Director of Football

BenLynch29

BenLynch29

Well-known member
James has written two articles today mentioning the creation of a DoF role within the club.

I find this a very curious development, but one that I support 1,000% for a variety of reasons. In my opinion, this role is actually far more important for the club to get right than the managerial appointment as it will have much more significant and longer lasting consequences for the club. And I’m curious who the club is looking at to fill the role.

One thing that never sat well with me with BR was his insistence of total control of everything related to the football operations of the club. While he was here and winning trebles and guiding us into European football after Christmas, it was sort of a necessary evil IMO, but now that he’s gone we should never allow a single person with that much influence ever again. And having a good DoF is a big part of that. It also ensures squad cohesion when we bring in a new manager in the sense that one of the responsibilities a DoF typically has is defining the playing style of the club and the appropriate characteristics of successful players at the club. So a new manager wouldn’t be given carte blanche to rip up the squad and start over as we so often see with more traditional power structures in football.

But this is going to be a monumental task for the DoF at Celtic because what is required and/or desirable domestically is very different than what we need for European football. It’s very much in Celtic’s DNA going back over 50 years to play attacking football; It’s attractive, sexy, exciting, and quite frankly it sells. But we’ve also seen how this plays out on the European stage, and it’s doubtful we’ll ever make another run to a final using such tactics. So how the DoF reconciles this dichotomy will be crucially important for how the club operates going forward in terms of player recruitment, managerial appointments, and even the youth development setup.
 
BenLynch29 said:
James has written two articles today mentioning the creation of a DoF role within the club.

I find this a very curious development, but one that I support 1,000% for a variety of reasons. In my opinion, this role is actually far more important for the club to get right than the managerial appointment as it will have much more significant and longer lasting consequences for the club. And I’m curious who the club is looking at to fill the role.

One thing that never sat well with me with BR was his insistence of total control of everything related to the football operations of the club. While he was here and winning trebles and guiding us into European football after Christmas, it was sort of a necessary evil IMO, but now that he’s gone we should never allow a single person with that much influence ever again. And having a good DoF is a big part of that. It also ensures squad cohesion when we bring in a new manager in the sense that one of the responsibilities a DoF typically has is defining the playing style of the club and the appropriate characteristics of successful players at the club. So a new manager wouldn’t be given carte blanche to rip up the squad and start over as we so often see with more traditional power structures in football.

But this is going to be a monumental task for the DoF at Celtic because what is required and/or desirable domestically is very different than what we need for European football. It’s very much in Celtic’s DNA going back over 50 years to play attacking football; It’s attractive, sexy, exciting, and quite frankly it sells. But we’ve also seen how this plays out on the European stage, and it’s doubtful we’ll ever make another run to a final using such tactics. So how the DoF reconciles this dichotomy will be crucially important for how the club operates going forward in terms of player recruitment, managerial appointments, and even the youth development setup.
Click to expand...
great point's Ben,got to get the DoF appointment spot on and no cheap option's HH
 
Yeah I’d be happy with that also.

If it’s done properly, especially the scouting side of it then it priceless.

Clubs like Ajax and PSV, also some of the French and German teams have great structures, although certain clubs call it technical director.

The cross border rule in England is something we also have to use more.

Olo-flex was the last one we got. Someone respected down there with good contacts could be an option.

To get Dembele for £500k was incredible.

When you look at the money we’re wasting on squad players, getting the best available in positions like Director Of Football is surely a no-brainer.
 
BenLynch29 said:
James has written two articles today mentioning the creation of a DoF role within the club.

I find this a very curious development, but one that I support 1,000% for a variety of reasons. In my opinion, this role is actually far more important for the club to get right than the managerial appointment as it will have much more significant and longer lasting consequences for the club. And I’m curious who the club is looking at to fill the role.

One thing that never sat well with me with BR was his insistence of total control of everything related to the football operations of the club. While he was here and winning trebles and guiding us into European football after Christmas, it was sort of a necessary evil IMO, but now that he’s gone we should never allow a single person with that much influence ever again. And having a good DoF is a big part of that. It also ensures squad cohesion when we bring in a new manager in the sense that one of the responsibilities a DoF typically has is defining the playing style of the club and the appropriate characteristics of successful players at the club. So a new manager wouldn’t be given carte blanche to rip up the squad and start over as we so often see with more traditional power structures in football.

But this is going to be a monumental task for the DoF at Celtic because what is required and/or desirable domestically is very different than what we need for European football. It’s very much in Celtic’s DNA going back over 50 years to play attacking football; It’s attractive, sexy, exciting, and quite frankly it sells. But we’ve also seen how this plays out on the European stage, and it’s doubtful we’ll ever make another run to a final using such tactics. So how the DoF reconciles this dichotomy will be crucially important for how the club operates going forward in terms of player recruitment, managerial appointments, and even the youth development setup.
Click to expand...
Is the manager not the "director of football". If not then what does a manager do??
Does he become a first team coach, and, does the first team coach coach players someone else has bought. Does he first team coach(manager) coach players in system designed by another (director of football).
So who is in charge ?? Who takes the blame ??
Have I got the wrong end of the stick ??
 
Weedocbhoy60 said:
Is the manager not the "director of football". If not then what does a manager do??
Does he become a first team coach, and, does the first team coach coach players someone else has bought. Does he first team coach(manager) coach players in system designed by another (director of football).
So who is in charge ?? Who takes the blame ??
Have I got the wrong end of the stick ??
Click to expand...
My understanding of director of football is division of labour.

The money in football is such that any financial mistake can be catastrophic.

Now its possible that the traditional manager of the team shoudl be able to see the best players that he wants at the club. But say you sign someone who turns out to have bad chemistry or whatever, but fails for some reason.

If you runa multimillion pound club you can wipe out massive amount of wealth with one duff purchase that nobody else wants to buy since he bacame rotten at your club.

Football managers, in theory, knwo the football side, but they are usually football players who dont understand the money side.

Take rodgers he gives a lost of guys he wants to make team better. He may see something in the player that is valuable. But can he quantify that qualitative value?

He may think he can but does he have the skill set to risk assess the value he sees?

Possibly not.

So when players become million pound purchases if the manager cant undertsand money he could wipe out the club while thinking he doing grand job because the players he has do the job he asks.

Thats where director of football is meant to come in. He should be a business, accounting, legal brain, The footabll manager gives him list of players he needs. The business director of football looks at the costs involved and risk assess if its a good finacial deal.

The football manager then becomes added value on pitch
Director of football becomes go between board and manager to help clarify the business stuff in football terms.
Finance team asses the risks off the field with players wanted. And then a get together with all the decision makers decide if the player sought adds enough value off field to be worth buying for on field.

Some football managers dont like that model. They like to have control over who they buy and couldnt care less about the costs involved. But unless you are backed by massive wealth the modern football manager doesnt have the business brain in many cases to safe guard the clubs future especially when 1 bad signing can bankrupt a club these days.

Director of football also should have more time to work with scouting teams to find better players who are undervalued and the manager of the team has more time to coach and pick the best team availble for each match.

Requires good communications between the director of football and the manager of team, to got out and find players who fit the managers requirements but is within risk metrics of the club
 
TET said:
My understanding of director of football is division of labour.

The money in football is such that any financial mistake can be catastrophic.

Now its possible that the traditional manager of the team shoudl be able to see the best players that he wants at the club. But say you sign someone who turns out to have bad chemistry or whatever, but fails for some reason.

If you runa multimillion pound club you can wipe out massive amount of wealth with one duff purchase that nobody else wants to buy since he bacame rotten at your club.

Football managers, in theory, knwo the football side, but they are usually football players who dont understand the money side.

Take rodgers he gives a lost of guys he wants to make team better. He may see something in the player that is valuable. But can he quantify that qualitative value?

He may think he can but does he have the skill set to risk assess the value he sees?

Possibly not.

So when players become million pound purchases if the manager cant undertsand money he could wipe out the club while thinking he doing grand job because the players he has do the job he asks.

Thats where director of football is meant to come in. He should be a business, accounting, legal brain, The footabll manager gives him list of players he needs. The business director of football looks at the costs involved and risk assess if its a good finacial deal.

The football manager then becomes added value on pitch
Director of football becomes go between board and manager to help clarify the business stuff in football terms.
Finance team asses the risks off the field with players wanted. And then a get together with all the decision makers decide if the player sought adds enough value off field to be worth buying for on field.

Some football managers dont like that model. They like to have control over who they buy and couldnt care less about the costs involved. But unless you are backed by massive wealth the modern football manager doesnt have the business brain in many cases to safe guard the clubs future especially when 1 bad signing can bankrupt a club these days.

Director of football also should have more time to work with scouting teams to find better players who are undervalued and the manager of the team has more time to coach and pick the best team availble for each match.

Requires good communications between the director of football and the manager of team, to got out and find players who fit the managers requirements but is within risk metrics of the club
Click to expand...

Example Rdogers

Signed lots of players at Celtic
Some have not been good value for money.
But overall; he doing grand job on pitch.
But the finacial side is now very high risk with op costs near maximum levels.

Rodgers did good job on the pitch
But his value added on picth may not be worth the moeny spend on the list of players.
A director of football may have vetoed some of these purchases
having risk analysed the purchases.
Like the McGinn deal for example.

The price asked for his analysis may have been too much. it may even have been rodgers had been a wonka and it was blaocked because the board no longer trusted him if he planning to escape mid season.
 
Can't agree with the requirement for a Director of Football, unless you were definitively looking for a head coach instead of an actual manager.

It's another buffer and potential obstacle and considering that there appeared to be a massive war of egos between Rodgers and Lawwell, would it be wise to throw a third party into the mix?

I'm sure there are examples where that model has worked, I'm also equally as sure there are as many, if not more, examples where it hasn't.

Certain elements of football have changed over the years, but the basic principles of nurturing and developing a team are not that far removed from a bygone era.

How much veto does the DoF have?

If the manager identifies a player and the board are prepared to submit the finance, does the DoF have the power of veto?

There's an old adage about too many cooks. We seem to have enough already making creative recipes with the books, perhaps we don't need to add more into the equation regarding what happens on the pitch.
 
TET said:
My understanding of director of football is division of labour.

The money in football is such that any financial mistake can be catastrophic.

Now its possible that the traditional manager of the team shoudl be able to see the best players that he wants at the club. But say you sign someone who turns out to have bad chemistry or whatever, but fails for some reason.

If you runa multimillion pound club you can wipe out massive amount of wealth with one duff purchase that nobody else wants to buy since he bacame rotten at your club.

Football managers, in theory, knwo the football side, but they are usually football players who dont understand the money side.

Take rodgers he gives a lost of guys he wants to make team better. He may see something in the player that is valuable. But can he quantify that qualitative value?

He may think he can but does he have the skill set to risk assess the value he sees?

Possibly not.

So when players become million pound purchases if the manager cant undertsand money he could wipe out the club while thinking he doing grand job because the players he has do the job he asks.

Thats where director of football is meant to come in. He should be a business, accounting, legal brain, The footabll manager gives him list of players he needs. The business director of football looks at the costs involved and risk assess if its a good finacial deal.

The football manager then becomes added value on pitch
Director of football becomes go between board and manager to help clarify the business stuff in football terms.
Finance team asses the risks off the field with players wanted. And then a get together with all the decision makers decide if the player sought adds enough value off field to be worth buying for on field.

Some football managers dont like that model. They like to have control over who they buy and couldnt care less about the costs involved. But unless you are backed by massive wealth the modern football manager doesnt have the business brain in many cases to safe guard the clubs future especially when 1 bad signing can bankrupt a club these days.

Director of football also should have more time to work with scouting teams to find better players who are undervalued and the manager of the team has more time to coach and pick the best team availble for each match.

Requires good communications between the director of football and the manager of team, to got out and find players who fit the managers requirements but is within risk metrics of the club
Click to expand...
thanks TET. Good answer.
 
There’s different titles for the same role:
Director of Football
Technical Director
General Manager (more common in America)

They’re all basically the same thing, although the exact org chart along with roles & responsibilities can vary quite a bit from one club to the next. But typically a DoF would sit at the top of the hierarchy with respect to football operations and report to the CEO/President of the club. So in addition to the manager, the DoF would also have reporting into him the women’s manager, the academy director, the scouting team, as well as some of the other smaller departments such as sport science etc.

But crucially, one of the things that a DoF does is implement a strategic vision and philosophy throughout the club. So the women’s team will play the same style as the men, and the academy for both boys and girls will learn the same system as well. It facilitates a tremendous amount of continuity throughout the club, both for players and staff. There’s a reason Barcelona has had such success promoting its youth players into the first team and also promoting their coaches up through the ranks up to 1st team manager. The manager then is only responsible for 1st team performance and will have responsibility for all the coaches, players, analytics, sports science, nutrition, strength & conditioning, etc etc that impact the 1st team squad. Player transfers are usually the remit of the DoF, at least on paper, but the manager obviously has a lot of input into that process as well as the club doesn’t want to make a big investment if the manager isn’t on board - but major disagreements should be rare if there is a consistant vision and philosophical alignment between the manager and DoF.

The upsides to this are many:
The club will never again be at significant risk of one individual walking out the door;
Much easier to replace, via internal promotion, the loss of any one player or staff member;
No need to turnover the entire squad whenever a new manager is hired - a prerequisite to being hired will be philosophical alignment on major issues with the DoF and the existing squad and staff;
Etc etc.

This sort of structure is much more common in North America, although it is gaining acceptance in Europe as well. When it is implemented well, and it’s not always!, the benefits for the club are enormous. The best example I can think of in North America is the New England Patriots. In Europe, most of the top clubs have implemented such a setup, although ManU remains a notable exception. Barcelona, Ajax, Man City, Liverpool, Arsenal, and Tottenham all have strong a strong DoF with a lot of responsibility.
 
W
Spherical Planet said:
Can't agree with the requirement for a Director of Football, unless you were definitively looking for a head coach instead of an actual manager.

It's another buffer and potential obstacle and considering that there appeared to be a massive war of egos between Rodgers and Lawwell, would it be wise to throw a third party into the mix?

I'm sure there are examples where that model has worked, I'm also equally as sure there are as many, if not more, examples where it hasn't.

Certain elements of football have changed over the years, but the basic principles of nurturing and developing a team are not that far removed from a bygone era.

How much veto does the DoF have?

If the manager identifies a player and the board are prepared to submit the finance, does the DoF have the power of veto?

There's an old adage about too many cooks. We seem to have enough already making creative recipes with the books, perhaps we don't need to add more into the equation regarding what happens on the pitch.
Click to expand...
where a DoF structure has worked well, the manager and the DoF are singing from the same hymnal, so to speak. That’s why it’s so important to get alignment between DoF and the manager as I noted in another post on this thread.

Think of it this way: a manager decides that the team needs a new RB. He then works with the DoF find the best replacement based on the requirements that the manager specifies (and which, ideally, the DoF agrees). Can he shoot? Are his crosses/corners good? Does he need pace? Does he need some physicality to his game? How is his vision on the pitch? How successful is he at tackling and winning headers? Etc etc. Then the responsibility falls on the DoF to find the best targets based on the requirements and the financial constraints (likely won’t be able to 100% meet every criteria on a limited budget). The targets are then presented to the manager for approval before an approach is made to sign the player. The DoF would also be much more deeply knowledgeable about the academy players coming up and who might be expendible. Lastly, the DoF would spend far more of his time working with counterparts across the continent and the scouting staff, so he’ll know the transfer market, both pricing as well as quality of players available, than the manager would ever be able to — this is likely one of the big weaknesses of the BR era.

Also in all of this will be some consideration of any deficiencies a player may have and the relative strengths of the coaching staff in terms of improving a player; eg maybe the DoF signs a player that is weak at a skill that the coaching staff is really good at developing if that also means for the same cost he can get a player better at other skills than would otherwise be available.

The keys to making this work are (1) ensuring alignment between the DoF and the manager and (2) having roles and responsibilities clearly defined so everyone knows what their job is, and just as importantly, what it isn’t (lookin’ at you PL).
 
BenLynch29 said:
W

where a DoF structure has worked well, the manager and the DoF are singing from the same hymnal, so to speak. That’s why it’s so important to get alignment between DoF and the manager as I noted in another post on this thread.

Think of it this way: a manager decides that the team needs a new RB. He then works with the DoF find the best replacement based on the requirements that the manager specifies (and which, ideally, the DoF agrees). Can he shoot? Are his crosses/corners good? Does he need pace? Does he need some physicality to his game? How is his vision on the pitch? How successful is he at tackling and winning headers? Etc etc. Then the responsibility falls on the DoF to find the best targets based on the requirements and the financial constraints (likely won’t be able to 100% meet every criteria on a limited budget). The targets are then presented to the manager for approval before an approach is made to sign the player. The DoF would also be much more deeply knowledgeable about the academy players coming up and who might be expendible. Lastly, the DoF would spend far more of his time working with counterparts across the continent and the scouting staff, so he’ll know the transfer market, both pricing as well as quality of players available, than the manager would ever be able to — this is likely one of the big weaknesses of the BR era.

Also in all of this will be some consideration of any deficiencies a player may have and the relative strengths of the coaching staff in terms of improving a player; eg maybe the DoF signs a player that is weak at a skill that the coaching staff is really good at developing if that also means for the same cost he can get a player better at other skills than would otherwise be available.

The keys to making this work are (1) ensuring alignment between the DoF and the manager and (2) having roles and responsibilities clearly defined so everyone knows what their job is, and just as importantly, what it isn’t (lookin’ at you PL).
Click to expand...
well said Ben,the era of managers having total control are about gone,even guardiola has to say to someone,i need this or that,same as klopp,DoF is as important as the "head coach" so any appointment needs to be spot on,who is available is the problem,although i'm sure there would be no shortage of applicants HH
 
michael duffy said:
down to DD i think,tell PL to stick to the commercial side and leave football business to football people. HH
Click to expand...
Michael, I don’t have any inside information, but it wouldn’t surprise me at all if this is being driven by the board and/or DD personally. Whatever one thinks of the merits of a DoF, one thing is absolutely certain: there are a lot of successful heirarchies, but one that has never worked anywhere is having the CEO of a £100M club personally approving or negotiating specific transfers. PL desperately needs to delegate this task to someone else who he trusts, whether that’s a manager or a DoF.
 
The DoF/Technical Director role has clearly worked well on the continent. I read in Soccernomics about how teams like Lyon flourished because they had a sound philosophy that was not reliant on the wants and whims of any one coach. Managers could come and go - which painted Le Guen's "success" in a new light - and the club carried on, uninterrupted. However, in British football (and certainly in Glasgow) we can't see past the manager as the war chieftain, the personality on whose every word the club stands or falls.
 
Incidentally, Soccernomics was also full of praise for Moyes. It extolled the virtues of his abilities to plan and prepare long-term, to spot talent on a budget. He doesn't bring instant success (Man U, Sociedad...) but he can build up clubs meaningfully over the course of years. I suppose his playing style is guff, though.

I'm not saying it would work, personality-wise, or that he'd be interested in a job upstairs, or if we could afford him plus a good manager, or if we could stand his daft sandpaper face, but just that his skill sets might suit that role.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

Total: 110 (members: 3, guests: 107)

Latest posts

Share this page

Back
Top