Rousseau

It sounds a bit short-termist to me. Of course, the best time was 2012 but we wasted that be being owned/run be wasters. Southampton are just the nearest successful example; they implemented their model when they reached their lowest ebb, and it helped get them back up. There are many teams that have a demand for success that have implemented this model, like Bayern, Ajax and Barcelona; and it's not mutually exclusive with winning. We can get a coach in that can get us winning, but we can also implement a DoF model. To me, it sounds like you want to buy success now and then implement a DoF structure, which sounds counter-intuitive to me. How can we ever expect the youth set-up to work if we don't have the structure in place? Surely, we need to get the structure implemented as soon as possible to give us the best possible chance of success in the long-term? Even if we get a new manager in that gets us winning, we'll be successful only in the short-term. Eventually he'll leave or get sacked and we'll need to rebuild the squad again. All the while trying to pounce on any Champions League crumbs. I don't believe that is sustainable. We are some of the most impatient fans in the world but we just need to deal with it; for I believe if we can get the right structure in place we'll be in a much better place long-term so these cyclical crises are mitigated as much as possible. We're already going through a turbulent time, what's a little bit more turbulence?

Brilliant read! Thanks! I find it fascinating how full-backs are used -- predominantly as wingers nowadays -- and their development. I think we all have a fixed perception of a certain position, but in truth it evolves with time. Also interesting to see that Guardiola has essentially used a formation (MW - 3-2-2-3) first used over 60 years prior!

Dougie Freedman... [tweet]834015248692740096[/tweet]

I was thinking about Chelsea's less ideal model. They have a DoF who has singed for them the best young talent in Europe -- Lukaku, Courtois, De Bruyne etc. and loaned them out -- it's just that they've signed managers that don't fit with that model. So, Mourinho, who is a manager in the traditional sense, didn't like those players for whatever reason. If they had signed a coach that fit into that model they'd have an outstanding squad of young talent. If those players (Lukaku, De Bruyne etc.) had been part of say, Southampton's model, they would've been given a pathway into the first-team and would be first-team players -- before being sold on for mega-bucks!

Oh, please no...

I don't think it matters what the guy's age is. All that matters is that he can implement a club-wide philosophy and scouting network. The coach needs to fit into it. (Southampton's scouting network is incredibly technical so I can't see an older guy being able to implement it.)

I think the building blocks are in place. For me, a DoF is responsible for the overall club philosophy, playing style, scouting network/system and acquisition of the type of players that suit our way of playing etc. Like at Southampton, they have a distinct playing philosophy throughout the club, from youth to first-team, and all players are scouted to fit into that system. I think too many of us are thinking that because MW is gone that we need to start again. That is precisely the type of thing we need to avoid. MW has started to implement a club-wide philosophy and this should be continued. We now need a new manager/head coach that will be able to fit into it. Southampton, because they have a DoF and a club-wide philosphy, can target managers that cause little disruption -- Pochetino, Koeman and Puel were all chosen because they fit into the club's -- and DoF's -- philosophy; how many thought Pochetino was a ridiculous appointment at the time? It really wasn't because he was a coach that fit into their system. Ideally, we'd want a DoF in first to 'direct' the club philosophy. In essence MW was doing most of it himself. A DoF would not interfere with team-affairs, otherwise he's not doing his job. He would be responsible for the players brought in, though. If the coach said he needed a left-back, the DoF would draw up a list -- ideally the list would already be there because they'd have a detailed scouting network of all positions and players with attributes that would fit into our club philosophy and price range -- and present that list to the coach, who would have a final say and choose the left-back he would want. We can't have a manager choosing any old left-back. The left-back would need to possess certain attributes that means he can fit into our philosophy, so any future manager can use him.

When you get excited about possible names like Pako Ayestaran, Gary Rowatt and Frank de Boer only to see the next name is Alan Irvine...

It's an interesting question. If you are talking first-team, then very few. Perhaps, Foderingham, Wallace, Wilson, McKay, and maybe Garner -- depending on how he fits in. (And Hyndman but he'll be away.) If you are talking squad, then I'd keep most. Even the much-maligned Halliday and Tavernier are 'decent' players that can be good squad players. A good coach can elevate the current squad, so in that regard I don't think it's a total rebuild. It's certainly clear we need upgrades all over the park, but I don't think that necessarily means a complete re-build; merely better quality additions -- perhaps a few!

I agree we were crap and I'm looking forward to seeing where we go, but I think we had a settled way of playing that was semi-successful. We just needed better players, and MW failed to add to the group over the last few windows. I don't think we require a total rebuild. He has started the build. It is for another to continue it.

I don't think hunger and desire get you that far, although it maybe looks better. Aberdeen were awful today; Simple, percentage football with plenty of desire and hunger but it's not enough. Where does that get them? 2nd at a push. When they come up against a half-decent side in Europe they get rolled over. I certainly expect a level of hunger and desire but I want more. I want a side that can actually play.

I lost count how many times I had my face in my hands after seeing too many players failing to take responsibility for loose balls and failing to control balls after more than one attempt. We spend too much time trying to get a ball under control than actually using it! This was always going to be a tricky game. We have a group of players used to playing a certain way -- successfully or not -- and it's not really logical to expect them to be excellent at Murty's system -- which I don't think he knows what it is. We can and were playing a lot better than that, though. LOL at Dundee celebrating like they've won the league. Percentage football won the day. Typical Scotland.

It has been clear for months that we need an upgrade all over the park, but at least we had way of playing with MW; I don't know what we are doing here? We can't expect a team of players not known for their physical acumen to suddenly be physical; that wasn't what we were about -- although I do expect the basic physical ability in any professional. We need a manager/coach in ASAP that can build on what MW started.

Who would you like to see. Your negativity would be easier to take if we had a little glimpse of your ideal option. Did you not have Conte and Chelsea written off after 4 games?

That's a bit extreme. He's a decent player, just not suited to DM.

Actually, Halliday at LM/LWB could be quite a good move, allowing us to use his work-rate and pace while keeping him as far away from the centre of the pitch as possible!

While initially surprised, I'm starting to think again about Muscat. I had no idea he had such a bad reputation as a player? He was recently named dirtiest ever player in a Spanish paper and had to pay out a few fines in his time for some bad tackles. I like the sound of him. He's thought of very highly in Australia -- winning a domestic double in his first season, his team scoring more goals than anyone else by some distance -- and an interesting tactical coach, apparently. I read that he had "studied Brendan Rodgers at close quarters during a tour of Europe where he went to various training grounds to watch the most forward-thinking and innovative coaches at work" -- not sure what to think of that?! He says, "'My thirst for knowledge is great. I went over to spend time with Brendan Rodgers, Frank de Boer at Ajax and Barcelona to gather knowledge and try and create my own philosophy. 'I won't shy away from my team being competitive, ultimately football is a contest, but I place high importance on possession. Using the ball wisely is the key but we like to attack quickly, a lot of goals are created in transition in the modern game. 'I was lucky enough to work with Terry Venables with the Australian national team. He was ahead of his time, how he structured the team and his man-management. It is one thing to have a great philosophy but to get the players to apply it, that is the hardest thing." Now, his Melbourne Victory team have "gained a reputation as standard-bearers for Australia's emerging football market. They play attractive, bright football." You can argue that the Australian league is of a poor standard, but they look to have better players than us! Muscat sounds like a really interesting option; young, has a distinct philosophy and appears to want to better himself -- he shouldn't cost too much, surely? I suppose though it depends how much of a backwater the league is, and if he can make the change.

I see Garry Monk is being linked. Perhaps a little far fetched, but I'd take Monk; he doesn't have the European experience but is a good, pragmatic and tactical manager (in the BR image...). Do/did Swansea have a DoF? Another tick if so.

While I liked the two up top, I hope Murty doesn't continue with the 4-4-2 -- we were far too open!

I wonder if we would have the patience for a FdB: very much in the same vein as MW's much lamented "do plan A better" approach. I believe he's a better quality coach, however, and instead of being an imitation of the Dutch school, he really is from the Dutch school of football.

Just seen on SSN that former Valencia manager Pako Ayestarán "would be interested in the job" according to Jim White.

Posted this elsewhere but it's probably better here: What about the Huddersfield manager? David Wagner has brought a modern, German pressing game to Huddersfield and has them sitting 3rd or 4th in the Championship. Huddersfield was his first real job but he learned his trade at Borussia Dortmund II. Nagelsmann at Hoffenheim brought fresh ideas, despite only being in his 20's and is now considered one of the best young coaches in the game. We need to show a bit of faith in a younger manager with modern ideas -- it is the only way we can move into the modern football age.

I agree with SBS, but I think gunslinger has brought balance to that thought. McLeish did "well" with us, but football has changed so that being well-organised and allowing your better players to produce a bit of magic is long gone. It can't be coincidence that he's done nothing of note since leaving us? Times have changed. We need to show more ambition. To be fair, I think that's the thinking of the board. According to SSN they are considering changing the football structure, to include a DoF, something that was discussed 2 seasons ago. I hope it proves that harking back to a previous age is not the answer. What about the Huddersfield manager? Wagner has brought a modern, german pressing game to Huddersfield and has them sitting 3rd or 4th in the Championship. Huddersfield was his first real job but he learned his trade at Borussia Dortmund II. Nagelsmann at Hoffenheim brought fresh ideas, despite only being in his 20's and is now considered one of the best young coaches in the game. We need to show a bit of faith in a younger manager with modern ideas -- it is the only way we can move into the modern football age.

tbf I was going to add it was more like 4-2-4 at times. I think 4-4-2 is the basic shape, it was just that neither McKay nor MOH tracked back.

It sounds like your describing a 4-4-2. Tavernier was just occupying the half-space.