Was Louis Van Gaal our best "coach" in the post Fergie years?

[noodlehair]

To start off, I'll say his recruitment was dreadful and his vision for football downright sleep inducing at times.

But in terms of the influence he had over the players individually and as a group, to me he was clearly the best at getting them to do what he wanted on the pitch. That was clear from the first couple of games he took charge in. You knew what you were expecting from his team when they went out on the pitch - even if it wasn't pretty. The players I think also developed best under him - he had a transformative effect especially on Smalling and De Gea. De Gea was sweeping under him and became a lot more comfortable coming out of the box. Smalling became a more dominant CB.

His signings were genuinely dreadful though. His vision was outdated, but his implementation of it was actually quite good. Anyone else feel the same way?

Nope. Well yes in one sense that you could see what our players had been told to do, but then he'd randomly switch it mid game to hoofing the ball to fellaini. He couldn't decide what positions people played in and I would still watch the games with no clue what the plan was or what we were trying to do. It's just that instead of being a mess we'd have the ball for ages but without making any attempt to try and score and then every single time we lost it the opposition nearly would.

Also in regards to comparing him to Rangnick, I definitely don't agree you could tell what we were trying to do after only a couple of games. Our first 10-15 games were a mess with no consistency at all in terms of types of performance and the results were really poor. I remember he used to bang on about it needing to "click" with the players, but he kept completely changing the system every 3 games. At one point we'd have Blind in midfield on his own and then a 50 yard gap to the rest of our team.

LVG's coaching influence mainly came down to people on the internet talking shite about him because they wanted to prove they knew about football tactics. In terms of the actual football on the pitch his team looked clueless and was the single worst football team to watch I can remember. Highlights included Old Trafford sarcastically cheering when it took us until the 80th minute to have a shot against a championship side, and "tactically" playing corners back to our own goalkeeper.

I've not been impressed with us under Rangnick so far but LVG at the same stage was even more all over the place, and he had a whole summer and pre season to get the squad into the order he wanted and work on tactics/coaching.

 

[Butty19]

Yes, arguably the two greatest performances at Anfield in my lifetime were under LVG. He implemented his philosophy and the players were very well coached. Sadly in the final third we lacked creativity and penetration.

 

[steffyr2]

No

 

[BuzzKillington]

My house has never been cleaner in the last ten years as it was during his tenure. I’d get about 15 minutes into a game and go and find something more interesting to do instead. I practically cleaned the pattern of my plates during those two years. Anybody getting misty eyed over LvG’s tenure can get in the sea.

 

[Crashoutcassius]

we only played well for 3 games, maybe 4. you could see the coaching come through to the players - it was just tactics that weren't going to work. with probably a lot less coaching and a lot more freedom we had so many better moments from ole. only so far that freedom can take you clearly, but would take it over the time we had with lvg any day

 

[Tyrion]

Jose was the best post Fergie, in terms of trophies won.

I liked Van Gaal. He spoke really well and he clearly had a set philosophy.

We played some great stuff under him, especially against Liverpool.

Shame it did not work out.

Agreed. LVG was the only appointment that made sense. Moyes was unqualified, Ole was a kneejerk response to good form and Mourinho is now a short term appointment who implodes after 2 years maximum.

 

[Lay]

Only one of the 5 that had the personality for the job. Unfortunately his football was dire

 

[glazed]

They've all been awful for different reasons. There's no point in saying who was better as they all failed because the club infrastructure did not permit good management to happen.

But to play the game, personally I thought Ole was best as at least his attacking football was sometimes nice to watch.

 

[Foxbatt]

I raised a couple of issues when he was given the gig. He should have been able to bring his own assistant manager. We lost the 4th spot by goal difference. He should have been given one more year. Yes it was feck boring. I felt that he underestimated the technical ability of the players. He needed a playmaker and he wanted Rooney to be the one and Rooney was past his best. I do not think Nani and Hernandez would have made much difference at all.

 

[el3mel]

No, it was a shit appointment that didn't work out. His philosophy and tactics were awful. Just because he implemented a style doesn't mean he did well, because the style he implemented was awful.

Not to mention his methods and transfer business of rebuilding the squad hurt the team more than it benefitted it.

Awful coach.

 

[Bebestation]

I actually liked his tactics - but the problem was that we didn't have a DOF so he bought shit players like he always had a problem doing at Barcelona.

I hated the fact we went from Van Gaal to Jose mourinho - that's like going from A to Z rather than A to B.

Felt that if a possesion manager had taken over after Van Gaal it would be better - he was also trying to teach ex players like Carrick & Giggs to manage/coach aswell, felt if we had gone that way instead of going for someone like Ole after Jose - it might have been better for us a teeny weeny bit.

 

[Code-CX]

LVG's football was by far the worst to watch out of the managers we had post SAF. I couldn't stand watching any of our games during his time here.

 

[Son]

The best coach we’ve had was Mourinho in his second season. Van Gaal was better in bigger games though usually we held control but struggled against lower sides.

The clubs signings in LVG’s time were absolutely diabolical too.

 

[elmo]

Having an identifiable philosophy =/= being a good or effective coach

Getting the players to perform how he wants is a sign of a good coach.

The issue is that there's a big difference between how we want the team to play and LVG's vision.

 

[Kostov]

He was dogshite.

 

[Roane]

Some of the things folk are saying about LVG I agree with. However the signings being criticised I'm not so sure.

All managers get some signings wrong, as in they don't turn out to be all that. Veron is an obvious one from SAF for example. But I don't think anyone was against Veron when we signed him. He was a class player who didn't work out.

Similarly with LVG his signings at the time caused a lot of optimism. Not least like Ronaldo and Varane signings recently for us which had some people thinking we'd win the league.

Di Maria was a signing that had people wetting themselves at the time. Started brilliant too. Non footballing factors made him bad.

Shneiderlin was pretty much the Rice of the time if I recall at the time.

Falcao again caused excitement at the time.

Romero was very capable and I personally thought he was better than DDG in some aspects.

Schweinsteiger was old but again no complaints at the time because many saw him as the "leadership" we needed and his experience. Unfortunately the guy was more interested in his girlfriends career. I for one was happy having seen him play for us live.

Depay had all the talent in the world but wasted it for us.

Martial also was clearly talented and started off well for us.

Some of the youth came in and played well and we're being spoken about positively.

Even Rojo initially was seen as a positive and someone who had passion etc etc.

Blind was seen as a positive too.

So yeah LVG had issues in how we were on the pitch but his signings were not as bad as people make out.

For me his problem was that he already had said he only wanted 3 years and no more. I still think had we given him the final year we may have seen improvements.

 

[GueRed]

Had the personality befitting a Manchester United boss..and his press conferences were great. But no.

The football on the whole was boring. In his second season lost count how many times we went into half time nil - nil with zero shots on goals.

The football always reminds me of this

And the signings under his spell was the absolute worst. Most of them were on their way out within the next 18-24 months or languished in the squad on high wages.

That set us back a few years

 

[Steve Bruce]

He is the only manager successfully implemented possession based football in man utd, even with kids. I am not sure if he is responsible for player recruitment in Man Utd.

He said himself he wasn't given the players he wanted.

If he had the same backing as OGS I think he'd been more successful and I think with better players he way of playing would have been much better as the possession based game would have been quicker and more progressive

 

[Ludens the Red]

Nope. Well yes in one sense that you could see what our players had been told to do, but then he'd randomly switch it mid game to hoofing the ball to fellaini. He couldn't decide what positions people played in and I would still watch the games with no clue what the plan was or what we were trying to do. It's just that instead of being a mess we'd have the ball for ages but without making any attempt to try and score and then every single time we lost it the opposition nearly would.

Also in regards to comparing him to Rangnick, I definitely don't agree you could tell what we were trying to do after only a couple of games. Our first 10-15 games were a mess with no consistency at all in terms of types of performance and the results were really poor. I remember he used to bang on about it needing to "click" with the players, but he kept completely changing the system every 3 games. At one point we'd have Blind in midfield on his own and then a 50 yard gap to the rest of our team.

LVG's coaching influence mainly came down to people on the internet talking shite about him because they wanted to prove they knew about football tactics. In terms of the actual football on the pitch his team looked clueless and was the single worst football team to watch I can remember. Highlights included Old Trafford sarcastically cheering when it took us until the 80th minute to have a shot against a championship side, and "tactically" playing corners back to our own goalkeeper.

I've not been impressed with us under Rangnick so far but LVG at the same stage was even more all over the place, and he had a whole summer and pre season to get the squad into the order he wanted and work on tactics/coaching.

Haha, horror days… and it was actually a league one team.

 

[GueRed]

I actually liked his tactics - but the problem was that we didn't have a DOF so he bought shit players like he always had a problem doing at Barcelona.

I hated the fact we went from Van Gaal to Jose mourinho - that's like going from A to Z rather than A to B.

Felt that if a possesion manager had taken over after Van Gaal it would be better - he was also trying to teach ex players like Carrick & Giggs to manage/coach aswell, felt if we had gone that way instead of going for someone like Ole after Jose - it might have been better for us a teeny weeny bit.

Fair point.

and when you got some banker in Ed Woodward who knows feck all about football making football decisions you're screwed..

 

[The Boy]

We're the only blip on his CV imo. If we had a proper footballing structure he would have done much better, turned us into a tactical side, and laid the foundations for a younger, modern manager.

I agree with this, I think the biggest mistake you made was going for Jose after Van Gaal, if you had gone for a more progressive and possession based modern manager like Poch at the time, I think you'd be in a far far better place now. The biggest problem was Mou coming in, ripping everything up and starting again with a very different and even more antiquated style of play.

 

[Nytram Shakes]

I would say he is the only manager we have had post Fergie who you could tell worked with and coached the players.

I still think it was a mistake to fire him, I think replacing him with Mourinho was the biggest mistake this club has made in the post Fergie era. Take what ever you think of LVG and Mourinho out of it, but going from a manage (LVG) who likes his team to play with the ball and who liketo work with and develop young players to then hiring a manager (Mourinho) who likes his teams to play without the ball and who likes to work with veteran and experienced players was never going to go well. Add to that both managers were given hundreds of millions to spend. So of course we ended up with a complete basket case of a squad.

Personally I think we would have been in a far better position as a club if we had stuck with LVG for a few more years and let him really build a ground work for the team.

 

[Marwood]

Had the personality befitting a Manchester United boss..and his press conferences were great. But no.

The football on the whole was boring. In his second season lost count how many times we went into half time nil - nil with zero shots on goals.

The football always reminds me of this

And the signings under his spell was the absolute worst. Most of them were on their way out within the next 18-24 months or languished in the squad on high wages.

That set us back a few years

Yeah my thoughts exactly.

He had a style but its probably the easiest style to implement. Pass it sideways and destroy the game as a spectacle. Most managers could do that.

 

[Marwood]

Some of the things folk are saying about LVG I agree with. However the signings being criticised I'm not so sure.

All managers get some signings wrong, as in they don't turn out to be all that. Veron is an obvious one from SAF for example. But I don't think anyone was against Veron when we signed him. He was a class player who didn't work out.

Similarly with LVG his signings at the time caused a lot of optimism. Not least like Ronaldo and Varane signings recently for us which had some people thinking we'd win the league.

Di Maria was a signing that had people wetting themselves at the time. Started brilliant too. Non footballing factors made him bad.

Shneiderlin was pretty much the Rice of the time if I recall at the time.

Falcao again caused excitement at the time.

Romero was very capable and I personally thought he was better than DDG in some aspects.

Schweinsteiger was old but again no complaints at the time because many saw him as the "leadership" we needed and his experience. Unfortunately the guy was more interested in his girlfriends career. I for one was happy having seen him play for us live.

Depay had all the talent in the world but wasted it for us.

Martial also was clearly talented and started off well for us.

Some of the youth came in and played well and we're being spoken about positively.

Even Rojo initially was seen as a positive and someone who had passion etc etc.

Blind was seen as a positive too.

So yeah LVG had issues in how we were on the pitch but his signings were not as bad as people make out.

For me his problem was that he already had said he only wanted 3 years and no more. I still think had we given him the final year we may have seen improvements.

You're judging signings by how excited fans were rather than how they actually performed.

There wasn't one you could call a legitimate success.

 

[soapythecat]

The best coach we’ve had was Mourinho in his second season. Van Gaal was better in bigger games though usually we held control but struggled against lower sides.

The clubs signings in LVG’s time were absolutely diabolical too.

Agreed. It went to shit when we bought Sanchez. We were going great guns until that point and looked a formidable side in the making.

 

[Zen86]

Lots of talk about LVG having a clear philosophy. He didn't. He talked a lot about philosophies but for the most part, it was anyone's guess what we were trying to do on the pitch. The players certainly looked like they hadn't a clue, either. Whatever it was, it was awful to watch.

 

[ROFLUTION]

You can argue Mourinho was equally "good". He implemented his style also, but neither Van Gaal or Mourinho's style suited United's traditional trademarks of entertaining football which is why they never won over the fans.

 

[Ixion]

Goal difference away from consecutive top 4 and a trophy. I think he was a little unlucky, the end of his second season was difficult as everyone knew he was being replaced but it just went down to goal difference in the end.

I think, aside from his football not suiting United, he was the first to really suffer Woodward's Disneyland philosophy.

 

[KingCavani]

No.

In fact I'd say he was clearly the worst. Are people really this short of memory?

Mourinho inherited a side that we having less shots per game than fecking Stoke. Do people forget those games at home where we failing to register shots on target in the first half of games. That was the most toothless United side I've seen in my lifetime.

It wasn't just that we were boring, we were boring by design. When times got rough for Mourinho and Ole it was still pretty apparent the players weren't doing what they wanted. Under Van Gaal we were at our most negative and worst it felt according to the plan. Even for all our possession we could never really control games, we'd immediately lose the initiative to better sides. It was dreadful.

https://statsbomb.com/2017/04/the-table-is-the-same-has-mourinho-improved-manchester-united/

Here's a good article on the ridiculous improvement from LVG's final year to Jose's first. LVG was atrocious for this club.

 

[Wednesday at Stoke]

He was definitely the most hands-on, there were videos of him coaching Rooney at finishing on summer tour. However, Ole never really had the benefit of a summer tour bar one season.

 

[Grande]

Said this before and got slaughtered here.

You seen a plan and implementation of that plan. I think given more time he may have progressed us a bit more but its hard to know

There is a recollection of him losing the players because of his detail management of a football the players didn’t believe to be working. Stories of humiliating two-hour-sessions of a player doing the wrong choice, situation after situation.

what I do remember is how the issues of the first season (little vertical play or directness, cautiousness in the last third) grew larger in the second season, which was not a good sign.

Van Gaal once said himself hw wanted the ball to move quicker in the last third, so that part he never managed to implement.

 

[Roane]

You're judging signings by how excited fans were rather than how they actually performed.

There wasn't one you could call a legitimate success.

I was just responding to the points about him making bad signings. Sure they weren't successful in hindsight but at the time they were decent to excellent signings. I mean di Maria was a Superstar.

Our signings haven't really been brilliant for us overall but they haven't all been bad signings. I mean even Sancho hasn't pulled up trees but based on his previous club he was a good signing as was Pogba based on his record.

Performance wise I don't disagree.

 

[golden_blunder]

Laid the foundations blah blah

in pyrite, the sleep inducing twat

 

[OnlyTwoDaSilvas]

The second half of 14/15, there were signs we were on the ascendency, and his style of play was going to click. But then he dismantled it in 15/16. He moved away from a compact 4-3-3 which was largely working, to a 4-2-3-1 with a huge space between the immobile midfield 2 and the front 4.

The 2nd half of 15/16 was horrific to watch, it looked like he had abandoned the possession football, and we were just out there without any plan at all. The 0-1 smash and grab at Anfield was horrific to watch even though we won and a million miles away from the way we were playing the season before, but then a few weeks later they beat us 2-0 in the first leg of the Europa League tie, but it really should have been more.

I dread to think what a 3rd season would have brought. It had gone so far off the rails between Christmas and the end of the season, the sacking was justified, FA Cup or not.

 

[sparx99]

I'll never forgive him for turning down Kroos.

 

[Maticmaker]

Yes, he was Dave Sexton reincarnated.
LvG's football was technically sound, boring to watch, it was all based on the premise that "whilst you have the ball your opponent can't score" and he did improve some players notably DeGea and Smalling... who we actually saw carry the ball over the halfway line without getting a nose-bleed!.
Trouble was LvG's ideas were suited to Dutch football philosophy and it didn't really translate to the PL. He couldn't resist the pull of United, wanted desperately to win some silverware in the UK (which he achieved), then said he had to keep a promise to his wife to retire..... but!

 

[Ace]

Revisionist history. I've never seen worse football from United than what was played under LvG. It was also at a time when the premier league was as a whole was down.

 

[sunama]

i have city fans who say similar, he was the best weve had. It was really the last 3rd he struggled with, in time he may have caved into pressure to attack and finished the job.

A manager should not have to "cave into pressure to attack".
A manager of any (big) club should be focused on scoring goals and not attempting to win matches 1-0.
LVG's brand of football was torture to watch.
I remember in 1 particular game, our first shot on goal came in around the 80th minute.
Shocking football.

 

[Marwood]

I was just responding to the points about him making bad signings. Sure they weren't successful in hindsight but at the time they were decent to excellent signings. I mean di Maria was a Superstar.

Our signings haven't really been brilliant for us overall but they haven't all been bad signings. I mean even Sancho hasn't pulled up trees but based on his previous club he was a good signing as was Pogba based on his record.

Performance wise I don't disagree.

But that's how we judge signings, with hindsight. There is no other way of judging them.

Everybody gets excited about a new signing but managers are paid millions to see beyond that excitement and evaluate if they'll actually be of use to us. Like I said I don't think he got a single one right. Total disaster.

 

[Smores]

Not by any stretch of the imagination.

I don't buy the idea that he's the better coach because he implemented his philosophy. Our last 3 managers have all succeed in implementing a style but they've all had weaknesses that made our football of a poor standard. Our football under LvG was dreadful and his transfers damaged us.