The game at Anfield they were far better but we scraped the win, and they tore us apart in the Europa League at Anfield. Note that Klopp didnt start the season there and got them gradually improving.
Are we the worst run elite club in the world? If not us then who?
- Thread starter Red Ryan
- Start date
Who are the players already at the club over the past few years who you believe have performed at a level befitting a top club over this period?
The Barcelona bad period saw them challenhe for titles and remain a dangerous champions league opponent. With Real Madrid they remained a league challenger. We have spent the most (hundreds of millions) with the least return. The season is still young though...
We've actually not fallen that far because all these talks of Pool are kneejerk reactions from the media and fans alike after 7 games played.
There is really nothing in it.
Barely any of them, that's what I'm saying. They're not good enough and a good chunk of them were bought in SAF's last few years.
Doesn't matter who is in charge that reality stays the same.
This is the correct answer. A
We're not run badly at all, we've had some bad managerial choices and good signings that didn't work out as expected but generally we carry ourselves well.
We're in a competitive league and going through a huge transition from SAF's empire, I don't think that should translate into a badly run club so much as a club trying to reinvent itself.
We were probably the best run for 26 years before Fergie left. Fine margins.
Real were horrific in the 3 years after Del Bosque left, getting knocked out repeatedly at the last 16 and quarter final stages and both Barca and Real were struggling in La Liga the early-00s. Bayern were in the doldrums for a prolonged period of time from 2002 til about the time Ribery joined, and even then, they only really got to a good level in 2010. We're experiencing a downturn now, but we're not a million miles away. The key difference between our situation and the other clubs is that the Prem is just so fiercely competitive. If you judge success to be winning 3 league titles on the bounce, or even two in succession, then you'll be disappointed. The days of that happening are long gone, IMO.
Real Madrid might be run in a manner that is idiosyncratic to a lot of people but there's no suggestion that it doesn't work given they are the most successful and biggest club in the world and the reigning champions of Europe, having won it twice in the last three years and are nearly every footballer's preferred destination.
Exactly this. They're pulling in the same direction under Klopp, but they were doing the same under Rodgers for a while too. It's all about the manager at the moment, and has been since Fergie left. If Mourinho gets us winning again the idea of us being poorly run will disappear. If we were that poorly run it wouldn't just come down to the manager.
We have a set-up that generates huge amounts of revenue, despite our poor league finishes in recent seasons, and we have a CEO willing to use this money to back the manager significantly. Not every club can say that. We either need Mourinho to put the pieces in place on the field or find a manager that can.
They still constantly qualified for the CL though - and comfortably so too.
Ye but they dont have any competition in Spain and Germany - English and Italian leagues are much more difficult for the CL places
You're conveniently forgetting that Madrid have been playing second fiddle to Barcelona for a long time now. United have a more recent league win than Real and that should be the first priority for any football team.
Dunno about being the absolute worst (don't think we are), but United are a poorly run football club, and have been for a while. Right now, we're suffering from the lack of someone with administrative insight at the upper management level (from a sporting standpoint). That much was evident even when Fergie was at the club, but him and Gill papered over the cracks - on and off the field, while the nincompoop owners/directors/primary decision makers went for a tag along ride.
Gill was replaced by Woodward - who's done a good job from a commercial standpoint. But the void created by Fergie's departure (not just as a manager, but as an all-encompassing figurehead with a distinct identity) has not been appropriately filled. Even the likes of Van Gaal and Mourinho are/were more first team coaches who aren't accustomed to the level of control United offers them, and there was no telling if they are/were up to the job in terms of navigating United from the bottom up.
The idea of a DoF has been floated before, but that seems unlikely, as things stand. Which is weird because if there's one major club in need of structure and a clear sense of direction, then that's United. Look at the job Watzke and Zorc are doing year in and year out at Dortmund. Or the way Soriano/Begiristain paved the way for Guardiola at City. Or Leonardo who played a big role in bringing Ancelotti, Ibrahimović, Thiago to PSG - and establishing them as a club with big European aspirations.
Other clubs make mistakes too, and no enterprise is 100% spot on all the time. But United's recent endeavors make for a case study in cascading failure. We messed up the transition, appointed managers with varying styles and ideologies instead of building a model of continuity, didn't feck them off when the season(s) could be salvaged, and gave them carte blanche to spend several hundred millions on scattergun signings - which have/will become redundant over time. So a lot of the transition/foundation laying stuff has to be repeated under a new manager.
That said, for all the criticism, it takes only one right decision and a bit of luck for things to 'click' - just like it did with Fergie's appointment all those years ago. So here's to hoping Mourinho pans out from a managerial and administrative standpoint, and not just a coaching standpoint - that would have a great stabilizing effect on the club as a whole. Though we could definitely do with a Bayern-esque structure where Hoeneß, Rummenigge and co. built the identity of the club, and made ruthless decisions, while transitioning between successive successful sub-eras under different coaches. That's the best approach given the transient nature of modern football, instead of the archaic approach of bestowing demigod status upon your manager (even when he's not proven to be worthy of said status).
Gill was replaced by Woodward - who's done a good job from a commercial standpoint. But the void created by Fergie's departure (not just as a manager, but as an all-encompassing figurehead with a distinct identity) has not been appropriately filled. Even the likes of Van Gaal and Mourinho are/were more first team coaches who aren't accustomed to the level of control United offers them, and there was no telling if they are/were up to the job in terms of navigating United from the bottom up.
The idea of a DoF has been floated before, but that seems unlikely, as things stand. Which is weird because if there's one major club in need of structure and a clear sense of direction, then that's United. Look at the job Watzke and Zorc are doing year in and year out at Dortmund. Or the way Soriano/Begiristain paved the way for Guardiola at City. Or Leonardo who played a big role in bringing Ancelotti, Ibrahimović, Thiago to PSG - and establishing them as a club with big European aspirations.
Other clubs make mistakes too, and no enterprise is 100% spot on all the time. But United's recent endeavors make for a case study in cascading failure. We messed up the transition, appointed managers with varying styles and ideologies instead of building a model of continuity, didn't feck them off when the season(s) could be salvaged, and gave them carte blanche to spend several hundred millions on scattergun signings - which have/will become redundant over time. So a lot of the transition/foundation laying stuff has to be repeated under a new manager.
That said, for all the criticism, it takes only one right decision and a bit of luck for things to 'click' - just like it did with Fergie's appointment all those years ago. So here's to hoping Mourinho pans out from a managerial and administrative standpoint, and not just a coaching standpoint - that would have a great stabilizing effect on the club as a whole. Though we could definitely do with a Bayern-esque structure where Hoeneß, Rummenigge and co. built the identity of the club, and made ruthless decisions, while transitioning between successive successful sub-eras under different coaches. That's the best approach given the transient nature of modern football, instead of the archaic approach of bestowing demigod status upon your manager (even when he's not proven to be worthy of said status).
Outside of Italy yeah. Since Fergie retired there's just been a long list of things I'd have found hilarious if it was a different club.
Debatable what you'd consider an elite club, but Liverpool and City have both had spells in recent years where you've had to wonder what the feck is going on. Particularly Liverpool around the time they had that gangsta guy going around threatening people for starting transfer rumours on twitter. I don't think we've quite sunk to those depths yet.
City's low point was around the time they were calling themselves a "project" and making a massive public deal out of not convincing Kaka to sign for them.
Again we've not sunk to that level, but we have arguably had worse managers than either of these two...and we kept one of them for two whole years. That's pretty fecking stupid.
Debatable what you'd consider an elite club, but Liverpool and City have both had spells in recent years where you've had to wonder what the feck is going on. Particularly Liverpool around the time they had that gangsta guy going around threatening people for starting transfer rumours on twitter. I don't think we've quite sunk to those depths yet.
City's low point was around the time they were calling themselves a "project" and making a massive public deal out of not convincing Kaka to sign for them.
Again we've not sunk to that level, but we have arguably had worse managers than either of these two...and we kept one of them for two whole years. That's pretty fecking stupid.
I'd consider us an anomaly for now. It's not like every other big club is moving on from their SAF.
We can't still be using that excuse three years on. Not when you've spent what we have.
When was the last time we started a season as a credible threat in Europe? 2011? The problems started under SAF. We can't put our struggles down to him leaving.
Yes, well if we were playing some of the dross that was conjured up outside of the big 2 in Lol Liga, we'd have qualified too.
You have to take it all in context.
Didnt we just win the FA cup last year??... If you don't count that as a trophy then Arsenal have won feck all in the last 12 years which would make them a top contender for the OP. You cant have it either way
But I do believe that it is just another kneejerk thread.. I think the board made probably one bad decision in the last few years.... But we have appointed the right managers since Moyes and given them freedom in transfer market. There is not more you can ask from them...
But I do believe that it is just another kneejerk thread.. I think the board made probably one bad decision in the last few years.... But we have appointed the right managers since Moyes and given them freedom in transfer market. There is not more you can ask from them...
SAF's departure ripped out every root and rootlet labelled 'football' from the top of the club, leaving nothing but business people and a business structure. It's not surprising the club began to wither.
As has been said many times, other top clubs have a rich football culture which cushions them against the turbulence of managerial change. When a manager departs at United, our whole football identity goes with him. Everything is reset to zero.
Since we haven't been lucky in our managerial appointments, the result has been waste and chaos.
Tbh, they haven't been that great for City. Brought in Guardiola but they literally dropped the soap after they won the title in 2012, where they brought in 5 players who literally did not improve them at all. Or how they had to rely on dodgy sponsorships and the new TV deal to get past FFP.
We coasted for far too long under Fergie, and we made a colossal error in hiring Moyes. LVG had some good ideas, but he fell victim to his own hubris. It's still far too early to tell with Jose, but from reports, this is the sort of job he had always wanted, and his reactions during the difficult period we had in September was heartening to see. There were meltdowns or histrionics and he was fully in control.
I just wish we had another club as an example of moving on. We should have done better you feel but how far off are we really. The money thing doesn't mean as much to me because we all know its has never been a precursor to success. As for what happened with SAF still here, that model worked wonders for us for a long time, I'm OK with us sticking with it to the end.
We're arguably the best run elite club in the world. No champions league in 2 out of the last 3 seasons and we still have the pull to bring in major sponsorships and licensing deals to make our clubs turnover astronomical. Even though what we're doing on the pitch leaves a lot to be desired, the fact the business side of the club is thriving tells you a lot about the appeal of Manchester United.
Invictus answered the question perfectly but I will like to point out something. We are fecked even if Mourinho because of the directors, these people have no convictions and zero plan for the future from a football standpoint.
They appointed LVG because he was supposed to be attacking minded, possession oriented and an advocate of youth football; They replaced him with Mourinho.
Even if Mourinho is a success at some point he will have to be replaced and if we have the same board, they will butcher the transition.
They appointed LVG because he was supposed to be attacking minded, possession oriented and an advocate of youth football; They replaced him with Mourinho.
Even if Mourinho is a success at some point he will have to be replaced and if we have the same board, they will butcher the transition.
I don't think there were many options around when LVG was hired.
Who would you have picked to replace Moyes?
There was other options, less flashy or reputable options but that's not the problem. They named attributes that they liked in LVG and brought Mourinho to replace him despite the fact that he doesn't really have those attributes.
Hiring Moyes was one of the worst decisions I've seen an elite club make in recent years.
LVGs transfers were very bad
Falcao - £6m
Di Maria - £60m
Herrera - £30m
Blind - £12m
Shaw - £30m
Rojo - £16m + Nani loaned for free while we pay wages
Valdes - £0
Martial - £40m
Depay - £30m
Schneiderlin - £25m
Schweinsteiger - £6m
Darmian - £13m
I'd say only 4 succesful transfers in those 2 years. And 2 of them were picked by Moyes I think and Martial was apparently a signing for Giggs in the future or something
LVGs transfers were very bad
Falcao - £6m
Di Maria - £60m
Herrera - £30m
Blind - £12m
Shaw - £30m
Rojo - £16m + Nani loaned for free while we pay wages
Valdes - £0
Martial - £40m
Depay - £30m
Schneiderlin - £25m
Schweinsteiger - £6m
Darmian - £13m
I'd say only 4 succesful transfers in those 2 years. And 2 of them were picked by Moyes I think and Martial was apparently a signing for Giggs in the future or something
I don't think LVG was really hired because they liked his attacking play or anything. If we had the chance to sign Mourinho in 2014 to replace Moyes I'm sure we would forget all about those attributes and pick Mourinho over LVG
I think they just wanted a manager with experience of managing a top club and had done well at them. The opposite of Moyes
Mauricio Pochettino. Promising young manager who had fresh ideas. Spurs dodged a major bullet in getting Pochettino instead of LvG.
It is this precise attitude that is why the club hasn't been hitting new heights. What the club needs isn't experience and big names. What it needs is someone who can modernize the club, someone who can reduce Fergie into a distant memory.
After hiring someone who had zero experience of managing a big club I doubt they would have even considered going for the Southampton manager over LVG
He was even less proven than Moyes
Well, that's what Woodward said. And the three managers they appointed have very little in common, there is no blueprint, no underlying idea or conviction. And your last sentence probably epitomize it.
We failed? Let us try the opposite then.
Moyes was a mistake not because he is unproven. He was a mistake because the way he made his Everton play made it clear that he is not a manager who can modernize the club, take it to levels Fergie was never able to reach. Fergie pushed for him to be hired precisely because of that, he wanted someone who is the closest to him but not as good. Same could be said about LvG, he's an old dinosaur and was previously linked with replacing Fergie.
Actually Moyes and LvG both had strong history of promoting youth which I am sure played a big part - perhaps too much emphasis was put on that though.
Anyway I dont think LvG was a bad appointment at all, it didnt work out but on paper he was a good appointment - Moyes on the otherhand was a mistake from day1.
Well you need to deal with whats available in the manager market. Did Moyes or Van Gaal leave anything behind to build on? There was no reason to try and find a manager who had the same kind of style as those two
We went with the best manager available to us and to me it makes sense hiring Mou
But remember what they said about Moyes, his PL experience was key, as long as his stability.
They make up things as they go along and in my opinion it's problematic, there is no direction.
Old dinosaur did win the Bundesliga a couple of years before and knocked us out of CL. Plus the likes of Lahm did say he was the one who had started the process of making Bayern decent again
I don't really want to be seen defending LVG
Ye well what do you expect them to say?
"Im sorry but we were too late for all the guys we really wanted so we have to take a chance on our 5th choice option and hope he rises to the challenge"
I remember David Gill saying days after Fergie announced he was leaving that the person to replace him should have European experience
made hiring Moyes even more confusingManchester United chief executive outlines the qualities the club are looking for
- David Gill: Sir Alex Ferguson successor must have 'domestic and European experience'
- Simon Stone
- Wednesday 8 May 2013
16
David Moyes (left) and Jose Mourinho are two of the possible candidates to replace Alex Ferguson Getty Images
Manchester United chief executive David Gill has outlined the qualities needed to succeed Sir Alex Ferguson as manager amid growing expectation that David Moyes will be confirmed as the new man in charge by the end of this week.
After confirming Ferguson's exit this morning, it is thought United wish to announce the 71-year-old Scot's replacement by the end of the week.
Although Real Madrid coach Jose Mourinho has been tipped to take over in some quarters, it is thought Everton boss Moyes is in line to land what Gill describes as a "dream job".
"The qualities are the ones that have been inherent at Manchester United for many years," Gill told MUTV.
"Our two most successful eras were with managers who got involved with all aspects of the club, from the youth team to the first team, to get that degree of loyalty and understanding of the football club.
"Clearly he has to have the requisite football experience, both in terms of domestic and European experience.
"It is a small pool."
Moyes' European experience is not extensive.
He has only guided Everton through four European campaigns and never went beyond the last 16 phase in any competition.
Yeah but he also got Bayern in a position where they wouldnt even qualify for CL in the end and got sacked, LVG's career has had many highs but many lows as well, with Barcelona and his first stint and National Coach as well.Old dinosaur did win the Bundesliga a couple of years before and knocked us out of CL. Plus the likes of Lahm did say he was the one who had started the process of making Bayern decent again
I don't really want to be seen defending LVG
Most managers who have been managing for a long time will have highs and lows