I think really we need to understand the roles and responsibilities of a Director of Football in our case, it's interesting looking at other sports such as Rugby that are well known to have a "Director of Rugby" and head coach. I think it is easy to overcomplicate things to some extent. When you look at some of the boards of the more established clubs they have a very complex system of Director of Football and Director of Performance etc.
In general most people agree that Director of Football holds strategic responsibility for all football matters within a club, focusing on long-term philosophy, recruitment, coaching development, academy and high-level structure, often acting as a bridge between the board and the playing department
When you look at that they are middle-men, it's clear they need footballing knowledge at a board level but also have that ability to be able to identify a pathway for the club which can't be easy. Although ever so slightly different and another phrase for the job title is Football Technical Director, Toronto used this for a short time their aim is to design long-term sporting strategy, technical philosophy, and player development pathways to ensure consistency from the academy to the first team. They Bridge the gap between owners and coaching staff by managing recruitment, mentoring coaches, and overseeing staff recruitment. Toronto had Paul Mariner in for a while doing that role. I know we have no chance but Ralf Rangnick was at one point the Red Bull Group of teams Football Technical Director.
In summary for me if we are bring in a DoF or Football Technical Director or whatever there needs to be a clear reporting line and distinction of the roles and responsibilities, although a lot have probably rightfully said it's something that progressive clubs do, we need to know is it the right direction for us?
