Michael Carrick - Head Coach for the remainder of the season

Considering the reason why Carrick was hired over Ole was because the latter wanted a guaranteed contract if he were to achieve Champions League qualification, I am confident that Ineos won't only hire Carrick off the back of him getting top 4/5. I am hopeful that they will do their due diligence on other managerial targets, however I would prefer them to stay away from any international manager who will be unavailable until after the World Cup, as this will likely have a knock-on effect on our preseason and early transfer activity.

Right now, I am enjoying the ride with Carrick. He has made United enjoyable to watch again. It feels too soon to say what it would take to convince me that he deserves the permentant job. It would largely depend on who else is attainable and how they match up to Carrick's performances from now until the end of the season.
 
Football is cultural and if manager has no connection to the said club, the job should never be theirs. Not saying non of the current top managers out there should not be appointed or considered but a very important question has to be considered, what is their connection with the fanbase? These 3 have to be in sync for a successful tenure - the players + the fans + head coach.

I personally do not think Manchester United should ever have a manager that is not British and Michael Carrick fits that profile. Currently most fans are happy with what he is done in 3 games but in truth most of it is not even exceptional yet we are treating it as if the guy just introduced us to football. What does that say about our connection with him? Us fantasizing about some magical or make believe scenario has led us to 13 wasted years of trying to create an identity that will always be alien to any fan that wants to recapture our glory years.

At Manchester United we need a manager we feel is one of us like at every other great club because when it gets tough, for us to keep hope alive, the feeling of us all being in it together is necessary.

We should not hire a manager us idiots cant make excuses for.I am of the thinking even Phil Neville will not do an awful job at United. Everything about football on matchday is cultural and operating within a culture you are well versed with is half the battle won.
 
KikiDaKats said:
Football is cultural and if manager has no connection to the said club, the job should never be theirs. Not saying non of the current top managers out there should not be appointed or considered but a very important question has to be considered, what is their connection with the fanbase? These 3 have to be in sync for a successful tenure - the players + the fans + head coach.

I personally do not think Manchester United should ever have a manager that is not British and Michael Carrick fits that profile. Currently most fans are happy with what he is done in 3 games but in truth most of it is not even exceptional yet we are treating it as if the guy just introduced us to football. What does that say about our connection with him? Us fantasizing about some magical or make believe scenario has led us to 13 wasted years of trying to create an identity that will always be alien to any fan that wants to recapture our glory years.

At Manchester United we need a manager we feel is one of us like at every other great club because when it gets tough, for us to keep hope alive, the feeling of us all being in it together is necessary.

We should not hire a manager us idiots cant make excuses for.I am of the thinking even Phil Neville will not do an awful job at United. Everything about football on matchday is cultural and operating within a culture you are well versed with is half the battle won.
Click to expand...
I have the same belief in a way.

I dont want a continental manager. They will more than likely come for 3 or 4 seasons max, then move on to the next project that they feel like completing.

For example, say Luis Enrique comes, does well but then leaves for a job role at Barcelona or Juventus or wherever, where do we go from there to keep the success going. We lost SAF and haven't come close to replicating the success we had.

Liverpool lost Klopp, now they look like a shadow of what they used to be.

I want a manager that doesn't look at United as a short term project, get the success and move onto the next. I want a manager that looks at aiming to stay the long term, build a dynasty. That wants to leave a legacy behind them when they leave.

It's not surprise that the most respected managers at Liverpool and United were Shankley, Paisley, Mat Busby and Alex Ferguson.

I firmly believe that even if Amorim was a success, it would be a matter of time his head would turn towards another European giant in the end anyway.
 
bond19821982 said:
I wasn't happy how we played against Fulham. Fulham was brilliant but we should have done more . How many chances did we actually create from open play ?

Diallo shot
Mbeumo chance
Sesko header
Sesko goal
Cunha goal

The matches like this is where I will judge a manager. We know we can play mid block and counter. We just dont know how to win when you have to dominate.
Click to expand...

I've got news for you.
 
DJ_21 said:
Agree. I’m a bit worried that Carrick isn’t that flexible and he’s going to stick with the same 11 every week depending on injuries. I’d like to try Mbeumo and Amad out wide with Sesko in the middle.
Click to expand...

It's his 3rd game in charge, and they only have 1 game/wk. Why would he change the winning team in such short period? Just because certain players should play??
 
Last edited:
Hopefully these 3 games convince the Boards to give him a much needed CM this winter window. Even a loan would help.
 
SungSam7 said:
I have the same belief in a way.

I dont want a continental manager. They will more than likely come for 3 or 4 seasons max, then move on to the next project that they feel like completing.

For example, say Luis Enrique comes, does well but then leaves for a job role at Barcelona or Juventus or wherever, where do we go from there to keep the success going. We lost SAF and haven't come close to replicating the success we had.

Liverpool lost Klopp, now they look like a shadow of what they used to be.

I want a manager that doesn't look at United as a short term project, get the success and move onto the next. I want a manager that looks at aiming to stay the long term, build a dynasty. That wants to leave a legacy behind them when they leave.

It's not surprise that the most respected managers at Liverpool and United were Shankley, Paisley, Mat Busby and Alex Ferguson.

I firmly believe that even if Amorim was a success, it would be a matter of time his head would turn towards another European giant in the end anyway.
Click to expand...
Eh Klopp
 
KikiDaKats said:
Football is cultural and if manager has no connection to the said club, the job should never be theirs. Not saying non of the current top managers out there should not be appointed or considered but a very important question has to be considered, what is their connection with the fanbase? These 3 have to be in sync for a successful tenure - the players + the fans + head coach.

I personally do not think Manchester United should ever have a manager that is not British and Michael Carrick fits that profile. Currently most fans are happy with what he is done in 3 games but in truth most of it is not even exceptional yet we are treating it as if the guy just introduced us to football. What does that say about our connection with him? Us fantasizing about some magical or make believe scenario has led us to 13 wasted years of trying to create an identity that will always be alien to any fan that wants to recapture our glory years.

At Manchester United we need a manager we feel is one of us like at every other great club because when it gets tough, for us to keep hope alive, the feeling of us all being in it together is necessary.

We should not hire a manager us idiots cant make excuses for.I am of the thinking even Phil Neville will not do an awful job at United. Everything about football on matchday is cultural and operating within a culture you are well versed with is half the battle won.
Click to expand...
Not that having a connection to the club is a bad thing but other than Solskjaer, Van Nistelroy, Giggs and Carrick, which former Utd managers have had a connection to the club? SAF did not and Matt Busby played for City and Pool not Utd.

And if not Carrick or Solskjaer where does that leave us Bruce, Hughes?
 
At the beginning of the season, based on our signings, areas of the squad we felt were still weak, no europe and the performances of last season, those of us (myself included) who doubted Amorim would have said a top 4 finish was good/very good, maybe those who were in favour of Amorim may have seen a top 8 finish as good/very good. So for me if Carrick gets us top 4 he will have done a good job.

If also shows that he's able to play a good style of football that potentially, with better signings, coule get us competing with the top teams then for me it would be a no brainer to keep him on.
 
I would guess most managers would happily take the job and obvs would love to be successful but would be aware of the stress and expectations of the job. Bottom line: they know full well it is a job. They are not fans. Every post Fergie “failure” has walked away, laughing all the way to the bank, pretty much set up for life and happy to take on a subsequent, much less stressful job which still pays enough to keep the rest of his family in luxury for the rest of their days.
I do believe there is merit in choosing someone with connections to the club although there should be alternatives. Similar with players. Although not universally so, but similar with players. Without going into specific nationalities, there are clearly some that have zero respect for the club, whereas most British/Irish players realise United are the pinnacle, within same/similar culture and locality plus family proximity. It’s easy for us fans to forget that it’s a job and all a balance. South Americans, first instance, have little to no connection regarding loyalty and sacrifice a lot to leave friends and family behind so feel less connection and obligation. All a bit generalised but I think we have a better chance with somebody who has a genuine connection, albeit, obvs, not exclusively.
 
Yeah, British players will never sulk on the pitch (only missing pockets in the shorts to put their hands in), act like dickheads off it, go on the piss when it's not a day off, sit on their fat contracts or, God forbid, start finding their form again when there's a NT tournament coming up or when it's time to negotiate a new deal. The managers you also mention are not outliers in the sense you imagine it. There are plenty who would stay at their respective clubs, but most managers can't produce the necessary results to stay that long. It has feck all to do with nationality, it has to do with (some of) us waiting for the next Ferguson to magically appear around the corner.
 
TheRedDevil'sAdvocate said:
Yeah, British players will never sulk on the pitch (only missing pockets in the shorts to put their hands in), act like dickheads off it, go on the piss when it's not a day off, sit on their fat contracts or, God forbid, start finding their form again when there's a NT tournament coming up or when it's time to negotiate a new deal. The managers you also mention are not outliers in the sense you imagine it. There are plenty who would stay at their respective clubs, but most managers can't produce the necessary results to stay that long. It has feck all to do with nationality, it has to do with (some of) us waiting for the next Ferguson to magically appear around the corner.
Click to expand...
Let’s face it, the next Ferguson could appear around the corner and he’d be fired because he didn’t get top 4 and win a trophy in this first 2 years (which Ferguson didn’t).
 
Fingeredmouse said:
Fergie finished second in his first full season didn't he?
Click to expand...

You’re right my mistake. He finished 2nd and then followed it up with finishing 11th the next year. He definitely would’ve been fired by current standards.

He then followed up with a terrible season where we finished 13th and had several fans calling for his job but winning the FA Cup saved him that year.

Compare that with Ole (just as an example) - we finished 3rd and 2nd, playing the most number of games in Europe (meaning we reached the latter stages of a lot of cups) and lost the EL final. He was then fired when we were 7th I believe the following season.
 
We've got to secure CL football to stop the rot. We are well capable with the players we have and 1 game a week.

CL footy will take revenue up to £750m next year and give us a splurge in the market this summer, not to mention the increased attractiveness of the club to transfer targets.

With people like Rashford, Casemiro and Sancho finally off the wage bill, wouldnt be suprised if we spent £300m.
 
RedSince82 said:
We've got to secure CL football to stop the rot. We are well capable with the players we have and 1 game a week.

CL footy will take revenue up to £750m next year and give us a splurge in the market this summer, not to mention the increased attractiveness of the club to transfer targets.

With people like Rashford, Casemiro and Sancho finally off the wage bill, wouldnt be suprised if we spent £300m.
Click to expand...
I kinda don‘t care about the CL anymore. I don‘t like the format. Anyways…

If we qualify we definitely need to invest in the squad to manage all those games. If we innit we might as well try to winnit.
 
Ole's screen said:
Let’s face it, the next Ferguson could appear around the corner and he’d be fired because he didn’t get top 4 and win a trophy in this first 2 years (which Ferguson didn’t).
Click to expand...

Can a comparison be made between taking over the job as Head Coach of the current Manchester United to the task that Fergie had in taking over Manchester United in the mid 80's?

I argue it just can't be done.

I was arguing with someone about Amorim recently and they were comparing the lack of time he got to early Ferguson.

I just had to tell him stop comparing Amorim to Ferguson!
 
Ole's screen said:
You’re right my mistake. He finished 2nd and then followed it up with finishing 11th the next year. He definitely would’ve been fired by current standards.

He then followed up with a terrible season where we finished 13th and had several fans calling for his job but winning the FA Cup saved him that year.

Compare that with Ole (just as an example) - we finished 3rd and 2nd, playing the most number of games in Europe (meaning we reached the latter stages of a lot of cups) and lost the EL final. He was then fired when we were 7th I believe the following season.
Click to expand...
Well said. You see 'We're United' or some other blathering bilge and managers have to be held to impossible standards. Fergie would have been fired 8 times over with our current fans.
 
Olecurls99 said:
Well said. You see 'We're United' or some other blathering bilge and managers have to be held to impossible standards. Fergie would have been fired 8 times over with our current fans.
Click to expand...
Amorim would have been fired at most other PL clubs, after a short period.

‚Impossible standards‘ :lol: . Let‘s see what you come up with next.
 
sullydnl said:
This is what happens when you give Farage too much airtime.
Click to expand...
So basically you have quoted me. Added no actual arguments to anything I said.

I feel I have valid points in what I said. But you brought nothing to the discussion other than trying to be funny.

Great discussion. Did you really need to bother?
 
sullydnl said:
This is what happens when you give Farage too much airtime.
Click to expand...
Interesting. Get some depth into your reasoning because that was cheaply directed at the wrong person.

If that was said as a joke? Cool
If its to look smart? Foolish utterances can be twattish especially if the recipient is sat on his bench under a mango tree enjoying palm wine.

We are on a football forum stop projecting what you harbour and making a fool of yourself to look smart.
 
Isotope said:
It's his 3rd game in charge, and they only have 1 game/wk. Why would he change the winning team in such short period? Just because certain players should play??
Click to expand...
No it’s more of the fact that some games will require Sesko hold up play and in the air ability. Like we seen against Fulham… Mbuemo wasn’t as affected as he was against city and arsenal up top where he’d have more space. So that’s what I mean
 
SungSam7 said:
So basically you have quoted me. Added no actual arguments to anything I said.

I feel I have valid points in what I said. But you brought nothing to the discussion other than trying to be funny.

Great discussion. Did you really need to bother?
Click to expand...
I think he made his point clearly enough.
 
bond19821982 said:
I wasn't happy how we played against Fulham. Fulham was brilliant but we should have done more . How many chances did we actually create from open play ?

Diallo shot
Mbeumo chance
Sesko header
Sesko goal
Cunha goal

The matches like this is where I will judge a manager. We know we can play mid block and counter. We just dont know how to win when you have to dominate.
Click to expand...

Who is actually thinking that we are anywhere near the point where we can "dominate" any Premier League side? You are talking like Fulham are a pub team.

Football has changed. Maybe it is my imagination, but in the 90s and 00s, we would routinely beat bottom half teams by 3 of 4 goals at OT. They would turn up knowing they would lose.

City were at that level a couple of years ago, where a team had no choice but to low block and hope to nick a goal.

Very few Prem teams go to away grounds with little to no ambition anymore. And I would say that only Arsenal currently are capable of dominating ball possession in every game they play.

Complaining about the fact that we only had a few chances v a very good Fulham side, yet scored 3 goals and won, in Carrick's third game as manager, is a little daft. Fulham had 57% possession v City and scored 4 goals, in their recent 4-5 loss. City had 4 shots and scored 4. Arsenal only beat Fulham 1-0 with 5 on target shots - we had 6 on Sunday. Liverpool only had 2 on target in their 2-2 draw with Fulham.

My point is, you said "matches like this is where I will judge a manager" and you somehow expect us to dominate this game. If you are judging Carrick on this game, then maybe you should take a look at what other teams did v Fulham. Teams that are far more established than us and that don't have managers that have only been in the job a few weeks.
 
Zed 101 said:
Not that having a connection to the club is a bad thing but other than Solskjaer, Van Nistelroy, Giggs and Carrick, which former Utd managers have had a connection to the club? SAF did not and Matt Busby played for City and Pool not Utd.

And if not Carrick or Solskjaer where does that leave us Bruce, Hughes?
Click to expand...
Right mentions. Manchester United after WW2 - military experience and working class club - working class family, we were a community club that needed rebuilding at various points and who better was there to do it with us.

Culturally we are just that club. We can stray but I'd rather we don't depart from who we are completely as a club.

Not every former player can manage the club and Tim from The Hounds doesn't have a God given right to manage the club because he knows or had a cuppa at the club canteen once. i wont argue against Eddie Howe but Dyche might give me stroke. There is no right or wrong in these types of arguments but the foundations cannot be ignored when making appointments. City tried Hughes and Bruce, common, Why is the gray haired guy for Brighton not being mentioned? Though unsure how he will operate in modern day football tactically but Mclaren should have always been considered for the United job (looking past his England failings - Capello did). I was dont think I mentioned club legends in my argument.

My main point is young British managers should always be in the conversation as one of the front runners for the United job especially if they are showing and Michael Carrick is currently showing. I wouldn't mind Diego Simeone at United because I believe he will fit right in culturally at this club and I believe he is world class.
 
KikiDaKats said:
Football is cultural and if manager has no connection to the said club, the job should never be theirs. Not saying non of the current top managers out there should not be appointed or considered but a very important question has to be considered, what is their connection with the fanbase? These 3 have to be in sync for a successful tenure - the players + the fans + head coach.

I personally do not think Manchester United should ever have a manager that is not British and Michael Carrick fits that profile. Currently most fans are happy with what he is done in 3 games but in truth most of it is not even exceptional yet we are treating it as if the guy just introduced us to football. What does that say about our connection with him? Us fantasizing about some magical or make believe scenario has led us to 13 wasted years of trying to create an identity that will always be alien to any fan that wants to recapture our glory years.

At Manchester United we need a manager we feel is one of us like at every other great club because when it gets tough, for us to keep hope alive, the feeling of us all being in it together is necessary.

We should not hire a manager us idiots cant make excuses for.I am of the thinking even Phil Neville will not do an awful job at United. Everything about football on matchday is cultural and operating within a culture you are well versed with is half the battle won.
Click to expand...


SungSam7 said:
I have the same belief in a way.

I dont want a continental manager. They will more than likely come for 3 or 4 seasons max, then move on to the next project that they feel like completing.

For example, say Luis Enrique comes, does well but then leaves for a job role at Barcelona or Juventus or wherever, where do we go from there to keep the success going. We lost SAF and haven't come close to replicating the success we had.

Liverpool lost Klopp, now they look like a shadow of what they used to be.

I want a manager that doesn't look at United as a short term project, get the success and move onto the next. I want a manager that looks at aiming to stay the long term, build a dynasty. That wants to leave a legacy behind them when they leave.

It's not surprise that the most respected managers at Liverpool and United were Shankley, Paisley, Mat Busby and Alex Ferguson.

I firmly believe that even if Amorim was a success, it would be a matter of time his head would turn towards another European giant in the end anyway.
Click to expand...

Three of those managers were Scottish. I think you both assume that Scottish managers have some kind of affinity for English clubs that managers outside Britain don't have. Really, what connection to the club did they have before going on to manage them? What connection to any of the clubs they managed did the most successful managers in England have? Those three managers all describe themselves culturally as Scottish rather than British. They might have accepted their British status, but I don't think any of them saw themselves as having a connection with England past the clubs they managed there. I mean, Shankley used to evoke William Wallace and Robert the Bruce when Scotland played England! There's no cultural reason why those managers would want to stay at an English club beyond being successful there and having a good time. Wenger, Guardiola, Klopp are all recent examples of long tenures at English clubs. The correlation is success and being happy there rather than nationality. When has a PL manager been very successful then moved on quickly to another project? They stick around for more than 3-4 years when they're successful and happy, regardless of nationality. Prioritising Scottish or English managers just seems to be based on unsound logic to me.
 
sullydnl said:
This is what happens when you give Farage too much airtime.
Click to expand...
Big Nige to be announced as our new manager at the end of the season? Shite all over the pitch but one hell of a right wing?

I honestly can't believe what I'm reading in this thread.
 
KikiDaKats said:
At Manchester United we need a manager we feel is one of us like at every other great club because when it gets tough, for us to keep hope alive, the feeling of us all being in it together is necessary.

We should not hire a manager us idiots cant make excuses for.I am of the thinking even Phil Neville will not do an awful job at United. Everything about football on matchday is cultural and operating within a culture you are well versed with is half the battle won.
Click to expand...
A manager has to understand the club, but I don't want a manager who panders to the fans. His job is to win in the right way, and progress, and if he does that the fans will be happy.
 
Isotope said:
It's his 3rd game in charge, and they only have 1 game/wk. Why would he change the winning team in such short period? Just because certain players should play??
Click to expand...
Spot on. Criticism for the sake of criticism.

On a wider point re Carrick's future. This isn't 2013 (Mourinho and Guardiola) or 2015/2016 (Guardiola again and Klopp) or 2019 (younger Ancelotti) where there's an obvious world class manager that would immediately improve us and have sustained success for a few years.

Every single manager available in the summer would arrive with significant downsides/weakness.
 
nickm said:
A manager has to understand the club, but I don't want a manager who panders to the fans. His job is to win in the right way, and progress, and if he does that the fans will be happy.
Click to expand...
I'd argue that one of our biggest issues over the last 10-12 years has been managers doing the complete opposite to "pandering to the fans".

See Moyes and "we aspire to be like city"
Ole and "trophies are for egos"
Mourinho and falling out with everyone etc
Amorim with almost every press conference

I've said before the PR element of the United job is one of the most important. If you can keep the fans/local press happy and are good with the national media, you buy yourself time. Obviously that has to come with good performances eventually.

After we beat city last season, the discussion after was largely dominated by the decision to drop Rashford and Garnacho rather than the win. He didn't even benefit from the win against our rivals because of how he handled the press.
 
gaffs said:
Who is actually thinking that we are anywhere near the point where we can "dominate" any Premier League side? You are talking like Fulham are a pub team.

Football has changed. Maybe it is my imagination, but in the 90s and 00s, we would routinely beat bottom half teams by 3 of 4 goals at OT. They would turn up knowing they would lose.

City were at that level a couple of years ago, where a team had no choice but to low block and hope to nick a goal.

Very few Prem teams go to away grounds with little to no ambition anymore. And I would say that only Arsenal currently are capable of dominating ball possession in every game they play.

Complaining about the fact that we only had a few chances v a very good Fulham side, yet scored 3 goals and won, in Carrick's third game as manager, is a little daft. Fulham had 57% possession v City and scored 4 goals, in their recent 4-5 loss. City had 4 shots and scored 4. Arsenal only beat Fulham 1-0 with 5 on target shots - we had 6 on Sunday. Liverpool only had 2 on target in their 2-2 draw with Fulham.

My point is, you said "matches like this is where I will judge a manager" and you somehow expect us to dominate this game. If you are judging Carrick on this game, then maybe you should take a look at what other teams did v Fulham. Teams that are far more established than us and that don't have managers that have only been in the job a few weeks.
Click to expand...
“I will judge” type phrases grind my gears. Come across as really self important, like there’s some sort of gravitas attached to someone’s opinion (even though I know it’s like lot intended that way).

Another product of over-hype, micro-analysis and internet ‘expertise’.

I need to go out more!
 
gaffs said:
Who is actually thinking that we are anywhere near the point where we can "dominate" any Premier League side? You are talking like Fulham are a pub team.

Football has changed. Maybe it is my imagination, but in the 90s and 00s, we would routinely beat bottom half teams by 3 of 4 goals at OT. They would turn up knowing they would lose.

City were at that level a couple of years ago, where a team had no choice but to low block and hope to nick a goal.

Very few Prem teams go to away grounds with little to no ambition anymore. And I would say that only Arsenal currently are capable of dominating ball possession in every game they play.

Complaining about the fact that we only had a few chances v a very good Fulham side, yet scored 3 goals and won, in Carrick's third game as manager, is a little daft. Fulham had 57% possession v City and scored 4 goals, in their recent 4-5 loss. City had 4 shots and scored 4. Arsenal only beat Fulham 1-0 with 5 on target shots - we had 6 on Sunday. Liverpool only had 2 on target in their 2-2 draw with Fulham.

My point is, you said "matches like this is where I will judge a manager" and you somehow expect us to dominate this game. If you are judging Carrick on this game, then maybe you should take a look at what other teams did v Fulham. Teams that are far more established than us and that don't have managers that have only been in the job a few weeks.
Click to expand...
Lot of baseless assumptions and imagination

1. I never said Fulham are a pub team.
2. I never said Carrick isnt up for the job and never said I will judge him based on one game.but games like this will be a factor or should be a factor when we make the final decision.
3. I dont care about how others fares against Fulham. We are at home and I expect my team to play better, irrespective of the opponent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.