We DON’T want a Director of Football

Mind, I can see it now

SD: 'After a great deal of thought and conversations with potential applicants we are proud to announce Richard Hill as our Director of Football. His record of success speaks for itself and comes with 3 glowing references from myself. I hope all our fans wish him well.'


CM: 'The fans have been vocal in their want for long term strategic planning and in particular a DoF. We gave the fans what they wanted.'

“Richard got Colchester promoted in 2006 after Phil left for Hull, the two of them are known as Colchester’s greatest ever employees. This is even more impressive as Richard has never worked for Colchester.”
 


Instead of buying 10 shit players on frees and next to nowt use the money and sign 2 good ones per season for a couple mil each and use kids and what we have
I wouldn't trust them to buy anyone. They had a golden chance to build a team from scratch and instead filled it with other team's rejects and has-beens.
 
Instead of buying 10 shit players on frees and next to nowt use the money and sign 2 good ones per season for a couple mil each and use kids and what we have
If you look at the teams in our league tho you can see that spending a couple of million on anyone in this division isn’t necessary. I don’t know figures but I’ll bet Wycombe Rotherham Fleetwood Oxford haven’t spent anywhere near what we have in the last 18 months. The key is scouting and signing the right players to do the specific job you want them to do, not signing the most expensive but least effective ie Will Grigg
 
I would probably say that it was a bad idea under any other circumstances but we need a DoF because nee other beggar has a bloody clue what they are doing.
 
Surely the scouts are equally if not more important than the DoF.

The DoF can come in and lay a strategic plan for what sort of "footballing club" we are going to be but if the scouts don't actually highlight anyone good then it won't get very far.

Now if only it was as simple as "getting good scouts" as if it was simply, everyone would have only good players where as realistically, probably 50% of transfers are not effective ('failures' basically).
 
I think our football decision making needs some wisdom and guidance asap and we need to give them a few years to set a direction of travel. My biggest criticism of the board are their football decisions across most of the club and various football aspects - some of which coincide with financial gambles. Yes please, as long as they're not from non league football.
 
Leicester and Southampton both had one when they were at this level, and were integral to their journey back to the top flight.
 
If you look at the teams in our league tho you can see that spending a couple of million on anyone in this division isn’t necessary. I don’t know figures but I’ll bet Wycombe Rotherham Fleetwood Oxford haven’t spent anywhere near what we have in the last 18 months. The key is scouting and signing the right players to do the specific job you want them to do, not signing the most expensive but least effective ie Will Grigg
We try and buy too many players at once is what I’m saying by a couple of quality players every season instead of 10 shit ones for the same money
 
Stew needs to accept he's essentially an administrator or accountant outside of social media.

I'm sure he's done a great job on our balance sheet but that means absolutely fuck all when you let agents sell you players that aren't up to the job then blow £3m on an injured hasbeen to fix things.
 
We try and buy too many players at once is what I’m saying by a couple of quality players every season instead of 10 shit ones for the same money
Yeah mate I understand your point. What I’m saying is if we were smart, we wouldn’t need to spend the kind of money you’re referring to as we need to consider financial rules etc. Other teams are outperforming us on a fraction of our budget. That’s down to the quality of the players and coaches at the club
 
Yeah mate I understand your point. What I’m saying is if we were smart, we wouldn’t need to spend the kind of money you’re referring to as we need to consider financial rules etc. Other teams are outperforming us on a fraction of our budget. That’s down to the quality of the players and coaches at the club
'Other clubs spending less money outperforming us' should be put on our badge in latin. It sums this club up for the past 10+ years or so.
 
Does anyone know the precise role of a Director of Football, please?

To recap, we now have (I think) Coton as Head of Recruitment & Hill as Head of Football Operations. Recruitment suggests hiring players. One might think hiring would include negotiating terms, but apparently Hill does that. And where does the manager fit into the equation?

If we recruit a Director of Football, is he recruited by Coton, our Head of Recruitment? And who negotiates terms? Coton, or Hill? Or, is the clue in the job title, meaning he'll be appointed to the Board by the existing directors?

And in whatever scenario he's appointed, what does he actually do? And if we appoint him, do we still need Hill and/or Coton? It seems we may be top heavy already.

Any sensible guidance on all this would be much appreciated.
 
Last edited:
Does anyone know the precise role of a Director of Football, please?

To recap, we now have (I think) Coton as Head of Recruitment & Hill as Head of Football Operations. Recruitment suggests hiring players. One might think hiring would include negotiating terms, but apparently Hill does that. And where does the manager fit into the equation?

If we recruit a Director of Football, is he recruited by Coton, our Head of Recruitment? And who negotiates terms? Coton, or Hill? Or, is the clue in the job title, meaning he'll be appointed to the Board by the existing directors?

And in whatever scenario he's appointed, what does he actually do? And if we appoint him, do we still need Hill and/or Coton? It seems we may be top heavy already.

Any sensible guidance on all this would be much appreciated.

As I understand it, a DOF is in charge of all football matters within a club. He works closely with the manager to identify the needs of the first team. He'll then tell the chief scout the type of players the first team require, and when they have their targets identified he'll deal with all the negotiations with the selling club and the players agents.

He'll also be dealing with the head of the academy, making sure everything is running smoothly with the kids.

In this model the manager/ head coach is in charge of coaching the first team only, he'll have no other duties within the club.

The DOF is recruited by the chief executive/ chairman and he would have to answer exclusively to him.

I have no idea how it would work at your club though. I don't understand the model you're currently using. If you have a DOF then you would have no need for Hill and Cotton.

Hope this helps mate
 
As I understand it, a DOF is in charge of all football matters within a club. He works closely with the manager to identify the needs of the first team. He'll then tell the chief scout the type of players the first team require, and when they have their targets identified he'll deal with all the negotiations with the selling club and the players agents.

He'll also be dealing with the head of the academy, making sure everything is running smoothly with the kids.

In this model the manager/ head coach is in charge of coaching the first team only, he'll have no other duties within the club.

The DOF is recruited by the chief executive/ chairman and he would have to answer exclusively to him.

I have no idea how it would work at your club though. I don't understand the model you're currently using. If you have a DOF then you would have no need for Hill and Cotton.

Hope this helps mate
It does, thank you, marra. Very helpful. To my untutored eye it seems a more streamlined, efficient way of handling things when compared to our current set-up.
 

Back
Top