This transfer window/Marwood

[AustinBlue]

Could it also be that Marwood is brown nosing Khaldoon as he knows Mancini's position is much stronger this season. Marwood wants to show Khaldoon how good he is at negotiating tranfers whilst staying within the remit set for him.

Whilst Marwood might save the club perhaps, £5mn (unknown figure) in fees, this short sightedness might actually come back to bite us all on the arse.

Marwood could also be trying to show Mancini that he still has some power at the club.

Meanwhile we keep missing out on players.

So let's get THIS theory straight too...

The owner, and the chairman (and the rest of the board for that matter) are just watching this happen before their eyes and doing nothing? They read the papers, they hear the news.... "City fail to land players". If they thought he was doing a lousy job, he'd be out.
OR, the more likely scenario is that the owner and the chairman (and the rest of the board) have tasked Marwood with getting the players Mancini wants WITHIN specific financial constraints, and it's those constraints that cause deals to fail (at this moment in time).

Say the Chairman's told him that the wage bill HAS to come down, and he doesn't want any more players on more than 120K a week. Robin Van Persie asks for 150K and Marwood says no. RvP signs for United. How is that Marwood's fault?

Yes, it's possible Marwood is trying to impress folks with his financial prudence but I think it most unlikely that our owners are so clueless they can't see that.

I firmly believe he's been given a task, and he's carrying it out - the result of that is a lack of signings, but again, it's a result of the task, not a result of him.

Personally, I don't think they would sack him during the transfer window, especially not late on in the window. I think we will all know what the owner thinks of the job Marwood has done in this window in the next couple of months. If he is still here for the next transfer window then we can safely assume they are at the very least satisfied with how he has handled this window. If he is no longer here for the January window then there is a fair chance that they have not been impressed.

Your assumption is that if Marwood is not at City, it's because he's sacked. Maybe he leaves because he is not satisfied working in an environment where he is undermined by the manager and lacks appropriate support from the CEO? You are mistaken if you think Marwood could not get other jobs. He would walk into a job at Nike tomorrow with half the stress and all the pay. Part of Marwood's job is to run the academy, run scouting, and run medical, and yet the staff of all three divisions have been driven out, or are about to be, in favor of Mancini's men... at some point Marwood's job becomes untenable. I want Mancini to stay as manager, but I don't want to build a demigod cult around Mancini - there needs to be professional independence of functions in a world where players cost tens of millions, and other millions swirl around via agents and back channels.. Manchester City is more than Mancini. Heck, Manchester City is about more than winning - it's my community club. My tribe. If all the world agents think that Mancini has 100% control, then he has no buffer against agents or the world. Any deal becomes suspect. Corruption and scandal become inevitable. I'm really not sticking up for Brian Marwood per se, although personally I find him thoughtful and passionate about helping City build a world class organization. I'm sticking up for some rational thought. We want a scapegoat, but the reality is that we are living in a fantasy world right now, where normal rules of professionalism and business have been blown out of the water. We are very much at the whim and mercy of our owners, and their motivations are driven primarily by wanting to look good and win respect. Marwood does not have the rank to even ask Khaldoon to change policies. Mancini wants any player he can have, in part to build a stronger team, and in part because he becomes hugely powerful if he can pull the strings of the transfer policy of the richest club in the world. It isn't just about players. It's about power and money - more money than any of us can imagine.

 

[Damocles]

So because he can get a job as a marketing manager at a sportswear manufacturer, we should value him as the overseer of the academy, the scouting, the performance analysis, the medical, and all other technical departments?

And giving a manager near total control hasn't hurt the two biggest clubs in England has it?

 

[Anonymous]

Your assumption is that if Marwood is not at City, it's because he's sacked. Maybe he leaves because he is not satisfied working in an environment where he is undermined by the manager and lacks appropriate support from the CEO? You are mistaken if you think Marwood could not get other jobs. He would walk into a job at Nike tomorrow with half the stress and all the pay. Part of Marwood's job is to run the academy, run scouting, and run medical, and yet the staff of all three divisions have been driven out, or are about to be, in favor of Mancini's men... at some point Marwood's job becomes untenable. I want Mancini to stay as manager, but I don't want to build a demigod cult around Mancini - there needs to be professional independence of functions in a world where players cost tens of millions, and other millions swirl around via agents and back channels.. Manchester City is more than Mancini. Heck, Manchester City is about more than winning - it's my community club. My tribe. If all the world agents think that Mancini has 100% control, then he has no buffer against agents or the world. Any deal becomes suspect. Corruption and scandal become inevitable. I'm really not sticking up for Brian Marwood per se, although personally I find him thoughtful and passionate about helping City build a world class organization. I'm sticking up for some rational thought. We want a scapegoat, but the reality is that we are living in a fantasy world right now, where normal rules of professionalism and business have been blown out of the water. We are very much at the whim and mercy of our owners, and their motivations are driven primarily by wanting to look good and win respect. Marwood does not have the rank to even ask Khaldoon to change policies. Mancini wants any player he can have, in part to build a stronger team, and in part because he becomes hugely powerful if he can pull the strings of the transfer policy of the richest club in the world. It isn't just about players. It's about power and money - more money than any of us can imagine.

That is a supremely insightful post. One thing I will say, is that my opinion of the owners is that they will never allow a manager carte blanche in the transfer market. They've been burned enough times i imagine to understand the value of having someone doing due diligence on their behalf who can marry both the sporting needs of the team with the financial reality of the club.

I know you won't answer but I suspect you're pretty close to GC, if not the man himself!

 

[moomba]

That is an incredibly generous view of how things have gone recently imo. Of course all teams are looking out for themselves and want to buy when they want to buy and want sell when they want to sell. But it should work both ways and surely the same for us? Nobody thinks negotiating/timing transfers is easy but that doesn't mean that negotiating in such a way that we end up selling a player before we get a replacement (this late in the window) is good or acceptable negotiating/timing, does it?

You know going on your theory Sunderland couldn't force us to sell at a time that only suited them either, but Marwood (unless of course it was someone else at the club?) chose to and, whether you like to accept it or not, it has left us needlessly exposed to some extent. For me that was a mistake.

As I said to you yesterday, I'm pretty sure it will all get sorted when the owner throws money at it this week to correct what has happened but that does NOT mean it was the right thing to do to sell Johnson on Friday before we had sorted ourselves out. I don't expect City to be able to call other clubs' tune but I certainly don't expect us to let them call our tune!

I don't think it's nearly as significant as you make out. We sold AJ because we wanted to, not because we were forced to. And the sale of AJ does not force us to pay one penny more for Sinclair than we want to.

Lets say we held on to AJ until the deal with Sinclair was done. Do you really think Swansea would have just bent over and accepted our bid? Of course they wouldn't and while we were pissing about we would have forked out another £160k in wages with the potential for more if we then couldn't shift him before the end of the window.

You seem to think that buying late in the window is for desperates, it's the other way around IMO. It means much more to Swansea to sell Sinclair than it does to us to buy him, and I'm pretty confident that they'll be the ones that blink come Friday. That is if we haven't moved onto other rumoured targets already.

 

[mancity1]

That is an incredibly generous view of how things have gone recently imo. Of course all teams are looking out for themselves and want to buy when they want to buy and want sell when they want to sell. But it should work both ways and surely the same for us? Nobody thinks negotiating/timing transfers is easy but that doesn't mean that negotiating in such a way that we end up selling a player before we get a replacement (this late in the window) is good or acceptable negotiating/timing, does it?

You know going on your theory Sunderland couldn't force us to sell at a time that only suited them either, but Marwood (unless of course it was someone else at the club?) chose to and, whether you like to accept it or not, it has left us needlessly exposed to some extent. For me that was a mistake.

As I said to you yesterday, I'm pretty sure it will all get sorted when the owner throws money at it this week to correct what has happened but that does NOT mean it was the right thing to do to sell Johnson on Friday before we had sorted ourselves out. I don't expect City to be able to call other clubs' tune but I certainly don't expect us to let them call our tune!

I don't think it's nearly as significant as you make out. We sold AJ because we wanted to, not because we were forced to. And the sale of AJ does not force us to pay one penny more for Sinclair than we want to.

Lets say we held on to AJ until the deal with Sinclair was done. Do you really think Swansea would have just bent over and accepted our bid? Of course they wouldn't and while we were pissing about we would have forked out another £160k in wages with the potential for more if we then couldn't shift him before the end of the window.

You seem to think that buying late in the window is for desperates, it's the other way around IMO. It means much more to Swansea to sell Sinclair than it does to us to buy him, and I'm pretty confident that they'll be the ones that blink come Friday. That is if we haven't moved onto other rumoured targets already.

I agree and we have to remember that AJ wanted to go and RM was not fussed whether he stayed or went.

This will always be the case when you are a club like City and are current stage and it matters little to some players that the club they are at are defending champions and in the champions league.

AJ is not the only one of our current squad that would not say no to a transfer should the opportunity present itself.

Whether Mancini sees the need for wide men in our starting eleven is up for debate , I suspect he does but obviously they need to have the qualities that he sees are required for the premiership now at the top level.

That includes the ability to defend to assert pressure on defenders to keep the ball in the attacking third and the ability to plug holes when defenders come forward.

I was more than happy for AJ to stay but if he felt he had little future of significant game time at the club I will not begrudge him wanting and maybe obtaining that like he most likely will at Sunderland.

 

[CityCTID]

Re: Winter defends Marwood

What evidence do some of you have,that Marwood doesn't know what he's doing?

It's facts I'm talking about,not twitter nonsense and RM spitting his dummy out cos we won't pay over the odds for players.

It's cringeworthy some of the stuff on here,embarrassing stuff.

Our profit making, Premiership player producing Academy has completely fell apart under his watch.
We have the highest wage bill in the league.
The club has no consistent football policy across teams. Our support of womens football fell apart.
The club leaks like a sieve and his personal grieveances are often publicly aired through his contacts in the press.
He has no relevant qualifications for the role he has.
He has consistently failed to get on with every manager who has worked under him.
We are unable to move on players.
We have no influence in UEFA and they still use us as a whipping boy.
Our scouting department fell apart.


There's more, but that's some to be getting on with.

Is anybody trying to seriously suggest that Brian Marwood is one of the greatest football administrators in the world? If the answer is no, why are you supporting his continued employment at the club?

There are better out there and I imagine that he will not last much longer now that Soriano is here.

^^^^^Absolutely Spot On^^^^^

 

[decmancity]

Will be very surprised if he is still here by January.

Soriano will want to bring his own man in. Tixi Bergstein would be the favourite after their time at Barca.

 

[Roll On City]

All in all, the manager needs a counter - someone to challenge his buys, and if necessary pull the plug.

Is this a joke?

Had the average performances of the tv pundit [Marwood] had his way in the transfer signing, we would have end with Ashley Young, Jordan Henderson and Junior Hoilett!! Right, the manager needs someone to challenge his buys ... BOLLOX

-------

To be fair we should give credit where credit is due, Marwood sold Caicedo to Levante for a massive £1million, who sold him a week later for £7.5million. That's probably our biggest success story offloading deadwood in the past decade!!!!

Ashley Young, Jordan Henderson and Junior Hoilett?!?!?

Bizarre

 

[tommyhair]

Plenty of other threads you could have stamped your feet and had your sulk in.....

Agree

 

[AustinBlue]

So because he can get a job as a marketing manager at a sportswear manufacturer, we should value him as the overseer of the academy, the scouting, the performance analysis, the medical, and all other technical departments?

And giving a manager near total control hasn't hurt the two biggest clubs in England has it?

I am only saying he has options, and that if he leaves, it isn't automatically evidence that he was screwing up the transfers in the eyes of our ownership.

I didn't recruit Marwood for the job. I've just spent some time with him, and personally found him intelligent, and to have an impressive grasp of his portfolio of responsibilities. Might someone else do it better? Maybe. I'm pretty sure someone could do my job better than me most days. I do assert that this transfer market is not Marwood's "fault."

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

So because he can get a job as a marketing manager at a sportswear manufacturer, we should value him as the overseer of the academy, the scouting, the performance analysis, the medical, and all other technical departments?

And giving a manager near total control hasn't hurt the two biggest clubs in England has it?

I am only saying he has options, and that if he leaves, it isn't automatically evidence that he was screwing up the transfers in the eyes of our ownership.

I didn't recruit Marwood for the job. I've just spent some time with him, and personally found him intelligent, and to have an impressive grasp of his portfolio of responsibilities. Might someone else do it better? Maybe. I'm pretty sure someone could do my job better than me most days. I do assert that this transfer market is not Marwood's "fault."

Let's throw it open.

Genuine question - How would the critics of Marwood & our transfer policy change things?

 

[Blue Haze]

So because he can get a job as a marketing manager at a sportswear manufacturer, we should value him as the overseer of the academy, the scouting, the performance analysis, the medical, and all other technical departments?

And giving a manager near total control hasn't hurt the two biggest clubs in England has it?

I am only saying he has options, and that if he leaves, it isn't automatically evidence that he was screwing up the transfers in the eyes of our ownership.

I didn't recruit Marwood for the job. I've just spent some time with him, and personally found him intelligent, and to have an impressive grasp of his portfolio of responsibilities. Might someone else do it better? Maybe. I'm pretty sure someone could do my job better than me most days. I do assert that this transfer market is not Marwood's "fault."

Let's throw it open.

Genuine question - How would the critics of Marwood & our transfer policy change things?

1. Get to this stage at least 1 month earlier. Scrambling at the last minute ensures our bargaining position for players who aren't out of contract is weakened, ex: players like Nastasic, Javi Garcia, etc.

2. Do not leak the club's transfer strategy to the media. Telling every journo who would listen about 'sell before buying' is foolish beyond belief. It gives the upper hand to every agent and opposing DoF. They can effectively exact concessions out of us because they know that otherwise it will disrupt our transfers. Did we think Platini would give us brownie points?


These are universal negotiating principles- do not bargain from a position of desperation if it can be avoided (2 days to go), and do not show your hand to your opponent (sell before buying). Is Marwood responsible for these fundamental errors? I don't know. But whoever is responsible shouldn't be part of a negotiating team where strategy is important.

 

[burning blue soul]

if someone told me on the 14th May that the only addition to our squad this summer with 2 days of transfer window left, is rodwell (who has spent a lot of time on the bench at everton, nothing wrong btw - a good future prospect!) and no-one else i would literally have shit my cornflakes back up out of my mouth!!!

i would indeed be asking who is in charge of transfers and what the fuck has he been doing all summer.

the transfer window in football is like xmas to santa inpersonators - you work your fucking bollocks off. looks like he hasnt been doing that or has bottled it when the going got tough in the negotiating stages.

 

[BringBackSwales]

So because he can get a job as a marketing manager at a sportswear manufacturer, we should value him as the overseer of the academy, the scouting, the performance analysis, the medical, and all other technical departments?

And giving a manager near total control hasn't hurt the two biggest clubs in England has it?

I am only saying he has options, and that if he leaves, it isn't automatically evidence that he was screwing up the transfers in the eyes of our ownership.

I didn't recruit Marwood for the job. I've just spent some time with him, and personally found him intelligent, and to have an impressive grasp of his portfolio of responsibilities. Might someone else do it better? Maybe. I'm pretty sure someone could do my job better than me most days. I do assert that this transfer market is not Marwood's "fault."

Let's throw it open.

Genuine question - How would the critics of Marwood & our transfer policy change things?

For me PB the issue is we can only go on what we see - at a club of our size and stature I would expect us to employ someone in such a senior role who has a suitable CV and experience - to the best of my knowledge BM does not have this - we are talking about someone having a key role in transfers and the academy and the running of the club. I do not know of any suitable high level experience or exposure to this that BM has had - a decent but not special player, a bit part commentator on lower league games with Sky, and an office job with Nike. He has not got paticularly good communication skills, does not seem overly sharp or intelligent, does not (as far as I am aware) have great contacts with other major clubs; he would not appear to be either inspirational nor a natural leader. I read an article in the summer in one of the broadsheets who were interviewing Khaldoon and his comment (which did not seem malicious) was that BM came into the room with the air of a junior school boy who has been summonsed by the head teacher - maybe Khaldoon likes him because he does exactly what he is told, and maybe for that reason we simply have to put up with him - but that does not necesarilly make him the right person for the job.

If I could tuen the question the other way, what does BM bring to the party, why exactly is he the right person for such a senior role at such a large club, what are his major strenghts and achievements?

 

[Anonymous]

We're going round in ever decreasing circles here. Abu Dhabi have decided they aren't spending until certain players have been sold. Simple. People continuing to blame Marwood are in complete denial.

 

[whipper]

We're going round in ever decreasing circles here. Abu Dhabi have decided they aren't spending until certain players have been sold. Simple. People continuing to blame Marwood are in complete denial.

If the Chairman wasn`t who he was,they`d be having a go at him.

Marwood is easy meat

 

[Lancet Fluke]

That is an incredibly generous view of how things have gone recently imo. Of course all teams are looking out for themselves and want to buy when they want to buy and want sell when they want to sell. But it should work both ways and surely the same for us? Nobody thinks negotiating/timing transfers is easy but that doesn't mean that negotiating in such a way that we end up selling a player before we get a replacement (this late in the window) is good or acceptable negotiating/timing, does it?

You know going on your theory Sunderland couldn't force us to sell at a time that only suited them either, but Marwood (unless of course it was someone else at the club?) chose to and, whether you like to accept it or not, it has left us needlessly exposed to some extent. For me that was a mistake.

As I said to you yesterday, I'm pretty sure it will all get sorted when the owner throws money at it this week to correct what has happened but that does NOT mean it was the right thing to do to sell Johnson on Friday before we had sorted ourselves out. I don't expect City to be able to call other clubs' tune but I certainly don't expect us to let them call our tune!

I don't think it's nearly as significant as you make out. We sold AJ because we wanted to, not because we were forced to. And the sale of AJ does not force us to pay one penny more for Sinclair than we want to.

Lets say we held on to AJ until the deal with Sinclair was done. Do you really think Swansea would have just bent over and accepted our bid? Of course they wouldn't and while we were pissing about we would have forked out another £160k in wages with the potential for more if we then couldn't shift him before the end of the window.

You seem to think that buying late in the window is for desperates, it's the other way around IMO. It means much more to Swansea to sell Sinclair than it does to us to buy him, and I'm pretty confident that they'll be the ones that blink come Friday. That is if we haven't moved onto other rumoured targets already.

My opinion is definitely that buying at the end of a window is generally a false economy. By and large you are going to get players who were not originally at the top of your list and you are going to pay over the odds. I recognise the Sinclair situation is different due to his contractual situation but still, if we had not sold AJ first then we massively had the upper hand in those negotiations. We held all the aces, they were desperate because of his contract and to all intents and purposes we still had a winger so didn't need to buy. As soon as we sold AJ then imo that changed because our need to buy a winger/impact sub became greater. That will have been the perception at Swansea I reckon and that perception is important. I don't really see how you can deny that tbh although I'm sure you will. I know you think it isn't important whether we have AJ or not and if we had a replacement then of course it wouldn't be important. But it is certainly important that we have a player like AJ (or Sinclair or Walcott etc) in the squad and if you don't think it is then you should tell Mancini because he threw AJ on enough times last season to make me think that he values having a winger on the bench as an option. As I have said, I know it will get sorted, we will probably still get Sinclair, and if we hold our nerve and Swansea don't hold theirs then we might even still get him for 6.2 million but none of that means that selling AJ first was prudent, it would just mean we got away with it, which is something entirely different. And worst case scenario, if we don't get a winger in, I reckon Mancini would go fucking ape shit and Marwood would have some serious quastions to answer as to why he left us exposed like that with days left of the window. More likely though is that we will just get Sinclair but pay a bit more as Swansea recognise that our need is greater than it was a week ago so they fleece us accordingly. All only my opinon obviously.

 

[Pam]

We're going round in ever decreasing circles here. Abu Dhabi have decided they aren't spending until certain players have been sold. Simple. People continuing to blame Marwood are in complete denial.

But we've left it so late, Billy.

 

[Chippy_boy]

We're going round in ever decreasing circles here. Abu Dhabi have decided they aren't spending until certain players have been sold. Simple. People continuing to blame Marwood are in complete denial.

I agree Billy. But playing devils advocate for just one moment, if that is the case, then why haven't they been sold much, much earlier. An asset is only worth what someone else is prepared to pay for it, and if that is fuck all, then so be it. If we had to shift the deadwood before we could concentrate on new signings, we should have offloaded the hangers-on ages ago at whatever price we could get.

To end up 48 hours from the end of the window with only 1 b-list signing is a little disappointing to say the least.

 

[moomba]

Genuine question - How would the critics of Marwood & our transfer policy change things?

Quite clearly I would have signed every player that our rivals (and some non rivals) have signed, while at the same time reducing our squad size, wage bill and exposure to FFP regulations.

I would pay whatever it takes to get world class, young and proven talent to the club, so long as it doesn't cost more than £10m. If selling clubs have a problem with this price I would use negotiating skills to convince them that they are wrong.

I will of course have no say in the selection of any of our targets, unless of course they turn out to be rubbish in which case I will take full responsibility for the selection, recruitment, pay packet and bad haircuts.