Leftback99
Might have a bedwetting fetish.
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2015
- Messages
- 14,390
Has the 'coaching' changed then?
Sneering aside. Our midfield has been a lot better at recycling the ball lately and does look better coached than before. Pogba and an on-form Fredrick make a huge difference breaking up play and getting the ball to our pacy and dynamic forwards.Has the 'coaching' changed then?
A lotNot conceding in the first few minutes of the game also helps.
Someone bumped this thread and i went back to read and chance upon your post.If I was a teenager I think I would call this post a mic drop. There really is nothing to add. Any response or attempt at a rebuttal is just desperate grasping at straws out of respect for a club legend.
This squad is incredibly expensive and full of internationals. I am convinced a better manager could get us performing at a much higher level.
Or maybe the club is just fecked and we would still fail even if we brought on Jesus C. himself to be the manager.
Yes. Like mancity without Debryne or Aguero, Liverpool without Wijnaldum and Salah,Until we can consistently keep our high tempo passing/quick transition identity with multiple personnel and not just our best team players I will always believe we are poorly coached. When we dont have a Fred or martial playing the coaching always shows it's ass.
This has always been a ridiculous thread. Moaners playgroundHas the 'coaching' changed then?
Yeah it 'looks better coached' when they play well. It just shows what a bullshit argument it was in the first place.Sneering aside. Our midfield has been a lot better at recycling the ball lately and does look better coached than before. Pogba and an on-form Fredrick make a huge difference breaking up play and getting the ball to our pacy and dynamic forwards.
You mean the magical coaching sessions that every other club does, but we can’t do?Has the 'coaching' changed then?
You seem to know all the answers. Are we a well-coached team, and why?Got to love the “poor coaching” brigade. The line for people to pretend they know what they’re talking about in a bid to hide their biased agenda
Because we are second in the league on goal difference!You seem to know all the answers. Are we a well-coached team, and why?
Were we well-coached under Mourinho when we were second after 38 games?Because we are second in the league on goal difference!
What's weird to me is that some people on here think every single team in the league receives the same level of coaching and the only thing that makes the difference between the poor, average, good and great teams is just who's bought the best players. So Steve Bruce is as good a coach as Klopp and the only difference is Klopp has better players (which he undoubtedly does). It makes you wonder why teams even bother with having a manager and chopping and changing to try level up, when all managers are doing the same things in preparing for games and on the training pitch and none of it really makes a difference come match day anyway.Got to love the “poor coaching” brigade. The line for people to pretend they know what they’re talking about in a bid to hide their biased agenda
YesWere we well-coached under Mourinho when we were second after 38 games?
With Mourinho it was the overall system that was the problem.Were we well-coached under Mourinho when we were second after 38 games?
we have 6 shots on target per game, second just behind liverpool. whether fans at home can interpret tactics or not isn't relevant for me, over long runs of games the stats are showing that we are consistently creating which is so so different to united from 2013 - the start of 2020.The 'fine margins' have been going our way a bit in the past few matches. We definitely looked more fluent against Villa, with Pogba in particular in great form.
Then again, I'd say Villa looked just as threatening as we did, but didn't put away their chances.
I fear with Ole there will always be this nagging wonder of what a real 'tactictian' could do with this group of players, because some of us (myself included) struggle to see what United's style or tactics are sometimes.
Then again, certainly towards later Fergie years, this was also the case and we still managed to do pretty well. That last title win we were kind of terrible, but RVP just hoisted us all onto his shoulders and delivered the title.
I share this nagging feeling, but I don't think the positive cultural shift that Ole has implemented can be underestimated. He got rid of the likes of Lukaku and Sanchez and seems to have handled the Pogba situation perfectly (and I was all for sending him to the reserves!) I think this likely gets him a lot of buy-in from players, as even someone like DVB, whom you might expect to be sulking, appears to be keeping a positive attitude. For varying reasons, this kind of squad unity was never going to happen with Moyes, Van Gaal, nor Mourinho. I also think Ole is the kind of manager who will be open to new ideas, or bringing in different coaches to help him sharpen the tactics.The 'fine margins' have been going our way a bit in the past few matches. We definitely looked more fluent against Villa, with Pogba in particular in great form.
Then again, I'd say Villa looked just as threatening as we did, but didn't put away their chances.
I fear with Ole there will always be this nagging wonder of what a real 'tactictian' could do with this group of players, because some of us (myself included) struggle to see what United's style or tactics are sometimes.
Then again, certainly towards later Fergie years, this was also the case and we still managed to do pretty well. That last title win we were kind of terrible, but RVP just hoisted us all onto his shoulders and delivered the title.
Thats a daft take. If we wheel out Lindgard and Ighalo to replace Bruno and Martial, of course we are going to look worse.Until we can consistently keep our high tempo passing/quick transition identity with multiple personnel and not just our best team players I will always believe we are poorly coached. When we dont have a Fred or martial playing the coaching always shows it's ass.
De Gea conceding 15.88 less goals than expected got us to second place, moreso than good coaching. In fact, our expected points for that season was 62.33 when we actually got 81. Our performances in that season were what indicated we weren't well coached.Were we well-coached under Mourinho when we were second after 38 games?
Nobody questioned whether Mourinho was coaching the side well, or patterns of play.Were we well-coached under Mourinho when we were second after 38 games?
Served a purpose of making us fight to get the points though .Not conceding in the first few minutes of the game also helps.
To be fair they definitely were. Questioning his negative style was part of questioning his coaching and preparation for games as it was limiting in how good the team could become.Nobody questioned whether Mourinho was coaching the side well, or patterns of play.
It was simply the fact that his negative style was not something that many were a fan of, and it was a boring and dull style that he wanted the team to play. Nobody was questioning him as being clueless or a P.E. teacher, which is some of the retarded crap repeated on here in conversation about Ole.
When people start making stupid hyperbolic statements like that, there is no place for sensible discussion.
Yes, people were wondering why he was so negative, but nobody questioned him as being clueless or a P.E. teacher.To be fair they definitely were. Questioning his negative style was part of questioning his coaching and preparation for games as it was limiting in how good the team could become.
1. We struggled to break down teams who sat deep
2. We only scored 68 goals in that 2nd place season while City scored 106 which is why they ended up 19 points ahead of us
3. We overperformed our XGA as De Gea was pulling off heroics, and overperformed our expected points, which suggested the results were not sustainable long term (and even then the results already weren't good enough to be where we wanted to be given we were so far behind City and then the game against Sevilla..)
Definitely. I would love to know the stuff Ole has the lads doing in training, because while the football was already better than under the previous 3 managers at the start of the season, this is real exciting, enthralling stuff. Brilliant, and I hope it continues this way.Has the 'coaching' changed then?
In 10 days we were clearly the better team vs Everton, Leicester and Villa and all of these clubs are at the top of the table. This is clear proof we are improving and deserve to be where we are.The 'fine margins' have been going our way a bit in the past few matches. We definitely looked more fluent against Villa, with Pogba in particular in great form.
Then again, I'd say Villa looked just as threatening as we did, but didn't put away their chances.
I fear with Ole there will always be this nagging wonder of what a real 'tactictian' could do with this group of players, because some of us (myself included) struggle to see what United's style or tactics are sometimes.
Then again, certainly towards later Fergie years, this was also the case and we still managed to do pretty well. That last title win we were kind of terrible, but RVP just hoisted us all onto his shoulders and delivered the title.
I don’t think anyone has ever suggested that management and coaching has no bearing in results.What's weird to me is that some people on here think every single team in the league receives the same level of coaching and the only thing that makes the difference between the poor, average, good and great teams is just who's bought the best players. So Steve Bruce is as good a coach as Klopp and the only difference is Klopp has better players (which he undoubtedly does). It makes you wonder why teams even bother with having a manager and chopping and changing to try level up, when all managers are doing the same things in preparing for games and on the training pitch and none of it really makes a difference come match day anyway.
I get coaching is one of the intagibles because we don't actually get to see it so it's all speculation. But sometimes failures on the pitch must be down to the training and preparation for games not being good enough, otherwise we're in the situation whereby we have to say every team in the league is being coached and prepped in the exact same way and to the exact same level - surely this can't be right?
Now it's possible teams failures are down to other factors for example
- the players are being prepped to the highest level but they're just too dumb to follow instructions
- the squad are being prepped to the highest level but the players are just very low on confidence
- the players actually just don't have the quality and aren't very good footballers
- it's just a bit of bad luck or "negative variance"
Now I don't think pointing to any of these reasons are more valid than the idea that the team is poorly coached. It depends on the context of the situation. If some fans on the caf rate our players highly and think the squad is full of good footballers than it's not hard to see how they'd start to question the coaching and preparation.
Note this post isn't intended to say we're poorly coached, I'm speaking in general terms that I don't buy the idea that "we don't see the coaching therefore you can never question it".
Why can’t we see nuance? Look, Ole isn’t 100% the best manager, and he’s not 100% the worst. We can argue about the margins, but I do see patterns of play being developed. Clearly, we want to take advantage of our pace, and we are putting a lot of balls over the top and into space. Secondly, with Martial as a target man, we are trying to get to the end line and putting the ball into the box on the ground (mostly from the left/Shaw/Rashford/Martial). When playing through the middle, it’s a lot of flicks and leaves. Movement is starting to come together. Are we Man City? No, and we’ll never be, but we can still be successful.Were we well-coached under Mourinho when we were second after 38 games?
Defensively yes we were a well coached side but attacking wise we looked like individuals who didn't know each other.Were we well-coached under Mourinho when we were second after 38 games?
Yes you're right failures are most likely a combination of factors. There are posters who aren't convinced we're a well coached team, but there are also loads of posters who ridicule the idea that any of our problems could be down to poor coaching.I don’t think anyone has ever suggested that management and coaching has no bearing in results.
If anything, it’s actually the opposite. Plenty of posters here seem to strip any and all responsibility from the players and place results solely on “the system” and the “style of play”. It actually goes as far as people suggesting misplaced passes and individual f***ups are the result of “poor coaching”. Obviously it doesn’t go the other way, as any positives are dismissed under that laughable term “individual brilliance”.
Anyone with any sense knows that football is far more complicated than to suggest any one thing is the root of all failures or success.