Time for a Director of Football?

[TheAllestreeRam]

A director of football is exactly what we need I think. Just like any appointment it can have downsides but there arent really any successful clubs currently running without a director of football. Man united being one of the only ones without one and we can all see how things have gone there recently. 

With a director of football the signings would surely improve... instead of just signing average championship players after 1 good season e.g butterfield, Blackman, Jozefzoon etc. we'd scout much more widely and sign players that fit the style of the club. 

Managers appointments would be better, Nigel Pearson was a poor appointment given the style we had been playing under Mclaren and Clement and the style he wanted to play, that shouldnt happen with a good director of football. 

I think it would be the best thing for the club in a long time. 

[Anag Ram]

Director of football - S McClaren

Manager - S Cooper

Cone spreader - W Rooney

 

[Ramos]

23 hours ago, LeedsCityRam said:

Lot of merit to this idea.

One of the reasons I believe Cocu was so popular was his stated long term vision for the club as a whole...implementing a style of play & youth progression. For the first time in ages, it seemed as if we were aiming for a particular identity & a long term plan and his removal has seemingly thrown all that hard work in the air.

Therefore if this is the direction we want to take, lets implement it no matter what. A director of football identifies and recruits players who fit into our model & is responsible for all the youth teams & progression. Ideally it'd be someone already familiar with the club..wouldnt be averse to Darren Wassall getting the position.

This of course then limits the scope of a first team coach, which I'd argue would be a good thing. The swing from Clement to Pearson to McClaren to Rowett to Lampard is a key reason for our lack of progress & the total waste of salaries & transfer fees spent. The manager/coach should fit the club, not the other way round.

Maybe cocu would actually have been the perfect director of football? Calm, composed, fair and dignified with clear knowledge and understanding of the game, recruitment etc. Bought into the vision of Mel and DCFC academy. 
 

An interesting case could be made for Darren getting it like you mentioned . 

[TheAllestreeRam]

Im not sure Darren would be the best man for the director of football job. A key part of the role would be understanding the business side of the game, I dont think Darren has enough experience of the financial and negotiation side of the game. 

[DarkFruitsRam7]

21 hours ago, Millenniumram said:

100% yes for me, I’ve been arguing this point for years. Appointing the highest quality, most experienced DOF we can attract should be one of the first priorities of the new owners - though we must make sure that whoever comes in shares the same philosophies as the club. The fit absolutely has to be right, as this would hopefully be a long term appointment.

This is key. We should absolutely aim to get the best one we can. I'd be far happier spending big wages on a top DOF and head coach than on players, as long as we committed to the model.

I strongly disagree with people saying we should just stick someone like Wassall or Clough in the role. It should be a specialised job role, and I'd quite like someone who takes a smart, statistics-led approach to recruitment of players and coaches. 

20 hours ago, Rab a dab doo said:

May work but more often than not leads to a blurring of responsibilities and duties as they overlap in some cases.

They can also lead to internal friction if said the parties have different or opposing views on different matters. 

That's why you preferably appoint someone who's used to working under the DOF model, or at the very least happy to do it. It narrows your pool of options for head coaches (probably eliminating the likes of Cook), but there will be loads of good head coaches out there happy to focus purely on coaching the first team.

[DarkFruitsRam7]

8 minutes ago, TheAllestreeRam said:

Im not sure Darren would be the best man for the director of football job. A key part of the role would be understanding the business side of the game, I dont think Darren has enough experience of the financial and negotiation side of the game. 

Nor first-team recruitment.

[RadioactiveWaste]

Depends a bit on who the manager is going to be. 

I'd not be totally against it, but it's got to be someone who is on board with the manager and the overall plan (assuming for now we are still on a value for money and players who will hopefully increase in value).

If the new owners are "orders of magnitude" different in terms of what the want to spend, then it's clearly a different situation and would need the best in the business so they don't get their own Sam Rush situation.

[DarkFruitsRam7]

Just now, RadioactiveWaste said:

Depends a bit on who the manager is going to be. 

I'd not be totally against it, but it's got to be someone who is on board with the manager and the overall plan (assuming for now we are still on a value for money and players who will hopefully increase in value).

If the new owners are "orders of magnitude" different in terms of what the want to spend, then it's clearly a different situation and would need the best in the business so they don't get their own Sam Rush situation.

If the new owners appoint a manager and a DOF in that order, then I think it would be safe to assume they have no clue what they're doing. If we go with the DOF model, that role needs to be filled first, and then we can discuss who the manager is going to be. Appointing a manager and then a DOF and hoping they mesh would be stupid.

Anyway, I think this is all a hypothetical discussion. I imagine we'll carry on without one.

[TheAllestreeRam]

3 minutes ago, DarkFruitsRam7 said:

This is key. We should absolutely aim to get the best one we can. I'd be far happier spending big wages on a top DOF and head coach than on players, as long as we committed to the model.

I strongly disagree with people saying we should just stick someone like Wassall or Clough in the role. It should be a specialised job role, and I'd quite like someone who takes a smart, statistics-led approach to recruitment of players and coaches. 

That's why you preferably appoint someone who's used to working under the DOF model, or at the very least happy to do it. It narrows your pool of options for head coaches (probably eliminating the likes of Cook), but there will be loads of good managers out there happy to focus purely on coaching the first team.

Couldnt agree more, a data based/statistical approach is the way football is going and I would be hard pressed to say Derby have ever recruited on a stats based approach, the clubs that have are leaving those that havent in the dust. The profits that Brentford have made in recent years from taking this approach is astonishing. We are very behind the times and need a reshuffle. 

 

[TheAllestreeRam]

 

7 minutes ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

Depends a bit on who the manager is going to be. 

I'd not be totally against it, but it's got to be someone who is on board with the manager and the overall plan (assuming for now we are still on a value for money and players who will hopefully increase in value).

If the new owners are "orders of magnitude" different in terms of what the want to spend, then it's clearly a different situation and would need the best in the business so they don't get their own Sam Rush situation.

The DoF should come first in theory. 

[nottingram]

I would just like to see a club which is aligned from top to bottom. Ironically, under Mel I don’t think we have had that until the Cocu reign, but results made it untenable. Agree with those saying Cocu would probably be an excellent fit in the background of the club, but I can’t imagine that is something he would be interested in and nor should he be.

I would much rather the new ownership group were sensible and calculated than just coming in and throwing money around. If we have smart people in the background and hire the right manager we will be far more successful, long term, than expensive purchases for the sake of it.

[Rev]

We've had a dictator of football for 4 years now. His name is Mel.

[IslandExile]

I prefer the manager to have ultimate responsibility - and control - of everything.

Re. McClaren as DoF. I would say he's a brilliant coach rather than a manager even, let alone DoF.

[TheAllestreeRam]

22 minutes ago, IslandExile said:

I prefer the manager to have ultimate responsibility - and control - of everything.

Re. McClaren as DoF. I would say he's a brilliant coach rather than a manager even, let alone DoF.

Our managers are only lasting about a year... It doesnt allow for continuity or long term planning, when they leave/get sacked we have to go back to square 1 everytime. 

Agree re Mclaren. 

[Millenniumram]

3 hours ago, i-Ram said:

You make some really good points.  Is this all your own work?

You’re right, it’s a bit long term for me. I really just want a DOF so we have someone else to sack. Got a bit of sacking fever now, just waiting for Southgate to bite the bullet next...

[Millenniumram]

4 hours ago, Ghost of Clough said:

I doubt the new owner will be as hands on as Mel was, so someone in a role similar to Sam Rush's will be a certainty - this'll pretty much be a DoF. The guy who hires/fires/manages those immediately below him in the club hierarchy - the heads of each department. The manager should always have a say on signings, and not simply dumped with a new unexpected signing

We already have one - Joe McClaren. With the signings of Jozwiak and te Wierik, the strong link to Dursun, I'm guessing we're developing that sort of area of our recruitment already.

I’d say Joe McClaren is more of a chief scout from the sounds of things, rather than a head of recruitment. There’s a difference, and ideally I’d want one of each. The point of bringing in a DOF, in my view, is so we have someone who’s making the actual decisions on who to recruit instead of the manager.

It’s a controversial argument I know, and I get those saying give the manager full control, but I disagree that’s the best way to look at things in the modern game. Coaching and recruitment are massively different, and require vastly different skill sets, so expecting one man to do both is foolish imo. A good coach can quite easily be a terrible judge of talent. So, in my opinion, to have the best chance of success, you want to have one specialised head coach, and one specialised head of recruitment / DOF, both on a level standing at the club. That way you can leave the coach to focus on what he does best - improving players, preparing tactics etc, without him having to worry about upcoming transfer windows. 

Naturally the manager should still have some say on who comes in, there would be no point giving them someone they don’t want. That overriding power can come in the form of an ability to veto any targets identified by the DOF, as well as make personal recommendations to be looked into. However ultimately the responsibility of deciding which players to move for, as well as negotiating the deal / walking away, lies with the DOF.

And that’s why you need a separate DOF to your Chief Scout. So Joe McClaren could still stay on in his current role, if we deem him to be doing a good job. Personally I’m far from convinced given our recruitment record whilst he’s been here, but obviously I don’t know the ins and outs of what he does, and I concede our recruitment seemed more imaginative this summer. Nothing would really change about his role, he’d still be watching players and identifying talent. It’s just now there would be a DOF above him, who would decide which of the players identified to move for, based on what the DOF and manager together decide we need in the first team.

[LeedsCityRam]

4 hours ago, Ramos said:

Maybe cocu would actually have been the perfect director of football? Calm, composed, fair and dignified with clear knowledge and understanding of the game, recruitment etc. Bought into the vision of Mel and DCFC academy. 
 

An interesting case could be made for Darren getting it like you mentioned . 

Definite case for Cocu. He does have something of an ambassadorial air about him, will have an extensive contacts book & he clearly has a passion for long term projects/club building/youth development - often plans that get rudely interrupted when you're scrapping for results as a first team manager. 

I guess the weakness would be on the business side of the game (dependant on his previous involvement in budgets/recruitment at PSV) but like Wassall, I think that's less important than the ability to articulate a vision. Lest we forget, bringing in individuals sharp on the business side hasn't exactly yielded the long term results we would have liked (Murdo Mackay & Sam Rush)

[Jourdan]

I think having a director of football is a good idea in principle.

But I doubt this will happen for at least another 12 months.

Once the ownership group have settled in, got the lay of the land and understood how workable their vision is, I think then we might see such changes.

But right now, getting the right manager in charge should be their only concern.

[IslandExile]

Potential source of conflict between DoF and manager - as seen at plenty of other clubs.

Do you really want the "continental model" where a DoF makes the signings and the coach tries to assemble them into a team.

Far better to have a single person responsible for both.

Can you imagine BC being told which players he had to use?

[OoooMarkWright]

I’m sure Murdo Mackay would be up for it again!