I don’t really get how forum posters can have insights about particular/specifics regarding these things. At surface level - Vivell seems to have achieved a decent/relative amount of success, no?
Player recruitment at United is completely different to that at Brentford, Palace, Brightons etc.Looking back on it, considering the importance of the role, this is the INEOS appointment I find hardest to understand. Wilcox is up there, but he was hired because of his connection with Berrada. And Berrada is, for an outsider, impossible to assess. Like it or not, considering the success of City over the past fifteen years, it makes sense to hire key figures from that organisation.
I would have appreciated a similar logic applied to recruitment. A few Premier League clubs have been genuinely outstanding at it over the last decade. Brighton and Brentford are the obvious ones, but Palace deserve a mention too. Our aim should have been to bring in someone who has had success building that kind of department in the Premier League. Not just someone who worked inside one elsewhere.
Which brings me to Vivell. I understand wanting someone with his type of background at the club, but as director of recruitment? His CV is built almost entirely within the Red Bull ecosystem, where player identification is driven by a centralised data model and a proven pipeline. He was a good cog in that machine. He never designed it. He was fired from Leipzig for talking to Chelsea behind their back. He lasted seven months at Chelsea before being made redundant. He was then out of work for a year before we picked him up on a short-term deal, later made permanent on a reduced salary. That is not the profile of someone you headhunt for the most important position at one of the biggest clubs in the world.
We did hire Kyle Macaulay, with his background from Brighton, which is probably the most successful recruitment operation in the Premier League. That made sense. But he came in essentially as a scout. The ambition should have been higher. Dykes built Brentford’s entire seven-stage recruitment model from scratch and has an ROI that is genuinely best-in-class. Mbeumo for €5m. Toney for £5m. Watkins for £1.8m. Freedman built Palace’s scouting infrastructure over seven and a half years and delivered Eze, Guéhi, Wharton, and Olise, all on a fraction of our budget. These are people who have created systems. Vivell has operated within them.
Perhaps Dykes and Freedman would want more comprehensive roles? But you would think the director of recruitment position at Manchester United sells itself. The transfer budget dwarfs anything Brighton, Brentford, or Palace can offer. The scouting network, even after the cuts, is one of the largest in the world. The brand alone opens doors that smaller clubs spend years trying to knock on. Players pick up the phone when United call. Agents want to do business with you. You have the resources to build something at a scale that simply isnt available anywhere else in England outside of City. If you are serious about recruitment as a craft, this is the job. And it should be possible to earn more at Man United as director of recruitment than as a technical director at Palace or Brentford.
Given the money we spend on transfers and wages, this is the most important position at the club. It deserved a bigger swing.
Mbeumo and Cunha seemed to be sure things that Amorim was behind (Amorim maybe preferred Semenyo). But Sesko and Lammens both seem like they were club buys that were led by the recruitment team in the face of Amorim’s preferred options of Watkins and Emi Martinez.In general, I agree. But that is my point, how has he achieved a relative amount of success on a surface level?
Mbeumo and Cunha seemed to be sure things that Amorim was behind (Amorim maybe preferred Semenyo). But Sesko and Lammens both seem like they were club buys that were led by the recruitment team in the face of Amorim’s preferred options of Watkins and Emi Martinez.
So if we go on the basis that two of the four players bought last season were purely led by the recruitment team and Vivell is the director of recruitment, then on a surface level he has done well during his first summer transfer window as permanent head of recruitment.
It was the club and Amorim’s decision to bring in another striker as Hojlund was off it. We would have gone for Watkins or Sesko. If it was a bit cheaper for Watkins we still wouldn’t have had enough to go for a midfielder at the level we wanted especially with clubs like Brighton holding unrealistic valuations.The club, and in particuclar Tony Cotton, did well with Lammens. Considering the fee, and the need for other reinforcements, I’m not sure what to make of Sesko yet.
You are not happy with the early signs?Looking back on it, considering the importance of the role, this is the INEOS appointment I find hardest to understand. Wilcox is up there, but he was hired because of his connection with Berrada. And Berrada is, for an outsider, impossible to assess. Like it or not, considering the success of City over the past fifteen years, it makes sense to hire key figures from that organisation.
I would have appreciated a similar logic applied to recruitment. A few Premier League clubs have been genuinely outstanding at it over the last decade. Brighton and Brentford are the obvious ones, but Palace deserve a mention too. Our aim should have been to bring in someone who has had success building that kind of department in the Premier League. Not just someone who worked inside one elsewhere.
Which brings me to Vivell. I understand wanting someone with his type of background at the club, but as director of recruitment? His CV is built almost entirely within the Red Bull ecosystem, where player identification is driven by a centralised data model and a proven pipeline. He was a good cog in that machine. He never designed it. He was fired from Leipzig for talking to Chelsea behind their back. He lasted seven months at Chelsea before being made redundant. He was then out of work for a year before we picked him up on a short-term deal, later made permanent on a reduced salary. That is not the profile of someone you headhunt for the most important position at one of the biggest clubs in the world.
We did hire Kyle Macaulay, with his background from Brighton, which is probably the most successful recruitment operation in the Premier League. That made sense. But he came in essentially as a scout. The ambition should have been higher. Dykes built Brentford’s entire seven-stage recruitment model from scratch and has an ROI that is genuinely best-in-class. Mbeumo for €5m. Toney for £5m. Watkins for £1.8m. Freedman built Palace’s scouting infrastructure over seven and a half years and delivered Eze, Guéhi, Wharton, and Olise, all on a fraction of our budget. These are people who have created systems. Vivell has operated within them.
Perhaps Dykes and Freedman would want more comprehensive roles? But you would think the director of recruitment position at Manchester United sells itself. The transfer budget dwarfs anything Brighton, Brentford, or Palace can offer. The scouting network, even after the cuts, is one of the largest in the world. The brand alone opens doors that smaller clubs spend years trying to knock on. Players pick up the phone when United call. Agents want to do business with you. You have the resources to build something at a scale that simply isnt available anywhere else in England outside of City. If you are serious about recruitment as a craft, this is the job. And it should be possible to earn more at Man United as director of recruitment than as a technical director at Palace or Brentford.
Given the money we spend on transfers and wages, this is the most important position at the club. It deserved a bigger swing.
You are not happy with the early signs?
Lammens, Dorgu, Yoro, Heaven, DeLigt, Mazraoui, Cunha, Mbeumo, Sesko..
The recent recruitment honestly looks good imo.
And the requirements and situations are different for a club like us and clubs like Brighton and Brentford. We are higher in the food chain and needs to focus more on ready made players, not so much on punts on younger talents from different lower quality leagues around the world that may or may not develop into a consistent top level player.
They pick up truckloads of young talents, nurture them as well as they can, then bigger clubs circle around and fight for the few of them that really looks good here in the PL.
We pushed so hard for Baleba that we rated him around 55 m and didnt even bother beyond that not exactly pushing hard I would say .Happy with Lammens, Dorgu and Heaven. Two of them prior too Vivell.
Early to say regarding Cunha and Mbeumo. I guess they are okey considering the fee. Sesko I’m not really sure about yet. I think he has potential. He is on a good run. Similar to what Hojlund was in his first season. If he can build on that, I can turn out very good and it will be a big win for Vivell.
It also scares me that we pushed so hard for Baleba. Based on what I had seen from him, I considered him hyped last summer. But this season, he has been dreadful.
Hold on, arePlayer recruitment at United is completely different to that at Brentford, Palace, Brightons etc.
United need mainly ready made players, with the occasional young player for the future thrown into the mix.
Your Brentford's and Brightons have time and less pressure on them for short term success so can buy these bargain players with a direct viewpoint to giving them game time and hopefully selling them off for profit, they often mix these 'rough diamonds' with proven premiership players so there's less pressure on these players becoming good/successful straight away.
United's recruitment is based more around who will be able to make the first 11 stronger, which is a different kettle of fish entirely, meaning the skill sets to finding and persuading these players to join is different to finding the unknowns.
Vivell is perfectly adept at working within this scope, moreso than anyone from the three aforementioned clubs I'd say.
I'd say Zirkzee was, as was Malacia, both on the fringes if not already involved in top international teams and heavily contributing to high performing domestic teams.Hold on, are
Zirkzee, Lammens, Malacia, Sesko, Amad, Hoejlund
ready made players? I have not even bother to include Antony, and those before him.
2/3 of our recruits were probably never heard of until rumours came, or unless you follow Europa alot
