Ok, yeah. I may has misunderstood your point. Apologies. I'm not blaming irrational hatred for people thinking Moyes was worse. I do think it's a close run thing, with reasonable cases to be made for saying one or other is the worst.
Who was worse, Moyes or Van Gaal?
- Thread starter Pogue Mahone
- 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.
Ok, yeah. I may has misunderstood your point. Apologies. I'm not blaming irrational hatred for people thinking Moyes was worse. I do think it's a close run thing, with reasonable cases to be made for saying one or other is the worst.
I can't think of a player Moyes moved on full stop. Thankfully he was so shit he was removed from a position to do so before he even had the chance to sell anyone and replace them with the dross he likes to buy.
No worries mate it's easily done.
Did Moyes actually move any players on? Vidic and Evra scarpered but our squad was fecking massive that year. You're on a windup here I'm sure.
You're being ridiculous.
Mourinho has just spent £150m in his first window.
Van Gaal spent £166m (even if you don't want to include Shaw and Herrera as if they were forced on a manager that didn't want them he still spent over £100m).
Moyes spent £28m.
Every single manager we've had post Ferguson has spent huge money in their first season. Except Moyes.
Every single manager we've had post Ferguson has broken our record transfer fee in their first season. Including Moyes.
Every single manager we've had post Ferguson has had the opportunity to spend whatever they want on whoever they want. Including Moyes.
Its fundamentally false to say Moyes did not have the same backing financially as Van Gaal; Moyes chose not to spend it (or went after players we couldn't get such as Fabregas after they had sold Thiago or Bale who was going to Madrid) and your argument is logically flawed. The money was there for him to spend.
Thats because Moyes was too scared to make a decision on his squad and didn't do anything. I think the most high profile departure in his time here was Fabio.
Moyes got the league winners (by an 11 point margin) to 7th position. LVG got us back on 4th and then won us a trophy the next season. On being fires, Moyes thinks he was being treated "unfairly" whereas LVG is just minding his own business.
Why are we having this discussion again?
Why are we having this discussion again?
Let's not forget that those City and Liverpool teams were considerably stronger than the teams Van Gaal was up against. Hence the fact both those clubs sacked their managers while Van Gaal was in charge of United. As did Chelsea. He literally could not ask for better timing, when it comes to getting good results against teams that would usually be the strongest in the league. Of course, he also proved himself completely incapable of getting good results against teams that would usually be the weakest in the league.
Moyes no doubt about that. We only had 1 season to compare and LvGs first season was ok, he had it harder after Moyes too. Confidence of the team was dead and if Moyes would have done anything with our money less spending would have been needed or maybe more when I look at Mata and Fellaini, but he could have signed players like Thiago or Strootman, who were lined up for him from Fergie, LvG did that with Shaw and Herrera.
The sole fact that our team had no huge problem with van Gaal till the end is just a sign for me that he was better. After 9 months of Moyes every United player was in suicide mode. People act like we would have improved in the second season under him, but I am pretty sure he would have brought us into midtable-relegation territory with a huge player fallout like Mou and Chelsea last season. We don't know it, but doesn't make much sense to compare LvGs 2nd season with first few months of Moyes and when I look at how we ended the season I am pretty sure things would have gone really, really bad under him.
And LvG won a title of course, something Moyes will never do in his career imo and no the Community Shield doesn't count
The sole fact that our team had no huge problem with van Gaal till the end is just a sign for me that he was better. After 9 months of Moyes every United player was in suicide mode. People act like we would have improved in the second season under him, but I am pretty sure he would have brought us into midtable-relegation territory with a huge player fallout like Mou and Chelsea last season. We don't know it, but doesn't make much sense to compare LvGs 2nd season with first few months of Moyes and when I look at how we ended the season I am pretty sure things would have gone really, really bad under him.
And LvG won a title of course, something Moyes will never do in his career imo and no the Community Shield doesn't count
Last edited:
We even got humiliated by Spurs FFS. They had Adebayor up front!
No one stopped him from splashing the cash. He dithered and got nobody in (except Fellaini) ! = clueless. Again, SAF was not as bad as it was made out to be by Moyes and his camp. Evans was very good before Moyes took over. What he did? He played Rio & Vidic for the first part of the season because he's scared of the senior players, not because they were better than Evans and deserved the chance. When he changed back, the damage was done and irreversible.
And the comment on keeping RVP on the field!
He simply dithered in everything. LVG was rightfully dismissed for his underachievement, but at least he resolved on his path. Moyes didn't know where to start. How can someone back someone like that? Ed got a lot of stick for Moyes' summer dealing. See how many transfer he had been able to pull through since then if the managers have a goal.
Last edited:
Moyes.
He took us from champions to 7th for fecks sake and oversaw a number of humiliations against our rivals.
Stupid question.
He took us from champions to 7th for fecks sake and oversaw a number of humiliations against our rivals.
Stupid question.
Whilst the football under LVG was gobsmackingly shit and I never want to think of it again:
1. It was shit under Moyes too, but didn't even have the odd good performance like LVG did
2. Under LVG I didn't immediately expect to get cuffed by any good team. This is because LVGs team could, on occasion, turn up and we had some pretty good performances asgainst the good sides.
3. LVG did sign the odd decent player
4. LVG won something
5. LVG was, occasionally, amusing
Moyes did do better in Europe, but he finished 7th (just) domestically.
LVG's second season was disappointing, but I dread to think what Moyes would've done if given another year. Might've turned it around, but I doubt it.
So, Moyes was worse I guess. Moyes win ratio being slightly higher seems less important than the above I suppose.
1. It was shit under Moyes too, but didn't even have the odd good performance like LVG did
2. Under LVG I didn't immediately expect to get cuffed by any good team. This is because LVGs team could, on occasion, turn up and we had some pretty good performances asgainst the good sides.
3. LVG did sign the odd decent player
4. LVG won something
5. LVG was, occasionally, amusing
Moyes did do better in Europe, but he finished 7th (just) domestically.
LVG's second season was disappointing, but I dread to think what Moyes would've done if given another year. Might've turned it around, but I doubt it.
So, Moyes was worse I guess. Moyes win ratio being slightly higher seems less important than the above I suppose.
Van gaal never lost the dressing room like Moyes did it would seem. Moyes never got the team to perform even decently in the big games after January. Last season, we seem to repeatedly come back from the dead beating city Arsenal and all. We were destroyed by every top team. You could say that only Arsenal and Spurs really 'destroyed' us. Most other losses were by 1 goal margins other than Liverpool in Europa. We also won a cup.
I believe if you ask any of our rivals who they prefer to be our manager between van gaal and Moyes & most of them would choose Moyes.
I believe if you ask any of our rivals who they prefer to be our manager between van gaal and Moyes & most of them would choose Moyes.
So Van Gaal was much more willing to spend shitloads of money, very quickly. Well done him. Obviously, he spent it badly. Not sure this does him any credit?
My point is that over a period of two years, you have more time to identify and sign the really quality signings that panic-buying in a single window won't achieve. Something Van Gaal spectacularly failed to achieve, while Moyes never got the chance.
Well, he still inherited champions, didn't he? The midfield needed some major work, but then we just didn't pull the trigger on any midfielders. We couldn't even sign Leighton Baines. By the time Van Gaal arrived the problem was even worse. Had Moyes acted more decisively that summer then I don't think Van Gaal (or even Moyes in the event he stayed) would have needed to spend as much beyond that.
Fellaini and Mata are both good players but they weren't what we needed at the time.
Although I don't agree that Van Gaal was worse than Moyes, I'm willing to hear the other side of the debate. But I'm quite certain both of them were backed by our top brass. Woodward, to be fair to him, more or less gives his manager's free reign on the football side of things.
Moyes easy.Its funny to read some posts,some went in selective Dory mode.Also not surprised with few posts,hatred is strong in some...one came out swinging recently without checking info,other one...well he wished us to lose games last season,all in a name of "greater good" 
Not even close.
LVG wasn't able to make it all work and he was too stubborn for his own good, but he did a lot of things right and left a better team than he inherited. He also went some way to reinstating a bit of mental belief in the players and has been dignified since leaving.
Moyes on the other hand took the best team in England, ripped it to pieces and now thinks he was hard done by. It was like watching a new version of Trading Places.
LVG wasn't able to make it all work and he was too stubborn for his own good, but he did a lot of things right and left a better team than he inherited. He also went some way to reinstating a bit of mental belief in the players and has been dignified since leaving.
Moyes on the other hand took the best team in England, ripped it to pieces and now thinks he was hard done by. It was like watching a new version of Trading Places.
Moyes took the whole spirit and mystics out of playing for the club. Having Evertons manager and staff coming in and take over Just feck off.
Just feck off.That's a possibility and saying Van Gaal is a worse manager than Moyes doesn't retrospectively make Moyes a good one. His dithering cost us dear, no doubt. I just think he inherited a squad that was much earlier along the road to a badly needed overhaul and had less time to turn things round. Which is a point in his favour and against Van Gaal, who had more time and money to fix things. As well as clarity about what needed to be done (e.g. no longer any question that Rio/Vidic might have a role to play)
Last edited:
they were both bad... but Van Gaal was bad in weaker league, with weaker competition, in the weakest cl group you can get, with more money spent, with more time to correct mistakes (which he never did).
LVG earned himself a second season. That's where the comparison should end. Moyes failed to keep his job by dithering. LVG's signings were not all bad and able to help him to achieve minimal requirement to keep his job. Both were meant to be back with money. Ed proved his back his word by spending money, so the question lies with Moyes for not able to get the players in.
LVG's failure in second season cost him the job. Not many complained bout it. His second season is not something Moyes' tenure can be related.
Last edited:
Bearing in mind their respective levels of experience at the top level, the money spent and the calibre of opposition, Van Gaal performed markedly worse in the job. Moyes' United was also a nicer team to watch week in, week out (just about).
Suffice it to say, neither of them were a good fit for this football club.
Suffice it to say, neither of them were a good fit for this football club.
Last edited:
We lost £15m on Di Maria. We wouldn't get half the outlay it cost us for Rojo either given we game them a player for free for on top of his fee. You're living in a dream if you think that Schweinsteiger is leaving for the same wages or that he'll take the cut in his salary. It's not going to happen. Mata's salary won't be the same problem as Schweinsteigers and if he stays he can actually contribute.
This.
Always believed that the results speak for themselves. In that regard, this is a no brainier - Moyes.
Who proved us wrong even under van gaal?
Welbeck - barely playing through injury and even when playing isn't much better than the likes of Walcott
Rafael- playing for Lyon and by all means doing nothing earth shattering and part of a defence that was appalling last season
Evans- playing well for a midtable side. Found his level
Vidic - retired barely playing for 3 years
Nani - had decent seasons at sub par leagues, even there wasn't as good as, say what Memphis did at PSV.
RvP- scores goals in an inferior league where the likes of rodallega score but fought with the coach and reportedly is out of favour
Buttner - left for Moscow only to go to anderlecht on loan last season
Kagawa- playing well at Dortmund but did nothing at United to suggest he was good enough
Evra and Hernandez are the only ones who we should have maybe kept but none of them would have been first choice had they been here behind Rooney and Shaw. Rooney wasn't going to be benched because he was the captain and he was the better striker till then (overall in their careers)
I think you can only compare the first season's and ultimately LvG got himself a second (very poor) season by largely accomplishing his goals in his first season.
He also had a really good record against the big teams whereas we were embarrassed constantly by them under Moyes when shambolic 3/4-0 results.
Hiring Moyes was a cock up of epic proportions from day one, he clearly wasn't fit for the job. LvG was the best option available to us at the time but ultimately made a lot of poor and old fashioned decisions in his second season which cost him. But in terms of who was worse I don't think there's any comparison, Moyes all day.
He also had a really good record against the big teams whereas we were embarrassed constantly by them under Moyes when shambolic 3/4-0 results.
Hiring Moyes was a cock up of epic proportions from day one, he clearly wasn't fit for the job. LvG was the best option available to us at the time but ultimately made a lot of poor and old fashioned decisions in his second season which cost him. But in terms of who was worse I don't think there's any comparison, Moyes all day.
My answer: Moyes.
Some voices in the debate give Moyes credit for not spending much money. I don't give him credit for that.
(a) Maybe he was not smart or famous enough to get the players he wanted in this summer.
(b) Maybe he thought, the defending champion squad is good enough. If so, please don't finish at 7th position then.
(c) Maybe he didn't like the crazy sums in modern football. That's at least understandable, but hey... deal with it or stay at the small clubs (or push the youth.)
As Moyes, I would think: Hell, I should have spent more. As fan I think: Thank God he didn't! Probably we will have spent a lot of money for average players.
Some voices in the debate give Moyes credit for not spending much money. I don't give him credit for that.
(a) Maybe he was not smart or famous enough to get the players he wanted in this summer.
(b) Maybe he thought, the defending champion squad is good enough. If so, please don't finish at 7th position then.
(c) Maybe he didn't like the crazy sums in modern football. That's at least understandable, but hey... deal with it or stay at the small clubs (or push the youth.)
As Moyes, I would think: Hell, I should have spent more. As fan I think: Thank God he didn't! Probably we will have spent a lot of money for average players.
I already had a preconceived distaste for Van Gaal so for me it is easily Van Gaal. Moyes not so much. A daft fool but an honest one. I suppose it is a very personal opinion for each individual, for me he deliberately took the team with decades of prestige of playing a certain way and purposely demolished it to rebuild in his own image. Crucial changes to the playing field infrastructure that ultimately blew up in his face due to the domestic conditions not being conducive to his methods. That is my reasoning anyway.
To me Moyes was like a guy who couldn't climb over the brick wall and ultimately fell and perished.
Van Gaal was the guy who set out to convince the fans he could purposely run head first through it instead of adjusting to go over it.
To me, standing still is better than a purposely pursued change for the worse.
In my opinion Van Gaal would have equally face planted like Moyes. That was a bit of a freak season for a lot of teams. For instance, if Van Gaal had have had his first season in the 13/14 league season he'd have finished 6th on 70 points behind Everton. There are a lot of bones of contention in this thread about peoples opinions and at the end of the day it all comes down to personal feeling which is completely fine.
To me Moyes was like a guy who couldn't climb over the brick wall and ultimately fell and perished.
Van Gaal was the guy who set out to convince the fans he could purposely run head first through it instead of adjusting to go over it.
To me, standing still is better than a purposely pursued change for the worse.
Easy. Van Gaal.
Nobody is giving him credit for not spending money. Van Gaal had more time to get the squad he wanted. He just about earned it by scraping into the Champions League but the point still remains he had a long time to build a squad capable of challenging and failed. It's close between the two. Especially when you consider the expectations had already been lowered for Van Gaal.
i think Van Gaal left us with a lot of exciting young talent for the future( i think thats gonna go out the window now Mouinho is here but thats not the point). he also improved alot of our exsisting players(smalling been the main one). he also cleared the decks alot and got rid alot players who where to long in the tooth or hadn't performed in years.
so for me Van Gaal did a better job as he left us in a better position to where he found us, so for me he did a far better job then Moyes.
but lets face it neither did a great job.
so for me Van Gaal did a better job as he left us in a better position to where he found us, so for me he did a far better job then Moyes.
but lets face it neither did a great job.
Van Gaal at least had entertaining pressers and team new to an extent what to do and players looked reasonably fine.
With Moyes, we got more cringeworthy pressers as we went on with the season and most of the players seemed totally lost on and off the pitch. Definitely Moyes is worse for me.
With Moyes, we got more cringeworthy pressers as we went on with the season and most of the players seemed totally lost on and off the pitch. Definitely Moyes is worse for me.
No. Your point was:
'[Van Gaal] had the sort of time and money to invest in the team that Moyes could only have dreamed of.'
Which is untrue. Van Gaal had the exact same amount of money to invest in the squad as Moyes did. That Moyes chose not to spend the money he had available to him doesn't mean that he wasn't backed in the same way.
Arguably Moyes got much stronger backing than Van Gaal ever did with the six year contract bollocks and Ferguson's pitch side plea. The only reason Van Gaal got a second season and Moyes didn't is because he achieved goals in his first season that Moyes failed to and he similarly got sacked when he failed to achieve the exact same goal. Perhaps Van Gaal only achieved it because of a weaker league, but if he'd failed to do so in the first season he'd have been sacked too.
As for quality signings. Well history will judge him on that. I do think he's created a stronger team here than people will give him credit for right now and hopefully Mourinho will go on to prove that.
Last edited:
That's why he's still here isn't it?
Last season:
Middlesbrough 0-0 (the worst game in the last three years since Fergis left.)
Bournemouth 1-2
Norwich 1-2
Stoke 0-2
Sunderland 1-2
Midtjylland 1-2
Funny how you chose to ignore all the possession stats, number of goals scored (or lack of), shots per game, number of backward passes etc., etc. under van Gaal plus the fact that we couldn't get out of the easiest CL group. The atmosphere at Old Trafford was more toxic last season than at any time that I could remember.
Anyway, whether you are for Moyes or van Gaal, you can find reasons to support your argument. It's just opinion at the end of the day.
Moyes
Since Moyes never managed Barcelona... Am I correct?
??
Scrapping into the CL. We beat the next placed team by 7 points.
Moyes was horrific, many multiple times worse than Van Gaal.
LvG was a failure, Moyes was an absolute disaster.
LvG was a failure, Moyes was an absolute disaster.