A serious look at Mauricio Pochettino

[cjj]

Name me one manager, who's managed to evolve a team with a shoe-shrine budget and then perform even better than the previous year whilst all surrounding peers and rivals are investing heavily? It's an acheivement in itself to maintain the status quo of being a solid top 4 team whilst contending on limited resource.

I would probably put Dyche firmly at the top of the list, as he's done wonders for the comparable budget. Strictly speak, Poch isn't one - if he is (we'll get to that), then Klopp, more so.

The 'shoe-shrine' (is that something Woogie would have in There's Something About Mary'?) budget is a myth anyway. People would think he had actually not had big money players, but he did - he just didn't get a tune out of barely any of them (Sissoko, Davinson, Ndombele, Lo Celso, Sessegnon, Moura, Aurier, Janssen.. must be £250-300m there). Son is the only exception, really.
The problem with Spurs fans and Poch fans is that they put all of the good ones as 'Poch signings' and all of the bad ones as 'Levy signings', when in reality there's a paradox there because the same people also say that the cheap ones are Levy ones and Poch should have more money, even though the evidence shows that the cheaper ones have been the better signings and the expensive ones have flopped. The key thing that reduces the 'spend' issue is that we've sold most of the expensive players that Poch couldn't get a tune out of, meaning low net spend.

Surely Utd fans would see that more than anyone else - a small fortune has been spent on players that have been utterly ineffective.

There's also a lot of context that needs to be taken on board here. Note that prior to MP, the record with Redknapp was 4th, 5th, 4th, then AVB 5th. Here's the league finishes including the season before Poch, which was the AVB/Sherwood disaster.

2013–14

38

21

6

11

55

51

69

6th

and the Poch era that followed:

2014–15	38	19	7	12	58	53	64	5th​
2015–16	38	19	13	6	69	35	70	3rd​
2016–17	38	26	8	4	86	26	86	2nd​
2017–18	38	23	8	7	74	36	77	3rd​
2018–19	38	23	2	13	67	39	71	4th​
2019–20	38	16	11	11	61	47	59	6th​

(You could note that he didn't complete 2019/20, but bear in mind that 6th is flattering because Mourinho was, I recall, comfortably top-4 based on the table since he started.)

What you see is two key things:
- 2016-17 was the peak. It would graph almost like a perfect Bell Curve.
- Defence is probably the key statistic, and ties very closely to performance more than goals for.

What the above figures don't show is the "surrounding peers" that are the basis of this:

Note - I'm going to point out some selective stats of teams we didn't take all the points off in these seasons. This is just to indicate a 'theme'

2014-15
- First season. One thing I'd like to point out is that he inherited a squad full of a lot of very good players in bad form. This could be the type of team he inherits next.
- Games were lost to WBA, Newcastle, Stoke, Palace, Villa. Teams we drew with included Sunderland, Palace, West Ham, Burnley.

2015-16
- Leicester won the league (with a very small budget, fyi)
- Arsenal finished 2nd after Spurs disintegrated late on (hence the '3rd in a 2 horse race' jibes).
- Liverpool were 8th, City 4th, United 5th, Chelsea 10th.
- Spurs 'took advantage' of poor seasons for the other big-hitters, but still left a lot to be desired in the final rounds - we won none of our final 4 games and got thumped 5-1 by relegated newcastle.
- Losses that stopped a title charge? They included Newcastle (both games...they were relegated!), West Ham and Southampton. We failed to beat Swansea, Stoke, WBA (both game)

2016-17
- A better example and without doubt of course our best season in the league. Peak in all forms.
- The main problem with that season, considering the above, was that we lost points in ridiculous areas: Lost to West Ham, Drew with Sunderland, Bournemouth and West Brom. The lack of killer instinct in 'easy games' was a big factor and was going to become a theme

2017-18
- By no means a bad season - not hugely dissimilar to the one before, but look where most of the points were lost again: Lost and Drew with WBA, Drew with Brighton, Southampton, West Ham, Watford, Swansea, Burnley.

2018-19
- Put simply, it's indicative of how utterly terrible Arsenal and Utd were that season. We shouldn't have finished anywhere near the top 6. I don't know if anyone will actually recall, but Spurs won only 3 of the final 12 games or so. It just so happened that United and Arsenal seemed to be just as shocking. The biggest difference was that for the first time in a while, we started losing the bigger games too. Still lost to Bournemouth, Burnley, Wolves, Watford, West Ham, Southampton.


So, about those teams above:

If he's able to apply this 'trendsetter' but dated tactics according to yourselves to Utd, we would be a much much better team than we are showing, which is what most of us are hoping. The thing is it's ridiiculous to suggest, high pressing, compact, organised, possession football is limited because that's the point. You beat teams with your Plan A. Most managers don't need a solid plan B (apart from several games a year) because plan A will win you the majority of games. Right now we're not got a plan A or B. Literally all the big teams play this way and most have a larger enough squad to sustain it.

At no point in his tenure was Pochettino able to cope with the type of teams who played traditional defensive or 'suppressive' football. The teams that took more points off us during his whole term were the lower table types - not top 4 rivals. In 2018/19 he got an FA ban for going mental at Mike Dean on the field because we couldn't break down Burnley.

Look at the common theme of his time with us and you'll see a team that was, at times, beautiful, excellent, entertaining... but inevitably trophy-less. You simply cannot win things if you aren't beating those teams. It's just not how success is found these days. Anyone who points towards the CL final would do well to pick out a single game with a convincing win in it, too. It was a miracle on all fronts, but the result in the final was inevitable.


Fans of other clubs can put their fingers in their ears and "la la la" as much as they want, but Spurs fans saw it in context week-in, week-out. United fans are simply looking through a filter and hoping that he's a magic fix for the problem, but I really don't think that would be the case. For a start, you'd need the patience that Liverpool had with Klopp, and there's seldom evidence for it (if a club legend like Ole can't get it, who can?)

 

[Man of Leisure]

Unless we're talking about Nagelsmann, not sure if there's a better next managerial target for us than Poch. Whether you're Ole in or out, does anyone really believe he can lead us to PL or CL glory?

 

[Tyrion]

And that had absolutely nothing to do with the Glazer ownership

I never said it did. I said we won it while they were in charge. You said "We can hire Jesus Christ but it will all end the same with them parasites in charge". I'm pointing out that it hasn't. We can win it despite them as we did before.

 

[Tyrion]

So what happens then? Pochettino comes in, needs time to evaluate the squad, Lingard, Jones, Mata and Pereria all stay at the club, we end up signing Deli Ali. Stumble through season, fail to qualify for the CL. Lose Pogba and maybe Rashford or Martial in the summer. Scramble to replace them with whatever cast offs Madrid or Barcelona are dumping, or worse, sign Zaha, Rice and Dier for daft money. Scrape top 4 and end up back where we are now.

In the mean time a whole load of questioning of Pochettino and his ability to get a tune out of the squad.

Or maybe you can't predict the future?

 

[elnorte]

So what happens then? Pochettino comes in, needs time to evaluate the squad, Lingard, Jones, Mata and Pereria all stay at the club, we end up signing Deli Ali. Stumble through season, fail to qualify for the CL. Lose Pogba and maybe Rashford or Martial in the summer. Scramble to replace them with whatever cast offs Madrid or Barcelona are dumping, or worse, sign Zaha, Rice and Dier for daft money. Scrape top 4 and end up back where we are now.

In the mean time a whole load of questioning of Pochettino and his ability to get a tune out of the squad.

Let's not expect miracles.

 

[bond19821982]

So what happens then? Pochettino comes in, needs time to evaluate the squad, Lingard, Jones, Mata and Pereria all stay at the club, we end up signing Deli Ali. Stumble through season, fail to qualify for the CL. Lose Pogba and maybe Rashford or Martial in the summer. Scramble to replace them with whatever cast offs Madrid or Barcelona are dumping, or worse, sign Zaha, Rice and Dier for daft money. Scrape top 4 and end up back where we are now.

In the mean time a whole load of questioning of Pochettino and his ability to get a tune out of the squad.

Not sure about others but he will replace AWB and probably Shaw. The Guy can't play without decent wing backs.

 

[Nick.]

You guys are such snakes turning on Ole like this. Can't you see the board have stitched him up? Give him a chance ffs

 

[Tel074]

I never said it did. I said we won it while they were in charge. You said "We can hire Jesus Christ but it will all end the same with them parasites in charge". I'm pointing out that it hasn't. We can win it despite them as we did before.

Yes and I've already said it was completely different back then and the success was already there before they arrived . We will never ever be properly successful with these owners because they don't want it enough . We are miles away and it's their fault

 

[BlueHaze]

You guys are such snakes turning on Ole like this. Can't you see the board have stitched him up? Give him a chance ffs

Feck the ownership, but that doesn't mean Ole doesn't have his own flaws as well and should get a free ride but yeah they've hung him out to dry and once again were incapable of landing our main target surprise, surprise.

 

[Tyrion]

Yes and I've already said it was completely different back then and the success was already there before they arrived . We will never ever be properly successful with these owners because they don't want it enough . We are miles away and it's their fault

We won the league around ten years after they arrived. We've outspent everyone bar City over the last few years. If they really didn't want it enough, there hasn't been much evidence of it.

 

[Bebestation]

The fact that your fanbase is talking about only hiring managers that won trophies shows just how conservative you guys are as a club, from the owners, CEO and all the way down to the fans.

Managers that won trophies might not be the right fit for the club like Man Utd, if they do not play the way Man Utd fans want the team to play. That's why a manager like Mourinho is not a good hire, because despite the fact that he won you guys trophies, no one is happy with him in the long run.

And he doesnt play the right way.

I absolutely hated like 3/4 of the fanbase crying for Jose Mourinho after LVG like they couldn't see how much of direct opposites they were in the type of football they wanted to play or even the type of footballer they had in mind to play that never mind who they could or wanted to bring.

I know it's way too early to be like Arsenal have improved and giving credit - but I do like that even after a manager like Wenger you have that technical aspect in your DNA no matter who comes and fails at your club.

It means for the good or bad - managers are judged by their style of football as much or even more than their trophies.

The fact is that Klopp would never have come here whether Woodward had called us Disneyland or not. Theres this mentality - we are trophy winning team, to some we are the biggest club in the world even when we win jack shit because of the money rather than the football we play. Klopp would've only gone to an underdog where he could focus on his football and not get the pressures of success all around him unnecessarily.

I get consistently hated for it but that's why I adore LVG and his possession football that was far from perfect. When I look at what Ole has done with reshaping the squad, it's why i wouldn't have minded if we skipped the whole Jose Mourinho phase and ended up from LVG to Solskjaer ( it was Giggs who was supposed to take over him if I remember) and build something like we see now a bit earlier than waste those 2.5 we did nothing but go for short term trophies.

 

[crossy1686]

Or maybe you can't predict the future?

Yeah who could possibly do that when I've only literally typed out what's happened when we've appointed new managers in the past. If you want to believe this time will be different then that's just wishful thinking I'm afraid.

 

[crossy1686]

Not sure about others but he will replace AWB and probably Shaw. The Guy can't play without decent wing backs.

We seem to be in the middle of replacing Shaw at the moment with Telles, but who know's how good he is.

 

[criticalanalysis]

I would probably put Dyche firmly at the top of the list, as he's done wonders for the comparable budget. Strictly speak, Poch isn't one - if he is (we'll get to that), then Klopp, more so.

The 'shoe-shrine' (is that something Woogie would have in There's Something About Mary'?) budget is a myth anyway. People would think he had actually not had big money players, but he did - he just didn't get a tune out of barely any of them (Sissoko, Davinson, Ndombele, Lo Celso, Sessegnon, Moura, Aurier, Janssen.. must be £250-300m there). Son is the only exception, really.
The problem with Spurs fans and Poch fans is that they put all of the good ones as 'Poch signings' and all of the bad ones as 'Levy signings', when in reality there's a paradox there because the same people also say that the cheap ones are Levy ones and Poch should have more money, even though the evidence shows that the cheaper ones have been the better signings and the expensive ones have flopped. The key thing that reduces the 'spend' issue is that we've sold most of the expensive players that Poch couldn't get a tune out of, meaning low net spend.

Surely Utd fans would see that more than anyone else - a small fortune has been spent on players that have been utterly ineffective.

There's also a lot of context that needs to be taken on board here. Note that prior to MP, the record with Redknapp was 4th, 5th, 4th, then AVB 5th. Here's the league finishes including the season before Poch, which was the AVB/Sherwood disaster.

2013–14

38

21

6

11

55

51

69

6th

and the Poch era that followed:

2014–15	38	19	7	12	58	53	64	5th
2015–16	38	19	13	6	69	35	70	3rd
2016–17	38	26	8	4	86	26	86	2nd
2017–18	38	23	8	7	74	36	77	3rd
2018–19	38	23	2	13	67	39	71	4th
2019–20	38	16	11	11	61	47	59	6th

(You could note that he didn't complete 2019/20, but bear in mind that 6th is flattering because Mourinho was, I recall, comfortably top-4 based on the table since he started.)

What you see is two key things:
- 2016-17 was the peak. It would graph almost like a perfect Bell Curve.
- Defence is probably the key statistic, and ties very closely to performance more than goals for.

What the above figures don't show is the "surrounding peers" that are the basis of this:

Note - I'm going to point out some selective stats of teams we didn't take all the points off in these seasons. This is just to indicate a 'theme'

2014-15
- First season. One thing I'd like to point out is that he inherited a squad full of a lot of very good players in bad form. This could be the type of team he inherits next.
- Games were lost to WBA, Newcastle, Stoke, Palace, Villa. Teams we drew with included Sunderland, Palace, West Ham, Burnley.

2015-16
- Leicester won the league (with a very small budget, fyi)
- Arsenal finished 2nd after Spurs disintegrated late on (hence the '3rd in a 2 horse race' jibes).
- Liverpool were 8th, City 4th, United 5th, Chelsea 10th.
- Spurs 'took advantage' of poor seasons for the other big-hitters, but still left a lot to be desired in the final rounds - we won none of our final 4 games and got thumped 5-1 by relegated newcastle.
- Losses that stopped a title charge? They included Newcastle (both games...they were relegated!), West Ham and Southampton. We failed to beat Swansea, Stoke, WBA (both game)

2016-17
- A better example and without doubt of course our best season in the league. Peak in all forms.
- The main problem with that season, considering the above, was that we lost points in ridiculous areas: Lost to West Ham, Drew with Sunderland, Bournemouth and West Brom. The lack of killer instinct in 'easy games' was a big factor and was going to become a theme

2017-18
- By no means a bad season - not hugely dissimilar to the one before, but look where most of the points were lost again: Lost and Drew with WBA, Drew with Brighton, Southampton, West Ham, Watford, Swansea, Burnley.

2018-19
- Put simply, it's indicative of how utterly terrible Arsenal and Utd were that season. We shouldn't have finished anywhere near the top 6. I don't know if anyone will actually recall, but Spurs won only 3 of the final 12 games or so. It just so happened that United and Arsenal seemed to be just as shocking. The biggest difference was that for the first time in a while, we started losing the bigger games too. Still lost to Bournemouth, Burnley, Wolves, Watford, West Ham, Southampton.


So, about those teams above:



At no point in his tenure was Pochettino able to cope with the type of teams who played traditional defensive or 'suppressive' football. The teams that took more points off us during his whole term were the lower table types - not top 4 rivals. In 2018/19 he got an FA ban for going mental at Mike Dean on the field because we couldn't break down Burnley.

Look at the common theme of his time with us and you'll see a team that was, at times, beautiful, excellent, entertaining... but inevitably trophy-less. You simply cannot win things if you aren't beating those teams. It's just not how success is found these days. Anyone who points towards the CL final would do well to pick out a single game with a convincing win in it, too. It was a miracle on all fronts, but the result in the final was inevitable.


Fans of other clubs can put their fingers in their ears and "la la la" as much as they want, but Spurs fans saw it in context week-in, week-out. United fans are simply looking through a filter and hoping that he's a magic fix for the problem, but I really don't think that would be the case. For a start, you'd need the patience that Liverpool had with Klopp, and there's seldom evidence for it (if a club legend like Ole can't get it, who can?)

Dyche has indeed done a good job but again he's done well to maintain the status quo. If there is not continuous investment in the squad or an elite push from the board, he will fade away or move just like Eddie Howe, Tony Pulis, Moyes, Billic, Bruce, Martinez etc. To evolve is to suggest that he builds from Burnley's consistent Premier League safety finishes and become a consistent top 10 team and perhaps deeper cup runs with his current resource. That is the equivalent of expecting Poch to have done the same and become a regular and proper title contender.

As for those transfers, didn't half of them arrive at the beginning of last season? Wasn't there a 12/18 month period where you didn't sign a single player? Nobody in the league has a great/fantastic track record of signings but they've had more opportunities to rectify it. Weren't Sissoko, Ndombele and Lo Celso were all last minute panic buys? Also I'm pretty sure he turned Sissoko into bit of a beast for you guys. Everton, Arsenal, Leicester were all spending and building on their squad continually; that's not to even mention the other tradtional big 4/5.

You've brought out a lot of stats but nobody can tell me that he's not a good coach and is able to get good performances from his team and raise their level. Is he perfect with transfers, building an expansive squad, challenging for titles/cups? No but in context, his potential and 'results to resource' is not below, a lot if any other managers.

A club legend like Ole has almost 2 years with us and our biggest defence for our inconsistent results is that 'the players aren't good enough, we need to sign more' tells you more about our current level despite the millions and millions we have spent on top of the current elite-level players we already have. It's harsh on Ole because he's done very well to get us to a certain standard but tactically there's little to suggest we're going to improve massively and suddenly turn into a coherent team.

 

[starman]

If Poch comes in which striker will he sign? or is the world class striker already at the club that he will rest 99% of his hopes on?
I look forward to the Vincent Janssen's and N'Jie's of this world as back ups...

 

[Tel074]

We won the league around ten years after they arrived. We've outspent everyone bar City over the last few years. If they really didn't want it enough, there hasn't been much evidence of it.

Ten years ? Mate if you are going to chat shite please at least have some sort of knowledge before embarrassing yourself .
If they wanted it enough we would have had at least one summer window that City and Chelsea have had . We would have proper football people running the club we would have a stadium that isn't falling apart.
It's obvious from your posts you don't really understand what's going on at the club .

 

[ThierryHenry14]

And he doesnt play the right way.

I absolutely hated like 3/4 of the fanbase crying for Jose Mourinho after LVG like they couldn't see how much of direct opposites they were in the type of football they wanted to play or even the type of footballer they had in mind to play that never mind who they could or wanted to bring.

I know it's way too early to be like Arsenal have improved and giving credit - but I do like that even after a manager like Wenger you have that technical aspect in your DNA no matter who comes and fails at your club.

It means for the good or bad - managers are judged by their style of football as much or even more than their trophies.

The fact is that Klopp would never have come here whether Woodward had called us Disneyland or not. Theres this mentality - we are trophy winning team, to some we are the biggest club in the world even when we win jack shit because of the money rather than the football we play. Klopp would've only gone to an underdog where he could focus on his football and not get the pressures of success all around him unnecessarily.

I get consistently hated for it but that's why I adore LVG and his possession football that was far from perfect. When I look at what Ole has done with reshaping the squad, it's why i wouldn't have minded if we skipped the whole Jose Mourinho phase and ended up from LVG to Solskjaer ( it was Giggs who was supposed to take over him if I remember) and build something like we see now a bit earlier than waste those 2.5 we did nothing but go for short term trophies.

As an Arsenal fan i believe it was a big mistake to sack LVG. In my eye he was building the foundation and it takes time, but no one has the patience anymore. A team needs to have an identity the way it plays, it can be direct, control, defensive and counter attack. LVG has a clear philosophy on how he wants his team play. I am not sure if he is responsible for all the players brought in during his time other than Schweinsteiger and Depay. Anyway now OGS is the manager so just support the manager. Football becomes highly tactical nowadays with Pep and Klopp in EPL.

 

[Bebestation]

As an Arsenal fan i believe it was a big mistake to sack LVG. In my eye he was building the foundation and it takes time, but no one has the patience anymore. A team needs to have an identity the way it plays, it can be direct, control, defensive and counter attack. LVG has a clear philosophy on how he wants his team play. I am not sure if he is responsible for all the players brought in during his time other than Schweinsteiger and Depay. Anyway now OGS is the manager so just support the manager. Football becomes highly tactical nowadays with Pep and Klopp in EPL.

The players were far from the best. However, I would have wondered what it would be like United being known as a possession based team for 3 years.

Giggs, Rooney & Carrick talk about his tactics as the most dense as well :

Carrick wrote in his book, serialised by the Times, about the spell when he felt progress in the post-Fergie era: ''Louis van Gaal taught me another way of football, especially how to set up the team defensively, how to squeeze the pitch and suffocate a team. He went into so much detail and was so particular that we were difficult to play against when we got it right.

Then Rooney & Giggs talk about how they felt the team were just starting to get it in to their gear towards the end of that 2nd season & how he should have stayed for the third.

However again, alot of the club needed that feeling for a trophy more than a style of playing a football and scrapped LVG for jose.

 

[acnumber9]

If Poch comes in which striker will he sign? or is the world class striker already at the club that he will rest 99% of his hopes on?
I look forward to the Vincent Janssen's and N'Jie's of this world as back ups...

Hueng Min Son maybe?

 

[ray24]

And he doesnt play the right way.

I absolutely hated like 3/4 of the fanbase crying for Jose Mourinho after LVG like they couldn't see how much of direct opposites they were in the type of football they wanted to play or even the type of footballer they had in mind to play that never mind who they could or wanted to bring.

I know it's way too early to be like Arsenal have improved and giving credit - but I do like that even after a manager like Wenger you have that technical aspect in your DNA no matter who comes and fails at your club.

It means for the good or bad - managers are judged by their style of football as much or even more than their trophies.

The fact is that Klopp would never have come here whether Woodward had called us Disneyland or not. Theres this mentality - we are trophy winning team, to some we are the biggest club in the world even when we win jack shit because of the money rather than the football we play. Klopp would've only gone to an underdog where he could focus on his football and not get the pressures of success all around him unnecessarily.

I get consistently hated for it but that's why I adore LVG and his possession football that was far from perfect. When I look at what Ole has done with reshaping the squad, it's why i wouldn't have minded if we skipped the whole Jose Mourinho phase and ended up from LVG to Solskjaer ( it was Giggs who was supposed to take over him if I remember) and build something like we see now a bit earlier than waste those 2.5 we did nothing but go for short term trophies.

But the Man Utd fanbase thinks it's all about winning trophies at any cost. You guys are so used to winning under Alex Ferguson that you think the club has an inherent right to win trophies even if it means playing badly. The board actually listened to the fanbase and gave him Mourinho despite the objection of Alex Ferguson and other stalwarts at the club.

Arsenal went a long while without winning any trophies, so the fanbase is used to the idea that trophies by itself doesn't mean anything, because playing attractive football can still entertain fans and make the fanbase happy. Hence the reason why Arsenal is more willing to ensure Wenger's successors followed his passing football philosophy to some extend.

The main worry for your club is the fact that your youth academy is simply not producing the footballers required for the modern game in the mid-field and centre-back positions. When was the last time you guys managed to have a youth prospect that has the technical abilities to play well from the back as a CB, or dominate the midfield by controlling the tempo?

 

[sammsky1]

But the Man Utd fanbase thinks it's all about winning trophies at any cost. You guys are so used to winning under Alex Ferguson that you think the club has an inherent right to win trophies even if it means playing badly. The board actually listened to the fanbase and gave him Mourinho despite the objection of Alex Ferguson and other stalwarts at the club.
Arsenal went a long while without winning any trophies, so the fanbase is used to the idea that trophies by itself doesn't mean anything, because playing attractive football can still entertain fans and make the fanbase happy. Hence the reason why Arsenal is more willing to ensure Wenger's successors followed his passing football philosophy to some extend.
The main worry for your club is the fact that your youth academy is simply not producing the footballers required for the modern game in the mid-field and centre-back positions. When was the last time you guys managed to have a youth prospect that has the technical abilities to play well from the back as a CB, or dominate the midfield by controlling the tempo?

This is not perfectly true. United fans realise that it's imperative that our club learns how to win the league without Ferguson. Once we break that duck, I think our fans will be alot more relaxed, because we'll know we have built a culture that can compete every year, and that would be fine with most.

 

[ti vu]

But the Man Utd fanbase thinks it's all about winning trophies at any cost. You guys are so used to winning under Alex Ferguson that you think the club has an inherent right to win trophies even if it means playing badly. The board actually listened to the fanbase and gave him Mourinho despite the objection of Alex Ferguson and other stalwarts at the club.

Arsenal went a long while without winning any trophies, so the fanbase is used to the idea that trophies by itself doesn't mean anything, because playing attractive football can still entertain fans and make the fanbase happy. Hence the reason why Arsenal is more willing to ensure Wenger's successors followed his passing football philosophy to some extend.

The main worry for your club is the fact that your youth academy is simply not producing the footballers required for the modern game in the mid-field and centre-back positions. When was the last time you guys managed to have a youth prospect that has the technical abilities to play well from the back as a CB, or dominate the midfield by controlling the tempo?

I don't think they listen to the fan base. I meant in sense of football people. There was framework of ideas but the football was truly bad. One part due to LVG man management, method, politic at the club, incompetent in recruitment. LVG turned down Kroos, while compromising on Rooney, Di Maria, and signed past it Bastian by his choice. There was no football people to help him, kept check him when he's off the rail.

This very same issue has been carrying on to Mourinho reign. Directors listen to fan base. That's for sure. But However, not in the way football people would do, those who can understand the situation to maintain certain continuity. Replacing LVG but with someone who can make use of some the ideas, instead doing a overhaul.

 

[Skills]

But the Man Utd fanbase thinks it's all about winning trophies at any cost. You guys are so used to winning under Alex Ferguson that you think the club has an inherent right to win trophies even if it means playing badly. The board actually listened to the fanbase and gave him Mourinho despite the objection of Alex Ferguson and other stalwarts at the club.

Arsenal went a long while without winning any trophies, so the fanbase is used to the idea that trophies by itself doesn't mean anything, because playing attractive football can still entertain fans and make the fanbase happy. Hence the reason why Arsenal is more willing to ensure Wenger's successors followed his passing football philosophy to some extend.

The main worry for your club is the fact that your youth academy is simply not producing the footballers required for the modern game in the mid-field and centre-back positions. When was the last time you guys managed to have a youth prospect that has the technical abilities to play well from the back as a CB, or dominate the midfield by controlling the tempo?

You've got it completely wrong. The Manchester United fanbase thinks its all about having a long term manager at any cost - someone to be there for the next 20 years. Success is then secondary.

I don't know if its do with domestic issues in the average household in the north west, but Man Utd fans need the manager to be a father figure for them. This is the biggest challenge that the club has - trying to be successful while also giving a psychology damaged fanbase what they want.

Unfortunately, unless we land on another Ferguson we're fecked. Because modern clubs need to be dynamic to be successful, and our approach of 'back the fecking manager' and 'give him time' is the polar opposite of how successful clubs are run.

 

[ray24]

This is not perfectly true. United fans realise that it's imperative that our club learns how to win the league without Ferguson. Once we break that duck, I think our fans will be alot more relaxed, because we'll know we have built a culture that can compete every year, and that would be fine with most.

And you are never going to win the league till you dare to take a risk and hire a manager that may not have won any titles before, but knows how to build an actual attacking team. From a tactical coaching perspective, you guys have been left behind even during the last years of Alex Ferguson's reign. Until you hire a manager that can coach an modern attacking team, you are highly unlikely to win too many titles.

I don't think they listen to the fan base. I meant in sense of football people. There was framework of ideas but the football was truly bad. One part due to LVG man management, method, politic at the club, incompetent in recruitment. LVG turned down Kroos, while compromising on Rooney, Di Maria, and signed past it Bastian by his choice. There was no football people to help him, kept check him when he's off the rail.

This very same issue has been carrying on to Mourinho reign. Directors listen to fan base. That's for sure. But However, not in the way football people would do, those who can understand the situation to maintain certain continuity. Replacing LVG but with someone who can make use of some the ideas, instead doing a overhaul.

The directors listened to the fanbase when they gave Ole a long-term contract just because of a new manager bounce. A good board knows when to listen to the fans and when to ignore the fans, but the Man Utd fanbase have not helped the board as well. You guys backed the wrong managers for far too long at times, while demanding for the wrong managers as well.

You've got it completely wrong. The Manchester United fanbase thinks its all about having a long term manager at any cost - someone to be there for the next 20 years. Success is then secondary.

I don't know if its do with domestic issues in the average household in the north west, but Man Utd fans need the manager to be a father figure for them. This is the biggest challenge that the club has - trying to be successful while also giving a psychology damaged fanbase what they want.

Unfortunately, unless we land on another Ferguson we're fecked. Because modern clubs need to be dynamic to be successful, and our approach of 'back the fecking manager' and 'give him time' is the polar opposite of how successful clubs are run.

It's fine to give a manager time, IF it is the right manager. Liverpool fans gave Klopp time, and even Man City gave Pep some time because they can see what the managers are trying to build. Arsenal fans gave Emery time, but once they saw he was not able to coach the team to play the way Arsenal ought to be playing, the fans were starting to push him out of the club.

Right now, Arsenal fans are more than happy to give Arteta time, because we can see what Arteta is trying to implement from a coaching and tactical perspective.

 

[cjj]

Dyche has indeed done a good job but again he's done well to maintain the status quo. If there is not continuous investment in the squad or an elite push from the board, he will fade away or move just like Eddie Howe, Tony Pulis, Moyes, Billic, Bruce, Martinez etc. To evolve is to suggest that he builds from Burnley's consistent Premier League safety finishes and become a consistent top 10 team and perhaps deeper cup runs with his current resource. That is the equivalent of expecting Poch to have done the same and become a regular and proper title contender.

He hasn't "maintained the status quo" though - he's battled fiercely against a lack of resources. They went: promoted (runners up), relegated (19th), promoted (champs), safe (16th), europe (7th), struggling with europe and the league (15th), then top 10 (10th) last season.

Dyche's job has always been made harder by the fact that they are run like a mid-table championship side. When they finished 7th they could have pushed on, but they didn't invest in a squad that needed more depth, so struggled to juggle europe with the league. They've never done much with cups and I don't blame them - there's no financial benefit in choosing domestic competitions over the league when you have their resources. Makes you wonder where all their money from the league is going.

I have no idea why you're comparing him to Howe, Pulis, Moyes, Billic, Bruce or Martinez - they are all very different managers. Feels like a lazy comparison.

As for those transfers, didn't half of them arrive at the beginning of last season?

No. Some, but not all.

2019: Sessegnon, Ndombele, Lo Celso (loan)
2018: -
2017: Davinson, Aurier, Moura,
2016: Janssen, Sissoko

That's not all the transfers, just some selective ones that were a good chunk of the budget.

Wasn't there a 12/18 month period where you didn't sign a single player? Nobody in the league has a great/fantastic track record of signings but they've had more opportunities to rectify it.

One of the things about spurs, as a club, is that we get a lot of reliable/credible info that leaks out. "ITK" if you will, but it is reliable and there are some key people in the media who are obviously close to what goes on a lot. The main fuss that window was that Pochettino thought the squad was too big and wanted players to be moved out, and yet he wouldn't actually tell the players as much (see Danny Rose or Trippier interviews. Wanyama and Sissoko were in the same boat). He kept saying he only wanted players that would improve the starting XI, not depth, so off the back of a 2nd place season it left very few options (we had a strong squad at its peak then). We of course went for Dybala late but all of the noises were that Poch was being stubborn. As ever, teflon Poch came out of it squeaky clean but definitely had responsibility for what happened.

Weren't Sissoko, Ndombele and Lo Celso were all last minute panic buys?

Ndombele was courted by Pochettino for a good year or two and he arrived early in the summer window. No idea how you can even observe that as 'panic'. Lo Celso was a loan with option and was also courted for a long time (before he was even at Betis).

All of this is very much my point - there are people who observe other teams (and managers) who have only a casual observance that is very flawed.

You've brought out a lot of stats but nobody can tell me that he's not a good coach and is able to get good performances from his team and raise their level. Is he perfect with transfers, building an expansive squad, challenging for titles/cups? No but in context, his potential and 'results to resource' is not below, a lot if any other managers.

The stats are there to be absorbed. What is 'a good coach'? What about the context of 'get(ting) good performances from his team and rais(ing) their level'.

So his record shows that he can raise a team's performances, but only for a short period. He pushes teams very hard to achieve this and that has had a significant effect on the squads he's had - they end up drained and, very often, badly injured due to all of this.
In addition, the results correlate with the suggestion that he succeeds with inexperienced/younger players but struggles with players once they are 'established' as stars etc. He had quite obvious (but no doubt glossed over) spats with the likes of Alderweireld, Walker, Trippier, Rose etc.


So would he be good for United? You probably don't want to listen anyway, but bear this in mind:

This article was written by a Southampton fan just after he'd agreed to join spurs. By the end of his 5+ years at spurs it still, mostly, ran true. I expect if he went to United and then left, you'd also read it and think "that sounds familiar":

https://www.fansnetwork.co.uk/football/southampton/news/35159/

 

[alexthelion]

I dont get where this miraculous transformation he did to Southampton and Spurs comes from that people say happened.

He carried on from Nigel Adkins who took Southampton from League 1 to the PL and was harshly sacked. He finished 8th in his first full season which Koeman improved on that twice and Puel equalled.

As for Spurs, they had not finished outside the top 8 since 2008, they were a hardly a bottom half club people keep on trying to make out when he took over.
Redknapp is the one that pushed Spurs out from being a nothing club, he's the one that got them first in the top 4, and won their first and only trophy since 1999.
Poch had a open goal during the year Leicester won the PL and blew it. He's never a won trophy. Him winning the CL with Spurs would have been as flukey Di Matteo winning it with Chelsea...

Some sanity in here at last.

 

[Fosu-Mens]

https://www.fansnetwork.co.uk/football/southampton/news/35159/

Good article. As for the tactics this is fairly spot-on regarding his main limitations and strengths as a manager: He is extremely good at coaching a team to dominate the game through possession and a high/hard press, but when it comes to the final third, his teams are unable to create chances without resorting to crossing by numbers and hoping that one or two of them finds the target. Still, his ability to coach a team into a cohesive high press and pass the ball around is miles better than what our team(11 individuals in reality) is able to do.

Not that I have watched a lot of Brighton games, but Potter seems to be able to do this as well. The only question is if he can coach them into breaking down balanced defences. If they can, then he would be an interesting prospect of a manager.

 

[cjj]

Good article. As for the tactics this is fairly spot-on regarding his main limitations and strengths as a manager: He is extremely good at coaching a team to dominate the game through possession and a high/hard press, but when it comes to the final third, his teams are unable to create chances without resorting to crossing by numbers and hoping that one or two of them finds the target. Still, his ability to coach a team into a cohesive high press and pass the ball around is miles better than what our team(11 individuals in reality) is able to do.

No guarantees. He did that for Spurs a long time ago, and we didn't have a cohesive high press or ability to pass (and, crucially, defend) for a good 18 months prior to his dismissal. That raises questions about whether the game has moved beyond his methods, whether his coaching is limited to less experienced or hungrier players, or whether that particular squad became disenchanted.

The more important factors are the myths: there is no tangible proof of him being good at using an academy (despite the rep), and although he has a rep for getting more out of players, he has also failed to improve quite a lot of them.

United fans would have to ask if they would still support him if he did what he did in his first season at Spurs - that is, freeze out key players and play naive football for a while until he could bring in a load of his former charges to support his methods. I don't know if Woodward would deal with Levy, or vice versa, but I would be surprised if he didn't attempt to sign a bunch of Spurs players and add an Argentinian theme to the squad. Plus jobs for the family. Moyes-esq culling of all backroom staff so Perez, D'Agostino, Jiminez and pequeño Pochettino.

If that did happen, it would be something like the 3rd or 4th squad overhaul since SAF left, which is pretty crazy.

Not that I have watched a lot of Brighton games, but Potter seems to be able to do this as well. The only question is if he can coach them into breaking down balanced defences. If they can, then he would be an interesting prospect of a manager.

Potter does seem like a prospect. It's going to be hard to judge him on the basis that Brighton are generally punching anyway. Unlikely to see him at a bigger club on the basis of the snobbery that exists towards unexciting British managers in the PL. Chris Hughton did a great job there but is ignored at a high level.

 

[Fosu-Mens]

Potter does seem like a prospect. It's going to be hard to judge him on the basis that Brighton are generally punching anyway. Unlikely to see him at a bigger club on the basis of the snobbery that exists towards unexciting British managers in the PL. Chris Hughton did a great job there but is ignored at a high level.

I would not say that Potter is unexciting, as they changed their approach radically from Hugthon to Potter in a short amount of time. Should be said that for the latter half of last season Potter approached games with a more pragmatic approach, so he can coach defensive structure and solidity as well. IMO he is the most exciting English manager by far, and that is not saying that the others are bad.

 

[Jonesno.8]

I guess the issue boils down to whether you think Pochetino would make "this" group of players any better. I believe and perhaps foolishly so that Ole has bought reasonably well but needs board support, without board support I don't see changing manager having any significant impact. If its Ole that holdings things up then sure reason to consider Poch but I'd give Ole this season at least.

 

[Cloud7]

You guys are such snakes turning on Ole like this. Can't you see the board have stitched him up? Give him a chance ffs

The club has multiple issues, as there have been for the entirety of the post SAF era. The squad certainly needs strengthening, but at the same time I've seen very little from Ole that makes me think even with a top class squad that he'll be the one to lead us to glory.

 

[Andycoleno9]

You guys are such snakes turning on Ole like this. Can't you see the board have stitched him up? Give him a chance ffs

He is here 2 years now ffs. How much we should give him? 5 years? And why? Because he is former player? He got job only because of it so that excuse is gone.
He is championship level manager (if even that) and with him we are fecked

 

[Champ]

Fecking hell, are people still coveting Poch?
This ship has sailed, the fact that Barca didn't want him and preferred Norman speaks volumes.

Poch is a myth, an over rated manager who relies on a plan A, with no plan B.
He doesn't change things when events conspire against him, he has rarely brought through youth players, the Southampton group were developed thanks to Nicola Corteses input and organisation from the youth team up, he doesn't get his team's playing attractive football, it's efficient yet lacking.

We should really stay well clear and I hope we do if Ole doesn't succeed this season.

 

[ThierryHenry14]

Fecking hell, are people still coveting Poch?
This ship has sailed, the fact that Barca didn't want him and preferred Norman speaks volumes.

Poch is a myth, an over rated manager who relies on a plan A, with no plan B.
He doesn't change things when events conspire against him, he has rarely brought through youth players, the Southampton group were developed thanks to Nicola Corteses input and organisation from the youth team up, he doesn't get his team's playing attractive football, it's efficient yet lacking.

We should really stay well clear and I hope we do if Ole doesn't succeed this season.

Barcelona is not a good example. Lots of uncertainty for the coach position because of the election next spring. Each candidate has his own project and ideas. There will be lots of opening for job every summer and no need to rush back into the job market for coach like Poch and Allegri. They got big package from their previous club so financial pressure anyway.

 

[criticalanalysis]

He hasn't "maintained the status quo" though - he's battled fiercely against a lack of resources. They went: promoted (runners up), relegated (19th), promoted (champs), safe (16th), europe (7th), struggling with europe and the league (15th), then top 10 (10th) last season.

Dyche's job has always been made harder by the fact that they are run like a mid-table championship side. When they finished 7th they could have pushed on, but they didn't invest in a squad that needed more depth, so struggled to juggle europe with the league. They've never done much with cups and I don't blame them - there's no financial benefit in choosing domestic competitions over the league when you have their resources. Makes you wonder where all their money from the league is going.

I have no idea why you're comparing him to Howe, Pulis, Moyes, Billic, Bruce or Martinez - they are all very different managers. Feels like a lazy comparison.



No. Some, but not all.

2019: Sessegnon, Ndombele, Lo Celso (loan)
2018: -
2017: Davinson, Aurier, Moura,
2016: Janssen, Sissoko

That's not all the transfers, just some selective ones that were a good chunk of the budget.



One of the things about spurs, as a club, is that we get a lot of reliable/credible info that leaks out. "ITK" if you will, but it is reliable and there are some key people in the media who are obviously close to what goes on a lot. The main fuss that window was that Pochettino thought the squad was too big and wanted players to be moved out, and yet he wouldn't actually tell the players as much (see Danny Rose or Trippier interviews. Wanyama and Sissoko were in the same boat). He kept saying he only wanted players that would improve the starting XI, not depth, so off the back of a 2nd place season it left very few options (we had a strong squad at its peak then). We of course went for Dybala late but all of the noises were that Poch was being stubborn. As ever, teflon Poch came out of it squeaky clean but definitely had responsibility for what happened.



Ndombele was courted by Pochettino for a good year or two and he arrived early in the summer window. No idea how you can even observe that as 'panic'. Lo Celso was a loan with option and was also courted for a long time (before he was even at Betis).

All of this is very much my point - there are people who observe other teams (and managers) who have only a casual observance that is very flawed.



The stats are there to be absorbed. What is 'a good coach'? What about the context of 'get(ting) good performances from his team and rais(ing) their level'.

So his record shows that he can raise a team's performances, but only for a short period. He pushes teams very hard to achieve this and that has had a significant effect on the squads he's had - they end up drained and, very often, badly injured due to all of this.
In addition, the results correlate with the suggestion that he succeeds with inexperienced/younger players but struggles with players once they are 'established' as stars etc. He had quite obvious (but no doubt glossed over) spats with the likes of Alderweireld, Walker, Trippier, Rose etc.


So would he be good for United? You probably don't want to listen anyway, but bear this in mind:

This article was written by a Southampton fan just after he'd agreed to join spurs. By the end of his 5+ years at spurs it still, mostly, ran true. I expect if he went to United and then left, you'd also read it and think "that sounds familiar":

https://www.fansnetwork.co.uk/football/southampton/news/35159/

On the whole, I'm going to say, I'll respect your depth of analyis on Poch but it doesn't really change my opinion. All of those issues are very valid but if we break down every top manager like that, there will be an equal amount of justifying that actually they aren't that good in certain aspects. The one 'constant' I feel for clubs like Spurs and Arsenal i.e peripheral top 4-6, is that their budget and squad depth is nothing like Utd, Chelsea, Liverpool and City. So to say for every 'failed' Ndombele or Jansen he has had, you could name the same plus more for those clubs.

The comparison with those other managers is that all those clubs, Bournemouth, Stoke, West Ham, Newcastle, Hull, Swansea etc have done the same (of course some of those names are not the same as others in terms of club size) with varying degrees of success and longetivity staying/pushing up the Premier League table. Dyche has done a good job period, no matter what happens this season (not that I'm saying his team is going to be relegation candidates) but he is stretching the limits at the resource available and it only takes a run of bad form to undo all that good.

The same is when you're trying to achieve top 4 parity/chase trophies. If you don't stop upgrading and improving, you are already one step behind. Therefore maintaining the status quo is the achievement imo.

I'll give you benefit of the doubt on the ITK stuff but it vastly contradicts a lot of the (admittedly casually observed) things he has said in the press regarding transfers etc. I'm not going to look into that much depth but here are some links from 2018 and last summer:

https://talksport.com/football/580352/tottenham-news-mauricio-pochettino-transfers/
https://blog.betvictor.com/en-gb/sports/football/premier-league/transfer-future-pochettino/

Briefly reading that also reminded me he was operating the squad achieving top 4 whilst you guys had that stadium being built. That's not a minor in the background thing. Now I'm not going to say he doesn't deserve criticism for squad/on the pitch failings but like Wenger at Arsenal, his hands were definitely tied.

As for the tactical criticisms, which manager doesn't want to play his best players especially when his plan A is effective? Look at Klopp and Guardiola, they abuse their rotation of 11-15 and then fill the bench with £20-40m talent. I'm not comparing him to them of course but that is true for any successful manager and top team.

We are coveting or would prefer someone like him because we have a good squad with potential (despite a lot of our fans scapegoating the board for not signing £100m Sancho and not asking why Ole can't get us playing like a cohesive team after almost 2 years). And there's a lot to think/hope based on his tenure at Spurs, that he could do well here with our vastly superior resource and quality rotation of players. I mean who else is actually available that doesn't have their own issues? For every LVG and Mourinho, you may have a Tuchel and Nagelsmann but none of them are flawless if you want to scrutinise also.

Edit: had a brief of that Southampton article:

Spoiler: Article

Overall Pochettino has been good for Southampton Football Club, he has taken us forward, but the overiding feeling is that perhaps he would not be able to take us forward much more, indeed could any manager, look at the clubs who finished above us and its a hard task to move up even one place.


But I think this season has been one of a squad performing to its capabilities rather than one that has overperformed, on a points per game ratio we really should have got more, our inability to beat the top sides asks a big question of Pochettino and there is that feeling that he inherited a good squad about to blossom, yes he took it forward, but he in many respects steered the ship rather than set a new course.


This sounds a little like sour grapes, but those who have read my articles over a season will know that what I have said here is nothing more than I have been saying all year.


Mauricio Pochettino is a good coach, he has helped our players develop as players, his style is good that is for sure, but I do feel that as a head coach he lacks that something that can turn average sides into better ones, good coaches change games unfortunately Pochettino will never do that, his tactics either work or they don't and if they dont there is no Plan B

Basically he's done par for course and that he couldn't raise a team like Southampton into something more. The fact they are still thereabouts in that mid-table position today tells you all you need to know about how realistic that was/is.

If he can do par for course for at this club, I'd expect a really strong Utd side. if we fail with him to get to the top top, then we move on and build on that top of that just like all the clubs in Europe are doing. And I guess harshly that's what we're potentially suggesting with Ole; he has done a good job to laid the foundations and fix the broken mess we were but we are probably in a position to upgrade again.

Ranieri and Klopp aside, who can you say has actually achieved more than above average to their resources available at the top end of the league?

 

[Champ]

Barcelona is not a good example. Lots of uncertainty for the coach position because of the election next spring. Each candidate has his own project and ideas. There will be lots of opening for job every summer and no need to rush back into the job market for coach like Poch and Allegri. They got big package from their previous club so financial pressure anyway.

I use Barca as an example due to Poch putting himself in the shop window for the job.
He actively promoted himself for the job yet got overlooked.

 

[Greck]

I use Barca as an example due to Poch putting himself in the shop window for the job.
He actively promoted himself for the job yet got overlooked.

Did he really?

 

[Champ]

Did he really?

Yep,
In an interview with media whilst Barca's managerial search was underway he back tracked on previous comments regarding never managing Barca.
He said he wouldn't say the same things (never coaching Barca) again as you never know what might happen.
Now some may think it's just a comment. However taken into context, the question put to him was would he coach Barca after the comments, to which he evidently backtracked due to the rumours flying around and refused to rule himself out, evidently putting himself back in the frame for the job.
Evidently Barca gave him a wide berth.

 

[Nou_Camp99]

A serious look at a guy who Spurs didn't even think could land them the Carabao Cup, let alone a league title.

And he's going to come here and challenge for the major honours? How exactly? This job will destroy him.

 

[Murray3007]

am 50/50 on Poch,

Negative - don't think he did the miracle job people talk about at spurs or Southampton, add in he did spend some big money on players at times and would say most of them ended pretty poor, was very lucky in the CL to get to the final,

Positive - loves to give young boys a chance, players up to the last season always gave everything on the park for him, which we don't see now with this current united side, don't bother me he never won a trophy there as would people really think he was a better manager if they won a league cup ?

if Ole was to go, I wouldn't be against the signing but don't think it would get me to excited either,