Cardiff City Long Term Plan

In the last year or so, we've had Mehmet Dalman state that the club has no long term plan, through some semblence of one with the increased emphasis on sustainability, which was meant to be about bringing through more academy players, but in practice was a well needed clearout in the summer with lots of transfers from the cheaper end of the market (blocking the first team path for many of those academy players), to Tan recently saying that there is indeed a plan, but on that he has only said that there is aspiration to make the playoffs - which even the most optimistic Cardiff City fan and Yes men would see as fanciful to say the least.

The club has yet to provide any more detail on this plan, so with the current malaise around the club and restlessness on the part of most of the fans who would like to know what the funk is going on, I'd like to propose that we keyboard warriors put our heads together to help out the club's Planning Department.

I'll start the ball rolling with a couple of elephants in the room:

- Appoint a Director of Football to align all aspects of the club across age groups and genders
- Determine how the club is going to manage down its debt

C'mon Bluebirds, let's do this!
:ayatollah:

The one Director of Football we had didn't work out. Fans thought him to be a complete waste of money. Perhaps he was the wrong appointment but if such a person was to be recruited it would have to be a person of great seniority with the authority to convince the Board and owner that his policies and practices would be approved. Frankly I'm doubtful as the route cause of the club's problems going forward is money. Without that any such appointment would be pointless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vindec

The one Director of Football we had didn't work out. Fans thought him to be a complete waste of money. Perhaps he was the wrong appointment but if such a person was to be recruited it would have to be a person of great seniority with the authority to convince the Board and owner that his policies and practices would be approved. Frankly I'm doubtful as the route cause of the club's problems going forward is money. Without that any such appointment would be pointless.

---

Do you mean Russell Slade?

I don't think he ever had a proper role - certainly not as a DOF. He was given a job title but never a job. It was just a way for Tan to move him within the club and not appear to be caving in to fan discontent by simply sacking him. In the end it didn't suit either Slade or the club and he moved on as soon as he could get a real job elsewhere.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon1959

Do you mean Russell Slade?

I don't think he ever had a proper role - certainly not as a DOF. He was given a job title but never a job. It was just a way for Tan to move him within the club and not appear to be caving in to fan discontent by simply sacking him. In the end it didn't suit either Slade or the club and he moved on as soon as he could get a real job elsewhere.

---

I was thinking of Kenny Hibbett.

I think it’s fair to say Morison was the long term plan. He put together an entire team of players he wanted and he changed the style of football.
A style of football that presumably the younger players are well versed in since he was the U21 coach.
I’m guessing the plan was let Morison sign a whole load of players, work out the ones good enough, let go of the ones who weren’t and plug the gaps with academy players who are coming into a first team that plays the same style they’re used to.
Say 5 or 6 signings each year are good quality and in 2 or 3 years we’ve built a strong championship squad on the cheap and one that our best young players can slot into with ease.

And then Morison got the boot :shrug:

I’m guessing the plan remains the same except it’s Hudson at the helm instead of Morison. For all his faults, Morison clearly had a good eye for players so I can understand if the above was what the club had planned.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vindec

The one Director of Football we had didn't work out. Fans thought him to be a complete waste of money. Perhaps he was the wrong appointment but if such a person was to be recruited it would have to be a person of great seniority with the authority to convince the Board and owner that his policies and practices would be approved. Frankly I'm doubtful as the route cause of the club's problems going forward is money. Without that any such appointment would be pointless.

---

I'd disagree totally on the money argument.

If money is tight then, given how we have spent it when we have money, a director of football being appointed is vital.

It is one thing blowing money and spending it badly when you have a relatively decent amount if it and spending more papers over the cracks. Spending it badly when it is scarce is recipe for relegation and disaster.

I'm still not convinced that Morison got the boot for football reasons, and think it far more likely that there was a falling out. But let's assume that he was sacked because of our position in the table and the results achieved. I don't think a case can really be made that it was the right decision looking at the below stats which I believe to be correct. I think I calculated that if Hudson maintained his current points per match over the next 25 games we would finish on 50-51 points. That is usually enough to survive but I think that it is too close for comfort and apparently Peterborough were relegated with 54 points in 2012/13. If he makes it until the transfer window, Hudson will need to find additional goals from somewhere as there is little sign of getting much more out of the present squad, even with Rubin Colwill and Isaak Davies to return. I think the plan is to survive in the Championship as we evolve over 2 seasons and 4 transfer windows. Perhaps VT did get a squeaky bum but, as things stand, the answer does not appear to be Mark Hudson. That said, I really do hope that he can turn it around having been our captain and a man who obviously does care something for CCFC.



Steve Morison

Played 10
Won 3
Drew 2
Lost 5
For 7
Against 11
Points per game = 1.1
Goals for per game = 0.7
Goals against per game = 1.1

Mark Hudson

Played 11
Won 4
Drew 1
Lost 6
For 10
Against 14
Points per game = 1.18
Goals for per game = 0.91
Goals against per game = 1.27

I doubt there is a long term plan.

Im not convinced theres much of a short one.

The last window was a big opportunity but it was a disaster.

We need a huge clear out but getting players under contract out wont be easy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Harry Bosch

I'm still not convinced that Morison got the boot for football reasons, and think it far more likely that there was a falling out. But let's assume that he was sacked because of our position in the table and the results achieved. I don't think a case can really be made that it was the right decision looking at the below stats which I believe to be correct. I think I calculated that if Hudson maintained his current points per match over the next 25 games we would finish on 50-51 points. That is usually enough to survive but I think that it is too close for comfort and apparently Peterborough were relegated with 54 points in 2012/13. If he makes it until the transfer window, Hudson will need to find additional goals from somewhere as there is little sign of getting much more out of the present squad, even with Rubin Colwill and Isaak Davies to return. I think the plan is to survive in the Championship as we evolve over 2 seasons and 4 transfer windows. Perhaps VT did get a squeaky bum but, as things stand, the answer does not appear to be Mark Hudson. That said, I really do hope that he can turn it around having been our captain and a man who obviously does care something for CCFC.



Steve Morison

Played 10
Won 3
Drew 2
Lost 5
For 7
Against 11
Points per game = 1.1
Goals for per game = 0.7
Goals against per game = 1.1

Mark Hudson

Played 11
Won 4
Drew 1
Lost 6
For 10
Against 14
Points per game = 1.18
Goals for per game = 0.91
Goals against per game = 1.27

---

We had a completely new squad which should have improved as we went on.
Morison seemed to be doing a decent job of changing personnel completely alongside changing our style of play.
The board finally agreed that our striking options were simply not good enough and relented in spending money on Robinson.
Morison was then sacked about a week later so didn’t have any benefits of that signing.
What I can see are as follows:

Players that Morison signed seemed ok while he was at the club but have deteriorated under Hudson
We were poor up front under Morison but played quite well from the back and through midfield - we are now poor all over the pitch
Morison had to persevere with Watters before everyone finally agreed that he was simply not good enough. If my memory serves me right Dalman made that signing over the head of the manager and agreed to pay almost £1M, which demonstrates how little his knowledge of football truly is.
I am sorry to say Hudson is clearly not the future of Cardiff City, although I would like him to be.
He seems to already have lost the players and our performances look anything but organised or motivated.

I will predict he will once again be replaced before the season end. Probably with another very cheap option.
The club can get by with free transfer players and cost cutting plans, but all the more need for a good manager, which Tan and Dalman don’t seem to agree with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blue lewj

I'd disagree totally on the money argument.

If money is tight then, given how we have spent it when we have money, a director of football being appointed is vital.

It is one thing blowing money and spending it badly when you have a relatively decent amount if it and spending more papers over the cracks. Spending it badly when it is scarce is recipe for relegation and disaster.

---

If anything, having money issues actually makes having a Director of Football even more important, to ensure that what money the club has, goes further.