Club ownership | Senior management team talk

[pocco]

Most football club owners had never owned a football club before. Also From what we have seen at united, nice and Lausanne they seem quite specialised in failing

Regarding psr/ffp there are ways to play around that. If the debt vanished then United can spend more on transfers. Meanwhile OT (+surrounding area) can be properly developed thus generating additional wealth (infrastructure doesn't fall in the psr/ffp domain). Finally someone like Saudi can buy some of our unwanted players. All we need is a proper plan and an owner whose willing to pump some serious money into the club

They couldn’t even provide proof of funds at the bidding stage, the rest is just a pipe dream.

 

[Shane88]

Not dead but be won't be competitive or relevant again for about 20 years. And we'll have to sign a bunch of shit journeymen players, but hey is that much different to our current squad?

Actually dead.

The instant loss of PL money, no more European money for years, kit money disappearing like said above, presumably sponsors fleeing, players on massive wages, the inevitable reduced gate receipts combined with our billion pound debt would equal bankruptcy/administration etc.

How would the club continue to operate?

 

[Nogbadthebad]

All irrelevant as we're obviously not getting relegated.

If we don't sign a striker, this side won't score enough goals to improve on the first half of the season.
That means relying on the 3 promoted teams to be shite, because if one or two of them manage a run of results, we are right in the mix.

We are just 7 points above the zone.

 

[spwd]

Can someone please explain how are we ever going to pay the debt off? I'm not clued up with all this stuff but with PSR etc are our 2 owners allowed to just pay some off if they wanted to? Because I can't see how we can invest in everything we need to when we're paying 50 million or whatever it is per year for that.

 

[Cathy Ferguson]

So what was the plan when hiring Amorim? Try 3421 for 15 games and switch back to 4231 if not succesful? Or persist with 3421 even if it means relegation? Amorim seems adamant that he only has one way of playing. What a mess we are in. Change playing style in the middle of the season.

 

[Plant0x84]

If we don't sign a striker, this side won't score enough goals to improve on the first half of the season.
That means relying on the 3 promoted teams to be shite, because if one or two of them manage a run of results, we are right in the mix.

We are just 7 points above the zone.

Palace might conceivably go above us, but I don’t see Wolves or Everton having enough to over take us. Ipswich and Southampton are basically already done.

We’ll finish 15th if we don’t improve.

 

[Garethw]

My Newcastle supporting mate has said that what we are going through now with Ineos reminds him of what they went through with Mike Ashley.

 

[Garethw]

So what was the plan when hiring Amorim? Try 3421 for 15 games and switch back to 4231 if not succesful? Or persist with 3421 even if it means relegation? Amorim seems adamant that he only has one way of playing. What a mess we are in. Change playing style in the middle of the season.

This is what worries me. They backed ETH that had one style of play and now they’ve brought Amorim in who plays a completely different system.

If we sack Amorim, do we appoint a 433 manager? Where is the consistency that this new managerial structure is supposed to provide? Where’s the structure that means that the clubs vision stays the same regardless of who the manager is?

If we back Amorim and he brings specialist players in for his system does that mean that going forward that’s the clubs vision? Or do these new players become deadwood when a future manager players a different system?

It’s a complete mess.

 

[Vidooq]

I watch some of the other teams in the Premier League, and compare some of their players versus what I see in United, and it's staggering the level of quality some of the players of Fulham, Brentford, Wolves, Bournemouth show. Don't get me started on the teams like Liverpool, Arsenal etc.

Kerkez, Robinson, Ait Nouri, Lewis Poter. Position where we are desperate.

I've watched how Brentford play through the lines vs Arsenal. Daamsgard so calm on the ball, each pass calculated, knows when to hold, when to pass. Casemiro and Eriksen were handling the ball v Newcastle like it was from hot lava, unable to complete few passes without handing the ball over in a dangerous area.

We need a total revamp od the team, and we need to get in players of much better quality than the ones from above, young, technical players, willing to compete. Because it doesn't matter how good a coach is, if he wants to play his formation with significantly inferior players, he will cause a huge problem by flirting with relegation. I understand the chances for such thing are currently 0.2%, however, it's scary how some of these players don't so the basics right.

 

[Giggs' right foot]

So what was the plan when hiring Amorim? Try 3421 for 15 games and switch back to 4231 if not succesful? Or persist with 3421 even if it means relegation? Amorim seems adamant that he only has one way of playing. What a mess we are in. Change playing style in the middle of the season.

I'm fearing there never was a plan.

Like... I fear they've just looked to a bunch of foreign leagues and landed on the one who seemed persuaded the fastest by the idea of coming to United.

That would also make our non negotiable of him coming here NOW make sense. I genuinely don't thing they had any other preferences than "He has to be relatively young with trophies to his name and want to come NOW."

I also fear Ineos purposefully will make his working conditions so hard and will go back on the promises they've made him to such an extent that they probably won't have to fire him (which they're stupid enough to wanting to do in no time from now) because Amorim will leave on his own accord.

Really have the lowest opinions of the lot. Cutting Christmas bonuses, halfing MUDSA-donation etc., christ man.

 

[sglowrider]

Translation: Relegation = dead club

Relegation = dead club = phoenix

 

[Valar Morghulis]

I doubt it. He doesn't have that cash for that price for the rest of United. Feckin' Elon had to get financing to buy Twitter.

All these petty cost cutting is a PR activity -- window dressing of sorts for the next round of serious capital injection. External source.

He is showing potential new partners (top 5 richest men in the world or more likely sovereign funds) that he is ruthlessly trimming away the fat within the Club -- to make it more attractive for the next round.. he paid 80million quid for 1% of the club. So we are playing in that 8billion valuation league. There aren't many folks lift in that bracket.

I think he, like Woodward believes that United is a money machine regardless of its on field performance. Both existing revenue streams/model and unlocking future new business models. And reaching the potential 400-600 million GLOBAL United fans. That's his pitch to the uber-billionaires and sovereign funds.

You’ve made a really strong argument here, and I agree with your perspective. INEOS does appear to be strategically cutting costs and increasing efficiency to prepare the club for something significant. By making the club leaner, they’re signaling to potential investors that they’re serious about maximizing value. Given the magnitude of the deal that it's going to take to buy the majority of shares from the Glazers, it’s clear someone in that ultra-high-net-worth bracket is going to probably need to come on board with INEOS.

Looking for a partner to help buy the remaining shares has probably been the plan for a while now in truth. Assuming a Sovereign Wealth Fund or the like does invest, you're probably looking at us then following the Chelsea under Boehly blueprint to turn our fortunes around.

 

[sglowrider]

You’ve made a really strong argument here, and I agree with your perspective. INEOS does appear to be strategically cutting costs and increasing efficiency to prepare the club for something significant. By making the club leaner, they’re signaling to potential investors that they’re serious about maximizing value. Given the magnitude of the deal that it's going to take to buy the majority of shares from the Glazers, it’s clear someone in that ultra-high-net-worth bracket is going to probably need to come on board with INEOS.

Looking for a partner to help buy the remaining shares has probably been the plan for a while now in truth. Assuming a Sovereign Wealth Fund or the like does invest, you're probably looking at us then following the Chelsea under Boehly blueprint to turn our fortunes around.

Tbf I said something like this minus the marginal cost (-cutting) approach of Ratcliffe a couple of years ago. I always said that he didnt have enough funds to buy out the club. But the consensus here said that he was the richest man in the UK, worth 18billion.... how can he not afford it? Meanwhile, Musk had to borrow to buy up Twitter when Musk is multitudes richer than Ratcliffe (who apparently had since lost 4.something billion in the last few months.)

At the 6 billion quid range, its out of the opportunity for only a handful of people. It made no financial sense. Jassim (and partners) had a low-ball numbers-crunched valuation and didn't see value beyond that. He sent a team of number crunchers to United first and not some PR visit as the first meeting.)
And those who think he doesnt exist, then you are deluded. He clearly was the face of a consortium of private folks. You dont send the CEO of PSG (the head of the European club association) to meet the United people if he was some AI-generated figure. They dont play that game at this level. Plus his dad, a former Prime Minister even talked about it in an interview.

But regardless, Sir Jim made an offer to the greedy cnuts that their Club shares would be worth double (the Jassim offer) using his complicated business model approach. But just wait 24-36 months.

He read the room better than Jassim who probably took things at face value.

My expectations are --- that we wait for another 2 years and we will see most likely a sovereign fund or PE buying up the club. And this journey of hope and purity of mind was all a mirage or a clever/cunning scheme. And that we would have landed up in the same place, but only 3-4 years earlier. But without the anger and disillusionment, post-Ratcliffe.

 

[MadDogg]

This is what worries me. They backed ETH that had one style of play and now they’ve brought Amorim in who plays a completely different system.

If we sack Amorim, do we appoint a 433 manager? Where is the consistency that this new managerial structure is supposed to provide? Where’s the structure that means that the clubs vision stays the same regardless of who the manager is?

If we back Amorim and he brings specialist players in for his system does that mean that going forward that’s the clubs vision? Or do these new players become deadwood when a future manager players a different system?

It’s a complete mess.

The majority of good players can play in numerous different formations. It's not like 3421 requires specialised players all over the field as the spine is largely the same. A top striker in 3421 will be fine in other formations. The two #10's at Sporting were apparently one recognised #10 and one inverted winger. The two central midfielders are largely the same. The central defender won't have too much difference, and the wider central defenders will generally be fine either as a central defender or a well-balanced fullback (think Shaw or Mazraoui) in a 4 at the back system. And obviously a keeper is a keeper.

It's really only the wider areas where it becomes a bit more specialised. A top wingback may not be good enough defensively to play at fullback or good enough offensively to play at winger at the top level. And on the flip-side, it's only the inverted goal-scoring winger that arguably may not have a spot in 3421. Perhaps one, but not two.

So yes, if we completely build our squad for 3421 and then later want to change to a 433 or 4231 system then we may need to make a few changes to the squad. But it won't be a complete rebuild, and generally any new manager joining a club will make a few changes to suit the specifics of what he wants anyway.

The more important aspect of having consistency between managers is style of play, not formation. High defensive line or low? Dominate possession or counter-attack? Hard pressing from the front or look to win the ball more in midfield? Build up with lots of short fast passing or spread the play by long balls out wide? Etc. They won't all be exactly the same, but that's where the consistency needs to be. Most players who suit doing those things in one formation will still suit doing them in another.

 

[devilish]

They couldn’t even provide proof of funds at the bidding stage, the rest is just a pipe dream.

The takeover process was weird to say the least.

A- United were massively overpriced which is the reason why barely anyone showed up.
B- no one should have reached the end of the process without proof of funds. We're not talking of a couple of dollars here.
C- The process dragged so long that SJR had to threaten of pulling the plug out of the deal
D- There's rumors that SJR was shocked of the financial mess United were in which is worse then what was portrayed during the takeover process. That in itself is sketchy as hell cause a potential owner whose pumping billions into an investment should have a good idea in what he's heading into

I can't help but thinking that we would be better off if SJR simply pulled out rather then bend over backwards to each and every Glazers demands. The Glazers would have been forced to reopen the process again in a couple of months time while lowering their demands or rely on the likes of Elliott whose got way more experience in running a successful club then SJR does. We are saddled with a man whose running United to the ground while expecting everyone (British taxpayer, local fans etc) to pay for his and his business partner's mistakes.

 

[AneRu]

The majority of good players can play in numerous different formations. It's not like 3421 requires specialised players all over the field as the spine is largely the same. A top striker in 3421 will be fine in other formations. The two #10's at Sporting were apparently one recognised #10 and one inverted winger. The two central midfielders are largely the same. The central defender won't have too much difference, and the wider central defenders will generally be fine either as a central defender or a well-balanced fullback (think Shaw or Mazraoui) in a 4 at the back system. And obviously a keeper is a keeper.

It's really only the wider areas where it becomes a bit more specialised. A top wingback may not be good enough defensively to play at fullback or good enough offensively to play at winger at the top level. And on the flip-side, it's only the inverted goal-scoring winger that arguably may not have a spot in 3421. Perhaps one, but not two.

So yes, if we completely build our squad for 3421 and then later want to change to a 433 or 4231 system then we may need to make a few changes to the squad. But it won't be a complete rebuild, and generally any new manager joining a club will make a few changes to suit the specifics of what he wants anyway.

The more important aspect of having consistency between managers is style of play, not formation. High defensive line or low? Dominate possession or counter-attack? Hard pressing from the front or look to win the ball more in midfield? Build up with lots of short fast passing or spread the play by long balls out wide? Etc. They won't all be exactly the same, but that's where the consistency needs to be. Most players who suit doing those things in one formation will still suit doing them in another.

Bingo, it's not rocket science or trying to convert a diesel car into an electric one. The thing many overlook is that our players failed even the formation or style they claim the team was built for, why did we sack Ole and why did we sack Ten Hag just two months into the season? These players sank them.

If you, at some point have to move from a 3421 to a 4231 or 433 it won't be that hard. The CCB and one of the wide backs become your CBs, the other can become a fullback and one wingback becomes a fullback. The inverted wingback just moves up to be a winger and one of the 10s plays as a wide forward, so simple it can be done mid game, let alone during a well planned window.

 

[pocco]

The takeover process was weird to say the least.

A- United were massively overpriced which is the reason why barely anyone showed up.
B- no one should have reached the end of the process without proof of funds. We're not talking of a couple of dollars here.
C- The process dragged so long that SJR had to threaten of pulling the plug out of the deal
D- There's rumors that SJR was shocked of the financial mess United were in which is worse then what was portrayed during the takeover process. That in itself is sketchy as hell cause a potential owner whose pumping billions into an investment should have a good idea in what he's heading into

I can't help but thinking that we would be better off if SJR simply pulled out rather then bend over backwards to each and every Glazers demands. The Glazers would have been forced to reopen the process again in a couple of months time while lowering their demands or rely on the likes of Elliott whose got way more experience in running a successful club then SJR does. We are saddled with a man whose running United to the ground while expecting everyone (British taxpayer, local fans etc) to pay for his and his business partner's mistakes.

It’s funny because, for years, our fans have rightly said that we don’t need a sugar daddy owner. We turnover enough money to be pretty much self sufficient. Which is true, we do. We are just hamstrung by the debt. But I don’t think you can say SJR is running us into the ground when he’s taking extremely unfavourable decisions to stop us haemorrhaging money. They estimate that the cost cutting exercise will be worth £40m per year, which is obviously an incredible amount.

For me personally I’d rather we sorted our affairs out in a sustainable way, rather than be propped up by an oil state which essentially paper over the cracks of a poorly run football club. In the long run, it is better for the club to be self sufficient once again and not at the mercy as the play thing for some rich owner. Look at Newcastle, already their owners are reportedly having to reign in their expenditure and their aspirations. And they’re the richest of the lot.

 

[devilish]

It’s funny because, for years, our fans have rightly said that we don’t need a sugar daddy owner. We turnover enough money to be pretty much self sufficient. Which is true, we do. We are just hamstrung by the debt. But I don’t think you can say SJR is running us into the ground when he’s taking extremely unfavourable decisions to stop us haemorrhaging money. They estimate that the cost cutting exercise will be worth £40m per year, which is obviously an incredible amount.

For me personally I’d rather we sorted our affairs out in a sustainable way, rather than be propped up by an oil state which essentially paper over the cracks of a poorly run football club. In the long run, it is better for the club to be self sufficient once again and not at the mercy as the play thing for some rich owner. Look at Newcastle, already their owners are reportedly having to reign in their expenditure and their aspirations. And they’re the richest of the lot.

Considering the debt that Glazers-SJR refuse to pay, the infrastructure that is basically not up for scratch (OT, Carrington etc) which will further increase that debt, a squad that need to be rebuilt from scratch + United registering losses year in year out then its becoming increasingly obvious that we do need a sugar daddy. It doesn't help that our owners has no clue of how to successfully run a football club

Regarding SJR who on earth think its a good idea to

a- put a bicycle man at board level
b- pay 2m to release a sporting director, we wait for him for months and then we fire him after 5 months
c- court managers for an entire summer (thus ruining any authority ETH on this squad), we then do a 180 by giving ETH a contract extension and 200m to spend only to fire him in few months time
d- we bring a manager whose system is completely different to ETH's only to refuse spending good money for him in january to rebuild the squad


Oh well there's always the fans to bail out each and every mistake they make. That's the United way I guess. SJR bails the Glazers out, his team makes their share of mistakes as well and we pick up the tab for both

We're currently sitting in 14th place and by the looks of it (Liverpool and then Arsenal) we've yet to hit the bottom. I don't recall that we ever been in such low position in the past 35 years of following United.

 

[Crostien]

['Adidas have the power under terms of their kit deal with #MUFC to terminate the £900m agreement at one full season’s notice if club relegated from PL Also have the option to reduce payments for a year by 50pc (to £45m) if United dropped out of PL

Adidas' kits are terrible. They seem obsessed with blue away kits and the 1992 light blue away kit design in particular. Home kits have been underwhelming, to say the least.

Green and Gold and the club being sold?

Depends on who to.

My Newcastle supporting mate has said that what we are going through now with Ineos reminds him of what they went through with Mike Ashley.

I'm going for broke, here.

Your Newcastle supporting mate despised Ashley, but not the Saudi regime?

Considering the debt that Glazers-SJR refuse to pay, the infrastructure that is basically not up for scratch (OT, Carrington etc) which will further increase that debt, a squad that need to be rebuilt from scratch + United registering losses year in year out then its becoming increasingly obvious that we do need a sugar daddy.

There's no guarantee your sugar daddy would be a success, only a guarantee they'd be infinitely harder to remove.

The Qataris failed to negotiate against the Glazers and Ineos. Woodward levels of abject failure, but many still cling to them as though they'd solve every problem with more and more money.

 

[devilish]

Adidas' kits are terrible. They seem obsessed with blue away kits and the 1992 light blue away kit design in particular. Home kits have been underwhelming, to say the least.



Depends on who to.


I'm going for broke, here.

Your Newcastle supporting mate despised Ashley, though now adores the Saudi regime?



There's no guarantee your sugar daddy would be a success, only a guarantee they'd be infinitely harder to remove.

The Qataris failed to negotiate against the Glazers and Ineos. Woodward levels of abject failure, but many still cling to them as though they'd solve every problem with more and more money.

Nothing is a guarantee in football but considering the dreadful situation we're in, I'd rather have someone who actually takes financial responsibility over the mistakes being made rather then expect the fans to pay for his real life FM experience

 

[Lyng]

Adidas' kits are terrible. They seem obsessed with blue away kits and the 1992 light blue away kit design in particular. Home kits have been underwhelming, to say the least.



Depends on who to.


I'm going for broke, here.

Your Newcastle supporting mate despised Ashley, but not the Saudi regime?



There's no guarantee your sugar daddy would be a success, only a guarantee they'd be infinitely harder to remove.

The Qataris failed to negotiate against the Glazers and Ineos. Woodward levels of abject failure, but many still cling to them as though they'd solve every problem with more and more money.

I don't want state ownership. But they could hardly have done much worse than our current owners. Glazers brought us to the brink and Jimmy is doing his best to push us over...

 

[Nico87]

With our hands be tied financially in January. Would fans be angry if Ineos sold naming right s to Old Trafford to fund transfers?

 

[Crostien]

I don't want state ownership. But they could hardly have done much worse than our current owners. Glazers brought us to the brink and Jimmy is doing his best to push us over...

Not sure.

Qatar have ultimately failed with their psg franchise and ruined the league. Being outwitted by the Glazers and Ineos during the negotiation is ample proof of their acumen.

Furthermore, is it really 'Jimmy' who is pushing us over, or just the decade-plus mismanagement of the Glazers reaching its culmination?

The allure of state ownership is the wanton belief of instant results. Clear the debt and we can do what we want, again.

However, if throwing money around was really the solution to all our ills, the billion-plus wasted in the last decade would have surely translated into success.

 

[Crackers]

With our hands be tied financially in January. Would fans be angry if Ineos sold naming right s to Old Trafford to fund transfers?

Sell it to Emma Mattresses so at least it'll still be the theatre of dreams

 

[Suv666]

Flip flopping on ETH, waiting months just to fire someone, mediocre transfer window, unnecessary austerity measures

The new ownership has been a circus, no fecking clue what they’re doing.

 

[Isotope]

Tbf I said something like this minus the marginal cost (-cutting) approach of Ratcliffe a couple of years ago. I always said that he didnt have enough funds to buy out the club. But the consensus here said that he was the richest man in the UK, worth 18billion.... how can he not afford it? Meanwhile, Musk had to borrow to buy up Twitter when Musk is multitudes richer than Ratcliffe (who apparently had since lost 4.something billion in the last few months.)

At the 6 billion quid range, its out of the opportunity for only a handful of people. It made no financial sense. Jassim (and partners) had a low-ball numbers-crunched valuation and didn't see value beyond that. He sent a team of number crunchers to United first and not some PR visit as the first meeting.)
And those who think he doesnt exist, then you are deluded. He clearly was the face of a consortium of private folks. You dont send the CEO of PSG (the head of the European club association) to meet the United people if he was some AI-generated figure. They dont play that game at this level. Plus his dad, a former Prime Minister even talked about it in an interview.

But regardless, Sir Jim made an offer to the greedy cnuts that their Club shares would be worth double (the Jassim offer) using his complicated business model approach. But just wait 24-36 months.

He read the room better than Jassim who probably took things at face value.

My expectations are --- that we wait for another 2 years and we will see most likely a sovereign fund or PE buying up the club. And this journey of hope and purity of mind was all a mirage or a clever/cunning scheme. And that we would have landed up in the same place, but only 3-4 years earlier. But without the anger and disillusionment, post-Ratcliffe.

It sounds like United will end up to this "sovereign funds" that could afford an 8 billion valuation, that I'm optimistic they're a strong human rights proponent, just to the relief of United fans.

 

[Lyng]

Not sure.

Qatar have ultimately failed with their psg franchise and ruined the league. Being outwitted by the Glazers and Ineos during the negotiation is ample proof of their acumen.

Furthermore, is it really 'Jimmy' who is pushing us over, or just the decade-plus mismanagement of the Glazers reaching its culmination?

The allure of state ownership is the wanton belief of instant results. Clear the debt and we can do what we want, again.

However, if throwing money around was really the solution to all our ills, the billion-plus wasted in the last decade would have surely translated into success.

I'd argue PSG are better off than Nice.
Either way, like I said I never wanted state ownership, but I didn't want Ineos either given their terrible track record.

 

[Crostien]

I'd argue PSG are better off than Nice.

I'd argue similarly, however, whenever psg can afford to blow 200 million on the likes of Neymar, well, you get the point.

Did not want Ineos or state ownership, either. I'll take Ineos over state ownership, of any state, but only belatedly and certainly without permanence.

Anyone who counters with 'you're being moral', yes, you're right. Morals are the primary reason why I'd take Ineos over Qatar (belatedly). They're as good a reason as any.

From footballing perspective, I think state ownership simply dilutes competition. Franchising (like red bull or Ineos) needs a heave, too. Clubs ought to be independent with strict financial regulations whereas in other news I should be the King of Humanity and...

 

[Cathy Ferguson]

This is what worries me. They backed ETH that had one style of play and now they’ve brought Amorim in who plays a completely different system.

If we sack Amorim, do we appoint a 433 manager? Where is the consistency that this new managerial structure is supposed to provide? Where’s the structure that means that the clubs vision stays the same regardless of who the manager is?

If we back Amorim and he brings specialist players in for his system does that mean that going forward that’s the clubs vision? Or do these new players become deadwood when a future manager players a different system?

It’s a complete mess.

Yup. I was led to believe that the club was to decide on a long-term style and then hiring a manager who plays that style. That is why Liverpool didn't hire Amorim.

 

[AneRu]

I think we need to calm down, ride out the storm and more importantly avoid any panic moves that could dig us further down into the hole. If we have some money lying around bring in the four to five players Amorim needs to stabilize, in this window and the next, and for now forget about top 4s, title challenges and just aim for incremental improvement whilst dumping the toxic contracts handed out by Arnold and Murtough, who have been more disastrous than Woodward in a quarter of the time.

Mistakes are going to be made by SJR, Berrada and Amorim but, it is what is it is, we should aim to see out the next two or three years making solid yet unspectacular moves to enable us to stay afloat. It's poor recruitment and management that got us into this mess and it's only through good recruitment and good management that will see us out.

The more we pressure ourselves trying to catch up with clubs who have less issues than us the more we dig ourselves into a hole. Let's run our own race, and forget everything else.

 

[#07]

This is what worries me. They backed ETH that had one style of play and now they’ve brought Amorim in who plays a completely different system.

If we sack Amorim, do we appoint a 433 manager? Where is the consistency that this new managerial structure is supposed to provide? Where’s the structure that means that the clubs vision stays the same regardless of who the manager is?

If we back Amorim and he brings specialist players in for his system does that mean that going forward that’s the clubs vision? Or do these new players become deadwood when a future manager players a different system?

It’s a complete mess.

Completely agree.

Last season 'game model' was the buzzword. We were told there would be a single vision at all levels, so that the academy could produce for the first team and we could recruit more specifically.

All that talk has vanished, and there's no sign that the youth ranks are being structured to suit 343.

It feels very much like we are where we have been for the past decade: Back the manager and pray. Instead of the club deciding this is how we want to play, let's go get the coach and players who can make it happen.

 

[Lyng]

I'd argue similarly, however, whenever psg can afford to blow 200 million on the likes of Neymar, well, you get the point.

Did not want Ineos or state ownership, either. I'll take Ineos over state ownership, of any state, but only belatedly and certainly without permanence.

Anyone who counters with 'you're being moral', yes, you're right. Morals are the primary reason why I'd take Ineos over Qatar (belatedly). They're as good a reason as any.

From footballing perspective, I think state ownership simply dilutes competition. Franchising (like red bull or Ineos) needs a heave, too. Clubs ought to be independent with strict financial regulations whereas in other news I should be the King of Humanity and...

We are in complete agreement

 

[sglowrider]

It sounds like United will end up to this "sovereign funds" that could afford an 8 billion valuation, that I'm optimistic they're a strong human rights proponent, just to the relief of United fans.

Which sovereign fund/s would meet that criteria?

 

[Crackers]

Which sovereign fund/s would meet that criteria?

It kinda said sounds like an oxymoron. A wealth fund is inherently capitalist, hard to see how one could be on a good moral standpoint

 

[sglowrider]

It kinda said sounds like an oxymoron. A wealth fund is inherently capitalist, hard to see how one could be on a good moral standpoint

Precisely. Any govt in the world will have some blood on their hands at some point in their history. From colonial abuses to slave trading to opium trading. Labour abuse in the scheme of things won't be in the same planet as those mentioned.

Lets see if the top five richest guys want to buy up the club after Sir Jim decides to check out: Elon, Bezos?

At this next price point, £8+ billion there are only a handful of potential buyers in this world. None of them are any good, never mind free of some serious human rights violation

 

[Crostien]

Precisely. Any govt in the world will have some blood on their hands at some point in their history. From colonial abuses to slave trading to opium trading. Labour abuse in the scheme of things won't be in the same planet as those mentioned.

Lets see if the top five richest guys want to buy up the club after Sir Jim decides to check out: Elon, Bezos?

At this next price point, £8+ billion there are only a handful of potential buyers in this world. None of them are any good, never mind free of some serious human rights violation

We need to be wary of such false equivalences.

The colonial abuses you allude to, slavery and opium trading are no longer in operation whereas Qatar's litany of abuses continue unabated. They're even trying to use our club to vindicate it and buy off local councils.

Furthermore, Qatar is the only country trying to buy us.

This cannot, and should not, be so blithely dismissed via rhetoric devices like whataboutery.

 

[acnumber9]

What did people expect from the new board and owners after 11 years of mismanagement

To not make things worse.

 

[AshRK]

To not make things worse.

And they did not make anything worse. We were shit and are just reaping the rewards of that. We are not 14th because of their decision to sign ugarte de ligt or yoro. Yes they made a mistake not sacking Eth. But overall the squad We have was assembled by the previous regime.

 

[acnumber9]

And they did not make anything worse. We were shit and are just reaping the rewards of that. We are not 14th because of their decision to sign ugarte de ligt or yoro. Yes they made a mistake not sacking Eth. But overall the squad We have was assembled by the previous regime.

We’re 14th because of their indecision in keeping a lame duck manager. We’ve wasted yet more money on players not up to the required standard. They chased a Director of football for months before sacking him a few months later. They’ve cut jobs, put ticket prices up. It’s demonstrably worse than it was before.

 

[Roboc7]

This is what worries me. They backed ETH that had one style of play and now they’ve brought Amorim in who plays a completely different system.

If we sack Amorim, do we appoint a 433 manager? Where is the consistency that this new managerial structure is supposed to provide? Where’s the structure that means that the clubs vision stays the same regardless of who the manager is?

If we back Amorim and he brings specialist players in for his system does that mean that going forward that’s the clubs vision? Or do these new players become deadwood when a future manager players a different system?

It’s a complete mess.

The formation doesn’t matter that much though. Our fundamental issue is not the formation it’s that the players are suited to low block, pragmatic, counter attacking and transition football. The players also lack pace, physicality and athleticism.

Of course a change of formation benefits or hinders some of the squad but what we are trying to tackle now is that changing the approach or game model etc is that it exposes the majority of our players. We need to start identifying and recruitment players suited to pressing, controlling possession and with the right physical qualities.

Good players with the right skillset will make the formation less relevant. Amad can play RW in a 4-2-3-1 or RWB in this 3-4-3, or behind the striker. Our issue is we are stuck with a lot of players who will fail irrespective of the formation or who need us to never try anything other than transitions and counter attacks.