Jose Mourinho- Next destination?

[Swaters16]

If it was up to me, he'd have been here a few weeks now already. The respect he has for United and Sir Alex is palpable, not only am I convinced he would 'behave' in the correct manner here, I think he relishes the challenge which as of yet - barring an LVG masterpiece finish to the season - is still open: who will be the man to get us back into the major honours after SAF?

Jose knows he can do it and he probably knew all along that the only place he could actually build a legacy, knowing Barcelona are off limits and that Chelsea are owned by Roman, is United. No bigger feck you to Roman than winning more titles with United than Chelsea.

I think you're ridiculously naive. Mourihno isn't going to suddenly become a whole new person because he gets a new job. He's not going to abandon what made him successful. Jose at United would be the same Jose he was elsewhere. Unpleasant, volatile, short sighted, defensive, etc

 

[Gol123]

It might well end up as civil war here. I just hope that not everyone - including me - reacts in a kneejerk way to everything he does and says.

Bring him in because he will give you trophies. Just don't expect any long term and romantic stories with him in charge. He will go in three years after a fall out with the club and you will need to start a new with another guy.

 

[Adzzz]

I think you're ridiculously naive. Mourihno isn't going to suddenly become a whole new person because he gets a new job. He's not going to abandon what made him successful. Jose at United would be the same Jose he was elsewhere. Unpleasant, volatile, short sighted, defensive, etc

And in fairness you're being ridiculously assumptive - I never said a whole new person - just that his 'behaviour' no matter how superficial will reflect the job or this weird perception United fans have of how our manager should behave. Unpleasant, volatile and even defensive could equally describe someone else who was at the club a couple of years ago, depending on your point of view.

 

[Big Ben Foster]

Bring him in because he will give you trophies. Just don't expect any long term and romantic stories with him in charge. He will go in three years after a fall out with the club and you will need to start a new with another guy.

That's how football works these days. We need to ditch this notion that we should be looking for a manager who will stick with us for twenty years. That mentality is what led us to appoint Moyes.

 

[Invictus]

Whatever you personal opinions of the man, given his record - José in the summer would be ace, especially at a time when Guardiola will be joining City. Suggestions in Giggs' favor are ridiculous to put it mildly - what has he actually accomplished as a coach compared with someone who is arguably the third best post-2000s club manager, and won the league just last season? Yes, Chelsea were atrocious this season, but their problems spread far and wide beyond the solitary figure of Mourinho. He'll be chomping on the bit to set the record straight, and his mentor Van Gaal can gracefully resign via 'mutual agreement'. The club could prolong Louis' reign, but major improvements should not be expected in that case, because the third season will inevitably be a repeat of this year - one step forward, two steps back, then sideways with not a whole lot of tangible progress - rinse and repeat.

Plus, if an agreement has been reached behind closed doors, Mourinho will have 4-5 months to access the squad from afar, and then he can coordinate summer deals with Woodward - quick, decisive movement in the transfer market is José's forte, and United needs someone with a clear vision from a sporting sense. As things stand, appointing him will be the most rational/ risk averse (atleast in the short term from a competitive sense) thing we can do at a time when another managerial mis-step could set us back even further. Maybe he's not a long term appointment, or even the most 'principled' one; but at the very least (given his prior success) he'll have us competing for the title for a couple of seasons. Then, if he has a meltdown by the third year, we'll have a better estimation of how good Pochettino, Tuchel, or even Giggs really are by 2018/ 2019, or maybe we could approach someone like a Conte who might be close to leaving the Italy job.

Mourinho might not be the perfect candidate according for a huge chunk of United supporters, but the perfect candidate doesn't really exist outside the realm of fantasy. In the real world, he could prove to be the right man at just the right time - and sometimes timing in everything in professional sport. Don't discount the ability of the biggest party pooper in football, particularly when he has a good record vs Pep. And just one additional detail, it's not like we're flush with viable alternatives to scoff at José - outside of Pep and maybe Ancelotti, there's no better manager for an elite level club than Mourinho, warts and all. Appointing him would atleast guarantee some form of success (we haven't won anything of great significance since 2013).

 

[Gol123]

That's how football works these days. We need to ditch this notion that we should be looking for a manager who will stick with us for twenty years. That mentality is what led us to appoint Moyes.

You're right. The only thing is, Mourinho won't give you good football. He used to but since his Madrid stint he has become ridiculously dull and defensive. Guardiola would be better IMO.

 

[Xaviesta]

That's how football works these days. We need to ditch this notion that we should be looking for a manager who will stick with us for twenty years. That mentality is what led us to appoint Moyes.

Agreed. The best teams in the world atm (Bayern and Barcelona) have a frequent turnover of managers and it has served them fine. I always found the whole stability breeding success stuff spouted by Sir Bobby Charlton with regards to Moyes appointment a bit sanctimonious.

 

[Invictus]

You're right. The only thing is, Mourinho won't give you good football. He used to but since his Madrid stint he has become ridiculously dull and defensive. Guardiola would be better IMO.

No one is arguing against the point that Pep would be a better option. But as things stand, he's extremely likely (if not nailed on) to join City. That ship might have already sailed, and the longer United contemplate or delay the decision, the more clouded the picture will become in terms of alternatives to Guardiola/ successor to Van Gaal. There's only so many times the club can piss in José's face before he shuts shop entirely. Then you're left scrambling for bargain bin choices (which is what happened when Fergie retired), or heaven forbid Ryan Giggs (great player, total legend - and also, completely unproven as a manager for a top club).

 

[Stack]

Whatever you personal opinions of the man, given his record - José in the summer would be ace, especially at a time when Guardiola will be joining City. Suggestions in Giggs' favor are ridiculous to put it mildly - what has he actually accomplished as a coach compared with someone who is arguably the third best post-2000s club manager, and won the league just last season? Yes, Chelsea were atrocious this season, but their problems spread far and wide beyond the solitary figure of Mourinho. He'll be chomping on the bit to set the record straight, and his mentor Van Gaal can gracefully resign via 'mutual agreement'. The club could prolong Louis' reign, but major improvements should not be expected in that case, because the third season will inevitably be a repeat of this year - one step forward, two steps back, then sideways with not a whole lot of tangible progress - rinse and repeat.

Plus, if an agreement has been reached behind closed doors, Mourinho will have 4-5 months to access the squad from afar, and then he can coordinate summer deals with Woodward - quick, decisive movement in the transfer market is José's forte, and United needs someone with a clear vision from a sporting sense. As things stand, appointing him will be the most rational/ risk averse (atleast in the short term from a competitive sense) thing we can do at a time when another managerial mis-step could set us back even further. Maybe he's not a long term appointment, or even the most 'principled' one; but at the very least (given his prior success) he'll have us competing for the title for a couple of seasons. Then, if he has a meltdown by the third year, we'll have a better estimation of how good Pochettino, Tuchel, or even Giggs really are by 2018/ 2019, or maybe we could approach someone like a Conte who might be close to leaving the Italy job.

Mourinho might not be the perfect candidate according for a huge chunk of United supporters, but the perfect candidate doesn't really exist outside the realm of fantasy. In the real world, he could prove to be the right man at just the right time - and sometimes timing in everything in professional sport. Don't discount the ability of the biggest party pooper in football, particularly when he has a good record vs Pep. And just one additional detail, it's not like we're flush with viable alternatives to scoff at José - outside of Pep and maybe Ancelotti, there's no better manager for an elite level club than Mourinho, warts and all. Appointing him would atleast guarantee some form of success (we haven't won anything of great significance since 2013).

The bit in everything you have written which is missing is the style of football that his teams play which is simply dull. I find it quite telling that those who are touting Mourinho all without fail, ignore or choose not to mention the boring football his teams play. There are a decent number of us fans who dont just follow Utd because of trophies. There seems to be only one criteria and its the possibility of trophies. I became a Utd fan because of a couple of key players and because of how exciting we were to watch, that was back in the 60's, not because we always won trophies.
Some of us place a high value on how Utd play and Mourinho for me is an awful option. I will absolutely hate it if he ends up here.

 

[Invictus]

The bit in everything you have written which is missing is the style of football that his teams play which is simply dull. I find it quite telling that those who are touting Mourinho all without fail, ignore or choose not to mention the boring football his teams play. There are a decent number of us fans who dont just follow Utd because of trophies. There seems to be only one criteria and its the possibility of trophies. I became a Utd fan because of a couple of key players and because of how exciting we were to watch, that was back in the 60's, not because we always won trophies.
Some of us place a high value on how Utd play and Mourinho for me is an awful option. I will absolutely hate it if he ends up here.

The style of football argument being dull with Mourinho is a bit blown out of proportion. Sure, he doesn't always profess champagne football that captures your imagination, but neither did Fergie (he too had his peaks and troughs if we plot the style of football on a graph through the length of his tenure), and a José managed team has never finished outside of the Top 3 in terms of goals scored over a full league season:

Porto Year 1: 2nd, 73 goals in 34 games at 2.15 gpg.
Porto Year 2: 1st, 63 goals in 34 games at 1.85 gpg.

Chelsea Year 1: 2nd, 72 goals in 38 games at 1.90 gpg.
Chelsea Year 2: Joint 1st, 72 goals in 38 games at 1.90 gpg.

Internazionale Year 1: Joint 1st, 70 goals in 38 games at 1.84 gpg.
Internazionale Year 2: 1st, 75 goals in 24 games at 1.97 gpg.

Real Madrid Year 1: 1st, 102 goals in 38 games at 2.68 gpg.
Real Madrid Year 2: 1st, 121 goals in 38 games at 3.18 gpg.
Real Madrid Year 3: 2nd, 103 goals in 24 games at 2.7 gpg.

Chelsea Year 1: 3rd, 71 goals in 38 games at 1.87 gpg.
Chelsea Year 2: 2nd, 73 goals in 38 games at 1.92 gpg.

So essentially, in 11 full league seasons, his teams finished 1st four times, joint 1st twice, 2nd 4 times, and 3rd just once. By all means, that's a perfectly good record. At Real Madrid where he had the tools to play breathtaking football, they set the current La Liga record for goals in a season at 121; and through that sort of 3 year window - the team scored at an average of 109.7 goals per season (a mark that was higher than Barcelona), and were among the most exciting teams in Europe. He will park the bus from time to time in the bigger matches (particularly when there's a relative deficit in terms of personnel), his teams won't always seek to score goals when the match is settled, but that's a pragmatic decision (particularly in Europe). Being overly attacking while leaving yourselves vulnerable at the back is not a smart decision anyway, and sometimes you have to be structured, precise and economical (like the traditional view of the German model) rather than expansive because the occasion calls for it.

Even aside from the goal output, one might argue that the teams are built to function almost robotically, but football (as it pertains to style) comes in all kinds of hues, and no particular way of playing it is inherently superior or more moralistic than the other, as opposed to what the preachy lot claim. Some find his catenaccio styled attention to detail and surgical precision engrossing, and there's nothing intrinsically wrong with enjoying that. Which is something that needs to be realized. What's subjectively dull for some, might be subjectively appreciated by others - and by all means, it's not as dull as is portrayed (it's just that the biggest games stick longer in public memory and Mourinho prefers function over form in those matches because he prioritizes results and big games can often prove to be title deciders).

 

[Sigma]

The style of football argument being dull with Mourinho is a bit blown out of proportion. Sure, he doesn't always profess champagne football that captures your imagination, but neither did Fergie (he too had his peaks and troughs if we plot the style of football on a graph through the length of his tenure), and a José managed team has never finished outside of the Top 3 in terms of goals scored over a full league season:

Porto Year 1: 2nd, 73 goals in 34 games at 2.15 gpg.
Porto Year 2: 1st, 63 goals in 34 games at 1.85 gpg.

Chelsea Year 1: 2nd, 72 goals in 38 games at 1.90 gpg.
Chelsea Year 2: Joint 1st, 72 goals in 38 games at 1.90 gpg.

Internazionale Year 1: Joint 1st, 70 goals in 38 games at 1.84 gpg.
Internazionale Year 2: 1st, 75 goals in 24 games at 1.97 gpg.

Real Madrid Year 1: 1st, 102 goals in 38 games at 2.68 gpg.
Real Madrid Year 2: 1st, 121 goals in 38 games at 3.18 gpg.
Real Madrid Year 3: 2nd, 103 goals in 24 games at 2.7 gpg.

Chelsea Year 1: 3rd, 71 goals in 38 games at 1.87 gpg.
Chelsea Year 2: 2nd, 73 goals in 38 games at 1.92 gpg.

So essentially, in 11 full league seasons, his teams finished 1st four times, joint 1st twice, 2nd 4 times, and 3rd just once. By all means, that's a perfectly good record. At Real Madrid where he had the tools to play breathtaking football, they set the current La Liga record for goals in a season at 121; and through that sort of 3 year window - the team scored at an average of 109.7 goals per season (a mark that was higher than Barcelona), and were among the most exciting teams in Europe. He will park the bus from time to time in the bigger matches (particularly when there's a relative deficit in terms of personnel), his teams won't always seek to score goals when the match is settled, but that's a pragmatic decision (particularly in Europe). Being overly attacking while leaving yourselves vulnerable at the back is not a smart decision anyway, and sometimes you have to be structured, precise and economical (like the traditional view of the German model) rather than expansive because the occasion calls for it.

Even aside from the goal output, one might argue that the teams are built to function almost robotically, but football (as it pertains to style) comes in all kinds of hues, and no particular way of playing it is inherently superior or more moralistic than the other, as opposed to what the preachy lot claim. Some find his catenaccio styled attention to detail and surgical precision engrossing, and there's nothing intrinsically wrong with enjoying that. Which is something that needs to be realized. What's subjectively dull for some, might be subjectively appreciated by others - and by all means, it's not as dull as is portrayed (it's just that the biggest games stick longer in public memory and Mourinho prefers function over form in those matches because he prioritizes results and big game can often prove to be title deciders).

Well said, completely agree. It's a myth the Mourinho is a defensive manager.

 

[Wumminator]

Agreed. Sentiment has little place in modern football.

Then there's no point. That's ALL that football is.

 

[Cal?]

I have no idea how a United fan could prefer Mourinho to Giggs.

I have no idea how a United fan could prefer someone who has no managerial experience to someone who's won a lot in the last decade.

 

[Gol123]

No one is arguing against the point that Pep would be a better option. But as things stand, he's extremely likely (if not nailed on) to join City. That ship might have already sailed, and the longer United contemplate or delay the decision, the more clouded the picture will become in terms of alternatives to Guardiola/ successor to Van Gaal. There's only so many times the club can piss in José's face before he shuts shop entirely. Then you're left scrambling for bargain bin choices (which is what happened when Fergie retired), or heaven forbid Ryan Giggs (great player, total legend - and also, completely unproven as a manager for a top club).

I think if United went 100% in for Pep and showed him their desire to bring him in, he will never choose City over you. Problem is there isn't enough from United hinting at that and seems to be a split over who to bring in. Mourinho coming in will undo any plans United have of transitioning to a more European, possession based team.

 

[Sarni]

I have no idea how a United fan could prefer someone who has no managerial experience to someone who's won a lot in the last decade.

Come on, it's Twigg, he will do whatever it takes to prove he's a super fan. He once considered Phil Jones a solution to our midfield problems.

 

[Sarni]

Would be one of the worst things that have happened to Manchester united in the current era.

That'd be Dave Moyes which you were absolutely delighted with.

 

[Lowkey]

This club needs someone of Mourinho's stature to come in. We need to be winning leagues/cups or we will start being as deluded as Liverpool soon enough

 

[Wumminator]

That'd be Dave Moyes which you were absolutely delighted with.

Left us in a better state than Mourinho did Chelsea.

 

[Randall Flagg]

I have no idea how a United fan could prefer someone who has no managerial experience to someone who's won a lot in the last decade.

I would take Giggs over Jose

Then again, I would prefer Moyes to be given a 2nd shot if I had to decide between him and Jose too

Im with @Twigginater on this one. Although I wouldnt stop supporting the team etc.... it will not be pleasant for me at all to have a manager I have real hatred for in charge of the club

I hope these rumours are false

 

[Wumminator]

I have no idea how a United fan could prefer someone who has no managerial experience to someone who's won a lot in the last decade.

How do managers get started?

 

[Cooksen]

I have no idea how a United fan could prefer Mourinho to Giggs.

Its simple Jose gets trophies.

 

[Wumminator]

Its simple Jose gets trophies.

He fecks up clubs.

Detestable man.

Surely Man United means more than that.

 

[Gol123]

How do managers get started?

Working their way up from the bottom.

 

[Cooksen]

He fecks up clubs.

Detestable man.

Surely Man United means more than that.

We already fecked ourselves by getting Moyes.

Jose is one of the few managers who can get this club great again and United is the one job where Jose can leave a legacy.

The club and jose needs redemption, its a perfect story imo.

 

[Wumminator]

Working their way up from the bottom.

Like Guardiola?

 

[Wumminator]

We already fecked ourselves by getting Moyes.

Jose is one of the few managers who can get this club great again and United is the one job where Jose can leave a legacy.

The club and jose needs redemption, its a perfect story imo.

There's plenty of people who can make this club great. LVG has more chance than Jose

 

[endless_wheelies]

Then there's no point. That's ALL that football is.

Maybe you're right, we shouldn't go for a proven winner, we should go for Giggs because sentiment; in fact hold on, let's go one better and sell the entire squad, replacing them with only Manchester lads, because sentiment!

You know what, I don't even think Ed Woodward should be in charge of the financial operations of Manchester United.... a non-Manchester lad ffs... my vote is for Twigginater; we might go into ruin and drop down the leagues faster than Concorde 4590 but c'mon - sentiment.

 

[Kostur]

Like Guardiola?

Like Ferguson.

 

[Wumminator]

Maybe you're right, we shouldn't go for a proven winner, we should go for Giggs because sentiment; in fact hold on, let's go one better and sell the entire squad, replacing them with only Manchester lads, because sentiment!

You know what, I don't even think Ed Woodward should be in charge of the financial operations of Manchester United.... a non-Manchester lad ffs... my vote is for Twigginater; we might go into ruin and drop down the leagues faster than Concorde 4590 but c'mon - sentiment.

Why support Man United if there is no sentiment?

 

[Sarni]

Left us in a better state than Mourinho did Chelsea.

Definitely. He did a great job in fact. Tremendous Scot.

Mourinho is shite though. He only wins trophies but has no United dignity.

 

[Man-United]

I don't want Mourinho either, rather be without trophies than have that clown here. Maybe some people support United because of winning only?

 

[Wumminator]

Definitely. He did a great job in fact. Tremendous Scot.

Mourinho is shite though. He only wins trophies but has no United dignity.

Why did Mourinho leave Chelsea by the relegation zone?

 

[Wumminator]

I don't want Mourinho either, rather be without trophies than have that clown here. Maybe some people support United because of winning only?

Don't bother mate, you have to want shiny new toys and not bother with any sentimentality to post here. I wish the players wore a bag over their heads so I didn't have to even know their names or appearance. If they do poorly we just replace them right away. Who cares about legends like Giggs and Ferguson when *Randomino* is available and Chelsea are linked!

 

[SteveJ]

You can bet your life that our board aren't thinking of putting United's traditions first, no matter what the PR machine comes out with. Should we continue to fall, few of us keepers of the flame will find it very consoling to say "Fair play - at least *Manager X* gave youth a chance" or "Remember those meaningful derbies against Liverpool?"

 

[Wumminator]

You can bet your life that our board aren't thinking of putting United's traditions first, no matter what the PR machine comes out with. Should we continue to fall, few of us keepers of the flame will find it very consoling to say "Fair play - at least *Manager X* gave youth a chance" or "Remember those meaningful derbies against Liverpool?"

We obviously don't think of traditions first, hence why every inch of Old Trafford is decked out in merchandise and advertising partnerships.

However, the brand of United means more than just "MOURINHO HAS WON A PREMIER LEAGUE HE WILL WIN IT US WE NEED TO BEAT EVERYONE". a

 

[SteveJ]

This is getting like a Giggs-as-manager or a Rooney thread, in which concerned critics - y'know, those fans who are concerned about the club's welfare and future - are somehow magicked into being 'United-hating shagbags from Hell'.

 

[Wumminator]

This is getting like a Giggs-as-manager or a Rooney thread, in which concerned critics - y'know, those fans who are concerned about the club's welfare and future - are somehow magicked into being 'United-hating shagbags from Hell'.

Steve literally on this page because I said you should have sentimentality in football, someone suggested that I wanted to take over United and drag them down thousands of divisions. The fact is that people who say "There isn't room for sentimentality in football" aren't United's biggest fans. It's that simple.

 

[Invictus]

Is @Twigginater's 'Mourinho fecks up clubs' claim based on reason and concrete evidence, or is that extracted from the commentary surrounding his departures, further colored by emotion and his personal dislike for José?

Porto: Finished 3rd before Mourinho joined the club. Won 1 Champions League title, 1 UEFA Cup, 1 UEFA Super Cup, 2 Primeira Liga titles, 1 Taça de Portugal, and 1 Supertaça in 2 seasons under him. Wobbled a bit after he left, but in the 5 seasons after Mourinho's departure, they won the League 4 times despite losing the likes of Deco, Carvalho, Costinha, Mendes, Maniche, Fereira.

Chelsea: Won the League twice, the FA Cup once, the League Cup twice, reached multiple Champions League finals, finished 2nd in the League in his last full season, and 2nd in 2007/ 2008 (2 points behind United) after United left, and reached the finals of the Champions League - under Grant before winning the title under Ancelotti again after Scolari was let go.

Internazionale: Rafa Benitez fecked the club up. Not José, he won them the first treble in their history, apart from another Serie A title, a Copa Italia, and a Supercopa. The transfer policy was also dictated in part by a combination of Moratti and the board, leading to grossly inflated salaries relative to their revenue (especially wth the decline of Serie A not just in terms of quality, but attendances and domestic broadcasting revenue), which proved to be the primary reason for their demise alongside Rafa and the ascent of Juventus among others.

Real Madrid: 2nd in La Liga in his last season, won the Supercopa de España, reached the finals of the Copa del Rey, and reached the semi-finals of the Champions League (lost 3-4 on aggregate to an inspired Borussia Dortmund). Next season, under Ancelotti - they won the European Cup, and the Copa del Rey.

So, how exactly did he feck clubs up? This season at Chelsea, didn't the board/ Abramovich/ whoever's incharge of the money feck José up by not signing players to improve the team (apart from the late addition of Pedro)? Didn't the players feck José up by not turning up, not being arsed and underperforming consistently (Hazard and co.)?

There's almost a sense of folks inventing arguments out of thin air to detract from his achievements/ standing as a manager when both of his recent dismissals came at clubs with massive player power issues/ having idiots incharge like Florentino. Even the best of managers fail under Florentino, and Madrid have a past of player ruling the roost or creating a hive mind, and the higher ups dismissing quality managers like Heyneckes, Capello, del Bosque and more recently - Carlo Ancelotti. Now, how many clubs did Mourinho really, truly feck up?

 

[SteveJ]

The fact is that people who say "There isn't room for sentimentality in football" aren't United's biggest fans. It's that simple.

Well mate, I think we're resigned to being as pragmatic as United's bosses surely are (seeing as us fans have so little power to change things). It's disappointing, and particularly disappointing the way football is going, but that's why we're obliged to cut our cloth accordingly.

 

[RamblingRebel]

Personally I think Jose is crying out to feel loved. If he comes to Utd and improves whats happening at the moment and starts seriously challenging for titles then I can see him being manager for a while.

He's proved himself to be one of the best, and won everything there is to win. Maybe he is at the time in his life where he needs a club like Utd where he will be allowed to 'put his own stamp' on the club.

This is just pure conjecture but feck it, nothing wrong with flights of fancy occasionally!

So...

To me he seems to hold SAF in great esteem, so much so in fact I'd say he idolise's him and all he achieved at Utd. The same can be said about Utd herself. Has he ever said a bad word about Utd? Considering he's always laid into any rival team/manager I find it intruiging that Utd, or any Utd manager has never been in his cross hairs. I think he wants to emulate SAF's longevity..maybe not 26 years but certainly longer than the 3 season shift he puts in.

I think maybe he see's Utd as a club where he will be given pretty much a free reign to organise things as he sees fit, from the youth setup all the way through to the first team, with minimal interferance. He will be given time providing he gets CL every year with a few cups thrown in. All the big clubs hes managed have a reputation for a quick turnover of managers..not Utd! Provided he acheives the minimum expectations and is either challenging on all fronts or improving a trasitioning team, and he doesn't piss woody off, he will have a job for as long as he wants it.

So he has a big gob...so did SAF. Tbh most of the time he only uses it to deflect attention away from his players, but I think given the right club and the right backing he will tone this side of his game down, at the end of the day its all an act and he loves being the pantomime villian!

Now lets address the important stuff...playing style! Id like to think his teams as solid and very difficult to bteak down often times this comes at the expense of free flowing attacking football, but i say to you...Once he has his solid defensive foundation and the more attacking players has gained his trust we will see a lot more inspiring play. Imagine how Jones, Smalling, Shaw, Sneiderlin, Januzaz, Martial, Depay, Periera and Lingard would flourish under his tutalage. He will foster a self belief in those lads much the same as SAF did.

Within 5 years under the guidance of Jose Manchester United WILL be the greatest team in world football.

Lets be positive for a change! If not Pep or Jose, then who?