Ole Gunnar Solskjær | 2021/22 Discussion

[Gandalf]

We are talking about all 3 managerial appointments since Fergie. During that period City have appointed Guardiola and Liverpool have appointed Klopp.

You seem keen to focus on the most recent appointment - obviously you're of the opinion that there is nobody more qualified and better suited to the job than OGS - you must be feeling really confident about the new season!

To be fair to the board, and I really don't like to be, both Klopp and Guardiola were contacted when they were available and both were disinterested in coming here. Most Managers of that caliber want to build without the pressure of the past looming over them and for the last 5 years anyone coming here knew they would be compared to SAF and that is not a comparison that is going to favour anyone. With more distance from the glory days we will perversely enough become more attractive to top names who will fancy becoming our savior although I would be perfectly happy for Ole to prove the doubters wrong and be here for the next 20 years.

 

[Saffron]

And Pochettino was poached by Tottenham right around the time we sacked Moyes. I’m sure he would have come here had we gone after him.

He had just given Southampton their highest points total in the Premier League era.

 

[JustAGuest]

And Pochettino was poached by Tottenham right around the time we sacked Moyes. I’m sure he would have come here had we gone after him.

He had just given Southampton their highest points total in the Premier League era.

He would hardly have been considered a world class manager at that point.

 

[Rusholme Ruffian]

To be fair to the board, and I really don't like to be, both Klopp and Guardiola were contacted when they were available and both were disinterested in coming here.

Well I view that as a mistake from the board - they clearly didn't sell the club in a way that was attractive enough. Woodward should have known enough about Klopp to realise that describing United as being 'like Disney' was not going to float his boat.

It's too easy to just let Woodward/the board off the hook by saying 'oh they tried' - United should be one of the very few clubs in the world that are impossible to turn down!

 

[Buster15]

He would hardly have been considered a world class manager at that point.

No. But he is now.

 

[Leftback99]

We are talking about all 3 managerial appointments since Fergie. During that period City have appointed Guardiola and Liverpool have appointed Klopp.

You seem keen to focus on the most recent appointment - obviously you're of the opinion that there is nobody more qualified and better suited to the job than OGS - you must be feeling really confident about the new season!

We had no chance of getting either at the time of their appointments so it's irrelevant.

No i'm not confident about the new season because i don't think these players are good enough. The same players that we've seen fail under vastly more qualified, experienced and successful managers.

We all know we have idiots running the club into the ground but in this case i probably would have done the same in giving Solskjaer the job. No guarantee it will work like anyone else. So what would you have done?

 

[Rish Sawhney]

Well I view that as a mistake from the board - they clearly didn't sell the club in a way that was attractive enough. Woodward should have known enough about Klopp to realise that describing United as being 'like Disney' was not going to float his boat.

It's too easy to just let Woodward/the board off the hook by saying 'oh they tried' - United should be one of the very few clubs in the world that are impossible to turn down!

The arrogance. As a manager United were always a very unattractive proposition because the manager has all the responsibilities in name but no backing. The board lose their nerve every time the crowd turn against the manager. Why would any sane manager want to work here? No structure, no backing, no philosophy, no long term planning? The way I see it, either we man up and make the manager a non-entity to the point that the manager really doesn't matter for things like transfers and recruitment (like say Barca or Madrid) or we pick a guy and back him to the hilt even if most of the fans want him fired (Like Fergie). I guess they keep hoping that someone they appoint will turn out to be another Fergie but even Fergie needed to be backed when the fans wanted him fired in '89.

 

[El-Manos]

I actually have a feeling we will genuinely
try for Aboomerang if Lukaku goes.

 

[Red-Man-Walking]

I actually have a feeling we will genuinely
try for Aboomerang if Lukaku goes.

No point, if he comes here he'll just end up back at Arsenal.

 

[Rusholme Ruffian]

The arrogance. As a manager United were always a very unattractive proposition because the manager has all the responsibilities in name but no backing. The board lose their nerve every time the crowd turn against the manager. Why would any sane manager want to work here? No structure, no backing, no philosophy, no long term planning? The way I see it, either we man up and make the manager a non-entity to the point that the manager really doesn't matter for things like transfers and recruitment (like say Barca or Madrid) or we pick a guy and back him to the hilt even if most of the fans want him fired (Like Fergie). I guess they keep hoping that someone they appoint will turn out to be another Fergie but even Fergie needed to be backed when the fans wanted him fired in '89.

You call it arrogance, I call it having a football club that is an absolutely unique resource. I call it having a club that regularly describes itself as the 'biggest in the world' based on metrics about the numbers of fans that the club has across the world. I call it having a club that rose from the flames of Munich, that was the first English club that won the European Cup. I call it being the biggest, most famous and most glamorous club in arguably the best football league in the world. I call it having a club facing what could have been styled as the exciting challenge of replacing the most legendary manager of all time, and returning it to the top of the league, rather than describing it as 'Disney' - i.e. the corporate nightmare that would have been the very thing that Klopp would have railed against. To say United were 'always an unattractive proposition' is simply not true - Mourinho would have killed to take over from Fergie at that time...and he was arguably the biggest name in football management at the time. The board have messed up woth every managerial appointment they've made since Fergie - I don't understand how people are defending them...they are clueless.

 

[Oldyella]

I actually have a feeling we will genuinely
try for Aboomerang if Lukaku goes.

Surely Arsenal will have none of it even if he is open to moving.

 

[Rusholme Ruffian]

We had no chance of getting either at the time of their appointments so it's irrelevant.

But Liverpool and City managed to get them? Why did they manage it but not us?

We all know we have idiots running the club into the ground but in this case i probably would have done the same in giving Solskjaer the job. No guarantee it will work like anyone else. So what would you have done?

I would have conducted a proper, rigorous recruitment process, and not been influenced by what now just looks like a pretty small sample of good results in the honeymoon period of a caretaker appointment.

 

[Kag]

Well let's see how long it takes Ole to get us to 2nd place with 81 points then.
And let's see if Ole can win us the Europa League next season.
Would you like to venture a guess or are you just completely blinkered against Jose.
You see. The person who ripped the soul out of this club is non other than Ed Woodward.

81 points is meaningless. About as meaningless as a tin pot trophy the club is playing in as a consequence of Mourinho’s diabolical recruitment and squad management. The only trophy of any real value we’ve won since Ferguson retired is the FA Cup, under Van Gaal.

I go as far as to say that Mourinho’s tenure at United, particularly given the resources and personnel provided, is one of the worst pound for pound reigns in modern European football. Metrics like ‘2nd. 81 points. 2 trophies’ fail to look at the wider picture with any real nous.

You seem to view Ole with lots of enthusiasm. Hopefully you find comfort in following Mourinho’s next Micky Mouse job, wherever it may be. The rest of us will stick with Ole with the delight of knowing he isn’t going to shit all over the pan to save his reputation.

 

[Rusholme Ruffian]

@Rusholme Ruffian Yep. I am learning a lot by having them around.

I'm completely fine with the Noggies sticking up for their man, but accusing others of wanting Ole to fail just because we don't view the world through their Ole-tinted glasses is a step too far!

 

[Foxtrot]

He will be the first manager to get fired next season. Love him as a player but he's completely useless and out of his depth as a manager.

 

[Buster15]

81 points is meaningless. About as meaningless as a tin pot trophy the club is playing in as a consequence of Mourinho’s diabolical recruitment and squad management. The only trophy of any real value we’ve won since Ferguson retired is the FA Cup, under Van Gaal.

I go as far as to say that Mourinho’s tenure at United, particularly given the resources and personnel provided, is one of the worst pound for pound reigns in modern European football. Metrics like ‘2nd. 81 points. 2 trophies’ fail to look at the wider picture with any real nous.

You seem to view Ole with lots of enthusiasm. Hopefully you find comfort in following Mourinho’s next Micky Mouse job, wherever it may be. The rest of us will stick with Ole with the delight of knowing he isn’t going to shit all over the pan to save his reputation.

Completely wrong on two counts.
Please explain how getting 81 points is meaningless.
Gaining points is actually the object of the exercise. You know. The more points you get the better the chance of winning the league or is that too difficult to comprehend.

And I certainly do not view Ole with enthusiasm.
My comment at the time was that his appointment was totally underwhelming and I continue to be of that view.
Keep up please.

 

[Rish Sawhney]

You call it arrogance, I call it having a football club that is an absolutely unique resource. I call it having a club that regularly describes itself as the 'biggest in the world' based on metrics about the numbers of fans that the club has across the world. I call it having a club that rose from the flames of Munich, that was the first English club that won the European Cup. I call it being the biggest, most famous and most glamorous club in arguably the best football league in the world. I call it having a club facing what could have been styled as the exciting challenge of replacing the most legendary manager of all time, and returning it to the top of the league, rather than describing it as 'Disney' - i.e. the corporate nightmare that would have been the very thing that Klopp would have railed against. To say United were 'always an unattractive proposition' is simply not true - Mourinho would have killed to take over from Fergie at that time...and he was arguably the biggest name in football management at the time. The board have messed up woth every managerial appointment they've made since Fergie - I don't understand how people are defending them...they are clueless.

Nobody's defending the board. I din't think you've actually read my post. All of what you described tells us why we're a big and popular club. None of it tells us why a world class manager like Pep/Klopp/Pochettino would want to come here. The only ones who would are people who're narcissistic enough to believe the narrative sold to them by the board. And even Mourinho didn't last long did he? So you're kinda making my point for me.

 

[Rish Sawhney]

Completely wrong on two counts.
Please explain how getting 81 points is meaningless.
Gaining points is actually the object of the exercise. You know. The more points you get the better the chance of winning the league or is that too difficult to comprehend.

And I certainly do not view Ole with enthusiasm.
My comment at the time was that his appointment was totally underwhelming and I continue to be of that view.
Keep up please.

Because we finished 19 points behind 1st place. Which is 3 point fewer than we did in 2013/14 under Moyes where we finished 22 points behind the winner. (City in both cases).

 

[AshRK]

Well I view that as a mistake from the board - they clearly didn't sell the club in a way that was attractive enough. Woodward should have known enough about Klopp to realise that describing United as being 'like Disney' was not going to float his boat.

It's too easy to just let Woodward/the board off the hook by saying 'oh they tried' - United should be one of the very few clubs in the world that are impossible to turn down!

Or maybe Klopp never wanted to join us in the first place. Looking at Klopp's personality I do not blame him rejecting us. He is someone who loves to represent an underdog and we , howsoever shit we may become, can never be an underdog. Also the pressure here would be much higher than compared to Liverpool. Being trophyless for 3 season, wellhe would have been eaten alive by the media and some of our fans.

Anyways our board is an incompetent one so no arguing on that.

 

[Kag]

Completely wrong on two counts.
Please explain how getting 81 points is meaningless.
Gaining points is actually the object of the exercise. You know. The more points you get the better the chance of winning the league or is that too difficult to comprehend.

And I certainly do not view Ole with enthusiasm.
My comment at the time was that his appointment was totally underwhelming and I continue to be of that view.
Keep up please.

Well, we can agreee it’s better than 80 points but it still didn’t ensure we challenged for the title. And the quality and style of football, which does bear some meaning for the season ahead, was absolutely dogshit (correctly identified by those who were willing to see it at the time). It’s why our points total subsequently decreased and the supporters tired of the team’s woeful inability to play attacking football against Brighton and Derby. So, yes, I’d suggest 81 points during a season in which our rivals were largely terrible is meaningless. But feel free to cherish it dearly.

That’s a shame with regard to Ole. I should have kept up. Silly me. As we’re both finding concepts such as points totals and sarcasm all too difficult to comprehend, I will digress.

 

[Buster15]

Because we finished 19 points behind 1st place. Which is 3 point fewer than we did in 2013/14 under Moyes where we finished 22 points behind the winner. (City in both cases).

Ah. I see.
So. 81 points got us into second place and into the Champions league.
Completely meaningful actually.

 

[Rusholme Ruffian]

Nobody's defending the board. I din't think you've actually read my post. All of what you described tells us why we're a big and popular club. None of it tells us why a world class manager like Pep/Klopp/Pochettino would want to come here. The only ones who would are people who're narcissistic enough to believe the narrative sold to them by the board. And even Mourinho didn't last long did he? So you're kinda making my point for me.

No mate, you are misunderstanding my point. I have listed the reasons why United should (if run properly, and sold effectively to a prospective managerial candidate) be a unique and attractive destination. We are in agreement that the board are shite, but I don't buy your take that we were so unattractive a proposition that we basically had no chance of securing a properly top manager. As I've pointed out Mourinho was desperate for the job when Fergie retired, and he was arguably the biggest name in management at the time.

 

[Leftback99]

But Liverpool and City managed to get them? Why did they manage it but not us?




I would have conducted a proper, rigorous recruitment process, and not been influenced by what now just looks like a pretty small sample of good results in the honeymoon period of a caretaker appointment.

Timing and both having better organisation at the top. We know this. You could make an endless list of decisions we've got wrong since SAF retired. You could make a list a bad decisions during SAFs regime as well, players we didn't buy, players we sold etc etc. What's the point?

So you still can't give an opinion on who we should have got instead, just saying Solskjaer is the wrong man every day? I'm not saying you'll be wrong, but it's easy to be right when so much else will impact how successful he is.

 

[Rusholme Ruffian]

Or maybe Klopp never wanted to join us in the first place. Looking at Klopp's personality I do not blame him rejecting us. He is someone who loves to represent an underdog and we , howsoever shit we may become, can never be an underdog. Also the pressure here would be much higher than compared to Liverpool. Being trophyless for 3 season, wellhe would have been eaten alive by the media and some of our fans.

Anyways our board is an incompetent one so no arguing on that.

There's a quote floating around somewhere from a close friend/colleague of Klopp's that says he absolutely loved United and he viewed us as his ideal club (at one point in time). If it wasn't Friday night and I didn't have better things to do I'd try and dig it out...

 

[AshRK]

There's a quote floating around somewhere from a close friend/colleague of Klopp's that says he absolutely loved United and he viewed us as his ideal club (at one point in time). If it wasn't Friday night and I didn't have better things to do I'd try and dig it out...

Again, considering we are being run by an incompetent CEO, I don't blame top managers choosing not to come here. But I still think Klopp made a wise choice by not coming here as he knew his limitations and he knew how he wants his club to run. This is why I keep on saying changing managers will only be good if you have a proper structure in place. We don't have one and we would struggle until we get one.

 

[Buster15]

Well, we can agreee it’s better than 80 points but it still didn’t ensure we challenged for the title. And the quality and style of football, which does bear some meaning for the season ahead, was absolutely dogshit (correctly identified by those who were willing to see it at the time). It’s why our points total subsequently decreased and the supporters tired of the team’s woeful inability to play attacking football against Brighton and Derby. So, yes, I’d suggest 81 points during a season in which our rivals were largely terrible is meaningless. But feel free to cherish it dearly.

That’s a shame with regard to Ole. I should have kept up. Silly me. As we’re both finding concepts such as points totals and sarcasm all too difficult to comprehend, I will digress.

Hell of a lot better than 66 points last season as well.
I certainly don't regard you as silly. Far from it.
As I have mentioned before, the fact that it didn't work out with Jose was in my opinion a missed opportunity. Yes it ended in failure. But we failed him as much as he did us. And I am not simply referring to money.

 

[Rusholme Ruffian]

Timing and both having better organisation at the top. We know this. You could make an endless list of decisions we've got wrong since SAF retired. You could make a list a bad decisions during SAFs regime as well, players we didn't buy, players we sold etc etc. What's the point?

What do you mean 'what's the point'?! The discussion was about how the board have got every managerial appointment wrong since Fergie retired - in spite of having gone through exactly the same scenario when Busby retired. That's the point - no more no less.

So you still can't give an opinion on who we should have got instead, just saying Solskjaer is the wrong man every day? I'm not saying you'll be wrong, but it's easy to be right when so much else will impact how successful he is.

Well, understandably, I would have made the decision on who we should have got instead AFTER conducting a rigorous process - why are you pressing me to come up with a name, I'm not the fecking board, it isn't my job, and I haven't conducted a process! I think almost everyone in the world would agree that Pochettino would have been a good place to start though. What I have been clear on is the flawed decision-making process that has been used to appoint OGS.

 

[Rusholme Ruffian]

Again, considering we are being run by an incompetent CEO, I don't blame top managers choosing not to come here. But I still think Klopp made a wise choice by not coming here as he knew his limitations and he knew how he wants his club to run. This is why I keep on saying changing managers will only be good if you have a proper structure in place. We don't have one and we would struggle until we get one.

Well yeah, I think we're all coming back to the same thing - which is that the board are incompetent.

 

[Rish Sawhney]

No mate, you are misunderstanding my point. I have listed the reasons why United should (if run properly, and sold effectively to a prospective managerial candidate) be a unique and attractive destination. We are in agreement that the board are shite, but I don't buy your take that we were so unattractive a proposition that we basically had no chance of securing a properly top manager. As I've pointed out Mourinho was desperate for the job when Fergie retired, and he was arguably the biggest name in management at the time.

I agree with you that united should - if run properly - be an attractive proposition. But I disagree that we were an attractive proposition after SAF retired. The incoming manager might have succeeded, but not straightaway, and not without a couple of really terrible seasons without us making top 4. But the board didn't have the stomach to bear those working pains. As for Mourinho, he was desperate for it for all the wrong reasons - ego and narcissism. The board needed to restructure or back the incoming manager with all the power and patience that Fergie got. And neither happened.

So yes - the board suck, but they're not necessarily wrong in their strategy but it doesn't seem like they have the stomach to follow through with it. I think they're trying to continue that strategy with Ole - but its success depends on if they back Ole even when most fans want him sacked. If the board cave, then we'll be back to square one - rise and repeat.

My end point is this - either restructure the club so that we're not dependent on a manager to improve things, or when you select a manager you back him for a long period of time even with short term failures like finishing 10th in a season. The fans will want the former but I think thats an inferior way to go because it diffuses responsibility, so I defend the board on that front, but I do blame the board for constantly caving to fan pressure for firing a poorly performing manager.

 

[Rusholme Ruffian]

I agree with you that united should - if run properly - be an attractive proposition. But I disagree that we were an attractive proposition after SAF retired. The incoming manager might have succeeded, but not straightaway, and not without a couple of really terrible seasons without us making top 4. But the board didn't have the stomach to bear those working pains. As for Mourinho, he was desperate for it for all the wrong reasons - ego and narcissism. The board needed to restructure or back the incoming manager with all the power and patience that Fergie got. And neither happened.

The thing is we actually needed somebody with a big ego and huge self-belief to come in after Fergie. That would have been a poisoned chalice for anybody, so it's got to be somebody that isn't overawed by the predecessor and has the balls to be their own man. We got the opposite of that.

So yes - the board suck, but they're not necessarily wrong in their strategy but it doesn't seem like they have the stomach to follow through with it. I think they're trying to continue that strategy with Ole - but its success depends on if the borach back Ole even when most fans want him sacked. If the board cave, then we'll be back to square one - rise and repeat.

What is their strategy with Ole? Cos to me it doesn't seem that there is one. Didn't they appoint him as caretaker boss and then just hand him the job permanently after a run of good results during the managerial honeymoon period? That doesn't smack of having a strategy. This is exactly why the process of finding and appointing the manager needed to be so rigorous - because we don't want to keep sacking managers and starting again, so when the chips are down you need to be as certain as you can be that you have appointed the right man. This is supposition on my part obviously, but I would place a bet that Woodward already has some grave doubts about OGS and that is a terrible way to be going into the new season.

 

[Leftback99]

What do you mean 'what's the point'?! The discussion was about how the board have got every managerial appointment wrong since Fergie retired - in spite of having gone through exactly the same scenario when Busby retired. That's the point - no more no less.



Well, understandably, I would have made the decision on who we should have got instead AFTER conducting a rigorous process - why are you pressing me to come up with a name, I'm not the fecking board, it isn't my job, and I haven't conducted a process! I think almost everyone in the world would agree that Pochettino would have been a good place to start though. What I have been clear on is the flawed decision-making process that has been used to appoint OGS.

I ask for a name because you're so sure Solskjaer will fail and tell us every day. I just assumed you were knowledgable on which managers would be the right choice. In the end just the stock Pochettino answer i expected.

 

[Rish Sawhney]

The thing is we actually needed somebody with a big ego and huge self-belief to come in after Fergie. That would have been a poisoned chalice for anybody, so it's got to be somebody that isn't overawed by the predecessor and has the balls to be their own man. We got the opposite of that.



What is their strategy with Ole? Cos to me it doesn't seem that there is one. Didn't they appoint him as caretaker boss and then just hand him the job permanently after a run of good results during the managerial honeymoon period? That doesn't smack of having a strategy. This is exactly why the process of finding and appointing the manager needed to be so rigorous - because we don't want to keep sacking managers and starting again, so when the chips are down you need to be as certain as you can be that you have appointed the right man. This is supposition on my part obviously, but I would place a bet that Woodward already has some grave doubts about OGS and that is a terrible way to be going into the new season.

Their strategy - as I understand it - seems to be "We're convinced that his long term interests are aligned with ours, so he's in charge of pretty much all footballing operations." The problem with Mourinho was that you could clearly see his long term interests weren't aligned with United's. And that became obvious last summer when he kept targeting 29-30 year olds who would have given us a couple of good seasons and then left us to rebuild again. And hence it made sense for Woodward to not back him in those targets.

The board's strategy in my view should be to stay hands off on footballing matters. What matters in managers is not their last 10 results or how popular they are with fans or how many cups and trophies they've won. Its this - "is this guy's long term vision aligned with our clubs's? And do we think this guy is good enough to execute that vision over a long term." On this condition Ole is actually pretty good as a candidate as long as the people hiring have some sort of faith in his abilities. And he'll continue to work here until in their minds one of those criteria fails.

 

[Enigma_87]

Their strategy - as I understand it - seems to be "We're convinced that his long term interests are aligned with ours, so he's in charge of pretty much all footballing operations." The problem with Mourinho was that you could clearly see his long term interests weren't aligned with United's. And that became obvious last summer when he kept targeting 29-30 year olds who would have given us a couple of good seasons and then left us to rebuild again. And hence it made sense for Woodward to not back him in those targets.

The board's strategy in my view should be to stay hands off on footballing matters. What matters in managers is not their last 10 results or how popular they are with fans or how many cups and trophies they've won. Its this - "is this guy's long term vision aligned with our clubs's? And do we think this guy is good enough to execute that vision over a long term." On this condition Ole is actually pretty good as a candidate as long as the people hiring have some sort of faith in his abilities. And he'll continue to work here until in their minds one of those criteria fails.

Interestingly enough we were after Maguire at 60m last year which Woodward seems to overturn, yet we're back for him at 80m this year and Woodward seems to be more warming at the prospect. I don't know what our club interests are. What I know is that man doesn't have a clue...

 

[Rish Sawhney]

Interestingly enough we were after Maguire at 60m last year which Woodward seems to overturn, yet we're back for him at 80m this year and Woodward seems to be more warming at the prospect. I don't know what our club interests are. What I know is that man doesn't have a clue...

Yes you're right. But I think the source of the recommendation was key here. When Mourinho tells me to spend $60 million on Maguire I dunno if thats the right thing to do as I'm unsure about Mourinho's goals and interests. Is Maguire better than Jones? I'm not a football person so I can't be sure. But this is coming from a guy who also wants me to get Willian/Perisic for Martial so I put a pin in it for now.

That train of logic sounds reasonable to me, but I might be giving Woodward more credit. He might just be a Disney villain that actively wants United to become irrelevant. Thats clearly the best way to make Glazers more money.

 

[Enigma_87]

Yes you're right. But I think the source of the recommendation was key here. When Mourinho tells me to spend $60 million on Maguire I dunno if thats the right thing to do as I'm unsure about Mourinho's goals and interests. Is Maguire better than Jones? I'm not a football person so I can't be sure. But this is coming from a guy who also wants me to get Willian/Perisic for Martial so I put a pin in it for now.

That train of logic sounds reasonable to me, but I might be giving Woodward more credit. He might just be a Disney villain that actively wants United to become irrelevant. Thats clearly the best way to make Glazers more money.

But then in that scenario he will lose them money?

If he as unsure of Mourinho goals and interests he shouldn't have given him 300m to play with, nor given him contract extension couple of months prior. Nor giving the go ahead for 500k per week Sanchez.

If he's not a footballing guy (and so far he has proven he definitely isn't) they either back or sack the manager and either go for his targets or don't give him money and work on a budget.

It's very odd to have our best finish since Fergie and you don't want to improve on your squad. Of course if he did back the manager there was no guarantee that we would be in a better position, but still his actions make little sense in footballing matter.

 

[Rish Sawhney]

But then in that scenario he will lose them money?

If he as unsure of Mourinho goals and interests he shouldn't have given him 300m to play with, nor given him contract extension couple of months prior. Nor giving the go ahead for 500k per week Sanchez.

If he's not a footballing guy (and so far he has proven he definitely isn't) they either back or sack the manager and either go for his targets or don't give him money and work on a budget.

It's very odd to have our best finish since Fergie and you don't want to improve on your squad. Of course if he did back the manager there was no guarantee that we would be in a better position, but still his actions make little sense in footballing matter.

This I absolutely agree with. But there might be whole host of reasons why that wasn't possible. 1. Mourinho could have been a 2 faced bastard telling Woodward something and then publicly saying something else. There're some hints of this from public statements made by board members. 2. Mourinho actually did have the board convinced that he was here for the long term which led to him being offered a new contract. 3. Maybe Woodward is just not interested in doing his job and lurched from decision to decision without any logic. ETC

"It's very odd to have our best finish since Fergie and you don't want to improve on your squad." We bought Dalot and Fred. But you're right he should have fired Mourinho last summer. I'm not going to defend Woodward there.

 

[Rusholme Ruffian]

I ask for a name because you're so sure Solskjaer will fail and tell us every day. I just assumed you were knowledgable on which managers would be the right choice. In the end just the stock Pochettino answer i expected.

Dude, if you go back and look at our interractions you will see that I was making a general point about how poor the clubs managerial recruitment has been since Fergie retired, and you are the one that has sought to make it specific about OGS. You have pushed me for a name that would have been a better choice than OGS, and then when I have finally given you one you have dismissed it - the reason it is the 'stock' answer is because it is the sensible, logical answer, and the answer that (I imagine) Woodward and co were thinking of before they were seduced by a run of form and the attraction of appointing a yes man who would be forever grateful for the opportunity. The truth is that there are probably 30 names that I could give you that would be a better bet than OGS - and if you disagree, or want me to start naming those names for you then I would just ask you to answer - honestly - 7 months ago would OGS have been in your top 30 choices as a replacement for Mourinho?

 

[Rusholme Ruffian]

Their strategy - as I understand it - seems to be "We're convinced that his long term interests are aligned with ours, so he's in charge of pretty much all footballing operations." The problem with Mourinho was that you could clearly see his long term interests weren't aligned with United's. And that became obvious last summer when he kept targeting 29-30 year olds who would have given us a couple of good seasons and then left us to rebuild again. And hence it made sense for Woodward to not back him in those targets.

The board's strategy in my view should be to stay hands off on footballing matters. What matters in managers is not their last 10 results or how popular they are with fans or how many cups and trophies they've won. Its this - "is this guy's long term vision aligned with our clubs's? And do we think this guy is good enough to execute that vision over a long term." On this condition Ole is actually pretty good as a candidate as long as the people hiring have some sort of faith in his abilities. And he'll continue to work here until in their minds one of those criteria fails.

So this is what we're using as our key managerial recruitment strategy these days? "Are his long term interests aligned with ours?" - What about old fashioned stuff like "how good is he at winning football matches"? Or "has he demonstrated the ability to lead and inspire at the highest level"? Or "does he have a track record of rebuilding a football club that is in trouble"? This "long term interests' thing is just a part of the bigger picture - there must be a thousand candidates out there who have long term interests that fit with those of the club...what we're looking for is a heck of a lot more than that though - and we deserve a lot more.

 

[Leftback99]

Dude, if you go back and look at our interractions you will see that I was making a general point about how poor the clubs managerial recruitment has been since Fergie retired, and you are the one that has sought to make it specific about OGS. You have pushed me for a name that would have been a better choice than OGS, and then when I have finally given you one you have dismissed it - the reason it is the 'stock' answer is because it is the sensible, logical answer, and the answer that (I imagine) Woodward and co were thinking of before they were seduced by a run of form and the attraction of appointing a yes man who would be forever grateful for the opportunity. The truth is that there are probably 30 names that I could give you that would be a better bet than OGS - and if you disagree, or want me to start naming those names for you then I would just ask you to answer - honestly - 7 months ago would OGS have been in your top 30 choices as a replacement for Mourinho?

Despite all the moaning about Solskjaer's appointment the only name anyone comes up with instead is Pochettino who we would probably still be negotiating with Levy for now even if for some reason he wanted to leave a better team. There's no guarantee Poch would do any better either, his run of results at the end of the season was terrible.

My honest answer 7 months ago would have been that I didn't expect anyone to do better than Mourinho with this set of players, I said as much on here. I also said at the time that none of the 'big names' available would interest me. So maybe he would have made my top 30. 4 months later there was barely a choice faced with new evidence.

 

[Rusholme Ruffian]

Despite all the moaning about Solskjaer's appointment the only name anyone comes up with instead is Pochettino who we would probably still be negotiating with Levy for now even if for some reason he wanted to leave a better team. There's no guarantee Poch would do any better either, his run of results at the end of the season was terrible.

My honest answer 7 months ago would have been that I didn't expect anyone to do better than Mourinho with this set of players, I said as much on here. I also said at the time that none of the 'big names' available would interest me. So maybe he would have made my top 30. 4 months later there was barely a choice faced with new evidence.

Barely a choice?! You're saying that a club like United had such a paucity of options that they had to go for a guy who even by your own admission might just have scraped into your top 30 choices?! Sorry but that is horseshit. There are names in the Premier League alone that would make more sense, let alone all the other top leagues.