There aren't many entertaining options available then. Entertainment comes with risk !
-
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.
There aren't many entertaining options available then. Entertainment comes with risk !
The foundations of this club have been built upon entertaining options.
I would break the bank to get Allegri.
And Simeone does bash his players in public
Keep your money. Did you not see them look lost and confused when we told them. Here have the ball for 90 minutes.
What about giving it to Jardim til the end of the season on interim basis. I know he was sacked from Monaco but think he would definitely get us playing better. Thoughts?
Jardim on a interim basis would be fantastic to be fair.
I know they're fun retro cars... but cmon man, surely we should be looking to improve on the Chevrolet years rather than regress...?
Oooooh AllegRI...
that isn't true at all. Under Fergie and Gill there was a plan. But a plan that suited one man's will. Since he left we have wrongly imagined we can find another miracle man to could plan around. Instead of having a plan and acquiring correct people to achieve it like others have done.
The fact you clearly do not understand how a club without a footballing identity, nor proper long term planning nor good recruitment can hamstring ANY manager says it all.
You clearly think landing by plain chance on the next SAF, rather then planning and setting up to find and thrive under a manager that suits an identity and clear plan is the way to go. Good luck with that. I hope you won't be the quickest to complain when a Woodward follows your lead and absolutely nothing changes success wise.
Gerrard.
Becaccece is the upcoming manager from Argentina. And also ariel Holan who’s 45 out of the 50 best in the world according to 442
Gerrard.
Brendan Rodgers, Wenger, beard guy from wolves, Roberto Mancini, Conte, lopetugi
Whoever the exact opposite to Mark Hughes is.
Steve Bruce and Moyes too.
Exactly. Also people just rate the structure based on the results on pitch, rather than in isolation.
For example, Spurs were a mess before Poch took over and after that with the work he did, they look like a properly run club. Just look at the players at Spurs when Poch became manager.
Gomes, Chiriches, Lenon, Soldado, Adebayor, Capoue, Naughton, Townsend, Dawsom, Chadli, Sandro, Bentaleb.
Even on redcafe people laughed at Spurs for squandering Bale money and players like Walker and Rose looked very average and Dembele's career was going nowhere. Now Walker is the best RB in the league, Rose's peak was very good and Dembele was one of the best CM in the league in last few years and they have completely changed their team. Funny how that coincided with manager who had proper plan.
Liverpool's previous owners sold the club in Oct 2010, since then their league position. 6th, 8th, 7th, 2nd, 6th.
Their squad when Klopp took over
Clyne, Toure, Lovren, Benteke, Henderson, Sakho, Moreno, Lallana, Lucas, Mignloet, Allen, Can, Origi, Ings, Ibe,
Liverpool's league position from Klopp's full season.
4th, 4th, right now 2nd. They also reached CL finals, Europa league finals and domestic cup finals. Broke goal scoring record in CL and now have one of the best teams in the league.
Funny how that coincided with Klopp signing for them, before him they signed so many average players with good player here and there.
It's just one more weak excuse. I will never understand how coach's inability to make his team work hard or string couple of passes together has anything to do with what the structure is at the club.
Chelsea looked shit last season and with same structure Sarri has made them play very good football. Same with Benitez and Sarri at Napoli. Benitez's football was poor and with same board and owners Sarri made them play superb football.
Just check Bayern, with same board and owners Pep played superb football, Heynckes played good one too and now Kovac looks so out of depth.
I'm more certain I want Jardim in at least temporarily. He's the one who gave Martial a jump in minutes. He's also one that integrated Mbappe into the first team. Seeing as we have Greenwood, Gomes, Tuanzebe, Pereira, Chong, O'Connor, etc... we should be hiring a manager that can give them the best chance to succeed. Just 1-3 of those being useful squad members could help ease our wage bill which can allow us to spend in other areas.
And who said we should not plan and set up a vision for the club? That's literally been my one want for this club and is a big reason why I want Mourinho out. He doesn't fit Manchester United. I've also said countless times that it's more likely that we hire the wrong manager than the right one based on this. But this is irrelevant to how much influence a great manager has on the side's performances apart from that initial period leading to immediate success. This is why I disagree with your statement that the manager will be hamstrung by Woodward apart from that initial period.
But lets say we do not have a vision for what we want. Let's say Woodward by chance picks a manager that does fit that vision that we as fans want and need, but one that Woodward is clueless about. How does Woodward hamstring the manager at that point? I would like for you to explain it to me. In this hypothetical, all of the structure remains the same, but it's the same manager that a competent board would have arrived at.
I'll retract or rather revise my statement. Inconsistent player turnover can make it more difficult for a manager when he first starts off because they're likely not the kind of players that lends itself to the new manager's vision for his side (provided they're on opposite side of philosophy). Other than that though? None of what you said does what you said it does.
And who said we should not plan and set up a vision for the club? That's literally been my one want for this club and is a big reason why I want Mourinho out. He doesn't fit Manchester United. I've also said countless times that it's more likely that we hire the wrong manager than the right one based on this. But this is irrelevant to how much influence a great manager has on the side's performances apart from that initial period leading to immediate success. This is why I disagree with your statement that the manager will be hamstrung by Woodward apart from that initial period.
But lets say we do not have a vision for what we want. Let's say Woodward by chance picks a manager that does fit that vision that we as fans want and need, but one that Woodward is clueless about. How does Woodward hamstring the manager at that point? I would like for you to explain it to me. In this hypothetical, all of the structure remains the same, but it's the same manager that a competent board would have arrived at.
Last edited:
As I said earlier, You simply don't understand it! That is why you can say this
With a straight face....United's football operations is currently a shambles and its fully reflected on pitch in our haphazard recruitment, playing style and hiring and persisting with a wrong man in charge.
Puhlease. Your ENTIRE argument from the get go has been for us to merely hire a progressive manager of the Klopp/Pochetino ilk who l will solve all our current problems.
Openly rejecting any notion that we need to restructure football operations first, by stripping Woodward of that role and hiring a top DOF to shape the long term direction of the club, playing style and recruitment . The VERY REASON I've been at odds with you!
As I said. You don't get it. You have a better chance of being hit by lightening than for a United with no off field plan, no football identity they want to have and a chairman who recruits only galacticos or what he 'feels' the manager should buy over what the manager reccomends him, finding
a perfect manager who can give united fans back a playing identity, success and flowing champaygne football.
The fact you came up with "Let's say Woodward by chance picks a manager that does fit that vision that we as fans want and need, but one that Woodward is clueless about. ' proves you plain dont get it.
Our total lack of direction, in recruitment and planning has given us 3 different managers and player recruitment cycles varrying degrees of wrong for the job. Yet miraculously you STILL think in that state we can find the right man and lay out a platform for him to thrive. That's what Einstein referred to as repeating an experiement in the exact same way time and again yet expecting to yield different results.
Last edited:
Which football club in England has an identity which has not been influenced by their current manager in charge? Someone please tell me?
I don’t remember City playing this good football and making every player they buy stick before Pep either.
I don’t remember City playing this good football and making every player they buy stick before Pep either.
City for 5 straight seasons have had a direction, an identity and a long term plan to install Guardiola as the man to help them climb over the mountain top. Their results speak for themselves. Their style got increasingly attacking, plus possesion friendly with recruitment suited to it, until the master arrived.
Swansea for another example were successful as long as they stuck to one identity evwn through changing managers. Same as Southampton. Both have been in various levels of decline since they abandoned it.
1. Our haphazard player recruitment is due to giving too much power to the manager. When the next manager comes along with a different vision for his side, he has more players he has no use for in his side going forward. Persisting with a man in charge and what I just said (and you said) are all failures of Woodward. This will be solved if United had a vision for what they want the side to be. Now explain why all of this is guaranteed 100% to hamstring the next manager and automatically dooms the next manager 100%.
2. That was never my entire argument. No idea why you would think that. I've been really consistent in my views. I can go further back to prove this btw.
See: https://www.redcafe.net/threads/the...rier-time-again.441140/page-434#post-23329985
https://www.redcafe.net/threads/gary-neville.378242/page-8#post-23300606
Here is what I directly told you
3. You still don't seem to understand my stance, nor how Woodward's failings directly impact on field performances. You seem to make a jump too far. You go from "here is why we're in this mess" (which I agree with), and because of this "Next manager is doomed to fail because those directly impact our manager." The latter is what I disagree with. The only way Woodward can fail the manager is if he doesn't properly back him even if the manager shows progress that is worth believing in. And the only other way he can fail the manager is that not having a plan leads to inconsistent managerial hirings that can directly clash with each of the manager's vision for what he wants in the side.
You thinking that I'm at odds with you is due to you making the jump and failing to prove the next manager is guaranteed to fail unless Woodward fixes his mistakes.
4.How on earth does me asking you that question prove I don't get it? I'm literally asking you to answer a very possible reality and you won't answer it because it shows the flaw in your entire argument.
I'll explain it to you again.
Woodward and the board have a shared vision for what they want the club to be. This now means we have consistent managerial turnover unlike right now, which leads to consistent player turnover. Great. This is what I want. This leads us to hiring the right manager. Does this manager somehow escape the fact that the previous manager (Mourinho) was a complete anithesis to what he is? No. So right off the bat we know for a fact Woodward's vision did not solve that problem at least for this 1st manager post-Vision United. Meaning in the short term it's completely irrelevant to how much impact a single manager can have on on the pitch performances. This correction begins to pay dividends long term.
Is it impossible for Woodward to stumble upon this manager even without correcting his mistakes? No it is not. This is why I don't say the next manager is guaranteed to fail due to Woodward's incompetency. What I have been saying and will continue to say is that the right manager can have a huge effect on our success and Woodward's incompetency will doom us to fail long term, not short term (what you are saying). Note, that more likely to fail due to hiring the wrong manager does not equate to doom to fail as soon as the next manager.
Last edited:
Okay so out of all the clubs Swansea and Southampton. One club relegated and another pretty much fighting relegation. But yet United’s long term future is integral to having a plan.
Maybe we just need a good manager. Just maybe.
Also it's funny how City signed possession friendly coaches and never topped possession table once before Pep arrived and they didn't even average 50% possession in CL before Pep. They were in 18th or 19th position in CL when it comes to possession.
So you have taken me mentioning just two to think it doesnt matter?
What of Burnley and Bournrmourth. Who have both the term planning and right man in charge? Spurs too. Always had an identity and now the right man is taking them places. Liverpool have been like us for ages. Relying on just finding 'the right guys'. They last won a league title with a still playing Daglish...
But go on dimissing it. Let's just hire Pochetino or Howe and 'see what happens'. 'Just maybe' we'll strike gold again.
think Jardim would be the one if Jose was to go mid season which sadly I don't see happening, Actually really like Marco Silva at Everton, only thing what puts me off is the fact of our last manager from Everton. which really shouldn't be put against him, not sure I would fancy Zidane to try rebuild the team if I am honest.
I asked you to mention them. You mentioned two. Now your telling me about Burnley and Bournemouth. My main point it your making a hessy fit about something so minute to success.. it’s only working with City and even City is flawed but cba to go into it unless you want to. But in short it’s only working because they have Guardiola.
You mention Liverpool... was Liverpool’s problem finding the right guys or just lack of funding and SAF? I don’t remember them being able to buy Rio Ferdinand and Juan Veron.
Bullshit. If any of the managers under him had 'too much power' he'd have recruited for them every buyable target they wanted and sold who so ever they wanted sold. That lie needs to be perished.....
Seriously? I need to 'explain' why United having 'no vision for what they want the side to be' will hamstring another managerial recruitment? Seriously? Even when you replied with the very answer in your own post?
I spent a whole day going back and forth with you on that very issue. Quit trying to switch goal posts
I understand it all too well. You simply just don't want to accept its implications and misguidedly think its I who doesnt get how Woodward's faillings are directly impacting United short and long term on the field.
No. Im merely following the facts to their logical conclusion. You instead are burying your head in the sand imagining merely bringing in a new manager will magically make the said problems go away
Wow. Im the one who has argued from the start:
1. Woodward doesnt fully back his managers
2. Has no long term vision for the club playing style no recruitment wise Leading to both poor identification of managers and bad player recruitment
3. Repeatedly thinks he knows whats better for the manager he hired than what player should suit them
And you are STILL claiming you dont SEE how that will still affect any other boss recruited? Really?
Yet in your own post you have just admitted that the next boss will most likely fail if ALL the things Ive highlighted are present?
No. You rather keep skipping over my argument. Repeating it back to me exactly why it would work. Then asking me to explain how it works.
No they DONT. Which is the CRUX OF THE MATTER! That is why we have hired 3 ill suited managers to the job required at United and have repeated haphazard recruitment. Plus ssticking with a failing manager too long. Which if conitinued as is now will not wield any sustained success for any future manager better suited to the United job. Your repeated denial of this is PRECISELY why I keep insisting you do not understand.
.....
Last edited:
There style of because of Pep don’t make them fool you this was some big master plan to get a bunch of players ready for Tika taka. Our LVG side played better possession football than them. With Mike Smalling at the back. It’s all down to c
How your coach wants you to play at the end of the day.
Yeah, people just see the results and then praise or criticize the whole club based on that. See Spurs for example by the same poster, they are praised for having proper structure when before Poch took over, they signed lot of poor players and had hard time with coaches.
It worked before they had him too. They beat Fergie to a league title remember? Then they won it back in Moyes' day. That wasnt by accident.
You seriously think its mere lack of 'purchasing power' that sunk Liverpool from serial title winners to what they are now? Really?
You're incredibly dishonest. Even though I clearly linked my posts where my posts were incredibly consistent and I literally said
https://www.redcafe.net/threads/d-m...as-board-backing.442035/page-24#post-23152796
I'm not sure what you're trying to pull. Everyone can read how consistent my comments are and nowhere have I ever stated you weren't consistent. I have just consistently disagreed with you because your absolutism in your statement is far too removed from reality.
I also did state how Woodward hamstrings the manager, but those two ways aren't really all that relevant to the next United manager apart from the initial period as I've stated. One of which isn't avoidable regardless of whether United fixes their problems at the top. None of this means the next manager is doomed to fail btw. It only means that it's more likely that the next manager fails because it will likely lead to the wrong hire. Woodward just needs to back the manager, not cause any drama, and for future managers needs to be consistent in his hirings so that the next manager isn't too far off from what our next manager wants out of the side.
You still didn't answer my question btw. Just answer my simple question.
1. Is it impossible for Woodward to hire the same manager if he had a plan/direction/vision and if he didn't have a plan/direction/vision? This will end the argument once and for all.
You have once again failed to prove your point. Answer the question. If it is impossible then you would be right and I would be wrong.
This is a logical argument for why a managerial hiring is all it takes to fix us in the short term. Not long term as I have consistently stated, because long term will require Woodward to make countless player transfers and countless managerial hirings and it's impossible to get it right all the time. A Structural problem of the club likely leads to a wrong managerial hiring, it doesn't guarantee it.
Understand the difference between fixing a long term problem and a short term problem.
1. Only evidence for that is this 3rd summer transfer window and it comes from a place of distrust after failing to prove he's worth trusting in. I don't feel that was a problem for LVG's 2 years at United nor at Mou's first 2 years at United. I don't think that's much of a problem.
2. Correct. However, player recruitment is tied to giving too much power to the manager. The manager has his own vision for what he wants his side to be and this can be drastically different from the previous manager. You can't exclude that bit of context.
3. Only proof of that is the 3rd season which will happen with a DOF regardless because again, they need to fit the vision that you yourself (myself included) wants at United.
When I say will most likely fail it's because I think it will lead to the wrong hire which will then cause all 3 of those points you and I have talked about to show themselves repeatedly. How does #2 affect the next manager? Only the player recruitment portion is (due to the hiring of Mourinho not being under the vision we want) will hamstring the next manager as its impossible for future managerial hirings to affect the current manager. Regardless of whether we fix that, that will remain a problem for the next manager no matter what.
Understand the difference between "guaranteed to fail" and "more likely to fail."
Again, my queston "1. Is it impossible for Woodward to hire the same manager if he had a plan/direction/vision and if he didn't have a plan/direction/vision?" stands. If it's impossible, then yes there is no quick fix for the short term on the field performances. If it's not impossible, then you have failed to prove the next manager is doomed to fail due to the boogey man that is Woodward.
Last edited:
They spent a shitload to win it too. Had nothing to do with structure if they couldn’t pay big wages Yaya Toure and Sergio Aguero wouldn’t exist there. That has nothing to do with structure. Structure allows you survive when things aren’t working out like lack of funds.
Liverpool’s demise is down to pure arrogance and lack of keeping up with the times. Seeing us expand our stadium and trusting in a manager like SAF. Whilst they stick to past methods which didn’t work in the new football environment. Abit like sticking with Jose Mourinho and his outdated counter attacking football.
Nobody worth their salt is coming here. I'd actually think less of someone for wanting to manage us whilst Woodward and the board are here. It would show a lack of intelligence on their part. For e.g if Pochettino decided to leave Spurs for us, he would go down in my estimations.
Just give it Nicky Butt, Giggs or someone that knows the club and will give young players a chance.
Just give it Nicky Butt, Giggs or someone that knows the club and will give young players a chance.
Give it to Mckenna.
Made wages and marque signings or limited funds and capped wages. Yes Poch would be mad to leave that. Chatting rubbish as usual I see.
I'll give you a £100 pound bet to the running costs of the forum that Pochettino doesn't leave Spurs for United this summer.
The Caf is in denial about the state of the club.
Solskjaer?
I never said he would. I will give you a £100 bet though that the next manger that comes he doesn’t lack any financial backing from the board.
What was this long term plan in the last 15 years?
A decade ago we sold our best player for a world record sum and bought in Obertan, Owen and Valencia for a fraction of that, whilst the Glazers banked the rest. Not great planning after losing to Barcelona in a UCL final.
Our midfield got so bad that we had all sorts of makeshift players there. It was absolutely atrocious when you compared it to our European rivals. The 'no value in the market' was taking shape. Whilst City were signing Aguero and Silva.
Then you had the succession plan which David Gill went on record as saying the man to replace SAF would have to fit the criteria and traditions of the club and have European pedigree. David Moyes didn't fit any of that.
LVG even said that he couldn't believe how unbalanced the squad was and how messed up we were structurally for such a huge club. The difference was that SAF helped paper over the cracks for many years and kept us winning.
We still have problems at the club, but hiring managers who don't align with the traditions of the club, makes the situation much worse.
He will receive backing to get back in the top 4.