DOF

[richinspain]

 I posted this on the Mac 3 thread, bu thought that it should have it's own thread.

 What exactly does a DOF do? Is he ultimately responsible for signings?

 It's this last question that has me worried. Let's suppose that we bring in a DOF, and just for argument it's McClaren. Is Mac the right person to bring in new players? Many feel that his biggest problem is player recruitment. So would Cocu, or any future managers, have to work with players that they ultimately hadn't chosen? And what exactly would Cocu's role be? A manager who doesn't choose his own players is basically a coach. Would he be ok with a "demotion"? I believe his job title is manager and not head coach?

 The next question is, who does the buck stop at? If the team is doing badly who do you sack? The manager, who didn't choose any of his players, or the man responsible for recruitment? Then when the next, and the next, manager fails he's gone too?

 An error in choosing the DOF could be an absolute disaster for the club, not for a couple of seasons but for God knows how long.

 So, the question is "do we need a DOF, and more importantly who should it be?"

[cosmic]

23 minutes ago, richinspain said:

 What exactly does a DOF do?

Gets the manager sacked then takes over the job, doesn't he?

[cheron85]

43 minutes ago, richinspain said:

 I posted this on the Mac 3 thread, bu thought that it should have it's own thread.

 What exactly does a DOF do? Is he ultimately responsible for signings?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/49858138

This article about Mark Bowen I read recently and thought was quite interesting

And found this one when looking for the above one

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/50086438

This one's focused on recruitment

[Coneheadjohn]

I don’t understand it.

Is it when a Manager becomes a coach and deals with the current squad and training/tactics but is deemed to daft to have anything to do with anything else.

Redknapp/Wassall?

If we had a DOF,errrm Bucko?

[DCFC27]

1 hour ago, richinspain said:

 I posted this on the Mac 3 thread, bu thought that it should have it's own thread.

 What exactly does a DOF do? Is he ultimately responsible for signings?

 It's this last question that has me worried. Let's suppose that we bring in a DOF, and just for argument it's McClaren. Is Mac the right person to bring in new players? Many feel that his biggest problem is player recruitment. So would Cocu, or any future managers, have to work with players that they ultimately hadn't chosen? And what exactly would Cocu's role be? A manager who doesn't choose his own players is basically a coach. Would he be ok with a "demotion"? I believe his job title is manager and not head coach?

 The next question is, who does the buck stop at? If the team is doing badly who do you sack? The manager, who didn't choose any of his players, or the man responsible for recruitment? Then when the next, and the next, manager fails he's gone too?

 An error in choosing the DOF could be an absolute disaster for the club, not for a couple of seasons but for God knows how long.

 So, the question is "do we need a DOF, and more importantly who should it be?"

Mac was good at recruitment, he was excellent and assessing what he had and what he needs to add. Wisdom/Thorne/Dawkins etc... his only real flop was Arbentuso and that was more to do with him feeling homesick if memory serves me right. He also brought in Ince/Lingaard his recruitment was spot on when compared to any post Clough managers. 

[DCFC27]

1 hour ago, richinspain said:

 I posted this on the Mac 3 thread, bu thought that it should have it's own thread.

 What exactly does a DOF do? Is he ultimately responsible for signings?

 It's this last question that has me worried. Let's suppose that we bring in a DOF, and just for argument it's McClaren. Is Mac the right person to bring in new players? Many feel that his biggest problem is player recruitment. So would Cocu, or any future managers, have to work with players that they ultimately hadn't chosen? And what exactly would Cocu's role be? A manager who doesn't choose his own players is basically a coach. Would he be ok with a "demotion"? I believe his job title is manager and not head coach?

 The next question is, who does the buck stop at? If the team is doing badly who do you sack? The manager, who didn't choose any of his players, or the man responsible for recruitment? Then when the next, and the next, manager fails he's gone too?

 An error in choosing the DOF could be an absolute disaster for the club, not for a couple of seasons but for God knows how long.

 So, the question is "do we need a DOF, and more importantly who should it be?"

Personally I think he would suit the Rosinior - Specialist Coach role - help with the coaching team, be an in between guy for the players and locate potential signings. Ultimately leave Cocu to be a manager just with a great back room member. I’d like to think Mac would enjoy the prospect too with his connection to Dutch football and Dcfc. 

[Dethorn]

Due to his coaching skills I think Mac would be better as a coach under a Dof rather than the dof himself

A bit like being an assistant to TBE and Alex Ferguson and not the manager.

I was gutted for him when he got the England job because I thought he would be 'found out'

In our set up 'IF' mac were to be involved surely it would be under Cocu as an assistant or coach

Cocu with his 'vision' for the club and being involved with all the squads would be the 'DoF' figure

 

But..........................

Why are we even discussing this - do you know something ?

[Bob Gnarly]

3 minutes ago, Dethorn said:

Due to his coaching skills I think Mac would be better as a coach under a Dof rather than the dof himself

A bit like being an assistant to TBE and Alex Ferguson and not the manager.

I was gutted for him when he got the England job because I thought he would be 'found out'

In our set up 'IF' mac were to be involved surely it would be under Cocu as an assistant or coach

Cocu with his 'vision' for the club and being involved with all the squads would be the 'DoF' figure

 

But..........................

Why are we even discussing this - do you know something ?

It was a question I raised in another thread.

[Dimmu]

I think Cocu is already closer to DOF-Manager than "normal manager" as he is involved basically in everything from how academy plays and what should be taught to little kids to first team and recruiting. His role is already engaged to the whole club more than just managing the first team.

[cosmic]

5 minutes ago, Dimmu said:

I think Cocu is already closer to DOF-Manager already as he is involved basically in everything from how academy plays and what should be taught to little kids to first team and recruiting. His role is already engaged to the whole club more than just managing the first team.

Yeah I agree with this. If anything, I’d switch McClaren and Cocu around in this scenario. Cocu instills a club philosophy and McClaren coaches it. 

[cannable]

1 hour ago, cosmic said:

Yeah I agree with this. If anything, I’d switch McClaren and Cocu around in this scenario. Cocu instills a club philosophy and McClaren coaches it. 

We kind of did this with Clough and McClaren. Clough spent four and a half years sorting the academy out and getting us playing good football right through the ages, McClaren just coached the first team better. 

Like, history is often re-written but we DID play good football under Clough. We were just crap at defending set-pieces and didn’t have the rotations coached into us to break teams down.

Whereas with McClaren I can tell you what runs each player made, when they made them, why they made them and how it worked out. 

[Ambitious]

Director of Football is a job that is in control of everything to put the first team squad in place. In that set up, the manager becomes more of a head coach and focuses predominantly on getting the best out of those players in his squad. I like the set up, personally, because it helps with consistency within the club. The problem is that if you hire a bad DOF then it can impact all aspects of your football club - not just the first team. If you hire a good one then success should be easy to come by, at all levels within the football club. 

[Boycie]

Mac can speak Dutch, so would fit in.

[richinspain]

2 hours ago, Ambitious said:

Director of Football is a job that is in control of everything to put the first team squad in place. In that set up, the manager becomes more of a head coach and focuses predominantly on getting the best out of those players in his squad. I like the set up, personally, because it helps with consistency within the club. The problem is that if you hire a bad DOF then it can impact all aspects of your football club - not just the first team. If you hire a good one then success should be easy to come by, at all levels within the football club. 

 This is pretty much my thinking. I think it would be very difficult to bring a DOF into the club (or any other club) when there is already a manager in place. You would be undermining his position. The ideal for me would be to move an already successful manager "upstairs" to continue what he had achieved, thus maintaining a natural order.

 The other option would be to appoint a DOF whilst looking for a new manager, or more correctly a coach.

 I would like us to appoint a DOF, but in about 5-10 years time when Cocu has us playing in Europe regularly, moving up to oversee the running of the club whilst moving away from the coaching side.

[Seaside Ram]

Derby have got a DFA at the club .......... Anya , ( Does F ... All. ) 

[Millenniumram]

As a straight answer to the question, yes, we do need a director of football. Think it’s been one of our biggest downfalls not having one, and I’ve been advocating one for a while now. It seems we tried it with Chris Evans, and then just gave up on the idea because he was crap. I don’t think that’s the right attitude to take, get the right man and it can be a real long term benefit to have one. In terms of what one is, it seems different clubs have different definitions. There’s the concept of a technical director as well, and the roles are often interchanged between the two names. I personally see the latter as more a board level role, whereas I’d define the former as effectively the head of recruitment.

I couldn’t actually suggest any suitable names as really the DOF role is very much a behind the scenes one that we don’t hear much about as fans. I’d be amazed if many fans can name any DOFs beyond the biggest names like Emanelo. People within football will hopefully have more knowledge, or links to people with more knowledge, of some potential suitors for the role. But the main point is, this isn’t just someone plucked out of thin air who’s been a decent ex pro/ coach like Mcclaren. This needs to be someone who is by trade a DOF, and who specialises in the skills which make a good DOF - judging a player, and tactical awareness to know which sort of player suits the team they are recruiting for. Mcclaren would not be a good option at all for this sort of role as his recruitment is notoriously sketchy, whereas his coaching is his main strength. 

As the OP says, the choice of a director of football is vital for any Chairman. Imo, the owner should choose a director of football, and if he’s made the right choice, the DOF should remain in his position throughout the owners tenure, instigating a consistent long term philosophy across the club. That’s where your stability and continuity that people have been crying out should come from imo. Not the manager, I’m of the view that managers come and go a lot in football and that’s ok. There’s no shame for me in changing managers fairly often when things aren’t working. But having the director of football throughout everything should mean that shouldn’t effect things all that much, because the overarching philosophy will remain the same, with the style of players that have been recruited, so each manager should be of a similar style and you get your continuity there. That’s why a director of football is so important, so we don’t end up with the mismatch of players we currently Have, from an erratic chain of managers with no consistency between them.

Again, the level of power a DOF has really down to the club. Imo though, if the right man is in, then I’d say the DOF should be almost level in power with the manager. And that’s why it sooooo important to get the right man in, just like it is for the manager, who matches the long term philosophy of the club, and is damn well good at his job. I’d say with a DOF there should be two distinct areas of staff - the coaching team, led by the manager, and the recruitment team, led by the DOF. So in this scenario, yes the manager does become effectively a “head coach”. But they shouldn’t see it as a downgrade. It should be seen as them being allowed to spend more time focusing on what they’re truly there for, to coach and improve players, and lead the team to victory on match days. Leave the recruitment to a specialised team who are experts in it. Obviously the manager should still have some say, and have power to veto transfers/ suggest his own, but the day to day running of recruitment should be down to the DOF.

To that end, if the team is playing poorly and below the standard of the squad, then the fault lies with the manager. So they should be sacked, and another man WITH A SIMILAR PHILOSOPHY, should be brought in. If the standard of the players coming in are poor, then that’s the DOFs fault, and he should go. But like I say, the DOF really should be long term, so you should hope to make an appointment good enough to start with that sacking him is never a consideration. 

Thats my view on things anyway. If anyone actually read that I commend you, because it probably sounds like baalocks in the most part. After years of seeing our recruitment I’m just desperate for some order in that area which is why I write so much about it!

[Srg]

8 hours ago, Millenniumram said:

As a straight answer to the question, yes, we do need a director of football. Think it’s been one of our biggest downfalls not having one, and I’ve been advocating one for a while now. It seems we tried it with Chris Evans, and then just gave up on the idea because he was crap. I don’t think that’s the right attitude to take, get the right man and it can be a real long term benefit to have one. In terms of what one is, it seems different clubs have different definitions. There’s the concept of a technical director as well, and the roles are often interchanged between the two names. I personally see the latter as more a board level role, whereas I’d define the former as effectively the head of recruitment.

I couldn’t actually suggest any suitable names as really the DOF role is very much a behind the scenes one that we don’t hear much about as fans. I’d be amazed if many fans can name any DOFs beyond the biggest names like Emanelo. People within football will hopefully have more knowledge, or links to people with more knowledge, of some potential suitors for the role. But the main point is, this isn’t just someone plucked out of thin air who’s been a decent ex pro/ coach like Mcclaren. This needs to be someone who is by trade a DOF, and who specialises in the skills which make a good DOF - judging a player, and tactical awareness to know which sort of player suits the team they are recruiting for. Mcclaren would not be a good option at all for this sort of role as his recruitment is notoriously sketchy, whereas his coaching is his main strength. 

As the OP says, the choice of a director of football is vital for any Chairman. Imo, the owner should choose a director of football, and if he’s made the right choice, the DOF should remain in his position throughout the owners tenure, instigating a consistent long term philosophy across the club. That’s where your stability and continuity that people have been crying out should come from imo. Not the manager, I’m of the view that managers come and go a lot in football and that’s ok. There’s no shame for me in changing managers fairly often when things aren’t working. But having the director of football throughout everything should mean that shouldn’t effect things all that much, because the overarching philosophy will remain the same, with the style of players that have been recruited, so each manager should be of a similar style and you get your continuity there. That’s why a director of football is so important, so we don’t end up with the mismatch of players we currently Have, from an erratic chain of managers with no consistency between them.

Again, the level of power a DOF has really down to the club. Imo though, if the right man is in, then I’d say the DOF should be almost level in power with the manager. And that’s why it sooooo important to get the right man in, just like it is for the manager, who matches the long term philosophy of the club, and is damn well good at his job. I’d say with a DOF there should be two distinct areas of staff - the coaching team, led by the manager, and the recruitment team, led by the DOF. So in this scenario, yes the manager does become effectively a “head coach”. But they shouldn’t see it as a downgrade. It should be seen as them being allowed to spend more time focusing on what they’re truly there for, to coach and improve players, and lead the team to victory on match days. Leave the recruitment to a specialised team who are experts in it. Obviously the manager should still have some say, and have power to veto transfers/ suggest his own, but the day to day running of recruitment should be down to the DOF.

To that end, if the team is playing poorly and below the standard of the squad, then the fault lies with the manager. So they should be sacked, and another man WITH A SIMILAR PHILOSOPHY, should be brought in. If the standard of the players coming in are poor, then that’s the DOFs fault, and he should go. But like I say, the DOF really should be long term, so you should hope to make an appointment good enough to start with that sacking him is never a consideration. 

Thats my view on things anyway. If anyone actually read that I commend you, because it probably sounds like baalocks in the most part. After years of seeing our recruitment I’m just desperate for some order in that area which is why I write so much about it!

Usually I'd agree, but it seems to me like Cocu has been given the autonomy of the entire club from top to bottom (rightly or wrongly) so I'm not sure this is now the right time for it. Have a feeling he will be more pivotal in choosing signings, amongst other things, then we've probably had for a long time.

p.s. Joe McClaren is useless.

[oldtimeram]

Clough (Jnr).  He bought in some decent players in his time?