Gavin Baldwin on Radio Sheffield

[silent majority]

He stated in the interview the plans still remain to be a fiscal club in the Championship. We won’t overspend to achieve that but we will continue to get there. We won’t have top two budget but our budget will increase so we can fight to get in the play offs. If you do that enough times you will be promoted.The club hope to be in the position of fighting for the playoffs in the next two seasons.
They will ensure the manager as every assistants to achieve that.

So what’s going to be said any different  on Monday.

So not going then? What about questions on the DoF.
No good moaning about the board and lack of communication and then when one of these meetings occurs not going and asking questions.

The communication from Gavin has been poor but he has sat down and answered questions to the media an hence passing information on to us as supporters about the sacking, the plans, the extra personnel that could be required. There could be other questions I agree. Whether going to sit in the room under latest Covid restrictions is worth it I will make my mind up on Monday

How has it been poor? By what definition do you class this as poor?  How many interviews and statements should he issue before you find it acceptable? 

[pib]

However SM, isn't there an issue there in that arguably there should be someone alongside Gavin doing the same things on a football point of view?  We appear to me to be moving through managers with different contacts, aims, ambitions and styles, it doesn't allow a consistent and longer term build.  Would we not perhaps benefit from that constant presence?

It is almost like we stop and start the whole thing again with each change of manager.  Players, coaches the lot.

In reality there isn't an easy answer but it feels like we could do things different to solve it?

Maybe. But how many other football clubs operate differently to us? Not many I can assure you of that.

It shouldn't be the CEO's position to be actively involved in the selection of players, can you imagine the uproar if GB did start to pick the players?

In fairness, I don't think anyone is advocating GB selecting players. I think what they are advocating is a more thorough and consistent football strategy, whether that's GB coming up with that or hiring someone else to do it.

I agree that GB has been very good on the commercial side, but I think the raising of revenues from "off field" activities needs to go hand-in-hand with more robust ways of working on the football/recruitment side.

In terms of GB's record, again like I say, undoubtedly very good on the commercial stuff. On the football side, I'm not going to say whether his record is good or bad, as I suppose it depends what your views are on where we should be as a club, and whether you have any inside knowledge on the budget to judge whether we've over/under performed compared to our budget (most of us don't have that knowledge). But here's how we've performed since GB became CEO, which I understand was 2012:

2012/13 - 1st in L1 (Promoted)
2013/14 - 22nd in Championship (Relegated)
2014/15 - 14th in L1
2015/16 - 21st in L1 (Relegated)
2016/17 - 3rd in L2 (Promoted)
2017/18 - 15th in L1
2018/19 - 6th in L1 (Play-off semi-finalists)
2019/20 - 9th in L1 (season curtailed)
2020/21 - 14th in L1
2021/22 - 24th in L1 (current standings)

Average finishing position in the 92 (excluding this season) = 54.4 (10th-11th in L1)

[DonnyOsmond]

The MTO will be a non event. It'll be a load of people saying the budgets crap and a bunch of 12 year olds saying Baldwin and Blunt out.

[ForsolongaRover]

Being flexible about the new structure is probably a good idea because it would not restrict the Board to appointing a “Chief Coach” whose strength is getting the best skills and strategy on the pitch. Perhaps this would more likely be a younger person. This would not rule out an experienced manager who would have a wider remit where he has previously successfully covered the full range of duties.

In practice I suspect that at most clubs the “manager” creates his own infrastructure by getting in an assistant, a fitness trainer etc., etc. From what we hear of Wellens he was rather autocratic and more modern management philosophies and structures would be designed to prevent that happening. So having a framework that Baldwin believes is appropriate for the club now is not a bad idea.

[silent majority]

However SM, isn't there an issue there in that arguably there should be someone alongside Gavin doing the same things on a football point of view?  We appear to me to be moving through managers with different contacts, aims, ambitions and styles, it doesn't allow a consistent and longer term build.  Would we not perhaps benefit from that constant presence?

It is almost like we stop and start the whole thing again with each change of manager.  Players, coaches the lot.

In reality there isn't an easy answer but it feels like we could do things different to solve it?

Maybe. But how many other football clubs operate differently to us? Not many I can assure you of that.

It shouldn't be the CEO's position to be actively involved in the selection of players, can you imagine the uproar if GB did start to pick the players?

In fairness, I don't think anyone is advocating GB selecting players. I think what they are advocating is a more thorough and consistent football strategy, whether that's GB coming up with that or hiring someone else to do it.

I agree that GB has been very good on the commercial side, but I think the raising of revenues from "off field" activities needs to go hand-in-hand with more robust ways of working on the football/recruitment side.

In terms of GB's record, again like I say, undoubtedly very good on the commercial stuff. On the football side, I'm not going to say whether his record is good or bad, as I suppose it depends what your views are on where we should be as a club, and whether you have any inside knowledge on the budget to judge whether we've over/under performed compared to our budget (most of us don't have that knowledge). But here's how we've performed since GB became CEO, which I understand was 2012:

2012/13 - 1st in L1 (Promoted)
2013/14 - 22nd in Championship (Relegated)
2014/15 - 14th in L1
2015/16 - 21st in L1 (Relegated)
2016/17 - 3rd in L2 (Promoted)
2017/18 - 15th in L1
2018/19 - 6th in L1 (Play-off semi-finalists)
2019/20 - 9th in L1 (season curtailed)
2020/21 - 14th in L1
2021/22 - 24th in L1 (current standings)

Average finishing position in the 92 (excluding this season) = 54.4 (10th-11th in L1)

I agree, we do need a more thorough and consistent football strategy, but what I'm arguing about is that the responsibility for that doesn't come from the CEO, that should come from the Chairman. It should all start there.

The Chairman sets the tone for the business as a whole, the CEO is there to carry out the Chairman's wishes, and as we all agree, has done excellent work on the commercial side as that's his area of responsibility. He earns the money to ensure the playing budget is as big as we can get it.

[Padge_DRFC]

One thing that struck me was we generate the second highest income in the league!

[Jonathan]

Under Covid restrictions will the meeting still go ahead genuine questions. Closed room masks to be worn, the microphone can’t be passed around. Two meter spacing for chairs.

Under the current advice, if it’s rebranded as a Meet the Owners Party it should be able to go ahead without any restrictions.

[scawsby steve]

He stated in the interview the plans still remain to be a fiscal club in the Championship. We won’t overspend to achieve that but we will continue to get there. We won’t have top two budget but our budget will increase so we can fight to get in the play offs. If you do that enough times you will be promoted.The club hope to be in the position of fighting for the playoffs in the next two seasons.
They will ensure the manager as every assistants to achieve that.

So what’s going to be said any different  on Monday.

Maybe the answers that are being given are the actual answers! What are you looking for exactly?

Why does everybody, like you, think that there is some kind of conspiracy to give out false or misleading information?

What’s the attitude for I have said nothing about conspiracy I have said the answers have been given in the interview.

You come across as very aggressive person Martin which doesn’t bother me but there’s no need to be defensive.

I can assure you, Steve, Martin's not an aggressive person.

[steve@dcfd]

He stated in the interview the plans still remain to be a fiscal club in the Championship. We won’t overspend to achieve that but we will continue to get there. We won’t have top two budget but our budget will increase so we can fight to get in the play offs. If you do that enough times you will be promoted.The club hope to be in the position of fighting for the playoffs in the next two seasons.
They will ensure the manager as every assistants to achieve that.

So what’s going to be said any different  on Monday.

Maybe the answers that are being given are the actual answers! What are you looking for exactly?

Why does everybody, like you, think that there is some kind of conspiracy to give out false or misleading information?

What’s the attitude for I have said nothing about conspiracy I have said the answers have been given in the interview.

You come across as very aggressive person Martin which doesn’t bother me but there’s no need to be defensive.

I can assure you, Steve, Martin's not an aggressive person.

Ok I not a person that as a go at posters so will leave it at that.

[NickDRFC]

I'm surprised at how many people on here are identifying the issues and the problems with player choice and recruitment, yet nobody seems to know the answer, or at least a consistent theory on how it should operate.

Let me just point out though that Gavin is not involved in the selection of players. Yes he gets involved in contract negotiation and advising the manager with respect to who is clearly not affordable or who's agent is talking too tough, but not during the selection process. That aspect is carried out by the football side of the business, that is the manager, talent identification guy, and senior pros. So, those who think he doesn't know enough about the football side shouldn't worry. What Gavin is though is an excellent sportsmen who forged his own sporting career. He does specialise in the business side of the club, to obvious effect.

Why should anyone on here have the answer? They’re not being paid a decent salary or being gifted shares to come up with it, GB is. He’s clearly done a really good job from a commercial standpoint but a pretty poor one football-wise. He should be accountable for that and seeking to improve it.

I didn't say anybody on here should have the answer, what I said was that everybody is great at identifying the issues but nobody has identified the answer to those issues, it was clearly an observation on my behalf. When I say clearly, it is to those who are not always looking to find fault with everything I say.

But to suggest that he hasn't done a good job is also disingenuous. Yes the last 12 months haven't been good but surely during his time here he's done more than good enough. He's been heavily involved in manager selection and finding the funding for those managers to operate in the market they have. Your comment on the share position is, quite frankly, rude and misunderstanding of the situation. How do you reach the conclusion he's been 'gifted' the shares and not earnt them? How do you know what part they form in his contract with the club? At the end of the day they're pretty much worthless as the club has no real value so it can't be much of a gift, more a liability.

Gifted was possibly a clumsy choice of words but think that’s a bit of an overreaction. My point was that GB is rewarded to find the answers, be that with shares or salary.

I haven’t suggested he hasn’t done a good job, I even said “he’s done a really good job from a commercial standpoint”. From a football perspective, though, the fact that we’ve regressed quite significantly over the past 18 months is why I think his running of the football side can be questioned. You disagree, fair enough, but the fact we’re considering a DOF also suggests there’s a gap there (although even the appointment of that being dependent on the outcome of our management search is confused for me. Surely we either want one or we don’t?)

[Colin C No.3]

We could call the owners meeting a gathering?

[DonnyBazR0ver]

On balance there are many other clubs particularly at higher levels that have got their manager choices drastically wrong, sometimes more than once, costing them a fortune in compensation.

Our record on the pitch under Gavins watch as CEO is pretty good to be fair given who we are. Even better when you loo. k at off field activities. The move to make him a shareholder has benefits other than a financial one which helps keep him here at the heart of what we do.
He and the rest of the board are not exempt from continuously learning and trying to move with the times in addition to coping with the covid situation, which we appear to be recovering from quite well. As long as things don't go tits up again.
.
We've had and are having more events at the Keepmoat now which will have no doubt improved the cash flow but these events don't just fall into our lap and  happen to clubs who are sleepwalking.

Yes, of course there are questions to be asked but we can do it in a supportive way. There's alot to contend with at the moment and we need everyone to pull together to make sure we've bottomed out and can start moving forward again.

[Bessie Red]

However SM, isn't there an issue there in that arguably there should be someone alongside Gavin doing the same things on a football point of view?  We appear to me to be moving through managers with different contacts, aims, ambitions and styles, it doesn't allow a consistent and longer term build.  Would we not perhaps benefit from that constant presence?

It is almost like we stop and start the whole thing again with each change of manager.  Players, coaches the lot.

In reality there isn't an easy answer but it feels like we could do things different to solve it?

It certainly seems that way. I think the club also had the view that the manager  should be given the power to oversee the football side and welcome  their input into the structure from top to bottom in the hope they would see it as a longer term project and therefore be more likely to stay.

Of course, reality shows that has not happened since Fergie left.

More recently, we've had the talent ID men or whatever you want to call them but they keep buggering off too.

I don't think there's a simple solution to the kind of DoF you'd want that would be here for the long term having responsibility for overseeing the set up from Youth through to the senior team, search for new talent, oversee the scouting network, use the latest analytics to talent spot, recruit that talent, build relationships with higher clubs for loans etc, manage players out on loan for development or to transfer permanently, all that with the confidence and support of the first team head coach and youth coaches, as well as the board.

Bleeding ell! That's a he'll of a job. Arsene where are you !!!!????

"Board, may I introduce you to .....James Coppinger!!"

[Bessie Red]

He stated in the interview the plans still remain to be a fiscal club in the Championship. We won’t overspend to achieve that but we will continue to get there. We won’t have top two budget but our budget will increase so we can fight to get in the play offs. If you do that enough times you will be promoted.The club hope to be in the position of fighting for the playoffs in the next two seasons.
They will ensure the manager as every assistants to achieve that.

So what’s going to be said any different  on Monday.

Maybe nothing different but it gives you and other supporters the opportunity to ask questions and scrutinise that vision.

[silent majority]

I'm surprised at how many people on here are identifying the issues and the problems with player choice and recruitment, yet nobody seems to know the answer, or at least a consistent theory on how it should operate.

Let me just point out though that Gavin is not involved in the selection of players. Yes he gets involved in contract negotiation and advising the manager with respect to who is clearly not affordable or who's agent is talking too tough, but not during the selection process. That aspect is carried out by the football side of the business, that is the manager, talent identification guy, and senior pros. So, those who think he doesn't know enough about the football side shouldn't worry. What Gavin is though is an excellent sportsmen who forged his own sporting career. He does specialise in the business side of the club, to obvious effect.

Why should anyone on here have the answer? They’re not being paid a decent salary or being gifted shares to come up with it, GB is. He’s clearly done a really good job from a commercial standpoint but a pretty poor one football-wise. He should be accountable for that and seeking to improve it.

I didn't say anybody on here should have the answer, what I said was that everybody is great at identifying the issues but nobody has identified the answer to those issues, it was clearly an observation on my behalf. When I say clearly, it is to those who are not always looking to find fault with everything I say.

But to suggest that he hasn't done a good job is also disingenuous. Yes the last 12 months haven't been good but surely during his time here he's done more than good enough. He's been heavily involved in manager selection and finding the funding for those managers to operate in the market they have. Your comment on the share position is, quite frankly, rude and misunderstanding of the situation. How do you reach the conclusion he's been 'gifted' the shares and not earnt them? How do you know what part they form in his contract with the club? At the end of the day they're pretty much worthless as the club has no real value so it can't be much of a gift, more a liability.

Gifted was possibly a clumsy choice of words but think that’s a bit of an overreaction. My point was that GB is rewarded to find the answers, be that with shares or salary.

I haven’t suggested he hasn’t done a good job, I even said “he’s done a really good job from a commercial standpoint”. From a football perspective, though, the fact that we’ve regressed quite significantly over the past 18 months is why I think his running of the football side can be questioned. You disagree, fair enough, but the fact we’re considering a DOF also suggests there’s a gap there (although even the appointment of that being dependent on the outcome of our management search is confused for me. Surely we either want one or we don’t?)

A point I've made elsewhere but I think is relevant to this discussion here is that GB carries out the direction/instruction from the board led by the Chairman. To pin the football failure over the last 12 months or so at Gavin's door is unfair, it's not his area of responsibility. Of course he partakes in the discussions but player selection remains with the selection committee and the club direction in terms of the playing side comes from the Chair.

Also if you listen to what GB has said with regard to a DoF it is not as straight forward as everybody makes out. Supporters have picked up on that and accepted it as fact, but what he actually said was that they were looking at supporting RW in other ways, and that could have been a DoF or it could have been a different kind of support. Whether that would have been a football mentor, or additional support with regard to player selection and recruitment, or any other level of increased support will become more apparent. I'm sure Gavin will explain more on Monday when he gets asked the question.

And that's the reason why they are looking at alternatives after they have selected the new manager. All managers have their strengths and weakness's, they have areas where they thrive and others where they struggle. What the club will be looking at doing going forward is to support the manager in the areas they agree need extra support. That might not necessarily be a DoF.

[pib]

Is the chairman a problem to this club and potentially holding us back? Most of us know virtually nothing about him or how he operates so this is purely a speculative question.

[GazLaz]

Bringing a manager in then asking him how he wants to work feels a bit like the tail wagging the dog.

The only mitigation to this approach is the board are obviously looking for the best man to get us out of the predicament we are I’m currently so any long term planning goes out of the window slightly.

The potential best candidate for the next 6 month slog may not be the best individual for a longer term rebuild. I wouldn’t like to see us stuck with the wrong man at the end of the season with him having brought in his own players in January and had a say in how the club is being run in the short term. Kind of feels like it could be 6 months wasted between now and May and still no vision of what kind of squad we want to build.

We are fairly likely to be an a worse position on 1st Feb than we would have been if we had kept Wellens and given him money to spend in January.

[Sammy Chung was King]

I’m happy that they have realised there has been a few long standing problems, and are looking to fix them, that’s all you can ask.
They can’t go appointing directors of football unless they interview only managers that would accept one.
It’s a good decision to leave it open ,otherwise we narrow down the quality of the candidates. There are many ways to help a manager.

[Campsall rover]

We could call the owners meeting a gathering?

Well it definitely will not be a party. 

[roversdude]

A hanging party maybe but the warriors won’t feel safe talking face to face will they

[Campsall rover]

A hanging party maybe but the warriors won’t feel safe talking face to face will they

Well that’s it roversdude they won’t. They will not even turn up. They would not have the balls to ask the questions face to face they ask on this forum.

[silent majority]

Bringing a manager in then asking him how he wants to work feels a bit like the tail wagging the dog.

The only mitigation to this approach is the board are obviously looking for the best man to get us out of the predicament we are I’m currently so any long term planning goes out of the window slightly.

The potential best candidate for the next 6 month slog may not be the best individual for a longer term rebuild. I wouldn’t like to see us stuck with the wrong man at the end of the season with him having brought in his own players in January and had a say in how the club is being run in the short term. Kind of feels like it could be 6 months wasted between now and May and still no vision of what kind of squad we want to build.

We are fairly likely to be an a worse position on 1st Feb than we would have been if we had kept Wellens and given him money to spend in January.

If your post is a response to mine Gaz then I think you may have misunderstood what I was saying.

They are not bringing in a manager and then asking how he wants to work, they'll be offering extra support wherever the manager feels he needs it. It could just be as simple as beefing up the talent identification area by honing in on the analysis issues, or if a young up and coming manager wants an experienced mentor in his camp.

The point I'm making is that a DoF is not a done deal and wasn't intended to be looked at like that, the mention of it was just an example of the extra support the club were looking at providing. What that support looks like will depend on the type and choice of manager they make.