Considering how hard we're finding it to sell even a single player, there would be nothing simple whatsoever about that transition. It also seems nothing has changed and no lessons were learned if that's how we're going to operate.
Jason Wilcox - Director of Football
- Thread starter reddevilchennai
- Start date
You buy players who can operate in multiple positions, makes any future transition much more straightforward. For example, Mbeumo has played wing back and right wing for Brentford, Cunha has played 9, 10 in a 433 and 343, and off the left. Semenyo similar to Mbeumo.
The title is still Wilcox - Technical Director? I thought he already doubled up as Director of Football too and assisted by Vivell?
Can't blame the current incumbents for the contracts agreed prior to their tenure. We're not going to pay excessive wages going forward, lessons have been learned, but the past cannot be changed.
Whatever Ashworth's role was, Wilcox has apparently stepped in to assume his duties (in addition to already being technical director).
Thread title to change? Wilcox DOF and TD?
Nothing has changed regarding job titles though. Wilcox is still the TD and not the DoF. A fair few clubs, including some in the Premier league I think, have their technical director take the roles often assigned to a director of football or a sporting director. Which title is used for these roles and how many people do them differs between clubs.
I'd really like to know more about how it all works behind the scenes for us, how the decisions are made and who makes them but it's not all public knowledge. Vivell is in charge of scouting and recruitment stuff, but which players to buy is probably a joint decision between himself, Wilcox and Amorim. I'm not sure how much influence they and Berrada have on hiring head coaches and other staff. Seems Wilcox is responsible for making sure all of the various age groups, scouting, data analysis and so on are aligned with our long term vision and strategy, which he himself sets, probably worth some level of input from Berrada, but I'm not sure how that all plays out.
Would love to be a fly on the wall for decisions made at the club. For example, if the three I mentioned above (plus whoever else?) are discussing buying a certain player, do they usually reach a consensus? Who is the most vocal and persuasive or holds the most influence? What if they don't reach a consensus? Who has the final say? Wilcox I'd expect. How often is the head coach is overridden? Etc
Last edited:
Murtough like promotion for Big Willy (or is he Small Willy?). Hope he does better...much better.
Thread is getting confused
no one has been promoted. Wilcox and others took on additional roles 5 months ago.That's just semantics. Basically someone with major experience in youth football is being laden with the responsibility for the senior team recruitment and planning. Not too dissimilar from Murtough.Thread is getting confused
Just pray that he is much better than Murtough. Murtough plus ETH combo was absolute disaster.
Having said that hope that we will get in a proper best in class DOF. We need to learn from our past experience.
A top DoF is absolutely needed. Nothing against Wilcox but an internationally exposed DoF will transform us
We need a top Dof and manager combo to get out of this rut. We only need to look at what Campos and Enrique combination have been able to do at PSG.
Don’t worry JWil and Rubey Ams got this.
Not sure why Ratcliffe didn't make it as priority to put a best in class DOF. Maybe they see it in Wilcox and Amorim combo. That's why they sacked Ashworth, I think.
But I still think it's extremely risky to put our hope on Wilcox who has never done it before to lead us out of this rut.
J Willy? I can get on board with that.
He did make it a priority (a Dof, if not a top Dof). Snatched him out of Newcastle's arms only to fire him 4 months later.
It is very risky. Besides Yoro, I don't think any of the other 5 players they bought are anywhere close to being good enough to be part of a top starting XI.
But this is the first summer with the combo, let's see how it goes. We need to get 2-3 windows almost absolutely perfect to be able to challenge in 3-4 years time.
Last edited:
The other thing is there were quite a few reputable DoFs on the market recently and we were never interested. I hope they did not give up that position with the firing of Aswhorth.
He’s J Willy only on weekends.
Does the claim that the Ugarte signing was driven by Wilcox concern you?
Because I remember many fans at the time pointing out why it was not a sensible idea - if they could see that, why couldn't Wilcox? To me, it shows a worrying thought process as to the way they want to move forward - one that is not entirely different from the past where central midfield is concerned.
Last edited:
The reality is that it’s going to take a bit of time to get it right when you’re starting from scratch, although we’re probably starting from worse than scratch. No club hires a sporting director and all of a sudden everything transforms.
I’m sure Ineos would make different decisions but they tried but a best in class DoF in place and it clearly wasn’t working behind the scenes. The worst thing they could do is appoint the wrong person and face another choice of sack or keep the wrong person. If things aren’t aligned between board, and the functions below DoF, it’s pointless having that person in place - as seen with Mitchell at Newcastle.
From what I read, it’s not just a case that Wilcox has assumed responsibility of both roles and more that it’s been shared out across multiple roles. For example Vivell is likely to be far more across recruitment than Wilcox, but he will also be relying heavily on our data analysis team, of which we’ve just filled a key role for. So that’s likely to take time to see results.
We’ve definitely seen a bit of a switch in transfers so far, but until we allow the changes from Vivell and the data team to properly imbed, it’s unfair to pin every negative mistake on them and Ineos. Zirkzee is probably a good example. You can understand why he was signed and he might still settle in and become a useful player, if not, we only need to sell him next summer for £21 million for net equal PSR costs.. That hasn’t really happened with a lot of our transfers up till now.
I’m sure Ineos would make different decisions but they tried but a best in class DoF in place and it clearly wasn’t working behind the scenes. The worst thing they could do is appoint the wrong person and face another choice of sack or keep the wrong person. If things aren’t aligned between board, and the functions below DoF, it’s pointless having that person in place - as seen with Mitchell at Newcastle.
From what I read, it’s not just a case that Wilcox has assumed responsibility of both roles and more that it’s been shared out across multiple roles. For example Vivell is likely to be far more across recruitment than Wilcox, but he will also be relying heavily on our data analysis team, of which we’ve just filled a key role for. So that’s likely to take time to see results.
We’ve definitely seen a bit of a switch in transfers so far, but until we allow the changes from Vivell and the data team to properly imbed, it’s unfair to pin every negative mistake on them and Ineos. Zirkzee is probably a good example. You can understand why he was signed and he might still settle in and become a useful player, if not, we only need to sell him next summer for £21 million for net equal PSR costs.. That hasn’t really happened with a lot of our transfers up till now.
Oh I agree with that. Was just saying nothing has changed in the past five months so not sure why people are only just noticing this.
It's been reported that they did exactly that and beleive they have all the skills they need already in Wilcox, Vivell, Berrada et al
No its not... Murtough was the sporting director in charge of transfers... Wilcox is a technical director and we have another person for recruitment called Vivell.
Its not schematics when its 2 different jobs..
I'm in the same boat, but I'm yet to read or hear anything at all that fleshes out the "game model" or the footballing vision they have. We can obviously see that they are prioritising young hungry players, and Amorim has identified physicality and athleticism (according to reports, and he's numerous times referred to physicality).
I'd love to see quotes from Wilcox, Vivell or Berrada on the matter.
It is. I was commenting based on Raoul's post above (#1085), where it mentions that he would step into Ashworth's shoes.
So far doing very well with Cunha and Mbeumo. Maybe soon Gyokeres. Need a GK and it will be a perfect summer.
Now, the hard part. To sell Rashford, Sancho, Onana, Garnacho, Antony.
Now, the hard part. To sell Rashford, Sancho, Onana, Garnacho, Antony.
Think the hard part will be making the players we sign play well. We have signed lots of good players in the last ten years. He needs to have got the profile right for the manager, and also needs to make a difficult call on the manager if the form is still relegation form or only improved to bottom half form in the first half of the season. It's not about signing random players if you are the director of football, it is making the team successful for me, the highest responsibility for football at the club over the medium term.
I know with PSG winning the treble this year (instead of three years ago when they lost to Bayern), the ‘Look what hiring a proven top DoF can do’ would come back with a revenge again. What is curious to me, is that the last time around when that idea did the rounds, it was hardly anyone who could give examples on this happening. The most mentioned example was City hiring Zubizarreta, but that is a strange example as the main point seemed to be not that he was a generally proven DoF, but more specifically that he had working relations with Pep Guardiola in particular.
Could you mention as much as five examples of club hiring an already well renowned DoF/SD, and then going on to have a related upturn in fortunes?
It absolutely concerns me deeply as a United supporter that a person would sanction a signing that is fundamentally flawed to aid the development of a playing style that is more expansive and proactive.
And from what I remember in the thread in question last summer, most people seemed happy with the signing and I was quite vocal in my displeasure in signing such a limited midfield player. It's absolutely shocking that they went through with it and didn't improve the midfield at all as far as implementing a more proactive brand of football.
You can get signings wrong and that's normal at a lot of clubs, but the signing itself has to come with certain attributes that will elevate the team towards playing a more expansive brand of football. And Ugarte definitely didn't do that and it was clear to see and why Wilcox couldn't see that I don't know. But like I said in my previous post, he needs to deliver this summer or else he needs to be shown the door because repeating a mistake like Ugarte would be extremely detrimental towards the development of a playing style.
I think this summer window needs to be a good one and it has to be one where each signing gives us a indication of the strategy they want to implement on the pitch. If you want to play proactive, attacking football, then signings have to reflect that. If they don't then heads need to roll, because it's unacceptable to sign players for a reactive way of playing the game.
Wilcox is the technical director and it's the job of the technical director to pass on the strategy to the chief scout (Vivell), who then attempts to execute the strategy. Vivell can only recruit for the strategy and game style that is passed down to him. The buck stops with Wilcox and I'm hoping he's learned his lesson from last season and we see players being bought who fit a vision/strategy that is proactive and attacking both in & out of possession.
And Bastian, you're familiar with my posts and I've numerous times over the years said that we lack the physicality, athleticism and technical ability. We need to raise the physical, athletic and technical ability of the team. And central midfield is the area where we lack considerably when it comes to the aforementioned attributes. We need players who not only have strong duelling capabilities off the ball but also carry a vertical passing threat at a high level. This cannot be compromised on and if it is, we will carry on seeing a lot of the shenanigans that we've seen post Fergie.
To be fair, almost no one watches foreign leagues week in week out to assess these international signings. All most of the caf knew is we desperately needed a midfielder, the club scouted the whole of Europe and landed on Ugarte, and the fans put the faith in the club that they must have some clue what they're doing and therefore it's worth supporting the club getting the deal over the line.
What we of course forgot is the club has shown over 12 years they don't have a clue what they're doing, and frankly they cannot trusted.
PSG is sighted because it is the latest one that has proved to be a success. They changed their whole Galactico approach under Campos and started targeting young players with desire and high potential. They made some astute buys of players available at decent prices and moved on duds like Ugarte pretty quickly without giving them the mandatory United "two years to stink up the place before we can judge him" period. They hired an excellent manager and provided him the technical tools needed to succeed. It's not too dissimilar to what City did before they hired Pep. Having working relationship with Pep doesn't mean Tiki and the other guy weren't the two of the very best available.
This is exactly what was promised by SJR when he talked about hiring best in the class folks and stopping United's wastefullness in the transfer market.
It's not my responsibility to find you examples. Do your own research.
Now needs to focus on
- Getting rid of Sancho, even on loan ideally with an ACTUAL obligation.
- Get something for Rashford with Barca likely playing games.
- Selling Anthony.
- Sell Garnacho to fund a ST or CM.
Really though, we'd want to sell/loan Hujlund, move on Shaw (or sell Dalot) aswell - we don't need the large squad.
- Getting rid of Sancho, even on loan ideally with an ACTUAL obligation.
- Get something for Rashford with Barca likely playing games.
- Selling Anthony.
- Sell Garnacho to fund a ST or CM.
Really though, we'd want to sell/loan Hujlund, move on Shaw (or sell Dalot) aswell - we don't need the large squad.
We ain’t going to get an obligation as I believe he’s in the final year of his deal.
That's correct
We have a negation manager, so I doubt Wilcox is getting involved in the day to day stuff around these players that we’ve already decided aren’t staying.
You are spot on. City and now PSG are blueprints of how you build a team. Ratcliffe promised this but the reality is he interfers all the time, while the cyclist guy has no idea about football. I would hope we move down this route but it takes time. whatever happened with Ashworth its clear he was selling a reset that takes time, Jim is an old man and impatient. Hence we have gone down the put all our faith in a manager route. Transfers beginning to look a bit better but last summer was still poor and obvious lessons simply not learned.
It’s no one’s responsibility to think of examples of top clubs hiring already reknowned DoF’s and then go on to have success. This is a chat forum, not a court of law.
My point was exactly that I couldn’t think of any good examples outside of Campos/PsG, except Beguiristain/City, which wasn’t really a very good example.
So I asked three posters who happened to just claim that it’s necessary and obvious that we should hire an already well reknowned DoF if we’re to improve substantially, as I assumed they would know this on the basis of some examples other than saturdays CL final.
It’s all fair if you don’t know any, but if you do, I don’t see the point of writing twenty lines about the two examples I already mentioned and then another two about not being responsible for answering questions, rather than just mentioning the examples you know off the top of your head in a line or two?
Actually, PSG’s approach didn’t fundamentally change the moment Campos arrived. For his first two years the club’s transfer strategy was still subject to significant interference from Al Khelaifi.
It was only last summer that Al Khelaifi truly stepped back and allowed Campos and Luis Enrique to work together. That’s when the recruitment policy shifted decisively towards young, high-potential players and a coherent squad-building strategy.
Campos has been at PSG for three years, and his record is mixed, like any sporting director. He was responsible for several transfers that didn’t work out such as Ugarte, Mukiele, Carlos Soler, Renato Sanches, Skriniar, and Kang-In Lee.
It’s also important not to rewrite history because until early 2025, PSG faced their usual winter crisis, with reports of squad unrest (Mendes wanting to leave), and barely scraping through the Champions League group stage. Both Campos and Luis Enrique faced heavy criticism in France, and almost everyone had a hard time understanding what Enrique was trying to do before things finally clicked in 2025.
So yes, PSG’s success in the UCL is great, but it’s the result of a process that only started working smoothly after the club’s hierarchy stopped interfering and let the football people do their jobs. Campos’ tenure has had its share of missteps and criticism, and the turnaround is recent, not something that’s been in place since his arrival.
The club is a bit of a mess, like I can go through each your points, which I agree for the most part but they don't really fix anything cause of how skewed everything else is, it basically adds up to less than saving wages for the most part, which will most likely be entirely swallowed by loss in revenue of not being in europe at all.
Sancho is tricky, a loan is unlikely to cover all wages and even if it did still costs 17m, we only have the threat of a +1 trigger to force a sale at the end of any loan, he needs to be sold.
Barcelona have money when it suits them, getting the cash in the bank is always the hard part.
Sure, sell Antony but anything less than £34m is still 0 funds generated.
-That seems to be the plan.
Selling Holjund for less than £40m generates 0, Im not sure who's paying you money for a 30 year old Luke "20 games per year" Shaw on the last year of a contract but sure, selling Dalot would be actually good finance wise if we aren't going to play him or need to replace him directly, he played in 53 games this year, you might not rate him but that's going to require a free replacement that's better to not be investing more money.
This. Need to get some outgoings done. Hopefully it’ll be a bit of a domino effect. Not surprised if we want to move people along first before we make anymore moves.