🔗 Share this article

Turns out he endured losing against Grimsby. Survive losing a crucial continental showpiece versus one of the worst Tottenham teams for many years. He withstood home defeats to domestic rivals, finishing 15th, his rigid approach, undermining the team's best academy products, the 32% win rate, labeling his team the worst the club has ever seen. But there was a single opponent with whom the Portuguese coach was not permitted to dance. If you challenge the sporting director, you had better succeed.

Regrettably, like many a top-flight defender in Blackburn’s title-winning 1994-95 season, Amorim took on Jason Wilcox and seems to have missed. Even the most casual observer will notice the paradoxical situation: a manager who frequently berated his squad for failing in one-on-one duels crumbling in the face of the white heat and animal charisma of a the Premier League’s most intimidating football executives.

In truth, this whole painful saga seems to paint Jason Wilcox in a different perspective. It may have been easy, given his nine months in a similar role with the Saints, to view Jason Wilcox as merely a functionary within the club's structure: an individual who owed his position as much to his friendship with ex-colleague a fellow executive as any demonstrable skill. How mistaken everyone was. By masterfully outmanoeuvring United’s feted manager, as he outmanoeuvred the unfortunate Dan Ashworth before him, he has proved himself to be among the sport’s strategic masterminds: a strategic mind that United’s competitors will now be justifiably concerned.

The Strategic Conflict Over Formation & Philosophy

To illustrate, it was Jason Wilcox , after having been part of the leadership that appointed the rigid 3-4-3 advocate Amorim in the first place, was instrumental in attempting to convince Amorim to abandon his favored formation. Unsurprisingly, these pleas faced pushback. But perhaps these judgements carry more weight when delivered from the mouth with the impeccable football pedigree he possesses, holder of three England caps and a role in a title-winning side from 31 years ago.

Perhaps in time Jason Wilcox might agree to explain his thought processes publicly. Perhaps at some point he might be asked regarding why the coach is departing with a full payout, without any compensation reduction clause in place. The director speaks rarely publicly, and with very good reason. The real thinkers of this sport – individuals such as Jason Wilcox – simply operate on a plane beyond our own mundane comprehension. If he ever did speak, most likely we would perceive would be ultrasonic blips and complex calculations. Desiring an explanation is not quite the same as being ready to receive.

The Supreme Authority Behind the Throne

But of course, by focusing our attention on Jason Wilcox we are obscuring the real power behind the club's current leadership. The director is, in reality, merely executing the commands of his superior the billionaire owner, who privately has made very clear his preference for a four-man defense. It is reported, the owner has also suggested playing Bryan Mbeumo in a wing-back role. The owner is eager for United to adopt data science and analytics. Per reports, during a leadership summit soon after his minority ownership, he announced that United’s style to football “will be decided by this group”.

Ultimately, Sir Jim is a specialist in this technical football matters, leveraging his previous experience in industry and yachting. Most importantly he remains incredibly rich, and as we all know, the rich are the best of us: more perceptive, sagacious, strategically brilliant, fundamentally superior. Who else would you trust to manage a strategic plan of cost-cutting, the building of a modern arena that appears similar to an abstract design, the signing of Benjamin Sesko?

A New Soccer Hierarchy: Directors Above Coaches

This represents a shift we are increasingly seeing in top-tier football. Historically, clubs foolishly entrusted big footballing decisions to low-level employees like managers, scouts – even footballers. Perhaps it was once possible for a young, innovative manager with ideas and energy to go into a club and see their vision through to completion. But how many companies have such individuals established? What number of mass redundancies have they managed? Far preferable to place genuine authority where it rightly belongs: the leadership tier, the open-necked shirt brigade, the individuals with impressive LinkedIn profiles. Better by far to decide the strategy by the directors and appoint someone who can tailor their offering accordingly. If coaches were formerly chefs, they are now more akin to delivery personnel: not really responsible for the product, yet finally accountable should it be delivered poorly or fails of the box.

In the meantime, a coach's role has become not about defining the vision and more about marketing it: the front-facing representative of the operation, the public face 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 two medium-sized trophies, and essentially is dismissed for talking. A manager at Celtic finds his reputation ruined whereas those individuals who hired him live to blunder another day.

The Neoliberal Game: Responsibility for the Coaches

And perhaps in a small way this is simply corporate governance at work: the elevation of a gilded elite who can never be wrong, whose choices are always sacrosanct, whose errors can invariably be sacked away without justification. Hire the system coach only to dismiss him for using too much 3-4-3. Bring in the project manager and later discard him for requiring too long. And above all show gratitude; for the incremental increases in ticket costs, for the latest player acquisitions, for the fact that the adults – regardless of their expertise – remain in control.