Michael Carrick - Head Coach for the remainder of the season

Carrick has turned the team around and actually gives a s about the club.

Most the others mentioned will just be another mercenary.
 
I feel like I'm losing my mind trying to read this in-depth analysis of his coaching ability based on his time at Boro. IMO there literally isn't a more irrelevant thing to talk about than this.

Because first off, he will have access to better coaches at United who can work on the technical aspects with the team. He doesn't have to be a coaching genius. Secondly, Boro weakened in the transfer market during his reign something that 100% is not happening here. The team will have access to funds, we are constantly among the top 4 spenders. Now it seems, with the structure put in place by INEOS, we might also have better scouting and target selection in the transfer market too. If this year is anything to go by, anyway.

Thirdly, I believe in many cases with managers that their success or failure at a club is completely circumstantial, because the success equation is multi-factorial. Managers are only one part, then there's the coaches, the players, the scouting department, the board and even good ol' lady luck. My point is that previous success is rarely a good predictor for future success. A good manager can fail at a club and a bad manager can succeed and made to look good, due to other circumstances. My point is, the past is rarely a good predictor for the future and it's certainly far less accurate than the present.

Fourthly and very importantly, I am adamant that there are two ways to manage a team: One is being a very strong tactical coach like Pep or Klopp, someone who can implements their very strong vision about how the team should play football. The other one is just being a sensible decision maker, a good motivator, an intelligent people manager and someone with a bit of charisma or IT factor. That guy tends to also leave some of the tactical coaching to more drilled instructors.

Ferguson in previous decades and Ancelotti and Zidane in the recent era stand out for me as managers without exceptional tactical or coaching skills, but who succeeded in a very demanding job because they fit the latter description. Xabi Alonso on the other hand, who is considered a very strong tactical coach that drilled Leverkusen to perfection, struggled to handle the personalities at Real Madrid and was forced out in less than a year.

We also tried two such coaches recently, with reputation for drilling their own system, in ETH and Amorim and it failed spectacularly. In my opinion this approach of looking for mercurial tactical coaches and then signing targets that align with their specific tactical vision, is like betting it all on your favourite number at the roulette table. It will still end in tears 98% of the time. So, if Carrick makes it to the end of the season with no collapse and he manages to grab 3rd spot against all expectations... then for me the job is his. I don't want to start again with a brand new gamble, while things are looking good for us as is. I'd much rather we keep him and focus the energy on just strengthening the squad for next year. And I don't give single F about his time at Boro, it literally doesn't matter at all.
 
Last edited:
MadMike said:
I feel like I'm losing my mind trying to read this in-depth analysis of his coaching ability based on his time at Boro. IMO there literally isn't a more irrelevant thing to talk about than this.

Because first off, he will have access to better coaches at United who can work on the technical aspects with the team. He doesn't have to be a coaching genius. Secondly, Boro weakened in the transfer market during his reign something that 100% is not happening here. The team will have access to funds, we are constantly among the top 4 spenders. Now it seems, with the structure put in place by INEOS, we might also have better scouting and target selection in the transfer market too. If this year is anything to go by, anyway.

Thirdly, I believe in many cases with managers that their success or failure at a club is completely circumstantial, because the success equation is multi-factorial. Managers are only one part, then there's the coaches, the players, the scouting department, the board and even good ol' lady luck. My point is that previous success is rarely a good predictor for future success. A good manager can fail at a club and a bad manager can succeed and made to look good, due to other circumstances. My point is, the past is rarely a good predictor for the future and it's certainly far less accurate than the present.

Fourthly and very importantly, I am adamant that there are two ways to manage a team: One is being a very strong tactical coach like Pep or Klopp, someone who can implements their very strong vision about how the team should play football. The other one is just being a sensible decision maker, a good motivator, an intelligent people manager and someone with a bit of charisma or IT factor. That guy tends to also leave some of the tactical coaching to more drilled instructors.

Ferguson in previous decades and Ancelotti and Zidane in the recent era stand out for me as managers without exceptional tactical or coaching skills, but who succeeded in a very demanding job because they fit the latter description. Xabi Alonso on the other hand, who is considered a very strong tactical coach that drilled Leverkusen to perfection, struggled to handle the personalities at Real Madrid and was forced out in less than a year.

We also tried two such coaches recently, with reputation for drilling their own system, in ETH and Amorim and it failed spectacularly. In my opinion this approach of looking for mercurial tactical coaches and then signing targets that align with their specific tactical vision, is like betting it all on your favourite number at the roulette table. It will still end in tears 98% of the time. So, if Carrick makes it to the end of the season with no collapse and he manages to grab 3rd spot against all expectations... then for me the job is his. I don't want to start again with a brand new gamble, while things are looking good for us as is. I'd much rather we keep him and focus the energy on just strengthening the squad for next year. And I don't give single F about his time at Boro, it literally doesn't matter at all.
Click to expand...
Brilliantly said
 
MadMike said:
I feel like I'm losing my mind trying to read this in-depth analysis of his coaching ability based on his time at Boro. IMO there literally isn't a more irrelevant thing to talk about than this.

Because first off, he will have access to better coaches at United who can work on the technical aspects with the team. He doesn't have to be a coaching genius. Secondly, Boro weakened in the transfer market during his reign something that 100% is not happening here. The team will have access to funds, we are constantly among the top 4 spenders. Now it seems, with the structure put in place by INEOS, we might also have better scouting and target selection in the transfer market too. If this year is anything to go by, anyway.

Thirdly, I believe in many cases with managers that their success or failure at a club is completely circumstantial, because the success equation is multi-factorial. Managers are only one part, then there's the coaches, the players, the scouting department, the board and even good ol' lady luck. My point is that previous success is rarely a good predictor for future success. A good manager can fail at a club and a bad manager can succeed and made to look good, due to other circumstances. My point is, the past is rarely a good predictor for the future and it's certainly far less accurate than the present.

Fourthly and very importantly, I am adamant that there are two ways to manage a team: One is being a very strong tactical coach like Pep or Klopp, someone who can implements their very strong vision about how the team should play football. The other one is just being a sensible decision maker, a good motivator, an intelligent people manager and someone with a bit of charisma or IT factor. That guy tends to also leave some of the tactical coaching to more drilled instructors.

Ferguson in previous decades and Ancelotti and Zidane in the recent era stand out for me as managers without exceptional tactical or coaching skills, but who succeeded in a very demanding job because they fit the latter description. Xabi Alonso on the other hand, who is considered a very strong tactical coach that drilled Leverkusen to perfection, struggled to handle the personalities at Real Madrid and was forced out in less than a year.

We also tried two such coaches recently, with reputation for drilling their own system, in ETH and Amorim and it failed spectacularly. In my opinion this approach of looking for mercurial tactical coaches and then signing targets that align with their specific tactical vision, is like betting it all on your favourite number at the roulette table. It will still end in tears 98% of the time. So, if Carrick makes it to the end of the season with no collapse and he manages to grab 3rd spot against all expectations... then for me the job is his. I don't want to start again with a brand new gamble, while things are looking good for us as is. I'd much rather we keep him and focus the energy on just strengthening the squad for next year. And I don't give single F about his time at Boro, it literally doesn't matter at all.
Click to expand...
Spot on Sir. Fergie was sacked by St. Mirren, but he turned out to be a half decent manager!
 
Fitchett said:
Spot on Sir. Fergie was sacked by St. Mirren, but he turned out to be a half decent manager!
Click to expand...
I feel like it would be remiss of me not to point out that SAF's sacking from St Mirren had absolutely nothing to do with his performance as a manager there. He was sacked because he was already negotiating with Aberdeen and the owner got upset about him.

I thought this kind of thing was common knowledge in the fan base, but I guess it's quite old history.
 
Olecurls99 said:
Brilliantly said
Click to expand...
There’s nothing brilliant about it if one of the contentions is SAF and Carlo Ancelotti weren’t good at tactics.

They might not be dogmatic or pioneering tactics wise but you don’t get those CVs with just giving rousing pep talks. Even more so for Carlo when he competed in the 90s/early 00s Serie A and is the most decorated CL coach ever, both heavily cagey, tactical competitions.

A high level understanding of the game and tactical flexibility is required to succeed at the highest level. Even Pep has evolved over the years, the truly dogmatic ones like Bielsa or Sarri never made it with a true top team.
 
Still the same idea that everything needs to be evaluated at the end of the season.

If Carrick continue this amazing run (even with a few loses) and get us to CL with clear sign of improvements, then he has a case for himself. For me, he has the advangtages especially when we see the clear standout candidates all extend their respectives work (Enrique, Ancelotti, Tuchel...etc). The rest are all inexperience interm of coaching team like United just like Carrick. If not the standout ones, then the rest are not that clear over Carrick especially if he keep getting results and play resonably well enough.
 
MadMike said:
I feel like I'm losing my mind trying to read this in-depth analysis of his coaching ability based on his time at Boro. IMO there literally isn't a more irrelevant thing to talk about than this.

Because first off, he will have access to better coaches at United who can work on the technical aspects with the team. He doesn't have to be a coaching genius. Secondly, Boro weakened in the transfer market during his reign something that 100% is not happening here. The team will have access to funds, we are constantly among the top 4 spenders. Now it seems, with the structure put in place by INEOS, we might also have better scouting and target selection in the transfer market too. If this year is anything to go by, anyway.

Thirdly, I believe in many cases with managers that their success or failure at a club is completely circumstantial, because the success equation is multi-factorial. Managers are only one part, then there's the coaches, the players, the scouting department, the board and even good ol' lady luck. My point is that previous success is rarely a good predictor for future success. A good manager can fail at a club and a bad manager can succeed and made to look good, due to other circumstances. My point is, the past is rarely a good predictor for the future and it's certainly far less accurate than the present.

Fourthly and very importantly, I am adamant that there are two ways to manage a team: One is being a very strong tactical coach like Pep or Klopp, someone who can implements their very strong vision about how the team should play football. The other one is just being a sensible decision maker, a good motivator, an intelligent people manager and someone with a bit of charisma or IT factor. That guy tends to also leave some of the tactical coaching to more drilled instructors.

Ferguson in previous decades and Ancelotti and Zidane in the recent era stand out for me as managers without exceptional tactical or coaching skills, but who succeeded in a very demanding job because they fit the latter description. Xabi Alonso on the other hand, who is considered a very strong tactical coach that drilled Leverkusen to perfection, struggled to handle the personalities at Real Madrid and was forced out in less than a year.

We also tried two such coaches recently, with reputation for drilling their own system, in ETH and Amorim and it failed spectacularly. In my opinion this approach of looking for mercurial tactical coaches and then signing targets that align with their specific tactical vision, is like betting it all on your favourite number at the roulette table. It will still end in tears 98% of the time. So, if Carrick makes it to the end of the season with no collapse and he manages to grab 3rd spot against all expectations... then for me the job is his. I don't want to start again with a brand new gamble, while things are looking good for us as is. I'd much rather we keep him and focus the energy on just strengthening the squad for next year. And I don't give single F about his time at Boro, it literally doesn't matter at all.
Click to expand...
Great post.

Everything is a gamble be it an established great manager, a highly rated upcoming manager or a Michael Carrick. We tried all these options before:
Established managers: LVG, Mourinho
Upcoming highly rated managers: ETH, Amorim
Michael Carrick type: Ole
None worked.
It is all about luck.
 
SambaBoy said:
He's won 6 out of 7 - following on from the worst manager we've had since SAF.

It's crazy that people were willing to brush under the carpet a cocktail of horrendous, boring performances combined with losses because the manager was trying to instil a philosophy under the assumption that it would bear fruit in the long run. This belief continued after a month, two months, three months...... 18 months.

Here we have a manager who's come in and beat the best teams in the divisions and won 6 out of his 7 games including some tricky fixtures, had some great performances and some not so good performances but managed to find a way to win but yet people are questioning his performances.

If people were so willing to give Amorim time to put his methods across, why doesn't Carrick get the opportunity or time to put his stamp on a team? Is it really down to him being Carrick and not a fashionable manager from Europe who mentions it being a process every interview?

Most managers say they will need time to put their mark on the team but that results also need to be there to get the time. Whilst Carrick is getting the results, I'll back him to improve the performances too.

Also, no team in history has domination in every game - I'm stunned at the way people have been judging United since Carrick came in. It's like everyone listens to the likes of Goldbridge and these idiots on twitter who ultimately hate to see us successful and want us to be in crisis mode as it's great for their brand and business.
Click to expand...

Aye.

We’ve tried everything from ”cut from the same cloth”, to ”Mr Philosophy”, “proven winner”, “DNA”, “we will suffer” and none has taken us right back to the top. All we’ve tended to do is waste time, and the philosophy managers have tended to be the worst of the lot, each one shitter than the previous. The longer we have waited for things to click, the worse it has gotten.

I have one expectation from a coach now, improve what you have, win yourself time. No 2 year rebuild nonsense, Carrick has taken a sledgehammer to that ridiculous notion and got a title winning run of results in 2 months.
Those defending the previous manager, almost to a man, were claiming the best we could hope for this season was Europa League qualification and that we may be able to challenge for CL qualification next season if we get the recruitment right.

Right now Carrick is absolutely smashing it out of the park in regards to winning himself time and improving what he has. Anyone asking for more after 7 games is talking in extremely bad faith.

For what it’s worth, I think we’re currently at the ceiling of what these players are capable of. We certainly need quality additions in CM, and we desperately need more pace an athleticism on the left side of the team. Absolutely no manager is making the current team perform better than this, that much I’m certain of.
 
Last edited:
Real Name said:
You should really stop acting like you're a mod here or stop in general.
Click to expand...
I will continue to point out your rudeness if and when it occurs and is directed at me. There's a simple solution if you'd like to avoid these exchanges.
 
Dion said:
I will continue to point out your rudeness if and when it occurs and is directed at me. There's a simple solution if you'd like to avoid these exchanges.
Click to expand...
You really have a lot of time on your hands dont you? And your victim acting is fast becoming really boring.
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
There’s nothing brilliant about it if one of the contentions is SAF and Carlo Ancelotti weren’t good at tactics.

They might not be dogmatic or pioneering tactics wise but you don’t get those CVs with just giving rousing pep talks. Even more so for Carlo when he competed in the 90s/early 00s Serie A and is the most decorated CL coach ever, both heavily cagey, tactical competitions.

A high level understanding of the game and tactical flexibility is required to succeed at the highest level. Even Pep has evolved over the years, the truly dogmatic ones like Bielsa or Sarri never made it with a true top team.
Click to expand...
Yeah that rubbed me the wrong way too. Ancelotti was treated like a fun guy who just lets his players play their thing and Fergie used to be treated just like a good motivator and a man who changed teams when necessary.
 
MadMike said:
I feel like I'm losing my mind trying to read this in-depth analysis of his coaching ability based on his time at Boro. IMO there literally isn't a more irrelevant thing to talk about than this.

Because first off, he will have access to better coaches at United who can work on the technical aspects with the team. He doesn't have to be a coaching genius. Secondly, Boro weakened in the transfer market during his reign something that 100% is not happening here. The team will have access to funds, we are constantly among the top 4 spenders. Now it seems, with the structure put in place by INEOS, we might also have better scouting and target selection in the transfer market too. If this year is anything to go by, anyway.

Thirdly, I believe in many cases with managers that their success or failure at a club is completely circumstantial, because the success equation is multi-factorial. Managers are only one part, then there's the coaches, the players, the scouting department, the board and even good ol' lady luck. My point is that previous success is rarely a good predictor for future success. A good manager can fail at a club and a bad manager can succeed and made to look good, due to other circumstances. My point is, the past is rarely a good predictor for the future and it's certainly far less accurate than the present.

Fourthly and very importantly, I am adamant that there are two ways to manage a team: One is being a very strong tactical coach like Pep or Klopp, someone who can implements their very strong vision about how the team should play football. The other one is just being a sensible decision maker, a good motivator, an intelligent people manager and someone with a bit of charisma or IT factor. That guy tends to also leave some of the tactical coaching to more drilled instructors.

Ferguson in previous decades and Ancelotti and Zidane in the recent era stand out for me as managers without exceptional tactical or coaching skills, but who succeeded in a very demanding job because they fit the latter description. Xabi Alonso on the other hand, who is considered a very strong tactical coach that drilled Leverkusen to perfection, struggled to handle the personalities at Real Madrid and was forced out in less than a year.

We also tried two such coaches recently, with reputation for drilling their own system, in ETH and Amorim and it failed spectacularly. In my opinion this approach of looking for mercurial tactical coaches and then signing targets that align with their specific tactical vision, is like betting it all on your favourite number at the roulette table. It will still end in tears 98% of the time. So, if Carrick makes it to the end of the season with no collapse and he manages to grab 3rd spot against all expectations... then for me the job is his. I don't want to start again with a brand new gamble, while things are looking good for us as is. I'd much rather we keep him and focus the energy on just strengthening the squad for next year. And I don't give single F about his time at Boro, it literally doesn't matter at all.
Click to expand...
Post.

Don’t think you’re mad.
 
Real Name said:
You really have a lot of time on your hands dont you? And your victim acting is fast becoming really boring.
Click to expand...
Again, you should probably just stick to the topic of the thread if you want to avoid these exchanges. Being rude to someone because they disagree with you is poor form.
 
Real Name said:
You really have a lot of time on your hands dont you? And your victim acting is fast becoming really boring.
Click to expand...
Clearly you do to and if you can't post civilly in this thread you'll be banned from it.
 
Jippy said:
Clearly you do to and if you can't post civilly in this thread you'll be banned from it.
Click to expand...
Acknowledged.
Although its all started by him quoting me after I said I dont want to discuss the topic with him any further.
 
I see that many have set the City game as the benchmark, which seems a bit unfair to Carrick. I compare our football and results to those under Amorim, and I think we have improved. Whether this improvement is enough for Carrick to keep the job is not for me to say, but I do see a difference and it’s a positive one.
 
Real Name said:
Acknowledged.
Although its all started by him quoting me after I said I dont want to discuss the topic with him any further.
Click to expand...
Fair enough, I think it's best for the thread if everyone moves on.
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
There’s nothing brilliant about it if one of the contentions is SAF and Carlo Ancelotti weren’t good at tactics.

They might not be dogmatic or pioneering tactics wise but you don’t get those CVs with just giving rousing pep talks. Even more so for Carlo when he competed in the 90s/early 00s Serie A and is the most decorated CL coach ever, both heavily cagey, tactical competitions.

A high level understanding of the game and tactical flexibility is required to succeed at the highest level. Even Pep has evolved over the years, the truly dogmatic ones like Bielsa or Sarri never made it with a true top team.
Click to expand...

Agreed. It's actually sad to see Ferguson's tenure (its perception historically) being downgraded to support this or that narrative, especially on the most prestigious United fan forum. The man understood the synergies that make a good side and the necessities required to win league titles better than anyone. And for a quarter of a century he overcame every challenge thrown his way.
 
Real Name said:
Acknowledged.
Although its all started by him quoting me after I said I dont want to discuss the topic with him any further.
Click to expand...
I was discussing the topic of the thread, you don't get to dictate who gets to discuss the topic in the thread, especially since after you made the comment about not wanting to discuss it with me you continued to make snarky comments about me across multiple threads. A behaviour another user felt implored to call you out on.

If you don't want to discuss something with someone then simply don't reply.

I'm more than happy to leave this and get back on topic now as Jippy has requested.
 
TheRedDevil'sAdvocate said:
Agreed. It's actually sad to see Ferguson's tenure (its perception historically) being downgraded to support this or that narrative, especially on the most prestigious United fan forum. The man understood the synergies that make a good side and the necessities required to win league titles better than anyone. And for a quarter of a century he overcame every challenge thrown his way.
Click to expand...
I think this gets overlooked a lot. You don't score as many goals as Ferguson's teams did consistently without being brilliant tactically. It'd be like being the best tennis player ever and apparently having a bad serve.

It's easy to confuse allowing coaches to coach your vision with trust and having no vision. We played enough weird formations during SAF's time to prove he says excellent. I still remember the Wolfsberg game and how easy we made that transition look. More convincing than any time Amorim tried it.

And I appreciate that @golden_blunder
 
Reyoji-Utd said:
Still the same idea that everything needs to be evaluated at the end of the season.

If Carrick continue this amazing run (even with a few loses) and get us to CL with clear sign of improvements, then he has a case for himself. For me, he has the advangtages especially when we see the clear standout candidates all extend their respectives work (Enrique, Ancelotti, Tuchel...etc). The rest are all inexperience interm of coaching team like United just like Carrick. If not the standout ones, then the rest are not that clear over Carrick especially if he keep getting results and play resonably well enough.
Click to expand...
Football is a results game. You lose consistently then you get sacked. You win consistently and you get your contract extended.
 
Just wait for the end of the season, no need for a premature contract like we did with Ole.

If things continue this well, then a 2+1 year contract, unless we can get someone like Luis Enrique.
 
I mean, we fired Amorim for bad results and a dopey formation

So we should hire Carrick for great results and a sensible formation

Simples.
 
cpresc said:
I mean, we fired Amorim for bad results and a dopey formation

So we should hire Carrick for great results and a sensible formation

Simples.
Click to expand...
It should be like that. For now results are most important. Performances are important too but posters panicking about our performances supposedly being worse as the games go by are not acknowlidging what kind of team Carrick has at his disposal and what are their limits. One poster even wrote few good results wont 'save him' and he'll be hired based on performances only.
 
Dion said:
I think this gets overlooked a lot. You don't score as many goals as Ferguson's teams did consistently without being brilliant tactically. It'd be like being the best tennis player ever and apparently having a bad serve.

It's easy to confuse allowing coaches to coach your vision with trust and having no vision. We played enough weird formations during SAF's time to prove he says excellent. I still remember the Wolfsberg game and how easy we made that transition look. More convincing than any time Amorim tried it.

And I appreciate that @golden_blunder
Click to expand...

Ferguson said it himself he was/is a gambler, during lockdown I watched the 2000 United PL goals on YouTube and at some points I struggled to wonder what the formation he was playing due to the personnel you could see on the pitch
 
Real Name said:
It should be like that. For now results are most important. Performances are important too but posters panicking about our performances supposedly being worse as the games go by are not acknowlidging what kind of team Carrick has at his disposal and what are their limits. One poster even wrote few good results wont 'save him' and he'll be hired based on performances only.
Click to expand...
‘Performance posters’ (I just coined that. feel free to use it) are neglecting that we are in the ‘business end’ of the season now, where performance matters much less. Results - points, are what matters now
 
Gavinb33 said:
Arteta is likely gonna scab his way to a league title
Click to expand...

Arteta is potentially going to win a league title because all his rivals have been shit this season. They are on track to get 7 less points than a few seasons ago and are generally poorer in every metric vs that season but might win the league. They are an effective team however you want to look at it. Not good to watch a lot of the time but generally effective. They win games by dominating their opposition.

We are currently not winning games by dominating out opposition. Arsenals style is relatively sustainable even if its not optimum for winning competitive titles. Ours is just not.
 
golden_blunder said:
‘Performance posters’ (I just coined that. feel free to use it) are neglecting that we are in the ‘business end’ of the season now, where performance matters much less. Results - points, are what matters now
Click to expand...
That’s a nice way of looking at this argument.

How about posters who were defending Amorim’s poor performances and now demanding perfect performances from Carrick?

We know our team isn’t perfect: every manager has struggled with these players to get them to perform consistently or have them play proactively.

Looking at Carrick’s work
this way: he really is knocking it out of the park.
 
Michael Carrick Deserves a Long-Term Contract in my eyes, with the right support from the club!

If we truly want stability and long-term success, Michael Carrick should be given a 2–3 year contract, ideally with performance-based clauses that protect both the club and the manager.
Under Carrick, we have already seen:

-A clear improvement in results
-A more positive and united dressing room
Players rediscovering confidence and purpose
-A realistic push toward Champions League qualification

These are not small achievements. They are signs of a manager building something sustainable. The common criticism is that Carrick lacks experience. But experience is not measured only in years — it is measured in leadership, tactical understanding, and the ability to earn respect. Carrick has played at the highest level, and has already shown composure under pressure.
We have seen former players succeed massively when trusted with long-term projects. Zinedine Zidane at Real Madrid is a perfect example — he transitioned from player to manager and delivered historic success because the club backed him properly.
But here is the key point:
Carrick must be supported properly in the transfer market.
We have seen before what happens when a manager is not allowed to shape the squad according to his system. Under Ole Gunnar Solskjær, long-term planning was undermined by inconsistent recruitment. Players who did not fit the tactical profile were brought in, strategies were altered mid-process, and the result was instability, something the club is arguably still recovering from.

If Carrick is to succeed long-term:
He must be allowed to build a squad that fits his football philosophy.
Recruitment must align with tactical identity.
The board must commit to a unified football structure.
Constant managerial changes create short-term reactions, not long-term success.
A 2–3 year contract with performance clauses would:
-Provide stability
-Maintain accountability
-Allow proper squad development
-Send a message of trust and direction

Modern football rewards clubs that build projects, not panic. If we believe in what we are seeing on the pitch right now, then we must commit to it. Carrick has earned that opportunity, and we should reward him with a contract!
 
Regarding ferguson and tactics, Ronaldo, neville , hernandez and nani all said he wasn't big on tactics in books and magazines, but praised his man management and motivational skills. I find it hard to believe. In fergusons book he talks about tactics a bit. It is a funny one why people, including players say that about him.
 
Anders Agnalt said:
Michael Carrick Deserves a Long-Term Contract in my eyes, with the right support from the club!

If we truly want stability and long-term success, Michael Carrick should be given a 2–3 year contract, ideally with performance-based clauses that protect both the club and the manager.
Under Carrick, we have already seen:

-A clear improvement in results
-A more positive and united dressing room
Players rediscovering confidence and purpose
-A realistic push toward Champions League qualification

These are not small achievements. They are signs of a manager building something sustainable. The common criticism is that Carrick lacks experience. But experience is not measured only in years — it is measured in leadership, tactical understanding, and the ability to earn respect. Carrick has played at the highest level, and has already shown composure under pressure.
We have seen former players succeed massively when trusted with long-term projects. Zinedine Zidane at Real Madrid is a perfect example — he transitioned from player to manager and delivered historic success because the club backed him properly.
But here is the key point:
Carrick must be supported properly in the transfer market.
We have seen before what happens when a manager is not allowed to shape the squad according to his system. Under Ole Gunnar Solskjær, long-term planning was undermined by inconsistent recruitment. Players who did not fit the tactical profile were brought in, strategies were altered mid-process, and the result was instability, something the club is arguably still recovering from.

If Carrick is to succeed long-term:
He must be allowed to build a squad that fits his football philosophy.
Recruitment must align with tactical identity.
The board must commit to a unified football structure.
Constant managerial changes create short-term reactions, not long-term success.
A 2–3 year contract with performance clauses would:
-Provide stability
-Maintain accountability
-Allow proper squad development
-Send a message of trust and direction

Modern football rewards clubs that build projects, not panic. If we believe in what we are seeing on the pitch right now, then we must commit to it. Carrick has earned that opportunity, and we should reward him with a contract!
Click to expand...
Why not just wait til the end of the season?
 
Watched a clip of Scholes and Butt earlier this morning in which they said that Sir Alex wasn’t a massive tactician and much more of a man manager but always had great assistants and a great coaching set up to do those roles, they also mentioned Carrick being a great man manager whilst Holland being a great assistant so if we can get a great coaching set up to do those roles we could be on to something.
 
Raul Madrid said:
Regarding ferguson and tactics, Ronaldo, neville , hernandez and nani all said he wasn't big on tactics in books and magazines, but praised his man management and motivational skills. I find it hard to believe. In fergusons book he talks about tactics a bit. It is a funny one why people, including players say that about him.
Click to expand...
To add to this, i remember del bosque saying he was confident about playing man united because they were not the best tactically or something like that. It is crazy how ferguson seems to get that criticism. It is hard to picture the most successful coach ever wasn't good at tactics.
 
Anders Agnalt said:
Michael Carrick Deserves a Long-Term Contract in my eyes, with the right support from the club!

If we truly want stability and long-term success, Michael Carrick should be given a 2–3 year contract, ideally with performance-based clauses that protect both the club and the manager.
Under Carrick, we have already seen:

-A clear improvement in results
-A more positive and united dressing room
Players rediscovering confidence and purpose
-A realistic push toward Champions League qualification

These are not small achievements. They are signs of a manager building something sustainable. The common criticism is that Carrick lacks experience. But experience is not measured only in years — it is measured in leadership, tactical understanding, and the ability to earn respect. Carrick has played at the highest level, and has already shown composure under pressure.
We have seen former players succeed massively when trusted with long-term projects. Zinedine Zidane at Real Madrid is a perfect example — he transitioned from player to manager and delivered historic success because the club backed him properly.
But here is the key point:
Carrick must be supported properly in the transfer market.
We have seen before what happens when a manager is not allowed to shape the squad according to his system. Under Ole Gunnar Solskjær, long-term planning was undermined by inconsistent recruitment. Players who did not fit the tactical profile were brought in, strategies were altered mid-process, and the result was instability, something the club is arguably still recovering from.

If Carrick is to succeed long-term:
He must be allowed to build a squad that fits his football philosophy.
Recruitment must align with tactical identity.
The board must commit to a unified football structure.
Constant managerial changes create short-term reactions, not long-term success.
A 2–3 year contract with performance clauses would:
-Provide stability
-Maintain accountability
-Allow proper squad development
-Send a message of trust and direction

Modern football rewards clubs that build projects, not panic. If we believe in what we are seeing on the pitch right now, then we must commit to it. Carrick has earned that opportunity, and we should reward him with a contract!
Click to expand...
Successful clubs like Brentford that punch above their weight don’t rely on their manager for signings and playing strategy.

There has to be a good balance, or we might end up with signings again that aren’t in our best interest.
 
Raul Madrid said:
Regarding ferguson and tactics, Ronaldo, neville , hernandez and nani all said he wasn't big on tactics in books and magazines, but praised his man management and motivational skills. I find it hard to believe. In fergusons book he talks about tactics a bit. It is a funny one why people, including players say that about him.
Click to expand...
Everything is relative and narratives form easily. There’s no doubt Ferguson was the tactical mastermind behind the Aberdeen that beat Celtic, Rangers, Bayern and Real Madrid, and the Man United who won the league several times and CL. His assistants up until them were never tactical masterminds, and he often outsmarted tactically acknowledged managers. People tend to simplify the identities of things, and I think the personality on show on the sidelines and in press conferences gave more showing to his authority and engagement - he didn’t like to talk tactics in public for obvious reasons, I think - and if you’re great at onething, you can’t be great at the complementary quality as well, in simple narratives.

The main narrative I think was formed when he got Carlos Quieroz to tactically rejuvenate (particularily defensively, and more than anything for Europe, I believe). That in combination with him becoming more on the sidelines and less on the training pitch, probably gave his players of later era even more of an impression he wasn’t that fussed with tactics. But I think evidence points to him being very much the main architect even when giving Queiroz and Meulensteen more responsibility for tactical development, seen in how he wentin like a Rembrant to reorchestrate things a few times when their approaches had issues (in attack for Queiroz, defensively with Meulensteen).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.