Who is head of recruitement.?

Quoted from Maringer

I'd argue that starting the season with just 3 strikers in the squad is a real failing, especially as only Rose can really do the job of leading the line. Pyke seems to do better from wide positions, but we would have been royally screwed had Rose picked up even a medium-term injury before now.

Other than Rose, I've not been enormously impressed with any of the other signings, though they've all had their good games on occasion.

I'm not claiming that the lack of numbers up top is the fault of the recruitment guy, incidentally. The buck stops with the manager/head coach and Hurst really made a pig's ear of the summer's transfer window.

Yeah esp when one of those three strikers (Pyke) isn't even a striker, he's a wide attacker. Wilson seems more of a super sub type, doesn't seem suited to 90 minutes or seem to offer a great deal other than a goal. Not that that's necessarily a bad thing for a striker and I think he's a valid member of a squad, but not as the number 2 backup striker.

Even more bizarre when we had a striker in the building in orsi, who whilst not the best wasn't the worst either and was certainly better as a lone centre forward than Pyke. So odd that we let him walk and didnt sign anybody to replace him, presumably a deal fell through at the last minute, but managers have to live and die by those decisions and it was certainly one that cost Hurst. We can only thank our lucky stars Rose hasn't been injured or else we'd probably be in or about the bottom spots, he is essential for us and irreplaceable by anyone in the squad.

If Rose gets injured we are down
Pyke and Wilson are ok but they like an injury.

Is Yoda really dumb, or a troll account of a regular here who is too chicken excrement to actually speak their opinion because they care about their internet reputation so much that they hide behind an alt?

They're certainly the first two of your suggestions and lack the intelligence to think about the third.

Still trying to decide whether this is a thread about Joe Hutchinson or Yoda TBH, so clearly the latter had to a degree achieved the result he no doubt desired.

I share the same view as some posters in that I assume Joe's role is based upon a brief from the manager to search for players that may be available and fit the brief, research targets both in terms of performance but also personality then presents his findings to PH/DA to see if they tick the box. It would be unrealistic to think he does not have some engagement with agents but to what degree I'm not sure.

If you search the interview the club we site did with Conteh when he joined you get an idea of Joe's value in that he seemed to build a relationship with Conteh (and no doubt his agent) ahead of PH getting too involved, something a manager working in isolation to recruit probably wouldn't have the time to do, but also in the case of Conteh it appeared really helped in making GTFC an attractive proposition.

In addition to the above if Joe has started to build a relationship with a target it really helps in terms of understanding how to engage the individual, the key word being "individual" as he may need a different approach for each player, possibly again something that a manager may not have time to do.

Some posters seem to believe that Joe signs player and gives them to the manager to utilise or that in the summer PH went off and signed his own players and just ignored Joe, both theories are complete nonsense and just suit the narrative of people who want to have a dig as we're not storming the league.

Joe Hutchinson cannot be held accountable for Mullarkey and Andrews seemingly jogging back whilst Waterfall tries to prevent the first Walsall goal on Monday or the various examples of nobody tracking opposition runners from midfield or the numerous defensive errors this term, the accountability for that and more importantly fixing that sits with the Manager/Head Coach who actually signed the players.

I don't know Joe are in reality what he does but I'm sure having someone in that role adds value, especially at a time (Jan window) when the manager and his coaches need to spend as much time on the training pitch as possible fixing the issues that are holding us back.  

If we weren't in a bit of a scary position then this might be an interesting topic but proximity to the trap door is clearly impacting emotions on a lot of these threads.

There's a lot to try and unpack for the club around whats going wrong at the moment. How we are recruiting and who's involved with this aspect of the club has clearly not worked in the way hoped, why that is I think they need to look at in great depth.

Looking at the players they seem reasonable enough signings at face value, however it doesn't appear to be turning out like that. Perhaps they have some common underlying deficiencies that the stats haven't shown up possibly because these attributes have been masked by other strengths of team mates at previous clubs.

Given the amount we appear to have invested in staffing you would not imagine its a fitness issue and with all the data we now have access to this must be fairly easy to rule in or out.

We clearly have a soft centre, perhaps we need to get a sports psychologist in to work with them.

I don't know but there's clearly some root cause and the club need to get to the heart of it pretty quickly.

Quoted from Swansea_Mariner

If we weren't in a bit of a scary position then this might be an interesting topic but proximity to the trap door is clearly impacting emotions on a lot of these threads.

There's a lot to try and unpack for the club around whats going wrong at the moment. How we are recruiting and who's involved with this aspect of the club has clearly not worked in the way hoped, why that is I think they need to look at in great depth.

Looking at the players they seem reasonable enough signings at face value, however it doesn't appear to be turning out like that. Perhaps they have some common underlying deficiencies that the stats haven't shown up possibly because these attributes have been masked by other strengths of team mates at previous clubs.

Given the amount we appear to have invested in staffing you would not imagine its a fitness issue and with all the data we now have access to this must be fairly easy to rule in or out.

We clearly have a soft centre, perhaps we need to get a sports psychologist in to work with them.

I don't know but there's clearly some root cause and the club need to get to the heart of it pretty quickly.

It's the same principle as when you sign say a 20 goal striker who when he plays for you can't hit a barn door.

Everything is different.  Teammates are different,  the manager is different,  the environment and everything else is different, and it might even be at a different level.

Football is too subjective to take data seriously; what it takes to put a competitive team together is very complex, often intuitive and is so influenced by money and outside factors.

Yes I know data is here to stay as there is a huge industry built on the back of it and it can useful in certain areas. People say it is successful for certain clubs but most aren't, and those that are usually have a lot of other things going in their favour.

Quoted from lew chaterleys lover

It's the same principle as when you sign say a 20 goal striker who when he plays for you can't hit a barn door.

Everything is different.  Teammates are different,  the manager is different,  the environment and everything else is different, and it might even be at a different level.

Football is too subjective to take data seriously; what it takes to put a competitive team together is very complex, often intuitive and is so influenced by money and outside factors.

Yes I know data is here to stay as there is a huge industry built on the back of it and it can useful in certain areas. People say it is successful for certain clubs but most aren't, and those that are usually have a lot of other things going in their favour.

And all those factors are relevant, and some can be easier measured, and improved when putting metrics on them. Such as how players behave with different team mates around. Gut feel and impulse is important to know what weighting you put on different factors, but if you have a hunch and you can put data on it, you can remove bias. Ultimately you cannot put gut feel on the average speed of running back for Conteh (just picking a random example here) in the last 15 minutes of the half when winning, drawing or losing. Certain things can come to light that you'd never think of. Some players are very good at conserving energy to stay on the pitch, and you need to know when to get people off, have a word, and be certain people are giving 95-100% and not 80% between 65-80 minute. When you're watching 11 players, you cannot see the average distance of a player away from the player with the ball and see if people's off the ball movement changes based on the result. How about for every player those metrics on an evening or day, or when they've played 2 games in a week or 1, or when you rest them 3 in 4 games or 2 in 4 games. You may feel some go anonymous, but you may have some surprises when the data comes in.

Hell, Arsene Wenger used to get a urine sample to see hydration levels and how people looked after themselves off the pitch. Obviously we're not at that level. I get that you hate data, and don't think it's everything, and I agree, but putting numbers on stuff really gives you a lot more information to confirm your hunches, or realised you're biasing it because of what you see in training or on a match day. Maybe learn new stuff like how even your fastest players can slack off but don't look it, because they're faster than everyone else.

You get a data scientist and plenty of data and they can throw data at the manager they never even considered or prepare metrics the manager requests.

Quoted from lew chaterleys lover

It's the same principle as when you sign say a 20 goal striker who when he plays for you can't hit a barn door.

Everything is different.  Teammates are different,  the manager is different,  the environment and everything else is different, and it might even be at a different level.

Football is too subjective to take data seriously; what it takes to put a competitive team together is very complex, often intuitive and is so influenced by money and outside factors.

Yes I know data is here to stay as there is a huge industry built on the back of it and it can useful in certain areas. People say it is successful for certain clubs but most aren't, and those that are usually have a lot of other things going in their favour.

The Purveyors Data Services, of will take the kudos when your team does well, but its your fault if the team does badly as your not using the data right. Theres a thread running about Snake Oil, it should be attached to the Dat people.

[quote=120845]Still trying to decide whether this is a thread about Joe Hutchinson or Yoda TBH, so clearly the latter had to a degree achieved the result he no doubt desired.


Joe Hutchinson cannot be held accountable for Mullarkey and Andrews seemingly jogging back whilst Waterfall tries to prevent the first Walsall goal on Monday or the various examples of nobody tracking opposition runners from midfield or the numerous defensive errors this term, the accountability for that and more importantly fixing that sits with the Manager/Head Coach who actually signed the players.        

Waterfall never got near the Walsall player as he was slow, but yes Mullarkey & Andrews only jogged back. DA can (hopefully)  "motivate" Mullarkey & Andrews and others to step up and react quicker, but Waterfall has serious problems in that he is slow, and if we press up the field he will be passed time and again. I wouldn't be surprised if its his last match, but Rodgers doesn't fill me with any hope as his positioning is terrible.  Not good.