I like the Motta idea purely because it’s not bloody obvious .
Who replaces Ten Hag?
- Thread starter Plant0x84
- Start date
I think it would be a very INEOS move.
Indeed, regardless of whether we can get one of the worlds top 5 coaches. We need a change and someone who can at the very least get us playing some sort of coherent style of football.
We should never be afraid to change a manager that isn't working just because the next guy might be no better.
Imagine if we took that attitude with players.
"We might as well keep Antony, we can't sign Saka or Foden. If we sign someone else they might be a flop like Antony."
You think he's ready for that "jump" from Bologna to United ?
I also think that Juve will want him instead of Allegri
How do you define 'ready'
As far as you can know anything as a fact in football. Should we bring in Steve Bruce, or Big Sam, or Neil Lennon? Because we don't know anything as a 'fact' until we put them in place and let it run its course. But what we can do, is look at what they have done in the past and give an assessment on how likely they are too succeed.
Klopp for instance, there's a high percentage he would succeed at United if in an alternative universe he was coming into OT next season. However there's certainly no guarantees.
Potter - It's a huge risk and how he dealt with Chelsea would suggest there's a high percentage of failure.
It's not difficult.
So basically after Liverpool, Barca and Bayarn pick the best of what's available, we'll be left with the scraps and we should take those scraps because it's better than ETH?
If ETH isn't good enough, but the options available are also not good enough, why bother paying out compensation to ETH and his coaching staff to bring in another manager that's not good enough? This is the problem with our fan base, little patience. I would rather wait our time and get a manager that has the potential to get United back the promise land. Not another manager before the next one.
You say its a big risk, but it's a lesser sized risk than bringing in a Potter or De Zerbi or Southgate. We bring in a new manager that isn't good enough and they're here for 2/3 seasons. ETH is out of contract next year. By being patient we could lose 1 year in progress, but by going for any old manager will do to get ETH out we would be facing another 2/3 years of lost progress.
Can I also make it clear, if a suitable manager does become available i'm open for change. My gripe is the managers mentioned as being the leading contenders as I see no decent future with any of them.
I'm genuinely really excited by that thinking and could absolutely get behind that.
The irony is strong here.
If he's the right guy moving forward he's the right guy after the euros
I'm not sure but I'd lean towards probably not. He's a known quantity in Italy and a short stint in Ukraine and a very, very up-and-down time at Brighton don't add much to his body of work at Sassualo, which in itself was impressive in fairness.
Yes there needs to be compromise if we go with another manager, but I think people wanting De Zerbi seem to not be fully aware that one of the 'compromises' there is that he's won two league games since December. Does that seem like an outstanding candidate? Will a run like that be tolerated here? If Brighton were a bigger club, would the narrative now be that he has been 'found out'?
I find it odd that you'd use the past 8 league games to determine whether or not a candidate is outstanding or not. Seems rather arbitrary. Regardless, 2 wins, 3 draws and 3 losses. That's.. fine? Why would that be definitive evidence of anything? Some bad losses to Fulham and Luton in there, but it's Brighton.
Also, a 'very, very up and down time at Brighton' is a crazy characterisation of his time there. It's been a success by basically every metric? European finish last season with 4th most goals scored, FA Cup semi, overseen a rebuild in the summer and navigated it well enough. Still a fair bit of the season to go, but it's no wonder he's been touted as a potential Pep/Klopp replacement.
Page 115. It's a sign. Welcome Pep Guardiola
I'm sure he'd say differently publicly, but I would bet he'd take it too if justice prevailed and city got relegated to league 2. Then United offered him the job. Same for a bunch of their players. I don't sense genuine loyalty. Not that our players wouldn't do the same if the tables were turned.
I'm sure he'd say differently publicly, but I would bet he'd take it too if justice prevailed and city got relegated to league 2. Then United offered him the job. Same for a bunch of their players. I don't sense genuine loyalty. Not that our players wouldn't do the same if the tables were turned.
Brighton won 5 of their opening 6 games and have since won 5 of the following 21.
If anything, he did De Zerbi a favour only looking at it from December.
Bald.fraud can feck off
So 10 in 27. Again, that's not particularly worthy of note either way? With a manager from Brighton (again, it's fecking Brighton), you're looking at the bigger picture and whether or not they've shown enough to suggest they're capable of stepping up, and able to bring their style of play to a bigger club (which ten Hag has drastically failed to do).
Linked to de zerbi & Southgate…. Not exactly inspiring
Depends how much stock you put in the opening games.
Regardless, I doubt Dr Zerbi is having much more luck than Ten Hag managing us.
Eh?!
Hard to imagine he'd do much worse than ten Hag has done this season. At some point, you have to draw a line somewhere. The results and performances have both been unacceptable. It's really as simple as that.
We've got a run of form over six games and a run of form over 21 games that look very distinct from one another.
Which is more representative of De Zerbi?
He might not have done worse than Ten Hag. I also think it's unlikely he'd have faired noticeably better.
Is he ready for the jump from Bologna to Juventus?
I think Italian managers historically do well in the PL. Fergie has warped the figures but in second place behind Scotland's 13, Italians have won 4 PL's.
It sounds like the links are mostly coming from their side, not ours.
You'd think from the way some go on that because we may not get a currently elite manager - i.e. Klopp or Pep, we may as well stick with what we have.
Those two are not the nadir of managers. There are others out there who will become elite and that's what the club should be looking for. If the right process for recruitment is in place we should be able to consider who they're likely to be. On the available evidence, Ten Hag doesn't look like he's going to be up to scratch.
If Ten Hag goes, and assuming the right structure is in place, then there should be plenty of options. It seems under a new structure the manager is essentially going to be a first team coach and as such, it makes it easier to move on from them without having to recycle three quarters of the squad. Might seem counter-intuitive to many fans of a club who had one man at the helm forever, but that's how modern football is.
I find it really weird you'd break down his suitability by stretches of games. Maybe last season is more representative of De Zerbi? Or maybe we should look at the entirety of his body of work at Brighton (which includes cup games, which bizarrely get omitted) and beyond.
I disagree. We are currently doing worse than the Ole/Rangnick meltdown season. If that's how lowly you see De Zerbi as a manager, there isn't much of a conversation to be had.
I'd take him off their hands in a heartbeat. 0.01% chance he's make the move now but if I were INEOS, I'd make the enquiry. I think their staff will abandon ship eventually if they sense they're going to get done in court.
I'd also make a sneaky call to Klopp. Again, not going to happen. But i'd ask the question. United will be the most formidable club in the World again once it wakes up from this Glazer-induced coma. Need to start acting like it and believing we can get who we want from wherever we want.
That'd be interesting. His stock is definitely high now, he's very young too.
The thing about De Zerbi at Brighton, results have not been particularly impressive in recent months but most times when I watch them play they turn up and look quite OK, even in the last game they lost 3-0 at Fulham they still created many chances and could have snatched a draw or a win. It's quite clear that a) he's missing personnel as they've been ravaged by injuries, b) not adequately replacing their midfield is a major hindrance. It's easy to see them going from here to a much better place if they just address their key team building issues because foundations are there and they are clearly seen on the pitch (which is not happening at United).
We need the best possible manager who can implement the style and philosophy that the board wants. If they decide that ETH isn't suited to doing that, we are far better off going for another manager that is, even if that manager ultimately isn't good enough and needs to be replaced in another year or two. When we then bring in our 'first choice' in one or two years, he will then find it much easier to implement what he wants if the playing squad have spent that time playing and being trained in a similar style. But there's no such thing as a sure thing when it comes to managers (except maybe Guardiola with a huge chequebook), so the first guy might actually step up and be truly successful after all.
Of course, the board may very well decide that ETH is suitable for doing that, and we just haven't seen it yet because of the demands and restrictions put upon him by the previous mob. That's up to them to decide.
Last edited:
If we replace Ten Hag it certainly should not be a manager who failed at a big club recently or has a playstyle that will be hugely unpopular.
Then there are a few that are just not good enough. Like Xavi.
We need to get it right or wait. Besides, there are precedents of managers struggling badly and then turning it around and winning the league.
Then there are a few that are just not good enough. Like Xavi.
We need to get it right or wait. Besides, there are precedents of managers struggling badly and then turning it around and winning the league.
Are there precedents of managers struggling badly then winning the league? I can’t think of many that have done as badly as ETH this season before winning the Premier League.
In terms of getting it right; if we get the system above the manager right, then we should be able to move on from managers more easily without having to ever fully buy into them. We need to move on from reinventing the wheel each time we sack a a manager.
I think someone like De Zerbi could 100% pick up from where ETH leaves off and progress us.
Can he win 6 times in a row with Ipswich Town though?
Ten Hag is gone as soon as we can't qualify for the Champions League, let's be honest.
There seem to be a fair few solid if not standout replacement options (realistically), so I mainly just don't want us to appear desperate as we did when getting ten Hag. It'll be up to the new backroom hires to do their jobs and interview well, and not pay over the odds in contracts or compensation. I like Nagelsmann but not enough that if Newcastle are offering silly money I'd want us to match it.
There seem to be a fair few solid if not standout replacement options (realistically), so I mainly just don't want us to appear desperate as we did when getting ten Hag. It'll be up to the new backroom hires to do their jobs and interview well, and not pay over the odds in contracts or compensation. I like Nagelsmann but not enough that if Newcastle are offering silly money I'd want us to match it.
EtH signed a 3 year contract correct?
So I'd give him until Christmas, then either offer an extension or agree to part ways at the end of next season.
The managers position needs to become less important at the club, but you run the risk of INEOS changing absolutely everything outside the players, and it's back to Clean Slate FC for the 24/25 season.
So I'd give him until Christmas, then either offer an extension or agree to part ways at the end of next season.
The managers position needs to become less important at the club, but you run the risk of INEOS changing absolutely everything outside the players, and it's back to Clean Slate FC for the 24/25 season.
There's literally none. All look a bigger risk than ten hag did before he joined.
Yeah because hiring a young potentially good manager is the same as hiring guys in their 60s who were never top managers at any point.
I'd actually agree there is a huge risk Potter would fail. But we already have a manager in place who's failing.
It's pretty clear at this stage he isn't good enough though. We're on course for our worst season since the 70s.
I used to be firmly in the give managers time camp. But I've come to believe the biggest problem for United post SAF is we give failing managers too much time. Moyes, Jose and Ole should have been sacked before they were.
A lot of our fans fall into this trap as well. Myself included until recently.
Last edited:
They're a lot of good candidates. Ten Haag on evidence of his United performance is not better than them. A bigger risk would be to know how poor Ten Haag has been and keep him due to fear of the unguaranteed. Superstar managers don't just arrive, they are made by their performances at big clubs. We gave Ten Haag that opportunity, he failed, so it's time for us to give someone else that opportunity
Ten Hag came in with a stronger pedigree than those managers, so there is nothing to suggest they will necessarily out perform him once burdened with the expectation.
Our united performances this season has context to be added. Last season he got us top 3, 2 finals and 1 cup. I wouldn't say its unreasonable to say none of those candidates would better that in year 1, at best perhaps match it.
Ten Hag has also never had teams playing so openly in his career, so it's all the more reason to put this season down to a range of factors contributing more than poor coaching.
We're realistically going to be keeping a clear majority of our players. I don't see it as much from a "this player needs to go" perspective, more one where signing a good player in literally any position would be an improvement over what we have, so halfway competent squad building should avoid the "clean slate" thing anyway. We need quality everywhere.
That's conflating risk with result. Obviously we can't attach clear values to football managers but conceptually, something can have a 10% risk of failure and fail, and something can have a 20% risk of failure and succeed. If we've come to the conclusion that ten Hag has failed (and I'm not as anti as most people, but can't look past the evidence that our results are bad and the performances are arguably even worse, after two years), then the only logical thing to do is try someone else. It's unacceptable at this point to be as poor on the ball as we are.
I certainly think the club have failed, but I am of the opinion that Ten Hag's value is maximized under a better structure, and that value has a greater ceiling than the other candidates.
I also point to the fact that he still very much has the dressing room behind him, running for him etc. which suggests that there is still unity behind him as a coach. Normally when a manager is sacked the players effort levels become a leading indicator.
There is no risk of failure with Ten Hag, he has already failed.
If you have an unreliable car, why would you go out and buy another one? Makes no sense. You'd wait until the right car came up rather than bouncing from 1 unreliable car to another.
Potter has already had a huge job with over half a billion spent at the time and failed. No chance he can succeed at United.
As I've said already, unless we start being linked seriously to managers with the potential to bring united to the top, I don't see the point in changing.