Liverpool didn't have a good Footballing structure, they had the notoriously terrible committee. They changed the structure during Klopp's second season at his request.Liverpool aren't as big in PL terms and commercial terms, we are a bigger brand. But even Liverpool was a mamouth task.
Naaah. Its more fun imagining the worst possible scenario, believing it wholeheartedly and having a right moan about it while calling everyone else clueless amongst other things.Are we certain that we are keeping ETH hanging? Isn't a far more likely solution they already know what is going to happen and we are just waiting for the right time?
We don't have to say everything to the press in advance. The club might know exactly what is happening.
In my opinion there isn't a model that is ideal, every clubs needs to evaluate their current situation every year and take decisions based on their own circumstances. Also clubs even the successful ones have no idea about what they are doing, the only notable difference is that the successful ones spot and act on mistakes faster than most but the immediate solution they chose isn't necessarily good, they are just ready to try something else quickly.Beside the flawed comparisons, there is the question of whether the Klopp/Arteta model is even the ideal.
We have seen from Klopp's stint at Liverpool that these stints don't last forever. It took time for Klopp's team to be competitive, then they were competitive for a few years, then they stopped being competitive, and now he's gone. The balance is 2 major titles in 9 seasons. Nobody knows whether the replacement manager will hit the ground running or need 'time' to win another major title.
In the case of Arteta the balance is no major titles won in his entire stint. Go back further and you have Pochettino, who spent years at Spurs, made them competitive, and won no major titles. They have not won any major titles since then either.
A lot of time and effort and structure and technocratic methodology to win relatively little.
I think you would have seen these methods bear more fruit if you didn't have a club that have cheated the system winning the league basically every year.Beside the flawed comparisons, there is the question of whether the Klopp/Arteta model is even the ideal.
We have seen from Klopp's stint at Liverpool that these stints don't last forever. It took time for Klopp's team to be competitive, then they were competitive for a few years, then they stopped being competitive, and now he's gone. The balance is 2 major titles in 9 seasons. Nobody knows whether the replacement manager will hit the ground running or need 'time' to win another major title.
In the case of Arteta the balance is no major titles won in his entire stint. Go back further and you have Pochettino, who spent years at Spurs, made them competitive, and won no major titles. They have not won any major titles since then either.
A lot of time and effort and structure and technocratic methodology to win relatively little.
True but barely. Without City, Tottenham would have 0 PL and Liverpool would have 3 PL while United would have 2.I think you would have seen these methods bear more fruit if you didn't have a club that have cheated the system winning the league basically every year.
Yeah but both Liverpool and Arsenal would have won more leagues, which to me justifies the means. It's not really realistic that a given methodology can just produce leagues or be deemed unsuccessful, and to me that journey of progression with 1 manager is more enjoyable than the conveyor belt method clubs like Chelsea use.True but barely. Without City, Tottenham would have 0 PL and Liverpool would have 3 PL while United would have 2.
But the point is whether it is an ideal model. It quite clearly isn't when it doesn't lead to a particular degree of success even when you have arguably the best manager in the World in Klopp.Yeah but both Liverpool and Arsenal would have won more leagues, which to me justifies the means. It's not really realistic that a given methodology can just produce leagues or be deemed unsuccessful, and to me that journey of progression with 1 manager is more enjoyable than the conveyor belt method clubs like Chelsea use.
The Newcastle game was 50/50, Brighton should have been out of sight in the first half. It's really the City win that's swung it. After the first first two, the poll was still 73% in favour of sacking him.3 consecutive wins.
I think it boils down to the clubs' in question's financial power and the ability to generate a buzz that makes them unstoppable. Look at United in 2021, having finished 3rd and 2nd and been to a European final we were able to strengthen massively in a huge push for the title by buying Sancho, Ronaldo and Varane.Beside the flawed comparisons, there is the question of whether the Klopp/Arteta model is even the ideal.
We have seen from Klopp's stint at Liverpool that these stints don't last forever. It took time for Klopp's team to be competitive, then they were competitive for a few years, then they stopped being competitive, and now he's gone. The balance is 2 major titles in 9 seasons. Nobody knows whether the replacement manager will hit the ground running or need 'time' to win another major title.
In the case of Arteta the balance is no major titles won in his entire stint. Go back further and you have Pochettino, who spent years at Spurs, made them competitive, and won no major titles. They have not won any major titles since then either.
A lot of time and effort and structure and technocratic methodology to win relatively little.
Liverpool are the strongest argument for the model since they were very strong domestically (huge point tally in 18/19) and in Europe (3 CL finals).Yeah but both Liverpool and Arsenal would have won more leagues, which to me justifies the means. It's not really realistic that a given methodology can just produce leagues or be deemed unsuccessful, and to me that journey of progression with 1 manager is more enjoyable than the conveyor belt method clubs like Chelsea use.
Can the "they had a much better footballing structure in place set up for success, which is actually why Klopp went to them and said no to us" assertion even be corroborated? Or are people in this thread just saying random things? Where is that coming from?Ah yeah the good old football structure preventing a manager to properly train train his players.
Next Utd loss it’ll swing back to sack ….probably after Charity ShieldThe Newcastle game was 50/50, Brighton should have been out of sight in the first half. It's really the City win that's swung it. After the first first two, the poll was still 73% in favour of sacking him.
Now it's 50/50 even though no one can name our top 5 performances this season.
They changed their structure in the middle of the season in 2016. Sorry for the terrible source.Can the "they had a much better footballing structure in place set up for success, which is actually why Klopp went to them and said no to us" assertion even be corroborated? Or are people in this thread just saying random things? Where is that coming from?
I don’t think so, plus friendlies don’t count!Next Utd loss it’ll swing back to sack ….probably after Charity Shield
Its biggest pile of shit thats what it is .Can the "they had a much better footballing structure in place set up for success, which is actually why Klopp went to them and said no to us" assertion even be corroborated? Or are people in this thread just saying random things? Where is that coming from?
Never doubt knee jerk UtdI don’t think so, plus friendlies don’t count!![]()
Us match going fans don’t do knee jerking, unlike those on Redcafe!Never doubt knee jerk Utd![]()
Match going fans always have my respectUs match going fans don’t do knee jerking, unlike those on Redcafe!![]()
Yeah, that's fair, I suppose ideal means different things to different people!But the point is whether it is an ideal model. It quite clearly isn't when it doesn't lead to a particular degree of success even when you have arguably the best manager in the World in Klopp.
I think Arsenal are a season off it alright, but another very good one next year with a challenge for something other than the league and it would be validated. Klopp had more experience of the process than Arteta also.Liverpool are the strongest argument for the model since they were very strong domestically (huge point tally in 18/19) and in Europe (3 CL finals).
Arsenal have been nowhere near as impressive, IMO. They have done little of note in Europe, and have yet to crack 90 points in the league.
Although I want to keep ETH, the final should really be seen as an argument not to. After refusing to change his tactics all season, he reverted to counter attacking football, the exact thing we don't want to do and he rightly said we shouldn't. After trashing the season saying any tactical compromise would be a backwards step and being a mess was a price worth paying, he threw his entire framework in the bin to beat City.The consensus on here has moved to keeping Ten Hag. You wouldn’t know it because the Hag out folks are loud and relentless.
As I said before, one cannot underestimate the impact the final had. It wasn’t so much that we beat Cheaty, because you can sometimes get lucky, but how we did it.
And applaud the manager off the pitch after we’ve just lost 4-0 to Crystal fecking Palace.Match going fans who wanted every manager to stay.
Consensus?The consensus on here has moved to keeping Ten Hag. You wouldn’t know it because the Hag out folks are loud and relentless.
When England are knocked out of the euros, Wouldn't be surprised if they have Southgate lined up.So when so we expect a decision here? A week before the seasons starts?
I'm sorry to do that but no ideal in this context has one meaning, it means the best, closest to perfection, most likely to yield success. Long term managers are quite obviously not ideal when they don't yield the best or most consistent results, few do but most don't. And in this context we don't even need to choose a side because there isn't an ideal or repeatable approach, results are highly dependent of the identity of the manager and his club. And we can expose that with this very simple idea, how do you get to Arteta being a good mid to long term appointment if you decide to stick with Emery? You don't because you would be with Emery and the same is true for Rodgers to Klopp, and for the latter it's especially true if you erase City, Rodgers isn't sacked in October 2015 even if he is 15th.Yeah, that's fair, I suppose ideal means different things to different people!
What happens when we don't get knocked outWhen England are knocked out of the euros, Wouldn't be surprised if they have Southgate lined up.
I have, but when they've made it so public that they're assessing the manager, I'd assume there will be some sort of public backing of him.Has anyone considered that this is just it. Nothing will be formally announced and it’ll stay like this until Pre Season when Ten Hag returns?
Onana isn't a worse shot stopper than De Gea of the last couple of years. That's the main reason he had to be replaced, he wasn't even doing the one thing he used to be good at anymore. We also wouldn't have won the FA Cup with De Gea in goal for the final. Onana is far more commanding and an overall more secure goalkeeper.DDG had his issues but he was far from the biggest problem to justify getting rid and spending 50m on a keeper who is a worse shot stopper with good passing that we don't even utilise because we planned on playing hoofball. Have you ever had of a thing called opportunity cost? We spent big on Onana when we could have kept DDG and brought in the much needed reinforcements at CB. Replacing DDG wasn't critical at all.
No, I expect the results of the audit to be made public before preseason because they briefed about an audit when they didn't have to.Has anyone considered that this is just it. Nothing will be formally announced and it’ll stay like this until Pre Season when Ten Hag returns?
I keep going back and forth in my mind on this. I think he's staying but surely they would've come and said he's staying by now. I'm 65% sure he's staying.Has anyone considered that this is just it. Nothing will be formally announced and it’ll stay like this until Pre Season when Ten Hag returns?
51 and rising, and other fan polls are much higher. I saw one at 91%.Consensus?
The poll is currently 50/50.
They will. 91% of the fanbase wanted Paul Mitchell. 50% probably still do and Ineos don’t care.51 and rising, and other fan polls are much higher. I saw one at 91%.
Don’t worry, you still might get your wish if INEOS completely ignores the fanbase.