Erik ten Hag | 100k a day, who is the real loser, heh ?

[JPRouve]

United fans and their worship of managers could probably be classified as a new diagnosis in the DSM-6

The Old Traffrod Syndrome?

 

[FortunaUtd]

This is almost exactly what I was trying to get across with my posts on the topic, sounds like we were in violent agreement.

Yes. I was only strongly disagreeing with the notion that the public campaign was designed to activate existing affects against Ten Hag, somehow involving the Utd fanbase as proxies.
On the contrary, it was designed to destroy the up to the point relatively solid and innocent reputation of Ten Hag in Germany, in order to put the blame of the outrageously quick collapse of the project on Ten Hag solely and absolve the club.

 

[TsuWave]

It's only easy to believe if it's confirming existing biases. The reports are clear that the results aren't why he was sacked, given that there aren't enough of them to judge.

He's a difficult guy to get along with, that's clear from his time here and there, but surely you have to accept that there were failings on the Leverkusen side here too.

I mean people use reference points for corroboration all the time. And I’m confused at you bringing up results not being the underlying motivator for the sacking - I’m well aware, and that wasn’t what my post was based on?!?

- Ten Hag had personality clashes at United
- Ten Hag was an active/key player in our transfer dealings
- IIRC Luckhurst hinted at the SEG skewed deals when he was here
- immediately after his dismissal Casemiro took to socials to praise the training sessions

I could probably keep going and cross checking the German reports against similar stuff that came out when he was here, without mentioning results.

And again, the reports I’ve read admit and assign culpability to Rolfes for hiring him, they just skew heavily against Ten Hag because there’s seemingly universal agreement from different sources at the club that he wasn’t up to scratch - and Rolfes seemingly has enough credit in the bank to still be trusted. Also, on a personal tip, I can respect an exec that fecks up, and takes the necessary steps - however controversial - to rectify the situation, with minimal consideration to optics and more to about getting it right.

 

[devilish]

The PL was literally won by a Dutch manager last season, but never mind.

Slot inherited a top side at a time when city lost rodri and de bruyne tanked. They have so much trust in their manager's ability that they spent like 500m on new players. But ok

 

[HTG]

Slot inherited a top side at a time when city lost rodri and de bruyne tanked. They have so much trust in their manager's ability that they spent like 500m on new players. But ok

I don’t understand how spending this much money suggests they don’t trust the manager?

 

[devilish]

I don’t understand how spending this much money suggests they don’t trust the manager?

If they think that the manager is that good then surely they don't need to spend 500m to top up a squad that had already won the title.

 

[HTG]

If they think that the manager is that good then surely they don't need to spend 500m to top up a squad that had already won the title.

So you think business people would trust a manager with an investment of half a billion if they didn’t believe in his abilities? If anything, this proofs the opposite. They think Slot is the right man to maximise their gigantic investment.
It’s the same with Pep, for example. The reason every club opens their chequebook for him, is because they trust his abilities.

 

[FortunaUtd]

If they think that the manager is that good then surely they don't need to spend 500m to top up a squad that had already won the title.

I think you know yourselves your argument doesn't make any sense. I could point out how that means that apparently managers like Pep and Mourinho weren't trusted by their clubs either, or I could point out how Liverpool didn't spend anything for Slot last summer so they apparently massively trusted him then but not anymore after he won the title (?), ... but I guess coherence isn't your priority here and we can leave it at that.

 

[Rista]

So what happened at United didn't affect his reputation, but what happened at Ajax did?

Outside of England, most neutrals did not think of him as much of a failure as we have. Even our own fans perpetuated this idea that he was just a victim of circumstances. A quality coach who came into a disfunctional club. It's obviously what Leverkusen thought as well.

 

[devilish]

So you think business people would trust a manager with an investment of half a billion if they didn’t believe in his abilities? If anything, this proofs the opposite. They think Slot is the right man to maximise their gigantic investment.
It’s the same with Pep, for example. The reason every club opens their chequebook for him, is because they trust his abilities.

With Pep you either fork the money or he rides off the sunset. All I am saying is that when a top manager had won the title comfortably then he isn't usually given 500m to spend. SAF didn't usually get huge budgets after winning the CL. There again SAF was trusted to seriously compete without having to spend a king's ransom on new players to augment an already successful side.

But this thread is on De B erm ETH and how he's been sacked after just 2 games after losing the trust of everyone in Leverkusen

 

[JPRouve]

With Pep you either fork the money or he rides off the sunset. All I am saying is that when a top manager had won the title comfortably then he isn't usually given 500m to spend. SAF didn't usually get huge budgets after winning the CL. There again SAF was trusted to seriously compete without having to spend a king's ransom on new players to augment an already successful side.

But this thread is on De B erm ETH and how he's been sacked after just 2 games after losing the trust of everyone in Leverkusen

That's a bold assumption, reality is that Pep has always finished his contracts. We don't know what he would do if a club didn't fork the money, though Bayern didn't actually spent much money when he was around, nor did Barcelona.

 

[Zumbi]

I think it's very naïve to suggest that the reporting, which is clearly designed to deflect blame from the Leverkusen management, didn't take in to account Ten Hag's previous reputation when creating the hit pieces as you call them.

It isn't for United fans, but they could clearly be relied upon to corroborate the accusations and boost the message.

As for your summary, it's not entirely accurate. He was hired to be head coach of a squad that was then dismantled without his knowing. No wonder he didn't take that well. He should have handled it better, but then so should his superiors. It's a case of failings all round, rather than just Ten Hag coming in like a wrecking ball from the start.

If he didn’t know that was going to happen this summer then he’s not very astute, because everyone else seemed to know that was going to be the case.

Months before Ten Hag joined them there were plenty of reports that Frimpong, Wirtz, Hincapie, Xhaka, Boniface were all looking to leave this summer.

 

[The Hilton]

Yes and that's my point, by the time he had been sacked it had been evident for three years.

My precise issue is that we are not manager centric at all, ever. We all see the same shit with the same managers and blame the players for it time after time until the point where it's so unbelievably obvious there's no other possible explanation.

Just once I'm asking us to entertain the possibility... maybe these guys just weren't up to it?

The closest we got to that was Moyes, and that was back when we still had standards.

Leverkusen obviously fecked up appointing him, but at the other extreme after two years we were still losing football matches in the exact same way we did in ten Hag's first two games in charge, and we still had a big chunk of people blaming everyone other than him. Perhaps there is a middle ground to be found between the two extremes which allows for managers simply to be not very good.

Seems like you're ignoring my previous post entirely. I agreed that Ten Hag wasn't good enough, I don't think anybody will argue against that. But he wasn't the only person not good enough, it was true of a large number of our squad, along with the entirety of the footballing department.

 

[The Hilton]

I mean people use reference points for corroboration all the time. And I’m confused at you bringing up results not being the underlying motivator for the sacking - I’m well aware, and that wasn’t what my post was based on?!?

- Ten Hag had personality clashes at United
- Ten Hag was an active/key player in our transfer dealings
- IIRC Luckhurst hinted at the SEG skewed deals when he was here
- immediately after his dismissal Casemiro took to socials to praise the training sessions

I could probably keep going and cross checking the German reports against similar stuff that came out when he was here, without mentioning results.

And again, the reports I’ve read admit and assign culpability to Rolfes for hiring him, they just skew heavily against Ten Hag because there’s seemingly universal agreement from different sources at the club that he wasn’t up to scratch - and Rolfes seemingly has enough credit in the bank to still be trusted. Also, on a personal tip, I can respect an exec that fecks up, and takes the necessary steps - however controversial - to rectify the situation, with minimal consideration to optics and more to about getting it right.

Exactly my point, the issues line up too perfectly, especially given how little time he'd been there.

Also it was Rashford who took to social media to praise the training sessions. Given his persistent attitude problems, and how quickly he was then criticising the new training sessions, that isn't really the gotcha you're making it out to be.

 

[Ichabod Ferguson]

Seems like you're ignoring my previous post entirely. I agreed that Ten Hag wasn't good enough, I don't think anybody will argue against that. But he wasn't the only person not good enough, it was true of a large number of our squad, along with the entirety of the footballing department.

I think you're ignoring mine! What doesn't fit into this narrative is ten Hag took a squad that finished 2nd, 3rd and 6th (with 66 points) to 3rd (with 66 points), 8th, 11th (or wherever he was when he was sacked).

This 'not good enough' squad, achieved far more in the league in the three years before him, than his 'not good enough' squad assembled for 600m or whatever it actually was.

Is it not possible that the squad we deemed not good enough, and I consider myself in this, to deliver ten Hag's football couldn't deliver ten Hag's football because ten Hag's football is actually just shit? And if that's possible, then could it not also be possible that Amorim taking them to 15th is a continuation of that?

I understand I'm challenging our orthodox understanding where everything has to always be as terrible as possible and we have to enter a 3 year rebuild every time we sack anybody, but wouldn't it actually be a relief if it turned out ten Hag and Amorim were actually just bad managers all along?

 

[stefan92]

Exactly my point, the issues line up too perfectly, especially given how little time he'd been there.

So what? When completely different media report the same stuff about someone, coming from completely different sources, shouldn't that make it more believable, not less?

 

[The Hilton]

Yes. I was only strongly disagreeing with the notion that the public campaign was designed to activate existing affects against Ten Hag, somehow involving the Utd fanbase as proxies.
On the contrary, it was designed to destroy the up to the point relatively solid and innocent reputation of Ten Hag in Germany, in order to put the blame of the outrageously quick collapse of the project on Ten Hag solely and absolve the club.

If that's the case, then it's very coincidental that the reports touch on so many of the criticisms of Ten Hag from his United time, including the ones that weren't really accurate but we're memeable.

Occam's razor says that it is a coincidence, but I'm still suspicious, considering this is a club in tune with us enough to tweet about us losing to Grimsby.

 

[The Hilton]

I think you're ignoring mine! What doesn't fit into this narrative is ten Hag took a squad that finished 2nd, 3rd and 6th (with 66 points) to 3rd (with 66 points), 8th, 11th (or wherever he was when he was sacked).

This 'not good enough' squad, achieved far more in the league in the three years before him, than his 'not good enough' squad assembled for 600m or whatever it actually was.

Is it not possible that the squad we deemed not good enough, and I consider myself in this, to deliver ten Hag's football couldn't deliver ten Hag's football because ten Hag's football is actually just shit? And if that's possible, then could it not also be possible that Amorim taking them to 15th is a continuation of that?

I understand I'm challenging our orthodox understanding where everything has to always be as terrible as possible and we have to enter a 3 year rebuild every time we sack anybody, but wouldn't it actually be a relief if it turned out ten Hag and Amorim were actually just bad managers all along?

Once again both things can be true. Ten Hag's football wasn't good enough, while the squad also wasn't good enough, and before the INEOS regime took over our entire footballing structure wasn't good enough.

You're trying to make a complex situation much more simple than it really is, the idea that all the blame for all our problems can be laid at the feet of bad managerial appointments. It would be lovely if it was that simple, and in a couple of years it may well be, after the INEOS rebuild has hopefully resulted in a squad good enough to challenge for honours, but it isn't remotely true yet.

 

[Ichabod Ferguson]

Once again both things can be true. Ten Hag's football wasn't good enough, while the squad also wasn't good enough, and before the INEOS regime took over our entire footballing structure wasn't good enough.

You're trying to make a complex situation much more simple than it really is, the idea that all the blame for all our problems can be laid at the feet of bad managerial appointments. It would be lovely if it was that simple, and in a couple of years it may well be, after the INEOS rebuild has hopefully resulted in a squad good enough to challenge for honours, but it isn't remotely true yet.

Nah I'm arguing that the complex situation could be a construct and a figment of our imaginations, which we have conjured up because the simple explanation is so anathema to United fans understanding of being a football fan that we don't even allow ourselves to entertain it as a possibility. Football tends to be simpler than we convince ourselves of.

Ironically, if I'm right, I suppose it proves you right too, because if it really would be as simple as bad managers and rather than solving the issue with one change, INEOS rip everything up and replace the squad again (we must be at around a billion spent on rebuilds now since Solskjaer) I suppose it would be proof of a badly run football club.

 

[The Hilton]

Nah I'm arguing that the complex situation could be a construct and a figment of our imaginations, which we have conjured up because the simple explanation is so anathema to United fans understanding of being a football fan that we don't even allow ourselves to entertain it as a possibility. Football tends to be simpler than we convince ourselves of.

Ironically, if I'm right, I suppose it proves you right too, because if it really would be as simple as bad managers and rather than solving the issue with one change, INEOS rip everything up and replace the squad again (we must be at around a billion spent on rebuilds now since Solskjaer) I suppose it would be proof of a badly run football club.

We'll have to agree to disagree then, as you'd need to have a much higher opinion of our previous squad, and the previous management regime, than I or I imagine most of the forum do.

 

[Ichabod Ferguson]

We'll have to agree to disagree then, as you'd need to have a much higher opinion of our previous squad, and the previous management regime, than I or I imagine most of the forum do.

Depends on what your opinion of them is. I think they were doing a bad job when we were finishing on average 5th given where we were when Ferguson left, but I don't think that bad job is primarily the reason why we've sunk to 8th and then 15th, nor is the squad that either manager has had actually so bad to justify those finishes. If you disagree with that then fair enough, I know some people do, I just think people are too willing to overlook the obvious.

 

[The Hilton]

Depends on what your opinion of them is. I think they were doing a bad job when we were finishing on average 5th given where we were when Ferguson left, but I don't think that bad job is primarily the reason why we've sunk to 8th and then 15th, nor is the squad that either manager has had actually so bad to justify those finishes. If you disagree with that then fair enough, I know some people do, I just think people are too willing to overlook the obvious.

The squad had clearly deteriorated from Ole's time here, while we could have achieved slightly higher finishes by sticking with the mid block from those days, the decline was inevitable. Poor recruitment has set us back years, and we're still trying to climb out of the hole we've dug for ourselves with it.

 

[FortunaUtd]

If that's the case, then it's very coincidental that the reports touch on so many of the criticisms of Ten Hag from his United time, including the ones that weren't really accurate but we're memeable.

Occam's razor says that it is a coincidence, but I'm still suspicious, considering this is a club in tune with us enough to tweet about us losing to Grimsby.

They touch on the same criticism because it apparently so happens that Ten Hag brought the bad habits he was allowed to develop as United manager and which we enabled him to, with our lack of a strong DoF and our managerial Führerkult, into the job in Leverkusen. That is the connection, no conspiracy theory needed.

I thought he might thrive again in a similar situation like Ajax, forced to focus on coaching while the squad building is done for him, but apparently once you've tasted power you don't like to give it up again, even if the facts on the ground should tell you you're not as good and competent in the areas you've taken over as you were in your core area of expertise.

As for Leverkusen tweeting, I'm not sure what tweet you're refering to but I guess it would be from their notorious English language twitter account which has been run by what seems to be an immature and attention seeking 12 year old for many years. Or maybe they hire a new 12 year old every year because the account never matures. That twitter account and whatevers happening there, again, has nothing to do with what Stephan von Nocks is writing in kicker magazine about Ten Hags tenure.

 

[peller]

That's not how I remember it. Pogba had already left, and Martial was finished due to his injuries. Greenwood was rightly despised for his actions. Rashford was coming off 18 months of poor form and injuries. There were loads of questions about Sancho's suitability for the PL. Ronaldo was seen as a disruptive influence. Bruno lost some of his goodwill in the 21/22 season.

Ten Hag and Murtough made a mess of rebuilding the squad, but it was in terrible shape after Ole and Rangnick's season.

Ole was sacked in November 2021, Pogba only left in summer 2022, people still hoped Martial would overcome his injuries, we didnt know Greenwood was a cnut until summer 2022 (kid was still playing under Rangnick), Rashford actually was coming off his best period where he actually finished with 20 goals in 2 seasons in row. Sancho and Ronaldo had just arrived so unless youre taking hindsight into the equation nobody can surely say theyre going to be disruptive influence. Bruno started 21/22 with a hattrick against Leeds btw. So yeah there was so much hope with these players just unfortune for us they failed to reach the heights.

 

[stefan92]

As for Leverkusen tweeting, I'm not sure what tweet you're refering to but I guess it would be from their notorious English language twitter account

That account tweeted something like "hopefully not Grimsby " ahead of the CL draw, that's all.

 

[Giggsyking]

That account tweeted something like "hopefully not Grimsby " ahead of the CL draw, that's all.

Seriously, that is absolutely stupid, to officially banter other clubs.

 

[pelterz]

If they think that the manager is that good then surely they don't need to spend 500m to top up a squad that had already won the title.

It’s crazy, a large section of our fans expected Rubin to be top 4 (from 15th) with Eths squad because they had underlying quality. This after also believing Eth with a much better squad needed 600m. Now the Liverpool manager who won the league needs 500m to help Liverpool maintain their performance.

 

[Idxomer]

Ole was sacked in November 2021, Pogba only left in summer 2022, people still hoped Martial would overcome his injuries, we didnt know Greenwood was a cnut until summer 2022 (kid was still playing under Rangnick), Rashford actually was coming off his best period where he actually finished with 20 goals in 2 seasons in row. Sancho and Ronaldo had just arrived so unless youre taking hindsight into the equation nobody can surely say theyre going to be disruptive influence. Bruno started 21/22 with a hattrick against Leeds btw. So yeah there was so much hope with these players just unfortune for us they failed to reach the heights.

You're right, I don't know why I thought you were talking about when Ten Hag arrived. I don't think there was much hope left for either Martial or Pogba. Rashford wasn't very good in the 2nd half of the 20/21 season and had an injury layoff after the Euros. The Greenwood case started in January 2022. The most hope people had for a group of United players was after Mourinho's sacking, as he was seen as too negative and holding the players back from expressing themselves.

My point was that when Ten Hag arrived, most agreed the squad needed a lot of work. He and the board messed that up massively.

 

[Robertd0803]

He would probably make a good International manager. Cant be insisting on buying former players/players from his own agency then.

 

[B20]

Kasper Hjulmand is the new manager in Leverkusen. Interesting appointment.

 

[RoyH1]

Kasper Hjulmand is the new manager in Leverkusen. Interesting appointment.

Makes good sense in the current market.Available, speaks English and some German, has Bundesliga experience, used to playing with young players and not too expensive either. Probably will work better within the framework that Leverkusen has

 

[Wednesday at Stoke]

Kasper Hjulmand is the new manager in Leverkusen. Interesting appointment.

Curious to see how he does. The national team was always well organized and played 3 at the back with two 6s and I felt he lacked the courage to try more attacking lineups.

 

[George The Best]

Leverkusen will just move on and soon forget this mis-step (just imagine they hire Thiago Motta to double down...), Ten Hag is left with the dork or even damaged good label that will make extremely difficult for him to get a job elsewhere in a top 5 league. People suggesting lower Serie A clubs would take a punt do not know what they are talking about, really.

Doubt he cares too much. He can retire now as a very wealthy man.

 

[Zehner]

Leverkusen will just move on and soon forget this mis-step (just imagine they hire Thiago Motta to double down...), Ten Hag is left with the dork or even damaged good label that will make extremely difficult for him to get a job elsewhere in a top 5 league. People suggesting lower Serie A clubs would take a punt do not know what they are talking about, really.

When we fired him and all these inside stories about his incompetence and arrogance surfaced, I had concerns that he will remain in the club's paycheck for the full duration of his contract. So I was actually happy when the news broke that we paid him out for €5m. Not good but at least not the full pay he negotiated for those two years.

Now the hit his reputation took isn't our problem anymore. I definitely think he has to earn his chance at a club with UCL ambitions again because most will stay clear of him. Maybe he can prove himself in the Eredivisie again. Turkish and Saudi-Arabian clubs also seem to target big names who fell out of public favor to an extent.

But going by how things went with us, I doubt it has dawned on him that he needs to change his ways and redeem himself now. Will probably blame us for ruining his reputation.

 

[B20]

Doubt he cares too much. He can retire now as a very wealthy man.

He could do the same before he took the leverkusen job.

I reckon he cares.

 

[Red Star One]

He could do the same before he took the leverkusen job.

I reckon he cares.

He was born millionaire so all this bullshit 'oh he surely is happy to take some nice package' is a bit pointless

 

[Cheimoon]

He was born millionaire so all this bullshit 'oh he surely is happy to take some nice package' is a bit pointless

That's also where I don't fully understand that he favours that one agency. Is that to help his mates? Or just because he's most familiar with their players and therefore defaults to them?

Neither is good, for different reasons, but at least the latter would be a little more reasonable.

 

[pelterz]

Considering Ten hag nearly destroyed the club it is rather odd seeing United fans revealing in his taking another club to the cleaners.

 

[Acheron]

Let me put it to you this way, do you believe the Leverkusen management should take any blame here, or is this entirely on Ten Hag?

Blame from what? His sacking wasn't about results but about falling out with him.

 

[stefan92]

Blame from what? His sacking wasn't about results but about falling out with him.

Thing is that many reasons for that falling out are no surprise for people who followed United. So blaming them for missing/underestimating that makes sense