Same
@Walrus, your assessment of Pep's character is so wide of the mark it suggests bias or just plain ignorance
Meltdowns and a lack of challenges, its cringeworthy
Pep Guardiola at City next?
- Thread starter .Rossi
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Same
@Walrus, your assessment of Pep's character is so wide of the mark it suggests bias or just plain ignorance
Meltdowns and a lack of challenges, its cringeworthy
I don't think any is saying its a risk free appointment. There always an element of risk. However, he is by far and away the best possible candidate.
I haven't stated he will have meltdowns, just that he would likely face challenges that he hasn't faced before and I don't think that any of us can state with certainty how he will react or handle it.
Lack of challenges is also not exactly what I said. But inheriting a treble winning team, or a team featuring the likes of Messi, Xavi and Iniesta, is not as big a rebuilding job as some of those out there. Anyway I am in bed now so will reply to further posts in the morning.
I really don't understand this he hasn't faced challenges. Do people want him to take up the Ipswich town to prove himself? He took over Barcelona at their lowest ebb in close to a decade, rebuilt half the side, done the same at Bayern. What else can be do? It's not like he will be taking over a pub team if he comes here.
What's people's obsession with Pep joining City?
Is there actually anything concrete people are basing this on?
Is there actually anything concrete people are basing this on?
Peps relationship with Begiristain.
City doesn't deserve Pep. And Pep doesn't deserve City. Will never happen. End of story.
Barca, Bayern and United would probably the best CV ever. Barca, Bayern and City is like leaving George Cooney and marrying the bin man.
I'm not disagreeing, but you know that the one and only LVG did it already? And that he got the boot from Barca and Bayern? Might he make it three?
Ancelotti's going to end up with the best.
Juventus
Milan
Madrid
Will end up managing at least one of us or Bayern at one point in the rest of his career. He's only 56.
The winner among managers will be the one who is the first (and maybe only ever) to win the CL with three different clubs. Ancelotti and Mou are the closest. I like neither very much, but Mou I hate so much, that this is an easy pick for me.
Great post.
Yep, I'm also pretty sure United as a club are unlikely to employ a Director of Football in the near future. We seem to be too comfortable with the existing status quo, and the Glazers aren't exactly visionary football owners to make use of a beneficiary trend. However, if we were to employ one, I don't think he would necessarily clash with Woodward as long as there is a clear demarcation in terms of what the job entails. eg. Hans-Joachim Watzke is Borussia Dortmund's CEO type figure, and Michael Zorc is the Sporting Director. Bayern have Karl-Heinz Rummenigge as the executive board President, and Matthias Sammer as the Sporting Director. And they seem to co-exist amicably for the most part.
Ed has a lot to deal with as the CEO. He's on the executive board, he's handling the commercial side of things, PR, sponsors, external relations, he's United de facto representative to various league/ club associations, he's on the UEFA committee. His hands are very much full, and I'm not sure how much time he spends on actual on-field football matters, and assessing the manager and his personnel. And he doesn't have a lot of football experience either, which is kind of a sporting director's domain. He is ultimately responsible to Woodward, but he could act as the liaison between the manager and the board - who don't have a lot of football experience to be honest. And he could be the de facto scouting figurehead. Not so much negotiating transfers, which is Ed's domain, but travelling around to get a handle on different players and trends, attending scouting symposiums (which United have forsaken for some reason), meeting up with agents and building a profile, sniffing out smart deals (like how Juventus signed Pogba and Coman for free), trying to improve the academy in sync with the manager, things of that nature - which Woodward can't always do due to time limitations.
What concerns me with the current setup is that there's zero football experience in the executive committee, and the Glazers aren't exactly football savants like Pérez is at Madrid for example. Then you have Fergie, Sir Bobby and David Gill as non-executive board members. Fergie is busy with his books, and post-retirement life (fully deserved) and is coming up in age. Sir Bobby might not be extremely thorough with the inner working of modern football. Gill is busy with his UEFA/ FA positions. There's really no one to do the job Sammer does for Bayern, or Zorc does for Dortmund. There's no young blood that's immersed in the machinations of modern football, and that needs to be addressed. You can't just give the manager carte blanche all the way tactics, to signings, and player development. Fergie did it, but he was the exception to the norm, and it shouldn't be expected of every managerial appointment.
While I do think the Premier League is slightly more competitive than the Bundesliga, the shindig as a whole is kinda fallacious. The Bundesliga's second placed team would probably beat the Premier League's second placed team, Arsenal. And the overall strength of the loosely defined Top 4 is comparable to an extent. Are smaller teams in the Premier League really that good, or are the top teams much weaker compared to the past, leading to an illusion of the league being ultra competitive as a whole? Fair to say that if we place Bayern Munich instead of City, they would easily walk to the title, and batter the uppity smaller teams which prove to be trouble for City, Chelsea and ourselves. As for squad rotation and maintaining fitness, he can and does rotate his squad, and he has shown that this season itself. No Bayern player has started every league game this season, apart from Manuel Neuer.
I dunno. But Pep is a cut above wankers like Rodgers who blame everyone but themselves, or Mourinho who sulks, and acts the big baby when things go tits up. If I had to guess, given the perfectionist that Pep is, he will be massively disappointed in himself above all else. He's always been a rather introspective man, and people of that kind internalize things instead of making a big fuss over it. As for Mourinho's meltdown, he had a mini-mare at Madrid itself, which was cut short before he went nuclear. He's been a changed man every since to be honest. Pep hasn't had any such harrowing experiences thus far.
contd.
Employing a top, top coach like Pep, and then burdening him with a million different things would be counterproductive IMO. Like buying a Ferrari and wondering if you can load it with 1 tonne of timber, and going cross country gravel driving. He could do it, certainly has the intelligence and adaptability for it. And knowing his tendency to be a perfectionist, he would leave no stones unturned. But ideally, you'd want him to concentrate his energies on the football pitch, and the training grounds. That's where he can produce magic. Guess it's a question mark for now.
I don't really care to be honest mate. United fans have this obsession with longevity because of Fergie's tenure, and I get that. Before Moyes was employed, I'd only ever seen Fergie on the sidelines so it was certainly a shock. But longevity should be the last criteria the board should consider. Anything approaching 5 years is great. That window is long enough to ensure the manager's ideology is implemented, and you can aim for some silverware. But short enough that things don't go stale (which they will, again Fergie was an anomaly, who kept reinventing themselves, most managers come with an expiry date).
Bayern Munich have been arguably the most successful club in Europe since the late 2000s, apart from Barcelona. And they've employed 6 managers in that time, including caretakers. When Klinsmann was sacked, they could've planned for managers who stayed for the long haul. But they appointed a good transition manager in Louis. He lasted less than 2 seasons, and Jonker took charge for 2 months. Again, they could've employed a long term candidate. But they went with 66 year old Juup Heyneckes. Now they're on to Guardiola, and he might leave after his 3 year contract is over. Then they'll probably employ Ancelotti or something.
Having a long term manager isn't a significant factor at all IMO. Infact, 5 years appointments are the best because the players are exposed to more ideologies, they become more adaptable, things stay fresh, and there's almost always someone capable enough of taking over from the previous manager (unless you botch the managerial transition up completely). If Pep signs a 4 year contract in 2017, and leaves in 2021, that's still 6 years away. More than enough time for the next generation of Mourinho, Klopp, Ancelotti, Simeone to emerge. Maybe we appoint Tuchel who approaches Klopp status at Dortmund and will be just 48 in 2021, or even Gallardo who was endorsed by fontaine and will be 45 - who knows.
Employing a top, top coach like Pep, and then burdening him with a million different things would be counterproductive IMO. Like buying a Ferrari and wondering if you can load it with 1 tonne of timber, and going cross country gravel driving. He could do it, certainly has the intelligence and adaptability for it. And knowing his tendency to be a perfectionist, he would leave no stones unturned. But ideally, you'd want him to concentrate his energies on the football pitch, and the training grounds. That's where he can produce magic. Guess it's a question mark for now.
I don't really care to be honest mate. United fans have this obsession with longevity because of Fergie's tenure, and I get that. Before Moyes was employed, I'd only ever seen Fergie on the sidelines so it was certainly a shock. But longevity should be the last criteria the board should consider. Anything approaching 5 years is great. That window is long enough to ensure the manager's ideology is implemented, and you can aim for some silverware. But short enough that things don't go stale (which they will, again Fergie was an anomaly, who kept reinventing themselves, most managers come with an expiry date).
Bayern Munich have been arguably the most successful club in Europe since the late 2000s, apart from Barcelona. And they've employed 6 managers in that time, including caretakers. When Klinsmann was sacked, they could've planned for managers who stayed for the long haul. But they appointed a good transition manager in Louis. He lasted less than 2 seasons, and Jonker took charge for 2 months. Again, they could've employed a long term candidate. But they went with 66 year old Juup Heyneckes. Now they're on to Guardiola, and he might leave after his 3 year contract is over. Then they'll probably employ Ancelotti or something.
Having a long term manager isn't a significant factor at all IMO. Infact, 5 years appointments are the best because the players are exposed to more ideologies, they become more adaptable, things stay fresh, and there's almost always someone capable enough of taking over from the previous manager (unless you botch the managerial transition up completely). If Pep signs a 4 year contract in 2017, and leaves in 2021, that's still 6 years away. More than enough time for the next generation of Mourinho, Klopp, Ancelotti, Simeone to emerge. Maybe we appoint Tuchel who approaches Klopp status at Dortmund and will be just 48 in 2021, or even Gallardo who was endorsed by fontaine and will be 45 - who knows.
Well said.
The narrative that Pep Guardiola inherited one of the greatest teams in the world at Barcelona is infuriatingly ignorant. Even poor sides make a Champions League semi final like Schalke in 2011 and Rijkaards Barça in 2008.
no chance mate, pep would destroy united's identity with boring sideways passes and all that. I don't think I really need a white text for this but just in case.The amount of people who still seem to think just because we're Manchester United it means everything will be okay is amazing
Now that Fergie is gone, we're exactly the same as every other team. And the only way we will get back to the top is through having quality players, and a quality manager. Romantic nonsense will take us nowhere, as the Moyes era proved.
Pep at City, and us with Giggs would be an absolute catastrophe.
But he did, the same Barca side that went toe to toe with us in 08 and arguably were the better side.
He took over a side that needed new blood, but that blood was already at the club. He didn't have to impose his style of play into the side because the vast majority grew up with that style of play.
His record in the transfer market was bit or miss in any case
No team that wins nothing in two consecutive seasons and finishes 18 points off the leaders at the end of a season can ever be considered one of the greatest teams in the world. Granted he inherited talented players. I agree with most of what you say, just the point about him inheriting of the greatest teams in the world where I strongly disagree.
@Invictus I completely agree with pretty much everything you have said regarding a DOF - it would be beneficial for the club if it happened, but realistically I dont think it will.
Just on the "longevity" argument however (I will be brief as we discussed this also in the Giggs thread) - this is tied to the entire DOF argument. Part of the appeal of a DOF for me, is that it gives the club the option of going for more short term appointments for the manager/head coach, because you have that continuity coming from the DOF - the guy who is arranging transfers, scouting, and having an impact in how the team ultimately plays. When you have that figurehead in place, overseeing these elements of the football-side of the club, then it is feasible to stick someone in as head coach for just a couple of years if necessary.
Without the DOF though, it is a different story and it is in this context that I think longevity and continuity should be factors in the decision making process when appointing a manager. You say yourself how Pep (or another candidate) would be "bogged down" with a million little things for running the entire football side of the operation, and this is why I think short term appointments are not practical in this setup. If you have a manager governing every single aspect of the football side of the club, from transfers, to scouting, to training, to playing style, as well as all the various other menial tasks, then you really need that person to be there for a good 5 years or so in order to make it worthwhile. Having a single person in charge necessitates that person staying around for longer, otherwise you are stuck in a constant cycle of transition and change. Thus my desire for longevity does not stem from Fergie, Busby, Wenger or anyone else - but rather I think it is tied to the board-level setup of the club, and that with our current CEO-Manager duo, it requires figures in both areas who can stay for the longer term.
Final quick point about the relative competitiveness of different leagues. Its been discussed to death in other threads, but basically when you look past the top 3-4 clubs (within which you can argue that the Real, Barca and Bayern are bigger/better than their English equivalents) I think the PL has more strength in depth. You have Chelsea, City, United, Arsenal, Liverpool, Spurs, Everton, Southampton, Swansea and Stoke all as pretty decent, established PL teams capable of top-6 finishes or so. Then in the likes of West Ham and Crystal Palace you have other solid teams that are definitely capable of pushing on.
I wont claim to have really intricate knowledge of the mid/low end clubs of La Liga or the Bundesliga, but when I see the league tables and results every weekend, I am not convinced that Bayern, Barca or Real would be able to simply come in and steamroll the PL in the same fashion they do in their own domestic leagues.
Just on the "longevity" argument however (I will be brief as we discussed this also in the Giggs thread) - this is tied to the entire DOF argument. Part of the appeal of a DOF for me, is that it gives the club the option of going for more short term appointments for the manager/head coach, because you have that continuity coming from the DOF - the guy who is arranging transfers, scouting, and having an impact in how the team ultimately plays. When you have that figurehead in place, overseeing these elements of the football-side of the club, then it is feasible to stick someone in as head coach for just a couple of years if necessary.
Without the DOF though, it is a different story and it is in this context that I think longevity and continuity should be factors in the decision making process when appointing a manager. You say yourself how Pep (or another candidate) would be "bogged down" with a million little things for running the entire football side of the operation, and this is why I think short term appointments are not practical in this setup. If you have a manager governing every single aspect of the football side of the club, from transfers, to scouting, to training, to playing style, as well as all the various other menial tasks, then you really need that person to be there for a good 5 years or so in order to make it worthwhile. Having a single person in charge necessitates that person staying around for longer, otherwise you are stuck in a constant cycle of transition and change. Thus my desire for longevity does not stem from Fergie, Busby, Wenger or anyone else - but rather I think it is tied to the board-level setup of the club, and that with our current CEO-Manager duo, it requires figures in both areas who can stay for the longer term.
Final quick point about the relative competitiveness of different leagues. Its been discussed to death in other threads, but basically when you look past the top 3-4 clubs (within which you can argue that the Real, Barca and Bayern are bigger/better than their English equivalents) I think the PL has more strength in depth. You have Chelsea, City, United, Arsenal, Liverpool, Spurs, Everton, Southampton, Swansea and Stoke all as pretty decent, established PL teams capable of top-6 finishes or so. Then in the likes of West Ham and Crystal Palace you have other solid teams that are definitely capable of pushing on.
I wont claim to have really intricate knowledge of the mid/low end clubs of La Liga or the Bundesliga, but when I see the league tables and results every weekend, I am not convinced that Bayern, Barca or Real would be able to simply come in and steamroll the PL in the same fashion they do in their own domestic leagues.
@Walrus, but you're readily acknowledging ignorance about the Primera Liga in terms of the quality of mid table sides. Lest you forget, there are 5 clubs in the CL this season and overall, the league is far more technical than the Premiership
"More technical" doesnt equal more competitive, more intense, more physically demanding or anything else. I agree La Liga is more technical - when I have seen some of the mid table clashes from Spain, the teams play some good technical football, but going back to the original topic, the only reason I brought any of that up is because I think that Guardiola (or various others) may not be used to the nature of the PL. Its a cliché I know, but I always remember being shocked at how little Pep's Barcelona side seemed to rotate, and how few injuries they seemed to get. With the amount of running they did, I just dont think you could get through a PL season (no winter break is also a factor) in that manner - the players would be knackered by Christmas, and some of this I attribute to the fact that perhaps the top teams in La Liga simply dont need to work quite so hard to beat some of the bottom clubs. The difference for a professional footballer being able to play at 90% rather than 100% is huge - I am not saying that the teams in La Liga are no good and that it is a cakewalk, simply that - to bring out another cliché - there are no easy games in the PL.
This isnt a bash at Guardiola, La Liga or anyone else, it is simply reinforcing my original statement that in some ways, Guardiola is still untested, inexperienced and unproven in various circumstances and environments.
As someone who follows both La Liga and PL i honestly see no evidence that the premier league has more depth. I do think think that Pep will face a bigger challenge if he comes to United as there is more work to be done. But you could say the same for most managers out there. There is no safe bet. City will be an easier challenge comparatively as they already have some top notch players there like Yaya, Silva, De Bruyne and Aguero who will fit right into his philosophy.
Can't think of a better manager to take over from van Gaal. He'l build on what has been done and take it to another level. Him at City and us ending up with Giggsy is a scary thought.
Agreed
On bluemoon, the resident ITK says he's heard Guardiola to us is a done deal which has upset a lot of people on that forum. Also on a city podcast Graham Hunter has said he knows Guardiola's preference is to come here. A lot of them are now calling for the club to move for Ancelotti quickly.
I wonder with the pressure he's under if FSW getting sacked at Real and taking over at City is a possibility?
Oh how I'd love this to be the case.
Is it the same one that said Pogba to City was a done deal?
No idea but they seem to believe him. Which is ridiculous.
Is this the kalia guy?ITK
If I had a choice between Pep or Ronaldo to Utd, I'd choose Pep.
Well, yeah. I reckon most would.
Going to City is like opting for a European Qatari club. Barcelona then Bayern then City is like one night standing through Kate Middleton then I-honestly-can't-think-of-another-high-quality-woman then A. Kardashian.
What's so high quality about Kate Middleton apart from the fact that she occasionally has a royal dick inside her?
tbf, she does has way more class than a regular "ops, my sextape was leaked on the internet and I got famous" Kardashian. it's like Ricky Gervais said "The golden globes to the Oscars are like Kim Kardashian to Kate Middleton - a bit drunkier, a bit trashier and more easily bought"
Sweet jesus, Pep going to City and us ending up with Giggs could cause the breakdown of the century here. Probably quite rightly so.
According to El Mundo Deportivo, he has signed for city yesterday. Contract will commence next season.
http://www.mundodeportivo.com/futbo...ya-habria-firmado-por-el-manchester-city.html
http://www.mundodeportivo.com/futbo...ya-habria-firmado-por-el-manchester-city.html
How reliable are they?