The Club, and planning for the long term/the future

[nicdic]

Great read.

We've not always agreed on everything but I think you're spot on here.

We need to grow a real philosophy at the club that prioritises the youth and a consistent style across all levels. I think what you say about a Technical Director is exactly the thing we need, and your point about also growing coaches and managers is something that I'd love to see us do too. The turnover of managers at Barcelona is very high (though not as high as ours), but when managers move on they are more often than not replaced from within. Men who already know and understand the philosophy of the club and can continue the work.

Basically I'd agree with you on almost everything. Think we'd need one more signing than you've outlined, that being a striker/wide forward, but otherwise very good.

Is Mitchell going to be this 'Technical Director'? Is this a move in the right direction?

 

[wooderz]

Very well thought out and articulated post - good on you.

The only thing I'd disagree with is the Manager/Tech Director bit - to me the manager has to be comfortable with his players, he should pick who he has in his squad.

Otherwise I couldn't agree more!

 

[dontcallme]

Youth Policy

This is naturally our way forward. After years of development we finally have players of the right quality coming through. The likes of Mason, Bentaleb, Kane etc have been better players and squad players than many of our expensive signings.

We also don't need to worry about recouping our money if they are to be moved on and their wages are generally lower than the expensive signings.

The less players we need to buy results in us being able to put in the extra money to get our genuine top targets.

Structure of the club

This is a difficult one. Arnesen was a good DOF who worked well with Jol. Since then it has been a bit blurry. Under Comolli we bought good players but didn't put a team together then Redknapp put a team together but didn't buy players of the quality needed.

Having a Mitchell to oversee a great scouting network to report his findings to the manager might be the best way forward.

Tactics

Developing a style of play is important for continuity. Replacing Jol with Ramos resulted in us selling a lot of the squad that got us 5th twice, then Redknapp did the same. Replacing a manager with a similar manager who wants the type of player we already have should result in less overhaul which hurts our consistency.

2015/16

I'd love to see us create a great attacking dynamic. Kane has been a big boost. If we can buy 2 strikers to give us a great set of options then we can get that excitement back.

2 strikers and a midfielder to help Bentaleb and Mason would be fine for me.

Finding buyers for our duds and implementing our younger players would be enough for me.

Competing in the cups and maintaining top 6 would be enough for me if the team look like a team and there are signs of improvement.

 

[Main Man]

I just want a season of no excuses.

It's pitiful how many excuses us fans allow for our performances at times.

Speaking of our fans, I want a home atmosphere to be proud of again (said from armchair).

I would like a big signing which got us all excited to compliment the yearly recycle too.

 

[nicdic]

Very well thought out and articulated post - good on you.

The only thing I'd disagree with is the Manager/Tech Director bit - to me the manager has to be comfortable with his players, he should pick who he has in his squad.

Otherwise I couldn't agree more!

But this just perpetuates the problems we've had over the past 10 years or however long.

If the coach isn't comfortable with the players, then don't take the job in the first place. We need to move away from the massive squad overhauls that we've been having with each managerial change.

For far too long we've had the DOF or Technical director model portrayed to us as a negative thing, and that managers clash with the DOF. If it's done well though this shouldn't be the case. I think @mpickard2087 is right that we really want a technical director, who finds a coach who will fit within the framework. If the coach's role is clear, and he agrees to it, then there should be no problem what so ever.

Hopefully what is coming into place now with Mitchell will see us move to this strategy. You are of course in part right though, that the squad will need some trimming to get rid of the players that the coach doesn't want and isn't going to play. But this is a fault with what has been our "philosophy" if you can even call it that, rather than a genuine critique that could be aimed at the OP's suggestions.

 

[Blake Griffin]

personally i think it's fanciful to think that just because the technical director and coach have the same "philosophy" that they're going to agree on players. i agree with @wooderz that i'd always prefer the manager to pick the players he wants, if poch were to go and he's replaced by another coach with the same ideas on football you can still guarantee that he'd be wanting his "own players" and the same transitional period will occur regardless. oh and if we're really going big on continuity then the next manager should be hired from within, so ehiogu/mckenna etc.

 

[nicdic]

personally i think it's fanciful to think that just because the technical director and coach have the same "philosophy" that they're going to agree on players. i agree with @wooderz that i'd always prefer the manager to pick the players he wants, if poch were to go and he's replaced by another coach with the same ideas on football you can still guarantee that he'd be wanting his "own players" and the same transitional period will occur regardless. oh and if we're really going big on continuity then the next manager should be hired from within, so mcdermott/ehiogu/mckenna etc.

But there was a push from @mpickard2087 and myself to hire from within.

Plus you're still thinking in terms of a manager. This would be a first team coach, with the technical director ultimately being the biggest decision maker within the club. I think this model is very attractive.

It won't rule out some players not being fancied by a coach or rated by a coach or whatever, and they could have differing views on players etc. but surely we want to push a higher continuity? I don't see why anyone wouldn't want that.

 

[Blake Griffin]

But there was a push from @mpickard2087 and myself to hire from within.

Plus you're still thinking in terms of a manager. This would be a first team coach, with the technical director ultimately being the biggest decision maker within the club. I think this model is very attractive.

It won't rule out some players not being fancied by a coach or rated by a coach or whatever, and they could have differing views on players etc. but surely we want to push a higher continuity? I don't see why anyone wouldn't want that.

because i just don't buy into it as being continuous, these are human beings, not robots. maybe it's one step up from hiring guardiola and replacing him with pulis but it's not this seamless transition it's being built up to be, far from it imo and i think it's wrong that the technical director gets off relatively scot-free if/when it goes wrong. in fact we're almost planning for failure by having this setup in place, show some faith in the manager you put in charge and let him work with the head scout of his choosing and let them build the team.

 

[nicdic]

because i just don't buy into it as being continuous, these are human beings, not robots. maybe it's one step up from hiring guardiola and replacing him with pulis but it's not this seamless transition it's being built up to be, far from it imo and i think it's wrong that the technical director gets off relatively scot-free if/when it goes wrong. in fact we're almost planning for failure by having this setup in place, show some faith in the manager you put in charge and let him work with the head scout of his choosing and let them build the team.

And when the manager gets sacked start all over again?

 

[Bulletspur]

Thats a really long post. Can anyone summarise?

That was the summary!

 

[Mullers]

I agree with having a proper DOF but again you see the problem is Levy and his need to be in control. Poch as already said in a couple of articles that we need a unique philosophy it was a message that was delivered to the board diplomatically. I don't think Levy as a unique strategy that he truly believes in. The astute businessman that he is, he should have been looking, studying the systems of ajax and Barcelona long before now and trying to emulate them. I am very convinced that none of the players from the academy would be there if it wasn't for the failure of the 2013 signings. kane has said himself he don't think he would be at the club if Sherwood had not given him a chance. Levy is totally focused on achieving champions league football I don't think he minds if we sell people from the academy to get there. If there is no patience there is no way the acadmey can work.

As for the players we should keep I just can't agree with keeping Dembele for a fourth season, he hasn't produced and doesn't have any ambition at all to improve himself.

 

[Bulletspur]

But there was a push from @mpickard2087 and myself to hire from within.

Plus you're still thinking in terms of a manager. This would be a first team coach, with the technical director ultimately being the biggest decision maker within the club. I think this model is very attractive.

It won't rule out some players not being fancied by a coach or rated by a coach or whatever, and they could have differing views on players etc. but surely we want to push a higher continuity? I don't see why anyone wouldn't want that.

In this scenario the buck stops at the DOF who is in charge. Managers who want the job would have to conform to the DOFs philosophy and work with the players provided. A long term ideology that should bring consistency and continuity IMO

because i just don't buy into it as being continuous, these are human beings, not robots. maybe it's one step up from hiring guardiola and replacing him with pulis but it's not this seamless transition it's being built up to be, far from it imo and i think it's wrong that the technical director gets off relatively scot-free if/when it goes wrong. in fact we're almost planning for failure by having this setup in place, show some faith in the manager you put in charge and let him work with the head scout of his choosing and let them build the team.

In this scenario the buck would stop with the manager who would apply his own philosophy and choose his own players. Would work if manager was long term. But runs the risk of keep starting over if manager goes as has been demonstrated in our very recent history. Also my opinion

 

[yido_number1]

Agree with most of it. The technical director with the whole club vision would appear to be Levy though which is a double edge sword. You also get the situation where the DF picks the coach. If the coach isn't good enough who is culpable? How long do you go before the DF needs replacing etc...

Youth policy: I think we are on the right lines with this and we have now played 4231 for at least 3 years and arguably when redknapp had VDV we played 4231 or 4411 depending how you looked at it. It seems to me this is what the academy is being developed to deliver.

Transfer policy: Keep the current main stays in defence. Fazio, Verts, Dier, Walker, Rose, Davies, Yedlin. Wimmer has come in and that is now a nice blend of youth and experience. Give some of the youths space to step up in the coming year.

MF: Looks like Carroll will get a chance in there with Bentaleb and Mason. I would sign one more player that is a creative type but with work rate. I don't know who but hopefully our scouts have a good opinion. We don't need to sign loads of players and I'm not against Stambo being given a chance if he could improve his fitness problem.

Forwards: Sadly and for his own health Soldado needs to move on to pastures new and so does Adebayor. As you said Chadli could fill in but I'd like to see us sign either an experienced campaigner that could do a good back up job. Or alternatively a young pacey player that is developing that could play as both CF or WF. I would like to practice what what we preach and promote Pritchard and keep some of the pacey forward players we had on tour around the squad. I'd also keep giving townsend time, although I know most will be against that. We are crying out for some pace and directness as an option. I would like to see that addressed.

Overall we are moving the club along in the right direction. Getting the training facilities built, having the stadium started (Groundworks) and doing well with the academy are all positives. Levy has his faults but the club is healthy. I would like to see us stick with the current manager and keep investing in the best young talent either through the academy or from other sources.

 

[mpickard2087]

Not sure where to start with these replies. Wooderz kicked things off though with this...

Very well thought out and articulated post - good on you.

The only thing I'd disagree with is the Manager/Tech Director bit - to me the manager has to be comfortable with his players, he should pick who he has in his squad.

Otherwise I couldn't agree more!

I don't think I really explained that part of the process. On appointment I think the Coach should know what is expected of him and be on the same page as the rest (eg. way of playing, use of youth etc) but of course I wouldn't want to see signings foisted on a Head Coach. What should happen for me is that the Coach and Director discuss what positions/skill sets the squad is lacking. They would then consider if there was anyone already at the club in the U21's who was ready to fill in and provide what we lacked (or, be given the opportunity to show if they could)... If not then the process of looking to sign someone begins. The Coach can give his input into what players he feels could fill the role. The Director also goes to the Head Scout figure and asks for his input into suitable players for the role/need in the team and so you then get a wider list. The Coach then considers all this and gives his option to move on. No one should come in who he isn't happy with.

personally i think it's fanciful to think that just because the technical director and coach have the same "philosophy" that they're going to agree on players. i agree with @wooderz that i'd always prefer the manager to pick the players he wants, if poch were to go and he's replaced by another coach with the same ideas on football you can still guarantee that he'd be wanting his "own players" and the same transitional period will occur regardless. oh and if we're really going big on continuity then the next manager should be hired from within, so ehiogu/mckenna etc.

See above. I agree that the Head Coach should always have say on who comes in. I'd fully expect the Coach though to be fully aware of what he is signing up to - transfer strategy, budget etc. - otherwise they wouldn't join in the first place, and so really there shouldn't be massive fundamental differences.

As nic points out below, I did mention about a 'conveyor belt' for coaches as well as players. That would be a long term aim though.

But there was a push from @mpickard2087 and myself to hire from within.

Plus you're still thinking in terms of a manager. This would be a first team coach, with the technical director ultimately being the biggest decision maker within the club. I think this model is very attractive.

It won't rule out some players not being fancied by a coach or rated by a coach or whatever, and they could have differing views on players etc. but surely we want to push a higher continuity? I don't see why anyone wouldn't want that.

I think this may be where we slightly differ though. If you are saying that the Director should choose and bring the players in(?) then I don't agree. He may have some input, but the Coach should have a level of autonomy (obviously within some parameters, such as if signing is within budget et.) and the final say as to who comes in.

because i just don't buy into it as being continuous, these are human beings, not robots. maybe it's one step up from hiring guardiola and replacing him with pulis but it's not this seamless transition it's being built up to be, far from it imo and i think it's wrong that the technical director gets off relatively scot-free if/when it goes wrong. in fact we're almost planning for failure by having this setup in place, show some faith in the manager you put in charge and let him work with the head scout of his choosing and let them build the team.

He doesn't get off scot-free but it is fair to say he probably does get more tolerance. The first team though isn't the only measuring stick of his performance. You go on the evidence available. If the Director is overseeing a youth system that is doing well, assembled a scouting network that helps us identify players, has put in place the best fitness/medical/sports science department and identified a Coach that seems to fit what we are looking for (tactical outlook & way of playing, belief in giving youth a chance etc) but for whatever reason it then didn't work out, then in all his other departments he's meeting his targets/remit. Obviously if we keep making poor appointments when it comes to coaches then eventually the powers that be look at what he is doing... But there are other aspects to the role, and many of them aren't necessarily to do with the first team.

It's also my opinion that if the Director builds the structure and puts in place different things like the scouts/fitness guys etc. then we actually have more chance of stability. Let the Coach bring them in and there's a good chance that when he departs, then they depart as well and he takes them elsewhere. You end up building the structure again every few years, rather than being able to withstand change and only losing a few of his lieutenants.

And when the manager gets sacked start all over again?

Exactly my point.

 

[yido_number1]

I agree with having a proper DOF but again you see the problem is Levy and his need to be in control. Poch as already said in a couple of articles that we need a unique philosophy it was a message that was delivered to the board diplomatically. I don't think Levy as a unique strategy that he truly believes in. The astute businessman that he is, he should have been looking, studying the systems of ajax and Barcelona long before now and trying to emulate them. I am very convinced that none of the players from the academy would be there if it wasn't for the failure of the 2013 signings. kane has said himself he don't think he would be at the club if Sherwood had not given him a chance. Levy is totally focused on achieving champions league football I don't think he minds if we sell people from the academy to get there. If there is no patience there is no way the acadmey can work.

As for the players we should keep I just can't agree with keeping Dembele for a fourth season, he hasn't produced and doesn't have any ambition at all to improve himself.

You could argue that we started the academy idea under Frank Arnesen when we started signing players like Rodrigo Defendi, Lee Mills, Paul Joseph M'Poku, Emil Halfredsen (SP) and many more that I can't remember how to spell. If you think Kane started in our Youth system 10 years or so ago it just takes time to get them through. We also started buying 18-21 year olds with potential to fill in the gap like Huddlestone, Lennon, Davenport, Rose(was younger), Walker, Naughton etc.

If anything I wish we'd keep on with this path as opposed to going after the top echelon of player like we did under Harry and AVB. Not to knock the manager because we all wanted to push on with the Modric, Berbatov, Bale money. I really feel like what is being discussed in ITK is the sign of a new policy for younger players again.

 

[mpickard2087]

@nicdic - Forgot to comment, I don't personally think Mitchell is the guy they have in mind for this/could fill the role. I think he is basically a modern scout/stats guy and is here for player acquisition. That's just one 'department' though. The Technical Director would have a much wider role overseeing the whole football operations at the club.

 

[Spurger King]

It's a good post with plenty in there that I agree with.

I agree that we should look to focus on the youth team, however I tend to think our youth players (with one or two obvious exceptions) are overrated. I also think it is important for young players to be able to learn from more established and experienced players. Someone like Cambiasso could have offered a huge amount to players like Bentaleb and Mason.

In terms of having a fixed style of play - I'm not so sure about this. Having an identity is all well and good, but there needs to be flexibility and opportunities for individual expression.

In all honesty I think if I were in Levy's position and genuinely wanted to plan for the club's successful future, I'd be badgering billionaires every day in the hope that I could find someone prepared to buy the club and bring our spending power up to the levels necessary to be competitive. You could execute the plan in the OP perfectly in every way, only for Everton, Villa, and Newcastle to all get taken over by billionaires and render all our efforts more or less pointless (at least in the eyes of people who want to see us winning more than just the 'best run club of the year' trophy).

That's the only way I can ever see us genuinely competing for honours on a regular basis. As much as I like a lot of ideas in the OP, if the most it can achieve is remaining the best of the rest and not worrying about our financial stability we might as well carry on as we are now, as apart from a few exotic (and often not very exotic) European fixtures there's little difference between finishing 5th or 15th if we're not competing for trophies in a meaningful and consistent way.

 

[Blake Griffin]

And when the manager gets sacked start all over again?

as much as you will deny it, that will happen no matter what system is in place. at least if the manager has been sacked then we've identified where the so called problem is, you sack managers under a technical director then how many do we go through until we think hang on a minute, maybe HE is the problem? it's something that works in an ideal world but in practice it causes more problems than it's worth imo.

 

[Mullers]

You could argue that we started the academy idea under Frank Arnesen when we started signing players like Rodrigo Defendi, Lee Mills, Paul Joseph M'Poku, Emil Halfredsen (SP) and many more that I can't remember how to spell. If you think Kane started in our Youth system 10 years or so ago it just takes time to get them through. We also started buying 18-21 year olds with potential to fill in the gap like Huddlestone, Lennon, Davenport, Rose(was younger), Walker, Naughton etc.

If anything I wish we'd keep on with this path as opposed to going after the top echelon of player like we did under Harry and AVB. Not to knock the manager because we all wanted to push on with the Modric, Berbatov, Bale money. I really feel like what is being discussed in ITK is the sign of a new policy for younger players again.

It was a unique transfer policy where we signing young British and foreign talent not really an academy as such such but I also liked that path. We lost Arnesen to Chelsea but I don't think Levy truly believed in this strategy otherwise he would have stuck with it.

 

[nicdic]

I think this may be where we slightly differ though. If you are saying that the Director should choose and bring the players in(?) then I don't agree. He may have some input, but the Coach should have a level of autonomy (obviously within some parameters, such as if signing is within budget et.) and the final say as to who comes in.

No, I'd go with this. I think I was just trying to stress that you're aiming at harmony between the Coach and Director, and that it's a false dichotomy to always assume that a signing in this set up must be wanted only by one or other of the parties and can't be agreed upon by both.