We've been terrible for 11 years. The worst run club in the PL and probably one of the worst in Europe. We can't moan about how bad the Glazers have been and then also complain when somebody comes in and starts doing things differently.
Club ownership | Senior management team talk
- Thread starter golden_blunder
- Start date
We've been terrible for 11 years. The worst run club in the PL and probably one of the worst in Europe. We can't moan about how bad the Glazers have been and then also complain when somebody comes in and starts doing things differently.
Okay, Ashworth wasnt the next best thing since sliced bread. But whats the logic behind hiring Amorim and then not backing him in January?(based on the reports I’m reading)
The team is in freefall, no player looks comfortable in his role. What sort of management is this? Did they think that these players are world class and will get adjusted to the new system instantly?
I suspect INEOS are just bringing the club in line with "industry standards". We know how badly we've overpaid players in recent years, I have no doubt behind the scenes we're massively overspending on staff costs too, and other things.
There is standards and compliance. Id say its more to do with compliance.
It's like he took his player data and fed it to FM2019 through chatgpt for verification. Utterly ridiculous, "data driven approach" when all you've got is a few samples from another league.
No $ clearly
And we thought we had enough in the squad to play his system. In theory LWB was the only place where we needed reinforcements, we had players for every other position.
Then all these so called football people are as clueless as Woodward and Murtough.
No proper player to play the wings and no players good enough to play behind the striker and a striker who is also nothing special.
They have been exposed badly. They have got basically everything wrong when they made that decision to back Ten Hag. And here we thought Woodward was an idiot.
Wilcox was the only person from the transfer committee in place throughout the whole summer and now seems like he has a de facto promotion so I don't have great hope for the future
Anyone fancy loading our current squad and budget limitations in FM24 and see how it turns out?
If we had an interim manager it would be a clean slate for players and we all know how that goes. Unfortunately there is no ideal scenario when the club is such a disaster.
Short term there isn’t a huge benefit to what we are doing but in theory the manager and staff can decide who they do and don’t want and plan for next season.
You'd at least expect some of the data indicating that he cannot sprint
Maybe they are just playing 4D chess and this is a deliberate ploy to reduce the value of the club, so they can buy at a much lower price. If we were on top of the league right with a Rashford topping the scoring charts, playr coming through, the value would be much higher. I can see INEOS using this as an opportunity the haggle a lower price for the remaining 72%.
Jim is telling them to go out there and be shit?
The only pleasure I can take from this horror show is knowing old Brexit Jim is absolutly shitting himself about relegation. His investment in the club will be next to worthless and he and the glazers will be faced with huge losses.
I wonder if the club has gone too far the other way. Let me explain this:
I don't think you can manage a football club like Alex Ferguson did anymore. That means running it as the man with the final say. I think that's a bygone approach from the 20th century which is dead because football clubs used to be a lot smaller. The squad sizes were smaller, the number of staff was smaller, the number of executives was smaller, the finances were much smaller, the media attention was far smaller. Ferguson maintained this approach into the 21st century while adapting to the gradual expansion of those things just because who he was. I think he was able to run the rule in how he dealt with young talents like Pogba and Ravel Morrison in 2011-2012 in the same manner he dealt with talented youngsters going astray in the 1980s that a modern day manager would not simply because he was Alex Ferguson. That man was a one man institution. Could you imagine if social media was as big then as it is now? Very few people actually saw Ravel play full matches of academy football unless you were actually there, but heard the hype generated in reports and forums like this from people who did. If he were to come through now you'd have all sorts of expectations that he should have been in the team as soon as possible and questions peppered at the manager.
It's been widely viewed that having one man with that much power walk away exposed the rest of the club as being antiquated. I think the idea of having a director of football acting as a go-between in that sense made sense. But now have we got too many people above the manager with a say? Are there too many cooks in the kitchen? Is having too much of a data-driven approach to recruitment a mistake because numbers can be misleading? If a stats guy in an office is given a barometer of narrowing down a set of players to an X number of passes a game to signify a midfielder, or X number of recovery runs a game to signify players suited to pressing, you're missing out on context that only going to see players through the eye test brings and probably will be misled. Is someone making a lot of passes just sideways without any real purpose besides possession for the sake of it? Is someone running around like a headless chicken when someone who sprints less but wins the ball more through shuttle movements a better choice for pressing?
I think running a football club like a normal commercial business is a fool's errand. Jim Ratcliffe saving money by turning the taps off on all the things that makes a football club a part of the local community is missing the point. Football clubs were made to serve the community in the first place. I think this is true with how they approach the sports side too.
I don't think you can manage a football club like Alex Ferguson did anymore. That means running it as the man with the final say. I think that's a bygone approach from the 20th century which is dead because football clubs used to be a lot smaller. The squad sizes were smaller, the number of staff was smaller, the number of executives was smaller, the finances were much smaller, the media attention was far smaller. Ferguson maintained this approach into the 21st century while adapting to the gradual expansion of those things just because who he was. I think he was able to run the rule in how he dealt with young talents like Pogba and Ravel Morrison in 2011-2012 in the same manner he dealt with talented youngsters going astray in the 1980s that a modern day manager would not simply because he was Alex Ferguson. That man was a one man institution. Could you imagine if social media was as big then as it is now? Very few people actually saw Ravel play full matches of academy football unless you were actually there, but heard the hype generated in reports and forums like this from people who did. If he were to come through now you'd have all sorts of expectations that he should have been in the team as soon as possible and questions peppered at the manager.
It's been widely viewed that having one man with that much power walk away exposed the rest of the club as being antiquated. I think the idea of having a director of football acting as a go-between in that sense made sense. But now have we got too many people above the manager with a say? Are there too many cooks in the kitchen? Is having too much of a data-driven approach to recruitment a mistake because numbers can be misleading? If a stats guy in an office is given a barometer of narrowing down a set of players to an X number of passes a game to signify a midfielder, or X number of recovery runs a game to signify players suited to pressing, you're missing out on context that only going to see players through the eye test brings and probably will be misled. Is someone making a lot of passes just sideways without any real purpose besides possession for the sake of it? Is someone running around like a headless chicken when someone who sprints less but wins the ball more through shuttle movements a better choice for pressing?
I think running a football club like a normal commercial business is a fool's errand. Jim Ratcliffe saving money by turning the taps off on all the things that makes a football club a part of the local community is missing the point. Football clubs were made to serve the community in the first place. I think this is true with how they approach the sports side too.
I think you took my post too literally
On the bright side it seems as if Wilcox actually had the right ideas (like getting rid of EtH in the summer) but was overruled then. Him being promoted could be seen as realizing which mistakes they made in the summer.
We improved under Ruud in my opinion so it was worth it. The issue is changing the system, which has exacerbated issues. But we needed to reinvent ourselves at some point anyway and move towards a more controlled style of play. Only one thing was proven to be true, and that is continuing under ETH was not going to take us anywhere in the long run.
Good for you, most reports said that’s what happened though. Luckily it’s not just INEOS running United but they have put in place two guys who have been a big part of the successful setup at City, along with further support staff.
Exactly.
Players and staff alike have been stealing a living at this club for years - rewarding mediocrity on the pitch. Something had to change to shake things up a bit.
I really don't get the outrage about redundancies being directed at Ineos and not the people who bloated the club in the first place.
I shouldn’t be really, but I’m quite shocked at the reaction so far. None of this should come as a surprise with these players, but people are talking like we were on to something good under ETH. It’s bonkers.
This is a ridiculous take - they'd even have contractual agreements in place for buying the remaining shares
People just don’t have the stomach for the hard times that come with making these changes. They want change and success at the same time, change and hardship isn’t an option. We all would have hoped it’d go more like it did for Tuchel at Chelsea, with immediate results. But it doesn’t always work like that.
I'm not sure about this. That said, INEOS would happily own this whole club at a lower value.
This is what you wanted because he was English and because of “morals”.
Enjoy your moral high ground and fake humility while the team crumble.
Enjoy your moral high ground and fake humility while the team crumble.
Yeah they aint leaving until they get a price they happy with, not hanging around to be short changed
Maybe old Jim just hates the Glazers more than he loves United and tricked them into giving him control to tank the club
I’d still make the same decision. I wouldn’t be surprised if we were as much or more of a shit show under the Qataris anyway. They have even less experience in football and apparently he didn’t even have much money to his name relatively speaking in terms of buying a club (~$6b net worth was it?). They’d have been hamstrung by the PSR/FFP rules anyway even if they did have the money.
Don't take everything so literally on the forum, you crackhead!
*Corrected
I'm a foodie, not a druggie. Well cheese is a drug I suppose....
Most reports emanating from the club which seem similar to those that came from the club during the sheer incompetence of the woodward years.
Amorim was a commercial man, and wilcox was in a much junior role. Not sure deluding yourself about this helps
How much power does Berrada actually have, seeing as the INEOS people have been the ones making a lot of the big decisions you'd usually expect the C suite to make?
Well he picked Amorim
Anyone think this is just negotiation bluff. The last thing you want is an Ed Woodward “we can do things other clubs can’t in the market” and then get confused when you pay 50% more players.
But that said one of my fears with Ashworth leaving was the possibility that Ashworth was recommending players outside of INEOS budget
From memory there is in the short-term (the first 18 months?), but after that any price will be completely renegotiated. Of course, there's no reason to think that the Glazers would actually accept a significantly lower price just because the team is doing worse.
The new leeches, added to the long list of the existing leechers list.
This would surely mean they could renegotiate with anyone?
The devaluing the shares thing doesn't stand up really as SJR could end up losing alot of money in the short term if that's the case, maybe it's just more a case of them hammering home just how bad things are, so the Glazers follow through and sell them their remaining shares.