16 hours ago, theAnticlough said:

I'd look at that as the model that got us relegated @YoopEyes, and the one with a Head of Recruitment as the model that got us back up - found us gems like Ruben, Cal, Maca, Cedwyn etc while the Head Coach was able to concentrate on the very taxing role of managing the team.

The window's closed til January now. The statement talks about how he will be replaced. We're more likely looking for someone better than Gagliardi in the role rather than switching models and asking Pato to become Arthur Daley or Delboy. He looks like Uncle Albert anyway, so it's a non-starter.

Bizarre response.

If that example is supposed to offset the other 160 years of our history - and that of the other 90+ Clubs - then I’m still not convinced!

During the Clough / Taylor years at Derby & Forest, Taylor as assistant Manager used to be the talent spotter & Head recruiter with scouts working for him, so I don't really see why a Director of Football is really necessary..

The Club Manager can still be the top dog with staff underneath him that he can delegate into different roles.

The trouble with a Director of Football position is that it is regarded as being above the Head Coach. The other thing with this Director of Football / Head Coach model, there has to be collective decision making & plenty of negotiation & give and take.

Is this really the best way to organise the Footballing side of a club? I don't see that there is a significant advantage to this model over a Manager, Assistant Manager model.

As I understand it the DoF is Head of Recruitment unless I’ve got that wrong. I do think the DoF should recruit the players to suit the system played, if the manager recruits the players and then moves on for whatever reason then the new manager usually wants his own players, it’s better to have continuity in my opinion i.e. players recruited to play a system irrespective of the manager.

During the War. I was on an Aircraft Carrier out in the Pacific. When this Kamikaze Pilot came hurtling towards our ship.

I Remember saying to the Skipper

The way he's Flying That Plane , if he's Not Careful He'll Kill Himself.

Albert Trotter.🤣

43 minutes ago, YoopEyes said:

Bizarre response.

If that example is supposed to offset the other 160 years of our history - and that of the other 90+ Clubs - then I’m still not convinced!

I'll direct you to Piethagoram's last post on this thread @YoopEyes, for the top and tail of it

Sure, you want to look at 160 years rather than the last 6, 2019-25, when the Football Radar brothers came in with their statistical, analytical based approach and regained league status with it.

I think you will have to wait til the Post-Reedtz era to have any chance of seeing an ex-player manager who also acts as the effective Head of HR as well. Even then it would have to be set to a Hovis commercial and we could all dust off our flat caps and maybe even go back to pigs' bladders 😀

MP has made an OK start, and many like him, but I don't see why the he Bros should entrust the whole operation of their multi-million investment to a novice head coach.

The plot thickens! Richard Montague's future at Swansea is in doubt apparently. I wonder....

i have seen a lot of fans sharing messages on social media where they hope martin paterson makes it known that he would like to handle the recruitment, but i think the head coach can sometimes be the problem as to who comes in. look at kevin nolan and how he goes about signing his mates, that is not how to run a football club and i am more in favour of seeing notts continue their recruitment under the polices which the reedtz first introduced.

that said, we should try to go back to looking the bigger picture when it comes to the recruitment. i dont think roberto gagliardi would have said to sign so many midfielders, i think this happened due to the amount of people involved in discussing incoming players.

take it a step back, keep short lists and track good players. have the group based talks but when it comes down to the decision it should be the head coach and the director of football agreeing on who comes in.

Delighted at this news.

For the funds we've made through player sales and staff( Macca, Crowley, Nemane, Bass, Williams, Harley, Lawtey, Scott) and then the revenue streams and (Padel, Nest, Hospitality, club partners) and then season ticket sales, we probably should've aimed higher. I believe the Reedtz bros statement about having a good budget, with not having to rely on owner funding as much now, due to our revenue streams. This increase in funding, has meant a bit more money to play with, money we haven't recruited smartly with.

Things to consider here. 1) I know not all revenue and income will go into the budget. 2) I don't expect us to spend big. I do expect us, with our model and how we've recruited since the bros bought us, to recruit smartly.

Some big things about this transfer window have made me consistently frustrated with him. This was our summer to kick on and go one step further, however we've not spent money that we genuinely have. I refuse to believe we're spending that much on loan fees. Speaking of loans, we've stocked up on them way too much. Loans should not be the bulk of your recruitment, but instead the cherry(ies) on top of your cake.

This leads me on to another point. In my opinion, we could've bought better players than what we have done this window. Some players have done really well so far. Matt Dennis and Tom Iorpenda. Dennis especially, as he has exceeded expectations, with the majority of our fans thinking Jatta would slot straight back in. Iorpenda has given us some much needed physicality and Norburn brings much needed leadership.

Luker looked good before his injury and we haven't seen enough of Hall yet. In the CAM department, I would've tried to bring a permanent option, rather than taking up another loan slot. Bennetts hasn't shown anywhere near enough and for the data we have, we bought someone who's played 35 competitive games in 3 years for 3 clubs. This is where we could've bought Vincent Harper, Ben Jackson or Ellis Taylor. Players who've proved their worth and wouldn't cost a fortune (Harper was a free agent).

Aljofree hasn't looked comfortable this season and with Ness' injury issues and the news of Macari before the season, there was the chance to bring in Harrison Burke on a permanent deal. Someone who we could've developed and eventually sold on for a good fee. Barry Cotter hasn't been good enough and hasn't shown anything that's an upgrade on Kellan Gordon. We had the chance to sign Macauley Southam-Hales, a 2-time promotion winner on a free transfer. You bring in Burke and Southam-Hales over Aljofree and Cotter, you're immediately improving the squad.

Then there's Kelle Roos. In his interview when discussing this summer, Roberto said about researching or scouting the lower leagues in Italy, in his time at Football Radar. How convenient we sign a keeper from Serie C, who has got more poor reviews than good reviews from previous clubs. You don't sign players off of fan views, but the video evidence is there. All of us have seen Roos' performances and his lack of commanding his area and organisation. To replace Bass, I didn't expect us to sign a 33-year old on a 2-year deal with an option of a third, when we could've signed someone younger and someone who we could develop further and again, sell on for a good fee.

I think some of us are veering towards a general "DoF/HC or old-school manager" discussion. That's fine, but maybe we should keep that discussion to the other thread (linked) and stick to the topic of Gagliardi and hus squad-building on this one.

48 minutes ago, theAnticlough said:

MP has made an OK start, and many like him, but I don't see why the he Bros should entrust the whole operation of their multi-million investment to a novice head coach.

Why would the brothers appoint a novice Head Coach & an even more of a Novice Director of Football to work together?

At least the brothers have put one side of the coin right with Roberto going.

Well lets see now. Gagliardi worked for the Brothers Company ( I believe that's right) So was his appointment based on his Data work he produced for their Firm? Why would they hire a Complete Novice to run one of the Most Important Departments (Recruitment) within the Club? A lot of the time the Brothers have Promoted from within for some crucial positions (not just from Notts but their Data Company) and they have proved to be the wrong choices. Just because someone proves to be a Whizz Kid with Data doesn't mean he'll make a Top D.O.F. or Head of Recruitment. So the New D.O.F or H.O.R Needs to be a Person with a wealth of Experience in that Role, and they don't need to be currently employed by the Club Nor Be A Data Genius. They Need To Know The Game Inside Out and Work Well with the Members of the Technical Board. The Appointment of such an Individual is Vitaly Important to Notts.

2 hours ago, Robbie said:

Why would the brothers appoint a novice Head Coach & an even more of a Novice Director of Football to work together?

At least the brothers have put one side of the coin right with Roberto going.

It's gone...

Ardley & Monatgue / Burchnall & Montague / Williams & Montague / Maynard & Montague / Maynard & Nobody / Maynard & Gagliardi / Nobody & Gagliardi / Paterson & Gagliardi

I'd hazard a guess that Williams and Montague was the peak of this coach/head of recruitment combo, and Paterson and Gagliardi the most fractious and unworkable.

I think we need to bring in a true stats/analytics based Head of Recruitment, drop the technical board now and come up with some other mechanism, and let both sides really concentrate on their jobs.

If it took the club four weeks to replace Stuart Maynard, we might be waiting even longer to see who replaces Roberto Gagliardi. I don't think the club will be focused on transfers right now. That time might come around early November.

This gives the Reedtz brothers plenty of time to find the right person to step in. There's no need to worry or feel stressed about the decision.

It was likely a mix of performance and the Reedtz being happy enough with how things were going. They tend to take a calm and measured approach, so I trust they'll make the right call.

I haven’t been impressed with the recruitment, but I don’t think all the blame should fall on Roberto Gagliardi. Any failure is also the responsibility of those above him. We don’t even know if he left because of football reasons or something else entirely. If the club acted quickly after seeing he wasn’t the right fit, then fair play to them. But they also need to admit that hiring him might have been the wrong call from the start.

If we do get promoted and the loan players play a big part in that, it raises a question. What does that say about the long-term plan and how much credit goes to the short-term fixes?

Like I mentioned in the squad registration topic, there are signs pointing to a bigger plan. No major departures, space being cleared, and Paterson asking for new players all suggest January is the focus. Gagliardi leaving might be part of that, but it shouldn't cause too much disruption. It would help if the club explained the decision a bit more. Even if they don’t want to say too much, a little openness goes a long way with fans.

@allardyces tash . As I have said in other comments on the Site, the Communication by the Club to the Notts Fans is Very Poor, at Best and needs to be Addressed. As you say if they don't want to say to much, a little openness with the Fan Base, would be Welcome.