’ve always said that the title “CEO” in a pro football club is a joke, and largely adopted by charlatans, because a CEO in a proper company is ultimately responsible for delivery of the P&L account. That can’t really happen in most clubs since they rely on the owners to fund it. It doesnt stop modern football “CEOs” arguing for and getting huge salaries because they have “benchmarked” themselves against real CEOs. That’s also why you get £2m p.a. for running the shitshow, literally, that is Thames Water.seth plum said:OK.
If it isn’t Methven (the football isn’t down to me) responsible for the disintegration and joylessness of our club, who was the exact person who told Brian Cole to lead the Kevin Nolan tribute in the way it happened?I believe that particular non football buck stops with Methven, and if I am right it reveals him to be an utter see you next Tuesday.
If not Methven then who?
Anyway, Methven is “CEO” despite initally saying that he wouldn’t be, because he learnt at Sunderland that he’s not very good at it. That’s on record. On an issue that causes serious reputational damage, the buck stops with the CEO, regardless of whether they were involved in the decision.Unfortunately if there’s one thing PR people are good at, it is wriggling out of any accountability for anything. Thats why advertising people hate them, despite the rest of the public assuming they are one and the same.
Agreed. The best set-up at a football club is the owner as the Chairman with a COO running the commercial side and a DoF running the playing side.0 -
I'd never formed an actual opinion of Charlie boy except to think he's a bit of a creep ...RodneyCharltonTrotta said:
What did he actually say? Fucking moron if he said thatMikeBaileysFanClub said:Watched a podcast a few weeks ago when Charlie boy commented that it was funny/odd that supporters believe that the club belongs to them. Just clarifies exactly how they view supporters.
But I've now discovered the final straw.
The Chuckle Brothers can exit stage left, hand in hand as soon as they like.
Good riddance to bad rubbish as my old Nan would say.0 -
Airman - I never really understand your obsession with owning The Valley. If I was running the club ( and I’m pretty sure I’d be better than this lot) it would be very low down my list of prioritiesAirman Brown said:To which the proper response is, without the fans you don’t have a business. Particularly when you don’t own the assets either.
It’s dead money - no sensible business person would buy it.4 -
Owners won't pump serious money into the squad, as there's little to zero chance of selling the Club for a large profit without such a key asset. They're simply supplementing costs and losing money until they may tire of such a "Project". That's the logic behind the obsession, I believe.alburyaddick said:
Airman - I never really understand your obsession with owning The Valley. If I was running the club ( and I’m pretty sure I’d be better than this lot) it would be very low down my list of prioritiesAirman Brown said:To which the proper response is, without the fans you don’t have a business. Particularly when you don’t own the assets either.
It’s dead money - no sensible business person would buy it.3 -
The money isn’t in a physical asset , that will always be valued as a property asset with little or no chance of development. The only money to be made in football ( if there is any at all !) is the TV money if you get promoted to the Premier Leaguemendonca said:
Owners won't pump serious money into the squad, as there's little to zero chance of selling the Club for a large profit without such a key asset. They're simply supplementing costs and losing money until they may tire of such a "Project". That's the logic behind the obsession, I believe.alburyaddick said:
Airman - I never really understand your obsession with owning The Valley. If I was running the club ( and I’m pretty sure I’d be better than this lot) it would be very low down my list of prioritiesAirman Brown said:To which the proper response is, without the fans you don’t have a business. Particularly when you don’t own the assets either.
It’s dead money - no sensible business person would buy it.3
