I have sentiment, I just don't let it overpower my sensibilities.
Jose Mourinho- Next destination?
- Thread starter bleedred
- 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.
Nope, I've been saying it for years, he has a "scorched earth" policy when it comes to clubs and he leaves when the players get sick of him or he's run them into the ground.
For example, this year we've got "Abramovic didn't back him" enough, he spent 65 million and took the champions to three points off relegation half way through the season.
Who took Chelsea from 3rd to Champions within 2 seasons? Also, you still haven't provided the evidence or factual arguments for him 'scorching earth' with clubs.
Third! To Champions! And then down to 15th or whatever it was.
He has NO long term goals at the club. I've said it for years and all I got was "This is going to be different, he'll stay at Chelsea"
Bullshit. He comes in, spends loads of money, gets rid of players who Chelsea now NEED. (Honestly his sold 11 at Chelsea would destroy his first team now) and runs players into the ground. He played a 38 year old John Terry every game for a season then acts amazed when next year he's done for.
Mourinho is the person I most dislike in football. Imagine how hard it is for me to state that, if he were United manager, I would support him; that's how serious I believe the club's condition is.
Not sure why you're getting so riled up, them being in 15th position was a cultination of several little details adding up (including Mourinho's poor management - even I won't argue that). But it's unbecoming to take a blemish from his career and extrapolate that over all his tenures as if it's a rule of thumb (it isn't). Most of the pro-Mourinho posters have admitted that he might prove to be just a short term appointment, so I'm not sure about what exactly you're arguing here. We bring him in, he brings us success (something we've lost touch with), when we're better placed maybe we'll act proactively and appoint the next one (this is what Bayern do - and they do it well, going from strength to strength under different short term managers without resorting to punts on Scholl or Matthäus for uber romantic reasons).
Also, one thing that you need to consider is - the only clubs where he had collective issues with players were Real Madrid and Chelsea (not at Internazionale, not at Porto), at two of the worst structured clubs when it comes to guarding the managers and putting him in a position of relative power over the squad, especially in terms of carving up massive egos to show 'em who's the boss (like what Fergie had at United, or Wenger has at Arsenal). With a mentalist like Florentino you wouldn't even discard the possibility of him jettisoning Fergie to protect the cash cow that was David Beckham. Overall, desperate times call for desperate measures. This will likely be our 3rd season without a league title. That can realistically snowball into 5, 6 years, or even a decade if we don't get back to winning ways, and a winning mentality sharpish. Mourinho might be a cock, but he's a cock that wins in the short term. And we need to win before the players completely lose the taste of success, and we become Liverpool II with better revenues, overt romanticism, and 'next year is our year'.
We're fine. We'll be competing for a league soon enough.
By proving themselves at smaller leagues/clubs like Sir Alex did.
Not if we stick with LVG and certainly not if we appoint Giggs.
Sadly quoting stats all the time just sucks the life out of football. I do wonder if those who quote stats at every turn ever actually played the game. Do they actually get it? Neymar for example is one of those players who puts a smile on my face with some of the things he does but then there will be people who simply use stats to show how good he is. The americanisation (reliance on stats) is killing perceptions observation and romance in football, its really quite sad.
For me the dull Mourinho isnt blown out of proportion, its my perception or belief. I hate the football his teams play. His approach is to strangle teams and I have always found it dull. He took a creative and off beat player like Joe Cole and turned him into a robot. Thats just what he does. Im sure you have some stats stored away somewhere that might show otherwise. The park the bus phrase is overly used because most dont understand what it is he does. A number of years ago I did the UEFA B badge and we studied his methods. Within that we got to see some interviews he did for FIFA ( FIFA runs annual coaching get togethers where top coaches discuss their work. Fergie, Wenger, Ancelotti etc etc). and he explained in some detail his approach. He bases his football on what he called the 4 moments of the game. The "moment" a team wins possession, the "moment" a team is in possession, the "moment" a team loses possession and the "moment" teams are out of possession. Everything revolved around how his players and team reacted. It was all about control. There was no freedom for the players to express themselves. Its clearly evident when watching his teams. His teams still play the same way, his football hasnt evolved from when he was at Porto.
Fergie had periods where we played poorly but we never had periods in my opinion where we were simply dull.
If Mourinho ends up here then all we will see is Utd play in the same way that his teams have done for years. All control, little expression. I will absolutely hate it if that happens. Football is to be enjoyed, the way a team plays should make me happy, enduring dull football because it brings trophies isnt something I want. Enjoy not endure.
I thought his team with Robben and Duff on the wings was pretty good to watch. Also the first half of last year Chelsea scored loads of goals
Who would you want if you could just cherry pick?
Because he were having bad season, as was Chelsea team and it was clear he lost the dressing room. It's the only season in the last 12 or 13 of his where he failed to finish in top 3 with his team.
He's still a top class manager.
Last edited:
Ferguson took 2nd placed team and got them 11th and 13th! I mean, how poor was he
Bad seasons happen. Losing dressing room happens (at Chelsea to almost everyone). Doesn't prove he's a bad manager at all, his record proves otherwise.
Bad seasons happen. Losing dressing room happens (at Chelsea to almost everyone). Doesn't prove he's a bad manager at all, his record proves otherwise.
@Stack
I'm not going to relentless argue the style part just to prove a point because you have your reasons, and you've seen far more football than me to appreciate attacking emphasis (or lack thereof) - and I realize that. Having said all of that, wrt the stats argument - they have their flaws. But a lot of times (infact, most times in arguments where there's no consensus), stats are all we have to reinforce our opinion (as far as semi-objective reasoning is concerned) because we could very well have subjective opinions that don't match at all. Do the stats convey the whole picture? Absolutely not, and a lot of times they can be twisted to suit an agenda. However, I believe I was being fair with them in that instance - teams that consistently ended up atop (or thereabouts) on goal-scoring charts could't always be characterized as dull across the board, efficient maybe, but certainly not dull - especially for a sustained period of time (would love to be proven wrong if someone can debunk that line of reasoning as far as multiple (close to a decade) full seasons at several clubs are concerned). The stats were posted for that purpose only, and nothing else.
The main purpose of the post was to show that - you know what, maybe he's not Guardiola or Klopp, but managers like that are few and far between at the top level (the German is already at Liverpool, Pep will join City if reports are to be believed, and a lot of the other options have severe shortcomings - mostly related to top shelf and title-winning inexperience at a critical time for United), so realistically - Mourinho might well be our best bet, unless you like the idea of Giggs taking charge just to avoid Mourinho. José isn't as dour as he is portrayed to be, and he did have his teams play quality football when he had the right personnel - Chelsea 1 were quite pleasant to watch I thought - with Drogba leading the line, flanked by the Robben-Duff duo (when they played as a combination) and Lampard bombing forward regularly. Were they as good as Barcelona with Ronaldinho, Eto'o and Deco? Nope, but they were one of the better teams in Europe when it came to playing good football while having a strong base in defense. Real Madrid were mesmerizing to watch under him - one of the best counter-attacking teams of the last half decade. Even last season, Chelsea played some eyecatching football, particularly through the first sort of 3-4 months.
So it's not like he's steadfast on employing a purely defensive approach all the time in a way that completely voids the teams out of any sort of expression. The primary thrust with Mourinho is his ability to win, and win quick at a time when we need to win and build some positive momentum. We're not playing good football under the current management on top of winning zeru tituli, we're unlikely to immediately employ a cavalier style under an available new manager who has a proven track record at the top level (unless we can somehow extract Pep from City's grip), so why not atleast employ someone who can ensure success in the short term? Might not be the perfect appointment, but the things is - there might not be a perfect appointment - one who is a proponent attacking football and has great pedigree. José might not be more than a band aid with potential to maybe change a bit at a club where he's given complete freedom (unlike the other clubs he's managed in the past), but he's a lot better than the alternatives all things considered - because while the likes of Pochettino are enticing, he has never won anything, and he hasn't evidenced the ability to manage a top, top club with massive expectations just yet. Employing someone like that would necessitate a leap of faith, and could easily backfire.
Mourinho is a proven manager - if he can win us a title or two, attract quality players with his gravitas, and build a winning identity (which has been crushed at United ever since Fergie left) - we could do a lot worse. When he's here, if the management is dissatisfied with the style of football, we can privately sound out managers like Tuchel too (who has a three year contract at Dortmund, and won't leave before its expiration because he's principled like Klopp). We can't always have the cake and eat it too. Sometimes, it takes a couple of steps, or transitions to fully resurrect a team. Mourinho has the ability to improve the club's sagging mentality, once that's re-established we could always appoint someone who professeses a more attractive brand of football to take things up a notch, and Tuchel/ Pochettino/ whoever can consolidate their credentials by then so we can minimize the risk in appointing them. No? The biggest fear is missing out on Mourinho, and then botching the transition from Van Gaal by taking a punt on a half-baked successor. That would be the worst possible outcome, and a nigh guarantee given the dearth of managers with recent records of success while simultaneously playing an expansive brand of football at one of the top clubs (which is what the United managerial post entails).
I'm not going to relentless argue the style part just to prove a point because you have your reasons, and you've seen far more football than me to appreciate attacking emphasis (or lack thereof) - and I realize that. Having said all of that, wrt the stats argument - they have their flaws. But a lot of times (infact, most times in arguments where there's no consensus), stats are all we have to reinforce our opinion (as far as semi-objective reasoning is concerned) because we could very well have subjective opinions that don't match at all. Do the stats convey the whole picture? Absolutely not, and a lot of times they can be twisted to suit an agenda. However, I believe I was being fair with them in that instance - teams that consistently ended up atop (or thereabouts) on goal-scoring charts could't always be characterized as dull across the board, efficient maybe, but certainly not dull - especially for a sustained period of time (would love to be proven wrong if someone can debunk that line of reasoning as far as multiple (close to a decade) full seasons at several clubs are concerned). The stats were posted for that purpose only, and nothing else.
The main purpose of the post was to show that - you know what, maybe he's not Guardiola or Klopp, but managers like that are few and far between at the top level (the German is already at Liverpool, Pep will join City if reports are to be believed, and a lot of the other options have severe shortcomings - mostly related to top shelf and title-winning inexperience at a critical time for United), so realistically - Mourinho might well be our best bet, unless you like the idea of Giggs taking charge just to avoid Mourinho. José isn't as dour as he is portrayed to be, and he did have his teams play quality football when he had the right personnel - Chelsea 1 were quite pleasant to watch I thought - with Drogba leading the line, flanked by the Robben-Duff duo (when they played as a combination) and Lampard bombing forward regularly. Were they as good as Barcelona with Ronaldinho, Eto'o and Deco? Nope, but they were one of the better teams in Europe when it came to playing good football while having a strong base in defense. Real Madrid were mesmerizing to watch under him - one of the best counter-attacking teams of the last half decade. Even last season, Chelsea played some eyecatching football, particularly through the first sort of 3-4 months.
So it's not like he's steadfast on employing a purely defensive approach all the time in a way that completely voids the teams out of any sort of expression. The primary thrust with Mourinho is his ability to win, and win quick at a time when we need to win and build some positive momentum. We're not playing good football under the current management on top of winning zeru tituli, we're unlikely to immediately employ a cavalier style under an available new manager who has a proven track record at the top level (unless we can somehow extract Pep from City's grip), so why not atleast employ someone who can ensure success in the short term? Might not be the perfect appointment, but the things is - there might not be a perfect appointment - one who is a proponent attacking football and has great pedigree. José might not be more than a band aid with potential to maybe change a bit at a club where he's given complete freedom (unlike the other clubs he's managed in the past), but he's a lot better than the alternatives all things considered - because while the likes of Pochettino are enticing, he has never won anything, and he hasn't evidenced the ability to manage a top, top club with massive expectations just yet. Employing someone like that would necessitate a leap of faith, and could easily backfire.
Mourinho is a proven manager - if he can win us a title or two, attract quality players with his gravitas, and build a winning identity (which has been crushed at United ever since Fergie left) - we could do a lot worse. When he's here, if the management is dissatisfied with the style of football, we can privately sound out managers like Tuchel too (who has a three year contract at Dortmund, and won't leave before its expiration because he's principled like Klopp). We can't always have the cake and eat it too. Sometimes, it takes a couple of steps, or transitions to fully resurrect a team. Mourinho has the ability to improve the club's sagging mentality, once that's re-established we could always appoint someone who professeses a more attractive brand of football to take things up a notch, and Tuchel/ Pochettino/ whoever can consolidate their credentials by then so we can minimize the risk in appointing them. No? The biggest fear is missing out on Mourinho, and then botching the transition from Van Gaal by taking a punt on a half-baked successor. That would be the worst possible outcome, and a nigh guarantee given the dearth of managers with recent records of success while simultaneously playing an expansive brand of football at one of the top clubs (which is what the United managerial post entails).
Last edited:
"Maybe he's not Pep or Klopp"
What will you think if Klopp doesn't turn Liverpool around?
What will you think if Klopp doesn't turn Liverpool around?
I agree with your general argument and don't really want the man here but it seemed fairly clear that all of the signings they actually did make were put onto him. None really seemed like Mourinho players.
Pep
Nothing. A manager should be judged on his overall body of work (especially in the last 5-6 seasons), not just on his latest appointment on a kneejerk basis. Jürgen will still be a top manager, albeit one with a few more chinks in his armor, and more questions surrounding his future projections. He worked miracles at Dortmund just 3 seasons ago, an achievement which speaks for itself. Failing to completely turn around a club that has a deeply entrenched mentality of not winning the league (and more recently, not winning anything at all), is stripped down talent wise relative to their competition in terms of Champions League aspirations, and cannot compete financially with the top dogs doesn't change that.
Really?...
They can't? They've spent a lot of money in the last couple seasons.
Wrt Pep, he is a pie in the sky. Look, we all would rather him in an ideal world, and everyone keeps mentioning his name like an automaton, but realistically, it's not gonna happen. Yes, we're United and one could put forth a million arguments detailing how we're superior to the noisy neighbors; but they've made contact, they've build up a long term structure by investing in the decision making staff while United don't seem to have a concrete footballing vision in place, they have his mates Begiristain and Soriano in place, currently - they are in a better position than us, and most the noise coming out of Germany and Spain suggests a move to City at the end of the season. We could always chase Pep to the bitter end, but there's a fat chance that we land neither him nor Mourinho if we go down that road. And then you're left scraping the bottom of the barrel for leftovers.
Man United £433.2m
Man City £348.3m
Chelsea £324.4m
Arsenal £300.5m
Liverpool £255.8m
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...billion-eclipses-rest-of-europe-10295701.html
And, every time they miss out on the Champions League, that deficit just increases in terms of money, and lure, and the competitive advantage in relation to the leading pack. That's going to a handicap for Jürgen unless he manages to establish them as an attractive club by consistently finishing in the Top 4, and leaving a mark in the Champions League.
Lot of spending ≠ lot of good sending relative to the money shelled out given Liverpool is not a lucrative proposition for top players - in terms of the club as it currently stands, in terms of the location, in terms of lure for top players. Evidenced by their inability to sign Sánchez, Mkhitaryan and the likes even though they had money to spare. Klopp gives them a leg up for German players, but if a player like say Rodríguez is deemed surplus to demands at Madrid, and wants to join a Premier League club, they're way down in the pecking order - behind the top quartet. Even in terms of overall revenue, they are kind of left behind the cream of the crop (based on figures from last season):
Man United £433.2m
Man City £348.3m
Chelsea £324.4m
Arsenal £300.5m
Liverpool £255.8m
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...billion-eclipses-rest-of-europe-10295701.html
And, every time they miss out on the Champions League, that deficit just increases in terms of money, and lure, and the competitive advantage in relation to the leading pack. That's going to a handicap for Jürgen unless he manages to establish them as an attractive club by consistently finishing in the Top 4, and leaving a mark in the Champions League.
If we dont get pep or Mourinho we are left scraping the barrel for leftovers? Seriously? Have I read this wrong?
Come on now. Which other top managers are available? Ancelotti will be at Bayern, Simeone will not leave Atlético, Conte is with the Italian national team, Blanc will be impossible to extract from PSG unless they want him out, and so forth. And no, you haven't read it wrong - maybe you think Pochettino or Emery would be great options, but I certainly don't, and with good reason. They might not be ready for a club of United's stature, not when they don't have a record of winning things, not when they haven't proven themselves equal to the task of handing an elite club, handling big egos, handling the incredible expectations that come with the job etc etc, but most importantly - silverware winning pedigree, that's what Fergie brought to the table all those years ago, the record of winning things; that's what Heyneckes and Pep and Ancelotti brought or will bring to Bayern. Anyone appointed aside from the established elite or those on the fringe (like Blanc) will come with major risks, and things could go tits up (not that they might not with Mourinho, but he's an established manager with a CV that speaks for itself - that won't change in the face of subjectivity).
If the grand plan is to elevate Giggs to manager someday, then why not bring in Mourinho this summer to serve as Giggsy's mentor for 2-3 seasons? We pick up the trophies under Jose, Ryan learns the trade and then Jose leaves, on cue.
Surely no one, not even on the board, believes that Giggs has learned much of anything of value from Moyes or Van Gaal.
Surely no one, not even on the board, believes that Giggs has learned much of anything of value from Moyes or Van Gaal.
Look I dont want Giggs as out next manager and I want LVG out but Giggs will be learning a lot from LVG. A large amount of valuable information is being soaked up.
Real Madrid side that won the title under him was very good to watch.
White text?
Seriously? Are you a WUM? You dont see that Giggs will be learning from LVG?
You've been saying it for years but never provided any evidence when questioned on it.
What about his time at Porto, 1st spell at Chelsea, and Real Madrid suggests he left them in bad shape? All 3 were successful after he left. The whole idea was based on Inter going down the shitter. Incidentally, our demise after Ferguson is comparable, but I've never heard you claim Ferguson ran us into the ground?
I'm curious. What lessons from LVG will Giggs have learned?
There's day to day management tasks, tasks that are not known to the public. Fine. But in terms of building a squad that plays attractive football that results in positive results on the pitch, I'm not sure Giggs could have learned anything that he didn't already learn from Ferguson. Do you disagree?
This famous 'scorched earth' policy is pure bollocks. Porto, Chelsea and Madrid went on to be successful after he left, and Inter had been constantly living above their means on Moratti's money years before he came, the meltdown was inevitable. Chelsea this season is undoubtedly a blemish on his CV but if we believe the reports, he wanted Martial, Stones and Griezmann and they gave him Pedro and a Sunday league left back. That doesn't absolve him of the blame but it has to count for something.
I was put off massively after his eye poking incident, and generally think that he's been damaged from his Madrid stint. However, with some time out of the game, a renewed vigor and a whole lot of motivation, there are none better than Jose Mourinho to bring us out of our current malaise. Even Rafael fecking Benitez managed Chelsea and did well ffs. The wellbeing of the club comes before personal preferences.
I was put off massively after his eye poking incident, and generally think that he's been damaged from his Madrid stint. However, with some time out of the game, a renewed vigor and a whole lot of motivation, there are none better than Jose Mourinho to bring us out of our current malaise. Even Rafael fecking Benitez managed Chelsea and did well ffs. The wellbeing of the club comes before personal preferences.
Absolutely disagree.
Every manager around has different methods for doing things, different training drills, different ideas on tactics, different methods of man management etc etc etc. How can you not know this and how can you not see how that is valuable to any coach to be able to watch and learn another coaches methods? Good or bad.
You're right, van Gaal does have the record and experience-he's not even lost the squad at United yet! Bad seasons do happen...we should hold on to him
Its not "Mourinho or no success at all". Isn't the current football boring enough or the week by week manager's bullshit enough that some turn blind on what makes Mourinho Moaninho. The guy takes all the credit for the good and blames others for all the bad. He did not show any hint of dignity when things started to go so very bad for him, did he?
The current job description of the manager's role at a club like United is just too big. We need a restructuring of the system. Set a preferred style of play and let the chosen coach just coach the team. The successful will soon follow.
After all, it would be good for the club's image if it is known for the type of football than the shenanigans of its manager.
The current job description of the manager's role at a club like United is just too big. We need a restructuring of the system. Set a preferred style of play and let the chosen coach just coach the team. The successful will soon follow.
After all, it would be good for the club's image if it is known for the type of football than the shenanigans of its manager.
Well I'm assuming Everton would have a bigger budget because of the new tv deal kicking in next season.
They wouldn't be able to afford his salary even with the new TV deal.
Fair enough.
But it should be noted that Giggs was carefully studying Ferguson in his last 3-4 years, perhaps longer, before Ferguson retired.
Whatever Ferguson did in terms of "different training drills", "different ideas on tactics", man management, etc., were of course vastly more successful than anything Moyes and LVG have done. Anyone who seeks a role model for how to manage United should seek Ferguson, not Moyes or Van Gaal.
If anything, you're right but for the wrong reason: the lessons that Moyes and LVG taught Giggs should be viewed as what not to do. I'm in the camp that views our play under Moyes/LVG as having been dreadful, boring and extremely disappointing. Had we known how plodding LVG would have set us to play we would never have supported his appointment. No neutral observer argues that Moyes and Van Gaal have done a brilliant job of molding a squad that plays intelligent, attacking football or even one that just consistently generates grinding wins. I can't imagine that you would disagree with that.
I don't want to be too hard on Moyes and Van Gaal. The former was simply not up to the job and the latter seems to have lost the will to be a tactical innovator. His tactics suffocate players who want to play attacking football. This isn't news to anyone here, but LVG's tactics, his philosophy, simply are out of step in a league that rewards the brave and out of step with United's best traditions. Our tactics are too predictable and too easy to counter. His approach is overly cautious, almost negative, and is designed not to lose a game before his players attempt to win it. Caution is a virtue, but an excess of caution is a vice. And we've paid for that excess of caution with repeatedly woeful performances for 18 months that have been papered over by a brilliant goalkeeper. As for man management, where is the evidence of LVG's brilliance? We've known for at least a year of player unrest. Scorn for our plodding play is a daily talking point around the world. There are lessons to be learned from LVG, some good and some bad, but after spending 20+ years under Ferguson there isn't much Giggs could have learned from Moyes and LVG in the last two seasons that would be of much use to him as a manager someday.
We're at serious risk that we will not qualify for the CL next season. And if we do, it will be by the proverbial skin of our teeth. There's not a whole Giggs could have learned from LVG this season regarding how to get the best of this squad.
Van Gaal's record over the last 10-15 seasons is not even close to Mourinho's record. They are on a different level.You're right, van Gaal does have the record and experience-he's not even lost the squad at United yet! Bad seasons do happen...we should hold on to him