Quote Originally Posted by blue lewj View Post
I would say we need a director of football because I don't think the people we have there at the moment know what is required or have the knowledge to deliver it. We shall see in time but just throwing kids in is not evidence of a great academy.

You've said yourself you would like a more progressive style and that won't happen under Mick. Surely it makes sense then that continuing with Mick and giving him money to carry this on is just wasted time and money?

We will have to disagree on the Wintle deal too. Signing a player and loaning him to a club where he is playing better than our current midfield is good business? I'm not sure I understand what a good and clever bit of business is if actively strengthening a Championship rival and continuing with our toothless midfield is an example of it.
People also talk of the inflated wages like they are something a previous owner and board gave out. These wages were discussed and signed off by the same people we will be letting spend money going forward. If people can't see any issue with that then I can't really paint it any more clearly.
I think everyone is aware we've made mistakes, but we do seem to be doing things differently for the time being at least.
A director of football might improve things, or if we appoint the wrong one could be a disaster. Christ there were even people on here hoping that Warnock would be "moved upstairs" not too long ago.
There are many different kinds of footballing directors, with completely different remits - what's important is someone is looking out for the longer term interests of the club in footbll terms, rather than the manager who will understandably always be short term thinking due to the precarious nature of their job.
MM being seemingly overruled on Marley Watkins would seem to suggest an element of that is already happening.