Jump to content

  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

The Case for a Director of Football.

redsoxs

By redsoxs,
in FF - Football Forum

 Share

Recommended Posts

redsoxs Rising Star

redsoxs

Posted
Posted (edited)

Having a bad experience of Comolli, doesn’t make the idea of having a director of football a bad one, there plenty of examples of clubs all over Europe were they have shown to be fully successful, splitting responsibility of tasks with managers improving fields of knowledge for both party's... in are case, specially with a young up coming manager breaking though the divisional ranks to one the top English clubs in the country, this transfer window as shown Rodgers is clearly in need of a helping hand.

 

Rodgers wasn’t keen working under a DoF, the manager wanted to be in full control of transfers. We've now seen the price paid for not having a DoF, during this transfer window, We heard of Ayre travelling around Spain dealing with Real Madrid, Rodgers was never expected to negotiate deals, this was left down to the 'Business men' on the last day of the window, we heard of Rodger leaving Melwood that evening feeling despondent, so its not to far of the mark to think Ayres was left hold the baby during the Dempsey deal, we don't know the full ins outs of what happened between Jol & Ayres, only that it was handle badly, with a low figure being offered, leaving Spurs to trump the offer, which again strengths the case for DoF, was the owners wrong to lets Rodgers take 'full control of all transfers'; i doubt a DoF would of allowed this mess to have happened.

Edited by redsoxs
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Saintslfc13 Mentor

Saintslfc13

Posted
Posted
Having a bad experience of Comolli, doesn’t make the idea of having a director of football a bad one, there plenty of examples of clubs all over Europe were they have shown to be fully successful, splitting responsibility of tasks with managers improving fields of knowledge for both party's... in are case, specially with a young up coming manager breaking though the divisional ranks to one the top English clubs in the country, this transfer window as shown Rodgers is clearly in need of a helping hand.

 

Rodgers wasn’t keen working under a DoF, the manager wanted to be in full control of transfers. We've now seen the price paid for not having a DoF, during this transfer window, We heard of Ayre travelling around Spain dealing with Real Madrid, Rodgers was never expected to negotiate deals, this was left down to the 'Business men' on the last day of the window, we heard of Rodger leaving Melwood that evening feeling despondent, so its not to far of the mark to think Ayres was left hold the baby during the Dempsey deal, we don't know the full ins outs of what happened between Jol & Ayres, only that it was handle badly, with a low figure being offered, leaving Spurs to trump the offer, which again strengths the case for DoF, was the owners wrong to lets Rodgers take 'full control of all transfers'; i doubt a DoF would of allowed this mess to have happened.

 

If he's not the one negotiating then how does he have full control?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
xerxes Grand Master

xerxes

Posted
Posted

Titles can be a bit of a blind alley.

 

The football manager’s job has become more demanding in recent years and the support structure around them is vital.

 

The principle of a Director of Football is a good one. The average life of a manager is eighteen months, the average player’s contract is three and a half years. Having a football man to ensure that the club’s contractual obligations to its playing staff fit some sort of strategy strikes me as being a pretty basic requirement.

 

Any purchase has to be signed off by the owners. If the owners know nothing about football a vital safety net is removed. Before the owners sign off a purchase the Board need to approve the purchase. If the Board know nothing about football another safety net is removed. Before the deal is put to the Board a Board member should be involved in securing the detail of that transfer- if no Board member is experienced in such duties that vulnerability is compounded again. In the above circumstances, which currently exist at LFC, giving a manager with one year’s PL experience “full control” (?) of transfers simply compounds the madness.

 

We need one of two things. An experienced DOF ( a Van Gaal) or an experienced CEO ( Barwick/Kenyon/Dein) to offer an essential test for all transfer activity. Given the lack of football experience that FSG have, both would make sense.

 

Comolli was never the right man. His experience in France was of little value here, his London centric experience pretty irrelevant to our needs with Wenger openly contemptuous of his inflated estimation of himself. That is no reason to ditch the DOF role- other than to save money. FSG’s problem is that they don’t know who to trust when it comes to appointing someone they should trust.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kalasoma Grand Master

kalasoma

Posted
Posted

I have a sneaking suspicion Rodgers said something along the lines of: 'don't loan out Andy on transfer deadline day unless you get me a replacement'. How is that difficult to understand? The owners must have made the final decision to not pay the Dempsey fee. So I can't see how Rodgers is responsible for transfer deadline day failing. Will Rodgers go to FSG wanting a clear explanation of what he can expect going forward? Will this be relayed to the fans in another open letter when January's transfer deadline day closes and we are still without a goalscorer?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LFC64 Community Regular

LFC64

Posted
Posted

Barwick as CEO or whatever title they want to give him so long as we no longer have to tolerate the farcical lack of basic communication between manager, Ayre and absentee owners.

 

It did for us in the Suarez affair, nothing was done other than sacking half the staff, and now the club has taken another blow.

 

I haven't read it but I heard Tony Evans has been saying something along these lines that a CEO has to be appointed to grab the club by the 'scruff of the neck'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RobbieOR Grand Master

RobbieOR

Posted
Posted
We just need a competent CEO or...

 

I'd have no problem if we poached someone like West Broms DoF who just stays in the back ground and does the deals

 

They need to fuck off these shadowy people or reveal who they fucking are

 

You're contradicting yourself there Mick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
shaunstrudwick Proficient

shaunstrudwick

Posted
Posted
Titles can be a bit of a blind alley.

 

The football manager’s job has become more demanding in recent years and the support structure around them is vital.

 

The principle of a Director of Football is a good one. The average life of a manager is eighteen months, the average player’s contract is three and a half years. Having a football man to ensure that the club’s contractual obligations to its playing staff fit some sort of strategy strikes me as being a pretty basic requirement.

 

Any purchase has to be signed off by the owners. If the owners know nothing about football a vital safety net is removed. Before the owners sign off a purchase the Board need to approve the purchase. If the Board know nothing about football another safety net is removed. Before the deal is put to the Board a Board member should be involved in securing the detail of that transfer- if no Board member is experienced in such duties that vulnerability is compounded again. In the above circumstances, which currently exist at LFC, giving a manager with one year’s PL experience “full control” (?) of transfers simply compounds the madness.

 

We need one of two things. An experienced DOF ( a Van Gaal) or an experienced CEO ( Barwick/Kenyon/Dein) to offer an essential test for all transfer activity. Given the lack of football experience that FSG have, both would make sense.

 

Comolli was never the right man. His experience in France was of little value here, his London centric experience pretty irrelevant to our needs with Wenger openly contemptuous of his inflated estimation of himself. That is no reason to ditch the DOF role- other than to save money. FSG’s problem is that they don’t know who to trust when it comes to appointing someone they should trust.

 

Xerxes talks sense

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ritchie Mentor

ritchie

Posted
Posted

We need a CEO/Sporting Director with some clout who's got the personality to deal with other clubs without managing to piss everyone off. And a CEO/Sporting Director who shows leadership and communication skills at all times to avoid calamaties like last week and over Suarez. Also a CEO/Sporting Director who can negotiate us good deals in the transfer market.

 

The above remit is way beyond Ian Ayre, and it was way beyond Comolli. Can we have some proper staff please FSG?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...