🔗 Share this article

Transpired he endured defeat by lower-league opposition. Survive a decisive European final versus one of the worst Tottenham teams for many years. He could survive home defeats to domestic rivals, a lowly league position, his rigid approach, undermining some of the club’s best homegrown talent, a poor winning percentage, calling the squad the worst in Manchester United history. Yet, there existed a single opponent with whom the Portuguese coach would not be allowed to tango. If you challenge the sporting director, you had better succeed.

Unfortunately, like many a top-flight right-back during Blackburn Rovers' championship 1994-95 season, the coach took on the executive and seems to have missed. The most casual observer can see the paradoxical situation: a coach who often railed his squad for failing in one-on-one duels succumbing in the face of the intense pressure and formidable presence of one of England's top division's most intimidating football executives.

In truth, this whole bruising episode appears to portray the director in a whole new light. Perhaps it might have been tempting, based on his nine months in a similar role with the Saints, to view him as little more than a functionary in the United exoskeleton: an individual who owed his position largely to his friendship with his former boss a fellow executive rather than any verifiable talent. How wrong everyone was. By masterfully outmanoeuvring United’s feted manager, just as he bested the unfortunate Dan Ashworth earlier, Jason Wilcox has proved himself to be among football's true generals: a strategic mind of which the club's competitors are now rightly wary.

The Strategic Conflict Over System and Ideology

To illustrate, it was Jason Wilcox who having been part of the hierarchy that hired the rigid 3-4-3 advocate the coach in the first place, played a key role in trying to persuade him to ditch his favored 3-4-3. Naturally, these entreaties met a certain resistance. But perhaps these judgements hold greater authority when issued by a man with the impeccable soccer background he possesses, a veteran of international appearances and a role in a championship team decades past.

Maybe eventually he may be persuaded to outline his reasoning to the rest of us. Perhaps at some point he might be asked regarding why the coach is departing with full compensation, with no penalty clause in place. The director seldom speaks in public, for excellent reasons. The real thinkers in football – individuals such as Jason Wilcox – simply operate at a level beyond our own mundane comprehension. If he ever did speak, probably we would perceive would be high-frequency signals and complex calculations. Wanting is not quite the same as being ready to comprehend it.

An Ultimate Power In the Throne

Naturally, in training our focus on the sporting director we are obscuring the true genius behind the club's current leadership. Jason Wilcox is, in reality, simply carrying out the directives of his superior the billionaire owner, who privately has made very clear his preference for a back four. It is reported, Ratcliffe has also suggested playing Bryan Mbeumo in a wing-back role. Ratcliffe is keen for the club to embrace data science and analytics. According to ESPN, during a leadership summit early in his minority ownership, he announced that the team's approach of play “shall be decided by this group”.

Ultimately, Sir Jim is an expert in this technical football matters, drawing from his previous experience in petrochemicals and sailing. Above all he remains immensely wealthy, and as we all know, the rich are superior: more insightful, more wise, more tactically astute, simply superior. Whom else could one trust to oversee an enlightened programme of cost-cutting, the building of a modern arena that appears a lot like an abstract design, the acquisition of Benjamin Sesko?

A Modern Soccer Hierarchy: Executives Over Coaches

This is a trend that is becoming prevalent in top-tier football. Historically, teams mistakenly entrusted big footballing decisions to low-level employees such as coaches, scouts – players themselves. Perhaps it was once possible for a young, innovative manager with ideas and energy to go into a club and implement their plan through to completion. Yet how many companies have such individuals established? How many mass redundancies have they managed? Better by far to invest genuine authority where it belongs: the leadership tier, the open-necked shirt brigade, the guys with the jaw-dropping LinkedIn profiles. Better by far to determine the strategy in the boardroom and appoint a coach who will adapt their methods accordingly. If coaches were formerly chefs, they are now more like delivery personnel: not really creating the food, yet finally accountable should it be delivered poorly or leaks out to meet standards.

In the meantime, a coach's role has become not about crafting the philosophy and more about marketing it: the front-facing representative on the front desk, the visible figurehead of an organisation they have minimal power to change. A coach at Chelsea takes a squad of very young players into the Champions League and secures domestic cups, and essentially is dismissed for speaking out. Wilfried Nancy finds his standing damaged whereas the people who appointed him continue to make errors another day.

The Modern Corporate Game: Responsibility for the Coaches

And perhaps in a small way this is simply corporate governance at work: the rise of a gilded elite who are infallible, whose choices are always sacrosanct, whose mistakes can always be resolved by sacking without explanation. Appoint the system coach and then fire them for playing excessively that system. Hire the process guy and later bin him for taking excessive time. And most importantly show gratitude; for the incremental increases in ticket costs, for the latest player acquisitions, for the fact that the adults – regardless of their expertise – are in charge.