Feyenoord's Failed Transfer Window: Leadership Critique

Feyenoord’s summer window was not just a missed opportunity. According to two prominent Dutch journalists, it was a fundamental failure of leadership.

On the De Telegraaf podcast Kick-Off, Mike Verweij and Valentijn Driessen tore into Feyenoord’s hierarchy, with technical director Dévy Rigaux and general director Robert Eenhoorn squarely in the firing line.

“They had the money. They didn’t use it.”

Verweij began by pointing at what he sees as a glaring contradiction in Rigaux’s stance.

“Rigaux has taken a huge swipe at his predecessor Te Kloese,” he said as the conversation turned to Feyenoord. “But now it turns out that Te Kloese, with the money for Hadj Moussa included, had 40 million.”

Then came the numbers that, in Verweij’s eyes, expose Feyenoord’s mismanagement of the market.

“There was a bid of 25 million for Ueda, who was sold far too cheaply to Lille OSC. And Read could almost have risen to 35 million. And Hull City bid 20 million for Targhalline.”

Add it up and the picture is stark. Feyenoord, he argued, sat on a potential windfall and let it slip.

“If they had simply done their job and sold the right players, Feyenoord would for the time being have had a great deal of financial resources,” Verweij continued. “That same Te Kloese put together a squad there that was worth around €120 million. So I think Rigaux and Eenhoorn did something wrong in this transfer window. If they had sold Read immediately, they could have been much more effective in the transfer market.”

In other words: the money was there. The decisiveness was not.

The shadow of the Friends of Feyenoord

Driessen then shifted the discussion from the pitch to the boardroom and the powerful group behind the scenes: the Friends of Feyenoord.

“It all comes back to the Friends of Feyenoord again,” he said. “They have 49 per cent of the shares. And the moment Feyenoord pay €17.5 million, they lose 25 per cent. And in two years’ time, again.”

The structure is complex, but the consequence is simple. Successful transfer business can trigger obligations towards the Friends.

“Feyenoord are also obliged to buy part of the shares if they post a positive transfer balance in a transfer window. And they certainly would have done that if one of those transfers had gone through. Then that transfer balance would have been so high that they would have been obliged to buy part of the Friends’ purchases.”

The suggestion is clear: a big profit on outgoing transfers does not just strengthen the squad budget, it also activates financial commitments to the Friends of Feyenoord. That, Driessen argued, shaped the club’s behaviour.

“Eenhoorn is their man”

Driessen then went a step further, making a pointed accusation about where power really lies and how it affects decision-making.

“The Friends of Feyenoord do not want out,” he stated. “And Eenhoorn came in at the request of the Friends. He is their favourite, and became director. So he is not going to go against those Friends.”

In that light, Driessen framed the failed move of Hadj Moussa to Al-Ittihad as more than a routine transfer collapse.

“Eenhoorn allowed himself to be influenced into not letting the Hadj Moussa transfer go through,” he said of Feyenoord’s technical director.

The official explanation had been a rejected bank guarantee. Driessen dismissed that as the decisive factor.

“It concerns a €40 million transfer. It concerns Saudi Arabia, just ask Ajax. They have always had the money and are solvent.”

For him, the story lies elsewhere: in reluctance, delay, and a lack of will to close the deal.

“Feyenoord were also hardly reachable by phone, it was very difficult to get in touch with them. It was dragged out for a very long time, and in the end the medical could no longer take place.”

Then came his most cutting line.

“Robert Eenhoorn is simply an extension of the Friends of Feyenoord. He is their mate. The moment someone puts you forward and you can serve their interests, that happens nine times out of 10. He has previously made it known that he is not exactly eager to buy out the Friends. And then you remain stuck with those Friends.”

The criticism is brutal and unambiguous: Feyenoord, in their eyes, have allowed internal power dynamics and shareholder interests to override sporting logic and transfer-market opportunity.

The squad that Arne Slot once saw built towards a €120 million valuation now sits at the centre of a different debate. Not about talent or trophies, but about who really calls the shots at De Kuip – and what that will cost Feyenoord in the seasons to come.