Mourinho won the PL in 2015. I feel like you're just digging your heels in at this point, so I'll try and not continue this discussion.
1 title which followed an awful title defense. Which then saw Leicester win the league that same season. The fact you think Jose was still top level is hilarious. I'm not digging my heels. I laid out why he was no longer a top level manager and you keep responding with 1 prem title during the weakest prem era ever. It ignores his other staggering failures and signs of decline.
I do agree certain players were more of 'managers friends' than properly targeted and sourced players. However, the major problem in many cases seemed to be that, quite often the real targets were not available, or the club senior management were unable to negotiate in a proper time frame /or make realistic offers, and that for example Jose always claimed he was asked to put forward 5 names of players he wanted for a certain role, but he was only allowed to bid for either the 4th or 5th choice.
This is spot on. I think in all of those cases the manager had too big a say in recruitment. Hopefully, Ratcliffe is fixing that with his new appointment.
I’ve tapped out. Peoples feelings on managers means subjective emotions override cold logic.
A lot of people seem to be saying this but how does it change anything? Obviously we're using the hindsight. That doesn't detract from the actual point. It's irrelevant if certain posters thought it was a good appointment at the time. It is even irrelevant if there was no better option out there.
If and buts are wonderful things. I am sure with that crazy disneyland management in place, none of these managers you listed would be successful. But Hey Ho
I also think that our previous managers were given the freedom to choose their players and all of them failed miserably. You can count only a few players that were decent/good from the tens of transfers that we've made post Fergie.
And (relatively) non since... So maybe they were already living off past glories at the time we appointed them?
LVG was certainly way past it and no other big club would have gone for him at the time. People literally trying to rewrite history here.
LvG was easy to identify as past it.
Not sure I agree. I know in his final season we only signed Fred and Dalot but he had spent a fortune the previous 2 summers, plus the disaster Sanchez signing in January. I don’t think he was helped by Zlatan injuring his cruciate, otherwise we may not have signed Lukaku for £90m.
There are so many aspects that drives the success of transfers, and usually the final piece of the jigsaw is having a decent manager that’s know how to implement the players signed. City, Arsenal and Liverpool currently all have this. Poch is a good manager but he has been given way too many players to build a successful squad in a short space of time. If we judge Ten Hag on transfer targets alone he should be sacked. Whilst he shouldn’t be steering United for transfer targets any manager has influence. Antony was an incredibly bad signing even at £40-50m. He’s shown he’s not good enough for the Premier League. The only player I rate is Martinez but he’s spent 1 and half years on sidelines now so that looks a dud signing as well.
I can't speak to the United fanbase as a whole, just to my own opinions. All i'm saying is this - of course the manager makes a difference, but United are yet another example that a manager can't come in and change the fortunes of a club by himself. He may coach and manage the team, but if he's forced to buy/ sell certain players OR not given a little bit extra $$ leeway with a someone else OR if the recruiting team is dogshit OR etc. etc. then it's very hard for that manager to perform up to their own standards.
Not sure about Pep, he’d need more money but for sure Klopp would get more of a tune out of them
And to think that ole wanted rice and Haaland. The lad could still have been in the managers chair right now possibly with a few trophies to show for it
This spot on, but you have to consider that neither Pep or Klopp would have come to/or fancied managing United immediately after a legend like SAF was had just left, and also a large section of the clubs fans were in open revolt against the owners. Further more both men knew that at their respective clubs they almost could not fail, City was already gaining ground and Liverpool were desperate for a PL title.
I recall at the time people accused us of being Brexit FC and favouring British players....I bet I could find hundreds of posts from people deriding the club for the Rice link, whilst the wonderkid they signed on FIFA from the Chinese 3rd division was going unnoticed
The question is who was a better option than Jose at the time he was appointed when Liverpool had already appointed Klopp and City had already appointed Pep?
City were luring Pep since 2012 or so, bringing in staff he worked with at Barca and laying the foundation for him. But Klopp or Ancelotti could've happened in 2015. But van Gaal had decent first season and also decent start to 15/16, before it went wrong in December. So the timing was never right.
We could have been doing the same in terms of laying foundations for a different set up but the owners lacked the foresight
You mean it wasn't a good idea to have no succession plan when your manager, who has already heavily considered retirement before, is in his 70s and on a rolling year-to-year contract?
Of course. I'd say 2009 as a year was also significant. We sold Ronaldo and Tevez, bought Owen and Obertan. Then next couple of years weren't much better in terms of transfers either,, we won titles thanks to Fergie + players like Rooney, RvP, Carrick. So transfer dealings of those late Fergie years also show lack of long-term planning at club.
Wouldnt back him? In his first season we broke the world transfer record, and then paid about the same again a year later for Lukaku. We were paying Alexis Sanchez a ridiculous salary, a signing that we did not need as we had Martial
Agreed, Mou was a horrible, toxic manager who should never have been appointed. Charlton was right on that front. He spends huge amounts on big names and aging players and delivers pretty utilitarian football. He also cant compete with the more recent high presses and Pep always had his number. If he had been allowed to spend more he would have left us with even more dead wood to shift.
Aged squad or not, saying that Moyes was "shafted" by the club by inheriting a squad of champions and leading them to 7th place is just ridiculous. That he couldn't win the league or challenge for the title is fair enough but let's be real here. He was wildly out of his depth. His big money signing was Fellaini and we're thinking whether things would have been better with more of his signings. If anything we're lucky that he wasn't in charge of the big rebuild or we would have ended with the likes of Jagielka in the team.
Moyes had Rafael (and as it turns out, Valencia) who were more than capable right-backs. His appointment was also not too far removed from Fabio starting a CL final against Barcelona. We had Smalling, Jones and Evans, who we (rightly or wrongly) believed to be excellent prospects at centre-back. The midfield was about the only area we'd left weak, but by all accounts we were targeting the likes of Thiago, Fabregas, Ozil and Khedira (I also believe Herrera was very much a target) and ended up with Fellaini because Moyes chose to pursue his own targets.
Moyes did not prioritise Fellaini, he never wanted Fellaini and only signed him as a last resort at the last minute on deadline day after the club failed to land any of the players he did want.
We were targeting Baines and Fellaini almost from the moment he arrived.
We wernt, Fellaini had a release clause that was valid from 1st to 31st of July that we didnt activate as Moyes didnt want him.
