What truly worries me about Manchester United

Saffron

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Aug 28, 2018
Messages
693
Agree 100% with this!

As I mentioned in my post we are relying on players coming good which is not a good place for a club of Utd's stature to be in.

I'm glad you were brave enough to highlight Rashford's deficiencies, as a noob to the Caf I thought I'd better tread lightly.

When I hear people talk about Rashford, his potential and how young he is I immediately compare him to the likes of Owen, Fowler and Rooney. It was clear to see these players clearly had the ability from 18 years old and were proving it week in week out. Their skill levels and technical ability far surpassed that of Rashford's. Rashford has one decent game and because he plays for Utd he is hyped up beyond belief. Stick him in a mid table team and nobody would be talking about him.

In fact you could stick half of our players in a mid table team and they would not stand out imho.

Very few of our players if any would get into the current City or Liverpool teams at the moment. We need to start filling our team with proven quality and not relying on players to just 'come good'.
At the same time, it’s harder than ever to just ”buy quality”. Clubs are much better at resisting nowadays and putting ridiculous price tags on their stars with no genuine intention to sell. Madrid is facing the same problem. They can’t just go out and buy 4-5 Galacticos anymore.

That’s why it’s more important than ever to have a very cohesive vision and get players that truly fit that bill. Even very large clubs have to be extremely savvy in today’s market.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Penna

Golden Nugget

Full Member
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
2,235
I worry we’ve got a fan base so spoiled and moany that I can no longer enjoy coming on this forum because everyone is so over the top and knee jerk that any sensible opinions are hidden away.

I worry that we’ve got people demanding a DOF for our club, ignoring the fact that about twenty DOFs who were supposed to be the saviour of other clubs have flopped and left since this random obsesssion became a thing.

I worry that games away at Wolves with half the team returning from injury are seen as “easy” games that have people insulting half our squad.

I worry that our fans don’t “support” the club but just wear a United top, demand subs at half time in every game and make disparaging comments towards fringe players.

I worry that people think it’s ok to genuinely mock people like Scholes, Neville, Keane, Charlton and Fergie because they don’t agree with what they think.
Excellent post.
 

MackRobinson

New Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2017
Messages
5,134
Location
Terminal D
Supports
Football
Woodward criticism is fair, because as the CEO the buck ultimately stops with him. Maybe he's loved by the owners and shareholders for keeping the share price up, but as a supporter I don't think he's done a good job. It's not the "not spending enough" argument - if that was case, I'd say his pursestrings are tied and that's just that. The argument against Woodward "he's wasted too much money" and that's highlighted in his approach to manager recruitment (ignoring Moyes, but going from LVG to Mourinho is beyond ridiculous), to player recruitment (you can re-read the bullet points again) and the fact that there's no footballing continuity at the club once a manager goes. Certain players are United players regardless if the manager is Moyes, LVG or Mourinho. What happened instead is you've got a manager clearing the deck of existing squad, failing, and then you've got the subsequent manager doing the same. So you've got a lot of churn, a lot of squad-building, without strategic thinking.

Sir Alex was unique, but the club and the fanbase should move on from a system that worked uniquely for HIM. Instead we should aim for a system that is used successfully by all the big clubs in Europe. Unless we find a new Ferguson.
Like I said, you're just making the assumption he's in charge of player recruitment because he is an easy scapegoat. Most of the current squad was recruited by the last 3 managers.
 

MackRobinson

New Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2017
Messages
5,134
Location
Terminal D
Supports
Football
Liverpool and City have one and look where they are now, Chelsea had one but he left and their signings haven't been great since he's departure. Arsenal are also using a DOF going forward.
What about when Liverpool had Damien Comolli? Why does everyone ignore DOFs who ended up failing?

The DOF argument is nothing more than confirmation bias. It could work, but it doesn't ensure success.
 

Suedesi

Full Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2001
Messages
23,873
Location
New York City
Like I said, you're just making the assumption he's in charge of player recruitment because he is an easy scapegoat. Most of the current squad was recruited by the last 3 managers.
You're just proving my point which is if you hire three different managers with completely different philosophies such as Moyes, LVG and Mourinho you'll end up with a completely unbalanced squad. The recruitment should be done on behalf of the club, and Moyes, LVG, Mourinho, the next manager should work with the players at the club, and should be kept away from recruitment. That way when you fire LVG or Mourinho, you don't have to fire all the deadwood squad that's no longer required by the next man in charge.

Now the subsequent point is that the recruitment cannot be done by Woodward alone - so call it chief scout, call it football director, call it sporting director that's semantics.
 
Joined
Feb 12, 2018
Messages
19,788
What about when Liverpool had Damien Comolli? Why does everyone ignore DOFs who ended up failing?

The DOF argument is nothing more than confirmation bias. It could work, but it doesn't ensure success.
It's not about ensuring success it's about ensuring continuity. So that when a manager leaves after 2/3 years you don't need to rebuild the squad each time. Which is what we've done with Moyes, LVG and Mourhino.
 

GlastonSpur

Also disliked on an Aston Villa forum
Joined
Feb 4, 2007
Messages
17,716
Supports
Spurs
… call it chief scout, call it football director, call it sporting director that's semantics.
It isn't semantics. It's a question of pecking order: if you have a Chief Scout then likely they will report to the manager, but definitely not the other way around. If you have a DoF then things become more murky and complicated. And if the manager is subordinate to the DoF then the manager has less free rein and the potential for conflict increases a lot.

In my view, you either have full confidence in the manager or you don't. If you don't, then get rid and replace. If you do have full confidence, then leave them to have the final say, subject only to budget constraints, as to who they want to sign and who they don't.
 

roonster09

Hercule Poirot of the scouting world
Scout
Joined
May 10, 2009
Messages
36,722
It isn't semantics. It's a question of pecking order: if you have a Chief Scout then likely they will report to the manager, but definitely not the other way around. If you have a DoF then things become more murky and complicated. And if the manager is subordinate to the DoF then the manager has less free rein and the potential for conflict increases a lot.

In my view, you either have full confidence in the manager or you don't. If you don't, then get rid and replace. If you do have full confidence, then leave them to have the final say, subject only to budget constraints, as to who they want to sign and who they don't.
You think Liverpool, City don't have full confidence in Klopp and Pep? Having or not having final say on transfers has nothing to do with board's confidence in coach.

Almost every club in Italy, Spain, Germany works with DoF/Coach model, doesn't mean they don't have full confidence on coach.
 

roonster09

Hercule Poirot of the scouting world
Scout
Joined
May 10, 2009
Messages
36,722
As an example, when Sancho was at City, if United saw him as a long term major target for the club, tap him up, pay his agent £10m on the proviso he signs no more than a 3-year deal at Dortmund, then bid for him in 18-24 months when Dortmund are forced to sell.
No transfers ever worked like that, using this logic no player is a long term target of the big clubs.

Lewandowski to Bayern might be 1 example but argument would be, if he was long term signing, why did they wait till he was amazing at Dortmund instead of signing from Polish league?

We could have tapped up the player and ask him to run down the contract, but why would he do that when he can go to Dortmund and play almost every week and improve as a player? Also why would he sign lesser contract at Dortmund (which the club should agree too) when there is also a chance when it might go all wrong and end up one of those players who was star at youth team and not so good at Senior football, and end up playing in lower leagues with shit wages.
 
Last edited:

GlastonSpur

Also disliked on an Aston Villa forum
Joined
Feb 4, 2007
Messages
17,716
Supports
Spurs
You think Liverpool, City don't have full confidence in Klopp and Pep? Having or not having final say on transfers has nothing to do with board's confidence in coach.

Almost every club in Italy, Spain, Germany works with DoF/Coach model, doesn't mean they don't have full confidence on coach.
It depends on the formal nature of the relationship between the DoF and the manager. Is Klopp formally subordinate to their Dof? Is Pep? I doubt it.
 

roonster09

Hercule Poirot of the scouting world
Scout
Joined
May 10, 2009
Messages
36,722
It depends on the formal nature of the relationship between the DoF and the manager. Is Klopp formally subordinate to their Dof? Is Pep? I doubt it.
I was replying to this part. Having or not having full say on transfers has nothing to do with confidence on coach. Only in England (majorly) that manager is so involved in transfers. In most big clubs they are first team coaches and have designated team (who obviously works with manager/first team coach) for signing players.

In my view, you either have full confidence in the manager or you don't. If you don't, then get rid and replace. If you do have full confidence, then leave them to have the final say, subject only to budget constraints, as to who they want to sign and who they don't.
 

POF

Full Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2014
Messages
3,798
No transfers ever worked like that, using this logic no player is a long term target of the big clubs.

Lewandowski to Bayern might be 1 example but argument would be, if he was long term signing, why did they wait till he was amazing at Dortmund instead of signing from Polish league?

We could have tapped up the player and ask him to run down the contract, but why would he do that when he can go to Dortmund and play almost every week and improve as a player? Also why would he sign lesser contract at Dortmund (which the club should agree too) when there is also a chance when it might go all wrong and end up one of those players who was star at youth team and not so good at Senior football, and end up playing in lower leagues with shit wages.
It is extremely naive to think payments like this or arrangements like this don't happen. Zeki Fryers from United to Spurs happened in a similar way.

With the Lewandowski example, he wasn't playing regularly against Bayern Munich in youth football. Sancho should be really well known to everyone at United. United and City had a major rivalry at that level.

Maybe Sancho wouldn't want to be tapped up by United. That is of course a possibility. Maybe he wouldn't want a guaranteed big contract at United in 18-24 months. If he didn't, why would he want it now, 9 months later? Either way, if he is the one United want above anyone else in world football, it's better to get him for an up front sweetener + £50-60m than £150m or whatever is being quoted now.

If there's a possibility he's a 6 month wonder and will end up in non-league football, maybe they should go for someone else. My point is, for a player as visible to United, if they had a reasonable structure for recruitment and a genuine long term outlook, a 6 month spell in the Bundesliga should not make that much difference.

Certainly not enough to justify paying £150m for a player who has just moved for £8m.
 

roonster09

Hercule Poirot of the scouting world
Scout
Joined
May 10, 2009
Messages
36,722
It is extremely naive to think payments like this or arrangements like this don't happen. Zeki Fryers from United to Spurs happened in a similar way.

With the Lewandowski example, he wasn't playing regularly against Bayern Munich in youth football. Sancho should be really well known to everyone at United. United and City had a major rivalry at that level.

Maybe Sancho wouldn't want to be tapped up by United. That is of course a possibility. Maybe he wouldn't want a guaranteed big contract at United in 18-24 months. If he didn't, why would he want it now, 9 months later? Either way, if he is the one United want above anyone else in world football, it's better to get him for an up front sweetener + £50-60m than £150m or whatever is being quoted now.

If there's a possibility he's a 6 month wonder and will end up in non-league football, maybe they should go for someone else. My point is, for a player as visible to United, if they had a reasonable structure for recruitment and a genuine long term outlook, a 6 month spell in the Bundesliga should not make that much difference.

Certainly not enough to justify paying £150m for a player who has just moved for £8m.
And how did that end up for Fryers? Exactly the reason why players don't want to risk it. Their progression is never linear, there was a decent chance Sancho would have flopped or got a career ending injury, why would player want to sign a short term contract when he hasn't even made his name in senior football?

Transfers won't work that way, and that's just fantasy what you are talking about.

So teams like City, Barca, Bayern, Madrid have long term vision? Because it's easy to prove they don't with few of the transfers blunders.

Sancho was their player and they didn't give him chance.
Bayern sold their youth player Hummels to Dortmund and then signed him back for big money
Barca could have tapped up David Villa, David Silva and many other spanish players who played against their youth academy. Or they could have even retained players like Pique, Fabregas, Alba, Thiago by providing easy path to first team football.

These are all fantasies and works with 100% success rate when we have fixed numbers like in FM.

Spurs also tried hard to sign Sancho and failed to do so. Klopp admitted every english club wanted him but had no chance. It was so obvious why.

I agree that we lack the long term vision, I just disagree with Sancho example. Dortmund are not some shit club to agree to these arrangements.
 
Last edited:

Mr PG

Full Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2014
Messages
1,514
It’s a bit absurd to moan about the lack of Summer transfers in March to be honest. :lol:
Glazers aren’t spending anymore. Maybe £30m manolas and that’s it. Not after recent year outlays. They”ll wait see how the kids turn out.
 

ghagua

Full Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2012
Messages
5,992
My worry is that there seems to be no long term planning at this club. We are just reacting and not planning for the long term which is setting us up for long term failure. Look at the planning those Spanish guys at City are doing. Pep did not just decide to join them out of the blue, they had been planning to get him for years and started planning for him aturend the team.

We need to get Woody away from the footballing side and bring in professionals who know how to plan for the club's future. I would love to see VDS come in from Ajax and try and convince Marc Overmars to join him here. Set up the club to run how Ajax is run, from the youth team to the first team (with much more funds at their disposal) and integrate Nicky Butt in there who has been doing a great job running the youth teams and recruiting.

Sometimes the answer is not just about spending money which we have done over the last few years on players and managers, but long term thinking and planning will get results. I would still love to get Poc from Spurs if possible, otherwise I am perfectly fine with Ole getting the manager's job on a permanent basis.
 

9 Stone Elvis

Full Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2018
Messages
377
Location
Scotland
we've spent 400m on transfers and we've got one of the highest salary bill in football with so little to show for. Most of our top players are heading towards the end of their contract, we're struggling to attract the players we need and some of the utter stupidity made throughout the past 6 years border to the hilarious. I mean, who on earth would buy a player for more money on deadline day when just few days before we could have activated the minimum clause fee and get him for cheaper?

Woodward is great in making money. He's horrible in spending it. He needs help on the football side.
1) We don't know we are struggling to attract the players we need. People are quick to point to players as failures but I repeat, many were happy with most of the signings at the time. We have demonstrated with our recent upturn in performance the perhaps it was the managers that were the issue rather than the signings.
2) We can only blame Woodward if Woodward is choosing the players. If he isn't and the names are coming from the manager(s) then he is doing a decent job IMO. We have broken transfer records, and secured players from top clubs. If however Woodward is selecting the targets himself then of course that is a different matter but I have my doubts that that's the case.
3) Fellaini was down to Dithering Dave IMO rather than Woodward but regardless it was 6 years ago when he had just come into the role, I really don't think its a stick to beat him with in 2019 given the number of players signed since.

Im actually not a fan of Woodward, Im pretty neutral to him really, he just seems to have become a bit of a scapegoat for things that may well be outwit his remit. As far as Im concerned we have employed our last two managers, taken a hands off approach and backed them with large sums in the transfer market. That is a pretty sweet deal for whoever is in the job.
 

GlastonSpur

Also disliked on an Aston Villa forum
Joined
Feb 4, 2007
Messages
17,716
Supports
Spurs
I was replying to this part. Having or not having full say on transfers has nothing to do with confidence on coach. Only in England (majorly) that manager is so involved in transfers. In most big clubs they are first team coaches and have designated team (who obviously works with manager/first team coach) for signing players.

In my view, you either have full confidence in the manager or you don't. If you don't, then get rid and replace. If you do have full confidence, then leave them to have the final say, subject only to budget constraints, as to who they want to sign and who they don't.
This is exactly the set-up at Spurs, where the 'designated team' consists of Levy, Pochettino and John McDermott (Academy Head), drawing on reports from our Head Scout.

However, the crucial question is who (within budget constraints set by the club chair) has the final say on player ins and outs. At Spurs it's Pochettino. But if it's not the team manager/coach who has this final say then you're setting up for conflict and the risk that players will be foisted on - or taken away from - the manager/coach against his wishes.

It's all very well talking about continuity of transfer approach - via having a DoF - beyond any current manager, but what about continuity of hanging onto a good manager/coach if the appointment of a DoF leads to conflict and the manager/coach wanting to leave?.
 

Bestietom

Full Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2013
Messages
8,021
Location
Ireland
If a DOF means getting Woodward out of the way, then yes I would be all for it. This club needs to have a wage structure as well as a knowledgeable DOF to negotiate transfers and wages. We just need to keep Woodward away from this, and let him carry on with money making promotions etc.

We have a way to go to catch up with the top teams and it will take a few transfer windows. I feel a DOF should already be in place NOW if we intend to go this way.
 

Suedesi

Full Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2001
Messages
23,873
Location
New York City
You think Liverpool, City don't have full confidence in Klopp and Pep? Having or not having final say on transfers has nothing to do with board's confidence in coach.

Almost every club in Italy, Spain, Germany works with DoF/Coach model, doesn't mean they don't have full confidence on coach.
Exactly, this point. Mourinho's most successful season in charge for example has been when Marco Branca delivered Milito, Eto'o, Sneijder, Motta, Lucio and Pandev to the team. This idea that the manager should coach, run tactics, organize transfers, talk to agents, negotiate fees etc is outdated and doesn't really happen in modern clubs.
 

roonster09

Hercule Poirot of the scouting world
Scout
Joined
May 10, 2009
Messages
36,722
Exactly, this point. Mourinho's most successful season in charge for example has been when Marco Branca delivered Milito, Eto'o, Sneijder, Motta, Lucio and Pandev to the team. This idea that the manager should coach, run tactics, organize transfers, talk to agents, negotiate fees etc is outdated and doesn't really happen in modern clubs.
Yeah, we need to find balance and proper DoF who works with coach rather than acting all like dictator and trying to be the star of the show. We need someone like the guy at Liverpool who barely makes news but drives the team really well.
 

roonster09

Hercule Poirot of the scouting world
Scout
Joined
May 10, 2009
Messages
36,722
This is exactly the set-up at Spurs, where the 'designated team' consists of Levy, Pochettino and John McDermott (Academy Head), drawing on reports from our Head Scout.

However, the crucial question is who (within budget constraints set by the club chair) has the final say on player ins and outs. At Spurs it's Pochettino. But if it's not the team manager/coach who has this final say then you're setting up for conflict and the risk that players will be foisted on - or taken away from - the manager/coach against his wishes.

It's all very well talking about continuity of transfer approach - via having a DoF - beyond any current manager, but what about continuity of hanging onto a good manager/coach if the appointment of a DoF leads to conflict and the manager/coach wanting to leave?.
I'm not arguing about the structure. Different clubs prefer different structure and most of them are successful with their methods. I was talking about having final say has nothing to do with confidence of the board on the coach.

Obviously the best structure is where coach and DoF (or anyone responsible for transfers) work together as a team and agree to disagreements, get on with the job.
 

ghagua

Full Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2012
Messages
5,992
Actually people should be worried. I know the transfer period has not started yet, but other top clubs are snatching up talent throughout the season. We are a proper club waiting for the transfer season to start and then go in waving our money and paying over the top fees.
 

roseguy64

Full Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2010
Messages
12,218
Location
Jamaica
Actually people should be worried. I know the transfer period has not started yet, but other top clubs are snatching up talent throughout the season. We are a proper club waiting for the transfer season to start and then go in waving our money and paying over the top fees.
Yeah we do no transfer work before. All the people we employ for that just sit idly waiting until the windows open to begin work.
 

ravelston

Full Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2010
Messages
2,624
Location
Boston - the one in the States
Clubs who need far less signings then us and aren't restricted with this moronic transfer deadline had already started signing players
Not really - they either agreed deals during the January window with players that are going to be out of contract in the summer, or they bought players in that window and loaned them back to the selling club. Those are both things we could have done if we'd wanted to. Our windows, like everyone else's conform to the FIFA requirement of 12 weeks pre season and 4 weeks mid season. We, like Italy, have chosen to end ours before the first game (which happens to be earlier than anybody else), but it's still the standard 12 weeks.
 

TsuWave

Full Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2013
Messages
14,280
while other clubs are chasing upcoming talent like De Ligt, according to reports, we are facing a summer of fighting to keep the little talent we have (De Gea, Pogba)
 

ghagua

Full Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2012
Messages
5,992
Yeah we do no transfer work before. All the people we employ for that just sit idly waiting until the windows open to begin work.
Too idiotic a response to even give you a proper answer. Need a person with a few brain cells to understand.
 

Xaviesta

Full Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2014
Messages
11,791
Location
Camp Nou
Supports
Barcelona
There's plenty of clubs that don't have a DoF and run smoothly, is it as big of a necessity as what everyone claims?
I don't have a strong opinion either way. United were fine without one while Ferguson was in charge but maybe it's worth exploring given their struggles since Ferguson retired.
 

TRUERED89

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jan 23, 2019
Messages
2,366
Location
England
I don't have a strong opinion either way. United were fine without one while Ferguson was in charge but maybe it's worth exploring given their struggles since Ferguson retired.
How long have Barca been operating with a Dof? I know City took one of the previous ones..
 

passing-wind

Full Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2013
Messages
3,041
We need a director of football, so that the vice chairman does his commercial role and stays away from implementing football decisions that end up costing us in the long run.

I keep seeing posts saying that a DOF wouldn't help our transfer strategy :houllier:, maybe those same people should research the typical role they occupy.