The only specifics I know is what LVG has mentioned in interviews; namely he provides analysis on the opponents in the week leading up the game, he presents this to the squad and obviously day to day he coaches the squad. Beyond that he is the assistant manager, as I've said before its not as if we'd be promoting a nobody to the top job. The prospect of him taking over really shouldn't be that bizarre to posters on here.
The Argument for Giggs as our Next Manager
- Thread starter Walrus
- Start date
- Status
I am not sure about Stuivenbergs experience, but if Giggs is appointed then I would expect/want him to bring in a vastly experienced figure as his assistant. I would take back Phelan, Meulensteen or Quieroz (if they accepted the role) to that end.
It's an idea but if I was Giggs I wouldn't, LVG created a good balance between them, Stuivenberg analyzes our team and follow the academy while Giggs analyzes our opponents and presents them to our players, they know each other and during games it's interesting to see them discuss while LVG is awkwardly sitting in the middle.
Edit: Hoek is in reality an assistant manager, at least I remember reading that somewhere, so if Hoek stays you don't need the Bitter gang.
I agree with you. There'll be a complete meltdown on here is he recalls Phelan
Would those kinds of figures really accept being #2 to Giggs, a player they coached? It's one thing playing second fiddle to Fergie with all his experience and success, compared to a person (whatever his playing background) taking up the manager's reins for the first time. I think they'd be looking across to him and thinking, I'm the more qualified one to be making the final call.
I guess I dont really know enough about Stuivenberg to make a judgement, I would just be concerned by the lack of experience (ironically enough) with the two of them.
To go back to my old phone shop comparison - we were one of the top Vodafone stores in the country. Then, just before christmas they completely revamped our store management team - the store manager had never managed a store as big or as busy as ours, only tiny little band 4 shops in Cirencester and Marlborough. The Deputy Manager and two Assistant Managers (yes, it was quite a top-heavy structure) were all promoted to those positions as secondments, and none of them had any real managerial experience. It did not go well.
I am obviously in favour of Giggs despite his inexperience, but for me, he does need to compensate for that by having a highly experienced and successful coaching staff/assistant surrounding him.
It may not be a guarantee, but at the end of the day assistant manager at United is still assistant manager at United - its a good position where you can have input in the way things are done, and be pretty well paid.
@Walrus That's why I would keep Hoek, if possible, and try to sign Neville or Meulensteen as first team coach.
Not sure if its been posted already but nice piece by Andy Mitten here during the week:
http://www.eurosport.co.uk/football...s-at-manchester-united_sto4943613/story.shtml
http://www.eurosport.co.uk/football...s-at-manchester-united_sto4943613/story.shtml
Yeah I think Neville could add a lot (on merit, not on CO92 membership), and Meulensteen. Its the sort of thing I would normally do on Football Manager, finding all the best staff around and assembling them into some all-star coaching team.
So true. I'm obsessive about getting everything to 5 stars.Yep, it looks that Hoek is really the assistant manager, while Giggs and Stuivenberg have more specified jobs to do.
I think it is imperative for Stuivenber and especially Hoek to stay if Giggs becomes our new manager. Maybe he needs some other experienced coaches (like Maulensteen and Phelan, I doubt that Queiroz will fancy the idea) to help him too.
Nah we need to look forward and stop trying to recreate the past. If Giggs gets the job he needs to avoid falling into the trap of mimicking the Fergie era, he needs to be himself and manage the team to achieve his own vision meaning that his staff should reflect the vision that he is working towards. Plus don't underestimate the personal dynamics involved too, Rene and Queiroz could work under SAF and not cause problems because Fergie was so established that he was untouchable. A blaber mouth like Rene could really ruin things through his ego.
I only mentioned those as examples of experienced AMs - not just because of bringing back the glory days etc.
Ok but my point still stands, this early in his career Giggs needs a group around him that will truly see him as their leader not people who could fancy themselves as senior or more accomplished coaches that could undermine him. Under him the last thing we'd need is discord within the technical team and Rene, in particular, is very capable of that.
While that's undoubtedly is true, it was nevertheless a big risk (that's my main point in this discussion), and if he hadn't been that successful, you can imagine how fans would have reacted: They would have crucified our management who not only spent money we didn't have, resulting ultimately in almost bankruptcy, but that they took such a high risk with a novice manager.
This is actually going to happen, isn't it? FML.
Thanks to everyone who provided some insights into what Giggs is actually doing, including Mitten's article. Sounds reasonable for an assistant. Although I have to admit I'd personally be too risk-averse to appoint him without any expertise as head coach or manager. A position in he was ultimatley responsible and accountable from training, squad planning, philosophy 
etc to match day to match day duties (tactics, picking the first XI etc), and last but not least, leading a backroom team; the full enchilada.
etc to match day to match day duties (tactics, picking the first XI etc), and last but not least, leading a backroom team; the full enchilada.I believe Giggs was intereviewd for the job when the decision was made to let Moyes go. He met the criteria that was set and was given the job...on condition he was 'tutored' for 3 years by an experienced manager.
40 pages in a month. So people are taking this seriously? Worrying.
How can one meet the criteria then be deemed to need tutoring? You do know that not everyone who is tutored passes right? So you are saying that his exam will be as Manchester United manager, God help us because we certainly can't help ourselves if we are dead set on playing Russian Roulette with the club's fortunes in this competitive climate whilst we are swimming in a sea of debt.
He lacks experinece...obviously. In fact the more I think about it, I am convinced he has been given the job. We dont know how much of a say Giggs has in team matters. This and much more must all be internal.
We kind of know, he has no say, LVG is the manager he will discuss with his assistants but he is the one that decides. If Giggs have a special status (if LVG can't do whatever he wants as the manager) our football club is dead because he is run by incompetent people.
Its probably happening so yes. This thread is more or less now a referendum on whether or not its a good idea.
Maybe I was in denial. What evidence can people put forth to support the theory that he won't be a reckless appointment? We all know he's had a great career, which can be quite irrelevant. He's also been coached by top managers but will he take in genius through a kind of osmosis?? Is there any interview where he talks about the game, other than saying things like Scholes "United attack with pace"? Has he ever uttered anything that can be copy-pasted here which indicates some high level insight on his part?
That's the central question isn't it, one that I feel hasn't been adequately answered here.
The question has been answered, there is nothing to support it from the outside.
Still there's no where near to United. Its like comparing Valletta FC (Malta's top team) and Barcelona FC (Spain's). That's totally ridiculous
And those on the other side of the argument will feel that it has been answered (and with "nothing").
I said from the outside and that's important because there is maybe and probably arguments to support it from the inside.
In order to accept the Giggs argument you have to suspend logic and admit that your view is based solely on romance, which the OP does - then proceed to dress up your conclusion with selective logic such as the bulleted points made in the OP. When you begin by admitting your views are based on romance over the normal logic of hiring based on qualifications, what you are really saying is - "I want someone who I identify with rather than someone who has previously been successful and demonstrated a capacity for the job, and I'm willing to mortgage the club's future on that bet".
This is not the case, and the very fact that by your own admission, Giggs as manager "Is probably happening", would strongly imply that there are logical reasons behind that decision, not ones of pure romance.
Stuivenberg has been in charge of Holland u17 for a few years. Qualified for Euro's u17 in 2007, reached the semi's in 2008. In 2011 and 2012 he's won them both with Holland u17.
I get the impression it is happening, and if it does, I don't think it will be widely accepted, especially if he gets off to a slow start. He will get crushed under the media scrutiny and it will all be downhill from there. An experienced manager with winning credentials on the other hand, would be given a much longer leash.
Not sure why something 'probably happening' implies there is a logical explanation for it.
Personally, I'd love to see Mick Phelan take over, as he meets much of the criteria in the OP.
Whoever it will be, I doubt it'll be any of the Dutch staff members currently employed. I think when Van Gaal goes, so will most of the Dutch staff.
What system do people think Giggs would play if he were to become the next United manager?
Because we are not run by fans, we are run by businessmen. Even if we go under the assumption that the Glazers will just take whatever recommendation SAF/LVG throws at them - do you truly believe that they will not even ask for some sort of justification? A thought process and business plan behind the appointment?
I sincerely doubt the Glazers and Woodward decide these things just by rolling a dice. They will not appoint Giggs unless a logical explanation for it is given, and I really dont think that is debatable.
Just because something is happening does not mean that logical steps have been taken during it's consummation. If this happens then it would mean that we have learnt nothing from the Moyes debacle and our policy is simply we are Manchester United we can do whatever the feck we want. The major protagonists of this appointment have simply identified Giggs and worked the equation backwards and that's not a logical step at all because logic dictates that you state the person specifications of the job and then identify those who meet these and proceed to select the best amongst them.
- Status