I get why we backed off from Longstaff if that was indeed the price quoted as it seems a crazy fee for someone with only the handful of games he had played last season.Thanks, mate.
Well, I'm not sure how reliable he is either (ESPN is generally rather dodgy, as per the consensus among transfer muppets and whatnot). At any rate, IF we were in for Longstaff at a "reasonable" price, but backed off when they demanded silly money for him - that isn't damnable in itself. He's not a "generational talent", to use that popular phrase - just a promising player.
And the original point was about Longstaff being our only CM target - yes? There were other reports (equally legit - one could say) about us approaching Levy about Eriksen (a completely different profile to Longstaff).
Anyway - what I keep coming back to is Ole's remit and the expectations of the people who pay his salary: if he went into the season with the expectation of being there or thereabouts, it makes no sense whatsoever that he didn't strengthen the middle of the park (after losing Herrera, in particular). As I've said before, if that was the case, we have two alternatives:
a) he's naive (at best). He thought Pereira was good enough - the most obvious example.
b) he was let down by Ed.
I doubt very much that he knew that "there or thereabouts" was expected - but nevertheless only had Longstaff on his list. That really makes no sense at all - no matter what one thinks about his managerial ability or general judgment.
I've been telling here that Ed and the owner does not care about football. That is why we're in thia state now. Or else we have will appointed DOF long time ago. Plus, Ole also a terrible manager. He's out of his depth. Why we can beat MC, Tottenham and other top 6 teams but can't do it against lower teams? That's clearly shows us that Ole and the coaches are shite.Absolutely delusional statements from the OP. Woodward backed Jose? You mean when Jose asked for Maguire and Woodward said no, too expensive, then exactly one year later with Ole in charge, Woodward says yes to Maguire and pays £10 million more? Doesn't sound like Jose was backed to me.
LVG has publicly said he wanted other players instead of Di Maria, but Woodward and Judge wanted Di Maria.
Woodward gave Moyes a 5 year contract, sacked him within a year.
Woodward gave Jose a new 3 year contract, sacked him within 8 months.
Woodward gave Fellaini a new 2 year contract, sold him within 6 months.
Woodward signed Ole on a temporary basis, and told the world a new permanent manger would be appointed in the following summer. Instead Ole was signed permanently within 4 months of this statement.
Does any of that sound like a man who knows what he's doing or keeps to his word?
Sure but we'll never have a superb man in charge, if the club's manager recruitment is constantly missing the mark.All of it will count for nothing if you the manager isn't good enough.
If Ed doesn’t make a real effort to gain some additions in January it would be a disgrace.Given the clarity of the need to strengthen the team, even this January window is another test of the brilliance that Woody tells all and sundry he has, if this window is another misfire of incompetence then there is no defence for Woody.
Only a few days till the window opens and negotiations commence.
Because based on the polls. Half still thinks ole is a good appointment. And 50 percent of the sample here wants to keep him.Sure but we'll never have a superb man in charge, if the club's manager recruitment is constantly missing the mark.
Somebody appointed Solskjaer and thought it would be a brilliant idea... and now he or they are not so keen on sacking him.
Yea I feel you.
First thing he did was pushed Fellaini out of the club as harshly as possible. Did the same to Lukaku in summer. 'Not Man Utd players.' Kicked Smalling out too, who whilst not great isn't much worse than slabhead. Gave new contracts to all manner of junk (Yes, that includes Mata)
Went on to buy players we needed less, and not ones we needed more.
Went into the season criminally underprepared, and has hung the kids out to dry. I want him sacked ASAP.
Guess I'm not a 'real' fan.
Yup, it's polarization reached a perfect 50/50, but club hopefully isn't run by democracy. If he's a legit CEO he should have whole department of advisors, not to mention board to help him make at least one good decision in 6 years.Because based on the polls. Half still thinks ole is a good appointment. And 50 percent of the sample here wants to keep him.
At 50 50 ed cant please both sides
Where did you get that story on Lukaku?What nonsense is this?
Lukaku was grossly unprofessional. He showed up late to training and fecked around causing the team to be late in its preparations and when Phelan confronted him he actually had a go at Phelan in return. On top of that he then went AWOL and went to Belgium to train by himself and the worst of all, mocked his team mates in a social media post.
Christ some of the posts on this forum of late are disgraceful.
Andy Mitten, posted it to the Athletic during the back end or right after the transfer window closed.Where did you get that story on Lukaku?
Short term --> Manager
Long term --> The elements above the manager
This is somewhat dependent on the role, responsibility, time in charge etc, but for our club, I reckon this is fair.
I see stuff like this all the time. Were you honestly disappointed when we signed Zlatan, Pogba, Micky and Bailly in his first summer?Woodward would've been seen as a success had Fergie still been at the helm. There's alot of criticism that is levelled at Woodward which to some extent is fair and I've even touched upon it myself on numerous occasions. But alot of the criticism to me is very unfair and I'll explain why below.
Woodward's biggest mistake post SAF has been trusting managers whole heartedly with recruitment. I could understand him following the Fergie model under Moyes and Van Gaal because why fix something that isn't broken. But under Mourinho he should've taken the power away from the manager and brought a DoF type figure to the club which would've served us better in recruiting players. But he carried on with his naive approach and kept trusting the managers until it became apparent we were wasting a shit ton of money. And it was at that juncture he took advice from the likes of Bout and Lawlor to curtail Mourinho's spending. I also see zero evidence to suggest that he was making signings on his own whim. The signings were mostly made by the managers who were the football experts and not Woodward.
Woodward believe it or not has been better for the club than David Gill. Gill just rode on the success of Fergie and under his stewardship our academy and scouting network was deteriorating fast. Woodward has helped improve our academy and structure at academy level to a world class level. And the fruits of the work done at youth level will be felt in the next couple of years.
I know this post isn't gonna be popular on here and I agree he does deserve criticism. But some of the criticism levelled at him isn't fair.
Yes on the commercial side we are the envy of the world. Ed deserves credit for his role in this. We desperately need football men to steer the onfield activities in a better direction. We are practically unstoppable, domestically at least, once we get the latter right. The likes of Liverpool will never be able to compete with us financially.We need a DOF that can get transfers over the line quickly, and Woody must concentrate on the commercial side of things.
The post wasn't about my thoughts on Mourinho's recruitment, it was about Mourinho failing with the money provided to him by Woodward. And if anyone is to be blamed here, it shouldn't be Woodward because he backed Mourinho like no other manager before him.I see stuff like this all the time. Were you honestly disappointed when we signed Zlatan, Pogba, Micky and Bailly in his first summer?
Second summer we got the best striker available on the market in Lukaku.
Many people wanted us to trump City at all costs for Sanchez.
Hindsights a wonderful thing but no one could have foreseen how bad nearly all this players performed for us. So many rewrite history on his transfer activity.
I have no idea. His job is selling the biggest brand in sports. A monkey could do it. When it comes to the stuff that's actually difficult he always fecks it up. He's all talk and no walk. The Jesse Lingard of CEOs.Where has this horseshit that Mr Ed is some amazing financial genius come from?
Bang on the money mate, and our growth is slower and smaller than our rivals, he is a complete fraud.I have no idea. His job is selling the biggest brand in sports. A monkey could do it. When it comes to the stuff that's actually difficult he always fecks it up. He's all talk and no walk. The Jesse Lingard of CEOs.
Woodward is certainly the biggest problem United have had in donkeys years, when it comes to making decisions of who to sign or who to sell he should have absolutely nothing to say. He has shown us many times how useless he is at making such decisions. And now in January he is getting ready for another attempt? Pathetic.Quite simple really. Ed is to blame and so are the owners.
Ed sacks the manager when he doesn't perform. Manager is in charge of getting footballing results. Correctly gets the sack if he doesn't perform.
Ed is in charge of the day to day running of Manchester United. He is responsible for them performing primarily on the football front and then the business side. They're failing miserably on the football front and beginning to regress on the business side.
The owners should have sacked Ed by now for failing so bad. On top of lot of other failures.
If we're waiting until the window opens to begin transfer negotiations, we're already fecked.Given the clarity of the need to strengthen the team, even this January window is another test of the brilliance that Woody tells all and sundry he has, if this window is another misfire of incompetence then there is no defence for Woody.
Only a few days till the window opens and negotiations commence.
Wtf have you been?The problem isn't that Woodward is blamed the problem is he is used as an excuse for the shtty performances for the managers and secondly blamed for things that are just rumors and paper talk. As the Chief Woodward simply has to take a share of the blame. Maybe all of it. But as soon as people start saying he wouldn't do x or y then they are talking sht because we simply do not know what the full story is. The manager can be blamed simply by watching the matches. We need to separate the critique of manager and Chief in separate threads and not link the two. Yes you can say but but but they are linked and yes they are but not in any way a average fan has knowledge of. The scouting, transfers, finance, all of the behind the scenes stuff between CEO and manager is just that behind the scenes. Until a manager comes out and says specifically that the CEO is crap because he did x, y and z and is backed by others then basing what goes on by Twitter rumblings and the Sun is ridiculous at best. Yes some of these stories might actually be true but the odds are that 100000 to 1 are a load of crap.
Managers always say that as an excuse. I specifically said they need their criticism backed by hard evidence or others. Its hearsay at best.Wtf have you been?
Both of the last two managers quite clearly said they weren’t backed.
It’s not a case of what is reported in The Sun but unless you’re missing something between the ears, it’s as plain as daylight these leeches are bleeding the club left, right and centre. Of course, we don’t know all the details.but hanging onto players who wouldn’t get into the Stockport County squad whilst constantly missing out on top players might be a bit of an indication.... and that’s apart from the stadium, which for the first time since the. Ground was rebuilt, there has bee little or no investment there, either, since the Glazers and their puppet became the curse upon the club.
