Traditions and ruthlessness

[RedStarUnited]

A day after the CL final I find my self reflecting on ours and Chelseas seasons. As a player, you could argue Lampard is an even bigger legend to Chelsea than Ole is. Add to this the fact that he got CL into the champions league in a season when Chelsea were banned from making signings. That alone would have got Lampard a new contract at United im sure. And probably bought him enough good will for a season or two at our club.

Flip to United now, By most big clubs standards, Ole is underachieving. But because he is a United legend and is doing slightly better each year, most United fans are willing to accept us not winning anything. I am pretty confident that if Ole keeps finishing top 4 and having seasons like this year he wont lose his job.

Chelsea are European champions now because they saw a good manager available and didn't hesitate to let go of their legend. Imagine we sacked Ole after failing to the CL group stages and hired Tuchel.

Would we not have won the Europa League? Would we have won the league?

We are putting more weight on traditions like standing by the manager and ignoring our other tradition that made Manchester United the club it is today - Winning.

 

[cyril C]

If we had Tuchel in Jan, we should be able to win Europa, but not the League. Roman recruited Tuchel because they had just recruited a vast array of Bundesliga players and believe a German / Bundesliga manager would have better chance in reversing their fortune. Ole did reverse our course, but not enough, and failed big time in crucial match. If the choice is Zidane, he might be able to work on Pogba and Martial better, but I doubt Tuchel can do any better, particularly with Pogba's agent.

 

[Eddy_JukeZ]

Lampard is easily a bigger legend for Chelsea than Ole is for us. I don't even think you can argue that.

 

[Igor Drefljak]

Our owners are happy with top 4. We're the new Arsenal in that regard.
We've only sacked managers when top 4 is either impossible or looking a big ask.

As long as Ole gets top 4, I can't see us getting rid, which is frustrating.
We've only ever invested big on a year we've missed out on CL football as far as I can remember.

This season for example, we signed a midfielder we don't use, a few teenagers, backup leftback and a striker on a free, while flirting all summer with a 'big' signing in Sancho. It's almost like they kept that rumour running and made it out like they did everything they could. Dortmund set a price early and we didn't match it.

 

[Sky1981]

Chelsea Chopping and changing managers like they do with baby Diapers aren't proven to be a downfall or anything, they remain one of the most successful teams in the last 10 years.

Our persistence in sticking to the "one man show" even before he's proven to be the correct guy is our downfall.

There is literally nothing wrong with chopping the wrong one until you meet the right one, only then you give him the key to the kingdom.

 

[Sky1981]

Our owners are happy with top 4. We're the new Arsenal in that regard.
We've only sacked managers when top 4 is either impossible or looking a big ask.

As long as Ole gets top 4, I can't see us getting rid, which is frustrating.
We've only ever invested big on a year we've missed out on CL football as far as I can remember.

This season for example, we signed a midfielder we don't use, a few teenagers, backup leftback and a striker on a free, while flirting all summer with a 'big' signing in Sancho. It's almost like they kept that rumour running and made it out like they did everything they could. Dortmund set a price early and we didn't match it.

Not only our owner, our own fans are happy with top 4 as long as the coach plays some youth , pretends to attack, and says the right sweet words of Honor, corp, glory, united ways

 

[SAFMUTD]

Hard to know what it would have happened, but we know what happened at Chelsea. So I think we shouldn't hesitate to do the same. I fear we have lost the train on some promising managers like Tuchel, Nagelsmann, Marco Rose, etc but we still have a shot now that Zidane and Poccetino are available. I don't think there are any indications that we'll change managers so we'll probably miss on them as well.

I don't think we're holding on to traditions or anything, it's just a case on how we grade success and how our owners grade it. It's clear their goal is top 4, anything above that it's a plus. So as long as Ole maintain us in there he won't be sacked no matter in he doesn't win a thing.

 

[shahzy]

Isnt there a good array of coaches available this year? Zidane, Conte, Poch. This has been probably the best time in a while to get a new coach because there is actually a good choice out there. I'd pick Zidane tbh. He's style isnt the best but neither are the others. However he does seem to win

 

[Bondi77]

If we had Tuchel in Jan, we should be able to win Europa, but not the League. Roman recruited Tuchel because they had just recruited a vast array of Bundesliga players and believe a German / Bundesliga manager would have better chance in reversing their fortune. Ole did reverse our course, but not enough, and failed big time in crucial match. If the choice is Zidane, he might be able to work on Pogba and Martial better, but I doubt Tuchel can do any better, particularly with Pogba's agent.

The only thing that Zidane would be able to do with Martial is tell him he is lazy in his own language.

 

[Tallis]

Chopping with Spending = Chelsea:
Chopping without Spending = Arsenal

 

[glazed]

Sports washing owners demand trophies. Money oriented owners just want the most efficient and reliable return. They are different models completely. Their only common factor is their moral bankruptcy.

 

[Bondi77]

Isnt there a good array of coaches available this year? Zidane, Conte, Poch. This has been probably the best time in a while to get a new coach because there is actually a good choice out there. I'd pick Zidane tbh. He's style isnt the best but neither are the others. However he does seem to win

Well he did when he had the best club side in the world.....I wonder why???

 

[FatTails]

We have really patient fans.

One thing to remember though is that chopping and changing managers and continuously taking the squad in different directions gets expensive really quickly. I personally don’t like to compare us to Chelsea or City. These clubs are run very differently and aren’t really that comparable.

A more apt comparison would be Bayern and the big two in Spain. Barca and Real both expect much higher standards than what we do, and quickly, but that makes them prone to some baffling expensive mistakes and I wouldn’t want us to be run like that.

Then there is Bayern. Run well, very high standards, actual sound enterprise financially with fantastic global growth in the past two decades , value sentiment and tradition, but ruthless when needed. I feel like we have a lot to learn from them. Kovak was let go after he won a double, when they were sitting four points off the top, and shortly after spanking Spurs in the CL. Hansi Flick was appointed and went on to win everything in sight that season. I just can’t imagine us doing something like that.

 

[lefty_jakobz]

We have really patient fans.

One thing to remember though is that chopping and changing managers and continuously taking the squad in different directions gets expensive really quickly. I personally don’t like to compare us to Chelsea or City. These clubs are run very differently and aren’t really that comparable.

A more apt comparison would be Bayern and the big two in Spain. Barca and Real both expect much higher standards than what we do, and quickly, but that makes them prone to some baffling expensive mistakes and I wouldn’t want us to be run like that.

Then there is Bayern. Run well, very high standards, actual sound enterprise financially with fantastic global growth in the past two decades , value sentiment and tradition, but ruthless when needed. I feel like we have a lot to learn from them. Kovak was let go after he won a double, when they were sitting four points off the top, and shortly after spanking Spurs in the CL. Hansi Flick was appointed and went on to win everything in sight that season. I just can’t imagine us doing something like that.

Chopping and changing is fine if youre backroom structure and footballing philosophy doesnt change. When we change a manager we change everything which is what our issue tends to be.

Had we had a style of play a system that we would play regardless of manager then a decent DoF would keep that style implemented and recruit players accordingly, but we dont so every managerial change we make we are expected to start over again. Ultimately if you have a sub standard manager but the same footballing philosophy the football would continue ala Bayern, just the person at the helm of the team would change.

We are so badly run its amazing we are even where we are.

 

[Mindhunter]

You are comparing apples to oranges. On the one hand we have Chelsea who have thrived in chaos and have had their most successful season on the back of sacking their full time coach mid-way through the season.

On the other hand you have us who are a fallen giant whose success was built on top of continuity and a GOAT coach. We don't operate under the same economics as Chelsea and so the only way our club can sustain this level of performance is by maintaining continuity, buying emerging players who can become stars, or by taking a gamble through buying youngsters who have the potential to become generational talents.

These talents will only come to us if we have a relatively calmer situation and environment to let them thrive. A constantly chopping and changing environment like Chelsea's is counterproductive to youth and patience. We can't compete in their market and so have to give emerging players what they need i.e., stability.

Given the handicap we are operating under, Ole has done a phenomenal job keeping us where we are. In fact, we have overachieved this season if anything by 1-2 PL places. Our current squad is only good enough to be top 4 and that's it. To maintain our standard, we have to operate more like Leicester than Chelsea.

 

[He'sRaldo]

Chopping and changing is fine if youre backroom structure and footballing philosophy doesnt change. When we change a manager we change everything which is what our issue tends to be.

Had we had a style of play a system that we would play regardless of manager then a decent DoF would keep that style implemented and recruit players accordingly, but we dont so every managerial change we make we are expected to start over again. Ultimately if you have a sub standard manager but the same footballing philosophy the football would continue ala Bayern, just the person at the helm of the team would change.

We are so badly run its amazing we are even where we are.

We've had two big problems post SAF (i) inability to avoid bad decisions, and (ii) not realizing that at this level, there are few players we have who cannot win the title with capable management.

Thus we enter each new managerial reign with the mindset of "what can we do for this new manager" instead of viewing it as "what can this manager do for us". For us to have the continuity that can result in a title win, we have to shed this mindset.

 

[Diabovermelho]

Well, Chelsea's tradition under Abramovich is being ruthless. In 2012 they also sacked a manager midseason and won the UCL.

Sarri won Europa League and had his contract terminated (tough i think he also wanted to leave).

Mourinho's 2nd tenure at Chelsea saw him win the premier league... and be fired midseason.

You can go on with Benitez, Grant, Scolari, Di Matteo (fired 6 months after winning the ucl). Lampard was just the latest one, and as far as i'm concerned, with some bad results, Tuchel could leave by Christmas, and they could bring Zidane and win the UCL again.

Abramovich cares about Chelsea, he's involved in every club decision, and invested a lot of money. As a result, he demands trophies, and is ruthless with the managers.

13 different managers since Abramovich took over, 17 major titles in this period. Ask any Chelsea fan if they care about the managers rotation. They share the same view as the owner: win now and nothing else matters.

I'm not saying we should be that ruthless, but we could learn a thing or two with them. Not settle for just being good.

 

[Rustyspider13]

The difference is in the structure of our club. After SAF, we never prepared for the modern way of management in football clubs where the higher ups make most of the recruitment decisions and the head coach manages the first team. This is because our owners don't care about football and think any manager can do all the jobs at once just as SAF did. So structurally, United puts a lot of responsibility and power in the manager's hands. Combine that with just hiring mangers without considering football styles in quick succession means that the Moyes, LVG and Mourinho tenures have been wastes of time. The only other club dealing with dismantling a 'dynasty' is Arsenal and they have the same problems. Until the owners change their ambitions, this won't change.

As for the fans' patience, we are patient with Ole because he has done well in the league. The records for comebacks, away matches, consecutive wins with 3 goals, equaling our biggest PL win margin etc. aren't trophies but they are indicators of a good team. We also have to remember that our transfer window was pathetic. By pure luck Telles pushed Shaw into his best form and Cavani stepped up to make it a somewhat effective window. This is why comparisons to Lampard are moot for me as he was given half a team to a squad already at top 4 level. By all accounts Lampard was underachieving and sacking him was a much easier decision.

Next season, if we have another window like the last, we'll be in danger of falling out of the top 4 and the blame won't be on Ole. But if Ole is given 2/3 first team players in the coming window and still crashes out of the CL in a similar fashion to this season and struggles for top 4, then he should be gone.

 

[Lee565]

Chelsea's ruthlessness ideology has created a well oiled machine, they don't except a drop in performance in anyone at the club from sporting directors, playing staff or coaching staff.

Where as with united it's the opposite where players like Jones, Rojo, lingard have been given bumper contracts without earning them, we gave ole a lengthy contract based on about 10 games before he went on a terrible relegation form run to throw away top 4 football and also behaving like a small time club by acting like ole and the team pulled off some type of underdog miracle when they beat psg in the knockout match a few years back, then you have Woodward who has failed massively on the football side of things with terrible managerial appointments and terrible transfer rubbish.

 

[Skills]

We've had two big problems post SAF (i) inability to avoid bad decisions, and (ii) not realizing that at this level, there are few players we have who cannot win the title with capable management.

Thus we enter each new managerial reign with the mindset of "what can we do for this new manager" instead of viewing it as "what can this manager do for us". For us to have the continuity that can result in a title win, we have to shed this mindset.

This basically sums it up. As soon as the club changes this mentality - the whole crap about continuity goes out the window, because you're not assembling a squad for the managers needs. You're assembling the best squad for the club itself, and the head coach himself is no more than a dispensable part of that squad.

 

[Mickson]

We are blinded by Fergie, everything about this club is Fergie's legacy. It's a good thing most of the time but not on this occasion. It makes our fans deluded. Chelsea is a great example of what can happen, as you pointed out. It's so, so, so weird that so, so, so many still want Ole. Wouldn't happen at ANY other club.

 

[KM]

My only hope is that we hire an external candidate for CEO and he/she will take steps to rectify the current situation. However it's probably gonna be Richard Arnold.

 

[Lyng]

The issue I have with comparing us to Chelsea is that you are completely forgetting the difference in owners.
Chelsea is a well run machine, and money is put into squad, stadium etc, whereas our owners take money out of the club, neglect facilities and have so far been terrible at transfers.
If you want to go about managers the way Chelsea does, you need a different set of owners.

 

[Handré1990]

Chopping with Spending = Chelsea:
Chopping without Spending = Arsenal

Agreed. We need to have other operations running regardless of manager before we can just be like Chelsea (transfers for one).

 

[OleBoiii]

Chelsea can best be described as organised but soulless chaos. They average a major trophy roughly every 3 years, typically sacking at least one manager in between. They kind run the club like Bayern, Real and Barca, but seeing as they are in the PL this is never gonna translate to the same level of success.

We could do things Chelsea's way. And looking at how shit things largely have been post Fergie, I'm sure that a fair share of United supporters would have taken the trophy return that Chelsea's been given. But there is a certain defeatist attitude in this ruthlessness as well. It takes courage to wait things out too. Football isn't an exact science. A manager could in theory be good enough and show all the things you want from a manager behind the scenes, but it doesn't always translate to immediate success.

Would Chelsea have stuck with Klopp as long as Liverpool? I don't think they would have. And then they'd miss out on 2 pretty great seasons. Pep barely finished top 4 in his first season in charge despite being backed financially and having a pretty good squad. If he had finished 5th, then I'm sure that City would have kept him around for another season. But would Chelsea have done that? I highly doubt it.

 

[Mickson]

Chelsea can best be described as organised but soulless chaos. They average a major trophy roughly every 3 years, typically sacking at least one manager in between. They kind run the club like Bayern, Real and Barca, but seeing as they are in the PL this is never gonna translate to the same level of success.

We could do things Chelsea's way. And looking at how shit things largely have been post Fergie, I'm sure that a fair share of United supporters would have taken the trophy return that Chelsea's been given. But there is a certain defeatist attitude in this ruthlessness as well. It takes courage to wait things out too. Football isn't an exact science. A manager could in theory be good enough and show all the things you want from a manager behind the scenes, but it doesn't always translate to immediate success.

Would Chelsea have stuck with Klopp as long as Liverpool? I don't think they would have. And then they'd miss out on 2 pretty great seasons. Pep barely finished top 4 in his first season in charge despite being backed financially and having a pretty good squad. If he had finished 5th, then I'm sure that City would have kept him around for another season. But would Chelsea have done that? I highly doubt it.

Do you think Chelsea has made a mistake with some of their sackings? I can't remember one sacking that they did who wasn't merited and that they should regret.

 

[Sweet Square]

Abramovich cares about Chelsea, he's involved in every club decision, and invested a lot of money. As a result, he demands trophies, and is ruthless with the managers.

Abramovich invests a lot of money because he views the club as a political investment(He is basically terrified that all the wealth he stole from the collapsing Soviet Union will come back to bite him). Also Abramovich tried to buy out Chelsea fans who own parts of the Stamford Bridge pitch in order to potentially move to a new stadium(Stamford Bridge has been Chelsea home for over a 100 years).

And finally he literally tried to join the super league this year!

 

[Skills]

Chopping with Spending = Chelsea:
Chopping without Spending = Arsenal

Your example is the one club who've managed to changed fewer managers than us?

 

[11101]

This is the curse SAF left us with. He's still fresh in our memories and we think we're going to find another one like him, when no other manager in history did what he did. We'll keep on 'having faith' through bad manager after bad manager because it paid off with SAF. To their begrudging credit, Liverpool have taken a little of this approach and it is beginning to pay off, 30 years later.

Chelsea have been run from Day 1 to have no loyalty to anybody but the owner's bank account. So have City. It's soulless and i wouldn't want it in our club but we could do with turning the ruthlessness up just a little bit.

 

[Josep Dowling]

We are blinded by Fergie, everything about this club is Fergie's legacy. It's a good thing most of the time but not on this occasion. It makes our fans deluded. Chelsea is a great example of what can happen, as you pointed out. It's so, so, so weird that so, so, so many still want Ole. Wouldn't happen at ANY other club.

I totally agree. Manchester United as a club believe the manager should control everything because that worked for years under Fergie. This only works when the manager is world class and wants that level of control. We allowed José to do it and he made the squad a total mess when spending millions in the process. Van Gaal did the same and because there was no continuity we ended up with a shambles of a squad.

Every other club around us has changed their structure, whilst bringing in competent people for the roles. Us on the other hand keep bringing in former players with absolutely no experience other than knowing the ‘United way’, in addition to unknown money men who handle the other decisions. The club’s management is only geared towards one thing and that’s making money. Having the likes of Fletcher, Carrick, Ole, Phelan around makes the majority of fans feel some sort of connection to management which has been carefully thought out to appease the fans whilst we aren’t winning anything. Are fans going to go after a former United player for lack of success? It’s carefully thought out marketing by the Glazers. Simple as that. Do you honestly think any other top club would have Ole in charge after nearly 3 years of winning nothing? I’m fairly sure we must be in the top 5 in Europe for spend as well. Just isn’t good enough.

But I’m sure this season will be the year things change (as if!). Lack of signings in the summer whilst we apparently spend all our efforts signing a player we should have bought last summer. There is always one big name in the media that we are going to sign but never do. Anyone would think it’s carefully thought out so United fans believe we are trying to sign the best. And once we signed our 4th choice CB and a youth prospect who will be the next Ronaldo in 2026 we will be chasing top 4 most of the season whilst being embarrassingly dumped out of every cup tournament.

 

[OleBoiii]

Do you think Chelsea has made a mistake with some of their sackings? I can't remember one sacking that they did who wasn't merited and that they should regret.

It's impossible to know for sure, as I don't possess the power to see alternate realities.

The only thing I feel fairly sure about is that they'd sack Klopp before he had time to win the CL and PL. And they'd probably have sacked Pep after his first season if he finished 5th instead of 4th. That is the nature of this ruthless approach.

 

[Skills]

I totally agree. Manchester United as a club believe the manager should control everything because that worked for years under Fergie. This only works when the manager is world class and wants that level of control. We allowed José to do it and he made the squad a total mess when spending millions in the process. Van Gaal did the same and because there was no continuity we ended up with a shambles of a squad.

Every other club around us has changed their structure, whilst bringing in competent people for the roles. Us on the other hand keep bringing in former players with absolutely no experience other than knowing the ‘United way’, in addition to unknown money men who handle the other decisions. The club’s management is only geared towards one thing and that’s making money. Having the likes of Fletcher, Carrick, Ole, Phelan around makes the majority of fans feel some sort of connection to management which has been carefully thought out to appease the fans whilst we aren’t winning anything. Are fans going to go after a former United player for lack of success? It’s carefully thought out marketing by the Glazers. Simple as that. Do you honestly think any other top club would have Ole in charge after nearly 3 years of winning nothing? I’m fairly sure we must be in the top 5 in Europe for spend as well. Simple isn’t good enough.

The final masterstroke to this strategy would be of course to hire VDS as the CEO (as per our fanbases wish). Put a club legend in the role that solely has to answer to shareholders (thus themselves).

 

[Mickson]

I totally agree. Manchester United as a club believe the manager should control everything because that worked for years under Fergie. This only works when the manager is world class and wants that level of control. We allowed José to do it and he made the squad a total mess when spending millions in the process. Van Gaal did the same and because there was no continuity we ended up with a shambles of a squad.

Every other club around us has changed their structure, whilst bringing in competent people for the roles. Us on the other hand keep bringing in former players with absolutely no experience other than knowing the ‘United way’, in addition to unknown money men who handle the other decisions. The club’s management is only geared towards one thing and that’s making money. Having the likes of Fletcher, Carrick, Ole, Phelan around makes the majority of fans feel some sort of connection to management which has been carefully thought out to appease the fans whilst we aren’t winning anything. Are fans going to go after a former United player for lack of success? It’s carefully thought out marketing by the Glazers. Simple as that. Do you honestly think any other top club would have Ole in charge after nearly 3 years of winning nothing? I’m fairly sure we must be in the top 5 in Europe for spend as well. Simple isn’t good enough.

Yes. We are nostalgic, hoping that we can go back. I see that argument often, United fans who really believe Solskjaer is going to be Fergie and using the same arguments "Fergie didn't win in the beginning either".

It's impossible to know for sure, as I don't possess the power to see alternate realities.

The only thing I feel fairly sure about is that they'd sack Klopp before he had time to win the CL and PL. And they'd probably have sacked Pep after his first season if he finished 5th instead of 4th. That is the nature of this ruthless approach.

Obviously, we can only speculate. But I can't see how they would sack Pep after one season, Pep is the best manager in the world and has won multiple times at every club, he is a guaranteed success. But maybe they would, who knows. All I can see is that they really don't regret their sackings, so obviously it was the right thing to do. Their sacking of Lampard and hiring Tuchel is a great example.

 

[Water Melon]

The tradition set by SAF is to win things. No player bigger than the club, no staff bigger than the club. Success comes first and foremost. The ultimate goal was to kick the scousers off their fecking perch. Now we have a set of owners, who do not give a flying feck about top honours, the stadium or fans. They care about CL money to make sure that the debt is managed without them having to invest single penny of their own money. When you have parasitic leeches at the top, it is close to impossible to win something big. If your owners do not care about top trophies and were one of the founders of the Super League, which cared only about the money, why would your manager feel any pressure as long as he is managing to be in CL? We are the new Arsenal, without a new stadium but with a manager who won nothing significant in his coaching career.

 

[OleBoiii]

Obviously, we can only speculate. But I can't see how they would sack Pep after one season, Pep is the best manager in the world and has won multiple times at every club, he is a guaranteed success. But maybe they would, who knows.

Well, ruthlessness goes both ways. You're bound to occasionally make the wrong call. The "genius" about being ruthless is that it's impossible to prove that it was the wrong call, unless your team starts performing significantly worse, which rarely happens anyways.

Also, ruthlessness typically means that you don't really care too much about a manager's past. If they're not performing right now, then they're out. I think a lot of people have forgotten how shit Pep's first season in charge of City was. He arguably had the best squad in the league and the league was in a pretty shite state(definitely worse than now). He still finished 4th, barely in front of Van Gaal's second season United(which was shit). Based on Chelsea's history, I have no doubt in my mind that Pep would have been out the door if he finished 5th with such a squad.

I'm not saying that being ruthless definitely is the wrong approach, btw. For certain clubs it has made perfect sense up until now(Bayern, Real and Barca etc). But in the PL, I'm not sure if it's better. Chelsea is the only example we have. They are fairly successful, but it comes at a clear cost. I think there is a limit to how successful Chelsea can be with their approach.

 

[Lee565]

It's not a coincidence that both united and arsenal have struggled massively to adapt to modern football since losing their lengthy long term old school managers in ferguson and wengèr who were hands on in every department of the club.

even now both clubs still seem to be stuck in the mindset of trying to create another wenger and Ferguson scenario of their managerial appointments spanning multiple decades in ole and arteta despite each manager's failings.

 

[Bobcat]

You are comparing apples to oranges. On the one hand we have Chelsea who have thrived in chaos and have had their most successful season on the back of sacking their full time coach mid-way through the season.

On the other hand you have us who are a fallen giant whose success was built on top of continuity and a GOAT coach. We don't operate under the same economics as Chelsea and so the only way our club can sustain this level of performance is by maintaining continuity, buying emerging players who can become stars, or by taking a gamble through buying youngsters who have the potential to become generational talents.

These talents will only come to us if we have a relatively calmer situation and environment to let them thrive. A constantly chopping and changing environment like Chelsea's is counterproductive to youth and patience. We can't compete in their market and so have to give emerging players what they need i.e., stability.

Given the handicap we are operating under, Ole has done a phenomenal job keeping us where we are. In fact, we have overachieved this season if anything by 1-2 PL places. Our current squad is only good enough to be top 4 and that's it. To maintain our standard, we have to operate more like Leicester than Chelsea.

This. Its also worth remembering Chelsea have won the league twice since Fergie retired while we have not even been close to. They are a much better run club and have an owner that spits vast amounts of money into the club instead of siphoning money from it.

Our structure is not the same either. With our "old school" way of running it we have a manager that is more of a sporting director than a head coach

Just to be clear, its not like we have not spent money, we have spent a fortune, but the problem is that its largely been spent poorly with little, if any long term strategy from the board and owners

 

[Oranges038]

Well, Chelsea's tradition under Abramovich is being ruthless. In 2012 they also sacked a manager midseason and won the UCL.

Sarri won Europa League and had his contract terminated (tough i think he also wanted to leave).

Mourinho's 2nd tenure at Chelsea saw him win the premier league... and be fired midseason.

You can go on with Benitez, Grant, Scolari, Di Matteo (fired 6 months after winning the ucl). Lampard was just the latest one, and as far as i'm concerned, with some bad results, Tuchel could leave by Christmas, and they could bring Zidane and win the UCL again.

Abramovich cares about Chelsea, he's involved in every club decision, and invested a lot of money. As a result, he demands trophies, and is ruthless with the managers.

13 different managers since Abramovich took over, 17 major titles in this period. Ask any Chelsea fan if they care about the managers rotation. They share the same view as the owner: win now and nothing else matters.

I'm not saying we should be that ruthless, but we could learn a thing or two with them. Not settle for just being good.

2 Billion+ and 13 managers and you are bound to win something alright. It's almost like Chelsea look for the new manager bounce to get them over the line in the second half of the season.

Man City have spent 2 Billion and had 5 managers in the last 10 years. Won a few trophies too.

Utd have spent a billion since Fergie left, had 4 managers and won a few trophies. Nothing major mind.

So there is a ruthlessness there when things turn sour, Moyes went as soon as CL football was off the table, with Mourinho and Van Gaal it dragged on too long, it was clear from a long way out they weren't the right fit anyway.

With Solskjaer I feel they've gone into this with a long term view, that there is an understanding in the backgorund that the squad needs to be balanced and the whole club needs a reset from top to bottom. You cannot really do that if your sacking a manager every 12/18 months unless you hire a DOF to shape the squad and only hire a coach. We know they aren't doing that amytime soon.

They don't want to go with thay approach of spending on players and hiring a new manager every year or two to maintain the league position and money coming in. Then they'd have feck all to take back for themsleves. City and Chelsea can do what they like. They don't gave to announce it, it doesn't affect the share price.

Stability is the key for them to maintain the earnings from their investment. Unless he's way off maintaining a top 4 finish he's going nowhere.

 

[krentz]

A day after the CL final I find my self reflecting on ours and Chelseas seasons. As a player, you could argue Lampard is an even bigger legend to Chelsea than Ole is. Add to this the fact that he got CL into the champions league in a season when Chelsea were banned from making signings. That alone would have got Lampard a new contract at United im sure. And probably bought him enough good will for a season or two at our club.

Flip to United now, By most big clubs standards, Ole is underachieving. But because he is a United legend and is doing slightly better each year, most United fans are willing to accept us not winning anything. I am pretty confident that if Ole keeps finishing top 4 and having seasons like this year he wont lose his job.

Chelsea are European champions now because they saw a good manager available and didn't hesitate to let go of their legend. Imagine we sacked Ole after failing to the CL group stages and hired Tuchel.

Would we not have won the Europa League? Would we have won the league?

We are putting more weight on traditions like standing by the manager and ignoring our other tradition that made Manchester United the club it is today - Winning.

You forgot Roman also invested ton of monies last summer. This if the pattern of modern football, bar some miracles like Leicester or Villareall, the winners have always been the biggest spender, even far better coach & manager than Ole, like Jurgen Klopp struggles badly without proper monetery back up.
Now it's up to the Glazers to show how they are willing to support us financially.

 

[Lee565]

You forgot Roman also invested ton of monies last summer. This if the pattern of modern football, bar some miracles like Leicester or Villareall, the winners have always been the biggest spender, even far better coach & manager than Ole, like Jurgen Klopp struggles badly without proper monetery back up.
Now it's up to the Glazers to show how they are willing to support us financially.

To be fair the money Chelsea spent last summer was self funded money from previous summer's money barely touched due to the ban and then on top of that outgoing transfer sales of players as well.

For quite some time now chelsea have been very good with their dealings in and out of the club, where as we have either giving our players away for pittance or allowed players to out stay their welcome with little resale value and then on the other side of it we have continuously over spent on nearly every player we have brought from mata, to fellaini, fred, sanchez, lukaku, bissaka and maguire. It's no wonder why we struggle to build a world class side with strength in depth