Reasonable excuse for last season but not this one. We had alternatives for the transfers for this season going by reports after hiring people and also people hired before being able to implement their processes during last season.
Erik ten Hag - Manchester United manager
- Thread starter sewey89
- Start date
This season he wanted an established striker but was told to focus on a youth project due to FFP reasons. That's totally fine - but the scouts could only come up with Kolo Muani and Goncalo Ramos as alternatives to Hojlund. The club were pushing for the former 2 and it was Ten Hag's push for Hojlund.
Ten Hag also couldn't get Kim in, he couldn't get the club to move on players he knew didn't suit his system (like Maguire or McTominay) and he couldn't even get the club to bring in the right emergency LB (Cucurella over Reguilon). He has Onana who the jury is still out on, and Mount was a joint target which I've addressed. However Mount has been injured all season and Hojlund was a 70m signing that isn't ready to start, which isn't really Ten Hag's fault.
I think Ten Hag overpaid for Hojlund & Mount, and both could have been negotiated down if we had competent negotiators at the table.
It wasn't overdrive but it certainly seemed like that was our first priority to take care of in the summer before moving on, and the player of choice was Mount. But I had less of an issue with Mount being pursued (even if I didn't really rate him personally) than I did the idea of playing him next to fecking Bruno as dual 8's because I never had hope that Bruno could operate well in a more structured/discplined role. Which is why I preferred our midfield target to be more similar to an Eriksen that would sit deeper and leave the forward spaces for Bruno to roam around in.
Just don't think it's genuine to say "that was a Murtough player not an ETH player" just like it's probably not genuine to say it was strictly ETH's choice.
Our signings are a mess, but its widely reported ETH wanted significant involvement and a veto over signings. He wasted £82m on Antony, so when you talk about forwards we cant ignore that. The club were trying to sell McT and Maguire, even if badly. But ETH wanted Amrabat and widely reported he would have been a permanent signing if we had the funds, he still cost £8m in loan fees.
Yeah the eagerness to absolve him of transfer blame is weird. He impressed over the other candidates when he applied for the job so being the clear #1 he got a transfer veto, the same as Ole had.
If Ole had to shoulder blame for transfers then so too has ETH. They both had a similar amount of transfer power.
Think Kim was the priority given his clause but our owners just couldn't get it done and Bayern came in.
I totally get that dual 8.5 approach, it looked manic in the few games we saw it in - however I think its too small a sample size to judge what the end game was. If it wasnt working I'd have backed Mount in other areas, for example on the right or as a Bruno replacement. I have little doubt having Mount fit, settled and available would have earned us more points this season. Havertz as a parallel had a torrid opening half season with Arsenal but now he's found his way in the team and Artetas worked out how best to use him too, and Mount is a much better player.
I'm in full agreement that Antony is a waste by the way - I'm not really trying to argue that at all!
Ten Hag is operating under a much tighter budget, I don't think he'd be dumpster diving for Amrabat if he had funds for a midfielder. If we sold McTominay I can see him going for Gravenberg for example rather than Amrabat. However dumpster diving for loans is an obligation for him, not part of his hipster new design.
I read all those pieces and not come to that conclusion so you need to say which one.
And it's almost certain we would have signed none of Antony, Onana, Mount and Amrabat under any different manager.
People say Mount was widely sought after but he wasn't really. Not for what Chelsea were demanding given his contract situation.
Absolutely no way to know that. The only way to have gotten Mount cheaper was to wait it out as Chelsea needed to sell but there's a risk in that as Liverpool and Arsenal were struggling to sign midfielders so might have put more pressure on Mount to join them instead. We got Mount for basically 50m which is roughly only like 5-10m an overpay or not an overpay. Depends on who's asking. Players with less than a year similar to him have been transferred for more than that. On current trajectory those bonuses aren't gonna be triggered.
Fair for the rest outside the bolded.
This is a huge problem, isn't it?
How many proper clubs make signings for the manager? Managers come and go and the players will still be there on big contracts for the next guy to manage. They are club signings and the club has needed to be, and needs to be, so much better at it no matter who the manager is.
Mount was definitely an ETH choice if we go by our tactics this season. They were made for him to play the role McTominay and Mainoo have played so far.
https://theathletic.com/5151315/202...ed=1&source=googlesearch&access_token=3793320
OK -here are some pieces from The Athletic which show how difficult it was to work under Murtough, and it's not specific to Eric Ten Hag but also Ole and Rangnick so we can just put aside the 'person' as manager and look at the structure.
These are just SOME takeaways. The consistency here is Murtough is fecking shite as a DoF, and even if we had Emery or De Zerbi in last year I actually think they'd have to plan with an arm behind their back, because the structure around them was absolute bollocks.
Regarding not knowing how much certain players were costing - here's a nugget with Ole and Diallo:
"Solskjaer had given his blessing to the signing 48 hours before the announcement, having watched some video footage, but he was unaware of the significant fee, which rose dramatically from when prospective buyers enquired at Atalanta earlier that year.
Solskjaer initially believed Amad, an exciting talent, was an academy player but realised after the move was finalised that the money involved meant he was expected to soon feature in the first team."
Regarding Murtough being unable to actually take the right consultation on where the issues were:
"Rangnick struggled to get his head around the setup. Appointed by Murtough as manager on an interim basis with the prospect of a director role at the end of the 2021-22 season, Rangnick soon found himself isolated. Murtough cut down communication on sensitive subjects. Rangnick, struggling to gain authority over players, responded by taking his observations public, stating that United required “open-heart” surgery to fix the issues at the club."
^ (worth also noting Murtough had a big fallout with Butt, which is in the wider article)
Regarding no structure existing for managers to be given alternatives by the recruitment team:
"When Arnold took charge as chief executive in February 2022 he conducted a root-and-branch review of club protocols. Internally, he asked hard questions of recruitment, wanting to know how United had got so little to show for a £1billion spend on new players. The result was Jim Lawlor and Marcel Bout, two long-standing chief scouts, being ushered out. Lawlor, a Ferguson ally, was judged to be dismissing too many targets as not good enough. Murtough and Brown, the main architects of the system, stayed on."
So from the above - Head scouts get the chop, it pretty much goes into Murtough to suggest club targets and put them on the table alongisde who the manager suggests, before they start going through the joint shortlist.
So when Ten Hag wants a DM - you'd expect the scouts to give some targets right?:
"United lost to Brighton & Hove Albion and Brentford, and panic spread. Chief executive Richard Arnold became more visible around Carrington and sat in on a lengthy recruitment meeting following the 2-1 defeat by Brighton at Old Trafford. It was then that staff decided to pivot from De Jong to Casemiro.
The decision to go for Casemiro, a different profile of midfielder to De Jong, was taken despite some internal resistance. It was calculated that signing Declan Rice from West Ham United for £120million, as an example, would have been better for United’s long-term financial-fair-play (FFP) prospects than bringing in Casemiro, then aged 30, for half the fee. Rice’s salary would have been significantly smaller than Casemiro’s earnings of around £350,000 per week and he could have signed a longer contract owing to his age, meaning the cost could have been amortised — or spread out — in the accounts over a longer period. Rice, then aged 23, also had potential resale value."
In other words, FFP wasn't even considered and we went for Casemiro. So much for Murtough's scouting prowess on finding a DM for Ten Hag. A 12 year old competent at FIFA could think of that as a suggestion, but it doesn't mean its the way forward. I don't see that as a manager failing - unless you think Ten Hag should draw up the shortlist all on his own.
Hojlund - a player told he can go for £50m, and Murtough rocks in and overpays by £20m for what I can only assume is banter:
" Atalanta had told Hojlund he could leave for £50m, and United communicated they would draw the line at £60m, but then agreed a fee worth £72m during all-day talks in Bergamo that lasted until 3am. Atalanta had demanded £86m for a player they signed for less than £15m just 11 months earlier."
Mount - going in with the stronger cards but still coughing up £20m more than what we want to pay because of fright of Liverpool(!)
" There are inconsistencies even within a window too. During the summer, for instance, United went first for Mount because they feared Chelsea would otherwise sell different players to alleviate their FFP concerns, and Arsenal and Liverpool were in for him too. Internally, the price set for Mount was £40m because he had only a year left on his Chelsea contract, but that was the first offer Chelsea received. United’s bidding rose 50 per cent to a total of £55m plus £5m in add-ons. If the full £60m is realised, United will be delighted, however, as they will make a £1m payment every time Mount plays 70 per cent of games in a title-winning campaign during his five-year contract."
The price we initially set for him was £40m and we paid £55+5m. That 20m gap can fund a other gaps, especially when you consider how shite we were with the Hojlund negotiation too.
Last edited:
I honestly can't take you seriously when you try to defend our so called "negotiation" for Mount. The claim he was 'never needed" is even worse. We always had to invest in a replacement for Mctominay who ETH preffered sold early doors and he was amongst the best available. Furthermore it's interesting for some it's preffable to ignore the blatant fact if our negotiations and recruitment departments worked at all, we were supposed to replace Fred and Mctominay with a DM, a CM 8 to upgrade on Eriksen and a Mount. Which is exactly what the manager intended before our pre season tour. Which started with only a mercurial unproven 18 year old Mainoo as the potential Eriksen replacement. But Sure. Let's blame him strictly and give props to our 'negotiators" for Mount....
Pure myth. Atalanta's original asking price as 57-58.5m Euros (or about £50m pounds] reported time and again by Fabrizio Romano on X. By the time we firmed up our interest we paid £72m pounds. If you don't see how inane that is nor how it underlines utter incompetence from negotiators and recruiters, I doubt anything more can be said....
Last edited:
It's impressive how wrong you are.
https://theathletic.com/5151315/202...ed=1&source=googlesearch&access_token=3793320
Mount's appetite was £40m, with an easy negotiation on the cards given Chelsea had to sell for FFP. Murtough somehow fecked it and paid £55+5m. Set up for failure by Ten Hag? Sure mate
And Atalanta told Hojlund he can leave for £50m. I don't know what Murgouth was smoking before he went to the table but he left paying £20m+ more than that.
Happened last match as well - proper going for him now, it seems
Source just seems to be "trust me bro".
We all agree that Murtough was bad , but just shifting the blame for any signing that isn't working well is just pure apologist at this point.
What kind of morons work at Atalanta to not realize GBP/EUR FX is the other way around?
Last edited:
Mount is a terrible Fred replacement. Focus on that, and less on negotiations.I honestly can't take you seriously when you try to defend our so called "negotiation" for Mount. The claim he was 'never needed" is even worse. We always had to invest in a replacement for Mctominay who ETH preffered sold early doors and he was amongst the best available. Furthermore it's interesting for some it's preffable to ignore the blatant fact if our negotiations and recruitment departments worked at all, we were supposed to replace Fred and Mctominay with a DM, a CM 8 to upgrade on Eriksen and a Mount. Which is exactly what the manager intended before our pre season tour. Which started with only a mercurial unproven 18 year old Mainoo as the potential Eriksen reolacement. But Sure. Let's blame him strictly and give props to our 'negotiators" for Mount....
Pure myth. Atalanta's original asking price as 40m- 45m Euros (or about £50m pounds] reported time and again by Fabrizio Romano on X. By the time we firmed up our interest we paid £72m pounds. If you don't see how inane that is nor how it underlines utter incompetence from.negotiators and recruiters, I doubt anything more can be said....
Was pretty funny. Obviously exaggerated but there’s a lot of themes there that are prevalent in this thread.
Not true.
Amrabat is on loan so I'll give ETH a pass for that.
You shouldnt because we paid £8m loan fee.
Which is exactly the same as signing him for £40m on a 5 year deal as far as the book keeping and FFP goes.
I am just so depressed to see Antony start ahead of Diallo. Means if ETH stays Amad is gone, he's just being stubborn now. As for McT in midfield....
You seem to have missed the point he was making that Mount shouldn't be signed at any price. Prioritising him as a signing was utter madnessIt's impressive how wrong you are.
https://theathletic.com/5151315/202...ed=1&source=googlesearch&access_token=3793320
Mount's appetite was £40m, with an easy negotiation on the cards given Chelsea had to sell for FFP. Murtough somehow fecked it and paid £55+5m. Set up for failure by Ten Hag? Sure mate
And Atalanta told Hojlund he can leave for £50m. I don't know what Murgouth was smoking before he went to the table but he left paying £20m+ more than that.
It's really hard to trust his judgement of talent given he thought Antony was up to starting for us
I actually addressed it and so did the Artticle.
Mount was a valuable asset chased by Klopp and Arteta - using that as a stick to beat Ten Hag with is a bit weird. Moreover the prioritisation is another indictment of how bad our transfer team is - unless you think Ten Hag is running around sitting with the players and deciding the funds.
Also he said something weird:
"If we hadn't negotiated we would have paid even more for Mount."
^Bit of bogus to be honest given we valued him at 40m, negotiated and walked away paying 55+5. He also weirdly blamed that on the manager setting them up for hard negotiations when its one of the most straight forward deals you can do - Club in FFP issue, player is a boyhood united fan and in his final year of contract. You literally can't feck that up but they found a way.
Tuchel would relegate you guys. Can't believe there are rumors about him. Well, he's a marketing genius, I guess.
But is there not a significant difference between a loan and a buy? In the case of the former, a bust can dropped back into the river at the end of the season whereas with the latter we're either stuck with the player for five seasons or find a buyer for what would very likely be a booked loss on the total value of the transfer fee paid out.
Sorry, I can't. Because anyone with a clue can see he was supposed to upgrade Mctominay and even Eriksen. Never Fred
Forget the points and the results it’s just sad that I hardly see a game these days where you can say that we are the superior team. We can be playing Luton,Newport or forest but there is really no difference between the two teams. This guy will just never get us to a good place
We are getting killed out there by Forest, they creating chances for fun and we have not created shit all game. The funny part is, we had a similar performance against them a month ago in league match where we lost, we never really learn do we. Also poses a big question mark on the manager and his credentials and ability to learn from mistakes.
I do have sympathy when you look at the left back and centre forward situation but damn this is a hard watch.
I've had enough. It's time to make a change.
There's just absolutely nothing this team is good at. Nothing. And many things it's bad that. We are hoping for Moments FC again to bail us out. It's so boring.
If you look at the defence and some of the basic midfield play it's actually not been that bad but my god the attack is so blunt at times. Yes Hojlind is out but he's just one player (an important one, but still)
Most insipid football I’ve ever seen
Ten Hag is trying to play this team like it’s a perfect 11 piece jigsaw.
Problem is, he’s never gonna have the right eleven pieces fit and available.
So he’s shoving corner pieces right into the middle and centre pieces on the outside and it’s just a mess.
Problem is, he’s never gonna have the right eleven pieces fit and available.
So he’s shoving corner pieces right into the middle and centre pieces on the outside and it’s just a mess.
His meek-ness towards refs will be a contributing factor towards him losing his job.
We literally look like a team without a manager.
Apart from bringing McTominay on - this guy has no clue about ingame changes. Never subs off players based on performances or tries anything different.