Wilcox was the one pushing for Delap - Sesko was reportedly down to Vivell.
Not signing a midfielder was still a mistake, as evidenced by the last few games.
Jason Wilcox - Director of Football
- Thread starter reddevilchennai
- Start date
-
In the latest edition of the United Hour Podcast, we interview Duncan Drasdo of MUST - covering ticket prices, new stadium, INEOS and what fans should be demanding from our club.
Also, due to technical issues we couldn't put a notice up for the previous episode which was about the game against Bournemouth and other stuff. If you'd like to listen to it, click here.
Not signing a midfielder was still a mistake, as evidenced by the last few games.
Ya but unlike under the previous setup you'd be quietly confident they at least know the profile of player we should be going for next summer instead of making singings that don't quite fit and overpaying all over the shop for the pleasure
The recruitment dept has really stepped it up. None of our signings values have tanked. Lammens Dorgu and Heaven at the time of writing look like long term bargains. We've badly missed sensible transfers
Weird comment. Clearly they objective in buying Sesko wasn't to buy a striker who was ready day one. There was always going to be an adaptation period, as there is with most players from abroad.
Beyond a 30 years old Ollie Watkins for circa 50mil, there was no striker available that would have been more likely to "contribute straight away". And just reming me how Watkins has been doing? One goal in 2026!
And lets remember, Amorim was using Sesko sparingly at the start of the season. Once he got going, he unfortunately got an injury for 5 or 6 games.
Me feels you waiting until a) Sesko didn't score and b) United lost.
We've bungled our way to third in the table? From last years 15th?
And I don't think Delap for £30mil would have been bad business. Not Sesko level clearly, but half the price and would have been a decent option for this year, allowing us to buy a striker in summer 2026 if needed.
It would have allowed us to pick up a midfielder. But we didn't make the CL and the rest is history.
We went the other way and strengthened the forward line and keeper and we are 3rd in the league. Far higher than anyone could have expected.
Midfield will be the priority this summer. Too many positions of need to fix everything in one window.
27 games, 2 goals. That's poor
That is nonsense to be fair. We didn't spend that amount of money on Sesko, when we desperately needed a striker, for him to not come in and take over half a season to find his feet.
There's always options when you're paying that sort of money. Watkins is on the same goals as Sesko, are you not making the argument for me? We've only started playing well now and could have done with a better goal scorer earlier in the season.
Carrick has used Sesko sparingly, he got cramp against Grimsby, he just wasn't ready for English football. He is up to speed now.
No, I've been consistent with my opinion on Sesko. Good long term signing. Not a good use of money if the goal was to get straight back into CL - which I thought was paramount. Also ironic to say I was waiting for this, that as you literally did the same.
Well yeah, we have sacked a manager mid season and luckily the league winners are absolutely honking this season and Villa have decided to implode after a record breaking run. This isn't a grand design, as you even a said, Amorims departure was luck and circumstance.
For sure. But he's been injured for 12 games this season and his game time has been sporadic.
Regardless of the price, it is fanciful to assume that a 22 year old striker is going to come into the Prem and hit the ground running in a team that were stuttering for for much of the first half of the season.
Like who?
So this vaunted Premier League proven striker in Watkins, with years of experience, in a much more settled team, has played 2,159 mins and returned 8 goals. Yet, Sesko, only signed days before our first game of the season, has played 1300 mins and scored 8. Safe to say who is doing better!
Give Sesko that extra 9 games worth of minutes and let's see where we are at!
You are right - Sesko is a good long term signing.
Who said the goal was to get straight back into the Champions League? Most would have been very happy with an EL place given we were 15th last season.
Have you not heard of "Project 2028" ? The clubs objective, however lofty it may seem, is to win the league in two seasons time. Meaning we still have three windows before that season starts. And if that goal slips, do we want an 33 year old Ollie Watkins, who this year looks to be on track for his worst return in the last four years. Sesko, on the other hand, should be coming into peak years.
However much you love Ollie Watkins, he isn't a title winning striker, certainly not at his age. He would have needed to be replaced in a year or two. And he wanted a long term deal, iirc.
Sesko has the potential to be a league winning striker. He likely would have been if Arsenal had gone for him over Gyokeres - a decision im sure Arteta regrets.
In case you haven't noticed, we are in third and bookies favorites to get into the CL, of those outside Arsenal and City. So if you want to taking about our "goal was to get straight back into CL" then we are on track.
And if we do get into the CL, Sesko will have played a big part with this winners v Everton and Palace, his two v Burnley and his late equalizer against West Ham. Crucial goals in games where we were not at our best.
Things had improved from the murtough days but they are far from perfect. After all these were the same idiots who went for the Portuguese 1 trick pony, while knowing fully well that we lack the funds to build the squad he needed to make his system work.
Delap would have made sense as a cover/competitor for the main striker, possibly after selling zirkzee. He was never good enough to lead our line, at least for the time being.
United committed another huge mistake when going for 2 no 10s despite already having Bruno at the club. We would have been better off with a CM and Mbuemo instead
I just want this guy out of Old Trafford. He offers nothing and the club doesn't need him. If he is so astute with clubs and players, then go and manage.
I find it hilarious that Michael Carrick needs to explain to Jason Wilcox anything about identifying, recruiting, coaching or managing players.
Wilcox is irrelevant. If he left the club today, ask yourself what difference would it make.
I find it hilarious that Michael Carrick needs to explain to Jason Wilcox anything about identifying, recruiting, coaching or managing players.
Wilcox is irrelevant. If he left the club today, ask yourself what difference would it make.
Go back to sleep Jeff
They weren't buying for one system. They wanted players who were seen to be flexible across systems.
I never suggested otherwise. My point is that we went for a manager who can only use 1 system. Since our team was built for a different system then the only way to make it work would have been to bring a huge influx of players in to fit that system. We simply lacked the funds and the time to do so.
It was more when you said they went for 2 10s. But yeah even if they did go for 2 forwards it was part of their priority list.
We have bodies in midfield but we shipped out a lot of wingers with little coverage in that area so I don't see it as a major issue.
If let's say we've bought Mbuemo then we would have had Bruno and Mbuemo as no 10s with Mount, Zirkzee and Amad as cover. That ain't so shabby considering that we're not playing in Europe. Things are very different in CM. Casemiro is at his last legs, Ugarte is quite frankly shit, Mainoo is half decent but lack physicality/mobility and then we're left with kids. CM had been our Achilles heel for years and we chose to ignore it for yet another year
That's not the argument though. Wilcox's job is to recruit to give us the best chance of performing in the short and long term. Selling Hojlund and then spending more money to get in Sesko could be good long term, but everyone knew it was a risk for this season as he was young, coming off the back of an average season and coming from the Bundesliga that can be hard to adapt from.
You don't need to get into specific players, because it's nuanced. On the whole though, this seasons soring charts on 8+ include Thiago, DCL, Welbeck and Kroupi. The idea it was a crap shoot between Sesko and Watkins is a false dichotomy.
They're doing exactly the same at the moment, you're just extrapolating. 2 of our best results this season he was not involved in at all and then got 10 mins. Their conversion rates at are 16% and 14% respectively. I like Sesko, this discussion is about Wilcox's decisions in planning for the season and just because he's started to play well now, doesn't ignore the fact he had little impact on the first half of our season.
Because of project 2028, it simply had to be that we were back in the CL and the money needed for the club. I wouldn't have been happy with an EL place, because the plan was we took the pain of 15th to implement a new style of play that everyone agreed was the path forward and planning the summer accordingly.
I said it at the time as well, Ollie watkins is a far safer bet to get CL and is also a good experienced professional that could add value in his later years as we bring younger strikers through. Sesko should be a longer term striker, but your risking your current season because of it.
That isn't a problem though, he is easily a top 4 club striker and we would always need depth and experience.
Maybe, I mean he's in good form at the moment, but I'm not going to disregard some of the performances I have seen from him before. I don't think he particularly does, Gyokeres is doing fine and their stats are extremely similar.
Of course I have, but it's not down to any planning or a proactive decision by Wilcox and we still have no idea what direction the club is going. It is very much back to your point of luck and circumstance.
Yeah, great contributions, but you can say the same conversely about his big chances misses against Leeds, Villa and Wolves that evens it all out. In the round I'd expect a bigger impact from spending £65-75m of our budget. It's not really about Sesko, it's about use of funds and I will always come back to the planning for a season aspect.
Its still not a miss though, signings are made for more than just one season and immediate impact.
There has to be a balance when making transfer decisions. If we signed a striker who made immediate impact but was crap next season onwards or in 2 seasons, then he'd be seen as a miss too.
The point of these DOFs is to ensure long term continuity and planning. It is also hard to have an impact when the head coach is shite, hence why many players were labelled shite (due to their lack of positive impact).
Again, it was in the context of what I think we needed to acheive this season and also what they all briefed about getting "premier league proven" signings. It's fine to deviate from that, but just be honest about the risks to your plan.
Of course, but again, this is a false dichotomy again. There's still no guarentee Sesko will get any better than he's shown too, that's just the hope.
Of course, but they cannot just ignore what impact that has on the current season. That only works when you have time and money to burn, which we did not after finishing 15th. I don't think I personally labelled players as shite, but I think our squad was quite obvioulsy unbalanced and the summer didn't really do anything to address that. :
We were lacking a proper striker, because our last striker was young an inexperienced and couldn't handle the pressure - so we went and bought another young and inexperienced striker.
Cunha was perfect planning and execution, all wrapped up ready for the tour.
Mbuemo I wish we'd got him done sooner, but he made the tour, but no big deal.
I'd have liked the keeper problem to have been dealt with quicker, because we basically went out of the cup and lost that game to Arsenal because of it - that had a massive impact on our season, starting the season on a downer and also probably sealed Amorims fate.
We then just sacked off addressing the midfield for a season because we spent so much on the above.
There's no absolving Amorim from anything with this critique - he had to go and we're moving on, it's just discussing Wilcox's role in it and also what he needs to do better this season. For me that's:
Set a clear vision for the team going forward in terms of either style of play or the role of the manager/head coach
Be more decisive and proactive in transfers - we've taken too long on transfers, flicked between targets and they've just been good individual players rather than building a team that aligns with the first point.
Mount can't stay fit for even half a season and Zirkzee is sub obtimal. We at least had 4 CM options but no true forwards and no CF.
I'm not against the idea of having a midfielder and one less signing in the forward areas but I don't think it mattered that we targeted forwards and GK first. We were never fixing it all in one window anyway.
It's really difficult to show conviction on transfers and not be bent over a barrel. We had no champions league nor Europa football and needed to be as careful as we could with spend which meant longer negotiations.
Also I think the Sesko move wasn't as punty as Hojlund. Vivell knew him a lot better and we had the security of two established forwards with 30 goals between them coming into the first XI, so the move was a lot more educated than it was for Hojlund.
We knew cunha and Mbeumo were key targets since the start of the window. In fact it surfaced after that Semenyo was the first target and it was too expensive so we turned to Mbuemo straight away. We got these guys in. It's tough to show a lot more conviction and proactiveness in the first window. This all comes across very nit picky.
Things could have been handled way better.
First of all let's start from Amorim. He should have never been signed in the first place. His system forced so many players to play out of position and players tend to struggle when playing out of position. That's basic common sense. Add to that, the fact that he had a knack of chipping 10m out of every unwanted player of ours whenever he opened his gob and the picture of him being the worst United manager in the past half a century gets clearer by the day. Carrick had done nothing revolutionary. He's simply playing to the team's strengths which, as said before, is basic common sense.
Which leads us to the squad. Rome wasn't built in a day and we wouldn't have been serious title contenders no matter what. However we had a key advantage that others did not ie we were set to play 1 game per week. That's a huge advantage as it gives us time to drill the squad and give adequate rest. It also meant that we could get away with a smaller squad as well. We'd probably do reasonably well as long as we've got 15 good players. That's exactly were we struggled
A-It was evident from the end of last season that both Onana and Bayindir were not good enough. Thus Lammens should have been signed way earlier then we did
B- We wasted time on Liam Delap when we knew very well that wasn't United XI quality and that he wanted a CL side. Can you imagine were we would have been with a striker who scored just 2 goals in 27 matches? Maguire scored as many goals in less games.
C- CM is weak especially in a 2 CM system. Bruno is, by nature, an AMC. He'll work hard but he simply lack the discipline not to chase the ball irrespective were it is. Casemiro lack legs. He can still produce dashes of brilliance but he needs to be surrounded by the right personnel. Ugarte makes Robbie Savage look like Diego Armando Maradona. I've never seen someone whose so frightened with the ball at his feet. Mainoo has his strengths but he certainly has loads of weaknesses as well. He ain't mobile enough or physical enough, at least not yet. That CM needed immediate help, loads of it. A top DM would have added mileage to Casemiro providing us with a solid back 2. He would have provided legs to make a Mainoo-DM work and he would have kept the donkey away from the squad as humanely possible. Bruno and Mbuemo as our first team no 10s would have provided great quality. Would we have quality strength in depth though? Probably not (and its endemic in almost every position at United). However as said before, we would be playing 1 game a week. The likes of Zirkzee (who is far more comfortable outside the box then in it), Mount, Amad and Mainoo could provide cover when those two need some rest.
Let's address these points :
First, you talk about punting on Amorim and seem to ignore Wilcox was the one who had reservations about Amorim, was unconvinced by the system fit and not even director of football at the time. Berrada was the one who led a snap charge for Amorim and flew out to hire him the same evening after Ten Hag was sacked. If you want to complain about the Amorim hire it's a stain you should put in the Berrada thread, not this one.
But to the actual points :
A - I agree with this. And there was an internal battle between Emi Martinez from Amorim and Lammens from others. We ultimately got the right man, albeit at the end of the window rather than the start. Sure we could have improved that - maybe we were busy getting 3 other players through the door but I think that's nit picking if its seen as a major shortcoming.
B - You are being disingenuous about Delap, who has been unfortunate with injuries in a broadly blunt and uncreative Chelsea side. You either purposely or accidentally didn't mention he is also a player who netted 12 PL goals for a relegated side the year prior. At 21 years and £30m he was representing a value target where we'd have considerable budget leftover to pair with another player (could be a midfielder, could be another position). The Delap pursuit is not remotely as bad as you make out to be.
C - you're talking about the CM point again. Yes, it was weak but so was our attack and GK - where we shipped Antony, Garnacho, Rashford and Hojlund (with Sancho also exiled) and didn't recruit replacements outside of Zirkzee. We needed to fix those areas, the goalkeeper and yes midfield too. But you don't fix all positions together and youl have a VERY hard time convincing anyone that we prioritised wrongly when we sit surpassing 50 goals scored already and in 3rd place.
There was an expectation that the system would evolve with layers that wouldn't just be a rigid system that you spoke of. And if it wouldn't, we'd change manager (which we did).
It is, but we were told they planned out all the scenarios. You have a player and a price in mind, you have alternatives and you have contingency. If I just take Semenyo, the alternative because of price ended up being just as expensive and we ended up buckling on the price for Mbeumo anyway, so just felt like we could have been more decisive on either.
It is though, just because Vivell knew him doesn't make it more likely he'd adapt to the league. That was the point of signing league proven players. Which had it's own risks as well as they were new signings, but the pivot from £30m Delap to £65m Sesko is just a bit all over the place, to me.
Cunha was great, I think we probably had it wrapped up before last season had even finished. Semenyo was deemed to expensive and then we just ended up paying the same for Mbuemo, so it's not nit picky - it's precisely what I'm talking about in being decisive. Also these were all just replacing the outgoings forwards, it wasn't proactive in terms finding profiles of players for the midfield, we kicked that to next season. Lammens was actually a proactive signing, because he was always earmarked to be someone to push to be our no 1., not actually coming into be our no 1. off the bat. I think the idea we couldn't have managed the money better to do that in areas like midfield, isn't nit picky, everyone has seen this problem for years.
We moved from Semenyo to Mbeumo and ended up paying similar for Mbeumo anyway - I agree this is a bit frustrating but you have to remember there's not a lot of wiggle room we have when entering these deals, clubs know we are a desperate team looking to get back into Europe. Semenyo was my dream target and I felt I was the only one here preferring him to Mbeumo.
On Sesko, I think having someone who knows the striker very well means the due diligence on how he'd fare is stronger, which in turn means we are more sure that hel do well for us in this league. Moreover him coming with 2 players who had 30PL goals between them last season helps take the risk as its not a dependency on Sesko to hit the ground running.
I see Sesko currently as a big win from Wilcox and the recruitment team. And Lammens too. For the first time we've seen the new structure overrule a manager twice for alternatives of their own and it worked out. Previously we either didn't have alternatives or we'd buckle to short term signings to suit the manager.
Agree, bringing Amorim in, and making a tough squad building task even harder was a big mistake.
I think he would have presented good value at 30mil. Maybe not the long term solution, but spending less on a striker would have given us room to invest in other areas. Water under the bridge though because we lost the EL final, he wanted CL football and we went a different route. More than happy that we have Sesko.
Disagree there given the number of forwards that left last summer - Antony, Rashford, Hojlund, Ganacho, Sancho. 5 went out, 3 came in.
Which midfielders left last summer? None. Tough to justify bringing in a midfielder into a team that only plays two under Amorim. Especially in light of one of those two being Bruno.
Amorim clearly saw Bruno as one of those midfield two, thus meaning two 10's were bought.
As long as this summer midfield is top priority, which im sure it will be with Casemiro leaving, then I think we are in a good possition. Maybe after two full years we can move Ugarte on? Those two were never being sold last summer.
Too many fans on The Caf get too hung up about which order players are brought in, but forget that last summer we had about 7 urgent positions of need - we could never have fixed them all in one summer.
I totally agree, but it's just a bit strange to be like, he's not worth that, Mbuemo's cheaper and then decide Mbuemo is actually worth more than what you were expecting. Funnily enough I was against him for the fee and then when I watched him against Liverpool, realised I made a big mistake!
I think it means long term you can be more sure, but I still maintain if you're spending such a big part of your budget, they need to be hitting the ground running. You're trading today for tomorrow, which is fine when you're in a good place, but we weren't.
I think it's to be proven yet. He's looking like the player we thought we were buying now. Lammens for sure, Coton deserves big credit for recommending him and I don' t discount it was brave in the end go for a keeper straight from the Belgian league, but I'd like us to trust the wider recruitment team a bit more on some of these left field signings. Hopefully this signing gives them a bit more confidence to do so.
Sure, but if we're talking about Watkins as the alternative then he didn't fare any better, scoring even fewer goals across the opening 13 league fixtures than Sesko did, even without having moved clubs.
The idea of Watkins as a safe bet in even the short term was heavily exaggerated in the summer. Because there was always the risk that the drop-off we've seen from him would occur, as most strikers are past their peak at 29/30, and always the risk that being "PL proven" would count for as little as it has in many failed transfers of the past. Especially as he was never going to be an elite RVP-esque PL signing to begin with, having had just one season where he scored more than 15 non-penalty goals.
So rather than framing opting for Sesko over Watkins as taking a major risk towards this season's prospects, you might consider it's also possible the club simply had a better assessment of their relative risk in even the short term. I think most people would have said Watkins was more likely to have a better season, but the outcome we've seen so far was never particularly implausible.
Last edited:
Which he did. The four signings made in the summer were balanced in terms of players ready to go now, Cunha and Mbeuno, and two who were longer term investments - Lammens and Sesko. The fact that all four have contributed in a big way should be celebrated.
Are you trying to say keeping Hojlund was the better option that Sesko?
Very easy to say Thiago now, but were you out there advocating for him last summer on the back of him being injured for almost the whole of 24/25?
DCL or Welbeck were not happened due to age/injury record.
Kroupi? You have an issue with Sesko not being ready to go, but fine with us buying players from mid table clubs in France with no international or European cup football experience?
There are not doing "exactly the same at the moment". Watkins has returned one goal in 2026.
The club made the right decision as there were able to balance out near and long term thinking. If Sesko and Watkins were stocks, everyone would be buying Sesko.
There isn't anyone but you making the Watkins over Sesko argument anymore. That ship has sailed.
Obviously, it will be better to be in the CL that EL, but the disparity this far in the competition is only about £20mil. That is comparing what Spurs and Villa have made in the respective competitions so far.
The biggest requirement was getting into Europe as the club is passing up on over £5mil in get revenue for each home game we don't play.
Obviously not though because we are third in the league and favorites to get into the CL behind Arsenal and City.
If we had signed Watkins and we were third, and he had scored 8, you would have been delighted. Yet somehow not for Sesko?
The club don't want to buy 30 year old strikers for £50 mil, with no sell on fees, looking for their final big contract of their career. You just need to accept that fact. Radcliffe said the Casemiro deal was a bad one, so was never going to do the same for Watkins.
If Arsenal had gone for Watkins, that would have been a very different story, as they are in "win now" mode, and were looking for the final pieces to win a league and CL this season. We are way off, so need to think about short, medium and long terms - Wilcox did that.
We got the signings right. The luck game from Amorim asking to be fired.
Youre beating a dead horse. We look to finally have a striker who is capable to leading the line and contributing for years to come.
Bruno was shit last season when playing as a wide #10, arguably the worst form he's shown since joining the club. It was a relatively small sample size so maybe with more time he would have started playing better, but based on last season he was comfortably better at CM than he was at wide #10. Indeed halfway through the season I remember it being widely agreed that it had been his worst season since joining (playing at both a normal #10 under ETH and wide #10 under Amorim), whereas by the end of the season that had changed to him being arguably our player of the season again after spending most of the second half of the season at CM.
Our midfield last season was far, far better than our attack. Yes the midfield certainly had it's weaknesses which were badly exposed in some games, but our attack was THE reason we finished the season in 15th. We could have had Keane and Scholes and we still would have finished mid-table due to the attack being atrocious. That's why this season, despite the midfield not changing, we had climbed from 15th up to 6th at the time Amorim had been fired (and now up to 3rd) simply by rebuilding our attack and Lammens in goal.
Obviously it would have been great to improve the midfield as well. But two attackers were clearly a higher priority, and it was then fairly even between a third attacker and a midfielder. Although I should note that the 'attacker' could also have been an attacking RWB with us then playing Amad at #10, as it was pretty much 50/50 as to which position Amad should play. If we'd gone that route we might have been able to save some money (since wingbacks are normally cheaper than attackers) and that 20m or so extra might have made the difference between signing a midfielder or not.
The 'Wilcox didn't want Amorim' theory bring some serious bad memories from my part. It reminds of the time when Murtough was being hailed as a genius not just by the CAF but by the mainstream media. Back then it was all about Murtough dragging the club to modernity by hiring an army of data analysts as opposed to SAF's men who were still writing things on papyrus and Murtough being 'the fixer', a term given to him by the Athletic. Turned out that it was all BS of course and when Murtough started losing control over the club hence the influence he once had, all knives came out. I remember an article by a very reputable outlet which was nothing short of a hit piece. Even I, who absolutely disliked the man professionally, I thought it went too far. But there again as they say. "The King is dead, long live the king"
What I've learnt about United is this.
A- those who sit at the top of United's football pyramid hold alot of power. United sell well media wise and people can literally reach celebrity status if they get 2-3 stories about United first. We've seen that with Romano, Ornstein and co. So being friend with someone so up in the hierarchy can change people's lives and is a friendship anyone would want to preserve
B- Facts are worth 10 times more than propaganda. Amorim came in, Ashworth was sacked and Wilcox was given a promotion. Do you think that Berrada would have approved that if Wilcox wasn't in favor of his plan?
C- If facts are scarce check what was the mood before shite hits fan. Amorim lost his job during a meeting where he was told that Semenyo will sign for City and we weren't going to sign anyone in January. Prior to that any news surrounding Wilcox and Amorim were great. That doesn't strike me of someone who didn't believe that appointing this manager was a mistake.
For the record I think that Wilcox is better then Murtough.
A- Murtough overpaid on Amad (ok it turned up well but back then we spent good money for a youngster with just 4 Serie A games under his belt), he spent ridiculous money on Hojlund and he was set to triple down on Ederson yet another player from Atalanta. Guess were he went after getting sacked with United? Yep Atalanta. Coincidence? Anyway I don't have any concerns about Wilcox on thar regards whatsoever.
B- He seems to be able to strike the right balance between listening to others (ex Sesko wasn't his guy yet we still signed him and let's not kid ourselves, he was a risk) and putting his foot down when needed. That's important in football especially around certain people. I wish Wilcox was here during most of ETH's era.
C- Most of our signings were a success and we didn't overpaid (salaries and fees)
Having said that there are things that concern me which I highlighted them before (ex Amorim's appointment, taking ages to sign Lammens, obsessing on Delap etc). I think it boils down to lack of experience as DOF. On one hand the guy seem to be quite a quick learner which is a huge plus. On the other hand United is really a horrible place for on the job learning.
Which is completely fair, I'm not tying the opinion to Watkins, that was just my opinion at the time when it was the question being asked.
I think it's relative to a big money signing from the Bundesliga, there's probably way more examples of that not working out - espeically for us. I never saw him as being elite, but more as a dependable goalscorer in the league - which he is.
I think opting for Sesko with the money that was spent also hampered our ability to invest elswhere. £65m+ is a big chunk of the budget and a big leap from what we were planning to spend on Delap. Like I've said, Sesko is the better long-term option, so if we get CL football, it will be worth it. The whole thread is more about the person planning for the season and onward. Sesko now coming good, doesn't really deserve a pat on the back in my eyes. This is what I would expect to have happened earlier.
As I've said multiple times interacting with you on this, it's balanced in terms of a squad. We're turning to Ugarte and fecking Malacia to try and win a match, it's just not balanced at all.Which he did. The four signings made in the summer were balanced in terms of players ready to go now, Cunha and Mbeuno, and two who were longer term investments - Lammens and Sesko. The fact that all four have contributed in a big way should be celebrated.
Are you trying to say keeping Hojlund was the better option that Sesko?
No, it all comes down to opportunity cost. Sesko is obviously better than Hojlund. For the investment we laid out on Sesko, his contributions haven't outweighed the opportunity cost to invest in other areas of the squad.
As I said, I'm not specifically saying these players, I'm telling you these players you would have never guess would be on the same number of goals or more than Sesko come the start of the season. They cost a fraction of the price, it's not impossible to find someone for less that £65m, that could countribute similarly for far less.
They're on the same amount of goals for the season.
If they were exactly the same price, of course.
I'm not making the argument for Watkins now, I'm talking about the decision at the time.
We lose sponsorship money from adidas for example (think about 10m) not making the CL, we lose out on targets we want and £20m is a lot. We put Sesko on the credit card for example, so we actually can't really afford to be loosing out on this extra revenue.
We're only 3 points from 6th, it's not like we're running away with it and currently on a downward trend when it comes to performances.
I'm not delighted with either of their seasons, but I'm not claiming one is better than the other. I'm saying they're the same in terms of output this season. I'm not bothered about Watkins at this point as he didn't sign for us, it was merely a hypothetical at the time and I gave my reasoning. Sesko hasn't really proven to be the obvious better alternative for the money he cost.
The sell on fee argument is irrelevant, it's about their contribution. If we wanted to sell Sesko, it will be because he doesn't make it and we won't be gettin anywhere close to what we paid. That's fine but if we actually signed a few more Casemiros in terms of contribution, we'd be in a better spot.
We are in a win now mode to get back in the CL, we were not happy to just get EL, not a chance that was an acceptable target for this season. We will see come the end of the season, I am worried watching our midfield every game. Proof will be in the pudding.
Again, I like the individual players. I don't like how we recruited for the squad and that all contributed to the chaos of Amorim and the issues are now popping up again post the initial Carrick period.
I hope that to be the case, this has only been a potential in the last month or so.
In my opinion the biggest mistake made was bringing in Amorim. His obsession with the 3-5-2 system meant that a big chunk of United's players would be played out of position. That's on football management, a decision that costed Ashworth's job and which Wilcox (among others including Berrada) should shoulder responsibility off. We insisted on keeping the guy despite taking United to a ridiculous 15th place. I am not a big fan of this squad but we're way better then 15th place. Again that's on the football management team.
Amorim influenced United's decision in going for two no 10s despite already having Bruno here. He also pushed Garnacho out of the door and would have done the same with Mainoo. We can discuss whether it was the right thing to do or not but its really out of the argument's scope. Quite frankly I was in the sell the player camp (Garnacho not Mainoo) however I fount the method used to be highly immature. The 'I hope you find a new club' comment from Amorim's side chucked 10m out of his value and was a sackable offense at any serious club. Anyway back to the decision of going for two no 10s, I could see why the club wanted to do it (Amorim used two no 10s) however I disagreed with it. CM was painfully weak and Bruno is better of as a no 10 then tucked as an 8. One could argue that he wasn't the best wide no10 in football but managers must acknowledge that tactics needs to be tweaked to accommodate the players they got. If Amorim caused a hissy fit in the summer rather then when he did the better, as seen with Carrick we're better off without him.
If you ask me we would have been better off with this team
---------------------Lammens-----------
Mazraoui----De Ligt---Yoro---------Dorgu
-------------------Casemiro---top DM----------------
Amad-------------------Bruno-------------------Mbuemo/Cunha
-------------------------Sesko---------------------------
In my opinion, priority comes before order of players. Adding a good value striker to act as cover/competitor was a nice to have and will probably be given a second look this summer. However can you imagine if we ended with Delap (2 goals so far) leading our line week in week out?
CM was a top priority last summer and we completely mismanaged it in my opinion.
I actually think our attack was so bad that 15th place wasn't 'that' much of an underperformance. Better than 15th, yes. But not way better, due to having a relegation-level attack at the top of the field dragging the squad as a whole down. Let's not forget, we were already in 14th when we sacked ETH so it's not like everything just went to shit when we bought in Amorim.
I really do think people underestimate just how much we were handicapped by our attack last season. It's not just the lack of goals from them, but the fact that they were all (bar Amad and occasionally Zirkzee on a good day) utterly useless in terms of building play or even maintaining possession. Putting the ball anywhere even near Hojlund was basically an automatic turnover as he had no idea how to win the ball under any kind of pressure. Garnacho would just turn and run at the nearest defender, inevitably losing the ball as he had one of the lowest (if not the lowest) successful take-on stats in the entire league. Zirkzee was obviously poor for most of the season, then unfortunately got injured just as he looked to be getting into form. Mount was injured most of the season.
What we saw under both ETH and Amorim was that we were regularly the better team throughout most of the field, but we were completely incapable of actually channelling that into threatening the goal. Especially towards the end of the season it was truly embarrassing just how little respect opposition teams were giving our attack. They were more than happy to throw players forward and go man-for-man at the back, having complete confidence that even bang-average defenders could handle the likes of Hojlund and Garnacho with ease. Then at times when we were under the pump we had no outlet whatsoever for the same reason. We'd win the ball and it'd just keep coming straight back at us due to our attackers complete inability to hold onto the ball. Everything we did was like we were in a boxing match with one hand tied behind our back.
To some extent I agree with you. If we knew we'd be playing 4231 then the midfielder probably would have moved ahead of the third attacker (although it would have left us with no real threat off the bench or cover for injuries). And while I do have some sympathy for Amorim as our pathetic attack would have completely handicapped any manager who joined last season, he ultimately had too many faults to be successful here. So in hindsight we would have been better off with someone else and building with a 4231 or 433 in mind.
The INEOS regime seemed to decide that completely rebuilding the attack last summer, then (presumably) completely rebuilding the midfield this summer would leave us in a better position long term than a combination each season. Maybe they'll be proven right, or maybe not. It should be noted that the contract situation of our players and the ability to sell for profit probably played a part, with it being much easier to find buyers for the likes of Garnacho, Hojlund, Antony and Rashford which opened up space in the squad. Then this summer we know Casemiro is leaving and Ugarte should be easier to sell without a PSR hit. Meanwhile quite a few attackers were available to buy last summer, and the three most obvious midfielders we're linked to were always more likely to move this summer.
Delap has been injured plus not starting ahead of Joao Pedro. But yeah, would have been a big flop if he replicated the same form and availability for us.
It just wasn't though. Amorim was playing a two man midfield, with Bruno and Casemiro as his starters and Mainoo and Ugarte.
Casemiro didn't want to leave. Bruno was convinced to stay. Ugarte wasn't going to be sold after one season and I didn't seem the club had the balls to sell Mainoo.
Fine to question the quality of those four player, but from a cover perspective, two senior players for each possition, in a season without Europe, is the best we can expect.
So why would we buy more midfielders this season? Especially after Amorim put four forwards in the bomb squad?
This discussion is so stupid because we all knew at the end of last season the squad needed 7 or 8 new, good quality signings to make the leap to competing for top 4. We have managed to do it with only 4 new players, so we're ahead of schedule in my opinion, with midfielders coming this summer.
The same debate would be happening in reverse had we not addressed the forward line and instead concentrated on midfield and full backs.
Yes, Amorim did shape transfer policy, as your would expect any manager to do, so any discussion needs to be had through the lens of building for his 3421 and the context of him forcing out four of his forwards and wanting Bruno to stay and play in the pivot.
There is little point in talking about 4231.
The summer signings were balanced in terms of a couple who were ready to hit the ground running and a couple who were more medium to short term prospects. And luckily, Sesko and Lemmans are performing and contributing. far sooner than many had expected.
The have, and they will. Because the objective with Sesko and other signings is not to go and win the league now. Sesko was clearly bought with future development in mind.
Three of the four had Premier League experience. And we're not buying crocked 28 year olds like DCL.
Thiago has obviously done well, but he is the exception, not the rule. If it was that easy to predict future performance, why didn't every top club in Europe buy him?
Sounds like you are making the argument for him now.
Correct re Adidas money, but I think we would still be just find financially if we only make EL at the end of the season.
Very few right minded fans felt we had a good chance of CL football at the start of this season.
The may be on the The good think about Sesko is that
Sell on fee is very relevant. It is our insurance policy should the player fail. We managed to at least re-coup over half of the money from the Hojlund purchase. Buy 28 or 30 year olds that fail, and were stuck with them.
Addressed this before, but we were 5/1 with bookies to get back into the CL at the start of the season. That is not win not mode.
Europa League was a sensible target from 15th.
And if we get back into the CL, that doesn't mean we're ready to win the CL, or the Prem. There will be a big adjustment to playing those extra games. That is why we are not wasting out money on short term fixes like Watkins.
Amorim made his own problems. If he had got a midfielder, he would have complained about not getting something else. Carrick has shown that the team is far more capable that what we saw under Amorim.
I think we only had enough money left to sign 1 striker and wanted Watkins in this year and saving Sesko for next summer.
Newcastle’s interest forced our hand and we went for Sesko instead.
Newcastle’s interest forced our hand and we went for Sesko instead.
Did we turn to them as match winners? I'd say we did that with Amad and Zirkzee, so we do have actual options to try and win a match, though not that great.
Had we, for instance, not signed one of Cunha, Mbuemo or Sesko but went for a midfielder we would not have more potential match winners. We would have had one less.