I would like to have seen us agree a couple of deals for the summer too,however not going to happen until Ole has been given job officially
What truly worries me about Manchester United
- Thread starter devilish
- Start date
Totally agree, fans that have never experienced pre SAF era think that we have a god given right to win everything but times have changed. SAF was genius at always managing to get 8 or 9 decent players to perform better than the opposition decent players and then had 2 or 3 players that were at a different level game changers.
SAF, David Gill and thanks to Moyes all the backroom staff went at the same time while the squad was also in need of overhaul. All of this in the current era where we have to compete with the likes of City who spend as if it is Monopoly money. There was not a long term plan and strategy and we have just tried different things and when not worked just reacted! Ole as an appointment seems to be working but I worry that fans suddenly expect us to win every game when the club as a whole has not fully recovered from 2013
I really don't understand what people actually want.
One the one hand not backing Mourinho last summer was a stick to beat Woodward with. Yet its been shown that the players the club had could perform to a far higher standard under someone who wasn't Mourinho so in that sense Woodward was right. But then you would suggest that by not backing the manager you are undermining his role.
So instead we officially undermine his role by employing a DofF to sign the players and make the decisions giving the manager a get out clause for failure and an additional hurdle to overcome in order to get success.
It seems to me we haven't had any issues signing players since 2013 aside from the first window after Fergies departure. We have spent unparalleled amounts of cash on players who haven't worked out yet we have also seen that put the players in the right formation with an attacking mentality and (last Saturday aside) they will tend to win.
Why not just actually get the right man in the dugout who can actually motivate and work with the players and then back him in the market for the players he identifies and do it because he is the right man rather than through in another layers of admin because in truth we don't trust the managers we are appointing in the first place?
One the one hand not backing Mourinho last summer was a stick to beat Woodward with. Yet its been shown that the players the club had could perform to a far higher standard under someone who wasn't Mourinho so in that sense Woodward was right. But then you would suggest that by not backing the manager you are undermining his role.
So instead we officially undermine his role by employing a DofF to sign the players and make the decisions giving the manager a get out clause for failure and an additional hurdle to overcome in order to get success.
It seems to me we haven't had any issues signing players since 2013 aside from the first window after Fergies departure. We have spent unparalleled amounts of cash on players who haven't worked out yet we have also seen that put the players in the right formation with an attacking mentality and (last Saturday aside) they will tend to win.
Why not just actually get the right man in the dugout who can actually motivate and work with the players and then back him in the market for the players he identifies and do it because he is the right man rather than through in another layers of admin because in truth we don't trust the managers we are appointing in the first place?
DoF or no DoF, i dont care much, my only worry is clear vision and path towards certain goals, while our DNA as a football club stays mostly intact. Things which are related to our longer term future. I dont care about this top 4 brainwashed bullshit, this aint Arsenal, issues i have are related to things i saw on the pitch during a game. I certainly didnt have same feeling after Arsenal defeat and after Wolves game.
When it comes to recruitment i dont wanna see scenarios where JM gives extensions to Fellaini due him being his type of player and then few months after interim manager sells him because he doesnt fit in what we are all about as a football club ( i suppose ). Academy on other hand should be reflection of first team on a lower level.
Another thing, stop drumming about divine right to win crap, when ever people express their concerns after the game which are none result related.
When it comes to recruitment i dont wanna see scenarios where JM gives extensions to Fellaini due him being his type of player and then few months after interim manager sells him because he doesnt fit in what we are all about as a football club ( i suppose ). Academy on other hand should be reflection of first team on a lower level.
Another thing, stop drumming about divine right to win crap, when ever people express their concerns after the game which are none result related.
A) Who would you want to find the right man in the dug out? Someone with knowledge about football, success and what it takes to be the right man in the dug out, or an investment banker who thought David Moyes, Lous Van Gaal and Jose Mourinho would be the right man in the dug out?
B) When your investment banker in six years goes through four managers of quadrimetrically opposite playing styles, would you want the possession based manager to identify player for the low blocks of defense manager to use and the crossing from wide manager to identify players for the tiki-taka through the middle manager to use, or would you want a person with competence about football and the fit of players to playing styles to identify both the players and the managers to use them, or would you want an accountant and investment banker to identify the players as well?
A)Sir Alex Ferguson picked Moyes and Sir Alex is pretty much the epitome of knowledge of football, success and what it takes to be the right man in the dug out. We saw how that went.
B)I don't want Woodward to identify the players. I want the manager to identify the players in order that the manager has the best chance of succeeding as the manager. I want Woodward signing the player the manager wants which by and large he has tended to do, certainly in greater volume and value than his predecessors.
I also pose the question that if you don't want Woodward and his like to be trusted to appoint the manager then who do you suggest we trust to appoint the DofF? Or maybe we need to appoint a football man of knowledge to identify the DofF who can then identify the manager.....and so it goes on.
I think this is down to organizational structure. Previously, in SAF’s era, the “Director of Football” was actually the Director of Scouting. He reported to SAF. His job was managing a team of scouts who were 95% focused on scouting and acquiring players for the first team. SAF made the final decision on who to sign and made the recommendation to the CEO. In this structure, credit/blame is easy to assign because one person is responsible for football operations. Moyes, LvG and Jose failed not only in on field tactics, but also in the transfer market.
In the Director of Football structure, the emphasis is on scouting and acquiring players for the club, not just the first team. Frequently, a club ethos or philosophy is used as a platform to develop players for the club. The DoF reports to the CEO. Many times, the club manager and the DoF both report to the CEO and therefore are equals. Sometimes, the manager reports to the DoF (Bayern). Responsibility for first team success is shared between the DoF and manager.
Both systems can work. It depends on who is in the key positions of CEO, DoF and manager. Many times, a DoFsystem can cause a lot of problem (PSG!) when a power struggle develops because the first team manager needs results now, and the DoF is also tasked with building talent for the future.
Personally, I think a DoF system is better at building youth talent. There are simply too many responsibilities that require a manager’s time to evaluate a 15 year old from Bosnia that won’t see first team football for 5 years. You look at clubs like Atletico Madrid, Dortmund, Monaco, Ajax.... they just churn out youth talent. Also, for an unproven manager, the DoF system is a way to mitigate potential weaknesses of the new manager.
For our situation, I prefer a hybrid system where both the manager (Ole) and a DoF report to the CEO. Ole would have full control over first team transfers (scouted by the DoF), but final say on whether to go after a player would be Ole’s decision. On the other hand, a DoF that knows the club culture but is multilingual with both European and South American ties would be ideal. With our vast network of former players, we should be able to find a suitable candidate (van der Sar?).
Look, clubs who have great success with the DoF system are selling clubs. We are one of 5 or 10 clubs worldwide who can drop 150m on a single player... we are a buying club. Secondly, top managers want control of their own destiny and many will not consider jobs where they have to report to a DoF. Hell, Real Madrid has the most chaotic structure — everyone reports to Perez who makes the final decision, both on footballing and non-footballing matters, and they’ve won 4 of the last 5 CLs.
In the Director of Football structure, the emphasis is on scouting and acquiring players for the club, not just the first team. Frequently, a club ethos or philosophy is used as a platform to develop players for the club. The DoF reports to the CEO. Many times, the club manager and the DoF both report to the CEO and therefore are equals. Sometimes, the manager reports to the DoF (Bayern). Responsibility for first team success is shared between the DoF and manager.
Both systems can work. It depends on who is in the key positions of CEO, DoF and manager. Many times, a DoFsystem can cause a lot of problem (PSG!) when a power struggle develops because the first team manager needs results now, and the DoF is also tasked with building talent for the future.
Personally, I think a DoF system is better at building youth talent. There are simply too many responsibilities that require a manager’s time to evaluate a 15 year old from Bosnia that won’t see first team football for 5 years. You look at clubs like Atletico Madrid, Dortmund, Monaco, Ajax.... they just churn out youth talent. Also, for an unproven manager, the DoF system is a way to mitigate potential weaknesses of the new manager.
For our situation, I prefer a hybrid system where both the manager (Ole) and a DoF report to the CEO. Ole would have full control over first team transfers (scouted by the DoF), but final say on whether to go after a player would be Ole’s decision. On the other hand, a DoF that knows the club culture but is multilingual with both European and South American ties would be ideal. With our vast network of former players, we should be able to find a suitable candidate (van der Sar?).
Look, clubs who have great success with the DoF system are selling clubs. We are one of 5 or 10 clubs worldwide who can drop 150m on a single player... we are a buying club. Secondly, top managers want control of their own destiny and many will not consider jobs where they have to report to a DoF. Hell, Real Madrid has the most chaotic structure — everyone reports to Perez who makes the final decision, both on footballing and non-footballing matters, and they’ve won 4 of the last 5 CLs.
A) Unless you have better sources than me, we don’t know who from Gill, Woodward and Ferguson had most input in that process, and we don’t know how far down the list Moyes was. What we know is that Gill was the only one of them with experience in picking managers. Anyway, I’m sure you are not using Ferguson vouching for Moyes as a proof that accountants with no football competancy generally are better at picking football managers than people with much football competancy?
B) So you are in favour of the current model of Moyes picking players for Van Gaal and Van Gaal for Mourinho, only for Van Gaal to say we have an unbalanced squad and then Mourinho to say we have an unbalanced and useless squad? Fair enough, it won’t be perfect either way.
It was you, though, that said you don’t understand what people want, and made a mockery of why anyone would want a football person as a DoF instead of just Woodward/current manager as the continuity guarantists. It’s fair to disagree, but if you can’t acknowledge there are legitimate arguments for why it could be different, I think you’re being deliberately slow.
As for your questions if it’s just turtles all the way down - of course: Glazers could make a football club man CEO, or even sell tje club to someone interested in football and United, or go to the other extreme and hire an accountant as manager and have Deloitte scouting players. It would be stupid, though. The point is that running the football side of a club the size of United demands some sort of continuance across several seasons, and hiring the next Ferguson and giving him six seasons to come through doesn’t seem as good an option as it used to. But what is your ideal?
Many good points here. Though Perez did have and trust his DoF-orsomething Valdano for a long while more than his ‘entrenadores’, then again, Mourinho made him drop that, then again, as a league club, RM have gone more backwards than forwards since Mourinho, which might be a better measure of consistency than Zidane and Ronaldo deciding five cup games a year. (Which, by the way, still is a fantastic acheivement all the more). One question for me with United though, is, after Ferguson/Gill we seem a badly run club, not just a struggling team. Managers are consistently trying to teach ill suited players to learn new styles/systems, and are not given time and support to acheive that, presumably because they are badly chosen managers for badly defined roles with inconsistent support. All this falls on Woodward, who has no relevant competance to make you think he could solve any of it. Another is that the owners of other gigantic clubs are fiercely invested in the utmost success for various reasons. The Glazers do not seem like that kind of owners, which may be a good thing, but not if the club is run by their kind of merger broker. Even Bayerns mad rooster loft of former ‘Ich-bin-Bayern’-egomaniacs is preferable to that.
I think we should go with Ole and his cabinet of Unitedy culture bearers, and at the same time get a kind of DoF that either is well established and fit United’s demands as a club (success/ethos), or can grow into the role. Wether he is above/aligned/subordinate to Woody depends on who it is.
UTD probably are trying to do business with players coming and going, nobody knows what really is going on behind the scenes, Real have done great business in getting Zidane back, and they will now keep players who I think would have been out of there?
Ole is having the job I think, top4 is must to get it. If we tail off now with sporadic results he won't get it, players now have to step up.. or he won't get job.
Ole is having the job I think, top4 is must to get it. If we tail off now with sporadic results he won't get it, players now have to step up.. or he won't get job.
Levy is and will be the big elephant in the room if Woodward decides to go for Poch, and if that falls through publically the whole thing could backfire. Will be an interesting next few months.If they go for Poch there will be a huge elephant in the room. Or more likely the looming spectre of a small Norwegian being remembered through rose tinted specs who would "never have lost that game" etc etc Exactly this,
Nevertheless they really have to do what is best for their long term future, United supporters want to support a winning team more than anything, preferably one that wins playing the 'United way', but they must at least win more often than not. Like any manager, if he wins, the background noise will just fade away . The pressure for any manager will be intense but on all available evidence Poch improves teams and their prospects, and at United that means winning trophies.
A lot of people seem to be assuming the DoF will be good, sign the players they want to see, and be able to identify a conveyor belt of managers who will play the exact same way with the exact same players successfully.
I think they are seriously over-estimating the impact of this role.
I think they are seriously over-estimating the impact of this role.
At Spurs we've had periods with a DoF and periods - as now - without one.
I prefer the latter, because if you've got a good manager, as Spurs now do, IMO it's better for that manager to have free rein (subject only to budget constraints set by the club chair) rather than risk potential clashes with a DoF.
I prefer the latter, because if you've got a good manager, as Spurs now do, IMO it's better for that manager to have free rein (subject only to budget constraints set by the club chair) rather than risk potential clashes with a DoF.
And, in reality, if your club can’t afford to sign any players then it doesn’t make any difference.
In that case you'd still be shelling out for a DoF's salary to little point, so the wasted salary would make some difference to finances.
Personally, I hope United do appoint a DoF, because that will add an extra, tangled layer of confusion to your club structure and make for potential DoF vs manager antagonism.
But my advice would be to stick with Ole and leave him free rein. Or else, if you don't stick with Ole, I'm not sure who else you could get.
Well said
We could get Poch mate straight from the cheese factory
Who was your DOF? Didn't your best signings come under Paul Mitchell?
I didn't "make a mockery" of anyone holding a different opinion so lets have that right for a start. I just don't think the DoF model changes as much as people seem to think.
All you are doing is shifting the level of responsibility for transfers one stage back and the people who appoint the manager will now appoint the DofF, so in essence not a huge amount has changed - make the right appointment and you don't have a problem, make the wrong appointment and you end up starting again. We are just shifting that from the manager to the DofF.
We can say we have made dubious appointments as manager in the recent past and that is fair enough, but those same people will appoint the DofF. What happens when he comes under scrutiny (as he will) if signings didn't work out? Do we then say we must change the DofF because he isn't doing his job properly? Does the DofF become bullet-proof because what we are aiming for is continuity? Does the manager carry the can for not being able to get someone elses signings to produce results?
I totally understand the theory of why is could work, I really do. I just don't think its that simple a plan. The theory is the DofF oversees the manager, works with him to supply players who fit into a playing style that transcends the manager at the time so that we have continuity across managers BUT
Lets say we appoint a DofF this summer - lets say Edwin for the sake of argument. We also appoint Ole full-time
Ole identifies 3 players in 3 areas we need strengthening. A CB, a Full back and a winger. He gives the names to Edwin.
Edwin buys 3 different players for those positions who have broadly the same characteristics that Ole identified.
We have a poor season as do the signings.
Is Ole a bad coach and responsible for not getting the team working and therefore at fault?
Does Ole say "well they weren't the players I wanted, so its little wonder"?
Is Edwin to blame for signing the wrong players?
Is Edwin actually any good at his job in that scenario? If he isn't is Ole going to carry the can for Edwins failings?
etc etc
That's just one example. Its not a great one, but its not all that far fetched and I think it does leave lines somewhat blurry. That's not to say it wont work but its not a given for me.
Mitchell was 'Head of Recruitment', but only for 2 and half years. He essentially came to Spurs from S'hampton along with Pochettino. Among the players he helped to sign were Alli, Trippier and Alderweireld.
I see - who was responsible for signing Eriksen, Dier and Son? Whose your head of recruitment now?
First I have to make an apology. You didn’t make a mockery of anything, on the contrary, it was me mixing up the general sentiment in your post with that of another poster I was discussing with. Sorry about that.
I see your nuances better in this post, and that you do understand why others might want a DoF position of sorts. I also agree that it’s not straight forward.
I do think part of the point is a crucial difference: A manager, realistically, is evaluated and sacked about every two seasons these days. Woodward, as per now the responible for choosing managers and the extent which to back their wishes in the market, has had seven years. I think that’s a reasonable delay. The failures of building solid progress these seven years falls mostly on him, even if the failure in Moyes first season is mostly on Moyes, Van Gaals second season mostly on VG and Mou’s third season is on Mou. But it’s hard to see a consistency in the build up of the club, from Academy to scouting to staff to players.
Under Martin Edwards, managers tended to last around four/five years, David Gill never had to answer to a manager appointment, but I think it’s clear Ferguson in many ways acted as both manager, ‘DoF’ and undisputedly in charge of the continuity of the football organization.
If you look at many of the other heavy weights who have managed to be consistently in or around the top in the last decade, they are much more football heavy above the trainer/entrenador/manager level.
I think these last six/seven years is enough to say that Woodward has done a great job at enhancing the club’s commercial operations, and a bad job at building and improving the club’s footballing organization. Unless we are going to give Solskjær seven years at the helm regardless of results, I guess/believe we need someone other than Woodward the main responsibilty of overseeing the continuous building up of the football organization, and I think it should be someone who knows more about football than your average investment broker.
No worries at all. I'm pretty new here and while I may hold strong views I certainly don't want to be rude to anyone so was a bit concerned had it been me you were talking about!!
I actually totally see where you are coming from and as a blueprint I would sign up for it tomorrow if I knew it would work as you have outlined above. Certainly the days of Fergie having a vice like grip on whatever he wanted are gone and in many ways probably rightly so. Ideally due to the short time spans of life that managers have (especially at the top level, where DofF's tend to operate) you would want continuity above them giving the club an overarching identity that will outlast the manager "passing through" and presumably you would appoint managers who most fitted in with that identity too.
The problem I have is that Im not convinced that making the appointment of DofF is any different from appointing the manager and the call for appointing one in the first place is down to the perception that he haven't appointed managers very well since Fergie left and therefore the need for the DofF is heightened. On that however I would say the following :-
Moyes was a disaster and I remove him from the equation.
Van Gaal and Mourinho were decent appointments at the time in my eyes so I cant be too critical of the board/Woodward for making them. I also think they were backed in the transfer market right up to last summer by a man who like him or hate him has delivered players on a more regular basis than previous regimes (maybe because it been a necessity to do so) and has broadly bought players identified by the managers. If we hand this role over to a man acting as a buffer between manager and board then it absolutely MUST be the right man and a man who is not only the right appointment but will be in it for the long term. Anything else is a waste of time. However as I have said before if we blame is managerial issues on the people appointing them and therefore that's why we need the DofF im nervous about the self same people being in charge of that appointment too.
Lastly and sorry for the long post, I think my worst fears have come true with Ole in a funny sort of way. I said the day he was appointed that even as a short term appointment as part of a bigger master plan the whole thing would be in jeopardy if he happened to do very well. That's whats happened and the board are now backed into a corner. Even if there was a plan its gone right out the window because not appointing Ole would not only cause a riot it would leave the new management team completely undermined from day one!
I don’t disagree in that VG and Mou was reasonable appointments, though I would say that the combination of one after the other has me unconvinced of there being a Master(ful) plan behind them.
As to Solskjær, I think there is no doubt he threw a curve ball at Woodward with his success. Then again, if he it is like the appointment of Dalglish at Liverpool in 85, I won’t worry.
We don't have a Head of Recruitment now, reportedly because Pochettino was against the idea and wanted more of a free hand (after Mitchell left to go to Red Bill Leipzig).
Many of Mitchell’s functions have been taken by our chief scout Steve Hitchen, who reports to the club’s football committee of Pochettino, Levy and the academy manager John McDermott.
Just want to clarify something here with regards to having a DOF.
If, as others say, a DOF is needed to identify talent suited to the clubs philosophy and the managers needs; then what's the difference between a DOF and head scout?
If, as others say, a DOF is needed to identify talent suited to the clubs philosophy and the managers needs; then what's the difference between a DOF and head scout?
I got to agree with the OP here though, our transfer window is now cut short. We haven't been a club known to sort out transfers early and the more the background staff let it happen, the more the club will panic buy or pay over the value.It’s a bit absurd to moan about the lack of Summer transfers in March to be honest.
What we want to become and how to attain it is 2 different matters.
Any fans can tell you about how why and what Manchester united is all about and what we want for our football club. Basically we want another class of 92 and another saf. Getting them is another thing.
Until the Glazers and Woodward are gone we will be stuck where we are now fighting for top 4 regardless of any DOF.
Poch is proven in prem, ole isn't, and our club isn't really a club for managers to learn? As you say levy is the one spoke in the wheel that needs to be taken out, it's going to be tough, I'd have him more experience, but ole is doing the right stuff at present, and going to be a cheaper option , we all know Woodward will go for cheaper. I do think ole is doing a fine job as is the rest of the staff, but I'd still like you would go for Poch, but I do think ole will get it.
We've also spent about $1b servicing our debt and paying the Glazers since they took over.
The problem is we've become a business, not a club that cares about success. We should've had the financial firepower to match City and PSG toe to toe even with their oil money, but unfortunately we don't, because a lot of money we make disappears due to the Glazers.
Due to that, we've gone from being the top club in England and one of the top in Europe to a second tier team in England (no title challenge since 12/13) and a third tier team in Europe (getting to the QF is an achievement).
The problem is we've become a business, not a club that cares about success. We should've had the financial firepower to match City and PSG toe to toe even with their oil money, but unfortunately we don't, because a lot of money we make disappears due to the Glazers.
Due to that, we've gone from being the top club in England and one of the top in Europe to a second tier team in England (no title challenge since 12/13) and a third tier team in Europe (getting to the QF is an achievement).
I will tell you what worries me.
What worries me is that City will continue to be ahead of us for many years to come and we will continue to underachieve.
Another worry for me is that we will see more players in the near future that will down tools and exert player power.
Weve seen it twice already since Fergie retired.
Those are my big worries
What worries me is that City will continue to be ahead of us for many years to come and we will continue to underachieve.
Another worry for me is that we will see more players in the near future that will down tools and exert player power.
Weve seen it twice already since Fergie retired.
Those are my big worries
United since Fergie and Gill retired have been amateur hour. Let's take a look down memory lane:
Sporting director should be of equal stature and independent of the manager, have a long-term view in mind, keep the philosophy of the club in mind when recruiting players and not bring the manager's favorite flavors of the month to the club (Fellaini, Depay, Matic come to mind) and most importantly be in touch/contact with scouts and agents throughout the year to execute a competent transfer process and campaign. Michael Edwards and Txiki Begiristian take a lot of the burden from Klopp and Guardiola respectively with regards to team building. Big clubs like Juventus, Real Madrid, Barcelona, Bayern Munich have already made moves in the market and have a clear idea of what they want the squad to look like. We still don't know if we're going for Ole or Poch, and if we go for Poch when can we get him and how much will he cost us. So until that's settled we can't even plan the transfer campaign.
If there's one thing Ed is good at it's marketing and generating headlines. Every season we were in for Cristiano Ronaldo - the prodigal son - to bring him back, and it looked like every summer we got played for a better contract at Real Madrid. When Ronaldo actually wanted to move, he called his agent to get in touch with Juve and they agreed the terms in a couple of weeks. In March 2018. Then Juve agreed a fee with Real in June and that's that. End of story.
- We completed a £27.5m move for Fellaini when his release clause if activated by July 31 would have been £23.5m (https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/23710170)
- We tried buy Herrera and were laughed at by Bilbao and Spanish FA (https://www.theguardian.com/football/2013/sep/03/ander-herrera-manchester-united)
- We purchased Mata for a £37.1m fee when he's clearly not a United type player - he is a great guy, he's not a great United player and this was obvious from day 1
- We waste time pursuing Kroos, Cesc, Bale etc.
- We fire Moyes
- We signed Angel di Maria for £59.7m only to get rid a year later. Someone should have done the homework on his personality, mentality, motivations etc prior to spending a British world record fee on a player. Failing that, someone should have ensured he settled in better in the new environment.
- We paid £27m for Luke Shaw, at the time one of the most expensive teenagers ever, basically for the price of Mane' and Tadic (which is what Southampton did). His career at United even prior to the knee injury was meh, and after recovery has also been meh. For comparison, Liverpool paid £10m for Robertson and he's a better player than Shaw is.
- Then we went back to Spain and paid the clause for Herrera a year later. Thankfully we learned this time.
- We bought Marcus Rojo, Daley Blind and Falcao. Complete scattergun approach.
- The following season we bought Schneiderlin and Schweinsteiger - that worked out well!
- We bought Depay, Darmian and brought Romero on a free (clearly the best transfer). But then we gave a contract to Victor Valdes, because why the feck not?
- We sold Chicharito for a pittance and he immediately went on an amazing scoring spree in Leverkusen. So much so that Leverkusen sold him 2 years after they bought him, for a profit. Well done Man Utd.
- Same thing for Jonny Evans, sold him to WBA for a pittance and they sold him to Leicester 3 years later for double the price. Well done Man Utd.
- To close the circle, we were quoted 70 million for Maguire, but thankfully we didn't bite.
- We bought Martial for a crazy fee (equivalent to KDB or 1.5x Mane or 1.5x Salah) and thankfully he's a great player but we certainly overpaid on transfer deadline.
- We fire LVG
- Enter Mourinho, we bring in the player of the year in Germany (£30m Mkhitaryan), player of the year in France (Zlatan on a free) and pay a world record fee for Pogba.
- A year in, Mourinho loses trust in Mkhitaryan and sends him to Arsenal in exchange for Sanchez. We give Sanchez a ridiculous salary that basically ruins our wage structure and threatens to ruin any future salary negotiations with existing players (see: De Gea now, Pogba possible next year). Sanchez needless to say has been a complete disaster on the pitch. We laughed at City for saying they couldn't afford Sanchez, but they were right, it's not just the transfer fee and the agent fee, it's the wages and the detrimental effect on the wage structure that is key. And he's been shite on the pitch.
- We also pay £30m for Eric Bailly who lacks a brain and consequently plays only when all the others are injured.
- We buy Lukaku, Matic and Lindeloff. For the outlay, none looks a bargain, and quite fits the United philosophy (except maybe Victor). Yes, I like Rom, and I think he's got the temperament and intelligence to be a United #9, but does he have the first touch, scoring record in big matches and participation in buildup play required of our leading striker? Not so sure. Matic is just a short term buy that appeased Mourinho. We finish a distant second to City and get bounced in Europe by Sevilla who have more 'eritage apparently.
- Then we buy Fred (of the famous, "Why did we buy Fred" thread)
- We buy Dalot and Grant.
- We fire Mourinho
Sporting director should be of equal stature and independent of the manager, have a long-term view in mind, keep the philosophy of the club in mind when recruiting players and not bring the manager's favorite flavors of the month to the club (Fellaini, Depay, Matic come to mind) and most importantly be in touch/contact with scouts and agents throughout the year to execute a competent transfer process and campaign. Michael Edwards and Txiki Begiristian take a lot of the burden from Klopp and Guardiola respectively with regards to team building. Big clubs like Juventus, Real Madrid, Barcelona, Bayern Munich have already made moves in the market and have a clear idea of what they want the squad to look like. We still don't know if we're going for Ole or Poch, and if we go for Poch when can we get him and how much will he cost us. So until that's settled we can't even plan the transfer campaign.
If there's one thing Ed is good at it's marketing and generating headlines. Every season we were in for Cristiano Ronaldo - the prodigal son - to bring him back, and it looked like every summer we got played for a better contract at Real Madrid. When Ronaldo actually wanted to move, he called his agent to get in touch with Juve and they agreed the terms in a couple of weeks. In March 2018. Then Juve agreed a fee with Real in June and that's that. End of story.
Last edited:
The main thing that concerns me is the ambition of the glazers. Do they really care about us winning trophies or do they care about where we are in the financial table. Recent seasons have proved that we can turn over eye watering profits without success. In their defence they have sanctioned huge transfers and there has been poor transfer windows as well. Most the time there has been poor transfer windows there’s been excuses for it. But this one coming up will be the real example for me. If ole gets the job having been here half a season then they have to back him with a massive transfer kitty in the summer. If we don’t there can be absolutely no excuses.
For me what worries me is ed Woodward and the glazers, not just spending money which we will find out in the summer once again we not spending much money unless it’s his failed galactico policy, but the money probably going to the glazers pockets. I don’t know who is more of a bigger problem, Woodward? Or the glazers? The latter and the former are has problematic has each other
But we have a chief executive who thinks it’s a good idea to run players contracts down to the very wire, and say hey here is a contract, when the player will respond to him and say you messed me about to save a few coins I’m talking to other clubs now, look at fellaini even he said he didn’t know what was going on, and the player will say (there is not a thing you can do about it) we used to make sure players are signed up, and making sure they get the pay rise they deserve. Woodward is like we not giving payrises until the 5 years are almost up, and that alone is so careless we could never keep big players in this kind of structure. But how DDG and Herrera have been allowed to have the contracts expire is nothing but terrible management by our chief executive, that alone says how much they trying to save money
The dream scenario would be a new takeover, and the also dream scenario would be removing Ed Woodward has chief executive and get one who will do a better job at this. His 6 years have been nothing but haggling in transfers, wrong manager appointments, and signing and extending contracts to players who should not be here, his decision to reward Rooney that contract and Sanchez, is shocking.
But unless we tackle the structure at the club which starts at the top, this club is not built not only to compete, but win trophy’s, let alone dominate, and we continue to watch and let our local rivals dominate the English game which makes me sick, because people running this club at the top are more concentrating on looking at the accounts numbers, than trophy’s. I just think we going to be in the same boat has we have been since 2013, poor transfer summers, frustrating on the pitch, and managers having to deal with a board not provinging the tools and the infrastructure in place to go places
But we have a chief executive who thinks it’s a good idea to run players contracts down to the very wire, and say hey here is a contract, when the player will respond to him and say you messed me about to save a few coins I’m talking to other clubs now, look at fellaini even he said he didn’t know what was going on, and the player will say (there is not a thing you can do about it) we used to make sure players are signed up, and making sure they get the pay rise they deserve. Woodward is like we not giving payrises until the 5 years are almost up, and that alone is so careless we could never keep big players in this kind of structure. But how DDG and Herrera have been allowed to have the contracts expire is nothing but terrible management by our chief executive, that alone says how much they trying to save money
The dream scenario would be a new takeover, and the also dream scenario would be removing Ed Woodward has chief executive and get one who will do a better job at this. His 6 years have been nothing but haggling in transfers, wrong manager appointments, and signing and extending contracts to players who should not be here, his decision to reward Rooney that contract and Sanchez, is shocking.
But unless we tackle the structure at the club which starts at the top, this club is not built not only to compete, but win trophy’s, let alone dominate, and we continue to watch and let our local rivals dominate the English game which makes me sick, because people running this club at the top are more concentrating on looking at the accounts numbers, than trophy’s. I just think we going to be in the same boat has we have been since 2013, poor transfer summers, frustrating on the pitch, and managers having to deal with a board not provinging the tools and the infrastructure in place to go places
Last edited:
It's not even the best in Manchester.
Levy isn't the elephant in the room and won't be …. because it's not practical to force a manager to stay if they want to leave. All he could do, if Poch wanted to leave, is extract a hefty compensation fee.
If United go for Poch, the elephant in the room is that Pochettino will prefer to stay at Spurs.
The other concern is that it looks like Barcelona have spent the season working towards transfers for De Jong and are working DeLigt. All teams who are serious are being linked with him (whether rumours are true or not).
There needs to be some ground work done in through the season. Show the player that we want him, there's a vision for us to play him in x position. Woodward doesn't seem to do much groundwork.
The thing about Moyes talking about us trying to hijack the Bale move to Madrid in 2013. That sounded complete bonkers. Would David Gill have allowed that? Or when he was harrassing Bayern Munich over Muller.
I worry there will be DoF because Woodward is arrogant enough to believe that he can handle the business side and football side.
I do think he wants to seem an improvement of some sort. I just don't think he's competent as he thinks he is. And he's risking our position and clout in world football. You just have to see Google trends to how other clubs are catching up in popularity.
There needs to be some ground work done in through the season. Show the player that we want him, there's a vision for us to play him in x position. Woodward doesn't seem to do much groundwork.
The thing about Moyes talking about us trying to hijack the Bale move to Madrid in 2013. That sounded complete bonkers. Would David Gill have allowed that? Or when he was harrassing Bayern Munich over Muller.
I worry there will be DoF because Woodward is arrogant enough to believe that he can handle the business side and football side.
I do think he wants to seem an improvement of some sort. I just don't think he's competent as he thinks he is. And he's risking our position and clout in world football. You just have to see Google trends to how other clubs are catching up in popularity.
What worries me is the reliance on the so called 'potential' of so many of our players. All I keep hearing is that so and so has the potential to be xxxxx (insert superlative here)!
We have been blinded by the success of the class of '92 which was a once in a lifetime group of players that actually fulfilled their potential.
Our reliance on current players to (hopefully) fulfill their potential is currently the most pressing of my Utd concerns.
Rashford apparently has the potential to be world class (although personally I doubt it).
Martial apparently has the potential too.
Lindalof has the potential to be a Man Utd centre half for years to come apparently.
Shaw has the potential to be a great LB.
Fred incredibly in some fans eyes still has the potential.
McTominay apparently has the potential.
Pereira apparently has the potential.
Chong apparently has the potential.
Greenwood apparently has the potential.
Dalot apparently has the potential.
Heck even Lingard apparently still has the potential to be a Utd great.
It's fine having a few promising youngsters in there but our reliance on so many actually coming through is a concern.
Given the fact we are such a rich club we should just be buying the best proven talent out there and not relying on..........yes you guessed it, potential!
We have been blinded by the success of the class of '92 which was a once in a lifetime group of players that actually fulfilled their potential.
Our reliance on current players to (hopefully) fulfill their potential is currently the most pressing of my Utd concerns.
Rashford apparently has the potential to be world class (although personally I doubt it).
Martial apparently has the potential too.
Lindalof has the potential to be a Man Utd centre half for years to come apparently.
Shaw has the potential to be a great LB.
Fred incredibly in some fans eyes still has the potential.
McTominay apparently has the potential.
Pereira apparently has the potential.
Chong apparently has the potential.
Greenwood apparently has the potential.
Dalot apparently has the potential.
Heck even Lingard apparently still has the potential to be a Utd great.
It's fine having a few promising youngsters in there but our reliance on so many actually coming through is a concern.
Given the fact we are such a rich club we should just be buying the best proven talent out there and not relying on..........yes you guessed it, potential!