If you register for free, you will be able to post threads, vote on polls and lots more. If you have problems with the registration or logging in, please contact the administrator.
Directors of Football - Important part of the club or more hassle than they are worth?
Been reading a thread on newcastle-online about DOF's and its got me thinking, is it important to have someone to organise the club or are they more bother than they are worth? Damien Comolli is being blamed for the sacking of Martin Jol, but is it fair?
Directors of Football are becoming more common at clubs and some are being given the power of buying players the over the managers head. Comolli wanted Ramos and as soon as the media found out, Jol's days were numbered IMO.
Are DOF's a good thing or a bad thing then? IMO they should take care off the behind the scenes stuff and should not interfere with buying & selling of players in the first team as that should be the sole job of the Manager. DOF should oversee negotiations, youth development & scouting but they shouldn't be able to say right im buying player x whether you like it or not, Comolli allegedly did this with a few players, Zokora being one of them. Also if results dont work out the DOF wont loose his job, the manager will.
Of course look at Barcelona they have had a DOF or years and its worked for them.
Discuss....
10-29-2007, 12:43 AM
Directors of Football - Important part of the club or more hassle than they are worth? Post #2
Directors of Football are usually the chairman saying:
"I don't want to sack the manager I have at the moment, but in case he turns out to be crap, I'll tie this bloke down just in case I need a new guy in charge."
10-29-2007, 12:47 AM
Directors of Football - Important part of the club or more hassle than they are worth? Post #5
I don't agree with a Director of Football being able to make transfers without consulting the manager.
How is a manager able to run a club if the money is being spent on players who he doesnt really need, as opposed to areas the manager feels he needs to stregnthen, ie spurs signing of darren bent, when the money should really have been spent on strenghten the left wing.
is ramos gonna like having the likes of comolli making signings, or do you think that perhaps part of his joining of the club was that he would have full control in who they bring in?
10-29-2007, 12:51 AM
Directors of Football - Important part of the club or more hassle than they are worth? Post #7
I think it works if everyone knows about it and its clear from the very first moment you come to the club as a manager that you are working under a DoF. Jol knew this, I really don't see what the problem is in having a DoF if thats the way you want to do it. I've been very pleased with the singings Tottenham have made barring a few but how is that different from any other club?
Jol's problem was his refusal to adapt his system to the players he was given, he never once tactically changed going into a game, it was the same way for 3 years.
10-29-2007, 12:53 AM
Directors of Football - Important part of the club or more hassle than they are worth? Post #9
There's nothing inherently wrong with having a Director of Football. Most American teams have a similar set-up(General Manager/Head Coach) and it works fine.
If there's a good relationship between the two and a clear delineation of authority then the DoF can be an incredible asset to the team. He can take a significant amount of the work and responsibility of the shoulders of the manager and allow the manager to concentrate on football.
If there there's a combative relationship between the two, or they aren't on the same page, then it's going to be a trainwreck.
10-29-2007, 12:58 AM
Directors of Football - Important part of the club or more hassle than they are worth? Post #10
Directors of Football - Important part of the club or more hassle than they are worth? 
Linear Mode
