Agree, Ed needs to stay out. Ideally, I would like Rangnick and Mitchell working together for us. Need experienced heads to start off a major rebuild.
Man Utd set to appoint Director of Football (when hell freezes over)
- Thread starter RedMachine03
- Start date
- Status
Agree, Ed needs to stay out. Ideally, I would like Rangnick and Mitchell working together for us. Need experienced heads to start off a major rebuild.
Because you are hooked up on the idea that naming someone DoF would instantly change things at the club. It would not. We have much more core problems at the club and appointing a DoF would def be a part of the solution IMO but not necesseraly before addressing other things first. The upgrading of the scouting network and the youth setup has been a good start. But that needs to set itself now also.
Agree with this. CEO is in charge of budgets, and 'DoF' works within it. But there is no way the ceo should meddle with anything else on the footballing sides of things.
What are these other priorities which are more concerning than the football at our club? Please enlighten me...
And what about the other questions I asked in the post? I know how you like people to answer questions that posters have post.
18/20 teams in the PL have a DoF. The only two that don’t: United and Newcastle. You can believe that if Newcastle ever gets new ownership hey will get a DoF as well.
Not having a DoF is like not having an architect to build a building and expecting a construction foreman to develop the plans and build the building.
Not having a DoF is like not having an architect to build a building and expecting a construction foreman to develop the plans and build the building.
And is it a coincidence both clubs are shocking?
Thinking of the more down-to-earth or United-resembling (for the football part of the business) examples like Internazionale and AC Milan could hopefully help? Both clubs have a distant, foreign owner (Suning and Elliot fund aka your Glazers); both clubs have deputies in charge (Steven Zhang as the son of the owner and Ivan Gazidis as the CEO aka your Woodward); both clubs have a DoF (the very competent Marotta and the confused or incompetent Boban-Maldini-Massara ... you have no one here); both clubs have a coach who only focuses on the pitch (Conte and Giampaolo aka your Solskjaer). There are three scenarios then: a competent DoF, an incompetent DoF, no one. Only the first seems to work when the starting point is a shipwreck.
But thats basically status quo then. You would only move the execution of the "budget" (I dont like the term because its such an oversimplification to think that such a thing as a "budget" even exists) from the manager to the DoF. I still think its a good idea long term but if anyone is thinking it will diminish Woodwards role; are fooling themselves. It would just be a different reporting structure.
Agreed but this has very little to do with your previous point. None of these things means that the owner and CEO do not ultimately hold the reigns, it only means that the manager doesn't hold them at all. At the moment we know that the manager provides a list of targets and that a group of people comprising the chief scout, Murtough, Judge, Woodward and maybe other people approve the list and try to get the targets.
In theory a DOF would change nothing for the Glazers and Woodward but it would change a lot for the rest because the DOF would be the only interface between the head coach and the board, he would be the main driving force and have seniority on everyone but the owner and the CEO. People that have the idea that it is Woodward/Glazers who are against that should think about it this way, who are the people within and around this football club who think that the manager is supposed to be a demigod?
Personally, I believe that the Glazers and Woodward are cowards and afraid to upset certain figures by turning the manager into a simple employee. They think that by maintaining the SAF/Sir Matt Busby role, they are protected from the traditionalists.
Of course, it could be confirmation bias and I'm totally wrong.
I said core problems, which are obviously related to the footballing side of things. When Sir Alex and Gill left, we had two major core problems: a) a non existent scouting network and b) a youth setup that had lagged behind the likes of Chelsea, the other big clubs and even clubs like Southampton.
Neither of these problems were small; they were huge, and it was a big mistake that we even ended up there to begin with. That was on Sir Alex and Gill first and foremost.
Those two things were much bigger issues than Sir Alex leaving behind an aging squad.
Those two "problems" have been addressed now. The club has invested massively to remedy both. If it has been done in a good way or not we will not know until a couple of years. Its not investments that you get instant dividends from. History will judge Woodward and the Glazers on the effectiveness of it.
I used the term budget for the sake of argument. But to say that a director of football would take control away from the manager isn’t really fair. They would work together, just that the director would have a clear idea of the style of play and players needed and would focus on handling scouting and transfers etc to take those jobs off of the coach.
And in an ideal world Woodward would let him and head coach work as they see fit.
Man city have a set up like this, and the title director of football mightn’t be 100% accurate depending on how you define it, but there’s no way that Guardiola concedes all control/decision making to Txiki or whoever. I think it’s an important role to have in modern football, like agents were important for players when the money got really crazy.
Like the lad Matt judge and whoever are involved with our transfer negotiations need a kick up the arse.
So I agree that we’re traditionalists with the role of manager.
It's totally fair because a DOF has seniority on a head coach, he is the main evaluator of the head coach and the main figure when it comes to hire or sack a head coach. Working together applies to everyone in the club, so it's not really a factor when it comes to who holds which powers. At City Txiki and Soriano are the ones that hold power, of course someone like Guardiola who is currently successful and popular will have some weight but that weight is given by the two aforementioned.
Last edited:
Right on, the DOF should have ultimate control over football strategy and that includes who is the manager, when to end that manager's particular tenure and consult the manager on the players to sign etc. The money men should exactly be that and set budgetary parameters by which the football side operates under. Of course the board will sign off on any sackings, hirings and signings but we need a true football man driving this rebuild and all football operations thereafter.
Look at City right now, if Pep walks they won't crumble just as Bayern and Barcelona didn't crumble the way we did after SAF left. They had the infrastructure to plan their next move, we have a bunch of Glazer siblings and a couple of ex bankers doing that for us.
PS. Sorry for going off tangent a bit.
You brought up an interesting angle I hadn't thought of and it would surprise me if there were senior figures in and around the club who would resist such a move. The Glazers as the owners would benefit immensely if we brought in a structure and put people in that structure who can make the club run more efficiently.
Its interesting that the DOF was promised after Jose got the sack but began to be watered down when Ole was made permanent. Now Woodward is using a small sample size of 3 players who haven't made 20 appearances for us as evidence of our way being the right way when decisions made that summer left us with a comparatively weaker squad.
There's your problem right away.
It is not just my problem, it's the problem of whole of Manchester United and all connected...bar the owners and shareholders.
Could we bring in a world class manager and move Ole to the DOF position? He seems to have done a decent job with recruitment this summer, and his overall vision of how to evolve the team seems to be right. With him managing the team, we're gonna have trouble attracting top class players, but in the boardroom managing recruitment and long term strategy, he might do alright.
For me that would be sentimental choice. I really don't think we can leave it to chance, as Ole has never done the job before. We need to get someone who has. Of course it's not guaranteed they will succeed but will have a better chance.
You're probably right
Edwin, Rangnick and Paul Mitchell would be an amazing start!
This idea needs to die.
His recruitment is a myth.
We wanted Maguire last season. Daniel James was recommended by Giggs and anyone could tell you Wan Bissaka was one of the best Prem right backs.
He hardly did something special and he didn't even see a need to replace Lukaku/Sanchez(unless you count Dan James and Greenwood as replacements).
Fails as manager, let's promote him and give him some power over the next manager. What could go wrong...
Really don't think the DoF is the answer.
The way our club is run we would bring in someone under the title but without the ability to make decisions.
The culture at the club would render a DoF powerless.
The way our club is run we would bring in someone under the title but without the ability to make decisions.
The culture at the club would render a DoF powerless.
I see what you're saying and you're correct. Under the current reigeme, DoF is useless. It would just be a tick box exercise.
We knew about him before Giggs' involvement though.A little update around the situation of Van der Sar. Dutch media are reporting he's about to extend his contract at Ajax until november 2023.
I think that he would have wanted a replacement for Lukaku but Woodward thought we didn't but unlike Jose, Ole is not going to come out and moan about it.
We dont even know if these signings will be a success. Bit premature to say signings has been good. Just let him go.
So you approve and also disapprove of James signing depending on the criticism of Ole you're trying to make. If he's a good signing he was Giggs' recommendation (he wasn't but obviously his opinion was sought, as any even remotely decent manager would do), and if he's a bad signing he's no replacement for the woeful, absurdly expensive flop Sanchez.
BTW, the criticism of the AWB signing, both on here and in parts of the press, was pretty bad at the time given his fee, his limited experience and City signing Cancelo for c.£60m.
Whether Ole originally targeted the players or not, either way, he would have had to say yes or no. Again, an experienced man is needed for the DoF role, not shoe horn in a rookie. When will the fans ever learn, we have too many rookies in too many important positions already, hence we're in the mess we are in!
What decent DoF would want to come to Utd? The past 5 years have shown that the club is lacking any plan, and vision, won't support managers, will support mediocre players, and changes it's ideas every other week.
Who wants to deal with that crap?
Who wants to deal with that crap?
Absolutely correct. This is why we will not be successful under Ed.
A top DoF will only come here if he's given assurances that he will be in charge of all that. Ed obviously will still be in charge of the financial side and how much money is available, but the DoF needs to be in charge of the footballing side of things.
I gave Ed the benefit of the doubt that Mourinho was going to be his last attempt to recreate the system we had with Fergie and previous CEO's. Ultimately that didn't work (I don't particularly blame Ed for it not working, but I do blame him for the stupid early contract extension), and that was when I hoped he would see the writing on the wall and look to modernise our set-up. That set-up only works with an amazing long-term manager or a CEO who is brilliant at the footballing side of the job. Ed certainly isn't the latter, and it's incredibly difficult to find the former these days.
Up until the end of Mourinho, it was understandable that Ed could be trying to do the right thing. I didn't blame him too much even though it wasn't working. But now, the fact that it's continued means he either is an egotistical prick who cares more about himself than the club, or he is simply negligent and terrible at his job.
Someone who wants to earn several million pounds a year and is ambitious enough to mould the future success of the biggest club in English football.
Generally speaking people who make it that far, are a bit more ambitious and driven than your average guy working the checkout till at Tesco.
Any professional with ambition and pride will come only if he is assured of the necessary decision making autonomy and reasonable transfer budgets. Believe it or not the £150m we spent on Maguire, AWB and James could have been spent differently and covered more holes within the squad, for example.
What Woodward fails to recognize is that Fergie was our defacto DOF and he had the vision, drive and energy to see it through. This is why SAF always had strong AM from Kidd to Queroz as this allowed him the room to take a helicopter view of the club. The fact that he was also a successful coach also bought him time to see through a vision and take the long term approach.
The current system at United is flawed because there currently is no manager who is capable of juggling the two - get results that earn you time whilst working on long term development of the football side. This is also compounded by Woodward's utter failure to identify the right manager, the manager who has the ability to deliver the short term results whilst driving the long term plan for growth. It has its roots in the decision post Moyes to just throw money at the problem. Now the money has been wasted and the owners no longer have the appetite to spend big money meaning that a change in strategy is required.
For us to succeed we need a DOF to come in and Woodward has to be prepared to handover decision making power to him including the decision on the fate of the manager and the choice of the next man in. Another issue is we can't be sending an ex banker like Matt Judge as our point man on transfers, he knows the language of money but does he understand the language of football? Clubs like Juve and Bayern can offer money but they also entice players through football challenges or look at how Klopp reportedly tapped up Van Dijk by showing him blueprints of how he intended to use him and stuff. Footballers have ego and we need men who can tap into that ego as our point men.
If they were given the right amount of authority to make footballing decisions then there are few reasons as for why most well performing DoF candidates around the world have not tried to get appointed or why we would struggle to find a candidate. So why have we not appointed anyone yet? It is because the club is not interested in appointing a DoF or unwilling to give the potential DoF the authority to operate as a DoF should. Personally i think the club is willing to appoint someone with the title DoF or Technical director, but they are in no way willing to give the role the authority or responsibility for anyone interested in being anything other than a figurehead and £££ to take that role.
It wouldn’t be a DOF
This is the concern but not from the angle of the CEO. The concern is we'll try to mish-mash an old school manager and a DOF. There was talk earlier that OGS would have an influence over the choice of DOF - that's a complete load of horse shit. He doesn't get to choose his boss.
The hierarchy should be set quite clearly - which is the DOF is the boss of the head coach. DOFs say is final over the managers.
The CEO is the DOFs boss. He sets the budget and has final say over anything that goes out of budget. So occasionally if we need to break our transfer budget, the CEO should sign it off and the DOF should give a good enough justification for it. Same if we need to break the wage structure for whatever reason. Things within budget remain within the DOFs autonomy.
Because it rarely works that way, if you look around the best DOFs come from within or where inexperienced when they got their job. Italians are the only ones that regularly swap clubs and will look at these jobs(CEO, COO or DOF) as managers would. I'm one 100% sure that th reports about best DOFs are absolute BS, the same way I didn't believe the initial rumour.
- Status