Not true, with Klopp you saw an instant style. They were literally saying his problem was he can't play it yet with that shit defence cos they kept scoring but also conceding which is why they were inconsistent - but you knew what he was trying to do
A reminder on Liverpool, Arsenal, City's ascend
- Thread starter Alek M
- Start date
Klopp’s Liverpool had bad runs of form too.
2017 : 2 wins in 11 games
2021 : 6 losses in a row at home
Worst away form of Liverpool‘s history under Klopp
In his first 3 years he managed only 6 wins in 18 games against bottom 3 teams.
I still remember in his second season he was getting under huge pressure because of his stats in the league that were not better than Rodgers (less points, lower win percentage, less goals scored).
So no, neither Klopp nor Arteta had smooth and perfect football and results from the start. They both had some pretty shite periods of football and results.
Once again, I couldn’t care less if Ten Hag got the sack but the Caf seems to think everyone else in world football is doing so great from day one while it’s simply not true
The most worrying part for me is he dosnt know how to use his own signings. As one of the few i can see the skills of Antony, i can see what Hojlund brings, what Onana offers with his feets, even Mount have some skills. But he just simply dont have a plan with any of them, no well coached runs, how to open up a low standing defense, how to control the game with movement and passing. He diffently lacks in game management. There is a reason we loose to all the top teams, its because they all know our tactic and how to play our weakest points. But ETH cant adjust it, he cant tweak the tactic and get a grip to the game before its too late. Most of the times he just rely on individuel performances.
That is the biggest difference between the coaches. Klopp, Arteta, Pep even Emery have so much more to offer in these aspects. Arteta had to learn the coaching game, he came from an assisting role. So of course he needed time to learn how to handle it.
That is the biggest difference between the coaches. Klopp, Arteta, Pep even Emery have so much more to offer in these aspects. Arteta had to learn the coaching game, he came from an assisting role. So of course he needed time to learn how to handle it.
United trajectory since 2013 is more ass-end than ascend. 
The Klopp part of the argument falls apart once anyone remembers that Liverpool played the CL final in 17/18.
Reaching a CL final in your first attempt with that club is impressive, and it was no fluke: they did the same in 18/19 and outright won it, and reached another final in 21/22.
Reaching a CL final in your first attempt with that club is impressive, and it was no fluke: they did the same in 18/19 and outright won it, and reached another final in 21/22.
You've got to ignore all of that though to make the comparison work.
Did Klopp and Arteta get around £400m to spend in their first 2 seasons??
Guardiola got a lot of money but he delivered very quickly in stunning fashion. Champion in his 2nd season.
Guardiola got a lot of money but he delivered very quickly in stunning fashion. Champion in his 2nd season.
City was already and champion side when Guardiola came in and he just revamped the squad to his needs and brought in younger players. Arsenal and Liverpool were far from the champions' side before Arteta & Klopp came in, they had much more to do than Pep.
In 16/17 Liverpool conceded 42 goals. Not a great number but it's not really that bad either. Arsenal conceded more goals than that in 22/23 and were in a title race.
Why do you have to remind us? Are you sado so the rest of us can be as well? F... this thread
Should we be performing better with the players at ETH's disposal? Yes.
Is ETH flawless? Absolutely not.
Is he still a good manager despite the struggles this season? Yes.
But the most important question for me: Have the owners, Murtough and the club given him the best possible chance and squad for a successful rebuild, taking United back to the footballing elite? Absolutely fecking not.
This is the same question Arsenal and Edu asked themselves when Arsenal were in relegation form for months, which resulted in Arteta keeping his job and there we are 2-3 years later, they have one of the best and youngest squads in the world that's already a serious challenger for all major trophies and most of their key players aren't even close to peaking just yet.
I'm not saying the same will happen if we stick with ETH but at the same time I feel like he could be a successful coach at a real football club with a proper footballing setup. Currently I feel like United aren't serious about returning to the top and no manager out there is capable of this task on their own. Not even Pep with the "3 major signings per summer" policy that Ole recently revealed in his interview. It all checks out as well if you look at our transfer history. In 2018 and 2020 we didn't even have 3 significant arrivals. Like I said, the Glazers and the club aren't arsed about getting back to the top.
I want Ineos to come in and give ten Hag a chance in a good, ambitious environment with competent people surrounding him. If it still doesn't work, then sure, we need to part ways.
Is ETH flawless? Absolutely not.
Is he still a good manager despite the struggles this season? Yes.
But the most important question for me: Have the owners, Murtough and the club given him the best possible chance and squad for a successful rebuild, taking United back to the footballing elite? Absolutely fecking not.
This is the same question Arsenal and Edu asked themselves when Arsenal were in relegation form for months, which resulted in Arteta keeping his job and there we are 2-3 years later, they have one of the best and youngest squads in the world that's already a serious challenger for all major trophies and most of their key players aren't even close to peaking just yet.
I'm not saying the same will happen if we stick with ETH but at the same time I feel like he could be a successful coach at a real football club with a proper footballing setup. Currently I feel like United aren't serious about returning to the top and no manager out there is capable of this task on their own. Not even Pep with the "3 major signings per summer" policy that Ole recently revealed in his interview. It all checks out as well if you look at our transfer history. In 2018 and 2020 we didn't even have 3 significant arrivals. Like I said, the Glazers and the club aren't arsed about getting back to the top.
I want Ineos to come in and give ten Hag a chance in a good, ambitious environment with competent people surrounding him. If it still doesn't work, then sure, we need to part ways.
What the heck is this shit again, with the comparisons to Klopp and Pep? Arteta, sure. Excellent comparison and supports the general point of the OP. But the mental gymnastics involving other two?
Every fecking time! I mean, OP even had to go back in time and change the course of events like who joined their club when, to make his point.Klopp did the double over City with the team he inherited right away. The aggregate score was 7-1. The quickfire goals in those games? Yeah, that was the signature. Their main striker at that time was Benteke, whom he promptly benched and started working towards building the famed front three.
He knocked us out of the EL along with a Dortmund in full flow. Remember that 4-3 comeback win at that bloody stadium in the last minute? He couldn't have signalled progress more if he sent up flares at the end of that night.
Thankfully he just kept faltering at finals repeatedly. Otherwise, they didn't lose a knockout European tie for years. Imagine that shit. A season in the EL plus two in the CL. Didn't get knocked out once. If Klopp signed for us, he'd have a statue by now.
Right from the beginning, it was obvious that Klopp was limited by a defence led by Lovren with Mignolet at the back. Meant that they often needed 2 or 3 goals to win away games. Of course that's not doable.
But at the other end, even before Mane and Salah turned up, they were scoring goals for fun. The problem in defence was obvious and once they hit that Coutinho lottery, the result was inevitable.
Seriously, people! No one claimed that Klopp was perfect from day one. But right away, it was very clear what his Liverpool team could look like at their best. The only issue was consistency and raising the floor of their performances and that's what's behind cherry picked stats like "managed only 6 wins in 18 games against bottom 3 teams." But the fecking ceiling? You had to be blind not to see it and be worried by it.
Have we had even 10 matches over two seasons against top-10 teams or good European teams that show what ETH's Man utd could like "at their best"? This question is absolutely genuine, because I can't come up with that sort of a list.
Every manager we have gets compared to Klopp’s start at Liverpool. We could have had 3 or 4 Klopp’s by now if we had more patience 
Managers aren't given time, they earn time.
Klopp and Arteta both faced similar issues to those faced by EtH. Both managers were able to come in and immediately demonstrate that they had a plan and a style of playing football that they could implement.
The problem with OPs argument is that is basically suggests that a manager should be given time regardless of whether of how badly they perform.
Klopp and Arteta both faced similar issues to those faced by EtH. Both managers were able to come in and immediately demonstrate that they had a plan and a style of playing football that they could implement.
The problem with OPs argument is that is basically suggests that a manager should be given time regardless of whether of how badly they perform.
People in here are exactly claiming that Klopp turned Liverpool from day one.What the heck is this shit again, with the comparisons to Klopp and Pep? Arteta, sure. Excellent comparison and supports the general point of the OP. But the mental gymnastics involving other two?
Klopp did the double over City with the team he inherited right away. The aggregate score was 7-1. The quickfire goals in those games? Yeah, that was the signature. Their main striker at that time was Benteke, whom he promptly benched and started working towards building the famed front three.
He knocked us out of the EL along with a Dortmund in full flow. Remember that 4-3 comeback win at that bloody stadium in the last minute? He couldn't have signalled progress more if he sent up flares at the end of that night.
Thankfully he just kept faltering at finals repeatedly. Otherwise, they didn't lose a knockout European tie for years. Imagine that shit. A season in the EL plus two in the CL. Didn't get knocked out once. If Klopp signed for us, he'd have a statue by now.
Right from the beginning, it was obvious that Klopp was limited by a defence led by Lovren with Mignolet at the back. Meant that they often needed 2 or 3 goals to win away games. Of course that's not doable.
But at the other end, even before Mane and Salah turned up, they were scoring goals for fun. The problem in defence was obvious and once they hit that Coutinho lottery, the result was inevitable.
Seriously, people! No one claimed that Klopp was perfect from day one. But right away, it was very clear what his Liverpool team could look like at their best. The only issue was consistency and raising the floor of their performances and that's what's behind cherry picked stats like "managed only 6 wins in 18 games against bottom 3 teams." But the fecking ceiling? You had to be blind not to see it and be worried by it.
Have we had even 10 matches over two seasons against top-10 teams or good European teams that show what ETH's Man utd could like "at their best"? This question is absolutely genuine, because I can't come up with that sort of a list.
Again, Im not comparing him with Ten Hag, I couldn’t care less.
But it’s utterly false to say Klopp or Arteta’s first two seasons were smooth sailing with a clear and bright potential.
Arteta got slayed by everyone in his first two seasons, with a vast majority of dull football played and disappointing results.
Klopp also had very bad runs of form in his first two seasons as well, contrary to some claims here that other coaches never had bad records with their clubs.
People are all talking with the benefit of hindsight saying « we all saw it coming with them » but it’s simply not true. Neither the Caf nor the media were singing praises of Klopp or Arteta in their first two seasons and both theses coaches had some embarrassing records to their names.
You said that if Klopp signed for us he’d have a statue? If he signed for us this place would’ve asked for his head after a year
I’ve said this in numerous threads but tend to get shouted down. Rome wasn’t built in a day, and nobody is winning a title with Antony martial up front.
Arteta is definitely a surprise improvement and I'm fine if the OP says let's take inspiration from that. But even he knows that a sample size of one looks silly, so added the other names just to try and "strengthen" his ridiculous position.
And I see that you've completely ignored my main point.
Yes, Klopp's first two seasons were not smooth sailing, but the potential was definitely bright. That was my whole point. Their performance ceiling was immediately lifted by Klopp. I've mentioned a few performances I'm aware of that demonstrate this. It has nothing to do with hindsight. It's just sight.
Your point is that the floor of their performances took longer to raise, which I completely agree with. But Klopp earned that time with some breathtaking football before even making his first signing.
That's all I want from ETH before embarking on these ridiculous comparisons. I'm fine if we finish 10th but on the way, convincingly win at Anfield or the Etihad or Emirates or even fecking Amex, man. If that happens, I'll believe the rest falling into place is just a matter of time.
No I mean when he had all is injuries and still saw a style, that was 4-5 years in.
Can argue you can see what ten hag is trying in quite a few games that we squandered (all CL ties, Spurs, Bournemouth) but he's also being sliced open.
I just don't think some of our fans have the patience to go through the pain though. So many posts ask him to adapt and change what he's trying to do. But they also praise Klopp for not doing that.
My best mate is a Liverpool fan and he wanted Klopp out for large parts of his second season. He’d mock him for wanting to play heavy metal football but actually playing boring as shit. Sounds familiar. Eventually though the injuries cleared up, players got fitter and several key signings fell into place.
Point being there was no magic wand he waved on day 1, and progress wasn’t linear. Ten Hag has shown enough to warrant that faith in my opinion, and people saying he hasn’t have very short memories.
There are lots of factors. In recent weeks we were poor vs Newcastle, vs Chelsea we were good, vs Bournemouth not so bad as the score suggested but they scored from typical Bruno wasteful pass, played well after that, and then scored the second goal again from individual mistake (Shaw). Big problem is in midfield. With McT and Amrabat we cannot expect more (btw I'm very disappointed with Amrabat, based on WC showing I thought his ceiling is higher). Why no Mainoo in last two games? No Casemiro, Mount. Also other teams blow hot and cold (Newcastle, Chelsea in particular). So I don't know. I would give him more time. Get all players back and invest in a proven striker and mid in January and we should be therre or thereabouts for top 5. Nothing drastic was expected for this year. Liverpool, Arsenal and City are stronger at least.
Its worth noting teams will click at different times. Ten hag beat city arsenal Chelsea and Liverpool in his first season after that never looked likely in the previous one. Now he's dipped massively. But it's never really a linear progression. Things are up and down.
Arteta couldn't do much for 3 seasons, so he took longer than Klopp.
I think 80% of the fans who want ten hag out would probably have done this under Klopp. They can't stomach pain for extended periods to get to the other side.
Posters jumping on ETH will jump on whoever comes after within a year.
We've been playing most of the season with arguably 3rd, 4th and 5th choice center backs, injuries have raveged us for most part too and Rashford has gone absolutely shit and there's nothing replacing his last seasons output.
He's not faultless, mostly his transfers have been abysmal, but he's doing the right things step by step, i.e. not extending de Gea on ridiculous money, calling out Sancho, binning Ronaldo, trying to move on McT and Maguire, getting fed up with Varanes fitness. I'm sure there's more players he wants to light fire under ass.
We've been playing most of the season with arguably 3rd, 4th and 5th choice center backs, injuries have raveged us for most part too and Rashford has gone absolutely shit and there's nothing replacing his last seasons output.
He's not faultless, mostly his transfers have been abysmal, but he's doing the right things step by step, i.e. not extending de Gea on ridiculous money, calling out Sancho, binning Ronaldo, trying to move on McT and Maguire, getting fed up with Varanes fitness. I'm sure there's more players he wants to light fire under ass.
And 9 minutes later someone defends it. -3 for Manchester United is beyond unacceptable.
I rate ETH, his work at Ajax was objectively brilliant.
Really questioning whether he's actually the man for United, but then again I question whether anyone is the man for Man United. These stats about Klopp/Pep/Arteta have been bandied about for a while and sadly there is just way too much context and nuance involved in order for it to be applicable to ETH at United. People were using the same arguments for Ole too and he was obviously not right for the job.
End of the day, the one thing that helped Klopp was a structure to identify and execute savvy transfers that fit the club. E.g. Robertson to pick one example. Pep is a terrible example, he quickly dominated with City because they'd spent 10+ years building a support structure specifically designed for him.
Arteta is the closest match imo, because Arsenal were absolutely shite for a couple seasons but he's definitely turned it around. However, as others have said they had a clear style of play and it's no coincidence that their improvement came when questions around the ownership were calmed down a bit and they started doing good transfer business (albeit still more hit and miss than Liverpool/City - e.g. Pepe).
Pick any other "elite" club and you'll see, at the very least, a semblance of a structure that is about winning football matches in order to grow the club. United is the only club in world football that has successfully disconnected football from business growth. It's testament to just how cynical the Glazers actually are and as long as that's the case we can have anyone in the hot seat and the hierarchy simply won't give a feck until the last possible minute and which point the cycle just starts again. Rinse and repeat, new manager, new individual car sponsors for EMEA and SEA.
Depressing as feck.
Really questioning whether he's actually the man for United, but then again I question whether anyone is the man for Man United. These stats about Klopp/Pep/Arteta have been bandied about for a while and sadly there is just way too much context and nuance involved in order for it to be applicable to ETH at United. People were using the same arguments for Ole too and he was obviously not right for the job.
End of the day, the one thing that helped Klopp was a structure to identify and execute savvy transfers that fit the club. E.g. Robertson to pick one example. Pep is a terrible example, he quickly dominated with City because they'd spent 10+ years building a support structure specifically designed for him.
Arteta is the closest match imo, because Arsenal were absolutely shite for a couple seasons but he's definitely turned it around. However, as others have said they had a clear style of play and it's no coincidence that their improvement came when questions around the ownership were calmed down a bit and they started doing good transfer business (albeit still more hit and miss than Liverpool/City - e.g. Pepe).
Pick any other "elite" club and you'll see, at the very least, a semblance of a structure that is about winning football matches in order to grow the club. United is the only club in world football that has successfully disconnected football from business growth. It's testament to just how cynical the Glazers actually are and as long as that's the case we can have anyone in the hot seat and the hierarchy simply won't give a feck until the last possible minute and which point the cycle just starts again. Rinse and repeat, new manager, new individual car sponsors for EMEA and SEA.
Depressing as feck.
That's why you need to have a footballing savvy management of the club, who can identify the manager's shortcomings and assess how they could help him to overcome them and help the manager as much as they can.
History doesn't always repeat itself, there's a weird obsession with it amongst United fans for some reason.
It's not that we don't have a style of play, we have a very clear style that simply isn't working. It worked once against Chelsea because they were shit at getting the ball forward, so our pressing resulted in a lot of turnovers. Basically they were doing the same mistakes that we do against any team, they were just even worse at it then us.
We don't have a way to progress the ball up the field - we can't build from the back (apparently only an 18 yo can save us), and we can't play it long because we don't have the attacking personnel for it.
Mainoo played like 3 games for us, so if ETH was planning to build the team around him, he's a fool (regardless of how good Mainoo is).
Agreed about Martinez and LBs.
Eriksen's engine has gone a while ago, this is why everyone thought we went for Mount. But at the same time we made Mount play second striker in "new system", so we have not really addressed any issue have we?
On Casemiro - true that his absence hurt us, but when he was available we made him play one man midfield so he looked shite obviously.
Amad is a prospect.
Antony was ETHs biggest signing and it's not like he's playing worse than he did last season, it's just we're losing games so people have paper thin patience for him.
I am not exactly sure what is it that ETH has made better since he came here. I would say replacing a GK that prevented us from playing out from the back, but we have capable on the ball keeper and still have no clue how to build from the back.
We are back to square one with a lot of players that we might have difficulties to move on, a midfield that probably needs to be overhauled AGAIN (funny that one guy we sold from that bunch of midfielders we badly miss now), and a few players that have "fallen out" with a manager. IMO there is no way back for ETH from this.
I think we also need to excuse all those managers that have been sacked in world football for losing a shit tonne of games and getting absolutely hammered in the majority of them.
More time is all they needed, not better tactics or coaching, not 100s of millions to spend either. It’s was actually the players fault, injuries, the owners, the fans etc etc.
I think no manager should be sacked again and only leave when they want to.
On an actual serious note though, I can’t see how anyone can defend him much longer if the defeats keep coming - I don’t recall Arsenal, City or Liverpool being beaten with so much ease when they were failing?
We beat Bayern and Liverpool (or really make good games of both) tough tasks I know but that would give him more time of course. Maybe we beat West Ham away and Villa at home as well? Or do we excuse these games already because we think they will be tough opponents and we have injuries. Can he not have a tactical set up now with the available players that doesn’t say to the opposition attack us at will, create chance after chance against my new keeper who couldn’t stop a balloon coming towards him.
Will it not matter “if” we have lost 15 games before January? Once he gets all his players back fit and starting in the new year do we then forgive our next Liverpool, City, Arsenal or Bournemouth defeat as he needs more time and money to spend and it’s the toxic players fault not his? I’m genuinely serious. When is it enough time before we are allowed to make another managerial change even if we like the manager… to the end of the season or do we give him 3, 4 or 5 years?
I’m old enough to remember Ron Atkinson's last days at the club and lucky enough to live through the whole SAF era and then the subsequent shit show. I would love nothing more than to have a manager be with us for years (should have been Jose in my opinion) but anyway, maybe I’m the only one finding it hard to understand, but I don’t see why any manager should be allowed to lose so often and keep his job - in any team sport regardless of circumstances.
More time is all they needed, not better tactics or coaching, not 100s of millions to spend either. It’s was actually the players fault, injuries, the owners, the fans etc etc.
I think no manager should be sacked again and only leave when they want to.
On an actual serious note though, I can’t see how anyone can defend him much longer if the defeats keep coming - I don’t recall Arsenal, City or Liverpool being beaten with so much ease when they were failing?
We beat Bayern and Liverpool (or really make good games of both) tough tasks I know but that would give him more time of course. Maybe we beat West Ham away and Villa at home as well? Or do we excuse these games already because we think they will be tough opponents and we have injuries. Can he not have a tactical set up now with the available players that doesn’t say to the opposition attack us at will, create chance after chance against my new keeper who couldn’t stop a balloon coming towards him.
Will it not matter “if” we have lost 15 games before January? Once he gets all his players back fit and starting in the new year do we then forgive our next Liverpool, City, Arsenal or Bournemouth defeat as he needs more time and money to spend and it’s the toxic players fault not his? I’m genuinely serious. When is it enough time before we are allowed to make another managerial change even if we like the manager… to the end of the season or do we give him 3, 4 or 5 years?
I’m old enough to remember Ron Atkinson's last days at the club and lucky enough to live through the whole SAF era and then the subsequent shit show. I would love nothing more than to have a manager be with us for years (should have been Jose in my opinion) but anyway, maybe I’m the only one finding it hard to understand, but I don’t see why any manager should be allowed to lose so often and keep his job - in any team sport regardless of circumstances.
The big reminder is that both Liverpool and Arsenal went a lot longer without challenging for a title than the run we are currently, longer outside the CL places than we’ve ever gone and finished in league positions consecutively that we have never finished as low as even once.
The good old ‘literally any manager will turn out to be world class and all will be good if you give him a lot of time’. We must be the only fan base in the world that really believes that.
I don't buy this for a moment. The thing with Klopp is that there were improvements year after year. From reaching Europa final in his first season, to reaching UCL final in his second season, to winning UCL in his third season, and ultimately winning the league in his fourth season. So yes, while it took him 4 full seasons to win the league, by that time he had already won UCL, reached another final of it, reached the final of Europa and had managed to get over 95 points in the league.
That is not what is happening with ten Hag. The first season was okay, with a really good two months spell between the end of world cup and the league cup win. But the second season is shaping to be the worst season in 30 years, and that is the exact opposite of what was happening with Klopp (continual progress). So there is no analogy whatsoever between Klopp's first two seasons and ten Hag's.
It's worth remembering that we had a tonne of Klopp comparisons with Ole too.....
Stop talking sense.
I don't think the Pep comparison is valid. On the one hand because he inhereted a much better side, on the other because he implemented a clear style of play more effectively than ETH has.
I also don't think the Klopp comparison works. Again because their shift in style of play was definitely more evident this far into his reign.
The Arteta comparison is very fair. He definitely went through phases where they looked terrible, their signings looked poor, their underlying stats were bad, their fans could take little solace from the way they were playing and many people thought they were going nowhere. But then again, many would argue that unlike Pep or Klopp he still hasn't proven anything yet.
I also don't think the Klopp comparison works. Again because their shift in style of play was definitely more evident this far into his reign.
The Arteta comparison is very fair. He definitely went through phases where they looked terrible, their signings looked poor, their underlying stats were bad, their fans could take little solace from the way they were playing and many people thought they were going nowhere. But then again, many would argue that unlike Pep or Klopp he still hasn't proven anything yet.
I agree with the OP. Will turn out right in the end.
If you have a structure around the manager build for success, and delivering success, then the manager becomes less important IMO. In our situation swapping out managers in hope that we will stumble upon someone able to turn the whole club around is risky. Better to stick with a highly competent and demanding ( again IMO) manager in ETH and build the structure around him. If hes still unable to progress the team then he will be rightly replaced.
Stuff like this is irrelevant because all these clubs are in different positions, with different managers, with different owners and have different expectations.
I definitely get your side for sure but progress isn't linear. Especially at our club.
Klopp said yes to Liverpool and no to us for a reason, because managers are severely handicapped when coming to United. And that needs to be taken into account, but it seemingly isn't. Theres always talk about "look at Klopp and Pep and Ange" and no one really wants to hear how shit our own club is for any manager. I think we can bring Emery in tomorrow and he's sacked in 12 - 18months (if there was continued ownership uncertainty just like there was under Ten Hag)
Arteta is not a great manager.
Arsenal have a solid structure above and he's won nothing other than the 2nd place trophy, which Ole won also