Topic: The Men in Suits behind the scenes

[Fromola]

I'd say recruitment is going to matter more than the manager, get that right and an average manager is going to do well. Also, how heavily involved in the manager search was Edwards back then? I'd also say if you look back at the list of potential candidates from back then Rodgers has probably been the best manager of the ones we actually had a chance of getting (Ancelotti, Guardiola, Klopp weren't coming for example). Cappello, Martinez, Villas Boas, ,De Boer (it was not a good set of potential managers in hindsight) were I believe the ones mentioned when I had a search on this a couple weeks back.

Ultimately we got the recruitment wrong each summer with Rodgers. He had one good transfer window (Coutinho and Sturridge in January 2013) which helped set up 13/14. On the other hand we signed Aspas, Alberto,. Sakho and Mignolet in summer 2013. A better window there sets us up far better to win that title. Mignolet a bang average goalkeeper at best and the others not good enough.

The Rodgers appointment was also let down by all the character flaws that came to light, he made sense on paper in terms of what was available to us in 2012. De Boer has been a disaster since, Martinez not kicked on at all, had that one good season with Everton.

We need a good summer. 22/23 was lost in that summer for example, it does play a big part in the season as to whether you get the right players in and strengthen where you need to.

[Egyptian36]

I'd say recruitment is going to matter more than the manager, get that right and an average manager is going to do well. Also, how heavily involved in the manager search was Edwards back then? I'd also say if you look back at the list of potential candidates from back then Rodgers has probably been the best manager of the ones we actually had a chance of getting (Ancelotti, Guardiola, Klopp weren't coming for example). Cappello, Martinez, Villas Boas, ,De Boer (it was not a good set of potential managers in hindsight) were I believe the ones mentioned when I had a search on this a couple weeks back.

Even with good recruitment an average manager won't do well and may actually harm you, Firmino is a big example of this.

You need to get the manager right and rest will follow.

[Lochgelly Violet]

I have no idea if Edwards was involved with hiring Rodgers (I don't believe he had a leadership role at the time), but I recall we were reported to have a long list of managers who turned down the opportunity to speak to us because the club was in a bit of mess from top to bottom (Ancelotti, van Gaal, Klopp, de Boer, etc) In the end it boiled down to Rodgers and Roberto Martínez!

We were very close to appointing Van Gaal as DoF, weren't we? All fell through when Brendan refused to work under that structure.

[Samie]

Orny on his podcast.

There are no signs that a dramatic revolution is on the way for Liverpool - more likely, a smart and necessary revolution.

[@David_Ornstein]

[Eeyore]

I'd say recruitment is going to matter more than the manager, get that right and an average manager is going to do well. Also, how heavily involved in the manager search was Edwards back then? I'd also say if you look back at the list of potential candidates from back then Rodgers has probably been the best manager of the ones we actually had a chance of getting (Ancelotti, Guardiola, Klopp weren't coming for example). Cappello, Martinez, Villas Boas, ,De Boer (it was not a good set of potential managers in hindsight) were I believe the ones mentioned when I had a search on this a couple weeks back.

The issue is that the players have to fit with how the coach wants to play the game. Someone has to provide the vision and the blueprint of how we play. That for me has to come from a football man and not a spreadsheet.

[mattD]

Given the disjointed nature of performances recently, it makes sense to double down on the DoF model again, with full responsibility of player recruitment given to only the DoF and scouts.

At the moment its all a mish mash of performances, primarily spearheaded by attackers rumoured to be brought in on the recommendation of the coaching team (Gakpo, Nunez and Diaz all thought to be the coaching teams signings). And it looks like it - some of these players look like square pegs in round holes, not offering the level of synchronicity or cohesion that your Manes or Firminos provided. There's effort there, but it just doesn't have the link up play, pressing or sheer presence on the field like before.

I'm looking forward to seeing who is brought in on the scouts recommendations this year. But I think the squad looks a bit of a mess at the moment and things might only get seriously better with sales of some big names who don't fit and incoming players.

At the moment, many of the young players like Danns and Clark look better attuned to high intensity, high pressing football than Diaz, Nunez, Szobo and maybe there's something to be said for that given they have been primed to play that way from such an early age, even if they perhaps don't have the raw skill that some of the incoming players have.

[Mighty_Red]

The issue is that the players have to fit with how the coach wants to play the game. Someone has to provide the vision and the blueprint of how we play. That for me has to come from a football man and not a spreadsheet.

That's why Richard Hughes is the Sporting Director, you can't level the same throwaway remarks at him that you do for Edwards.

We keep talking Edwards as if he is the only one making decsions at the club. He doesn't want that else he would've taken the SD role back. He has gone higher up the chain and is looking at the overall philosophy of the club.

[Draex]

Orny on his podcast.

Haha he said the same thing twice using more/less words

[In the Name of Klopp]

The issue is that the players have to fit with how the coach wants to play the game. Someone has to provide the vision and the blueprint of how we play. That for me has to come from a football man and not a spreadsheet.

Agree, you need both. We had our best recruitments with Klopp and Edwards working together. Giving full control to the coaching team, was the dumbest move we made, no matter how brilliant we might think Klopp and the coaching staff are.

[Eeyore]

That's why Richard Hughes is the Sporting Director, you can't level the same throwaway remarks at him that you do for Edwards.

We keep talking Edwards as if he is the only one making decsions at the club. He doesn't want that else he would've taken the SD role back. He has gone higher up the chain and is looking at the overall philosophy of the club.

I thought Richard Hughes was the Sporting Director because he is Edwards mate?

He certainly doesn't have a track record of success or appointing managers like Scott Parker and Jason Tindall.

[alonsoisared]

That's the one concern for me. They're all mates who've got history of giving jobs to eachother and family members. Giving total control to Klopp and Ljinders was obviously a big blunder, giving total control to Edwards and Hughes would be a blunder as well. He's in a position of extreme strength of course given we threw the kitchen sink at bringing him back.

[DLF]

I thought Richard Hughes was the Sporting Director because he is Edwards mate?

He certainly doesn't have a track record of success or appointing managers like Scott Parker and Jason Tindall.

And yet Bournemouth are sitting comfortably in 10th with the 16th highest wage bill.  Hardly "just a mate".

[Mighty_Red]

I thought Richard Hughes was the Sporting Director because he is Edwards mate?

He certainly doesn't have a track record of success or appointing managers like Scott Parker and Jason Tindall.

Looks like the last two he appointed were along the right lines though. Don't think we can look at any of there guys in isolation as none of them individually are going to have the expertise or clout to drag us to the next level. There will be no Jurgen to pull us together so the focus looks like lots of people to do their small jobs that contributes to a vision which the club as a whole carries out.

The worst thing we can do is chase names for the sake of it.

[Kopenhagen]

Orny on his podcast.

My word, he doesn't half talk some utter shite.

[Eeyore]

And yet Bournemouth are sitting comfortably in 10th with the 16th highest wage bill.  Hardly "just a mate".

So Edwards ran the numbers on all the possible DoFs on the planet and remarkably his mate just happened to have the best numbers.

[DLF]

So Edwards ran the numbers on all the possible DoFs on the planet and remarkably his mate just happened to have the best numbers.

Here's the thing.  The problem with hiring a mate is you had better be sure they are an exceptional candidate because if it goes wrong it is 1) you who are going to have to sack them and 2) leaves you open to the inevitable 'they only got the job because it's your mate'.  Out of interest who are all the available DoFs?  There's Glazers mate who just left United who has done a real bang up job for them but apart from him I have no idea.  Oh Tixi Bergywhatsit at City I suppose.  They don't do Panini sticker albums for DoFs.

[TepidT2O]

And there’s the problem that no one else was trying to hire him, and most people thighht he’d done a poor job at Bournemouth

[The_Nomad]

Given the disjointed nature of performances recently, it makes sense to double down on the DoF model again, with full responsibility of player recruitment given to only the DoF and scouts.

At the moment its all a mish mash of performances, primarily spearheaded by attackers rumoured to be brought in on the recommendation of the coaching team (Gakpo, Nunez and Diaz all thought to be the coaching teams signings). And it looks like it - some of these players look like square pegs in round holes, not offering the level of synchronicity or cohesion that your Manes or Firminos provided. There's effort there, but it just doesn't have the link up play, pressing or sheer presence on the field like before.

I'm looking forward to seeing who is brought in on the scouts recommendations this year. But I think the squad looks a bit of a mess at the moment and things might only get seriously better with sales of some big names who don't fit and incoming players.

At the moment, many of the young players like Danns and Clark look better attuned to high intensity, high pressing football than Diaz, Nunez, Szobo and maybe there's something to be said for that given they have been primed to play that way from such an early age, even if they perhaps don't have the raw skill that some of the incoming players have.

I wonder if you would have said the same thing when we were flying earlier this season. Every time the team performs shit, it doesn’t mean the players and/or manager are suddenly shit. But I do believe in the old adage of reverting to the mean. A motivated Klopp is the difference, in my opinion. When he’s on it, players and the team consistently perform above their mean. Now, we’re probably performing and finishing where most supporters thought we’d be at the start of the season. Which is why l think these same players may give somewhat similar performances next season under anyone else. Not a happy thought l know.

We’re probably going to have to really up our game when it comes to player recruitment from now on without Klopp, in order to achieve similar performances and results.

[Draex]

And there’s the problem that no one else was trying to hire him, and most people thighht he’d done a poor job at Bournemouth

What’s this based on? Bournemouth are currently 10th with a spend of 16th, seem to be doing very well.

[Eeyore]

What’s this based on? Bournemouth are currently 10th with a spend of 16th, seem to be doing very well.

What metric are you using there?

Bournemouth have spent heavily in the transfer market. They have had a Net spend of £115m this season and £75m last season.

Hughes was appointed Technical Director in 2016. That season they finished 9th. That was then followed by 12th, 14th and then relegation in 19/20. They then finished 6th in the Championship. They were promoted as runners-up in 21/22 then finished 15th after O'Neill turned things around last season and it looks like they will finish around 10th this season.

I think it is fair to say he has done okay and nothing more.

The really worry though is his record in the transfer market. You would expect a DoF at that level with the amount of money he has had to spend to have unearthed rough diamonds and then sold them on for big money. It hasn't happened. Over the last two seasons, their player sales have totaled £1m which was the sale of Ben Pearson to Stoke.

In 8 years at Bournemouth Hughes has only really made decent money once when they got relegated and presumably had to offload players. That summer they sold Ake for £40m and Wilson and Ramsdale for £20m each. That is pretty much it for players sales unless you include Danjuma who they sold for Just over £20m after paying a similar fee for him.

I mean compare that to the kind of job Brighton have done over a similar period. For me it is pretty clear that Hughes isn't here because they ran the numbers on DoF's and he came back as the outstanding candidate.

[killer-heels]

What metric are you using there?

Bournemouth have spent heavily in the transfer market. They have had a Net spend of £115m this season and £75m last season.

Hughes was appointed Technical Director in 2016. That season they finished 9th. That was then followed by 12th, 14th and then relegation in 19/20. They then finished 6th in the Championship. They were promoted as runners-up in 21/22 then finished 15th after O'Neill turned things around last season and it looks like they will finish around 10th this season.

I think it is fair to say he has done okay and nothing more.

The really worry though is his record in the transfer market. You would expect a DoF at that level with the amount of money he has had to spend to have unearthed rough diamonds and then sold them on for big money. It hasn't happened. Over the last two seasons, their player sales have totaled £1m which was the sale of Ben Pearson to Stoke.

In 8 years at Bournemouth Hughes has only really made decent money once when they got relegated and presumably had to offload players. That summer they sold Ake for £40m and Wilson and Ramsdale for £20m each. That is pretty much it for players sales unless you include Danjuma who they sold for Just over £20m after paying a similar fee for him.

I mean compare that to the kind of job Brighton have done over a similar period. For me it is pretty clear that Hughes isn't here because they ran the numbers on DoF's and he came back as the outstanding candidate.

Its a mixed record but Edwards had a mixed record at Spurs as well before he got the gig here. Also surely we are not relying on the likes of Hughes to find players? Thats the role of the scouts and nerd analysts which do all that. We have an amazing bunch of those already at the club.

The Dof role here should surely be about integrating the different departments? Ensuring parity between the backroom and the manager?

[rossipersempre]

What metric are you using there?

Bournemouth have spent heavily in the transfer market. They have had a Net spend of £115m this season and £75m last season.

Hughes was appointed Technical Director in 2016. That season they finished 9th. That was then followed by 12th, 14th and then relegation in 19/20. They then finished 6th in the Championship. They were promoted as runners-up in 21/22 then finished 15th after O'Neill turned things around last season and it looks like they will finish around 10th this season.

I think it is fair to say he has done okay and nothing more.

The really worry though is his record in the transfer market. You would expect a DoF at that level with the amount of money he has had to spend to have unearthed rough diamonds and then sold them on for big money. It hasn't happened. Over the last two seasons, their player sales have totaled £1m which was the sale of Ben Pearson to Stoke.

In 8 years at Bournemouth Hughes has only really made decent money once when they got relegated and presumably had to offload players. That summer they sold Ake for £40m and Wilson and Ramsdale for £20m each. That is pretty much it for players sales unless you include Danjuma who they sold for Just over £20m after paying a similar fee for him.

I mean compare that to the kind of job Brighton have done over a similar period. For me it is pretty clear that Hughes isn't here because they ran the numbers on DoF's and he came back as the outstanding candidate.

It's doesn't add up that's for sure, and clearly a worry. Allied to a new "head coach" like Slot who has almost certainly ceded full control in the transfer/recruitment department to Hughes (overseen by Edwards), and it's even more of a concern.

For me, if you bring in a "mate" into a job reporting into you, you have to absolutely prove beyond question he's by far the best candidate out there. Otherwise it's cronyism/nepotism. The fact Hughes was appointed immediately AFTER Edwards' return was announced, suggests it was a condition (not the only one you'd imagine but still) of the latter accepting the Football CEO role.

[killer-heels]

It's doesn't add up that's for sure, and clearly a worry. Allied to a new "head coach" like Slot who has almost certainly ceded full control in the transfer/recruitment department to Hughes (overseen by Edwards), and it's even more of a concern.

For me, if you bring in a "mate" into a job reporting into you, you have to absolutely prove beyond question he's by far the best candidate out there. Otherwise it's cronyism/nepotism. The fact Hughes was appointed immediately AFTER Edwards' return was announced, suggests it was a condition (not the only one you'd imagine but still) of the latter accepting the Football CEO role.

Dont see what Edwards would gain out of hiring someone who wasnt good enough. He is head of FSG’s football arm and the last thing he would want is their main footballing asset going to the dogs.

Also thanks to the internet, media, we know more about the remit of the DOF than ever and if Hughes does a shit job, him and Edwards will be told about it.

[Eeyore]

Its a mixed record but Edwards had a mixed record at Spurs as well before he got the gig here. Also surely we are not relying on the likes of Hughes to find players? Thats the role of the scouts and nerd analysts which do all that. We have an amazing bunch of those already at the club.

The Dof role here should surely be about integrating the different departments? Ensuring parity between the backroom and the manager?

Edwards's role at Spurs was as a video analyst. Comolli was the DoF. We have also had a high turnover of staff over the last couple of years. Hughes is bringing staff with him. The ones who didn't do a particularly good job at Bournemouth by the looks of it.

As for integrating the departments that didn't seem to work very well when Parker and the Bournemouth owner had a very public spat about the direction of the Club last season.

[Peabee]

A bit nervous about the manager search. Edwards has a great track record for player recruitment, but identifying the right management isn't the same. Klopp was always going to be perfect for us and you didn't need a team of analysts to wave spreadsheets in your face. The one time they started from scratch and actually had some thinking to do we ended up with Rodgers.

I'm not sure Edwards was involved with Rodgers back then. He was promoted after that period.

[killer-heels]

Edwards's role at Spurs was as a video analyst. Comolli was the DoF. We have also had a high turnover of staff over the last couple of years. Hughes is bringing staff with him. The ones who didn't do a particularly good job at Bournemouth by the looks of it.

As for integrating the departments that didn't seem to work very well when Parker and the Bournemouth owner had a very public spat about the direction of the Club last season.

We might have had a high turnover but a lot have come back and there are still lots who know the club and have proven to have done a good job, such as Fallows, Hunter, Spearman and even Edwards himself. Now if he gets rid of those then it would be a concern but there is no indication yet that it will be the case.

Its wrong to say they didnt do a good job. It was a mixed job but generally the Bournemouth fans are delighted with how their club has been run and performed these past several years.

As for Parker, it goes to my overall point that ultimately for us to be successful every department has to be in sync with one another. How do we know Parker didnt just kick off to have total control?

Football is littered with supposed high profile DoF’s who were deemed to be amazing but have mixed records such as Monchi, Mitchell etc. Even Brighton De Zerbi is questioning the direction of the transfers there.

[Eeyore]

It's doesn't add up that's for sure, and clearly a worry. Allied to a new "head coach" like Slot who has almost certainly ceded full control in the transfer/recruitment department to Hughes (overseen by Edwards), and it's even more of a concern.

For me, if you bring in a "mate" into a job reporting into you, you have to absolutely prove beyond question he's by far the best candidate out there. Otherwise it's cronyism/nepotism. The fact Hughes was appointed immediately AFTER Edwards' return was announced, suggests it was a condition (not the only one you'd imagine but still) of the latter accepting the Football CEO role.

Then Hughes wants to bring Burchill with him as his chief scout. I wonder what the existing staff like Fallows and Hunter think of that. As you say it is a dangerous thing to do.

[Eeyore]

Dont see what Edwards would gain out of hiring someone who wasnt good enough. He is head of FSG’s football arm and the last thing he would want is their main footballing asset going to the dogs.

Also thanks to the internet, media, we know more about the remit of the DOF than ever and if Hughes does a shit job, him and Edwards will be told about it.

If the transfers don't go well I am sure the usual journalists will get briefed regarding it being the fault of the coach not using them properly or that they were really the managers choices after all. 

[Stockholm Syndrome]

And there’s the problem that no one else was trying to hire him, and most people thighht he’d done a poor job at Bournemouth

Weren't Roma trying to hire him

[killer-heels]

If the transfers don't go well I am sure the usual journalists will get briefed regarding it being the fault of the coach not using them properly or that they were really the managers choices after all. 

Yeah but come on, if you know your mate is shit and your asset is going to turn to shit, then your hardly going to be thrilled about it. Edwards carefully crafted his rep through success. If Liverpool turns to shit, his rep will get tainted.

[Eeyore]

Yeah but come on, if you know your mate is shit and your asset is going to turn to shit, then your hardly going to be thrilled about it. Edwards carefully crafted his rep through success. If Liverpool turns to shit, his rep will get tainted.

That isn't really how nepotism and cronyism work though. People aren't usually that good at judging those close to them. People like to work with people who they are familiar with and who they trust implicitly.

[killer-heels]

That isn't really how nepotism and cronyism work though. People aren't usually that good at judging those close to them. People like to work with people who they are familiar with and who they trust implicitly.

Well then ultimately the proof will be in the pudding. Point as i raised above, show me a football director who has an amazing, unblemished record.

By the way i am chief of the ‘It-will-all-go-to-shit-after-Klopp’ fan club. But there are lots of really qualified and proven people at the club and unless there is a massive clearout of the likes of Spearmon, Fallows, Hunter etc. then Hughes should be fine. Also whats clear is that Edwards will also have a say.