[Ali Dia]

Mourinho signed Matic to be that player and then after that we just stopped trying despite Matic clearly being past his best.

and by god we flogged that horse for years!

 

[Adnan]

Probably all the recruitment was compromised by quite a few factors. We didn’t have a manager with quite such a developed vision and detailed master plan as what we’ve got with EtH. Almost certainly EtH wouldn’t have signed Bruno but it’s hard to see it as a mistake because he delivered product (on a pretty spectacular scale).

The problem then, as now, is identifying players suitable for a modern style who are at the required (elite) level and then being able to acquire them. A pre-requisite is a single-minded manager, and the whole structure around him working in harmony.

People say the coach / manager shouldn’t have absolute power. It is not a problem giving such power to the manager as long as the end goal (or continuing goal) and the whole strategy to achieve it is agreed across the whole football department. I personally have no problem with the manager being at the head of the pyramid, in fact I prefer it because accountability is clear and, in my view, in the right place. The coach / manager is responsible for results and also every decision that contributes to that.

It follows that the coach / manager should be effectively in charge of recruitment albeit he should delegate as much of the legwork as possible. The scouts should all be working to the same script and the advice they give should reflect that. In that case the manager may rely on the scouts but confidence in the framework and the individuals working within it will not be immediate. Long and short, our recruitment should be better next year and beyond (I have a feeling you said this before, probably in fewer words!).

I think it was a mistake due to the signing not making any sense as far as developing a play style is concerned. The midfield options we had at the time required a deeper lying midfielder who could help us control the game in possession, especially against the press. And signing Fernandes on top of Maguire and Wan Bissaka meant we had become a team best suited to playing football in transition against any decent possession based out-fit.

And I said at the time that Solskjær had made a big error after he claimed he wanted to implement a highline like Jurgen Klopp with his first 4 signings. But he was still in a position to sign a deeper lying midfielder, but for some strange reason he never did and wanted to target Sancho for the RW role, when Sancho wasn't a right winger and was best suited to playing on the left, which is something myself and one other poster argued about during the transfer saga in the transfer forum. We can talk about a manager not being tactically capable but if your recruitment doesn't make sense, then it's just a matter of time before the wheels come off and being a good tactician won't be able to make up for poor recruitment decisions.

Tbh with you mate the process is very simple when it comes to recruitment. The club should have a network of scouts, analysts etc and the head coach/manager will come in and work with those people who will help him identify players for his methodology on the pitch. But the evidence strongly points towards both Mourinho and Solskjaer not working with the existing recruitment department and then signing players with input from their personal scouts, which has been reported on by a number of journalists. If you as a manager join a club and don't want to take advantage of the man power and resources at the club via the football structure, then you're going to come a cropper soon enough because you've severely disadvantaged yourself. I've provided reports in the past about how the heads of scouting vetoed the Maguire signing, vetoed the Fernandes signing, vetoed the Matic signing etc but Woodward still went ahead and backed the managers which is a big mistake. Mike Keegan in 2017 wrote a article in his Daily Mail column about Mourinho, and there was a small snippet in their, where he mentioned that Eric Bailly was a player that wasn't even on the list of the Man Utd scouts but was signed on the say so of Mourinho's personal scouts. And below is a quote from Laurie Whitwell where he mentions that the United scouts didn't endorse the Donny van de Beek signing.

Laurie Whitwell: "There are claims that United progressed a move for Donny van de Beek because Ajax made him available at an affordable price, rather than the midfielder being actively scouted and endorsed."

https://theathletic.com/3287110/202...ver-manchester-uniteds-summer-transfer-plans/

At any well run club, the recruitment is led by the Chief Scout. And it's the role of the DoF to connect both the head coach and chief scout. Erik ten Hag as far as I know is working with both Jose Mayorga and Simon Wells who reportedly run Man United's recruitment since the departure of the previous heads of scouting.

 

[Valencia Shin Crosses]

We always wait for that mystical player that never exists.

Which is funny because in the Pogba instance it didn’t even need to be some special player. Just a solid ball winning anchor who could cover for PP’s defensive lapses without needing to do anything going forward. There are about a million of that style of profile in football.

 

[Jeppers7]

That's really just a damning indictment of our scouts. Arguably the one and only signing in the post Fergie era to have an indisputably positive effect on the team and they tried to block it. Where were they when we needed them to block the signings of Bailly, Lukaku, Antony, Van Der Beek and Sancho?

Not really. It’s very arguable that three months of outstanding form warrant an indictment.

What is this positive effect? We won three times as many trophies in the four years before he came than we have in the four he has been here.

 

[Champ]

What the feck has happened in this thread?

It went from discussing whether Mainoo is our savior or not to people copy and pasting Uniteds scouting set up from Wikipedia?!?

 

[Jeppers7]

The purpose was presumably to improve the team to a point where we secure CL football. Which was duly achieved, thanks largely to an incredible personal contribution from Bruno. At this point our amazing scouting team had the opportunity to sign some really top players - who might be holding out for CL football - and build from a position of strength. If Bruno is as poor a player as you seem to think then these world class players signed by the brains trust in charge of transfers could have seen Bruno relegated to a squad player. A versatile attacking player who can make something happen in the final third when he's brought on off the bench. Even his harshest critic would agree that this is something he'd be well suited for and all the top teams have big names like Bruno on the bench. How did that work out?!

Nothing to do with how well Luke Shaw played at that time? Bruno came into a side that had lacked Pogba and Rashford for a large spell. Covid helped because it meant we got both players back before the season ended.

Replacing Perreira and Lingard in the short term was always going to be an easy job. I don’t think it’s fair ignore the contributions of Martial, Greenwood, Rashford, Matic, Shaw etc to place all the credit on Bruno that’s simply not the case of what happened but Bruno was outstanding for three months along with others.

Sadly longer term it hasn’t worked. Bruno’s performances have been generally poor bar that period and the club have won only a Carabou cup.

 

[Jeppers7]

I hope we get to see Mainoo at some point soon. Feels like Groundhog Day watching McT again. Whether he is ready we need to see but he’s levels above McT talent wise.

 

[Stack]

Why are you asking this question? The players aren't getting dropped in any situation

huh???

 

[Highfather_24]

Saying our recruitment used to be bad but its all fine and dandy now is just putting your head in the sand. Its no better. We still make the same mistakes and Murtough needs to be sacked asap.

 

[Leftback99]

Every game is a must win but the players havent been winning so why stick with the losing players when its must win?

I'm just saying what I expect to happen. Looking at the fixtures up to FA Cup I can't see him getting a start or barely any minutes unless we're somehow comfortable (we never are). Luton is his best chance.

 

[Stack]

I'm just saying what I expect to happen. Looking at the fixtures up to FA Cup I can't see him getting a start or barely any minutes unless we're somehow comfortable (we never are). Luton is his best chance.

Understood.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

I think it was a mistake due to the signing not making any sense as far as developing a play style is concerned. The midfield options we had at the time required a deeper lying midfielder who could help us control the game in possession, especially against the press. And signing Fernandes on top of Maguire and Wan Bissaka meant we had become a team best suited to playing football in transition against any decent possession based out-fit.

And I said at the time that Solskjær had made a big error after he claimed he wanted to implement a highline like Jurgen Klopp with his first 4 signings. But he was still in a position to sign a deeper lying midfielder, but for some strange reason he never did and wanted to target Sancho for the RW role, when Sancho wasn't a right winger and was best suited to playing on the left, which is something myself and one other poster argued about during the transfer saga in the transfer forum. We can talk about a manager not being tactically capable but if your recruitment doesn't make sense, then it's just a matter of time before the wheels come off and being a good tactician won't be able to make up for poor recruitment decisions.

Tbh with you mate the process is very simple when it comes to recruitment. The club should have a network of scouts, analysts etc and the head coach/manager will come in and work with those people who will help him identify players for his methodology on the pitch. But the evidence strongly points towards both Mourinho and Solskjaer not working with the existing recruitment department and then signing players with input from their personal scouts, which has been reported on by a number of journalists. If you as a manager join a club and don't want to take advantage of the man power and resources at the club via the football structure, then you're going to come a cropper soon enough because you've severely disadvantaged yourself. I've provided reports in the past about how the heads of scouting vetoed the Maguire signing, vetoed the Fernandes signing, vetoed the Matic signing etc but Woodward still went ahead and backed the managers which is a big mistake. Mike Keegan in 2017 wrote a article in his Daily Mail column about Mourinho, and there was a small snippet in their, where he mentioned that Eric Bailly was a player that wasn't even on the list of the Man Utd scouts but was signed on the say so of Mourinho's personal scouts. And below is a quote from Laurie Whitwell where he mentions that the United scouts didn't endorse the Donny van de Beek signing.



At any well run club, the recruitment is led by the Chief Scout. And it's the role of the DoF to connect both the head coach and chief scout. Erik ten Hag as far as I know is working with both Jose Mayorga and Simon Wells who reportedly run Man United's recruitment since the departure of the previous heads of scouting.

To be honest all these "manager's private scout identified them" rumours sounds like attempts to distance the recruitment team at the club from poor signings. We're seeing the same more recently with stories leaked to the press about Antony's signing. It all stinks of cynical arse covering within a deeply dysfunctional organisation.

 

[NZT-One]

To be honest all these "manager's private scout identified them" rumours sounds like attempts to distance the recruitment team at the club from poor signings. We're seeing the same more recently with stories leaked to the press about Antony's signing. It all stinks of cynical arse covering within a deeply dysfunctional organisation.

Sounds plausible. But could also be plausible, that some of the decision makers still didn't understand the negative effects of everbody not pulling in the same direction. Knowing that Murtough has such a (presumably) powerful position within the setup, he comes across as somebody who avoids the headlines. Could very well be somebody, who tries to delegate responsibility which is something, the initial ETH transfer spree could be seen as.

That's really just a damning indictment of our scouts. Arguably the one and only signing in the post Fergie era to have an indisputably positive effect on the team and they tried to block it. Where were they when we needed them to block the signings of Bailly, Lukaku, Antony, Van Der Beek and Sancho?

Think this is a matter of perspective. But that is clear from the Bruno thread, your perspective is more short-term-based where yes, Bruno fixed issues within the squads because he is a more quality player than Lingard or Perreira. But he also is a player type, that is pretty rare for topclubs these days. Granted, fitness levels and injury records are great but at the same time, players in the 10 mould usually are good dribblers or at least very good with their touch to handle pressure. I also think, they are usually a little more measured in terms of decision making but I guess, this is difficult to measure.

It’s the system that is often wrong at United. Not the players. Although recruitment has also been fecked. But Bruno for example, Jurgen Klopp once said that he was the perfect midfielder. He could do everything. Run, press, tackler, shoot, pass. He desperately wanted to sign him and would have done if not for finances. And you can easily see how he would’ve fit in to his whole heavy metal football approach.

At United he has become a pure #10. But in a true hardworking midfield 3, he was originally an 8/10 hybrid.

It would have been interesting to see him in such an environment. But you also have to consider that Klopp went for Thiago at one point because he recognized, that his heavy metal approach needed to evolve and introduce a level of control. Bruno might have created similar concerns there as well. Similar, not the same, his effects on us are probably multiplied by the fact that the overall workrate of the team is average at best, that the midfield composition is strange for ages and that Klopps team show a unity in terms of playing as a collective that hasn't been seen at United for quite some time.

At any well run club, the recruitment is led by the Chief Scout. And it's the role of the DoF to connect both the head coach and chief scout. Erik ten Hag as far as I know is working with both Jose Mayorga and Simon Wells who reportedly run Man United's recruitment since the departure of the previous heads of scouting.

That is interesting to hear. Would never have expected that as I thought, that the Scouting Department is tasked with keeping an eye on a) the worlds emerging top talents and b) players who would fit a specific skillset and/or profile. I.e. meaning that players in category a not necessarily are the greatest fits for the teams needs but are too good to not consider them and category b being players who might not be considered as great overall but with a skill set that matches existing needs perfectly.

I always thought, the best way to recruit would be to hand that to this DOF figure who decides together with the head coach on game style, plan and approach and is then aided by Scouting and Academy by getting information which players might fit the plan.

 

[zapp]

Saying our recruitment used to be bad but its all fine and dandy now is just putting your head in the sand. Its no better. We still make the same mistakes and Murtough needs to be sacked asap.

It certainly doesn't seem like it has improved beyond saying we're going for the right profile of player, which is arguable as the ones signed have been lacking in one area or another.

The head scouts were fired though so it was okay to go with manager's choices last summer. Even though that was a problem under the Woodward regime. What could possibly go wrong with that again? The data analytics is in place so summer 2023 will showcase the new recruitment process. Oh that's the same as summer 2022 transfer window... next year will be better they've had more time to gel. Who could have predicted us prioritising Mount this summer?

Anyway, I hope Mainoo gets a proper chance and takes it. I just don't think it's happening unless Ten Hag's hand is forced. With Casemiro out again his chances are better but it'll be the Mejbri thing all over again. Sporadic appearances. Would love to be proven wrong because it'll save us loads of dough if he is a star.

 

[OrcaFat]

I think it was a mistake due to the signing not making any sense as far as developing a play style is concerned. The midfield options we had at the time required a deeper lying midfielder who could help us control the game in possession, especially against the press. And signing Fernandes on top of Maguire and Wan Bissaka meant we had become a team best suited to playing football in transition against any decent possession based out-fit.

And I said at the time that Solskjær had made a big error after he claimed he wanted to implement a highline like Jurgen Klopp with his first 4 signings. But he was still in a position to sign a deeper lying midfielder, but for some strange reason he never did and wanted to target Sancho for the RW role, when Sancho wasn't a right winger and was best suited to playing on the left, which is something myself and one other poster argued about during the transfer saga in the transfer forum. We can talk about a manager not being tactically capable but if your recruitment doesn't make sense, then it's just a matter of time before the wheels come off and being a good tactician won't be able to make up for poor recruitment decisions.

Tbh with you mate the process is very simple when it comes to recruitment. The club should have a network of scouts, analysts etc and the head coach/manager will come in and work with those people who will help him identify players for his methodology on the pitch. But the evidence strongly points towards both Mourinho and Solskjaer not working with the existing recruitment department and then signing players with input from their personal scouts, which has been reported on by a number of journalists. If you as a manager join a club and don't want to take advantage of the man power and resources at the club via the football structure, then you're going to come a cropper soon enough because you've severely disadvantaged yourself. I've provided reports in the past about how the heads of scouting vetoed the Maguire signing, vetoed the Fernandes signing, vetoed the Matic signing etc but Woodward still went ahead and backed the managers which is a big mistake. Mike Keegan in 2017 wrote a article in his Daily Mail column about Mourinho, and there was a small snippet in their, where he mentioned that Eric Bailly was a player that wasn't even on the list of the Man Utd scouts but was signed on the say so of Mourinho's personal scouts. And below is a quote from Laurie Whitwell where he mentions that the United scouts didn't endorse the Donny van de Beek signing.



At any well run club, the recruitment is led by the Chief Scout. And it's the role of the DoF to connect both the head coach and chief scout. Erik ten Hag as far as I know is working with both Jose Mayorga and Simon Wells who reportedly run Man United's recruitment since the departure of the previous heads of scouting.

The thing is, all that manpower is only worth having if your scouts are good and your chief scout is very good. And the manager has to trust them all.

I know most clubs are probably run as you described and it might be the best way but it comes down to the calibre of the individuals. My preference is for the manager to be in charge so that all the responsibility is concentrated in one place.

The manager should not do any of the actual scouting but should be in charge of what the plan is. When the manager is first recruited, all the plans for scouting etc need to be agreed in principle and if it’s not possible to agree then we shouldn’t hire that manager.

The thing that some people will have trouble with is the idea that scouts should be assumed to know more than the manager. So the fact that our scouts want to veto certain signings, to me, is not any kind of evidence that any of those signings were a mistake. It’s merely evidence of a difference of opinion.

Differences of opinion are, on the whole, bad because the scouts and the manager should be singing from the same hymn sheet. The question is how best to come to that state of harmony. Trust and getting the right people in the roles, I suppose.

I would say it is not the answer for managers to have their “own” scouts but, at the same time, if the scouts at the club are not good enough, then the manager should have input into recruiting better scouts (albeit all the scouts should follow the plan agreed between the club and the manager at the start).

The likes of Mourinho and Ole going rogue is obviously chaotic but it probably stems from their having no confidence in the scouts at the club. The no1 aim should be to keep everyone rowing the boat in the same direction but you also have to get the best possible rowers in the boat.

We could have signed someone other than Bruno but he turned out to be very productive. If you take him out of the side you have to replace his goals and assists somehow.

What I said before was really a hope that our recruitment is better next year but there is still a way to go. I saw you posted that we’re not that far away but I fear it is worse than you think. A CB and midfielder of the right calibre will help but we are short on quality in so many positions and it’s probably why EtH doesn’t want to take Bruno out (and plays Rashford regardless) - there is not the quality to come in and deliver game-winning actions.

I don’t know where Mainoo fits into this, unless it’s to save a few quid on a midfielder!

 

[Bobski]

If this season is gone then bin off plodders like Amrabat and develop guys like Mainoo and Diallo as much as possible.

 

[Bwuk]

If we have concerns about him not being fully fit for the first team, then fair enough.

Otherwise I cannot for the life of me justify Amrabat getting minutes over him &
Hannibal.

 

[Adnan]

It would have been interesting to see him in such an environment. But you also have to consider that Klopp went for Thiago at one point because he recognized, that his heavy metal approach needed to evolve and introduce a level of control. Bruno might have created similar concerns there as well. Similar, not the same, his effects on us are probably multiplied by the fact that the overall workrate of the team is average at best, that the midfield composition is strange for ages and that Klopps team show a unity in terms of playing as a collective that hasn't been seen at United for quite some time.


That is interesting to hear. Would never have expected that as I thought, that the Scouting Department is tasked with keeping an eye on a) the worlds emerging top talents and b) players who would fit a specific skillset and/or profile. I.e. meaning that players in category a not necessarily are the greatest fits for the teams needs but are too good to not consider them and category b being players who might not be considered as great overall but with a skill set that matches existing needs perfectly.

I always thought, the best way to recruit would be to hand that to this DOF figure who decides together with the head coach on game style, plan and approach and is then aided by Scouting and Academy by getting information which players might fit the plan.

You make a good point about Klopp and how he had to adapt his heavy metal approach to playing the game by combining a positional game in possession with his high tempo, high pressing play style. And he did that by adding a Dutch coach in Pep Ljinders. So having a defensive rest phase in possession where you recycle the ball positionally, helps the team apply the press out of possession more effectively because they get a breather by keeping the ball in possession. And in the EPL it's absolutely vital to develop the team where you can dominate the ball if the aim is to play 40 yards higher up the pitch in a high-line or else burn out is a very real possibility.

Regarding Bruno Fernandes, we need him right now because he's one of our better players in the final third. He's a second striker and has a goal and assist threat. But our aim imo should be to develop the team from the GK up, and once we get the pieces in place where we can build play effectively from the back and through defence and deeper midfield positions, then I don't believe it's going to be difficult at all to replace Bruno. In the short clip below, Guardiola clearly mentions that without having players who can dribble 'nothing can be done'. What he means by that is against set defensive structures it's extremely important to have players who can dribble the opponent to open up numerical superiorities and spaces. Bruno isn't that player but Kevin de Bruyne is that player. Guardiola also mentions in the clip about having CBs who can defend 40 yards up the pitch, which I will touch on below.

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

@OrcaFat

It's the job of the DoF to implement the strategy by appointing the head coach and providing him the support. And that support when it comes to recruiting players, comes from the Chief Scout and head of recruitment who lead a big network of scouts and are backed up by several teams who provide them with the advanced analytics like video analysis or data analytics. So it's important that once the recruitment chiefs are in position, that they work with the head coach to develop a team that fits the strategy. And it's the job of the DoF to connect the head coach with the recruitment team. The head coach's role is to focus on coaching the team, the DoF's role is to attend to all departments from the scouting, data science, sports science, medical etc but those people leading the aforementioned departments will be expected to make the difference. At Liverpool the recruitment is led by Barry Hunter (ex N Ireland). At City it's led by Gary Worthington and at Brighton it was led by Paul Winstanley and currently Sam Jewell. The DoF can only support a head coach adequately if he has capable heads of recruitment in place. If you fire them on the eve of the transfer window, then the head coach will have to step in to fill the void on a temporary basis.

Our scouts get a bad rep on here for the poor decisions made by Ed Woodward who created a problem by putting himself in a position where he was the middle man between a manager who wanted control of recruitment with the aid of his own personal scouts and a recruitment team that had come into existence in 2016/17. This was Woodward's biggest blunder imo and he was forced to create a compromise by creating a transfer committee where the manager (Mourinho) and recruitment team were constantly at loggerheads with each other. Gary Neville then went on a rant on Sky and said 'Who is Woodward to tell Mourinho who he can and can't sign'. This I feel put Woodward under pressure and he went ahead and signed Matic for the manager and would later sign Maguire for Solskjaer who was also vetoed under the scouts during Mourinho's scatter gun approach towards recruitment.

Jim Lawlor who had been at the club since 2005 and was Fergie's Chief Scout where we won league and European Cups had now become a bad scout after Fergie left? I don't believe he became a bad scout but what changed was that without Fergie there was no direction when it came to developing the team. Take Moyes as another example, according to several reliable reports, we had three midfield targets ready for Moyes to sign to bolster the midfield. And those three players were Kevin Strootman, Thiago and Ander Herrera. Moyes was said to be unsure about signing any one of the aforementioned three players and as he's affectionately known by the Everton faithful, he dithered and it meant Roma and Bayern signed Strootman and Thiago whilst Moyes had Woodward chasing Fabregas. And then when that fell through, we signed Fellaini and attempted to sign Herrera late in the window. What was Moyes trying to develop by signing Fellaini? Strootman and Thiago were two excellent scout choices at the time and unfortunately if Fergie had not retired, he would've signed one if not both midfielders imo.

If you want to act like Fergie and Wenger then act like them as a manager. Because both Fergie and Wenger not only oversaw the recruitment but also oversaw the wage structure and other associated football departments. Fergie and Wenger developed their clubs when it came to recruitment, they didn't have scouts independent from the club. Damien Comolli was Arsenal's Chief Scout under Wenger and he was in charge of signing players for the vision set by Wenger. And Wenger like Fergie, developed his clubs on the football side of the club because they were intelligent enough to know that the club had the resources to help them implement their vision and direction. There isn't a club in Europe who is successful without developing their club's own recruitment structure and backing the eye test up via the eyes on the ground with advanced analytics. The head coach should absolutely have a choice on who he wants to sign but that choice should come from the list of the people running the recruitment department backed up by data and video analytics.

Over the years I've mentioned players on here who we should sign. And the following players like Maignan, Tchouameni, Todibo, Saliba, Konate, Bruno Guimaraes etc were mentioned on here early by myself when they weren't big names. That Bruno Guimaraes who Newcastle renewed with a £100m release clause was first mentioned on here by myself as a player we should sign and I gave a break down on his abilities. That was around 4 or 5 years ago when he was playing in Brazil for Athletico Paranense. No data, no analytics just a TV screen was enough to form a opinion with a large margin of error. I do not believe professional scouts who have a back ground in spotting top talent, backed up numerous people in recruitment and analytics won't identify top talent if you give them a blueprint to follow.


So for example I'm the manager/head coach and together with the DoF we've decided that a CB is required for a team that wants to progress the ball through the thirds, implement a high defensive line and control the game out of possession in rest defense. This information is passed on to the person or persons running recruitment and I tell them I want a player who fits the technical profile in possession to progress play, and has the physical and athletic profile to control large spaces in rest defense. So I would expect a list of scouted names backed up the analytics team to help me make a decision on who best fits my proactive attacking play style. Under Brendan Rodgers the Liverpool recruitment team was a laughing stock but under Jurgen Klopp the same recruitment team started to excel because he gave them a direction. Edwards is the same guy who signed Lazar Markovic over Sadio Mane after it was reported that the Liverpool data team deemed Mane not good enough to play for them. But when you have a head coach who gives direction to the football structure then things start to happen.

I also mentioned above about Guardiola talking about having CBs who can defend 40 yards higher up the pitch. And I was watching Leverkusen lately to see how they were playing under Alonso after hearing a lot of nice things about them. After watching them play it became very obvious that Alonso is using his back 3 to compress the pitch in a high line and control rest defense situations due to the profile of CBs he has in his 3 man back-line. What that does, is it frees up additional players to stay high up the pitch due to the CB profiles they have at the back. And those three CBs are Adilon Kossounou, Jonathan Tah and Edmond Tapsoba. All three players have the pace, physicality, athleticism and progressive capabilities to provide a very strong foundation for the team to attack in a compact high block. Kossounou is a 22 year old RCB who was at Brugge previously. Replicate something like the above and I'm confident we'll be competing with the top teams. The likes of Frimpong excell in such a setup because they have a solid base behind them who can single handedly take control of transitions in a larger space.

 

[johnnyteutonic]

That's really just a damning indictment of our scouts. Arguably the one and only signing in the post Fergie era to have an indisputably positive effect on the team and they tried to block it. Where were they when we needed them to block the signings of Bailly, Lukaku, Antony, Van Der Beek and Sancho?

It was reported that the scouts were against signing Antony. I read that around a week after we signed him (so not the reports coming out at the moment).
I don't know enough about the others that you mentioned though to comment.

 

[OrcaFat]

@Adnan

I don’t say our scouts are necessarily bad only that it is important they are trusted which might mean the manager will need time or might mean some changes are needed.

I prefer the manager to be in charge so that he can take full responsibility, but ideally you get the structure right (and the people in it) and then recruit the manager who is happy to work in that structure, more or less.

I don’t know how good our scouts were under SAF but we didn’t have great success with unknown signings. We got a few beauties but a lot of our signings were traditional marquee types.

 

[red woppit]

It’s a reference to what caused this thread to get so funny in the first place. The poster who said there was no reason Mainoo couldn’t match Bellingham.

It's good to be optimistic, but the fact is no one knows if Mainoo will get into United's first team, let alone match what Bellingham has done, so far.
Mainoo does look very promising, but let's give him time to develop in his own way.

 

[Gordon Godot]

@Adnan

I don’t say our scouts are necessarily bad only that it is important they are trusted which might mean the manager will need time or might mean some changes are needed.

I prefer the manager to be in charge so that he can take full responsibility, but ideally you get the structure right (and the people in it) and then recruit the manager who is happy to work in that structure, more or less.

I don’t know how good our scouts were under SAF but we didn’t have great success with unknown signings. We got a few beauties but a lot of our signings were traditional marquee types.

Other top teams dont have the manager in charge. World has moved on. Too many targets, from across the world. They are involved but also need consistent style so we survive changes in manager

 

[NZT-One]

In the short clip below, Guardiola clearly mentions that without having players who can dribble 'nothing can be done'. What he means by that is against set defensive structures it's extremely important to have players who can dribble the opponent to open up numerical superiorities and spaces. Bruno isn't that player but Kevin de Bruyne is that player. Guardiola also mentions in the clip about having CBs who can defend 40 yards up the pitch, which I will touch on below.

Fully agree. Dribbling, like Passing, Shooting and Tackling are the most basic competencies of a footballer. At the highest level, those abilities have to be at a certain, pretty high level. I think, the dribbling thing is not just something I'd call Bruno out for, it is almost a general thing because apart from our wingers, we literally have next to no one who really has and had this as a strength. Rashford can be alright, same as Antony or Pellistri. Sancho had one or two tricks but none of them is elite level. And lets not even start talking about Fullbacks or other areas on the pitch. In the era of pressing, that sets us up with a big disadvantage as a team.

It's the job of the DoF to implement the strategy by appointing the head coach and providing him the support. And that support when it comes to recruiting players, comes from the Chief Scout and head of recruitment who lead a big network of scouts and are backed up by several teams who provide them with the advanced analytics like video analysis or data analytics. So it's important that once the recruitment chiefs are in position, that they work with the head coach to develop a team that fits the strategy. And it's the job of the DoF to connect the head coach with the recruitment team. The head coach's role is to focus on coaching the team, the DoF's role is to attend to all departments from the scouting, data science, sports science, medical etc but those people leading the aforementioned departments will be expected to make the difference.

...

So for example I'm the manager/head coach and together with the DoF we've decided that a CB is required for a team that wants to progress the ball through the thirds, implement a high defensive line and control the game out of possession in rest defense. This information is passed on to the person or persons running recruitment and I tell them I want a player who fits the technical profile in possession to progress play, and has the physical and athletic profile to control large spaces in rest defense. So I would expect a list of scouted names backed up the analytics team to help me make a decision on who best fits my proactive attacking play style.

Interesting summary. One question: who would be the "element of continuety", say the person who makes sure we don't get LVG as a manager only to replace him with Mourinho to replace him with ETH to replace him with say Simeone?

The way you describe it here, it sounds like the head coach is providing the strategy but who is responsible for the strategy above? Would that be the DOF simply by his "feeling" of which manager would fit in based on the available players?

I think, this element or rather its inexistence at United, is probably the main reason for me personally, why we are where we are. So who do you think, should have been this figure at United?

That would be two questions then - how is this organized at other clubs usually (based on your knowledge) and is something known about who this figure should have been at United.

 

[OrcaFat]

Other top teams dont have the manager in charge. World has moved on. Too many targets, from across the world. They are involved but also need consistent style so we survive changes in manager

Delegation is the answer to that problem. If the manager isn’t in charge, you end up sacking your manager when, really, the problem was recruitment and therefore someone else’s fault.

 

[Adnan]

Fully agree. Dribbling, like Passing, Shooting and Tackling are the most basic competencies of a footballer. At the highest level, those abilities have to be at a certain, pretty high level. I think, the dribbling thing is not just something I'd call Bruno out for, it is almost a general thing because apart from our wingers, we literally have next to no one who really has and had this as a strength. Rashford can be alright, same as Antony or Pellistri. Sancho had one or two tricks but none of them is elite level. And lets not even start talking about Fullbacks or other areas on the pitch. In the era of pressing, that sets us up with a big disadvantage as a team.


Interesting summary. One question: who would be the "element of continuety", say the person who makes sure we don't get LVG as a manager only to replace him with Mourinho to replace him with ETH to replace him with say Simeone?

The way you describe it here, it sounds like the head coach is providing the strategy but who is responsible for the strategy above? Would that be the DOF simply by his "feeling" of which manager would fit in based on the available players?

I think, this element or rather its inexistence at United, is probably the main reason for me personally, why we are where we are. So who do you think, should have been this figure at United?

That would be two questions then - how is this organized at other clubs usually (based on your knowledge) and is something known about who this figure should have been at United.

I understand what you're saying regards continuity but I don't believe our issues post Fergie are to do with hiring managers with differing philosophies but rather the issue has been signing players who just aren't good enough. Every manager whether that be a manager who is adventurous in his approach or someone more measured in his approach, where they cede possession against a strong opponent, should target players with the aim of playing through the thirds, pressing high or pressing in a mid block and controlling the defensive transitions in larger spaces. Because the manager of Manchester United is expected to take the game to the opponent 70% of the time even with a manager who is deemed to be more defensive in his approach.

And if we're playing a team outside of the top 6 clubs then the onus is on us to take the initiative and force the issue by playing higher up the pitch and provoking the opponent into making errors with and without the ball. And against teams like City, Liverpool or even Arsenal who defend aggressively from the front, you need players who are adept at evading and resisting pressure in a low block to make your counter attacks/transitions more effective. So having a higher technical level on the ball from the back will potentially elevate the approach in question due to having more composure on the ball from the back. And if you go a goal down to a team that is strong in possession, then you can't carry on playing reactively in transition and will need to play more proactively higher up the pitch and will need your CBs to progress the ball against the press and also defend 1v1 40 yards higher up the pitch. So if you target the correct profiles, then you as a coach can adapt to any game situation because a Neuer in goal, Van Dijk at CB, Modric in midfield and Louis Saha upfront can adapt to any coach whether that be Guardiola or Sean Dyche. But my personal preference is always to target a particular type of coach who aims to dominate the ball in all phases of play, press high and have players in rest defense who have the physical, athletic and technical qualities to control the game out of possession in large spaces, as well as in possession. Every little detail should be looked at imo.

The director of football should be the person who sets the strategy on the football side of the club and his decision to hire the head coach will give us a indication to what strategy is going to be implemented. But if both the DoF and head coach inherit a squad of players that are unsuited to the football that is envisioned, then imo it's important to build the squad around the strengths of the team, whilst removing the weaknesses. And when you've improved on the weaknesses and brought in the correct profiles for the vision in question, then it will become easier to upgrade on the players who were seen as strengths in the teams created by the previous managers. The DoF basically appoints the manager to execute the plan on the pitch. And you just have to look at the work Simon Rolfes is doing at Leverkusen where he was promoted from a head of youth development role in the academy to a Sporting director's role in 2018, where he and his team have done a excellent job in developing a very strong team in the 4 + years since he got promoted from managing their academy structure.

Man United's biggest problem has been the complete and utter incompetence of the Glazers. I'm not sure if there's worse owners at any other club in Europe. All we need is a owner who cares about running the club the right way. And if we can have someone at the very top who cares, is ambitious and takes a active interest in how things are developing on the football side of the club, then we will compete before long. Our current owners have actively been more interested in their dividends payments.

If Ratcliffe is coming in then I hope Jean Claude Blanc ends up at the club. There was a time in the past when Sir Bobby Charlton was someone who helped the Edwards family with appointing managers and it was Sir Bobby who wanted Fergie from Aberdeen after accompanying Martin Edwards to interview the then Aberdeen manager. The structural side is different now but I think it's important to have a Jean Claude Blanc type figure at board room level because it will hopefully take some responsibility away from Joel Glazer. So the biggest change for me would be Ratcliffe coming in and taking a active interest in the running of the football club by bringing Blanc into the setup. The Brighton owner Tony Bloom parted ways with Chris Hughton about 5 years ago after Brighton narrowly avoided relegation. And from what I read, Bloom wanted to drive the club towards a direction where the football on the pitch had to be endearing to the Brighton faithful. And without their owner's drive and passion for the club, they would likely still be a struggling club playing a very predictable game.

This is also my last post on the topic because the thread has been derailed, my apologies.

 

[NZT-One]

I understand what you're saying regards continuity but I don't believe our issues post Fergie are to do with hiring managers with differing philosophies but rather the issue has been signing players who just aren't good enough. Every manager whether that be a manager who is adventurous in his approach or someone more measured in his approach, where they cede possession against a strong opponent, should target players with the aim of playing through the thirds, pressing high or pressing in a mid block and controlling the defensive transitions in larger spaces. Because the manager of Manchester United is expected to take the game to the opponent 70% of the time even with a manager who is deemed to be more defensive in his approach.

And if we're playing a team outside of the top 6 clubs then the onus is on us to take the initiative and force the issue by playing higher up the pitch and provoking the opponent into making errors with and without the ball. And against teams like City, Liverpool or even Arsenal who defend aggressively from the front, you need players who are adept at evading and resisting pressure in a low block to make your counter attacks/transitions more effective. So having a higher technical level on the ball from the back will potentially elevate the approach in question due to having more composure on the ball from the back. And if you go a goal down to a team that is strong in possession, then you can't carry on playing reactively in transition and will need to play more proactively higher up the pitch and will need your CBs to progress the ball against the press and also defend 1v1 40 yards higher up the pitch. So if you target the correct profiles, then you as a coach can adapt to any game situation because a Neuer in goal, Van Dijk at CB, Modric in midfield and Louis Saha upfront can adapt to any coach whether that be Guardiola or Sean Dyche. But my personal preference is always to target a particular type of coach who aims to dominate the ball in all phases of play, press high and have players in rest defense who have the physical, athletic and technical qualities to control the game out of possession in large spaces, as well as in possession. Every little detail should be looked at imo.

The director of football should be the person who sets the strategy on the football side of the club and his decision to hire the head coach will give us a indication to what strategy is going to be implemented. But if both the DoF and head coach inherit a squad of players that are unsuited to the football that is envisioned, then imo it's important to build the squad around the strengths of the team, whilst removing the weaknesses. And when you've improved on the weaknesses and brought in the correct profiles for the vision in question, then it will become easier to upgrade on the players who were seen as strengths in the teams created by the previous managers. The DoF basically appoints the manager to execute the plan on the pitch. And you just have to look at the work Simon Rolfes is doing at Leverkusen where he was promoted from a head of youth development role in the academy to a Sporting director's role in 2018, where he and his team have done a excellent job in developing a very strong team in the 4 + years since he got promoted from managing their academy structure.

Man United's biggest problem has been the complete and utter incompetence of the Glazers. I'm not sure if there's worse owners at any other club in Europe. All we need is a owner who cares about running the club the right way. And if we can have someone at the very top who cares, is ambitious and takes a active interest in how things are developing on the football side of the club, then we will compete before long. Our current owners have actively been more interested in their dividends payments.

If Ratcliffe is coming in then I hope Jean Claude Blanc ends up at the club. There was a time in the past when Sir Bobby Charlton was someone who helped the Edwards family with appointing managers and it was Sir Bobby who wanted Fergie from Aberdeen after accompanying Martin Edwards to interview the then Aberdeen manager. The structural side is different now but I think it's important to have a Jean Claude Blanc type figure at board room level because it will hopefully take some responsibility away from Joel Glazer. So the biggest change for me would be Ratcliffe coming in and taking a active interest in the running of the football club by bringing Blanc into the setup. The Brighton owner Tony Bloom parted ways with Chris Hughton about 5 years ago after Brighton narrowly avoided relegation. And from what I read, Bloom wanted to drive the club towards a direction where the football on the pitch had to be endearing to the Brighton faithful. And without their owner's drive and passion for the club, they would likely still be a struggling club playing a very predictable game.

This is also my last post on the topic because the thread has been derailed, my apologies.

A few very unexpected standpoints but thanks for taking the time again.

to the mods: I agree with Adnan, we have derailed the thread, my apologies as well. Don't know if possible, but maybe you can move the posts to another more fitting thread.

I continue to hope for game time for Mainoo (and Hannibal). But seeing that Mainoo played 90minutes on Wednesday, I guess it is rather unlikely again.

 

[CallyRed]

You watch, Sir Jim will get him to start.

 

[jesperjaap]

Is this the Mainoo thread case all I am doing is skipping through waffling twaddle about or scouting set up?

He s fully fit now isnt he? Should be getting game time if so, or midfieldit dreadful

 

[Adnan]

A few very unexpected standpoints but thanks for taking the time again.

to the mods: I agree with Adnan, we have derailed the thread, my apologies as well. Don't know if possible, but maybe you can move the posts to another more fitting thread.

I continue to hope for game time for Mainoo (and Hannibal). But seeing that Mainoo played 90minutes on Wednesday, I guess it is rather unlikely again.

Thanks to posters like yourself and OrcaFat we can discuss things which are not possible with certain other posters. So I appreciate good posters like you guys.

Hopefully Mainoo appears in a game soon. The post below is from around a couple of years ago where I made a comparison between Mainoo and Roony Bardghji who scored the winning goal against us just recently. And hopefully Mainoo will also show early signs of his talent in the season ahead.

Kobbie Mainoo looks a gem of a player and I'd put him in a similar talent category to 16 year old Roony Bardghji, who is a Swedish national of Kuwaiti descent playing in Denmark for FC Copenhagen's youth as a wide forward.

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[sglowrider]

If this season is gone then bin off plodders like Amrabat and develop guys like Mainoo and Diallo as much as possible.

This.

I think ETH would get more rope and credit in the bank if he was braver and took this approach -- instead of a washing machine approach.

 

[sglowrider]

You watch, Sir Jim will get him to start.

I expect Ratcliffe to be at the U16 games' sidelines scouting potential first-team staters soon.

#JWFI (Jim will fix it)

 

[united for life]

I have not seen him play before but I have read lots of good things about him. He is 18, so even if fit, we should be careful with how he gets integrated into the team. The team is a mess, I fear throwing him into this chaos with high expectations would only hurt his progress

 

[Remember the geese]

Perfect opportunity for him to be given game time today. Will be really disappointed if he doesn't feature.

 

[Jeppers7]

Thanks to posters like yourself and OrcaFat we can discuss things which are not possible with certain other posters. So I appreciate good posters like you guys.

Hopefully Mainoo appears in a game soon. The post below is from around a couple of years ago where I made a comparison between Mainoo and Roony Bardghji who scored the winning goal against us just recently. And hopefully Mainoo will also show early signs of his talent in the season ahead.

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Kobbie thread but your posts are always an enjoyable read and add value.

 

[Dannn411]

Would be nice to see him get solid gametime today. Not holding my breath though.

 

[Baneofthegame]

I understand what you're saying regards continuity but I don't believe our issues post Fergie are to do with hiring managers with differing philosophies but rather the issue has been signing players who just aren't good enough. Every manager whether that be a manager who is adventurous in his approach or someone more measured in his approach, where they cede possession against a strong opponent, should target players with the aim of playing through the thirds, pressing high or pressing in a mid block and controlling the defensive transitions in larger spaces. Because the manager of Manchester United is expected to take the game to the opponent 70% of the time even with a manager who is deemed to be more defensive in his approach.

And if we're playing a team outside of the top 6 clubs then the onus is on us to take the initiative and force the issue by playing higher up the pitch and provoking the opponent into making errors with and without the ball. And against teams like City, Liverpool or even Arsenal who defend aggressively from the front, you need players who are adept at evading and resisting pressure in a low block to make your counter attacks/transitions more effective. So having a higher technical level on the ball from the back will potentially elevate the approach in question due to having more composure on the ball from the back. And if you go a goal down to a team that is strong in possession, then you can't carry on playing reactively in transition and will need to play more proactively higher up the pitch and will need your CBs to progress the ball against the press and also defend 1v1 40 yards higher up the pitch. So if you target the correct profiles, then you as a coach can adapt to any game situation because a Neuer in goal, Van Dijk at CB, Modric in midfield and Louis Saha upfront can adapt to any coach whether that be Guardiola or Sean Dyche. But my personal preference is always to target a particular type of coach who aims to dominate the ball in all phases of play, press high and have players in rest defense who have the physical, athletic and technical qualities to control the game out of possession in large spaces, as well as in possession. Every little detail should be looked at imo.

The director of football should be the person who sets the strategy on the football side of the club and his decision to hire the head coach will give us a indication to what strategy is going to be implemented. But if both the DoF and head coach inherit a squad of players that are unsuited to the football that is envisioned, then imo it's important to build the squad around the strengths of the team, whilst removing the weaknesses. And when you've improved on the weaknesses and brought in the correct profiles for the vision in question, then it will become easier to upgrade on the players who were seen as strengths in the teams created by the previous managers. The DoF basically appoints the manager to execute the plan on the pitch. And you just have to look at the work Simon Rolfes is doing at Leverkusen where he was promoted from a head of youth development role in the academy to a Sporting director's role in 2018, where he and his team have done a excellent job in developing a very strong team in the 4 + years since he got promoted from managing their academy structure.

Man United's biggest problem has been the complete and utter incompetence of the Glazers. I'm not sure if there's worse owners at any other club in Europe. All we need is a owner who cares about running the club the right way. And if we can have someone at the very top who cares, is ambitious and takes a active interest in how things are developing on the football side of the club, then we will compete before long. Our current owners have actively been more interested in their dividends payments.

If Ratcliffe is coming in then I hope Jean Claude Blanc ends up at the club. There was a time in the past when Sir Bobby Charlton was someone who helped the Edwards family with appointing managers and it was Sir Bobby who wanted Fergie from Aberdeen after accompanying Martin Edwards to interview the then Aberdeen manager. The structural side is different now but I think it's important to have a Jean Claude Blanc type figure at board room level because it will hopefully take some responsibility away from Joel Glazer. So the biggest change for me would be Ratcliffe coming in and taking a active interest in the running of the football club by bringing Blanc into the setup. The Brighton owner Tony Bloom parted ways with Chris Hughton about 5 years ago after Brighton narrowly avoided relegation. And from what I read, Bloom wanted to drive the club towards a direction where the football on the pitch had to be endearing to the Brighton faithful. And without their owner's drive and passion for the club, they would likely still be a struggling club playing a very predictable game.

This is also my last post on the topic because the thread has been derailed, my apologies.

Just came to say that I enjoy reading your posts as they are always insightful and great content, thank you.

 

[lex talionis]

Others have made the point already but I would like to add my voice in support of using this season, which will be a trophyless season, now as one to prepare young players for next season. There’s little to be gained and much to be lost with relying on players this season who aren’t going to be here next season.

 

[Swedish_Plumber]

There’s probably not a better game to start him in this season than this one if we’re looking to really change the way we are gonna play. Mctominay starts again and it’s gonna be him until we get Casemiro back.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Others have made the point already but I would like to add my voice in support of using this season, which will be a trophyless season, now as one to prepare young players for next season. There’s little to be gained and much to be lost with relying on players this season who aren’t going to be here next season.

That’s a nice sentiment but completely removed from reality. Trophyless or not we’ll be in a dog fight for CL qualification where every point and goal is crucial. Just like every other season. We will never get the luxury of a season where we can take our foot off the gas and experiment with young players.

 

[Oldyella]

Others have made the point already but I would like to add my voice in support of using this season, which will be a trophyless season, now as one to prepare young players for next season. There’s little to be gained and much to be lost with relying on players this season who aren’t going to be here next season.

Well, ETH has a job to lose. But that aside, little to be lost.