LFC approach Wigan for martinez

[cyador]

The two english clubs that actually won a major trophy this season both use a DoF system.

 

Plus every other club in the world outside england.

[silverlining]

The two english clubs that actually won a major trophy this season both use a DoF system.

 

Plus every other club in the world outside england.

 

No they don't.

[cyador]

No they don't.

 

Yes they do.

[BCM]

The two english clubs that actually won a major trophy this season both use a DoF system.

 

Plus every other club in the world outside england.

 

No they do not.

[SCOUSE TAPAS]

The two english clubs that actually won a major trophy this season both use a DoF system.

 

Plus every other club in the world outside england.

So basically what your saying is Rafa will never work again.

[BCM]

That's a big "if"' date=' and one we don't know will directly apply to our scenario.

 

If a DoF buys players without any regard to the manager's wishes, and that in turn affects the team performance, the DoF would be at fault, but to what extent largely depends on how good the team was under the manager to begin with. I'd have killed for a strong DoF when Hodgson bought Poulsen.

 

If the players are quality, fit the playing style the club wants, and one within which the manager intends to work, things get a bit more muddy.

 

Hypothetical - if a DoF like Van Gaal bought Hodgson a player like Sigurdsson, who can't play longball, and the DoF has been put in place to implement a passing style, but Hodgson wanted a hoofer, who would you consider to be at fault, and is that the same person you'd want rid of?

 

See, the whole issue with this is less what the structure is, and more who we put into it, and how good they are. Many European managers work perfectly well in it, but there are so many factors to consider that it makes no sense to me to slate the system rather than how it is put in place, which is something we have no idea about yet.

 

With regards to your outlined ideal structure, what happens when the manager and chief exec don't agree?

 

Also, do you genuinely think Benitez worked "fine" under that model with Parry?[/quote']

 

Thats why im saying you have to have the DOF / Manager combo near perfect other wise they are working against each other.

 

As for Benitez/ Parry. It worked fine for a while, but like i said earlier and for example , rafa wanted barry and keane. But in his opinion Barry was the priority purchase in the system he wanted to develop. In the end Barry's transfer proved awkward with o'neill and Villa, so parry decided to do the Keane deal first, which angered Rafa, because he saw Barry being the key to Keane working out.

The DOF/Chief exec have to be pulling the same way all the time other wise it breaks down.

 

When you say the manager and chief exec dont agree, what do you mean. On a certain player, on wages or transfer fee. ?

[silverlining]

Yes they do.

 

Do they fuck. Who are they? Emenalo? That fucking clueless Abramovich lickspittle? What the fuck does he do? Brian Marwood? Chief pen-pusher and letter-writer at Arab City? He doesn't tell Mancini to do anything.

 

And in any case, most clubs with a "Director Of Football" role have differing internal visions of how they work.

[cyador]

So basically what your saying is Rafa will never work again.

 

Whats rafa got to do with anything?

 

All i'm saying is chelsea and man city both use a dof system. Which they bloody do.

[Captain]

I'll always believe the boss should be the boss and he should be allowed to live or die by his decisions.

 

Comolli didnt work did it?

 

That had nothing to do with the structure. Kenny had final say on the signings, just like the manager should have.

[JoeyJones65]

@thisisanfield: Hearing the Martinez deal is very much still on. He has been the top and priority target for FSG from the start. Rodgers NOT in the frame.

 

 

FSG - Fucking Stupid Gets.

 

We want Champions League....lets get that relegation dodger Martinez. The ultimate in fuckwittery as far as I am concerned. If FSG were doctors they'd prescribe laxative pills to an anorexic.

[TheHowieLama]

Kenny had final say on the signings, just like the manager should have.

 

Not sure you would get a lot of support for this.

[BCM]

Not sure you would get a lot of support for this.

 

Kenny said himself every player Commoli brought in, he wanted.

[TheHowieLama]

Kenny said himself every player Commoli brought in, he wanted.

 

I know - point is that might not be seen as a good thing.

[Babb'sBurstNad]

Thats why im saying you have to have the DOF / Manager combo near perfect other wise they are working against each other.

 

As for Benitez/ Parry. It worked fine for a while, but like i said earlier and for example , rafa wanted barry and keane. But in his opinion Barry was the priority purchase in the system he wanted to develop. In the end Barry's transfer proved awkward with o'neill and Villa, so parry decided to do the Keane deal first, which angered Rafa, because he saw Barry being the key to Keane working out.

The DOF/Chief exec have to be pulling the same way all the time other wise it breaks down.

 

When you say the manager and chief exec dont agree, what do you mean. On a certain player, on wages or transfer fee. ?

 

See, i don't think you do have to get the DoF/manager combo any more right than the alternatives. They all have massive risks and clear benefits.

 

When i talked about agreement, i meant on any of the things you've listed, and the Parry/Rafa example is a good one. The hope is that, in a similar scenario with a proper, strong DoF with a footballing style in the Parry position, the player bought would at least be utilisable by other managers and not an instant write off in a power struggle.

 

It could all go tits up with LvG or whoever, but i'm pretty sick of us not having a footballing identity or any common thread between managers. No one after Hodgson would want Poulsen near a pass and move team, and i doubt if we did snare Guardiola he'd be eager to integrate some of last summer's signings.

 

Comolli spent as much time shifting players as he did signing them.

 

If we know we can't follow the spiral of rebuilding each year, then we need someone higher than the manager, of footballing pedigree, who'll act as a constant.

 

We know very little of how it might be structured and the remit of each role, but i'm open to new ideas.

[J-V]

Swansea have said we haven't even spoken to them about Rogers. According to SSN Martinez will have more talks with us tomorrow. He wants full control over transfers etc. Even more reason not to get the prick.

[The Golden Eel]

Swansea have said we haven't even spoken to them about Rogers.

 

To be honest with you, I don't know what to believe any more.

[Red '84]

this is one tiresome hunt for a new manager.

[xerxes]

That had nothing to do with the structure. Kenny had final say on the signings, just like the manager should have.

 

What does "final say" mean?

 

Werner/ Henry write the cheques. The remaining FSG 18 have a far greater holding presumably they could veto expenditure they did not approve of. Ayre is essentially the Operations Director, if proposed expenditure was contrary to agreed policy presumably he could have vetoed it on those grounds.And when Comolli was here, as the senior football figure at the club, if he had opposed a purchase, would it have gone ahead?

 

The structure which Martinez inherits will go a long way to determining his success.

 

I am a fan of the DOF structure, but it needs the right man, a knowledgeable CEO and a mana ger who has confidence in both to work.

[FanchesterCity]

My understanding is that Brian Marwood is the Football Administration Officer, which (in some folks eyes) equate to a Director of Football.

 

There seems to be two views of the role:

 

1) The Director of Football oversees actual football (talent) matters from a higher perspective than the first team alone... essentially holding a wide view of what's best for the club, from the youth through to first team and scouting network too.

 

or

 

2) (which is also my view) it's about the Football BUSINESS side of the operation. i.e. Player negotiations, contract talks, image rights, disciplinary matters (to some extent), and agent - essentially the paperwork behind buying and keeping a player happy.

Paperwork is a little unjust - it's a skilled job, but he's taking the crap away from the manager - leaving the manager free to manage, and not spend forever dealing with agents and the like.

 

 

At City (So I believe) Marwood is much more option 2 than option 1 - and has NO say in which players are bought - other than to keep an eye on the purse strings and to negotiate, but he's not identifying the players. He possibly might suggest someone he's seen, but Mancini is calling the shots.

 

The reality MIGHT be a bit different, but that's how I understand it.

 

I think it works well, but it's easy to say that when you're winning. Let's not forget it might not be the system that's winning - it's just 200 million quid on the pitch doing it, and you can have your grandma as DoF. The money spent makes it hard to know how effective that role truly is.

[TheHitman]

If you get bored have a light read..

 

https://twitter.com/#!/ChelseaMeltdown

[Anubis]

If you get bored have a light read..

 

https://twitter.com/#!/ChelseaMeltdown

 

Some of the stuff on there is (unintentionally) hilarious.

[KopOut]

My understanding is that Brian Marwood is the Football Administration Officer, which (in some folks eyes) equate to a Director of Football.

 

There seems to be two views of the role:

 

1) The Director of Football oversees actual football (talent) matters from a higher perspective than the first team alone... essentially holding a wide view of what's best for the club, from the youth through to first team and scouting network too.

 

or

 

2) (which is also my view) it's about the Football BUSINESS side of the operation. i.e. Player negotiations, contract talks, image rights, disciplinary matters (to some extent), and agent - essentially the paperwork behind buying and keeping a player happy.

Paperwork is a little unjust - it's a skilled job, but he's taking the crap away from the manager - leaving the manager free to manage, and not spend forever dealing with agents and the like.

 

 

At City (So I believe) Marwood is much more option 2 than option 1 - and has NO say in which players are bought - other than to keep an eye on the purse strings and to negotiate, but he's not identifying the players. He possibly might suggest someone he's seen, but Mancini is calling the shots.

 

The reality MIGHT be a bit different, but that's how I understand it.

 

I think it works well, but it's easy to say that when you're winning. Let's not forget it might not be the system that's winning - it's just 200 million quid on the pitch doing it, and you can have your grandma as DoF. The money spent makes it hard to know how effective that role truly is.

 

I think you mean leaving the Coach free to coach.

[FanchesterCity]

Some of the stuff on there is (unintentionally) hilarious.

 

Every club's got 'em... but very funny stuff. Like you say, some clearly believe what they are saying.

 

Most are probably teenagers (I hope!). If that's coming from grown men, heaven help us all.

[FrenchEyeGlass]

This is your 26th post in this thread so far

 

Your point?

 

I said a few days after Kenny's sacking, I decided to not give a shit until further official information. Most of my posts will probably have been ages ago.

[TheHowieLama]

Like coached to the league title thing.