Is the 'United Way' killing us?

[UpWithRivers]

We've had jobs for the boys, old schoolers behind the scenes, yes even Sir Alex.

Moyes was brought in to be a Sir Alex clone. Scottish and everything. That's no way to choose a successor. I don't think Mourinho was his usual self and adapted to a slightly different less pragmatic form of football. Van Gal seemed to do it his way. Ole was chosen because of his links with the club and the football he played. Now even Ten Haag is talking the United way and transitional which is completely different to his style of play. Or so we believed.

Player wise we have a history of youth. Which is beautiful. But that means we have to adapt to those players. We could never get rid of Rashford for example. So we adapt everyone around him. Garnacho the same. I'm not saying they are the problem abilty wise I'm saying that a new manager is never given the choice to get rid if they don't fit their style.

I think Liverpool went through the same problems until Klopp transformed them totally. So how do we change and adapt if we continually stick to the past?

 

[Roboc7]

It’s the owners killing us and their inability and indifference to run a football club. Despite consistent failure the only reason Woodward still isn’t here is because he wanted to leave and he was replaced by his two right hand men who are continuing his legacy.

Until the owners are gone, new leadership brought in and huge changes made the ‘United Way’ will just continue being repeat of last ten years.

The United Way was SAF, when he went it went with him.

 

[m1tch]

I'm not sure I recognise United's past, or attempts to copy it identically, in today's side.

Under Ole you could see it but so what? He had us playing infinitely better football than the dross under LVG, at least until it all started falling apart.

I do find this "jobs for the boys" talk to be utter drivel though, as if forever employees couldn't possibly be their own people, with their own talents, oh and maybe some useful insight into working at the club during its most successful period.

I'm sure there's people here that would kick off about hiring SAF as manager again post the world finding a cure to ageing ... because he'd definitely try to do things the United way.

 

[stefan92]

Now even Ten Haag is talking the United way and transitional which is completely different to his style of play. Or so we believed.

Have to disagree on this part. He was always more flexible than just coaching a possession system - Ajax was more or less the first time he did that, and even that was stronger in transition than a classic Ajax team.

 

[elmo]

The owners accept mediocrity and until we get rid of them, nothing will change.

Under Sir Alex, players were desperate to get on the pitch to show what they were capable of and they still gave their all even when played out of position. Now, our fans are giving excuses for players showing no effort because they’re playing out of position or they don’t know how to play their role.

 

[Son]

I'm not sure I recognise United's past, or attempts to copy it identically, in today's side.

Under Ole you could see it but so what? He had us playing infinitely better football than the dross under LVG, at least until it all started falling apart.

I do find this "jobs for the boys" talk to be utter drivel though, as if forever employees couldn't possibly be their own people, with their own talents, oh and maybe some useful insight into working at the club during its most successful period.

I'm sure there's people here that would kick off about hiring SAF as manager again post the world finding a cure to ageing ... because he'd definitely try to do things the United way.

Barcelona showed us the future first hand in those finals. They were levels above any side United have ever put on the field though in our history.

Bilbao also embarrassed us near the end of Sir Alex’s time which was the wake up call that was ignored.

Football changed drastically as a sport the past 12 years. We never evolved with it.

The biggest problem is the lack of elite coaching and older training facilities. (Apart from the couple of years we had Rui Faria alongside Mou.)

He did good work with our players. You could tell we were making progress for 18 months. Won some trophies and the best league campaign post Fergie.

The coaching dropped drastically once he left and hasn’t yet recovered.

We need best in class everything, Steve McClaren as much as I respect him isn’t it.

Arteta at Arsenal you can tell is building something special for example. Young players are moving there for a sporting reason now.

 

[DomesticTadpole]

The owners accept mediocrity and until we get rid of them, nothing will change.

Under Sir Alex, players were desperate to get on the pitch to show what they were capable of and they still gave their all even when played out of position. Now, our fans are giving excuses for players showing no effort because they’re playing out of position or they don’t know how to play their role.

Think quality of squad has not helped there. The regular first team know their replacements on the bench are nowhere near their level. There is no threat to their places. That needs to change. That if you are injured you might not get back in the team for a while. That you have to keep your performances at a high level at all times. For we are bringing the odd player through not impressed with our academy system, it seems to be more about keeping that record of always having an academy player on the bench than producing top class footballers. Bringing up United of old is difficult because you were shopping in a different market then. Sir Matt's time the furtherest you went is Ireland. When the Class of '92 came through they were all English/British lads. Now academies have a lot of kids from abroad, if you do that you have to make sure they are the right ones.

 

[acnumber9]

Of course it isn’t.

 

[Zehner]

I definitely think the quote by Ten Hag about becoming the best transition team there is is a bit suspicious. You didn't sign him because of his acconplishmts as a transitional coach but his time at Ajax where he was highly possession and control oriented.

One way or another, this club has signed so many players and coaches I rate and they suddenly underperformed expectations so heavily that I believe it has to be something cultural. Sancho and Antony so far looked nothing like their former selves and now Ten Hag is seemingly leaving the path that saw him ascend to one of the most promising young managers in Europe. All because people are living in the past and can't accept the sport has changed.

 

[DomesticTadpole]

Barcelona showed us the future first hand in those finals. They were levels above any side United have ever put on the field though in our history.

Bilbao also embarrassed us near the end of Sir Alex’s time which was the wake up call that was ignored.

Football changed drastically as a sport the past 12 years. We never evolved with it.

The biggest problem is the lack of elite coaching and older training facilities. (Apart from the couple of years we had Rui Faria alongside Mou.)

He did good work with our players. You could tell we were making progress for 18 months. Won some trophies and the best league campaign post Fergie.

The coaching dropped drastically once he left and hasn’t yet recovered.

We need best in class everything, Steve McClaren as much as I respect him isn’t it.

Arteta at Arsenal you can tell is building something special for example. Young players are moving there for a sporting reason now.

Think the new Bournemouth manager was captain of that team.

 

[mandroid]

This 'united way' thing is all bullshit, and just a way of self aggrandizing adopted by Man Utd fans when the club was doing good on field. Now thats no more the case, they have started questioning it. Nothing surprising though, happens with all humans.

 

[Red_toad]

So many threads on what ails the club. It starts at the top, look at the owners, quit the crap threads about anything else, it’s not the players, nor the managers, nor appointed executives. It’s all on the owners, how many managers or players etc are needed to change things?
We could be here in another 15 years still shifting the blame around and it’d still be pointless. Until they go nothing will change. So enjoy supporting the team as best you can until that day…

 

[stefan92]

So many threads on what ails the club.

It's not a club, it is an entertainment business. I think it is time for english fans to accept this truth about their league.

It is excellent entertainment, but it has sold its soul.

 

[Moriarty]

It's not a club, it is an entertainment business. I think it is time for english fans to accept this truth about their league.

It is excellent entertainment, but it has sold its soul.

Absolutely. Couldn't agree more.

 

[Rightnr]

It's rank incompetence that's killing us really.

 

[Plant0x84]

The ‘United way’ - isnt a specific formation or style of play, it’s winning in an entertaining way. Youth, Courage, Success.
We aren’t winning and I’m not entertained. We are relying on great players past their prime and are linked to others in the same category.
We have no courage to trust the youth, we don’t buy young, we have very limited success.
Id say the answer is no and we could do with a bit more ‘United way’ in our team. I’m not sure we’ll see it until we get a change of owner.

 

[fps]

The United way under Fergie involved him placing absolute trust in the players he had and making them take responsibility for their position as players for Man Utd. He made mediocre players winners and leaders, and great players all-timers.
That is not currently happening at Man Utd.

 

[Lee565]

It's the owners, I'm watching Brentford and Brighton playing far more exciting attacking football despite both side not having any stand out striker but they are so well run clubs who identify how they want their football side to evolve and are proactive with implementing a plan b, where as united have been nothing but reactive under glazers and have allowed the standards of the footballing club to drop in every area except for their precious commercial side.

 

[AndySmith1990]

It all starts with the owners. They're incompetent and that's bred a culture of incompetence throughout the club. If there's a "United way" then this certainly ain't it

 

[united_99]

We have rarely seen the United way since Fergie retired. United Way is brave, attacking, entertaining football, giving academy and young players a chance and platform to improve, trying out different things, working hard, fighting spirit, winning mentality, creating chances and scoring for fun, being such a well oiled machine that we could even win most matches with average players at times or by playing badly.
Where has all this been over the last decade? Which United Way? It’s more that players and managers misuse this by trying to justify their own underwhelming performances and results.

 

[predator]

I definitely think the quote by Ten Hag about becoming the best transition team there is is a bit suspicious. You didn't sign him because of his acconplishmts as a transitional coach but his time at Ajax where he was highly possession and control oriented.

One way or another, this club has signed so many players and coaches I rate and they suddenly underperformed expectations so heavily that I believe it has to be something cultural. Sancho and Antony so far looked nothing like their former selves and now Ten Hag is seemingly leaving the path that saw him ascend to one of the most promising young managers in Europe. All because people are living in the past and can't accept the sport has changed.

That shit hits hard. It's telling when someone who isn't a united supporter even notices this. I respect your honesty.

However, when you actually think about it, why can't a progressive manager succeed at United with their own philosophy and tactics? Who at the club is insisting that we keep the 'United DNA'?



Fergie is obviously a massive figure behind the scenes but there's no chance he is interfering with ETHs decisions. If any of those cnuts on the board be it the glazers, murtough, Arnold or even woodward at one point etc actually had the gall to pretend they know the 'United way' and made it a prerequisite for ETH implement, then that would be outrageous.

The 'United way' is bollocks imo. I've never heard any old United fans say it.

 

[ShinjiNinja26]

It’s a silly buzzword that needs to feck off.

 

[Blood Mage]

I think one of the biggest killers for us has been a very simple and easy to correct problem: our constant neglect of the midfield and reluctance to bolster that area with real quality. We always seem to prioritise workhorse midfielders over press resistant technicians.

 

[Zed is not dead]

We've had jobs for the boys, old schoolers behind the scenes, yes even Sir Alex.

Moyes was brought in to be a Sir Alex clone. Scottish and everything. That's no way to choose a successor. I don't think Mourinho was his usual self and adapted to a slightly different less pragmatic form of football. Van Gal seemed to do it his way. Ole was chosen because of his links with the club and the football he played. Now even Ten Haag is talking the United way and transitional which is completely different to his style of play. Or so we believed.

Player wise we have a history of youth. Which is beautiful. But that means we have to adapt to those players. We could never get rid of Rashford for example. So we adapt everyone around him. Garnacho the same. I'm not saying they are the problem abilty wise I'm saying that a new manager is never given the choice to get rid if they don't fit their style.

I think Liverpool went through the same problems until Klopp transformed them totally. So how do we change and adapt if we continually stick to the past?

The Athletic just issued an interview of Rene Meulensteen and he said that the issue with Moyes was actually that he wanted to do everything by himself and didn’t listen much to the advice of the staff that worked with Ferguson and that was still at the club.
That’s part of what made the transition ineffective, because well nobody was there to pass on knowledge and working methods.
There was also a big drop in standards and demands on the footballing side because it was Fergie and McGill to an extent that kept the commercial side of the club at bay. Once he left, it was « Disneyland for adults ».

If anything, I think that there not enough members of the former staff that worked under SAF or players that worked under SAF to maintain the high standards and the winning mentality, also to act as a footballing counterweight to the commercial side of the club.

 

[ForeverRed1]

The glazers are killing us. We need mass investment across the board and it’s not happening.

look at the buzz at Newcastle under new ownership. The structure they have now is like nothing they had under Mike Ashley. Of course money comes into it but they have bought wisely rather than just thrown money about. You just know the club is going to go from strength to strength and that’s down to the owners. Nothing else. Fast foward 10 years and they will be totally different on all levels.

we have a massive grey cloud hanging over us and until that’s lifted it’s always going to be like this, the last 10 years tells us that.

it doesn’t matter who the manager is. How big the club is, the history or who has the biggest fanbase, it all literally means nothing. The club is out dated. Crazy how far we have been let to slip in every aspect.

 

[Zehner]

That shit hits hard. It's telling when someone who isn't a united supporter even notices this. I respect your honesty.

However, when you actually think about it, why can't a progressive manager succeed at United with their own philosophy and tactics? Who at the club is insisting that we keep the 'United DNA'?



Fergie is obviously a massive figure behind the scenes but there's no chance he is interfering with ETHs decisions. If any of those cnuts on the board be it the glazers, murtough, Arnold or even woodward at one point etc actually had the gall to pretend they know the 'United way' and made it a prerequisite for ETH implement, then that would be outrageous.

The 'United way' is bollocks imo. I've never heard any old United fans say it.

I guess the thinking is that a certain way of playing needs to be accepted by the fans and general club environment. If the stakeholders aren't convinced of the general direction, the support will quickly dissolve during a dry spell of results.

My impression is for instance the fanc in here clearly prefer a certain type of player. You often read stuff like 'player A lacks the pace and strength to make it here' or 'there is no urgency or bravery in player B' and 'he's such a nothing player'. That kind of thinking is omnipresent, especially when the results aren't there. And it is supported by all the United experts saying stuff like this over the media. Players who aren't direct, physical, passionate or output oriented have a difficult time.

I think the decision makers are caught between a rock and a hard place due to this. They want to modernize the club but also respect where it is coming from is my theory. But maybe that's not possible and drastic changes would be required. The fans will get on board eventually.

 

[Red the Bear]

There's no United way, at least in terms of stylistic football that we used to play during our epochs of success.
At best you could generalize it to a vague form of attacking football but then again does that tell you anything?

I doubt most clubs have it either, probably only ajax (post cryuff) and Barcelona (again cryuff influenced) have anything resembling a coherent style of playe, maybe juve if you stretch the definition and include defensive cohesion.

But aside from that can any of you speak of a Madrid way or bayern way? Just a meaningless buzzword.

 

[Spoony]

The United Way just means exciting attacking football to me.

 

[Devil You Know]

The ultimate aim was to win, but Sir Alex wanted to win in a certain style. I can remember him bringing me into his office when he’d made me first-team coach. He had a flipchart and said, ‘listen, Ren - I don’t need to talk to you about how to run your sessions, you know all that. But I’d like to reiterate what I want to see.'

Possession is important, but always possession with a purpose. When we attack I want to see pace, power, penetration and unpredictability.

These are the four things you must instil in the team in every single training session.

https://www.tntsports.co.uk/footbal...s-at-manchester-united_sto6280695/story.shtml

The United Way is:

0. possession but with purpose
1. pace
2. power
3. penetration
4. unpredictability

I don't think we're getting it right now.

 

[Chip]

SAF leaving and an era coming to an end killed us. Hiring Moyes as his replacement - followed by a number of questionable/unlucky hires - obviously accelerated our decline - along with the appointment of Woodward and our ownership. But you can't help but think how things would've been if Pep or Klopp replaced SAF instead of Moyes.

We were spoiled for years which makes it hard to accept - even now, 10 years later. It wouldn't surprise me if we are looking at something like Liverpool's 30 year league drought.

Best thing to do is probably accepting that we aren't going to be as succesful in any foreseeable future and hope that we get lucky with a manager of the quality of Klopp or Pep some time in the future.

 

[Irwin99]

From Moyes to Ole to even Jose allegedly penning a 'love letter' to United saying his style wasn't antithetical to United's traditions, it is a bit of a concern. That's why i wasn't too thrilled by EtH's comments but maybe they're being blown out of all proportion.

I look at our closest rivals and Klopp had feck all to do with Liverpool's history and Pep had feck all to do with City's history (what history?!) and yet both came into their clubs and did things their way without seeming to feel pressured to live up to something.

 

[Carl]

We've had jobs for the boys, old schoolers behind the scenes, yes even Sir Alex.

Moyes was brought in to be a Sir Alex clone. Scottish and everything. That's no way to choose a successor. I don't think Mourinho was his usual self and adapted to a slightly different less pragmatic form of football. Van Gal seemed to do it his way. Ole was chosen because of his links with the club and the football he played. Now even Ten Haag is talking the United way and transitional which is completely different to his style of play. Or so we believed.

Player wise we have a history of youth. Which is beautiful. But that means we have to adapt to those players. We could never get rid of Rashford for example. So we adapt everyone around him. Garnacho the same. I'm not saying they are the problem abilty wise I'm saying that a new manager is never given the choice to get rid if they don't fit their style.

I think Liverpool went through the same problems until Klopp transformed them totally. So how do we change and adapt if we continually stick to the past?

You're overcomplicating it mate. It's the Glazer ownership. Always has been.

We have to pray that EtH works out for us, because if it doesn't then we will again have a new manager with a squad of players he doesn't want.

Its an actual joke that in this day and age we still don't have a director of football, enabling at least some continuity even if the manager changes.

The Glazers are parasitic cretins that give zero fecks about the club, so long as its continuing to make them money. And that ultimately shows on the pitch.

 

[Big Ben Foster]

"Jobs for the boys" isn't necessarily a problem, as long as the "boys" are all competent and a right fit for the overall structure. Bayern, Barca, and Real have all had former players in key positions within their hierarchy, and it hasn't held them back.

The key issue for me is the structure. To this day - regardless of how our org charts are drawn out on paper - the manager still functions as de facto DOF and chief scout.

Until that changes and we get the proper specialists in charge of scouting, recruitment, analytics, and football operations (with actual authority, not just a fancy title), and allow the manager to focus on coaching, nothing will change.

 

[UpWithRivers]

"Jobs for the boys" isn't necessarily a problem, as long as the "boys" are all competent and a right fit for the overall structure. Bayern, Barca, and Real have all had former players in key positions within their hierarchy, and it hasn't held them back.

The key issue for me is the structure. To this day - regardless of how our org charts are drawn out on paper - the manager still functions as de facto DOF and chief scout.

Until that changes and we get the proper specialists in charge of scouting, recruitment, analytics, and football operations (with actual authority, not just a fancy title), and allow the manager to focus on coaching, nothing will change.

Which is the United Way. Its another example of - its how we have always done it and we wont change

 

[Luffy]

OP, it is expected of many institutions to have a tradition of rewarding faithful servants. What you wanted for the club you support is light years away from the way things are done at United. Not only that, but I bet that many who think like you had to give Moyes the benefit of the doubt, because else you would not be able to engage with your fellow supporters. When Moyes was appointed I was dismayed, and the Scottish connection did not escape me.

I think the best thing that can happen to the club, and also the most horrifying, is a return to 70s doldrums, minus the relegation of course. I am happy supporting the team. I don't need title wins to stay on as a fan. I don't care if old adversaries outdistance us. It is too late to lament about the past. Finally I would like to hope that you were not too much surprised by the responses coming your way, apart from mine of course. See you.

 

[IrishRedDevil]

Times change. We are stuck in the past.

Trying to play some form of inverted player, while still being counter attacking / long ball team.

 

[Dominos]

It's been a problem over the last 10 years, but not necessarily our biggest issue right now.

- The push for a British manager because it's "United tradition" was a bad one as it resulted in Moyes
- Appointing Ole because "he knows the club"
- Appointing a load of ex-United players as coaches and staff simply because they "know the club".
- Trying to groom Giggs as LVG successor at one point despite never having managed
- Trying to build a "British core" in the early days under Ole which resulted in £130m on Maguire and AWB.
- I can't say they have a massive influence on how we actually operate, but it can't help the likes of Scholes and Neville in the media pushing the "United way" every chance they get. The other month they were discussing how United shouldn't play out from the back because United don't do that, and our fans won't accept it Neville wanted Simeone at one point not long ago because he sometimes plays 442


Is it our problem right now? No I don't think so, we have a foreign manager and he's doing whatever he wants. Our problem is our transfer policy is just horrendous with countless wrong signings and giving the manager too much power. Frankly I don't think anyone involved in transfers has a clue what they're doing. We've got a squad full of players who are both below par physically and technically poor, which is why we're getting performances like the opening 2 games.

 

[Rapsinfour]

Player wise we have a history of youth. Which is beautiful. But that means we have to adapt to those players. We could never get rid of Rashford for example. So we adapt everyone around him. Garnacho the same. I'm not saying they are the problem abilty wise I'm saying that a new manager is never given the choice to get rid if they don't fit their style.

I think to say that a new manager is never given the choice to get rid of United young players is a bit too much. LVG got rid of Welbeck, Evans barely a month in. Ole got rid of Lingard. It is a bit laughable to say we are adapting around Rashford when he has literally played all three spots on the front (LW, RW, ST) when we all know that he is best on left and wants to play there. One thing that managers can't complain about is that United doesn't give them control; we can argue a lot of our problems come from giving the managers control like we gave SAF ( this lead to Fellaini under Moyes, Matic under Jose, etc...).

If I were to say if there is a United way, it is the British way. Fast, athletic football up and down the pitch. I don't think you can say any of the managers that got fired got fired because they tried playing this way. If anything, it was literally the opposite on the pitch ( and the losing would have been much more bearable).

But our biggest problem right now is that people who make footballing decisions at the boardroom level aren't really good at their jobs.

 

[UpWithRivers]

Is it our problem right now? No I don't think so, we have a foreign manager and he's doing whatever he wants. Our problem is our transfer policy is just horrendous with countless wrong signings and giving the manager too much power. Frankly I don't think anyone involved in transfers has a clue what they're doing. We've got a squad full of players who are both below par physically and technically poor, which is why we're getting performances like the opening 2 games.

Can he though? Thats the question. His speech about the United Way and transition football says otherwise. Sure he can sell Elanga but never Rashford. Never Garnacho. Never not keep pulling from the academy. Can he ask for a DOF? And on and on.

 

[UpWithRivers]

I think to say that a new manager is never given the choice to get rid of United young players is a bit too much. LVG got rid of Welbeck, Evans barely a month in. Ole got rid of Lingard. It is a bit laughable to say we are adapting around Rashford when he has literally played all three spots on the front (LW, RW, ST) when we all know that he is best on left and wants to play there. One thing that managers can't complain about is that United doesn't give them control; we can argue a lot of our problems come from giving the managers control like we gave SAF ( this lead to Fellaini under Moyes, Matic under Jose, etc...).

If I were to say if there is a United way, it is the British way. Fast, athletic football up and down the pitch. I don't think you can say any of the managers that got fired got fired because they tried playing this way. If anything, it was literally the opposite on the pitch ( and the losing would have been much more bearable).

But our biggest problem right now is that people who make footballing decisions at the boardroom level aren't really good at their jobs.

Sure he can sell Elanga but never a Rashford. He has to have at least one youth player at the core of the team. Imagine he decided to play 0 youth players? Impossible. So he builds around the best one - Rashford. Sure he has been played out of position but our whole style of play is to hit Rashford quickly. Thats all we do.