Bingo. I don’t know why people find it so hard to understand why they stuck with ETH.
Club Ownership | INEOS responsible for the football side
- Thread starter Solius
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) and Jamie (@Vault Dweller) are here to talk about United's dreadful home defeat at the hands of Big Ange's Tottenham Hotspur. Should this have been the end of Ten Hag? How long does he actually have left? And does Nik finally want ETH out?!
- Status
Bingo. I don’t know why people find it so hard to understand why they stuck with ETH.
The quantity of money spent in terms of signings hasn't been a problem at all. It's just been wasted. We need people who will run us smartly, not throw money around.
We need money invested in the training ground and stadium, as that's been neglected, but generally it's more about managing us smartly and not big spending.
Why did they make such a big deal of it then?
Exactly, we are already a global brand that can attract some of the biggest sponsorship deals in the world and have the turnover to fund ourselves so wouldnt need owners to pump millions in to the transfer budget every window.
One way to look at it was they just came in as owners and were looking at all the key roles, and they didn't hire ten hag. So essentially it was an interview process where he also had to be interviewed, except he had the advantage of being here already. Fair for them to talk to other people as well as Ten Hag and whose ideas and plans aligned best with what we wanted.
The cynical view is that nobody out there impressed enough to replace Ten Hag after a mediocre season and we are also just ultimately waiting for Ashworth to come in.
Sounds like they inherited a complete shit show which is no surprise to anybody. The Madrid comparisons are a bit skewed though if you have a bad season in the PL you could finish 7th and lose millions in CL money but the grip on La Liga by Madrid means a bad season is finishing third it’s a setback but easily recoverable
It kind of makes sense tbf. I keep thinking about that Ibrahimovic interview, where he said - "I've been at Ajax, there you have a lot of young talents, at MU you have established players."
Considering that most of the players we've been linked to this summer are pretty young, maybe INEOS have decided that if we go for young talent ETH is by far the better choice for the coming year/s than someone like Tuchel/Poch.
Considering that most of the players we've been linked to this summer are pretty young, maybe INEOS have decided that if we go for young talent ETH is by far the better choice for the coming year/s than someone like Tuchel/Poch.
Where do these quotes keep coming from? Feels like we hear some new ones from big Jim every other day 
I'm not wrong in what I said though am I?
No one has ever said its all the manager and nothing else that's the issue.
That's a strawman argument for you.
If he wants to be like Real Madrid or City, then signing players like Mbappe is just as important as finding someone with huge potential.
Let's not get it twisted, the most successful clubs over the past decade spent a lot of money on top players. Just because we failed to identify the right players and wasted our money it doesn't mean that we should only go for good cheap deals. We aren't Brighton or Spurs. To close the gap on City we need top players. Successful clubs manage to do both well, finding players with potential and also spending on superstars when needed, and that should be our approach.
"Buying an Mbappe won't solve Man United's problems" - it doesn't mean we won't ever sign these superstars but just signing those superstars won't solve the current problems we have.
Madchester Unido CF!!
If nothing else I'd like to see "communicado official" as part of our transfer reveals.
He actually said in that interview that you need 1-2 Mbappe-like players once the team is established and completed, something like Cantona effect on United.
No one is absolving him of anything.
We have all agreed that Ten Hag talent ID is rubbish. INEOS want to take him away from that.
Also... yes 400m was huge.. so what about the other 700m spend in the years before Ten HAg?
Ratcliffe all but saying that the Glazers have done a shocking job running the club. I wish he had the balls to say what he really means but it's understandable that he needs to maintain that relationship.
Fair you used Real Madrid as an example.
So let me ask you this.. do you think if Ten Hag got sacked... new manager will win us the league next season, because that's what happens at Madrid.
Yes whataboutism is alive again
There was a time when whataboutism was looked down upon on this forum. Are you saying United wasting 700m before Ten Hag somehow absolves him of any culpability in him directing us to waste 400m, if Ole/Jose/Louis did then ETH can but guess what all the other guys lost their jobs for their part in those debacles.
Likes the sound of his own voice and chucking people under the bus.Where do these quotes keep coming from? Feels like we hear some new ones from big Jim every other day
He's a very rich man, who does interviews about 10 times a day on various issues. He's just nailed his allegiance to the Labour Government this week, so expect to see a lot more quotes from him.Where do these quotes keep coming from? Feels like we hear some new ones from big Jim every other day
Its funny that people like you say whataboutism.
Look, we can sack Ten Hag for spending money because other managers did the same.
What people forget is the in a football club, the manager is not the one signing the cheques, although looks like you think that way because you absolve all the culpability from Scouts, CEO, Sporting director.
Exactly.
It is going to take time for United to be comparable with the successful clubs on field because we havent been one of those clubs for 11 years.
I think what happens is that when some people hear "It will take time to get things right at United" , all they hear is "ETH had nothing to do with the awful season, all statistics are irrelevant ,all top clubs would stick with the manager, and lastly ETH is infallible and godly ".
Regardless of manager, If Real Madrid, City, Liverpool, Arsenal were spending 400 million and united were spending the same which of those clubs will probably overpay ? Which will be able to offload unwanted players and get a decent fee ? Which is better at having strong squads regardless of manager ? Which club seems to be in a state of crisis every 2/3 years with every manager ? Weird that we keep just apparantly choosing the wrong managers, which doesnt seem to be a problem of any other club similar to us.
All the best clubs dont rely on individual managers picking and choosing targets, the fact that United did that was a reflection of how badly things have been done. ETH couldnt decide on his own to just buy players, the lack of football infrastrastructure and meaningful direction from the top is why we are where we are, not ETH or Ole or Jose or LVG.
United is a club with a culture of mediocrity permeating throughout the club since SAF retired. Money has been thrown to compensate, but its been spent badly BY THE CLUB time and time again. Different managers may or might improve things, but only improve things relative to how underwhelming things have been, thats still not good enough. We cant expect an United manager to compete with city when the club is just so so bad at transfers and squad management. We match what they spent and have always ended up in a mess.
The only club properly able to compete so far has been liverpool, which many would agree is a really well run club. Klopp was the final piece, but he benefited greatly from a complimentary professional/collaborative structure to help with squad management. Klopp also apparantly turned down "disneyworld" United role, weird that promising him a bigger budget then Liverpool wasnt the only thing that interested Klopp. Also, Pep declined the United role aswell so its not like United havent tried to get the best coaches, I am sure theres times when maybe the best coaches available looked at United circus and were less then excited about the challange.
400million spent means what ? You talk about whataboutism, but what is the context of how that money has been spent and the state of the club before and since ETH took over ?
Like , were United a title challanger ? A regular CL latter stage team ? What has United done in the last 5 or 10 years on the pitch that makes you think its reasonable to compare us with the elite clubs ?
When have United spent their money well ? How much do United get for selling players ? What sort of value for money do we get on ins/outs ?
You see a statement like "ETH spent 400 million" means absolutely nothing. Chelsea spent double that in the same time and arent doing much better then us, but nobody thinks Poch is a crap manager for having a far more expensive squad. Its how the money is spent thats the problem and thats NOTHING to do with managers. They are empowered by the clubs and it seems most of the most successful clubs have long term plans that have less to do with just giving their current managers what they want and more about building strong squads regardless of managers.
United do pretty much most things wrong, throw in a new manager, throw in lots of money and make a balls of it everytime. United Managers simply choosing targets is a club failure , not a manager failure.
Agreed
Coping with what? They didnt buy us so there is nothing to cope with, however the facts are undeniable.
The fact is that the bid came from the 92Foundation which is a private company headed by someone who has never held any state role in his life - you can choose to believe whatever you want but lets be clear that your view is pure speculation.
Completely different to Newcastle & PSG (owned directly by state entities) or City (owned by the current deputy PM of the UAE).
Anyway cant be arsed to rehash last year's discussion so that's my last on this subject.
United and transition, name the better duo. Just bring good manager and some quality players. Its not quantum physics.
You make it sound so easy. If that was the case, every other club would be a success. BUT,
- Quality players come at a hefty price, especially if they play in the PL
- Young players - We don't seem to be getting them on time, rather, they play one season somewhere, and then they have a 70m price tag slapped on them
- Good Manager - Most managers will not want to come to United, as we are a work in progress. Our part owner said just this morning that it will take 2-3 transfer periods, to sort us out somewhat. So no sane manager is willing to risk his reputation in the media, while we sort ourselves out
- The stink of Woodward will follow us for some time. If a player is 35m, it will be 50-55m for United, so this makes every transfer tenfold harder to agree. I believe Barrada will learn this the hard way
Doesn't that mean United should be even more ruthless than Real Madrid?
Agree. What’s the common denominator the last 10 years? It’s more about the Glazers than anything else. The whole Real Madrid thing is because they are the gold standard right now, not because he’s going to copy their modus operandi bit by bit.
I don’t think that’s a problem.
Should he be openly mentioning that?
Also since Uefa already blocked Todibo, will it work using Nice as conduit? Also how will Nice fans feel about this?
Also since Uefa already blocked Todibo, will it work using Nice as conduit? Also how will Nice fans feel about this?
Well, he certainly likes to talk.
I wonder what Nice fans make of these comments
We discussed this a couple of weeks back in his thread, but just to ensure you get it let me repeat again - there is no way Murtough and Arnold pay £80m for Antony without letting Ten Hag know of the price, he'd have to be exceptionally thick not to know of the implications of that deal on the budget down the line, if he didn't I am sure even the incompetent Arnold would have told him how harmstrung he'd in subsequent windows but still he, with his infamous veto, approved the deal.
- Status