Cautiously optimistic, yes. I mean, what else can you do as a supporter of the club? Confident of success in the INEOS era: not really, no.
For an institution of Manchester United's stature, “success” has a specific definition: repeatedly winning the Premier League title and earnestly contending for the European Cup, while playing entertaining football and doing justice to the core principles of the club. That's what we did when we succeeded under Matt Busby and Alex Ferguson, and that seems unrealistic in a period dominated by Manchester City on the domestic front, with their limitless resources, streamlined organization and presence of one of the absolute greatest managers of all time in Pep Guardiola, not to mention lack of scruples. Unless they suddenly crash and burn, we might repeatedly hit a brick wall, even if the INEOS project takes off and starts bearing fruit. Liverpool stumbled upon a really good technical/sporting director in Michael Edwards and had the great fortune of picking up one of greatest managers of the last 20 years in Jürgen Klopp (while going on an absolute tear in terms of recruitment and individual/collective development), but still struggled to consistently win silverware, ending up with 1 Premier League title, 1 European Cup, 1 FA Cup and 2 League Cups over a decade-ish vs. 6 Premier League titles, 1 European Cup, 2 FA Cups and 6 League Cups for Manchester City. Not to mention the likes of Real Madrid on the continental front, who dashed their European Cup winning aspirations on multiples occasions. They succeeded in a relative sense, re-established themselves as a Top 2 team in England, and ended their excruciatingly long league title drought, but the success was not emphatic by any means (like it was under Bob Paisley, for example).
The benchmark for success is so, so, so high (both internally and externally), and there's very little margin for error across innumerable moving parts, with regard to appointment of the right executives, the right manager(s) and coaches, signing the right players, selling certain players at the right time, putting the right systems in place, making the right decisions on the right occasions (on and off the pitch), establishing the right culture, developing players and the team at large in the right way and so forth, year in and year out — even one aspect being substandard, in comparison with the chasing pack led by the likes of Arsenal, let alone the seemingly unstoppable machine across Manchester, could make all the difference.
Also, any sort of “confidence” has to be rooted in something tangible, some sort of objective evidence, otherwise you're merely hoping for success in the ether. Manchester United is not being led by Florentino Pérez and coached by Pep Guardiola with Juni Calafat as recruiter-in-chief now. Jim Ratcliffe and Dave Brailsford, who have the majority vote in the new executive committee, have not overseen organizations that have won anything of note in football thus far, or built genuine title contenders in France and Switzerland.
Omar Berrada, the new chief executive, was part of extremely successful clubs in Barcelona and Manchester City, who collectively won 5 La Liga titles, 8 Premier League titles, 4 European Cups et cetera while he was there, but those organizations were primarily led by the likes of Joan Laporta, Pep Guardiola, Ferran Soriano, Txiki Begiristain — we don't know how much influence Berrada wielded, especially in a sporting sense as he was a marketing or commercial director for a majority of that period. Dan Ashworth did quite well in a developmental capacity with England, but positive development over a period of time ≠ guarantee of success as a sporting director at a major club in the most competitive and punishing league in club football. Jason Wilcox also did well at Manchester City as a youth coach and academy director, but we don't know how that translates to First Team level as a technical director. Good resumés, no doubt about that, and I'm sure these people will give their all to turn things around, but you would have to be the best-of-the-best (and incredibly lucky, luck always plays a role in these situations!) to turn present-day Manchester United into a serial winner. They might turn out to be the best-of-the-best in due time for all we know, future success is not exclusively the domain of people with quantifiable, pre-established records of success, but it wouldn't be rational to be overly enthusiastic at this juncture, when they have everything to prove.
Lots of uncertainities and unknowns and variables, suffice to say. Especially now, when the new appointments are just getting started. So, yes, cautiously optimistic, but not necessarily confident.
For an institution of Manchester United's stature, “success” has a specific definition: repeatedly winning the Premier League title and earnestly contending for the European Cup, while playing entertaining football and doing justice to the core principles of the club. That's what we did when we succeeded under Matt Busby and Alex Ferguson, and that seems unrealistic in a period dominated by Manchester City on the domestic front, with their limitless resources, streamlined organization and presence of one of the absolute greatest managers of all time in Pep Guardiola, not to mention lack of scruples. Unless they suddenly crash and burn, we might repeatedly hit a brick wall, even if the INEOS project takes off and starts bearing fruit. Liverpool stumbled upon a really good technical/sporting director in Michael Edwards and had the great fortune of picking up one of greatest managers of the last 20 years in Jürgen Klopp (while going on an absolute tear in terms of recruitment and individual/collective development), but still struggled to consistently win silverware, ending up with 1 Premier League title, 1 European Cup, 1 FA Cup and 2 League Cups over a decade-ish vs. 6 Premier League titles, 1 European Cup, 2 FA Cups and 6 League Cups for Manchester City. Not to mention the likes of Real Madrid on the continental front, who dashed their European Cup winning aspirations on multiples occasions. They succeeded in a relative sense, re-established themselves as a Top 2 team in England, and ended their excruciatingly long league title drought, but the success was not emphatic by any means (like it was under Bob Paisley, for example).
The benchmark for success is so, so, so high (both internally and externally), and there's very little margin for error across innumerable moving parts, with regard to appointment of the right executives, the right manager(s) and coaches, signing the right players, selling certain players at the right time, putting the right systems in place, making the right decisions on the right occasions (on and off the pitch), establishing the right culture, developing players and the team at large in the right way and so forth, year in and year out — even one aspect being substandard, in comparison with the chasing pack led by the likes of Arsenal, let alone the seemingly unstoppable machine across Manchester, could make all the difference.
Also, any sort of “confidence” has to be rooted in something tangible, some sort of objective evidence, otherwise you're merely hoping for success in the ether. Manchester United is not being led by Florentino Pérez and coached by Pep Guardiola with Juni Calafat as recruiter-in-chief now. Jim Ratcliffe and Dave Brailsford, who have the majority vote in the new executive committee, have not overseen organizations that have won anything of note in football thus far, or built genuine title contenders in France and Switzerland.
Omar Berrada, the new chief executive, was part of extremely successful clubs in Barcelona and Manchester City, who collectively won 5 La Liga titles, 8 Premier League titles, 4 European Cups et cetera while he was there, but those organizations were primarily led by the likes of Joan Laporta, Pep Guardiola, Ferran Soriano, Txiki Begiristain — we don't know how much influence Berrada wielded, especially in a sporting sense as he was a marketing or commercial director for a majority of that period. Dan Ashworth did quite well in a developmental capacity with England, but positive development over a period of time ≠ guarantee of success as a sporting director at a major club in the most competitive and punishing league in club football. Jason Wilcox also did well at Manchester City as a youth coach and academy director, but we don't know how that translates to First Team level as a technical director. Good resumés, no doubt about that, and I'm sure these people will give their all to turn things around, but you would have to be the best-of-the-best (and incredibly lucky, luck always plays a role in these situations!) to turn present-day Manchester United into a serial winner. They might turn out to be the best-of-the-best in due time for all we know, future success is not exclusively the domain of people with quantifiable, pre-established records of success, but it wouldn't be rational to be overly enthusiastic at this juncture, when they have everything to prove.
Lots of uncertainities and unknowns and variables, suffice to say. Especially now, when the new appointments are just getting started. So, yes, cautiously optimistic, but not necessarily confident.
