Sporting Director / Director of Football

[Guest]

Please get a sporting director in

[Whitley mag]

2 minutes ago, Jack27 said:

Please get a sporting director in

Andy Howe i’m hearing.

 

 

 

 

Edited June 22 by Whitley mag

[The Prophet]

6 minutes ago, Jack27 said:

Please get a sporting director in

 

 

This is pretty much the same setup we had for the first two windows. They were pretty good.

 

As ever it's probably best to review a transfer window as s complete piece of work.

[SUPERTOON]

 

[80]

Not surprised to hear that. I would've expected it to be done and dusted by now if we truly fancied him.

 

I've got no problem with searching on if they're not convinced by him, by the way. Better no hire than a bad hire. I'm not persuaded that 'just anyone' would've made the last 8 weeks go better.

 

 

Edited June 27 by 80

[andycap]

No links to any other candidates though. 

[Sibierski]

Must be close to Nickson getting it, and a reshuffle elsewhere and recruit. 

[80]

40 minutes ago, Sibierski said:

Must be close to Nickson getting it, and a reshuffle elsewhere and recruit. 

Yeah, he's been my sneaky outside bet. And I'm optimistic about what he could do for us with more authority, he's clearly got many things going for him.

[PauloGeordio]

19 minutes ago, 80 said:

Yeah, he's been my sneaky outside bet. And I'm optimistic about what he could do for us with more authority, he's clearly got many things going for him.

Club wanted him, think he shied away from it. Maybe they have come to an acceptable arrangement. Think he’ll do well in that roll too. 

[TRon]

2 hours ago, 80 said:

Yeah, he's been my sneaky outside bet. And I'm optimistic about what he could do for us with more authority, he's clearly got many things going for him.

 

I'd be a bit worried it would just end up with Howe running the show. Much though I love Howe as a manager, we really do need some separation between DOF and the coach.

[Sibierski]

If we’re all in on Howe, then I’m not concerned. For him personally, would come with added expectations and pressure, and if he delivered, superb. Doesn’t, club would just replace and the structure with it.

 

Backing a settled manager with a settled squad, wouldn’t be so unwise. 

[Collage]

I have doubts about Spors. Think I'd rather see Nickson get the gig.

[Menace]

Nickson's definitely got an eye for talent. Those Ederson links in January were very interesting.

[80]

30 minutes ago, TRon said:

 

I'd be a bit worried it would just end up with Howe running the show. Much though I love Howe as a manager, we really do need some separation between DOF and the coach.

I think the separation is overrated to be honest. But also I get the impression the club doesn't see a ton of clashing/hierarchy in responsibilities, beyond what is already there i.e. mutual agreement on significant signings. Rather than a situation where the DOF has the whiphand and the coach gets what he's given (or fights to overpower the structure).

[FLUMPO235]

I think it would more be a capacity issue for Howe. Doesn’t he already get to the office for 6/7am. Also a good idea to have resilience and consistency if Howe left for any reason. 

[janpawel]

1 hour ago, 80 said:

I think the separation is overrated to be honest. But also I get the impression the club doesn't see a ton of clashing/hierarchy in responsibilities, beyond what is already there i.e. mutual agreement on significant signings. Rather than a situation where the DOF has the whiphand and the coach gets what he's given (or fights to overpower the structure).

Read this from Liverpool fans / Twitter gossip etc so make of it what you will

 

But all of their good/budget friendly signings that propelled them to the top (along with Klopps management too) , matip, Salah, Wijnaldum, Mane, selling Coutinho for van dijk/Allison etc etc

 

Was supposedly done with Michael Edwards leading, and apparently he left after a power struggle with Klopp, and has just rejoined back now klopp left... 

 

And they say Klopp was the one who wanted Nunez for the fortune they paid, Diaz, didn't want to replace Henderson etc, kept the same midfield for 5 years etc etc

[TRon]

2 hours ago, 80 said:

I think the separation is overrated to be honest. But also I get the impression the club doesn't see a ton of clashing/hierarchy in responsibilities, beyond what is already there i.e. mutual agreement on significant signings. Rather than a situation where the DOF has the whiphand and the coach gets what he's given (or fights to overpower the structure).

 

We were looking for two positions anyway from what we were led to believe, I suppose one of those would be to deal with the infrastructure, and the other would be more geared to recruitment. I think Howe's got a good eye for players anyway, but his focus is more on PL ready players, we need someone who is an expert on the foreign market.

[80]

1 hour ago, TRon said:

 

We were looking for two positions anyway from what we were led to believe, I suppose one of those would be to deal with the infrastructure, and the other would be more geared to recruitment. I think Howe's got a good eye for players anyway, but his focus is more on PL ready players, we need someone who is an expert on the foreign market.

Yeah, that's the last I've heard, which sounds positive to me.

 

I'm not sure the search started that way though - I think the board weren't too certain of what they wanted the structure to be at first. 

 

I don't blame them for that either, I think it's a good thing - that they're actually thinking about it. The structure of a modern football club isn't cut and dried nowadays; I think sometimes outsiders imagine the responsibilities of various job titles as being more cookie cutter than they actually are. There should be plenty of room to flex around the talents of individuals.

[Lotus]

Would imagine this could move along a bit now Ashworth isn’t hanging around threatening constructive dismissal.

[r0cafella]

1 minute ago, Lotus said:

Would imagine this could move along a bit now Ashworth isn’t hanging around threatening constructive dismissal.

Fingers crossed, I do wonder which direction we go with this. 

[SUPERTOON]

9 minutes ago, Lotus said:

Would imagine this could move along a bit now Ashworth isn’t hanging around threatening constructive dismissal.

Not sure that had anything to do with it, we would have already appointed Freedman as his replacement if he hadn’t turned us down.

[elbee909]

33 minutes ago, Lotus said:

Would imagine this could move along a bit now Ashworth isn’t hanging around threatening constructive dismissal.

 

But he wanted to leave. How was it ever constructive dismissal?

[Lotus]

5 minutes ago, elbee909 said:

 

But he wanted to leave. How was it ever constructive dismissal?

Don’t know much about employment law tbh. However, we weren’t releasing him from his contract and if we effectively replaced him I would imagine it would make his case stronger in a tribunal.

This is all purely conjecture on my part.

[madras]

4 minutes ago, Lotus said:

Don’t know much about employment law tbh. However, we weren’t releasing him from his contract and if we effectively replaced him I would imagine it would make his case stronger in a tribunal.

This is all purely conjecture on my part.

Why was he placed on gardening leave ?

 

He had no case whatsoever as all the evidence was that he was trying to engineer his move behind his employers back and in contravention of his contract.

[Lotus]

I guess we’ll see. If something happens rather quickly now, we can infer Ashworth’s existing contract with the club may have been an influencing factor.