Not a bad idea as others have mentioned. How about Steve Bruce as manager then? Thoughts?
Ole Gunnar Solskjær | 2021/22 Discussion
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
- Status
I don't get what's so special about the signings. Maguire was a top tier defender everyone wanted and we ourselves tried to sign him last summer. AWB was a hot known and top talent in the league last season. We paid loads for both. Only James was the unexpected signing. It's not like he was discovering underrated and unknown gems eh?
As others have said we need to invest but more importantly we need to invest in someone who knows how to win at this level.
Ok somewhat obvious but so what? Unearthing unknown gems is a rare thing, but the main goal is to sign the right players right?
When the bar is Fred, Sanchez, Matic etc, his signings can be considered exemplary.
Di maria, Falcao, Schweinstegger, Pogba etc etc.
All established players and all dirt for United.
Including Pogba in that bunch is a little unfair.
He's contributed more to the club than the rest of them combined, even with his somewhat inconsistent performances.
Agreed.....but to be fair, Schweinsteigers knees were done before he left and Falcao hadn't recovered from his surgery. Good players bought at the wrong time.
Obviously not. Klopp's potential was clear.
Really? You are mentioning Matic even though everyone was raving about him in his first 3 months. I can say the same about every signing we made in every one of the past 6 seasons. Darmian won POTM in his first month and Bailly was considered to be a rock solid who is going to be our main defender for years. Maybe we should wait a little bit before start saying things like "exemplary" and compare to the previous signings. It's like we never learn.
Yeah so what's so exceptional about his signings to make him the freaking long waited Dof? It's like people just want him around the club by any possible means.
Potentially, sure. Trouble is when taking any conclusions from any data, the more you gather, the better the picture, and the further and further away we get from those "first 3 or 4 games" the worse the picture, the data and ultimately the conclusion looks!... And thats before we actually analyse those 3 or 4 games (which I watched as well, btw) and remember that Chelsea had more of the ball and the greater chances before our 2nd & 3rd one-two punch killed the game. That we completely capitulated in the second half against Wolves and barely created a single chance from open play once they'd gotten back into the game and disrupted our rhythm. And that both the Palace and Soton games followed an almost identical pattern, where our inability to score a second, and mental weakness when pegged back, caused our own downfall.
In fact if we're analysing any kind of performance data from these "first 3 or 4 games" the fact that we were completely clueless once the opposition did anything at all to disrupt our plans, is by far the biggest takeaway... Certainly as opposed to the vague optimism of "We played kinda well against 3 historically mid-table teams for a whole half, so, you know, PROGRESS!!!!"
And that's before we even get into the wider discussion of whether a "direct counter attacking style" is even appropriate in the current 2019 iteration of competitive Premier League football? The thing that made Fergie an unparalleled GOAT manager was not his adherence to any one style of play, but his consistent willingness to adapt to the era he was in... Hence why Alex Ferguson's Manchester United didn't actually play the kind of "direct counter attacking football" that people lazily associate with him, for any consistently sustained period outside of his 92-94 and 06-08 sides (where he had fast wingers and fullbacks to deploy) and even then only dogmatically in big games, or Aways....
In fact if anything he moved deliberately away from it once Guardiola's Barcelona overtook us at the top of the tree, in favour of trying to build a new side around the likes of Kagawa, Cleverley, Phil Jones and...er...Nick Powell. Admittedly, that was bad. Very very bad. But hey, even the best are wrong sometimes! - But the point to takeaway is that he was at least trying to adapt and modernise, even to the very last!
We seem to be doing the complete opposite. Ignoring the modern trends of hyper-tactical coaching, in favour of some vague motivational notion of what a Fergie side might have done once upon a time, in another era, with a better team... Harking back, not looking forward. The very antithesis of what Fergie would've done.
I dearly hope I'm wrong, but even though I agree the biggest problems are at board level, and that Ole has identified some really good new signings, promoted the right youguns and jetisoned some long overdue deadwood in his short time so far... He still seems so very obviously naive and tactically antiquated as a manager at this level... And thats not good enough, I'm afraid.
Last edited:
I hope not if we do ever appoint a DOF it needs to be somebody well qualified with the competence and contacts to do the job properly.
Undiscovered or otherwise, Ole's signings have been hugely successful by comparison to those made by Jose or LVG.
He deserves credit for that alone, in spite of the team's poor form.
Jose wanted Maguire on a cut price last year. You can’t praise Ole for getting him, yet criticising Jose for getting a veto on that transfer. Makes no sense.
No no. You have to understand. Tottenham are just as shit because Poch is bored. Man utd is struggling becouse Ole I shit. Apparently he can’t coach and there is no pattern of play! 3 points of 4th, but he need to go now! The football experts on the CAF said so. You know who.
Load of utter nonsense.
I find it bizarre as well. As soon as he was made permanent, he felt the weight and United have played joyless football ever since.
It is telling that you didn't reference Fred or Sanchez in your reply.
Of course you are right that you don't make any long term predictions on the basis of 6 weeks but it won't be hard to improve on the sum total of Fred & sanchez's contribution....started very low and got worse as time went on. I would have to concede that we got 5 months out of Matic though.
Can anything about our season so far be described as "hugely successful"? We thought the same about many Mourinho signings at first too. The idea of Ole being a good DOF candidate based on these signings blows my mind.
You can revert to Sanchez transfer thread and earlier in his performance thread and you will see the same. Literally this happened to every transfer of the post SAF era, Bastian, Di Maria, Blind, Darmian, Depay, Pogba, Bailly, Mikhi, Matic, Lukaku..literally everyone people though during their first month here that they are great signings and will solve our problems.
So I don't like the hindsight. Maybe wait a little bit before starting to set these new transfers as an example.
Sanchez had a couple of half decent performances in his first few games and then his only real contribution after that was to 2 pocket close to 2 million a month. If James never kicks another ball again, he has already surpassed his signing.
It is a incredibly low bar set by Jose's failures and waste in the transfer market, it was almost impossible not to better it. Only signing Bale could have competed.
I don't know what brought Mourinho to this. I'm listing transfers of both LVG and Mourinho eras. Again I don't like hindsight. Saying Ole transfers have been better than the previous 2 managers even though most of their transfers were considered big success in their first 2 months or so is just a big hindsight in general. Wait till we're midway in the season at least before we start saying things like this.
Anyway back to the original, it still doesn't justify giving a falling manager the position of Dof who is going to shape the vision and style of the club for the next few years just because he signed 2 already known players for loads of money and 1 unexpected talent
Which club exactly sack their failed manager to appoint him as a Dof who is going to rule over the next manager?
It's a beyond ridiculous suggestion.Given the attacking football last season as interim, the clearout in the Summer and the cautious football we are witnessing now which is hard to watch, I'm wondering is this a move away from the contractual obligation of you don't finish top 4 you get sacked, is there a collective agreement from ceo, board to management that this is a long term effort they all believe in, even if we finish mid table Ole is still the manager, it smells like that because there is no way we are finishing in the top 4 and this would have been known given the competition in the league and our recruitment and clearout, I have no problem with that if the plan is sound and the long term attacking intentions are there, the only nagging doubt is though we were the form team for 3 months with uninhibited attacking football last season, we are now stronger at the back which should encourage more of that yet we are playing cautious.
You will die of old age before getting any sense from Ole apologist. The more badly he does the more we need him.
The ole deadends just can't admit they just done goofed.
That would be ridiculous I agree, if he gets sacked he is gone.I don't know what brought Mourinho to this. I'm listing transfers of both LVG and Mourinho eras. Again I don't like hindsight. Saying Ole transfers have been better than the previous 2 managers even though most of their transfers were considered big success in their first 2 months or so is just a big hindsight in general. Wait till we're midway in the season at least before we start saying things like this.
Anyway back to the original, it still doesn't justify giving a falling manager the position of Dof who is going to shape the vision and style of the club for the next few years just because he signed 2 already known players for loads of money and 1 unexpected talent
Which club exactly sack their failed manager to appoint him as a Dof who is going to rule over the next manager?
Our current squad is possibly the worst in the clubs history (most certainly in the PL era anyway) and that is due in large parts to Jose's appalling strike-rate on transfers. That the board chose to tighten the purse strings in his third summer in charge is hardly surprising. Why should the board have given him more funds to play with when he would have in all likelihood wasted it?
Let's not lose sight of the fact that Jose is the primary reason for the state of the current squad, not Ole.
At the very least, with the mass-clearing of deadwood and what looks like three successful signings, Ole has gone a long way in fixing the squad that Jose messed up. I think the DoF role would suit him down to the ground, as he clearly understands the concept of what makes for a successful football team. His diplomatic nature, his knowledge of the club inside and out and his genuine will to see it succeed will stand him in good stead.
Last edited:
Not investing in two midfielders was a huge handicap for Ole to overcome.
Somehow signing 2 defenders for 130 m pounds and winger recommended by Giggs is considered a materstroke.You will die of old age before getting any sense from Ole apologist. The more badly he does the more we need him.
The ole deadends just can't admit they just done goofed.
Mind blowing
The current state of the squad is largely due to the current manager. He replaced a 75m striker with no one. No replacement brought in for Fellaini and Herrera and blew the whole kitty on two defenders.
The balance and the lack of it you can’t blame on Jose. So far Ole oversaw not one but two transfer windows.
Why the board should’ve approved tentative transfer? Well not to buy him anyway a year later for more money, or that was a master stroke as well?
There are two competing camps of fandom. Not just in this context, tbf, but football in general.
There are those who think the manager has a greater impact on the way a team plays than the players he has available. And there are those who think the players have a greater impact on the way a team plays, than the manager enforced on them. Whatever your view of Ole, its fair to say that everyone is at least somewhere on this spectrum, from A (manager) to B (players)
I'd consider myself around 68/32 in favour of A, personally...Moyes taking Fergie's last Championship side down to 7th should've solidified the idea of managerial influence for any sane fan, IMO. Long before Longetugui tanked Madrid's 3 time CL winners in a two team league within half a season. In fact anyone who looked at Chelsea, who’ve had a plethora of short term managers, managing many of the same players, over a reasonably comparable period, should've realised that - fluke Cups aside - the only ones to have been genuinely successful in the League, were Mourinho, Ancelotti and Conte… Or in other words - The objectively good ones!
However I do understand the arguments against. Such as those that claim Ole cant be judged on this squad, because it's so obviously bad that even Mourinho considers finishing second with it his greatest achievement - thus proving its objectively absolute badness. A kind of badness beyond the realms of any normal adjudicating*.
An argument that, by it's very nature, is so obliviously imploding that it manages to make such a convincing argument for a good manager improving a bad team, that it forgets it's ostensibly trying to argue the complete opposite!
* Except the one that says finishing above Liverpool with said squad a mere 18 months ago wasn't a managerial cock up, and rather a player problem, because Liverpool's improvement has nothing to do with their manager...as Henderson and Millner would've always become a solid and worthy CL winning midfield combo regardless of who was managing them... Even if it was Steve MacManaman... Or Jason McAteer.... Or, I dunno, Phill Babb, perhaps?
There are those who think the manager has a greater impact on the way a team plays than the players he has available. And there are those who think the players have a greater impact on the way a team plays, than the manager enforced on them. Whatever your view of Ole, its fair to say that everyone is at least somewhere on this spectrum, from A (manager) to B (players)
I'd consider myself around 68/32 in favour of A, personally...Moyes taking Fergie's last Championship side down to 7th should've solidified the idea of managerial influence for any sane fan, IMO. Long before Longetugui tanked Madrid's 3 time CL winners in a two team league within half a season. In fact anyone who looked at Chelsea, who’ve had a plethora of short term managers, managing many of the same players, over a reasonably comparable period, should've realised that - fluke Cups aside - the only ones to have been genuinely successful in the League, were Mourinho, Ancelotti and Conte… Or in other words - The objectively good ones!
However I do understand the arguments against. Such as those that claim Ole cant be judged on this squad, because it's so obviously bad that even Mourinho considers finishing second with it his greatest achievement - thus proving its objectively absolute badness. A kind of badness beyond the realms of any normal adjudicating*.
An argument that, by it's very nature, is so obliviously imploding that it manages to make such a convincing argument for a good manager improving a bad team, that it forgets it's ostensibly trying to argue the complete opposite!
* Except the one that says finishing above Liverpool with said squad a mere 18 months ago wasn't a managerial cock up, and rather a player problem, because Liverpool's improvement has nothing to do with their manager...as Henderson and Millner would've always become a solid and worthy CL winning midfield combo regardless of who was managing them... Even if it was Steve MacManaman... Or Jason McAteer.... Or, I dunno, Phill Babb, perhaps?
Last edited:
We've been over this, you and I, why are we going over it again? For the sake of clarity; Woodward makes the player purchases that his manager requests of him. So how can you hold Ole responsible for Woodward failing to secure the multitude of midfield/attacking targets he chased in the summer? That Woodward was even after these guys is evidence enough to Ole was not content with the current playing personnel, he wanted far more than he got.
Jose is, without a shadow of a doubt, at fault for the failings of the current squad. How you can argue this is beyond my understanding.
I think we have been through this and I’ll say it again it’s Ole who picks the priorities and picks the players not Woodward.
Multitude of attacking/midfield options that we chased? That’s laughable. Who are they?
I’m sorry but you can’t pin it on the manager who left a year ago and the new manager had not one but two windows to asses the squad and fill the gaps.
what I find ridiculous is some of our fans expecting a team without a midfield to play decent football.
"you win or lose a football match in midfield"
What is ridiculous is some of our fans expecting the CEO to look for midfielders, scout them, decide who are good enough and then bring them to OT
This is what a DoF would have done if the CEO had signed oneWhat is ridiculous is some of our fans expecting the CEO to look for midfielders, scout them, decide who are good enough and then bring them to OT
@Mockney
Oddly specific percentage there but good post, a manager can only do so much the rest comes down to the players on the pitch who are not functioning to a level they should be.
Is that always the managers fault? In business if 4 managers failed with a business unit the unit would eventually be fired or replaced. To replace people in business is a lot easier without multimillion pound contracts in 99% of situations, in uniteds situation we can only move players on if someone else wants them, we don’t have many that would be wanted currently.
Whoever whether it’s Ole or someone else still has to transition half this squad out and at the same time attract the right stuff, I won’t hold my breath so would rather stick with Ole while we “muddle” through it.
Oddly specific percentage there but good post, a manager can only do so much the rest comes down to the players on the pitch who are not functioning to a level they should be.
Is that always the managers fault? In business if 4 managers failed with a business unit the unit would eventually be fired or replaced. To replace people in business is a lot easier without multimillion pound contracts in 99% of situations, in uniteds situation we can only move players on if someone else wants them, we don’t have many that would be wanted currently.
Whoever whether it’s Ole or someone else still has to transition half this squad out and at the same time attract the right stuff, I won’t hold my breath so would rather stick with Ole while we “muddle” through it.
Poor midfield and absolutely no forwards.... a poor combination for an attacking, successful team.
- Status