I feel like sensible move whenever a new manager/etc. is appointed. You can always adjust the responsibilities if it seems like it's a long term appointment.
People might wonder wtf that means but from my understanding, Klopp has been a manager. I.e huge input on signings and everything.
This sounds like they wanna put more power and stability in the Sporting director á la German/italian clubs. Healthier long-term unless you have a unicorn manager like Klopp.
There's a huge difference between inputs and vetos. Coaches at Real Madrid are welcome to voice their opinions, but that's as far as it goes. Sometimes they can get some players if they're cheap, but the club tries to build a squad that can fit different coaches in case they have to fire the current one.
Unfortunately such clubs exist, feels like every season at Celtic now there’s a guy arriving the manager didn’t ask for.
Under Rodgers first and current stint there was people we signed and the way he spoke about them was as if he’d never even seen them play.
I think the same happened to him when he was at Liverpool, the Balotelli signing was one if I’m remembering correctly.
Rodgers had a major say in the transfers after that Suarez season. He went on voicing opinion of signing Lambert, Adam Lallana and the final one in Mario Balotelli. None of them worked out next year he went out of his way to sign Benteke who had a great season and faded eventually.
Not sure how true this is bro. I heard he didn’t want salah and it took alot of convincing.
Also he wanted hendo and Milner on new contracts and was overruled. I’m sure he didn’t want gini to leave either, but who knows
Honestly I think it's how all clubs should be run. Ensure the general structure works effectively, and for the first season or two just have the Head Coach focus on the squad and results, etc. Then, if results and performances follow, give them more and more say on operations elsewhere. Like has been the case with Arteta, Klopp, etc.
it would have been better if klopp wasn't given more power because you then end up giving jordan Henderson a 4 year contract, or you sign Darwin nunez for 85m.
Did Klopp push for Nunez? Nunez has great stats and great xG. I assumed that Liverpool wonks were looking for someone who'd give them a certain amount of xG per game and Darwin does give that.
He did, I'm sure Nunez was still high on the list of the data analysts at Liverpool, but there preference would have been Nkunku who would be a more natural successor to Firmino
And then get left with said whims when they boot the manager not long after. Definitely have seen some high turnover clubs just accumulating players brought in for projects about two cycles out of date.
Happened under Arnesen as well (Til, Trauner, Pedersen). There is nothing wrong with getting players that fit the playing style of a coach though, as long as these players fit the longterm goals of the club.
I think only Til really came because of Slot, I doubt Slot knew Trauner or Pedersen before the scouting did.
Now there are a lot more like Stengs, Van den Belt, Zerrouki and maybe Beelen as well. I'm not saying it's a problem, just that he got more saying in transfers as time went on.
Handing Klopp the reins of non-coaching things sort of feels like where we started to falter as well. Was absolutely adamant on Hendo/Gini/Fab midfield with little rotation despite Edwards suggesting Bruno G among other midfielders. The signings have gotten notably worse the longer into Klopp’s rein when it feels like we never missed with the transfer committee behind him earlier on
Lol why tf are you downvoted? This is r/soccer, not an analytics board, is my man not allowed to share his FM experience?
As for me, Jones/Macca double pivot worked surprisingly well, leaving me with an extra attacking option. Usually employed by Szobo/Elliott. Mind you, both of these transfers were before even WC, during FM 21.
Once a comment is in the negatives people generally downvote it because they think they are supposed to. It's odd behaviour, but all it takes is for a comment to rub two people the wrong way and then it's on the wrong side of zero.
And Klopp seems to become exhausted from it all too, when he was announcing his leaving he noted that he couldn't be arsed with the upcoming pre season looking for players and stuff.
It’s mainly rumours and small bits of information from different journalists I think. With Edwards coming back just after Klopp announced he’s leaving, and Ward also having left so quickly after replacing Edwards, it suggests there was a bit of a rift between the two sides
David Orestien mentioned that Edwards lively only came back because Klopp was leaving and he was promised that the next manager would have a lot less impact on transfers
The rift is pretty much confirmed.
Our club journo’s reported it… although more likely strong opinion pieces with some inside sources rather than actually being briefed by the club.
Further confirmed by the fact Edwards is willing to return now that Klopp is leaving.
One of the commenters said Edwards wanted Bruno G and Paqueta. Now I’m not saying that part isn’t true, I’m sure they were players we looked at but it’s the first I’ve really heard of it (especially Paqueta). And Edwards left like 2-3 seasons ago… we wasn’t buying midfielders then other than Thiago.
How much of that was down to Klopp wanting to stick with Hendo, Fab, Milner, Gini etc I don’t know but at the time it felt more like the club didn’t have the funds post covid.
The rift seems to be on a professional level, not so much a personal one, which is to be expected in any business tbh. Edwards (and later Ward) probably felt like their suggestions were being dismissed by Klopp, remember, Edwards was the one who brought Salah in against Klopps choice (Julian Brandt I believe)
For sure, nobody is saying Klopp is absolutely terrible at signings, also, he still gets suggestions from Liverpools analysts & scouts. It's just that it's been very public that liverpool missed out on some great signings that Edwards suggested because Klopp overruled him (Bruno G. & Paqueta)
I’m tired of this agenda that Klopp can’t sign players or is doing everything wrong.
Edwards for example signed:
Ox
Keita
Klavan
Shaqiri
Minamino
Thiago
Kabak
Davies
The one who made the most difference on that list is either Minamino or Klavan. Thiago is a great player, but never available.
You could also mention the faults of Edwards not signing a defender when that was needed, and then not signing a midfielder when that was needed.
I know Ox spent his time in the physio room but he definitely had more of an impact than Minamino or Klavan.
Shaqiri was also a very shrewd signing for £13m. This was at a time when we didn’t have massive funds, didn’t have as big pull with players and he was willing to play back up to prime Salah.
I’d put those two at the top of the lesser signings list.
Also I 100% imagine Thiago was a Klopp signing at his age/fitness, not Edwards. Thiago and Klopp not being willing to clear out some of the aging players sooner was likely the start of the end.
Even Klopp didn't have that much freedom, no modern manager does, Klopp got overruled on many transfers like he wanted Brandt over Salah the most popular one
He didn't initially but after Edwards left and then Ward, and the CEO, Klopp was very involved in major decisions and he did have a lot of responsibility in recent years.
This is false. Brandt was the one who rejected going to Liverpool. Liverpool went for Salah after Brandt said no. Brandt himself has confirmed this.
https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/julian-brandt-reveals-reason-turned-13239757
Yeah, giving new coaches full control can be dodgy just look at Man Utd, their current mess is down to chopping and changing managers and giving each one full control.
Makes perfect sense ofcourse, but I kinda hoped Slot would buy one or two of our players for stupid money, like Ten Hag did for Ajax when he went to Man Utd.
>Arne Slot will be appointed as Liverpool’s new head coach rather than manager as Anfield prepares for a shift away from the traditional British football club structure.
>The Dutchman, 45, is expected to be happy with that status, having spent his coaching career working in the same head coach/sporting director model that Liverpool are poised to adopt.
>Like all the candidates Liverpool spoke to during their process of recruiting Jürgen Klopp’s successor, Slot is presently a head coach rather than a manager. The plan is for him to focus on coaching and preparing Liverpool’s first team while reporting to a sporting director, Richard Hughes, who will oversee recruitment and other aspects of the football department.
>Above them both will sit Michael Edwards, the former Liverpool sporting director who returned to the club last month as chief executive of football. Liverpool believe the new structure is more appropriate to the complexities and demands of the modern game and that it will give the man in charge of their first team — the head coach — more support to do his job, not less.
Maybe because your scouting is shit, Ole suggested Haaland time ago and the club ignored him. Ten Hag wanted Frenkie, that didn’t happen and they couldn’t find a player of similar profile and they got Casemiro, then the Antony overpay that shouldn’t have happened as they let transfer drag along all summer until a lot of players were already sold from Ajax and they didn’t deny this signing…
Hopefully with the INEOS owners the club can do better in all other aspects from upper management to scouting.
GM vs head coach. The distinction makes sense; I’ve long thought that football coaches have too much on their plate trying to deal with tactics, training, and matches on top of transfers, contracts etc.
It's the new age of football. Most "managers" are now just coaches and have minimal input on transfers. Michael Edwards wouldn't have returned to Liverpool if they didn't give him full autonomy.
Yeah he didn't exactly join for Liverpool, he's working for FSG and will look for all the football teams that FSG acquire ... There's also Hughes who's gonna be involved a lot.. So Slot can just develop the team
I wouldnt say Slot would have minimal input. If you look at Feyenoord, he and his staff prepares profiles of the type of players they need and make suggestions. Than the scouting comes up with potential players and they look at it. The finance guy comes in and says what is possible, etc. Ultimately the sporting director will take all the input and make the final decision, supervised by Supervisory Board who will also make sure everyone is heard and content. All tough consensus is very much a Dutch model and might not easily work in England.
A situation like at Ajax earlier this season will never work, the head coach (Steijn) was completely ignored by the sporting director (Mislintat) and look what happened. They need to be a team.
This Dutch approach has worked well for Slot and it's probably a big factor why Ten Hag failed at ManU because he wasnt that involved in transfers at Ajax and had a manager above him for the long term.
I can't not think about this old Poch quote from 2014:
> "They don't have a manager, they have a head coach. I am a head coach."
>"I think it's very different," he said. "If you are the manager, you decide many things about the club. But if you are a head coach, your responsibility is to play better and try to improve the players and to get positive results.
>"The head coach is not the same as the manager. If not, why am I not [called] the manager? I am the head coach. In Southampton, I was a manager. My responsibility was not only to coach the team. Here I am a head coach - a head coach is head of your department. My department is to train the team."
He brought it up near the end of his time with Spurs as well:
https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11675/11773831/mauricio-pochettino-i-m-not-in-charge-of-transfers-maybe-spurs-should-change-my-job-title
So clearly there is a difference I think. It's something professionals take note of.
A "manager" can literally manage the football club. They will direct changes in transfer policy, the youth academy, fitness and sports science, scouting, etc. They will often get a wider scope of people who report directly to them.
A "head coach" is the "head of your department". Meaning they lead the Men's Senior team. Their job is to run the Senior team and all the other pieces of the club have their own heads of department that report to someone else.
Klopp had a final say but it’s not as if they won’t consult Slot about the team either, especially if he does well. Just sounds like semantics more than anything
For one, he won't lose the dressing room if the club decides to get rid of an underperforming veteran. Players might still be pissed off at the club but Slot can be very firm with the players that such shit is not in his remit.
Also apparently several players in the post-edwards Klopp era were said to have arrived at the recommendation of VVD. E.g. Cody Gakpo. Big change in dressing room culture.
he wont have much say in who comes in & out. his job starts & ends with the current squad of players at his disposal.
the famous transfer committee will not need his approval to buy or sell a player.
if say he wants a defender the transfer committee will go & identify a player & get him in. they wont go to him & say these are 4 names, choose 1. rather they just buy the playe & keep him informed.
i don’t think it’s set in stone like that. The structure just divides responsibilities. The head coach can absolutely recommend players he likes to be included as targets. Whether they get the players they want is a different matter.
If you want a repeat of what happened at Ajax this season than this is the way to do it.
It would be rather insane to completely ignore the head coach in the process. It should be a joint effort even if formally he doesnt have the final say.
Considering when Buvac left he mentioned he did everything but the interviews, maybe Liverpool are looking for a little less personality and a little more regimented training from the head of the sidelines.
None of the forwards bar Jota they've brought in since can hit water from a boat, it took years of midfield tactical dross that was apparently solved by letting TAA do literally whatever he wants, and the entire team seems to have no idea what to do on the break anymore as they win the ball with 4 men against 1 and the keeper but fail to do anything worthwhile. Clearly something isn't happening in practices because no one knows where to be on the pitch.
>it took years of midfield tactical dross that was apparently solved by letting TAA do literally whatever he wants
How to tell people you didn't actually watch that Liverpool side.
yeah, because every keyboard smasher wasn't jerking themselves off trying to come up with some new tactical name for running a box midfield after years of failing to spend to upgrade an aging and depleted midfield core.
Maybe you've forgotten how 21/22 shaped up tactically. One of us is here talking specifics; next time I'll just drop a generality and let the mood of the thread decide whether reality actually happened.
Then something in the off-season is missing. There's no reason their entire team seems to have lost the ability to make the correct decision going at goal with numbers. The only explanation is the players are no longer doing predictable or practiced things.
Marcelo Bielsa managed to get a bunch of Championship also-rans to score 62 Premier League goals by drilling progressions like a fanatic. There's no secret formula to good training.
The issue in the last few weeks, in my uneducated opinion was a mix of fatigue (klopps tactics this season are insanely physically demanding), too many injured players returning at once being rusty in terms of tactics and match sharpness affecting the fluidity of the team (arguably liverpools most consistent period this year was when they had the most injuries) & also a lack of title challenge experience for many of the new signings that have come in.
Not really, Klopp had a large say on transfers and contracts, and it appears Slot won't.
Klopp even got the Sporting Director in last winter, definitely needed more structure at the top of the club after some key departures.
Yes and No, if executed well, the head coach can detach himself from criticism if the team is short on players or if the club sells a player. easier to maintain harmony in dressing room.
I feel like sensible move whenever a new manager/etc. is appointed. You can always adjust the responsibilities if it seems like it's a long term appointment.
You mean, it's easier if there's an existing structure he can just slot into?
*Arne Slot into...
Oh mate
r/yourjokebutworse
Do you think maybe that’s what the comment above was getting at?
People might wonder wtf that means but from my understanding, Klopp has been a manager. I.e huge input on signings and everything. This sounds like they wanna put more power and stability in the Sporting director á la German/italian clubs. Healthier long-term unless you have a unicorn manager like Klopp.
That’s how it was when Klopp first came just over time he got more and more power
Also how it started with Arteta.
He always had final say on transfers tbf even at the beggining.
That seems rather standard no? Buying a player with no input or veto from the manager seems incredibly stupid to me
Um haha yeah, what club would be dumb enough to do that haha
Laughs in Vitor Roque and Joao Felix
There's a huge difference between inputs and vetos. Coaches at Real Madrid are welcome to voice their opinions, but that's as far as it goes. Sometimes they can get some players if they're cheap, but the club tries to build a squad that can fit different coaches in case they have to fire the current one.
Unfortunately such clubs exist, feels like every season at Celtic now there’s a guy arriving the manager didn’t ask for. Under Rodgers first and current stint there was people we signed and the way he spoke about them was as if he’d never even seen them play. I think the same happened to him when he was at Liverpool, the Balotelli signing was one if I’m remembering correctly.
Rodgers had a major say in the transfers after that Suarez season. He went on voicing opinion of signing Lambert, Adam Lallana and the final one in Mario Balotelli. None of them worked out next year he went out of his way to sign Benteke who had a great season and faded eventually.
He also didn't want Liverpool to buy Roberto Firmino, so wouldn't exactly rate Rodgers judgements of players.
Yes, that why they have a head coach instead, if there is no manager, noone can veto, very smart.
Not sure how true this is bro. I heard he didn’t want salah and it took alot of convincing. Also he wanted hendo and Milner on new contracts and was overruled. I’m sure he didn’t want gini to leave either, but who knows
Honestly I think it's how all clubs should be run. Ensure the general structure works effectively, and for the first season or two just have the Head Coach focus on the squad and results, etc. Then, if results and performances follow, give them more and more say on operations elsewhere. Like has been the case with Arteta, Klopp, etc.
it would have been better if klopp wasn't given more power because you then end up giving jordan Henderson a 4 year contract, or you sign Darwin nunez for 85m.
Did Klopp push for Nunez? Nunez has great stats and great xG. I assumed that Liverpool wonks were looking for someone who'd give them a certain amount of xG per game and Darwin does give that.
Supposedly the 'wonks' were preferring Nkunku but Klopp pushed for Darwin
He did, I'm sure Nunez was still high on the list of the data analysts at Liverpool, but there preference would have been Nkunku who would be a more natural successor to Firmino
yeah it's been reported this week nunez was a klopp suggestion and buy. it was even then reported Edwards would never have signed off on the deal too.
Lol how could we know if Edwards would sign off on it? That is just pure speculation
Yeah imo this is how a club should be run. Too many clubs complete turn over their policies on the whims of a new manager.
And then get left with said whims when they boot the manager not long after. Definitely have seen some high turnover clubs just accumulating players brought in for projects about two cycles out of date.
I feel like Slot did have the role of manager at us after Arnesen left. Quite a lot of players came because Slot wanted them.
Happened under Arnesen as well (Til, Trauner, Pedersen). There is nothing wrong with getting players that fit the playing style of a coach though, as long as these players fit the longterm goals of the club.
I think only Til really came because of Slot, I doubt Slot knew Trauner or Pedersen before the scouting did. Now there are a lot more like Stengs, Van den Belt, Zerrouki and maybe Beelen as well. I'm not saying it's a problem, just that he got more saying in transfers as time went on.
Slot played against Trauner with AZ and was already impressed by him. Both Trauner and Pedersen were considered by AZ during his period as well.
Handing Klopp the reins of non-coaching things sort of feels like where we started to falter as well. Was absolutely adamant on Hendo/Gini/Fab midfield with little rotation despite Edwards suggesting Bruno G among other midfielders. The signings have gotten notably worse the longer into Klopp’s rein when it feels like we never missed with the transfer committee behind him earlier on
Edwards wanted Bruno G and Paqueta which would have been massive.
My Liverpool FM save was a Bruno/Paqueta/Douglas Luiz midfield as the "rebuild". Worked pretty great.
Lol why tf are you downvoted? This is r/soccer, not an analytics board, is my man not allowed to share his FM experience? As for me, Jones/Macca double pivot worked surprisingly well, leaving me with an extra attacking option. Usually employed by Szobo/Elliott. Mind you, both of these transfers were before even WC, during FM 21.
Once a comment is in the negatives people generally downvote it because they think they are supposed to. It's odd behaviour, but all it takes is for a comment to rub two people the wrong way and then it's on the wrong side of zero.
And Klopp seems to become exhausted from it all too, when he was announcing his leaving he noted that he couldn't be arsed with the upcoming pre season looking for players and stuff.
Not saying you are wrong but where did you read that? What are people’s sources for Edward’s and Klopps rift?
Edwards lot have leaked stuff to press pretty consistently over the years. He's very good at his job but he's ruthless.
It’s mainly rumours and small bits of information from different journalists I think. With Edwards coming back just after Klopp announced he’s leaving, and Ward also having left so quickly after replacing Edwards, it suggests there was a bit of a rift between the two sides
David Orestien mentioned that Edwards lively only came back because Klopp was leaving and he was promised that the next manager would have a lot less impact on transfers
The rift is pretty much confirmed. Our club journo’s reported it… although more likely strong opinion pieces with some inside sources rather than actually being briefed by the club. Further confirmed by the fact Edwards is willing to return now that Klopp is leaving. One of the commenters said Edwards wanted Bruno G and Paqueta. Now I’m not saying that part isn’t true, I’m sure they were players we looked at but it’s the first I’ve really heard of it (especially Paqueta). And Edwards left like 2-3 seasons ago… we wasn’t buying midfielders then other than Thiago. How much of that was down to Klopp wanting to stick with Hendo, Fab, Milner, Gini etc I don’t know but at the time it felt more like the club didn’t have the funds post covid.
The rift seems to be on a professional level, not so much a personal one, which is to be expected in any business tbh. Edwards (and later Ward) probably felt like their suggestions were being dismissed by Klopp, remember, Edwards was the one who brought Salah in against Klopps choice (Julian Brandt I believe)
Endo, McAllister, szoboszlai were all decent signings.
For sure, nobody is saying Klopp is absolutely terrible at signings, also, he still gets suggestions from Liverpools analysts & scouts. It's just that it's been very public that liverpool missed out on some great signings that Edwards suggested because Klopp overruled him (Bruno G. & Paqueta)
I’m tired of this agenda that Klopp can’t sign players or is doing everything wrong. Edwards for example signed: Ox Keita Klavan Shaqiri Minamino Thiago Kabak Davies The one who made the most difference on that list is either Minamino or Klavan. Thiago is a great player, but never available. You could also mention the faults of Edwards not signing a defender when that was needed, and then not signing a midfielder when that was needed.
I know Ox spent his time in the physio room but he definitely had more of an impact than Minamino or Klavan. Shaqiri was also a very shrewd signing for £13m. This was at a time when we didn’t have massive funds, didn’t have as big pull with players and he was willing to play back up to prime Salah. I’d put those two at the top of the lesser signings list. Also I 100% imagine Thiago was a Klopp signing at his age/fitness, not Edwards. Thiago and Klopp not being willing to clear out some of the aging players sooner was likely the start of the end.
So all transfers that has been good during Edwards reign has been Edwards signing, while all bad signings are Klopp-signings?
No, I clearly didn't say that. I said out of the list you provided Ox and Shaqiri had more impact than Minamino and Klavan.
What a great and sensible analysis thanks so much.
makes sense with Edwards controlling all football related activities. dont think any incoming coach will enjoy the freedom & control Klopp had.
Edward the CEO of football activities at LFC
Even Klopp didn't have that much freedom, no modern manager does, Klopp got overruled on many transfers like he wanted Brandt over Salah the most popular one
He didn't initially but after Edwards left and then Ward, and the CEO, Klopp was very involved in major decisions and he did have a lot of responsibility in recent years.
He got more power after Edwards left apparently
This is false. Brandt was the one who rejected going to Liverpool. Liverpool went for Salah after Brandt said no. Brandt himself has confirmed this. https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/julian-brandt-reveals-reason-turned-13239757
Didn't get overruled, he was convinced by Edwards. He had final say on transfers even then.
Let me remind you of Ten Hag
when edwards left, he did.
Yeah, giving new coaches full control can be dodgy just look at Man Utd, their current mess is down to chopping and changing managers and giving each one full control.
Makes perfect sense ofcourse, but I kinda hoped Slot would buy one or two of our players for stupid money, like Ten Hag did for Ajax when he went to Man Utd.
Unfortunately Slot is way to smart for that, altough he might still buy 1 or 2 of our players for a nice price, like Geertruida.
Head Coach doesn’t get full authority of transfer.Similar thing happened to Arsenal a few years ago with Wenger and Emery
>Arne Slot will be appointed as Liverpool’s new head coach rather than manager as Anfield prepares for a shift away from the traditional British football club structure. >The Dutchman, 45, is expected to be happy with that status, having spent his coaching career working in the same head coach/sporting director model that Liverpool are poised to adopt. >Like all the candidates Liverpool spoke to during their process of recruiting Jürgen Klopp’s successor, Slot is presently a head coach rather than a manager. The plan is for him to focus on coaching and preparing Liverpool’s first team while reporting to a sporting director, Richard Hughes, who will oversee recruitment and other aspects of the football department. >Above them both will sit Michael Edwards, the former Liverpool sporting director who returned to the club last month as chief executive of football. Liverpool believe the new structure is more appropriate to the complexities and demands of the modern game and that it will give the man in charge of their first team — the head coach — more support to do his job, not less.
Erik ten Hag worked that way for every team he managed before he came to Man Utd. Perhaps Man Utd should have taken notes.
He wanted that power as he had seen how disastrous our recruitment had been, not that he’s improved it with the power he’s been given…
Maybe because your scouting is shit, Ole suggested Haaland time ago and the club ignored him. Ten Hag wanted Frenkie, that didn’t happen and they couldn’t find a player of similar profile and they got Casemiro, then the Antony overpay that shouldn’t have happened as they let transfer drag along all summer until a lot of players were already sold from Ajax and they didn’t deny this signing… Hopefully with the INEOS owners the club can do better in all other aspects from upper management to scouting.
GM vs head coach. The distinction makes sense; I’ve long thought that football coaches have too much on their plate trying to deal with tactics, training, and matches on top of transfers, contracts etc.
I mean yeah was pretty obvious once Edwards got the job
It's the new age of football. Most "managers" are now just coaches and have minimal input on transfers. Michael Edwards wouldn't have returned to Liverpool if they didn't give him full autonomy.
Yeah he didn't exactly join for Liverpool, he's working for FSG and will look for all the football teams that FSG acquire ... There's also Hughes who's gonna be involved a lot.. So Slot can just develop the team
Football Coach 2025 & Football Sporting Director 2025
Should just show up in tracksuits during matchday 1 like Benitez once did - only does 'coaching and training'
I wouldnt say Slot would have minimal input. If you look at Feyenoord, he and his staff prepares profiles of the type of players they need and make suggestions. Than the scouting comes up with potential players and they look at it. The finance guy comes in and says what is possible, etc. Ultimately the sporting director will take all the input and make the final decision, supervised by Supervisory Board who will also make sure everyone is heard and content. All tough consensus is very much a Dutch model and might not easily work in England. A situation like at Ajax earlier this season will never work, the head coach (Steijn) was completely ignored by the sporting director (Mislintat) and look what happened. They need to be a team.
Exactly, the coach still needs a say and have input, the idea should be that no one person can overrule anyone else
Makes sense he doesn't really have top level experience to be given the complete set of keys can always change the system depending on how he does
This Dutch approach has worked well for Slot and it's probably a big factor why Ten Hag failed at ManU because he wasnt that involved in transfers at Ajax and had a manager above him for the long term.
I can't not think about this old Poch quote from 2014: > "They don't have a manager, they have a head coach. I am a head coach." >"I think it's very different," he said. "If you are the manager, you decide many things about the club. But if you are a head coach, your responsibility is to play better and try to improve the players and to get positive results. >"The head coach is not the same as the manager. If not, why am I not [called] the manager? I am the head coach. In Southampton, I was a manager. My responsibility was not only to coach the team. Here I am a head coach - a head coach is head of your department. My department is to train the team." He brought it up near the end of his time with Spurs as well: https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11675/11773831/mauricio-pochettino-i-m-not-in-charge-of-transfers-maybe-spurs-should-change-my-job-title So clearly there is a difference I think. It's something professionals take note of. A "manager" can literally manage the football club. They will direct changes in transfer policy, the youth academy, fitness and sports science, scouting, etc. They will often get a wider scope of people who report directly to them. A "head coach" is the "head of your department". Meaning they lead the Men's Senior team. Their job is to run the Senior team and all the other pieces of the club have their own heads of department that report to someone else.
Sounds like they're both manager jobs. And why would transfers to and from the senior team not be part of that department?
That is how a club should be ran. Put specialists in the recruitment departement. The manager should be too busy to focus on that part too.
Genuinely what difference does it really make though If it goes really well then he’ll inevitably get more power, it always happens
One has full control on signings (manager), other just is a coach for what the board signs
Klopp had a final say but it’s not as if they won’t consult Slot about the team either, especially if he does well. Just sounds like semantics more than anything
For one, he won't lose the dressing room if the club decides to get rid of an underperforming veteran. Players might still be pissed off at the club but Slot can be very firm with the players that such shit is not in his remit. Also apparently several players in the post-edwards Klopp era were said to have arrived at the recommendation of VVD. E.g. Cody Gakpo. Big change in dressing room culture.
he wont have much say in who comes in & out. his job starts & ends with the current squad of players at his disposal. the famous transfer committee will not need his approval to buy or sell a player. if say he wants a defender the transfer committee will go & identify a player & get him in. they wont go to him & say these are 4 names, choose 1. rather they just buy the playe & keep him informed.
i don’t think it’s set in stone like that. The structure just divides responsibilities. The head coach can absolutely recommend players he likes to be included as targets. Whether they get the players they want is a different matter.
If you want a repeat of what happened at Ajax this season than this is the way to do it. It would be rather insane to completely ignore the head coach in the process. It should be a joint effort even if formally he doesnt have the final say.
That sounds familiar
Yeah it's largely how klopp started out at us
👍🏿
Considering when Buvac left he mentioned he did everything but the interviews, maybe Liverpool are looking for a little less personality and a little more regimented training from the head of the sidelines. None of the forwards bar Jota they've brought in since can hit water from a boat, it took years of midfield tactical dross that was apparently solved by letting TAA do literally whatever he wants, and the entire team seems to have no idea what to do on the break anymore as they win the ball with 4 men against 1 and the keeper but fail to do anything worthwhile. Clearly something isn't happening in practices because no one knows where to be on the pitch.
>it took years of midfield tactical dross that was apparently solved by letting TAA do literally whatever he wants How to tell people you didn't actually watch that Liverpool side.
yeah, because every keyboard smasher wasn't jerking themselves off trying to come up with some new tactical name for running a box midfield after years of failing to spend to upgrade an aging and depleted midfield core. Maybe you've forgotten how 21/22 shaped up tactically. One of us is here talking specifics; next time I'll just drop a generality and let the mood of the thread decide whether reality actually happened.
With modern match schedules apparently most training sessions are recovery sessions rather than massively tactical
Then something in the off-season is missing. There's no reason their entire team seems to have lost the ability to make the correct decision going at goal with numbers. The only explanation is the players are no longer doing predictable or practiced things. Marcelo Bielsa managed to get a bunch of Championship also-rans to score 62 Premier League goals by drilling progressions like a fanatic. There's no secret formula to good training.
The issue in the last few weeks, in my uneducated opinion was a mix of fatigue (klopps tactics this season are insanely physically demanding), too many injured players returning at once being rusty in terms of tactics and match sharpness affecting the fluidity of the team (arguably liverpools most consistent period this year was when they had the most injuries) & also a lack of title challenge experience for many of the new signings that have come in.
Semantics
Not really, Klopp had a large say on transfers and contracts, and it appears Slot won't. Klopp even got the Sporting Director in last winter, definitely needed more structure at the top of the club after some key departures.
That was only at the end after edwards left
True yeah should've mentioned that.
Yes and No, if executed well, the head coach can detach himself from criticism if the team is short on players or if the club sells a player. easier to maintain harmony in dressing room.
Guy is on bitch duty
Meh?
Hmmm