Sly Posted 5 July 2015 Share Posted 5 July 2015 With Nigel having been shown the door due to having a different opinion to the board. Could the club be looking at re-structuring to a more European based model? Director of Football - Handles all transfers, contracts, scouting etc First Team Coach - Training, Matches, Tactics Maybe the Thai Board just had enough of butting heads with Pearson over him wanting to manage and they wanted to do it the way they see fit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finnegan Posted 5 July 2015 Share Posted 5 July 2015 This strikes me as one of the more likely theories, to be honest. Especially with stories circulating about Rudkin and Pearson being on poor terms and you can't see Nigel wanting to accept a smaller role. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cc_star Posted 5 July 2015 Share Posted 5 July 2015 at people talking about Pearson falling out, when every single interview, quote, whatever shows the exact opposite about NP.... A DoF who doesn't work with the players and signs players either Football Manager-style or based on committee? Rather than adding people who not only can kick a ball in the right direction but are also made of the right stuff mentally & will blend with the rest of the squad rather than upset the apple cart? It seems sustainable building days are over and we're back to chequebook management, let's hope it turns out ok Fingers crossed & up the City Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Year Of The Fox Posted 5 July 2015 Share Posted 5 July 2015 Apparently he was steaming and it pissed Rudkin off immensely. Things haven't been the same since so I'm told. Just another straw that broke the camels back if true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_Fatboyslow_ Posted 5 July 2015 Share Posted 5 July 2015 This just shows how desperate some are to make sense of something we don't understand, apart from me and I'm keeping quite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cujek Posted 5 July 2015 Share Posted 5 July 2015 what a load of nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan LCFC Posted 5 July 2015 Share Posted 5 July 2015 It's a good model with the right people in. That can be said about any, mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donut Posted 5 July 2015 Share Posted 5 July 2015 Well, certainly the days of a manager managing all the football aspects of the club are diminishing. It is no better or worse a model than having the manager manage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Lowe Posted 10 July 2015 Share Posted 10 July 2015 Would O'Neill be happy not to manage all parts of the club? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MPH Posted 10 July 2015 Share Posted 10 July 2015 With Nigel having been shown the door due to having a different opinion to the board. Could the club be looking at re-structuring to a more European based model? Director of Football - Handles all transfers, contracts, scouting etc First Team Coach - Training, Matches, Tactics Maybe the Thai Board just had enough of butting heads with Pearson over him wanting to manage and they wanted to do it the way they see fit. We already have a director of football ( john Rudkin) and Nigel was our manager so i don't see what restructuring will be needed? I am assuming they are just going to refill Nigels position Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cc_star Posted 10 July 2015 Share Posted 10 July 2015 Would O'Neill be happy not to manage all parts of the club? Doubt it, he left Villa for not having control of transfers, being forced to sell players a diminished budget to replace them Here, I think he'd want to be like Pearson, but I don't think lurching from 3/4 year plan to 3/4 year plan, with personnel and direction, systems changing each time IMO a pretty set way of playing, attracting footballers who can play that way, developing youngsters who can too makes managers interchangeable and it's what many of the continental clubs do That way if you have to remove managers, there's continuity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DANGEROUS TIGER Posted 10 July 2015 Share Posted 10 July 2015 I'm not really sure what the best format would be, but as long as it worked smoothly, I would be happy with either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimsalabim Posted 11 July 2015 Share Posted 11 July 2015 Manager every time. The DoF system always seems to create conflict. Does Jose Mourinho report to a DoF and have his transfers done without his say-so? Does Van Gaal? Does Pellegrini? Did Fergie? Does Wenger? Deos Bren... Wait, no one cares about Brendan Rodgers. Pattern... Top teams in England do not use a structure such as this. They may have a Director of Football at the club, but thse above managers make their own moves in the transfer market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.