Totally agree man. It's crazy to me some are still going on about this.
Solskjaer is a worryingly easy out for the Glazers
- Thread starter Tarrou
- Start date
Which bit makes you think I'm not pleased? I did say Solskjaer has performed perfectly.
This is about making the right decision in the future, based on the right criteria.
Didn't Boateng said that he rejected us?
If we go by what was reported, Jose wanted Willian, Perisic, (not sure?) Boateng, and Maguire among others. I can very well understand them not wanting to back him.
Yeah, this is a good point that a few people have made. I think it's the right decision to reign it in, if that is what was reasoning. They also gave him a new contract in January, then we finished 2nd, so you could easily make a case for them doing it to be frugal too. Who knows?
But besides that, I still think Solskjaer is giving them a massively cost saving option, which may or may not be important to them at this moment for whatever reason.
The only issue is that United haven't and doesn't follow the criteria that you are worried about. We are talking about a club with a massive wage bill, that spends a lot on the transfer market to the point where when the club spends 70m, it's considered like not backing the manager which is a daft notion for 99.99% of clubs. And then you need to keep in mind how much the club spent on Mourinho, he wasn't paid 15m just to get top 4 and limit costs, that's a stupid idea simply because 15m is the very top end of manager wages, most very good to excellent managers are in the 5 to 10 million range, some are lower than that.
The only worry that you should actually have with the Glazers and Woodward is that they think that money can replace competency, actual planning and common sense. Hopefully last summer is a sign that they learn something because as things stands it seems that Lindelof, for example, is a lot better than his former manager thought.
I want the Glazers gone as much as anyone. Using the club as leverage in Fergie’s tenure was a joke.
However I think the only mistake they made in the last three years is appointing Mourinho. He was SO bad at his job and transfers that I don’t blame them for vetoing his transfer spend. Let’s see what they do going forward now we’ve got our club back.
However I think the only mistake they made in the last three years is appointing Mourinho. He was SO bad at his job and transfers that I don’t blame them for vetoing his transfer spend. Let’s see what they do going forward now we’ve got our club back.
No idea. But he would say that, I suppose.
I do agree with that, I can see just like all of us we've been throwing money at the problem. But throwing money at the problem hasn't worked, and nobody can deny that the Glazers primary motivation is money.
Now we find ourselves in a situation where the next appointment is absolutely crucial, we need a restructure and rethink, and we need to plan this properly, as you say, and with all that going on Ole's performance has meant appointing him is a viable option over our supposedly original choice, that could come in at £300m cheaper. So it's all just conjecture, yeah, but that is what football forums are. I do regret not making it much clearer I wasn't having a direct pop at the Glazers, and I did not communicate that bit well at all.
There is no reason for him to say that, it's not something that happens that often too. Players will almost always not comment on rumours.
Didn't the club speak to both Perisic and Boateng? It was them who turned us down.
VvD was on that list too but we fecked that up as well. Our logic seems to be we'll go for marketable players first then when we get rejected see who other big clubs want then finally sign some average dross for a reasonable fee.
The club briefed that they had no interest in signing Boateng. For the sake of my sanity I choose to believe it.
It seems to me that the Glazers (for the time being at least) seem happy to back Ed Woodward's overall position of being the 'money man'. There is no doubt however, that they will be worried about his man-management skills e.g. Ed has had three goes at appointing a Football Club Manager capable of winning the highest honours (PL and/or CL) and producing entertaining football, in the clubs traditions.
Ole seems capable of the later, but the job of overall Football Club Manager may be deemed out of his league. Hence the job of Football Club Manager gets split into 1st Team Coach and a Director of Football. If Ole turns out to be the preferred 1st Team Coach, then he needs to be partnered with a preferred Director of Football... they become the dream team!
Ole seems capable of the later, but the job of overall Football Club Manager may be deemed out of his league. Hence the job of Football Club Manager gets split into 1st Team Coach and a Director of Football. If Ole turns out to be the preferred 1st Team Coach, then he needs to be partnered with a preferred Director of Football... they become the dream team!
No white text?
This point is important, they are in it for money but their money doesn't really depend on transfers or things like that, their plan is and was to increase turnovers. It's the logic of getting the same share from a bigger plate instead of a bigger share from the same plate, for some reason people tend to think that business men necessarily do the latter.
I agree with the idea that it's all conjecture and that there aren't bad debates, on your main topic I would offer a different alternative though. The Glazers are american sports owners, they are familiar with a GM-Head coach-Head of personnel-head of recruitment-head of scouting-head of sport science and so on, basically they are used to top heavy organizations, that's the american culture, they don't put all their eggs in the same basket, specialization is a key component of US management. So there is a chance that the Glazers see Mourinho's failure as a big enough event to justify a complete shift to a less british organization which is basically what most posters seem to want.
I expected CAF to be a bit crazy but never this crazy. If the Glazers buy the players Jose wanted it is wasting money. If they refuse then they are not backing the manager. This is absolutely ridiculous.
They got Ole as a Interim manager because the Manager they want is not coming right now. So what do you expect them to do? Appoint Carrick who has had no experience at all? If so the same people will jump on and say they have appointed someone with no experience.
This is the correct decision. He is the Interim Manager and he knows that and it is up to him to prove that he is good enough to manage Manchester United. If he shows with this squad that he can do it then I am sure they will back him in the summer.
If not they will be wasting money by getting players in January as the new incoming manager would want his own players.
They got Ole as a Interim manager because the Manager they want is not coming right now. So what do you expect them to do? Appoint Carrick who has had no experience at all? If so the same people will jump on and say they have appointed someone with no experience.
This is the correct decision. He is the Interim Manager and he knows that and it is up to him to prove that he is good enough to manage Manchester United. If he shows with this squad that he can do it then I am sure they will back him in the summer.
If not they will be wasting money by getting players in January as the new incoming manager would want his own players.
Come on, nobody said that, you just made it up.
Seriously, can we not have a nuanced discussion about a hypothetical that may or may not happen?
Apparently, we've done that with the previous 2 managers; big names, won titles in several countries, winners etc. Not worked out has it.
Maybe we should stop analysing criteria based on who should be hired and go with who feels right.
Have a look here at the past threads. It is exactly as I have said. When they spend money it is said they are wasting it. Look at the Sanchez situation. Look at Lukaku. Look at Lindelof. A lot of them say that the club paid too much for these players. Now because the club refused to buy Toby or Harry McGuire, they are saying that the club did not back the manager.
But these must surely be different people saying the opposing things? I mean on any given topic there is the full spectrum of opinions, even something as one sided as Mourinho's sacking has people who opposed it.
So what is it exactly that you find absolutely ridiculous? Surely not that?
Do you really think we should do that?
I'd be seriously worried if the Glazers approached running the club that way, but i don't think they do.
He's turned them from a fourth/fifth/sixth team to a second/third/ fourth team by having some young players like Alli & Kane coming through not by masterstroke in rebuilding a team. He's won nothing and has no experience in dealing with bringing in top class players and a big disadvantage he knows nothing about running a big club. Tottenham are nowhere near the level of United Liverpool or Arsenal in terms of size of club, I'm not talking about recent results.
The expectations of Tottenham are way way below that of United.
There are equally as many unanswered questions about Poch as there are with Ole. Even Mourinho couldn't handle United
Poch may be a good manager, the question is whether he's right for United.
Obviously being a great player is no guarantee of being a good manager. That's not what i'm saying.
The difference is obvious, we have a temporary manager.
So, you are pleased with Ole, but you are worried he might be the "easy" appointment for the Glazers. So, you are suggesting that perhaps the Glazers should make a different appointment who might not please you or anyone else but he will be the "hard" appointment. Doesn't make sense to me.
They certainly made more mistakes than one in the last three years.
No, that is just putting words in my mouth and then disagreeing with them.
I'm saying that *might* make the wrong choice because the motivations *might* be wrong.
I am saying that what you are saying *might* make no sense.
By all means make a case for it not making sense, but you haven't done that yet.
I think that @Tarrou initial train of thought was relatively simple. He simply wondered if Solskjaer being a potential success will lead to the Glazers not rethinking the process that they followed in the last 5 seasons. The only issue is that when he tried to convey that idea he used money as an argument when in my opinion it's irrelevant to his point. The initial point makes sense though because if Solskjaer is a success, he is a success without restructuring which might affect said restructuring and could allow the Glazers to sweep the last five years under the proverbial carpet.
Yes so it's an easy out for the owners.
City haven't spent anything this month. So we're matching them...
None bigger than Jose though. They gave him 400 million and he spent it poorly.
Running the club is the chair's job, not that of the squad's manager. He doesn't run Spurs, Levy does.
Much of rest of your post is nonsense. He's improved Spurs by:
(a) being part of the decisions to sign Alli, Son, Alderweireld, Davies, Dier, Trippier, Sanchez, Moura, Foyth, Gazzaniga and others
(b) by coaching big improvement in virtually every player in the squad
(c) giving young players a good chance
(d) ruthlessly getting rid of the dead wood (Adebayor, Paulinho, Fazio, Lennon, Sigurdsson, Dawson, Sandro, Livermore, Gomes and many others);
(e) having a defined style of football and drilling this deep into the squad;
(f) by instilling huge self-belief in the players and establishing a strong team spirit.
You say he "has no experience in dealing with bringing in top class players", but you confuse top class with "expensive" ... because several of his signings are top class players.
Nah just because they hire a manager who isn't a moaning twat doesn't mean they want to cheap out. Need to come down from the mindset that Jose wasn't backed. He was backed rather generously. He just couldn't get it through his skull that free spending on certain players isn't ideal for a club that has to generate its own finances. Ole and/or the next manager will be backed like the manager before and the one before that one
Que?
Did I say he'd done a bad job at Spurs?
And yes Levy definitely runs the club and Poch has little say outside the football side of it.
Maybe Spurs are doing better than United at the moment but we've had to put up with dinosaurs of managers for the last few years but even then still won trophies which is still not enough.
You still haven't won anything and you're not expecting to be regular challengers or more so winners of the PL title and successful in Europe. If you finish ahead of Arsenal and reach top 4 that's seen as a major achievement, that's seen as failure at United. That's the difference. Poch does not have the pressure to achieve more than what he has, unless his players start wanting titles and decide to leave.
My point is that I believe Ole is far more suitable as a United manager than Poch and I'm sure you'd be happy to keep Poch, I agree you can keep him.
No it’s not. If OGS stays, he will be backed financially, without a shadow of a doubt. However, for him to even have a chance he needs to do a great job in the next 6 months. It would be poor business to spend lots of money on players if they are not in the (future) managers plans - and we don’t know who that will be yet.
No, but you did say that Spurs have improved under Poch "not by masterstroke in rebuilding a team", when as my posted explained he has rebuilt the team.
And you're now implying that United finishing top 4 this season would be seen as failure, when in truth most United fans would bite your hand off for a top 4 finish.
Players have move in and out of clubs all the time. Theoretically United have bought much better players in that time but if they're used wrongly the team does not function. It's too early to tell whether the players we have can function much better than have now Ole's in charge, first signs are good but we'll see.
Poch has done a good job with the players he has but I don't see Spurs winning the title this year or in the years to come, the failures of Arsenal and United because they've been so poor contributes equally to the resurgence of Spurs as Poch's coaching.
At the start of the season we'd have been seriously disappointed if we thought we'd finish fourth, now for sure I'd bite your hand off to finish fourth.
I'm thinking further ahead, if our expectation next season is to finish fourth it would be seen as failure. We have to be challenging with City and to finish behind Liverpool again is not worth thinking about.
I do not think you get what he means. If United gets to the top 4 THIS season most fans would be satisfied as the chance of getting to the top 4 is very bleak this season. But for United not winning any trophies and especially the PL or the CL is classed as a failure. Simply because that has been the bench mark for United in the past 15 years or so.
Not so for Spurs. Spurs has not won anything of significance yet. So getting into the top 4 has been the best for Spurs up to now.