We are crap on the pitch, but who gives a shit the cash is still rolling in.
They are the virus.
Ed Woodward 2019 - Until all Arctic ice melts edition
- Thread starter fallengt
- Start date
They are the virus.
Sounds like something my 5 year old cousin would say.
Whatever happened to the DOF Ed was going to hire?
They more then a virus they a leech that sucking the blood out Man Utd history and the money out of the fans. They are the rotten core and cause of all the problems at the club. Nothing will change while they are the owners.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Very few clubs can do what Madrid are doing and we're not one of them i'm afraid. Perez knows how to get his man and with a manager like Zidane who knows what he wants it makes for a lethal combination.
In terms of getting they want early ?
Dunning Kruger
No I just happen to be speaking from a bizarre place to your average caftard, common sense.
Fergie was indeed a once off, so of course we should lower our expectations and then not expect it from EVERY manager cause you rightly say..ONCE...off..its in the noun.
Plenty of folks did and still do praise Gill, he gets the tag "Football man" which is absolute, complete and utter...BOLLICKS! He's an accountant, exactly like Woodward! He just happened to be at the club at the right time and sponge off of Fergies brilliance.
When you've to resort to this level of "debate" then you've lost already. Perhaps attempt to answer my question I've put to EVERY post here who is anti Woodward.
Not a single poster has even attempted to answer it yet cause they damned well know they are talking through their backsides and know full well what they are posting not to be true, but instead just want to post irrationally and find a single entity of blame.
Honestly no idea, but considering some of them don't have DoF in place either or duties are different from club to club its obviously difficult to divulge exactly.
Arsenal and Chelsea have DoF and are they much better than us? I mean Sarri's just quit and Chelsea are looking to hire the equivalent of Ole FFS! In fact even Ole has more experience than him! Arsenal haven't won a league since 2004! Meanwhile you've City & Liverpool planning well and being successful now so its 2 for 2 pretty much out of the big clubs. I won't count Spurs on either side yet cause reality is even though they've climbed up the table under Poch they haven't won anything still.
The narrative that DoF = guaranteed long term success needs to stop, cause it isn't true at all. The structure is hit n miss in equal measure.
I didn't say he specifically renews them, he would be involved. It's hilariously naive to think otherwise.
Jose went public in his demands of Fellaini being kept, didn't he? How anyone can attempt to say a manager is not involved is mind boggling. They clearly are, Ferguson also admitted as much in his biographies.
Woodward is then in a position of either A) Supporting his manager by keeping an average player or B) not supporting.
So who is to blame here in this scenario? STILL no one has bothered answering this question cause they know what I'm saying diverts blame away from Woodward and it doesn't suit their biased, ill thought out agenda.
Whilst I agree about the 180 in change of managerial ideals (I've posted to this effect already), Jose's CV was still the best around and he was available. That's the point I am making is all. That if he was adamant change was needed Jose's CV dictated he was the most qualified. Beyond that it was an error of judgement and I've repeated this over the last 5-10 pages.
LVG was not a short term appointment in that he was supposed to have his 3 seasons and the plan was to possibly consider Giggs or a younger coach at that point. Woodward panicked seeing Pep go to City and yes made a bad decision.
Again, DoF will not give us certain success. It might or it might not, it takes time to put this plan in place with the right hires and in turn recruit correctly over a number of years. So there is a huge possibility we could still struggle even if this plan is rolled out.
Of course they won't answer it... They know I am right.
They know that it diverts blame away from Woodward and on the managers.
Anyone care to take a stab at it finally?
If a manager (ANY MANAGER), demands X Player (ANY PLAYER) is kept at any cost (something to that effect)...
The example I gave was Jose demanding Fellaini be kept...so we've a manager demanding an average player stay at the club.
Who is to blame?
A) The manager for demanding the average player remain and get the pay rise?
B) The CEO for supporting his manager?
Fully expect this will be ignored yet again.
Thing is most players want to play for Madrid just for the love of it, so its easy to coax them. We have to convince players by offering loads of money to come and a few teams can quite easily match us in this department as well. Comparing Madrid and Utd at this present time is like choosing to watch a blockbuster film on a smart tv with surround sound, or on a black and white one.
In terms of their ability to attract players who want to play for them, virtually no other club has the same appeal as they do except maybe Barcelona. Players would take pay cuts and (try to) pressure their clubs to accept lower fees to pay for them. We on the other hand have to overpay on foreign players in terms of fees and wages and for Brits we have to pay ridiculous fees as well.
I think he changed his mind, and decided he already has the best man for the job, himself.
There's been talks, Rio confirmed.I think he changed his mind, and decided he already has the best man for the job, himself.
Its an important role so I don't mind if it takes time to find the right candidate.
Folks piss n moan that Ole was a rushed appointment, then piss n moan about it going slow over a DoF.
Can't win.
https://www.skysports.com/football/...an-united-return-and-frank-lampard-at-chelsea
Both bear responsibility, of course. But with the Fellaini example, that's more on Jose. A manager wanting a player to remain is quite different to, IMV, a manager wanting a player bought. The former is much easier to achieve. Also, actively selling a player a manager wants to stay, is more undermining than not being able to recruit a specific player the manager wants.
Let's assume Jose identified Sanchez and wanted him "at any cost", I'd say the responsibility of that move (3 and a half years for a 29 y/o on 350/400K wages, breaking our wage structure) is on the board. The "at any cost" argument is misleading, unless the manager is throwing his whole weight behind it, issuing an ultimatum whereby he walks if player x is not bought.
We have had this discussion before I believe, but there is no way that you can convince me that the manager would not be involved or even being able to veto a signing like Sanchez. Very well aware of what it would mean for the possibilities of other signings in the summer.
I dont buy this idea that there are firewalls between the manager and the club either. I dont know if that is what you mean but your post indicates that you agree with this strange narrative: that Mourinho or whoever is manager just gives a list of players to the club and then the club returns with a signed player like Santa Claus on christmas. Here, merry christmas, hope it was in line with what you wished for. Sorry if it cost too much; so you might not get any gifts next year. Strangely that seems to be what people believe actually happens.
I think a lot of it is because some fans on here just want to see this line of conflict between the club (often represented quite falsely by Woodwards name) and the manager so they can blame someone higher up in the hierarchy.
I would be shocked if there was not detailed daily conversations between the club and the manager regarding the negotiations with different players, how they are proceeding and which to focus and concentrate on. And of course how much they will cost. Im sure that the head of scoutings opinion will be heavily valued as well and that he is involved in these discussions as well.
I believe that the transfers at the club are much more of a team effort than people like to believe. And that there is much more consensus than conflict. This idea to categorize signings as "woodwards" or "mourinhos" is completely illogical and should be left to click-baiting articles of ABU-media.
That said I also think that the final decision since Sir Alex left on any transfer or renewal has always been down to the manager.
Of course there are discussions but Woodward oversees all of it. If his old drinking buddy from university (Judge) is bad at negotiating, it’s his responsibility to sack him. If the head scout’s input it bad, it’s Ed’s responsibility to sack him and bring in someone better. If our bloated scouting network can’t identify a single under-priced gem since Fergie, it’s Ed’s responsibility to rectify the situation. Not just wallow in mediocrity.
Him not taking any significant action to rectify a system that has failed dramatically for 6 years makes him a bad CEO by default. And that’s without even touching on his own personal judgment which doesn’t seem to be that good either. He’s like your average FM/FIFA player with a Dunning Krueger complex.
I’ve answered that question him in a broader way. But @Keefy18 kept dismissing my answer and kept asking me to answer his question.
My answer was the manager is responsible for the micro footballing decisions. Woodward is responsible for the macro decision sanctioning contracts for Sanchez, negotiating deals etc. They both have an impact on the club.
Woodward isn’t doing a job though...
That’s if your last name is Glazer
Yeah, we've been down this road before because we are talking in circles. You believe one thing, and I believe another. Jose specifically said he did not deal with the contracts. Woodward has obviously more authority than any manager. He is free to veto any specific signing, any specific contract, choosing other targets instead or doing nothing at all. Overseeing the wage structure is his responsibility more so than any manager's. SAF is very much an anomaly and those days are gone.
I was just making the same point to @Johan07 here. But you put it more clearly, hence my quoting you here.
We did not have a scouting network when Fergie left. It was non-existent. It took two or three years to build up and was not really in place until Van Gaals last year. Then Mourinho did not want to work with it or even clashed with them dependning on what stories you do believe. So the years under Mourinho says nothing.
Therefore its way to early to judge our scouting network. Which will be difficult to do in another couple of years since its basically teenagers they are mostly following. What we do need is a manager who is ready to work with the setup we do have. If not its never gonna work.
But those two posters will just dismiss any answer to them and rehashing. I admire their spirit in defending Woodward and the Glazer. Stockholm syndrome to the tee.
I wouldnt say its baseless it came from here:
http://priceoffootball.com/manchester-united-2018-finances-made-of-stone/
Unless they are of course making it up.....
Maybe because he realized it was a shit, bloated set-up? LVG has always been bad at identifying prospects at other clubs, all his successful youth players were in place already. He’s only good at spotting talent when he can see them on his own training pitch every day.
Look at the disaster he inflincted on the entire Dutch youth system with his ”Master plan” that he presented to the KNVB in 2001. It’s been widely acknowledged as a disaster that eventually had to be salvaged by Cruyff. But I wouldn’t expect Woodward to even be aware of that.
So I definitely wouldn’t trust LVG’s input on how to set up a scouting network. If his philosophy is still in place in United’s scouting network, that could very bad for us going forward.
Exactly they do, but most can't admit that it isn't just Woodward.
They flat out believe that all aspects of transfer dealings / renewals are completely with Ed which isn't the case.
For Sanchez, I'd argue its again both. I mean it obviously affected Jose's summer budget. Bearing that in mind, its fairly obvious Jose was consulted but in typical Jose fashion as he has done at every club he's managed he just concerns himself with spend and not raising funds via sales.
EDIT: That bold part also fits what Jose was doing, not the board. There was very, very strong rumor going back well over a year that the board wanted long term investment, not short term like Jose.
Every club Jose has been at, its a quick fix job. Instant success and investing in players in the 28-30 year old bracket for the vast majority. He bought Zlatan, Matic and wanted Willian and Perisic as well. The board supported his desire to sign Sanchez at 29 years old.
It completely fits that Jose wanted Sanchez.
I've seen that reply and I don't believe that line of thinking either cause well its far too simplistic.
Transfers and renewals are far more complex than that and there is clearly a balancing act in play.
Jose demanding Fellaini is most definitely on him. Keeping Fellaini and rewarding him I believe it was £150k per week was insane. It eats into the overall transfer / salary bill. You'll say they didn't need to give him that much, but then you'd also say that they aren't supporting the manager. If they give him the wage then they are idiots equally for doing so, its a lose lose situation.
This was only months after the club had blown all financials out of the water by giving him Sanchez as well.
If the board support the manager in his requests, they are at fault.
If the board don't support the manager in his requests, they are at fault.
That is the foundation of the really ridiculous expectations of our supporters currently in a nutshell.
i did not say that LVG had any input regarding the scouting setup. He most likely had not. I havent seen any reports saying anything like that. You are making a strawman argument.
What is on the record is Moyes being shocked over the non-existent scouting network at United even compared to Everton.
If anything the decision to put more resources and money in our scouting network has been the clubs own.
And a separate, independent and self-sustaining scouting network is a must if we are going to operate with a DoF. One of the biggest problems with our scouting system is that each manager has wanted to use his own, beginning with Moyes (understandable, since we did not have one) and especially with Mourinho and his Mendesian contacts.
If we ever are going to operate as a club with a DoF and be able to change managers more flexibly, an independent (or rather club-owned, overseen by the DoF) scouting system is essential. It has to be separate from the manager himself.
Woodward and the club should be complimented for putting resources in to that as well as the youth setup that was also severly lacking compared to other clubs when Fergie left.
Both things are essential for a more progressive setup of the club with a DoF.
Last edited:
Why are you trying to imply United had no scouts? Of course we had, it simply wasn’t as bloated as today.
Here’s what a SAF era United scout had to say last year, as reported by Manchester Evening News via Talksport. I think I will go with his judgment over fecking Moyes’:
https://talksport.com/football/4593...-frenkie-de-jong-matthis-de-ligt-ed-woodward/
This is so old and been discussed in so many threads so I am not giving it the time of day. Disgruntled sacked employee that says that he recommended De Jong and De Ligt. to the club.
Duh, the couple have been followed by every top clubs scouting network since they basically kicked their first ball at Ajax. They have been scouted to a microlevel since they were fifteen. By everyone. If that is supposed to be one of our "top scouts" if anything it underlines what I am saying:
Its a fact that we did not have a scouting network under Sir Alex. We had Jim Lawlor and what maybe in the best case can be described as a couple of freelancers. Everything else was Sir Alex himself and his contacts.
Now we have close to 60 scouts employed on a world-wide basis. You just dont build such a network in a couple of years and expect it to give immediate results. Especially if the manager does not want to work with them.
Try to reply to one of the points I actually made next time btw.
Last edited:
The original DOF story leaked over 12 months ago.
Yep, question was answered a long time ago. Why keep zooming in only one of the myriad of bad decisions made at the club.
It really is unbelievable the lengths they will go to. Beginning to wonder if they're on the United marketing team payroll at this point.
Tbf, the first DoF story leaked even earlier. At least as a principle. Already under LvGs first year, who in retrospect seems to have advocated it himself.
I think we would have had one in place if we didnt go for Mourinho who was completely opposed to it. So it got put on hold until now more or less.
Not that different from when FSG appointed Rodgers once upon a time. They had also considered the role, but Rodgers opposed it so it did not happen until after he had left.
Moyes is the disgruntled ex-employee desperately trying to salvage his legacy. There were systems in place that Moyes could have used. But he thought using them even initially was beneath him and he wanted to build his own legacy immediately.
Cleaning out the backroom staff on day 1 wasn’t exactly a good decision. That’s part of the reason everything had to be rebuilt from scratch starting in 2014, with poor results so far.
Yeah, eventually the system had to evolve. But not so abruptly and poorly.
Stop trying to rewrite history to shift as much blame away from Woodward at every turn. I know you’re a shareholder and have a vested interest in him being perceived as competent, but you’re turning into Baghdad Bob mate.
Last edited:
Yes and Jose blocked it.
We've only started interviewing for the role in recent months. Jose is gone 6 months almost to the day now (4 more days I believe) and folks are in meltdown months as is.
It takes time, but folks think its as easy as picking a phone up and that's it, job done.
No it was not. Did I say that? Did I even discuss it? You are throwing strawmen all over the place and making yourself look stupid.
It was stupid to get rid of the backroom staff. Which was on Moyes. Or do you blame Woodward for that too?
The scouting system is something completely different. Apples and oranges. There are plenty of objective information both in Ferguson´s own books and from what Moyes has said about how our scouting system was structured or not structured back then.
I dont know how it is defending Woodward stating the obvious facts that we were way behind the top-clubs in the PL and the rest of Europe both when it came to scouting system and youth setup when Ferguson and Gill left.
Do you think the club should have done nothing about this?
We were never going to hire a DOF, it was just Woodward lying to the fans as usual when the results were shite.
We're doomed as long as he's managing the football side and he's not going to leave until the Glazers themselves feck off so still some painful years coming till the failure reaches a point they can't milk the club anymore and will sell for new owners who hopefully will be more ambitious than the Glazers.
For the mean time Woodward will be around managing the football side and fecking up the club with his decisions.
Woodward has had 5 years to ”do something about it”. It has failed so far.
You were the one who started sidetracking the discussion by cherry-picking one sentence and ignoring my main argument. Which was that Woodward has overseen all of our failed rebuilding for 5 years. You can try to pin all individual decisions on his henchmen as much as you want, but it has all been under his supervision. His employees and himself are failing miserably.
Our value has dropped -8% since last year, so it seems all the compounded incompetence is finally starting to affect the bottom line.
It’ll be interesting to see your excuses when Woodward has been in charge and failed for 10 years. 15. 20. It’s never his fault because we are in an ”eternal revolution”. The exact same phrase dictators who have been in power for 50 years use to pin all their failures on their presecessors.
So what would you have done differently? I would respect you more as a poster if you actually could provide some decent arguments and solutions?
I am not at all "-pro-Woodward". But I do think he has done a decent job with the hand he was dealt.
He was appointed with Moyes already in place, at Carrington on a six-year contract that Gill gave him. He had to fire Moyes after nine months with Gill and Ferguson who put him there then at the advisory board of directors. The club appointed LvG and then the club spent a feckload of money on players that summer. And the year after, and the year after.
Since that summer of LvGs arrival we have spent a feckload of money on players and wages, not to mention the scouting network and youth setup. Plus that we started up a womens team as well.
It would be very different for me if the owners and Woodward had cut the spending, but if anything its been the opposite. What is it that you are so fecking upset with? Honest question.
I'm sure you can spot the difference. Ole was hired after a few good games when he was actually just a stop gap solution, whereas we've been - allegedely - on the market for a DoF for good 12 months now. Which is obviously not the case. No good business would take so much time for a position like this. It's just the usual bollocks spouted by Woodward.
LVG: failed appointment, which in turn led to failed signings. And yes, plenty of people said he was a dinosaur already back then. This was the guy who nearly relegated Barcelona in 2003 and was sacked when they were hovering 3 points off relegation. Then he spent years on the managerial dumpster heap in AZ Alkmaar before winning the league with Bayern (yawn) and getting third with Robben, RVP and Sneijder.
Mou: complete opposite philosophy to LVG, which led to incompatible signings and a mess of a team.
Ole: even David Squires is mocking Ed for giving him a permanent contract after 2 losses with absolutely no competition for his signature. The jury’s still out, but do you seriously think giving ole the permanent job so soon while foregoing available managers of a much higher calibre was shrewd?
Then we have all the ridiculous contracts which Ed is ultimately responsible for. And a scouting network that has proven useless so far.
And that’s just what we can directly observe. From LVG saying he has no clue about football, to Mourinho hating him, to SAF employees venting their frustrations with him there’s a lot of smoke pointing to incompetence behind closed doors.
Last edited:
You’ve not answered his question at all, you’ve just done what he’s accused which is not offering any solutions just pointing out the problems. Anyone in hindsight can talk about mistakes, if Woodward could see into the future he too could have avoided these mistakes. The guys question is what would you have done instead? In 2014 after the World Cup instead of hiring the guy who massively overachieved with a Netherlands team who would you have gotten?
Instead of getting Mourinho the most successful manager in the game bar Pep who would you have gotten?
The point is it’s super easy to analyse problems after the fact. But at the time, in the context of things, a lot of these decisions were very defensible, extremely defensible and probably even seemed like good ideas. Yes people doubted Mou but he also brought us 2 trophies and 2nd place after 2 years. We wanted him to get us to winning ways and he did that and it’s very hard to say at that time it seemed like a bad idea to have gotten him. If you think that’s not what we wanted you should offer up some alternatives or solutions