I wasn't talking about Ole. It's from last year which doesn't change Poch's record.
MNF with Pochettino
- Thread starter keithsingleton
- Start date
Yeah I think it's hopelessly out of date. Possibly by as much as a year.
However, we did well against the top 6 last season taking 23pts out of a possible 30, second only to Liverpool on 25, so his record against the top 6 at United, if it's relevant, is still better than what Poch achieved at Spurs.
Ole's record against the top 6 is very good. But that does not make him a better coach than Poch.
I did say if it's relevant. Mine was more a point of fact than anything else.
In the interest of fairness what was Cardiff's net spend under Solskjaer relative to Spurs under Pochettino then?
What's funny is that we presently have a manager who is clearly worse in charge. Solskjaer has won a meaningless title in Molde but also is a pragmatic manager. Anyone who's praising Solskjaer and ridiculing Poch / Allegri will automatically be contradicting themselves when talking from a tactical standpoint. Why don't we just hire whoever won the MLS last season...
Compare Cardiff and Southampton. Plus how long did Ole stay at Cardiff?
You do need to beat the top 6 these days, something he clearly struggled with.
And I’m sick of hearing of bloody net spend
You may be sick about hearing that, but we hear from plenty of United fans that Solskjaer isn't given enough money to compete at the top of the league. What would you say about Pochettino?
Is Net Spend to do with Levy or Pochettino?
I personally know who it will be at United.
I personally know who it will be at United.
The point is, his hands were tied financially and obviously that lowers his chances of sucess.
How can something that is backed by science be a myth?
Anyway, he exceeded expectations with a team without resources of a big club. It is a no brainer that he will do well here and take us back where we should be.
I don't think we should ever measure a manager's ability for player sales return - it should go to the ones who actually negotiated the deals.
What's that got to do with net spend though- why does it matter where money comes from whether it's by selling players who isnt good enough or playing good enough football to keep the stadium completely full all the time.
He spent money and he had money, where & how it came from isnt going to change that.
I dont really know this but how much did Pochettino spend throughout his time at Spurs?
That's ubergorp Maths for you.Where the hell are those Ole vs the other big 6 stats coming from?
In the Prem vs Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool, City and Spurs under Ole:
Played 18, won 6, drawn 6, lost 6. 24 points out of a possible 54. 33% win.
What he did was the best CV upload ever. He turned MNF into Jobstreet.
Poch had a very quality squad that made CL final that everyone here was drolling all over . Ole inherited a morally broken squad full of overpaid deadwoods that everyone here said were all trash.
Tbh I couldn't care less about sacking Ole and hiring Poch. But what I despise the most about you OleOut guys is you people always posting with too big of an agenda, refuse to look at facts, twisting and rewriting history to serve your agenda. I won't waste my time with you guys though. Bye.
I’d say Pochettino getting glorified for finishing top four with a low net spend is senseless unless we are crediting him with the sales of players and recouping money. Something I’m sure he’s not involved in. He still had a team of quality players and a world class striker for free.
Came in here to say this. Very convenient that they did not include his Cardiff stats.
Woodward is a bigger issue than the Glazers. You can work with the Glazers. You get X amount to money to spend and you need to achive a certain minimum in order to keep up max profits. That's what they mostly do to the club. United aren't being constricted by the Glazers as much as some people claim. We are one of the world biggest spenders despite the debt they put on the club and the money they take out. The issue with Glazers at United specifically is that they haven't fired Ed Woodward. We don't know what direction the club is at. Juventus and Bayern always have a direction no matter the manager. What's United's direction? Whatever the current manager wants? That's not good enough because you sack the manager if results get to poor and that means start over fresh which is what we've been doing. That's why people are clamoring for a DoF but you don't necessarily need a DoF for that but it is better because that's specifically their job.
Ed is definitely the biggest issue at the club. He's simply incompetent at his role and I agree with the one you quoted that it doesn't matter if we change managers, we won't progress unless we change the upper management. Until then people are venting their frustrations and anger at the wrong direction.
I agree with this. Logically it makes no sense why the Glazers haven't gotten a DoF and allowed Ed so much freedom on footballing matters after repeated failure. A good DoF benefits everyone, for the fans looking at the money we've spent the last 7 years, we would be in a better position in competitions if we had a good DoF since that time. For the Glazers we would be in a better position financially. For Ed he wouldn't get this amount of criticism and abuse and would be more praised for his sponsorship deals or whatever good business he had done.
Problem is the DOF would be in charge of player purchases/ sales and contracts. Then how could Ed protect his fecking 'assets' ? or how he could be sure that the commercial value of that newly signed player is what he wants? If we have a DOF.
I just don't think they're invested at all. Their dad bought the club, I'm not sure how much they had to do with it at the time but it doesn't feel like they're invested. They're billionaires that take what, 40 million pounds or so out of the club per year as dividend? That's chump change. Prestige of being the owner is bigger than the money they get out of it I imagine.
To compare ourselves to Juventus again. United are owned by Americans that have no knowledge or care for the sport. Two of them are chairmen but left the club in charge to a businessman who's proven to be incapable. Juventus are also owned by a rich family but that family has owned it for so long that the family member that's in charge is not only heavily involved with the club day to day but also grew up in it. He's Cameron Diaz in Any Given Sunday. Our club lacks passion at the top. The other European greats all have passion.
Good post and this is what worries me about Utd's future. Regardless of whoever we bring in as the next manager, whenever that may be, I can't see us challenging for the league and CL. We may just have to wait ages until we hit the jackpot for another Busby or Fergie.
No I don't think it's chump change.
Yes they're billionaires, the Glazers are worth about $5bn, for five sons and one daughter. But as any other billionaire their worth is usually in form of assets like shares, real estates etc. It's not cash and that amount was accumulated over years, starting from his father. Imo what counts is how much their annual net income is. I've no idea but I don't think it'd be hundred of millions. And as any billionaire they should spend a lot. Plus imo they're the typical greedy and stingy types. So £40m is no small money for them I think.
Oles worst position with owners who wont spend money has been?
That's because contrary to what people say Woodward isn't making these decisions alone without the Glazers. The impression from reports is he and Joel Glazer are the decision makers. There's a large amount of joint incompetence at the board level. If they fire Woodward they may even bring someone from their eggball franchise to oversee the club. Getting rid of Woodward and leaving the Glazers will likely see an even less qualified Ceo. Those guys aren't interested in someone who's purely football oriented
Last edited:
This to me is the only reasonable conclusion. So basically we are a club whose owners don't give a shit about winning trophies, have a banker heavily involved in significant footballing matters and a coach whose highest achievement was winning the league in Norway seven years ago. It isn't as gloomy as it looks as we have a promising squad but Its hard to see how we are going back to winning trophies with all these people running the club.
That said I do think we can still win trophies with Ed and the Glazers management though it's like a 2% chance. The key is to find or rather bump into the right coach.
This coach shouldn't just be good at tactics but also recruitment since Ed gives the manager the freedom to choose the players they want. He should also know how to work with what he has and get players to punch above their weight because you never know when the club/Glazers decides not to back you. And lastly he has to have a winning mentality. I think Ferguson would have won trophies with us if he was still here because he had these attributes I listed that basically countered the negatives of the poor management under the Glazers and Woodward
Can't wait to be here again in 2 years time with the same people saying the same shit about the next manager.
Where the hell are those Ole vs the other big 6 stats coming from?
In the Prem vs Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool, City and Spurs under Ole:
Played 18, won 6, drawn 6, lost 6. 24 points out of a possible 54. 33% win.
The Pochettino stats are wrong too. He's played 64 games against the top 6. I literally have the breakdown of all the stats infront of me, we discussed it in his own thread as they're fecking woeful. We had a discussion as we were comparing his goddamn shocking away form to his home form. Some posters attempted to defend him and suggest all the teams struggled, so I checked them out too. Let me repost. To be very clear, anyone suggesting this isn't woeful needs to go outside and have a stroll around in the wind and rain for a bit. At the very end you will see that Tottenham lost 48% of the games against the top 6, winning just 28% of them.
To be clear, all of these stats represent the clubs form while Pochettino was at Tottenham in all competitions.
Club | Games | W | D | L | CS | GF | GA | GD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Arsenal | 35 | 14 | 12 | 9 | 10 | 56 | 46 | 10 |
Tottenham | 29 | 14 | 6 | 9 | 11 | 42 | 29 | 13 |
United | 32 | 15 | 12 | 5 | 11 | 47 | 30 | 17 |
City | 28 | 15 | 6 | 7 | 7 | 59 | 36 | 23 |
Liverpool | 36 | 18 | 14 | 4 | 10 | 68 | 37 | 31 |
Chelsea | 39 | 21 | 9 | 9 | 16 | 61 | 38 | 23 |
Club | Games | W | D | L | CS | GF | GA | GD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Arsenal | 32 | 3 | 12 | 17 | 3 | 40 | 69 | -29 |
Tottenham | 35 | 4 | 9 | 22 | 2 | 41 | 69 | -28 |
Chelsea | 34 | 5 | 13 | 16 | 4 | 29 | 57 | -28 |
Liverpool | 31 | 9 | 12 | 10 | 5 | 41 | 48 | -7 |
United | 31 | 10 | 6 | 15 | 8 | 26 | 41 | -15 |
City | 37 | 12 | 8 | 17 | 12 | 44 | 54 | -10 |
Club | Games | W | D | L | CS | GF | GA | GD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Arsenal | 67 | 17 | 24 | 26 | 13 | 96 | 115 | -19 |
Tottenham | 64 | 18 | 15 | 31 | 13 | 83 | 98 | -15 |
United | 66 | 20 | 25 | 21 | 15 | 76 | 87 | -11 |
City | 59 | 24 | 18 | 17 | 12 | 100 | 84 | 16 |
Liverpool | 67 | 28 | 20 | 19 | 18 | 94 | 78 | 16 |
Chelsea | 76 | 33 | 17 | 26 | 28 | 105 | 92 | 13 |
Club | Win % | Draw % | Lose % |
|---|---|---|---|
Arsenal | 25% | 36% | 39% |
Tottenham | 28% | 23% | 48% |
United | 40% | 29% | 32% |
City | 42% | 22% | 37% |
Liverpool | 40% | 39% | 21% |
Chelsea | 36% | 30% | 34% |
Oh and to compare to Ole who's played 24 games against the top 6, with 10 wins, 6 draws and 8 losses in all comps his % looks like the below. Which if you compare to Pochettinos above is considerably better. Pochettinos record is fecking terrible lads.
Manage | Win % | Draw % | Lose % |
|---|---|---|---|
Ole | 42% | 25% | 33% |
Last edited:
He had no control over the transfers at Spurs, it was all Daniel Levy
Why is this still getting bumped? I wonder.
What will be the narrative if we were to sign Poch but there wasn't any improvement from this team?
Exactly. I can't wait to see what the narrative will be if we were to sign Poch but the signing doesn't come with the expected results/improvement.
Exactly. I can't wait to see what the narrative will be if we were to sign Poch but the signing doesn't come with the expected results/improvement.
Great post. Thank you for the data. This is probably why Poch has been out of job for a while and no big club wants him. If you want to win big silverware you'd need someone good against the big teams. I always wonder why. Since he seems to be hyped through the roof here.
Anyway, imo if Ole gets the sack he'll very likely become our new manager. He has a good record of regularly getting top 4 with a tight budget. Just perfect for Ed and the Glazers I think.
Regularly with Erikson, kane and Alli all bang in form. Once the form dipped he was gone.
Should have kept LVG then. His stats against big teams were good as if that's only thing that ever matters.
Ask me again when/ if he's stays as long as Poch did. Ole only needs around another 200 games.
Last edited:
you could accuse Pep of some of that - everywhere he's been!
You honestly think Pep doesn’t get his teams playing attractive football when on form? Highly disagree personally
Please will people stop mentioning this
What has he done to convince anyone he would be a good DOF other than not be a good enough coach for united?
Its hard to know who is responsible for signings at utd but the signings under his tenure have been average to poor so far
Exactly the obvious criticism of ole is how poor we look when teams sit back e.g. outside of top 6