Behind the trends

[amolbhatia50k]

It all stems from the top - training facilities, stadium upkeep, scouting, key decision making, recruitment, hiring of managers, an overarching vision etc You cannot expect these things to be on point when you have owners like we do. It’s no coincidence that the teams that have been doing well of late - City, Liverpool, to a minor degree Brighton and Newcastle, Madrid (forever), Bayern (till recently) and the ones that aren’t (ourselves, Spurs, to an extent PSG) have not.

Swap ours and Cities owners and we’d be ahead of them in the table and in other areas too. I don’t think the manager and players are irrelevant but their job can be made easier / harder by how well/ poorly the club is run.

 

[Tarrou]

The bolded part is key for me and I don't really understand it. What makes you think that he was meddling in the football side?

We targetted and signed players that Moyes wanted and scouted, we also made structural changes that were demanded by Moyes, the same happened with LVG, Mourinho and Ole. What do you think is more likely that Woodward somehow managed to shapeshift into all of these managers and follow completely different ideas and tendencies or these managers led nearly entirely the football side of things. I personally think that this idea is BS, I don't think that Woodward morphed into the manager that he appointed.

And keep in mind that to me this is the reason why I claimed years ago that he was incompetent as a CEO, because he didn't meddle, he followed the SAF logic where the manager leads entirely the Football side of things which is a very bad idea unless you have SAF, when it comes to changing the structure and adding a technical direction, I have defended that idea but the reality is that many people in the media and among fans were vocally against it and claiming that it was an attempt from Woodward to take control away from the manager and put it towards him, he should have done it anyway but we should act as if it was an obvious thing at United, it was for a long time a controversial topic due to SAF doing it differently and successfully.

We agree on the idea that Woodward was incompetent but disagree on why and how. Which isn't that important when it comes to Woodward but is important when it comes to United and the OP. The cardinal sin that Woodward made was to cling onto the SAF blueprint which isn't one that works without SAF and is objectively outdated and out of place. We recently changed that and now we need to refine it and understand how it actually works which could take a few years.

just going by what was reported by lots of sources over the years, we can never know for sure of course but there have been reports of him meddling in recruitment, for example wanting more galactico style signings for commercial reasons. I could be wrong of course.

on the second bolded, I agree completely, but surely it supports the claim that he was part of the reason we're behind the curve?

 

[Solius]

Good thread, but at a price - many of these things don't really depend on one another. So while the general assessment is spot on ime, it sort of doesn't translate into how the team is supposed to develop from here. I'm thinking of football as a wheel, and with three quarters of a revolution alteady behind us, doesn't it make some sense to grind through the rest, and eye for the next trend (which is 20 years old) to then be on top again? Steering late into trends that are about to become oldfashioned, that just prolongs the wheeling, doesn't it? So I have my doubts about now jumping the train when it comes to football tactics, but mentality and leadership wise, yeah, I too feel your way

Yeah my thinking is we need to start setting them instead of catching up. Easier said than done though.

 

[Andycoleno9]

We are still only (top) club where manager is in 100% control of transfers.
Every other club moved from that "old" approach.

 

[Solius]

We are still only (top) club where manager is in 100% control of transfers.
Every other club moved from that "old" approach.

Tbf I remember ETH saying it's a three way decision between him, Murtough and Arnold.

 

[Siorac]

I haven't paid attention to Ferguson but based on the profile made by some posters, I wouldn't even go for a more established striker. Basically my idea is that we spent 22-23 without a proper striker, so I would gamble on two young a relatively cheap striker as long as they have above average technique and are either fast or physical but generally athletic. Their current end product wouldn't be a big factor mainly because my focus would be on putting Rashford in a better situation to reach 35-40 goals in all competitions, the other ones are just supposed to add goals by committee(on the short term).

Basically I would prefer to spend 60m on two promising strikers and then 100m on a AM and a CM then spend 160m on a striker. The figures are just an illustration of my logic.

This is where I'm at, too, regarding the striker position. We don't have to gamble on blowing the entire budget on one player who is supposed to score 40 a season. We need to build a team and get one or two strikers who fit that team, fit what we need. Like how Liverpool did with Firmino back then, or Arsenal with Gabriel Jesus last summer.

 

[JPRouve]

just going by what was reported by lots of sources over the years, we can never know for sure of course but there have been reports of him meddling in recruitment, for example wanting more galactico style signings for commercial reasons. I could be wrong of course.

on the second bolded, I agree completely, but surely it supports the claim that he was part of the reason we're behind the curve?

And do you think that these reports are accurate or that they were from people that wanted to save their own backsides? The players we actually got matched our managers and the change of profiles matched new managers. Logically if Woodward was meddling then you would see an incoherence between managers and players or you would see a continuity regardless of managers but it's not what happened.

We didn't sign players for Galactico reasons either. While the reports exist they are quite obviously BS since they don't match what actually happened and it has been a constant up until ETH, Moyes, Mourinho and Ole have seemingly used their connections in the british media to peddle nonsense that could be spotted from miles, Woodward also did it with the infamous article that was published after United failed to lower Leicester demands for Maguire and name dropped Varane.

 

[Champ]

We were one of the first clubs to truly embrace social media as an advertising platform.

We truly revolutionised advertising and sponsorships

We were one of the first teams in the premiership to drop wingers back as full backs

We were massively ahead of the curve in terms of sports science and injury recuperation, having upgraded facilities for this in 2012.

In Fact our training facilities themselves were massively ahead of the curve when first implemented, one of the first teams to have an indoor pitch the same size as the stadiums pitch.

Tactically we aren't 'behind', we just haven't had the consistency in terms of results/managers in order to create a 'style'.

The nearest we had was under LVG which was actually a very progressive possession based game, something which had it been more enterprising would have been similar to Brighton's way of playing this season.

 

[MegadrivePerson]

Sir Alex Ferguson wouldn't let them/didn't want them to have a Twitter account

Good Thread.

I do think that one of the drawbacks of having the same manager for such an incredibly long time is that you don't get the same new fresh ideas in a club that you'd get if you changed manger every few years. I know Sir Alex often freshened up his assistants going from the likes of Brian Kidd to Mclaren and then Carlos Queiroz but by keeping the same person in charge for such a long time, I think it gives them almost too much sway/power and it makes it incredibly difficult when they do actually leave.

In a sense that's another way we were behind the trend of regularly changing your manager, although obviously I doubt any United fan in their right mind would have advocated ever replacing Sir Alex!

 

[JPRouve]

Good Thread.

I do think that one of the drawbacks of having the same manager for such an incredibly long time is that you don't get the same new fresh ideas in a club that you'd get if you changed manger every few years. I know Sir Alex often freshened up his assistants going from the likes of Brian Kidd to Mclaren and then Carlos Queiroz but by keeping the same person in charge for such a long time, I think it gives them almost too much sway/power and it makes it incredibly difficult when they do actually leave.

In a sense that's another way we were behind the trend of regularly changing your manager, although obviously I doubt any United fan in their right mind would have advocated ever replacing Sir Alex!

More than a trend it was a peculiarity of United at the highest level. Very few clubs have had the same managers for more than 5 years at the top level. It's one of the reasons why I put a fair amount of blame on Gill, he didn't prepare the club for life without SAF when it was his job to do so years before SAF left, instead the club went from an experienced CEO-manager duo to two people that were learning their new positions on the fly.

The structure of the club should have been modernized around 2010 at the latest while we had the luxury of having a strong team and a great manager.

 

[Based Adnan]

The fact we were playing Chris Smalling as late as 2020 when it was obvious the game was moving towards ball playing defenders 12 years earlier tells you all you need to know about the club adapting to change. Always behind the curve.

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

City's accountant has a track record in football for many years, which is why they got him. Our lad just got involved during the takeover, eventually was put in charge and kept in charge despite years of pissing into the wind.

I do agree on your wider points about the culture, this is of course a multi-faceted issue with many reasons behind it. But for me one of those reasons is definitely the leadership from the owners.

‘Accountant for Manchester City’ is perhaps the second easiest job in football after ‘Goalkeeper for Manchester City’

 

[Solius]

We were one of the first clubs to truly embrace social media as an advertising platform.

We truly revolutionised advertising and sponsorships

We were one of the first teams in the premiership to drop wingers back as full backs

We were massively ahead of the curve in terms of sports science and injury recuperation, having upgraded facilities for this in 2012.

In Fact our training facilities themselves were massively ahead of the curve when first implemented, one of the first teams to have an indoor pitch the same size as the stadiums pitch.

Tactically we aren't 'behind', we just haven't had the consistency in terms of results/managers in order to create a 'style'.

The nearest we had was under LVG which was actually a very progressive possession based game, something which had it been more enterprising would have been similar to Brighton's way of playing this season.

A lot of this was under Fergie. We've fallen behind since.

 

[AndySmith1990]

With so many advocating keeping De Gea it seems its not only the club but many fans who are adverse to change and modernising our football. A club stuck in the past

 

[Kaos]

I think our stadium is currently symbolic of where we are as a club - Wonderful memories within an otherwise old, dilapidated and outdated structure.

 

[Green55]

not surprising when you have owners who only care about profit and put an accountant in charge

This is it in a nutshell.
We try to scrimp on everything until it's feasibly impossible and we are duty bound to do anything. All of the managers after Fergie should have been outed earlier but no we generally had to wait until the end of the season so that it was mathematically impossible to secure CL etc before we sacked them (saving money in the process as contractual requirements not met).
You could add Womens Football to the list too as we must have been one of the last major clubs to sign up.
Would be great to be at the forefront again of innovation - but it won't happen on the Glazers watch.
You get the impression they're dragging the sale on as best they can so they have a ready excuse for not putting their hand in their pocket over the summer.
Feel sorry for ETH as it seems he's doing the job with one hand tied behind his back. Give him what he wants and we''ll really kick on

 

[redIndianDevil]

We are still only (top) club where manager is in 100% control of transfers.
Every other club moved from that "old" approach.

This. I'm worried again as EtH is being given the same control. We really have to move away from this and let our scouting teams sign young and upcoming players.

 

[Raoul]

Were also last with concepts like MUTV ? Or did other clubs already have them as well.

 

[horsechoker]

We need a Balenciaga sponsorship

 

[CM]

Tbf I remember ETH saying it's a three way decision between him, Murtough and Arnold.

Maybe it's just that Murtough and Arnold are poor at their jobs but last summer seemed heavily weighted on which players the manager wanted. I do think the manager should have some say but the club should have final say on decisions which are financially irresponsible or at odds with the longer-term vision of the club.

It's part of the reason why the De Gea renewal angers me so much. That's as close to an open goal as it gets when deciding to move on from a player, yet all the noise seems to suggest he'll be staying on in some capacity. If we can't get a decision as basic as that correct, I don't have much hope for the bigger, more complex decisions.

 

[Solius]

Were also last with concepts like MUTV ? Or did other clubs already have them as well.

I think we were ahead in that respect. MUTV is a bag of shite though.

 

[Raoul]

I think we were ahead in that respect. MUTV is a bag of shite though.

I remember the deal United had with Yes Entertainment about 23 years ago (around Y2k) where we partnered with the New York Yankees to show United games on the Yankees channel. I recall thinking how absurdly cutting edge it was given that there was little to know across the pond engagement on Americans watching the Premier League at the time.

 

[wolvored]

Good Thread.

I do think that one of the drawbacks of having the same manager for such an incredibly long time is that you don't get the same new fresh ideas in a club that you'd get if you changed manger every few years. I know Sir Alex often freshened up his assistants going from the likes of Brian Kidd to Mclaren and then Carlos Queiroz but by keeping the same person in charge for such a long time, I think it gives them almost too much sway/power and it makes it incredibly difficult when they do actually leave.

In a sense that's another way we were behind the trend of regularly changing your manager, although obviously I doubt any United fan in their right mind would have advocated ever replacing Sir Alex!

Kidd went behind Fergies back and Knox went back to Scotland. Queroz left to manage Portugal so it was more them fecking up or leaving rather than Fergie freshening it up. Cant remember why Mclaren left. The fact Phelan and Mulenstein were here for years proves Fergie was happy with whoever hes had as backups and never freshened it up deliberately

 

[El Jefe]

Signing Kane for huge money only for him to immediately look over the hill would be such a typical post-Fergie signing for us. And it would be even more painful if it coincides with Casemiro's current wobbles turning into a more substantial decline. Which is a far from unlikely scenario, if we're honest with ourselves.

Nothing scares me more than this. We had Rooney, Sanchez and DDG contracts that were absolute nightmares and with our luck it could easily happen again with these two.

 

[Skills]

I'd say the biggest way as a club, that we're so far behind is the attitude to the managers role. It should be an easily disposable role and shouldn't be critical to the clubs long term ambitions or strategy.

In before, someone says but what about Ferguson, Klopp or Guardiola. My response is, if your strategy is based on generational outliers (i.e. 3 of the top 10 managers of all time) you're doomed to fail. There's no other Klopp or Guardiola out there, like there wasn't another Alex Ferguson.

 

[redIndianDevil]

Also our fanbase is behind the trend for calling out underperforming managers.

 

[united_99]

With so many advocating keeping De Gea it seems its not only the club but many fans who are adverse to change and modernising our football. A club stuck in the past

Yep. “He will be back up only”. Back-up at what price? We have a unique opportunity to completely get rid but we aren’t taking it. While other clubs wouldn’t even give him 100k per week.
We are actually keeping an expensive keeper who if the fax machine had worked many years earlier wouldn’t even be here (although I am convinced Madrid did it on purpose / changed their mind last minute).

 

[Gordon S]

Good.

We just have to keep it slow and the trends will do a full circle and we'll be on top!

Oh god how i miss having 2 center forwards.
Any news on that being a "thing" again?

Me too!
I mean, if you can find an absolute perfect fit for that lone striker role, sure, you can make it work, but otherwise that poor fecker is so easily isolated and your attack becomes so stale.
Zlatan was a treat to watch in a red shirt but feck me we were blunt in attack with him up there.
Lukaku was not a treat but also made us terrible in attack.

Something like Rashford up front with Martial or Bruno close by to always give an option would be nice to try.

 

[Hoof the ball]

What's the deal with the LvG comments about archaic? It says him who was at the forefront of progressiveness with all things internal at the club. The overhaul of the scouting, youth departments, the technology for the training complex and fields.

I get what people are saying about on the field, but in terms of our club structure internally, LVG was anything but behind the times.

@Adnan right?

 

[Adnan]

What's the deal with the LvG comments about archaic? It says him who was at the forefront of progressiveness with all things internal at the club. The overhaul of the scouting, youth departments, the technology for the training complex and fields.

I get what people are saying about on the field, but in terms of our club structure internally, LVG was anything but behind the times.

@Adnan right?

If you can please post a link to what LVG said, then I can attempt to give my opinion on what he's said.

 

[Hoof the ball]

If you can please post a link to what LVG said, then I can attempt to give my opinion on what he's said.

Sorry, not LVG's comments, but comments about LVG in this thread. My recollection of him is that he had a lot of progressive influence within the structural side of the club. Am I mistaken for remembering him for bringing in innovations?

 

[MegadrivePerson]

Kidd went behind Fergies back and Knox went back to Scotland. Queroz left to manage Portugal so it was more them fecking up or leaving rather than Fergie freshening it up. Cant remember why Mclaren left. The fact Phelan and Mulenstein were here for years proves Fergie was happy with whoever hes had as backups and never freshened it up deliberately

Thats a very good point!

Mclaren took a managerial job too, I think it was Middlesbrough?

 

[Trumpeter Whydah]

Yeah my thinking is we need to start setting them instead of catching up. Easier said than done though.

So I left for two job interviews and did only just see your response.
Now guess what was on my mind during the first, very long-threaded interview - yes, that trendsetters don't follow trends, they set it. While my visavis went on to describe the place, their philosophy and the like, I was more into chasing ideas how I'd go about all things Man United than paying attention to their words, and came up with

- spreading training materials, with great insights into how all Man United play, from toddlers to the first team. One system, well defined, with all sorts of training routines for variants if the system, and explanations why this and that, what are triggers for decisions... you know, a full catalogue for every kid to download, a detailed orientation for every group in the hood to follow and pretend to be Marcus, Amad or you know who.
- grassroot projects that are involving, and paying, potential junior players' peers, their generation - you know, bassy techno productions, social media campaigns, hip street art and the like. Others have studied midtwens who care a great deal about trends; feck that, you need authenticity to pull the upcoming Sanchos in.
- let the players do the talking. Stop the softened commonplace chitchat, instead promote no nonsense jargon. No more beating around the bush. Engaging in their engagement, feck us oldies and our newspaper orientation.
You get the point of all of this.
Oh yeah, I got the job

 

[JPRouve]

Sorry, not LVG's comments, but comments about LVG in this thread. My recollection of him is that he had a lot of progressive influence within the structural side of the club. Am I mistaken for remembering him for bringing in innovations?

He didn't really bring innovations. By United standards they were new like the sleeping pods but not really new by top level standards. Now he was more modern than Mourinho who thought that technology and GPS trackers weren't a good addition.

 

[KiD MoYeS]

City get evil overlord sportswashing owners, and we still haven't done it ourselves.

 

[JagUTD]

In some ways it reflects the wider world. Look at the West, for a century lead the world in terms of technology and innovation. Always at the cutting edge. That was United 20 years ago until a decade ago.

Now, after aspiring to be us, other have done so and then gone beyond. They now lead the way and we're kind of just looking back on our great Empire

 

[Adnan]

Sorry, not LVG's comments, but comments about LVG in this thread. My recollection of him is that he had a lot of progressive influence within the structural side of the club. Am I mistaken for remembering him for bringing in innovations?

His influence was mainly on the coaching side of the club and he was said to have brought some changes to how the players trained by asking Woodward to rip up the pitches at Carrington and replace them with synthetic grass. He also asked for trees to be planted around the facility to shelter the players from the wind, along with the request to put up 50 ft fences. His request for flood lights was also granted so the players could train during the dark. And his requests were granted by Woodward.

But the fundamental issue that has held this club back for many years, is that we carried on with the manager/CEO model for far too long. And that management model was normal for a very long time where Fergie had created a structure that was reporting directly to him and we were very successful. But the key bit to note here is that everyone on the football side was reporting directly to Fergie who set the directive on the football side of the club, which meant that things evolved due to the process being aligned structurally and the leader of the pack Fergie, being the master of his craft.

But the problems arose when Fergie retired and the model then required tweaking without losing the bit where everything was aligned towards one man on the football side of the club. And that man should've been a DoF with the coaching, academy, sports science, scouting departments etc all reporting in to him. And we could then develop the football side of the club to a world class level by creating conditions for different football departments to thrive, which will lead to on field performances being of a higher level. That's the foundation both Liverpool and City gave to Klopp and Guardiola with Guardiola having the benefit of Sheikh Mansour absorbing the hit of failed transfers.

With Woodward the intention to create a strong scouting network with aid of a head hunting firm was the correct move. And the network of scouts arrived in 2016, with Jose Mourinho as the manager. But the problem Woodward seemingly created was that he had hired a manager that didn't want to work with the existing recruitment structure and instead wanted to work with his own scouts, which meant Woodward had to find a compromise and hence the transfer committee was created with the power of veto given to Bout, Lawlor and Court who were part of the committee. And then Mourinho went to war with the club scouts and was telling the media in press conferences about how West Ham scouts were much better due to them spotting the talent of CB, Diop. And he was triggered because the clubs heads of scouting had vetoed his transfer targets. It would later emerge that those players were Maguire, Boateng and Alderwereild etc. Which brought a angry response from Gary Neville who said that who is Ed Woodward to veto a football manager like Mourinho?. A year later Maguire was signed due to Solskjaer and Phelan wanting him and the scouts were undermined probably due to the pressure from fans and ex players who wanted Woodward to back the manager. We actually needed someone like LVG in 2016 and not Mourinho.


So the key is to align the process where everyone on the football side is working together in unison. And that hasn't been happening at this club since Fergie retired. And because that didn't happen, we haven't evolved. And because we haven't evolved due to the reasons mentioned, our football structure can't thrive due to the naivety at the top which I feel has affected the personnel working at the core of the structure with Mourinho even dismantling the the sports science side at the club which was ahead of the game.

And then there's the data science strategy that should've been in place since David Gill's time. But we've eventually got that going with John Murtough a decade later but fans expect our head of data science to start competing with his counterparts straight away, when the competition has had their data strategies in place for well over a decade and we're still forming the department with Dominic Jordan and Alex Kleyn confirmed staff. Kleyn being someone who connects the playing style from the first team and aiding performance. With new owners we'll compete before long but the Glazers and David Gill caused the rot before Woodward's naivety came into play.

 

[dwd]

Digital turnstiles is another, only came about due to covid

 

[JPRouve]

Digital turnstiles is another, only came about due to covid

Why do you lie? Bailly, Lindelof and Maguire were signed before covid.

 

[Revan]

I'd say the biggest way as a club, that we're so far behind is the attitude to the managers role. It should be an easily disposable role and shouldn't be critical to the clubs long term ambitions or strategy.

In before, someone says but what about Ferguson, Klopp or Guardiola. My response is, if your strategy is based on generational outliers (i.e. 3 of the top 10 managers of all time) you're doomed to fail. There's no other Klopp or Guardiola out there, like there wasn't another Alex Ferguson.

Exactly this. The manager is an important role, but it is a relatively easy replaceable role. They cost cheaper than backup full-backs, but have far more influence. Most clubs use the fail-fast paradigm of quickly relaxing managers until find a good one. And then replacing him when he is not doing well.

We instead praise them for being geniuses and performing miracles where there is no miracle to be seen. Then a year after everyone else is laughing at that manager, we praise them for building the team for the next manager (can anyone forget the praising Ole was getting here for building such a strong team with the likes of Maguire, AWB, Sancho and co. for the next manager)? The entire club is a fanatical cult of the manager, we should change the name to Manager United.

Also, besides the main point, Klopp is probably not a top 10 manager of all time. A terrific manager, but he is nowhere near the likes of SAF and Pep (and even Mourinho and Ancelotti have had far better careers).