The Case for a Director of Football
A recent item in the Rumour Mill suggesting that Everton were considering appointing a Director of Football drew an almost overwhelmingly negative response. Consequently I expect this will be unpopular, but nevertheless, I'm going to try and set out why I believe it's the way to go.As supporters of a football club, all we really know is what we experience with our own eyes. Results speak for themselves, but we can also judge the style of play, evaluate whether the players are fit enough to perform for 90 minutes, and if they appear committed. We can assess whether tactics are working and whether changes made during the match are positive. We can also weigh up whether the latest player on the team sheet is doing a better job than the one he replaced. Beyond that, we can really only speculate.
I want the man in the hot seat — manager, coach, call him what you will, to focus on looking after the things I can see. Select the best available eleven players to face the next opposition, prepare them and set them up properly, make sure the bench is stocked with options to cope with most predictable eventualities, and respond to the dynamic of each game as it unfolds.
ADVERTISEMENT
Roberto Martinez was highly praised for laying out plans to improve Finch Farm and for the interest he took in the academy, and if that adds value in the future we should thank him for it. Even so, I don't want the guy in charge of winning football matches for the first team distracted by other issues, no matter how important.
But someone does need to take responsibility for identifying potential new first team players both from the academy and from the wider football world, for signing them up and keeping them happy and motivated, for analysing and improving performance, skills, stamina and strength, for rehabilitating injured players, for analysing the opposition, and for all the other things that go on unseen by the fans at a top flight football club.
Whether Martinez's back room team was any good, I can't really say, but now they need replacing. The conventional response would be to hire a manager and leave him to recruit his own team, repeating the cycle at regular intervals as and when required.
And we know the cycle will be repeated. During the Premier League era only one man has built a dynasty and departed at the top; the phenomenon that is Sir Alex Ferguson. But that mould is broken. So, compile a list of the best available candidates and cross your fingers that whoever gets the job does better than the man he replaced. Then sit back and enjoy the ride until he is seduced by greener grass elsewhere or, more likely, until it all goes wrong. And then repeat.
An all-powerful manager means the club reflects the philosophy of that manager for as long as it lasts. No-one should have been surprised how Martinez approached his task, but it meant he was imposing his ideas on footballers mostly schooled by an arch pragmatist. Perhaps the biggest surprise is that it went so well for as long as it did.
A lack of job security also encourages an all-powerful manager to act short term in order to survive the next crisis rather than make decisions with the end goal in mind. In that respect at least, Martinez may have been the exception that proves the rule.
Surely a better policy is to separate the first team coach from the long term strategy. To decide what you want and put in place a structure designed to get you there. A Vision if you will.
Under such a policy, the club (and for club read owners, and for owners read Farhad Moshiri) would decide it wanted to see Everton win trophies, or wanted Everton to play “attractive” football, or wanted Everton winning trophies while playing “attractive” football, or wanted to maximise the financial return available from owning 49.9% of a club playing in the Premier League. Who knows? We can voice an opinion, but in reality as fans we have no input in the Vision.
Certain clubs (and now, for clubs read fans), Manchester United, Tottenham, Liverpool, West Ham and Everton among them, pride themselves on playing football a certain way. Whether they adhere to the perceived house style is really beside the point. It is now Moshiri's task to set out his Vision and put in place a structure to maximise the chances of achieving it.
A cornerstone of establishing that structure should be appointing an individual to take care of all the unseen football-related matters that are essential to success. That wouldn't involve coaching the first team, but it would extend to identifying and ranking the candidates most capable of bringing the best out of the first team, and to keeping track of the careers of potential alternatives so that they could be quickly approached when an upgrade is required.
Every incoming coach will want to bring in his own trusted support team, and to an extent that is unavoidable. But that means key components recruited by each new coach will leave with him. I have no real insight into whether or not Kevin Reeves was a capable chief scout, but now he's gone we've presumably lost access to his database and contacts as well as to the research he'd done in readiness for the forthcoming transfer window. Hopefully Everton has its own scouting network in place, but who's running it, and who will run it when the next manager turns up?
Dr Peter Vint, ex-senior director of competitive analysis, research and innovation with the US Olympic Committee and with no football experience to fall back on, was appointed to head up the academy in December 2015. While I can't comment on his performance, as a strategic hire it makes perfect sense. His title is Academy Director, but he isn't a member of the board. Does he report to an unqualified (in a football sense) chief executive, or to whoever holds the title of manager?
But who's running the rest of the club from a footballing perspective? It's not apparent from the club's website or elsewhere, at least to me, but hopefully Everton has individuals still in place with departmental responsibility for sports science, conditioning and fitness, for identifying potential players, and for opposition and performance analysis whose foremost loyalty is to the club.
If they're not in place they should be, but assuming they are, they need direction. Structure and reporting lines are essential in any organisation, and in the absence of a “Sporting Director” that direction will gravitate to the new manager if he's given traditional all-powerful authority.
The season may have just ended, but our competition will already be plotting for the future, prioritising their targets for next season, organising itineraries to spot talent at the European Championships, etc, while we waste time debating about a new manager.
Thanks to the loyalty of our chairman, which surely wouldn't have been replicated at any other club, over 11 years David Moyes brought Everton stability and respect, but no glory. I'd be very surprised if anyone else is given as long. The average life expectancy of a Premier League manager is less than 3 years. Investing the club's leadership in an individual with such a short term horizon inevitably results in huge turmoil at regular intervals.
Football at the elite level today is vastly more complex than it was when Harry Catterick and Howard Kendall were kings of the hill. If we don't learn lessons from the past while other clubs with far less prestige than ours rapidly evolve, I fear our destiny is perpetual mid-table mediocrity or worse. In that scenario, the best we can hope for is to find someone that can drag us to Wembley for the occasional cup final before it inevitably ends in tears.
My ideal director of football would be a well-connected expert experienced in the machinations of elite level football who is directly accountable to the board and whose voice will be heard as a member of the board. He'll probably be someone who appears to be most comfortable working outside the spotlight such as Les Reed at Southampton. He will articulate the club Vision clearly so that it's understood and accepted by all of the club's employees, embedding a culture that will stand the test of time.
It goes without saying that player identification and value for money recruitment is of critical importance, so much so that some clubs have appointed heads of recruitment either separately or to work alongside a Director of Football. While their work is unseen by the fans, presumably Steve Walsh at Leicester City and Paul Mitchell at Tottenham contributed significantly to the success their clubs enjoyed last season.
Taking ultimate responsibility for recruitment away from the first team coach minimises the risk that impulse buys are seen as costly mistakes with hindsight. Instead all new recruits will be acquired in the expectation at least that they will fit into the system laid down to achieve the Vision.
But the coach stands or falls on results and consequently must have right of veto over purchases for the first-team squad and, at least to the extent it isn't dictated by overriding financial considerations, selling first-team players. Dumping unwanted footballers on the man responsible for performance on the pitch makes no sense.
We can also learn from the mistakes of others. Transfer committees encourage compromise, which leads to poor decisions, as Liverpool learnt. Relying on a powerful chief scout while ignoring the pleas of your manager can result in an unbalanced squad, as Newcastle found out. If one person is given responsibility to present options to the coach, choose that person with care.
If all goes to plan, a Director of Football would be in place for the long term to enable the club to build a lasting structure where every component contributes to the success of the first team. In that structure the first team coach is just one component and can be replaced with minimum turmoil when a better option becomes available. All that matters is the Vision.
And what might the Vision look like? Well oddly enough, tucked away on the club's academy website is the following;
That'll do for me. I wonder who wrote it?
Club Vision
To prosper at the top of the Premier League
To play in European competitions
To win games…preferably with style
To recruit and develop young players to play for Everton Football Club
To provide the best opportunity for young players to play in the Premier LeagueClub Football Philosophy
Everton Football Club's football philosophy is based around our long standing motto “Nil Satis Nisi Optimum” which translates into “Nothing but the best is good enough”.
It is an ethos that is followed diligently by every single player and member of staff. Everybody is valued and everybody makes a contribution. This is a belief that is in-line with the “spirit” associated with the City of Liverpool.
The ultimate aim is for the 1st team to win football matches, ideally through entertaining and attacking football, whilst always giving 100% effort and determination.
Academy Football Philosophy
All Academy departments will work together to support the needs of all our players with the common goal of creating a pathway from the Academy to the 1st team. We will encourage our players to play creative, attacking football with a winning mentality. This is part of our Coaching Philosophy.
We will try to control the game by dominating possession. Our aim is to play out from the back and through midfield. To enable us to do this we must spread out and make the pitch as big as possible. Our players must look to play forward whenever possible and we must not miss a chance to turn, penetrate, or shoot. Our Club has a tradition of getting crosses into the box, but we must also teach our players to attack through the 18-yard line by playing clever, creative and inventive football.
Out of possession all players must have the mentality to defend. They must know their defensive roles and responsibilities and they must be difficult to beat in 1v1 situations.
Our teams must look to press whenever possible but if we cannot press we must be compact and patient. From this position we must look for opportunities to press.
But saying it is the easy part. Getting there is much harder. Selecting the right director of football might just be the most important decision Farhad Moshiri will ever make on Everton's behalf.
The quoted material above is an extract. The full content can be found at: About the Academy
Reader Comments (65)
Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer
2 Posted 19/05/2016 at 17:08:01
I don't know enough about a Director of Football, but I think you have explained why countless clubs have gone down this road before. Is it achievable? I'm not so sure.
3 Posted 19/05/2016 at 17:28:20
A director of football would have big input into the next appointment at the club should a manager leave.
Or else it's just up to Kenwright to hit Google and see what pops up... or hire an ex-Wigan manager.
4 Posted 19/05/2016 at 18:10:15
That would surely have to be after the coach/manager has identified the players he wants wouldn't it?
Otherwise you've got the director of football picking the players for the manager!
5 Posted 19/05/2016 at 18:47:41
I'd say that the head coach identifies what resources they need and the DoF would give him a range to choose from that matched the budget available. The resource could be from the academy, U21's or anywhere. There'd be constant communication between coach and DoF to keep on top of who is available. When the manager and DoF agree the DoF does all negotiations and contracts. The DoF would also offer the board a choice of Head Coaches with written analysis should the vacancy become available and they would make the selection based on this.
The idea would be to have checks and balances in place to stop a powerful "Manager" hijacking the club like Martinez did but also to make the board accountable for the selection of the head coach. The DoF would be a knowledgeable person who would sit on the board as Director of Football.
The head coach would have one responsibility and that would be to coach and select the first team in accordance with the guideline and philosophies of the club. He would have great influence with the academy, etc., but via the DoF.
Soccer clubs are 21st century businesses with people in important decision making positions who are total amateurs.
6 Posted 19/05/2016 at 19:06:25
7 Posted 19/05/2016 at 19:31:01
8 Posted 19/05/2016 at 19:49:18
9 Posted 19/05/2016 at 20:06:32
We need to change the club from top to bottom, and remove all the old-guard crap lying around. We're a 'jumpers for goalposts' club and it winds me up. We're held back by our own stubbornness in relying on our history - and that goes for supporters as much as the club itself.
Change the structure, change the club, change the philosophy, change the mindset of supporters, change everything - why are we being left behind? Because other clubs are miles ahead in the way they conduct things.
I'm sick to death of supporting the stuffy old Grandad of English football, and I want success, not past glories. It's bullshit.
10 Posted 19/05/2016 at 20:07:02
11 Posted 19/05/2016 at 21:35:24
Nick - I was hoping to read a post containing a proper case, i.e. providing facts and examples of successes elsewhere. Sevilla have been held up as a model - Monchi by all accounts is the best in his field but has no coaching pedigree. However, Sevilla's situation could be the exception instead of the norm. To understand whether there is a case, one needs to see whether the division of labour - the heart of your argument I think - outweighs the importance of the absolute authority of a manager who decides who stays, who goes and who plays, who doesn't.
Will we as a club adopt this model? Maybe. The vast sums in transfers and wages which we appear to be contemplating next season may make it necessary and prudent to have someone whose sole job is to oversee this part. I hope, however, we stick to the current model, as I have not seen this work in the EPL. Ready to be proven wrong.
12 Posted 19/05/2016 at 21:59:26
The General Manager is responsible for bringing in the players and that is almost always done in concert with the coach who identifies who he wants. The General Manager is then responsible for negotiating contracts and getting the deals done.
The Coach, well... he coaches.
It really amazes me in football that the Manager (Gaffer, Coach) seemingly handles all the phone calls, all the negotiations, all the contacts, etc. That has to be incredibly time consuming.
This is definitely a cultural difference, but I just don't see that as a use of productive time; time wisely spent.
I want my Manager actually managing - not on the phone convincing all and sundry to play for him and possibly getting involved with contract negotiations, trades (transfers), etc.
It's befuddled me why there isn't a person - General Manager / Director of Football - completely and solely responsible for these tasks and responsibilities.
From the outside looking in, we in American sports have a better system and application for divvying up these tasks.
The coach should say, "I want this guy, that guy, that dude..." etc. Then step aside and actually coach. He should be focusing on player fitness, training sessions, tactics, etc. Not spending all day long with a cell phone growing out of his ear with agents on the other end.
And Managers are often times ex-players. It seems to me when it comes to the negotiations and acquisitions I'd want someone with more "business savvy" and a good footballing mind - but not a coach per se...
It's very, very hard to wrap my head around why this isn't done more often over there.
13 Posted 19/05/2016 at 22:01:57
Ignoring the fact that Martinez didn't 'hijack' the club (he merely performed the roles that were part of his job remit), that might well be "the idea", but the reality (at least in the English game) often descends into a ruinous power struggle between two egos, a pointing of fingers and a shifting of blame when it comes time to take responsibility for any failures.
Manager: "Not my choice. He fucking bought them.
Director Of Football: "I brought in all the right talent. Blame the tosser who trains them".
14 Posted 19/05/2016 at 22:05:49
Our coaches and GMs generally (not always) work together and work well together. I don't understand why the two roles have to be in conflict, and why the blame game is played.
When a team goes south here, the powers-that-be analyze the situation, and frankly appropriate the lion's share of blame. One or the other, GM or Coach, is shown the door. It's usually a pretty clear case which one should go.
Shit players punching above their weight? GM is out.
Very good players not performing? Coach is gone.
Total shit train wreck? Both are tossed and the team starts afresh.
15 Posted 19/05/2016 at 22:07:38
Moshri? I think he'd be up to it.
Bill? I think a Director of Football under his stewardship would be a nightmare.
16 Posted 19/05/2016 at 22:22:48
17 Posted 19/05/2016 at 22:39:28
18 Posted 20/05/2016 at 00:27:48
Everton is a stuffy old club run by fuddy-duddies, and needs to modernise in every way. Cretinous? OK I'll take that on the chin if it makes you happy.
19 Posted 20/05/2016 at 00:38:38
20 Posted 20/05/2016 at 00:57:30
Jesus, James. You flinch at someone firing the word 'cretinous' your way and then you basically go and call us all Bill Kenwright by another name?
21 Posted 20/05/2016 at 01:18:07
Jamie (12) nails it. I tend to make comparisons with our native AFL (with TV money at about 1/20th the value) and the differences are stark. It's also worth noting that while AFL clubs have visited EPL clubs, they learn little and tend to partner with NFL clubs to find the cutting edge. Below is a rundown of the basic structure of an AFL club which proves enlightening. The staff do not come and go with each change of coach but stand on their own performance. (sorry for the huge post!)
Football department employees:
Director of Football
Football Operations Manager
Executive Assistant
Player Wellbeing Manager
Opposition Analyst
Football Analysis Manager
Senior Football Analyst
Football Analyst
Football Analyst
Football Analyst
Dietitian
Player Development Manager
VFL General Manager
Property Manager
VFL Property Coordinator
Coaching department employees:
Senior Coach
Senior Assistant Coach
Assistant Coach (Backline)
Assistant Coach (Midfield)
Assistant Coach (Forward line)
Reserves Coach
Development Manager
Development Coach (Midfield)
Development Coach (Forward line)
Skill Acquisition Coordinator

Football high performance department employees:
High Performance Manager
Strength and Conditioning Coach
Sports Scientist
Head Trainer/Player Appearance Coordinator
Rehabilitation Coordinator
Strength Program Coordinator
Movement and Weights Specialist
Reserves Strength and Conditioning Coach

Doctor
Integrity Manager
List management department employees:
General Manager of List Management
Senior National Recruiting Assistant
National Recruiting Assistant
National Recruiting Assistant
The coach determines his team of assistants and has 'input' in certain areas but generally the structure remains intact. Could moving to a more progressive corporate structure where roles are carefully defined benefit Everton?
22 Posted 20/05/2016 at 01:22:42
He does have a bit of a point. How many posts on here start with "I've supported my beloved blues since [fill in mid 20th century year]".
I mean, it is sort of true.
23 Posted 20/05/2016 at 01:34:32
Though tbf Jim Rom and Barkley would benefit from some AFL training to slim the bulk off them ( like Folau did ) and gee them up a bit.
Anyway; If the DoF is a facilitator / bagman who gets who the manager wants, then OK
If he is there to push the Owner /Chairman's choice of player (via youtube, the press, agents etc ) on to the manager and when he complains - He's not what we want or need, he won't fit in...Only to be told - Make him fit in, you're the coach, coach him so he does. Then No.
24 Posted 20/05/2016 at 02:01:03
We are not like Bill at all. We (most of us) talk about past glories in terms of setting a benchmark for what we expect going forward. Kenwright acts like the good days are behind us and he's just a nostalgic curator of a museum. He has no expectations of success and indeed expects our gratitude for the fact that we have yet to go bankrupt.
25 Posted 20/05/2016 at 02:03:59
Our football seems to be the reverse. Extensive power vested in the hands of a few. Short term employees responsible for implementation of a long term strategy.
I've posted a fair bit about this recently. Football will change; the current model makes so little sense that it will have to. The idea of a guy stood at pitch level and taking charge of everything from tactics to multi million pound decisions is massively out of date.
The change in England will need someone to break the mould and gain an advantage. I hope that could be us. There might be plenty of examples of it not working but that doesn't mean it can't work. I wouldn't have thought Dennis Wise should ever have been a candidate, nor JFK. I'm not convinced by Joe Royle either. Maybe it's failure had not been the concept but the execution.
I would have thought the role is part football, part businessman. Someone who can buy into a vision and align every part of the club behind it.
The big gripe seems to be the transfer question. For me that's simple. The coach identifies the targets, and would be supported by the DoF and the scouting team. The DoF's key role there would be signing off on the transfer. So if our footballing vision says we will play out from the back, any attempt by a manager to sign Andy Carroll should be stopped immediately. If he identifies a player that fits our plan then no issue - the manager remains accountable for delivering within a framework.
26 Posted 20/05/2016 at 02:55:14
This where Ernie (25) makes a good point; who is going to break the mold and cast off old school practices and modernise. English clubs seem uninterested in pursuing best practice and identifying trends beyond their own shores. Or is that an unfair assessment?
Could this also be a contributor to the long term status of the England national team? I think comparisons to other sports (UK) which have recruited people and science to improve or remain competitive such as Rugby and Olympics would be valid.
Anyway, back to Everton, any such change would need to be holus bolus and not a half step in so a DoF may not work unless there was comprehensive structural change IMO.
27 Posted 20/05/2016 at 03:00:15
I just don't think it can work in the PL in the current environment. One thing to keep in mind is that most of the managers in the clubs regularly talk to each other and the general football community is a relatively closed shop (same managers seem to be hired time after time despite being regularly sacked). The manager of any club will want to have a lot of say in transfers and we've seen many examples where things have gone wrong when players have been brought in the manager didnt want or the manager didnt get the players he asked for. I just don't think a DoF would work and as for providing a list of suitable players, isn't that the point of having a head scout and scouting team?
As for wages and contracts, I'm pretty sure the manager does not negotiate the details of any contracts although he will know what his overall wage budget is. If there is a strong, properly functioning board then there is no need for DoF in the first place imo.
The manager should be in control of all team matters imo.
28 Posted 20/05/2016 at 04:29:05
The Aussie cricket coach alluded to the improvement ( while it lasted ) as being due to, if not getting rid of some of these 1%-ers, then not concentrating on them to the detriment of the bigger picture, the basics, batting bowling and fielding.
Seems to me that the obvious choice would lie with 'some' devolving of responsibilities - not solving the unemployment problem in one go...at least for now.
29 Posted 20/05/2016 at 04:31:07
You make a good case and include the most important point that the manager must have the final say. We wouldn't want the Chelsea scenario of an owner buying players he wants and forcing the manager to use them.
It appears to work well in Europe, but it's been tried before in England and failed. We would need to examine why it failed to avoid repeating the same mistakes and make improvements.
For example was the manager an old school English manager wanting control and resenting a DoF? Or was the DoF inexperienced with little knowledge of European and world teams and players?
With the right DoF and possibly a European manager experienced with such a system it should work in theory. Are we ready to take the gamble in practice though?
30 Posted 20/05/2016 at 06:33:41
Still; at least we can explain the recent government figures claiming a fall in unemployment.
Jamie C
We dont do things that differently to you, we just carry more passengers . .and we give them different titles
31 Posted 20/05/2016 at 07:19:19
A director of football to me is just red tape and I see loads of potential problems. It's worse if you pick wrong director of football as he's likely to be their for years implementing the wrong "philosophy" and buys - who judges this director of football - the board I guess? You could have the right manager but not realise it because of the football!
The one argument in favour is managers doing stuff short term instead of long term philosophy but that comes down to the board. Everton's board are patient - Chelsea on the otherhand are not.
Leave it as it is - surely this season has shown that football a simple game.
32 Posted 20/05/2016 at 07:56:18
A world with less visions and more actions.
33 Posted 20/05/2016 at 08:45:22
For example, relate the VFL to the equivalent or close to equiv that is wrapped up in the British scene.
The thread following this might be quite interesting as there are plenty of extremely bright and imaginative people on ToffeeWeb IMO!?
34 Posted 20/05/2016 at 08:56:52
35 Posted 20/05/2016 at 09:21:59
Having said that I like the idea of a Director of Football as I think it would provide a very important link between what happens at board level and on the pitch.
The challenge for the board would be to find two people whose experience and skill sets compliment each other, and even more importantly, can work together.
Board
Director of Football
Head Coach
Team Captain
In my view a Director of Football must have experience as a manager of a successful top flight team.
36 Posted 20/05/2016 at 09:25:41
Peeps seem to be taking it to extremes though. Leicester didn't win the league because they went 'back to basics'. They won it through being exceptional at a way of playing. When you go through their first team you realise that not only did they have the right types of players for that system, they may have had the best out there. If you're playing a deep defence and an out and out pressuring striker, you need a midfielder who is quick and can go all day - is there anyone better than Kante at that fine detail?
I'm with Bobby in that you pick a style and find a way to be the best at it. So, no, you can't have the right manager with the wrong strategy. By definition any hire who doesn't fit the plan is a poor hire.
Test 1 - is he adhering to our plan?
Test 2 - are we improving?
Bobby still gets sacked under those tests.
37 Posted 20/05/2016 at 09:39:56
Agree with Darren, way too many passengers get carried in football. They stab you in the back, the minute you turn your back, and as John says, any problems are always caused by somebody else.
Give it to the brothers, because I still shudder that Big Joe, firstly signed Claus Thompson, then must have sanctioned to the board, that he was worth 10K, a week!
38 Posted 20/05/2016 at 10:03:15
3 field umpires,
1 4th umpire,
4 boundary umpires
2 goal umpires,
2 Time keepers.
2 goal line video umpires.
2 scoreboard men.
2 runners per team transmit messages from the coach to players.
18 players per team plus 4 interchangeable subs.
Should a player suffer injury he can be swapped for a non interchangeable sub.
Each team also has 4 water carriers who dart about the field as play continues. Usually done by women.
Injuries are usually dealt with by numerous trainers also while play continues.
I almost forgot the turnstile men.
The cost of all that must be enormous.
39 Posted 20/05/2016 at 10:05:39
"who is going to break the mold and cast off old school practices and modernise."
I read this article a week or so ago about Leicester's approach "off the pitch". It seems they may have been the first to break the mould. Well worth a read.
40 Posted 20/05/2016 at 10:16:42
41 Posted 20/05/2016 at 10:25:55
I wonder to what extent training programs change when a manager changes? That would be bad for the players wouldn't it?
I've had a strong suspicion for a while that Roberto was building Ross and Del into physically strong specimens that would fit his slow, slow, slow bang philosophy but lack stamina.
It's just another tick for the DoF style approach isn't it? You train the players for the style the club wants to play, not an individual manager.
42 Posted 20/05/2016 at 10:46:00
Stubborn is the word that springs to mind. The reason I cite Kenwright is because he's accused by many of being stubborn, clinging to his blue-tinted view of Everton - a view shared by many as well.
Everton needs to let go of the past - and this is my overriding point - because it holds us back in my view. Kenwright, the way the club is run, even the way the club is supported (ooooh the Everton way/we're better than other clubs, if y'know yer 'istory etc etc, blah blah blah). It's all hot air, waffle, it's not forward thinking, decisive action in making the club a successful 21st century entity. We're tin-pot, old school and guess what? We haven't won shit for 21 years and hold absolutely no relevance to modern football at all. We're a relic, just like our crappy old stadium.
I want to support an Everton that's modern, and successful, not some dinosaur that relies on tradition and 'istory to make itself heard. Fuck that.
43 Posted 20/05/2016 at 11:28:50
I wonder to what extent training programs change when a manager changes? That would be bad for the players wouldn't it?
I would think so. However Everton has a window of opportunity between now and the start of pre season training to:
Decide on the style of football they want us to play - this is the key issue in my view.
Appoint the Director of Football
Appoint the Coach (and his assistants)
Review the squad accordingly.
This is a lot of work in a short space of time unless of course the ground work has already been done.
About Barkley and Delboy - I think you are correct. Our departed frien Harold made this observation about Browning in particular. Too much weight work in the gym. But that is one of my pet subjects best kept for another thread. Suffice it to say the "Nordic board" approach in the Leicester article using self body weight appeals to me.
James # 42 - I agree we have to move with the times but Everton "having no relevance to modern football" is not a view shared by the Scudamore the executive secretary of the premier league. We still have much to be proud of.
Check his interview out on the offical website. –And we are getting a stadium on the waterfront ;)
44 Posted 20/05/2016 at 13:10:02
I was really just highlighting the irony, rather than disagreeing but, now that you mention it, no I don't think James has a point.
It isn't Kenwright harking on about our history that people find cringeworthy. It's more him spinning tales with a side serving of soap queen sentimentality that puts himself in prime position at every pivotal event like a footballing version of Forrest Gump. Simply mentioning that "we've won the league quite a few times in the past", or "I've supported Everton since before Madonna was a badly soiled mattress", isn't 'the same thing' by any means.
Now, whilst I would guess there might well be a few Everton fans kind of similar to Kenwright....after they've had a few and finally got tired of staggering around saying "i fucking love you mate" to anyone who strolls on by...I wouldn't presume to say 'you're all the bloody same' on the back of it. Â
It's like your wife reading a random article about how all men secretly prefer anal and then, on the basis of that, her calling you an absolute filthy bastard, firing a boot into your bollocks and banning you from bedroom duties for six weeks, when all you asked was if she wanted "Butter or Marge?".
45 Posted 20/05/2016 at 13:19:00
In my opinion, there's nothing at all wrong with taking pride in and celebrating your history and past achievements, nor is there any reason why it should be seen as an impediment to change, progress or future success.Â
Did Man United finally alter their fortunes by saying 'fuck you' to their history? Did they wipe their collective mind clean of previous players and vow never again talk about teams of the past? Did they ban Bobby Charlton for being a boring old baldy twat cramping their new fangled, forward looking style by banging on about stuff the kids no longer care about? Nah, they just happened to find a ruthless, determined, nasty bastard of a manager to drive them toward success and, once they'd got a sniff, they bloody capitalised on it.Â
That's what Everton have been lacking as far as I'm concerned. Sheer bloody mindedness, determination and ruthlessness at the top. Not necessarily a more 'modern' structure with more meaningless job titles, more spare parts, more trembling hands to gather round and stir a pot containing nothing but the same old shit given a sexier name: 'New Turdally Awesome', 'Turdally Awesome On Fleek' and 'Turdally Awesome With Added Blood Bruv'.Â
For too long there's been a message filtered down through the club, to the media and the fans, that the middle of the road is where we should be and we should thank our lucky stars if we can just stay there. People's Club, best of the rest, top of the points per pound league, punching above our weight, plucky underdogs. Piss off with your patronising platitudes. We're just proper pish....but we haven't always been.Â
That's why I take an alternative view to yourself (as often seems to be the case between you and I) and believe it's actually important to keep banging on about the clubs history and pointing to accomplishments of the past, to remind ourselves and everybody else that Bang Fucking Average Avenue isn't Everton's rightful place in the pecking order, as they keep trying to make us believe. Past success should be embraced and used as inspiration to motivate people to try and make it happen once again. That's one thing Martinez seemed to understand at least.Â
46 Posted 20/05/2016 at 14:22:33
If EFC is going the DoF route, this is the most important thing for our owners to get right. Otherwise it's a waste of time; owner hires some butt-kisser, egos, power struggles, whose dick is bigger, etc. The whole thing doomed from the start.
47 Posted 20/05/2016 at 14:45:41
48 Posted 20/05/2016 at 15:01:07
Our players must look to play forward whenever possible and we must not miss a chance to turn, penetrate, or shoot.
No idea who wrote this mate but there is no evidence to suggest it is the chap you are thinking of.
49 Posted 20/05/2016 at 21:12:09
Martin, why would Alex Ferguson want to be Everton's director of football?
50 Posted 20/05/2016 at 21:15:14
51 Posted 20/05/2016 at 21:19:25
52 Posted 21/05/2016 at 10:09:51
53 Posted 21/05/2016 at 10:17:28
Gone quiet on the new manager front.
54 Posted 22/05/2016 at 00:28:41
55 Posted 22/05/2016 at 01:53:26
From a Premier League point-of-view, as it nears its thirtieth birthday, "And if yer know, yer history" has about as much relevance to the world beyond Everton as does the brand of liniment Dixie used to slap on his thighs way back in the day.
Apart from not having been relegated in the Premier League we have no history worthy of recognition and that's why a Director of Football might, just might, be an idea worthy of consideration.
As the much quoted adage on insanity says, and we've done it way before the PL came to pass, repeatedly doing the same thing and expecting different outcomes is proof positive that you are.
56 Posted 22/05/2016 at 14:54:17
57 Posted 22/05/2016 at 15:00:12
58 Posted 22/05/2016 at 20:50:22
59 Posted 23/05/2016 at 14:41:39
No you're not the only one who finds "It's a Grand Old Team To Play For" toe-curlingly embarrassing. But I find it embarrassing because it's a Celtic song. We're Everton.
60 Posted 23/05/2016 at 14:51:33
Just posted this an another thread - Link
Love the images, Johnny Cash-style rhythm, clappy bit, chorus etc (can see myself giving this loads after a 3-0 derby win).
61 Posted 23/05/2016 at 15:19:28
62 Posted 23/05/2016 at 18:38:05
Cheers for the link to the song. You're spot on about the Johnny Cash sound - like a mash up of Jackson & I Saw The Light. Did I read about you in Brian Viner's great book 'Looking For The Toffees'? Cracker story bout The Scout!
Dave #61
Ta for that, suppose it's one of those what came first, the chicken or the egg type thingies. Glen Daly, whose 1961 recording is played at each Celtic home game gave credit for the song to the late Charlie Tully of Belfast Celtic & Glasgow Celtic.
"Charlie would invariably sing the praises of his beloved Belfast Celts with; “Sure it's a grand old team to play for.â€
A version of only a few choruses perhaps, but Glen Daly recalled it years later, when he recorded his own ‘Celtic Song'.
63 Posted 23/05/2016 at 18:52:34
I remember (ages ago) there was a post (must have been on TW) asking for Everton-related stories and I remember writing down a story that my (late) pater told me about the Lord Montague scandal and two fellers he heard in the Bullens discussing it.
(If that's it, yes).
64 Posted 23/05/2016 at 18:57:35
By doing that we are in fact acknowledging that it's all about our history and never about out future.
I sing all those songs but by christ I wish I had a few newer ones to sing.
Like 'We're going to win the league' !!
65 Posted 23/05/2016 at 19:30:37
Yeah, funny story about the Daily Express racing tipster, I think Brian Viner said you told him it was one of your Dad's tales. I'm guessing you got your sense of humour from him.
Keep 'em coming, we need all the laughs we can get on here.
Add Your Comments
In order to post a comment, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.
Or Sign up as a ToffeeWeb Member — it's free, takes just a few minutes and will allow you to post your comments on articles and Talking Points submissions across the site.
-sm.jpg)
-sm.jpg)
-sm.jpg)
-sm.jpg)
1 Posted 19/05/2016 at 14:57:29
Sort of gives it away who wrote this, don't you think? ;)