Most liked posts in thread: Head of recruitment

Nobody really knows what he does as he's only the head scout with Hughes having the final say. He could be putting very good players forward and Hughes rejects them or even he could be finding players then the budget isn't there for them. I don't think this squad is as bad as the results have been and the team is underachieving.

Tonight, Saturday and Harrogate we've not looked like we had any plan to get back in the game and almost just throwing players forward in hope rather than expectation.

 

That's not how it works though is it? Hughes has the final say on who we sign. It's rare that a big name goes into recruiting rather than coaching/management because it's less profile (and pay).

Greg Abbott's helped Carlisle go from L2 strugglers into L1 as their head of recruitment.

There seems to be a strange reluctance in our fanbase to accept that coaching, managing and recruiting is a joint effort.

 

Hughes was involved in identifying and recruiting Gent to the role, if Gent isn't identifying the players Hughes wants then he could probably remove him. He certainly doesn't need to sign anyone he doesn't want.

It's not like past relationships we've had at VP where Richmond was signing players for Hutchings, Lawn/Christie were signing players for Jackson or Rahic for Collins because those managers were just happy to have the job.

The Head of Recruitment is not above the manager, examples of people in those roles who have a better pedigree in the game than managers are few and far between. In the Premier League Brighton and Brentford are probably the most effective recruiters at the moment, Brighton's Head of Recruitment is Paul Jewell's son, and I think Brentford's was brought in from Bury.

It's a massive failure on all concerned that recruitment for this year has taken us backwards, and, in particular, that the failings of panic loan signings who add nothing seem to have been repeated leaving us with a bloated squad with less quality. Hughes and Gent should both be accountable for it.

 

I think the theory is that the director of football is responsible for establishing a football philosophy and strategy.

The chairman appoints a DoF but normally retains the responsibility choice on manager too. We are an unusual case, though, as Rupp is merely a sleeping investor with no interest in the sport, so maybe our DoF would pick our boss?

Barry Fry at Peterborough is a good example. Posh sack managers regularly but their ethos of attacking football and developing players to sell on, remains unchanged.

McAnthony is in the states but at least Fry is around to act as a sounding board for the manager.

The theory is that if you have a level of structure above the manager then you shouldn’t have to rip everything apart if things don’t work out.

the problem is we have a short term culture whereby we rip stuff up and rebuild every few years. We cant plan long term as we don’t know if Rupp will still be here or is just nursing us along sustainably until an exit opportunity appears.

i’ll get pelters for this but I think the structure Rahic implemented is the right one if you have an investor like Rupp. Our issue was the people he employed were incompetent. He didn’t know English football, Collins should never have been coach, nor Abbott let loose with recruitment.

I want a young coach from a higher club or someone like Fil Morais (who comes across superbly every time on the radio, knows what this club is about and properly gets the fans and their expectations), who I think will adopt a modern approach and get players onside and enjoying their football again.

he played under Mourinho and has plenty of contacts in the game.

i would ideally prefer David Baldwin to take over and run the club heading up a consortium, with Morais as head coach, but Rupp seems here to stay for now, so, to compromise if Rupp/Sparks will remain, I do think we will need a football man like a DoF in to assist Sparks, who doesn’t have the background to be making these key footballing decisions anymore.

 

Yes, he will have the final say but my understanding is the chairman sets the budget. Recruitment man draws up a shortlist of five or six names per position - some cheaper than others. Then the committee get together and discuss the options presented?

chairman may refuse to sanction option a), so they then move on to agreed option b), then c) etc

i.e. the manager is only as good as the shortlist he’s working from - and recruitment man compiles that.

some of our signings just seem random though - not like they were planned months ago, the loans especially.

 

My summary at the moment is….they’re all equally as bad as each other: Rupp, sparks, gent, hughes, all the players….unfortunately we can’t sack them all, unless an oil sheikh buys us out

 

I'd be surprised if they were sacked, for that very reason, if we keep making poor appointments that we need to pay off it will eventually have to impact the playing budget, or budget for the backroom staff.

If he doesn't resign (and I don't think he will) I think he'll be here until his contract runs out and isn't renewed.

 

You can't just sack everyone when it goes a bit wrong.

Stephen Gent isn't picking the team or the tactics, it's not his fault the players seem to lack a backbone - that's got to be the gaffer.

Let me guess, if we install a Director of Football (which we absolutely must do) there would be calls for him to go every time we change managers?

No, not for me.

Gent stays and we judge his performance with another gaffer.

 

I'm undecided on Gent. Some of the sigings seem poor, but I think that's largely caused by our poor recruitment strategy, squad management and use of the budget which must come from Hughes/Sparks.

Once again we have a heavily bloated squad of mediocre players rather than a lean squad of quality players.

We've renewed several contracts over the last two seasons for average players frequently out of the starting 11.

We finished last season with a squad geared towards 4231, and needed 4-5 quality additions to enhance that. Instead we opted to sign players to go 3 at the back which didn't complement the players already ay the club. Then right before deadline day we've panicked and brought in several players capable of playing 4231. So rather than the 5 quality additions, we've brought in large numbers... Again!

Perhaps Gent has put forwards some quality names. But if you're spreading your budget too thinly across an inflated squad, the chances are you'll miss out on the best signings.

 

Nail, head, hit for me of what would one bring BL.? What is a good director of football? A poor coach, a poor man manager, a poor tactician etc. Or his he /she a decent coach, a decent man manager and a brilliant tactician ?

If he’s the latter then why isn’t he a manager/ coach in a job ? . If he’s the former he is not qualified to oversee nor select a manager . See what the conundrum is?

I don’t personally understand the need if the DoF has zero accountability in selecting the “ right man “ for the job if he’s not qualified to determine the right man for the right job in the first instance.?

Let’s say hypothetically, a DoF recruited MH. ( One CANNOT knock his previous credentials no matter what others claim) . MH has turned out to be not as good as we or the DOF thought.
So we sack em BOTH, wrong choice made by DoF because he also “believed” his choice was the right one and MH for his worse than expected reign.

What are the qualifications necessary to actually be a DoF as a starting point?

 

Well I suspect they may differ for different clubs depending on priorities and over different time periods.

 

Surely if we employ a DoF the ideal solution would be sack the DoF and keep the head coach

 

No he isn’t. He is recruiting the positions that Hughes is asking for. Gent is in control of recruitment. Hughes gets the final say though.

 

Greg abbott was also part of our recruitment team not long ago.
Remind us how that went?

 

So if a season goes tits up…., who do we sack… the Director of Football or the Manager.

Therein lies the problem with that proposition.

 

Wow, his contract runs until the end of next year, I believe?

But I agree with you on principle. This is a tough spot for Sparks, as his commercial success is up in smoke with a big pay off.

There's absolutely no sign from Hughes that he's resigning, so it's either Sparks bites the financial bullet, or he bets his job on Hughes turning it round as the cheaper option.

 

Exellent post

 

When I look at the summer signings if Ash Taylor was the answer, what was the question?