We Don't Need A Director Of Football

[BCFC_Dan]

I've been thinking about the managerial situation at the moment. Clearly things aren't quite right and can't be allowed to carry on as they are. McInnes doesn't have a great record and he's not showing too many signs of being able to turn it round.

Often at times like this the call goes out for a Director of Football to help the struggling manager out. However in this instance I don't believe we need one. I think McInnes would make a good Director of Football and that we need a new Head Coach.

On the continent where the Director of Football role is more popular, the purpose of the job is to provide a continuous strategy for the club at a high level, overseeing football at all levels and deciding which players to sign and release. The Head Coach is then responsible for using these players on a week to week basis, developing them, selecting the right ones for a match and choosing the tactics for them to play. If the team goes on a poor run of form, the Head Coach can be fired without affecting the Director of Football and the long term strategy of the club.

Now, think about the arguments against sacking McInnes:

- He's signed a number of decent players (and arguably a couple of duds but everyone makes the odd mistake. He's in credit overall)

- He's done a lot of work overhauling the structure behind the scenes and appointed people to work with the Academy etc. Time will tell how well he's done this but it doesn't make sense to rip it up just yet.

- Changing the manager would just mean more upheaval and another manager bringing in his own players

And think about what he's weak at:

- Team selection - seems erratic and with little consideration for the opposition

- Organisation - the players look like they've never met each other let alone trained together

- Motivation - gone are the days of players throwing their bodies on the line. Now they let the opposition walk past them at will.

These latter responsibilities are ones which would be handled by a Head Coach. Somebody who can organise a solid back 4, help them improve themselves and motivate them to play above themselves.

Arguably they are responsibilities that McInnes and Doherty should be taking and if they can't they should go, and there's every chance that McInnes would rather walk than be moved upstairs, but to my mind appointing a Head Coach would move McInnes into a role that concentrates on areas he's done reasonably well at and away from those he hasn't.

It's a thought, anyway.

[REDOXO]

Reshaping the backroom seems to be a theme that is put forward to support the manager. I am not sure it stans up to much scrutiny myself

He replaced very loyal City men completely it seems with guys from the outside.

You said yourself the players are demotivated and let players run past them and the team selection is eratic in your very eloquent post, however the back room must take its share of the blame of the failure here throughout the first team and as such I see nothing to make me think that has made any positive difference!!

But hey if some one can elucidate please do?

[rockinredrobin]

i disagree a bit because we dont have anybody on the Board that I trust to make the right footballing appointment if we do sack DM

In addition to your list of DM's 'faults' can we add :

Having Baldock ( £1.2m) and Davies ( top scorer ) on the bench whilst starting with an Ex Rotherham free signing Ryan Taylor - this is no disrespect to Ryan but shows that Derek signed these strikers but now doesnt think they are any better than a striker already at the club

dont even get me started on why he signed Jodi Morris and Paul Anderson because already this season he's played strikers ( Stead and Davies ) out of position in wide left midfield roles rather than play Anderson

Like many inexperienced managers he tinkers a lot trying to find the right blend and also when he gets a result ( eg Boro away ) he is too frightened to change the formation so plays it again come what may ( and what came was two defeats )

[BCFC_Dan]

The arguments against are valid, though I maintain that his signings have, in the main, been good. Off the top of my head I'd put Cunningham, Heaton, McManus, Bikey, Baldock, Danns and Davies in the positive column and most of the others have been adequate.

The fact that he now seems unable to use these signings effectively is not a sign of failure in identifying and signing them. Though the fact we have numerous attacking players and a severe weakness in defence is, we have to consider circumstances which may have prevented signing defensive players (we know for instance that he tried to sign several central defenders.)

Detractors of McInnes seem to think we still have a poor squad. I disagree. It's a lot stronger than the squad which Gary Johnson took to the playoff final. However, Johnson knew how to organise and motivate a team into playing better than it should be able to. McInnes seems unable to do this and this is the problem.

I don't want McInnes to go because I don't want all the work he's done to be in vain and to have to start again with another manager. Maybe his backroom team would stay but they followed him here so why wouldn't they follow him out again? Especially if they see that the club offered their man a 3 year contract then booted him out as soon as things went wrong.