I've been through my reasons for appointing Giggs with you earlier in the week so I won't repeat them. By bringing Cantona into the conversation, a man with no coaching qualifications, we will only derail this thread.
Martin Ferguson. Spent more time with SAF than anyone else, thus probably picked up more from him than anyone else, so will probably be a brilliant manager.
So if Cantona got his coaching qualifications, he'd be worth consideration?
Cathy Ferguson has spent even longer with him! Sign her up.
If Eric got his qualifications and LVG took him under his wing and made him assistant manager then yes I would consider him. None of these things are happening re: Cantona.
Not when he is pushing another pie in the sky move that could set us back years and probably cause us irreparable damage given the nature of our competition. He's done more than anyone can ask but that doesn't give him a right to play power broker pushing under qualified novices at our expense. A week after Moyes was ditched he stated that Giggs should be given the job full time, a week, on the back of one match under Giggs. Trying to be as respectful as I can I think Fergie is more interested in us appointing his cronies than he is in determining the most suitable candidate else why would he be trying to preempt any selection process by putting Giggs' name forward at any given opportunity?
This type of reasoning (which several such as @Raoul have used) is pretty much the very definition of a straw man argument.
This type of post is typical of those against Giggs being appointed. It's totally disingenuous. You know it's because of the dismissive attitude of some of the posts on here that I really want Giggs to succeed. As I said earlier, you'd swear we were talking about promoting the megastore manager to first team coach. Not the teams' current assistant manager who just happens to also be the most decorated player in the clubs' history. For my sanity I'm going to have to take a break from reading this type of nonsense.
That's what I thought!
Player = player, manager = manager. Sorry to come across as a patronising cnut but the two roles are chalk and cheese. As many of Fergie's protégés at Aberdeen and United have shown.
So what is a player manager then?
There's no magical rule that says we can't expand the discussion to include other players since some have repeatedly cited "knows the club well" and "he was a successful player" as examples of why he should get the job. We've already demonstrated that other ex Fergie era players have mostly flopped as managers, and so the question then becomes why wouldn't Giggs do the same.
But the primary reasoning for Giggs taking over (ultimately the only reason he's in consideration), is due to his legendary status at the club as a player. If Giggs had played for us for a brief two-year spell, spending the majority of his career with Spurs or Everton, then we wouldn't be thinking about him.
Something that was last successful in 1986 with Kenny Dalglish. Being a great player and being a great manager are two entirely different things. Even if we discount playing and managing at the same time, you have to go back to the early nineties (George Graham and Dalglish again) to find the last example in England.
Are you familiar with the term 'Gestalt'?
Nope, can't say I am.
Honestly, I'm not so sure this would be the case.
But you admit that it possible for a player to also be a successful manager? I hope so. Because your original post seemed to suggest the two were mutually exclusive, we have now established that the two aren't. Good. We're making progress.
Not acceptable to you perhaps but worth consideration to many others. Sounds like if he got the job (Giggs) then you would be obliged to want him out asap - for the best interests of the club obviously
We should make him Gigg's No 2.
Some are too busy fantasising about the success that Klopp will bring the scousers I think!Not acceptable to you perhaps but worth consideration to many others. Sounds like if he got the job (Giggs) then you would be obliged to want him out asap - for the best interests of the club obviously
Well in the anti-megathread spirit, if you want to discuss some pie in the sky notion of having Cantona in charge, I would invite you to create a new thread on it and I will happily ignore it.
Gestalt is a term from physchogy that means 'the whole is greater than the sum of its parts'.
touchéAs you just said yourself, through keen powers of observation, Giggs is our assistant manager and will have been for several years by the time he would be appointed. Giggs has his coaching badges, an interest in the managers job, decades of experience within the club. In short, a night and day difference to Cantona. There. Is. No. Comparison.
But no matter how we paint it, he is in the running because he's a United legend. Again, as I've said, I understand that it's not the sole reason for his potential appointment, but it's the entire basis upon which it's built: the romanticism of it is shrouded in his legendary status.
Because he's a different fecking person?
Same here. Funny thing is when I referenced some examples of successful players turned coaches from other sports @Raoul tried to shut that down by telling me expanding the discussion to other sports or even other footballing decades was irrelevant. Yet when it suits @Cheesy and @Raoul can extend the discussion to 'hypothetical' scenarios involving Cantona. I'm now at the stage where I think it's time for us all to agree to disagree.
On the contrary - every single argument for Giggs as a manager is based on a delusional fantacism that suspends logic for feel good romance. Not only is that rampantly irresponsible, but its also bad business. Let's hope more rational minds prevail in the end.
Which is useful and all, but doesn't really make a case for being our manager. Being our assistant manager isn't that much impressive than any of our other assistant managers. He'll have been our assistant for a few years by the time LVG leaves; it's still relatively inexperienced in comparison to other top managers.
That is the bit you and I don't agree. I really don't agree with you on that. He's in the running for a whole range of reasons, legend status is not the primary one. In my opinion!
Who exactly is it bandying Cantona's name around in these threads again? The ones suspending logic?
Nobody tried to shut you down - I just said it was utterly irrelevant to compare Ryan Giggs with Mike Ditka as if there's some rational correlation between a 1960s American footballer transitioning into 1980s coaching and an English league player who just retired last year in a completely different sport - that's why I dismissed it, as would just about everyone who hears it, after laughing out loud of course.
Its been offered up in the past, quite recently infact and quite regularly over the years.
And every single argument against him is based on myopic conservatism.The primary reason for Giggs taking over is due the meticulous planning that has placed him as LVG's apprentice with a long term view of him being his successor should he be judged fit to do so by LVG , the board and the tea lady.
But not by anyone who you are discussing it with right now, apart from Cheesy, who is agreeing with you.
Cantona is not being groomed for the job. Gigg's on the other hand, clearly is.
Every single argument against him is based on sound logic - as in you'd be hard pressed to find anyone in any industry with zero experience getting hired into the biggest job available. That is why so many find the idea of Giggs as manager so mindbendingly fatuous.
