5Live Monday Night Club

[Scallywolf]

Excellent interview imo.

4 in the know football pundits, questioning 1 Matt Hobbs. No obvious bull****, but honest and open imo.

MH cane across as very articulate, intelligent and knowledgeable. Very supportive of GO as well (mind you, he would be after appointing him).

I did get the impression, though, that our big spending days are over. Young and hungry is the future and £10-£15million is our ceiling, with South America a market to explore. I reserve judgement on that.

 

[SmiffyWolf]

We should have at least £250 million January when we flip Neto and Hwang . So even better for FFP .

Before Bostin puts it I won't have a day off .

 

[Ned Stark]

as an aside , thought that Rory Smith bloke was very smart and his Hugo joke cracked me up big time

 

[Bawtry Wolf]

Mentioned the club has a strategy and a vision several times. But doesn’t actually articulate what it is.

We wanted a British Manager. Why was that important.

Wrote the Bournemouth Manager pre- match script by announcing we had far better players. We might but don’t shout about it as the opposition will use it as a motivation.

Wants the club to be more in control and moving away from Gestifute (we knew this).

To be honest he was articulate but I didn’t come away with much other than cliches and stuff we already knew. Other than the Kilman anecdote.

 

[SingYourHeartsOut]

as an aside , thought that Rory Smith bloke was very smart and his Hugo joke cracked me up big time

Bloody right too, 'football fans are tribal and prone to violence at any minute, but rugby fans are blokes called Hugo'. Take your beer into the stands old chap, of course, stand on a terrace, no problem.

 

[TF2Wolf]

One of the interesting snippets for me was when he talked about having to pander, ie give him what he wants, when it’s a manager of Lopetegui’s standing, so struck me that as a club reinforces the owners don’t know how to work with a ‘big’ manager, and Jeff doesn’t like not being in control.

So it’s clear we’re not going to get in a Manager of his experience and reputation in the foreseeable future should GON not work out.

Talked about a vision and strategy but if the rumours of the candidates including Lampard and Dean Smith along with GON & presumably Rob Edwards I’m still not entirely sure the strategy extended beyond out of work available managers who wouldn’t kick up too much fuss about the transfer situation.

Let’s just hope they are ahead of the curve with GON and he is the next up and coming manager as that will mean success for our club.

 

[VancouverWolf]

Interesting to compare and contrast Molineux Mix with real life:

1. A bunch of knowledgable and reasonable football blokes just had an informed and intelligent discussion about Wolves in which nobody had a bad word to say about our manager and in which Mark Chapman for one was very complimentary about some of the football we've played this season. Our director of football gave a very measured and credible account of where we are heading as a club which was taken seriously by all concerned and everyone seemed interested and engaged.

2. But in actual fact we know Wolves are run by asset-stripping liars who are under the thumb of the Chinese government and are engaged in a cynical endgame to maximise profit from a project they no longer care about and have employed a yes-man PE teacher as manager because he was the cheapest option who, was it not for a lucky result against Citeh, has until the Villa game to save his job. We are currently on course for relegation, most likely double-relegation and probably bankruptcy as a result.

Excellent!

 

[VancouverWolf]

Hobbs is a good un we should try our best to hang on to him.

He may not want to stay if the club is as shambolic as many claim.

 

[BlahBlah]

Total contradictions in what he said about project being back on track, then buying £15m players to needing £85m profit, not definition of straight.

If you sell three for 45 million, and buy three for 15 million, you've made 90 million.

 

[Oh When the Wolves]

Why did we have to make 85m?

 

[Mile End Wanderer]

Why did we have to make 85m?

Transfer profit demand from owners over ffp which is bs

 

[lets all have a disco]

85m profit? That’s Billy bull shine we are on €75m according to transfermarkt

So where has the other 10m come from? Someone exaggerated the interview?

We was told by the media 50m transfer profit.

View attachment 37646

Probably expected add ons with some of the deals...

 

[Leominster_Wolf]

85m profit? That’s Billy bull shine we are on €75m according to transfermarkt

So where has the other 10m come from? Someone exaggerated the interview?

We was told by the media 50m transfer profit.

View attachment 37646

Transfermarket is about as accurate and reliable as a bloke with a tape measure, measuring his ****… it’s 7”, honestly love

 

[bigwolf]

Bunch of journos who know **** all about Wolves brown nose their guest, meanwhile the views of fans who watch week in week out are irrelevant. Strange take.

Perhaps Hobbs can go on White and Jordan and answer some proper questions.

These interviews are just nonsense. No accountability, no challenge and no substance.

They'll be saying we are the blueprint on how run a club next

 

[Supadavewolf]

Transfermarket is about as accurate and reliable as a bloke with a tape measure, measuring his ****… it’s 7”, honestly love

I notice the first Mixer to like this was 'Big'wolf

 

[Supadavewolf]

Matt Hobbs. No obvious bull****

No bs indeed. It's the perfect combination :

Doris's tea and Hobbs nobs.

Sorry

 

[UncleJorge]

People seem to be questioning the accuracy of the £85m.
Remember that when you buy it's spread over the contract, when you sell it all goes on the profit immediately

 

[DanishWolf]

With regards to the strategy, there's not really anything wrong with having finances dictate the strategy. I suspect thats the case in most businesses..
Remember my local team Brondby changing strategy, after having huge losses over several seasons, to "focus primarily on developing an using academy players". Actually that formula proved a succes, as they ended up winning their first Championship for years..
But just be honest about it. We all know things changed from January until the summer, otherwise Lopetegui will be in charge, so dont make it sound like we had this grand plan, and that getting GON in was all part of that..

 

[clivewolves]

He talks a good game. Certainly better than Sellars. Let's see how the next five years develop. I still don't know why it was important to have a British coach, not that we shouldn't have one. A foreign coach could still be young and hungry. Maybe he said that because a British coach was given the job so it gives O'Neil a bit more of a confidence boost.

 

[loppers86]

Interesting to compare and contrast Molineux Mix with real life:

1. A bunch of knowledgable and reasonable football blokes just had an informed and intelligent discussion about Wolves in which nobody had a bad word to say about our manager and in which Mark Chapman for one was very complimentary about some of the football we've played this season. Our director of football gave a very measured and credible account of where we are heading as a club which was taken seriously by all concerned and everyone seemed interested and engaged.

2. But in actual fact we know Wolves are run by asset-stripping liars who are under the thumb of the Chinese government and are engaged in a cynical endgame to maximise profit from a project they no longer care about and have employed a yes-man PE teacher as manager because he was the cheapest option who, was it not for a lucky result against Citeh, has until the Villa game to save his job. We are currently on course for relegation, most likely double-relegation and probably bankruptcy as a result.

#2 is the truth.
#1 is everyone self serving their own interests.

 

[maws]

Interesting to compare and contrast Molineux Mix with real life:

1. A bunch of knowledgable and reasonable football blokes just had an informed and intelligent discussion about Wolves in which nobody had a bad word to say about our manager and in which Mark Chapman for one was very complimentary about some of the football we've played this season. Our director of football gave a very measured and credible account of where we are heading as a club which was taken seriously by all concerned and everyone seemed interested and engaged.

2. But in actual fact we know Wolves are run by asset-stripping liars who are under the thumb of the Chinese government and are engaged in a cynical endgame to maximise profit from a project they no longer care about and have employed a yes-man PE teacher as manager because he was the cheapest option who, was it not for a lucky result against Citeh, has until the Villa game to save his job. We are currently on course for relegation, most likely double-relegation and probably bankruptcy as a result.

As usual the truth will lie in the middle ground

 

[SuperGran]

More in-depth interview here
https://spotify.link/3t1BOFcDADb

 

[Shergar]

It remains to be seen whether he just spouted rhetoric.
But kudos for doing the interview (from Telford in the middle of a U21’s game as well) and what a MASSIVE upgrade on the depressing Sellars persona.

 

[SingYourHeartsOut]

People seem to be questioning the accuracy of the £85m.
Remember that when you buy it's spread over the contract, when you sell it all goes on the profit immediately

But equally if it's an FFP issue then Neves is a great book profit, Nunes a decent one, Collins a fairly small one. It's always quite a simplification.

 

[goldfish]

I think he was laying that on a bit thick to be honest. We were not told at all what was happening this summer. He released a statement on the 15th June that he was 'never in doubt Lopetegui would stay'.

Agree it was a bit OTT, but I think he was suggesting that Lopetegui leaving has given the club the opportunity to reset the narrative and base it around 'honesty'.

I also wonder if that was Hobbes putting his vision forward to stop Fosun continuing with obfuscation.

 

[Mile End Wanderer]

Transfermarket is about as accurate and reliable as a bloke with a tape measure, measuring his ****… it’s 7”, honestly love

Really?

 

[WeAreTheWolvesII]

On the one with Mikey Burrows, Hobbs stated we shouldn't be in a position like we were again in terms of needing to hit a figure, that we can be 'aggressive' moving forward, and that there should be money available in January.

However, he played down the latter, insisting we shouldn't want to do much business as it would mean the plan has gone wrong and it would need to be the right price.

 

[Bostin]

If they are going down the young and hungry route again, I can't see us needing to spend more than £20-25m on a player.

 

[WolvesAndCows]

On the one with Mikey Burrows, Hobbs stated we shouldn't be in a position like we were again in terms of needing to hit a figure, that we can be 'aggressive' moving forward, and that there should be money available in January.

However, he played down the latter, insisting we shouldn't want to do much business as it would mean the plan has gone wrong and it would need to be the right price.

They'll be hoping we'll be comfortably midtable come January, so that we can spend a bit in the summer

 

[Contrarian]

The league could contain 20 brilliantly run clubs yet still 3 get relegated every season and only 7 qualify for Europe.

What we are trying to do and even how we go about it, isn't that different to most of the other 14 at least. It's the quality of the people doing it that counts.

Being well run is only part of it, you have to be better run!

 

[Fifty Niner]

One of the interesting snippets for me was when he talked about having to pander, ie give him what he wants, when it’s a manager of Lopetegui’s standing, so struck me that as a club reinforces the owners don’t know how to work with a ‘big’ manager, and Jeff doesn’t like not being in control.

So it’s clear we’re not going to get in a Manager of his experience and reputation in the foreseeable future should GON not work out.

Talked about a vision and strategy but if the rumours of the candidates including Lampard and Dean Smith along with GON & presumably Rob Edwards I’m still not entirely sure the strategy extended beyond out of work available managers who wouldn’t kick up too much fuss about the transfer situation.

Let’s just hope they are ahead of the curve with GON and he is the next up and coming manager as that will mean success for our club.

All is rosy after beating Man City. GON has not gone and may be the next best thing since Nuno.

If Hobbs' pandering comments were a dig at Lopetegui, I think it is a bit disingenuous. The club wanted him and to get a manager like him when we were bottom of the table they had to show some ambition to back him. We can all differ on whether Lopetegui was right to chuck it in but the bottom line is that the decision makers, or maker, at the club were dishonest in what they were promising.

Matt talks an excellent game. Very presentable and convincing. But less than a year ago, as the press and football pundits began to mock Wolves recruitment process for replacing Lage, Hobbs was championing Mick Beale.

Hobbs words are reassuring but as a pessimistic pessimist, I remain to be convinced.

 

[DanishWolf]

About the strategy:

Sporting director Matt Hobbs urges Wolves fans to get behind Gary O'Neil

Sporting director Matt Hobbs has urged Wolves supporters to get behind Gary O'Neil and the club's philosophy.

www.expressandstar.com

"Everything we're trying to do is in it's infancy, with a different strategy where the club controls it, rather than the manager,"

"The project we're trying to build is in it's infancy. Julen was hugely successful for us in keeping us in the league and we had to be adaptable to what I would have liked the strategy to be at that time.

"I said this on Julen's first day, and I said the same on Gary's first day, I want a team on the pitch that represents the team in the stands.
"For me, the strategy was a smaller first team squad, a young, hungry set of players like Joao Gomes, alongside your experience in Daws (Craig Dawson) and Mario (Lemina).

"If you want young, hungry players, in my opinion the best coach to have is a young, hungry coach who is on the same journey with you and wants something long-term.

"But someone who has that desire and work ethic that the players can buy into. That's what we've found."


Now I simply disagree completely that you need to have a young coach still learning his trade if your vision is a young hungry team.

What matters in my opinion is whether the manager still has a hunger and a point to prove.
In fact I'd argue that with a young and hungry team, a wise experienced head, who's been through that process of developing a team might be better.

That's not say GON isnt a good choice, just that I don't buy Hobbs argument here.

Also "young and hungry " is actually a good group to target and also I like the idea of the club having an overall vision that are independent of the manager Because as we saw with Nuno, if the manager leaves, then everything falls apart.
Much better to have continuity, which is something the DOF should build. So I like what Hobbs is saying..
However age and hard work which he talks about a bit too is quite broad as a vision.
Usually the advantage with the sort of continuity he talks about; is that you don't need to change style of play completely whenever a manager leaves.

I've a difficult time to see what kind of overall vision which takes from you from Lage to Beale(in theory) Lopetegui to GON.
Obviously there are things in common, but while still being unassure about GONs prefered style of play, I'd say there are quite a lot of differences.

BUT Hobbs is a more knowledgable football man than me, so I actually trust him on this.

 

[WolfLing]

One of the interesting snippets for me was when he talked about having to pander, ie give him what he wants, when it’s a manager of Lopetegui’s standing, so struck me that as a club reinforces the owners don’t know how to work with a ‘big’ manager, and Jeff doesn’t like not being in control.

So it’s clear we’re not going to get in a Manager of his experience and reputation in the foreseeable future should GON not work out.

Talked about a vision and strategy but if the rumours of the candidates including Lampard and Dean Smith along with GON & presumably Rob Edwards I’m still not entirely sure the strategy extended beyond out of work available managers who wouldn’t kick up too much fuss about the transfer situation.

Let’s just hope they are ahead of the curve with GON and he is the next up and coming manager as that will mean success for our club.

The issue with having a manager of Lopetegui's standing and pandering to them, is it does then create issues around succession planning.

If you have a Sporting Director, as we do in Matt Hobbs, the reality is that is should be them making the big strategic decisions, obviously with input from the manager and other staff. If the tail is wagging the dog, that position will be watered down and those big strategic calls with an eye on the future are not prioritised.

It's where Man United have fallen down in recent years by not having an underlying strategy or philosophy of how they want to do things, and then signing collections of players for each and every manager they employ, most of which are then not the same types of player the next manager wants or needs.

Then ultimately, when that manager underperforms and leaves, everything that manager built crumbles and you end up starting from scratch again.

Had Lopetegui stayed and continued to do well, he would likely have been poached from us at some stage, and if everything that had been built had been compromises to what the club were looking to do long-term, at that stage it potentially falls apart.

Get that strategic bit right first and foremost and you end up appointing managers based on those goals and targets, rather than their reputation. Obviously Hobbs thinks GON is perfect for what we are trying to achieve currently.

While Man United are the extreme of how not to do it, Brighton are probably the other extreme. De Zerbi was appointed based on how he could fit into their long-term vision of how they play football and how they develop players. It probably couldn't have gone any better so far, taking away last week's result.

Obviously the flip side to all of that is the benefit of having a high reputation manager's input and ability in the first place, which is clearly positive, but a club of our size and standing should be looking more towards the Brighton model than the alternative in my opinion.

Although the issues around the Sporting Director model come when/if the Sporting Director is poached, as clubs like Leicester have found!

 

[SingYourHeartsOut]

All is rosy after beating Man City. GON has not gone and may be the next best thing since Nuno.

If Hobbs' pandering comments were a dig at Lopetegui, I think it is a bit disingenuous. The club wanted him and to get a manager like him when we were bottom of the table they had to show some ambition to back him. We can all differ on whether Lopetegui was right to chuck it in but the bottom line is that the decision makers, or maker, at the club were dishonest in what they were promising.

Matt talks an excellent game. Very presentable and convincing. But less than a year ago, as the press and football pundits began to mock Wolves recruitment process for replacing Lage, Hobbs was championing Mick Beale.

Hobbs words are reassuring but as a pessimistic pessimist, I remain to be convinced.

I don't think he was exactly having a dig at Lopetegui, but if you put a few things together, he said basically our successful signings have been younger players who were not too expensive and had something to prove on the way up. The club had to pander to Lopetegui a bit because he was high profile and expected to get what he wanted. I'm definitely putting Sarabia into that category. Thing is maybe Nuno also thought he'd earned that status before he left. There's a balance somewhere between getting in a manager who thinks we're lucky to have him and a manager who thinks he's lucky to have got the job.

 

[Contrarian]

All is rosy after beating Man City. GON has not gone and may be the next best thing since Nuno.

If Hobbs' pandering comments were a dig at Lopetegui, I think it is a bit disingenuous. The club wanted him and to get a manager like him when we were bottom of the table they had to show some ambition to back him. We can all differ on whether Lopetegui was right to chuck it in but the bottom line is that the decision makers, or maker, at the club were dishonest in what they were promising.

Matt talks an excellent game. Very presentable and convincing. But less than a year ago, as the press and football pundits began to mock Wolves recruitment process for replacing Lage, Hobbs was championing Mick Beale.

Hobbs words are reassuring but as a pessimistic pessimist, I remain to be convinced.

Yes, talk is easy and cheap. And what he says about us is much the same as most of the "Other 14" are run these days. We are all looking for young and hungry bargains to develop. It's how good you are at identifying them.

It's like we could could all talk about winning a sprinting race - about how hard we are working at running fast. We all know what you have to do - but actually doing it? And there's only one winner, the rest can talk about how fast they are going to run as much as they like, they ended up beaten.

Apologies...it's been a slow day.

 

[SakosRightFoot]

About the strategy:

Sporting director Matt Hobbs urges Wolves fans to get behind Gary O'Neil

Sporting director Matt Hobbs has urged Wolves supporters to get behind Gary O'Neil and the club's philosophy.

www.expressandstar.com

"Everything we're trying to do is in it's infancy, with a different strategy where the club controls it, rather than the manager,"

"The project we're trying to build is in it's infancy. Julen was hugely successful for us in keeping us in the league and we had to be adaptable to what I would have liked the strategy to be at that time.

"I said this on Julen's first day, and I said the same on Gary's first day, I want a team on the pitch that represents the team in the stands.
"For me, the strategy was a smaller first team squad, a young, hungry set of players like Joao Gomes, alongside your experience in Daws (Craig Dawson) and Mario (Lemina).

"If you want young, hungry players, in my opinion the best coach to have is a young, hungry coach who is on the same journey with you and wants something long-term.

"But someone who has that desire and work ethic that the players can buy into. That's what we've found."


Now I simply disagree completely that you need to have a young coach still learning his trade if your vision is a young hungry team.

What matters in my opinion is whether the manager still has a hunger and a point to prove.
In fact I'd argue that with a young and hungry team, a wise experienced head, who's been through that process of developing a team might be better.

That's not say GON isnt a good choice, just that I don't buy Hobbs argument here.

Also "young and hungry " is actually a good group to target and also I like the idea of the club having an overall vision that are independent of the manager Because as we saw with Nuno, if the manager leaves, then everything falls apart.
Much better to have continuity, which is something the DOF should build. So I like what Hobbs is saying..
However age and hard work which he talks about a bit too is quite broad as a vision.
Usually the advantage with the sort of continuity he talks about; is that you don't need to change style of play completely whenever a manager leaves.

I've a difficult time to see what kind of overall vision which takes from you from Lage to Beale(in theory) Lopetegui to GON.
Obviously there are things in common, but while still being unassure about GONs prefered style of play, I'd say there are quite a lot of differences.

BUT Hobbs is a more knowledgable football man than me, so I actually trust him on this.

In fairness it wasn’t Hobbs who appointed Lage and wasn’t it Sellars that pushed for Beale. Lopetegui was Shi’s appointment so basically GON is the first time Hobbs has been able to do his own thing

 

[Leominster_Wolf]

Really?

So I'm told

 

[WolvesAndCows]

So I'm told

Mile End is impressed

 

[Bostin]

The issue with having a manager of Lopetegui's standing and pandering to them, is it does then create issues around succession planning.

If you have a Sporting Director, as we do in Matt Hobbs, the reality is that is should be them making the big strategic decisions, obviously with input from the manager and other staff. If the tail is wagging the dog, that position will be watered down and those big strategic calls with an eye on the future are not prioritised.

It's where Man United have fallen down in recent years by not having an underlying strategy or philosophy of how they want to do things, and then signing collections of players for each and every manager they employ, most of which are then not the same types of player the next manager wants or needs.

Then ultimately, when that manager underperforms and leaves, everything that manager built crumbles and you end up starting from scratch again.

Had Lopetegui stayed and continued to do well, he would likely have been poached from us at some stage, and if everything that had been built had been compromises to what the club were looking to do long-term, at that stage it potentially falls apart.

Get that strategic bit right first and foremost and you end up appointing managers based on those goals and targets, rather than their reputation. Obviously Hobbs thinks GON is perfect for what we are trying to achieve currently.

While Man United are the extreme of how not to do it, Brighton are probably the other extreme. De Zerbi was appointed based on how he could fit into their long-term vision of how they play football and how they develop players. It probably couldn't have gone any better so far, taking away last week's result.

Obviously the flip side to all of that is the benefit of having a high reputation manager's input and ability in the first place, which is clearly positive, but a club of our size and standing should be looking more towards the Brighton model than the alternative in my opinion.

Although the issues around the Sporting Director model come when/if the Sporting Director is poached, as clubs like Leicester have found!

I'd honestly be more concerned if we lost Hobbs than I was when we lost Loeptegui.

 

[SteveBullsKnee]

The issue with having a manager of Lopetegui's standing and pandering to them, is it does then create issues around succession planning.

If you have a Sporting Director, as we do in Matt Hobbs, the reality is that is should be them making the big strategic decisions, obviously with input from the manager and other staff. If the tail is wagging the dog, that position will be watered down and those big strategic calls with an eye on the future are not prioritised.

It's where Man United have fallen down in recent years by not having an underlying strategy or philosophy of how they want to do things, and then signing collections of players for each and every manager they employ, most of which are then not the same types of player the next manager wants or needs.

Then ultimately, when that manager underperforms and leaves, everything that manager built crumbles and you end up starting from scratch again.

Had Lopetegui stayed and continued to do well, he would likely have been poached from us at some stage, and if everything that had been built had been compromises to what the club were looking to do long-term, at that stage it potentially falls apart.

Get that strategic bit right first and foremost and you end up appointing managers based on those goals and targets, rather than their reputation. Obviously Hobbs thinks GON is perfect for what we are trying to achieve currently.

While Man United are the extreme of how not to do it, Brighton are probably the other extreme. De Zerbi was appointed based on how he could fit into their long-term vision of how they play football and how they develop players. It probably couldn't have gone any better so far, taking away last week's result.

Obviously the flip side to all of that is the benefit of having a high reputation manager's input and ability in the first place, which is clearly positive, but a club of our size and standing should be looking more towards the Brighton model than the alternative in my opinion.

Although the issues around the Sporting Director model come when/if the Sporting Director is poached, as clubs like Leicester have found!

I think it’s the right approach to have so there is some long term planning rather than “rip it up and start again” every time a new manager comes on board. It’s a very continental approach where there is less importance on the head coach as there is in the uk. The average Italian and Spanish clubs go through managers very quickly but the sporting director has a much more important role.