Why is this team not seen as a "classic United" side?

[apotheosis]

Yeah, we didn't have any major injuries to significant players at all last season...

Point missed Chabon. 3 players who came in and improved the first team addressed the issues that had cost the team the year before. We have addressed no issues from last year, RVP coming in has simply made us better in that position is all.

There's no possible way this both these statements are true. The only way this is the poorest top flight you've ever seen is if you're 14 years old.

It's the poorest in terms of how the winner can amass record points totals, whilst not being able to get much further than the group stage 2 years on the trot. Were English champions and runners up just unlucky in Europe over the past 2 seasons, or is it as i suggest that the winners of a poor PL have simply fell behind their foreign counterparts?

 

[KingEric7]

In style, yes, but in terms of ABILITY? No way!

First of all, this season's team has RVP, Kagawa and Vidic. That alone is an insane boost in terms of squad quality.

But what about the other players? Have they improved? The answer to this question, is in my opinion; yes.

Important players who have improved from last season:
- DDG
- Rafael
- Evra
- Carrick
- Giggs(to a certain degree)
- Hernandez
- Welbeck

Important players who are roughly around the same level as last season:
- Lindegaard
- Evans
- Rio
- Smalling
- Jones
- Cleverley
- Anderson
- Young
- Rooney

Important players who have performed worse than last season:
- Valencia
- Nani(mainly because of lack of play time)
- Scholes(same as above)

If we add our "new" players to the mix as well, then it becomes pretty obvious that the team of this season is superior. I have put up the current XI below. Bolded players are players who have improved or new players.

DDG
Rafael - Vidic - Evans - Evra
Carrick - Cleverley
Welbeck - Rooney - Kagawa
RVP​

5 improved players
3 strong reinforcements(RVP, Kagawa, Vidic)
3 players playing at their usual level

I think what this season has proved is that we would've walked the league last year if it wasn't for injury. Ability is obviously going to be improved with the signing of Van Persie and the return from injury and rise in form of some players (the increase in Welbeck's and Giggs' form is arguable, where as the increase in De Gea's is negligible given that he also had a good season last year) but it's insufficient going through performances of individuals when it's clear that the team performance itself is a different figure than the sum of that. Ultimately, the same issues that were there last year are there this year but to the same extent. It makes for a very similar style of play and a pretty similar overall strength of team in my opinion.

One thing is that I actually think we were better in midfield last year with Scholes for example after his return than we have been this year with the Cleverley/Carrick combo. Scholes was in immense form and it's a massive shame we bottled the league on that basis alone.

 

[Amir]

It's the poorest in terms of how the winner can amass record points totals, whilst not being able to get much further than the group stage 2 years on the trot. Were English champions and runners up just unlucky in Europe over the past 2 seasons, or is it as i suggest that the winners of a poor PL have simply fell behind their foreign counterparts?

Sometimes crap happens. Don't get me wrong, I do not believe this is a GREAT United side, I do believe the PL isn't the strongest it's been in terms of the top teams, but the European point is a problem. Like I said, what happened to us this season could have happened to the best United sides. Last season we were just crap in Europe. But the Real thing...

 

[Mad Winger]

but it's insufficient going through performances of individuals when it's clear that the team performance itself is a different figure than the sum of that.

So basically, this years squad is:

- Significantly stronger player for player
- Much better in Europe
- Have better results against the top teams in the PL(we've beaten City and Chelsea away so far).
- On for a new points record.

But despite aaaaall this, we're on the same level as last season? The season where we got humiliated by City twice, lost the title despite having a BIG lead, failed to advance in the easiest CL group ever, and then got ridiculed in the Europa League? I'll be right back, I'm just gonna go bang my head against the wall for a couple of minutes.

 

[KingEric7]

So basically, this years squad is:

- Significantly stronger player for player
- Much better in Europe
- Have better results against the top teams in the PL(we've beaten City and Chelsea away so far).
- On for a new points record.

But despite aaaaall this, we're on the same level as last season? The season where we got humiliated by City twice, lost the title despite having a BIG lead, failed to advance in the easiest CL group ever, and then got ridiculed in the Europa League? I'll be right back, I'm just gonna go bang my head against the wall for a couple of minutes.

Enjoy. The situation is just a bit more complex than the basic outline. I think we're better at winning than we were last year, that's unquestionable. That's to say we are better than a team that was absolutely obliterated by injuries. I don't get think anyone can seriously say that we wouldn't have gained at least 10 or so points had we not suffered so badly in this respect. You don't go most of the season without a full choice defence and a large chunk without two in form midfielders without feeling the effects. It's hypothetical but not unreasonable, and the gap between the two teams narrows considerably when you consider that.

Irrespective of this, I must stress that I've not actually said this team isn't better than the one from the last season. I said the strength and style of player is 'similar' - hardly an outrageous comment. It just seems a bit basic when people go "ah, well we've got this many points this year and these particular guys played better, therefore..." without considering other factors. There is clearly not a huge difference in the way we're playing now and the way we played last year, and the difference in points total is marred mostly by a quite frankly bizarre collapse and equally crazy injury record. They were two freakish occurrences.

Aside from this, what has differed is the way we have responded to similar problems. Valencia was our answer to some fairly dry and inconsistent play and movement through central areas last season, where as it has mostly been the sheer quality of Van Persie that has gotten us through that this year. Individual players have varied slightly in terms of quality in either direction, but it's the way that the team has performed as a unit that has been similar. I actually think we've looked more disjointed for most of this year than we have for parts of last year. This of course does not include the Bilbao period and the madness towards the end of the season against Wigan, City, etc...

That despite any reasoning that player for player we are stronger. For me, these are two teams very similar in quality that would've achieved similar success barring some bizarre circumstances. You've a Van Persie and a Valencia either side of the equation but there's very little in it.

 

[Mad Winger]

I guess I'm gonna have to highly disagree with pretty much your entire post then. I still think it's pure madness to even suggest that we're about equally good this year when there are so many factors showing that we're significantly better now. To me, your arguments are starting to sound like this: We don't play beautiful football, wah-wah-waaah...

 

[KingEric7]

Well, I think you're being too superficial in your assessment and are not looking at it in enough depth. So nerrr...

Nah, never mind. Fair enough, it's not something that is likely to be agreed on at this point.

 

[Will Absolute]

Two reasons why this is a not a classic United side:

1) We often play scrappy, unattractive football, on the back foot for long periods against inferior opposition.

2) We have a lot of mediocre players. Would Cleverley, Young, Valencia, Anderson, Welbeck get into the Barca, Madrid or even Bayern and City teams? Yet they appear regularly for us.

 

[Inspectah deck]

Two reasons why this is a not a classic United side:

1) We often play scrappy, unattractive football, on the back foot for long periods against inferior opposition.

2) We have a lot of mediocre players. Would Cleverley, Young, Valencia, Anderson, Welbeck get into the Barca, Madrid or even Bayern and City teams? Yet they appear regularly for us.

Spot the odd one out, very overrated as a team and they've been shown up much more than united have this season, I've lost count the number of times they've been outplayed this season.

 

[Rowem]

Two reasons why this is a not a classic United side:

1) We often play scrappy, unattractive football, on the back foot for long periods against inferior opposition.

2) We have a lot of mediocre players. Would Cleverley, Young, Valencia, Anderson, Welbeck get into the Barca, Madrid or even Bayern and City teams? Yet they appear regularly for us.

I think all of the players you suggested would get games aplenty at City. Gareth Barry and Javi Garcia are average CMs. On the flanks Nasri is a massive flop for them and Milner is no more than a workhorse.

 

[ItsEssexRob]

I think all of the players you suggested would get games aplenty at City. Gareth Barry and Javi Garcia are average CMs. On the flanks Nasri is a massive flop for them and Milner is no more than a workhorse.

Welbeck maybe, and Cleverley perhaps, but I really wouldn't expect to see anything of Young, Valencia ( after this season) or Anderson.

 

[Rowem]

Welbeck maybe, and Cleverley perhaps, but I really wouldn't expect to see anything of Young, Valencia ( after this season) or Anderson.

Anderson would be a squad player like Garcia. Young is on a similar level to Milner. Valencia was better than both until this season, and will probably sort himself out before long.

Welbeck and Cleverley would both improve their first XI

 

[Ash_G]

We don't smash teams often, we just do enough in most games and that's why we're not perhaps getting the praise we should. It's not like we couldn't do it but we just don't play fully switched on or even near the top of our game either in many games or during many games. Personally I don't think there's a huge desire to bury teams for whatever reason, it's not a question of not being able to do it though imo.

 

[JohnLocke]

I think it's because we don't batter teams as much as we once did.

I've tallied up all the times we beat opponents by at least 3 goals (PL games only) in the seasons that we have won the PL, along with our biggest win that season.


1993 - 5 times - 5:0 Coventry City

1994 - 5 times - 5:0 Sheffield Wednesday

1996 - 6 times - 6:0 Bolton Wanderers

1997 - 5 times - 5:0 Sunderland

1999 - 9 times - 8:1 Nottingham Forest

2000 - 9 times - 7:1 West Ham

2001 - 8 times - 6:0 Bradford

2003 - 6 times - 6:1 Newcastle

2007 - 10 times - Couple of 4:0's

2008 - 11 times - 6:0 Newcastle

2009 - 6 times - 2 5:0's

2011 - 5 times - 7:1 Blackburn

2013 - 4 times - 4:0 Wigan (x2)

And last season:

2012 - 9 times - 8:2 Arsenal


Although those stats don't really mean anything it sort of shows that we aren't battering teams as convincingly as we once did. Although that could change in the next few results.

There were also a couple of those seasons where we got big wins in the FA cup and CL etc, but I couldn't get stats - or be arsed looking again - for all the games of all the seasons, especially as it was a pointless exercise.

But there aren't as many big wins as there used to be, the 6 and 7 goal thrashings that we used to hand out.

I'd love one tonight

 

[::sonny::]

Two reasons why this is a not a classic United side:

1) We often play scrappy, unattractive football, on the back foot for long periods against inferior opposition.

2) We have a lot of mediocre players. Would Cleverley, Young, Valencia, Anderson, Welbeck get into the Barca, Madrid or even Bayern and City teams? Yet they appear regularly for us.

Agreed

 

[Name Changed]

I don't think this is a classic United team. Never until this season have I ever been regularly bored watching united. Why we sit back and defend against poor teams astounds me. Hanging on against the likes of Sunderland and Reading is not the united way, not one that I can remember in 25 odd years anyway.

 

[SharkyMcShark]

2008 - 11 times - 6:0 Newcastle

That surprises me, especially given our dour start that season

 

[Cina]

It's far from a classic Utd side, I don't really know how people have continued to argue it is. We've been the best of a very "meh" bunch of teams in the PL this season, have largely played shit football and have lacked the resolve of actual classic Utd sides in the cup competitions.

 

[Gaeilge]

Different times and different era's. Why is this side not held in the same regard as others gone by? We do not have four midfield players, in their prime, creating endless opportunities for our frontmen. Valencia and Nani are painfully inconsistent and although Young tries hard, he has never brought that wow factor that he had at Watford or Villa. We are a side that is enriched with utilizing wing play throughout the years and with what we currently have, we are one dimensional and classified as 'average'. I find it bizzare that Tony has taken such a dip but he has. Nani has started beliving the articles about himself too - which is a dreadful shame! If this side is to be considered to be up there with those 'classic' united sides, Fergie will need to break policy and throw big bucks on a winger and a central midfielder.

For what its worth, I love the team. It is packed full of youth and very enetertaining to watch(mostly). Going on what I have just heard Paddy Crerand say on Newstalk, we may be in for a couple of Dortmunds players. Take from that what you will.

 

[Carl]

Last night was another example of why it isn't. No balance, lob sided and inept midfield play.

I don't care what statistics say. This isn't even a great United side never mind a classic one. The most frustrating thing of all though is that it would be very easy to turn it into a great side with the addition of a quality midfielder.

 

[Gaeilge]

Last night was another example of why it isn't. No balance, lob sided and inept midfield play.

I don't care what statistics say. This isn't even a great United side never mind a classic one. The most frustrating thing of all though is that it would be very easy to turn it into a great side with the addition of a quality midfielder.

As I said above, spunk money on a world-beater for the wing and the middle. It aint rocket science like.

Aint' gonna happen though

 

[ArmchairCritic]

It's a much better side than it's ever given credit for, just weird we can't approach more games with the intensity and desire we had against Madrid. It's a good team, shame the wingers have been out of form so badly. It's weird how we seem to have a cycle of 2-3 players stepping up one season and then the next they aren't as good. I think we put too much faith in Fletcher, Scholes and perhaps even Anderson at the start of the season, our starting midfield two is good enough (league wise) but there's no depth there. I think we'd have seen more midfield 3's had our wingers been in some reasonable form but the amount of games Welbeck is getting out wide sums it up.

The thing for me is that we still haven't remedied our dependency on width, before the season that was something we seemed to have done signing Kagawa and RVP. As the season's gone on our wingers have been poor and we still give them a lot of the ball. RVP just doesn't get enough touches at times.

 

[Siorac]

That surprises me, especially given our dour start that season

But that is one of the reasons why, despite Brwned's constant protests and stat-mongering, that team is remembered as a classic one. It produced quite a lot of really memorable performances, as well as winning a double.

 

[apotheosis]

Last night was another example of why it isn't. No balance, lob sided and inept midfield play.

I don't care what statistics say. This isn't even a great United side never mind a classic one. The most frustrating thing of all though is that it would be very easy to turn it into a great side with the addition of a quality midfielder.

Well said. Considering we have to debate whether this team is classic or not says it all really. But most telling to me is how many people are claiming to be bored watching them, and on top of that the amount of times they are beaten when push comes to shove.

To me they have the players to be far better than they have been, even without another WC midfielder. Let's face it you don't have to have ten WC players to play good football! Why can't we play like Swansea do relative to the quality of player they have at their disposal?

Even Saints have gone from relegation fodder to an effective team playing good football under Pochettino in less than half a season! How the feck - considering the players we have at our disposal - can we not look as comfortable on the ball or as cohesive as they do?