Why do United fans seem to hate squad depth?

[Rolaholic]

Year in and year out since Fergie retired it's felt as if a fair share of United fans have something against having more than 1 or 2 good players. It's either that or we love pitting them against each other.

Just over the last few weeks I can't count the amount of times I've come across variations of the following:

• “Rashford or Martial”
• "We should get rid of Shaw since Williams seems capable of doing a job"
• “Greenwood is playing well I don’t really know if we need Sancho”
• “Look at how well we’re playing without Pogba, we don’t really need him so he can bugger off”
• “Who needs Pogba or Grealish when we have Bruno?”

It kind of does my head in tbh

It seems while fans of other big clubs constantly seem to bemoan their lack of depth and always want to add more talent while we seem to be fine settling on 'A or B' as if that's brought us anywhere close to challenging the last few years.

Wanting more squad depth isn't necessarily always an indictment on the players we currently have or a detriment to them. In fact it's quite the opposite, more solid players usually makes the talent you already have shine or raise their games a level or 2. The best sides that win silverware consistently always have multiple good options for most positions and can survive competing in multiple competitions at once even in the event of injuries as a direct result of that depth.

I feel like that's exactly what we should be aiming towards getting back to not unlike the great squads of yesteryear that we used to have under Fergie instead of always pushing back against the idea.

 

[AneRu]

Usually it's not about hating squad depth but being concerned about misplaced priorities. For example, I don't think it makes sense to spend circa £60m on Grealish and the fail to sign Sancho because of a difference of £20m in valuation between the clubs or fail to adequately replace Matic in time because you have signed player to compete against Rashford and Fernandes.

But if we are doing it from a position of strength then it's alright but where we are right now we actually need to sign two starters and Matic's understudy and eventual replacement just to have a team that can comfortably finish in the top three. If we achieve that then by all means let's sign Haaland to compete with Martial.

 

[flappyjay]

Usually it's not about hating squad depth but being concerned about misplaced priorities. For example, I don't think it makes sense to spend circa £60m on Grealish and the fail to sign Sancho because of a difference of £20m in valuation between the clubs or fail to adequately replace Matic in time because you have signed player to compete against Rashford and Fernandes.

But if we are doing it from a position of strength then it's alright but where we are right now we actually need to sign two starters and Matic's understudy and eventual replacement just to have a team that can comfortably finish in the top three. If we achieve that then by all means let's sign Haaland to compete with Martial.

Absolutely this. It's like a couple of years ago when we got Sanchez, we had 3 good left wingers and no right winger at all. Put out a strong balanced first 11 before contemplating depth and competition.

 

[Rolaholic]

Absolutely this. It's like a couple of years ago when we got Sanchez, we had 3 good left wingers and no right winger at all. Put out a strong balanced first 11 before contemplating depth and competition.

I abvsoluitely agree that areas of need have to be addressed but that's where my point comes in, I've seen arguments against signing a starting RW since Greenwood has started looking really good there and people will point to him and James as signs of looking to add elsewhere where I'm not fully comfortable relying solely on either 2 U-23's to provide enough there for us to challenge for silverware. That position has been a black hole for almost a decade, a quality starter is well overdo and would only help with Greenwoods development with less pressure on him to be perfect at 18.

Seen the same thing regarding Matic's longterm successor (which I agree needs to be invested in) and arguments about Fred and McTom being able to play there already.

 

[acnumber9]

Some people just don’t want to see their favourites replaced.

 

[Maticmaker]

Having the right squad in terms of size and balance is essential, but for many fans discussion on individual players frequently gets caught up with the TV pundits favourite saying about United managers over recent years... " does he/does he not know his best X1"?

I think the team which started against Brighton is currently our best X1, and is well supported by Romero, Williams, McTominay, Fred, James and Oghalo, the rest are suspect for one reason or another and whilst still maybe able to do a job for us, it will be only on specific occasions, and Ole will never know exactly what he will get. Therefore by the above reasoning we have an acceptable First team squad of around 17 and a few likely looking youngsters outside that group.... not enough!

 

[Web of Bissaka]

Don't you know, football is only 11 players

 

[Web of Bissaka]

Just over the last few weeks I can't count the amount of times I've come across variations of the following:

• “Rashford or Martial”
• "We should get rid of Shaw since Williams seems capable of doing a job"
• “Greenwood is playing well I don’t really know if we need Sancho”
• “Look at how well we’re playing without Pogba, we don’t really need him so he can bugger off”
• “Who needs Pogba or Grealish when we have Bruno?”

It kind of does my head in tbh

Contexts need to be considered though.

While I agree the other four there is just bizarre having all of those players makes our squad stronger. Same with VDB.

The Greenwood and Sancho one -- you do know players left because of limited playing opportunities, starter senior players in front of him and manager's favoritism/decisions no? Do you not remember how many players especially our young players left because of those eg. Pogba, Pique, Rossi, etc etc. I wouldn't feel surprise Gomes left because similarly he cannot trust Ole. Greenwood's recent insta post to Gomes is also interesting.

Anyway point is, won't surprise me if Greenwood left because a new expensive player has arrived in the future, and he wasn't given enough number of games. Plus, so far, his only position is RW isn't it. Ole never used him as CF anymore ever since Ighalo arrived. After Ighalo's loan ended, it's likely we'll get another experienced striker, coupled that we should get a new RW at that time, so less playing times for Greenwood.

Everything is fine if manager actually gave fair competitions always to players. Doesn't always happen now isn't it. Pre-Bruno #10 situation is just bizarre this season.

 

[UNITED ACADEMY]

I abvsoluitely agree that areas of need have to be addressed but that's where my point comes in, I've seen arguments against signing a starting RW since Greenwood has started looking really good there and people will point to him and James as signs of looking to add elsewhere where I'm not fully comfortable relying solely on either 2 U-23's to provide enough there for us to challenge for silverware. That position has been a black hole for almost a decade, a quality starter is well overdo and would only help with Greenwoods development with less pressure on him to be perfect at 18.

Seen the same thing regarding Matic's longterm successor (which I agree needs to be invested in) and arguments about Fred and McTom being able to play there already.

You do realised those people aren't the same people right?

You don't need to have another exact 11 players to cover your starting XI. There is still a way to rest your key players or cover your injured players without having the exact 11 backup to maintain the balance.

For example, Fred is pretty much already considered as depth squad for Pogba while Pogba is already considered as depth squad for Bruno. Sancho can be considered as depth squad for Rashford and also additional of creativity in the team if people are worry about lacking of creativity if one of Pogba & Bruno got injured. Look at Barcelona team over the past years, they never have a big squad. They have a player who can cover multiple position.

At this moment we'll need to use the money wisely. If we really need cover then we'll sign the player for example Ighalo, if we don't really need it then we can put it on hold and concentrate on the ones we need the most.

 

[romufc]

Anyway point is, won't surprise me if Greenwood left because a new expensive player has arrived in the future, and he wasn't given enough number of games

He is 18, Ole has given him so much confidence, no way he just leaves. I am sure even Greenwood will understand because he is not a RW. Having 4 players in 3 positions will not starve anyone of games.

If we get CL, can you tell me that Martial, Rashford and Greenwood will all be fit for the entire season? This season we rested them for the EL games.

Greenwood will easily get 30/40 games even if we signed Sancho.

We cannot rotate because the quality at the moment is not good enough.

 

[JPRouve]

Sancho or Grealish are the more baffling to me because signing only one of them would help us cover 5 positions.

- Greenwood could cover Martial or start on the right or upfront.
- Martial could start on the left, upfront or cover each positions.
- Sancho could start or cover LW, AM and RW. Same for Grealish.
- Bruno could on occasion cover for Pogba at the CM position while Sancho/Grealish plays in his stead as AM.
- Rashford could cover or start at the striker and lef winger positions.

Adding Sancho or Grealish would allow us to always have quality options in almost all attacking positions every week regardless of form, injuries, suspensions, fatigue or tactical choices. I would argue that it's a must and that all these players would play a lot of football each seasons if we are good in all competitions.

 

[Vidyoyo]

Dunno. I personally don't mind having players like ever-criticised Pereira waiting in the wings. Not on a lot of money. Good enough for cup games. Etc.

Add James, Bailly, Dalot, Greenwood, Grant, Williams, Matic, Ighalo to this list.

Only issue is Lingard because he's on stupid money for the role he plays. Happy to replace him with Grealish (but would he be happy with rotation?).

The more I think about it, our squad depth is great. We're probably only another RW away from having a stacked team.

Edit: Don't think this is what you mean but hey-ho.

 

[romufc]

I would argue that it's a must and that all these players would play a lot of football each seasons if we are good in all competitions.

I agree, I do not buy the story of "not enough game time". We will have 38 PL games 6 CL games Fa cup and League cup games.

out of 50 games, I would say they play 30/40 games each. Imagine going into a CL away game playing Pogba, Bruno, Martial, Sancho Rashford and knowing the PL game on the weekend you can have Grealish and Greenwood starting.

This will not only bolster our chances to go further in competitions but reduce the risk of injuries.

 

[tenpoless]

Afraid to hinder players' development.
But never actually considered injuries and overplaying young players, which in fact, would hinder their development.

 

[JPRouve]

I agree, I do not buy the story of "not enough game time". We will have 38 PL games 6 CL games Fa cup and League cup games.

out of 50 games, I would say they play 30/40 games each. Imagine going into a CL away game playing Pogba, Bruno, Martial, Sancho Rashford and knowing the PL game on the weekend you can have Grealish and Greenwood starting.

This will not only bolster our chances to go further in competitions but reduce the risk of injuries.

I wouldn't have Sancho and Grealish because it's not cost-effective but I would try to get someone cheaper who is more promising than James.

 

[romufc]

I wouldn't have Sancho and Grealish because it's not cost-effective but I would try to get someone cheaper who is more promising than James.

Sancho and Grealish was an example. I think Sancho is a must and Grealish if we can get him for £40m or less. If not, we need to find someone who will be of similar quality and can play 3/4 positions.

 

[van Persie]

Why? Because we have learned that our youth usually play that role and it's been like that through the entire history of Manchester United basically. We like homegrown players. We have plenty of youngsters coming through and they should get the chance to make their way into United.

 

[Dan_F]

Hasn’t Andreas played over 30 games this year? We have plenty of space in the squad considering we could clear him, Mata and Lingard who must have played well over 60 between them.

 

[RedDevil@84]

Part of the problem is in the world of agents and hype and media, it is difficult to keep multiple top talents happy in the team. There will be a constant drama about how a player is wasting his talent competing for spots at United, when he could join team X or Team Y and be a top dog there. Now if we were a constant CL challenging team, many so called talents will be expected to ignore the constant rant from agents and media, because they can't be in a better place. But our last 7 years have diminished our value in the market (perceived value at least).

Another problem is that now everyone has the money and all talents are expecting high wages. Many of the so called talents are ready to go to teams that were never considered top dogs before because they pay well. And United has a reputation of paying over the odds for average players. So the club will have to shell out lot of money to keep everyone happy and have that kind of competition for every spot.

 

[RedRonaldo]

Its more about the balance of the squad, we don't want to have another situation like Rashford vs Martial vs Sanchez fighting for one left wing forward role, giving us an impressive squad depth on the left, while leaving our right wing as a big black hole.

 

[noodlehair]

Does anyone actually "hate" squad depth?

I mean it's a bit like saying people hate having a choice of different foods to eat. They probably don't, really.

 

[afrocentricity]

I've been sayng this for over a decade on here. It's always clear out the deadwood, sack frogie sell goggs...

 

[Fletchageddon]

Football isn't 11 v 11 anymore. Especially with the 5 subs rule, which I imagine will continue after the COvid stuff dies down.

Being subbed or benched isn't a massive snub or statement anymore. You need to have 2 players in each position who are near each other in terms of ability. The league has changed in the sense you can't lose matches anymore so you need a consistent level in your squad to compete on all fronts.

 

[Skills]

Buying depth for the sake of depth is stupid. Improve your first team by replacing the weakest links and relegating them to the bench.

 

[BenitoSTARR]

Improve the starting XI and demote previous starters to squad players unless they are on ridiculous wages.

I don’t think anyone doesn’t want depth what people don’t want is frivolous spending on players without addressing what they perceive to be the priority.

Fortunately everyone agrees on Sancho but then beyond that the dissenters of “depth” players don’t want to jeopardise a move for the top target.

For example signing Sancho solves RW and offers depth at CAM and LW which in some eyes negated then need for Grealish particularly at £50m+ fees.

People will always disagree on which player they want or what the priority is but with unlimited funds of course depth is lovely. It’s just hard to justify buying a another kettle if your electricity isn’t working fully yet.

 

[limerickcitykid]

Buying depth for the sake of depth is stupid. Improve your first team by replacing the weakest links and relegating them to the bench.

So we just have to do without any depth for Pogba and Bruno then? Since it doesn’t fall under your arbitrary specific guidelines. Literally doesn’t make any sense. We need depth for Bruno and Pogba so we have someone to actually create anything when they are out. We don’t need to replace them, we need to replace the depth.

 

[SteveW]

Inability to consider different scenarios. We will have injuries. Currently injuries have dire effects due to the crap subs. So we need more good options.

Sancho and Grealish would give us the depth we need in attack imo. We have more than enough games for them.

 

[Annihilate Now!]

So we just have to do without any depth for Pogba and Bruno then? Since it doesn’t fall under your arbitrary specific guidelines. Literally doesn’t make any sense. We need depth for Bruno and Pogba so we have someone to actually create anything when they are out. We don’t need to replace them, we need to replace the depth.

But no team in the world caters for a scenario where there two best players get injured... Especially when they both play in the same position.

I said this in another thread, but our current second XI quite easily matches up very well with any second XI in the league... And it'll only get better if we sign one or two players in the Summer.

 

[limerickcitykid]

But no team in the world caters for a scenario where there two best players get injured... Especially when they both play in the same position.

I said this in another thread, but our current second XI quite easily matches up very well with any second XI in the league... And it'll only get better if we sign one or two players in the Summer.

Having depth doesn’t cater to having two injuries at once. What happens when Bruno is out? Back to the same as what we’ve had for the past years that has been nowhere near good enough? Who is replacing Pogba or Bruno? Fred? A guy who hasn’t scored or assisted in the league all season? That’s good enough for you? It’s like people are happy to never win the league again.

Our second XI doesn’t match to City at all. Our second XI would struggle to ever score a goal, and they have every time we’ve tried to rely on them.

 

[Bilbo]

The issue we have, being United, is that players will cost us a premium price, so bringing in players merely as backup doesn't really work. What we see, or want to see, as squad depth are players that we can bring in that won't significantly lower the quality of the team. In other words, high class players.

Grealish would be a fine example of that. Villa will want £60m for a player that really is only worth £30-35m IMO, so for me we are better to continue to focus on bringing in first team players and try to bring through players from our youth system to round out the squad.

Greenwood and Williams would probably cost us in excess of £50m for the pair if we were to buy them from other clubs. Obviously we won't always have that quality coming through, so its a huge bonus when we do, but realistically its very difficult for us to go out and get adequate cover at a price that we could consider value for money.

 

[Annihilate Now!]

Having depth doesn’t cater to having two injuries at once. What happens when Bruno is out? Back to the same as what we’ve had for the past years that has been nowhere near good enough? Who is replacing Pogba or Bruno? Fred? A guy who hasn’t scored or assisted in the league all season? That’s good enough for you? It’s like people are happy to never win the league again.

Our second XI doesn’t match to City at all. Our second XI would struggle to ever score a goal, and they have every time we’ve tried to rely on them.

But what happens to Liverpool if Salah and Mane get injured? Or City if KDB and Sterling get injured? They'd be fecked too... No club anywhere expects to be anywhere near as good with their 2 best players out.

Besides, at least we'd have Mason, Rashford and Martial to do stuff...

And Cities second XI midfield is strong (something like Rodri / Gundogan and one of the Silva twins) But their defence is shocking and their attack is good (depending on how it rate Jesus) , but a team without KDB and Sterling is instantly a bit meh.

But even if you have City... Our second XI is still comparable to Liverpool's, Chelsea's, Spurs etc.

 

[bsCallout]

I'm not against squad depth, nor about having top back up options but I don't think it generally works in reality.

There are very few teams, if any, that have ever had a very good back up 'team'. Most teams have their first 11, a few key subs, and then the rest that can do a job. The important thing is having a way of playing, and a good enough first 11, that any average player can come in a it doesn't screw everything up.

Liverpool certainly don't have a great second team. Far from it. Who is their back up GK, RB, LB, CB, RW, LW, CF? No one I'd want at Manchester United.

The only two areas I think we need to improve are a starting CB & a starting RW. Greenwood should still be understudy and give us a top option off the bench, and a player that has years left and should be willing to provide that role for a season or two.

I personally think our squad depth is great already, if you add those two players.

If you have too many good/great players, you can easily have an unhappy squad, as they all expect to start.

I think the question should be - what is the obsession with having a squad of great players, and thinking you need that to win the league? It's never been the case. City are the only team to have anything close to that and they've been beaten by Chelsea, Leicester & Liverpool to titles over recent years. None of which had very good back up players.

 

[Adnan]

Usually it's not about hating squad depth but being concerned about misplaced priorities. For example, I don't think it makes sense to spend circa £60m on Grealish and the fail to sign Sancho because of a difference of £20m in valuation between the clubs or fail to adequately replace Matic in time because you have signed player to compete against Rashford and Fernandes.

But if we are doing it from a position of strength then it's alright but where we are right now we actually need to sign two starters and Matic's understudy and eventual replacement just to have a team that can comfortably finish in the top three. If we achieve that then by all means let's sign Haaland to compete with Martial.

Good post and I totally agree.

 

[Annihilate Now!]

I think the question should be - what is the obsession with having a squad of great players, and thinking you need that to win the league? It's never been the case. City are the only team to have anything close to that and they've been beaten by Chelsea, Leicester & Liverpool to titles over recent years. None of which had very good back up players.

Exactly... And Pep rotates so often that all their players are effectively first teamers anyway. You don't want to be rotating Pogs and Bruno, and both are so good that anyone who is at their level or even near ii won't want to come here to sit on the bench.

 

[Bilbo]

Having adaptable players is key. We've all seen how valuable the likes of Park and O'Shea have been for us down the years. IMO we have quite a few players like that but could do with one or two more to round us out.

This topic really stems from the fear of how we will cope should Bruno suffer an injury. We have adequate cover everywhere else. A quality adaptable forward player coming in to replace Lingard and Pereira would obviously ease that fear.

 

[davidmichael]

For me it’s more about priority positions that need to be filled rather than stockpiling certain positions because a player we like becomes available, the perfect example is Grealish as I don’t think we need him to cover for Fernandes or Pogba as much as we need to prioritise Sancho to fill the right forward role.

Having two quality players for each position is the dream but right now we’re not at that place and need to put quality ahead of quantity, once we've got quality in the positions then add the quantity.

I don’t agree with us selling players just because we’ve got others in the squad that can play that position or because we’ve got lots of great prospects in the youth team either, either way though I trust Ole in regards to transfers.

 

[Beanz]

I've been slightly guilty of this. I want the players but I worry for displacement.My reason is I get so emotionally attached its insane. Logically I know Pogba is the best player we have but before resumption I was so worried for fred. Now that Pogba is playing I cannot fathom him being replaced. I want us to buy grealish but i'll feel sad over the one being replaced (except lingard or andreas)or even worse, telling jack he'll be on the bench. Just the thought of de gea being replaced by deano almost moved me to tears. I'm just glad i'm nowhere near the decision making of this club

(P.S I refused to go to school for a week when Van Der Sar left)

 

[van Persie]

I've been slightly guilty of this. I want the players but I worry for displacement.My reason is I get so emotionally attached its insane. Logically I know Pogba is the best player we have but before resumption I was so worried for fred. Now that Pogba is playing I cannot fathom him being replaced. I want us to buy grealish but i'll feel sad over the one being replaced (except lingard or andreas)or even worse, telling jack he'll be on the bench. Just the thought of de gea being replaced by deano almost moved me to tears. I'm just glad i'm nowhere near the decision making of this club

(P.S I refused to go to school for a week when Van Der Sar left)

There's no sense in getting too attached to players in this era. It's all about the club and fans. It's the sole reason. I just look at the players like a piece in chess unless I have any other reason to believe otherwise. Football has changed.

 

[AneRu]

Good post and I totally agree.

Cheers! Needs first then we can focus on depth later, lets avoid the Sanchez situation where we had three left wingers but had to field Mata and Lingard on the right as it leads to teams knowing that they only have to mark out your left winger and win the game.

 

[Adisa]

Our lack of squad depth could cost us massively. Our players look tired but we can't rotate cause the drop in quality is too big.