Mitchell’s influence was felt in a number of different areas during his one-year spell on Tyneside – his appointment of James Bunce as performance manager helped improve Newcastle’s injury record markedly last season, he ensured the Magpies did not foul fall of PSR regulations when they were sailing very close to the wind, he made key structural changes that have significantly strengthened the women’s team – but given that Darren Eales described recruitment as “90 per cent” of his remit, his time at the helm was more notable for what did not happen than what did.
So, with that in mind, it is tempting to assume that his departure will not affect things at St James’ Park. After all, the sporting director role has been something of a revolving door in the last couple of years, with Dan Ashworth’s equally-brief reign proving every bit as unremarkable. Newcastle functioned effectively enough prior to Ashworth’s arrival. Why can they not do so again?
The internal messaging from within St James’ is that it is very much business as usual in the wake of Mitchell’s exit, even though Eales is coming to the end of his own spell as chief executive after announcing his intention to stand down after being diagnosed with a chronic form of blood cancer. Eddie Howe is leading the recruitment process, assisted by his nephew, Andy, and head of recruitment Steve Nickson, with Eales continuing to play a prominent role while Newcastle’s ownership group search for a replacement.
It has been a frustrating start to the transfer window, with Newcastle failing in attempts to sign Bryan Mbeumo and Joao Pedro, admitting defeat after yet another pursuit of Marc Guehi and having to increase their initial offers for James Trafford and Anthony Elanga when they were previously adamant they would not be drawn into a bidding war.
However, sources insist it would be unfair to attribute the club’s transfer travails to the absence of a functioning sporting director. Mitchell had already begun to hand over his duties by the time Newcastle started bidding for players last month, but the internal messaging is that the Magpies missed out on Mbeumo and Pedro because PSR constraints continue to mean they cannot compete with Chelsea and Manchester United in an open market for transfer fees and wages, not because their recruitment operation is malfunctioning.
**READ MORE**:
There is merit to that argument. But that does not mean Newcastle can successfully negotiate the rest of the summer, and conduct the kind of strategic long-term planning and development work that is needed if they are to close the current financial gap separating them from the Premier League’s biggest clubs, without a world-class sporting director leading the way.
Howe has many strengths, but once pre-season is under way in another week or so, it is realistic to expect him to lead the recruitment process while also carrying out all his other duties as head coach? Would it be desirable for him to do so?
Yes, Howe needs to have a major say over who is bought and who is sold. But the idea of a head coach being in charge of recruitment, assisted by his nephew, all feels very 1980s in the lower-leagues. Compare and contrast to Brighton or Brentford, and the forensic data-driven models they have utilised to such lucrative effect in the transfer market in recent years, and Newcastle hardly look cutting edge. That’s not to say that the Magpies are not using analytics to assist in their transfer approach, but their current model feels archaic when posited against what some of their rivals are doing.
Things happen slowly at Newcastle anyway given the PIF’s procedural approach to signing off any major investment decisions. So far this summer, it feels as though the club have been glacial when it comes to reacting to rapidly-changing situations in the transfer market. Surely the presence of an experienced, well-connected sporting director would help deliver some of the “dynamism” that Howe was calling out for before the start of the summer, but that has been impossible to discern so far.
Clearly, after the disappointments of both Ashworth and Mitchell, Newcastle have to get their next appointment right. Mitchell was a disruptive presence in the early days of his tenure last summer – although some would claim he was merely trying to make necessary changes that were being resisted elsewhere – so perhaps the hierarchy think it would be better to see out the current transfer window before turning things upside down again.
If that is their thinking, it feels short-sighted. All organisations are ultimately led from the top, and at the moment, Newcastle’s two key executive-level positions are either vacant or filled by someone who is trying to leave. That is not a sustainable position in either the short or long term.