He will fail cos 200m of today is not 200m of when he took over liverpool, and is worth even less given the overpaying idiocy we currently exhibit in transfers. Secondly he will likely not get the players he wants when he wants due to Ed and his nonsense indecision and finally (and most importantly), Phil Jones will still be here to fvck things up
The “Ole In” Brigade
- Thread starter Lentwood
- Start date
Well I wouldn't argue with his contribution but he still needed replacing. If he had stayed it would be on the basis that he was expected to contribute more/do better. So I was fine with him leaving IF someone else was brought in who again was expected to do better.
We went into the season with only two players we could realistically expect would get us 10 goals. Even presuming both Martial and Rashford had massive breakthrough seasons and actually got 20 goals each, this would still leave us woefully short, which surprise surprise, it has.
I know presuming Sanchez would have helped fill that void is a big stretch, but it is certainly less of a stretch than expecting it to be filled by the absolutely no one we replaced him with.
But again, James matched Sanchez's United goal tally (in the league) by the end of August (and never scored since but that's a different discussion).
We are short on quality in attack, that is true. But that's not because Sanchez left. We wouldn't have a better attack if he was still here; we'd have one more player who's not very good. We have no shortage of those.
You already know what would happen if Woodward did this, because he literally tried to do it, and Klopp said no because he didn't trust/like Woodward's idea of "backing"...and yet was happy to accept the job at Liverpool instead. I mean how much more clear do you need it to be? It's a completely self defeating argument.
How much clearer can it be than the manager you are using as an example, literally turning down the job here BECAUSE of the way the club is run?
You might as well be claiming that banging your head against a brick wall wont hurt your head, whilst being bandaged up because you banged your head against a brick wall.
And again you are being dishonest and over simplifying. "If we sacked Solskjaer and got this other manager who know we can't get, and then gave him loads more money to sign better players than Solskjaer had, he would do better than Solskjaer"...well, duh.
Well we don't, but you're just arguing over what the word "replace" means really. We didn't have enough goalscorers. It was obvious. Before Sanchez left the plan seemed to me to be an unrealistic one of expecting him and others to contribute more. Once he left the plan was to expect extra goals to magically be scored by no one at all.
Let's keep the manager because changing him won't magically fix everything. Yeah...great logic.
What point are you trying to make? That Klopp is a good manager or that managers can succeed under Woodward? If its the latter then it remains to be seen. Each manager he has hired has been gradually more hamstrung than the previous one was because of the bad choices made. Ole has by far been dealt the worst hand of any his managers, and I'm pretty confident that if they give Ole £280m worth of players. or even half that amount, we'll have a much better team than we do now.
Based on what?
The fact that they are finally clearing out the deadwood but not actually replacing the players they've got rid of?
He got the players he wanted, including a world record fee for a defender, and got rid of the players he didn't. How has he been dealt the worst hand of any of Ed's managers?
Our manager defends our transfer strategy nonstop, says he's fully backed and he chose to prioritize the defense in summer, but still his supporters insist that Woodward let him down. There's no other ways around it: either he was really fully backed or he's covering for Woodward to keep his job safe. Both don't warran any kind of defense.
Does it even really need to be explained? The wage bill problem was not of his making. The number of highly paid players not contributing or not wanting to be here was inherited. The lack of balance in the squad was not of his making - people will say on this point that he had money to spend, but I'll bet if he had spent it on midfielders he'd be crucified now for not trying to fix the defence.
There is no doubt at all that he has walked into a much tougher job than anyone since Ferguson was here
He had probably 6 or 7 problem positions to solve. Doesn't happen in one window.
He's been backed fully by Woodward, and has made the team worse. He's also been presented a total pass on giving us our worst season in 30 years. He should be counting his blessings.
Mourinho was told he couldn't sell the players he wanted to, and when he wanted a defender, was told his choice wasn't better than what we had. By a CEO. And after signing a new contract. Ole has had it easy, in comparison.
He got *some* of the players he wanted. He also said it would be ridiculous to let Lukaku leave without replacing him and what did Ed do?
No but I do think it's important to realise that letting Sanchez go wasn't a mistake even if we didn't bring in anyone because he was nothing but a burden on the wage bill, and it would have been completely unrealistic to expect him to contribute more.
I cant even think of a response to that one. Speechless. Have a good one
Sold the player Ole alienated by playing him on the wing?
Mourinho spent nearly 500 mil on transfers. How did those work out? He wanted an unlimited budget despite squandering our money.
A reminder that LvG was sacked after winning the FA Cup. Moyes was binned less than a year into a 6 year contract. But yeah, poor Ole.
Well he still is a burden on the wage bill. We're basically paying him to do nothing somewhere else...and yes I definitely agree it would be unrealistic to expect him to contribute more, but again, less unrealistic than expecting no one to contribute more
Backed fully my arse!
£70 mill net spend is pathetic when you consider the players that we needed to get rid of.
Not to mention that for a club of our size and standing in the game to only spend that under a new manager during our biggest rebuild in recent memory!
*Compare that to Real Madrid who were undergoing a rebuild and see what they spent mate!
Fully backed, that’s a joke.
He spent £150 million!
To be fair though, A lot of that falls on Ole aswell for being a pathetic yes man.
And no one forced him to spunk £80 million on Slabhead. Money that could have been used more wisely.
It's never ole's fault.
That part of it is definitely stupid. Par for the course these days for us, however. We're just a stupid club, above all else.
By that standard, Ferguson was a pathetic yes man as well, considering how he was supported in replacing Ronaldo.
Ole is, and always has been a team player... you could see that by his attitude from the bench, by him taking a red card against Newcastle, and now, by defending the undefendable... even going so far as to take responsibility for it... we even have Riola praising him through gritted teeth.
But sure, it's because Ole can't get Woodward to be a good DoF, just like Van Gaal & Mourinho we've hired another yes man.
No one told him to sell Lukaku in the dying minutes of the market.
The amount of posters defending him by saying he's not backed when the manager himself defends the board and its strategy in every presser is staggering. I bet if Ole himself told them in person he's backed they tell him "No you're lying, I know better than you weren't backed!!" or something.
Well at least you agreed he will do better than Ole. And that's in any circumstance
Anyways that's not answering my question. Your idea is that any manager will fail under Woodward which is hypothetical because we haven't tried every manager. And now I'm asking you hypothetically again, if Klopp came in during Mourinho's time and was given the same net spend as Mourinho had in three years do you think he would have failed? It's a hypothetical question that's meant to give me more insight so whether Klopp has rejected us doesn't matter in this argument
Can't believe Barcelona didn't bring him in.
and then we would be right back at the start of the rebuild with all the pain to come......
He's doing fine. We're exactly where most people would put us in the league. So he's neither over achieving or under achieving.
We're rebuilding. Some good football being played by us at times, we need to kick on though now. We're screwed with injuries. Ole needs these core players back AND at least 2 more good transfer windows in my opinion.
We're rebuilding. Some good football being played by us at times, we need to kick on though now. We're screwed with injuries. Ole needs these core players back AND at least 2 more good transfer windows in my opinion.
I think you’ll find that to be Darren and Jason.
Nope, he has zero accountability. Absolutely nothing, even coaching the team, is on Ole. It is all on someone else. This lack of accountability trickles down to the players, who (even before injuries), were picked consistently for shite performances and some rewarded with new contracts.
Well according to Lukaku he told Ole he wanted to leave in March...
Who was his well thought out replacement? Mandzukic?
He needs help but he shouldn’t be learning here go to Swansea or something.
The term "The Ole In Brigade" makes me chuckle. It makes us sound dangerous or something
I’m sick of you.
We haven’t played an ounce of good football all season and he’s the worst manager we have ever had. But he’s doing fine. Yes probably by his own personal standards.
Exactly, I'm pretty sure most fans at the start of the season would've expected us to have a rough season from the get go. Ole tbf himself said we're gonna be inconsistent even during the wins again Man City and Tottenham
It's crazy how some here think he should've done better with this squad that's thread bare and missing all essential players.
The guys who want Ole out want quick fixes to a problem that has compounded over a decade. Ole might very well not be the man but whoever it is needs time to get in all the right pieces.