First off, as I've said on here many times I am a fan of this role.
However...
I did get to thinking about why this Rangers board are willing to pay 2 big wages to 2 different men.
I think that Rangers are sick of paying compensation to sacked managers. I have a feeling that Rangers might appoint a fairly high profile DoF (McLeish?) in order to allow them to appoint a very cheap option as a manager. They possibly figure that the high profile DoF will placate the fans while a disposable manager is brought in who can easily be sacked on the cheap at any time, a fall guy if you will. If things go bad, the fans demand a head, the manager is sacked for peanuts and the more expensive DoF keeps his job.
What do you think? Would Rangers fans accept a cheap option as a manager as long as a big name DoF is installed? Celtic tried it with Dalglish/Barnes back in the day.
Rangers Director of Football
posted on 14/2/17
After all the scandal with Allardyce down south and his inside info in how managers make money from transfers, I wouldnt be surprised if that was the deal that Warburton and McParland were trying out at Rangers, bring low cost players with potential sell them on and get a cut!
Big Flaw they have to be successful in the SPL, which the Rangers team aint!
posted on 14/2/17
comment by Oh Mickey, you're so fine You're so fine you blow my mind, hey Mickey, Hey Mickey… (U20769)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by rats juice ra honkin tims natno (U6393)
posted 52 seconds ago
It's a very cynical view Mick.
Surely it makes sense to have someone there who has the job of keeping continuity as part of the structure of the club? These days managers come and go. I'm quite comfortable with the DoF idea.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I couldn't agree more
As I say, I like the DoF role, I think it's the best way forward. I just don't trust this Rangers board to do the best thing for the club without any interior motive.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I do see your point, but ultimately it suits everyone at Rangers to have a stable club. Us bluenoses just wish for the day that the chaos calms down a wee bit! Hopefully a DoF can bring some level of stability, at least throughout the club's football. Whatever happens next in the business side of the club is anyone's guess.
posted on 14/2/17
King needs bums on seats... His appointment will be staunch and they'll loyaly follow follow
posted on 14/2/17
comment by rats juice ra honkin tims natno (U6393)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by My POV-2 for 2 in name change bets against lauders (U10636)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Oh Mickey, you're so fine You're so fine you blow my mind, hey Mickey, Hey Mickey… (U20769)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by rats juice ra honkin tims natno (U6393)
posted 52 seconds ago
It's a very cynical view Mick.
Surely it makes sense to have someone there who has the job of keeping continuity as part of the structure of the club? These days managers come and go. I'm quite comfortable with the DoF idea.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I couldn't agree more
As I say, I like the DoF role, I think it's the best way forward. I just don't trust this Rangers board to do the best thing for the club without any interior motive.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ulterior?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exterior?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
<musical note> I'll be loving you internally....
posted on 15/2/17
You dont need a DoF, you just need an interested chairman. Minty Moonbeam, for all his faults, at least watched every game, he saw the team and did what he could to support the managers he employed.
Huw Jenkins at Swansea has the vision, he has had great success at Swansea by trying to employ young managers to set out teams the way he wants them to play.
Dave King is noticeable by his absence.
posted on 15/2/17
No offence but the dof role doesn't work in football. Never has.
posted on 15/2/17
DOF is just a glorified recruitment manager in charge of sourcing and recruiting signings. He might also be given responsibility for contract negotiations with current players.
Works for some clubs.....not for others.
DK seems to think they need one.....it's his money he's frittering away
posted on 15/2/17
Comment Deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 15/2/17
The DOF role seems to work best where it's not a traditional football man that's in the role. Like an ex-manager, etc.
I said last night-won't matter what road they go down, they'll muck it up anyway.
posted on 15/2/17
I think it can work right if the roles are clearly defined.
If your DoF is there to ensure continuity, ie type of trainer (because he`ll no longer be the manager), style of play and player recruitment, then it could work.
The problem is usually the trainer coming to terms with the restrictions.