Man Utd set to appoint Director of Football (when hell freezes over)

[bleedred]

Not spending record amounts every summer is a strategy. Its being made out Mourinho has been given no money at all, in 3 years he's spent 300m, logic would say he has been backed.

Again you go on about no coherent strategy, we went from Moyes, to Van Gaal, to Mourinho and won trophies and made it back in the top 4 two years running, notsure why you cant see the strategy in that.
And maybe Mourinho is here next year and is given 100m+, that would be near half a billion he would have spend. I dont see how anyone in their right mind can not say has not been backed. You cant get every single player you want and moan about it not being backed if you don't get them

Yes, we did get to top 4, but what next? How do you plan on reducing the 20 point gap to city?, without investment, do you expect the manager to just try to get the best of the players and close the gap.

I have said clearly in the previous posts that Jose is completely to blame and I don't back him at all, but the board is also to blame for a multitude of reasons and if we don't recognize it, we will become the next Arsenal even before we realize what happened.

My question regarding the strategy is simple, "Does the board want us to close the gap to city?, If so how was this addressed in the summer?." They should have either brought in a new manager to get the best of what we have, or backed Jose with more investment. They did neither. We are just riding on the same boat while others around us have either caught up or raced far ahead, incase of city.

 

[Moonwalker]

It's easy to say how Mourinho signing were underwhelming and all, but try to remember what happen when some of them out of form or not available. Ain't we worse with what was already here from previous regime?

Sure the board doesn't have trust in Mourinho thus no more signings, then what? Why is he here?

It's not that dichotomous. Perhaps they do trust his ability to identify talent, but they don't appreciate his willingness to squander cash for self serving reasons.

And if they felt he's no good at transfers, they should absolutely do everything in their power to keep him coaching the team, because if he's achieved what he has (and that's plenty) in his career without any transfer nous, that just means he's an absolute wizard at everything else.

Perhaps they have identified someone better but he's unavailable until the end of this season. Do you then sack the man who has tailored and assembled this team, and is therefore the best man to guide it?

The space for interpretations beyond "sack him or back him" (with a very quixotic definition of 'back him') is limitless; you don't have to be a postmodernist to figure that one out.

 

[lilcurt]

I'm not a fan of our board at all but feel Jose is the bigger problem.

For me where Ed and the board as a whole are being completely niave is by being fence sitting tortoises. You either back the manager completely (transfers and all) or you believe he isn't right for the club and move him on. This middle position serves no one and will only work to the detriment of the club.

I can have some sympathy for the board, if I was sat there I'd consider the style of football is tumescent, the players he has signed either haven't worked or have underperformed (perhaps barring Matic) and his relationship with the dressing room gets weaker by the day. Is that a manager I would want to invest further in? Probably not... However if that is the decision reached you need to move him on after identifying the direction abd shortlist you want to go for, something I have no confidence this board will be forward planning for.

 

[bleedred]

It's not that dichotomous. Perhaps they do trust his ability to identify talent, but they don't appreciate his willingness to squander cash for self serving reasons.

And if they felt he's no good at transfers, they should absolutely do everything in their power to keep him coaching the team, because if he's achieved what he has (and that's plenty) in his career without any transfer nous, that just means he's an absolute wizard at everything else.

Perhaps they have identified someone better but he's unavailable until the end of this season. Do you then sack the man who has tailored and assembled this team, and is therefore the best man to guide it?

The space for interpretations beyond "sack him or back him" (with a very quixotic definition of 'back him') is limitless; you don't have to be a postmodernist to figure that one out.

The board will still be at fault for any number of those interpretations, because if this season is another write off, its going to set us back again a lot.

Because the question to the board at the start of the summer was pretty simple as I replied to another poster.

"Do we have the intention to close the gap to city", If yes, how do we go about it?".

From what happened over the summer, it would seem that the answer is "No".

 

[Revan]

It's what was leaked to almost every paper.

Nope. It was clearly we can spend as much as needed if we can get a player who is much better than what we have and is of right age (example Varane), rather than Varane or dust.

 

[Moonwalker]

I'm not a fan of our board at all but feel Jose is the bigger problem.

For me where Ed and the board as a whole are being completely niave is by being fence sitting tortoises. You either back the manager completely (transfers and all) or you believe he isn't right for the club and move him on. This middle position serves no one and will only work to the detriment of the club.

I can have some sympathy for the board, if I was sat there I'd consider the style of football is tumescent, the players he has signed either haven't worked or have underperformed (perhaps barring Matic) and his relationship with the dressing room gets weaker by the day. Is that a manager I would want to invest further in? Probably not... However if that is the decision reached you need to move him on after identifying the direction abd shortlist you want to go for, something I have no confidence this board will be forward planning for.

You identify three positions there, as if that's all there is to it. In reality it's much more like a continuum of various degrees of backing. Absolute backing is something completely fantastic. We can rule that one out as a possibility, that any manager ever had that, and you can assert that just from the little that we know that's publicised.

And if you want to know where on that continuum is the support for Jose Mourinho from our board, you look no further than the spending table. That one will tell you Jose has more reasons to feel backed than most other managers.

 

[automaticflare]

The board will still be at fault for any number of those interpretations, because if this season is another write off, its going to set us back again a lot.

Yup it is that stagnation that is a real problem

 

[Vialli_92]

If they weren't going to back Mourinho they should have sacked him

No point keeping a manager around that you don't believe in

 

[VP89]

If they weren't going to back Mourinho they should have sacked him

No point keeping a manager around that you don't believe in

This.

Either back and spend or sack and move on.

 

[Janson]

Klopp gets his team to play football that jose can only dream of. If Jose played klopp level of football and the board over ruled him there would be riots.

What level is that? They finished fourth. Jose could only dream of getting to that level.

 

[AllezLesDiables]

Anyone know anything about either of these guys?

EDIT - turns out it was in the article itself. Quite like the sound of Mitchell:

"Formerly with Spurs and Southampton, Paul Mitchell, a Mancunian by birth, secured the signatures of Sadio Mane, Dejan Lovren, Nathaniel Clyne while at St Mary's, before selling on for huge profits.

At Spurs, he set up a recruitment system which brought in Dele Alli, Toby Alderweireld, Heung-Min Son and Kieran Trippier."

At least Pogba would be guaranteed great hair.

 

[Hernandez - BFA]

Hurry up with this shit please!!

Woodward needs to stay the feck out from anything related to football.

I can't see it being done for a few more months.

 

[steffyr2]

I can't see it being done for a few more months.

When there are no buys in January.

 

[ti vu]

It's not that dichotomous. Perhaps they do trust his ability to identify talent, but they don't appreciate his willingness to squander cash for self serving reasons.

And if they felt he's no good at transfers, they should absolutely do everything in their power to keep him coaching the team, because if he's achieved what he has (and that's plenty) in his career without any transfer nous, that just means he's an absolute wizard at everything else.

Perhaps they have identified someone better but he's unavailable until the end of this season. Do you then sack the man who has tailored and assembled this team, and is therefore the best man to guide it?

The space for interpretations beyond "sack him or back him" (with a very quixotic definition of 'back him') is limitless; you don't have to be a postmodernist to figure that one out.

I see what you're coming from. Let's say I am not gonna disagree but more of having doubt in our decision makers. Just many questions.

Who are they in this board beside Woodward? They , but did they suggest alternatives or believe in there was noonebetter out there? Why Ribalta left with rumor about he was not afforded enough influence? Sure he got promotion by join Zenit, but why wouldn't he get promotion here now that there is the talk of us want to have DOF? If board already had someone and playing the waiting game, then why don't they do the ground work? Look, buying all the players in one window has been proven to be tall order. Why not started now? For example, City spent few years working the ground for Pep landing. Why is the contradictory in keeping manager you don't trust when he can set the club back before the new man come in, leaving mountain of work? Did they have agreement with Mourinho that he would be only allowed X amount of signings/fund before he is to make do with what he has? Or they made promises such as you improved our result and we would continue to back up you? Moyes and LVG pretty much said about Woodward gave false promises/assurance. Is this another case? Would thing change with new manager, next season, or same repeat shite?

Mourinho had been rumored to have many good pick when it comes to transfer for his previous clubs. Most of the problem for him again lied with the board thinks differently than what he suggested.

 

[CA1]

I strongly believe that the club need to change its structure that the football side needs to be run by football people but the investment talks are ridiculous. But our problem is simply that our managers are wank not that we didn't spent a billion yet. And the board only has itself to blame since they chose them.

Mourinho is not a wank manager. He's one of the most successful football managers of all time.

Van Gaal was a success at Ajax, Barcelona and Bayern Munich.

The next manager will struggle, I'm telling you now.

With our squad, we did well to finish 2nd last year.

And then when Mourinho wanted to improve it by shifting out players who aren't good enough like Rojo, Shaw, Martial to fill replace them for the summer gone, Woodward said no.

Why? Because he's incompetent and more importantly, because his paymasters said enough has been spent we're happy where we are. Top 4 money. Winning the league is a sporting honour, not a financial one.

Wake up my friend.

 

[goin4glory]

Nope. It was clearly we can spend as much as needed if we can get a player who is much better than what we have and is of right age (example Varane), rather than Varane or dust.

And Toby isn't clearly better?

 

[George Owen]

I can't see it being done for a few more months.

For sure. I just hope they pick the right choice, who could spend the whole current season studying and preparing a success plan starting from next summer.

 

[steffyr2]

It's not that dichotomous. Perhaps they do trust his ability to identify talent, but they don't appreciate his willingness to squander cash for self serving reasons.

And if they felt he's no good at transfers, they should absolutely do everything in their power to keep him coaching the team, because if he's achieved what he has (and that's plenty) in his career without any transfer nous, that just means he's an absolute wizard at everything else.

Perhaps they have identified someone better but he's unavailable until the end of this season. Do you then sack the man who has tailored and assembled this team, and is therefore the best man to guide it?

The space for interpretations beyond "sack him or back him" (with a very quixotic definition of 'back him') is limitless; you don't have to be a postmodernist to figure that one out.

What can you possibly mean by this? Does the board think mourinho has the players out mowing his lawn? There isn't any way that they could trust his ability to identify talent and not see it as good for the team.

If you (or Mourinho or the players) think that Mourinho is just a 9 month caretaker manager, wow! what a mess of a season this will be.

 

[lilcurt]

You identify three positions there, as if that's all there is to it. In reality it's much more like a continuum of various degrees of backing. Absolute backing is something completely fantastic. We can rule that one out as a possibility, that any manager ever had that, and you can assert that just from the little that we know that's publicised.

And if you want to know where on that continuum is the support for Jose Mourinho from our board, you look no further than the spending table. That one will tell you Jose has more reasons to feel backed than most other managers.

Of course there are many variables all of which we cannot see. The point I was trying to make was that Ed and the board aren't decisive and it feels like we always take an age to act. This goes beyond Jose and can be seen when looking back at everything post SAF.

 

[Castia]

Not defending Jose here, but that's stupid logic. Klopp got Karius, so we shouldn't let him buy another GK.

Well if you had 6 goalkeepers on the books in which 2 were signed by Klopp you’d be wondering why the feck you need a 7th though right?

Point being if he’s not happy with his defence then clear em out, I won’t blame Ed for not signing another defender when we have 5 first team players and 2 out on loan.

 

[Moonwalker]

I see what you're coming from. Let's say I am not gonna disagree but more of having doubt in our decision makers. Just many questions.

Who are they in this board beside Woodward? They , but did they suggest alternatives or believe in there was noonebetter out there? Why Ribalta left with rumor about he was not afforded enough influence? Sure he got promotion by join Zenit, but why wouldn't he get promotion here now that there is the talk of us want to have DOF? If board already had someone and playing the waiting game, then why don't they do the ground work? Look, buying all the players in one window has been proven to be tall order. Why not started now? For example, City spent few years working the ground for Pep landing. Why is the contradictory in keeping manager you don't trust when he can set the club back before the new man come in, leaving mountain of work? Did they have agreement with Mourinho that he would be only allowed X amount of signings/fund before he is to make do with what he has? Or they made promises such as you improved our result and we would continue to back up you? Moyes and LVG pretty much said about Woodward gave false promises/assurance. Is this another case? Would thing change with new manager, next season, or same repeat shite?

Mourinho had been rumored to have many good pick when it comes to transfer for his previous clubs. Most of the problem for him again lied with the board thinks differently than what he suggested.

It would be an understatement if I said I'm not omniscient on these matters. I wonder about many of those questions myself and then ponder some additional conundrums, all the time. I'm just trying to argue against a very crude "sack him or back him" argument that has gained currency on here against better judgment.

 

[CA1]

Well if you had 6 goalkeepers on the books in which 2 were signed by Klopp you’d be wondering why the feck you need a 7th though right?

Long been established that Mourinho simply gives a list and Woodward signs them regardless of order. He's the director of football. He ran the rule on not wanting Alderweireld this summer don't forget. Not good enough, apparently.

It's time for Ed Woodward to be hounded out of town.

 

[goin4glory]

Well if you had 6 goalkeepers on the books in which 2 were signed by Klopp you’d be wondering why the feck you need a 7th though right?

And how many goalkeepers did Pep go through before he was content? There's always an element of risk bringing in unproven players, when it turns out they aren't good enough the smart move isn't to dig your heels in it's to recognise they aren't good enough and move on as quickly as possible.

 

[Dr. StrangeHate]

What level is that? They finished fourth. Jose could only dream of getting to that level.

Jose could only dream of playing the style of football that klopp has implemented. Klopp hasn't won trophies so far but the way they blow teams away now, in addition to the good investments, would anyone be surprised if they started winning. They have created a team better than ours while spending less than us (net spend, yes it matters).

 

[Castia]

And how many goalkeepers did Pep go through before he was content? There's always an element of risk bringing in unproven players, when it turns out they aren't good enough the smart move isn't to dig your heels in it's to recognise they aren't good enough and move on as quickly as possible.

The problem with that though is he must think Smalling and Jones are good enough too, they play an awful lot of football and there’s no links with either being surplus to requirements.

Then he signed Lindelof and Bailly so already he’s got 4 defenders who he must be happy with and that’s not even counting Rojo.

Another defender added in the summer would make it 6 first team CB’s it’s too many.

If he’s not happy with the back line clear them out.

Pep bought Bravo and Ederson by the way but he got rid of Hart and Caballero it’s nothing alike.

 

[jymufc20]

Jose could only dream of playing the style of football that klopp has implemented. Klopp hasn't won trophies so far but the way they blow teams away now, in addition to the good investments, would anyone be surprised if they started winning. They have created a team better than ours while spending less than us (net spend, yes it matters).

Looks like Phil Thompson has infiltrated the caf.

 

[Moonwalker]

Of course there are many variables all of which we cannot see. The point I was trying to make was that Ed and the board aren't decisive and it feels like we always take an age to act. This goes beyond Jose and can be seen when looking back at everything post SAF.

It's quite possible that Ed Woodward isn't the most vigilant negotiator, however the feeling of "we always take ages", "and look how swiftly Chelsea do it" are phenomena born out of sheer solipsism on the part of our fans, and they contribute to the assessment in no small part.

But even if you were to conclude that Woodward had a lot of screw ups, that would still leave you in wont of an explanation of how a manager who's spent an absolute fortune on players is considered to not have backing.

 

[Janson]

Jose could only dream of playing the style of football that klopp has implemented. Klopp hasn't won trophies so far but the way they blow teams away now, in addition to the good investments, would anyone be surprised if they started winning. They have created a team better than ours while spending less than us (net spend, yes it matters).

Why would he dream about it when he doesn't want to play that way? He's won more than Klopp can ever dream of himself by playing counterattacking football.

They're not better than us until they finish above us, simple. No matter how pretty they're football is.

 

[Litch]

Why would he dream about it when he doesn't want to play that way? He's won more than Klopp can ever dream of himself by playing counterattacking football.

They're not better than us until they finish above us, simple. No matter how pretty they're football is.

Agree. I guarantee if it was the other way round, there would be loads moaning on here that we were all style and no substance.

 

[Vault Dweller]

I have no experience running a football club or anything, but it seems to me that a simple choice was required in the summer. Back the manager in the summer with who he wants, and then if the season goes wrong, then it’s the managers/players fault. Or, sack the manager. If you aren’t going to give the manager the backing, and then decide to brief the press that no one better was available, you are isolating the manager and sticking your head in the sand.

Woodward took the easy decision and done nothing. He may not be at fault for the defeat today, but he certainly is an issue.

 

[goin4glory]

The problem with that though is he must think Smalling and Jones are good enough too, they play an awful lot of football and there’s no links with either being surplus to requirements.

Then he signed Lindelof and Bailly so already he’s got 4 defenders who he must be happy with and that’s not even counting Rojo.

Another defender added in the summer would make it 6 first team CB’s it’s too many.

If he’s not happy with the back line clear them out.

Pep bought Bravo and Ederson by the way but he got rid of Hart and Caballero it’s nothing alike.

Buying Lindelof and Bailly wasn't a sign that he didn't think Jones/Smalling were good enough? They play because the other CBs are always injured.

Yes I agree he should clear out some of the deadwood given the clubs wage bill but ideally you should bring in players first so you're not held to ransom but the club you're buying from.

 

[Djemba-Djemba]

I have no experience running a football club or anything, but it seems to me that a simple choice was required in the summer. Back the manager in the summer with who he wants, and then if the season goes wrong, then it’s the managers/players fault. Or, sack the manager. If you aren’t going to give the manager the backing, and then decide to brief the press that no one better was available, you are isolating the manager and sticking your head in the sand.

Woodward took the easy decision and done nothing. He may not be at fault for the defeat today, but he certainly is an issue.

Fully agree with this.

By not giving him money you're saying you don't trust him or his judgement in which case how can you judge him to manage the club?

But as usual Woodward has bottled it and so I imagine we'll have to wait until the season is utterly fecked and we're bottom half at Xmas before he acts.

 

[JPRouve]

Mourinho is not a wank manager. He's one of the most successful football managers of all time.

Van Gaal was a success at Ajax, Barcelona and Bayern Munich.

The next manager will struggle, I'm telling you now.

With our squad, we did well to finish 2nd last year.

And then when Mourinho wanted to improve it by shifting out players who aren't good enough like Rojo, Shaw, Martial to fill replace them for the summer gone, Woodward said no.

Why? Because he's incompetent and more importantly, because his paymasters said enough has been spent we're happy where we are. Top 4 money. Winning the league is a sporting honour, not a financial one.

Wake up my friend.

20 years before we hire him and then he was sacked by Bayern for underperforming. But there past his irrelevant, they have been wank at United and Mourinho got plenty of money to spend, Martial was replaced by Sanchez on the left, Mourinho counted on Young and Valencia as starters and Rojo is the fifth CB so mentioning him is just an act of desperation. The two CBs that he bought aren't exactly shining either.

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

He may not be at fault for the defeat today, but he certainly is an issue.

He is the problem. Our present predicament coincides completely with his tenure. The rot starts and ends with Woodward. He must go.

 

[CA1]

20 years before we hire him and then he was sacked by Bayern for underperforming. But there past his irrelevant, they have been wank at United and Mourinho got plenty of money to spend, Martial was replaced by Sanchez on the left, Mourinho counted on Young and Valencia as starters and Rojo is the fifth CB so mentioning him is just an act of desperation. The two CBs that he bought aren't exactly shining either.

The answer to your question lies in this line

"they have been wank at United"

I wonder why? Coincedence?

Mourinho got money to spend at first to get CL and spent it well. We improved a lot from Van Gaal. We finished 2nd to City who spent double what we did in the time Guardiola and Mourinho took over and with Guardiola taking over a better squad containing Kompany, Silva, Fernandinho, Aguero, De Bruyne, Sterling. Finishing 2nd to that is not under achieving.

And when he needed further backing to help close the gap?

Nothing doing. Because the owners are happy with where we are at.

The result is that the manager of our football club is under huge pressure to deliver at the top of the football pyramid without ever really having the right backing either through competency of the board or consistent, note the word consistent, spending on players.

The next manager, whoever your choice would be, will find himself "wank at United" too I'd suggest.

 

[Mercurial]

Mourinho is not a wank manager. He's one of the most successful football managers of all time.

Van Gaal was a success at Ajax, Barcelona and Bayern Munich.

The next manager will struggle, I'm telling you now.

With our squad, we did well to finish 2nd last year.

And then when Mourinho wanted to improve it by shifting out players who aren't good enough like Rojo, Shaw, Martial to fill replace them for the summer gone, Woodward said no.

Why? Because he's incompetent and more importantly, because his paymasters said enough has been spent we're happy where we are. Top 4 money. Winning the league is a sporting honour, not a financial one.

Wake up my friend.

You are close to the mark I feel. The club is being ambivalent in how and what they want to go for. Poor us fans.

 

[Bwuk]

Mourinho is not a wank manager. He's one of the most successful football managers of all time.

Van Gaal was a success at Ajax, Barcelona and Bayern Munich.

The next manager will struggle, I'm telling you now.

With our squad, we did well to finish 2nd last year.

And then when Mourinho wanted to improve it by shifting out players who aren't good enough like Rojo, Shaw, Martial to fill replace them for the summer gone, Woodward said no.

Why? Because he's incompetent and more importantly, because his paymasters said enough has been spent we're happy where we are. Top 4 money. Winning the league is a sporting honour, not a financial one.

Wake up my friend.

Agree entirely with this.

Woodward needs to get someone in to run the football side of things. Let him handle the commercial side.

 

[shaky]

Jose could only dream of playing the style of football that klopp has implemented. Klopp hasn't won trophies so far but the way they blow teams away now, in addition to the good investments, would anyone be surprised if they started winning. They have created a team better than ours while spending less than us (net spend, yes it matters).

Why does net spend matter? If we'd managed to flog Rooney to some daft Chinese club for £60m, would it have affected your opinion on the job Mourinho has done?

 

[Moonwalker]

I have no fondness for Ed Woodward the person whatsoever. I have no reason to like him, and I know precious little about him.

That being said, I do have sympathy for the abstract role he is performing. He is mocked constantly for not being quick enough, he also mocked for being fleeced by everyone because of how naive he is. As a result of this egregious naivete, we are left with a bloated squad, full of average oxygen thieves, who are also on such ridiculously high wages that it's impossible to get rid of them. Our squad is full of overpaid deadwood.

Now there's only one panacea for all of this, caf experts argue - indulge yet another manager in every possible wish he has, buy anyone he wants, at whatever price, all the time, do it super quick (read now). Fall anywhere short of this and you'll be accused of breaking the "back him or sack him" maxim.

It's not a position to be envious of.

 

[Fosu-Mens]

I have no experience running a football club or anything, but it seems to me that a simple choice was required in the summer. Back the manager in the summer with who he wants, and then if the season goes wrong, then it’s the managers/players fault. Or, sack the manager. If you aren’t going to give the manager the backing, and then decide to brief the press that no one better was available, you are isolating the manager and sticking your head in the sand.

Woodward took the easy decision and done nothing. He may not be at fault for the defeat today, but he certainly is an issue.

Yes. This is what Mourinho was getting at with his interviews about lack of signings; "back me or fire me".

Woodward is part of the core issue at the club. As long as we are governed the way we are, and the objective is to earn money rather than trophies we can only hope for a top 4 position at best and a minor cup if we are lucky.