Isn't a DOF another name for a scout ?
Not at all. Check the DoF thread for numerous pages on that subject.
Isn't a DOF another name for a scout ?
Even Fergie never had full control. We lost out on many players that he wanted over the years because they were too expensive (either to sign or their wages). Not really any different than Jose had last season, where it did seem we tried to sign the players he wanted but every single one of them ended up costing far more than they were actually worth.I read other forums where people know whats going on in clubs, Ole won't be like a Fergie having full control. Jose had this problem and voiced his concerns on many occasions yet it seems to get glossed over quite a lot because its Jose.
I keep seeing posters pop-up with 'why do we need a DoF?', 'why is structure so important?', 'why doesn't the manager just sign player X, Y,Z'? - all of which are very outdated statements to be making in modern football
The reasons clubs appoint these people and have structure around the manager;
1) To prevent success/failure being totally dependant on one individual
2) To ensure continuity of vision i.e. if you want to play the 'United-way' or the 'Liverpool-way' or the 'City-way' or the 'Barcelona-way' you need to ensure that this comes from above and players are not just signed on the whim of the manager, as in the 90s
3) The modern football manager has to much on his plate to do things like handle contract negotiations, transfer negotiations and watch hours of video footage to scout players from the Dutch 2nd division
What we have seen at United over the last 5/6 season is a classic example of how not to run a football club. We've now had four different managers since SAF, all of whom have a different style, different objectives, different man-management techniques and who were at different stages of their career.
The result of this is this 'Frankenstein' of a squad we have put together whereby we have young, inexperienced lads who are not quite ready thrown into regular first-team actions with Moyes' panic buy(s), LvGs 'multi-purpose footballers', Jose's giants and SAFs squad players! How ridiculous is it to see a midfield containing Matic and Herrea together with wingers at full back, a wannabe-striker on the LW, a slow, technical #10 out on the right and our highest-earner sat on the bench!
If we are ever, ever going to achieve anything again we need to get over this 'Cult of the Manager'. I get it, because for a long time we were managed, albeit in a different era, by a man who will go down as possibly THE greatest ever. However, I think the fact that we were so successful under that 'structure' for so long is actually hurting us now because whilst our rivals where modernising we stood still. Let's be brutally, brutally honest without our rose-tinted glasses for a second...as great as SAF was, and I'm not knocking what he achieved, United where miles ahead of our rivals in terms of resources and power in the 90s/00s. Therefore when we did go a season or two without a trophy we would just flex our muscles and buy the best players in the league, that's not possible anymore!
To put it another way, look at both City and Liverpool - Pep and Klopp could leave tomorrow and the clubs would continue to move in the same direction. The signings, the ethos, the tactics, the style etc....would be continuous and the 'only' thing that would change would be the name of the bloke who picks the XI and makes the subs!
Believe what you want. Believing everything that the club wants you to see sounds like your forte.I see. Well I suspect a director will be introduced as we have said is our intention. We also wanted to introduce one under Jose but he resisted it. That said, I find it difficult to believe that the players we bought under Mourinho were not players that he selected. Unless we’re saying that Woodward scouted Dalot, Fred and Bailly himself!
Believe what you want. Believing everything that the club wants you to see sounds like your forte.
Yep thats fair enough. It's only like taking info off journos etc.Perhaps I’ll try baseless conspiracy because ‘I read it on a forum’ in the future.
I asked yesterday but no one has given an answerSorry, i am in dark with this. When Ed said that we will spend big?
I asked yesterday but no one has given an answer
If i remember correctly, exact same stuff were said last year also. And we all know how that ended.No direct quotes, but all the credible sources comes out at the same time saying it'll be a lot of players out and a lot of players in. Consensus is that he has briefed/leaked this to the press.
Check some of the links in the OP here:
https://www.redcafe.net/threads/sol...rs-could-leave-bbc-telegraph-guardian.446294/
there is Herrera, Shaw that were bought without a manager in place, Pogba another
The managers don't feel the heat? 3 Managers have been let go. That is one hot seat.So fecking sick of this Woody stuff. The Glazers need to sort this stuff out once and for all. We've been complaining about him for years. He's been made the scapegoat for every situation, its about time the managers and players feel the heat for once.
To put it another way, look at both City and Liverpool - Pep and Klopp could leave tomorrow and the clubs would continue to move in the same direction. The signings, the ethos, the tactics, the style etc....would be continuous and the 'only' thing that would change would be the name of the bloke who picks the XI and makes the subs!
I agree to an extent. And I do think Woodward or ‘the club’ wants to appoint a DoF. Our preferred model is to have a long-term manager, but I think the club do want to take some things out of the manager’s hands. What I have been arguing in this thread is that, in the absence of a DoF, these ‘football decisions’ have been taken by our managers, not our execs. What people actually want, it seems, is a DoF to take duties from the manager. Yet all I’m reading is they want him to do Woodward’s job.
That said, since LVG left, the club has been trying to appoint a director. It’s not as if they are all daft. Andre Berta was strongly linked, and an obstacle was that Mourinho didn’t want to work with one (reportedly). Given Jose’s pedigree as a manager, and the club’s preference for long-term managers who do their own planning and structuring, it seems the club chose to appoint what they believed to be the right manager over changing the structure. But the talk of us hiring a DoF has been there for about 3 years now, and once Jose left, it was said to be a priority again.
Again, I’m not against a director, I just don’t understand how it will change Woodward’s role at all, and his role is apparently the problem here. What will happen is that he will allow a DoF to do many of the tasks his manager currently does. That doesn’t guarantee that results will improve. He will still sign players on the direction of his DoF (and manager too, I presume), and the ‘football decisions’ will still be taken by others, and he will still continue to lead on the business ones.
My issue is that the implication is that Woodward is the one taking all the footy decisions, which is a problem because he ‘knows nothing about football’. My point is that Jose and Van Gaal know about football, amongst others including Nicky Butt, who are the ones making the football planning. Woodward’s fault here doesn’t go beyond ‘well he hired them’. Which is true, but I still find that a weirdly obsessive and disproportionate bone to pick, as I have never seen fans calling for an exec to be sacked on the basis that the managers have underachieved and ‘they hired them’. It just smacks of a determination to point a finger.
I’ve said already in this thread, but I strongly doubt many posters could even say what it is that Woodward does on a daily basis. The fixation on his role is odd to me.
Guess who is still seating comfy in his seat, despite all the complaints about him? That's the seat you need to crank the heat up on.
Im gonna wait to see what his strategy is and how he works with ole before i judge him again.
I read other forums where people know whats going on in clubs, Ole won't be like a Fergie having full control. Jose had this problem and voiced his concerns on many occasions yet it seems to get glossed over quite a lot because its Jose.
I mean hiring managers who have such differing philosophy that it is difficult to take the club forward. Do you have any idea on what are we trying to pursue as a club as far as our on-field playing style is concerned?What footballing decisions does he make that he’s been getting wrong for 5 years? Do you mean not hiring a manager who has not gone on to win the PL? If so, fair enough.
As long as the club is generating massive profits and team is meeting minimum targets (top four), the Woodward won't be dislodged any time soon. Even if we don't make top four or go on the slide, there's plenty of people lower down the food chain at United who'll be shown the door before Woodward. Like it or not, if anyone's job is secure, it is his.
we are going round in circles. I think we can agree on one thing: Woodward is deciding who becomes manager.
Your argument is, that he also delegates most decision making power to the manager, which would make this appointment even more important.
My view:
His first three appointments failed and making any decision about Ole before the end of the season is truly moronic. Thats why he should be less important in this process. Generally speaking, delegating all decision making power about transfers/team development to the manager is a terrible idea. Regardless of who ultimately made the decisions about transfers, those decisions were terrible and the system has to be changed. I think he does have a say in transfer decisions and is not just setting the budget constraints, but thats not really important in my argument.
On a side note: To believe that Mourinho would manage United for a long time was always wishful thinking.
I mean hiring managers who have such differing philosophy that it is difficult to take the club forward. Do you have any idea on what are we trying to pursue as a club as far as our on-field playing style is concerned?
Excellent post and I wish that a lot of one-liner posters would actually try to read some of the more intelligent posts in here.I agree to an extent. And I do think Woodward or ‘the club’ wants to appoint a DoF. Our preferred model is to have a long-term manager, but I think the club do want to take some things out of the manager’s hands. What I have been arguing in this thread is that, in the absence of a DoF, these ‘football decisions’ have been taken by our managers, not our execs. What people actually want, it seems, is a DoF to take duties from the manager. Yet all I’m reading is they want him to do Woodward’s job.
That said, since LVG left, the club has been trying to appoint a director. It’s not as if they are all daft. Andre Berta was strongly linked, and an obstacle was that Mourinho didn’t want to work with one (reportedly). Given Jose’s pedigree as a manager, and the club’s preference for long-term managers who do their own planning and structuring, it seems the club chose to appoint what they believed to be the right manager over changing the structure. But the talk of us hiring a DoF has been there for about 3 years now, and once Jose left, it was said to be a priority again.
Again, I’m not against a director, I just don’t understand how it will change Woodward’s role at all, and his role is apparently the problem here. What will happen is that he will allow a DoF to do many of the tasks his manager currently does. That doesn’t guarantee that results will improve. He will still sign players on the direction of his DoF (and manager too, I presume), and the ‘football decisions’ will still be taken by others, and he will still continue to lead on the business ones.
My issue is that the implication is that Woodward is the one taking all the footy decisions, which is a problem because he ‘knows nothing about football’. My point is that Jose and Van Gaal know about football, amongst others including Nicky Butt, who are the ones making the football planning. Woodward’s fault here doesn’t go beyond ‘well he hired them’. Which is true, but I still find that a weirdly obsessive and disproportionate bone to pick, as I have never seen fans calling for an exec to be sacked on the basis that the managers have underachieved and ‘they hired them’. It just smacks of a determination to point a finger.
I’ve said already in this thread, but I strongly doubt many posters could even say what it is that Woodward does on a daily basis. The fixation on his role is odd to me.
Makes incorrect accusation then proceeds to ramble on nonsense about the incorrect accusation.You mean Red Issue?
Those feckers dont know what the feck is going on in the Club. The Caf had a highly informed poster who was best mates with Eric Steele and even Eric was reluctant to say anything half the time.
Makes incorrect accusation then proceeds to ramble on nonsense about the incorrect accusation.
Yep thats fair enough. It's only like taking info off journos etc.
On another hand when you look at it, when there is so much information to see out there that aims target at Woodward everyone still seems to aim back at the manager, there is Herrera, Shaw that were bought without a manager in place, Pogba another, (Riaola confirmed it took months/years to work on the deal) was coming with or without Jose, the manager probably got asked/told about these players arriving but didn't have much to any say in them coming or not. (Jose just the other day said he was going to go before Pogba).
We did have a manager when we signed Shaw and Herrera, as Van Gaal was appointed a month before. Obviously he was busy with the Netherlands and the groundwork on the two players was done before, but he gave the green light to sign them.
Van Gaal may also have been in on the Pogba deal, if the club was working on it for a while. Anyhow, do you honestly believe he would have been bought if Jose said no?
Excellent post and I wish that a lot of one-liner posters would actually try to read some of the more intelligent posts in here.
It is kind of interesting why the focus always is turned to Woodward in threads like this.
Anyone with some insight in the club knows that Woodward has distanced himself more and more from the footballing side of things since the appointment of Moyes. This will probably come full circle when a DoF/technical director is appointed.
As Rozay argues the "footballing decisions" is not a stick to beat Woodward with and it has not been for quite a while if ever.
What you can argue is that he has made wrong decisions in the appointment of managers. Which is fair in a way. At the same time retrospective analysis is simple. Both appointments of LvG and Mourinho were hailed on the Caf. Even Moyes. Anyone remember the "Chosen One" banner?
We as a club have a history of putting all of the footballing decisions in the hands of the manager though. You just have to read anyone of the great mans books to see what type of leadership of a football club he advocates. All power to the manager.
Its also the tradition that lured Mourinho to the club.
What Mourinho faced was not what he had imagined I suppose, it was a club in transition that was expanding its scouting system, delegating executive decisions to people like Matt Judge negotiating contracts
Basically it was a club that was and is reforming itself into a much more modern setup. This is most likely down to Woodward and the more progressive elements in the club. There still are people at the club, especially at the advisory board that opposes this reformation which is not a secret either.
We are a club with a lot of tradition and it does not reform easily.
What happened with Mourinho is a many ways a sign of the reformation going on at the club.
The tabloids always had it being Mourinho against Woodward. He was not "backed in the market", etc. What actually did happen was that Mourinho clashed with the new structure being built at the club. He did not accept or get along with Jim Lawlor´s scouting network that the club spent quite a lot of money to rebuild,. He did not get along with the clubs youth setup either. All of this would lead to his demise. And of course he would never have had accepted a DoF. If not for Mourinho I am pretty sure we would have a technical director in place by now.
Because I belive that is what is going to happen. We will appoint a technical or sporting director that will be focused on negotiations of contracts and also have responsibility over the scouting network and youth setup. I am not ruling out that the club will just promote Matt Judge. Which of course would lead to mayhem on the Caf since he is a financial guy to begin with and not a "football man" whatever that is.
Its semantics this, but I dont believe that the club is ready for or is going to appoint a pure DoF in the sense that people at the Caf seems to want. And as Rozay put it, however we solve this situation its not going to change Woodwards status at all. Its a question of managing the responsibilities between the Dof/TD and the manager.
A lot of power over the footballing decisions will remain with the manager IMO. And maybe it should.
Sir Alex would definately say so.
The way Man United has been run by Woodward and Glazer family since Sir Alex left, sometimes I find it hard to believe we are owned and Run by Astute American businessman family with experience of sports teams ownership and man city is owned by Arab despots who only know oil business. Even more so when we have regularly outspend them in transfers.
That's it, isn't it. He has no vision as to how our club should play on the field. He should be CFO or something, definitely not CEO.No I don’t really. I think Woodward has just hired football managers and allowed them to introduce the style that they are comfortable with, so long as it wins. If it doesn’t, they are out.
That's it, isn't it. He has no vision as to how our club should play on the field. He should be CFO or something, definitely not CEO.
They've done that multiple times and the problems persist. Indicating that our issues go deeper than football management.I’m not sure his job is to ‘have a vision as to how our club should play on the field’. That sounds like a ‘football decision’ to me, and I’m still not sure whether people want Ed to be making those or not.
Surely the football people he has hired from the managers to scouts to academy staff are supposed to have a vision as to how we are to play on the field? If he hires a DoF, that would be one more football employee who should help shape how we play on the field. If after that we still don’t play ‘free-flowing football’, I’m not sure we can start questioning Ed Woodward, Matt Judge or Richard Arnold. We CAN question them if performances suffer for too long and they don’t replace the football people in charge. But as we have seen, they have done that.
They've done that multiple times and the problems persist. Indicating that our issues go deeper than football management.
the caf is savage these daysMate I honestly couldnt give a feck so get back in your box
But he wasn't hired a DoF yet. He has hired managers who will stay true to their style of play. What was Ed asking them during their interviews if he did not know what he was getting from them on the field. Your posts come across as simply absolving him from blame and saying he should not be looked at to improve the footballing side of the club. I agree that he shouldn't be but unfortunately he is.I’m not sure his job is to ‘have a vision as to how our club should play on the field’. That sounds like a ‘football decision’ to me, and I’m still not sure whether people want Ed to be making those or not.
Surely the football people he has hired from the managers to scouts to academy staff are supposed to have a vision as to how we are to play on the field? If he hires a DoF, that would be one more football employee who should help shape how we play on the field. If after that we still don’t play ‘free-flowing football’, I’m not sure we can start questioning Ed Woodward, Matt Judge or Richard Arnold. We CAN question them if performances suffer for too long and they don’t replace the football people in charge. But as we have seen, they have done that.
Excellent post and I wish that a lot of one-liner posters would actually try to read some of the more intelligent posts in here.
It is kind of interesting why the focus always is turned to Woodward in threads like this.
Anyone with some insight in the club knows that Woodward has distanced himself more and more from the footballing side of things since the appointment of Moyes. This will probably come full circle when a DoF/technical director is appointed.
As Rozay argues the "footballing decisions" is not a stick to beat Woodward with and it has not been for quite a while if ever.
What you can argue is that he has made wrong decisions in the appointment of managers. Which is fair in a way. At the same time retrospective analysis is simple. Both appointments of LvG and Mourinho were hailed on the Caf. Even Moyes. Anyone remember the "Chosen One" banner?
We as a club have a history of putting all of the footballing decisions in the hands of the manager though. You just have to read anyone of the great mans books to see what type of leadership of a football club he advocates. All power to the manager.
Its also the tradition that lured Mourinho to the club.
What Mourinho faced was not what he had imagined I suppose, it was a club in transition that was expanding its scouting system, delegating executive decisions to people like Matt Judge negotiating contracts
Basically it was a club that was and is reforming itself into a much more modern setup. This is most likely down to Woodward and the more progressive elements in the club. There still are people at the club, especially at the advisory board that opposes this reformation which is not a secret either.
We are a club with a lot of tradition and it does not reform easily.
What happened with Mourinho is a many ways a sign of the reformation going on at the club.
The tabloids always had it being Mourinho against Woodward. He was not "backed in the market", etc. What actually did happen was that Mourinho clashed with the new structure being built at the club. He did not accept or get along with Jim Lawlor´s scouting network that the club spent quite a lot of money to rebuild,. He did not get along with the clubs youth setup either. All of this would lead to his demise. And of course he would never have had accepted a DoF. If not for Mourinho I am pretty sure we would have a technical director in place by now.
Because I belive that is what is going to happen. We will appoint a technical or sporting director that will be focused on negotiations of contracts and also have responsibility over the scouting network and youth setup. I am not ruling out that the club will just promote Matt Judge. Which of course would lead to mayhem on the Caf since he is a financial guy to begin with and not a "football man" whatever that is.
Its semantics this, but I dont believe that the club is ready for or is going to appoint a pure DoF in the sense that people at the Caf seems to want. And as Rozay put it, however we solve this situation its not going to change Woodwards status at all. Its a question of managing the responsibilities between the Dof/TD and the manager.
A lot of power over the footballing decisions will remain with the manager IMO. And maybe it should.
Sir Alex would definately say so.
Surely the football people he has hired from the managers to scouts to academy staff are supposed to have a vision as to how we are to play on the field
The way Man United has been run by Woodward and Glazer family since Sir Alex left, sometimes I find it hard to believe we are owned and Run by astute American business family with experience of sports teams ownership and man city is owned by Arab despots who only know oil business. Even more so when we have regularly outspend them in transfers.
Involve janitor as well while we at it.