Thank you for that very informative reply sad-eyed prophet. I think that the decision re a DoF is a difficult one to make. It has advantages in so far as consistency and forward planning, as against just changing the manager and throwing the baby out with the bathwater, which we seem to do on a far too regular basis. I feel that where we can agree is the need for planning and foresight, or to put it a little more bluntly professionalism as against the ad hoc decisions we have made recently. The most important factor for me is getting the right people and getting them to work as a team pulling in the same direction rather than sitting on opposite sides of a desk shouting at each other. What that actual structure would look like is open for debate.
We're agreed on that mate. Management stability and continuity is the key,with everyone on the same page working for the here and now and also for the future. Chopping and changing manager and/or CEO every 5 minutes is a recipe for disaster. History proves it. I'm desperately hoping that the takeover....if it happens....will result in a coherent approach to our future which everyone will buy into.
Isn't it the case though that Txiki Beguiristain was appointed in 2012 as technical director, almost 4 years before Pep became manager at Man City? Arguably, if Beguiristain wasn't the DoF/technical director, then someone else might have been identified as 'the best that is available'. Pep was appointed, surely, as he was the best for the system that Beguiristain (and others) wanted to implement. A DoF can work excellently if there's a clear direction. Even without one, I think its important that a club sets a clear footballing identity and establishes a set of characteristics that it looks for when recruiting both managers and players.
Yes,I think he was appointed when Mancini was manager. I'm not sure it's right to say Txiki identified the system they wanted to play and then appointed Pep to implement it. If they did identify the system,I think it's more likely because they knew Pep was a master at it. Completely agree with the comments of your last paragraph.
A DOF type role makes perfect sense to me. In our technology company arguably the 3 most important people are the CEO, CFO and CTO or chief technical officer. the first 2 are more or less generic jobs, the CTO is in charge of the products that the company sells and knows the whole process inside out. I see clubs in England like Liverpool, City and Chelsea that seem to be very well run and clubs like MU and Arsenal seem to make a mess of recruitment, and there is a lot of criticism of the people in charge of the football side of the business at MU and Arsenal. All I hope is that the new people concentrate on getting the business side of the club sorted out to avoid the mess they got into with people like Byrne and Bain. Having someone in charge of setting up scouting and the whole recruitment infrastructure is something that seems to have been missing for a long time, and when the takeover happens its the perfect time to start building this. It would be very interesting to find out how City managed this whole process to get from Div 3 up the top of the PL.
That is possibly the case. Although as Beguiristain spent the majority of his playing career at Barcelona and then worked in a technical capacity there he was always going to be steeped in the traditions that Barca adopted from Rinus Michels, Vic Buckingham and, ultimately, the Danubian school. Pep was a more natural choice for him than, for arguments sake, Mourinho or Diego Simeone. So his own inclinations must have come in to it somewhere along the line, I would imagine.
I'd give it a go if we could find someone who'd do a decent job and work well with everyone else ie not Tony Coton, Congerton or that Keith Lemon bloke
I still remain unconvinced about a DoF. It is a formula that when it is correct pays handsome dividends. When it is wrong it is disastrous. Whenever there are more links in a chain from CEO to CFO to another director - to senior Manager- to Mid manager to junior manager - to the deliverers - if the chemistry, direction, recruitment, training, salaries, incentives (midst dozens of other things) then it is more prone to break down. Intervention and cross over in another persons role is a recipe for problems. I would vote no to that one. Sorry
As you say its all about recruitment and I hope they start top down on the business side, which is where they seem to have gone wrong in the past. If they get that right, moving towards a DOF type setup could work.
A Director of Football or similar role is absolutely essential in modern football. Like it or not, football is a business these days. You need to constantly be making good transfers or developing your own players to move forward without losing a **** load of money. You need a stable structure and strategy to do this. By having a manager overseeing everything, the focus is always on the short term. You need someone to be keeping an eye on the bigger picture whilst the coach focuses on getting it right on the pitch. I don't really care that as a fan I don't know who to "blame". Anyone not having a clear transfer policy, not looking at analytics, not having scouts far and wide across the continent at least, not having a plan to develop their own youngsters and not trying to establish a footballing identity is a dinosaur in the modern game in my opinion.
We've tried a DOF twice in recent years and on both occasions it just didn't work. I'm yet to be convinced that this is a viable option.
We've tried managers making all of the decisions for far longer with no success either. Our failures cannot be the basis on which you judge the concept. Try looking at most of the successful clubs around the world for proof that it works.
On both occasions that we've tried a DoF it's been a half-hearted effort with their hands tied. De Fanti is on record as saying that Short wanted all player acquisitions to be done on the cheap. Congerton had some notable successes but he wasn't given long enough to begin operating in the way that you'd want.
Moyes was a bigger disaster in the transfer market. Does this mean we should never let a manager do that job again?
A lot will depend on their role as to who it could be and if it would work. For me a sporting director who oversees the whole set up from kids coaching to the first team would be better. Given a clear role that from the young kids up we want the best coaches coaching the best young kids we can attract. Having the best medical and sports science staff and facilities for all the players Having a network of scouts and contacts worldwide, we don't need a scout based in South America, but need good contacts there Being the buffer between the first team coach and the board / other areas to ensure the coach concentrates on what he is paid to do which is get the first team playing and winning matches It would be a huge task and would need a fair bit of investment so we probably aren't in a position to fully implement it
Well in fairness one of them was di fanti who was a glorified agent. The other was congerton who deserves credit for swapping Altidore for defoe if nothing else.
I agree that's a concern. In a recurring theme I think it's our recruitment that was wrong. I mean, De Fanti was an agent, not sure why Short ever thought he'd be a good shout for such a role (he was a friend of Short's iirc). The Congerton spell just reinforced my belief that it's the kind of role that will attract bluffers (they can always blame any lack of success on the manager). It would be an appointment we'd need to get right, and unlike the ones we've had they'd need to be long term (kind of defeats the purpose if they last less time than a lot of managers) but if we could get it right I think it would benefit us in the long run
Spot on. If we're going to go down that route, there's no point in going in half arsed with someone who is not familiar with the role. We need someone proven who can add value to the role and the club.
With a DOF, it's important that he and the manager work as a team. That was never the case here. Remember the week when Advocaat wanted Lombaerts and Fer, and both mysteriously failed medicals, despite Lombaerts vehemently denying it. Congerton brought in the journeyman, Kaboul, and Adam f*****g Matthews.
