Our managers actually are being backed.

[Mainoldo]

Haaland went to Dortmund for €20m Euro, and Woodward pulled the plug because Haaland wanted a release clause inserted to kick in 2022.
Instead we had that last day scramble eventually getting Ighalo.
At worst we could have had Haaland for two years and quadrupled our outlay in two years time. If the team had done well, he might have wanted a new longer term contract.

The Sancho fiasco has been done to death.
If you are not yet grasping what a major balls up that was, then I don't know what else to say.

Okay so you want a well run club, you want standards, you want a United culture re-installed. But your happy for us to sign a player with a release clause just so he can look pretty for two years for him to move on for a third of his worth (Pre Covid). That does not sound like sensible business for a “big club” also probably the reason why City and Liverpool would never looks twice at that deal.

As for Sancho quite simply put he was too expensive no one else was going to do that deal and next summer no one else is going to do that deal unless they drop their price.

So come into the real world and stop thinking football is FM manager.

 

[Amir]

Yeah pretty much.

If we actually went out and grabbed the targets our managers wanted, or even at bare minimum one of them each summer, then I would agree that we were backing them. However, it's quite clear that we only back "new" managers after missing out on UCL money. The evidence is damning when looking at the second or third summer for our managers.

The evidence - based on very few managers and very few summers - is what you want to make of it. Mourinho spent a lot in his second summer with us after qualifying to the CL.

 

[Foxbatt]

Haaland went to Dortmund for €20m Euro, and Woodward pulled the plug because Haaland wanted a release clause inserted to kick in 2022.
Instead we had that last day scramble eventually getting Ighalo.
At worst we could have had Haaland for two years and quadrupled our outlay in two years time. If the team had done well, he might have wanted a new longer term contract.

The Sancho fiasco has been done to death.
If you are not yet grasping what a major balls up that was, then I don't know what else to say.

Woodward is correct in not accepting a release clause in 2022. It is pointless to get us a player and then set a team around him and for him to leave. 2022 is way too soon for a release clause. That said he sure fecks up with the transfers. There are so many players out there who would come much cheaply than Sancho. Bringing Sancho is not going to sort our problems. Our forwards are the issue. We need strengthening in other areas much more than our forwards.

 

[Amir]

At worst we could have had Haaland for two years and quadrupled our outlay in two years time. If the team had done well, he might have wanted a new longer term contract.

Not saying that shouldn't have been considered, but you have to draw a line somewhere.

Supposed we would have done that Haaland deal. Why not do the Reguilon deal Real Madrid wanted as well? Would have given us a good player for two years minimum, and maybe beyond.

And then maybe in the summer of 2022 we end up losing both our starting left back and our top striker. Oops.

Obviously you are argue for everything, but I can't fault United for walking out on the Haaland deal. It was at very least a reasonable decision.

 

[Mainoldo]

Klopp also wanted Thiago. He also targeted VVD who they paid 75m for in a world record deal. As well as Salah, Mane, Keita, Allison, etc. He's

Pep wanted Koulibaly and didn't get him sure, but he's been backed probably more than any manager in world football at City so that's one miss for a ton of successes (from a transfer point of view).

Ole probably wanted the players we brought in, to an extent at least, but I suspect it was more like needing a new car because you don't have one, and instead of getting the shiny sports car you had your eye on, you get the used SUV. It's still useful and you needed a car, but it's not close to the quality you initially hoped. He wanted Sancho, but was given some young prospects that are highly rated. He wanted Grealish, but got VdB. He wanted Haaland, but was given Cavani on a free. He wanted Upamecano, but we decided against a CB and grabbed Telles instead.

Yet you haven’t answered why Klopp wanted Werner but ended up with Jota. Or why Pep wanted Koulibaly and ended up with Ruben Diaz. Your making no sense was they backed or not backed?

 

[Amir]

Yet you haven’t answered why Klopp wanted Werner but ended up with Jota. Or why Pep wanted Koulibaly and ended up with Ruben Diaz. Your making no sense was they backed or not backed?

What about Zidane wanting Pogba last summer?

 

[big rons sovereign]

They are backed when we fail to qualify for Europe, but once we're back in Europe the shackles are put back on. Vicious cycle we've been in the past few years. No excuses for Ole though, he's simply out of his depth and a better manager would achieve better results with the players we currently have.

Both lvg and Mourinho could be considered better managers. Both failed.

 

[big rons sovereign]

Liverpool 666. Seems about right to me.

 

[Mainoldo]

What about Zidane wanting Pogba last summer?

It happens all the time and I’ve used that example before when not buying Bruno meant we were ruined last summer. Zidane still managed to win the league with his board failing him.

But just to be clear we definitely needed a midfielder however the budget is the budget. It sucks but we still spend a load of money wastefully.

 

[Mainoldo]

Both lvg and Mourinho could be considered better managers. Both failed.

No they did what their current coaching level would take them to.

 

[el3mel]

It's nothing like that at all mate, because most of Ole's targets were readily available and were attainable to an even semi competent board.

Grealish at 80m and Sancho 120m are definitely not that available. They are staying at their teams for now for a reason.

 

[el3mel]

Haaland went to Dortmund for €20m Euro, and Woodward pulled the plug because Haaland wanted a release clause inserted to kick in 2022.
Instead we had that last day scramble eventually getting Ighalo.
At worst we could have had Haaland for two years and quadrupled our outlay in two years time. If the team had done well, he might have wanted a new longer term contract.

The Sancho fiasco has been done to death.
If you are not yet grasping what a major balls up that was, then I don't know what else to say.

Under no circumstances we should accept a release clause for a Raiola's client. It would have turned into a disaster 2 years later.

Beside, didn't people here scream for Martial to be our main number 9 anyway?

 

[Adnan]

Yet you haven’t answered why Klopp wanted Werner but ended up with Jota. Or why Pep wanted Koulibaly and ended up with Ruben Diaz. Your making no sense was they backed or not backed?

Klopp also wanted Brandt and had to settle for Salah.

 

[Mainoldo]

Klopp also wanted Brandt and had to settle for Salah.

Yes he wasn’t very happy about it at the time either, rumour has it.

Salah was also a Liverpool target (You could say a board purchase?) as the had previously failed at the last minute when Chelsea done their normal scumbagging.

 

[Adnan]

Yes he wasn’t very happy about it at the time either, rumour has it.

Salah was also a Liverpool target (You could say a board purchase?) as the had previously failed at the last minute when Chelsea done their normal scumbagging.

Salah was a club purchase for sure and it's been well documented.

 

[Class of 63]

Klopp also wanted Thiago. He also targeted VVD who they paid 75m for in a world record deal. As well as Salah, Mane, Keita, Allison, etc. He's

Pep wanted Koulibaly and didn't get him sure, but he's been backed probably more than any manager in world football at City so that's one miss for a ton of successes (from a transfer point of view).

Ole probably wanted the players we brought in, to an extent at least, but I suspect it was more like needing a new car because you don't have one, and instead of getting the shiny sports car you had your eye on, you get the used SUV. It's still useful and you needed a car, but it's not close to the quality you initially hoped. He wanted Sancho, but was given some young prospects that are highly rated. He wanted Grealish, but got VdB. He wanted Haaland, but was given Cavani on a free. He wanted Upamecano, but we decided against a CB and grabbed Telles instead.

Ole is not daft, he'll have known if Dortmund weren't prepared to lower the price for Sancho(and let's be honest most of us thought they'd cave coming up to the deadline) he wouldn't be getting him this Summer/Autumn, so he and his staff will have taken their time to decide who to sign(if anybody) instead of Sancho, and with the alternatives available he might well have picked a winner with Amad Traoré who has more to his game at 17/18 than Sancho did, and less likely to burn down Carrington than Dembele. Think Pellistri would still have been signed even if we'd got Sancho.

It was always going to be difficult to get Grealish after Villa avoided relegation even if we(Ole)wanted him, if memory serves we were linked strongest with him last Christmas and the capture of Fernandes in January should really have put that to bed, but the press kept running with it knowing they could list him as another target Ed Woodward and Chums fecked up on when we didn't sign him. We got VdB because for the price he was available for it was a no-brainer, not instead of Grealish, or whoever the press were linking us at the time.

Ole knew the score with Haaland, and it made sense not to go for him at the time because of the buy-out clause, but I wouldn't be surprised, moreso if Ole is still Manager we don't sign him in 18 months when the buy-out clause can be activated. Cavani was probably signed because Ighalo will almost certainly be off in January.

United were never gonna sign Upamecano once it became known that he will be available for £25m less next year than it would have cost this year. And without breaking the bank we were always going to sign a left-back this window whether a starter or back-up, and now it's up to Telles to decide which of those he is.

 

[AFC NimbleThumb]

We went from having the 11th 'best' defence in the league to 3rd best in one season. They both more than played their part in that.

To say otherwise is just being ignorant.

In 18/19 we were under the management of Jose trying to get sacked & OgS form fell off a cliff; thus the defensive stats were heavily impacted by a lack of tactical consistency/poor management.

So speaking of ignorance what was our defensive record in 17/18 & 16/17? I could go further back but again, referring to ignorance, you’re using an outlier as the standard.

Defensively we’ve actually performed better without Maguire in recent seasons bar the one where our manager fell out with the club, “To say otherwise is just being ignorant.”

Being a better RB than Antonio Valencia & a questionable upgrade on Chris Smalling doesn’t make you fantastic signings; if Maguires name were Mustafi & Arsenal had paid £80mil for him it’d be called catastrophic.

Anyway, back to goals conceded. . . I’ll wait.

 

[DarkXaero]

How are the managers backed when Woodward doesn't go for players the managers want?

We went into the window needing a CDM, RW, Cb & grealish and we got none of OGS targets, how is that being backed?

Where are you getting your information about what our targets were? Ole didn't want Donny VDB when he had been linked to us from early this year? Do you think Ole didn't want Telles? Do you think we should have paid the 80 million pound asking price for Grealish? Which DMs were we linked to? Which CB were we realistically linked to?

 

[Tel074]

Cash spent on transfers doesnt always equal backing your manager.
Did Ole have VDB/another midfielder as his priority or a RW/CB. Mourinho was offered Fred or nothing that final summer
Who is making the final decisions and doing the negotiating?
Can managers sell who they want and spend on who they prioritise?
The club have spent a lot over the last few years. Doesnt feel the managers are fully backed though. LVG and Jose both conplained about it and no doubt Ole would if he wasnt so nice!

At last some sense . Exactly your point . Just because we spent huge sums of money doesn't necessarily mean the manager has been properly backed . lVG has stated he didn't want Di Maria or Falcao or Schneiderlin but Ed or whoever bought them . They fecked over Moyes bigtime and didn't he tell Jose he didn't need a LB cause he had Shaw the very same Shaw who has just seen us add another LB to the squad .
If you think Ole was backed in this summer's window then you need help . VDB is quite obviously not a priority signing for him and was Telles ? I doubt it .

 

[Class of 63]

At last some sense . Exactly your point . Just because we spent huge sums of money doesn't necessarily mean the manager has been properly backed . lVG has stated he didn't want Di Maria or Falcao or Schneiderlin but Ed or whoever bought them . They fecked over Moyes bigtime and didn't he tell Jose he didn't need a LB cause he had Shaw the very same Shaw who has just seen us add another LB to the squad .
If you think Ole was backed in this summer's window then you need help . VDB is quite obviously not a priority signing for him and was Telles ? I doubt it .

I need help!

 

[Sky1981]

Ole was lauded as genius last year for bringing awb, maguire, james, and ighalo and bruno. Pristine. Marvelous. Genius. DoF was the buzz word for him.

Now out of all our signings none of them are ole target. It's all ed. Heck some of youse even claimed none of last year signing is Ole's.

Talk about mental gymnastics. If it's good it must be ole. If it's bad it must have been forced on him. Poor ole. 350m signing and none of them are his....

Ed doesnt interfere with football. He delivers the manager's target to the best of his abilities. He didnt pick the who , he only deal with how much.

Stop bending realities. Our managers are all responsible for their signing. Ed was responsible for the how much. Overpaid and underpaid is a valid critics of ed. Buying the wrong player isnt on him

 

[Adnan]

This thread further demonstrates that we need a coach who isn't only a potentially fantastic coach on the training ground but also someone that can identify primary/secondary targets if needs be without shelling out crazy amounts of money.

 

[big rons sovereign]

No they did what their current coaching level would take them to.

So who's this mythical great manager we'll replace ole with and everything will be sparkly and wonderful?

 

[Adnan]

So who's this mythical great manager we'll replace ole with and everything will be sparkly and wonderful?

How about someone that is spoken of highly for their work on the training ground by their peers? Work that has shown to manifest itself on match days. Now that would be a good start instead of always going for the most obvious choice. Don't you think?

 

[Blood Mage]

Both lvg and Mourinho could be considered better managers. Both failed.

Mourinho didn't have Bruno and Greenwood. Van Gaal didn't have Bruno, Greenwood or Pogba.

 

[Sky1981]

Both lvg and Mourinho could be considered better managers. Both failed.

Failed?

If ole reached what Either of them reached (winning the FA, Europa, 2nd) he'd be lauded as the next SAF and given 10 years contracts.

Failure in a subjective

How about someone that is spoken of highly for their work on the training ground by their peers? Work that has shown to manifest itself on match days. Now that would be a good start instead of always going for the most obvious choice. Don't you think?

Why do we need to resort to this? This applies to pre-Barcelona Pep where he works with Barcelona B, or the time when Jose was managing Leira, or when Klopp is at Maine.

Ole has 10 years of managerial stint (granted it's Cardiff and Molde), but he's not actually an unknown quantity, 10 years worth of managerial work is enough to measure what kind of manager he is.

 

[Gazza]

Bad negotiation has led to spending all the managers budget and then these negotiators want to blame the manager for it so the following window become tight asses which leads to sacking. Rinse and repeat.

I’m assuming Ole gave Woodward the go ahead to spend £130 mil on Maguire and AWB so he can’t be absolved of responsibility for that.

 

[Adnan]

Failed?

If ole reached what Either of them reached (winning the FA, Europa, 2nd) he'd be lauded as the next SAF and given 10 years contracts.

Failure in a subjective




Why do we need to resort to this? This applies to pre-Barcelona Pep where he works with Barcelona B, or the time when Jose was managing Leira, or when Klopp is at Maine.

Ole has 10 years of managerial stint (granted it's Cardiff and Molde), but he's not actually an unknown quantity, 10 years worth of managerial work is enough to measure what kind of manager he is.

We should resort to this because it would lead us to getting a coach that is highly thought of by his peers (Klopp) for his work on the training ground which has proven to be effective on match days.

The second part of your post has no correlation to my post.

 

[Sky1981]

We should resort to this because it would lead us to getting a coach that is highly thought of by his peers (Klopp) for his work on the training ground which has proven to be effective on match days.

The second part of your post has no correlation to my post.

Thought highly by his peers? That's a weird line. I doubt managers handing peer review like journals.

The second line is the fact : why you need peer review when his actual work is there for everyone to see. It's like refusing to actually go and see the movie on netflix, yet listening to what the critics says.

 

[tombombadil]

It really needs to be said again. The manager doesn't control transfers. The transfer committee does and the manager is one of many members in that committee. The committee choose the players. Then Ed/Matt negotiate the transfers.

Imagine this "structure" spending a club record on a target man for the manager, but then refusing to buy a winger to feed the target man. Knowing full well there are no other decent crossers in the team.

And then when shit hits the fan 5 months later, this "structure" forces the manager to either accept a panic buy of a left sided inside forward (the 3rd in the squad) or accept nothing at all.

And during this time, said manager was begging for a centerback. Which the "structure" refused, arguing existing centerbacks are good enough. And then the following season, after failing to qualify for CL, they pay a record for a centerback.

When this farce flops, the manager gets the blame for the failure and people claim he was "backed" by the club because of the "record signing target man" and a record wages inside forward.

Now the same shit is happening to the current manager. Rinse, wash, repeat.

And still people don't realise that the same shit is happening and will continue to happen as long as nothing changes upstairs. The "structure" has to change.

 

[Adnan]

Thought highly by his peers? That's a weird line. I doubt managers handing peer review like journals.

The second line is the fact : why you need peer review when his actual work is there for everyone to see. It's like refusing to actually go and see the movie on netflix, yet listening to what the critics says.

You've missed the context of the post in question which was a response to another poster and are stuck on the bit about the peers.

What I meant was that we should try going for someone that is up and coming and known for his work on the training ground which has proven to be successful and match days are the evidence for that work. The peers bit was thrown in because the body of work was so impressive that it garnered admiration from fellow pro footballers/coaches.

Ole has been managing for 10 years but never have I heard admiration for his work on the training ground hence why I said you putting that info in response to me had no correlation to my post.

 

[Sky1981]

You've missed the context of the post in question which was a response to another poster and are stuck on the bit about the peers.

What I meant was that we should try going for someone that is up and coming and known for his work on the training ground which has proven to be successful and match days are the evidence for that work. The peers bit was thrown in because the body of work was so impressive that it garnered admiration from fellow pro footballers/coaches.

Ole has been managing for 10 years but never have I heard admiration for his work on the training ground hence why I said you putting that info in response to me had no correlation to my post.

Ah. My bad. THat makes sense

 

[Andycoleno9]

What is definition of backing the manager? Lvg got many players, some of them stars but he said that he didn't get players who he wanted. Is that backing?
Solskjaer spent 300mil on new players. He spent 130 mil on new defence. Is backing him to give him another 50 or 60 on another defender? I agree that he should have got right winger but again does backing him means Sancho or nothing?
Jose got everything first two years. In third year, he didn't get nearly anything what he wanted for title challenge. But he got 9 players till then. So was he backed or not?

They were (except Moyes) all backed more than other managers in other clubs. 100% backed? No. But there is no manager in the world who gets everything.

 

[Adnan]

Ah. My bad. THat makes sense

No problem, it's all good.

 

[jamesjimmybyrondean]

This thread further demonstrates that we need a coach who isn't only a potentially fantastic coach on the training ground but also someone that can identify primary/secondary targets if needs be without shelling out crazy amounts of money.

And also a coach that can get players to punch above their weight because they can't get what they want all the time and need to work with what they have

 

[Adnan]

And also a coach that can get players to punch above their weight because they can't get what they want all the time and need to work with what they have

Exactly..

 

[zenith]

We seem to financially back the managers till we get top 4 and beyond that become stingy again, till we do out of champions league.

It's an absurd logic which is founded more on corporate principles rather than sporting ones.

 

[Andycoleno9]

Every manager has spent money, but they wanted steak and Woodward provided pot noodles at the price of steak.

You can't say a manager has been backed if they don't get what they want. We went into the market with Ole wanting a RW, CDM, Cb & grealish. He got none of them

Yeah, but this was similiar situation with Jose in season 3.
Ole inherited 5 central defenders. He wanted Maguire and AWB. He got them with us overpaying them hugely. And that is best proof that he wanted exactly those two by name. Because Ed wouldn't go crazy with fee for those two if manager didn't insist on those two. So you are saying that after spending 80 mil on defender he should have got another defender for 60-70? Sorry mate, but even sugar daddy would not give him that wish.

As i said, he should have got right winger. But if his only wish was Sancho or nothing then it is on him. I am the one who completely understands why we didn't spent 120 mil on him in this post covid era. Same when Jose wanted 30y old Toby and Perisic for 60 mil. Some deals are just not logical to ask.

Solskjaer was backed so far. Maybe not fully but he was backed well enough. It is like when Pep spent 250 mil on defenders and then cried how he didn't got Maguire. Come on...

 

[Bobcat]

Ole was not backed this window, but it's also due to a combination of our bloated squad, much of which is due to the mismanagement of the squad under previous managers and poor contract negotiation by Woody and co, covid impacting financials, and the Glazers not being willing to put money into the club during a time where its finances have been hit by the pandemic.

This. Of course they have been "backed" in the sense that a lot of money have been spent, but that does not necessarily translate into quality on the pitch. Our Net spend since Fergie retired has been stupidly high, but much of that is because we always tend to overpay when we buy and we sell for peanuts. This was particularly bad under LvG when we always paid a premium for incomings, yet somehow managed to to rid ourselves with Fergies old team for a laughable total sum

Of course many of those players were at the end of their careers so they would have little resale value, but a big portion of them also were in their best years and the fact that we let them go so cheap is nothing short of scandalous. Same with the wages. For years we have thrown money at mediocre players and handed out ridiculous gilded deals to the likes of Sanchez and it has caused us all sorts of trouble. So we have been spending alright, the problem is that we have spent in terribly.

The thing is though, Woody and co are supposed to be shrewd business people. They know feck all about football, but they should be good at making money. Right? We have been a complete disaster in that respect as well. Completely disregarding all sporting aspects the last years, the way our finances have been handled have been a complete mess

 

[jackal&hyde]

We seem to financially back the managers till we get top 4 and beyond that become stingy again, till we do out of champions league.

It's an absurd logic which is founded more on corporate principles rather than sporting ones.

This! Plus we go for wildly different types of managers so few of the signings have continuity. The squad ends up being disjointed and unbalanced and the total price becomes a stick to beat the managers with, much to Woodwards favor of deflecting blame.