BBC: United hold talks with Mourinho

[Adebesi]

No, it's not a bad thing - probably even a necessary thing in most cases. But like you say, it's the nature of the target.

It's also - for me, at least - a question of comprehending the situation from a football standpoint. I don't have an iota of trust in our board as far as that is concerned.

True.

Im inclined to think its a red herring anyway. I think the conversation @prath92 and @itso 7 are having above, about the availability of our chosen candidate - or indecision about who exactly the incoming manager should be - explains LVG still being here, not worrying about paying him off. Though I can imagine both are considerations.

 

[itso 7]

Not sure if serious. Heyneckes (if that's whom you meant) retired and has no connection to United anyways. Why would he reconsider? And I'm not even taking the queiroz suggestion seriously.

Your problem was highlighted by yourself. You want to sack the manager to show that something is being done not to improve the season. Unless there is actually a viable candidate, it didn't make sense to sack a a manager just for the sake of it and the new manager would take another month to get acclimatised.

I already highlighted that being a Director at United is not my job but I expect those who hold those posts and should be in a position to come up with better candidates than me or any of us, the biggest factor, on our results, was Van Gaal's influence. He had to go and more could have been salvaged by an interim manager, identified and appointed by men who are being paid millions to do that job, how is that difficult to understand? We were losing games not only because we had a shit team but also because of his tactics which are designed to create one chance per match, his team selections and substitutions. Removing him and bringing someone who would give a little more creative freedom to our players would have made a huge difference whilst a permanent replacement was being sought.
The month you mention a new manager needing to settle was spent by Van Gaal getting destroyed by teams like Norwich and Stoke City who didn't need to pull up trees to record a victory against us.

 

[Jazz]

Apart from Moyes (which seems to be a Fergie choice) where have they bowed to the sway? I'm seriously confused, there is no indication we are going to appoint Giggs, if we were going to do that we would have already

You're right of course. I guess I'm looking at it from the worst case scenario.

The different reports in the press, and Giggs still being a part of the conversation, is getting to me tbh. You don't have to have more than an ounce of intelligence to know that Giggs shouldn't even be considered for the simple reason he is not yet a manager. Yet, it seems that's exactly what is happening going by all the reports, and the board is scaring the hell out of me by even listening to any arguments for Giggs. In Woody's position, I would have fired someone instantly for daring to suggest such a dumb idea in the first place.

 

[Cassidy]

I already highlighted that being a Director at United is not my job but I expect those who hold those posts to come up with better candidates than any of us because to the biggest factor was Van Gaal's influence on our results. He had to go and more could have been salvaged by an interim manager identified and appointed by men who are being paid millions to do that job how is that diffidult to understand? We were losing games not only because we had a shit team but also because of his tactics which are designed to create one chance per match, his team selections and substitutions. Removing him and bringing someone who would give a little more creative freedom to our players would have made a huge difference whilst a permanent replacement was being sought.
The month you mention a new manager needing to settle was spent by Van Gaal being destroyed by teams like Norwich and Stoke City which didn't need to pull up trees to record a victory against us.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that there were not many viable candidates around. They only one really would have been Ancelotti and if you believe the press we contacted him in November and he already had decided to move to Bayern.

 

[golden_blunder]

Was thinking about the Giggs/Mourinho situation last night. To me it's a complete mess and the appointment of Giggs would be a trainwreck. But maybe we should take comfort in the fact that United is such a huge club that no amount of Woodward/Glazer mismanagement can keep us down for long.

To my mind there is a certain, immutable law of gravity in football. The best-supported clubs will generally rise to the top, and the clubs with smaller fanbases (apart from that tiny handful with a billionaire owner) will eventually be pulled downwards by their lack of economic power.

In every league you can think of, the clubs with the biggest fanbases (and hence the most money) are at or near the top. Liverpool has probably been the only outlier in recent years, but then they have a small stadium which has prevented them from monetizing their support.

In recent years clubs like Portsmouth, Bolton and Blackburn have tried to cheat football economics, and failed. And clubs like Real Madrid and Barcelona have gone through fallow periods, but returned to the top soon enough.

This may read like an arrogant and complacent homily, a footballing version of the 'too big to fail' mantra which undid the banking system. But football clubs aren't banks. They have supporters, not customers. If your bank lets you down, you can ditch them for another bank. A football supporter follows the same club for life, so when a footballing giant starts to struggle, the fanbase remains.

United, to my mind, are one of the three biggest clubs in world football, alongside RM and Barca. None of those clubs should ever be an also-ran for a prolonged period. If they endure three or four bad years, eventually the huge supporter base mutinies, the pressure is ratcheted up, and the owners are forced out, or forced to buck their ideas up.

So, if the Glazers try to turn us into a football version of the New York Yankees, a glamorous name with no on-pitch success, the law of footballing gravity will slap them in the face. If we appoint Giggs and it turns pear-shaped, the current apathy and frustration will turn to outright mutiny, and United's fortunes will be turned round.

Apologies if this reads like an arrogant rant. I am not trying to demean the smaller clubs - United are my local team and I'd like to think I'd have supported them even if they'd been in division three when I was growing up. It's brilliant that Leicester are winning the league, good luck to them. I'm just trying to find some crumbs of comfort in what is a hugely frustrating time to be a United fan!

bit unfair on Blackburn, their sugar daddy died

 

[Cassidy]

You're right of course. I guess I'm looking at it from the worst case scenario.

The different reports in the press, and Giggs still being a part of the conversation, is getting to me tbh. You don't have to have more than an ounce of intelligence to know that Giggs shouldn't even be considered for the simple reason he is not yet a manager. Yet, it seems that's exactly what is happening going by all the reports, and the board is scaring the hell out of me by even listening to any arguments for Giggs. In Woody's position, I would have fired someone instantly for daring to suggest such a dumb idea in the first place.

No it seems that there is a campaign coming from somewhere to appoint Giggs as the next United manager, just like the Redknapp for England campaign. The board haven't shown any indication that they are even considering Giggs to take over this summer. We will find out in the summer

 

[itso 7]

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that there were not many viable candidates around. They only one really would have been Ancelotti and if you believe the press we contacted him in November and he already had decided to move to Bayern.

Remember we are talking about someone taking over for just six months not someone on a three year deal to plot our rise from the ashes. If someone had come in, signed a striker and a defender and simplified instructions to players he could have topped what Van Gaal has 'achieved' to date. If a board can not identify a stand in manager then there is little hope for it to do better on a more substantive appointment.

 

[Cassidy]

Remember we are talking about someone taking over for just six months not someone on a three year deal to plot our rise from the ashes. If someone had come in, signed a striker and a defender and simplified instructions to players he could have topped what Van Gaal has 'achieved' to date. If a board can not identify a stand in manager then there is little hope for it to do better on a more substantive appointment.

Sounds easy when you type it, in reality if the board appointed Joyce and we ended up 10th you would be outside OT with a pitch fork

 

[Chesterlestreet]

Removing him and bringing someone who would give a little more creative freedom to our players would have made a huge difference whilst a permanent replacement was being sought.

Certainly could have played out that way, yes.

As I keep saying, though, it all depends on what verdict was actually reached on LVG: If the board concluded in December that they'd had enough of him and began looking for a permanent replacement, there's every reason to question their decision to let him stay on given where we find ourselves per now.

This is all a bit too hypothetical, however. We don't know any details. But yes - this "there was no suitable replacement" argument is absurd for my money. If you conclude that the manager is done for, you have to do something. Letting him carry on, hoping for the best, whilst having every intention to terminate his contract at season's end, well, that's a highly unusual form of "doing something" - at best.

 

[VP89]

Sounds easy when you type it, in reality if the board appointed Joyce and we ended up 10th you would be outside OT with a pitch fork

Its not just the league position thats pissing the supporters off. The style of football, questionable tactics/subs and tarnishing of the club's stature in press conferences are big drivers too.

 

[itso 7]

Sounds easy when you type it, in reality if the board appointed Joyce and we ended up 10th you would be outside OT with a pitch fork

Its not easy, granted, but isn't being on top all about being capable of making the tough decisions not just stick your head in the sand as we are seeing our board do now? We will never know how Joyce would have done but to me you get credibility by showing whats not acceptable and taking corrective steps, Van Gaal stayed and we showed the world that we are pretty fine with being a laughing stock.

 

[Cassidy]

Its not just the league position thats pissing the supporters off. The style of football, questionable tactics/subs and tarnishing of the club's stature in press conferences are big drivers too.

Whats your point exactly? You would of been fully supportive of the board if they made that decision then and we ended up 10th?
I am not here arguing LVG should stay and that he is doing a fantastic job, my point was that there wasn't really a viable interim

 

[Super Nani]

Have gone from thinking we will definitely be signing Mourinho to genuinely concerned that the board are actually going to keep him on if we win the cup or take the huge gamble on Giggs. Anyone with a basic understanding of the game would agree we need a manager the level of Mourinho right now so it is worrying that we could miss out when he would love to manage us and has the quality and experience to guide us back to the top. It's quite simple, we both need each other, I don't understand what is so difficult for Woodward and the board to comprehend. Hopefully it's already done and we are just keeping quiet until the end of the season.

 

[Cassidy]

Its not easy, granted, but isn't being on top all about being capable of making the tough decisions not just stick your head in the sand as we are seeing our board do now? We will never know how Joyce would have done but to me you get credibility by showing whats not acceptable and taking corrective steps, Van Gaal stayed and we showed the world that we are pretty fine with being a laughing stock.

Keeping the manager on till then end of the season to appoint Mourinho would have been a tough decision.... not only that but the correct one in the eye of the storm IF its true that Mourinho isn't available till July.

EDIT: We would have been more of a laughing stock had we decided to hand the job for 6 months to someone who has never managed at senior level before

 

[VP89]

Whats your point exactly? You would of been fully supportive of the board if they made that decision then and we ended up 10th?
I am not here arguing LVG should stay and that he is doing a fantastic job, my point was that there wasn't really a viable interim

No I wouldn't be supportive, but calling it 10th place is overkill. Just saying league position isn't the only driver behind fans dismay.

 

[Cassidy]

No I wouldn't be supportive, but calling it 10th place is overkill. Just saying league position isn't the only driver behind fans dismay.

I never said it was, the point I was making is that if you're going to get rid of the manager you need to have a viable replacement.
Also I don't think 10th place is far fetched with an inexperienced manager in charge of a squad which in reality is lacking quality especially in attacking positions and has had a lot of injuries.

 

[itso 7]

Keeping the manager on till then end of the season to appoint Mourinho would have been a tough decision.... not only that but the correct one in the eye of the storm IF its true that Mourinho isn't available till July.

EDIT: We would have been more of a laughing stock had we decided to hand the job for 6 months to someone who has never managed at senior level before

So eh... doing nothing = tough decision! I rest my case.

 

[Cassidy]

So eh... doing nothing = tough decision! I rest my case.

You obviously have difficulty reading. Where did I say do nothing, I said hire Mourinho

 

[Eckers99]

FSW was sacked for what exactly? The club are in no better position now than they were then.
Anyway thread is being derailed. Lets see what the club does in the summer

This thread is a train wreck of circular thinking and borderline neurotic fixations on spurious events. So being derailed seems pretty apt, as it's been one long teeter on rickety rails for weeks.

 

[VP89]

This thread is a train wreck of circular thinking and borderline neurotic fixations on spurious events. So being derailed seems pretty apt, as it's been one long teeter on rickety rails for weeks.

There are so many good words in that sentence.

 

[itso 7]

You obviously have difficulty reading. Where did I say do nothing, I said hire Mourinho

But we are working on the assumption that Mourinho isn't available till July and in that context the board accepted that it was okay to write off the season till we reach that point because its too difficult to identify a jobless tactician that can do better than the shit Van Gaal served up.

 

[Cassidy]

But we are working on the assumption that Mourinho isn't available till July and in that context the board accepted that it was okay to write off the season till we reach that point because its too difficult to identify a jobless tactician that can do better than the shit Van Gaal served up.

Yes I am saying in that particular scenario they would have made the decision to hire Mourinho and leave things as is till the end of the season. Which atm we are 5th not far from 4th and in the semi final of the FA cup. A jobless tactician that we could have got probably and likely in all reality wouldn't have us in this position, we would more likely be worse off. So overall like it or not, in that scenario is would likely be the correct decision.

Anyway lets just agree to disagree, you obviously feel there is some magical candidate that could have taken the job for 6 months that none of us are aware of that would have had us in a better place, I do not that is all.

 

[Garethw]

@itso 7 it doesn't matter now what the board should have done in Dec etc - it's gone and we can't do anything about it except move on. Our big worry now is what the hell they're likely to do at this moment regarding the managerial situation. If they miss out on a proven candidate for superficial and stupid reasons, then we've got a big problem obviously. This now is the issue.

Spot on mate!

 

[prath92]

I already highlighted that being a Director at United is not my job but I expect those who hold those posts and should be in a position to come up with better candidates than me or any of us, the biggest factor, on our results, was Van Gaal's influence. He had to go and more could have been salvaged by an interim manager, identified and appointed by men who are being paid millions to do that job, how is that difficult to understand? We were losing games not only because we had a shit team but also because of his tactics which are designed to create one chance per match, his team selections and substitutions. Removing him and bringing someone who would give a little more creative freedom to our players would have made a huge difference whilst a permanent replacement was being sought.
The month you mention a new manager needing to settle was spent by Van Gaal getting destroyed by teams like Norwich and Stoke City who didn't need to pull up trees to record a victory against us.

The question of sacking him came up end of December when were losing to stoke Bournemouth and Norwich and when we lost to Wolfsburg in the CL. That's when our season derailed. So another month was January.

The people in higher posts can't magically create people just because they are paid millions. And we cant hire any random guy who seems decent as Moyes showed. Interim or not, there wasn't anyone with the caliber of getting us into top 4 or better (which is higher than our current position) other than mourinho.

And there's nothing to suggest that we have passed upon mourinho. In fact 90% of the media are reporting (including di marzio) we have done this months ago

 

[reelworld]

You're right of course. I guess I'm looking at it from the worst case scenario.

The different reports in the press, and Giggs still being a part of the conversation, is getting to me tbh. You don't have to have more than an ounce of intelligence to know that Giggs shouldn't even be considered for the simple reason he is not yet a manager. Yet, it seems that's exactly what is happening going by all the reports, and the board is scaring the hell out of me by even listening to any arguments for Giggs. In Woody's position, I would have fired someone instantly for daring to suggest such a dumb idea in the first place.

Or the only reason van Gaal is still on the job is that the board actually didn't want to give it to Giggs. But they were reluctant to outright deny him the job because Fergie was very vocal in his support of Giggs for the job. Imagine if Van Gaal was sacked in December, you can be sure that Fergie, and all other United ambassadors is calling for Giggs to be given the interim job since he already have experience on it. And imagine if he somehow fluked his way to 4th place, can you imagine the pressure of giving the job to Giggs? While all the time the board (correctly) should give the job to an available Mourinho.

Mourinho is coming, from his interviews he seems content and satisfied with things are going. He doesn't sound like someone whose future are still up in the air. Right now Woodward is letting van Gaal finished the season out, and we still have a chance of a trophy after all. People just need to have patience.

 

[Owngoalscorer]

Do you think we'd be likely to get Poch or Simeone (as an example) if we wanted them? I don't think the latter will come if we made an offer at all tbh and I don't see Poch leaving what he's building at Tottenham either.

Many people didn't believe he would leave the project he was building at Southampton but what happened proved he can be "bought" in the right circumstances.. As for Simeone i'd have serious doubts due to his fusional relationship with Athletico and the fans - he'll stay until thing start going pear-shaped. Its extremely unlikely but i'd love to see Bielsa at OT but it won't happen.

 

[Jazz]

Or the only reason van Gaal is still on the job is that the board actually didn't want to give it to Giggs. But they were reluctant to outright deny him the job because Fergie was very vocal in his support of Giggs for the job. Imagine if Van Gaal was sacked in December, you can be sure that Fergie, and all other United ambassadors is calling for Giggs to be given the interim job since he already have experience on it. And imagine if he somehow fluked his way to 4th place, can you imagine the pressure of giving the job to Giggs? While all the time the board (correctly) should give the job to an available Mourinho.

Mourinho is coming, from his interviews he seems content and satisfied with things are going. He doesn't sound like someone whose future are still up in the air. Right now Woodward is letting van Gaal finished the season out, and we still have a chance of a trophy after all. People just need to have patience.

Yes I have considered this and I remember reading an article about this same thing. No one paid any attention to it at the time. Whoever the source was explicitly (apparently) said that to give Giggs the interim job would make things awkward as they didn't see him as the next United manager. This made sense to me, but since then, I dunno, all the conflicting reports are doing my head in. I have no clue what to believe exactly.

 

[Erebus]

I am starting to get really worried. When any organisation allows its heart to rule its head then the consequences are usually pretty dire.

 

[Jazz]

I am starting to get really worried. When any organisation allows its heart to rule its head then the consequences are usually pretty dire.

I don't believe it's ruling with the 'heart' - I believe it's more a case of self-interest from the parties involved. Total selfishness on their part for choosing whatever route they take. Nothing to do with what's good for the club imo.

 

[KingMinger22]

Please. Surely. We can't be that stupid as to pass up on Mou and stick with Louie.

Can you imagine the mood at OT opening match if the season if LVG is in charge?

 

[MrSingh2002]

If we sign Mourinho I'd upgrade to a season ticket tomorrow.

 

[Jazz]

If we sign Mourinho I'd upgrade to a season ticket tomorrow.

Tell United's ticket office. Only way to get through to the people in charge knowing one decision means less spending from fans whilst the other decision means more money for them.

 

[reelworld]

Yes I have considered this and I remember reading an article about this same thing. No one paid any attention to it at the time. Whoever the source was explicitly (apparently) said that to give Giggs the interim job would make things awkward as they didn't see him as the next United manager. This made sense to me, but since then, I dunno, all the conflicting reports are doing my head in. I have no clue what to believe exactly.

I think there are several things that prevent United board from announcing the decision. First we are still in FA Cup. Second, I think the clause that prevent Mourinho from signing with another club before July do exist. Chelsea got to protect their own interest. They don't want Mourinho to feck up them up if Chelsea and United were neck to neck for a CL place or title.

I am starting to get really worried. When any organisation allows its heart to rule its head then the consequences are usually pretty dire.

If my guess above is correct, then keeping van Gaal now is actually the correct and non-emotional decision.

 

[JPRouve]

I think there are several things that prevent United board from announcing the decision. First we are still in FA Cup. Second, I think the clause that prevent Mourinho from signing with another club before July do exist. Chelsea got to protect their own interest. They don't want Mourinho to feck up them up if Chelsea and United were neck to neck for a CL place or title.

If my guess above is correct, then keeping van Gaal now is actually the correct and non-emotional decision.

The clause doesn't prevent any announcement or even signature, and this type of clauses generally can be bought. United could even tell Chelsea to feck off and a judge will have to fine Mourinho, a fine that could be paid by the club.

 

[peridigm]

I see everyone is still rationalizing why the club have not announced Jose yet in hopes they are going to do so in May. There could be a lot of people jumping off bridges come July. I hope I'm wrong.
We all think Woodward and the Glazers are not naive enough to keep LVG, hire Giggs, or worse yet, keep LVG for a year, then let Giggs take over, but the last 3 years have put a doubt in everyone's mind.
Our results coupled with other happenings like Klopp going to Liverpool, Liverpool advancing to in EL despite looking like they were on the way out, City hiring Pep, City making it to the semis of CL, has all United fans on the edge of their seats eagerly anticipating the club to make the next move and a statement that we're not going to sit back and lose our place as a top team domestically and in Europe.
I think the club has it's back against the wall more than ever in terms of the next move. We MUST get rid of LVG and get someone world class to compete and be near the top. Keeping LVG will further cement our demise and put us in a deeper hole. There are only a few managers capable of taking the United job and succeeding. There is only one currently available.
It just makes too much sense to hire Jose and that makes me think we won't hire Jose.

 

[LeftyBlaster]

Dory is strong in this.

Dory?

 

[ColvaleGoa]

I think we have fecked up big time by dithering over Maureen! Not confident at all about this happening now. Depressing if LvG or Giggs is our manager next season!

 

[Scorpy]

Dory?

Spoiler

 

[Sir A1ex]

I see everyone is still rationalizing why the club have not announced Jose yet in hopes they are going to do so in May. There could be a lot of people jumping off bridges come July. I hope I'm wrong.
We all think Woodward and the Glazers are not naive enough to keep LVG, hire Giggs, or worse yet, keep LVG for a year, then let Giggs take over, but the last 3 years have put a doubt in everyone's mind.
Our results coupled with other happenings like Klopp going to Liverpool, Liverpool advancing to in EL despite looking like they were on the way out, City hiring Pep, City making it to the semis of CL, has all United fans on the edge of their seats eagerly anticipating the club to make the next move and a statement that we're not going to sit back and lose our place as a top team domestically and in Europe.
I think the club has it's back against the wall more than ever in terms of the next move. We MUST get rid of LVG and get someone world class to compete and be near the top. Keeping LVG will further cement our demise and put us in a deeper hole. There are only a few managers capable of taking the United job and succeeding. There is only one currently available.
It just makes too much sense to hire Jose and that makes me think we won't hire Jose.

Yup. We're all blindly ignoring the fact that so far the owners' attitude appears to have been to try and show that they can do it "their way"and not just take the obvious path. Who says the leopard will change its spots all of a sudden? If the Green and Gold years told us anything its that they are every bit as stubborn as Vangle in the face of relentless criticism and pressure to change.

 

[reelworld]

The clause doesn't prevent any announcement or even signature, and this type of clauses generally can be bought. United could even tell Chelsea to feck off and a judge will have to fine Mourinho, a fine that could be paid by the club.

I think a large amount of money will involved if Mourinho break the clause, and most likely Chelsea also pay Mourinho to not taking job in the middle of the season.