Not to defend LVG but he has made clubs he has managed better for the one who replaces him.. Barça,Bayern,Ajax... In great shape for the next manager. He isn't afraid to chop,change or replace big names.. That said the day he leaves can't come soon enough.
BBC: United hold talks with Mourinho
- Thread starter Damien
- Start date
- Status
if it is Mourinho he will be prepared no doubt, he speaks like is raring to go this minute. Unlike Moyes who turned up open mouthed taking pictures of things first day
Cheers for the info, gents. 
Saha thinks it's time for a change
Former United man Louis Saha believes that the Reds need a change of management.
“It is obvious (Jose) Mourinho wants the job. The club is looking for a solution because it has been really hard to see them play some games.
“If you look at the history of Manchester United it is all about the style. The fans are really used to winning games in a special way.
“There is nothing to hide there. United need a change in some ways.
I’m not going to only blame Louis van Gaal because some big players left the club and the big manager (Sir Alex Ferguson) left the club, so it was going to be hard for anyone.
“All the talk about a new manager is disruptive for young lads who are trying to prove themselves to a manager who could then not be there next season, it is not nice.
You want to have consistency. It will be nice for the club to keep things quite if they have a decision to make at the end of the season. I think that will be best.”
Former United man Louis Saha believes that the Reds need a change of management.
“It is obvious (Jose) Mourinho wants the job. The club is looking for a solution because it has been really hard to see them play some games.
“If you look at the history of Manchester United it is all about the style. The fans are really used to winning games in a special way.
“There is nothing to hide there. United need a change in some ways.
I’m not going to only blame Louis van Gaal because some big players left the club and the big manager (Sir Alex Ferguson) left the club, so it was going to be hard for anyone.
“All the talk about a new manager is disruptive for young lads who are trying to prove themselves to a manager who could then not be there next season, it is not nice.
You want to have consistency. It will be nice for the club to keep things quite if they have a decision to make at the end of the season. I think that will be best.”
"Wow! Look at that class feckin' mouse mat! Never had anythin' like that back at 'ol Everton......"
WIFI!!
The only justifiable reason for not removing LVG from his post back in December (or whenever the decision not to let him see his contract out was made), is – well – actual faith in his abilities. You believe he can turn it around, and that he can meet whatever demands he's supposed to meet as per the terms and goals agreed upon. If you don't actually believe that – you sack him and replace him with the best possible alternative, whether that be a short-term or long-term alternative. What you don't do, is to install the done-for bloke as caretaker for the rest of the season. That makes absolutely no sense on any level.
So, for me at least, it rings very odd when people say: “Yeah, but there was no point in sacking him, because Giggs was the only alternative.” What? If that's actually true, we're in deeper trouble than most suspect. We let LVG stumble and fumble along because we couldn't think of a single half-plausible caretaker candidate beside Ryan Giggs (who didn't want the job). Well, I refuse to believe that. There's incompetence and there's...I don't know, pure lunacy? Woody isn't a maniac. If he'd concluded back in...whenever it was, that LVG had lost his mojo and his ability to do the job properly – he'd have let him go.
So, what we're left with – if we insist on Woody's sanity – is a scenario in which LVG continues to be genuinely backed by his employers (who believe he isn't doing badly enough to warrant a sacking) – but at the same time has been effectively replaced already. Presumably because the same employers do not feel that letting LVG see out his contract is in the best interest of the club.
That is a pretty odd state of affairs, one could say. But it could very well be close to the actual truth of the matter.
So, for me at least, it rings very odd when people say: “Yeah, but there was no point in sacking him, because Giggs was the only alternative.” What? If that's actually true, we're in deeper trouble than most suspect. We let LVG stumble and fumble along because we couldn't think of a single half-plausible caretaker candidate beside Ryan Giggs (who didn't want the job). Well, I refuse to believe that. There's incompetence and there's...I don't know, pure lunacy? Woody isn't a maniac. If he'd concluded back in...whenever it was, that LVG had lost his mojo and his ability to do the job properly – he'd have let him go.
So, what we're left with – if we insist on Woody's sanity – is a scenario in which LVG continues to be genuinely backed by his employers (who believe he isn't doing badly enough to warrant a sacking) – but at the same time has been effectively replaced already. Presumably because the same employers do not feel that letting LVG see out his contract is in the best interest of the club.
That is a pretty odd state of affairs, one could say. But it could very well be close to the actual truth of the matter.
Since we're still in the hunt for a Champions League place, the worst thing we could is paint ourselves into a corner. Confirm Mourinho now and the players and coaches will already be looking ahead to next season. Keep the focus for now, keep Mourinho close, and make the move when it needs to be done. I think Jose gets the job regardless but logistically it just makes sense now to wait until top 4 is confirmed one way or the other. Maybe giving Woodward too much credit.
Why only Giggs? Chelsea didn't seem to have that problem when sacking Mourinho.
Not that many good managers available for a short-term contract of a few months, wait a minute, what was the name of that Scottish bloke who used to manage Everton ....
The hope is that is exactly what we're doing.
The fear is that we haven't made our minds up , and are giving LVG every chance to achieve top 4 and a stay.
Why are fans believing that 4th place is enough to save his job?
None of the big clubs would aim for 4th place (including Liverpool, who haven't won the title in decades), so why is it that some fans believe that Woodward's target is to see us scrape in to 4th place?
What am I missing here?
None of the big clubs would aim for 4th place (including Liverpool, who haven't won the title in decades), so why is it that some fans believe that Woodward's target is to see us scrape in to 4th place?
What am I missing here?
Of course it's not 4th, which some of us keep saying. Anyway it's so obvious he's going in the summer and the decision has long been made, getting bored with the whining. Not long now before it's announced and the nervous wrecks can calm down a bit.
I just find it a ridiculous move. How many times do you hear "you can't judge the manager until he gets his own players in"? For any new manager to basically have his squad built by a manager with a totally different style and who has never previously managed in the league (or shown an aptitude for it) is ludicrous.
If Mourinho is appointed next, he will have a huge portion of the squad purchased by a significantly inferior manager for a style of play that he will change. What if Mourinho preferred Rafael, Evans, Chicharito and Nani to Darmian, Rojo, Schweinsteiger and Memphis?
Or we had no suitable candidates available and willing to start mid-season to replace him.
I realise that LVG supporters like to say this, but dude, it's untrue.
No manager would sacrifice his own success, career and professional standing, for the good of the next manager. In fact, this doesn't happen in any profession. LVG is not a martyr.
LVG's aim has been to put together a team, to win games/trophies HIMSELF, not for Mourinho.
I don't believe LVG has ever stated that his target is to help the next manager win trophies. If I'm wrong, please can you link me to the news articles.
With regards to Bayern and Barca - he put together the squad and won the league title at those clubs...for HIMSELF.
Other, better managers then came in, changed the system, bought/sold players and made the team better.
LVG had nothing to do with Pep's or Heynckes' success. Just like LVG will not be able to claim a part of Mourinho's success.
Woodward's interested in making as much money for the Glazers as possible, profit is more important than trophies, Champions league keeps the money rolling in. Aiming for 3rd is barely better than 4th so it's not inconceivable that 4th will save his job.
That's what I'm thinking too. The board saw what happened to City's season after they confirmed Guardiola and decided they don't want us to go down the same route.
Why do you think that United has become the biggest most attractive marketing prospect for sponsors - by finishing fourth every season? Please.........
It's not conceivable because being 4th doesn't guarantee CL football, the club won't wait late August to see if he manages to qualify.
It's down to the saf-era.
Got nothing to do with Woodward/Glazers having those expectations.
Yep, we've won nothing since the Glazers took over.
One minute we're criticised for spending £300m in incoming transfers . Now others are criticising us for not wanting to win anything
I get it that was all done deliberately to finish 4th, for heavens sake how ridiculous can people be
This thread is becoming quite long. Hey, remember when we had that huge thread for that player we all thought we were getting and the media said was coming....and then we didn't get him and stuck with what we had instead and everyone was really disappointed?....
They did last year. I wanted him gone then.
It was his first season and we had a lot of injuries, they probably thought that he deserved a second chance.
We invested little to nothing back in Sir Alexes days, and won because of his abilities as a manager, trying to make it sound like we won because we invested 300 million gbp then is plain stupidity.
Now we're investing heavy money-wise because we fell out of the Champions League when Sir Alex retired.
We're naturally, like any club, hoping to win, but we got off our asses because we got a wake up call under Moyes.
You seem to think that
Because the Glaziers and Woodward was the ones doing the heavy lifting.
We became the echonomical powerhouses because we had Sir Alex and the history of the club, any big club owner could capitalize on the extremely benificial situation we found ourselves in when the Premier League era started.
If you seriously think it's not in great due to Sir Alexes abilities, then by all means, get back to your Woodward poster for another round.
What are you talking about???
Of course we won the trophies because of SAF, and of course we haven't won trophies in the last 3 seasons because we've had two idiots for managers
The £300m was spent since SAF left....???!!!!!!!!!!
What do you think the Glazers were saying to SAF when he was here, ........... stop winning we're trying to be fourth!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
There are a very great number of differences, but still this thread is:
30% debate over whether Mourinho is wanted
20% talk of media speculation
20% taking about Moyes and Giggs
10% posts of "I'll lol so hard when this doesn't happen"
10% posts calling the above 10% idiots
7% Randall saying Mourinho took Chelsea to 16th and nothing else matters
3% people comparing the size of the thread to transfer forum threads
Well, that was the point. I don't buy that we couldn't find a replacement on an interim basis. In fact, I'd go as far as to call it a ridiculous notion.
If the manager is done for, you have to replace him. Clubs with a tiny fraction of our resources do this all the time.
The part in bold is obviously key, though, which is what I keep banging on about. Put it like this: If Woody considered LVG a dead man walking – for all intents and purposes – months ago, it is inexplicable that he didn't fire him. And having Maureen lined up doesn't change that one bit. When the manager is done for, you do what you can in order to salvage the season. That's Woody's job, presumably. In addition to the noodles and whatnot.
So, then - in order to cut Woody as much slack as possible, I can only conclude that the premise is false: He didn't consider LVG a dead man walking, and he still doesn't. *
* And no, this does not mean there is no Maureen deal. It only means Woody considers LVG as something other than a sub-standard employee who deserves to be fired. His exact reasoning on the subject would be interesting to know.
Chelsea managed to find one without too many problems.
Please name one who was available that you think might have taken the job for a few months and was up to the task other than Hiddink
Some people here are crazy. Success is the only thing that bring money. We are a football powerhouse, so we can get away with some shit seasons, but we cant get away with it in the long run.
People saying the Glazers and Woodward just care about the money and 4th every year is okay are right on one thing; the money. The other aspect is just plan stupid. They know that finances will keep up if the results are good.
Ffs people, this is business. Do you guys think Apple or Google will just stop trying their best one day because they are the best in the market?
I rest my case.
People saying the Glazers and Woodward just care about the money and 4th every year is okay are right on one thing; the money. The other aspect is just plan stupid. They know that finances will keep up if the results are good.
Ffs people, this is business. Do you guys think Apple or Google will just stop trying their best one day because they are the best in the market?
I rest my case.
Best in market goes much much faster than it came.. It took 50 - 60 to build, it takes 5-6 to go...
Well i can see what you're saying mate but it's entirely possible that Woodward and the board have decided that going forward Van Gaal isn't as good an option as Mourinho but he isn't willing to or can't take over mid-season, but in that scenario they may still rate LVG to an extent or in their opinion theres no one available for half a season who's better than him. So they could have decided to just stick to their guns and allow him to see out the season.
And lets not forget it's also possible the club/board/Glazers might have all agreed that however badly a manager is doing he will be given every opportunity to turn a season around and meet the goals set out in his contract. They did it with Moyes who was having a worse time than LVG. So that might lend some credence to that theory.
If they are going to take that stance with managers, then maybe it's a compromise between the old school thinking that saw SAF get 3-4 years to turn things around and the cut throat Chelsea approach where someone gets sacked a few months after winning a league title or european cup.
He's at the boxing watching the Joshua fight tonight.
Jose is a Joshua fanboy
He should have done a Mayweather and rocked up in a United jersey.
I do think his blooding of Rashford et al will pay dividends later. They're players Mourinho probably wouldn't have bothered with otherwise.
- Status