The "Committee"

There's been a lot of discussion about the "transfer committee" with a lot of people saying this affects how quickly we can complete transfers, and even that this "committee" was forcing players on the manager, something I find ridiculous.

Lets start with the basics and define a "committee"

 noun

    1 /kəˈmɪti/ [treated as singular or plural] A group of people appointed for a specific function by a larger group and typically consisting of members of that group: the housing committee [as modifier]: a committee meeting
    More example sentences
    1.1(In the UK) a committee appointed by Parliament to consider the details of proposed legislation: there was much scrutiny in committee
    More example sentences
    1.2 (Committee of the whole House) (In the UK) the whole House of Commons when sitting as a committee.

Origin

late 15th century (in the general sense 'person to whom something has been entrusted'): from commit + -ee.
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/committee

BR used this term when he first came to the club, and it has since gained a lot of traction and has been used in various ways to critique our transfer process.

This is a fallacy, a myth, a lazy argument to excuse the manager from less successful transfers and try to pin the "blame" elsewhere.
Here's the actual truth, with thanks to BBB for posting the article last week in response to a debate we were having.

Rodgers sits on the committee along with managing director Ian Ayre, head of recruitment Dave Fallows and head of performance and analysis Michael Edwards.
Rodgers must secure the agreement of the committee that a player meets the club’s requirements and is worth pursuing.

However, the boss says the input of Ayre, Fallows and Edwards is a help rather than a hindrance in the recruitment process.

“Obviously, I am involved heavily in the identification of the player,” Rodgers told the ECHO.

“The principle idea when I first came in was that like any manager you will have the first call on a player and the last call.

“That’s the call on whether he’s good enough to continue to look at and try to organise a deal and the last call to say yes or no.

“There is a big part that goes on in between. In modern football you need to trust other people to do the work. That’s something we do here and that’s why we have had the success we’ve had.

“The finer details of that are left to Ian who does a terrific job and our other guys in that field who will go through the contracts. I am aware of where the situation is at right the way through the process.

“We will never bring in a player here who the manager doesn’t want in. That’s a great credit to the owners and the other people at the club.
“We work very closely together – it’s worth stressing that. It’s key that we are very much one club.

“We are really preparing for next season. I’ve had some very good meetings with our recruitment team. We are very much together as one.”

The negotiating of transfer fees and player contracts is carried out by Ayre and Fallows, who have been busy working on deals to try to secure the likes of Southampton’s Adam Lallana and Bayer Leverkusen’s Emre Can.

So, we can see from the above, in a direct quote, that BR has the first and last call on any player.

Now, it might seem unusual to some that the manager has to rely on other people to identify players, but in fact this is nothing new at all.
In the past, potential targets were identified by scouts, and at times, other members of the coaching staff before the manager went to watch the player for himself.

Yes, the Boot Room was a committee, a parliament of sorts, where Shanks and his team would talk about players (amongst other things) and thrash out details between them.

The difference today is that the process is more "scientific" in the sense that there is much more involved in the identification and recruitment process than simply turning up at a match and watching a player.

So lets have a look at te makeup of the committee and the people who meet:
BR - no need to say any more

Ian Ayre - just (literally) promoted to CEO from managing director, Ayre has been heavily criticised in some quarters (including me) for alleged penny pinching and inability to "get a deal done". This is a man who has done an excellent job on the commercial side, but has left us frustrated at times when it comes to player recruitment.

Ian Ayre is to be promoted to the role of chief executive at Liverpool FC – as the club looks to close in on a deal for Bayer Leverkusen midfielder Emre Can.

Ayre is to be rewarded for his work as managing director, and before that as commercial director, with an improved contract at the club.

He becomes the first permanent CEO the club has employed since Rick Parry, who left in 2009.

Among Ayre's successes are his role in persuading Luis Suarez to remain at Anfield last summer.

He is also credited with vastly improving the club's commercial performance, helping to secure landmark sponsorship deals with the likes of Warrior Sports and Standard Chartered.

The 51-year-old is currently working on a number of transfer deals, and could tie up a move for Can, the 20-year-old Leverkusen starlet, by the end of the week

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/ian-ayre-liverpool-fc-chief-7219079

Despite our frustrations, BR has has praised his work, although his comment about "money men" has led many (including myself) to question his ability to close a deal. Others see him as FSG's useful fool who keeps the purse strings tight.

Dave Fallows - Not many people know much about him other than the fact he was "poached" from Man City, so here's a short article from when he was recruited:

LIVERPOOL FC are set to appoint Dave Fallows as head of scouting and recruitment as part of a double swoop on Manchester City.

Fallows will leave his role as first team scouting and recruitment co-ordinator with the Premier League champions to start work at Anfield.

The former Bolton Wanderers performance analyst will be joined by Barry Hunter, who will also quit City to be part of the new scouting set-up under manager Brendan Rodgers.

Since 2008 Hunter has been City’s chief scout for Italy, Switzerland and Russia.

The 43-year-old former Northern Ireland defender, who has also worked as a scout for Blackburn and Norwich, knows Rodgers well from their days at Reading together.

Securing the services of Fallows and Hunter from City represents a major coup for Rodgers as he looks to put the staff in place to help him realise his vision for the club.

Liverpool declined to comment but it’s understood that Fallows will form part of the new technical team working with Rodgers after owners Fenway Sports Group shelved plans to appoint a sporting director.

There are likely to be further appointments to the roles of head of development and head of medicine.

Fallows was at Bolton before moving on to City where he was key to building the club’s international scouting infrastructure using state-of-the-art technology.

“My role is primarily to co-ordinate all aspects of our scouting department, which includes liaising with scouts, fixture planning, managing the constant stream of reports coming in and effectively linking everything together,” Fallows explained back in 2010.

“The traditional role of a scout, where they went to a match and kept all the knowledge in their head rarely exists in modern day scouting structures.”

An experienced man who was targeted with a view to improving our recruitment process.

Michael Edwards - another man about whom little is known, but here's a brief bio

Head of Performance and Analysis

Edwards is the least well-known of the committee. He was appointed at the club by Damien Comolli having worked alongside the Frenchman at Tottenham where he was head of performance analysis. His role with Liverpool changed from “Head of Analytics” to “Head of Performance and Analysis” when Fallows was put in place last year.

Edwards graduated from The University of Sheffield in 2002 in Business Management and Informatics.

This seems like a nonsense title to many, but we need to be clear that technology plays a vital role in identifying players, with top flight clubs using tools like "Pro Zone" and many others to assess players. It would be a mistake to dismiss the impact that technology has had on football in general and recruitment in particular.
Gone are the days when a manager would watch a few videos of a player, the process is much more in-depth and intense in the 21st century.
Of course identifying a players physical attributes and positioning, tracking back, movement without the ball and everything else that Pro-zone (and other tools) can do is not the be all and end all.
We often hear managers talk about mental attributes as well, and although some of these can be identified by the use of various technology, it is important to talk to the player and clarify his mentality, something which both Rafa Benitez and BR have spoken of many times, and which both are very good at.

So, there's the members of this fabled "committee", what they actually do and how they contribute to the process.

At this point it is important to point out that most top flight clubs (across Europe) use similar structures to identify and target players. An amateurish old fashioned approach will never be as successful in modern top flight football because the technology used can identify things the naked eye cannot.

Some also seem to think that this process begins as the season ends or a window approaches (such as January), but if you'll excuse the dismissive nature of the phrase, this is absolute bullshit.
The process of identifying players who meet the managers criteria is an ongoing, year round job.
The "committee" meet regularly to discuss players identified, and in many cases, negotiations are started well in advance of transfer windows opening.
Of course, discussing players outside of transfer windows is nothing new: it was one of the most important functions of the boot room.
Managers and their recruitment staff have always discussed players they would like to bring in.

Valuations are another grey area, but all top flight clubs are sent player profiles by those scourges of the game and vultures known as player agents.
The advantage of the technology used by the performance and recruitment people is that they can compare the attributes of similar players.
Then of course we have the poker game of actual negotiations.
I'd love it if we could just throw the money at a selling club and say "there you go", but the reality we must all face is that we are not in a position to be able to compete with the clubs who have mega rich owners.
This is the major stumbling block in my view, and the mega rich clubs have skewed the transfer market (and players wages) out of all recognition compared to the recent past of a decade or so ago.
So with this in mind the question we have to ask is about "value", something we hear a lot about from BR and the club.
Something I didn't know until recently (and I mean the last few days) is that agents and potential selling clubs will quite freely give a valuation of a player when enquiries are made. The valuations are sometimes honest, and other times are a pisstake, but they serve as a starting point for negotiations, and if a club is determined to buy a player and the selling club is willing to listen then generally a deal can be done.
When it comes to the price there can be many variables, for instance Beckhams price was always inflated above his playing worth because of merchandising opportunities, and equally a players wages are dependent on different things as well. It's only human nature that a player will want the best wages he can get.
Throw into the pot agents and their fees, selling clubs wanting to make as much as possible, sell on clauses to other clubs etc etc and what should be a fairly simple process becomes more complicated. Of course the process becomes simple again if a club can just throw money around like a pissed up sailor in a brothel, but again, we are not in a position to do that.

So to recap: BR in his own words has the first and last say in player transfers.
The "committee" is in fact standard industry practise.
Recruitment is an ongoing process, that is year round.

My own view on this is that we need to do better.
As many know, I have reservations about our wage policy and I have reservations about valuations and negotiations, but trying to blame a "committee" for shortcomings that include our managers own is a crock of sh*t, simply because the manager (in his own words) is heavily involved in the process, and has the first and last word on any potential player recruitment.

As you maybe know Swab I agree with you in that I don't see our 'committee' as anything different to what most other clubs have.

We just choose to give it a name.

As you maybe know Swab I agree with you in that I don't see our 'committee' as anything different to what most other clubs have.

We just choose to give it a name.

Exactly mate.
I just get frustrated by the blame game that many choose to play.
It's counter productive and adds nothing to any debate.

To me it's simply a way for people to lay blame without involving the manager when it comes to transfers, which I find cowardly.
If someone thinks the manager has ballsed up, they should be free to say so without fear of castigation.

Loyalty is one thing, unquestioning loyalty is quite another.

As you maybe know Swab I agree with you in that I don't see our 'committee' as anything different to what most other clubs have.

We just choose to give it a name.

There has never been a manager yet who signs the cheques, scouts all his own players from the start etc. In that sense Si, our "Committee" is the same as at every other club and in that sense I agree with you. Equally I've never been one to be absolving managers of blame if signings don't work out. I remember the ridiculous nonsense which surrounded the Robbie Keane transfer only too well, how it was a "Parry signing" when it didn't work out. It was balls then and it's balls now. As I've said many times, the manager who is there at the club at the time of the signing is responsible for the acquisition. To that end, people who slag the King off for the Downing and Carroll transfers would do well to remember he also signed Suarez for 23 million quid.

Where I've been frustrated with our situation in the past (and clearly the manager has been frustrated too) is the difference in terms of vigour and determination with which signings which are clearly HIS idea are pursued, and the alternative (often cheaper) signings which are clearly committee suggested ones. We've missed out countless times on Brendan's targets, and I think as I said in a thread earlier he allowed himself to be talked into/bullied into signigns which he clearly didn't fancy anywhere near so much in the last closed season.

It's understandable why on both fronts really. From his point of view, after his first season and it's indifferent nature he was bound to be more compliant, less vociferous when buys such as even the Dempsey one were bodged up. Equally he was bound to be more accepting of "suggestions" to bolster the squad, more in hope than anything else, simply because it was obvious we needed numbers. Equally, from the clubs/moneymen points of view the manager had hardly uprooted trees in his first season, and neither had his own star signing (Allen). So you ended up with a situation where many bets were hedged on both sides, but as is often the case in such a scenario paralysis occurred and nobody benefitted really. We signed quite a few players who ultimately weren't/aren't good enough, the manager missed out on a significant coup in Willian amongst others and nobody was/is any the happier.

The other thing to consider also is that this Fallows character is by all accounts a man who is significantly aware of the facts and figures when it comes to his onions. Only a fool would completely dismiss any or all of the selections he makes, but there must be a better amalgamation of his input and the managers ultimate wants if we are going to make it work. As it has stood, we have appeared to miss out on nearly every player Brendan set his heart on, then offered him a cheaper alternative and said "do you want him instead?". That cannot continue, and that with the greatest of respect definitely isn't the way it works at other clubs. For sure they have scouts and money men, but they aren't undermining the manager at every turn like our lot did during last season.

Thankfully the signing of Rickie Lambert surely is a measure of the way things are changing. Brendan's changing too, and in his own subtle way he could be very clearly seen putting his foot down last season. That's the thing with Brendan, he makes his point in a very clever way and his words shouldn't always be taken TOO literally. His comments on the Ayre doing a "brilliant job" last season were a classic example, as was his "I don't want any more squad players" speech. I think we're close to sorting things out now, and hopefully going forward the "committee" and Brendan can work together much more effectively. 

I broadly agree Swab. My only question is on how free Brendan has been to make the first call and the last call. If you take your kids into poundland and tell them they can have a free choice , it is a lot different than taking them into Toys r us and giving them a free choice, and even when he finally got to shop at Toys R us everything he picked was somehow out of stock

In other words I think Brendans choices have been dictated to a large extent both by the money available and the fact that the squad was so small he had to spread it around too thinly to build a bigger squad.

Hopefully those days are behind us now and Brendan can be judged fairly on the players he brings in without making excuses if and when he buys the odd dud.

I am not saying this to defend Brendan's transfers so far, because I think even with the limited funds he could have done a lot better in the transfer market. Take out Coutinho (who we may not have bought if we had signed Sigurdsson) and Sturridge (who we may not have bought if we had signed Dempsey) and his transfers so far have not been great imo.

I broadly agree Swab. My only question is on how free Brendan has been to make the first call and the last call. If you take your kids into poundland and tell them they can have a free choice , it is a lot different than taking them into Toys r us and giving them a free choice, and even when he finally got to shop at Toys R us everything he picked was somehow out of stock

In other words I think Brendans choices have been dictated to a large extent both by the money available and the fact that the squad was so small he had to spread it around too thinly to build a bigger squad.

Hopefully those days are behind us now and Brendan can be judged fairly on the players he brings in without making excuses if and when he buys the odd dud.

I am not saying this to defend Brendan's transfers so far, because I think even with the limited funds he could have done a lot better in the transfer market. Take out Coutinho (who we may not have bought if we had signed Sigurdsson) and Sturridge (who we may not have bought if we had signed Dempsey) and his transfers so far have not been great imo.

Mostly agree with that all of that S@int, but it's the first time I've heard a managers good signings undermined by "but we wouldn't have signed him if we'd got the other fella" line FWIW my guess is that Coutinho was a committee signing too, it was only when he got to the club and obviously shone in training that Brendan seemed to get really excited about the fact he had him. Broadly though I agree that Brendan has only the one blockbuster success in Sturridge, some of his others are what you would charitably call "slow burners".

I broadly agree Swab. My only question is on how free Brendan has been to make the first call and the last call. If you take your kids into poundland and tell them they can have a free choice , it is a lot different than taking them into Toys r us and giving them a free choice, and even when he finally got to shop at Toys R us everything he picked was somehow out of stock

In other words I think Brendans choices have been dictated to a large extent both by the money available and the fact that the squad was so small he had to spread it around too thinly to build a bigger squad.

Hopefully those days are behind us now and Brendan can be judged fairly on the players he brings in without making excuses if and when he buys the odd dud.

I am not saying this to defend Brendan's transfers so far, because I think even with the limited funds he could have done a lot better in the transfer market. Take out Coutinho (who we may not have bought if we had signed Sigurdsson) and Sturridge (who we may not have bought if we had signed Dempsey) and his transfers so far have not been great imo.

The thing is mate, all clubs except the oil oligarch clubs have to work under financial constraints of one sort or another, and I think I included that qualifier in the OP, although maybe not as clearly as I could have.

To me, the bottom line is that BR makes the decisions, although it's a fair point about our target market, and one that I discussed in depth with BBB who made the very same point as you do.
It's not a point I'd argue with, but I would also say that the market in which we can compete with the mega rich troll b***ard motherfuckers who have inflated the whole market, is very small.
I'd also say that working within a budget is something everyone has to do, with a few obvious exceptions.
What I mean is that if someone is on the dole, they have to think more about value than someone who earns 50k a year, but the guy on 50k a year would be stupid to do his grocery shopping at Harrods.

I think the main point stands, but I'm happy to discuss it, although I see that some are still trying to say that the "committee" has foisted players onto BR despite the fact he has stated quite clearly that he has the first and last word.

Mostly agree with that all of that S@int, but it's the first time I've heard a managers good signings undermined by "but we wouldn't have signed him if we'd got the other fella" line FWIW my guess is that Coutinho was a committee signing too, it was only when he got to the club and obviously shone in training that Brendan seemed to get really excited about the fact he had him. Broadly though I agree that Brendan has only the one blockbuster success in Sturridge, some of his others are what you would charitably call "slow burners".

I think it is a fair enough point mate. Would we be targeting Lallana so strongly if we had signed Willian ? I think Brendan got lucky with some of the players we didn't sign.... with a bit more luck we may have missed out on Aspas too

Obviously Dempsey and Sigurdsson could have had great success under Brendan and we may have still signed Sturridge and not signed Aspas.

Yep I think transfers provide a constantly evolving picture S@int. Would we for instance be as interested in Emre Can (if he is indeed a holding midfielder) had not Lucas so emphatically demonstrated that we desperately need one in the last 1/4 of last season?

ahhh, nothing like someone trying to chum the waters.

It's pretty funny really.

The thing is mate, all clubs except the oil oligarch clubs have to work under financial constraints of one sort or another, and I think I included that qualifier in the OP, although maybe not as clearly as I could have.

To me, the bottom line is that BR makes the decisions, although it's a fair point about our target market, and one that I discussed in depth with BBB who made the very same point as you do.
It's not a point I'd argue with, but I would also say that the market in which we can compete with the mega rich troll b***ard motherfuckers who have inflated the whole market, is very small.
I'd also say that working within a budget is something everyone has to do, with a few obvious exceptions.
What I mean is that if someone is on the dole, they have to think more about value than someone who earns 50k a year, but the guy on 50k a year would be stupid to do his grocery shopping at Harrods.

I think the main point stands, but I'm happy to discuss it, although I see that some are still trying to say that the "committee" has foisted players onto BR despite the fact he has stated quite clearly that he has the first and last word.

I again broadly agree mate. I am just not completely convinced that the committee is just there to advise. I think they play a more dominant role than maybe you do in selecting or "helping" the manager select a player. 

Unless we see them in action we will never really know, but my own view is that they will discuss a player, maybe even vote on the better option of two players, with Brendan then having the final say on whether he actually wants the selected player or not. Probably not as simplistic as that but hopefully you get the gist.

I again broadly agree mate. I am just not completely convinced that the committee is just there to advise. I think they play a more dominant role than maybe you do in selecting or "helping" the manager select a player. 

Unless we see them in action we will never really know, but my own view is that they will discuss a player, maybe even vote on the better option of two players, with Brendan then having the final say on whether he actually wants the selected player or not. Probably not as simplistic as that but hopefully you get the gist.

Yep, I see your point, although I kind of disagree.

I may be wrong in taking BR's statement at face value when he says “Obviously, I am involved heavily in the identification of the player,” but to me that says he is driving the process rather than just being presented with a list.
It could very well be a bit of PR on his part, but he strikes me as the kind of fella that wouldn't say that if it wasn't true. I think he'd say nothing rather than something like that if it wasn't true.

My own take on it is that when he refused to work under a DoF, it was because of the very situation you described, and he's clever enough not to have the wool pulled over his eyes by working under a DoF going by a different name.
Personally, if that were the case, I think he'd walk. He strikes me as a very strong character with great self belief, and in my experience people like that move on rather than be taken for a ride.

Yep, I see your point, although I kind of disagree.

I may be wrong in taking BR's statement at face value when he says “Obviously, I am involved heavily in the identification of the player,” but to me that says he is driving the process rather than just being presented with a list.
It could very well be a bit of PR on his part, but he strikes me as the kind of fella that wouldn't say that if it wasn't true. I think he'd say nothing rather than something like that if it wasn't true.

My own take on it is that when he refused to work under a DoF, it was because of the very situation you described, and he's clever enough not to have the wool pulled over his eyes by working under a DoF going by a different name.
Personally, if that were the case, I think he'd walk. He strikes me as a very strong character with great self belief, and in my experience people like that move on rather than be taken for a ride.

I don't think he just gets presented with a list mate, just that he may only have one vote on the committee until "the final say".

e.g. :-
 
From the scouts and other sources the committee makes a list of 10 possible choices.

After Ayre investigates possible prices and wages ... 4 names are struck off it .... Messi should never have been on it to be fair
Another 2 players don't want to come to Liverpool as they are in negotiation with Madrid

2 players might come if the price is right and the wages are good
2 players are eager to come and would be happy with a reasonable wage.

So that leaves us with 4 players. Two difficult to sign (finance), two thought to be reasonably easy to sign.

This is the stage where I think they vote.

(I have ignored the footballing ability side of the problem for simplicity.)

Once a player has been voted in .... Brendan then decides if that player is suitable or they should continue looking.

Something like that anyway     

I don't think he just gets presented with a list mate, just that he may only have one vote on the committee until "the final say".

e.g. :-
 
From the scouts and other sources the committee makes a list of 10 possible choices.

After Ayre investigates possible prices and wages ... 4 names are struck off it .... Messi should never have been on it to be fair
Another 2 players don't want to come to Liverpool as they are in negotiation with Madrid

2 players might come if the price is right and the wages are good
2 players are eager to come and would be happy with a reasonable wage.

So that leaves us with 4 players. Two difficult to sign (finance), two thought to be reasonably easy to sign.

This is the stage where I think they vote.

(I have ignored the footballing ability side of the problem for simplicity.)

Once a player has been voted in .... Brendan then decides if that player is suitable or they should continue looking.

Something like that anyway   

I see where you're coming from mate, but I think BR is more heavily involved in the process than that if his statement is to be believed.
I think he is involved in making the shortlist, with his preferred options heading it up.

To put it in the same way as your post, in my mind it would go something like this:

BR states position of player and criteria the player must meet.
The recruitment head presents a list of players who meet the conditions of BR, but also the budget set for the position (with some wriggle room)
They make an enquiry and get a valuation, which they then agree or disagree with.
They speak with agents, selling club and see if they are willing to negotiate, if BR really wants the player they make a bid.
If it falls through, or the club says not willing to sell at any price, or player doesn't want to move, they go onto the next target.

I'm probably pretty wide of the mark, but hey, it's a fun game to play

I don't think he just gets presented with a list mate, just that he may only have one vote on the committee until "the final say".

e.g. :-
 
From the scouts and other sources the committee makes a list of 10 possible choices.

After Ayre investigates possible prices and wages ... 4 names are struck off it .... Messi should never have been on it to be fair
Another 2 players don't want to come to Liverpool as they are in negotiation with Madrid

2 players might come if the price is right and the wages are good
2 players are eager to come and would be happy with a reasonable wage.

So that leaves us with 4 players. Two difficult to sign (finance), two thought to be reasonably easy to sign.

This is the stage where I think they vote.

(I have ignored the footballing ability side of the problem for simplicity.)

Once a player has been voted in .... Brendan then decides if that player is suitable or they should continue looking.

Something like that anyway     

I think it may in fairness be more of the case that BR gives the first couple of options, then the recruitment fella (Fellows or Fallows or whatever he's called) gives him some "alternatives" which may or may not represent better value. From there Ayre gets involved..........

He asks about the valuations/availability etc and this is then relayed back to the "committee" (At this point I don't think speed is an issue as most of this work will be done with the window shut). I would guess that Brendans preferred targets are the ones which are gone after first, but it's at this point that I think the system falls down. I think the negotiating team (principally Ayre) has a tendency to get too easily discouraged by the price/wages of any more expensive players, so that player becomes "unavailable" or goes into the "too hard" basket.

When that one falls through, they move onto the next target. This one is almost always the suggestion of the head of recruitment, and cheaper. I think where we saw Brendan digging his heels in around Christmas time was that he was making it clear that if we didn't get HIS targets (in this instance Salah or Konoplyanka), he wasn't interested in the cheaper 4th or 5th ones on the list. Probably a case of him being 4th bitten 5th time shy or something, hence we was quite laid back about it when we didn't actually sign anyone at all. 

And again, completely ignoring the fact that BR stated very clearly that he has the first and last word and always has had since he came to the club.

Hmmm, some good points but for a start you can't always believe what BR says to be taken as fact. During his tenure he's had a propensity to contradict himself on many occasions a la Pepe "going nowhere" or "we're definitely" keeping Downing.

How does BR and or the 'committee' account for misnomer players like Assaidi and Sahin for example then?

Hmmm, some good points but for a start you can't always believe what BR says to be taken as fact. During his tenure he's had a propensity to contradict himself on many occasions a la Pepe "going nowhere" or "we're definitely" keeping Downing.

How does BR and or the 'committee' account for misnomer players like Assaidi and Sahin for example then?

Or perhaps, situations change?

Assaidi was a bargain basement squad filler who has done pretty well on loan, and Sahin came with an excellent reputation and had an impressive career before going to madrid.

What are we after? Big names! They have to want to come here, we have to pay them what they want and fend off other clubs. Has to be a better way than being held to ransom by agents and greedy players. Good scouting network is hard when you have other clubs with a good scouting network too. What you need is a plan and belief in that plan. The plan must be flexible in that you don't need this player at all costs ( real madrids plan is inflexible). You cannot guarantee a player will transition to our team. No one had been able to crack that code. As for the committee, we are a business no one is going to let the manager spend without it being accounted for, trouble is 'who sets the price'. It's easy if your broke or rich but if your neither like us you have a budget.
So if we miss out because BR has set a price and it doesn't work out, do we then pay more and lose another target or look for someone else. It is in this nether region that the trouble could start and flexibility is important. We need a CB of Z certain quality at a certain price not we need Varane.

Or perhaps, situations change?

Assaidi was a bargain basement squad filler who has done pretty well on loan, and Sahin came with an excellent reputation and had an impressive career before going to madrid.

Granted, but are you honestly saying BR didn't already have pre-conceived ideas as to those players futures? I think he knew damn well that once he'd signed Ming that there was no way of justifying keeping hold of Pepe.

BR only ever played Assaidi 4 times and on each of those occasions he IMO played a hell of a lot better than Downing. BR never seemed interested in giving him a proper chance. As for Sahin, maybe he himself was partially at fault for not being flexible enough, but why on earth would you play someone totally out of position and out of there comfort zone within a new league and environment! Shouldn't he have been afforded bedding in time before being moved about tactically?

I have no qualms about the 'committee' per say, what I do have a problem with is the time taken to aquire and sign their chosen targets. Obviously, parameters are set when a player has been identified such as analysis, maximum transfer fees and wages ceiling height, that then should end any other 'committee' involvment shouldn't it? The rest then is down to Ayrehead who IMO should go in with 3 bids; a low ball figure, then a mid range figure before finally offering the top of our range. Is it therefore too simplistic for me to reason that once a negotiating club wont't match our 'committee's' parameters that we should just quickly move on to the next target?

Granted, but are you honestly saying BR didn't already have pre-conceived ideas as to those players futures? I think he knew damn well that once he'd signed Ming that there was no way of justifying keeping hold of Pepe.

BR only ever played Assaidi 4 times and on each of those occasions he IMO played a hell of a lot better than Downing. BR never seemed interested in giving him a proper chance. As for Sahin, maybe he himself was partially at fault for not being flexible enough, but why on earth would you play someone totally out of position and out of there comfort zone within a new league and environment! Shouldn't he have been afforded bedding in time before being moved about tactically?

I have no qualms about the 'committee' per say, what I do have a problem with is the time taken to aquire and sign their chosen targets. Obviously, parameters are set when a player has been identified such as analysis, maximum transfer fees and wages ceiling height, that then should end any other 'committee' involvment shouldn't it? The rest then is down to Ayrehead who IMO should go in with 3 bids; a low ball figure, then a mid range figure before finally offering the top of our range. Is it therefore too simplistic for me to reason that once a negotiating club wont't match our 'committee's' parameters that we should just quickly move on to the next target?

The thing with pepe is a bit of a head scratcher mate, and I doubt we'll ever know the full story.
My own take on it is that Pepe was none too pleased to have someone really challenging him for the number 1 spot, but I admit I might be wide of the mark
Assaidi I wasn't overly impressed with, although he did have some good moments, and has since done pretty well on loan. He had a tendency to run down blind alleys, if you know what I mean.

As far as the committee goes, I agree about the length of time it takes to get our targets, and I have posted my concerns about Ayres negotiating skills many times.
I think we identify targets very well.
The problem, as I said in the OP is going out and getting the buggers.

...we have to pay them what they want and fend off other clubs. Has to be a better way than being held to ransom by agents and greedy players.

Just contradicted yourself there. You want us to pay players what they want but you don't want us to be held to ransom

Nowadays it is called "The Committee"

Back in the day, it was called "The boot room" ....

Nowadays it is called "The Committee"

Back in the day, it was called "The boot room" ....

Said the very same thing in the OP mate.

People are making far too much of this committee thing.

Nowadays it is called "The Committee"

Back in the day, it was called "The boot room" ....

Exactly Bill Shankly  had a committee, him Bob and Joe with Peter Robinson there to sign the cheques for the new players.

Exactly Bill Shankly  had a committee, him Bob and Joe with Peter Robinson there to sign the cheques for the new players.

I think part of the problem is the modern fad for important sounding job titles.

Where people today crave a job title that sounds important, Bob and Joe would probably have told them to get to F**k with that sh*te