We will never know if they would have changed their naive approach, but even if they wouldnt, that might be a byproduct of knowing that in this backwards modern day, clubs tend to be only interested in managers who play that way.

The symptom of a club whose owners dont have any interest in making us better.

I understand the reasoning behind having someone to help to spread the workload and add more expertise to the off the field stuff. Its the idea of a director of football being the one telling any head coach how to play. Drivel about an ethos or principles is exactly that. The head coach should come in, analyse what he has, the circumstances etc and decide how he wants to set up. He should then feed back and say I want x and y and the director of football can then work around that. Southampton are a good example. They had a very strong team in the Championship, so such a style made sense. When they came up suddenly they go from one of the best technical sides in the division to the worst. The "ethos" demands continuing with a style that clearly isnt effective. The effect of the current setup is that nearly every club wants to play "the right way" as a club isnt going to have plans of playing more direct football even if it is effective, so you get loads of teams playing a style they clearly cant pull off.

All them ideas are good, cheaper under 16s tickets are good, but one controllable thing will move the dial, and that is cheaper adult season tickets.

Club philosophy and ethos, its just nonsense business speak. Im still none the wiser as to how it is possibly more sensible to get the director of football to decide the style of play and not the head coach. Should be a case of the head coach comes in, decides how he wants to play, and then the club is built around that.

Even Mowbray didnt have a really deep squad. Initially for the year or two after promotion much of the depth was the likes of Smallwood, Downing, Samuel, Nuttall etc, who helped us get promoted to varying degrees but weren't Championship players. And towards the end the funding was cut and the squad was too small to sustain a full season because the Armstrong money vanished.

Fuck sake. Not the move a club with any shred of ambition would do. He has achieved very little year on year and has also had issues with injuries in the last 18 months.

But is dictated to on how to play.

And if the adult cant afford their ticket or choose not to buy one, then the kid doesnt go, then the kid doesnt get hooked. Again, my point.

Giles isnt good enough defensively as an out and out left back. We had come off a very successful half season where we had got to 2nd playing without out and out strikers, but with Brereton and Khadra as sort of inside forwards and Buckley in the middle. Such a system did work for a while as we were winning every week. His use of Giles was strange but then again, I do think this idea that he was a massive wasted talent and a big factor in our decline is overstated. He was getting loads of assists at Cardiff mainly from set pieces in what was a team of giants with the likes of Aden Flint and Keiffer Moore. He has never replicated that since.

Again, you missed the point. Obviously its good to reduce those prices, but under 16s are naturally going to be brought by adults. Reducing the under 16 price in isolation will only do so much if that barrier of adult tickets that are too expensive remains. Because if the adult doesnt go then the kid doesnt go.

It explains the new roles. It doesnt explain WHY it is deemed to be a logical move to have the director of football dictating the tactical approach based on on how he would prefer to see the team play rather than leaving it to the manager/head coach to decide, after all its his neck on the block and hes best placed to decide how best to utilise his team. End product. So many teams trying to play a style their players clearly arent suited to because the manager has no choice.

Under 16 price reductions are almost immaterial compared to adult prices as an adult would naturally accompany an under 16.

Still doesnt explain WHY it makes sense for a director of football to be the one in charge of what style the manager/head coach has to play. Well, I dont think it does make sense. True, a side effect to them not giving a shit is that they dont care how we play.

Im sure Gueye would equally be grateful had he joined Norwich, Stoke or Preston. I dont think he is specifically proud to be at Rovers necessarily so I dont get the difference.

Fit the ethos, fit the style. Just nonsense management speak. Whatever happened to letting the manager decide how they want to play, regardless of delusions about how it should be played. The result of this is managers sticking to a style that doesnt suit the players at his disposal and getting the sack.

I dont know whether he should have been sacked, but I think Manning had Oxford top last season and they dropped under Buckingham. Although he did still get them up.

Bennett seemed proud to be here so seems a strange theory. I think the key is time. Bennett had been stinking the place out over an extended period and offering little more than fistpumps. If Gueye continues to miss sitters and seldom score and the results obviously arent winning every game, then it might start to grate on people.

Why do director of footballs decide the tactics these days.

I read some comments from Hull fans suggesting that they wouldnt mind selling him. He had a spell of assists at Cardiff mainly from set pieces but he seems to have underwhelmed since.

Basically every Championship owner bar the parachute clubs has to put in money each year to offset the losses Championship club makes. For example Prestons owner does the same. They put the minimum in they have to to keep the club. Seems to be a mentality of that they are doing their bit by doing that, and the people below them are the ones to target.

We havent seen much evidence of their wealth for a long while. I supppse its a question of who if anyone comes in for Eustace as that could lure him in regardless or failing that, how frustrated he becomes with a lack of backing. Since the summer of 2020, weve spent about £7-8m I think (Szmodics, Hyam and Brittain were £4m combined, Gueye was £1m then aside from that a series of nominal fees up to maybe £500k each) and in that time weve sold Szmodics, Wharton, Armstrong, Gallagher, Phillips, Kaminski and have had the Raya sell on as well as have aggressively slashed the wage budget. He has recently dropped hints about needing reinforcements so it depends how much that boils over.

I would like to think that 2 reasons will stop Prem teams from considering Eustace. Firstly, I dont think he has done anything worthy of a Prem job just yet. But football is run by director of footballs who seem to prioritise playing "the right way" driven by data etc over actual results. Eustace is quite pragmatic and focusing on clean sheets doesnt seem to be glamorous anymore.

Cantwell for Ohashi but leave JRC in, so just 1 change.

Overall I certainly wouldnt say he was lazy. I didnt really agree with the idea that he chucked it towards the end with a move in the offing, maybe it was subconsciously in his head but the team were struggling as a whole to get results.