a manager should have total control

[iron_stan 0]

top to bottomhaving a sporting director above a coach will only lead to a mess, this has got EPIC FAIL written all overa coach can only work with what the director gives himits never really worked, if you look at the three most successful clubs in this country for the last 30 years none of their managers let someone else make calls on their behalf, fergie, wenger and mourinho run their clubs, no one second guesses them

poor poor decision yet again

sack the board

[Crabbycanary3 994]

As the kids used to say, lol

[nat_canaries 0]

It may not have worked for the top 4 side but if you look under that a lot of the middle tier clubs like Soton, Swansea and Spurs all have this set up in place and does help having the same set up and ideas running through the whole club from u10''s to first team so there is an easier transition all the way through to the first XI.

I for one tentatively applaud the board for moving forward and installing a modern template for the club to move forward with instead of settling with little old Norwich, but we have to get the right people in to not make this an expensive mishap.

[Coneys Knee 1,049]

To be fair, it does say that the new head coach and sporting director will work together to find the right players.

Also, I don''t think total control is a good thing. A new structure like this should, in theory allow for a long term football culture to develop instead of having to endure upheaval every time a manager moves on. That''s what we all want isn''t it? To be able to build and progress rather than knocking down to the foundations every 18 months?

[king canary 8,754]

Man City have a similar structure, doesn''t seem to have hurt them.

As do Tottenham.

As do Chelsea.

You''re talking nonsense.

[iron_stan 0]

“If the coach has no control, he will not last,” Ferguson said. “You

have to achieve a position of comprehensive control. Players must

recognise that as the manager you have the status to control events.

Before I came to United, I told myself I wasn’t going to allow anyone to be stronger than I was."- Alex "38 trophies in 26 years " Ferguson

too many chefs spoil the broth

[Darth Canary1 92]

I applaud this, very sensible move in my view.

[king canary 8,754]

Then why isn''t it spoiling the broth at Spurs or Chelsea?

Ferguson had his way but he was a one off.

[wcorkcanary 4,784]

Fergie also handed over to D Moyes, basically similar to dropping a stink bomb as you exit the room. Look how far off the pace Man u have been since he left(fergie). Its almost as if he didnt want themto be succesful after he left. Hmmmm.

[Making Plans 957]

[quote user="nat_canaries"]It may not have worked for the top 4 side but if you look under that a lot of the middle tier clubs like Soton, Swansea and Spurs all have this set up in place and does help having the same set up and ideas running through the whole club from u10''s to first team so there is an easier transition all the way through to the first XI. [/quote]Any set up only works if you have the right people in place. Doesn''t matter what the system is the same applies. Get the right people and it''ll be a success, get the wrong people and it will fail.

[whoareyou? 0]

Watford, Southampton, West Brom, Swansea all seem to show it can work well with the right people in place.

[Branston Pickle 4,149]

IMO it looks like a better working structure - I can''t see how how one person could can one person could/should oversee absolutely everything, it seems much more sensible to let the head coach concentrate on the coaching.

[whoareyou? 0]

The football world has changed because of the monies involved. If a manager at a club like ours does well he gets poached by a bigger club, if we struggle he gets sacked and either way we have to start ago over again.

Seems sensible to make the team manager not the only cog in the wheel.

[Chesney Hawkes 0]

I like the structure as a concept, but as with any formation it will stand or fall based on the people hired to execute the strategy.

[Crafty Canary 547]

It''s the owners that have total control.

[Horse Renoir 1]

In the black and white days maybe, football has changed.

The one thing this type of change will guarantee is no more pointless wastes of money that managers spend to slightly extend their time here or just want in the dressing room a la Elmander, Gutierrez, Andreu, Bamford etc

Absolutely senseless signings that only a manager with complete autonomy would make.

Hopefully now there will be a plan behind each player purchase and we can avoid wasting money on temporary fixes or over the hill players that the manager likes personally.

[KiwiScot 1,684]

So, using this season as an example would we have been shouting sack the coach or sack the sporting director or both?

[danielsroundabout 9]

Etc. in itself represents a pretty long list in your examples Horse R. but can we be sure they were the result of just one persons view? We''ve always had a Head of Recruitment which is part of the brief of the yet to be appointed Director of Football (or whatever).

The relationship/chain of command between the two positions is interesting. In these clubs which are said to successfully have the two positions i.e. coach and director, does the coach actually report to the DoF or simply work with him? And who does the main board take action against if things go horribly wrong. I guess there will always be plenty of takers for a managers job in the Championship but the thought of not being your own man would certainly deter some of the stronger characters.