It was all common knowledge about Wilder before he came so appointing him when he didn't fit the model they wanted was a dreadful decision. Scott can't take the credit for anything good and not get blamed for terrible decisions like signing Wilder. I worked with someone who's son played under Wilder and when he became our manager he said you'll see nothing of Payero and don't expect to see any youth players given a chance. Wilder likes experienced, dependable, finished article players and especially players that speak the language and will follow his instructions (i.e. no kids, no foreigners). Attitude over ability, he even said it himself. This wasn't really news and anyone involved with football knew that so why didn't Scott and co? I'm guessing they did know but they believed Wilder when he said he had changed or they thought having a good manager while there is a chance of getting him is more important than the long term model. Either way it was Scott's first big decision and it was a bad one.
Scott doesn’t get to decide the manager. That’s a a gibson Bauser decision. I’m sure he will be consulted but he isn’t accountable or responsible for that decision.
“My first role at Middlesbrough was to identify the new manager,” he said. “It wasn’t necessarily a case of the previous manager leaving straight away, but it was clearly going to happen at some stage. It was my job to identify candidates and analyse whether they’d be a good fit for Middlesbrough.
And to be fair he got off to an absolute flyer. Carrick has gone on and improved us by a few positions. Let's hope the momentum keeps going.
He’s still not accountable or responsible for that final decision is he? He identified candidates, decision is Gibson’s ultimately. I mean it says “WE went through a shortlist”, not “I”. He was certainly heavily involved in it, essential to it, but it’s not all on his shoulders and final decision is Gibson’s
Ask Mel Morris about Gibson and being a vindictive bellend........
Gibson had the final say but Scott got him to the top of the list based on his judgement and Gibson just made the yes/no decision. I agree with him that we needed a new manager. I completely disagree with him that Wilder was a good fit because he completely clashed with the model that the club wanted. You can't have a developmental model and hire someone like Wilder.
I'm not "absolving all responsibility", I've said that he was responsible for identifying suitable candidates. I'm not sure why you would want to absolve Gibson of the accountability for the selection of managers.
Indeed, though no one was saying that when the results were good...... which I think is Lizard's point.
Because we weren't talking about Gibson. Gibson gets overall blame/credit for any decision made by him or his staff. We were talking about Scott and he identified Wilder as a suitable candidate when he clearly wasn't so I am questioning his judgement and not proclaiming him as some sort of saviour of the recruitment team.
absolutely, you have to have a long term strategy and a consistent philosophy on the game, otherwise you pour good money after bad
and i would like to think that the strategy means that if we loose any part of the framework personnel wise that we can easily slip in a replacement without too much upheaval. e.g. we won't see a manager come in with a drastically different style of play
Connolly makes the cut! I agree however...
I think that's exactly what happened. Wilder was in the Wilder-ness in his career, needed to get a good role. We gave him that, under the agreement of it being a head coach not manager. He needed the job and probably wasn't his authentic self in agreeing to that structure. Once the Burnley thing came up, he decided that if we wouldn't release him then he was going to use it to try and renege and gain control over every part of the club he could, thus the problems happened.