New Everton Owners: The Friedkin Group

[John from Bootle]

….the DoF will have a team of trusted scouts who make recommendations to him or are sent to look at a particular player but ultimately it’s the DoF who decides.

The manager will also make recommendations but the demarcation is he’s the one responsible for team selection and tactics. The Manager ultimately works with the players provided to him by the DoF but it’s good if they’re on the same page and largely agree on the ‘type’ of player and positions that need strengthening.

The bizarre situation with Walsh and Koeman was they brought in and negotiated their own players. That position worsened by interference and acquisitions from Moshiri and BK. Despite this, Brands seemed to keep a level of control in the madhouse, apparently highly respected by players and both warring factions on the Board. Brands worked particularly well with Silva but Benitez obnoxiously refused to even talk with the DoF and his position was untenable.

I’m not surprised we’ve plummeted since Brands left, more because of his diplomacy than his player acquisition skills. From what I’ve heard of TFG, they leave key personnel to get on with their jobs.

Yeah, this is what I mean though. "It's good if they're on the same page."

Is it so difficult to find a manager with an eye for a player these days that you need to muddy the waters in the first place? Could you not get by on having say a Technical/Youth Development director, a chief scout, and a chief executive or deputy chief exec dealing with the finances of transfers?

Some people might say that's putting all the trust in one man (the manager), but aren't you just doing that with a DOF anyway? You could show me a list of managers and there's several I'd probably choose as being preferable to Dan bleedin' Ashworth (for example) in having the ultimate say on transfers.

 

[jamieni]

Yeah, this is what I mean though. "It's good if they're on the same page."

Is it so difficult to find a manager with an eye for a player these days that you need to muddy the waters in the first place? Could you not get by on having say a Technical/Youth Development director, a chief scout, and a chief executive or deputy chief exec dealing with the finances of transfers?

Some people might say that's putting all the trust in one man (the manager), but aren't you just doing that with a DOF anyway? You could show me a list of managers and there's several I'd probably choose as being preferable to Dan bleedin' Ashworth (for example) in having the ultimate say on transfers.

I guess the idea was to take some of the responsibility away from the manager to let them get on with the job of preparing the team etcetera and doing so by overseeing all those roles you mentioned. As others have said it seems that the DoF role is a fairly ambiguous concept and different clubs will have different ideas of what the DoF role is for.

My main concern is that Everton finds a system that works for the club. Personally I don’t give a stuff if it’s a DoF or Big Ron phoning round clubs asking for players as long as the team is doing well.

 

[John from Bootle]

In all seriousness, most of us have absolutely no idea what a DoF actually does, it's just something we're vaguely aware of being a thing. I reckon what most of us think a DoF does and what they actually do are probably miles apart. I'd guess it's one of those roles that can vary hugely from club to club too.

Yeah, of course. I just don't look at the list of people who tend to get these jobs and think there's any way on gods earth most of them can spot a player better than say a Moyes, Thomas Frank, Jose Mourinho or even say a Gary Neville. They might have their finger in more pies, have more contacts, and be a bit more financially astute than say a Gary Neville would be in the market, but then isn't that just largely down to scouting and having the opportunity to network by lieu of it being part of your job?

That's not to say that none of them can spot a player, because we know they can, but I think the main benefits they should bring can be covered by other roles. I'd just back myself to get a good manager and let them have final say whilst ensuring they had as much support as possible.

 

[Eggs]

Yeah, this is what I mean though. "It's good if they're on the same page."

Is it so difficult to find a manager with an eye for a player these days that you need to muddy the waters in the first place? Could you not get by on having say a Technical/Youth Development director, a chief scout, and a chief executive or deputy chief exec dealing with the finances of transfers?

Some people might say that's putting all the trust in one man (the manager), but aren't you just doing that with a DOF anyway? You could show me a list of managers and there's several I'd probably choose as being preferable to Dan bleedin' Ashworth (for example) in having the ultimate say on transfers.

….i imagine the scope of the Managers job was deemed big enough without also being responsible for player acquisition. Moyes was probably the last of that old school, he would often be seen in the stands when teams were playing in midweek. He tells the story that he went to watch Millwall on a Monday night and spotted Tim Cahill.

What the DOF/Manager demarcation allows is coaches to run teams. I’d imagine the present system would’ve suited the likes of Colin Harvey, a fantastic coach who maybe struggled on transfers. Might be similar with Lee Carsley, more renowned for his coaching.

 

[jazzy]

To be fair.
KT has never had a half decent transfer budget.

Could well be in positive territory with transfer spend.

Has reduced wages hugely.

Can't disagree with any of that but I can't forget the Beto signing and failure to sign a decent full back.

For me the jury's out on Thelwell and he certainly hasn't done enough to give me confidence that he's the right man to select the new manager.

It's a tough one but on my balance I'd like to see both Dyche and Thelwell replaced

 

[18efc78]

Can't disagree with any of that but I can't forget the Beto signing and failure to sign a decent full back.

For me the jury's out on Thelwell and he certainly has done enough to give me confidence that he's the right man to select the new manager.

It's a tough one but on my balance I'd like to see both Dyche and Thelwell replaced

How far was beto down the list though when you're offering £0 up front, who knows who's top of his list of he's got money to spend

 

[Bob Elstone]

Thelwell isn’t the answer unless we want to embrace mediocrity

 

[jazzy]

How far was beto down the list though when you're offering £0 up front, who knows who's top of his list of he's got money to spend

Yeah I know, again acknowledge the constraints that he was / is working under . It's just that I'm not sure that anyone with a modicum of football knowledge looks at Beto and thinks he's a player regardless of finances. Same as Niasse really.

 

[John from Bootle]

I guess the idea was to take some of the responsibility away from the manager to let them get on with the job of preparing the team etcetera and doing so by overseeing all those roles you mentioned. As others have said it seems that the DoF role is a fairly ambiguous concept and different clubs will have different ideas of what the DoF role is for.

My main concern is that Everton finds a system that works for the club. Personally I don’t give a stuff if it’s a DoF or Big Ron phoning round clubs asking for players as long as the team is doing well.

I think United had the perfect blend with the Ferguson/Gill model. As ever good scouting is essential, and good youth, sports science and facility management.

I'd like to see us break the mould and move away from DOF led recruitment. I think there's lot's of good managers who would welcome the opportunity to have final say on transfers.

 

[Eggs]

How far was beto down the list though when you're offering £0 up front, who knows who's top of his list of he's got money to spend

…..there’s no excuse for buying poor quality footballers, even on the ‘never, never’. He seems to pay the going rate for largely mediocre players, he’s yet to unearth a bargain who’s making a significant difference to the team and his loan deals tend to also be in the mediocre category. He talks a good game, though.

 

[jazzy]

….i imagine the scope of the Managers job was deemed big enough without also being responsible for player acquisition. Moyes was probably the last of that old school, he would often be seen in the stands when teams were playing in midweek. He tells the story that he went to watch Millwall on a Monday night and spotted Tim Cahill.

What the DOF/Manager demarcation allows is coaches to run teams. I’d imagine the present system would’ve suited the likes of Colin Harvey, a fantastic coach who maybe struggled on transfers. Might be similar with Lee Carsley, more renowned for his coaching.

I think we need to understand the true remit of a DoF . Everyone seems to think that they are directly responsible for player recruitment and I suspect that at Everton that's probably the case.

However , as I understand the role of a DoF at most clubs the DoF is in charge of all football matters and should appoint the manager and head of player recruitment who should report back to the DoF.

That's certainly the role that Ashworth had at Brighton for example and supposedly what he was supposed to do at United where Jason Wilcox was in charge of player recruitment

 

[Eggs]

I think we need to understand the true remit of a DoF . Everyone seems to think that they are directly responsible for player recruitment and I suspect that at Everton that's probably the case.

However , as I understand the role of a DoF at most clubs the DoF is in charge of all football matters and should appoint the manager and head of player recruitment who should report back to the DoF.

That's certainly the role that Ashworth had at Brighton for example and supposedly what he was supposed to do at United where Jason Wilcox was in charge of player recruitment

….of course, the scope of the job is more than managing the transfer envelope and deciding what players to bring in. He can be conduit between the playing side and the Board, set the transfer & playing strategy, contract renewals, oversee Academy etc.

 

[John from Bootle]

….i imagine the scope of the Managers job was deemed big enough without also being responsible for player acquisition. Moyes was probably the last of that old school, he would often be seen in the stands when teams were playing in midweek. He tells the story that he went to watch Millwall on a Monday night and spotted Tim Cahill.

What the DOF/Manager demarcation allows is coaches to run teams. I’d imagine the present system would’ve suited the likes of Colin Harvey, a fantastic coach who maybe struggled on transfers. Might be similar with Lee Carsley, more renowned for his coaching.

I personally think there's a middle ground to be had. More importantly, I think there's still many managers who would relish the opportunity of having total control. As I've mentioned above, I reckon United had it about right in Ferguson's latter years. He still had the say, but had all the right support around him.

You know, for all the talk of directors of football, it's still been the worlds top managers that have been serial winners. Stick Alan Pardew in as Brighton manager for 3 seasons and let's see how well they do then...

 

[GrandOldTeam]

…..there’s no excuse for buying poor quality footballers, even on the ‘never, never’. He seems to pay the going rate for largely mediocre players, he’s yet to unearth a bargain who’s making a significant difference to the team and his loan deals tend to also be in the mediocre category. He talks a good game, though.

Disagree.

The difference then was very likely Calvert-Lewin or no one. Or Calvert-Lewin or Beto.

When we consider Calvert-Lewin's fitness at the time, we absolutely needed another striker.

This isn't like when we signed Tosun.

Makes the difference when such small margins at the bottom.

 

[Neiler]

Disagree.

The difference then was very likely Calvert-Lewin or no one. Or Calvert-Lewin or Beto.

When we consider Calvert-Lewin's fitness at the time, we absolutely needed another striker.

This isn't like when we signed Tosun.

Makes the difference when such small margins at the bottom.

Is it better to have a bad striker or no striker at all..............