June 27, 2019, 02:59:07 AM

Author Topic: Director of Football might be appointed...  (Read 33235 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

May 14, 2016, 04:05:28 AM
Reply #15

Major Clanger

NSNO Subscriber
OK cool, my only worry would be if they had a difference of option over targets, like kinnear and pardew at Newcastle, that would be absolute bollocks

Yeah, what I painted was the ideal picture.

If you hire a dickhead or just a mate of a mate, you get what Newcastle got. It is a tricky position to get right.
« Last Edit: May 14, 2016, 04:06:05 AM by Major Clanger »
I didn't even remember I had a signature.

May 14, 2016, 04:13:47 AM
Reply #16


While looking on my cell phone I mis-read the headline as "Sporting Director/Director of Football Might Be Accountant."

Needless to say I about had a heart attack.

May 14, 2016, 05:14:01 AM
Reply #17


I've mentioned it a few times on this forum, I think having a football director - if the role can be properly implemented and defined without causing too much friction with the manager/head coach - could very well be a step in the right direction:

Our managers in the past have been given a hell of a lot of responsibility including scouting and dealing with transfers, creating and implementing a football philosophy based very much on their own vision, recruiting staff (players, coaches and scouts) and having a large say in how the long term infrastructure of the club's facilities is developed. Plus on top of all that, don't forget their main priority is to prepare the current team for the next game! Moyes and Martinez in particular were individuals who ate, slept and breathed football even when they were not working so that kind of character suits our current model.

But when that manager leaves, many of the personnel they brought in also leave and the next manager has free reign over the whole philosophy of the club and how the infrastructure is developed - what if some of the meticulous work that Martinez has done off the field is not appreciated by the next manager especially with regards to bringing more youngsters through and talks of us having a big transfer war chest?

In general, there is a concern that our current technical football model suffers from a lack of continuity and having a football director could help alleviate that problem by taking some of the burden from the manager and allow them to concentrate more on working with the players and preparing for the next game. Of course I feel that the manager should always have the biggest and defining say regarding what players are brought in as they will be working with those players closely every day but the DoF would be more in charge of chasing up the player, work on the negotiations etc.

There has to be more of an 'Everton; model then a 'Moyes' or a 'Martinez' model. A DoF should help us adapt to changes in football and help implement a philosophy while still allowing the manager the flexibility to interpret it the way they wish within certain parameters.

May 14, 2016, 05:15:05 AM
Reply #18


In favour of it, with the reservation that it does not always work. An acutely embarrassing example is the RS who have had something like it before they got Herr Clip.

May 14, 2016, 05:33:28 AM
Reply #19


I'm sold give Martinez a call he is good at all that shit just can't coach😏
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?hmm hmm?

May 14, 2016, 05:38:24 AM
Reply #20


100% behind it.  So long as they take the footballing decisions.  You can't have Bill there as the puppet master.  He has to step back now.

May 14, 2016, 01:36:40 PM
Reply #21


NSNO Subscriber
I'm in favour of this.

If for nothing other than the fact that there are less and less managers who will now have the experience of doing everything themselves.

Of course there are issues with getting the appointment right. But there are those same issues with getting a manager right too. There's always a recruitment risk.

I did also think that it should help smooth the transition of youth players to the first team.

While individual coaching styles might differ the DoF should help ensure that the youth programme and the senior signings etc are aligned.

Whereas in the manager model you always need to find someone who will take an interest in this.

May 14, 2016, 01:38:26 PM
Reply #22


NSNO Subscriber
With regards to this specifically we must surely have whoever it is lined up and they will be involved in the recruitment process of the new manager and any new players.

Obviously if we hadn't planned to sack RM this week then there wouldn't be the awareness of this idea until next week/the week after; so I'd expect an appointment/announcement in that timeframe.

May 14, 2016, 02:41:57 PM
Reply #23



It's about time we joined the 21st century footballing world.

May 14, 2016, 02:44:51 PM
Reply #24

sam of the south

Let's say we get De Boer; how has Overmars performed as the DoF at Ajax?

Would it be feasible to get both?

Getting a DoF is indeed the modern way forward.

However, my fragile and jaded Evertonian constitution says that it greatly increases our chances of getting another vital appointment wrong 😁
« Last Edit: May 14, 2016, 02:45:54 PM by sam of the south »
Dignity does not consist in possessing honours, but in deserving them

May 14, 2016, 03:21:04 PM
Reply #25


I'm sold give Martinez a call he is good at all that shit just can't coach😏

He's not though.

The only 2 real quality players he's brought in during his time are Lukaku and Barry, both of which were no brainers.

May 14, 2016, 03:36:22 PM
Reply #26


Excellent, I've always thought NSNO has a bit more enlightened fans than other forums. What I've seen in them there have been much more people rejecting the idea out of hand because it doesn't work at City or whoever.

Toffee_scot put down the reasons why a DoF is a good idea well. It's also worth realising that a good manager doesn't necessarily make a good DoF any more than the reverse is true. They require somewhat different skills. That's why I would scan through clubs using this model and see which are doing a good job from this perspective. Clubs that are punching above their weight over a period of time including more than one manager, who have a good transfer policy and a good youth setup with a clear vision for the club.

The last part is something Everton needs as well. What sort of image should the club have in ten years time? There are plenty of clubs that are known for a style. Tactics come and go but underlying principles can stay. We were known as School of Science but what does it actually mean? Should the club define it set it as the goal to aspire to? At least to me it looks like our greatest teams (mid-80s and period from 1963 to 1970) had a few things in common: skill, determination, grit and mentality. They played good football but they were also tough and had people who hated loosing. IMO, that would not be a bad place to start defining the requirements for a team.

DoF's job would be to see that player recruitment would be on the right track. There would not be too many players who don't fit into the chosen style. This way each manager (who would also be chosen to fit the club) would only need small adjustment rather than whole-sale changes making the transition much smoother and quicker.

May 14, 2016, 04:02:55 PM
Reply #27


Unless the manager has the right of final decision, otherwise it may not be a good idea.

May 14, 2016, 04:13:30 PM
Reply #28


There is also the practical factor that increasingly managers coming to the Premier League have largely or exclusively worked under this type of structure and therefore might not be interested in or competent to taking on the more traditional 'manager' role. The pool of candidates willing to take responsibility for the whole footballing structure is going to get smaller and smaller.

May 14, 2016, 04:32:27 PM
Reply #29


Not for me, the manager should be the main man given full control of everything , I hate that term 'Director of Football' load of old cobblers