Luckhurst has been sugesting some shaddy dealings for ages
Erik ten Hag | 100k a day, who is the real loser, heh ?
- Thread starter Red Star One
- Start date
Exactly. And why wouldn't something that worked at United not work in Leverkusen? After all EtH is the big name, coming from one of the biggest clubs in the world to a German suburb. Surely they will adore him and do whatever he says!
Narrator voiceover: They did not.
66% would be high, these days people often use Liverpool as an example, FSG appointed Hodgson, Dalglish, Rodgers, Klopp and Slot, depending on how generous you are the success rate would be anywhere between 40%-60%.
The severance pay for Erik ten Hag after getting SACKED at Leverkusen will be €6M. €6m for 60 days of work - or around €100K PER DAY, reveals Bild today.
He lost his job but won at life.
Heh.
He lost his job but won at life.
Heh.
You’d think by now clubs would mitigate this risk with clauses. Any other job would have a probation period.
They do use clauses that's why he "only" got 6m but clubs aren't really in a position to put stringent clauses when there is a scarcity of candidates.
Yep, very true.
They did. The shortest tenure in Bundesliga history is very much an edge case, however.
Heh
Yeah but it isn't any other job. The managers are quite rightly protected.
But the circumstances surrounding his sacking also mean he'll either have to wait a long time for his next job or he'll have to take one that pays way less.
Agreed. United are a shambles and random journos on podcasts have assured me no-one could be successful there. Leverkusen are brilliantly run so hes sure to be brilliantly successful.
He wasn't joking when he said it's unprecedented
, never seen such an acrimonious split this fast beforeNasty work all around
Who besides Zehner puts Carro or Rolfes on a pedestal?
Truly followed Mourinho’s footsteps
How many days was he at Leverkusen? Did he beat Brian Clough's 44 days at Leeds? Inquiring minds want to know.
It's way too much - makes me think a lot of it is embellished BS, and they're jsut trying to save face/mask what a shit show the club is.
He wasn't joking when he said it's unprecedented
Nasty work all around
We need to bring this Rolfes guy to United on a fixed term contract. Guy would probably have a nosebleed if he knew what managers are getting away with at Manchester United.
But there is no indication that they are a shit show. None at all. They never were fast to sack their managers, they always acted responsible, even when things were getting tough. The way they dealt with EtH is a massive exception to their usual proceedings. And this makes it mostly believable what's reported about EtH in the eyes of people who follow the Bundesliga more closely.
And on top every leak fills in the picture or answers questions that arise when you followed their (pre)season, their press conferences, watched their games, listened to player interviews...
It's absolutely crazy, but everything fits together in a way that points to EtH indeed being a massive problem there. It's almost impossible to fabricate a media campaign that fits that well to obvious events and is at the same time lying about EtH. A lot of what is reported has to be true. Possibly not every detail, I'm sure some journalists like to make their stories about this a bit more lively, but the gist of all that? Fully believable.
I hope someone makes a The Damned Leverkusen movie one day
And everyone here dismissed that notion at the time.
Everything that Levekusen implied about him is basically things that we knew about from his time here, only people refused to acknowledge it or downplayed how detrimental all of it was.
Yep. Very strange at the time.
We knew about it but no one knew how much of the issues could have been managed better. The issue with ETH, is that we know that Overmars handled him well in spite of reported disagreements when he joined United he was managed by people that were seemingly more hands-off, with Leverkusen he went back to something that is closer to Ajax and they apparently decided to jettison him because he was causing issues.
I would say that now we know or it is at least very likely that ETH is the issue and that it wasn't just United executives being useless.
He started 1 July and was fired on 1 September. Apparently that's 62 days.
On the other hand, Brian Clough managed 8 games at Leeds.
We could be relegated to league one and someone here would insist the manager needs more time.
The title ffs
That means most clubs are shit at it.
City and Liverpool have had good runs of selecting managers. Real and Barcelona get right more often than not. We shouldn't have to assume that managerial hires are a crap shoot.
City for one?
Im not sure if city applies. Mancini and Pellegrini were good but not massive successes the way Pep was. He's the outlier but he's that way for every club he works for.
We're an outlier in how bad we are at it.
City would be the only one but even then it's actually questionable whether Mancini and Pelllegrini are successes when you consider the spendings and actual expectations. Liverpool under FSG have hired Hodgson, Dalglish, Rodgers, Klopp and Slot, 3 out of 5 faillures.
Barcelona and Real Madrid more often than not, do not get it right. That's why each teams have hired above 40 managers in the past 60 years.
Mancini and Pellegrini won a PL title each, come on.
I wouldn't call Rodgers a failure either. I know we laugh at Crystanbul but he was the first manager since Benitez to get Liverpool that far in a title race.
Real have had Zidane, Ancelotti and Alonso. Jury is still out on Alonso but early results look good.
Barcelona: Xavi and Flick
(Also keeping in mind that sometimes they lose otherwise great managers because of board bullshit: cf del Bosque and Guardiola)
We can delve into minutae but there's no reason why we have to accept that managerial selection is a completely stochastic process and we're just rolling dice until we hit on the right one
Of which, I think, he won only 1.
Yeah even now United fans are defending a failed shitshow of a manager after another club saw through his BS and canned him immediately and admitted their mistake. But no apparently it’s all “embellishment” and fake media stories being briefed by the club.
Insane what lengths our fanbase goes to to defend managers, I’ll never understand it.
I would get it if it was for SAF. But usually SAF is insulted by claiming that any manager becomes great if he is given time. I just don't get it.
Yet are still two of the most successful clubs ever. You’d think that would make people wake up to the fact that not every manager needs years and years to prove that they are incompetent
I could kind of understand this attitude toward our other post-SAF managers, even if I often vehemently disagreed with it: Moyes because SAF said to give him time, LVG and Mourinho because of their past accomplishments, and Ole because of his status as a club legend.
But ETH? Where the hell did such goodwill and devotion from our fans even come from?
Real Madrid also had Lopetegui, Benitez and Solari. In the last decades they went back to managers they knew because their other choices bombed.
Yes, Mancini and Pelligrini won the league, twice in 7 years while being around the top of spendings and also while being irrelevant in the CL.
Barcelona: Xavi, Flick. Setien, Martino, Koeman. The only reason most of these managers had "decent" result is because Messi was playing at an all world level but everyone at the time considered and knew that the managers and the club were failing him.
Clubs are largely rolling dices, they try to isolate traits that will reduce the failure rate but the failure rate is still very close to 50%
The sad thing about United imo, its always been the managers. It sounds weird to say, but giving the managers so much power and having them wield their authority around, should have led to more results if they were good enough.
Somehow, it got twisted to them not being supported, when all evidence shows that they were consistently backed in the market and were given time and positivity without ever really showing any output. Moyes was given a dream job with players who had won the league. Yes, they were older, but a decent manager would have been able to get much more out of that team. He didn't identify the need for defenders or a mobile midfielder to work with Carrick. The players complained about his methods. They'd seen what success looks like, and instead of hearing them, we just called them whiners. We sacked them, and got a tough disciplinarian to punish the players for the previous season. We backed LVG for every decision despite it making our squad consistently worse. Without knowing details, fans backed him against Di Maria, despite him having clear issues with south americans who express themselves in their play. Ironically, we struggled to create chances under him and played the worst football. At the end of his tenure in May 2016, we were left with the weakest team we've had. Next, we brought in Mourinho, who'd already just come off the back of a terrible season. He bought expensive and poorly. Under him, we struggled to play out of the back or press, as he didn't adapt to the modern game. As a club, United also had a weird affinity with young players who hadn't really proved anything. Mourinho was right to question Martial and Rashford, which is why he got Alexis. Did Alexis Sanchez succeed? No. But it was clear that what we had on the flanks was not good enough. We then moved on to Ole. Ole tried, but he was not good enough long term. The lack of urgency to start seasons was a sign of his inexperience. He could not adapt to a more attacking style, despite getting relative success from the team. ETH was another manager who came in and was immediately backed. He got to punish players at will and it was somehow seen as strength. His transfers were woeful and cost the club millions. His tactics were terrible, did not suit the league, yet he was treated like a genius who just happened to take on a poisoned chalice.
My point here is that the job was never a poisoned chalice. We just always picked wrongly and felt the need to back that choice despite what we were seeing. Over time, the standards kept dropping, due to being ok with what these poor managers were producing. Mourinho and Ole are the only ones who actually tried, and they both had poor squads to work with. I think more than anything, the decisions of who the managers were going to be, were the biggest failing of the club. Blaming the Glazers or INEOS has never been the solution, and actually distracts from it, despite their culpability. Money was provided, it was used poorly by poor managers with poor tactics. For me, you blame the club, when they sell desired players and leave the manager with a poorer squad than they inherited. United have always struggled in sales, so that's never been the issue.