The mancityfans.net football forum

Does it ever work out well? Can't think of the top of my head where it has worked effectively before but would love to hear of any success stories.

In recent days it has become more apparant that Marwood is a Director of Football in all but name and has a very big say (if not final decision) in the transfers we make.

What's the initial thoughts on a Mancini/Marwood line-up?

I'd guess that as a continental manager Mancini will be more used to a hands off role regarding the running of a club which seems to be more of an English trait of a manager running the club from top to bottom.

Still, I don't feel entirely at ease with the long reporting structure within the club (Mancini >> Marwood >> Cook >> Khaldoon >> Mansour) as this is how factions develop long term.

MaineRoadMemories wrote:Does it ever work out well? Can't think of the top of my head where it has worked effectively before but would love to hear of any success stories.

In recent days it has become more apparant that Marwood is a Director of Football in all but name and has a very big say (if not final decision) in the transfers we make.

What's the initial thoughts on a Mancini/Marwood line-up?

I'd guess that as a continental manager Mancini will be more used to a hands off role regarding the running of a club which seems to be more of an English trait of a manager running the club from top to bottom.

Still, I don't feel entirely at ease with the long reporting structure within the club (Mancini >> Marwood >> Cook >> Khaldoon >> Mansour) as this is how factions develop long term.

Maybe Cook feels it will guarantee an upward "trajectory of results" :-)

Usually they either sack the manager & take over themselves or sack the manager, bring someone else in, sack him & take over themselves. Luckily Marwood has no managerial CV so that problem won't arise.

I very much doubt he has much control over who we sign. Probably just there to organise the various football related aspects so the manager doesn't have to do it & to protect the football side of the operation from Gary Cook.

It is the accepted way of operating just about everywhere apart from the UK, if anything with a foreign manager in place it might be detrimental to not have a director of football. Mancini himself said that was how he was used to working.

In actual fact we have been run along similar lines for a while, the last two managers have openly talked about assessing existing transfer targets when they arrived. We have a big scouting staff who obviously keep on working regardless of who the team boss is, it makes sense for someone to be heading that up, the new manager just slots in as part of that overall recruitment team.

at City it was needed. Cook is not a football man and we needed someone above the manager to deal with the footballing issues at a higher level.

Wonderwall wrote:at City it was needed. Cook is not a football man and we needed someone above the manager to deal with the footballing issues at a higher level.

Didn't Cook himself bring Marwood in? I know they worked together at Nike (Marwood was the 'our boot's don't break your feet' spin doctor there).

BlueinBosnia wrote:

Wonderwall wrote:at City it was needed. Cook is not a football man and we needed someone above the manager to deal with the footballing issues at a higher level.

Didn't Cook himself bring Marwood in? I know they worked together at Nike (Marwood was the 'our boot's don't break your feet' spin doctor there).

probably, if so, it makes sense

As a structure it has a lot of advantages - more continuity, more debate and discussion etc... If you owned a football club would you let one man (with a football cv - such as Fat Sam) run it from top to bottom. Better to have a structure of competent employees researching talent and making options available to the Board - not saying the Coach should not have last say but the structure at many English clubs baffles me because it has people performing roles they are simply ill equipped to perform.

The problem in England to date is that the wrong personnel have been employed in the structure - ex managers such as Pleat in the Director role - and often 'traditional' English Manager's in the coaching role who all reject the structure and spend their time playing politics.

I was thinking this just the other day. I'm not so much worried about the actual system but Marwood as Director of Football. Man has absolutely no experience of managing or similar jobs. He played football himself ages ago and then worked in Nike. What experience dos he have of spending hundreds of millions???

Niall Quinns Discopants wrote:I was thinking this just the other day. I'm not so much worried about the actual system but Marwood as Director of Football. Man has absolutely no experience of managing or similar jobs. He played football himself ages ago and then worked in Nike. What experience dos he have of spending hundreds of millions???

The financial blokes will deal with that. He'll be there to talk more details about selling the football philosophy to potential players etc, (like Cook struggled top do with Kaka's dad) organise the scouting network & that kind of stuff & also do all the stuff manager would have to do at a lower league club when he'd rather be on the training ground or having the day off.

My only problem with Marwood is that he never had a good word to say about us when he was a commentator & he obviously will have a lot of mates in the Sky 4 media.

Niall Quinns Discopants wrote:I was thinking this just the other day. I'm not so much worried about the actual system but Marwood as Director of Football. Man has absolutely no experience of managing or similar jobs. He played football himself ages ago and then worked in Nike. What experience dos he have of spending hundreds of millions???

i've been in similar situations before where a company had huge upside, but the executives running it had fuckall idea how the actual business that we were in operated...and it always failed. Totally out of their league, but talked a fantastic game to everyone within earshot...did some of the right things, but never understood truly why something worked vs. something that didn't etc. Were always surprised by everything...total cock up.

This is my only fear for the club in any fashion...from the entire array of people that have been listed not one of them has experience in football management outside of Mancini...and most are in their first jobs ever in the role that they are in. Surely, the Sheik will fix that over time i think. He's got to recognize that as a risk if i do...surely.

i'm not panicky about it...because i think we've done well in the transfer market. This Jan and next summer will indicate how much of a role Hughes had in those decisions i think. Time will tell.

cheers

DoomMerchant wrote:

Niall Quinns Discopants wrote:I was thinking this just the other day. I'm not so much worried about the actual system but Marwood as Director of Football. Man has absolutely no experience of managing or similar jobs. He played football himself ages ago and then worked in Nike. What experience dos he have of spending hundreds of millions???

i've been in similar situations before where a company had huge upside, but the executives running it had fuckall idea how the actual business that we were in operated...and it always failed. Totally out of their league, but talked a fantastic game to everyone within earshot...did some of the right things, but never understood truly why something worked vs. something that didn't etc. Were always surprised by everything...total cock up.

This is my only fear for the club in any fashion...from the entire array of people that have been listed not one of them has experience in football management outside of Mancini...and most are in their first jobs ever in the role that they are in. Surely, the Sheik will fix that over time i think. He's got to recognize that as a risk if i do...surely.

i'm not panicky about it...because i think we've done well in the transfer market. This Jan and next summer will indicate how much of a role Hughes had in those decisions i think. Time will tell.

cheers

We have a much bigger & better scouting network now which Hughes & now Mancini will have benefitted from. All these departments have to report to someone which I imagine is Marwood. Don't think there will be so many people with particular experience of Marwood's role in this country as it's a relatively new thing. If you employ an ex manager in that role it seems to me he ends up getting the actual manager sacked & doing the job himself, then getting sacked.

Ted Hughes wrote:

DoomMerchant wrote:

Niall Quinns Discopants wrote:I was thinking this just the other day. I'm not so much worried about the actual system but Marwood as Director of Football. Man has absolutely no experience of managing or similar jobs. He played football himself ages ago and then worked in Nike. What experience dos he have of spending hundreds of millions???

i've been in similar situations before where a company had huge upside, but the executives running it had fuckall idea how the actual business that we were in operated...and it always failed. Totally out of their league, but talked a fantastic game to everyone within earshot...did some of the right things, but never understood truly why something worked vs. something that didn't etc. Were always surprised by everything...total cock up.

This is my only fear for the club in any fashion...from the entire array of people that have been listed not one of them has experience in football management outside of Mancini...and most are in their first jobs ever in the role that they are in. Surely, the Sheik will fix that over time i think. He's got to recognize that as a risk if i do...surely.

i'm not panicky about it...because i think we've done well in the transfer market. This Jan and next summer will indicate how much of a role Hughes had in those decisions i think. Time will tell.

cheers

We have a much bigger & better scouting network now which Hughes & now Mancini will have benefitted from. All these departments have to report to someone which I imagine is Marwood. Don't think there will be so many people with particular experience of Marwood's role in this country as it's a relatively new thing. If you employ an ex manager in that role it seems to me he ends up getting the actual manager sacked & doing the job himself, then getting sacked.

that last point is actually a good one..that creative contention in the sporting world usually ends up badly.

Ted Hughes wrote:

DoomMerchant wrote:

Niall Quinns Discopants wrote:I was thinking this just the other day. I'm not so much worried about the actual system but Marwood as Director of Football. Man has absolutely no experience of managing or similar jobs. He played football himself ages ago and then worked in Nike. What experience dos he have of spending hundreds of millions???

i've been in similar situations before where a company had huge upside, but the executives running it had fuckall idea how the actual business that we were in operated...and it always failed. Totally out of their league, but talked a fantastic game to everyone within earshot...did some of the right things, but never understood truly why something worked vs. something that didn't etc. Were always surprised by everything...total cock up.

This is my only fear for the club in any fashion...from the entire array of people that have been listed not one of them has experience in football management outside of Mancini...and most are in their first jobs ever in the role that they are in. Surely, the Sheik will fix that over time i think. He's got to recognize that as a risk if i do...surely.

i'm not panicky about it...because i think we've done well in the transfer market. This Jan and next summer will indicate how much of a role Hughes had in those decisions i think. Time will tell.

cheers

We have a much bigger & better scouting network now which Hughes & now Mancini will have benefitted from. All these departments have to report to someone which I imagine is Marwood. Don't think there will be so many people with particular experience of Marwood's role in this country as it's a relatively new thing. If you employ an ex manager in that role it seems to me he ends up getting the actual manager sacked & doing the job himself, then getting sacked.

I think you have it right Ted - Marwood (with no demeaning intended) is Cook's bag carrier for a number of key administration functions - Cook will still do all the heavy duty work - Marwood will ensure smooth running - I think that it will work well with Mancini - Marwood is no threat to a good coach like Mancini - and he is no threat to a major business man like cook - he will know his place and run it well I think

Hopefully this means we will see Marwood handling some of the press stuff as well

mcfc1632 wrote:

Ted Hughes wrote:

DoomMerchant wrote:

Niall Quinns Discopants wrote:I was thinking this just the other day. I'm not so much worried about the actual system but Marwood as Director of Football. Man has absolutely no experience of managing or similar jobs. He played football himself ages ago and then worked in Nike. What experience dos he have of spending hundreds of millions???

i've been in similar situations before where a company had huge upside, but the executives running it had fuckall idea how the actual business that we were in operated...and it always failed. Totally out of their league, but talked a fantastic game to everyone within earshot...did some of the right things, but never understood truly why something worked vs. something that didn't etc. Were always surprised by everything...total cock up.

This is my only fear for the club in any fashion...from the entire array of people that have been listed not one of them has experience in football management outside of Mancini...and most are in their first jobs ever in the role that they are in. Surely, the Sheik will fix that over time i think. He's got to recognize that as a risk if i do...surely.

i'm not panicky about it...because i think we've done well in the transfer market. This Jan and next summer will indicate how much of a role Hughes had in those decisions i think. Time will tell.

cheers

We have a much bigger & better scouting network now which Hughes & now Mancini will have benefitted from. All these departments have to report to someone which I imagine is Marwood. Don't think there will be so many people with particular experience of Marwood's role in this country as it's a relatively new thing. If you employ an ex manager in that role it seems to me he ends up getting the actual manager sacked & doing the job himself, then getting sacked.

I think you have it right Ted - Marwood (with no demeaning intended) is Cook's bag carrier for a number of key administration functions - Cook will still do all the heavy duty work - Marwood will ensure smooth running - I think that it will work well with Mancini - Marwood is no threat to a good coach like Mancini - and he is no threat to a major business man like cook - he will know his place and run it well I think

Hopefully this means we will see Marwood handling some of the press stuff as well

I wish that was true but Cook's appearing on BBC radio 5 next Sunday morning :(

Unfortunately Cook just doesn't know when to let it lie, he'll be desperate to get on the radio and tell everyone why he is in the right, the problem with that is that:
a. Even the press have moved on
b. He's useless with the media and will just make it worse, guaranteed

irblinx wrote:Unfortunately Cook just doesn't know when to let it lie, he'll be desperate to get on the radio and tell everyone why he is in the right, the problem with that is that:
a. Even the press have moved on
b. He's useless with the media and will just make it worse, guaranteed

No doubt about that whatsoever, right at the end of what could be a great week he'll bring all the shit back again.

Oh well - at least my thinking was right - shame about reality

It's often said that the manager has to be in control of everything. Sometimes that's true but there are plenty of examples (often in other sports) where coaches form very good partnerships. In football we tend to retain the distinction when it happens so you have Sven and Tord, or Hughes and Bowen.

At times, I feel that it holds back development within the game. The structure itself is limiting. When done properly, a director of football can look at some of the wider aspects of the football side of the club. Managers come and go, it is reasonable to entrust them with control over the academy, scouting, facilities and transfer policies that may only see fruit long after the manager is gone.

If a manager is only interested in one type of player should a club stop tracking other types, what if the manager is replaced and there's a change. There'd be a frantic investigation that could lead to mistakes.

It's important for the director of football to work with the manager rather than against him but at the same time, it's good to have someone with more football knowledge who can consult the chairman on replacements and give an expert opinion on the manager's transfer-targets.

I think much of the reaction against directors of football is overplayed. In England, they never get any credit, but they get all of the blame when a signing doesn't work or a club with one does badly.

ronk wrote:I think much of the reaction against directors of football is overplayed. In England, they never get any credit, but they get all of the blame when a signing doesn't work or a club with one does badly.

yeah, how did Dennis Wise get on at Newcastle ;-)