How sensitive are the board to the fans feelings over new appointment?

[BobbyBiscuit]

Do you think the board are aware of how the support would react to certain appointments or is it a case that they don't give a fuck what we think and will steam ahead with their own ideas regardless?

 

Surely they'd appreciate that an appointment of, say, Gus MacPherson would be far from a popular choice, but would it mean they would steer clear of him even if they thought he was the right man?

[dave_min]

They better not give a fuck what anyone thinks and go ahead and appoint the correct candidate. I'm pretty sure the last appointment was made to please the fans and look how good that turned out?

 

I've no doubt in my mind that whatever the board do, they will fuck it up completely.

[Tyrant]

They better not give a fuck what anyone thinks and go ahead and appoint the correct candidate. I'm pretty sure the last appointment was made to please the fans and look how good that turned out?

 

I've no doubt in my mind that whatever the board do, they will fuck it up completely.

 

I don't know many people that wanted McGhee. Some wanted rid of Calderwood but the JMGers would have been happy with anyone as a replacement.

 

That said.. I can't see the board giving a shit what we think. Although if they're reading: If you give John Hughes or Gus MacPherson the job I will burn your houses down.

[Kowalski]

If they are not going to engage with the fans then they should be monitoring forums and newspaper websites where fans can comment on stories.  They need to know that appointing the likes of Hughes or MacPherson will not see fans flock back.  It'll probably do the opposite and could be the final nail as far as many fans are concerned.

[El Padre™]

I'd rather they didn't monitor fan-sites. They only represent a tiny cross section of people and their opinions.

[Sandaldinho]

at the end of the day, the only thing that is going to get the fans flocking back will be an Aberdeen team that plays exciting football and is competitive.

 

[dave_min]

I'm not sure you really need the 'and' there. Crowds will come if we play attractive or successful fitba. If we do both we're in dreamland.

[Ajja]

If you strip away the football then we are talking about a business who are selling a product to a customer base. The first rule of business is to know what your customer wants and give it to them. If Aberdeen FC know something that all other businesses have missed then good luck to them but I very much doubt they do. I wouldn't expect them to only consider the fans opinion, it would be too subjective and emotional. However, if they ignore it then it will be another significant step to disaster.

[maverick sheep]

If you take the Newcastle example, the unrest that ignoring fans can cause, creates the inevitability of failure - as seen by their relegation. When Newcastle were out of the limelight in div 1, the attention seeking cunt ashley left Hughton to it. He did extremely well. And then back in the EPL, the attention seeking cunt ashley starts the exact same tricks that fucked the club.

 

So yeah definately agree with ajja that you HAVE to have the board providing fans with the product they want. And the ID of the manager is a part of that product, but the main thing is what goes on on the park.

 

The counter example being Man City. Fans are fickle enough to get over the meddling if the team is winning. We don't have the billions to spend so the balance is harder to get. But the board must be seen to be putting the club first. The revelation that the board took the financial hit to swap managers - if true - goes a long way to restoring my faith in them.

 

I'm sick of feeling like everyone is pulling in different directions and I know we can't afford to sack and replace the majority of the squad overnight, but if we have certain individual players unwilling to work to their best depending on how they feel about the manager, the board have to take the financial hit to sack and replace them too. Otherwise it's an exercise in futility to change managers. Or worse, it's reinforcing the negative and destructive attitudes of those players.

[Ajja]

If you take the Newcastle example, the unrest that ignoring fans can cause, creates the inevitability of failure - as seen by their relegation. When Newcastle were out of the limelight in div 1, the attention seeking cunt ashley left Hughton to it. He did extremely well. And then back in the EPL, the attention seeking cunt ashley starts the exact same tricks that fucked the club.

 

So yeah definately agree with ajja that you HAVE to have the board providing fans with the product they want. And the ID of the manager is a part of that product, but the main thing is what goes on on the park.

 

The counter example being Man City. Fans are fickle enough to get over the meddling if the team is winning. We don't have the billions to spend so the balance is harder to get. But the board must be seen to be putting the club first. The revelation that the board took the financial hit to swap managers - if true - goes a long way to restoring my faith in them.

 

I'm sick of feeling like everyone is pulling in different directions and I know we can't afford to sack and replace the majority of the squad overnight, but if we have certain individual players unwilling to work to their best depending on how they feel about the manager, the board have to take the financial hit to sack and replace them too. Otherwise it's an exercise in futility to change managers. Or worse, it's reinforcing the negative and destructive attitudes of those players.

 

The thing is Maverick, footballers all over the world have pretty much got similar views. If they are good enough to play in the higher leagues, even in Scotland, they earn a fair amount of cash. They consider themselves minor stars, they publicise themselves via social media and they float around bars and clubs seeking attention and generally acting like the uneducated, immature, self-absorbed pricks they generally are (with a few exceptions). If we ship out a batch of these guys, we are very likely to bring in another set in the same type. The only way to combat such attitude is to manage it out. To make it clear its not acceptable at the club. In doing so the manager also has to be prepared to find a replacement for such bullshit, you can't simply squeeze it out. You have to find another way to provide support, fun, togetherness that doesn't operate unshackled as it appears to do so at our club. Find that ability and you have the answer. I have no idea who that man is.

[One Bobby Clark]

The Board really shouldn't be basing anything as important a decision as a new manager on how the fans feel about it.

 

There's probably no-one that they could appoint who will be met with universal approval, barring SAF, (and someone is bound to complain he's too old and out of touch with scottish football)

 

So they should just ignore t'internet talking heads and make damn sure they pick the best guy available.

 

If they do pick a haddie who is universally unpopular, such as say,  Yogi Shoos or Grumpy Gus - there will be a muted roar of outrage and then we'll all greet about how cheap and shite the Board is.  All it will take for that appointment to be seen as the right one, is for the club's players to actually play like they are capable of and string some results together.

 

I don't believe the old "too good to go down" -- this crowd are bad enough to go down for sure, but I do believe that they actually do have the quality to rescue the situation - guided by the right manager.  (whoever that is........)

[Superstar Tradesman]

I don't care who they appoint.

 

Truly, I don't care.

 

Hughes?  Not fussed.

 

As long as they show an ounce of ambition and back him with their own money then I'll be happy with that.

 

If not, we'll be here in 18 months saying the exact same thing.