Yep I agree with all that.
Mauricio Pochettino: Win or Bust?
- Thread starter Green_Red
- 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.
Yep I agree with all that.
I agree. Spurs have lot to prove and most important thing (maybe second most important after money) for player is trophies which Spurs haven't won or came close to winning it.
Everyone agrees that they look lot more stable now and made good progress.
Look at us all - all agreeing with each other. Tis a miracle I tells ya. Surely this can't be a Spurs thread???
Your desperation is
Worst spurs poster on this site and that says something..
You biting again ))
4 super clubs?
Last season was his win or bust. He's not winning the league this season.
I too, am not too impressed.
I will admit though, if he gets 4th this season, that'll be 2 seasons, top4, back to back. That will be impressive.
Didn't Moyes get 4th place a few years back?
Seriously?
3 of those clubs are absolutely dominant even though two play in the same league. The other struggles to qualify for the CL.
I'm not saying Utd and Bayern aren't huge clubs but they aren't currently in the same bracket as Barca and Real, those 2 right now are the giants of world football.
Serious question as it definitely influences my thinking in this, why were City able to attract Pep and Utd weren't?
I do agree that those are some of the reason. Also working/living in London is another attraction.
But, the 2 biggest factors are usually salary and size/history of the club.
This means that MUFC can attract a player like Pogba, who only wants to play for big clubs. I doubt Spurs would be able to attract Pogba.
The big boys right now are Barca, Real, Bayern, MUFC and probably PSG. Juventus is also an option for a top player.
Spurs are not in that class yet. If they win 5+ leagues in the next 10 years, then they may be heading that way, but until then...
Yes.
At this point in time, yes, go back 10 years and the same was said about Bayern, and what have Real actually won in the last 10? Not as much as people think.
City managed that because of Tixi whom they recruited years ago for this reason, I don't believe this deal was set up in the summer, I think it's been decided a long time ago. Moreover, I assume we tried, but there is no proof even that we were interested, as said already I guess we were but we will never know..
Why would it be win or bust ? Spurs never win anything and are currently in 2nd amidst a group of sides managed by the likes of Mourinho, Guardiola, Wenger, and Klopp.
To be fair they have been competing against probably the best club side seen in the modern era.
No. You are not right. If Man Utd and Tottenham both come in for a player, you lose out. That's all I am saying. I don't see why this is sooo controversial. We have taken 4 players from teams in the Champions League this year. 2 of them were already bigger than Spurs (Dortmund and PSG). This isn't a dig at Spurs as you are my Atletico, yet it isn't a controversial opinion either.
I don't quite get the argument that Man Utd currently not being in the Champions League makes us less attractive. Players would choose us from the long term view of their career, and know that such decisions are made with >1 year in mind.
When a club goes out and signs Mourinho, splashes the cash, attracts most sponsors and has no problem matching wage demands there is little boxes left to tick for the player. Spurs on the other hand are limited in brand and finances, which means regardless of their admirable form, they will still be ranked less attractive than Manchester United. And I don't mean that in a patronising or sour way at all.
When a club goes out and signs Mourinho, splashes the cash, attracts most sponsors and has no problem matching wage demands there is little boxes left to tick for the player. Spurs on the other hand are limited in brand and finances, which means regardless of their admirable form, they will still be ranked less attractive than Manchester United. And I don't mean that in a patronising or sour way at all.
Shaw, Martial, Baily Depay etc all came running. Depay would've got more game time at Liverpool. We get the young talented ones too.
Exactly. If players starts making decision with short term views then everyone will be signing for Leicester. There is more than just whether the club is in CL or not.
Still the fact stands, but I get your point, I wouldn't be against out of the top clubs for Barca to be on their own level if we look over a 10 year period.. but anyway, best let the thread get on with Mauricio comments
It's not one year though is it, it's 2 out of the last 3 and you could might struggle again this year. If you don't make it come May then in the summer some players may well not be looking at you as a CL club anymore.
We are rebuilding no doubt, whilst you are peaking.
But lets get real here - you havent come close to winning anything whilst crap as we have been we still won the cup.
Oh, and signed some world class talent.
In the same way Arsenal will always be a bigger club than Spuds, so will United always be a huge club. What cretin couldnt grasp that?
Its a bit of an anomoly that its taken 2 really. Its unfair to put the pulling power of Moyes & Man Utd and then Mourinho & Man Utd in one basket. One obviously has a much higher attraction than the other.
We don't have Champions League and managed to attract Ibrahimovic, Pogba, Bailley and Mkhitaryan in one window. This is probably the worst time for us to have this debate about Spurs being more attractive.
No they wouldn't because they would still see that Leicester were a 1 season wonder. If Utd missing out on the CL becomes a regularity then it'll be harder and harder to sign very good players.
Why would Spurs even want to attract Pogba? We don't need him and we certainly wouldn't pay £90m for him even if we had £90m going spare.
And btw, United are not in the same top tier as Barca or RM (and nor are PSG) .. and it's not even close.
Maybe but that's also not given. IIRC only 2 teams qualified for CL in 90s from Serie A but there were many teams who had great teams and signed some very good players. For example, Inter didn't qualify for CL for years but still signed Ronaldo.
I think you are looking too much into the last 3 years. Historically I believe those 4 clubs stand out overall.
I'm not sure the Pep point is at all relevant to this. There isn't any real evidence that we were even interested in him. I'm sure we were to some extent, but how much effort we did or didn't make is unknown. Besides most people think there are 2 standout managers in world football currently. Even if we missed one we got the other so it doesn't really have any bearing at all on our status as a club.
Bale says hello. And that was before United started playing Thursday night football.
As for the rest, it's just a continuation of the "big money" obsession that has not served United well for the last 3 years. You get Pogba for £90m, we got Alli for £4m. You pay £30m for Schneiderlin, we get Dier for £5m. You pay £32m for Bailly, we get Alderweireld for £14m. You pay £32m for Shaw, we got Rose for £1m. And so on.
As have we. There is a really good chance we would have added 2 more Champions Leagues if we hadn't come up against a near unbeatable team in the final.
Bale going to Tottenham doesn't mean he chose them over United. Southampton's financial troubles meant an early settlement to Tottenham was better business. IIRC Bale himself never got a straight choice between the two clubs: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...d-missed-out-on-Gareth-Bale-for-just-10m.html
And yes, we would pay big money. But we're more likely to go for more established stars given the size of our club and elasticity of our wage bill. I'm sure Spurs would do the same. If Daniel Levy granted Poch with an unlimited transfer kitty, I'm sure Poch would start bringing in more established names and less unknown talent.
Yeah but Inter were still a different proposition than Leicester even with them being champion. Look at the players they had back then and besides Serie A was the league to play in at the time.
See this is why you have such a bad reputation on here. Ridiculous post. Of course Spurs would want Pogba and Levy would pay £90m for him in a heartbeat.
I think he was trying to say that if £90m is spare, they wouldn't spend on Pogba because they already have a well oiled midfield. Presumably it would be allocated to more offensive areas of the pitch or towards wingers.
I'm comparing inter with ManUtd.
We won trophy, you won feck all
Yes it does. Bale said so himself: "Man United were interested in me but I wanted to play first-team football"
And in any case, why would he have cared about S'hampton's financial troubles - do you imagine he said to himself "well, I really want to go to United, but I'll do S'hampton a favour and go to Spurs instead?"
I agree that you "are more likely to go for more established stars" ... but that's been part of your problem, partly driven by a felt need to flash the cash in effort to prove that you can still get one over the likes of RM.
Lol ... that's your delusion I'm afraid.
Nobody has said Spurs are more attractive than Utd, that's people misreading.
I doubt that, Levy hates to overpay, even the Sissoko deal which could be classed as over paying is set up more akin to a loan.
Pogba isn't worth £90m or anywhere near even in this inflated market. He's a good player no doubt but that money is way over the top, but Utd can afford to overspend so it's moot.
I don't think so. This thread has turned into a discussion of Spurs status as a club. Signing superstars elevates this immensely. If you are thinking along the lines of 'we have Dier or whoever, we don't need Pogba' then you are seriously missing the point.
I absolutely guarantee you that in 5 years time, with increased revenue from your new stadium, your club will be more than happy to pay bigger fees for bigger names.
Fair enough re. Bale. Other reports highlighting the granularity of the transfer contradict what Bale has said but he's more reliable then they are. Assuming of course he isn't just giving quotes on hindsight to appease fans.
I think ideally we'd only want to pay a massive amount if we deem the player to be worth it (from the performances and brand image views together). With us missing out on Champions League two years, it obviously meant we had to pay over the odds, but thats something Spurs would easily do themselves had they had the money to do so.. so I'm not sure what higher ground you think you're taking on the debate.
That Spurs spend less and get hidden gems? Well yeah, but thats because they're obliged to under the limitations of the transfer budget, not because they are actively choosing to.