Ole is nothing like Ferguson. He is not a leader at all. A leader does not sit all match and play on his ipad while his team is being pressed by Brighton and losing to Sheffield United.
We are an awfully coached team
- Thread starter bond19821982
- Start date
I am really tired of Ole to SAF comparisons. Those two are in different galaxies. SAF is one of the GOATs, Ole is basically a nobody in top managers' world.
Yeah, but folk aren't comparing Alex Ferguson the GOAT against Ole, are they?
They are comparing Ole's first two years at United to Alex Ferguson's first two years at United...
What I'm tired of is fans who aren't open-minded to understand this... and who can only judge Alex on his entire career... D'yall forget he took 6 years to win a title, because he was building in the background for hopeful long-term success?
Given that Ole is also building in the background towards long-term success, his first two years versus Alex's first two years are notable comparisons. VERY notable.
With big differences
Ole first two years at united with hundreds of millions, but sir Alex had no such luxury at that time.
Ole first two years at united with nothing in his managerial career that proves he is a top club manager, While sir Alex, you know!
Sir Alex spent a loooot of money in his early days at Utd.
I'm not saying playing a No.10 is a benchmark for attacking football. It's just one example of how Ole could be more defensive if he wanted to. You'd have to accept that even with a hard working Bruno it would still make us more solid if we just played a third midfielder. Like everyone else does. There are criticisms of Ole but being overly defensive isn't one in my opinion. Which you agree with
I disagree that Ole has no tactical plan but it's tricky being manager at a club like United. You have to play a certain way, fans demand it, even if you don't have the players to do so. Until you have the players who can play the United way you can end up with this watered down, neither here nor there approach.
Your last paragraph I can agree with. However I'd still like to see what Ole can do with three more players who allow him to really play the kind of football we all expect.
Not more than Liverpool.
Which basically means we have great dependency on how our opponents play. And it shouldn't be like that.
How come supporters want to drag Ole down in the garbage. It’s a shame.
SAF was a great coach, but he was also very very lucky with academy players (a generation of extreme talents). Many of us ask ourself what SAF actually left when he retired. Did he leave a sinking ship? I think also SAF would’ve been in big trouble if he continued two more seasons.
To me the time after SAF proved United had slept during class for many years. Off course our downfall was more a result of system failure than managers. That’s why I also think success is more a result of a system than solely the manager. Managers are not magicians.
SAF was a great coach, but he was also very very lucky with academy players (a generation of extreme talents). Many of us ask ourself what SAF actually left when he retired. Did he leave a sinking ship? I think also SAF would’ve been in big trouble if he continued two more seasons.
To me the time after SAF proved United had slept during class for many years. Off course our downfall was more a result of system failure than managers. That’s why I also think success is more a result of a system than solely the manager. Managers are not magicians.
I think you folks are taking that literally. No one is suggesting Ole is the next Ferguson. But he is a better man manager than he is a tactician or one who drills his teams into many ways of playing technically speaking.
We are, and Ole and the staff need to go. Garbage performances. On the ball, we are a League one side collectively.
I said against City we need to improve in possession, and people think we need to be better than them at this. No, what i mean is we need to be PL level at least, and not some pub team going forward and in possession. It is a joke at this point.
I said against City we need to improve in possession, and people think we need to be better than them at this. No, what i mean is we need to be PL level at least, and not some pub team going forward and in possession. It is a joke at this point.
No he is not. If he was he would have hired competent people in his coaching staff.
You think Ferguson had competent staff? Does anyone know what his staff actually did that was so special? I think the only one who had any tactical input was Carlos Queiroz and he was there for only 2-3 years. Mike Phelan is literally still in the coaching staff. lool
People give way too much credit to ferguson's staff.
You can't have it both ways. Either SAF was a good enough coach not to need better coaching staff or else he was not good enough which meant his coaching staff was good. He himself said that he had heard about Steve McLaren and found out that he was a very progressive coach and got him from Derby. McLaren himself said it took more than 5 months for him to prove to the players that he was good enough to be a coach for them. You simply cannot walk into a club and tell the players that they are good enough to coach you when as a coach you have not proved yourself. Mike Phelan was and is the Assistant Manager. It was Rene who was the head coach. Now it is Carrick who has never coached anyone before.
Ferguson was a great man manager, motivator and all around leader of men. He didn't need a 'genius' level coaching staff to get success in England. His lack of relative success was apparent in Europe because the continental team were more tactical than the teams he played in England. Leadership alone wouldn't have gotten him past the likes of Barcelona, BM, Madrid, Milan in those days and it showed. When Jose came to England he consistently got the better of Fergie and that was down to the tactics. Mick Phelan and Rene could not help him in Europe. If it wasn't for Carlos Quieroz we probably wouldn't have won the CL in 2008. Carlos helped build the team with Portuguese contingent and was generally more tactically astute than anyone else on Ferguson's staff. I feel you are confused as to what I am saying. I find Ole in a simlar mould to ferguson (that's not to suggest he is the next ferguson). Tactically naive and not a great hand on coach but a decent man manager.
You forget that Fergie won the Cup Winners Cup twice. One with Aberdeen beating Bayern and Real Madrid and then with United beating Barcelona.
Yes I agree he was a great manager. Great bosses always has great subordinates. Ole as a one to one may be a nice guy but for sure he has not got any good subordinates. That shows he is out of his depth in managing such a huge club.
Aye, better to question and drag there the best manager in history of football.
Tbh tactically Ole is rather comparable to Queiroz than SAF.
Queiroz was not a tactical genius or anything, however SAF was impressed by his in depth analysis of opposition, as well as his views and knowledge of fitness, nutrition, etc.
While SAF especially pre 2007 was mostly focused on how United played and less what the opposition did, Queiroz was the opposite. His biggest achievement probably was to convince SAF in 2008 to play less like United and more like a team which needs to stop Barcelona (and their many world class players). Our players were impressed by the preparation for that game probably because it was the first time for them at United when the focus was more on the opposition than on United. We managed to score a grand total of 1 goal (“individual brilliance” btw) in 180 minutes against Barca and our great defence kept a clean sheet.
This is the tie which has somehow made all the other European games we played when Queiroz was here non existent, as if Queiroz just flew over to Carrington for the Barca tie.
Where were his tactics when we were convincingly knocked out in 2002/03 against RM? Where was he when we were beaten in both games against Milan in 2004/05? What happened to the supposed great coaching by Queiroz when we were last of an easy CL group in 2005/06?
We were also easily knocked out by Milan in 2006/07, however I can put that one down partly to injuries and the team being tired by fighting for 3 trophies.
Queiroz also didn’t have an attacking plan, that was always down to SAF. Where Queiroz excelled was being reactive.
However Ole is already good at that. Next he needs to focus more on taking initiative and control of games. If he can’t do it himself with a couple of much needed additions (players) then he either hires someone who can help him here (so he identifies and hires someone who specialises in one or two areas of the game) or he has to leave and someone else takes over.
Queiroz was not a tactical genius or anything, however SAF was impressed by his in depth analysis of opposition, as well as his views and knowledge of fitness, nutrition, etc.
While SAF especially pre 2007 was mostly focused on how United played and less what the opposition did, Queiroz was the opposite. His biggest achievement probably was to convince SAF in 2008 to play less like United and more like a team which needs to stop Barcelona (and their many world class players). Our players were impressed by the preparation for that game probably because it was the first time for them at United when the focus was more on the opposition than on United. We managed to score a grand total of 1 goal (“individual brilliance” btw) in 180 minutes against Barca and our great defence kept a clean sheet.
This is the tie which has somehow made all the other European games we played when Queiroz was here non existent, as if Queiroz just flew over to Carrington for the Barca tie.
Where were his tactics when we were convincingly knocked out in 2002/03 against RM? Where was he when we were beaten in both games against Milan in 2004/05? What happened to the supposed great coaching by Queiroz when we were last of an easy CL group in 2005/06?
We were also easily knocked out by Milan in 2006/07, however I can put that one down partly to injuries and the team being tired by fighting for 3 trophies.
Queiroz also didn’t have an attacking plan, that was always down to SAF. Where Queiroz excelled was being reactive.
However Ole is already good at that. Next he needs to focus more on taking initiative and control of games. If he can’t do it himself with a couple of much needed additions (players) then he either hires someone who can help him here (so he identifies and hires someone who specialises in one or two areas of the game) or he has to leave and someone else takes over.
'Hundreds of millions' and then you compare that to 1988... Ha ha.
Understand the failed logic in the point you're trying to make?
United between 2019-2021 - second highest spenders; finish 6th, 3rd , (currently 2nd)
United between 1986-88 - second highest spenders; finish 11th, 2nd, 11th.
I don't understand what you are talking about in your second point.... As you can tell from above, United were much more inconsistent in Fergie's earliest years...infact, the season after that, in 1989 under Sir Alex, they finished 13th. So your second point, like your first, makes zero sense.
You started this with a huge wide. And never got back on course.
Queiroz convinced Fergie to go 4-3-3from 2005. You can find that in Fergie's autobio... Also, in that autobio, Fergie claimed Queiroz was tactically so impressive, that he thought him better, tactically, than Mourinho at the time.
As I said, Queiroz was reactive, SAF was all about playing our own game (even being naive at times), so it was a good match. And Mourinho was a great tactician, but at the same time also someone who was rather reactive. I can’t see the contradiction to what I said. Plus 433 was not something Queiroz invented.
SAF kept changing his coaching staff to bring in fresh ideas (on and off the pitch) as he himself couldn’t experience what was happening outside of United. Usually the managers bring fresh ideas as they change clubs every 2-4 years. SAF spent almost 3 decades at United so he made sure that other people regularly brought the required changes to the club.
Yeah this sums up perfectly our main issues on the pitch in a nutshell, like you say it's a joke when teams who are supposed to have less talented players than us actually play much better football and make us look so average in ball retention and general passing and movement.
I admire SAF, and he probably was one of the best managers in the world, but I think it’s wrong to only credit him for our glorious period. Would he also led us to success without the class of 92? Was the class of 92 a result of SAF?Aye, better to question and drag there the best manager in history of football.
Success is a result of many bricks falling into places at the same time, and off course SAF was a very important brick.
Because SAF only managed United it’s difficult to assess his individual or universal qualities as a manager. He was a perfect fit for United, but would he have brought the same success to other clubs? We will never have the answer.
Maybe you need to check wiki to see which all clubs SAF managed, what he won with them.
As already mentioned you might check what the man achieved with Aberdeen.
As for class of 92, there was universal opinion that Fergie went crazy by selling Ince, Hughes and Kanchelskis without buying anyone and throwing bunch of kids in the first team.
Everyone today laughs at that Hansen "you can't win anything with kids" statement, but I can assure you that at the time most people shared his opinion. I can't think of a single manager who would give so much belief to a bunch of kids. So yeah, the class of 92 was a result of SAF.
The fact that you are painting his unique ability to recognise a player talent and have so much belief in it once he recognised it to pure luck is baffling.
Some really have no shame. There is no line that either side wouldnt cross.
Also an invalid comparison. Different era and much more importantly SAF had something on his resume to earn him the benefit of the doubt.
I like how you're calling SAF just "Alex" as if he's some sort of your close friend.
How can you support United and be this clueless about SAF's career? Probably one of the best?
It was a hell of a thing to have these great players coming up around the same time but you're ignoring the fact that our academy was run down when he took over and the first thing he did was revamp our academy. Would we have signed these players like Beckham with the old setup?
?? I’m aware of his achievements from old days but I’m talking about modern football.How can you support United and be this clueless about SAF's career? Probably one of the best?
It was a hell of a thing to have these great players coming up around the same time but you're ignoring the fact that our academy was run down when he took over and the first thing he did was revamp our academy. Would we have signed these players like Beckham with the old setup?
Seems like people think United was a nobody when SAF took over. He probably took over a club in better condition than Ole, but still it took him 6y to improve the whole system, hereby also improving the squad and the culture.
Off course SAF was the architect behind the restructuring, but it also shows success depends on a good system (academy and so on) and also that it takes time to restructure a club and build a competitive squad.
At the same time I don’t think the best academy can guarantee a generation like the class of 92. SAF did it right, but at the same time: if you are good enough, you are old enough. Maybe they were to good to be ignored.
I already said I’m a fan of SAF and consider him as one of the best managers of his time.
My point is that success or failure isn’t a one man show. Success is a result of both a good system, manager, academy and quality players. This isn’t done over night or a couple of years.
Cos I'm talking abut 1986-1989 - 10-years yet to be a knight of the realm, Alex.
Shouldn't really need explaining.
Good heavens. What would some people say? Either they have no clue or are WUMs or not fans or supporters of United.
We were second from bottom when SAF took over. This is why I say that a lot of these people are not supporters of Manchester United.
We were second from bottom when SAF took over. This is why I say that a lot of these people are not supporters of Manchester United.
Sure, as you see it fit mate. Alex alright.
Ha ha... Don’t know who you try to fool..
United was never lower than nr.4 with Ron (1981-1986) and won FA-cup in 83 and 85. He was fired after two months into the 86/87 season.
I’m a fan of United and SAF, but I’m not pretending SAF is God or a wizard. Even though I’m fan of SAF, I try to be balanced and nuanced.
Are you a real fan? We were 19th when big Ron was sacked. I was at Oxford United in first match of SAF. I was at OT when we defeated Maradona and Barca.
Big Ron may have never finished so low but then the same with Jose. He never finished below 6th. He also won the EL and League Cup.
That last year under big Ron and the first couple of years under fergie were horrific. It was a pretty shit time to be a fan as a kid.
Not helped by the vermin hoovering up titles.
So many bad takes in these posts. SAF is generally considered as the top 2-3 managers of all time, by many as the best ever. I don't think you reach those heights by being grossly deficient tactically, as a man manager, or as a judge of talent. He made mistakes, nobody is perfect, but he had an amazing, historical run -- maybe the best in history given the three generations of talent he managed. It's comical that armchair managers are dissecting him in this manner.
Secondly, it's pretty naive to think that coaching is the root of all problems at Manchester United. There's multiple factors behind the failure to win a PL title since SAF retired. If coaching is the single most important factor, then Pep would win everything every season, because by most accounts, he is the greatest tactical innovator of this era. But Pep had a rocky first season at City, they spent almost 1 billion on new players, and he still hasn't won a CL without Messi. Sometimes multiple factors combine to determine success or failure.
By order of importance, what wins championships? Players, first and foremost. A distant second is manager and coaching staff, followed by the club/organization. To lay the failure of Post SAF Man United solely at the feet of Ole is madness. Is Ole the second coming of Sir Alex Ferguson? No. Is he better than Moyes, LVG and Mourinho? In a vacuum, maybe not materially better, but in the situation we are in right now, oh yes, much better.
In my view, neither Klopp nor Pep would be producing trophy after trophy with this squad. Maybe marginally better, but the amount of talent we have in the squad is significantly worse than City, Liverpool, Chelsea and Tottenham, probably on par with Leicester. We may have the best player in the league in Bruno, but with Pogba constantly injured and Rashford not consistent enough, there isn't any standout other than Shaw.
Ole is really similar to the greatest manager of all time. I'm so happy we have him in charge. I wonder why everybody except a minority of united fans can't see how great he is.
Yes... but Ron was fired two months into the season, which makes the story more nuanced.
Why do you question I’m a fan only because I’m saying: “success and failure isn’t a result of only on person: “SAF likely didn’t everything right all the time”.
- Are the above mentioned points wrong?
- Am I godless (talking about SAF)? Probably Yes
- Am I fan of SAF? Yes
- Am I fan of United? Yes
- Is SAF one of the most successful managers in history? Yes
Deluded doesn't even begin to describe this statement.