Erik ten Hag | Currently unemployed

[crossy1686]

Very unprofessional for Rats to be dumping on ETH. Interesting to hear his response, the settlement contracts normally have confidentiality clauses.

What's unprofessional or confidential about this? The owner confirming the old manager had a say in transfers over the summer? Wait until you read the other quotes that mention Ten Hag doing blow in the changing rooms, you're going to lose your mind.

 

[crossy1686]

Outside of his horrendous signings, I do like ETH but he had the charisma of a potato.

"Despite his shit signings, shit tactics, and shit personality, I like him"

 

[RuudTom83]

The signings ETH made here were fecking unbelievably bad.

Antony
Casemiro
Mount
Hojlund
Onana
Zirkzee

Just for fun, looking at that list I'd say...

Antony - 100% EtH buy
Casemiro 0% Clearly wasn't a managers pick and i'd be interested how you came to that assumption? other than a player arriving under the managers tenure = managers buy?
Mount 0-50%
Hojlund 0-50%% EtH wanted an experienced CF like Kane so I can't see how Rasmus equals a EtH pick.
Onana 100% EtH buy
Zirkzee 0-50%

I'd say De Ligt, Maz, Martinez, Antony, Onana are the clear 100% Managers picks and some of those have been great in spells.

That's the thing with transfers, some you win some you lose.

 

[BorisManUtd]

And that was most of this forum, mind. The swerve on here was unbelievable. I still can't wrap my head around how a one-off game completely gave everyone collective amnesia

Absolutely. That poll whether we should keep or sack ten Hag was best indicator - about 75/80% of votes were for him to get sacked. Then in period of like 5 days after the game it shifted towards 50% keep and 50% sack. It was one of the most enjoyable games since Fergie retired I get it but as you say: it gave everyone collective amnesia about the whole season we had before that.

 

[crossy1686]

Just for fun, looking at that list I'd say...

Antony - 100% EtH buy
Casemiro 0% Clearly wasn't a managers pick and i'd be interested how you came to that assumption? other than a player arriving under the managers tenure = managers buy?
Mount 0-50%
Hojlund 0-50%% EtH wanted an experienced CF like Kane so I can't see how Rasmus equals a EtH pick.
Onana 100% EtH buy
Zirkzee 0-50%

I'd say De Ligt, Maz, Martinez, Antony, Onana are the clear 100% Managers picks and some of those have been great in spells.

That's the thing with transfers, some you win some you lose.

Mount is also 100% on Ten Hag. He spent all summer chasing him while we all lost our shit.

 

[RuudTom83]

Mount is also 100% on Ten Hag. He spent all summer chasing him while we all lost our shit.

Personally I could easily see United going for Mount without EtH being the manager...everyone at United seemed super keen on that signing, the no.7, big contract, English, still young. All point to a club signing imo which is why I would never blame EtH solely for that signing.

I can't say the same for Malacia, Martinez, Antony for example.

 

[Red Star One]

Personally I could easily see United going for Mount without EtH being the manager...everyone at United seemed super keen on that signing, the no.7, big contract, English, still young. All point to a club signing imo which is why I would never blame EtH solely for that signing.

I can't say the same for Malacia, Martinez, Antony for example.

if so then our scouting team is even worse than I thought, and I thought it is bad. We were never in need for a player of his profile, and to splash so much money just because someone is English and will take the no. 7 shirt is plain stupid

 

[crossy1686]

Personally I could easily see United going for Mount without EtH being the manager...everyone at United seemed super keen on that signing, the no.7, big contract, English, still young. All point to a club signing imo which is why I would never blame EtH solely for that signing.

I can't say the same for Malacia, Martinez, Antony for example.

No, it was Ten Hag, he chased him hard in the summer and made Murtough get him. It was well documented at the time, Ten Hag even spoke about Mount a couple of times after pre season friendlies. He wanted him since his Vitesse days, here's just one article: https://www.footballtransfers.com/e...-ten-hag-mason-mount-man-utd-transfer-6-years

 

[Sunny Jim]

Just for fun, looking at that list I'd say...

Antony - 100% EtH buy
Casemiro 0% Clearly wasn't a managers pick and i'd be interested how you came to that assumption? other than a player arriving under the managers tenure = managers buy?
Mount 0-50%
Hojlund 0-50%% EtH wanted an experienced CF like Kane so I can't see how Rasmus equals a EtH pick.
Onana 100% EtH buy
Zirkzee 0-50%

I'd say De Ligt, Maz, Martinez, Antony, Onana are the clear 100% Managers picks and some of those have been great in spells.

That's the thing with transfers, some you win some you lose.

Nah,
Mount was 100% on ETH. Fletcher did confirm that.
De Light was a club buy. Maz ditto.

 

[Alex99]

Nah,
Mount was 100% on ETH. Fletcher did confirm that.
De Light was a club buy. Maz ditto.

It's been all but confirmed that De Ligt and Mazraoui were Ten Hag signings.

 

[RuudTom83]

No, it was Ten Hag, he chased him hard in the summer and made Murtough get him. It was well documented at the time, Ten Hag even spoke about Mount a couple of times after pre season friendlies. He wanted him since his Vitesse days, here's just one article: https://www.footballtransfers.com/e...-ten-hag-mason-mount-man-utd-transfer-6-years

Yeah, it always makes me laugh this story...Mount played well in friendly against Ajax in March 2018...moves to United in 2023!

I imagine EtH having a wall of cutting from every game Mount played in the 5 years between that memorably friendly, waiting for the day he could make a bid haha.

The story/link is extremely tenuous. But we all make our opinions on football gossip, I just don't give that Mount story much weight or lay the blame of his failed transfer solely on EtH.

 

[Carl]

Sir Jim:



Me and few others spent entire summer arguing with people here that we are only signing some players because they are Dutch and barely survived from being attacked by his fans that it's not true. And we finally have our owner confirming it now. I wonder where all those people are now?

I love "I told you so" posts like this because in reality i bet it was just a disagreement with 1, maybe 2, people.

 

[Amar__]

I love "I told you so" posts like this because in reality i bet it was just a disagreement with 1, maybe 2, people.

Not really, if you followed the forum lot of people argued that we are not signing dutch players because of Ten Hag. Not majority of course, because majority here are sane people who use their logic, but 10-20 loud and ignorant ones are more than enough. I mean, you have few posts even here people still denying it.

 

[SuperiorXI]

Sir Jim:



Me and few others spent entire summer arguing with people here that we are only signing some players because they are Dutch and barely survived from being attacked by his fans that it's not true. And we finally have our owner confirming it now. I wonder where all those people are now?

I bet your family is proud

 

[Sunny Jim]

It's been all but confirmed that De Ligt and Mazraoui were Ten Hag signings.

Nope. ETH said the club had offered DeLigt and ETH approved this.

 

[VP89]

It's been all but confirmed that De Ligt and Mazraoui were Ten Hag signings.

Where?

 

[Alex99]

Nope. ETH said the club had offered DeLigt and ETH approved this.

Where?

Pretty much everything I read in the summer and after Ashworth's departure had De Ligt down as a Ten Hag pick that Ashworth was happy to sign off on, and Mazraoui basically came as part of the package due to him being relatively cheap.

 

[VP89]

Pretty much everything I read in the summer and after Ashworth's departure had De Ligt down as a Ten Hag pick that Ashworth was happy to sign off on, and Mazraoui basically came as part of the package due to him being relatively cheap.

No that's not quite true. There was certainly a brief that MDL was an INEOS target and Ten Hag also confirmed in a press conference that the player was suggested to him by the board and he agreed with their consensus to go for him.

 

[Rooney in Paris]

Mount is also 100% on Ten Hag. He spent all summer chasing him while we all lost our shit.

Mount was signed at the beginning of July, very early in the transfer window. Other clubs were in for him and Utd decided to swoop in swiftly. I'm sure Ten Hag was very happy to have him, but it was as much a club signing as a Ten Hag one.

 

[Lay]

I'm not a fan of ETH but I'm never sure on who to blame for transfers. Surely it's a collective effort and not just left to the manager

 

[Kostov]

Feck him. The level of incompetence he brought here deserves no empathy.

 

[AjaxCunian]

How is Onana an EtH buy? I think he even kinda fell out with Onana in Onana's last season at Ajax if Im remembering correctly.

Onana was one of the best keepers in Europe and we needed a long-term goalkeeper. Which other attainable goalkeepers were there that were better options? We saw him shine in the Champions League, and mainly in the CL Final.

 

[redshaw]

I would say Mount was more ETH given how he had this best transition team plan formed and thought Mount could play in midfield, cited Pep's city as doing well with a lightweight more attacking midfield. ETH wanted the team to press high and win the ball back and have the midfield get forward to create.

Mount impressed a lot of people when at Vitesse and beat ETH's Ajax and had 14 goals and 10 assist from mostly midfield that season. ETH wanted him at Ajax. His performances were more wide ranging and had brilliant dead ball deliveries. Not only was the level easier I just don't think he has that game now so he's best as either a swap for Bruno or a left or right 10 in the PL.

The reason Amorim is so fond of Mount is he'd be a great left 10 on paper. When signing Mount we had golden boy Rashford on a new contract and an unmovable Bruno. Mount was brought in on the last year on big fee to play from a deeper 8 in ETH's plan and not take Rashford or Bruno's place.

 

[Gordon'sHill]

I would say Mount was more ETH given how he had this best transition team plan formed and thought Mount could play in midfield, cited Pep's city as doing well with a lightweight more attacking midfield. ETH wanted the team to press high and win the ball back and have the midfield get forward to create.

Mount impressed a lot of people when at Vitesse and beat ETH's Ajax and had 14 goals and 10 assist from mostly midfield that season. ETH wanted him at Ajax. His performances were more wide ranging and had brilliant dead ball deliveries. Not only was the level easier I just don't think he has that game now so he's best as either a swap for Bruno or a left or right 10 in the PL.

The reason Amorim is so fond of Mount is he'd be a great left 10 on paper. When signing Mount we had golden boy Rashford on a new contract and an unmovable Bruno. Mount was brought in on the last year on big fee to play from a deeper 8 in ETH's plan and not take Rashford or Bruno's place.

Yep, Mount was 100% an ETH signing. But just another one of the terrible ones he made. Even when fit he's too lightweight and was simply not the player we needed when our midfield was so poor and we were crying out for a mobile defensive midfielder or someone who can pick up the ball deep on the half turn and allow us to play out from back.

 

[Red Star One]

Onana was one of the best keepers in Europe and we needed a long-term goalkeeper.

Was he really? His flaws in technique were well known before he came here and you would think his former manager and the scouts would be aware of that.

Which other attainable goalkeepers were there that were better options? We saw him shine in the Champions League, and mainly in the CL Final.

Raya went to Arsenal same summer for less money and he's significantly better than Onana. Diogo Costa would be available for similar money to Onana. Not to mention few less acclaimed but very talented keepers that were available if we put some effort in scouting. But yes, I agree we saw him shine in the CL final and went for him greatly influenced by a single game - idiotic approach we'd later repeat in extending ten Hag after the FA final.

 

[Stickz]

Amorin has been worse, so shows ETH wasn't the problem.

That’s complete nonsense. The performances basically caught up with us in the results.

Amorim should be doing better, but to suggest anything he’s doing shows ETH wasn’t a significant issue is crazy.

It’s ETHs squad and it’s utterly abject in every way.

 

[romufc]

if so then our scouting team is even worse than I thought, and I thought it is bad. We were never in need for a player of his profile, and to splash so much money just because someone is English and will take the no. 7 shirt is plain stupid

Mount was a ETH signing. He wanted to play the 1 6 and 2 8s with Bruno and Mount.

 

[Gordon'sHill]

That’s complete nonsense. The performances basically caught up with us in the results.

Amorim should be doing better, but to suggest anything he’s doing shows ETH wasn’t a significant issue is crazy.

It’s ETHs squad and it’s utterly abject in every way.

The arguments become circular. Of course ETH was a problem, his tactics were awful, his signings were awful, his man management and communications were poor etc. He also left the worst squad in 20 years, bereft of world class players. That's a given. Its also possible that Amorim is and will fail. He is a young manager (remember ETH wasn't, though some seemed to pretend he was), unproven outside a minor league. He is also the most rigid system manager we have ever had, and that makes me nervous.

 

[Stickz]

The arguments become circular. Of course ETH was a problem, his tactics were awful, his signings were awful, his man management and communications were poor etc. He also left the worst squad in 20 years, bereft of world class players. That's a given. Its also possible that Amorim is and will fail. He is a young manager (remember ETH wasn't, though some seemed to pretend he was), unproven outside a minor league. He is also the most rigid system manager we have ever had, and that makes me nervous.

Don’t disagree with any of that.

I do however feel most would struggle to play a new formation with this “talent”. That’s where for me Amorim should play a bit more to the players strengths as long term more than half this squad isn’t going to be part of his vision anyway.

Something like the 343 away from home v the better sides where it seems to serve us well but 4231 or 451/433 at home more often than not.

 

[Alex99]

No that's not quite true. There was certainly a brief that MDL was an INEOS target and Ten Hag also confirmed in a press conference that the player was suggested to him by the board and he agreed with their consensus to go for him.

There were conflicting briefs in the summer, with some saying Ten Hag had been chasing De Ligt since the summer before and Ashworth was willing to sign off as a show of support, and some saying De Ligt was a player Ashworth had followed since he got the job at Newcastle. Since his departure, it's basically been revealed that it was the former, with Ten Hag pushing for both De Ligt and Mazraoui and Ashworth basically just sanctioning them. It was two of our better signings being Ten Hag's that contributed to his sacking, because he'd apparently been chasing Zirkzee since he was at Newcastle, and they were supposed to be in for him this summer.

From The Athletic:

Ashworth oversaw all the summer signings, which included some influence from Ten Hag. Ashworth was tasked with making things work with Ten Hag and sanctioned the signings of Noussair Mazraoui and Matthijs de Ligt, two preferences for the manager

From ESPN:

Sources told ESPN that aside from Matthijs de Ligt, the Netherlands international centre-back signed from Bayern Munich in a combined £50.5m deal with Mazraoui, every summer signing was driven by the recruitment department headed up by Ashworth. Ten Hag wanted De Ligt and, despite believing the squad was already well stocked with centre-backs, Ashworth sanctioned the move in order to show faith in the manager following his retention in the role weeks earlier.

 

[Ish]

I'm not a fan of ETH but I'm never sure on who to blame for transfers. Surely it's a collective effort and not just left to the manager

As it should be, but enter those clueless bunch in Woodward/Arnold/Murtough etc. who for some reason or another, gave our managers way too much power (probably in part because of their ineptitude plus no supporting structure) and then just sprinkled on the odd "marquee" (read: over the hill!) signing by throwing wads of cash at them.

 

[stevoc]

Nope. ETH said the club had offered DeLigt and ETH approved this.

Ratcliffe pretty much confirmed in the Neville interview that Ten Hag was the driving force behind last summers targets and the signing of several Dutch players.

A journalist recently on Stretford Paddock (maybe Whitwell?) basically said the same. Ten Hag pushed for DeLigt and Mazraoui and Ashworth went along with it.

I'd take anything Ten Hag said on this matter with a pinch of salt.

 

[Alex99]

Ratcliffe pretty much confirmed in the Neville interview that Ten Hag was the driving force behind last summers targets and the signing of several Dutch players.

A journalist recently on Stretford Paddock (maybe Whitwell?) basically said the same. Ten Hag pushed for DeLigt and Mazraoui and Ashworth went along with it.

I'd take anything Ten Hag said on this matter with a pinch of salt.

The split I've seen reported multiple times was that Yoro, Ugarte and Zirkzee were Ashworth/INEOS/club signings, with Zirkzee in particular being a player on Ashworth's radar from his time at Newcastle, and allegedly being shortlisted as one of their targets last summer.

De Ligt was targeted by Ten Hag last summer and was seen as even more crucial once Yoro got injured, then while we were negotiating for De Ligt, we were made aware of Mazraoui's availability and Ten Hag wanted him too, so Ashworth sanctioned both "as a show of support".

 

[VP89]

There were conflicting briefs in the summer, with some saying Ten Hag had been chasing De Ligt since the summer before and Ashworth was willing to sign off as a show of support, and some saying De Ligt was a player Ashworth had followed since he got the job at Newcastle. Since his departure, it's basically been revealed that it was the former, with Ten Hag pushing for both De Ligt and Mazraoui and Ashworth basically just sanctioning them. It was two of our better signings being Ten Hag's that contributed to his sacking, because he'd apparently been chasing Zirkzee since he was at Newcastle, and they were supposed to be in for him this summer.

From The Athletic:



From ESPN:

I mean ten hag himself said De Ligt was an INEOS target so I think that would conclude it surely.

 

[Matriac]

This is more of embarrassing towards the club than towards eth to be fair.


A managers job is to perform GIVEN the squad he has.. Its not the managers job to build the squad and to scout players he is not working with on a dailly basis.. Everyone has preferences, also ETH, but if a clubs allows the manager to spend millions on transfers while overrulling scouts, thats fully 100% on the club and the horribly led football organization.. The whole "Klopp wanted Brandt but got Salah" is a perfect example of how a sustainable club is ran..

Its 100% on United if we allowed eth to brings his own players.. How on earth is he supposed to have detailed info on players he hasnt worked with? He came straight from Ajax where he was 100% responsible for getting the best results with his current team, and immediately continued to United where he was 100% expected to work.with the squad om the pitch on day 1.. You have DoFs to focus on building the squad the manager has to work with..

Ofcourse managers can voice opinions, but this whole 'club transfer' vs 'manager transfer' is such bullshit.. And IF a club allows for a manager to bring in own players and overruling scouts, thats 100% the fault of the club and 0% fault of the manager.

The mistake was allowing him to choose signings, not keeping him after you won the cup...

Clubs don't operate like that these days, criminal mismanagement pretty much. Who greenlighted Casemiro, Anthony, Hojlund and even Yoro for such bat shit mental wages / fees. They should be sacked.

Amorin has been worse, so shows ETH wasn't the problem.

Utd should have kept ETH or Ruud till the end of the season. Ultimately the damage has been done by the senior management green lighting ETH signings.

This was because the previous administration before INEOS gave ETH a contract with veto right on signings.
Essentially allowing him to partially control at least some incomings. If they don't come to an agreement/compromise no players can be signed, bad for the manager and the club. But this way the club couldn't force just their picks on the manager.


The club tried to have this veto-right removed in the summer when negotiating for a new contract with ETH. He refused to give it up, and so because the club had promised in the media that ETH would get a new contract/new vote of confidence, they felt they had to extend the current contract.

What they should have done was not extend it so at least the veto right would be gone next summer if ETH wanted to stay on. But they probably didn't want to go back on their word, they would have taken some flack in the media, and questions to ETH every press conference about his future.
And by extending they eliminated uncertainty around if it had gone well then they wouldn't have had any power to keep him next summer if they didn't extend.

 

[Alex99]

I mean ten hag himself said De Ligt was an INEOS target so I think that would conclude it surely.

You're going to have to provide a source on that one because goggling it is just pulling up a bunch of articles from last summer to last month saying the exact opposite.

 

[stevoc]

The split I've seen reported multiple times was that Yoro, Ugarte and Zirkzee were Ashworth/INEOS/club signings, with Zirkzee in particular being a player on Ashworth's radar from his time at Newcastle, and allegedly being shortlisted as one of their targets last summer.

De Ligt was targeted by Ten Hag last summer and was seen as even more crucial once Yoro got injured, then while we were negotiating for De Ligt, we were made aware of Mazraoui's availability and Ten Hag wanted him too, so Ashworth sanctioned both "as a show of support".

Yep same here. It would have been quite the coincidence for Ineos and Ashworth to coincidentally target two former players of a manager who'd spent the previous two summers targeting a lot of his former players.

 

[Sunny Jim]

No that's not quite true. There was certainly a brief that MDL was an INEOS target and Ten Hag also confirmed in a press conference that the player was suggested to him by the board and he agreed with their consensus to go for him.

Ratcliffe pretty much confirmed in the Neville interview that Ten Hag was the driving force behind last summers targets and the signing of several Dutch players.

A journalist recently on Stretford Paddock (maybe Whitwell?) basically said the same. Ten Hag pushed for DeLigt and Mazraoui and Ashworth went along with it.

I'd take anything Ten Hag said on this matter with a pinch of salt.

ETH himself said the club had offered him DeLigt. 100% sure of this.

 

[Mb194dc]

This was because the previous administration before INEOS gave ETH a contract with veto right on signings.
Essentially allowing him to partially control at least some incomings. If they don't come to an agreement/compromise no players can be signed, bad for the manager and the club. But this way the club couldn't force just their picks on the manager.


The club tried to have this veto-right removed in the summer when negotiating for a new contract with ETH. He refused to give it up, and so because the club had promised in the media that ETH would get a new contract/new vote of confidence, they felt they had to extend the current contract.

What they should have done was not extend it so at least the veto right would be gone next summer if ETH wanted to stay on. But they probably didn't want to go back on their word, they would have taken some flack in the media, and questions to ETH every press conference about his future.
And by extending they eliminated uncertainty around if it had gone well then they wouldn't have had any power to keep him next summer if they didn't extend.

Better to keep your powder dry than make poor big money savings / high wages.

Can't blame ETH, the owners should veto the deals or say only at reasonable fees or no deal

Have youth options to use.

 

[VP89]

You're going to have to provide a source on that one because goggling it is just pulling up a bunch of articles from last summer to last month saying the exact opposite.

He said it in a press conference why do you need a source?

Anyway he said

“I know Matthijs well and I will not deny that. I wanted to sign him two years ago but at that time, he was already very far along to join Bayern Munich (from Juventus) but believe it or not, his name did not come from me in the process (of targeting signings).”

The Athletic posted this
https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/56...h-matthijs-de-ligt?source=user-shared-article

On a side note I'm pretty annoyed by athletic. They're meant to be premium but they change their narrative according to momentum. As you just saw with your athletic article and mine.

A good example is they did a summer deep dive the year we finished 3rd and were complimentary to ten hags handling. And then they were changing the narrative of that same summer when we finished 8th.