Who are the best Sporting Directors out there today?

Someone who understands the mercato, is bright, rigorous and analytical, and in alignment with Berrada, first and foremost. As well as Wilcox and Amorim (who seem to be on the same page as Berrada, from the outside looking in.)

Most of the “best in class” Sporting Directors of the contemporary period didn't have a glittering directorial resumé to begin with.

Maybe we don't even need to bring someone in, and Jason Wilcox will be promoted to the position. He was the academy director of Manchester City and then the director of football of Southampton, so the background is there.
 
Adnan said:
Tbh with you mate, all this talk of a Sporting director having a network around the world is a load of waffle that started with journos in the media who imo are clueless when it comes to portraying the role of a Sporting director. Take Rangnick as a example, he was a average to above football coach that wasn't even known outside of Germany. And when he eventually got the Sporting director's role at the Red Bull clubs there were periods where they didn't have good seasons but being backed by a very wealthy owner they had the financial advantage over most clubs in Germany to propel the team towards a champions league position which should've been par for the course for clubs with their financial superiority. So when it comes to building and developing networks, it's not difficult when you're financially doped up like with Hoffenheim or the redbull clubs because naturally you will attract people towards the club. And with a club like Man Utd, the name alone attracts people and creating networks should be normal. At Liverpool their scouts had developed the networks and not their Sporting director as was mentioned by Michael Edwards himself once he stepped down as the Sporting director and he credited Barry Hunter the Chief Scout as the man with all the contacts.

If it was upto me then I'd personally look at Simon Rolfes from Leverkusen as the Sporting director. His ideas are great imo as far as creating teams who play attacking football. But if he isn't given the time then we'll be looking for a new Sporting director again but on that occasion the fans will turn on Shaggy (Ratcliffe, Scooby Do) who has been talking a lot of waffle in the media.

A Sporting director provides a environment for the coach and team to succeed on the pitch. But the guys at boardroom level need to understand their roles within the club and not veer into a lane they aren't experienced in. Omar Berrarda isn't a football man but a suit at board room level and neither are Ratcliffe and Brailsford. So if you hire a Sporting director then you need to let him do his job and not step on to his toes.

The most important people on the football side apart from the coach and playing staff are the Sporting director and heads of scouting. And if the suits at boardroom level start to meddle with the work that should be overseen by the Sporting director then there will be trouble ahead.
Click to expand...

As usual, excellent points mate. I suspect Ashworth wasn't let go for footballing reasons. And I don't buy the Southgate stuff. Could be a clash of egos, non-alignment with regards to the vision, or something more sinister. I just hope Ratcliffe doesn't interfere too much. With regards to the money angle, we of course have a huge attraction, but we need to keep changing the perception of the club outwardly. Not that I expect non-serious people to be appointed, but we're emerging slowly from a period of a total lack of professionalism and we'd do well hiring people who are extremely competent.

I confessed my ignorance here and people have had issues with the thread title. I think people understand the sentiment though.
 
This all smacks of a truly poor working environment with a compromised structure to me. Fight tooth and nail for a sporting director, who by all accounts is in the top bracket, and then fire him after five months with a load of leaks/fanfiction/clickbait coming out about personality clashes, British bias, Southgate-was-his-man nonsense pooring out to undermine Ashworth and make it sound like a necessary decision. The circus around this club is truly something, but it's starting to look like the clown show on the inside could be even worse.

I thought we we're trying to build something akin to a rational structure here with actual processes and professionals working in a team effort to bring about a long term vision for the club. An organizational culture that could foster real, sustainable success again. I'm getting a bad vibe here of Ratcliffe and INEOS being much more ad hoc in their approach to running things than they said, and Berrada stepping into Woodwardian territory on their behalf. It's a very different path to the one I was hoping for.

Maybe it's "just" disagreements and a too many cooks in the kitchen kind of thing. It does happen obviously. But I wonder if someone like Ashworth was sidelined and eventually pushed out, not because he has the wrong ideas or isn't up for the task, but because he might have fought for those ideas in the face of pressure from an overinvolved owner and a CEO, who doesn't like the limitations of his role and is being squeezed to deliver short term results.

I agree with others here, I think Wilcox with his City connection will be the new DoF. It's quick and an easy fit, which is what I'm starting to think INEOS are more about. Or they get Viana in, if it's still technically possible. I just hope we don't end up being as burnt by our poaching from City's transfer list at the office level as we have been in the dressing room.
 
Dan Ashworth. Just became available too.
 
Bastian said:
As usual, excellent points mate. I suspect Ashworth wasn't let go for footballing reasons. And I don't buy the Southgate stuff. Could be a clash of egos, non-alignment with regards to the vision, or something more sinister. I just hope Ratcliffe doesn't interfere too much. With regards to the money angle, we of course have a huge attraction, but we need to keep changing the perception of the club outwardly. Not that I expect non-serious people to be appointed, but we're emerging slowly from a period of a total lack of professionalism and we'd do well hiring people who are extremely competent.

I confessed my ignorance here and people have had issues with the thread title. I think people understand the sentiment though.
Click to expand...
They need to hire a Sporting director who has a vision on how he wants to develop the team playing a brand off football that is proactive on the football side which is then backed up by the out of possession concepts which also need to be proactive.

If the above is adhered to then understanding the market is easy because you will then have a clear criteria on what positions to target in the team and with the correct attributes. But if you only understand the transfer market without understanding the details on how you want to implement a plan on the pitch both on the ball and off the ball, then we carry on giving the advantage to those teams who we want to catch at the top of the chain.

The guys at boardroom level like Berrarda have a place at the club but his job should be to align the structures by hiring the Sporting director who then directly runs the football departments at the club.
 
Last edited:
Mcking said:
Wilcox is already at the club, so I don't see the need for another big appointment. Let him and Berrada run the club. Ashworth was already one director too much.
Click to expand...
You are right we had too many cooks. I'm not sure about Wilcox though, he was an academy director at city, not clear he has the track record to be over recruitment.
 
I wonder which independent minded self respecting person will audition for the post after this fiasco? If the management want a yes man then fine.
 
Can’t we just make Vivell permanent instead of going out and getting someone new again?
 
It sounds to me a bit like the CEO berrada wants to be the sporting director, making decisions that would usually be left to a sporting director. While fans may agree with the amorim appointment this is still a bit worrying as it isn't clear berrada has the credentials that ashworth would have as a sporting director.
 
Adnan said:
They need to hire a Sporting director who has a vision on how he wants to develop the team playing a brand off football that is proactive on the football side which is then backed up by the out of possession concepts which also need to be proactive.

If the above is adhered to then understanding the market is easy because you will then have a clear criteria on what positions to target in the team and with the correct attributes. But if you only understand the transfer market without understanding the details on how you want to implement a plan on the pitch both on the ball and off the ball, then we carry on giving the advantage to those teams who we want to catch at the top of the chain.

The guys at boardroom level like Berrarda have a place at the club but his job should be to align the structures by hiring the Sporting director who then directly runs the football departments at the club.
Click to expand...

Absolutely agree with you there. And it seems that we might be doing things the other way around, i.e. hiring (or promoting from within) a Sporting Director who aligns with the Head Coach's vision, rather than vice versa given where we are now. Which is not a bad thing in this instance, though in principle it should be the Sporting Director who is in charge of the long-term implementation of the vision, while managers/head coaches may come and go. However, Amorim is certainly strong on work ethic, has identified all the same things Rangnick did, which likely means a major upheaval in terms of squad building (hence why I think finishing outside of Europa/CL qualification would make things a lot easier next summer).

I am still skeptical on whether or not there was indeed any well defined footballing vision on behalf of INEOS and the new hierarchy. A lot of talk about "game model" but no substance. Not one paragraph from anyone describing said vision and the different types of managers linked last summer strengthened the doubts I have of there being a coherent vision defined.

They've certainly placed more scrutiny on the club now. You've got an ageing owner who allegedly wants to achieve sporting success, a mishmash squad, and FFP/PSR issues. It's going to be tricky to navigate.
 
If Luis Campos is poachable from PSG he would be my bet. Has had an excellent track record at all of Monaco, Lille and since taking over from Leonardo has taken PSG from a galactico transfer policy to a more sustainable, youth-driven squad build.

Arsenal are currently being linked to him as Edu’s replacement.
 
Positive thinking: we already identified and got the agreement for a better one, and hence Ashworth is shipped out.
 
Surely has to be somebody who has good South American, Spanish and Portuguese network
 
Galactic said:
Positive thinking: we already identified and got the agreement for a better one, and hence Ashworth is shipped out.
Click to expand...
Txiki Begiristain maybe? If Viana wants to go it alone or Txiki doesn't want to spend half a year teaching someone to suck eggs.
 
daba said:
If Luis Campos is poachable from PSG he would be my bet. Has had an excellent track record at all of Monaco, Lille and since taking over from Leonardo has taken PSG from a galactico transfer policy to a more sustainable, youth-driven squad build.

Arsenal are currently being linked to him as Edu’s replacement.
Click to expand...
Are we after Edu?
 
A stupid question IMO. Berrada of course, or Berrada wants to appoint his dog to be DOF, call DOFG, and collect his wage to pay for dog food.
 
Lee Congerton keeps getting shit tons of money out of us. How about him?
 
Tarrou said:
we're might struggle to hire after the ashforth clown-show
Click to expand...
Sure, Manchester united one of the biggest clubs in world football are going to struggle to attract someone to director level at the club.

Just like Chelsea and Madrid always struggle to hire managers despite the fact its often over as quick as it started.

Ashworth's reputation remains unchanged, he's still done everything he has done which has previously earned him the gig at united and one failed project won't see his reputation reduced to ashes.
 
ErikElevenHag said:
Sure, Manchester united one of the biggest clubs in world football are going to struggle to attract someone to director level at the club.

Just like Chelsea and Madrid always struggle to hire managers despite the fact its often over as quick as it started.

Ashworth's reputation remains unchanged, he's still done everything he has done which has previously earned him the gig at united and one failed project won't see his reputation reduced to ashes.
Click to expand...

Yes I agree it’s easy to hire someone, obviously, but we might struggle to hire the best in class now after this. The illusion that we are no longer a shit-show under the Glazers is over..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.