Solskjaer's legacy and his future

[b82REZ]

The irony is Grealish would have been a much better signing for United and Ole than Sancho and Jadon suits City and Pep more.

His style suited the way Ole made us set up a lot better than Sancho. As many have said we signed a lot of square pegs for round holes with Ole.

Sancho may eventually come good but it's going to take us to change our style of play massively to see the best of him.

 

[Sky1981]

The title of the thread is 'Solskjaer's legacy and his future'. So that's what I'm talking about.

Even so, the 4 players you mentioned are for the here and now. Ronaldo and Cavani were free, and have both been fantastic. Maguire has been poor this season, but was great the last two seasons and even got into the Euros team of the tournament in July. Varane is undoubtedly world class as well.

If Ole had bought more seasoned veterans like those, rather than splitting his purchases between the future and the present, he'd have been much better off. And possibly even built on the 2nd place we got in the league last season. But instead he prioritised United's future by spending the bulk of his transfer budget on kids.

If you want to talk about how Ole fecked things up in his last few weeks, there are plenty of other threads on that topic. But to bring it back to the thread title, his youth oriented transfer policy is his legacy.

HAHAHAHA

You can't be serious? he brought "Safe Bets" even if it meant we overpaid for mediocrity

 

[horsechoker]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Does Ole smile too much?

 

[Jippy]

This is very true. The endless excuses and holier than thou top red remarks from this group escalate the divide between the fans.

The same exists for our previous managers except that the Ole-in group is larger and more aggressive.

Reminds me somewhat of the movie and games industry with certain subpar titles having 2 camps pouring buckets of crap over each other.

Yeah those on the other side saying anyone not wanting the team to lose every game 6-0 wasn't a real fan were a real unifying force.

 

[Tom Cato]

Name me a player who were successful with cuddled approach. All winners came from harsh treatment , it's not just in football ,in every career. They becomes winner because they can overcome it. A manager has to be fair , reward them when they played well, kick them in the ass when they were shit, that's how a good man management is. Cuddling approach will only breed loser. Mourinho wouldn't have over 25 major trophies in his career if he was bad at man management absolutely no chance. Look at the kind of players he was once managed , Ibrahimovic , Balotelli , Adriano , Cambiasso , Walter Samuel all in the same dressing room. I think what he couldn't manage is a lazy player.

It works both way ,if you are mentally too weak and too soft to handle it then you are probably end up as a loser too. Back then we have Sir Alex and Roy Keane in dressing room , can you imagine how horrible they are for a mentally weak players ?
By the way , football manager isn't there to make a player happy , that's what fans are for. Manager is there to turn player into winners if the player refuse / mentally weak then it's the manager job to get rid of them before they brought the whole team down with them. There are too many soft and weak characters in our team which lead us to this mess Rangnick has to deal with. I only support the club and what's best for the club ,never the player , mentally weak players should never be allowed to step foot at Manchester United. if you care about players feelings and mental health that only shows where your priorities at. OGS seems to be only care about players feelings and mental health but look where it brought him ? We get battered week in week out yet he keeps the same starting eleven because he didn't dare to hurt Luke Shaw , AWB , Rashford , Maguire feelings. Weak leadership is what failed him and one of the reasons why he is still jobless.

Early candidate for worst post of 2022.

 

[stefan92]

Yeah those on the other side saying anyone not wanting the team to lose every game 6-0 wasn't a real fan were a real unifying force.

The only thing that's safe to say is that he divided the fans.

 

[Jippy]

The only thing that's safe to say is that he divided the fans.

Yep and not sure why some posters want to keep raking it over again and again.

 

[anant]

Agreed, with the exception of VdB, and some would argue AWB, none of them are bad signings at face value, but the problem is that they seemingly did not fit into a greater philosophy. It became painfully obvious when you then get a purist like RR to take over and you realize a sizable portion of the squad are square pegs in round holes

True, but that's on the club to hire a manager whose philosophy is similar to the predecessor. And that is exactly where we've done poorly - more than splashing stupid money or hiring poor managers. Ole's tactical system was more flexible than defined, as in he changed tactics based on opposition and hence needed players for every role rather than them being specialists of a particular system.

Eventually the manager will sign players who suit him, not the next potential manager, and it is up to the club to not hire Sam Allardyce after Pep, because you are forcing yourself into a rebuild. Us hiring LVG after Moyes, Mou after LVG, Ole after Mou, and RR after Ole perfectly encapsulates the stupidity of the footballing men at the club. And, if you're going to change philosophy after every manager, give the manager 4-5 years to change the club as he pleases, but also be sure that the manager would be a success

 

[King29]

Grealish may have been on the shortlist of options. But Sancho was a higher priority.

United's transfer strategy is to compile a list of preferences for each position. That's been well documented over the years. And I'm sure Solksjaer would have settled for Grealish as a fallback option.

But Sancho is the one we prioritised. There was never any bid for Grelaish. If they were equal priority, we'd have negotiated for both at the same time. Instead, Solksjaer wanted the younger option, with the longer adaptation period - but who's upside would also have been bigger in the long term.

Every transfer is a gamble. Ole gambled for the benefit of United more than himself. Even if Sancho fails, that's still Solksjaer's legacy.

We simply don't know if Ole wanted sancho over grealish because he was the "younger option"

And your last point on Ole gambling for the benefit of United is not consistent with his entire tenure. 85m for Maguire and 50m for Awb for established premier league proven players are not gambles (relative to cheaper/riskier options out there). Ironically they aren't doing well but that's a whole other conversation...

 

[devilish]

Your opinion on Ole is too skewed to be taken seriously. You even implicated him in the Greenwood thread ffs.

You can't see the good and the bad about Ole. You can only see the bad. And then you twist the good into the worst possible interpretation.

Regarding your first quote that was in reply to a tweet that Ole might have covered previous mishaps of Greenwood and some player in Norway. I think that we can all agree that if that was indeed the case then he should have no business at our club. That applies not only to him but to anyone else

Ole was a decent temporary manager but he was clearly out of depth as a permanent manager. During his time we spent 415m on a huge squad made up of largely overpaid and overrated bottlers with poor attitude.

 

[wise_old_man]

The irony is Grealish would have been a much better signing for United and Ole than Sancho and Jadon suits City and Pep more.

His style suited the way Ole made us set up a lot better than Sancho. As many have said we signed a lot of square pegs for round holes with Ole.

Sancho may eventually come good but it's going to take us to change our style of play massively to see the best of him.

If we signed Grealish, imagine the meltdown on here: "Why did we sign another playmaker/number 10 when we had Bruno and ignored our right wing yet again?"

 

[b82REZ]

If we signed Grealish, imagine the meltdown on here: "Why did we sign another playmaker/number 10 when we had Bruno and ignored our right wing yet again?"

The last few years has proven countless times that the Caf is not a fair barometer for level discussions or opinions.

Again ironically, Sancho is arguably more of a 10 than Grealish who I think will naturally move further back into midfield.

 

[Tom Cato]

Yeah those on the other side saying anyone not wanting the team to lose every game 6-0 wasn't a real fan were a real unifying force.

I dont think anyne is genuinely going to argue that the last 2 months were something anyone wanted. Before that we didnt lose a lot of football matches so I assume you`re lumping the entirety of the project into the last stretch of games.

 

[Jippy]

I dont think anyne is genuinely going to argue that the last 2 months were something anyone wanted. Before that we didnt lose a lot of football matches so I assume you`re lumping the entirety of the project into the last stretch of games.

Tbh I was initially replying to a silly comment about the divide being caused solely by 'Ole inners', but given my lack of interest in that historic debate I shouldn't have.

 

[stevoc]

Maguire was 26, Bruno was 25. Studies show (link below) that for outfield players peak performance for outfield players is reached on average between 25 and 27 years old (for forwards rather 25, defenders rather 27). For every player the peak can be different but statistically they were both bought either exactly at their peak or very close to it.

https://content.iospress.com/download/journal-of-sports-analytics/jsa0021?id=journal-of-sports-analytics/jsa0021

Not sure I buy into that study but regardless those two can't be compared to the likes of Cavani and Ronaldo in terms of age. And Bruno was certainly a risk and far from a safe bet. Maguire for a world record fee was let's be honest a massive risk too and while he's looked solid for most of time at United. He was never a sure thing to justify the massive fee or be one of the worlds top defenders.

 

[Pintu]

I dont think anyne is genuinely going to argue that the last 2 months were something anyone wanted. Before that we didnt lose a lot of football matches so I assume you`re lumping the entirety of the project into the last stretch of games.

Not sure what this is supposed to mean. He should have been sacked a year earlier after the shameful CL exit. Olé was never in a title race, he went out of a UCL group stage by losing to Istambul and Leipzig.

And of course, the consolation trophies that Van Gaal and Mourinho were capable of winning disappeared with him. Only Roma players dropping injured like flies put a stop to his semi-finals curse, but even that wasn't enough. He had to bottle the final this time.

 

[tomaldinho1]

Would be nice to see him back in management somewhere else than United just can't see a PL team having any interest in him. There are a lot of good Championship clubs with potential, could see him going somewhere like B'Ham or SHU.

 

[chiz2kul]

Solskjaer's legacy in my mind will be these 2 catastrophic moral failures. Had it been just one that happened under his watch, then I'd give him the benefit of the doubt but two is more than I can stomach. Add the uncertainty over Ronaldo's incident and you have an alarming pattern.

Apart from that, Fernandes a huge positive, most of the other transfers seem like a waste of money, though in time some may look differently. Results fairly similar to other post-Ferguson managers. Left behind a very unhappy playing squad.

completely agree. The weird romanticism among the fans about him is borderline idolatry.

 

[Tom Cato]

Not sure what this is supposed to mean. He should have been sacked a year earlier after the shameful CL exit. Olé was never in a title race, he went out of a UCL group stage by losing to Istambul and Leipzig.

And of course, the consolation trophies that Van Gaal and Mourinho were capable of winning disappeared with him. Only Roma players dropping injured like flies put a stop to his semi-finals curse, but even that wasn't enough. He had to bottle the final this time.

Damn. If only he had put players on the pitch instead of himself.

 

[Tom Cato]

Tbh I was initially replying to a silly comment about the divide being caused solely by 'Ole inners', but given my lack of interest in that historic debate I shouldn't have.

A good lesson to learn from the staff and moderation team would be to look at what could have been done better to make this place less toxic than what it became for a long time.

 

[Pintu]

Damn. If only he had put players on the pitch instead of himself.

Mea culpa.

The Olé system (staff, player selection, tactics, coaching) and of course the players lost those games and the club now knows its longest trophy drought for 40 YEARS. This is a club that under Fergie had never gone 3 years without a PL title.

Now, acknowledging that others share the responsibility with Olé, how many losses do you consider to be "a lot"?

 

[anant]

A good lesson to learn from the staff and moderation team would be to look at what could have been done better to make this place less toxic than what it became for a long time.

I think that's what internet is now. Every thing is treated in extremities - either best manager in the world or PE teacher/not good enough for any team in Europe.

Look at twitter 'analysts', hell even journos - At one moment they were fawning over him, the very next, we had the same people shitting on everything and rewriting the past. I get these extremist views get more clicks, and sitting on the fence is no longer cool, but it's stupid having such views - good or bad

 

[anant]

Mea culpa.

The Olé system (staff, player selection, tactics, coaching) and of course the players lost those games and the club now knows its longest trophy drought for 40 YEARS. This is a club that under Fergie had never gone 3 years without a PL title.

Now, acknowledging that others share the responsibility with Olé, how many losses do you consider to be "a lot"?

Fun fact: In the 2 full seasons under Ole, the team lost lesser games than Man City in the league. He was sacked correctly when he was, but people claiming he should have been sacked 1 year or 2 years ago are just being knee-jerky

 

[Jippy]

A good lesson to learn from the staff and moderation team would be to look at what could have been done better to make this place less toxic than what it became for a long time.

Yep definitely. Staff are just posters too who want to enjoy spending a bit of time on Caf escapism and maybe learning a thing or two at the same time.

The place got toxic around Moyes, LVG, Mourinho and Ole, and no doubt will when the next per manager is at a tipping point. Ultimately the toxicity here reflected the fan base and how vitriolic the extremes of the two sides get when it comes to sack or not.
You can weed out the abuse, banning the worst offenders, and close provocative threads, but you're going to be hard pushed to lift the mood when it's in chaos on the pitch.

 

[Pintu]

Fun fact: In the 2 full seasons under Ole, the team lost lesser games than Man City in the league. He was sacked correctly when he was, but people claiming he should have been sacked 1 year or 2 years ago are just being knee-jerky

And the team won as many games as Leicester city. United ended both seasons more than 10 points behind Man City. 2019 and 2020 was the first time in the history of the PL that City ended 2 consecutive seasons with such margins over United. Last season made it 3.

 

[Beans]

Did as well as Lampard, but he won't get a job like Everton.

 

[anant]

And the team won as many games as Leicester city. United ended both seasons more than 10 points behind Man City. 2019 and 2020 was the first time in the history of the PL that City ended 2 consecutive seasons with such margins over United. Last season made it 3.

Your point was around losses, so not sure why are we changing the goal posts here.

2017-18, 18-19, 19-20, 20-21 : That's 4 seasons btw. And are we blaming City's rise on Ole?

And if we're also quoting records that mean nothing, last season was also the season where our gap with the champions was the least since SAF retired, so not sure what your point is. For every negative record you quote, one can come up with a positive record as well, and hence saying stuff like he was the worst manager or the best manager will never make sense

 

[Pintu]

Your point was around losses, so not sure why are we changing the goal posts here.

I never said he was the worst, but not being the worst shouldn't be enough to be given that much time at United.

This is what I reacted to.

Spoiler

I dont think anyne is genuinely going to argue that the last 2 months were something anyone wanted. Before that we didnt lose a lot of football matches so I assume you`re lumping the entirety of the project into the last stretch of games.

Not sure what this is supposed to mean. He should have been sacked a year earlier after the shameful CL exit. Olé was never in a title race, he went out of a UCL group stage by losing to Istambul and Leipzig.

And of course, the consolation trophies that Van Gaal and Mourinho were capable of winning disappeared with him. Only Roma players dropping injured like flies put a stop to his semi-finals curse, but even that wasn't enough. He had to bottle the final this time.

"Losses" have different meanings. When you lose a CL game to a team (Istanbul) on a smaller budget than Millwall and end up kicked out of the group stage it is a terrible loss. A draw with Sheffield is a loss. Giving away a European trophy to a lesser team (Villareal, smaller budget than Burnley) it is a terrible loss, whether it goes down to a shootout or not.

So taking into account a more reasonable definition of "losses". How many losses would be a lot?

 

[anant]

I never said he was the worst, but not being the worst shouldn't be enough to be given that much time at United.

This is what I reacted to.


"Losses" have different meanings. When you lose a CL game to a team (Istanbul) on a smaller budget than Millwall and end up kicked out of the group stage it is a terrible loss. A draw with Sheffield is a loss. Giving away a European trophy to a lesser team (Villareal, smaller budget than Burnley) it is a terrible loss, whether it goes down to a shootout or not.

So taking into account a more reasonable definition of "losses". How many losses would be a lot?

I've said this earlier as well that if we're including injuries to players to downplay your team/manager/players, then atleast maintain the consistency to acknowledge the same when it's happening to your team - like it did in 19/20 when we missed Pog, Martial, Rashford, McT and Fred for significant parts of the season and more often than not, at the same time.

And let's stop using one off games as some argument and blow those results up. You can list down similar results for I believe every team or close to every team for any era. Eventually, every game is equal - 3 points at stake. You want to beat the shit teams consistently, but if you're ending with a good enough haul at the end, it barely matters - and I acknowledge to win titles you need to be ruthless against these teams. I really dont want to go into whataboutism and compare the results last season with those under say, Mou, as it doesn't serve anything. But the point is, unless you blow up wins against the Citys and Chelseas and PSGs, blowing up these losses is a one-sided exercise

 

[Max_United]

Fun fact: In the 2 full seasons under Ole, the team lost lesser games than Man City in the league. He was sacked correctly when he was, but people claiming he should have been sacked 1 year or 2 years ago are just being knee-jerky

In the 2 full seasons under Jose we lost just 12 league games vs 14 losses in 2 full seasons under Ole. So even on your deliberately picked stat under Ole we performed worse than under the previous manager.

And we were 8th before Christmas in 2019-2020 and did not sneak into top-4 until May. You can debate whether Ole deserved the sack then, but no way you could have called his sacking "knee-jerk", given his subpar credentials for the job. I never understood the concept of giving a manager with a weak CV more time. If anything, he should be having an uphill battle and outperform greatly from the start to keep his job - since he does not have history of success that you can point to and hope he replicates eventually.

 

[copen1945]

Fun fact: In the 2 full seasons under Ole, the team lost lesser games than Man City in the league. He was sacked correctly when he was, but people claiming he should have been sacked 1 year or 2 years ago are just being knee-jerky

It is about winning, not avoiding a loss. While United were on the "not have lost" streak, City were winning, picking up three points. When Ole transitioned to intent to win, things got horribly wrong. Accumulating 85 points or more per season isn't for everyone.

 

[Andycoleno9]

Fun fact: In the 2 full seasons under Ole, the team lost lesser games than Man City in the league. He was sacked correctly when he was, but people claiming he should have been sacked 1 year or 2 years ago are just being knee-jerky

He really lowered standards here. Counting how many games club didn't lose is something which WH or Everton fans would say.
For Man Utd manager is how many games he won and what trophies he won.

 

[BorisManUtd]

Looks about 10 years younger.

We say that about every former manager few months after they get sacked though

 

[NZT-One]

Agreed, with the exception of VdB, and some would argue AWB, none of them are bad signings at face value, but the problem is that they seemingly did not fit into a greater philosophy. It became painfully obvious when you then get a purist like RR to take over and you realize a sizable portion of the squad are square pegs in round holes

I agree for the most part but I'd like to note, that there were few posters on here, who were questioning the underlying plan of the recruitment pretty early in Oles reign. I mean, it was obvious we needed to upgrade RB and CB, but, while I am happy to give a bit of leeway for AWB who the scouts might have thought has potential to improve, especially with Maguire, it was obvious that a relatively slow and not agile player would interfere with the supposed plans of playing on the front foot and try to press high. The warning signs were there, but the success and the dark days of Mourinho potentially effected the perception of some fans.

 

[Stgun]

I agree for the most part but I'd like to note, that there were few posters on here, who were questioning the underlying plan of the recruitment pretty early in Oles reign. I mean, it was obvious we needed to upgrade RB and CB, but, while I am happy to give a bit of leeway for AWB who the scouts might have thought has potential to improve, especially with Maguire, it was obvious that a relatively slow and not agile player would interfere with the supposed plans of playing on the front foot and try to press high. The warning signs were there, but the success and the dark days of Mourinho potentially effected the perception of some fans.

Does it still look dark ? I feel like we are even in darker days. Back then you can blame every mess on him. Now you don't know who to blame anymore.

 

[NZT-One]

Does it still look dark ? I feel like we are even in darker days. Back then you can blame every mess on him. Now you don't know who to blame anymore.

Your message shows another name than mine even though you quoted me. Very strange.

I understand the question and I know, where you are coming from with it. I personally still think these were dark times. When you have manager, who is seemingly more interested in his own picture than the club, then things can go downhill pretty fast. Mou wasn't backed in the way he wanted to, he was going for older players he hoped could bring instant success. When he was denied that (we don't know how and why and how it was communicated), he wanted to prove his point by ludicrous team selections. He was clearly unhappy, seemed miserably but didn't want to step down and leave his position because he probably didn't want to lose out on cash.

I don't think, Mourinho didn't succeed with us just because of Mourinho. There were other factors, but the way he dealt with that, was bad and he never looked at himself when looking for reasons. And even if you want to bring a valid point across, you can't do it by forcing so many to suffer. So yes, these were dark times.

Right now there are no dark times. Some new "thing" is forming itself. And we don't know where this road will bring us. But thats just life nothing dark about it.

 

[devilish]

What a great side Ole left behind.

 

[Ayoba]

In his 3 years he signed strikers all over 30. Ighalo, Cavani and Ronaldo.

Spent 130m in defense, yet we have one of the worse defense records in the league.

 

[elmo]

Fun fact: In the 2 full seasons under Ole, the team lost lesser games than Man City in the league. He was sacked correctly when he was, but people claiming he should have been sacked 1 year or 2 years ago are just being knee-jerky

Top sides are judged by their win percentages.

 

[Roboc7]

Left us in a real mess, allowing him and Woodward to oversee a reboot/rebuild despite clearly lacking the competence and qualifications was just utter stupidity.

Following Ole is hardest job of any manager post SAF because we’re nowhere near, still need a clear out and no one will be afforded same time, patience and funding now.