Improving on a shoestring - Can it be done?

[NE5]

Absolutely. I asked Baggio a while ago if he thought the yids would be in the same position if Santini hadn't chickened out, but he didn't respond.

 

Well I've just searched the word Santini by NE5 on this site and no questions by you towards me have come up.

 

You last used the word Santini on May 28th 2006.

 

So you're obviously telling lies.

 

Fancy that eh, you mean editing posts.......No, I have not made it up and I'm not sad enough to go looking anyway. BTW, it isn't too late for you to comment, better late than never ?

 

 

 

 

 

Can you provide me with a link then?

 

I've found it.

 

http://www.toontastic.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=11726&hl=Santini&st=20

 

http://www.toontastic.net/forum/style_emoticons/default/crylaughin.gif

 

 

nice of him to provide the link showing Santini wasn't doing so well, despite having the "DOF"

 

mackems.gif

[NE5]

I've said it many times before over on toontastic, we need to bring in a Director of Football type figure to completely change everything behind the scenes at the club, someone who can set up a top scouting network to find all he top young players and someone who can spot cheap players in smaller foreign leagues who can come in cheap and do a job.

 

Not only would it benefit the club but it would take a lot of pressure off the manager and leave him to concentrate on the first team squad only.

 

This was my actual post.

 

"An example of a club that has had success with a Director of football is Spurs, 3 years ago Arnasen came into the club and completely altered the club from youth team up to their starting 11, he got rid of all the dead wood at the club even if it meant paying their contracts up, he then replaced with cheap young players who's transfer value could only rise (Carrick, Robinson etc)

 

On top of that he scouted youth teams to get the best young talent signed up to Spurs, even if it meant loaning them back out they were still signed to Spurs before their value went up, Lennon, Huddlestone, Dawson etc. Even with s**** like Davenport and Atouba they've managed to sell on for more than they paid for them.

 

I'll address your point about the last decade, have Spurs been better than us over that period of time? No they haven't, however in the last 3 years since they employed a Director of football they've not only caught up with us but have sailed by, they have a far superior squad and have managed to do this while remaining debt free. We on the other hand have a poor squad with no depth, average players who we can't move on as nobody in their right mind will match the wages we pay them, a wage bill that is running too high and a debt of over £80 million.

 

Such an overhaul by a DOF has made it possible for Spurs to bid £10 million for a top 17 year old without damaging their finances too much, at the same time we have to sniff around for players on loan because we haven't got a pot to piss in.

 

Have Spurs been better than us over the past decade? No, however I have no doubt that we won't be better than then them over the next decade if Shepherd is still in charge."

 

The part about them spending £10 million and not hurting their finances too much is because as far as I'm aware they already have the cash in the bank, compared to us who would have to loan it from the bank, I thought I should clear up that point before someone gets their knickers in a twist over it.

 

I'm not exactly averse to a DOF but a good manager won't need one. And just because Spurs are doing well under one doesn't mean anything really, I'd say their progress is all down to Jol and the team on the pitch more than anything else. If they were doing s****, how would the DOF get them out of it?

 

He wouldn't, however when the under performing manager is replaced the new manager will walk into a club with a great squad and an excellent scouting network, btw wasn't it Arnesen that brought Jol in as a coach?

 

Football is too big to leave it all to one man now, there was a thread on here months ago on how many staff the big clubs employ compared to us, I'll try to dig it out.

 

EDIT - http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=31057.0

 

What happens if the new manager doesn't rate some of the squad left over from the previous manager?

 

Fergie et al don't have any problems managing a club without a DOF, neither did SBR who was in his 60s when he took over Newcastle, he worked 18 hours a day at times.

 

BTW I'm not disagreeing with you here or against the idea of a DOF, at times I've wondered myself whether we should go down that route but only because the manager is inept in certain areas. Again, if we had a top manager in charge, there would be no need for a DOF. Spurs appointed one because their new board came from a non-footballing background and thought they needed a middleman to help them run the club on their behalf. At the moment it looks like they have a good setup there, but Jol and the team out on the pitch will determine whether Spurs as a club succeed and not their DOF.

 

Alex Ferguson had over 20 years to get Man Utd the way he wanted, Bobby Robson was excellent for us but it's often pointed out how much money he wasted, money that we just can't afford to lose anymore, which is the whole point of this thread.

 

You say Spurs appointed one because their board came from a non-footballing background and thought they needed a middleman to help them run the club on their behalf, isn't that the case with us? Can we really trust Shepherd and Hall to bring in a manager after employing both Souness and Roeder? If you look at the other 'Big clubs' in the Premiership they are all ran by people with knowledge of football with the owners in the background, Abramovich owns Chelsea yet he isn't chairman, at Arsenal it is David Dein not Peter Hill-Wood, at Manchester United while the Glazers own it they realise their shortcomings and it is David Gill who runs the show, we need someone like that.

 

I'm not saying a DOF should come in and buy all the players he wants, I'm saying how much the club would benefit by having someone in who could set up a top scouting network and spot bargain players at other clubs, of course the manager would have the final say on all transfers for the first team but having Roeder ringing around trying to get anyone in on loan on January 31st is a bit of a joke as far as I'm concerned.

 

People talk about Keegan at Fulham and Pleat at Spurs failing as DOF, neither of these have any sort of knowledge of setting up scouting networks or anything like that, both were appointed because of who they are not what they know.

 

I would of thought the 5th best club over the past decade and the 8th biggest club in the World would have enough contacts to find someone with a proven track record as a DOF to come in and sort this club out, however I have strong doubts it would work with Shepherd as chairman.

 

Fair enough Baggio, you make some good points and put a strong case forward but would you concede that appointing a top manager and giving him complete control would reduce the need for a DOF and therfore be the best option?

 

For me a DOF at Newcastle defeats the object somewhat, it is kind of like being bought off. "OK, you can't have a top manager, you'll have to do with a s*** one, but to soften the blow, we'll bring in a DOF".

 

I'm not saying we should have to do with a shit one, a top manager is important and what matters most as far as the first team squad is concerned, however Mourinho and Wenger, both top manager,  have someone in the background taking care of every other aspect of the club from scouting to fitness etc as the job is just too big for one man alone, football has moved on a lot since the Premiership was invented.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/t/tottenham_hotspur/4224278.stm

 

 

it never has been one man doing all those jobs.

 

Keep up the cliches though  8)

 

Baggio, you're a scream. First you say that if you have a "plan" you will succeed, now you say if you have a "DOF", you will succeed. What happens if everybody appoints a DOF and everybody has a "plan" ....... superbly amusing.

 

There are only two trophies, the title and the FA Cup. The teams that win those, have the 2 trophy winning managers. All teams are chasing these 2 trophy winning managers....it would be canny if the penny dropped at last ....

 

 

[Baggio]

Absolutely. I asked Baggio a while ago if he thought the yids would be in the same position if Santini hadn't chickened out, but he didn't respond.

 

Well I've just searched the word Santini by NE5 on this site and no questions by you towards me have come up.

 

You last used the word Santini on May 28th 2006.

 

So you're obviously telling lies.

 

Fancy that eh, you mean editing posts.......No, I have not made it up and I'm not sad enough to go looking anyway. BTW, it isn't too late for you to comment, better late than never ?

 

 

 

 

 

Can you provide me with a link then?

 

I've found it.

 

http://www.toontastic.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=11726&hl=Santini&st=20

 

http://www.toontastic.net/forum/style_emoticons/default/crylaughin.gif

 

 

nice of him to provide the link showing Santini wasn't doing so well, despite having the "DOF"

 

mackems.gif

 

I'm still waiting for your link where you asked me.

[Baggio]

I've said it many times before over on toontastic, we need to bring in a Director of Football type figure to completely change everything behind the scenes at the club, someone who can set up a top scouting network to find all he top young players and someone who can spot cheap players in smaller foreign leagues who can come in cheap and do a job.

 

Not only would it benefit the club but it would take a lot of pressure off the manager and leave him to concentrate on the first team squad only.

 

This was my actual post.

 

"An example of a club that has had success with a Director of football is Spurs, 3 years ago Arnasen came into the club and completely altered the club from youth team up to their starting 11, he got rid of all the dead wood at the club even if it meant paying their contracts up, he then replaced with cheap young players who's transfer value could only rise (Carrick, Robinson etc)

 

On top of that he scouted youth teams to get the best young talent signed up to Spurs, even if it meant loaning them back out they were still signed to Spurs before their value went up, Lennon, Huddlestone, Dawson etc. Even with s**** like Davenport and Atouba they've managed to sell on for more than they paid for them.

 

I'll address your point about the last decade, have Spurs been better than us over that period of time? No they haven't, however in the last 3 years since they employed a Director of football they've not only caught up with us but have sailed by, they have a far superior squad and have managed to do this while remaining debt free. We on the other hand have a poor squad with no depth, average players who we can't move on as nobody in their right mind will match the wages we pay them, a wage bill that is running too high and a debt of over £80 million.

 

Such an overhaul by a DOF has made it possible for Spurs to bid £10 million for a top 17 year old without damaging their finances too much, at the same time we have to sniff around for players on loan because we haven't got a pot to piss in.

 

Have Spurs been better than us over the past decade? No, however I have no doubt that we won't be better than then them over the next decade if Shepherd is still in charge."

 

The part about them spending £10 million and not hurting their finances too much is because as far as I'm aware they already have the cash in the bank, compared to us who would have to loan it from the bank, I thought I should clear up that point before someone gets their knickers in a twist over it.

 

I'm not exactly averse to a DOF but a good manager won't need one. And just because Spurs are doing well under one doesn't mean anything really, I'd say their progress is all down to Jol and the team on the pitch more than anything else. If they were doing s****, how would the DOF get them out of it?

 

He wouldn't, however when the under performing manager is replaced the new manager will walk into a club with a great squad and an excellent scouting network, btw wasn't it Arnesen that brought Jol in as a coach?

 

Football is too big to leave it all to one man now, there was a thread on here months ago on how many staff the big clubs employ compared to us, I'll try to dig it out.

 

EDIT - http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=31057.0

 

What happens if the new manager doesn't rate some of the squad left over from the previous manager?

 

Fergie et al don't have any problems managing a club without a DOF, neither did SBR who was in his 60s when he took over Newcastle, he worked 18 hours a day at times.

 

BTW I'm not disagreeing with you here or against the idea of a DOF, at times I've wondered myself whether we should go down that route but only because the manager is inept in certain areas. Again, if we had a top manager in charge, there would be no need for a DOF. Spurs appointed one because their new board came from a non-footballing background and thought they needed a middleman to help them run the club on their behalf. At the moment it looks like they have a good setup there, but Jol and the team out on the pitch will determine whether Spurs as a club succeed and not their DOF.

 

Alex Ferguson had over 20 years to get Man Utd the way he wanted, Bobby Robson was excellent for us but it's often pointed out how much money he wasted, money that we just can't afford to lose anymore, which is the whole point of this thread.

 

You say Spurs appointed one because their board came from a non-footballing background and thought they needed a middleman to help them run the club on their behalf, isn't that the case with us? Can we really trust Shepherd and Hall to bring in a manager after employing both Souness and Roeder? If you look at the other 'Big clubs' in the Premiership they are all ran by people with knowledge of football with the owners in the background, Abramovich owns Chelsea yet he isn't chairman, at Arsenal it is David Dein not Peter Hill-Wood, at Manchester United while the Glazers own it they realise their shortcomings and it is David Gill who runs the show, we need someone like that.

 

I'm not saying a DOF should come in and buy all the players he wants, I'm saying how much the club would benefit by having someone in who could set up a top scouting network and spot bargain players at other clubs, of course the manager would have the final say on all transfers for the first team but having Roeder ringing around trying to get anyone in on loan on January 31st is a bit of a joke as far as I'm concerned.

 

People talk about Keegan at Fulham and Pleat at Spurs failing as DOF, neither of these have any sort of knowledge of setting up scouting networks or anything like that, both were appointed because of who they are not what they know.

 

I would of thought the 5th best club over the past decade and the 8th biggest club in the World would have enough contacts to find someone with a proven track record as a DOF to come in and sort this club out, however I have strong doubts it would work with Shepherd as chairman.

 

Fair enough Baggio, you make some good points and put a strong case forward but would you concede that appointing a top manager and giving him complete control would reduce the need for a DOF and therfore be the best option?

 

For me a DOF at Newcastle defeats the object somewhat, it is kind of like being bought off. "OK, you can't have a top manager, you'll have to do with a s*** one, but to soften the blow, we'll bring in a DOF".

 

I'm not saying we should have to do with a s*** one, a top manager is important and what matters most as far as the first team squad is concerned, however Mourinho and Wenger, both top manager,  have someone in the background taking care of every other aspect of the club from scouting to fitness etc as the job is just too big for one man alone, football has moved on a lot since the Premiership was invented.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/t/tottenham_hotspur/4224278.stm

 

 

it never has been one man doing all those jobs.

 

Keep up the cliches though  8)

 

Instead of trying to shoot down everyone else's ideas and trying to score points all the time, why don't you tell us how the club can improve.

[Guest BooBoo]

Yet another decent thread has been spoilt by NE5.

[NE5]

I've said it many times before over on toontastic, we need to bring in a Director of Football type figure to completely change everything behind the scenes at the club, someone who can set up a top scouting network to find all he top young players and someone who can spot cheap players in smaller foreign leagues who can come in cheap and do a job.

 

Not only would it benefit the club but it would take a lot of pressure off the manager and leave him to concentrate on the first team squad only.

 

This was my actual post.

 

"An example of a club that has had success with a Director of football is Spurs, 3 years ago Arnasen came into the club and completely altered the club from youth team up to their starting 11, he got rid of all the dead wood at the club even if it meant paying their contracts up, he then replaced with cheap young players who's transfer value could only rise (Carrick, Robinson etc)

 

On top of that he scouted youth teams to get the best young talent signed up to Spurs, even if it meant loaning them back out they were still signed to Spurs before their value went up, Lennon, Huddlestone, Dawson etc. Even with s**** like Davenport and Atouba they've managed to sell on for more than they paid for them.

 

I'll address your point about the last decade, have Spurs been better than us over that period of time? No they haven't, however in the last 3 years since they employed a Director of football they've not only caught up with us but have sailed by, they have a far superior squad and have managed to do this while remaining debt free. We on the other hand have a poor squad with no depth, average players who we can't move on as nobody in their right mind will match the wages we pay them, a wage bill that is running too high and a debt of over £80 million.

 

Such an overhaul by a DOF has made it possible for Spurs to bid £10 million for a top 17 year old without damaging their finances too much, at the same time we have to sniff around for players on loan because we haven't got a pot to piss in.

 

Have Spurs been better than us over the past decade? No, however I have no doubt that we won't be better than then them over the next decade if Shepherd is still in charge."

 

The part about them spending £10 million and not hurting their finances too much is because as far as I'm aware they already have the cash in the bank, compared to us who would have to loan it from the bank, I thought I should clear up that point before someone gets their knickers in a twist over it.

 

I'm not exactly averse to a DOF but a good manager won't need one. And just because Spurs are doing well under one doesn't mean anything really, I'd say their progress is all down to Jol and the team on the pitch more than anything else. If they were doing s****, how would the DOF get them out of it?

 

He wouldn't, however when the under performing manager is replaced the new manager will walk into a club with a great squad and an excellent scouting network, btw wasn't it Arnesen that brought Jol in as a coach?

 

Football is too big to leave it all to one man now, there was a thread on here months ago on how many staff the big clubs employ compared to us, I'll try to dig it out.

 

EDIT - http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=31057.0

 

What happens if the new manager doesn't rate some of the squad left over from the previous manager?

 

Fergie et al don't have any problems managing a club without a DOF, neither did SBR who was in his 60s when he took over Newcastle, he worked 18 hours a day at times.

 

BTW I'm not disagreeing with you here or against the idea of a DOF, at times I've wondered myself whether we should go down that route but only because the manager is inept in certain areas. Again, if we had a top manager in charge, there would be no need for a DOF. Spurs appointed one because their new board came from a non-footballing background and thought they needed a middleman to help them run the club on their behalf. At the moment it looks like they have a good setup there, but Jol and the team out on the pitch will determine whether Spurs as a club succeed and not their DOF.

 

Alex Ferguson had over 20 years to get Man Utd the way he wanted, Bobby Robson was excellent for us but it's often pointed out how much money he wasted, money that we just can't afford to lose anymore, which is the whole point of this thread.

 

You say Spurs appointed one because their board came from a non-footballing background and thought they needed a middleman to help them run the club on their behalf, isn't that the case with us? Can we really trust Shepherd and Hall to bring in a manager after employing both Souness and Roeder? If you look at the other 'Big clubs' in the Premiership they are all ran by people with knowledge of football with the owners in the background, Abramovich owns Chelsea yet he isn't chairman, at Arsenal it is David Dein not Peter Hill-Wood, at Manchester United while the Glazers own it they realise their shortcomings and it is David Gill who runs the show, we need someone like that.

 

I'm not saying a DOF should come in and buy all the players he wants, I'm saying how much the club would benefit by having someone in who could set up a top scouting network and spot bargain players at other clubs, of course the manager would have the final say on all transfers for the first team but having Roeder ringing around trying to get anyone in on loan on January 31st is a bit of a joke as far as I'm concerned.

 

People talk about Keegan at Fulham and Pleat at Spurs failing as DOF, neither of these have any sort of knowledge of setting up scouting networks or anything like that, both were appointed because of who they are not what they know.

 

I would of thought the 5th best club over the past decade and the 8th biggest club in the World would have enough contacts to find someone with a proven track record as a DOF to come in and sort this club out, however I have strong doubts it would work with Shepherd as chairman.

 

Fair enough Baggio, you make some good points and put a strong case forward but would you concede that appointing a top manager and giving him complete control would reduce the need for a DOF and therfore be the best option?

 

For me a DOF at Newcastle defeats the object somewhat, it is kind of like being bought off. "OK, you can't have a top manager, you'll have to do with a s*** one, but to soften the blow, we'll bring in a DOF".

 

I'm not saying we should have to do with a s*** one, a top manager is important and what matters most as far as the first team squad is concerned, however Mourinho and Wenger, both top manager,  have someone in the background taking care of every other aspect of the club from scouting to fitness etc as the job is just too big for one man alone, football has moved on a lot since the Premiership was invented.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/t/tottenham_hotspur/4224278.stm

 

 

it never has been one man doing all those jobs.

 

Keep up the cliches though  8)

 

Instead of trying to shoot down everyone else's ideas and trying to score points all the time, why don't you tell us how the club can improve.

 

Oh, I have told you many times. By finding the new Keegan. Unfortunately, other clubs are looking for the same person. In the real world, there are only 2 winners, and the european spots are the next best,  so you must be doing something right to get into these places.

 

 

[Baggio]

Yet another decent thread has been spoilt by NE5.

 

Agreed.

[NE5]

Yet another decent thread has been spoilt by NE5.

 

Boo Boo, it is a decent thread, I don;t mind if Baggio doesn't agree with me, but its posts such as yours which contribute absolutely nothing.

 

As usual.

 

 

[Baggio]

I've said it many times before over on toontastic, we need to bring in a Director of Football type figure to completely change everything behind the scenes at the club, someone who can set up a top scouting network to find all he top young players and someone who can spot cheap players in smaller foreign leagues who can come in cheap and do a job.

 

Not only would it benefit the club but it would take a lot of pressure off the manager and leave him to concentrate on the first team squad only.

 

This was my actual post.

 

"An example of a club that has had success with a Director of football is Spurs, 3 years ago Arnasen came into the club and completely altered the club from youth team up to their starting 11, he got rid of all the dead wood at the club even if it meant paying their contracts up, he then replaced with cheap young players who's transfer value could only rise (Carrick, Robinson etc)

 

On top of that he scouted youth teams to get the best young talent signed up to Spurs, even if it meant loaning them back out they were still signed to Spurs before their value went up, Lennon, Huddlestone, Dawson etc. Even with s**** like Davenport and Atouba they've managed to sell on for more than they paid for them.

 

I'll address your point about the last decade, have Spurs been better than us over that period of time? No they haven't, however in the last 3 years since they employed a Director of football they've not only caught up with us but have sailed by, they have a far superior squad and have managed to do this while remaining debt free. We on the other hand have a poor squad with no depth, average players who we can't move on as nobody in their right mind will match the wages we pay them, a wage bill that is running too high and a debt of over £80 million.

 

Such an overhaul by a DOF has made it possible for Spurs to bid £10 million for a top 17 year old without damaging their finances too much, at the same time we have to sniff around for players on loan because we haven't got a pot to piss in.

 

Have Spurs been better than us over the past decade? No, however I have no doubt that we won't be better than then them over the next decade if Shepherd is still in charge."

 

The part about them spending £10 million and not hurting their finances too much is because as far as I'm aware they already have the cash in the bank, compared to us who would have to loan it from the bank, I thought I should clear up that point before someone gets their knickers in a twist over it.

 

I'm not exactly averse to a DOF but a good manager won't need one. And just because Spurs are doing well under one doesn't mean anything really, I'd say their progress is all down to Jol and the team on the pitch more than anything else. If they were doing s****, how would the DOF get them out of it?

 

He wouldn't, however when the under performing manager is replaced the new manager will walk into a club with a great squad and an excellent scouting network, btw wasn't it Arnesen that brought Jol in as a coach?

 

Football is too big to leave it all to one man now, there was a thread on here months ago on how many staff the big clubs employ compared to us, I'll try to dig it out.

 

EDIT - http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=31057.0

 

What happens if the new manager doesn't rate some of the squad left over from the previous manager?

 

Fergie et al don't have any problems managing a club without a DOF, neither did SBR who was in his 60s when he took over Newcastle, he worked 18 hours a day at times.

 

BTW I'm not disagreeing with you here or against the idea of a DOF, at times I've wondered myself whether we should go down that route but only because the manager is inept in certain areas. Again, if we had a top manager in charge, there would be no need for a DOF. Spurs appointed one because their new board came from a non-footballing background and thought they needed a middleman to help them run the club on their behalf. At the moment it looks like they have a good setup there, but Jol and the team out on the pitch will determine whether Spurs as a club succeed and not their DOF.

 

Alex Ferguson had over 20 years to get Man Utd the way he wanted, Bobby Robson was excellent for us but it's often pointed out how much money he wasted, money that we just can't afford to lose anymore, which is the whole point of this thread.

 

You say Spurs appointed one because their board came from a non-footballing background and thought they needed a middleman to help them run the club on their behalf, isn't that the case with us? Can we really trust Shepherd and Hall to bring in a manager after employing both Souness and Roeder? If you look at the other 'Big clubs' in the Premiership they are all ran by people with knowledge of football with the owners in the background, Abramovich owns Chelsea yet he isn't chairman, at Arsenal it is David Dein not Peter Hill-Wood, at Manchester United while the Glazers own it they realise their shortcomings and it is David Gill who runs the show, we need someone like that.

 

I'm not saying a DOF should come in and buy all the players he wants, I'm saying how much the club would benefit by having someone in who could set up a top scouting network and spot bargain players at other clubs, of course the manager would have the final say on all transfers for the first team but having Roeder ringing around trying to get anyone in on loan on January 31st is a bit of a joke as far as I'm concerned.

 

People talk about Keegan at Fulham and Pleat at Spurs failing as DOF, neither of these have any sort of knowledge of setting up scouting networks or anything like that, both were appointed because of who they are not what they know.

 

I would of thought the 5th best club over the past decade and the 8th biggest club in the World would have enough contacts to find someone with a proven track record as a DOF to come in and sort this club out, however I have strong doubts it would work with Shepherd as chairman.

 

Fair enough Baggio, you make some good points and put a strong case forward but would you concede that appointing a top manager and giving him complete control would reduce the need for a DOF and therfore be the best option?

 

For me a DOF at Newcastle defeats the object somewhat, it is kind of like being bought off. "OK, you can't have a top manager, you'll have to do with a s*** one, but to soften the blow, we'll bring in a DOF".

 

I'm not saying we should have to do with a s*** one, a top manager is important and what matters most as far as the first team squad is concerned, however Mourinho and Wenger, both top manager,  have someone in the background taking care of every other aspect of the club from scouting to fitness etc as the job is just too big for one man alone, football has moved on a lot since the Premiership was invented.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/t/tottenham_hotspur/4224278.stm

 

 

it never has been one man doing all those jobs.

 

Keep up the cliches though  8)

 

Instead of trying to shoot down everyone else's ideas and trying to score points all the time, why don't you tell us how the club can improve.

 

Oh, I have told you many times. By finding the new Keegan. Unfortunately, other clubs are looking for the same person. In the real world, there are only 2 winners, and the european spots are the next best,  so you must be doing something right to get into these places.

 

 

 

So you're suggesting we sack Roeder then and find another manager?

[NE5]

Yet another decent thread has been spoilt by NE5.

 

Agreed.

 

What, because someone doesn't agree knows better than you ? Sad that like.

 

Isn't that what message boards are all about ? Why do you think everybody should agree with you ?

 

 

[NE5]

I've said it many times before over on toontastic, we need to bring in a Director of Football type figure to completely change everything behind the scenes at the club, someone who can set up a top scouting network to find all he top young players and someone who can spot cheap players in smaller foreign leagues who can come in cheap and do a job.

 

Not only would it benefit the club but it would take a lot of pressure off the manager and leave him to concentrate on the first team squad only.

 

This was my actual post.

 

"An example of a club that has had success with a Director of football is Spurs, 3 years ago Arnasen came into the club and completely altered the club from youth team up to their starting 11, he got rid of all the dead wood at the club even if it meant paying their contracts up, he then replaced with cheap young players who's transfer value could only rise (Carrick, Robinson etc)

 

On top of that he scouted youth teams to get the best young talent signed up to Spurs, even if it meant loaning them back out they were still signed to Spurs before their value went up, Lennon, Huddlestone, Dawson etc. Even with s**** like Davenport and Atouba they've managed to sell on for more than they paid for them.

 

I'll address your point about the last decade, have Spurs been better than us over that period of time? No they haven't, however in the last 3 years since they employed a Director of football they've not only caught up with us but have sailed by, they have a far superior squad and have managed to do this while remaining debt free. We on the other hand have a poor squad with no depth, average players who we can't move on as nobody in their right mind will match the wages we pay them, a wage bill that is running too high and a debt of over £80 million.

 

Such an overhaul by a DOF has made it possible for Spurs to bid £10 million for a top 17 year old without damaging their finances too much, at the same time we have to sniff around for players on loan because we haven't got a pot to piss in.

 

Have Spurs been better than us over the past decade? No, however I have no doubt that we won't be better than then them over the next decade if Shepherd is still in charge."

 

The part about them spending £10 million and not hurting their finances too much is because as far as I'm aware they already have the cash in the bank, compared to us who would have to loan it from the bank, I thought I should clear up that point before someone gets their knickers in a twist over it.

 

I'm not exactly averse to a DOF but a good manager won't need one. And just because Spurs are doing well under one doesn't mean anything really, I'd say their progress is all down to Jol and the team on the pitch more than anything else. If they were doing s****, how would the DOF get them out of it?

 

He wouldn't, however when the under performing manager is replaced the new manager will walk into a club with a great squad and an excellent scouting network, btw wasn't it Arnesen that brought Jol in as a coach?

 

Football is too big to leave it all to one man now, there was a thread on here months ago on how many staff the big clubs employ compared to us, I'll try to dig it out.

 

EDIT - http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=31057.0

 

What happens if the new manager doesn't rate some of the squad left over from the previous manager?

 

Fergie et al don't have any problems managing a club without a DOF, neither did SBR who was in his 60s when he took over Newcastle, he worked 18 hours a day at times.

 

BTW I'm not disagreeing with you here or against the idea of a DOF, at times I've wondered myself whether we should go down that route but only because the manager is inept in certain areas. Again, if we had a top manager in charge, there would be no need for a DOF. Spurs appointed one because their new board came from a non-footballing background and thought they needed a middleman to help them run the club on their behalf. At the moment it looks like they have a good setup there, but Jol and the team out on the pitch will determine whether Spurs as a club succeed and not their DOF.

 

Alex Ferguson had over 20 years to get Man Utd the way he wanted, Bobby Robson was excellent for us but it's often pointed out how much money he wasted, money that we just can't afford to lose anymore, which is the whole point of this thread.

 

You say Spurs appointed one because their board came from a non-footballing background and thought they needed a middleman to help them run the club on their behalf, isn't that the case with us? Can we really trust Shepherd and Hall to bring in a manager after employing both Souness and Roeder? If you look at the other 'Big clubs' in the Premiership they are all ran by people with knowledge of football with the owners in the background, Abramovich owns Chelsea yet he isn't chairman, at Arsenal it is David Dein not Peter Hill-Wood, at Manchester United while the Glazers own it they realise their shortcomings and it is David Gill who runs the show, we need someone like that.

 

I'm not saying a DOF should come in and buy all the players he wants, I'm saying how much the club would benefit by having someone in who could set up a top scouting network and spot bargain players at other clubs, of course the manager would have the final say on all transfers for the first team but having Roeder ringing around trying to get anyone in on loan on January 31st is a bit of a joke as far as I'm concerned.

 

People talk about Keegan at Fulham and Pleat at Spurs failing as DOF, neither of these have any sort of knowledge of setting up scouting networks or anything like that, both were appointed because of who they are not what they know.

 

I would of thought the 5th best club over the past decade and the 8th biggest club in the World would have enough contacts to find someone with a proven track record as a DOF to come in and sort this club out, however I have strong doubts it would work with Shepherd as chairman.

 

Fair enough Baggio, you make some good points and put a strong case forward but would you concede that appointing a top manager and giving him complete control would reduce the need for a DOF and therfore be the best option?

 

For me a DOF at Newcastle defeats the object somewhat, it is kind of like being bought off. "OK, you can't have a top manager, you'll have to do with a s*** one, but to soften the blow, we'll bring in a DOF".

 

I'm not saying we should have to do with a s*** one, a top manager is important and what matters most as far as the first team squad is concerned, however Mourinho and Wenger, both top manager,  have someone in the background taking care of every other aspect of the club from scouting to fitness etc as the job is just too big for one man alone, football has moved on a lot since the Premiership was invented.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/t/tottenham_hotspur/4224278.stm

 

 

it never has been one man doing all those jobs.

 

Keep up the cliches though  8)

 

Instead of trying to shoot down everyone else's ideas and trying to score points all the time, why don't you tell us how the club can improve.

 

Oh, I have told you many times. By finding the new Keegan. Unfortunately, other clubs are looking for the same person. In the real world, there are only 2 winners, and the european spots are the next best,  so you must be doing something right to get into these places.

 

 

 

So you're suggesting we sack Roeder then and find another manager?

 

If we get someone better, of course. When we find the money to pay him off though, I'm sure you will agree with that. It would be a far better move than employing a "DOF"

 

 

[Dokko]

Yet another decent thread has been spoilt by NE5.

 

What do you expect?

 

He breathes, therefore he is alive and therefore he types, which in turn ruins a decent thread its all he can do.

 

Glad to see HTL distancing himself from him though.

 

End of an era on the horizon?

 

 

[Baggio]

I've said it many times before over on toontastic, we need to bring in a Director of Football type figure to completely change everything behind the scenes at the club, someone who can set up a top scouting network to find all he top young players and someone who can spot cheap players in smaller foreign leagues who can come in cheap and do a job.

 

Not only would it benefit the club but it would take a lot of pressure off the manager and leave him to concentrate on the first team squad only.

 

This was my actual post.

 

"An example of a club that has had success with a Director of football is Spurs, 3 years ago Arnasen came into the club and completely altered the club from youth team up to their starting 11, he got rid of all the dead wood at the club even if it meant paying their contracts up, he then replaced with cheap young players who's transfer value could only rise (Carrick, Robinson etc)

 

On top of that he scouted youth teams to get the best young talent signed up to Spurs, even if it meant loaning them back out they were still signed to Spurs before their value went up, Lennon, Huddlestone, Dawson etc. Even with s**** like Davenport and Atouba they've managed to sell on for more than they paid for them.

 

I'll address your point about the last decade, have Spurs been better than us over that period of time? No they haven't, however in the last 3 years since they employed a Director of football they've not only caught up with us but have sailed by, they have a far superior squad and have managed to do this while remaining debt free. We on the other hand have a poor squad with no depth, average players who we can't move on as nobody in their right mind will match the wages we pay them, a wage bill that is running too high and a debt of over £80 million.

 

Such an overhaul by a DOF has made it possible for Spurs to bid £10 million for a top 17 year old without damaging their finances too much, at the same time we have to sniff around for players on loan because we haven't got a pot to piss in.

 

Have Spurs been better than us over the past decade? No, however I have no doubt that we won't be better than then them over the next decade if Shepherd is still in charge."

 

The part about them spending £10 million and not hurting their finances too much is because as far as I'm aware they already have the cash in the bank, compared to us who would have to loan it from the bank, I thought I should clear up that point before someone gets their knickers in a twist over it.

 

I'm not exactly averse to a DOF but a good manager won't need one. And just because Spurs are doing well under one doesn't mean anything really, I'd say their progress is all down to Jol and the team on the pitch more than anything else. If they were doing s****, how would the DOF get them out of it?

 

He wouldn't, however when the under performing manager is replaced the new manager will walk into a club with a great squad and an excellent scouting network, btw wasn't it Arnesen that brought Jol in as a coach?

 

Football is too big to leave it all to one man now, there was a thread on here months ago on how many staff the big clubs employ compared to us, I'll try to dig it out.

 

EDIT - http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=31057.0

 

What happens if the new manager doesn't rate some of the squad left over from the previous manager?

 

Fergie et al don't have any problems managing a club without a DOF, neither did SBR who was in his 60s when he took over Newcastle, he worked 18 hours a day at times.

 

BTW I'm not disagreeing with you here or against the idea of a DOF, at times I've wondered myself whether we should go down that route but only because the manager is inept in certain areas. Again, if we had a top manager in charge, there would be no need for a DOF. Spurs appointed one because their new board came from a non-footballing background and thought they needed a middleman to help them run the club on their behalf. At the moment it looks like they have a good setup there, but Jol and the team out on the pitch will determine whether Spurs as a club succeed and not their DOF.

 

Alex Ferguson had over 20 years to get Man Utd the way he wanted, Bobby Robson was excellent for us but it's often pointed out how much money he wasted, money that we just can't afford to lose anymore, which is the whole point of this thread.

 

You say Spurs appointed one because their board came from a non-footballing background and thought they needed a middleman to help them run the club on their behalf, isn't that the case with us? Can we really trust Shepherd and Hall to bring in a manager after employing both Souness and Roeder? If you look at the other 'Big clubs' in the Premiership they are all ran by people with knowledge of football with the owners in the background, Abramovich owns Chelsea yet he isn't chairman, at Arsenal it is David Dein not Peter Hill-Wood, at Manchester United while the Glazers own it they realise their shortcomings and it is David Gill who runs the show, we need someone like that.

 

I'm not saying a DOF should come in and buy all the players he wants, I'm saying how much the club would benefit by having someone in who could set up a top scouting network and spot bargain players at other clubs, of course the manager would have the final say on all transfers for the first team but having Roeder ringing around trying to get anyone in on loan on January 31st is a bit of a joke as far as I'm concerned.

 

People talk about Keegan at Fulham and Pleat at Spurs failing as DOF, neither of these have any sort of knowledge of setting up scouting networks or anything like that, both were appointed because of who they are not what they know.

 

I would of thought the 5th best club over the past decade and the 8th biggest club in the World would have enough contacts to find someone with a proven track record as a DOF to come in and sort this club out, however I have strong doubts it would work with Shepherd as chairman.

 

Fair enough Baggio, you make some good points and put a strong case forward but would you concede that appointing a top manager and giving him complete control would reduce the need for a DOF and therfore be the best option?

 

For me a DOF at Newcastle defeats the object somewhat, it is kind of like being bought off. "OK, you can't have a top manager, you'll have to do with a s*** one, but to soften the blow, we'll bring in a DOF".

 

I'm not saying we should have to do with a s*** one, a top manager is important and what matters most as far as the first team squad is concerned, however Mourinho and Wenger, both top manager,  have someone in the background taking care of every other aspect of the club from scouting to fitness etc as the job is just too big for one man alone, football has moved on a lot since the Premiership was invented.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/t/tottenham_hotspur/4224278.stm

 

 

it never has been one man doing all those jobs.

 

Keep up the cliches though  8)

 

Instead of trying to shoot down everyone else's ideas and trying to score points all the time, why don't you tell us how the club can improve.

 

Oh, I have told you many times. By finding the new Keegan. Unfortunately, other clubs are looking for the same person. In the real world, there are only 2 winners, and the european spots are the next best,  so you must be doing something right to get into these places.

 

 

 

So you're suggesting we sack Roeder then and find another manager?

 

If we get someone better, of course. When we find the money to pay him off though, I'm sure you will agree with that. It would be a far better move than employing a "DOF"

 

 

 

So you don't think Roeder is the man to take us forward?

 

We need a new manager and a DOF tbh.

[NE5]

Yet another decent thread has been spoilt by NE5.

 

What do you expect?

 

He breathes, therefore he is alive and therefore he types, which in turn ruins a decent thread its all he can do.

 

Glad to see HTL distancing himself from him though.

 

End of an era on the horizon?

 

 

Someone else who just wants to post in threads where everybody agrees with him. It escapes you, that if you had any idea or knowledge of the club, then I might.

 

 

[NE5]

I've said it many times before over on toontastic, we need to bring in a Director of Football type figure to completely change everything behind the scenes at the club, someone who can set up a top scouting network to find all he top young players and someone who can spot cheap players in smaller foreign leagues who can come in cheap and do a job.

 

Not only would it benefit the club but it would take a lot of pressure off the manager and leave him to concentrate on the first team squad only.

 

This was my actual post.

 

"An example of a club that has had success with a Director of football is Spurs, 3 years ago Arnasen came into the club and completely altered the club from youth team up to their starting 11, he got rid of all the dead wood at the club even if it meant paying their contracts up, he then replaced with cheap young players who's transfer value could only rise (Carrick, Robinson etc)

 

On top of that he scouted youth teams to get the best young talent signed up to Spurs, even if it meant loaning them back out they were still signed to Spurs before their value went up, Lennon, Huddlestone, Dawson etc. Even with s**** like Davenport and Atouba they've managed to sell on for more than they paid for them.

 

I'll address your point about the last decade, have Spurs been better than us over that period of time? No they haven't, however in the last 3 years since they employed a Director of football they've not only caught up with us but have sailed by, they have a far superior squad and have managed to do this while remaining debt free. We on the other hand have a poor squad with no depth, average players who we can't move on as nobody in their right mind will match the wages we pay them, a wage bill that is running too high and a debt of over £80 million.

 

Such an overhaul by a DOF has made it possible for Spurs to bid £10 million for a top 17 year old without damaging their finances too much, at the same time we have to sniff around for players on loan because we haven't got a pot to piss in.

 

Have Spurs been better than us over the past decade? No, however I have no doubt that we won't be better than then them over the next decade if Shepherd is still in charge."

 

The part about them spending £10 million and not hurting their finances too much is because as far as I'm aware they already have the cash in the bank, compared to us who would have to loan it from the bank, I thought I should clear up that point before someone gets their knickers in a twist over it.

 

I'm not exactly averse to a DOF but a good manager won't need one. And just because Spurs are doing well under one doesn't mean anything really, I'd say their progress is all down to Jol and the team on the pitch more than anything else. If they were doing s****, how would the DOF get them out of it?

 

He wouldn't, however when the under performing manager is replaced the new manager will walk into a club with a great squad and an excellent scouting network, btw wasn't it Arnesen that brought Jol in as a coach?

 

Football is too big to leave it all to one man now, there was a thread on here months ago on how many staff the big clubs employ compared to us, I'll try to dig it out.

 

EDIT - http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=31057.0

 

What happens if the new manager doesn't rate some of the squad left over from the previous manager?

 

Fergie et al don't have any problems managing a club without a DOF, neither did SBR who was in his 60s when he took over Newcastle, he worked 18 hours a day at times.

 

BTW I'm not disagreeing with you here or against the idea of a DOF, at times I've wondered myself whether we should go down that route but only because the manager is inept in certain areas. Again, if we had a top manager in charge, there would be no need for a DOF. Spurs appointed one because their new board came from a non-footballing background and thought they needed a middleman to help them run the club on their behalf. At the moment it looks like they have a good setup there, but Jol and the team out on the pitch will determine whether Spurs as a club succeed and not their DOF.

 

Alex Ferguson had over 20 years to get Man Utd the way he wanted, Bobby Robson was excellent for us but it's often pointed out how much money he wasted, money that we just can't afford to lose anymore, which is the whole point of this thread.

 

You say Spurs appointed one because their board came from a non-footballing background and thought they needed a middleman to help them run the club on their behalf, isn't that the case with us? Can we really trust Shepherd and Hall to bring in a manager after employing both Souness and Roeder? If you look at the other 'Big clubs' in the Premiership they are all ran by people with knowledge of football with the owners in the background, Abramovich owns Chelsea yet he isn't chairman, at Arsenal it is David Dein not Peter Hill-Wood, at Manchester United while the Glazers own it they realise their shortcomings and it is David Gill who runs the show, we need someone like that.

 

I'm not saying a DOF should come in and buy all the players he wants, I'm saying how much the club would benefit by having someone in who could set up a top scouting network and spot bargain players at other clubs, of course the manager would have the final say on all transfers for the first team but having Roeder ringing around trying to get anyone in on loan on January 31st is a bit of a joke as far as I'm concerned.

 

People talk about Keegan at Fulham and Pleat at Spurs failing as DOF, neither of these have any sort of knowledge of setting up scouting networks or anything like that, both were appointed because of who they are not what they know.

 

I would of thought the 5th best club over the past decade and the 8th biggest club in the World would have enough contacts to find someone with a proven track record as a DOF to come in and sort this club out, however I have strong doubts it would work with Shepherd as chairman.

 

Fair enough Baggio, you make some good points and put a strong case forward but would you concede that appointing a top manager and giving him complete control would reduce the need for a DOF and therfore be the best option?

 

For me a DOF at Newcastle defeats the object somewhat, it is kind of like being bought off. "OK, you can't have a top manager, you'll have to do with a s*** one, but to soften the blow, we'll bring in a DOF".

 

I'm not saying we should have to do with a s*** one, a top manager is important and what matters most as far as the first team squad is concerned, however Mourinho and Wenger, both top manager,  have someone in the background taking care of every other aspect of the club from scouting to fitness etc as the job is just too big for one man alone, football has moved on a lot since the Premiership was invented.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/t/tottenham_hotspur/4224278.stm

 

 

it never has been one man doing all those jobs.

 

Keep up the cliches though  8)

 

Instead of trying to shoot down everyone else's ideas and trying to score points all the time, why don't you tell us how the club can improve.

 

Oh, I have told you many times. By finding the new Keegan. Unfortunately, other clubs are looking for the same person. In the real world, there are only 2 winners, and the european spots are the next best,  so you must be doing something right to get into these places.

 

 

 

So you're suggesting we sack Roeder then and find another manager?

 

If we get someone better, of course. When we find the money to pay him off though, I'm sure you will agree with that. It would be a far better move than employing a "DOF"

 

 

 

So you don't think Roeder is the man to take us forward?

 

We need a new manager and a DOF tbh.

 

We need a good manager.

 

And nothing else.

 

 

[Dokko]

Yet another decent thread has been spoilt by NE5.

 

What do you expect?

 

He breathes, therefore he is alive and therefore he types, which in turn ruins a decent thread its all he can do.

 

Glad to see HTL distancing himself from him though.

 

End of an era on the horizon?

 

 

Someone else who just wants to post in threads where everybody agrees with him. It escapes you, that if you had any idea or knowledge of the club, then I might.

 

 

 

You are getting desperate tbh, its showing badly.

 

Carry on.

[Baggio]

I've said it many times before over on toontastic, we need to bring in a Director of Football type figure to completely change everything behind the scenes at the club, someone who can set up a top scouting network to find all he top young players and someone who can spot cheap players in smaller foreign leagues who can come in cheap and do a job.

 

Not only would it benefit the club but it would take a lot of pressure off the manager and leave him to concentrate on the first team squad only.

 

This was my actual post.

 

"An example of a club that has had success with a Director of football is Spurs, 3 years ago Arnasen came into the club and completely altered the club from youth team up to their starting 11, he got rid of all the dead wood at the club even if it meant paying their contracts up, he then replaced with cheap young players who's transfer value could only rise (Carrick, Robinson etc)

 

On top of that he scouted youth teams to get the best young talent signed up to Spurs, even if it meant loaning them back out they were still signed to Spurs before their value went up, Lennon, Huddlestone, Dawson etc. Even with s**** like Davenport and Atouba they've managed to sell on for more than they paid for them.

 

I'll address your point about the last decade, have Spurs been better than us over that period of time? No they haven't, however in the last 3 years since they employed a Director of football they've not only caught up with us but have sailed by, they have a far superior squad and have managed to do this while remaining debt free. We on the other hand have a poor squad with no depth, average players who we can't move on as nobody in their right mind will match the wages we pay them, a wage bill that is running too high and a debt of over £80 million.

 

Such an overhaul by a DOF has made it possible for Spurs to bid £10 million for a top 17 year old without damaging their finances too much, at the same time we have to sniff around for players on loan because we haven't got a pot to piss in.

 

Have Spurs been better than us over the past decade? No, however I have no doubt that we won't be better than then them over the next decade if Shepherd is still in charge."

 

The part about them spending £10 million and not hurting their finances too much is because as far as I'm aware they already have the cash in the bank, compared to us who would have to loan it from the bank, I thought I should clear up that point before someone gets their knickers in a twist over it.

 

I'm not exactly averse to a DOF but a good manager won't need one. And just because Spurs are doing well under one doesn't mean anything really, I'd say their progress is all down to Jol and the team on the pitch more than anything else. If they were doing s****, how would the DOF get them out of it?

 

He wouldn't, however when the under performing manager is replaced the new manager will walk into a club with a great squad and an excellent scouting network, btw wasn't it Arnesen that brought Jol in as a coach?

 

Football is too big to leave it all to one man now, there was a thread on here months ago on how many staff the big clubs employ compared to us, I'll try to dig it out.

 

EDIT - http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=31057.0

 

What happens if the new manager doesn't rate some of the squad left over from the previous manager?

 

Fergie et al don't have any problems managing a club without a DOF, neither did SBR who was in his 60s when he took over Newcastle, he worked 18 hours a day at times.

 

BTW I'm not disagreeing with you here or against the idea of a DOF, at times I've wondered myself whether we should go down that route but only because the manager is inept in certain areas. Again, if we had a top manager in charge, there would be no need for a DOF. Spurs appointed one because their new board came from a non-footballing background and thought they needed a middleman to help them run the club on their behalf. At the moment it looks like they have a good setup there, but Jol and the team out on the pitch will determine whether Spurs as a club succeed and not their DOF.

 

Alex Ferguson had over 20 years to get Man Utd the way he wanted, Bobby Robson was excellent for us but it's often pointed out how much money he wasted, money that we just can't afford to lose anymore, which is the whole point of this thread.

 

You say Spurs appointed one because their board came from a non-footballing background and thought they needed a middleman to help them run the club on their behalf, isn't that the case with us? Can we really trust Shepherd and Hall to bring in a manager after employing both Souness and Roeder? If you look at the other 'Big clubs' in the Premiership they are all ran by people with knowledge of football with the owners in the background, Abramovich owns Chelsea yet he isn't chairman, at Arsenal it is David Dein not Peter Hill-Wood, at Manchester United while the Glazers own it they realise their shortcomings and it is David Gill who runs the show, we need someone like that.

 

I'm not saying a DOF should come in and buy all the players he wants, I'm saying how much the club would benefit by having someone in who could set up a top scouting network and spot bargain players at other clubs, of course the manager would have the final say on all transfers for the first team but having Roeder ringing around trying to get anyone in on loan on January 31st is a bit of a joke as far as I'm concerned.

 

People talk about Keegan at Fulham and Pleat at Spurs failing as DOF, neither of these have any sort of knowledge of setting up scouting networks or anything like that, both were appointed because of who they are not what they know.

 

I would of thought the 5th best club over the past decade and the 8th biggest club in the World would have enough contacts to find someone with a proven track record as a DOF to come in and sort this club out, however I have strong doubts it would work with Shepherd as chairman.

 

Fair enough Baggio, you make some good points and put a strong case forward but would you concede that appointing a top manager and giving him complete control would reduce the need for a DOF and therfore be the best option?

 

For me a DOF at Newcastle defeats the object somewhat, it is kind of like being bought off. "OK, you can't have a top manager, you'll have to do with a s*** one, but to soften the blow, we'll bring in a DOF".

 

I'm not saying we should have to do with a s*** one, a top manager is important and what matters most as far as the first team squad is concerned, however Mourinho and Wenger, both top manager,  have someone in the background taking care of every other aspect of the club from scouting to fitness etc as the job is just too big for one man alone, football has moved on a lot since the Premiership was invented.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/t/tottenham_hotspur/4224278.stm

 

 

it never has been one man doing all those jobs.

 

Keep up the cliches though  8)

 

Instead of trying to shoot down everyone else's ideas and trying to score points all the time, why don't you tell us how the club can improve.

 

Oh, I have told you many times. By finding the new Keegan. Unfortunately, other clubs are looking for the same person. In the real world, there are only 2 winners, and the european spots are the next best,  so you must be doing something right to get into these places.

 

 

 

So you're suggesting we sack Roeder then and find another manager?

 

If we get someone better, of course. When we find the money to pay him off though, I'm sure you will agree with that. It would be a far better move than employing a "DOF"

 

 

 

So you don't think Roeder is the man to take us forward?

 

We need a new manager and a DOF tbh.

 

We need a good manager.

 

And nothing else.

 

 

 

Are you saying Roeder isn't a good enough manager then?

 

 

 

[Baggio]

Yet another decent thread has been spoilt by NE5.

 

What do you expect?

 

He breathes, therefore he is alive and therefore he types, which in turn ruins a decent thread its all he can do.

 

Glad to see HTL distancing himself from him though.

 

End of an era on the horizon?

 

 

Someone else who just wants to post in threads where everybody agrees with him. It escapes you, that if you had any idea or knowledge of the club, then I might.

 

 

 

HTT talks about a ceasefire, yet he can't see all of the bickering and point scoring is all to do with NE5.

 

He is at the centre of all of it.

[Dokko]

Yet another decent thread has been spoilt by NE5.

 

What do you expect?

 

He breathes, therefore he is alive and therefore he types, which in turn ruins a decent thread its all he can do.

 

Glad to see HTL distancing himself from him though.

 

End of an era on the horizon?

 

 

Someone else who just wants to post in threads where everybody agrees with him. It escapes you, that if you had any idea or knowledge of the club, then I might.

 

 

 

HTT talks about a ceasefire, yet he can't see all of the bickering and point scoring is all to do with NE5.

 

He is at the centre of all of it.

 

Its tragic.

 

But one good thing coming of this is HTL distancing himself from it all and we are getting threads like this.

 

More from him, less from his monkey, we all want it.

[Guest BooBoo]

Yet another decent thread has been spoilt by NE5.

 

What do you expect?

 

He breathes, therefore he is alive and therefore he types, which in turn ruins a decent thread its all he can do.

 

Glad to see HTL distancing himself from him though.

 

End of an era on the horizon?

 

 

Someone else who just wants to post in threads where everybody agrees with him. It escapes you, that if you had any idea or knowledge of the club, then I might.

 

 

Its this sort of arrogant tripe that marks you down as an oaf in most peoples books. Your persistent claim that most people on here, other than yourself, know little about NUFC is wrong and quite frankly an insult, as many of the folk you slag off put a great deal of time and effort into supporting the club.

[Lotus]

Yet another decent thread has been spoilt by NE5.

 

Agreed.

 

What, because someone doesn't agree knows better than you ? Sad that like.

 

Isn't that what message boards are all about ? Why do you think everybody should agree with you ?

 

 

I've said it many times before over on toontastic, we need to bring in a Director of Football type figure to completely change everything behind the scenes at the club, someone who can set up a top scouting network to find all he top young players and someone who can spot cheap players in smaller foreign leagues who can come in cheap and do a job.

 

Not only would it benefit the club but it would take a lot of pressure off the manager and leave him to concentrate on the first team squad only.

 

This was my actual post.

 

"An example of a club that has had success with a Director of football is Spurs, 3 years ago Arnasen came into the club and completely altered the club from youth team up to their starting 11, he got rid of all the dead wood at the club even if it meant paying their contracts up, he then replaced with cheap young players who's transfer value could only rise (Carrick, Robinson etc)

 

On top of that he scouted youth teams to get the best young talent signed up to Spurs, even if it meant loaning them back out they were still signed to Spurs before their value went up, Lennon, Huddlestone, Dawson etc. Even with s**** like Davenport and Atouba they've managed to sell on for more than they paid for them.

 

I'll address your point about the last decade, have Spurs been better than us over that period of time? No they haven't, however in the last 3 years since they employed a Director of football they've not only caught up with us but have sailed by, they have a far superior squad and have managed to do this while remaining debt free. We on the other hand have a poor squad with no depth, average players who we can't move on as nobody in their right mind will match the wages we pay them, a wage bill that is running too high and a debt of over £80 million.

 

Such an overhaul by a DOF has made it possible for Spurs to bid £10 million for a top 17 year old without damaging their finances too much, at the same time we have to sniff around for players on loan because we haven't got a pot to piss in.

 

Have Spurs been better than us over the past decade? No, however I have no doubt that we won't be better than then them over the next decade if Shepherd is still in charge."

 

The part about them spending £10 million and not hurting their finances too much is because as far as I'm aware they already have the cash in the bank, compared to us who would have to loan it from the bank, I thought I should clear up that point before someone gets their knickers in a twist over it.

 

I'm not exactly averse to a DOF but a good manager won't need one. And just because Spurs are doing well under one doesn't mean anything really, I'd say their progress is all down to Jol and the team on the pitch more than anything else. If they were doing s****, how would the DOF get them out of it?

 

He wouldn't, however when the under performing manager is replaced the new manager will walk into a club with a great squad and an excellent scouting network, btw wasn't it Arnesen that brought Jol in as a coach?

 

Football is too big to leave it all to one man now, there was a thread on here months ago on how many staff the big clubs employ compared to us, I'll try to dig it out.

 

EDIT - http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=31057.0

 

What happens if the new manager doesn't rate some of the squad left over from the previous manager?

 

Fergie et al don't have any problems managing a club without a DOF, neither did SBR who was in his 60s when he took over Newcastle, he worked 18 hours a day at times.

 

BTW I'm not disagreeing with you here or against the idea of a DOF, at times I've wondered myself whether we should go down that route but only because the manager is inept in certain areas. Again, if we had a top manager in charge, there would be no need for a DOF. Spurs appointed one because their new board came from a non-footballing background and thought they needed a middleman to help them run the club on their behalf. At the moment it looks like they have a good setup there, but Jol and the team out on the pitch will determine whether Spurs as a club succeed and not their DOF.

 

Alex Ferguson had over 20 years to get Man Utd the way he wanted, Bobby Robson was excellent for us but it's often pointed out how much money he wasted, money that we just can't afford to lose anymore, which is the whole point of this thread.

 

You say Spurs appointed one because their board came from a non-footballing background and thought they needed a middleman to help them run the club on their behalf, isn't that the case with us? Can we really trust Shepherd and Hall to bring in a manager after employing both Souness and Roeder? If you look at the other 'Big clubs' in the Premiership they are all ran by people with knowledge of football with the owners in the background, Abramovich owns Chelsea yet he isn't chairman, at Arsenal it is David Dein not Peter Hill-Wood, at Manchester United while the Glazers own it they realise their shortcomings and it is David Gill who runs the show, we need someone like that.

 

I'm not saying a DOF should come in and buy all the players he wants, I'm saying how much the club would benefit by having someone in who could set up a top scouting network and spot bargain players at other clubs, of course the manager would have the final say on all transfers for the first team but having Roeder ringing around trying to get anyone in on loan on January 31st is a bit of a joke as far as I'm concerned.

 

People talk about Keegan at Fulham and Pleat at Spurs failing as DOF, neither of these have any sort of knowledge of setting up scouting networks or anything like that, both were appointed because of who they are not what they know.

 

I would of thought the 5th best club over the past decade and the 8th biggest club in the World would have enough contacts to find someone with a proven track record as a DOF to come in and sort this club out, however I have strong doubts it would work with Shepherd as chairman.

 

Fair enough Baggio, you make some good points and put a strong case forward but would you concede that appointing a top manager and giving him complete control would reduce the need for a DOF and therfore be the best option?

 

For me a DOF at Newcastle defeats the object somewhat, it is kind of like being bought off. "OK, you can't have a top manager, you'll have to do with a s*** one, but to soften the blow, we'll bring in a DOF".

 

I'm not saying we should have to do with a s*** one, a top manager is important and what matters most as far as the first team squad is concerned, however Mourinho and Wenger, both top manager,  have someone in the background taking care of every other aspect of the club from scouting to fitness etc as the job is just too big for one man alone, football has moved on a lot since the Premiership was invented.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/t/tottenham_hotspur/4224278.stm

 

 

it never has been one man doing all those jobs.

 

Keep up the cliches though  8)

 

Instead of trying to shoot down everyone else's ideas and trying to score points all the time, why don't you tell us how the club can improve.

 

Oh, I have told you many times. By finding the new Keegan. Unfortunately, other clubs are looking for the same person. In the real world, there are only 2 winners, and the european spots are the next best,  so you must be doing something right to get into these places.

 

 

 

So you're suggesting we sack Roeder then and find another manager?

 

If we get someone better, of course. When we find the money to pay him off though, I'm sure you will agree with that. It would be a far better move than employing a "DOF"

 

 

Name someone?

We qualify for Europe a lot so it'll have to be someone with experience of European football, that rules out Allardyce.

O'Neill did alright at Celtic in Europe but some don't favour his style so he's out.

 

Man U picked the right man.

Arsenal picked the right man.

Liverpool picked the right man.

Chelsea picked the right man.

Bolton picked the right man (imo).

 

We haven't, twice in a row. And only 2 of the managerial appointments out of the last 6 have done anything. Why? Only bad luck? It hasn't happened to Liverpool or Chelsea, both of those clubs have changed managers lately for the better. Why haven't we?

We've got to where we are, great. No need now to compare ourselves to clubs who are doing worse, how about comparing ourselves to clubs who are doing better, consistently better.

Who's going to pick our next manager?

How well as he done at picking them in the past?

How successful have they been?

I'm all for the club staying with it's present owners but i'll make this comparison:

I run a small business, if i don't know much about something i ask someone who does. If i have to keep asking him, i employ him.

[Dokko]

Yet another decent thread has been spoilt by NE5.

 

What do you expect?

 

He breathes, therefore he is alive and therefore he types, which in turn ruins a decent thread its all he can do.

 

Glad to see HTL distancing himself from him though.

 

End of an era on the horizon?

 

 

Someone else who just wants to post in threads where everybody agrees with him. It escapes you, that if you had any idea or knowledge of the club, then I might.

 

 

Its this sort of arrogant tripe that marks you down as an oaf in most peoples books. Your persistent claim that most people on here, other than yourself, know little about NUFC is wrong and quite frankly an insult, as many of the folk you slag off put a great deal of time and effort into supporting the club.

 

Aye, spot on, its like talking to a brick wall most of the time.

 

I do not know another poster who shows the amount of disrespect to other posters, mainly due to no fault of their own, their age.

 

Its criminal, i'm so glad HTL is distancing himself from this tripe finally. Cant wait for more threads like this and experiencing his knowledge in General Chat. 

[Dr. Nguyen Van Falk]

Bringing in actual coaches who know how to coach (for specefic area such as a defence and skills) would be improving vastly. The whole "jobs for the boys" mentality with our coaching has to go.

[NE5]

Yet another decent thread has been spoilt by NE5.

 

What do you expect?

 

He breathes, therefore he is alive and therefore he types, which in turn ruins a decent thread its all he can do.

 

Glad to see HTL distancing himself from him though.

 

End of an era on the horizon?

 

 

Someone else who just wants to post in threads where everybody agrees with him. It escapes you, that if you had any idea or knowledge of the club, then I might.

 

 

 

You are getting desperate tbh, its showing badly.

 

Carry on.

 

your post at 6.44 is what exactly ?

 

 

[Dave]

ABORT!

 

Please don't ruin a good thread everyone. Lies, links, whatever.