- Joined
- Sep 1, 2015
- Messages
- 15,209
- Supports
-
Erik ten Hag - Manchester United manager
- Thread starter sewey89
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) was joined by comedian Ali Woods to look back at the best and worst moments of a rollercoaster season with the annual United Hour Awards.
Has Ten Hag been sacked yet? We're not sure and we hope not, but it's looking more likely as the days pass.
Who should replace him and why is it taking so long to make a decision?
The ships going down but it's alright lads, I'll stay on until the end because I have more patience than those idiots bailing out early
So if the wide attackers are picking up the the wingbacks, who is picking up the the 3 CB'S and the 2 deeper CM'S?
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2015
- Messages
- 15,209
- Supports
-
You might be right I might be right. Let’s see what summer brings.
I’d wager we’ll still have Ten Hag, we’ll make some defensive signings and we’ll be playing significantly better for it.
All things considered Casemiro was manna from heaven at the time the transfer was happened, so even if he's not exactly the profile of player Ten Hag was looking for in that position, it wasn't completely out of football context as the Ronaldo and Alexis Sanchez transfers were. I still think Mount is a very good player, but legitimate high level two way midfielders are sure af not costing what Mount cost these days.
Speaking of Casemiro, I was far from hopeful as any time before ETH we've brought in a player that Madrid forced out, they never looked like they were completely brought in to playing for this club, and last season they absolutely did buy in. That can't have anything to do with the manager, can it?
Derivative debate? Read what I said, I said transfers failed under Ole and under Ten Hag weren't managerial issues but structural ones. Do you actually think before you reply to posts? This is a serious question.
We need to remember that Erik is not supposed to be responsible for transfers.
He is filling a vacuum left by the Glazers.
All this will change with SJR next season.
He is filling a vacuum left by the Glazers.
All this will change with SJR next season.
Look what you did here you accidentally cracked the code of why the "double 8" (It's not exactly a double 8 but you get the idea) is becoming more and more prevalent. It's why City can play with KDB and Bernardo in front of Rodri. (Yes, I know how good Rodri is, but that's part of it. Bruno and Eriksen were doing just fine as rotating 8s last season when Casemiro was in peak form)
How can Bruno and Mount fit together is a question I imagine that has stumped you in the past, but now you have an answer. Now if you want to talk about his insistence on playing Bruno every single second of every single game, that's a fair criticism.
Indeed.
Can you point to this article please? By all accounts Mount was a joint pursuit by the club. Mount wasn't just a player pursued by Ten hag and United, but by Liverpool and Arsenal.
Ten Hag hasn't got all his first choice signings, by the way.
All of his first choice signings? You're either trolling or flat out lying.
De Jong? Potentially Kane? Who else?
Also, I never quite understood him going from de Jong to Casemiro.
We got Casemiro the same way we got Di Maria and Varane. Glazers relationship with Perez, only last season was the most committed any of the Madrid throw-aways have ever been. (I wonder why)
There was also Declan Rice and Gakpo, (He's been up and down for Liverpool but he's obviously much better than Weghorst) and the center backs they wanted before the Glazers refused to pay an exit fee for Maguire. This is just the transfer targets we know of.
So you’re saying we would have signed Mount no matter which manager was in charge? And the only target of his we didn’t get was FDJ. I’m pretty sure everyone els he got was first choice. Are you an ETH in or out person? I’ve always defended ETH but some things he is to blame.
Who wasn’t then apart from FDJ/Casemiro situation? Also he wanted Kane but that was very unrealistic with our budget.
No, I'm saying that Mount wasn't solely pursued by Ten Hag, and most certainly not just because he knew him at Ajax. Mount was a back to back player of the season winner after his Holland stint, it's a bit misleading to claim he was just a ten hag pursuit and that too because of a loan stint 4-5 seasons ago. Regarding targets, we wanted a CB reportedly, but didn't get one. He wanted Kane but the club wanted him to pursue a project signing instead. There may have been others. Gakpo and I guess Arnautivic back in season one.
Im ten hag in, but for different reasons to before. Before I was more confident on him being the man to turn it around, but now I'm more in because I don't actually see managers who are going to be a sure thing moreso than him. I'd give him season 3 (barring a capitulation now), and sack if he can't progress us under a better structure. At that stage we'd probably be able to talk to managers who have won things meaningful, like Ancelotti or Enrique.
Scroll up I'm not repeating myself. Also you just admitted that a player he wanted was unrealistic with our budget, and at the same time you want him to build on a 3rd place finish when the clubs around him didn't have the same budget restrictions.
You got up on the wrong side of bed this morning? Rice is an unrealistic target just like I said about Kane if you scroll up… and your dwelling over Gakpo? You’d be one of the ones moaning at how crap he is if we’d of signed him. Martinez, he wanted, Antony he wanted and we pushed very hard and over payed for him. Mount he clearly wanted. Onana we pushed for and eventually signed. Malacia he wanted and got from the league he knew. Eriksen he wanted. Højlund you could argue wasn’t his first choice but when he knew we wasn’t getting Kane that was his main ST to chase. Yes we’ve had to sign crap like Weghorst but that’s because we didn’t have funds for anything els so we had to get a stop gap signing.
The thing is, a lot of managers never really get their first choice. I know for a fact Pep and Klopp haven't. For example, Pep not getting Paqueta or Rice this season, or Klopp not getting Caicedo or Lavia. As managers, you need to make do with what you have and get the best out of those players. Unfortunately, ten Hag hasn't quite been able to do that this season. Injuries certainly haven't helped, though.
Below are the permanent signings ten Hag has made since being here. From the list below, which of these do you not think were his first choice. Please bare in mind players like Evans, Malacia and Eriksen were initially bought in as squad players. Maybe not Eriksen, but certainly the other two.
Malacia
Martinez
Casemiro
Hojlund
Mount
Onana
Antony
Eriksen
Evans
You are spot on, however Pep relies on Tixi to get players of his ilk, and Klopp has a well functioning recruitment board to lean on.
Ten Hag (and Ole and the managers before him) had little outside of commercial signing punts suggested to them. Rightly or wrongly they had more control over matters, which is a recipe for disaster for any coach.
I literally just laid out the reason he had to sign Evans and you still need to ask? Also, I'll save you the embarrassment of responding to your comparing our overall set up to Liverpool and City. You actually said Pep and "make do with what you have" in the same sentence, which is pure comedy, but when he didn't get Paqueta, he got Matheus Nunez, who hasn't played a whole lot because he was behind Julian Alvarez, who we would have signed if we were run like a football club and not a money front. "Make do with what they have.."
Project went off the rails with the Antony and Casemiro signings. Casemiro was so short term and now needs replacing barely two years after coming in, if we replace him with a signing that costs 50m and above that's easily 120m spent in 24 months on one position. It's such a waste bearing in mind that in August 2022 we probably knew we had several positions to address.
Then in the summer of 2023 it was another case of misappropriation of resources. Whatever the merits of Mount, which arent obvious, spending 60m on him and 45m Onana when DDG had agreed a lower wage wasn't best use of limited resources to take the team forward. When considered in the context of the previous year's blunders we have easily pissed away over 250m on players that haven't moved the dial in terms of team progression and an expensive punt on an ageing superstar.
These are very expensive mistakes and whilst time will dig us out of the financial hole the opportunity cost on team progression has had dire consequences.
Rice wasn't an unrealistic signing for our competition though was it? The only reason Kane isn't at City is Daniel Levi, so he wasn't unrealistic for them. Eriksen was a necessary bargain signing and would have been one of the transfers of the season if he didn't get hurt. Malacia was another bargain signing that was contributing well above his price tag until he got injured. Onana is playing very well after a rough start, Hoijland has come good after a rough start, and you have no earthly clue how the Mount signing will end up so we can't call it a good or a bad buy at this time. Martinez was an excellent buy, and you don't get to put hypothetical words in my mouth and tell me what I'd moan about so bore off with that. Antony was a bad buy. Not because he lacks talent, but because given what we know now, a manager that was already familiar with him should have had doubts he'd be able to mentally handle what comes along with playing for United.
I think you're missing the point. Regardless of whether City and Liverpool have a better set up than us or not, the initial point was that ten Hag didn't get his first choice signings, or am I wrong? Therefore, I quite rightly pointed out pretty much any manager has to deal with that issue, at times.I literally just laid out the reason he had to sign Evans and you still need to ask? Also, I'll save you the embarrassment of responding to your comparing our overall set up to Liverpool and City. You actually said Pep and "make do with what you have" in the same sentence, which is pure comedy, but when he didn't get Paqueta, he got Matheus Nunez, who hasn't played a whole lot because he was behind Julian Alvarez, who we would have signed if we were run like a football club and not a money front. "Make do with what they have.."
Now, going back to my question, if you can handle it in a mature fashion, which one of those players were not ten Hag's first choice?
Equally as important, Pep gets to say who leaves and enforce the standard at the club. If City's ownership came to Pep and announced they're signing a player he doesn't want for commercial purposes he'd think they're having a laugh.
You’re wasting your time mate. Starts going on about stuff that wasn’t the original debate.
I agree. In hindsight, a few signings ten Hag made were mistakes. The Casemiro one certainly sticks out like a sore thumb.
Process the information I'm giving you properly and we can talk about my maturity. "A manager has to deal with that issue" is vague purposely and not only did you ignore the context I provided, but there are examples of Ten Hag doing just that. If you don't understand the difference between getting Weghorst instead of Gakpo, and getting Matheus Nunez instead of Paqueta, that's on you.
Of the players you listed, btw Antony is the only one you can call a bad buy, so I'm not sure what the point of your little list is in the first place.
Arguing with another member
Pointing out your blinding ignorance isn't something I'd call debating, but even still, everything I said was in the context of the topic at hand. If you don't understand the context then you have no place debating with me.
Last edited:
And you going on about something irrelevant is? You started going on about the good and bad signings… correct me if I’m wrong but was the original argument about the signings being ETH first choice.
No ones saying which ones a bad guy though
We’re talking about being an ETH signing and one he wanted.Yes we wasted money on the Mount transfer. Overspent (you agreed), would have been better spent on a CM (again you agreed).
Dear me. Going round in circles here.
Is it the biggest waste of money within the £400m? No. Does it contribute to my original point that Ten Hag has spent £400m badly? Yes.
Last edited:
A reactive coach that’s only won 3 games in the last 20….
You shouldn't need me to tell you some of those bargain signings were not first choice. The list of players he wanted as a plan A are Martinez, Antony, Onana, Mount, and I'll even grant Hoijland was a plan 1.B to Kane's 1.A. Everyone else was a bargain buy.
What in your opinion is the criteria for money well or poorly spent?
I started going on about that because the poster I was replying to, after comparing Liverpool and City's set up to our own, was a manager has to make do with what he has. I provided examples of him doing just that.
It has to be case by case.
In Mount's case overpaying on what seems to have been a squad player rather than improving the first XI.
Never liked the Casemiro signing, high fee, declining, high wages, long contract.
Antony was never going to justify the fee, Ten Hag should have known his value relative to other players
Just for laughs, your original post said “ETH got all his first choice signings” which is 100% false and you know it, or you wouldn’t have switched to, “other than player a and b”. Dont be full of shite and you won’t get called out for being full of shite.
Seems to have been, or in other words nobody knows yet. Btw, have you paid attention to what squad players that are key subs are going for now a days. If Mount flops he flops in which case he’d absolutely be a waste of money, but $60 million these days is what you pay for players that make up the upper middle of your squad if you want to build on finishing 3rd in the Premier League
Last edited:
In our system, though it may be too generous to describe our play as having any kind of “system”, Bruno and Mason don’t work well together. They have different qualities but essentially thrive in the same role.