No. If allegri performs well we keep him, but we keep realistic with the plan and understand he may go stale after 2/3 years. If he is performing superbly we extend a contract as rational clubs would. But if we consider Cagliari, AC and Juventus stints, we are realistic to assume we will need to move him on. We wouldn't be the first club to use him as a journey man in that regard.
Would you sack or keep Ole? (Poll reopened)
- Thread starter MrSingh2002
- Start date
- Status
Constraints- financial mostly. The Glaziers like the sound of a 3-4 year rebuild as they won't have to spend any big money in any one year. Players out before players in.
Schtum- quiet. No criticism of the board and the lack of investment. Definitely no talk about the club being milked dry by owners that care only about how much money they can earn for the least investment.
Wait, I’ve seen this one before.
You mean replacement as a permanent manager?
I'd rather go down the caretaker route so that we really carefully use the time till the end of the season to really asses well our next permanent appointment and have some sort of a plan.
Going now after a permanent role would be difficult as not many will be available.
Come next Summer you might have Ten Hag, Nagelsmann, Rose, Poch, Allegri, etc..
Currently we can have someone like Spalletti, Marcelino, Blanc, van Bronkchorst etc to steady the ship.
Yes if we are going to do it, do it properly.
What madness is there in sacking Ole and replacing him with one of his coaches?
TBH, whoever comes next, should sack the whole lot of them and bring in a team he's comfortable with.
The whole coaching side needs restructuring.
That’s why I say, if it is going to happen. Keep this in place and get the next manager and his team in place. Change it completely.
Sacking ole for sacking sake does not make sense to me.
Fecking hell did we really only score one goal in the last month?
McTominay against Arsenal?
Exactly why does everyone still believe everything on the inter web
You really haven't. Every fecking managerial appointment has been us pinning hopes on them to rocket us to winning titles eventually. We need to accept the idea that certain managers are good for certain stages of a clubs transition. Allegri would be the best available to install a pragmatic, efficient system and deploying players in their best positions. He can bring in a winning mentality, but struggles beyond 2-3 years.
Then there are managers who can take the foundation and build further with attractive football and maintaining harmony in the dressing room. It's easier, and low risk for a Rose or a Nagalsmann to take over from a shit show from Ole than from a better solid foundation set by Allegri
Not every manager is a jack of all trades. Klopp and Pep are 2 of a kind.
Still sounds very familiar
Kinda ruins the joke now doesn’t it. Still funny though.
So why you take so long to pipe up if you knew it wasn’t true?Exactly why does everyone still believe everything on the inter web
I was watching the internationals pal, someone whatsapped it to me and i told them it was bollocks.So why you take so long to pipe up if you knew it wasn’t true?
Yeah agree on that. If we are to get an interim, and IMO we should, it should be someone from the outside.
The players won't trust someone from Ole's team and rightfully so.
If only Ed and whoever else was responsible had stuck to what they said and waited until the end of the season to appoint a permanent manager .
Yes Ole went on a fantastic run of form and I must admit I was one of those who thought he should he made permanent manager.
However if they had still waited (putting aside any potential external factors for appointing him early eg Molde needing to know etc) the fantastic run of results that led to people wanting him permanently would have become a fond but distant memory had the subsequent games stayed as they were eg the pathetic end to the season but we could have then said thank you for what you've done while you've been here, we have decided not to make you permanent and he could have gone back to Molde with a thank you, fond memories or perhaps an opening for a job at one of the smaller PL clubs. The fans wouldn't be angry at the board for not appointing him as the dammed if you do dammed if you dont scenario caused by that great run of results would have been cancelled out due to the following run of poor form.
If the form had continued due to the players and everyone continuing the trying to impress phase, would probably would have got top 4 and Ole would have a lot more behind him to convince people to give him time.
We didn't even announce it after say the PSG game, it was after a loss if I can recall.
I'd be intrigued to know if they still had interviews with Ole/ other potential candidates- it may simply be there was no one else available however would there have been in the summer? Did we interview Ole about his visions and plans for the club and still treat him as we would a potential appointment who wasnt carrying out an "audition" or go just based on his performances?
What I'm trying to say is had the club done as they had originally said and waited until the end of the season its unlikely Ole would have got the job permanently in the first place and we wouldn't have had to sack him, merely thanked him for all he did for us during his spell as caretaker and looked into the next permanentl manager.
Obviously there may be reasons why he was given the job "early" outside the run of form that we wont ever know about however if not that is negligent from Ed etc.
I agree he is out of his depth and needs to be moved on however had we waited he would have shown that during his spell as temporary manager and we wouldn't have had to sack him.
Yes Ole went on a fantastic run of form and I must admit I was one of those who thought he should he made permanent manager.
However if they had still waited (putting aside any potential external factors for appointing him early eg Molde needing to know etc) the fantastic run of results that led to people wanting him permanently would have become a fond but distant memory had the subsequent games stayed as they were eg the pathetic end to the season but we could have then said thank you for what you've done while you've been here, we have decided not to make you permanent and he could have gone back to Molde with a thank you, fond memories or perhaps an opening for a job at one of the smaller PL clubs. The fans wouldn't be angry at the board for not appointing him as the dammed if you do dammed if you dont scenario caused by that great run of results would have been cancelled out due to the following run of poor form.
If the form had continued due to the players and everyone continuing the trying to impress phase, would probably would have got top 4 and Ole would have a lot more behind him to convince people to give him time.
We didn't even announce it after say the PSG game, it was after a loss if I can recall.
I'd be intrigued to know if they still had interviews with Ole/ other potential candidates- it may simply be there was no one else available however would there have been in the summer? Did we interview Ole about his visions and plans for the club and still treat him as we would a potential appointment who wasnt carrying out an "audition" or go just based on his performances?
What I'm trying to say is had the club done as they had originally said and waited until the end of the season its unlikely Ole would have got the job permanently in the first place and we wouldn't have had to sack him, merely thanked him for all he did for us during his spell as caretaker and looked into the next permanentl manager.
Obviously there may be reasons why he was given the job "early" outside the run of form that we wont ever know about however if not that is negligent from Ed etc.
I agree he is out of his depth and needs to be moved on however had we waited he would have shown that during his spell as temporary manager and we wouldn't have had to sack him.
Money
United saw it as a cheaper option and it had public support and the press support.
Carrick and McKenna have been both been an unmitigated disaster.
Rui Faria got us 2nd.
He left, Carrick and McKenna took over and we turned to absolute crap. They are still in their roles and we are in the worst league table position since the EPL started.
Those 2 have been absolutely terrible for us.
If either of them are rewarded by giving them the manager's role, that person who gave them the role should be checked into a mental institute.
In fact anybody who thinks that McKenna and Carrick are good at their jobs should be checked into a mental institute!
EDIT: Is McKenna in charge of training our attackers? Not sure, but I remember fans saying that our attack will be fantastic when he was appointed. Sadly, that did not happen and these days we can barely score a goal.
Whoever is our attacking coach should be relieved of his duties.
Said better than I said, you go bob!
Why don't we stop pretending we know what the coaches do, how they do what they do, and why they do it in that manner. At the end of the day, the manager is the one who decides how they want their side to play a certain way. We don't know what type of influence McKenna has to really judge him.
This is what Mourinho said about his coaches
Stop trying to make it seem like McKenna is the one in charge of tactics. It's the manager who wants the players playing a certain way and the assistant coach has to fit that before anything else.
In the case of Ole, he literally said that he hasn't wanted to change his tactics this entire season. What do you want McKenna to do? Defy the manager?
Last edited:
Please tell me you don't actually believe that?
Mourinho is gone. See any improvements?
Like i said. They're either have no influence, or a bad influence. You cant have it both ways
It's like you're not getting my point. Why does Mourinho leaving change anything in regards to how much say a coach has on the tactics? Ole has his way of playing and that's that. In fact, Ole literally said after Newcastle that they've stuck to the same principles and starting lineup system every match. You want McKenna to defy the manager? Again, you're concluding that he must go based on knowing nothing of what goes on.
If he has no influence, one of your two options, why on earth does he need to leave? In the end, it's the manager that is in charge.
So it's correct. They either have no influence. Or they have a bad influence?
If he has no influcence on ole that simply means he has no ideas that can help his manager, if that's the case he needs to go.
Your premise is flawed. You keep absolving the manager of blame. I know you don't like Ole (not trying to paint you as Ole in), but he's the one in charge. He's the one that decides what he wants out of his side. McKenna has to follow Ole's lead even if flawed because at the end of the day, Ole is his boss. You don't know whether Ole is giving a ton of responsibility to McKenna to the point where he can overwrite Ole's main system and tactics. If that were the case, your point would be a valid one. The problem is, we don't know whether that's the case or not.
It's not as simple as no influence or bad influence. It's more like:
1.Responsibility to overhaul manager's tactics
a. No influence
b. Bad influence
2. Does not have responsibility to overhaul manager's tactics and can only tweak
a. No influence
b. Bad influence
You automatically use #1 when we don't know that to be true. I would buy into that more if it was Fergie still in charge because he has admitted to the idea that he needed to defer to progress with the times. You don't know if Ole is the same at this point in his career.
The buck stops with the manager. SAF had either very good coaches or good assistants. Carlos was by all means a manager as SAF had said so and delegated a lot of responsibility to him and trusted him.
It's getting a bit embarrassing now, that's the 4th, 5th or even 6th time in the last week or so you've put my name forward for poster of the year, I appreciate you putting my name forward, no I really do, i'm humbled in fact, but maybe its time to reign it in for a while as ive started getting members PM-ing me to ask if i'm paying you to nominate me, what are they like eh? Feel free to go hard again in the last week before the votes are counted though, cheers
Assistant coaches are usually in charge of organizing training sessions, which affect the players overall movement and link on the pitch. Both are crap for us. So either they are crap in their job or they don't even organize those sessions under 2 managers in a row which means they are useless. Both aren't good scenarios anyway.
And McKenna has been as extemely overrated here as our youngsters. It's like anything coming from our academy must be overrated by United fans first before starting to value them correctly.
Or he’s being ignored in favour of Ole’s and/or Phelan’s ideas, such as they are.
McKenna is a young highly rated youth coach. Carrick is a novice who’s been learning his trade from a melting down Jose and a hopeless Ole. While I think it’s completely ridiculous to blame either of them for any of our current failings, it’s also obvious that they are doing neither the team nor themselves any good by hanging around, and both need to move on. McKenna should be looking to manage a lower league club with a decent youth development programme here or abroad. Carrick is well regarded as an intelligent man with massive experience as a player; surely he could get a coaching role at a decent club where he will actually learn how to do the job?
Maybe Carrick is doing great work behind the scenes work with, say, Garner. But his public image is not being enhanced by his mooching around the sidelines during games looking ether depressed or bored.
Being in charge of training sessions don't mean he's in charge of the tactics. He's there to get Ole's message across to the players. If a manager is out of his depth like Ole is, then why is McKenna supposed to change that all of a sudden? And McKenna was highly regarded before his time at United so your 2nd point is just nonsense.
And maybe McKenna is crap at that level, but it's hard to tell when he first had to utilize Mourinho's complete opposite viewpoint and Ole, who seems out of his depth. I haven't judged McKenna because I have no way to really single him out like I could Matt Judge. It feels like some of you just want to blame everyone regardless of whether you have evidence for it or not.
It's proper open season now, everybody is getting it, the owners are shit, the CEO is shit, the Manager is shit, 98% of the players are shit and now the coaches are shit, if I was Fred the Red, or Cynthia the Tea Lady i'd take my phone off the hook because they'll be next on the hit-list.
I didn't say they are the ones putting the tactics of the team, but the tactics itself had nothing to do with the players having zero link on the pitch and look like strangers. It means we are doing feck all on training ground and as I said, either they are in charge of training sessions which mean they are shite in their job or they are not which mean they have been having zero role under 2 managers in a row and still sticking around which is crap too. Both scenarios aren't good.
No the second point isn't nonsense. Being successful managing U18 or any youth team doesn't necessarily mean you are going to make it in top flight football. People are were hailing McKenna as someone who was going to make our football far better and have amazing football. Maybe he's not going to make it in such high level of football and youth teams are his limit. Similar to academy players. You know it's possible, so maybe we should stop over rating everything coming from our academy as a sure success in first team.
For me it's kinda weird people are trying to absolve them both from the blame when it's so obvious the entire coaching stuff are fecking shite in their job with how we look. Every one know I'm firmly Ole out, but it doesn't mean I'm going to make illogical excuses for his assistants.
He managed and coached the under 18’s who played good football and could actually attack. They didn’t have the best defence so does that mean I’m suppose to now believe he went full 360. Like someone already said the manager decides how a team plays the coaches role is to implement the managers tactics on the field. He’ll only coach how he is told to.
We shall see. I never remember Mourinho’s Chelsea team playing good football but Brendon Rodgers seems to be alright at it.
I didn't.
Here is what I said back in May
Your 2nd point is still nonsense because you're calling our entire academy overrated based on what? What are you basing McKenna being overrated on? It's based on flimsy evidence that he's to blame for Ole's tactics. In the case of Mourinho you apply that as well, but provide further flimsy evidence that Mourinho's poor run of form is caused by McKenna when our football was rubbish under Rui Faria, and Mourinho backers like to blame Woodward for failing to back him in his last season.
Here is more context of Ole and Mourinho
1. Mourinho
a. We were saved by de Gea for that 2nd place finish which is why Mourinho wanted more defenders despite already having a great defensive record under he and LVG.
b. We were saved by de Gea because out of the top 6, we were last in chances created, and had the most shot attempts at our goal. This points to us being lucky de Gea saved us that season. Deep down Mourinho knew his coaching wasn't the reason for 2nd place and instead it was de Gea's brilliance.
2. Ole
a. Cardiff prior to Ole were 17th with 15 goals in 20 matches. Under Ole, they went to 20th with 17 goals in 18 matches. Hardly a shift in goal scored despite Ole being "attacking."
b. Our most progressive performance was Ole's first match in charge with McKenna having more say as Ole had no time to get his ideas across, as he admitted.
c. Ole himself has stated that he's purposely kept things consistent this season meaning McKenna has largely no say because it's not his side. His job is to coach Ole's tactics. You misconstrue that with him having total control to get the side playing like he wants when that's not his job. It doesn't make sense when you really think about it. He's not the manager. If Ole is supposedly an attacking manager and Mourinho a defensive manager, why does McKenna get the blame when what you're really asking from him is to get the team playing the way he wants. Same job in your view is it not?
Last edited:
I don't it has anything to do with savings on wages or things like that. Ole's new manager bounce was a relatively long one and then we were favourites for a top 4 finish and going deep in the Cup. Woodward, for me, saw an opportunity to own the narrative and preempt a mooted restructuring that would have brought in a DOF and possibly limited his involvement in the things that bring attention to him that he so loves. It has blown spectacularly in his face and I doubt the six Glazer siblings all think he is doing a good job and some amongst them don't have access to various opinions from top football people to show them just how disastrous he has been to the club.
I don't know if they have any say or not but if they are being paid they should advise Ole and if he is not accepting their advise and we continue to fail then it's time they resign.
For sure, they all can see we are crap at set pieces and they should be practicing it.
For sure, they all can see we are crap at set pieces and they should be practicing it.
- Status