Yeah FA Cup, League cup and Europa cup arent real.I've given up, to be honest.
I think we are destined for a barren spell.
4 years and counting is already long.
Mitten bang on about Mourinho
- Thread starter Ramshock
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik and Imran hold a long overdue conversation about United's awful league form with 1 win in 7. They discuss a disappointing draw at Bournemouth, a not so disappointing draw against Liverpool and a crushing defeat at Chelsea - Is time nearly over for Erik Ten Hag?
Then in a special second half of the pod, Nik welcomes Natalie ( https://twitter.com/natalie_17) to discuss the fortunes of Manchester United Women as they booked a place in the FA Cup Final after a historic first ever win vs. Chelsea.
Literally has nothing to do with what I said. In fact if you actually read my post you’d see I said this has nothing to do with the manager or their style of play, this is about planning from the board for a climate where managers come and go.
What happens if the DoF leaves after 2 years and the next best DoF available has a different philosophy... The exact same thing as you're suggesting with changing a manager.
The truth is there is no difference. As a club if our philosophy is a counter attacking one then we don't need a DoF... We need a manager like Mourinho who plays counter-attacking football and the accountability to replace him with a manager like Simeone if he can't succeed.
The problem has not been a director of football... It's been hiring two managers who had no clue what they were doing in the transfer market (or on the pitch for that matter). We had Moyes whose dithering cost us the most vital transfer window in our recent history. Then we had Van Gaal whose blunderbus approach saw us sign players based on availability, rather than how they fit his approach.
The DoF approach is just one that completely undermines any accountability. If we'd have had a DoF the 3 years after Fergie retired we'd have ended up sacking him half way through Van Gaal's reign due to the poor signings. We'd then have given Van Gaal more time as the blame would have been put on the DoF.
Rinse repeat the merry-go-round of blaming DoF and manager. Then just for extra fun instead if hearing Mourinho talk about needing one extra player this Summer, he'd be talking about needing 3 extra players due to half not being his choice.
What’s the point in getting a DOF if he’ll have no power? Considering the ridiculous transfer fees and managers who last an average of 3 years these days doesn’t it make sense to actually give a DOF the power to do their job?
Interesting debate about DoF. I'm not entirely sure what would be within their remit. Wouldn't there have to be a vision laid out by the club's board for which they'd find a suitable DoF? Would that vision be based only, or mostly, on football?
I think the role can be very helpful, if you've got a manager and a DoF working in tandem, with footballing decisions driving a club forward. Those are a lot of boxes to tick. Before even getting to this question, I'd simply like to know what the short-term and long-term vision the board actually has and how it plans to execute its objectives, which kinda brings this comment back to topic. Decent article.
I think the role can be very helpful, if you've got a manager and a DoF working in tandem, with footballing decisions driving a club forward. Those are a lot of boxes to tick. Before even getting to this question, I'd simply like to know what the short-term and long-term vision the board actually has and how it plans to execute its objectives, which kinda brings this comment back to topic. Decent article.
So who is qualified at club right now to choose our DoF and define the vision of playing style which will deliver 'trophy winning attacking attractive with lots of youth' football for less than £300m that would satiate the hordes of redcafe?
And who should be our DoF?
Some names please.
Last edited:
By what metrics are a DoFs assessed that clearly show whether or not they're doing a good or bad job compared to the coach? Just something I never understood.
A team doing well could be because the DoF was a genius at recruitment, and even though the coach is performing averagely, or even slighlty poorly they're still winning. Or the coach could be getting results out of somewhat inferior players recruited by the DoF. Same things applying to when the team is performing poorly.
They could both be good or both be rubbish at the same time too, but how would you know it wasn't just one of them?
A team doing well could be because the DoF was a genius at recruitment, and even though the coach is performing averagely, or even slighlty poorly they're still winning. Or the coach could be getting results out of somewhat inferior players recruited by the DoF. Same things applying to when the team is performing poorly.
They could both be good or both be rubbish at the same time too, but how would you know it wasn't just one of them?
Last edited:
Interesting to realize that we’ve had 5 mangers in five years. That is the definition of instability but unfortunately it was necessary due to Moyes and LvG being poor fits.
We need stability and although Jose resume doesn’t exactly scream stable we need to back him. We’ll be good for it in the short and near long term.
We need stability and although Jose resume doesn’t exactly scream stable we need to back him. We’ll be good for it in the short and near long term.
The articles make some very good points. I'm 50/50 on Mourinho for reasons I'll mention, but I think we need to stick with him.
Firstly, the problems with the club are deep rooted. As the article points out, since Fergie has left, we've had 3 managers, all of which have different styles of play and want their own type of player. Changing the manager just leads to another overhaul of the squad, big losses and starting again. It's to late now, but we need to hire managers that fit a profile, rather than hiring the biggest name we can get. Going forward, at least this means better use of players we sign from past managers.
Secondly, We need to back the manager. Mourinho has spent big money, their is no denying that, but it does almost feel a bit late. The last years of Fergie and the Moyes season, we penny pinched and we were left with an underwhelming team. Mourinho has a profile, and we are building towards that, so changing the manager now would just be 2 steps backwards, but we need to fully back him, not half arsed. As much as we have spent, City have spent more, and Liverpool are catching up the VVD and Keita deals, so they are showing intent. Right now, we are a bigger club with bigger profits, so we should be outspending Liverpool.
One thing I will say is, we are second in the league, vast improvements, so the only reason we are having these discussions is because of how well City are playing, it's that simple. If they were having a similar season to last, we'd be sitting top and going that we are finally back.
Thing is though, City are doing what they are doing, and if we want to compete, that is the standard we need to look at (Obviously this season has been exceptional for them and may not be repeated). They've recruited better than us, they've back the managers and right now, they are reaping the rewards.
There is a lot of luck involved when it comes to transfers though. When we signed Falcao, we expected big things, same with Di Maria, Mhki, and so on. These players just never did it. City made signings like Sterling, Stones, Sane, Jesus etc, and they've just clicked. The players we bought weren't bad, they just didn't work for us.
One thing I will say though, I think some of the players at City are only performing to the standard they are due to how they play. They defend from the front and attack from the back. Stones doesn't need to defend as much as he would at other clubs, and Sterling is putting up great numbers, but is he really that good, or is he just playing in a team that gives him the freedom due to how high and aggressive they play. (Not saying Stones and Sterling are bad players btw) As a unit, City defend with everybody and attack with everybody.
In contrast, we play completely different. We are quite rigid in our player. Our defenders defend, our attacks attack and thats about it. Unlike City, who have people running beyond the ball. Walker, Sterling, Silva etc, our players stay in line or behind the ball. We are not adventurous at all. I think we are a better team than we are showing, even while sitting in second place. We defend first and attack later. We see clueless going forward at times.
Personally, I'd love Poch here. I think he'd serve up for entertaining football. I think he'd get better out of some of our attacking players, but switching and changing every other season is really hindering us
I need to stop because nobody reads these long posts anyway
Firstly, the problems with the club are deep rooted. As the article points out, since Fergie has left, we've had 3 managers, all of which have different styles of play and want their own type of player. Changing the manager just leads to another overhaul of the squad, big losses and starting again. It's to late now, but we need to hire managers that fit a profile, rather than hiring the biggest name we can get. Going forward, at least this means better use of players we sign from past managers.
Secondly, We need to back the manager. Mourinho has spent big money, their is no denying that, but it does almost feel a bit late. The last years of Fergie and the Moyes season, we penny pinched and we were left with an underwhelming team. Mourinho has a profile, and we are building towards that, so changing the manager now would just be 2 steps backwards, but we need to fully back him, not half arsed. As much as we have spent, City have spent more, and Liverpool are catching up the VVD and Keita deals, so they are showing intent. Right now, we are a bigger club with bigger profits, so we should be outspending Liverpool.
One thing I will say is, we are second in the league, vast improvements, so the only reason we are having these discussions is because of how well City are playing, it's that simple. If they were having a similar season to last, we'd be sitting top and going that we are finally back.
Thing is though, City are doing what they are doing, and if we want to compete, that is the standard we need to look at (Obviously this season has been exceptional for them and may not be repeated). They've recruited better than us, they've back the managers and right now, they are reaping the rewards.
There is a lot of luck involved when it comes to transfers though. When we signed Falcao, we expected big things, same with Di Maria, Mhki, and so on. These players just never did it. City made signings like Sterling, Stones, Sane, Jesus etc, and they've just clicked. The players we bought weren't bad, they just didn't work for us.
One thing I will say though, I think some of the players at City are only performing to the standard they are due to how they play. They defend from the front and attack from the back. Stones doesn't need to defend as much as he would at other clubs, and Sterling is putting up great numbers, but is he really that good, or is he just playing in a team that gives him the freedom due to how high and aggressive they play. (Not saying Stones and Sterling are bad players btw) As a unit, City defend with everybody and attack with everybody.
In contrast, we play completely different. We are quite rigid in our player. Our defenders defend, our attacks attack and thats about it. Unlike City, who have people running beyond the ball. Walker, Sterling, Silva etc, our players stay in line or behind the ball. We are not adventurous at all. I think we are a better team than we are showing, even while sitting in second place. We defend first and attack later. We see clueless going forward at times.
Personally, I'd love Poch here. I think he'd serve up for entertaining football. I think he'd get better out of some of our attacking players, but switching and changing every other season is really hindering us
I need to stop because nobody reads these long posts anyway
Looks like Mitten has added that bit dramatically. SAF retired, after that Jose is third manager use fifth season. Highs was just a care taker for 4 games.
A good read,highlights some valid points that have already been mentioned on here.
If that is the case why would we even need a football director. Although it’s us so it’s probably true.
There are fundamental problems at the very core of the club. Will take years to fix, and even then nothing is guaranteed. This is why I’m not part of the “Jose out” brigade. It’s all too easy, and the next manager will run in to the exact same problems as LVG and Jose have experienced. We’ve seen threads made complaining about the boardroom, the transfer strategy, the website, YouTube and social media presence, and more. You may ask who the hell cares about YouTube, but it’s indicative of how we’ve fallen behind the times in every facet of club management. I’m not at all optimistic about our future, I could see us going the way of Liverpool for the next 20 years or so, competing for the odd cup here or there while better run clubs sweep up the league titles.
I've given up, to be honest.
I think we are destined for a barren spell.
4 years and counting is already long.
Mou was actually still very biting back in his first and second Chelsea stints but was still quite a bit more charming than now. Mitten got it spot on (and my main gripe with Mou), he should at least pretend to be proud and happy to be the Manchester United manager.
Mitten may not be the best journalist in the world but think you are being a bit unfair in saying he is being completely lazy. His writing is indeed lazy but he has a point re transfers. Hindsight is perfect and of course the strategy would be a good one had all the players worked out. But you can’t assume they all work out that is why there is scouting and transfer strategy/vetting in place to minimise the risk. The fact that a lot of our transfer targets over the past few years (pre Mou) which have not worked out speak to the deficiencies of a manager driven transfer policy.
Further, the biggest issue a lot of folks have (including myself) is that we have lost that attacking fluid playing style after SAF (one could argue SAF himself became less attacking in his last years but that’s another story). United should have a identifiable playing style, like Barca, Madrid or the biggest teams in the world. This has succumbed to whatever “philosophy” the incumbent manager has. This not only leads to a disjointed playing style but a muddled transfer policy.
The second paragraph says it all really!
Nice bit of perspective in that article...
^^^
Yeah, the part about Real Madrid not being Real Madrid of today (at least the last 3-4 seasons), I remembered that. Despite having players such as Robben, Sneijder, van der Vaart, Ramos, they didn't have what it takes to past QF even.
It is footballing cycles. At the moment, it is Barca, Madrid, Bayern's time. Heck, even Bayern was pretty bad at some point. I think when they bought Ribery and Robben their fortune started to change(I think?).
Hope Jose will get his wishes in January, probably get at least one winger (Carrasco, Malcom - prefer Carrasco as he has more experience and more or less playing in the same team setup as United's)
Yeah, the part about Real Madrid not being Real Madrid of today (at least the last 3-4 seasons), I remembered that. Despite having players such as Robben, Sneijder, van der Vaart, Ramos, they didn't have what it takes to past QF even.
It is footballing cycles. At the moment, it is Barca, Madrid, Bayern's time. Heck, even Bayern was pretty bad at some point. I think when they bought Ribery and Robben their fortune started to change(I think?).
Hope Jose will get his wishes in January, probably get at least one winger (Carrasco, Malcom - prefer Carrasco as he has more experience and more or less playing in the same team setup as United's)
I think Mourinho's buy has been pretty good so far. Apart from Zlatan and Mkhi this year, i see bright futures for the rest of the lot.
However, i think one of our problems was that we spent a huge chunk of our budget on Lukaku and Pogba and thus, we couldn't bring in more players to fill the holes in our team. And mind you, we have more holes to fill than City.
Besides that, Mourinho also had to clear out the deadwood signings of LVG. So, despite having more holes to fill and a weaker team to begin with, we spent less than City. I still believe that Mourinho is the right man to sort this out. We need another window.
However, i think one of our problems was that we spent a huge chunk of our budget on Lukaku and Pogba and thus, we couldn't bring in more players to fill the holes in our team. And mind you, we have more holes to fill than City.
Besides that, Mourinho also had to clear out the deadwood signings of LVG. So, despite having more holes to fill and a weaker team to begin with, we spent less than City. I still believe that Mourinho is the right man to sort this out. We need another window.
Yes Chelsea don't overhaul because they have DoF of sorts, his name was Emenalo I think.
The problem at Chelsea was the manager appointed didn't suit the players they signed. That was their mistake, plus there was way too much player power given to the likes of Terry there.
I found the article to be pretty useless. Each paragraph is saying something different and paragraphs have no connection to each other. More like ramblings from a fan than a thought out piece from a good journalist.
There is pre-Chelsea horror season Mourinho and post-Chelsea horror season Mourinho.
It's obvious that that chapter in his career scarred him and he won't be the same again. Seems like he doesn't have that fire in him anymore and that's a shame because love him or hate him, he used to be a hell of a character. The 'special one' Mourinho and our Mourinho are two different people.
Let’s be serious, if Benzema is option 1 how is Michael bloody Owen option 2? That’s a massive drop.
It doesn't matter which players you provide Mourinho with, he will still play cowardly in big games, the root of our poor form after Annfield cowardice.
Nah I think it's pre-Madrid horror Mourinho and post-Madrid horror.
He's still a good enough coach to win a league but the Madrid experience, fighting with Pep and losing the players is something he'd never had before. He's not been anything like the same since.
Pre-Madrid he was untouchable, even given he was sacked in 2007.
I really don't think it's either. I think he's just matured, as people do with age. As SAF aged he lost some of his fire too, he was still an incredible manager though.
That coupled with the fact that he's basically been targeted by the FA since he arrived here is why I think he seems much more reserved.
I don’t know, that’s not for me to decide, that’s something the board would have to agree on. Besides it has nothing to do with money, we’d still spend money with a DOF, it’d just be spent with a plan for the future rather than present.
We failed to sign Perisic because we were offering £42m and Inter wanted £45.
Its the small print that people intentionally avoid bringing it up when badgering Jose. I was not aware of it either. However, its a fact and people seem to omit things that don't serve their agenda and make their opinion objective.
Its funny, and disturbing at the same time, how people who hate Mourinho, try to pick holes in anything that even remotely tries to defend his tenure. And funnily enough, these are the same people over and over again. Its like their vendetta is personal. They breath to wake up in the morning get in the caf and badger anyone who tries to mutter some positive words about our manager. It is disgraceful as the great SAF would say.
Give the guy a break, he is miserable because he is losing games or draws games. Show me a happy loser to show you a Loser. I think Jose is starting to realize that the task is much more complex and difficult that he expected.
And finally, I m happy to have a manager who looks pissed off when things dont go right. He is not here to play happy houses but to win games. And that what makes him a winner.
Give the guy a break, he is miserable because he is losing games or draws games. Show me a happy loser to show you a Loser. I think Jose is starting to realize that the task is much more complex and difficult that he expected.
And finally, I m happy to have a manager who looks pissed off when things dont go right. He is not here to play happy houses but to win games. And that what makes him a winner.
To say that Guardiola has signed 16 players is misleading as 4 are youngsters who have been loaned out to other clubs. Currently, 11 players in the squad are signed by Guardiola. Zinchenko is a fringe player and costs less than 2m, he has played only 20 min. in the PL. Mendy has played only 5-6 games in all compets. Bravo is a flop.
Basically, 8 of Guardiolla's signings have been seriously involved this season and 3 of them are squad players - Danilo, Gundogan and Bernardo. Against United he started with 4 of his signings (Ederson, Walker, Sane and Jesus) and vs Spurs with 4 too (Ederson, Walker, Gundogan, Sane). These signings (who started vs United and Spurs) cost about 150m - that is, less than a Mbappe.
Basically, 8 of Guardiolla's signings have been seriously involved this season and 3 of them are squad players - Danilo, Gundogan and Bernardo. Against United he started with 4 of his signings (Ederson, Walker, Sane and Jesus) and vs Spurs with 4 too (Ederson, Walker, Gundogan, Sane). These signings (who started vs United and Spurs) cost about 150m - that is, less than a Mbappe.
Decent read but we've discussed all these points in the past as well. The signings had no direction and changing managers with completely different styles would lead to such a mess. Hell, we didn't know what are play style are we adopting looking at LVGs signings.
The “mangled transfer strategy” is primarily because of the rapid turnover of managers, obviously.
You have issues with Mitten, for some strange reason, but everything he’s written makes sense.
So 50% of his signings are first-team regulars. Not a great success rate but obviously not a problem when you’ve signed 16 players. The margin for error is obviously a lot tighter for a manager who has only signed 7 players.
" Radamel Falcao, Henrikh Mkhitaryan, Matteo Darmian, Memphis Depay, Bastian Schweinsteiger and Morgan Schneiderlin cost a lot of money in transfer fees and wages. You won't find many people arguing that they were worth it. There are doubts that many more aren't true United calibre."
Every single one of those signings (okay, except maybe Darmian) people absolutely fecking lauded at the time. We're having our best season in 5 years yet because the last few results have been crap suddenly we get articles explaining how everything is shit, evidenced by listing a bunch of transfers that didn't turn out as expected over the last few seasons.
On what basis would a DOF have concluded that one of the world's most prolific strikers, the player tearing it up in the Bundesliga, one of the hottest young talents in Holland, a veteran world cup winning midfielder or a Frenchman from Southampton who everyone was after at the time - wouldn't have been good signings? There isn't a single one. No club nor DOF is immune from signing players that don't work. It isn't some kind of extended warranty - £11.99 a month for DOF coverage from Currys and if you're not satisfied by the January window you get your money back or a replacement.
It's complete bollocks. We can all play this game. Find a signing that worked out well "Good transfer strategy". Find a player who didn't work out well "Poor transfer strategy".
Every single one of those signings (okay, except maybe Darmian) people absolutely fecking lauded at the time. We're having our best season in 5 years yet because the last few results have been crap suddenly we get articles explaining how everything is shit, evidenced by listing a bunch of transfers that didn't turn out as expected over the last few seasons.
On what basis would a DOF have concluded that one of the world's most prolific strikers, the player tearing it up in the Bundesliga, one of the hottest young talents in Holland, a veteran world cup winning midfielder or a Frenchman from Southampton who everyone was after at the time - wouldn't have been good signings? There isn't a single one. No club nor DOF is immune from signing players that don't work. It isn't some kind of extended warranty - £11.99 a month for DOF coverage from Currys and if you're not satisfied by the January window you get your money back or a replacement.
It's complete bollocks. We can all play this game. Find a signing that worked out well "Good transfer strategy". Find a player who didn't work out well "Poor transfer strategy".
Last edited:
Saying the last 4 years have been barren is definitely overdoing it, but to me the two important trophies are the PL and CL. The FA cup is nice, but the EL and league cup, meh.
Started to read the article but gave up as I was losing the will to live.
What a load of poorly written waffly crap.
What a load of poorly written waffly crap.
Yeh, rubbish eh? Have you forgotten that's what got us into the CL?
Apart from anything, what a great night that was.
Well written, to the point Article. Mostly information we already know (or what the Caf knows). That DoF comment was interesting though. What other major roles would an incoming DoF have apart from Player transfers and contracts ? I'm assuming he'll be the one to hire/fire managers. Surely, he won't have a say in the tactical side of things.