Director of Football Coming In?

[Berkshire Blade]

To prove your point, you've cited a club that has become much worse since getting rid of the person managers were accountable to?

They just replaced him with a CEO AND sporting director(s)

 

[Carlton Blade]

They just replaced him with a CEO AND sporting director(s)

So if you hire shit people, you get shit results. The argument being put up is that the role above the manager is unnecessary but it's being made by highlighting poor hires, poor process and poor structure. They are 2 very different arguments

 

[Berkshire Blade]

So if you hire shit people, you get shit results. The argument being put up is that the role above the manager is unnecessary but it's being made by highlighting poor hires, poor process and poor structure. They are 2 very different arguments

The idea it's a magic wand that makes us a good club obviously isn't true. Personally I think the previous performance under Bettis/Wilder/Hecky in the championship was more than good enough. Lack of funds from above hurt so it couldn't go further in the premier league.

I didn't and still don't see a strong reason to change. We did last summer and it was horrific and will hurt us for years. Look at the summer before. Another like that, building from a stronger place too, and I think we would have had a fair chance at autos. So why change? There needs to be a bloody good argument than "it might work"

 

[Carlton Blade]

The idea it's a magic wand that makes us a good club obviously isn't true. Personally I think the previous performance under Bettis/Wilder/Hecky in the championship was more than good enough. Lack of funds from above hurt so it couldn't go further in the premier league.

I didn't and still don't see a strong reason to change. We did last summer and it was horrific and will hurt us for years. Look at the summer before. Another like that, building from a stronger place too, and I think we would have had a fair chance at autos. So why change? There needs to be a bloody good argument than "it might work"

"Why change?” has a simple answer. Because continuing a model that repeatedly wastes huge amounts of money and narrows recruitment thinking needs a better defence than nostalgia.

And “it worked once” is not a strategy, especially when the margins are tighter than ever.

 

[Carlton Blade]

The idea it's a magic wand that makes us a good club obviously isn't true. Personally I think the previous performance under Bettis/Wilder/Hecky in the championship was more than good enough. Lack of funds from above hurt so it couldn't go further in the premier league.

I didn't and still don't see a strong reason to change. We did last summer and it was horrific and will hurt us for years. Look at the summer before. Another like that, building from a stronger place too, and I think we would have had a fair chance at autos. So why change? There needs to be a bloody good argument than "it might work"

Also, If your argument was "I don't trust COH to hire the right people", fine. I get that. But it's not. It's just "change might be shit so don't try"

 

[Upton_Blade]

You're advocating keeping failures in support job roles because of Watford. You're saying let Wilder run everything when he's struggling to even find consistency in the job that's meant to be the one he's judged on.

What you're saying is that you'd rather have one man doung a mediocre, at best job across 5 roles than filling those roles with competent people. Look at the loan signings of the last 3 seasons. Look at the lack of ability to look beyond the same player type. Look at the insistence that athleticism isn't a requirement. How is letting that continue, with the huge amounts of money it wastes a better idea than taking some money, especially when the cost of these roles will not count towards SCR costs, and employing a few people who have experience of success and then holding them accountable for results of their work?

No accountability? Not every employee is as free of responsibility as Bettis. Others are given targets to achieve and milestones to hit.

Because Watford are a joke, keep the club where it is and pray the football world turns the click back a decade. I think it's complete madness.

You're wasting your time with the dinosaurs on here Carlts. You really are!

 

[Berkshire Blade]

Also, If your argument was "I don't trust COH to hire the right people", fine. I get that. But it's not. It's just "change might be shit so don't try"

No my argument is that the current set up wasn't the main reason we weren't able to establish ourselves in the premier league. I remain unconvinced coh will be better in that regard until we do it though. I think we about to see a diversion away from LinkedIn football after the disaster at Chelsea. It's not wise to chase the "in thing" like we did with Belgium after that gold rush was over.

 

[Carlton Blade]

No my argument is that the current set up wasn't the main reason we weren't able to establish ourselves in the premier league. I remain unconvinced coh will be better in that regard until we do it though. I think we about to see a diversion away from LinkedIn football after the disaster at Chelsea. It's not wise to chase the "in thing" like we did with Belgium after that gold rush was over.

Describing having enough qualified, talented, experienced people in the right roles to allow the person in charge of results to focus on just that as "LinkedIn football" is why Bettis gets paid so much to add so little.

Your taking the worst examples and saying "let one bloke do it all, it's safer"

 

[Berkshire Blade]

Describing having enough qualified, talented, experienced people in the right roles to allow the person in charge of results to focus on just that as "LinkedIn football" is why Bettis gets paid so much to add so little.

Your taking the worst examples and saying "let one bloke do it all, it's safer"

All the middling examples of also rans also justify why it's not vital

 

[Carlton Blade]

All the middling examples of also rans also justify why it's not vital

Your whole argument for not improving the off pitch set up is "not every team wins the league, why even bother"

 

[Berkshire Blade]

Your whole argument for not improving the off pitch set up is "not every team wins the league, why even bother"

Well if you want to frame it that way then it is. But that's not what I said is it. I don't think we are going to agree and I don't think Bettis is going to change his opinion either...if he stands down maybe the owners disagree with him...but don't hold your breath!

 

[Carlton Blade]

Well if you want to frame it that way then it is. But that's not what I said is it. I don't think we are going to agree and I don't think Bettis is going to change his opinion either...if he stands down maybe the owners disagree with him...but don't hold your breath!

Bettis will never disagree. United being run this way keeps him employed

 

[Berkshire Blade]

Bettis will never disagree. United being run this way keeps him employed

Well the owners could get rid...

 

[Carlton Blade]

Well the owners could get rid...

As before, if your argument is against COH 's competence, I'd get it

 

[jt64]

You're actually emphasising my point, thank you.

Toto Wolf had a top end budget,which allowed him to recruit top drivers and support staff.

That's exactly my point! without the finance to build the structure and recruit top talent a director of football adds nothing but more levels of bureaucracy.

It really doesn't. It just creates a clear demarcation between who does the coaching/game planning and who does the recruiting. Which are more than full time jobs on their own probably at League Two level.