How have we done post-Fergie, in your assessment?

roonster09

Hercule Poirot of the scouting world
Scout
Joined
May 10, 2009
Messages
36,577
Its obviously been shite, but I was surprised to see that only Chelsea and City have won more trophies than us since Fergie retired. Obviously if City hadn't been so dominant the others would have won more, but that would also mean we'd won the league twice in the time period.

The reason we are looked at as a shambles and none of the other big clubs are is simply prestige, we are expected to come out on top every single year, so when we don't it's a failure.
Liverpool won more trophies than us. Pl, CL, FA Cup, league Cup twice, super Cup, club world Cup
 

Jeffthered

Full Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2015
Messages
2,692
Dreadful. Lost our identity as an attractive, uncomplicated, dedicated, tremendously hard-working, brave team with players who are not afraid to showcase their talent and fight on the biggest stage.

All whilst spending billions. Our ownership and administration has been shockingly poor.
 

Foolsgold21

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Aug 28, 2021
Messages
223
Abysmal.

More debt with very little to show for it - billions squandered.

Couldn’t have gone much worse really could it?
 

bringbackbebe

Full Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2021
Messages
1,658
I'm surprised there's a thread on this. If I'm to be super liberal, I'd give it a negative 10.
 

NWRed

Full Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2019
Messages
1,176
As bad as it could've gone given the starting point and our wealth.
 

#07

makes new threads with tweets in the OP
Joined
Oct 25, 2010
Messages
23,276
In the last few seasons we have lost 5-0 at home to Liverpool and 7-0 away. Considering what we were under Sir Alex, we have fallen further than I ever thought possible.

A club of our size and resources should not have become as bad as we have been. When Sir Alex retired I knew our domination would not continue unchallenged. But I thought we would at least be challenging.
 

Fortitude

TV/Monitor Expert
Scout
Joined
Jul 10, 2004
Messages
22,612
Location
Inside right
This is a question that does not need to be asked. We all know the answer to it. A better question would be: who are we blaming it for? Even that is a dumb question. Not sure what OP wanted to achieve here that hasn’t been debated/talked about to death already.
To be fair, I should have better padded out the OP as I would've thought the gist behind it was implied, that being for bust cycle after a boom, how have we done.

Objectively, and for the money spent, we can obviously say it's been absolutely shocking, but firing off money blindly whilst not having an identity lends itself to that and as @eire-red stated in their post, we're not the only giant that has done that during a bust period.

Real Madrid and Barcelona exist within a bubble, so too Bayern, but even they have had periods in their history which were objectively disastrous, but within the context of a bust cycle, there's still an assessment to be made as to how bad bad is.

For where we were to the place that has to be temporarily considered home, it's a long drop, but even then, we've won more than most clubs in the country - at our very worst, we're still the 4th most winningest team in the country (our haul of 4, inclusive of a Europa/Uefa Cup is superior to Arsenal's 4 FA Cups, imo) and are due two league titles if '115' is ever dealt with.

If the bust cycle of other giants over large periods were considered, I'm not sure how we've fared would be below average. Milan's collapse has been worse than ours in many ways - they were chasing, and closing in on Real Madrid's CL haul and were by far the glamour club of their league - they're arguably a non-entity now relative to what they were, and even with the league win they had, one would argue are still in their bust cycle.

Actually, here it is:

AC Milan bust period haul 2011-2024:

Serie A: 2021-22
Supercoppa Italiana: 2016

The Supercoppa is a Charity Shield equivalent. I haven't even included those for England because they are meaningless. So, from a superpower to what they are now, Milan have 1 league title or serious trophy in 13 years. That's what a 0/10 or 1/10 looks like to me.

As a club, we were used to being more dominant than City have been (due to our frequency of being in CL finals alongside domestic success), but it was clear that without another injection of funding, the pool would most likely have been diluted as our squad was mostly on its last legs and unless we found some uncut diamonds from the academy or obscure clubs, the rebuild would've not been of the same stock we had become accustomed to. Fergie would always remain competitive, but as Chelsea had already shown, and City were starting to; serious amounts of [focused] money, talks.

10 years, 4 trophies and what should be two league titles, is it something a club underperforming turns its nose up at, or does it suffice in the interim? That's pretty much the TL;DR.
 

Buster15

Go on Didier
Joined
Aug 28, 2018
Messages
13,390
Location
Bristol
Supports
Bristol Rovers
Possibly the worst run big club in the history of the sport for a decade we’ve been that poor.

Like others have said this club is a worldwide phenomenon. The fact we haven’t won a league title in 10 years is more impressive than winning one.

It’s failure of the absolute highest order. 2/10 considering we won a few trophies though and second placed finishes.
Bang on.
For the millions of Manchester United fans, it has been a total disaster.
The complete lack of structure has resulted in a truly terrible outcome.
Wet finger in the air recruitment.
Waisting billions on managers, players and wages.

So yeah.
2/10. And that is being generous.
 

Josep Dowling

Full Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2014
Messages
7,636
Not been close to winning the league. Even when finishing 2nd the gap was huge. Barely qualifying for the Champions League most seasons. When we do we make a total mess of Europe. Our best performance is the quarter finals where we have been embarrassed by Sevilla and hammered by Barcelona.

The League and Champions League performance should be the only trophies that United are assessed on. Not been close to winning either so it’s 10 years of failure.
 

Telsim

Full Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2021
Messages
4,761
Relative to the club's resources, spending, and overall standing in the game, I'd agree with the 0/10 appraisal.
I agree. All things considered, it couldn't have been any worse. No one takes us seriously anymore, at home or abroad. We are "grandpa's favorite club". A barren period. The only success I'd consider as such is the Europa League win, but that's just not enough.

And for the time being, I don't see anything to convince me this period is coming to an end.
 

Mike Smalling

Full Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2018
Messages
10,743
It's been a lot worse than expected. I don't think many United fans expected such a massive drop in performance so quickly. Once it became clear that Moyes was taking over, I expected us to not win the league for a few years, but still be comfortably top four and maybe challenging for a title. Instead we immediately dropped to 7th, made baffling transfers that failed to address the real squad issues and got into a merry-go-round of different managers with different styles buying all types of players.

The only positives worth mentioning in this period has been that we have still won a few cups, and we continue to see academy players make it into the first team. And at least we haven't dropped into the bottom half of the table like Chelsea (low bar, I know).
 

Giggsy13

Full Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2016
Messages
4,297
Location
Toronto
I could never envision it would be this poor when Sir Alex retired. United would be an interesting case study on how you could run a massive football club into the ground in less than a decade. It’s been spectacular in the worst way possible. I’m hoping that as INEOS further solidify their control over football operations that we’ll hear more about the incompetence of the glazers and Woodward. I bet what many supporters suspected of the incompetence under the previous regime will hold true.
 

AndySmith1990

Full Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2021
Messages
6,040
It's been very poor to the point our reckless spending looks like purposeful sabotage
 

Giggsy13

Full Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2016
Messages
4,297
Location
Toronto
It's been a lot worse than expected. I don't think many United fans expected such a massive drop in performance so quickly. Once it became clear that Moyes was taking over, I expected us to not win the league for a few years, but still be comfortably top four and maybe challenging for a title. Instead we immediately dropped to 7th, made baffling transfers that failed to address the real squad issues and got into a merry-go-round of different managers with different styles buying all types of players.

The only positives worth mentioning in this period has been that we have still won a few cups, and we continue to see academy players make it into the first team. And at least we haven't dropped into the bottom half of the table like Chelsea (low bar, I know).
The revamp of the academy operations and recruitment is the only positive that has come out this decade. It was crumbling near the end of Sir Alex’s reign and that neglect further fuelled city’s rise and influence.
 

E-mal

Full Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2017
Messages
3,257
Abysmal.

More debt with very little to show for it - billions squandered.

Couldn’t have gone much worse really could it?
It is a miracle that we still generate this amount of followership and finance seeing how abysmal we have been
 

Revan

Assumptionman
Joined
Dec 19, 2011
Messages
49,466
Location
London
We have been a case study on how to not do things, at basically every level. I do not think it could have been worse (when you overspent pretty much every other club in the world, it is hard to get relegated).
 

Wing Attack Plan R

Full Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2019
Messages
10,216
Location
El Pueblo de la Reyna de los Angeles
I think the reality of how special a manager Fergie was became clear in that first transfer debacle under Moyes, where Bale, Fabregas, and Ronaldo were whispered to be joining, and instead we picked up Fellaini for over the asking price. It was like David Lee Roth being replaced by Sammy Hagar. We were United in name only. The academy was in shambles, we couldn’t attract believers and instead bought mercenaries, and our identity was ripped up before our very eyes.

If 115 adjudication nets us two league titles, the post-Fergie years were merely disappointing instead of embarrassing.
 

Okocha119

Full Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2014
Messages
462
To be fair, I should have better padded out the OP as I would've thought the gist behind it was implied, that being for bust cycle after a boom, how have we done.

Objectively, and for the money spent, we can obviously say it's been absolutely shocking, but firing off money blindly whilst not having an identity lends itself to that and as @eire-red stated in their post, we're not the only giant that has done that during a bust period.

Real Madrid and Barcelona exist within a bubble, so too Bayern, but even they have had periods in their history which were objectively disastrous, but within the context of a bust cycle, there's still an assessment to be made as to how bad bad is.

For where we were to the place that has to be temporarily considered home, it's a long drop, but even then, we've won more than most clubs in the country - at our very worst, we're still the 4th most winningest team in the country (our haul of 4, inclusive of a Europa/Uefa Cup is superior to Arsenal's 4 FA Cups, imo) and are due two league titles if '115' is ever dealt with.

If the bust cycle of other giants over large periods were considered, I'm not sure how we've fared would be below average. Milan's collapse has been worse than ours in many ways - they were chasing, and closing in on Real Madrid's CL haul and were by far the glamour club of their league - they're arguably a non-entity now relative to what they were, and even with the league win they had, one would argue are still in their bust cycle.

Actually, here it is:

AC Milan bust period haul 2011-2024:

Serie A: 2021-22
Supercoppa Italiana: 2016

The Supercoppa is a Charity Shield equivalent. I haven't even included those for England because they are meaningless. So, from a superpower to what they are now, Milan have 1 league title or serious trophy in 13 years. That's what a 0/10 or 1/10 looks like to me.

As a club, we were used to being more dominant than City have been (due to our frequency of being in CL finals alongside domestic success), but it was clear that without another injection of funding, the pool would most likely have been diluted as our squad was mostly on its last legs and unless we found some uncut diamonds from the academy or obscure clubs, the rebuild would've not been of the same stock we had become accustomed to. Fergie would always remain competitive, but as Chelsea had already shown, and City were starting to; serious amounts of [focused] money, talks.

10 years, 4 trophies and what should be two league titles, is it something a club underperforming turns its nose up at, or does it suffice in the interim? That's pretty much the TL;DR.

For me the reason why United's performance post-SAF seems so much worse than any other similar club in decline is just how much money has been used up in order for United to stay competitive only to end up with abject failure. Since 2013 United have spent over 1.1 billion in net transfer fees. That's significantly more than any other team in the same period, around as much as Real, Barca and Liverpool combined and even more than financially doped teams like City, PSG or Chelsea, despite all of them being far more successful.
Milan, meanwhile, have spent nowhere near the same amount of money, less than half in fact. Plus their decline was a lot more gradual. Sure, Milan won another Scudetto under Allegri in 2011, but their last national championship before that came in 2004 and the last time they did anything of note in the Champions League was 2007. United, on the other hand, went from consistently being one of the best teams in Europe to also-rans more or less overnight.
 

stefan92

Full Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2021
Messages
6,130
Supports
Hannover 96
For me the reason why United's performance post-SAF seems so much worse than any other similar club in decline is just how much money has been used up in order for United to stay competitive only to end up with abject failure. Since 2013 United have spent over 1.1 billion in net transfer fees. That's significantly more than any other team in the same period, around as much as Real, Barca and Liverpool combined and even more than financially doped teams like City, PSG or Chelsea, despite all of them being far more successful.
Milan, meanwhile, have spent nowhere near the same amount of money, less than half in fact. Plus their decline was a lot more gradual. Sure, Milan won another Scudetto under Allegri in 2011, but their last national championship before that came in 2004 and the last time they did anything of note in the Champions League was 2007. United, on the other hand, went from consistently being one of the best teams in Europe to also-rans more or less overnight.
Very good point. Milan simply lacked (or lost) the financial power to stay at the top. United didn't.

I think every year in which United doesn't reach the CL quarterfinal, FA/Carabao Cup semifinals AND top 3 in the league is a season in which United got results below their financial power. Sometimes this can be excused by unlucky draws, but that is my general expectation for United.

Off-seasons happen and if due to an injury crisis something like the Carabao Cup is effectively written off and thrown away that's fine, but how often did United even fulfill three of the four criteria I mentioned?
 

Todd

Full Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2011
Messages
3,374
Location
Indiana, USA
-Manager's office has been a revolving door
-No real trophies (EPL or CL)
-Only a couple second-rate trophies
-Pathetic return on investment when it comes to the players we've bought post-Fergie. Something like 60 players brought in, and maybe 10 of them you could say were good business
-The stadium and the training grounds have fallen behind the times, without proper investment to modernize them. The greatest thing Ronnie did for us when he came back was call out the state of the training ground

A 0/10 would be having been relegated. I'd put us at a 3/10 in the post-Fergie era
 

buckooo1978

Full Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2008
Messages
13,761
Its been a car crash. Our financial muscle has resulted in a couple of bright spots but in 2024 we find ourselves with a mish-mash of a squad of overpaid players, in a team with no style of play with a debt issue.

of course it could have been worse but the leaching Glazers meant we didnt do a Leeds and spend beyond our means.
 

BorisManUtd

Full Member
Joined
Nov 4, 2013
Messages
3,729
I remember what a nightmare 13/14 was. Especially in context of previous 20 years where we had so much success. We've had couple more of 13/14-esque seasons since but dealt with it much easier because last decade has been so average so we got used to failure.

If 6/10 rating means solid or decent, then our post-Fergie can't be rated that in any way. Maybe 4/10, because of Europa League win, Fa Cup win and 2 Carabao Cups + 2 second place finishes. Though given how much we've spent, even 3/10 or 2/10 as many are posting is more realistic.
 

sglowrider

Thinks the caf is 'wokeish'.
Joined
Dec 27, 2009
Messages
25,199
Location
Hell on Earth
Statistically, this has got to be the worst season/manager so far. I don't ever remember in the multiple decades at this stage of a season, 29 games played and we have only 40 goals and 40 conceded.

Dave Sexton was bad, but this takes the cake.
 

Pintu

Full Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Messages
4,091
Location
Sweden
Everything changes if we are awarded the PL trophies for 2018 and, 2021 once City’s cheating is dealt with.
 

JediSith

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jun 13, 2023
Messages
922
We’ve really just gone back to what we were between the Sir Matt Busby & SAF years. A very big club, big revenue, can spend money on players, but never really winning the league. Occasional 2nd spot finish, and a cup win every 2-4 years.
 

Robertd0803

Full Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2014
Messages
6,551
I knew it would be bad but I never thought it would be this bad.

City (artifically) replicating our greatest success while Liverpool have won the CL and probably equalling 20 league titles is just sickening.

Every positive has been a false dawn or burned out super quick thus far.

The scale of the rebuild required is frightening because of pure mismanagement and poor decisions top to bottom.

4 trophies and a handful of moments over the time period involved is probably a 3 or 4 out of 10 at the very most.
 

Kelly15

Full Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2014
Messages
241
On the footballing side you would have to say as bad as it gets. The amount if money we have spent. A lack of structure, organization, and planning. From the moment Moyes took 2 weeks off after getting the biggest job in football to putting Ed Woodward in charge of football operations with zero previous experience in that position. It's been a cluster of bad decisions. With the amount of money we spent it's more impressive how little we have won. That type of incompetence is impressive.
 

lex talionis

Full Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2017
Messages
13,783
I don't know how to describe how bad it's been, but it's very safe to say that it's been worse than anyone here could have expected. It's been mostly unwatchable stuff, with glimpses of very good play coming sporadically and we're never seriously been in the hunt for a PL or CL trophy.

I expected a step backward for 2 seasons then a restoration of at least reasonable competitiveness for the two trophies that matter, but I never expected this. The shit began with the appointment of Moyes, who was terrified of the awesome responsibility he was given and whose first act, after the Jagielka film debacle, was bringing in Fellaini. WTF??? Then Van Gaal, then Mourinho, both of whom were psychos who went bonkers with stupid player sales and buys. At that point the turd was swirling in the bowl and here we are to this day, adrift like an unflushed turd.
 

Tyrion

Full Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2014
Messages
5,190
Location
Ireland
We've done really poorly. The massive amount of money in football gives the bigger clubs huge advantages. We've squandered those advantages massively and in a past era, our dysfunction would likely have seen us relegated.

Given all that has gone on and the upheaval we've had as a club, how would you assess this period, accepting it to be one of the famed United slumps between success periods?

For further reference, these are the intervening years between Busby and Ferguson (1969-1986):

Division 2 Champions: 1974-75
FA Cup: 1976-77, 1982-83, 1984-85
United don't have famed slumps between success periods. No club in England is always successful or even consistently close to the top. United have no God-given right to win things so I don't see how it counts as a famous slump when it's what happened to every successful club I'm England between the 1800s to 2010.