A serious look at Mauricio Pochettino

[el3mel]

Totally forgetting that United is a club that always have had huge successful periods when we had players who developed at the club AND under managers who liked/were successful at developing them.

What are you talking about? We've always developed our own players. It's part of our heritage.

The hell are you fecking talking about?

Developing youth and waiting for them to become top players alone is pretty much useless nowadays and will end with you left behind if all your competitors in the league title actually don't give a feck about it and are splashing money on big signings year in year out. The time and competitors have changed.

Beside, Fergie usually didn't just throw youth in the team like that. He did it once, the class of 92, as they were exceptional and came at a certain time, but later on he never did this experiment again. All our next teams had a certain core of experienced old players with youth developing under them, then these youth took the spot from the experienced players once they develop enough and became later the experienced players themselves. He got Rooney and Ronaldo while RVN was around, then the 2 youngsters started to take the main spot once RVN left. When Rooney turned to the experienced player himself he got Chicharito and Welbeck, and so on. This happened in other positions as well. That's the reason why Fergie kept going from generation to next in a smooth way without much struggling.

 

[Greck]

Developing youth and waiting for them to become top players alone is pretty much useless nowadays and will end with you left behind if all your competitors in the league title actually don't give a feck about it and are splashing money on big signings year in year out. The time and competitors have changed.

Beside, Fergie usually didn't just throw youth in the team like that. He did it once, the class of 92, as they were exceptional and came at a certain time, but later on he never did this experiment again. All our next teams had a certain core of experienced old players with youth developing under them, then these youth took the spot from the experienced players once they develop enough and became later the experienced players themselves. He got Rooney and Ronaldo while RVN was around, then the 2 youngsters started to take the main spot once RVN left. When Rooney turned to the experienced player himself he got Chicharito and Welbeck, and so on. This happened in other positions as well. That's the reason why Fergie kept going from generation to next in a smooth way without much struggling.

On the contrary I think most teams are going the route of developing their own youngsters because of the crazy fees in the market. Even Madrid can't snap up galacticos like before. When clubs do buy they buy cheaper young players on the cusp of breaking out.

 

[GlastonSpur]

I think you must struggle to read. I literally said 'forget developing players' as for a club of Uniteds stature we shouldnt have to rely on that as we aren't a selling club. But the seeing as you're the fourth biggest club in London I can see why you do. In terms of squad yours is far superior. You talk about finishing above us before last season is that something you will put on a plaque and stick in that dusty tomb you call a trophy cabinet? Poch isnt a winner now and he never will be. And his interview last month was it after the inter game where he is already talking about the media disrespecting you even though you hardly get any media attention despite being in a major shambles this season and winning nothing the previous. United is the big time and he clearly cant handle the pressure.

Yet another post chock-full of contradictions:

* Spurs supposedly "hardly get any media attention", yet he is supposedly (according to your previous post) cracking under this pressure.

* You cite one interview from Pochettino, yet ignore the virtually twice-weekly circus of Mourinho's interviews.

* United don't need to develop players, yet the Spurs squad - containing many players who have developed under - Pochettino is "far superior" despite your vast spending. This strongly suggests that maybe United do need to develop players.

* Spurs season is "in major shambles", despite being only 2 points from the top of the table. If we make to joint top on points, will it then reduce to being only a minor shambles?

 

[el3mel]

On the contrary I think most teams are going the route of developing their own youngsters because of the crazy fees in the market. Even Madrid can't snap up galacticos like before. When clubs do buy they buy cheaper young players on the cusp of breaking out.

Clubs in England that we compete with don't. City and Livepool are splashing the cash with insane fees and Chelsea had just spent 70m on a GK.

And Madrid did something similar to what I said Fergie used to do i.e. getting youngsters and keeping them on the bench for several years so that once the old experienced player leave these youngsters start to take over. They didn't simply throw Asensio around as a starter from the start.

 

[The United]

Developing youth and waiting for them to become top players alone is pretty much useless nowadays and will end with you left behind if all your competitors in the league title actually don't give a feck about it and are splashing money on big signings year in year out. The time and competitors have changed.

Beside, Fergie usually didn't just throw youth in the team like that. He did it once, the class of 92, as they were exceptional and came at a certain time, but later on he never did this experiment again. All our next teams had a certain core of experienced old players with youth developing under them, then these youth took the spot from the experienced players once they develop enough and became later the experienced players themselves. He got Rooney and Ronaldo while RVN was around, then the 2 youngsters started to take the main spot once RVN left. When Rooney turned to the experienced player himself he got Chicharito and Welbeck, and so on. This happened in other positions as well. That's the reason why Fergie kept going from generation to next in a smooth way without much struggling.

So you described how United and Fergie used to develop young players to become champions. The guy who we quoted should read this.

Did you quote wrong people?!

 

[Johan07]

Well, it turned out with United winning 3 trophies in 4 years, which is exactly 3 more than Pochettino.

And your point is? My was that it is a lazy argument. In the same way that lack of trophies is not a hurdle for actually winning trophies; having won trophies is not a guarantee for doing so going forward. There are a lot of good arguments for and against all of the managers who are mentioned in this and other threads; including Pochettino. Yours is one of the weakest though IMO.
I have no real interest discussing who of Mourinho and Pochettino has performed better historically with the resources at their disposal. Focus should be on what is the best for the club going forward. For me Pochettino would be the best choice available; if he was. Which all signs point to is not the case and then this discussion is pointless to begin with.
One final point though, Pochettino not having won anything with Spurs so far might be the one reason that he would consider United going forward. We are the bigger club with more resources and over time that will always equate to a bigger chance of winning something. So your "argument" might even be in our favour so to say....

 

[el3mel]

So you described how United and Fergie used to develop young players to become champions. The guy who we quoted should read this.

Did you quote wrong people?!

He was still using a core of old experienced players not just throwing youth around and waiting years for them to develop while winning nothing.

And anyway, as I said, in the current era if your competitors are splashing the cash everywhere on big signings you can't aimply go and say "I'm going to follow club traditions and develop youth anyway". You will end up being lett behind.

 

[el3mel]

And your point is? My was that it is a lazy argument. In the same way that lack of trophies is not a hurdle for actually winning trophies; having won trophies is not a guarantee for doing so going forward. There are a lot of good arguments for and against all of the managers who are mentioned in this and other threads; including Pochettino. Yours is one of the weakest though IMO.
I have no real interest discussing who of Mourinho and Pochettino has performed better historically with the resources at their disposal. Focus should be on what is the best for the club going forward. For me Pochettino would be the best choice available; if he was. Which all signs point to is not the case and then this discussion is pointless to begin with.
One final point though, Pochettino not having won anything with Spurs so far might be the one reason that he would consider United going forward. We are the bigger club with more resources and over time that will always equate to a bigger chance of winning something. So your "argument" might even be in our favour so to say....

Poch had several chances to try and win something but he usually threw it out or the window. Several times he played a secone string in Europe League and cups. It wasn't long ago when he was playing second string team in CL group. He keeps going on after each cup exit downplaying winning them like he's too good for these trophies.

It's his own problem that he didn't win anything so far, not resources or the club he's managing.

 

[Johan07]

Poch had several chances to try and win something but he usually threw it out or the window. Several times he played a secone string in Europe League and cups. It wasn't long ago when he was playing second string team in CL group. He keeps going on after each cup exit downplaying winning them like he's too good for these trophies.

It's his own problem that he didn't win anything so far, not resources or the club he's managing.

Spurs does not have the depth that the other top6-clubs in the PL have and that is very much down to resources I would argue. It makes it much more difficult to rotate the squad; if one is still in most of the competitions - and to do so without affecting performance.
And you need to rotate the squad in todays game, thats just how it is.
Its probably the biggest challange for any Spurs-manager and a very difficult one to come to terms with. Its also the major reason Spurs probably will not win anything; anytime soon. Its absolutetly down to resources IMO and not the manager.

 

[andersj]

Poch had several chances to try and win something but he usually threw it out or the window. Several times he played a secone string in Europe League and cups. It wasn't long ago when he was playing second string team in CL group. He keeps going on after each cup exit downplaying winning them like he's too good for these trophies.

It's his own problem that he didn't win anything so far, not resources or the club he's managing.

Maybe he had to play second string to keep his team in Champions League next year? I rather enjoy the way he approach a loss. Rarely excuses. Rarely pointing to others. Rarely moaning. I know a guy who could learn a thing or two.

http://www.football-observatory.com/IMG/sites/b5wp/2018/233/en/

In each competition Pochettino enters there are usually at least four teams that have spent close to twice as much assembling there squad as him. For him to win a conpetition where one of these teams enters, it is not enough that he «overperform». The gap in resources is to big. The other teams have to «underperform». Not one, but all four of them. That will rarely happen. That he consistently beats one or two of these teams, coached by Klopp, Conte, Pep and Mourinho is so impressive!

You can also note that the gap between Arsenal and Spurs used to be a lot bigger. But the success of Pochettino has helped close the gap. That imply that he, over the last four years, has consistently performed better than three-four teams with a lot more resources.

He could prioritize differently to win a trophy. But he would be stupid to do so. The most important thing for Spurs is to stay in the Champions League. They could do that by winning the Europe League, but the element of «chance» is bigger in the Europe League.

Furthermore, I think we should remember that the most important difference between a club that has spent €673-976 mill and a team that has spent half that is the level of their substitutes. Man Utd, City and Chelsea could probably field two teams that costs more than Spurs first team. That will hamper the possibility of rotation greatly.

I must also say that I’m so impressed by the results of Spurs so far. They had a really tough build up to this season with a lot of england and belgium players, but are just two points behind. (The were also very unlucky not to get a penalty in the final minute against Liverpool.)

 

[el3mel]

Spurs does not have the depth that the other top6-clubs in the PL have and that is very much down to resources I would argue. It makes it much more difficult to rotate the squad; if one is still in most of the competitions - and to do so without affecting performance.
And you need to rotate the squad in todays game, thats just how it is.
Its probably the biggest challange for any Spurs-manager and a very difficult one to come to terms with. Its also the major reason Spurs probably will not win anything; anytime soon. Its absolutetly down to resources IMO and not the manager.

What is the point of rotation in Europe League and sacrificing it to get 4th spot while you can go and win the competition and still qualify to CL ? What's actually thr point of qualifying to European cup if you're going to not play your best team in it ? Why all the efforts for 1 whole year to qualify to it then ?

Throwing out CL or Europan trophy to just qualify for it the next season is a loser mentality. You can't simply convince me he can't field a team to defeat Gent in Europe League.

He's not winning trophies because he chose to. He chose to threw his chance to win something several times by not playing his best team and concentrating on getting top 4. He downplays these cups and trophies whenever he's KOed from them as if he's too good for them and only PL and CL are worth his attention.

It's his own problem that he's not winning much.

 

[Sky1981]

What is the point of rotation in Europe League and sacrificing it to get 4th spot while you can go and win the competition and still qualify to CL ? What's actually thr point of qualifying to European cup if you're going to not play your best team in it ? Why all the efforts for 1 whole year to qualify to it then ?

Throwing out CL or Europan trophy to just qualify for it the next season is a loser mentality. You can't simply convince me he can't field a team to defeat Gent in Europe League.

He's not winning trophies because he chose to. He chose to threw his chance to win something several times by not playing his best team and concentrating on getting top 4. He downplays these cups and trophies whenever he's KOed from them as if he's too good for them and only PL and CL are worth his attention.

It's his own problem that he's not winning much.

His priority is keeping his job. Not about glory. How do i know? I dont, just guessing.

Fighting in a two front with a fierce competition back home can see him ended up with no cups and 6th place (if they go all out in champions league, it's a possibility. An injury here, fatigue there, shit can happens pretty fast).

Nobody would blame him if he crashes out in knockout, everyone will still praise him for finishing 4th. He keeps his job, his reputation intact, never his fault not to win a thing with Tottenham. I mean, look at what he has to work with, a shoestring budget, lack of quality depth, lack of world class player, he's doing a great job keeping them top 4th.

 

[Sky1981]

Developing youth and waiting for them to become top players alone is pretty much useless nowadays and will end with you left behind if all your competitors in the league title actually don't give a feck about it and are splashing money on big signings year in year out. The time and competitors have changed.

Beside, Fergie usually didn't just throw youth in the team like that. He did it once, the class of 92, as they were exceptional and came at a certain time, but later on he never did this experiment again. All our next teams had a certain core of experienced old players with youth developing under them, then these youth took the spot from the experienced players once they develop enough and became later the experienced players themselves. He got Rooney and Ronaldo while RVN was around, then the 2 youngsters started to take the main spot once RVN left. When Rooney turned to the experienced player himself he got Chicharito and Welbeck, and so on. This happened in other positions as well. That's the reason why Fergie kept going from generation to next in a smooth way without much struggling.

People loves to paint as if we're the bastion of youth machines. Class of 92 apart our most successful youth is darren fletcher and john oshea.

 

[cyberman]

We forget how we developed youth though. We didn't cry because 18 year old Scholes didn't make the bench or constantly play 18 yo kids because "Thats how they learn"
They also don't have to be academy graduates to be in the conversation. Rooney, Giggs and Ronaldo are Sir Alex greatest achievements in youth development and 2/3 of them never set foot in our academy.

 

[Red_Aaron]

People loves to paint as if we're the bastion of youth machines. Class of 92 apart our most successful youth is darren fletcher and john oshea.

Jonny Evans was as good as those 2 and wes brown was better than all of them.

Besides, united produce a huge number of players who have professional careers at all levels, far more than any other club in the country iirc I know that's not what this discussion is about and we're talking about players who make an impact here but nevertheless this is something I'm proud of and I imagine everyone at the club is too It's not something we should turn away from in the pursuit of instant success

 

[Kapardin]

Developing youth and waiting for them to become top players alone is pretty much useless nowadays and will end with you left behind if all your competitors in the league title actually don't give a feck about it and are splashing money on big signings year in year out. The time and competitors have changed.

Agree with this. One thing I won't blame Jose for is if he chooses to rely on experience. There is this utopian dream for some that we will win the league with the U-20s, it just isn't possible.

Myself, I am excited by seeing world class players exhibit passion for our club and putting in electrifying performances on the pitch. They can be 20 years old or 30, I don't care so long as they give their all for the club and also entertain us.

 

[Johan07]

What is the point of rotation in Europe League and sacrificing it to get 4th spot while you can go and win the competition and still qualify to CL ? What's actually thr point of qualifying to European cup if you're going to not play your best team in it ? Why all the efforts for 1 whole year to qualify to it then ?

Throwing out CL or Europan trophy to just qualify for it the next season is a loser mentality. You can't simply convince me he can't field a team to defeat Gent in Europe League.

He's not winning trophies because he chose to. He chose to threw his chance to win something several times by not playing his best team and concentrating on getting top 4. He downplays these cups and trophies whenever he's KOed from them as if he's too good for them and only PL and CL are worth his attention.

It's his own problem that he's not winning much.

I refer to #andersj post above. He put it more eloquently then I did. If you dont see the reasoning; good riddance and have a nice day.

 

[BusbyMalone]

Developing youth and waiting for them to become top players alone is pretty much useless nowadays and will end with you left behind if all your competitors in the league title actually don't give a feck about it and are splashing money on big signings year in year out. The time and competitors have changed.

Beside, Fergie usually didn't just throw youth in the team like that. He did it once, the class of 92, as they were exceptional and came at a certain time, but later on he never did this experiment again. All our next teams had a certain core of experienced old players with youth developing under them, then these youth took the spot from the experienced players once they develop enough and became later the experienced players themselves. He got Rooney and Ronaldo while RVN was around, then the 2 youngsters started to take the main spot once RVN left. When Rooney turned to the experienced player himself he got Chicharito and Welbeck, and so on. This happened in other positions as well. That's the reason why Fergie kept going from generation to next in a smooth way without much struggling.

The guy i quoted is talking nonsense. His quote was:

I literally said 'forget developing players' as for a club of Uniteds stature we shouldnt have to rely on that as we aren't a selling club

It makes no sense whatsoever. The stature of the club should have no bearing on whether you develop players or not. it's a nonsensical, illogical argument. Also, nobody is really saying that you should rely on developing youth players alone without the mixture of experienced players there. The implication that only selling clubs need to develop youth is a nonsense, too. He's talking utter rubbish.

 

[andersj]

What is the point of rotation in Europe League and sacrificing it to get 4th spot while you can go and win the competition and still qualify to CL ? What's actually thr point of qualifying to European cup if you're going to not play your best team in it ? Why all the efforts for 1 whole year to qualify to it then ?

Throwing out CL or Europan trophy to just qualify for it the next season is a loser mentality. You can't simply convince me he can't field a team to defeat Gent in Europe League.

He's not winning trophies because he chose to. He chose to threw his chance to win something several times by not playing his best team and concentrating on getting top 4. He downplays these cups and trophies whenever he's KOed from them as if he's too good for them and only PL and CL are worth his attention.

It's his own problem that he's not winning much.

Actually, it is a winner mentality. And I know we cant convince you. You have already decided. Your way of argument clearly show that when you have decided, you are unwilling to change opinion. No matter what facts or arguments you face.

Pochettino wins every year he qualify for the Champions League. The point of qualifying is that it will ensure the club keeps getting funds to invest. And as the club keep investing they slowly close the huge gap to the other clubs in the Premier League. Step by step. Stone by stone. Organic growth. That is how you build a club.

Pochettino ensures that Spurs remains competitive while they have the funds to invest in a new stadium. The new stadium will help Spurs remain competitive for the next 50 years.

Winning the Europe Leage would perhaps be easier if he went all in on it. However, more is left to chance in a cup competition than in the league. Consequently, going for a trophy at the cost of games in the Premier League would be more risky. To ensure that the club is competitive and keep growing the best move, statistically, is therefor to maximize your performance in the league.

 

[BusbyMalone]

I’d take him at United. The fact that he hasn’t won a trophy doesn’t bother me particularly. He regularly goes into a season as 4th/5th favourite to win the title, and a big underdog when it comes to winning the Champions League. If he went on and won some nonsense cup like the Carabao Cup my opinion on him wouldn’t change in the slightest. He got this squad to the point where you expect them to win a trophy. That’s an achievement in itself, especially when you consider the discrepancy in spending between them and the rest of the top 4/5. He’s a very good coach who i think would be great for us.

 

[Bestietom]

Has not won anything yet, but likes to bring on youngsters and looks after them well. Plays attractive attacking football but with a good defence also. Don't know if Manchester United would be too big for him but worth a try.

 

[Kostur]

Has not won anything yet, but likes to bring on youngsters and looks after them well. Plays attractive attacking football but with a good defence also. Don't know if Manchester United would be too big for him but worth a try.

He'd be the best babysitter in the world then.

 

[el3mel]

The guy i quoted is talking nonsense. His quote was:



It makes no sense whatsoever. The stature of the club should have no bearing on whether you develop players or not. it's a nonsensical, illogical argument. Also, nobody is really saying that you should rely on developing youth players alone without the mixture of experienced players there. The implication that only selling clubs need to develop youth is a nonsense, too. He's talking utter rubbish.

How is the stature ot the club not having baring on it ? If you're a big club that your aim is to win trophies regularly and competr on the biggest trophiew year in year out, you'll definitely not go the route of developing youth exteneively and will focus on getting ready made playera. Your objective will be to win trophies and that will be with the best playere, not to develop youth, wait years for them to develop then sell them.

Several times people comment on a potential signing as "it doesn't have a resale value", what is the point ? You're not buying players to sell them later to worry about resale value. You're buying to win now. That's the only objective.

Fans of big teams are less patient, need trophies and care more about winning and instant impact on the pitch. Not many withstand seeing an inconsistent youngster develop regularly for some years before he starts to perform. You can see it yourself in the likes of Rashford and Scott threads. No patience whatesover, even from me so I'm not saying I'm any different.

That's different from clubs whose aim is to finish as high ss possible close to top teams while playing some good football and selling their players regularly.

So no, simply put, there are clubs and environment more suited to develop youth, giving them time and patience they need without much pressure the club or fans. United, currently, isn't one of these good environment to develop youth, for several factors, pressure, targets, lack of patience..etc. Most top clubs are the same anyway. Of course the stature of the club matters.

 

[BusbyMalone]

How is the stature ot the club not having baring on it ? If you're a big club that your aim is to win trophies regularly and competr on the biggest trophiew year in year out, you'll definitely not go the route of developing youth exteneively and will focus on getting ready made playera. Your objective will be to win trophies and that will be with the best playere, not to develop youth, wait years for them to develop then sell them.

Several times people comment on a potential signing as "it doesn't have a resale value", what is the point ? You're not buying players to sell them later to worry about resale value. You're buying to win now. That's the only objective.

Fans of big teams are less patient, need trophies and care more about winning and instant impact on the pitch. Not many withstand seeing an inconsistent youngster develop regularly for some years before he starts to perform. You can see it yourself in the likes of Rashford and Scott threads. No patience whatesover, even from me so I'm not saying I'm any different.

That's different from clubs whose aim is to finish as high ss possible close to top teams while playing some good football and selling their players regularly.

So no, simply put, there are clubs and environment more suited to develop youth, giving them time and patience they need without much pressure the club or fans. United, currently, isn't one of these good environment to develop youth, for several factors, pressure, targets, lack of patience..etc. Most top clubs are the same anyway. Of course the stature of the club matters.

No, the stature of the club doesn't matter. Christ. You're making it sound like you either develop youth and to hell with everything else, or you focus on getting ready made players through the door that will win you all the trophies. It's not that black and white. You can do both. Some clubs will obviously concentrate more on developing youth due to financial restrictions or the inability to attract "big name" players. I say it has no bearing because it doesn't. I don't care what stature of club you are, you can still develop youth (and should, imo) AND have ready-made players there that will increase your chances of winning trophies. I'm not advocating we have a whole team full of youth players and struggle for season after season until they maybe become good enough. It's not an all or nothing scenario.

And why do you keep bringing up developing youth just to sell them. That's not the only reason why you would develop youth. You seem to be arguing against something i've never even said. I took umbrage with that quote, and you're making a slightly different one. I never said that we should (or any big club for that matter) strictly develop youth and to hell with the rest.

 

[el3mel]

No, the stature of the club doesn't matter. Christ. You're making it sound like you either develop youth and to hell with everything else, or you focus on getting ready made players through the door that will win you all the trophies. It's not that black and white. You can do both. Some clubs will obviously concentrate more on developing youth due to financial restrictions or the inability to attract "big name" players. I say it has no bearing because it doesn't. I don't care what stature of club you are, you can still develop youth (and should, imo) AND have ready-made players there that will increase your chances of winning trophies. I'm not advocating we have a whole team full of youth players and struggle for season after season until they maybe become good enough. It's not an all or nothing scenario.

And why do you keep bringing up developing youth just to sell them. That's not the only reason why you would develop youth. You seem to be arguing against something i've never even said. I took umbrage with that quote, and you're making a slightly different one. I never said that we should (or any big club for that matter) strictly develop youth and to hell with the rest.

The bold parts pretty much describes why the stature of the club actually matters when developing youth. In other clubs with low stature young players play more aside from their form, with less pressure, more patience so they take their time to develop. In big stature club they usually play second foddle to top and experienced players when it matters the most, and they are harshly criticized whenever they don't make good impact, or even being sent on loan to other small clubs when they can play more regularly. A youngster playing as a starter in a big club regularly needs to be an exceptional talent.

So how you develop your youngster is surely affected by your stature as a club. Some clubs afford it more and some less, how can not be due to your club stature and targets ? You can't appoint a United manager because one of his criteria is "he develops youth well". Not just that it's actually not the aim here anyway, but also it's pretty hard to take a youngster from the academy and give him enough time at United till he becomes good enough. You hire your manager based on his football or his ability to win trophies. That's what the poster you were replaying to earlier was saying.

 

[James Peril]

I’d take him at United. The fact that he hasn’t won a trophy doesn’t bother me particularly. He regularly goes into a season as 4th/5th favourite to win the title, and a big underdog when it comes to winning the Champions League. If he went on and won some nonsense cup like the Carabao Cup my opinion on him wouldn’t change in the slightest. He got this squad to the point where you expect them to win a trophy. That’s an achievement in itself, especially when you consider the discrepancy in spending between them and the rest of the top 4/5. He’s a very good coach who i think would be great for us.

A trophy is never nonsense. It shows character and hunger to motivate players even in the Carabao Cup, the final is never easy if a top team is on the other side of the pitch. Letting the trophy go and «focusing» on the league and CL is always a chicken move, he knows they’ll never win those. A trophy means everything for a team that has never won anything together, it creates vital experience and accomplishment within the ranks. I remember United winning the League Cup under Ferguson when we hadn’t won anything for like two years (which felt like a Tottenham-decade or two for us back then) and it showed in the players that it was utterly important to life that trophy. I think we then went on to win three league titles in a row. Winning a trophy could be a catalyst for winning more, and more, and more.

 

[BusbyMalone]

The bold parts pretty much describes why the stature of the club actually matters when developing youth. In other clubs with low stature young players play more aside from their form, with less pressure, more patience so they take their time to develop. In big stature club they usually play second foddle to top and experienced players when it matters the most, and they are harshly criticized whenever they don't make good impact, or even being sent on loan to other small clubs when they can play more regularly. A youngster playing as a starter in a big club regularly needs to be an exceptional talent.

So how you develop your youngster is surely affected by your stature as a club. Some clubs afford it more and some less, how can not be due to your club stature and targets ? You can't appoint a United manager because one of his criteria is "he develops youth well". Not just that it's actually not the aim here anyway, but also it's pretty hard to take a youngster from the academy and give him enough time at United till he becomes good enough. You hire your manager based on his football or his ability to win trophies. That's what the poster you were replaying to earlier was saying.

No he wasn't. He said

I literally said 'forget developing players' as for a club of Uniteds stature we shouldnt have to rely on that as we aren't a selling club

The stature of the club does't matter insofar as regardless of the size, developing youth is always important. I don't care what size club you are. I never said that i disagree with he fact that some clubs operate differently and have different expectations, therefore they can afford to concentrate more on youth. Again, you're debating and making an argument that i haven't made. And of course you can appoint a manager who's known for his ability to develop youth. What a daft thing to say. I never said we should solely concentrate on youth to the detriment of the team. Not sure how many times i have to say that. My issue is with the quote above. The implication that we're not a selling club so the ability to develop youth shouldn't be a concern for us is rubbish. That's what i'm saying.

 

[BusbyMalone]

A trophy is never nonsense. It shows character and hunger to motivate players even in the Carabao Cup, the final is never easy if a top team is on the other side of the pitch. Letting the trophy go and «focusing» on the league and CL is always a chicken move, he knows they’ll never win those. A trophy means everything for a team that has never won anything together, it creates vital experience and accomplishment within the ranks. I remember United winning the League Cup under Ferguson when we hadn’t won anything for like two years (which felt like a Tottenham-decade or two for us back then) and it showed in the players that it was utterly important to life that trophy. I think we then went on to win three league titles in a row. Winning a trophy could be a catalyst for winning more, and more, and more.

My point is, that him winning that cup wouldn't change my opinion on him in the slightest. United possibly hiring Poch should not be determined on whether he's one the Carabao Cup cup or not. It's a petty cup. I'm not completely dismissing the importance of trophies, per se, just that i don't put much importance in that one. Personally, i think he's shown more than enough for me to happily take him at this club at the end of the season. Just my opinion on the matter, of course. I know some people want to see him win a trophy first, which is fine. Just does't bother me.

 

[sam147]

The hell are you fecking talking about?

Do tell me how many players Sir Alex developed after the class of 92?! Fitting you ignore the rest of the post. United dont need a manager whose man positive is he develops players. We need a manager who wins. Because thats what the club is about.

 

[adexkola]

A trophy is never nonsense. It shows character and hunger to motivate players even in the Carabao Cup, the final is never easy if a top team is on the other side of the pitch. Letting the trophy go and «focusing» on the league and CL is always a chicken move, he knows they’ll never win those. A trophy means everything for a team that has never won anything together, it creates vital experience and accomplishment within the ranks. I remember United winning the League Cup under Ferguson when we hadn’t won anything for like two years (which felt like a Tottenham-decade or two for us back then) and it showed in the players that it was utterly important to life that trophy. I think we then went on to win three league titles in a row. Winning a trophy could be a catalyst for winning more, and more, and more.

Tell that to Arsenal fans after they won 3 FA cups. Or everyone else who thought Wenger had to go, trophies be damned.

 

[el3mel]

No he wasn't. He said


The stature of the club does't matter insofar as regardless of the size, developing youth is always important. I don't care what size club you are. I never said that i disagree with he fact that some clubs operate differently and have different expectations, therefore they can afford to concentrate more on youth. Again, you're debating and making an argument that i haven't made. And of course you can appoint a manager who's known for his ability to develop youth. What a daft thing to say. I never said we should solely concentrate on youth to the detriment of the team. Not sure how many times i have to say that. My issue is with the quote above. The implication that we're not a selling club so the ability to develop youth shouldn't be a concern for us is rubbish. That's what i'm saying.

He said that we shouldn't have to relay on it, not that we shouldn't develop youth at all, so I don't understand your problem with the sentence if you also think we shouldn't field a full youth team.

 

[TheFlagStaysDown]

Fans in an absolute state aren't they. First are the facts. Forget developing players he isnt backroom staff. The fact is he has a better team than us apart from DDG and Pogba yet finished below United. He has a 30 goal season striker. He isnt a miracle worker. Why couldnt he make Jannsenn look any good? On top of that their playstyle is overrated. Most goals from set pieces last season. Not to mention the fact the man is cracking under media pressure at Spurs and people think he can handle United. A serious look maybe for a club like Valencia or Dortmund. Not United. And thats backed up by him nor winnng anything, throwing league cup games and his naivety not to change tactics against Juventus.

what a horrible comment

 

[BusbyMalone]

Do tell me how many players Sir Alex developed after the class of 92?! Fitting you ignore the rest of the post. United dont need a manager whose man positive is he develops players. We need a manager who wins. Because thats what the club is about.

I've already highlighted above quite extensively the problem i had with your quote. As for the bold part, i don't know. I'll have to have a look. But, let's be honest, i'm not going to because that's not the issue i had with your quote. Again, i've explained all this above.

 

[Bearded One]

I'll take Poch in a heartbeat.

 

[hellohello]

Poch had several chances to try and win something but he usually threw it out or the window. Several times he played a secone string in Europe League and cups. It wasn't long ago when he was playing second string team in CL group. He keeps going on after each cup exit downplaying winning them like he's too good for these trophies.

It's his own problem that he didn't win anything so far, not resources or the club he's managing.

This is just not true, except when we were chasing Leicester and sacked the EL. He uses his squad, just like most managers, but I can't remember any CL group game he has played a second string side.

 

[JMack1234]

Pochettino is our man.

He walked into a messy club with a squad that had been put together by Villas-Boas and Redknapp. It was full of mediocre player who were nowhere near as good as they think they are and he transformed them into what they are today. A team with identity. A team who are good to watch. A team who are likeable.

I know he hasn't won anything but, nobody would win much with Espanyol and Southampton. Spurs was obviously a long term project but I think with extra spending power and a deeper squad he'll really challenge.

 

[el3mel]

This is just not true, except when we were chasing Leicester and sacked the EL. He uses his squad, just like most managers, but I can't remember any CL group game he has played a second string side.

The CL and Europe league of the very next season. Spurs got KOed from the group that had Monaco, Leverkusen and Cska, then got KOed from Europe League by Gent.

 

[hellohello]

The CL and Europe league of the very next season. Spurs got KOed from the group that had Monaco, Leverkusen and Cska, then got KOed from Europe League by Gent.

Getting beaten and sacking a competition are very different things though.

 

[GlastonSpur]

… Pochettino ensures that Spurs remains competitive while they have the funds to invest in a new stadium. The new stadium will help Spurs remain competitive for the next 50 years....

Exactly so.

I'd like to see how competitive our rivals would be if they chose to invest - from their own, club-generated, non-sugar daddy income - close to £1 billion in building a new stadium complex and new training centre … and so didn't have that money to invest in players.

 

[Enigma_87]

Exactly so.

I'd like to see how competitive our rivals would be if they chose to invest - from their own, club-generated, non-sugar daddy income - close to £1 billion in building a new stadium complex and new training centre … and so didn't have that money to invest in players.

It's a moot point as the sugar daddy clubs have their own methods and you can't really complain about that.

One stadium won't make you competitive for the next 50 years - that's bollocks.

Sunderland have close to 50000 seater stadium the 8th biggest one in England. They reside in League One currently.