This was never the case whatsoever.
Manchester United name John Murtough as Football Director and Darren Fletcher as Technical Director
- Thread starter Tom Van Persie
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik @Rood and Imran @Annihilate Now! start with the good news by celebrating Manchester United Women's emphatic FA Cup win over Spurs at Wembley and the future of manager Marc Skinner.
Then it's the bad news and the ever worsening form of our Men with losses to Arsenal and Palace.
Finally the main debate - ETH Out now or keep him until the end of the season - if not longer. Are you Team Nik or Team Imran?
And where did you come up with this?
Director of Football doesn't mean he will target players and signs as he wish. DoF, Manager, coaching staff, Recruitment staff all work as a team.
Not sure why people always want to make it as DoF vs Manager.
It's a crazy argument you are pushing. If the DOF decides against ETH's wish list then you wil claim that he isn't supportive of ETH.
And of is supportive of ETHs choices then you will claim he isn't doing his job?
Sounds like he can't win or you are just creating an argument for the sake of it. Or both.
Because they have a weird view that a DoF alone makes all decisions and if he doesn't well then he isn't much of a DoF at all
In my head, director of football is there to make sure that the manager aligns with the clubs ethos, so that if that manager gets sacked, a new manager with similar ethos can come in and you won’t need to reset the team every time a manager is sacked
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
That is a major problem and goes back to the manager having too much emphasis on transfer decisions it should be something that's completely cohesive not individual. There are clear examples of when a DOF has input due to the allocated resources at disposal and the best example was Liverpool's recommendation via Edwards to sign Salah it didn't come from the manager.
It doesn't matter if the said manager is successful it's not a sustainable model heading forward because the downside always outweighs the upside in football and if the said manager is sacked the revolving door rebuilding policy is back in full force. Then every manager needs a minimum of three seasons to 'undo' what the previous manager has done. It's the same story over and over again. The club hasn't and doesn't learn.
Additionally the DOF positionally is far more of a constant compared to the periodical position of a manager. The constant should always be the more influential.
Last edited:
Exactly. 99% of posters on here have bemoaned this approach by us for years. They've been crawling all over this issue and how it holds us back. Yet suddenly willing to overlook it... go figure!
To paraphrase Succession: Good negotiating isn't just "saying the biggest number"
I agree.
At any well run club it's the role of the DoF to connect the football departments with the first team head coach. And talking of the recruitment department specifically, they work in-sync with the head coach and identify players which best suit the play style which has been defined by the head coach. And all that is overseen by the DoF.
So it was widely reported about United having a number of names on the final list, which included players like Kane, Osimhen, Ramos, Kolo Muani and Hojlund. And when the decision making process takes place, the heads of recruitment along with ten Hag and the various analysts give their thoughts on the players that have been scouted and analysed over the course of the season. And ten Hag will select his preference from the list that has been put to to him by the head scouts with input from the data analytics and video analytics teams which are led by Dominic Jordan and Mick Court. So if ten Hag prefers Hojlund over Kolo-Muani, then that's perfectly fine. And if ten Hag wants the scouts and analysts to run the rule over someone he's coached previously, then he needs to inform the scouts via the DoF to compile reports on said players. And it was reported at the start of last season about ten Hag providing a detailed dossier to the scouts around the world on what he wants from players in all eleven outfield positions, tweet below. And it was also reported about ten Hag wanting the scouts to also run the rule over some of his former players.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
At Bayern they also operate the same way from what I've read and also sign players that have worked with their coach previously. And that's fine as long as their scouts and analysts are on the same page as the head coach. And Rangnick himself has mentioned about not signing players at his previous clubs without buy in from the head coach at first team level. And he said that when he was the interim manager at United.
Also people like to bring up Liverpool signing Salah and persuading Klopp to drop interest in Brandt. But those same people are oblivious to Michael Edwards and Liverpool's recruitment structure vetoing the signings of Van Dijk and Sadio Mane under Brendan Rodgers after it was reported that Van Dijk was considered too much of a risk from Celtic and Liverpool's data analytics team under Dr Ian Graham deemed Sadio Mane as someone who wasn't good enough according to the 'Graham model' per reports.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Prior to ETH there wasn't any cohesion, long term plan or anyone with credible ability that has actually delivered on it. So it's either our DoF suddenly decides he's the one to lead and create the footballing philosophy from scratch or he works with the manager, who is literally the one creating that identity now.
It's a fine line and either method is a risk but when there wasn't any existing foundation to work with in the first place, it's strange to make it sound like the DoF/club have some brilliant track record and are kowtowing to ETH. Your take lacks so much context as if we've been run like Bayern, City or Madrid for the past 10 years. Really bizarre.
spot on
'Some at the club' is very different from 'the club'. The initial post made it sound like it was Ten Hag against literally everybody else, whereas Mitten's statement just means a few preferred him over Hoilund. There's always going to be disagreements with any committee of people so it seems like it's mountains out of molehills to me.
Surely that's what they are doing though, they have picked a manager with a certain approach and are signing players that fit that approach in conjunction with the manager so in theory the next manager should have the same play style and ethos as EtH and therefore the players signed now should still fit the play style, we obviously won't see that unless EtH fails which we obviously all do not want to happen
For these points to be valid based on this one issue, you have to assume that the committee outside Ten Hag (the DOF doesn't decide alone) wanted Kolo Muani but really not Højlund. It doesn't say that though. Or at least, that tweet to me rather only suggested that others would have preferred Kolo Muani, without indicating what they thought of Højlund. So it's entirely possibly that Højlund was second or third or fourth on their list of preferred strikers, and that Ten Hag's insistence (presumably backed by arguments, not sheer stubborness) elevated him to #1 in the committee's eventual decision. In which case all these comments about Ten Hag totally overruling the DOF are way overblown.
No it doesn't lack any context, it's all factual (maybe not 99%, but it sure felt that way). All I'm saying is right now nobody is bothered that we're following the same approach because things are relatively ok on the pitch, but if things go off the rails, or we don't win major trophies soon, I guarantee that everybody will be bumping this thread and questioning the whole lot again.
If and when ETH goes, I will not be shocked in the slightest if we go for a completely different manager and we'll be talking about a rebuild. Obviously we're not at that point yet, but I base this on the fact that we apparently coveted managers with completely different styles just last summer. Which tells me there was no overarching plan or philosophy. Like you said, we're relying on one manager to dictate that, you seem to be happy with it but thinking strategically over the long run, I think it's a bad approach.
I completely agree with your overarching point. For a football club to be successful in the medium to long term, there has to be a strategic vision that supersedes the manager and executive body. For there to be continuity in player recruitment, which can only be achieved if there is a consensus on how the team will play. Players are primarily bought to fit tactical and stylistic roles, which are determined by the way the team plays and sets up. This can be further boiled down to the fundamentals of how the team approached the game. Is it possession orientated, is it a fast or slow tempo, does it include a high or low line? Etc etc.
We have seen in the past that when you hire successive managers that have competing philosophies eg a possession orientated, technical, slow tempo Van Gaal, to a low block, counter attacking, possession shy Mourinho, you end up with a lot of players not fit for purpose. You then end up with enormous turnover, massive amounts of wasted money, lengthy integration periods, and a constant state of transition. Data shows us that the squads, historically, with the lowest rate of turnover, are typically the most successful. So whatever is happening at United now, and I think we can all agree that we like the direction Ten Hag is taking us in; everything we do now also has to have one eye on what happens when he leaves. Because if there is one inevitability in football, it’s change. And our recruitment, both playing and managerial, has to have a thread of continuity about it.
with regards to this story about Hojlund vs Kolo Muani, there is a fair amount of context missing that doesn’t allow us to draw any significant conclusions. I would expect there to be divergent opinions on recruitment. That is part and parcel of the process. It just depends on why those opinions diverge. Is it because we look at both players and say they both fit the chosen needs and direction of the squad, and some people think KM is better equipped for that than RH, or is it that the difference in opinion is also a difference in opinion over how the team should play? Hence different choices for CF. Those are two very different disagreements. One is natural, the other is alarming. Alas, I don’t think we can really know without being in the room.
The other point to consider, if we assume that there will always be differing opinions (normal), is how that tie breaker gets resolved. Was everyone happy to go along with RH because ETH made his case and ultimately the deciding vote goes to the manager? Or did the manager force it through despite the DoF or data team being opposed to it? Again, two very different disagreements.
We also have to consider the alternative. The DoF overruling the manager and getting the final vote, and the manager being unhappy. Potentially a worse situation.
Bottom line is that I don’t think we know if there is a disagreement, or the basis of that disagreement. All we can do is hope that there is a general consensus on the way the team should play, and the profile of players that fit. A consensus that has to have permanence beyond the existing human capital in place.
I have no doubt you are correct about what would happen if ETH left. We have no choice but to rely on the manage as there isn’t anyone else to do it or even share the burdenThe kind of jargon we read about the recruitment methods was all mentioned in the past when things were going well only for everyone to wash their hands of it when it went pear shaped.
You need a consensus but if you have a DOF/Sporting Director etc they need some stature and authority or they just get bypassed. When club appointed Murtough they made sure everyone knew he wasn’t a DOF and didn’t even get the job title. He’s an administrator/fixer not someone to map out the future of the club.
If ETH is successor won’t matter but if he isn’t we’ll just repeat the same cycle of starting over again.
Erm, you seem to be missing the two most obvious things here:
1) Player recruitment is neither a binary choice between DoF or manager's; as others have alluded to, it's a collaborative process. The club and/or DoF have made no foundation or long term plan in the past 10 years, so it absolutely makes sense to support and work with the current manager to build the existing structure for the present and future. Especially the most successful and forward thinking manager since Fergie.
2) If things does go south with ETH, it's the job of the DoF to then hire a manager that suits the players and ask him to do his job i.e get the best out of the current crop of players; it will be on the club to recruit the next best talent/manager that meets their vision.
On the one hand you want the DoF to manage the long term vision and have 'final' say (or thereabouts) on transfers but then you also say 'oh but if ETH fails badly here, I don't expect the DoF to then do a good job or hiring the next manager'. Make up your mind.
It’s always strange to come to these blogs and see so many negative comments concerning this player and what ifs, even in junior footy the coach always prefers a player that suits his style. Just don’t understand the many comments always seeming to have a negative spin on what ever the club does.
Despite a so so playing roster ETH managed to provide a decent season which culminated in Champions League qualification, and we still see posts about his tenure and someone else could come in and change things. Some would have sacked Fergie after 2 seasons, how would that have gone. Just be positive for at least a couple of months and support decisions, then again the Glazers can fornicate elsewhere.
Despite a so so playing roster ETH managed to provide a decent season which culminated in Champions League qualification, and we still see posts about his tenure and someone else could come in and change things. Some would have sacked Fergie after 2 seasons, how would that have gone. Just be positive for at least a couple of months and support decisions, then again the Glazers can fornicate elsewhere.
I think that is the whole point of having a DOF. If you just want another person to discuss transfers there are other titles to appoint.
The two most successful eras in this club history had the manager as "the star", it is as traditional as its history of utilizing youth product. Man utd will never be like a Barcelona or Roman's Chelsea were the manager role is limited. The current structure is designed to enable the manager carryout his duties efficiently. People getting frustrated over ETH targeting ex players or Dutch products should get in with the program.
This is the "ETH era", we carefully selected him because we believe he is the right man to lead united back to the top, we'll continue to back him till he succeeds or fail.
This is the "ETH era", we carefully selected him because we believe he is the right man to lead united back to the top, we'll continue to back him till he succeeds or fail.
This is spot on, it's just moaning for the sake of it.
The report says few at club were in favor of Muani and somehow it became "EtH vs DoF", Sunesque reach there.
Yessss I can’t wait for this! Want to see the club bring in top young talent as squad depth after we fix the first team.
We are looking to offload
1) Maguire 30M
2) Henderson 20M
3) Fred 10M
4) VDB 10M
5) McT 30M
If Murtough is able to sell these deadwood and got approx. 100M for these players then this will be one of our best windows.
Maybe Murtough is finally showing his worth.
1) Maguire 30M
2) Henderson 20M
3) Fred 10M
4) VDB 10M
5) McT 30M
If Murtough is able to sell these deadwood and got approx. 100M for these players then this will be one of our best windows.
Maybe Murtough is finally showing his worth.
We should end up with way over 100m if everything goes to plan. We have already banked around 25-30m from sells of the likes of Elanga Telles etc.
There's no point in bringing in players the manager doesn't want. He's not going to be successful that way. So you do need to try and sign the players he does want. What should be important in the eyes of the club or a DOF is that those players fit a certain profile we're looking to create in terms of age, style or whatever.
What I like about this transfer window is the lack of drama. The transfer team went on quietly doing their business -- plugging up the gaps. Very professional.
No bombastic statements ala Woodward especially in the Age of Social Media.... in fact, I don't recall any in fact.
This is the Way.
No bombastic statements ala Woodward especially in the Age of Social Media.... in fact, I don't recall any in fact.
This is the Way.
Henderson is the only one which looks like there is no resolution coming anytime soon
You mean telling prospective sellers that you have an insane warchest is a good way to get ripped off? Morons all of them before this.
Been a frustrating window for transfer WUM's. Usually United are a major source of their summer window nonsense. This year, we hear about a specific target and not much else about any other players in those same positions. Then within weeks we've signed that player. So simple, so remarkable
That's why credit needs to go to Arnold too -- he's willing to delegate authority; unlike the prick Woodward who resisted getting a DOF for the longest time.
Absolutely. Arnold's role is very underestimated in our club rebuilding. He realizes where we are & genuinely wants to improve the club rather than assuming "Players will come to us if we throw out money", "Let's hire only marketable players", "Let's hand out long term contracts to duds to increase asset value in our balance sheet". The shift in approach would not have been possible without Arnold completely backing Murtough and Ten Hag. It feels like we're not a circus but a properly run football club for the first time in a decade.
Last edited:
100%. That's why I hope any takeover won't change the structure much -- and not change for the sake of it.
Let Arnold handle the new owners and be the buffer. Let the rest alone. We are on a solid upward trajectory now.
I think you're looking at it the wrong way. Obviously if the manager hates a player, its probably not going to work out but it's physically impossible for a manager to be aware and have in depth scouting information on all the players a scouting network has knowledge of in its aggregate.
For this reason, the manager should set out his parameters for each signing and the scouts should provide a short-list to the manager. It's up to them to convince him that their preferred signing works. You're going to have very limited success and a very expensive transfer strategy if all you target are peak players and those who the manager has first hand experience of.
It seems Maguire sales is very close to be done. Well done!
Reported to be done.
Goes to show how bad a job Woodward & Matt Judge did. And how frustrated Arnold and Murtough and their teams must have been in general.
No, how a DoF should work is have a vision for the club and appoint a manager befitting that vision - including in terms of style of play etc.
So having appointed EtH, I’d assume the DoF (& the back room team) would draw up lists of players who fit into the clubs (& ergo the manager!) ethos. ie shouldn’t matter which striker on the list say, 1-5 we sign, they should all have the characteristics of how we want to approach our football. So it’s not just randomly going out there and signing whoever EtH wants.
The crux being, when/if EtH is replaced, we need to ensure we identify a list of managers with the same/similar ethos and thus we wouldn’t need to replace the entire squad again, as we needed to going from Moyes, to LvG, Jose, Ole & EtH.
So unless it doesn’t end up like this and go to appointing Conte after EtH, there’s no way you can accuse them of still following the old blueprint.