Hughes in charge of recruitment

[Pompey55]

Not saying that I doubt his ability but did he not before joining us have a similar position at Forest Green before joining us yes they got promoted from league 2 ( division 4) but where are they now going with players he helped recruit
Maybe I’m just pissed off with our end of season but to me it doesn’t bode well for next year

[Sam_Brown]

It does seem to obfuscate who may or may not be responsible for any failings which I’m not sure is a good thing.

The way things are set up it’s hard to pin point any immediate failings on either the manager, Hughes or owners specifically.

Who is responsible for recruitment? Does Jose give Hughes a list and then Hughes determines who we can and can’t get in or does Hughes do that and give the manager a list and say pick from these. And do the owners have any say on the bigger picture in terms of sort of personality or physical traits we want to get? Do they have ultimate sign off on any players? I imagine it’s a combination of all three to some extent. Which makes you wonder do we sometimes point the blame at the wrong people? Is it fair to criticise Jose in the new season if we are playing poorly if he had little influence on who we get in? Likely should we criticise Hughes if he was given a list from Jose and ultimately all of them were crap? Finally should we blame either Jose or Hughes should the playing budget not be big enough to get the players in we want? So many variables and we’ll never know who is ultimately responsible for any immediate failings and I wonder if this is by design.

Ultimately it’s the owners responsibility to structure the club as they see best.

As an aside you could argue Forest going down is because Hughes did such a good job over the years and without him things have gone to ******. We’ll never know the truth.

[Pompey1984+1]

1. It was talked about a while back in an interview how it would work. Collectively was the answer.

2. You are saying you doubt his ability.

3. Perhaps Edu and Arteta will be available if Arsenal don't win the league.

[Pompey55]

1. It was talked about a while back in an interview how it would work. Collectively was the answer.

2. You are saying you doubt his ability.

3. Perhaps Edu and Arteta will be available if Arsenal don't win the league.

1) guess it was collectively at Forest Green
2) I was suggesting his track record isn’t that good apparently based on his former club’s situation
3) that’s a totally ridiculous suggestion
I’m not saying that we are not going to progress next year but that we should not believe this crap that he is some kind of experienced person
Basically next season we have a combination of an inexperienced director of football and manager so collectively they are both inexperienced

[PeteM]

I think its probable that Forest Green's struggles this season have much more to do with losing highly rated manager Rob Edwards (now doing well at Luton) and a couple of key players after getting promoted than anything to do with Hughes (positive or negative) to be honest.

[Kingo]

Personally I think as soon as the bloke trying to get a performance out of the team is not the bloke choosing the players to recruit, you already have a problem.

[Blue Walter]

I would think the owners now want transfers to be more of a team effort in an effort to make incoming transfers less of a risk. Perhaps they feel their fingers have been burnt a bit with some of the Cowley & Jackett inspired recruitment. Marquis comes to mind who cost £1 million, or thereabouts, and was a flop. Whether or not that is fair to put the blame solely on Jackett or Cowley I am not sure but other incoming from the both eras have also not worked out either. I must admit I was extremely excited when I learnt that Marquis had joined us. His failure (Marquis) also was a failure of Cowley & Jackett by not playing in a way that got the best out of him in my opinion. Also I wonder how much trust the owners have in Mousinho to bring in players due to his inexperience. So I think the recruitment will be done with input of all those responsible for recruitment with each incoming player needing a unanimous nod.

[Pompey1984+1]

1. It was talked about a while back in an interview how it would work. Collectively was the answer.

2. You are saying you doubt his ability.

3. Perhaps Edu and Arteta will be available if Arsenal don't win the league.

1) guess it was collectively at Forest Green
2) I was suggesting his track record isn’t that good apparently based on his former club’s situation
3) that’s a totally ridiculous suggestion
I’m not saying that we are not going to progress next year but that we should not believe this crap that he is some kind of experienced person
Basically next season we have a combination of an inexperienced director of football and manager so collectively they are both inexperienced

You talk like he is some sort of novice - this is his job. He had the qualifications, he's done the job at Forest Green and he's now effectivly just moved to a different company, and i'm damn sure that if he does well for us he will go on elsewhere.

You suggest that his track record isn't that good isn't it? Says who? He was given a lot of credit and carried a lot of kudos when we got him. Perhaps Forest Green would be in the conference without him? We just don't know.

[Pompey1984+1]

I would think the owners now want transfers to be more of a team effort in an effort to make incoming transfers less of a risk. Perhaps they feel their fingers have been burnt a bit with some of the Cowley & Jackett inspired recruitment. Marquis comes to mind who cost £1 million, or thereabouts, and was a flop. Whether or not that is fair to put the blame solely on Jackett or Cowley I am not sure but other incoming from the both eras have also not worked out either. I must admit I was extremely excited when I learnt that Marquis had joined us. His failure (Marquis) also was a failure of Cowley & Jackett by not playing in a way that got the best out of him in my opinion. Also I wonder how much trust the owners have in Mousinho to bring in players due to his inexperience. So I think the recruitment will be done with input of all those responsible for recruitment with each incoming player needing a unanimous nod.

On paper at the time Marquis was a fantastic signing. He was red hot, on paper Tyler Walker was a good signing. For whatever reasons they didn't work out.

This notion that recruitment is just a manager's say so just isn't the modern way, and hasn't been the way for a long time football is a team game on and off the pitch.

If you employ someone and don't trust them to do the job you shouldn't be employing them - that notion in any walk of life completely baffles me.

[Blue Walter]

I would think the owners now want transfers to be more of a team effort in an effort to make incoming transfers less of a risk. Perhaps they feel their fingers have been burnt a bit with some of the Cowley & Jackett inspired recruitment. Marquis comes to mind who cost £1 million, or thereabouts, and was a flop. Whether or not that is fair to put the blame solely on Jackett or Cowley I am not sure but other incoming from the both eras have also not worked out either. I must admit I was extremely excited when I learnt that Marquis had joined us. His failure (Marquis) also was a failure of Cowley & Jackett by not playing in a way that got the best out of him in my opinion. Also I wonder how much trust the owners have in Mousinho to bring in players due to his inexperience. So I think the recruitment will be done with input of all those responsible for recruitment with each incoming player needing a unanimous nod.

On paper at the time Marquis was a fantastic signing. He was red hot, on paper Tyler Walker was a good signing. For whatever reasons they didn't work out.

This notion that recruitment is just a manager's say so just isn't the modern way, and hasn't been the way for a long time football is a team game on and off the pitch.

If you employ someone and don't trust them to do the job you shouldn't be employing them - that notion in any walk of life completely baffles me.

Cowley mentioned a few times how he gave his list of players he wanted to whomever's job it was to get them if they could. He spoke of his choice and I understand there was a bit of friction and frustration concerning players who weren't signed for some reason. So the manager or head coach had a greater say on player recruitment in his era. I would assume it was the same for Jackett during his reign. I think that it is a better idea if clubs are moving on to a committee style of recruitment.

Actually people do employ people they wouldn't trust completely in certain facets of their job. If someone is employed for their future potential and learning their role on the job it would mean they wouldn't have the necessary qualifications or experience at the start. But at some time in the future they will gain the necessary experience and be of greater value. Much like employing an apprentice.

[Pompey1984+1]

I would think the owners now want transfers to be more of a team effort in an effort to make incoming transfers less of a risk. Perhaps they feel their fingers have been burnt a bit with some of the Cowley & Jackett inspired recruitment. Marquis comes to mind who cost £1 million, or thereabouts, and was a flop. Whether or not that is fair to put the blame solely on Jackett or Cowley I am not sure but other incoming from the both eras have also not worked out either. I must admit I was extremely excited when I learnt that Marquis had joined us. His failure (Marquis) also was a failure of Cowley & Jackett by not playing in a way that got the best out of him in my opinion. Also I wonder how much trust the owners have in Mousinho to bring in players due to his inexperience. So I think the recruitment will be done with input of all those responsible for recruitment with each incoming player needing a unanimous nod.

On paper at the time Marquis was a fantastic signing. He was red hot, on paper Tyler Walker was a good signing. For whatever reasons they didn't work out.

This notion that recruitment is just a manager's say so just isn't the modern way, and hasn't been the way for a long time football is a team game on and off the pitch.

If you employ someone and don't trust them to do the job you shouldn't be employing them - that notion in any walk of life completely baffles me.

Cowley mentioned a few times how he gave his list of players he wanted to whomever's job it was to get them if they could. He spoke of his choice and I understand there was a bit of friction and frustration concerning players who weren't signed for some reason. So the manager or head coach had a greater say on player recruitment in his era. I would assume it was the same for Jackett during his reign. I think that it is a better idea if clubs are moving on to a committee style of recruitment.

Actually people do employ people they wouldn't trust completely in certain facets of their job. If someone is employed for their future potential and learning their role on the job it would mean they wouldn't have the necessary qualifications or experience at the start. But at some time in the future they will gain the necessary experience and be of greater value. Much like employing an apprentice.

Sporting Director and Head Coach aren't some junior role in the business - Richard Hughes oversees the football side of the busines he isn't like some apprentice accountant.

I don't understand how people have this mindset people have that the manager does everything in football clubs, Harry didn't just decide he wanted every player we signed, someone will have recommended them to him, or he would have asked someone to look at them sure there might the the odd occasion where an opportunity arises and you go yep just get it done.

Every club misses out on players for various reasons.

[Blue Walter]

I would think the owners now want transfers to be more of a team effort in an effort to make incoming transfers less of a risk. Perhaps they feel their fingers have been burnt a bit with some of the Cowley & Jackett inspired recruitment. Marquis comes to mind who cost £1 million, or thereabouts, and was a flop. Whether or not that is fair to put the blame solely on Jackett or Cowley I am not sure but other incoming from the both eras have also not worked out either. I must admit I was extremely excited when I learnt that Marquis had joined us. His failure (Marquis) also was a failure of Cowley & Jackett by not playing in a way that got the best out of him in my opinion. Also I wonder how much trust the owners have in Mousinho to bring in players due to his inexperience. So I think the recruitment will be done with input of all those responsible for recruitment with each incoming player needing a unanimous nod.

On paper at the time Marquis was a fantastic signing. He was red hot, on paper Tyler Walker was a good signing. For whatever reasons they didn't work out.

This notion that recruitment is just a manager's say so just isn't the modern way, and hasn't been the way for a long time football is a team game on and off the pitch.

If you employ someone and don't trust them to do the job you shouldn't be employing them - that notion in any walk of life completely baffles me.

Cowley mentioned a few times how he gave his list of players he wanted to whomever's job it was to get them if they could. He spoke of his choice and I understand there was a bit of friction and frustration concerning players who weren't signed for some reason. So the manager or head coach had a greater say on player recruitment in his era. I would assume it was the same for Jackett during his reign. I think that it is a better idea if clubs are moving on to a committee style of recruitment.

Actually people do employ people they wouldn't trust completely in certain facets of their job. If someone is employed for their future potential and learning their role on the job it would mean they wouldn't have the necessary qualifications or experience at the start. But at some time in the future they will gain the necessary experience and be of greater value. Much like employing an apprentice.

Sporting Director and Head Coach aren't some junior role in the business - Richard Hughes oversees the football side of the busines he isn't like some apprentice accountant.

I don't understand how people have this mindset people have that the manager does everything in football clubs, Harry didn't just decide he wanted every player we signed, someone will have recommended them to him, or he would have asked someone to look at them sure there might the the odd occasion where an opportunity arises and you go yep just get it done.

Every club misses out on players for various reasons.

I am not sure what point you are trying to make to me as I am particularly disagreeing with you. You are not alone in understanding how a football club is run these days. You are saying things that are generally known to us all. I know the football manager of old had an autonomous rule of a clubs playing operation which has morphed into a head coach that works under, or along side, a sporting director and has less duties than yesteryear. Quite why you needed to tell me that me that the position of Sporting Director & Head Coach was not some sort of junior role I don't know but thanks for the heads up. It just so happens that our Head Coach is a novice at this position and therefore does have things to learn and experience to gain.

Actually I think you are wrong about Harry Redknapp in as much he did have an autonomous rule. If you have read any of his biographies there are several mentions of this. One particular question he addresses is the transfer policy at Pompey where we were spending money way above our income. He said that he produced a list of players he wanted and the club went and got them for him. He said he was shocked that he asked for Peter Crouch and then, unbelievabley, got him. I think that Jackett also enjoyed a fair level of autonomy as well. So this move to how we are working as a club now is a relatively new at Portsmouth.

[Blue Walter]

I would think the owners now want transfers to be more of a team effort in an effort to make incoming transfers less of a risk. Perhaps they feel their fingers have been burnt a bit with some of the Cowley & Jackett inspired recruitment. Marquis comes to mind who cost £1 million, or thereabouts, and was a flop. Whether or not that is fair to put the blame solely on Jackett or Cowley I am not sure but other incoming from the both eras have also not worked out either. I must admit I was extremely excited when I learnt that Marquis had joined us. His failure (Marquis) also was a failure of Cowley & Jackett by not playing in a way that got the best out of him in my opinion. Also I wonder how much trust the owners have in Mousinho to bring in players due to his inexperience. So I think the recruitment will be done with input of all those responsible for recruitment with each incoming player needing a unanimous nod.

On paper at the time Marquis was a fantastic signing. He was red hot, on paper Tyler Walker was a good signing. For whatever reasons they didn't work out.

This notion that recruitment is just a manager's say so just isn't the modern way, and hasn't been the way for a long time football is a team game on and off the pitch.

If you employ someone and don't trust them to do the job you shouldn't be employing them - that notion in any walk of life completely baffles me.

Cowley mentioned a few times how he gave his list of players he wanted to whomever's job it was to get them if they could. He spoke of his choice and I understand there was a bit of friction and frustration concerning players who weren't signed for some reason. So the manager or head coach had a greater say on player recruitment in his era. I would assume it was the same for Jackett during his reign. I think that it is a better idea if clubs are moving on to a committee style of recruitment.

Actually people do employ people they wouldn't trust completely in certain facets of their job. If someone is employed for their future potential and learning their role on the job it would mean they wouldn't have the necessary qualifications or experience at the start. But at some time in the future they will gain the necessary experience and be of greater value. Much like employing an apprentice.

Sporting Director and Head Coach aren't some junior role in the business - Richard Hughes oversees the football side of the busines he isn't like some apprentice accountant.

I don't understand how people have this mindset people have that the manager does everything in football clubs, Harry didn't just decide he wanted every player we signed, someone will have recommended them to him, or he would have asked someone to look at them sure there might the the odd occasion where an opportunity arises and you go yep just get it done.

Every club misses out on players for various reasons.

I am not sure what point you are trying to make to me as I am particularly disagreeing with you. You are not alone in understanding how a football club is run these days. You are saying things that are generally known to us all. I know the football manager of old had an autonomous rule of a clubs playing operation which has morphed into a head coach that works under, or along side, a sporting director and has less duties than yesteryear. Quite why you needed to tell me that me that the position of Sporting Director & Head Coach was not some sort of junior role I don't know but thanks for the heads up. It just so happens that our Head Coach is a novice at this position and therefore does have things to learn and experience to gain.

Actually I think you are wrong about Harry Redknapp in as much he did have an autonomous rule. If you have read any of his biographies there are several mentions of this. One particular question he addresses is the transfer policy at Pompey where we were spending money way above our income. He said that he produced a list of players he wanted and the club went and got them for him. He said he was shocked that he asked for Peter Crouch and then, unbelievabley, got him. I think that Jackett also enjoyed a fair level of autonomy as well. So this move to how we are working as a club now is a relatively new at Portsmouth.

Edit: Apologies, that first line was meant to read "as I am NOT particularly disagreeing with you"

[pompeygunner]

I dont see Hughes being i/c of recruitment as a bad thing, he worked miracles @ FGR to get them into L1 with his signings. I mean they are absolute minnows even @ L1 level (no disrespect to them).
Towler, Macey have been 2 good signings albeit one a loan. If we can expect more of that quality I'm all for it. But will they be supported financially by Tornante? And I hope we dont have to flog Bishop to fund signings.

[StMonkton]

I think another principle is that there is continuity in team style for a sustained period. Recruitment would fit this model and incoming coaches would need to buy into it. This ,in theory, should avoid the need for a complete squad change when a new coach is appointed .

We’ll see. That’s fine on paper but as several have observed, football is played on grass not paper.