Muffled cries of “I told you so” from behind a green and gold scarf / blame it on the glazers part V

golden_blunder

Site admin. Manchester United fan
Staff
Joined
Jun 1, 2000
Messages
121,183
Location
Dublin, Ireland
I don’t really get what people think is the solution? A Saudi owned club?
Fan ownership? (Head in cornflakes mode)
A United fan who has 3bn quid lying around just to buy the club? (Head in cornflakes mode)
Maybe they’d like an owner like mike Ashley who doesn’t spend a penny?

I didn’t like the way the glazers took over the club but at this point In time they are the best we can hope for.

There’s nothing wrong with this club that putting in a good structure wouldn’t fix.
Woody stays in charge of making money - the best in his field at doing it
Bring in a football director
DoF
New coach to work within the structure and define football strategy going forward

Btw this has been done a million times since the summer
 

Snowjoe

༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ
Staff
Joined
Jan 14, 2013
Messages
30,351
Location
Lake Athabasca
Supports
Cheltenham Town
No Mod on here is a matchgoing Manchester United fan.

They don't want to get involved in issues like this that are the heart of Manchester United. They just want discussions on players/tactics etc.
@jojojo @Penna how are your season tickets guys?
 

golden_blunder

Site admin. Manchester United fan
Staff
Joined
Jun 1, 2000
Messages
121,183
Location
Dublin, Ireland
Chucking endless money at the team won’t solve the issues either when the coach wastes and misuses what he has
 

MackRobinson

New Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2017
Messages
5,134
Location
Terminal D
Supports
Football
I want owners who let the club spend its own money, who have a vision for the future and strive for all aspects of the club to keep up with the times and to improve. None of these things are happening at the moment. That doesn't mean a money bags owner at all.
I never understood this argument. How is it fans money? Is it a fan ownership model that I haven’t received the memo for?
I don't understand it either. It's almost as if some believe the owners are just caretakers of the club. Regardless of the means used to buy the club (leveraged buyout, cash, etc) they still own the club. The Glazer Family owned around 97% of the shares at one point. It's theirs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: golden_blunder

Random Task

WW Lynchpin
Joined
Feb 7, 2010
Messages
34,503
Location
Chester
In some ways yes it does.

Not in terms of players, managers etc but you can't comment on how the owners treat fans or how the stadium is decaying if you don't go all the time. In my opinion.

I honestly don't know one matchgoing fan who would even dream of defending the Glazers. Yet many on here do.

There's not right or wrong but there's a reason for that difference.
Well that hurt.

I used to be a season ticket holder back in the day (when it was relatively cheap!) but I have more pressing priorities with which to spend my money hard-earned money these days, unfortunately. Plus I'm somewhat of a tight fecker.

In any case, I disagree with your "armchair fans hold a less weighty opinion than that of the match goers" assessment.
 

CA1

New Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2012
Messages
1,894
But what's all that got to do with not being able to beat Brighton, Derby and West Ham?

The immediate problem is the manager, and I'd respect your opinions a lot if you agree that Jose shares the blame as much as the Glazers do, rather than implying Jose would win the title if someone like Mansour was our owner.
Well I think he would to be honest. The vision, the relentless money, the improving facilities, the mood around the club, the PR around the club. I think he would win it comfortably.

Mourinho hasn't managed well his season hence those defeats you mention but it was going to happen before a ball was kicked this season (look back on my posts on the Woodward thread) I said it was all over and that the players would down on him and that Mourinho himself isn't the type of character to fight out of this situation placed on him. So this year was always a disaster after him not being backed in the summer (not just financial backing)
 

CA1

New Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2012
Messages
1,894
I don't understand it either. It's almost as if some believe the owners are just caretakers of the club. Regardless of the means used to buy the club (leveraged buyout, cash, etc) they still own the club. The Glazer Family owned around 97% of the shares at one point. It's theirs.
You're simply used to bad owners.

Good owners are caretakers of the club as well and strive to improve the business they own. In football and at Manchetser United, that means on field success.
 

CA1

New Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2012
Messages
1,894
Well that hurt.

I used to be a season ticket holder back in the day (when it was relatively cheap!) but I have more pressing priorities with which to spend my money hard-earned money these days, unfortunately. Plus I'm somewhat of a tight fecker.

In any case, I disagree with your "armchair fans hold a less weighty opinion than that of the match goers" assessment.
I didn't say they hold a less weighty opinion on judging a player or whatever because they watch it on Television.

I stand by they hold a less weighty opinion when discussing how the owners treat match going fans. It's just nonsense to suggest otherwise.
 

GBBQ

Full Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2012
Messages
4,828
Location
Ireland
I don’t really get what people think is the solution? A Saudi owned club?
Fan ownership? (Head in cornflakes mode)
A United fan who has 3bn quid lying around just to buy the club? (Head in cornflakes mode)
Maybe they’d like an owner like mike Ashley who doesn’t spend a penny?

I didn’t like the way the glazers took over the club but at this point In time they are the best we can hope for.

There’s nothing wrong with this club that putting in a good structure wouldn’t fix.
Woody stays in charge of making money - the best in his field at doing it
Bring in a football director
DoF
New coach to work within the structure and define football strategy going forward

Btw this has been done a million times since the summer
Is the correct response.

Sure we can (and should) improve our structure but we've got a business set up that is increasing our net worth organically. Regardless of the underhanded way we got here this is one of the most stable ownership set ups we can have and the alternatives are dubious, risky or pipe dreams. Its a business investment to the Glazers which means they constantly have to work on it both on and off the field and thats exactly why Moyes and LVG are no longer in charge (because believe or not, the football side of the business is extremely important).
 

MackRobinson

New Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2017
Messages
5,134
Location
Terminal D
Supports
Football
You're simply used to bad owners.

Good owners are caretakers of the club as well and strive to improve the business they own. In football and at Manchetser United, that means on field success.
They first and foremost OWN the club. You are a paying customer. Everyone wants the their club to have "good" owners but this notion of a perfect owner you laid out is fictional and seems like nothing more than a synonym for "I want a Sheik to come buy the club". Most of your issues with the owner center around investment (it takes money to fix that leaky roof and I'm not buying your "they don't come to matches" argument), so I'm not sure why you just don't want to admit it.
 

jojojo

JoJoJoJoJoJoJo
Staff
Joined
Aug 18, 2007
Messages
38,519
Location
Welcome to Manchester reception committee
@jojojo @Penna how are your season tickets guys?
The one to the men's team or the one for the women's team?

I'm currently pissed off that we're scheduled to play Durham in the Cup (women) at the same time as we're playing Arsenal in the League - I keep rechecking to see if the Durham game has moved.

As for the Glazers, my opinion hasn't changed - I hate that they managed to pull off the ridiculous trick of buying the club with its own money. I also hate all the obvious potential buyers that are likely to step in if they ever do sell up. But I'm not yet ready to give up going to matches, or paying my Sky/BT subs over it, so they haven't quite driven me away.
 

CA1

New Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2012
Messages
1,894
They first and foremost OWN the club. You are a paying customer. Everyone wants the their club to have "good" owners but this notion of a perfect owner you laid out is fictional and seems like nothing more than a synonym for "I want a Sheik to come buy the club". Most of your issues with the owner center around investment (it takes money to fix that leaky roof and I'm not buying your "they don't come to matches" argument), so I'm not sure why you just don't want to admit it.
The money Manchester United make thanks to its "customers" is huge. They should be investing that money back into the club and the stadium etc. Simple as that.

Under the Glazers, Manchester United are getting worse in all aspects and will continue to get worse in all aspects as we are only going one way. The owners are responsible.

There are more empty seats at every game now and will only get more not less.
 

CA1

New Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2012
Messages
1,894
The one to the men's team or the one for the women's team?

I'm currently pissed off that we're scheduled to play Durham in the Cup (women) at the same time as we're playing Arsenal in the League - I keep rechecking to see if the Durham game has moved.

As for the Glazers, my opinion hasn't changed - I hate that they managed to pull off the ridiculous trick of buying the club with its own money. I also hate all the obvious potential buyers that are likely to step in if they ever do sell up. But I'm not yet ready to give up going to matches, or paying my Sky/BT subs over it, so they haven't quite driven me away.
You're a Mod and a matchgoing fan, do you find it odd that a fellow mods are shutting down people's posts (not mine) that are negative towards the Glazers? It seems strange to me. I know you may not be able to comment if you didn't shut them down yourself.

The change of this thread title for example, it's very strange. I don't believe you did it as I can't believe for one second that a matchgoing supporter would defend the Glazers after how they treated this club when they bought the club and how they've ran it whilst they've been here.
 

Cloud7

Full Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2016
Messages
12,989
What a stupid.....thread. That’s about all the response that this kind of drivel deserves.
 

spiriticon

Full Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2013
Messages
7,592
Yeah, let's get Mike Ashley in to sort it all out. :rolleyes:

Looking forward to going to the SportsDirect Old Trafford Arena and doing transfer business with Ligue 3 clubs for cool sounding French players
 

Snowjoe

༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ
Staff
Joined
Jan 14, 2013
Messages
30,351
Location
Lake Athabasca
Supports
Cheltenham Town
You're a Mod and a matchgoing fan, do you find it odd that a fellow mods are shutting down people's posts (not mine) that are negative towards the Glazers? It seems strange to me. I know you may not be able to comment if you didn't shut them down yourself.

The change of this thread title for example, it's very strange. I don't believe you did it as I can't believe for one second that a matchgoing supporter would defend the Glazers after how they treated this club when they bought the club and how they've ran it whilst they've been here.
The post was shut because you’re already talking about it here, it wasn’t done to censor the opinion.

The title change is also nothing to do with the subject matter.

I also go to matches.
 

ivaldo

Mediocre Horse Whisperer, s'up wid chew?
Joined
Nov 15, 2012
Messages
28,701
Don't break it to me, break it to Woodward

"Playing performance doesn't really have a meaningful impact on what we can do on the commercial side of the business."

Brilliant, there's been no need to invest a penny into the player staff then. That £360m we have spent in the last two seasons must just be an admin error...
 

golden_blunder

Site admin. Manchester United fan
Staff
Joined
Jun 1, 2000
Messages
121,183
Location
Dublin, Ireland
You're a Mod and a matchgoing fan, do you find it odd that a fellow mods are shutting down people's posts (not mine) that are negative towards the Glazers? It seems strange to me. I know you may not be able to comment if you didn't shut them down yourself.

The change of this thread title for example, it's very strange. I don't believe you did it as I can't believe for one second that a matchgoing supporter would defend the Glazers after how they treated this club when they bought the club and how they've ran it whilst they've been here.
For the record we don’t censor opinions but we do close if the topic is already being discussed elsewhere or people are becoming bigger twats
 

noodlehair

"It's like..."
Joined
Apr 1, 2004
Messages
16,598
Location
Flagg
Woodward is being blasted left, right and centre. The idea that he escapes criticism is baffling, he's one of the prime targets. The poor structure of the footballing side of the club is brought up repeatedly, too, and that is the owners' fault.

That commerce is more important to the owners than footballing success is indeed an undeniable fact. But then that's what football is these days. A huge money-making business. You can either have oil princes financing you as a PR exercise - which is ultimately still a profit-motivated thing - or businessmen trying to make money. I do not think this is a good thing but can't really see a way out of it, unless the Premier League adopts the Bundesliga model which is not happening at the moment.

And by the way you can absolutely accuse Mourinho of placing the success of the team secondary to his own ego, to political points scoring. See his lack of subs against Juventus, for example. He was making a point rather than attempting to win a football match.
Woodward gets criticism but is always offest with "but he is good at the commercial side"...with barely anyone stopping to think that maybe there is a link between what Woodward is good at, and what the club's owners want him to be good at...or more tellingly, whether neglecting the team in favour of commercial success is actually a viable or smart plan in the long run.

You are even doing it in your post "but that's what football is these days"...except it isn't. Teams build commercial success on the back of being succesful on the pitch. Liverpool, City, Chelsea, etc. We are the only team focusing on commercial success at the expense of on the pitch success. Woodward by his own admission would rather spend money on a player he can market than a player the manager thinks the team needs. If this was a concern to the Glazers, he would have been sacked by now.

I would dare say there is no fan who would rather cheer a spnsorship deal than winning a football game, but even if there were, our ignorance of the way one eventually links to the other should be a big concern to them. We are unique as a club in possessing this ignorance. It's a far bigger and more fundamental problem than who Pogba chooses to high five, or why Mourinho didn't make an subs iin our last game.

You can certainly accuse Mourinho of being out to prove a point, being childish, negative, etc. You can accuse our players of being idiots, having the wrong attitude etc...but at the end of the day, their success is directly related to our results and how we perform as a team. Whatever their motive and how lost it might be, the goal is to be succesful as a player, manager, team. When you get to Woodward and above, where other clubs still place priority on this, with us it is very clearly of secondary importance.
 

Fluctuation0161

Full Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2016
Messages
8,205
Location
Manchester
I agree and disagree. SAF still got new younger players in like Jones, Smalling and Zaha, but it doesn't always work out. We've just had a hugely bad run of luck with transfers, which may point to other problems or as likely down to a bunch of managers with out dated styles of play not making the most of what we have as a start point to build on.
Not just bad luck with transfers. It's terrible succession planning from possession obsessed LVG to pal the bus, counter attack Mourinho. They both require totally different types of player. So instead of building the squad up we had to knock it down and start again.
 

golden_blunder

Site admin. Manchester United fan
Staff
Joined
Jun 1, 2000
Messages
121,183
Location
Dublin, Ireland
You're simply used to bad owners.

Good owners are caretakers of the club as well and strive to improve the business they own. In football and at Manchetser United, that means on field success.
Wishy washy that doesn’t answer the question. How is it OUR money as you stated in a previous post? We don’t own the club
 

BlueHaze

New Member
Joined
May 20, 2018
Messages
4,453
Him and his family had a few season tickets which they let other people borrow if they couldn’t get to a match themselves. The club have since cancelled his ticket because of it.
I see, thanks for explaining. I personally feel that is a very kind and generous thing of him to do.
 

CA1

New Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2012
Messages
1,894
Wishy washy that doesn’t answer the question. How is it OUR money as you stated in a previous post? We don’t own the club
I refer to Manchester United as "we"

When I say "our money"

I mean its the clubs money
 

CA1

New Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2012
Messages
1,894
Him and his family had a few season tickets which they let other people borrow if they couldn’t get to a match themselves. The club have since cancelled his ticket because of it.
Incident 1567 of Glazers being money grabbing twats.
 

golden_blunder

Site admin. Manchester United fan
Staff
Joined
Jun 1, 2000
Messages
121,183
Location
Dublin, Ireland
I refer to Manchester United as "we"

When I say "our money"

I mean its the clubs money
It’s not really the same saying “I hope we win tonight” to “taking OUR money”

Anyway, bottom line whether I like it or not is that Clubs money = owners money
 

Fluctuation0161

Full Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2016
Messages
8,205
Location
Manchester
Yes, I read your post in its entirety.

During the period of the Glazers arrival and that of Fergie's retirement, United had one of the best squads on planet earth. The urgency to spend above and beyond mere 'value in the market' was non-existent. Squad reinforcement was all that was needed and that was taken care of sufficiently.

It wasn't until we found ourselves in the difficult position of playing catch-up to lottery winners City that the owners decided to invest heavily into the squad - £700 million heavy in fact - which came about through the sheer force of necessity rather than anything else.

Yes, the Glazers are businessmen and like all businessmen, they are in the business of making money. That they have syphoned upwards of £1 billion from the clubs hard-earned revenue since their arrival is a testament to that fact, but they have also invested a large percentage of that revenue back into the club when and wherever necessary. Any claim to the contrary is a lie.
They certainly inherited one of the best squads in the world when they took over the club in 2005. By the time Fergie retired the squad was ageing and needed an over haul because of lack of investment.

In 2005 they inherited Ferdinand, Vidic, Evra, Giggs, Scholes, Ronaldo, Rooney and RVN. To name a few.

Ronaldo sold for£80m and was replaced with Valencia. RVN moved on.
Apart from those players, when Fergie retired in 2013 they were STILL our best players. But much older.

The squad was not invested in sufficiently from 2005-2013 while we cleared the initial debt. Since then we've been playing catchup.

Funny thread titles are all well and good. But the reality is that The Glazers have mismanaged our club since 2005. Luckily they had Ferguson who had everything under control.

With putting debt on the club, under investing for 8 years, appointing an investment banker as our 'football man' on the board, overruling serial winning managers. But also making bad appointment after bad appointment with no succession planning. The Glazer takeover has not been good.

PS. I've never worn green or gold or protested the take over when it happened. But this is looking back and analysing their performance.
 

Fluctuation0161

Full Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2016
Messages
8,205
Location
Manchester
SAF continuously said that he always had money available to him when and if he needed it. To say that he was underfunded is either a completel lie on your part, or you are saying that SAF is a liar. Sorry, but I get the feeling that SAF isn't the type to give in to the Glazers during his time at United, and he certainly wouldn't continue that trend after he retired. If they were holding him back, he would have said so...
But yet he rarely spent it under the Glazers. What would be the benefit to the club or Fergie if he spoke out about the Glazers?
 

Fluctuation0161

Full Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2016
Messages
8,205
Location
Manchester

If it was only city and Chelsea who we were playing catch up to, I would agree with your post. But the rest of the teams above were spending less than us in the years we weren't spending and yet they are doing better than us. Looks like our 2nd finish last year was a fluke because whilst we signed dalot and Fred spurs signed no one at all yet they are doing much better than us in the league. Looks more like a coaching problem to me. We took Arsenals best player and got worse than then somehow.
Agreed about the bad coaching being an issue too.

But the reason we've spent so much and achieved so little is because every manager post Fergie has needed different types of player. Poor succession planning by the board.1
 

spiriticon

Full Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2013
Messages
7,592
But yet he rarely spent it under the Glazers. What would be the benefit to the club or Fergie if he spoke out about the Glazers?
If Fergie spoke out, the fans would have listened, the pressure on the Glazers would be emormous and things would change. Fergie is that big.

But he never once said the Glazers held his transfer fees back. I'm inclined to believe him rather than the musings of the discontented fanbase.
 

Fluctuation0161

Full Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2016
Messages
8,205
Location
Manchester
If Fergie spoke out, the fans would have listened, the pressure on the Glazers would be emormous and things would change. Fergie is that big.

But he never once said the Glazers held his transfer fees back. I'm inclined to believe him rather than the musings of the discontented fanbase.
Fair enough. Each to their own.

Personally I think sparking a civil war at Old Trafford was not what Fergie wanted. He said he was never refused money - but if he understood the tight financial situation at the club he may have simply not asked for it.
 

Thunderhead

Full Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2016
Messages
3,156
Supports
City
Fair enough. Each to their own.

Personally I think sparking a civil war at Old Trafford was not what Fergie wanted. He said he was never refused money - but if he understood the tight financial situation at the club he may have simply not asked for it.

If Fergie spoke out, the fans would have listened, the pressure on the Glazers would be emormous and things would change. Fergie is that big.

But he never once said the Glazers held his transfer fees back. I'm inclined to believe him rather than the musings of the discontented fanbase.

funny, I think there is possibly some truth in what you're both saying, who were Fergie's biggest signings from 2005-2013?