- Joined
- Jan 5, 2019
- Messages
- 32
No way Poch will leave Spurs for United. When he eventually splits, it will be for Real, Barca, Milan or something.
100% this. Ole is doing good but meanwhile Poch is doing great things. Without 2 best players he is winning game after game in PL. And in game against Dortmund he again showed why we should go all in for him. That was something what i call good match preparation.
I will be pissed when Ed decides( and he will) that Ole is staying
I am not optimistic about us and Poch.It's unfair on Ole really, because under most other circumstances he would be given a go, but Ed was happy to brief the press that we were going to go for Poch in the summer, and for good reason, so he needs to follow it through now.
Ole was brought in to steady the ship, and improve things until the end of the season, which he is doing very well, but that doesn't mean long term plans should be changed.
I am not optimistic about us and Poch.
1.Ed never said that we are going for Poch or that Ole will not stay.
2. Our players have huge influence. They are going in public how how they are happy with Ole. It means something.
3. Ole said that he wants to stay. He would not say that if he doesn't have some good info from Ed
4. If he gets that 4th spot( and he will) then Ed will be under huge pressure
5. He is much much much cheaper than Poch
He also doesn’t look like he’s running through sand.
I don’t understand this revisionism going on here. Pulisic just went to Chelsea for £60m and Gotze was a top player and still is a very good player. When you look at statistics before their injuries, it will most likely show how most goals scored by Spurs, Kane and Ali contributed over 50%. These players are very important as without them, Spurs loses critical goal scorers. Spurs front line of Eriksen, Son and Moura is not much better than Gotze, Sancho and Pulsic. Heck, if United fans have to choose any of the players, it would be unanimously favored to Dortmund with Sancho coming first and Pulsic may be even with Eriksen and Son based of the amount of relevant data of interest towards these players. The front line was even and with a full strength team spurs missed out more so with Kane and Ali than Dortmund did with Paco and Reus.
Vertonghen has played left back lots for us as well.
He's still not a natural left back, he's a natural centre back.
Dani Alves is a natural RB/RWB who is also capable of playing on the wing if he has to.
WTF has Vertonghen got to do with anything?
You must have misread my post, which I am not surprised. If you read closely, I stated that United fan would unanimously choose Sancho out of all the attackers that played yesterday. Pulsic “may be” even with Eriksen and Son. I didn’t change anything in my post and that is what I clearly stated. If you misunderstood something as simple as that, you may have misunderstood my entire post and actually agree with everything I have said.
Yeah of course the entire United fan base would unanimously choose Pulisic over Eriksen and Son
FFS just stop embarrassing yourself now, you're talking shit
Lad, eh? Haven’t been called that for decades.You can believe whatever you like, lad, 'tis a fact.
You don't know me nearly well enough to make a judgement either way.
The only teams not mentioned by any respondents are Barcelona and Manchester City.Liverpool for sure (weren't they in the same group?), and probably Bayern also.
I agree with pretty much all that, Ole has been here for hardly five minutes, the great start has skewed expectations I think.
I think you’re right about the one game plan and it’s worked so far and it’s built morale and confidence so they’ve stuck to it.
Ole could have done something similar to what you suggested but he only had five minutes to get it across, they wouldn’t have had time to work in anything similar in training, it could have been a mess when trying to get it working on the field and we’d lose all shape and be a mess.
Ole may well have thought that and knew that putting mata and Sanchez on wasn’t a great option (I definitely think he thought that) but it was the lesser of evils in regards to options we had.
As much as everyone knows everything on here I haven’t really seen a sound and workable option Ole could have done instead.
Same. Actually if (when) United go out this year, I'll be hoping Spurs win it, even if we have to suffer Glastonbury. I wouldn't mind seeing Dortmund do it either with Sancho but I think Spurs put that to bed.I honestly hope I'm wrong because I hate PSG and everything they stand for
I don't think that's too far from the truth. Juventus are in and around there. Hopefully we won't be saying that Liverpool are up there too at the end of the season.The only teams not mentioned by any respondents are Barcelona and Manchester City.
That puts PSG at about number 3 or 4 in World Club Football.
Sorry mate but I don't agree with this.He deserved criticism when we got eliminated by Genk/Gent (whatever). It was a shit result, I'd argue mostly down to complacency and us targeting the league, but still crap. I wouldn't say it's the same as getting swatted aside at home in a big CL game, but it was poor management.
It's Ole's team when he's winning though, but seems like suddenly it's not Ole's side now he's lost. Plenty on this site think he has a perfect team for counter attacking football and that you're good enough for a title challenge, but now a single match has been lost he lacks the tools and hasn't been here long enough? I think Ole's identity has been very clearly stamped on the side and you tried to play his way vs PSG, the problem was his way didn't work because of how they were set up tactically, and you didn't adjust for that .. so lost.
Sorry mate but I don't agree with this.
It's like people saying Spurs regularly get top four down to Poch's excellence etc, but then when the bad results come Poch is separated from then along with a host of excuses. It's just what fans of football teams and particular managers do.
Simply put, if the situation was in reverse, and A new Spurs manager lost a game against a top European side after going on a solid run during a previously poor season, you'd 100% be saying he's not been at the club long enough to fully leave his mark on the side.
We lost against PSG because two of our three attackers had to come off mid game and because they're simply better than us.
Any United fan saying we have enough to challenge for the title is very optimistic imo. We are a good side, probably even a very good side; we lack in a couple of areas though, I'm just happy that for what feels like the first time in years the management of the side isn't one of them.
I'm honestly doubtful many have said we have what it takes to challenge for the title at the moment anyway, and as for having a perfect side for counter attacking, it's pretty much common knowledge our defence is in a terrible state along with question marks over our midfield and right wing; how does that correlate to having a perfect side for counter attacking?
If you could find plenty of examples of united fans on here saying anything contrary id love to see it.
If he was always such an amazing player and hasn't improved further that much under Poch, then how come he cost Spurs only £11m in the same summer that Bale was sold for £85m, Ozil for £42.4m, Willian for £30m and Fellaini for £27.5m?
It baffles you because you are used to the needs of the club you support. For a Spurs yout potential counts as paramount. For Clubs like United it cant. Winning is the priority. Not the potential to winThe issue with your whole post (and this general movement/idea of wanting coaches to "prove themselves" first before moving on) is this need for "evidence". To make such appointments, and to make them feasible, you have to act upon a good reason to believe something rather than evidence. This way of thinking just baffles me.
1) Managers don't wait for us and we don't wait for them. That window to hire someone is short and you don't have the luxury of seeing something happen all the time.
For the same reasons the likes of Mourinho left an Inter for Real Madrid. He might relish the challenge of a bigger club than Spurs. The key being any move he'd make would be from a position of strength. Even if he went to a place as chaotic as a Real Madrid he'd be as untouchable as a Pep is currently at City. If he left this summer he'd not have that2) Even if we did have that luxury, we wait till 2020 and Poch won the League with Totenham, why on earth would he want to move onto Man United now?
That argument proves you fundementally misunderstand why winning is highlighted. It is highlighted because a person who has won things has shown they can live with the pressure of having to take first place. And for big clubs thar pressure is constant. 'Other teams are competive' is treated as an excuse. At a big club you must either win in or at worst fall narrowly at the last hurdle to the guy who did. Your past is used against you constantly. Especially your past success.3) Let's assume he doesn't give a shit about spurs and joins us. There is absolutely no telling he will win the league with us. The league is competitive. Pep and Klop might win it those next few years. He might still be building out squad. Point is there, just because he won something last season wouldn't guarantee anything for the following season
Ole was merely appointed to care take. Steady the ship till the next guy is appointed.4) Look at Ole. He struggled at Cardiff. By this idea of "nah gotta prove yourself first mate", he'd have never gotten the United Job. However we gave Ole the Job because there was reason to believe he could instill success in the club and it wasn't just because he'd won stuff.
2 things did it. Solksjaer is ALSO a winner and he isnt a confrotation magnet like Keane.Roy Keane is a winner. There's a reason Ole got the nod and not Keane.
Oh really?It's worked out well so far so again, this proving yourself stuff is crap.
At the end of the day, you have to ask yourself is there reason to believe that Poch can be successful in winning trophies at United? The answer for me glaringly obvious. A yes all day. I'm not going to wait for some arbitrary loss in a final to turn into a win when I know this guy has the talent to build teams wherever he goes.
I'm still on the Ole bandwagon but dismissing Poch because of not winning the premier league is foolish.
Meaningless statement utilizing a word like 'loads' for vague emphasis to make it seem like you are actually making a point. If he was deployed as a RW it was a rarity.He played right wing loads for Barca
You are twisting facts to suit your arguments. Goetze has been starting at the 9 for a few games now. Alcacer is in fact not an automatic starter for BVB. He alternates with Goetze.Kane and Alli are out for Spurs yet they can still call on a player like Son. Dortmund's injuries mean they had to play Gotze as a 9 and Pulisic who's in single digits in terms of starts in 2019
This is such an absolutely foolish statement. And you have made it multiple times in a few different guises. The cost of a player(s) is directly established from the players' recognized or perceived abilities, past performance (serving as the basis of such perceptions), perceived future performance (serving as the basis of a market value). Therefore the cost of a player(s), ie market value, is directly related to the perceived quality of a player(s). WTF else would it be based on?Money spent doesn't reflect player-quality.
Poch is a very good manager and gets his players to be disciplined, improves them according to how they set up to play.
My biggest concern isn't Poch, but more so that the structure he's been in at Southampton and now Spurs have been a great fit for him and vice versa. I don't think United's identification, scouting and recruitment structure is as good as Spurs.
You must have misread my post, which I am not surprised. If you read closely, I stated that United fan would unanimously choose Sancho out of all the attackers that played yesterday. Pulsic “may be” even with Eriksen and Son. I didn’t change anything in my post and that is what I clearly stated. If you misunderstood something as simple as that, you may have misunderstood my entire post and actually agree with everything I have said.
You are twisting facts to suit your arguments. Goetze has been starting at the 9 for a few games now. Alcacer is in fact not an automatic starter for BVB. He alternates with Goetze.
That argument proves you fundementally misunderstand why winning is highlighted. It is highlighted because a person who has won things has shown they can live with the pressure of having to take first place. And for big clubs thar pressure is constant. 'Other teams are competive' is treated as an excuse. At a big club you must either win in or at worst fall narrowly at the last hurdle to the guy who did. Your past is used against you constantly. Especially your past success.
… For a Spurs yout potential counts as paramount. For Clubs like United it cant. Winning is the priority. Not the potential to win....
What a load of crap.
When it comes to the league or CL, you need to have or develop the potential to win before you can go on actualise that potential and actually win. Currently, United don't even have much potential to win the league or CL (so far behind the curve is your club), yet here's you banging on with unwarranted arrogance about "winning is the priority not potential to win".
Still, I suppose your delusions helps you to keep up the pretence that United are still in some 'elite' bracket alongside the likes of Barca and Real Madrid.
Pochettino isn't going to United regardless, but I sincerely hope United do appoint (yet again) some "proven winner" as manager in the summer …. because it'll likely mean one less rival for Spurs to bother about.
Are you saying United aren't an elite club?
It's also cute the one less rival for Spurs to bother about line. The only rival Spurs have is Arsenal, Chelsea and West Ham, and that's down to Geography. Spurs shouldn't care about anyone else because no one cares about them.
It's literally spelled out for you in the post you quoted. Goetze was not necessarily chosen due to other injuries. He has been chosen there quite often all year. In fact it seems Favre prefers him to start there and bring Alcacer off the bench especially since Alcacer has gone off the boil. But they share the 9.Which facts am I twisting? That Gotze played out of position as a false 9 or that Pulisic is in single digits for starts in 2019? Tell me which of those facts are twisted?
It was in fact a mischaracterization of the situation (at best) or disingenuous (if I'm being less charitable). Injury did not necessarily force Favre's hand in picking Goetze at the 9. In fact the last two games vs Hoffenheim and Bremen Goetze started, vs Bayern (big game) and many other games also.Kane and Alli are out for Spurs yet they can still call on a player like Son. Dortmund's injuries mean they had to play Gotze as a 9 and Pulisic who's in single digits in terms of starts in 2019
United are an elite club in terms of history and income, but have not been an elite club in terms of football for the last half decade and counting …. because elite football clubs do not finish outside the top 4 in their own domestic league more often then not.
Your claim that Spurs are not rivals to United falls flat given the league table in the majority of seasons since Fergie retired.
United are an elite club in terms of history and income, but have not been an elite club in terms of football for the last half decade and counting …. because elite football clubs do not finish outside the top 4 in their own domestic league more often then not.
Your claim that Spurs are not rivals to United falls flat given the league table in the majority of seasons since Fergie retired.
United are an elite club in terms of history and income, but have not been an elite club in terms of football for the last half decade and counting …. because elite football clubs do not finish outside the top 4 in their own domestic league more often then not.
Your claim that Spurs are not rivals to United falls flat given the league table in the majority of seasons since Fergie retired.
Sorry mate but I don't agree with this.
It's like people saying Spurs regularly get top four down to Poch's excellence etc, but then when the bad results come Poch is separated from then along with a host of excuses. It's just what fans of football teams and particular managers do.
Simply put, if the situation was in reverse, and A new Spurs manager lost a game against a top European side after going on a solid run during a previously poor season, you'd 100% be saying he's not been at the club long enough to fully leave his mark on the side.
We lost against PSG because two of our three attackers had to come off mid game and because they're simply better than us.
Any United fan saying we have enough to challenge for the title is very optimistic imo. We are a good side, probably even a very good side; we lack in a couple of areas though, I'm just happy that for what feels like the first time in years the management of the side isn't one of them.
I'm honestly doubtful many have said we have what it takes to challenge for the title at the moment anyway, and as for having a perfect side for counter attacking, it's pretty much common knowledge our defence is in a terrible state along with question marks over our midfield and right wing; how does that correlate to having a perfect side for counter attacking?
If you could find plenty of examples of united fans on here saying anything contrary id love to see it.
I am ready to bet that if both Ole and Poch stay at their current clubs, next season United will finish above Spurs. Any takers? The loser leaves the Caf foreover.
Quite the post there buddy. You are correct, the basis for the points I was making was United-related. United's model of doing things right now 'high cost relative to actual ability' proves my point. Money spent doesn't reflect quality. It is the other way around. Player quality reflects transfer value, which is what you have said here. So its nothing to disagree on and it is certainly not foolish. Do I have to keep on explaining in details all the ways a transfer can go wrong, different causes for a drop in perceived player quality etc.? I certainly hope not.This is such an absolutely foolish statement. And you have made it multiple times in a few different guises. The cost of a player(s) is directly established from the players' recognized or perceived abilities, past performance (serving as the basis of such perceptions), perceived future performance (serving as the basis of a market value). Therefore the cost of a player(s), ie market value, is directly related to the perceived quality of a player(s). WTF else would it be based on?
Better players cost more. It logically follows that better teams are assembled more expensively. Their has to be inputs in one form or another. If you decided to purchase your quality as finished product then it costs more on the front end. If you decide to develop it it may cost less on the front end relative to purchasing the finished product but the good 'raw material' still costs relatively more than the shit 'raw materal'.
If a player's cost is not based on or reflective of 'quality' then in as simply as you can state it please tell us what the cost of a player is based on? Twitter emojis? Hairstyles or other branding BS?
Simple question, has United spent more money than Cardiff? Does united have greater player-quality than Cardiff? That suggests that there is a correlation between money spent and player quality, no? Do that comparison all the way up the table and where does that correlation fall away. Some where about the top 6 right? Why? Diminishing returns possibly? You can keep paying more and more money but if you are buying shit players it doesn't disprove the correlation between money and player quality it just means the other team saw you coming a mile away.
Look at Martial who Spurs were negotiating for 18M yet United paid >50M for. Not looking to get into a pissing match here but it could be reasonably argued that he still hasn't justified that price yet even in this inflated market. Yet he would have developed nicely for 18M of raw material which would have been a lot to spend on player in need of developing relative to other options. The problem isn't the correlation between money and player quality the problem is you are using United's lavish and low-value (cost relative to actual ability) expenditures as the basis of your analysis.
I'd be saying that it was one poor result and not enough to undo a lot of good work, which is what I have said repeatedly about Ole. If we put in a performance like that at home in a big European game I don't care how long the manager has been there, it's unacceptable. 1 shot on target? No. That should never happen at your own ground. Has Ole had enough time to fully leave his mark on the side? No, but he's had enough time for the team not to be as poor as that. But it's only one game and it's his first loss .. so really it isn't a big deal, is it?
I think the 'we lost because of two injuries' thing would carry more weight if you had looked at all threatening in the first half, but you didn't. For me the game didn't really shift that much from the first to the second half, about 30 minutes in I was saying that I thought PSG looked the bigger threat in behind and that United would get frustrated. I think the injuries are a bit of a convenient excuse for what always looked to be a poor performance, it's especially poor when you consider they were missing two of their best players. Yes though, they are better than you, and losing to them is no embarrassment .. it's just the performance was limp and lacking in any fight, which is never good enough for United.
Ok, a 'perfect side for counter attacking' is an exaggeration, but overall I don't think you have too bad a side and the lack of talent in the side has been overplayed. You've got arguably the best goalie in the world, international level defenders who all cost a pretty price, you're weak at fullback for sure but in midfield the likes of Herrera, Pogba, Matic, Fred etc offer decent balance and some genuine world class talent. Martial, Lingard, Rashford, Mata, Sanchez are hardly poor attacking options, are they? It's pretty clear Mourinho was doing a shit job and United do have some excellent players, now after one loss people are saying there's some huge rebuild job needed? You could do with 2-3 players coming in, but so could most sides. He's hardly working with scraps, the injuries against PSG hurt you but maybe move Lukaku central and Rashford out wide? You keep some pace in the side, you offer a different kind of threat in the middle. We know Lukaku can be an effective threat for other teams, he is for Belgium and he was for Everton and even United last season.
I've seen plenty of United fans push the argument that it's all down to Mourinho and you have a very good squad which would be challenging for the league had Ole been here since the start. Either they believe Ole is some management genius on par with Ferguson, or they think you genuinely have an excellent squad, until it doesn't suit the narrative.
Big clubs dont care for 'factors'. They only care that you win whislt winning well. Or at worst finish second at the last minute to the winner, whilst doing it well. Its brutal. That why even a serial winner like Mourinho gets spat out the momment he fails to match that standard.Just responding to this little bit. There are many factors that plays a part with winning, especially for a manager where 11 other players are the ones to do it on the pitch.
No one said it did. It merely gave him the chance quicker to coach a huge club. Which is my point. When he got there he drowned and got booted outEmery won the EL and also the French league, I don't think that in itself makes him a better manager than Poch.
Correct. Because at PSG the achievement would be the UCL. Not merely lifting any trophy.Similarly I don't think Poch would be a better manager if he went to PSG and won the league.