LVG shouldn’t have been allowed anywhere near our club.
Man Utd set to appoint Director of Football (when hell freezes over)
- Thread starter RedMachine03
- Start date
- Status
LVG shouldn’t have been allowed anywhere near our club.
Just like many other clubs who hired few shit ones before getting it right, we are in that process.
For me, neither manager was the problem, but that we hired them without putting things in place to get the best out of them or even seem to have any long term vision in place. Chelsea change managers almost every 2-3 seasons but never seem to miss much of a beat, Having won 2 PL titles with same Mourinho and Conte, while we are still searching for the perfect manager.
Example is hiring LvG is setting a philosophy of 'total' football, and subsequent managers would need to be of similar philosophy else you are facing a squad overhaul. Of course this is not what we did, with Mourinho first step being getting rid of almost all recent LvGs signings. That essentially wasted about 4yrs and several transfers, leaving us with a more aged and mediocre squad. On the other hand, a player like Di Maria, who would have fit Mourinho's philosophy was sold earlier.
The best solution would be to have a DoF who gets a budget from Ed and is allowed to manage football matters. Ed can stick to his marketing and sponsorship deals which he seems very good at.
But keep the same back room structure, and the nonsense will only keep repeating itself.
Like who? Citeh that won titles with Mancini and Pellegrini or Chelsea that did same with Mourinho and Conte?
Madrid, Inter, Barca and many others. They all hired bad ones before getting it right. You think clubs never made mistakes while hiring managers?
No manager is a guarantee of success, there’s so much risk - half the time it’s just pot luck, that’s why there’s such a merry go round of managers. What’s the average time for a manager to be in post - I’m sure that stat is out there, but it’s probably max 18 months.Madrid, Inter, Barca and many others. They all hired bad ones before getting it right. You think clubs never made mistakes while hiring managers?
made 3 mistakes over 5yrs while keeping the same management structure?Madrid, Inter, Barca and many others. They all hired bad ones before getting it right. You think clubs never made mistakes while hiring managers?
So someone tell me, who is the clown making all these decisions Woodward or Matt Judge? I know the Glazers have the final say but I am hearing different things from different reports and articles. Some say it's Ed and some say its some Matt Judge lad so who really is it?
All professional football clubs are businesses. I think the difference between say Us and City is that we already have an established brand, that brings in enough sponsorship for us to have become a cash cow for a property and sports franchise conglomerate, but City are still in a phase where they're building a business and a brand by reinvesting in their assett.
For us to get on a level playing field with them would require them to decide to sit back and milk money out of their assett, like our owners do, because we're never going to go back to the investing and growing model from where we are now.
As an aside, because thinking about it winds me right up!
I'm actually getting a bit iffy about using the word 'us' when it comes to talking about United because United 'the club' aren't 'us' anymore. The club itself is now an offshore company based in the Camen Islands (to avoid UK taxes so that our money doesn't benefit us or or country through the UK tax system). It's owned by a Americans who own malls and other sports businesses and who work in debt using low investment / high take out practices across all their businesses. The registered UK office is in London and we play football in Trafford (so we don't even pay rates to Manchester and haven't done since we left Newton Heath (and the players stopped drinking in The Railway on Dean Lane where my Dad used to drink as a young man)).
As a Manchester man; I must say that it peeves me that what was once a Manchester football club, that relied on us as a local fanbase and was 'our club', has become so far removed from 'us' and the ethics, roots and exciting football playing style that made 'us' what we were.
It's become more a case of 'them' because that's how I now think of the club - especially when I'm watching dire football and shaking my head thinking about what they've done to what was once Manchester United. I swear that football supporting is an incurable disease because that's the only logical explanation as to why we still care, still turn out in all weathers, still stay in our seats until the final whistle (some of us anyway), still pay them money to go into their offshore accounts and still call their monster our club.
Sorry for the moan, it's put me on a downer . . any kind of win tomorrow should lift the gloom!
2 and yeah, they all made many mistakes.
Woodward didn’t hire Moyes. So if you incist in using Moyes, then you can argue three bad appointments and a change in CEO/ management over that period...
Please provide details.
I have less of a problem with the actual hiring themselves, but with the backroom management during their tenures.
Ed has been paired with 3 managers with no success, and I simply dont agree that the core problem is with the managers.
WTF? If you have nothing worthwhile to post, then keep your hands off the keyboard.
Can't you see who all are failed managers from that list? Or you believe when shit sites like sportskeeda reports it?It's a list managers for Madrid and Inter. Not difficult to see how many wrong or failed managers were appointed before getting it right.
Clicking links is hard work.
It's a list managers for Madrid and Inter. Not difficult to see how many wrong or failed managers were appointed before getting it right.
It is when you’ve only got one hand free!
Sorry but I dont see it.
It's a list managers for Madrid and Inter. Not difficult to see how many wrong or failed managers were appointed before getting it right.
To make it simpler, please provide details using Madrid.
Click the first link. Can't make it simpler than that.Also check the managerial appointments from 2003-2006 around that time.
Isn’t it. It makes few seconds to check whats needed. If only some shit side reported it, it would have been easier.
Dont tell me you meant doing something watching Jose's pic
and do you know what happened on 27 February 2006?
Also check the managerial appointments from 2003-2006 around that time.
Please feel free to click the link https://www.theguardian.com/football/2006/feb/28/europeanfootball.sport
BTW thanks for helping me make my point.
And who hired managers who won 4/5 CL titles? Yeah, obvious point is proven. Same guy who made wrong choices got it spot on after failed appointments.
So, he's yells when someone puts two links up then posts a link himself. Ok. *steps back and leaves quickly*
Our management made 3 poor appointments bud, deal with it. Woodward or not someone from upstairs appointed Moyes.
Anyway the Manager isn't important. Good clubs with good structures win trebles regardless of the manager. Whether Pep, Tito, Tata or Luis Enrique, they all win because the club got their shit together.
Real managers win all the time too and get sacked afterwards.
Chelsea and city's "wrong appointments" all won titles.
Yet for us, we can't win no matter who we hire and then we blame the manager. You think Pep and Klopp will do any better here? Those two are just smart enough to turn us down knowing we are hopeless.
And?
What Roonster said. Most sides fail their way to success. How did Liverpool end up with Klopp?
He came back 3yrs later for a second stint, obviously having learnt from his earlier mistakes and have someone else clean up the mess he left behind.
Since coming back Perez has hired 6 managers in 9 seasons, having to fire 3 of the 6 (50%) within a season of hiring them, showing that his success is not premised on hiring that 'good' manager.
and what success has liverpool had with Klopp?
What do you think is the average life span of a manager at big club? 26 years?
So so man who made wrong appointments made good ones and that was the point I made. Just because Woodward made 2 wrong decisions doesn't mean he won't get it right, in fact no club gets all their appointments spot on.
Then why are you blaming Woodward for 3 wrong appointments when 2 of the managers won few cups? At least be consistent with your logic. Btw only 2 of them were his appointments.
Exactly. Every club made wrong appointments, there is no other way to learn than appoint and see.
That is why those clubs dont rely on managerial appointments for success.
We have changed managers and changed players. The only thing we havent changed is the backroom setup.
Yeah, that's a foolproof logic.
I am consistent - if we deem LvG and Mourinho to have failed and need to be replaced, then we cannot be talking of Klopp being successful.
I have repeatedly said that I dont really have a problem with the appointment themselves, but that Ed making footballing decisions is not an environment in which a manager can be expected to succeed imo.
So we can rely on Woodward who made 2/2 good appointments. Glad we sorted this out.
Its not foolproof but is much more likely to succeed than your wishful thinking.
Wrong cos no matter who we appoint, as long as Ed is making football decision, we are more likely to fail than succeed.
Yeah why not. But unless some shit site reports it I won't believe it.
So Klopp is a failure because he didn't win anything when their progress has been nothing but superb, Jose won 2 trophies bit still didn't succeed. I don't understand what your point is, well I never understand the point of your posts.
Hooray! Let's keep Mourinho, because he clearly is a good appointment.
- Status