If David Moyes turned United down in 2013, who would've been next on the list?

gormless

Full Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Messages
7,711
Location
comfortable and settled in my rut
Jose was the obvious choice. I still think he'd have done well. He was big enough to handle the pressure, whereas Moyes crumbled.

I'd have taken Ancelotti as well. Still would now actually
 

Chairman Steve

Full Member
Joined
May 9, 2018
Messages
2,227
Outside of Jose and Ancelotti, I honestly wouldn’t know and it wouldnt surprise me if Moyes said no, then we’d have seen Phelan as manager, with Meulensteen as assistant manager.
 

Falcow

Full Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2019
Messages
1,148
Location
Dublin
The way we mishandled Fergie's succession boils my blood to this day. It was the first real indication of how badly run a club we really are and the horrifying proof that Fergie was holding it all together by sheer force of will.

Given the options available at the time (i.e. Pep and Klopp were out of the picture) I wanted Jose, despite all his known flaws. I think he could have taken that Championship winning team and kept it ticking over, winning trophies, until we lined up a more long term solution. From all indications he wanted the job too. It would have inevitably ended in tears but I doubt it would have been the shit show that was Moyes.

I have no idea who else we could have gone for instead of Moyes. I'm pretty sure we were already scraping the barrel by choosing him.

As much as I hate to say it I partially blame Sir Alex for the messed up succession. He should have made his intentions clear well ahead of time so we could have a replacement in the wings ready to go. Instead he stepped down seemingly out of the blue and everything collapsed like a deck of cards. I wonder if he feared announcing it too early would derail our season and cost us the league that season. I remember when he first announced he was going to retire in the mid-2000s(?) the team's form collapsed. Only when he reversed his decision did we start to play well again.

I don't know if more details have come to light in the years since, but I'd love to know exactly what happened with the succession planning/decision making.
Dont forget Gill, he was the CEO at the time and the issue was badly compounded by them both (Fergie and Gill) leaving at same time.
 

horsechoker

Sailor vee, this is a right off.
Joined
Apr 16, 2015
Messages
20,320
Location
The stable
To be fair to Fergie, he left a team which, while ageing, had won 2 of the previous 3 league titles and only missed out on a third on goal difference. The squad needed a few tweaks and then would have been more than capable of challenging that season.

In hindsight, Moyes was nowhere near ready to take over. However, he was the master of his own downfall by trying to impose his own ideas on a team which just needed tweaking. As has been mentioned many times, getting rid of Sir Alex's coaching staff was a terrible mistake. We were already replacing a manager who had been in charge for 26 years as well as an experienced chief executive in David Gill. What we didn't need was a complete overhaul of the backroom staff.

I think Fergie's choice was probably influenced, ironically, by stability. He probably expected Moyes to provide a smooth transition from Fergie's last team to Moyes' own, an expectation which was quickly dashed. Van Gaal or Mourinho would have ripped that team apart as we saw first hand in later years. You could argue that they would have had the experience and authority to handle a squad of champions, but I have a feeling they'd have wanted to do it their 'own' way, particularly Van Gaal.
I don't think Mourinho would have ripped the team apart. He'd have gone on with the old boys while perhaps bringing in someone like Fabregas.
 

wolvored

Full Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2016
Messages
6,292
Cappello was free at the time I think or was he managing in Russia? Cant remember. but he would have probably been in the frame.
 

FrankDrebin

Don't call me Shirley
Joined
Aug 25, 2019
Messages
7,816
Location
Police Squad
Jupp Heynckes would have been a somewhat left-field choice yet he was/is a vastly experienced coach, played with similar attacking flair and had won the top trophies.

Could've done worse....oh, we did. We did much worse.
 

Acheron

Full Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2016
Messages
1,614
Supports
Real Madrid
At that time it would had make more sense to go for Mourinho rather than going for him after Moyes and Van Gaal. The team SAF left seemed a better fit for Mourinho in terms of their mentality and he would had get better results from that team and the transition wouldn't have been so rough for the players in having to play for SAF then for someone so out of depth like Moyes.

It wasn't solely a mistake in hiring Moyes but also giving him such a long contract and betting everything on him becoming the next SAF on the virtue of... well I really don't know why they were expecting him becoming that and being at the club for many years to come. Trying to get Guardiola was a good attempt but it would have been worth trying to go for Klopp who was already regarded as a very good manager.

If it wasn't someone already proven like Mourinho or Klopp I think United would had needed to go for someone with a more progressive approach when it comes to playing football. Even before SAF left I felt Manchester United had a very outdated style so it would had been worth to try to get some new manager from either Spain or Germany.
 

Bastian

Full Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2015
Messages
11,928
Quite possible it was zero.

According to Fergie's book he didn't start asking around until April 2013 when he says he spoke to Klopp and Ancelotti. But even then there's no solid quotes from any manager to say they were offered the job and/or turned it down.

But Ferguson had told Moyes not to renew with Everton way back in February even before, around or shortly after he'd told the club he was retiring. So do the maths on that one.

I've though for a long time that Moyes was Ferguson's 1st choice or maybe 2nd choice once Guardiola wasn't an option.
I guess the reality is, as has since been punctuated in history, that Fergie really thought Moyes could become a great United manager. Maybe sentimental on his part, and he may not have realised to what overwhelming level he was responsible for the success of the whole club through his force of will, to use Niall's phrase here. I'd be surprised if he did not sound out a few European calibers prior, after all this was a man who was a fan of Lippi, Guardiola and Mourinho, while Hitzfeld was linked when he first tried to retire.

It's still quite amazing that we not only went for him, but gave him that very long contract and proceeded to watch him replace all the coaching staff.
 

Kag

Full Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2013
Messages
16,476
Location
United Kingdom
Dont forget Gill, he was the CEO at the time and the issue was badly compounded by them both (Fergie and Gill) leaving at same time.
The club was rotting under Gill’s tenure long before he left and he is as culpable as any other individual for our post Ferguson semi-demise. I mean, leaving or not leaving, it was his job to plan for the succession and he made a royal mess of it and appeared to abdicate all form of responsibility.

‘Grinds my gears’ that he comes in for all of this praise and I’ve argued as such for years now. Ferguson ensured United won games, not Gill, and had he stayed on when Moyes came in then Gill would have exposed for the fraud he was. He’s lucky Woodward has carried the can since. I’m not absolving the latter either; he’s been his own idiot. But he’s had to reverse a lot of internal neglect that occurred between 09 and 13.
 

Amir

Full Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2000
Messages
22,868
Location
Rehovot, Israel
The club was rotting under Gill’s tenure long before he left and he is as culpable as any other individual for our post Ferguson semi-demise. I mean, leaving or not leaving, it was his job to plan for the succession and he made a royal mess of it and appeared to abdicate all form of responsibility.

‘Grinds my gears’ that he comes in for all of this praise and I’ve argued as such for years now. Ferguson ensured United won games, not Gill, and had he stayed on when Moyes came in then Gill would have exposed for the fraud he was. He’s lucky Woodward has carried the can since. I’m not absolving the latter either; he’s been his own idiot. But he’s had to reverse a lot of internal neglect that occurred between 09 and 13.
I agree that it's quite possible that Gill was never as good as Fergie made him look. But I'm not really sure how you can plan for such a retirement. You can look at managers in the world and have a list, but there's not much you can do with it until Fergie tells you he's actually about to go.
 

littlepeasoup

Full Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2013
Messages
4,452
Location
Give peas a chance.
I think with the team Fergie left, Jose would have won the league that following season. We would still have been shackled with a chief exec learning his trade, but I do think he would have squeezed another trophy out of that squad before a rebuild.

Definitely would have ended up the same way though. Couldn't see him hanging around.
 

stevoc

Full Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2011
Messages
11,973
Location
And Solskjær has won it!
I guess the reality is, as has since been punctuated in history, that Fergie really thought Moyes could become a great United manager. Maybe sentimental on his part, and he may not have realised to what overwhelming level he was responsible for the success of the whole club through his force of will, to use Niall's phrase here. I'd be surprised if he did not sound out a few European calibers prior, after all this was a man who was a fan of Lippi, Guardiola and Mourinho, while Hitzfeld was linked when he first tried to retire.
Well on the one hand we do know he asked Pep to keep him informed of his plans but never offered him the job so theres a good chance he had one eye on retirement and was maybe trying to line Guardiola up.

But on the other hand there was no greater champion for British managers to get chances at managing top English clubs than Ferguson. So once he was given the task of choosing his own successor, it was always likely he would go with a British manager.

It's still quite amazing that we not only went for him, but gave him that very long contract and proceeded to watch him replace all the coaching staff.
The 6 year deal was a PR stunt but Moyes was too daft to realize that.

The one big mistake the club did was giving Moyes all of Ferguson's power. As you say Ferguson ran the entire footballing side of United. He gained that power and trust over 3 decades of success as he earned it. But that power shouldn't have been handed over to the next manager, there should have been some stipulations to him taking over. If Ferguson thought it was in the best interests of the club for Moyes to keep the current coaching staff then that should have been made clear before he got the job. It was pretty widely reported that Ferguson told Moyes to keep the staff on but Moyes ignored this and any other advice he received from people at United.
 
Last edited:

manutddjw

Full Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2010
Messages
3,435
Location
Canada
I absolutely detest Mourinho but SAF left such an ageing team that it would have suited him the most.

Going from LVG to Mourinho was such a poor decision because it's like asking Barcelona to play like stoke.

Going from Mourinho being the first manager to win titles with an ageing experienced squad before trying to refresh after with Van Gaal would have been a much better plan or pattern.

The biggest problem though is that after SAF has such a controlling ability of the club - giving it to any manager would only lead them to controlling the club more than they should or even capable of - we saw this at how LVG and Mourinho made the club the way they desired rather than being controlled by a DOF.
See I disagree with this to a point. I think in Sir Alex’s mind he’d brought through Jones, Evans, Smalling, Cleverley and Welbeck, bought Kagawa and Zaha and if you read his book he was absolutely certain Powell was going to be a great player. In his mind I think he thought the rebuild was mostly complete. Unfortunately for him I don’t think he took into account those players weren’t that good and he was a big reason why we were winning with those players.
 

MrMarcello

In a well-ordered universe...
Joined
Dec 26, 2000
Messages
47,168
Location
On a pale blue dot in space
As posted above, I am surprised Queiroz wasn't in the consideration when you take into account SAF had great success with Q around, and helped instill new tactics and whatnot.

Jose was the obvious choice. I still think he'd have done well. He was big enough to handle the pressure, whereas Moyes crumbled.

I'd have taken Ancelotti as well. Still would now actually
Mourinho would have looked at that midfield and immediately signed two quality players, wouldn't have dillied around for weeks, and not one of them would have been Fellaini. That's an immediate better start from the gate. My guess is he'd have nabbed two of the following: Fabregas, Herrera (no f'ng around with faxes), Thiago, Strootman, perhaps a few others in the mix.
 
Last edited:

Falcow

Full Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2019
Messages
1,148
Location
Dublin
The club was rotting under Gill’s tenure long before he left and he is as culpable as any other individual for our post Ferguson semi-demise. I mean, leaving or not leaving, it was his job to plan for the succession and he made a royal mess of it and appeared to abdicate all form of responsibility.

‘Grinds my gears’ that he comes in for all of this praise and I’ve argued as such for years now. Ferguson ensured United won games, not Gill, and had he stayed on when Moyes came in then Gill would have exposed for the fraud he was. He’s lucky Woodward has carried the can since. I’m not absolving the latter either; he’s been his own idiot. But he’s had to reverse a lot of internal neglect that occurred between 09 and 13.
I 100% agree with you on Gill making a mess of the succession planning. It was astoundingly badly handled.

What is the internal neglect that you are referring to between 09 and 13? If its transfers then you can blame Fergie for replacing Ronaldo with Valencia and Owen. You can blame Fergie for not signing a midfielder and you can blame Fergie for not getting Hazard that time. I dont believe that Fergie ever went to Gill and was told there were no funds available for xyz players, not investing in players during that period is all down to Fergie in my view. I think he never asked for the players during those years.
 

horsechoker

Sailor vee, this is a right off.
Joined
Apr 16, 2015
Messages
20,320
Location
The stable
I remember reading that Sven signed a contract to take over united in 2002. I wonder how that would of turned out if sir Alex didn't change his mind.
Hard to say perhaps we would've won another title but that title winning squad was at an end and Arsenal were coming into their peak whilst Roman was around the corner buying Chelsea.

Thank god Fergie changed his mind.
 

groovyalbert

it's a mute point
Joined
Feb 14, 2013
Messages
4,892
Location
London
Not going to lie. The way SAF left still irks me.

Like, no qualms with him wanting to call it quits, but choosing to go so late in the season - knowing full well how few options were out there - and with Gill going the same summer. Disaster waiting to happen.

The more insane it looks, the more I'm willing to believe the Glazers were wanting to move both on/take full control in the running of the club.
 

Amir

Full Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2000
Messages
22,868
Location
Rehovot, Israel
The more insane it looks, the more I'm willing to believe the Glazers were wanting to move both on/take full control in the running of the club.
If it is insane and illogical, it's probably not true. I don't see how they would have thought they had anything to gain by getting rid of Ferguson.
 

Sylar

Full Member
Joined
May 15, 2007
Messages
27,123
As posted above, I am surprised Queiroz wasn't in the consideration when you take into account SAF had great success with Q around, and helped instill new tactics and whatnot
Wonder if his Madrid stint was taken into consideration for that.

I think Jose or Ancelotti were the best suited for taking over from Fergie as we were champions, had some older players and that would have suited them both (with the chance to add some players and quality to it). No way either signs Fellaini, I reckon we end up getting Thiago and / or Fabregas.

Given they were both a no though, and Moyes was further down the list, its hard to say. Maybe Phelan and Rene put in charge for a year?
 

groovyalbert

it's a mute point
Joined
Feb 14, 2013
Messages
4,892
Location
London
If it is insane and illogical, it's probably not true. I don't see how they would have thought they had anything to gain by getting rid of Ferguson.
I can remember stuff going around about how much they disliked his control over the day-to-day running of the club. Don't forget, we only tailed off on the pitch after Fergie left. Our commercial pull and success only went up. That's always been their focus.
 

stubie

Full Member
Joined
May 13, 2009
Messages
9,446
Location
UK
Looking back Capello would have been a good option for a few seasons

I think people forget how good of a manager he was
 

Foxbatt

Full Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2013
Messages
8,690
I remember reading that Sven signed a contract to take over united in 2002. I wonder how that would of turned out if sir Alex didn't change his mind.
That's one of the reasons why Fergie changed his mind.
 

Kag

Full Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2013
Messages
16,476
Location
United Kingdom
I 100% agree with you on Gill making a mess of the succession planning. It was astoundingly badly handled.

What is the internal neglect that you are referring to between 09 and 13? If its transfers then you can blame Fergie for replacing Ronaldo with Valencia and Owen. You can blame Fergie for not signing a midfielder and you can blame Fergie for not getting Hazard that time. I dont believe that Fergie ever went to Gill and was told there were no funds available for xyz players, not investing in players during that period is all down to Fergie in my view. I think he never asked for the players during those years.
My view is that Ferguson loved spending money. There was nothing prior to 2009 that suggested he didn’t. We broke transfer records when we could, and Ferguson and Martin Edwards would often squabble over the release of funds prior to the takeover.

Then 2009 happened. Our interest fees on the debt were phenomenal and I believe that it absolutely placed a strain upon the club’s ability to compete in the transfer market. Ferguson propped us up, as only he could. He was also at fault for neglecting the squad, though, I agree. The midfield situation was utter negligence and the signings we did make were largely poor. I argued at the time that he had mellowed to the point that he no longer had the conviction to replace the old guard and overplaying those players ensured we gave the title away in 2012 (the Wigan, Everton and City sequence still haunts me).

You could write a book about United’s decline, but anybody who thinks that it was just down to Moyes, or Woodward, is kidding themselves. Ferguson and Gill didn’t get it right at the end and the club had slipped behind. Then there is the Glazers, which is another topic altogether, but one that is closely connected to the issues referenced above.
 

Falcow

Full Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2019
Messages
1,148
Location
Dublin
My view is that Ferguson loved spending money. There was nothing prior to 2009 that suggested he didn’t. We broke transfer records when we could, and Ferguson and Martin Edwards would often squabble over the release of funds prior to the takeover.

Then 2009 happened. Our interest fees on the debt were phenomenal and I believe that it absolutely placed a strain upon the club’s ability to compete in the transfer market. Ferguson propped us up, as only he could. He was also at fault for neglecting the squad, though, I agree. The midfield situation was utter negligence and the signings we did make were largely poor. I argued at the time that he had mellowed to the point that he no longer had the conviction to replace the old guard and overplaying those players ensured we gave the title away in 2012 (the Wigan, Everton and City sequence still haunts me).

You could write a book about United’s decline, but anybody who thinks that it was just down to Moyes, or Woodward, is kidding themselves. Ferguson and Gill didn’t get it right at the end and the club had slipped behind. Then there is the Glazers, which is another topic altogether, but one that is closely connected to the issues referenced above.
That's a good point re the interest payments in 2009. It would be interesting to know what they were around those years to see if the periods of high interest rate/debt payments did correspond with limited transfer activity. Perhaps someone less lazy than I would oblige with a neat graph.

Agree also re Fergie mellowing. I think his team selections in the 09 and 11 CL finals point to that. Re the Wigan, everton and city sequence.....the everton one pissed me off way more than the other two. Losing to City was no disgrace, you always get the odd loss to a team like Wigan but that fcuking everton game drove me round the bend, it really did.

I've gone way off topic here!
 

Amir

Full Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2000
Messages
22,868
Location
Rehovot, Israel
I can remember stuff going around about how much they disliked his control over the day-to-day running of the club. Don't forget, we only tailed off on the pitch after Fergie left. Our commercial pull and success only went up. That's always been their focus.
At the same time, our spending also increased to try and build a good team.

Obviously you can say the Glazers wanted Fergie out as they were unable to forsee the effect it would have and the ramifications, but I think it's just a conspirasy theory. And eight years later, there's still nothing to base it on.
 

Amir

Full Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2000
Messages
22,868
Location
Rehovot, Israel
You could write a book about United’s decline, but anybody who thinks that it was just down to Moyes, or Woodward, is kidding themselves. Ferguson and Gill didn’t get it right at the end and the club had slipped behind. Then there is the Glazers, which is another topic altogether, but one that is closely connected to the issues referenced above.
It's true, but I think our managerial selections post Fergie would have meant we were always going to drop down a level or two.
 

Andy_Cole

Full Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2009
Messages
5,175
Location
Manchester
I remember at the time there was a lot of noise we only wanted a British Manager. We had never hired foreign in the past.

I think it would’ve been Giggs.
 

UnrelatedPsuedo

I pity the poor fool who stinks like I do!
Joined
Apr 15, 2015
Messages
6,828
Location
Blitztown
Not really on topic but I can’t believe he’s rehabilitated himself as a manager before we have as a club.

He’s going great at West Ham and I’m pleased for him. The United job came too soon and he was the wrong man but it’s genuinely pleasing to see a good manager find his feet again.
 

UnrelatedPsuedo

I pity the poor fool who stinks like I do!
Joined
Apr 15, 2015
Messages
6,828
Location
Blitztown
Ancelotti is simply never a bad hire. Not a guaranteed success, but he coaches existing players to add value, is safe with money, players love him, he doesn’t rock the boat and he doesn’t leave a trail of destruction.

No brainer.
 

Moriarty

Full Member
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
16,970
Location
Reichenbach Falls
Jose after Fergie for me. There was something in the press at the time about him being stunned that Moyes got the job, especially after he laid it on thick after the Real match. I'm still baffled as to why we picked Moyes, especially after Gill went to great lengths to tell us that the successor would be a man with a proven record in Europe. I don't think Jose would have thought twice about coming, even with a promise to Chelsea.