Club ownership | Senior management team talk

redNATION said:
If Amorim doesn’t win the Europa League, I think he’ll be sacked. The club needs champions league football to try to get on a sustainable financial footing, most of the sponsorships will ratchet up on champions league qualification.

If I was SJR id be looking at the teams left in Europa and thinking surely that’s achievable. The league is a write off this season and Amorim will get a pass on, I don’t think they’ll be as charitable with the cups.
Click to expand...
You could be majorly unlucky and lose a game you've dominated on penalties or a dodgy reffing decision. You can't sack your manager 6 months after bringing him in and not signing him the players he needs to implement the system he was adamant he would implement.
 
When do we acknowledge that it’s not INEOS, it’s Glazers and INEOS. With INEOS basically being a management firm that paid to run the club with Joel.
 
stefan92 said:
343 variations aren't that uncommon as you claim. Just look at Palace today, Glasner's 3421 isn't that different from Amorim's 343.

So it is a valid concern, but not as bad as you apparently think.
Click to expand...
Also, notice how the players he picked seamlessly transitioned from 4 at the back to 3 at the back with barely any issues. Yet we struggle like feck with it.
 
Telsim said:
Getting rid of Rashford has massively improved my opinion of this group. Now I believe there is an actual desire for change.

The Dorgu transfer and not bending over backwards for Bayern over Tel is good as well.
Click to expand...

Undoing this mess will take time, people refuse to accept that.
 
afrocentricity said:
Fair point but I think people are more worried about how viable it can be at the cutting edge, not for also rans..... Great I hope, but it remains to be seen
Click to expand...
Judt keeping him as an example: Glasner won the EL with Frankfurt and that system, which included winning against Barca on the way. So examples for success aren't that difficult to find.

And even if 343 shouldn't be the way to go, but a 433 for example would. What is actually the difference between the Systems? Going from 433 to 343 you basically replace a CM with a CB and can then afford to use two attacking fullbacks instead of one like we see in many 433 setups.

Or if somebody uses two attacking fullbacks in a 433 they usually have a DM drop into defence while they are attacking. So depending on different possible interpretations it really is a continuum between these formations instead of being fundamentally different.
 
Big Andy said:
Also, notice how the players he picked seamlessly transitioned from 4 at the back to 3 at the back with barely any issues. Yet we struggle like feck with it.
Click to expand...
Actually it's quite simple. Players just need a bit of talent and a working brain. United just has too many who have just one of those things but not both
 
Is there any kind of minimum achievement needed for Ineos to retain control of 'football matters'? Or are they in charge permanently?
 
I think much of our fanbase has been starved of actual success for so long that they feel we have to "win" the transfer window each time by getting in someone exciting to make us feel better. Never mind that this approach has never worked, many fans still cling to it.

Running the club well does not mean magicking up world class strikers for £20M that no-one else knew about, and it certainly doesn't mean blitzing £50M+ on players that weren't in our plans. It means making sure every player is better than what came before, fits to an overarching template, and has a transfer fee & salary package that works for us. It also means not wasting money on players who don't fit the mould. Do that consistently over 4 to 6 transfer windows and you end up with a squad that is significantly better than what came before.

United post-Fergie are practically a case study in how chasing that one big name that will fix everything is a myth. By all means, we should keep an eye out for a deal or two for the short short term, but never at the expense of the long term.
 
Tallis said:
Not sure which part of the post you were objecting to but I do agree with the poster that we needed owners who could put a good amount of capital into the club. Early days but doesnt look like Ineos is planning on putting loads of capital into the business (I am aware they have committed $300m or so)
Click to expand...
“Middle Eastern owners rarely show incompetence” - PSG are arguably the biggest and best example of an oil club and their sporting project has been an absolute failure even after spending billions on Mbappe, Neymar, Messi, Cavani, Ibra, DiMaria etc…. Money isn’t the answer.

“Cuts would be unnecessary if the owner were more financially amicable” - the club is LOSING £80-100m per season. There is only so long this can be propped up before the owners would get sick of pumping good money after bad and the club ceases to exist. The INEOS cuts however difficult, however minor are absolutely necessary. This is rebuilding sustainably for the future.

The poster finished by saying the Glazers have screwed the club which is spot on, but his whole post previous to that sentence was advocating for more of the same, spending loads, seeing little benefit and pouring cash down the drain trying to cover loses and hide mistakes. It’s madness.
 
Telsim said:
Getting rid of Rashford has massively improved my opinion of this group. Now I believe there is an actual desire for change.

The Dorgu transfer and not bending over backwards for Bayern over Tel is good as well.
Click to expand...
Thats half the problem. But I think the window overall has been piss poor.

1 20 year old left back when we clearly cant score a goal?
 
Plant0x84 said:
“Middle Eastern owners rarely show incompetence” - PSG are arguably the biggest and best example of an oil club and their sporting project has been an absolute failure even after spending billions on Mbappe, Neymar, Messi, Cavani, Ibra, DiMaria etc…. Money isn’t the answer.

“Cuts would be unnecessary if the owner were more financially amicable” - the club is LOSING £80-100m per season. There is only so long this can be propped up before the owners would get sick of pumping good money after bad and the club ceases to exist. The INEOS cuts however difficult, however minor are absolutely necessary. This is rebuilding sustainably for the future.

The poster finished by saying the Glazers have screwed the club which is spot on, but his whole post previous to that sentence was advocating for more of the same, spending loads, seeing little benefit and pouring cash down the drain trying to cover loses and hide mistakes. It’s madness.
Click to expand...

Er PSG have about 8 of last 10 league titles and are regular CL semi finalists and are bona fida top 5 club in the world. Yet according to you are an absolute failure? Ok mate.

Mbappe, Neymar, Messi, Cavani, Ibra and Di Maria a waste of money? No, Rashford is a waste of money, Maguire is a waste of money, Shaw is a waste of money, Mount is a waste of money, Casemiro is a waste of money. Hojlund is a waste of money. Anthony is a waste of money. Deluded.
 
Last edited:
Big Andy said:
Also, notice how the players he picked seamlessly transitioned from 4 at the back to 3 at the back with barely any issues. Yet we struggle like feck with it.
Click to expand...

I think we struggle because we just don't have good players (although some have potential to become good players eventually). Besides Bruno, our best players were Garnacho and Rashford, who only excelled when we managed to hit teams on counter. That's no good for a team which wants to control the football, which is nothing to do with the formation per se. Obviously Garnacho is improving to the new system.
 
PlasticRed said:
Er PSG have about 8 of last 10 league titles and are regular CL semi finalists and are bona fida top 5 club in the world. Yet according to you are an absolute failure? Ok mate.
Click to expand...
The whole project was about winning the CL. They craved the prestige of reaching the pinnacle of European club competition yet every year find new and hilarious ways to get knocked out. Europe is laughing at them.
Who actually cares about the one club French league? Not the Qataris I bet.
Also they are not ‘bonafide’ anything. Without the Qatari sovereign wealth they would be just as irrelevant as every other French club, and I include Nice in that statement.
 
PlasticRed said:
Mbappe, Neymar, Messi, Cavani, Ibra and Di Maria a waste of money? No, Rashford is a waste of money, Maguire is a waste of money, Shaw is a waste of money, Mount is a waste of money, Casemiro is a waste of money. Deluded.
Click to expand...
I didn’t say they were a waste of money. Stop putting words in my mouth.
I said they’ve spent billions on those great players but ultimately failed to win the prize they covert most.

Maybe be less angry, read my post properly and feck off with the personal insults.
 
Plant0x84 said:
The whole project was about winning the CL. They craved the prestige of reaching the pinnacle of European club competition yet every year find new and hilarious ways to get knocked out. Europe is laughing at them.
Who actually cares about the one club French league? Not the Qataris I bet.
Also they are not ‘bonafide’ anything. Without the Qatari sovereign wealth they would be just as irrelevant as every other French club, and I include Nice in that statement.
Click to expand...
No. Europe is laughing at Man Utd.

Football fans live in the past and cant accept change. City and PSG are top 5 clubs. Weve rotted away.
 
PlasticRed said:
Er PSG have about 8 of last 10 league titles and are regular CL semi finalists and are bona fida top 5 club in the world. Yet according to you are an absolute failure? Ok mate.

Mbappe, Neymar, Messi, Cavani, Ibra and Di Maria a waste of money? No, Rashford is a waste of money, Maguire is a waste of money, Shaw is a waste of money, Mount is a waste of money, Casemiro is a waste of money. Deluded.
Click to expand...

They've created a monopoly within their league due to their spending power, which is about twn times their closest opposition.

United would not be able to create similar due to state-owned opposition and ffp/psr.

We'd be in a far better financial position, sure, but if chucking billions about on talent was the solution to all our ills, we would be in a much better position as of now, obviously.

To mitigate such, Qatar would have hired the likes of Berrada (or thereabouts) to 'get recruitment right'.

The consensus clearing our debts will clear our problems is demonstrably wrong, even before we assess whether or not we want to become a PR project for literal despotism.

PlasticRed said:
Football fans live in the past and cant accept change. City and PSG are top 5 clubs. Weve rotted away
Click to expand...

So are Liverpool. They haven't been coerced into state-ownership and their finances, though better than ours, are far from perfect.

No quick fix.
 
I got abused for saying this months ago - but someone show me how Ineos are any better than Glazers... new faces, same clown show
 
Plant0x84 said:
I didn’t say they were a waste of money. Stop putting words in my mouth.
I said they’ve spent billions on those great players but ultimately failed to win the prize they covert most.

Maybe be less angry, read my post properly and feck off with the personal insults.
Click to expand...
Maybe they havnt won a CL. They came close and are a latter stage certainty most years.

City only have 1 CL. Its not like they are easy to win.

Are you saying Mbappe, Neymar, Messi, Cavani, Ibra and Di Maria at the club you support is billions wasted when you get to watch them every Saturday and be entertained? You just sound bitter pal.
 
PlasticRed said:
No. Europe is laughing at Man Utd.

Football fans live in the past and cant accept change. City and PSG are top 5 clubs. Weve rotted away.
Click to expand...
City yes... they actually won the CL by now and are dominating a league against other top clubs. But PSG? I know nobody who would see them as a top 5 club in Europe.

Everybody is laughing at PSG for waisting money, just like United.
 
Would be utter incompetence from INEOS and Glazers at this stage if we DIDNT get another forward in. Yeah I get it, PSR, don't make the same mistakes as the past etc.

No wonder opposition teams are picking us off week by week. We lack any real goal threat so of course they are willing to take more risks, be more expansive. I understand the fans frustration with Rasmus and while he should be performing better, let's have it right, he should have been bought in to be a development striker behind a more established head.
 
PlasticRed said:
Are you saying Mbappe, Neymar, Messi, Cavani, Ibra and Di Maria at the club you support is billions wasted when you get to watch them every Saturday and be entertained? You just sound bitter pal.
Click to expand...
Compared to City they have a bigger financial advantage in their league but are less dominant. It's fair to say they wasted a lot of money.
 
UnsungHero said:
Glazers have bled the club dry for 2 decades.

INEOS have been running things for 8 months, and are actually investing money despite the cutbacks which do leave a slightly sour taste, I agree.
Click to expand...
They aren’t investing money though. They have paid money to acquire equity. Some of that has been put into the club as part of the arrangement. The Glazers are more responsible for that as they have given up something for that investment.
 
PlasticRed said:
No. Europe is laughing at Man Utd.

Football fans live in the past and cant accept change. City and PSG are top 5 clubs. Weve rotted away.
Click to expand...

PlasticRed said:
Maybe they havnt won a CL. They came close and are a latter stage certainty most years.

City only have 1 CL. Its not like they are easy to win.

Are you saying Mbappe, Neymar, Messi, Cavani, Ibra and Di Maria at the club you support is billions wasted when you get to watch them every Saturday and be entertained? You just sound bitter pal.
Click to expand...
City and PSG do not have legitimacy because of how they have achieved their ‘success’.

Omfg - for the 2nd time I didn’t say those players were wasted money or that they aren’t great players. The point of the Qatari project in Paris was to dominate Europe, and they have simply failed to do so.
 
UnsungHero said:
Glazers have bled the club dry for 2 decades.

INEOS have been running things for 8 months, and are actually investing money despite the cutbacks which do leave a slightly sour taste, I agree.
Click to expand...
I'm not saying you're wrong, but what investment? It's an honest question, I fully accept I might have missed it.

The cutbacks are indeed horrible for the poorly paid staff (I worry much less about SAF no longer being an ambassador) but they've already sacked one guy they brought in - and the others are, to me, highly questionable: I mean, someone explain Jason Wilcox's qualifications to me (just another Darren Fletcher, as far as I can see). Who knew how much we'd miss Ed Woodward so much... and even Martin Edwards?
 
acnumber9 said:
They aren’t investing money though. They have paid money to acquire equity. Some of that has been put into the club as part of the arrangement. The Glazers are more responsible for that as they have given up something for that investment.
Click to expand...
Absolute rubbish. The money invested to acquire the equity was firmly pocketed by the Glazers. The club has seen none of it.
The only money the club has seen is the $300m invested for infrastructure projects by INEOS/sjr/trawlers ltd.
I don’t get why people are suddenly so desperate to give the Glazer family more credit. They deserve none.
 
acnumber9 said:
They aren’t investing money though. They have paid money to acquire equity. Some of that has been put into the club as part of the arrangement. The Glazers are more responsible for that as they have given up something for that investment.
Click to expand...

I believe something like an additional £300m has been injected by Ratcliffe himself. Maybe his motives are nefarious, his focus seems to be redevelopment of the stadium and surrounding area, but it's more than the Glazers have done.

I'm not saying I have any faith in him, I don't really, but it is still early days.

mitchmouse said:
I'm not saying you're wrong, but what investment? It's an honest question, I fully accept I might have missed it.

The cutbacks are indeed horrible for the poorly paid staff (I worry much less about SAF no longer being an ambassador) but they've already sacked one guy they brought in - and the others are, to me, highly questionable: I mean, someone explain Jason Wilcox's qualifications to me (just another Darren Fletcher, as far as I can see). Who knew how much we'd miss Ed Woodward so much... and even Martin Edwards?
Click to expand...

See above. I agree on the staffing, the setup doesn't scream 'best in class' to me. Ashworth was the only highly regarded person and he's gone...
 
Plant0x84 said:
“Middle Eastern owners rarely show incompetence” - PSG are arguably the biggest and best example of an oil club and their sporting project has been an absolute failure even after spending billions on Mbappe, Neymar, Messi, Cavani, Ibra, DiMaria etc…. Money isn’t the answer.
Click to expand...

PSG: 10 of their 12 Ligue 1 titles have come since they got taken over. Bound to hear a farmers league reply, think before replying with that.

They are always in the knockout stages of the CL, regularly in the QF & SF.

Finances: I can’t be bothered to write year by year. But post takeover “PSG recorded a negative net income every season between 1998 and 2011, with losses amounting to nearly €300m: €240m under Canal+'s ownership and €58m more with Colony Capital.[57][58] At the time, the club had a total revenue of €101m and was valued at €100m”

Now “PSG currently have the third-highest revenue in the footballing world with annual earnings of €806m according to Deloitte, and are the world's seventh-most valuable football club, worth $4.4bn according to Forbes.”

If you’re going to call something an “absolute failure” at least back it up. City were not an absolute failure until they won the CL.
 
JediSith said:
PSG: 10 of their 12 Ligue 1 titles have come since they got taken over. Bound to hear a farmers league reply, think before replying with that.

They are always in the knockout stages of the CL, regularly in the QF & SF.

Finances: I can’t be bothered to write year by year. But post takeover “PSG recorded a negative net income every season between 1998 and 2011, with losses amounting to nearly €300m: €240m under Canal+'s ownership and €58m more with Colony Capital.[57][58] At the time, the club had a total revenue of €101m and was valued at €100m”

Now “PSG currently have the third-highest revenue in the footballing world with annual earnings of €806m according to Deloitte, and are the world's seventh-most valuable football club, worth $4.4bn according to Forbes.”

If you’re going to call something an “absolute failure” at least back it up. City were not an absolute failure until they won the CL.
Click to expand...
You need to scroll up the page, I’ve already answered your points.
 
Plant0x84 said:
Without the Qatari sovereign wealth they would be just as irrelevant as every other French club, and I include Nice in that statement.
Click to expand...

Doesnt that contradict your statement about the ownership being a abject failure?
 
Plant0x84 said:
Absolute rubbish. The money invested to acquire the equity was firmly pocketed by the Glazers. The club has seen none of it.
The only money the club has seen is the $300m invested for infrastructure projects by INEOS/sjr/trawlers ltd.
I don’t get why people are suddenly so desperate to give the Glazer family more credit. They deserve none.
Click to expand...
It’s not though. INEOS didn’t buy their shares and then put extra money in. They bought shares and part of the deal was that some of that money went on the club. I don’t know why you’re so desperate to support everything Ratcliffe does. If the Glazers were doing what INEOS are currently doing you’d be calling it out. I bet Woodward would’ve loved to know the way to fans hearts was to cut costs and put prices up.
 
UnsungHero said:
I believe something like an additional £300m has been injected by Ratcliffe himself. Maybe his motives are nefarious, his focus seems to be redevelopment of the stadium and surrounding area, but it's more than the Glazers have done.

I'm not saying I have any faith in him, I don't really, but it is still early days.



See above. I agree on the staffing, the setup doesn't scream 'best in class' to me. Ashworth was the only highly regarded person and he's gone...
Click to expand...
Any money put in by INEOS was in exchange for equity.
 
mitchmouse said:
I'm not saying you're wrong, but what investment? It's an honest question, I fully accept I might have missed it.

The cutbacks are indeed horrible for the poorly paid staff (I worry much less about SAF no longer being an ambassador) but they've already sacked one guy they brought in - and the others are, to me, highly questionable: I mean, someone explain Jason Wilcox's qualifications to me (just another Darren Fletcher, as far as I can see). Who knew how much we'd miss Ed Woodward so much... and even Martin Edwards?
Click to expand...
There's a few things here.

The club's wider structure was disjointed at every level. They were correct to change that. Redundancies are shite but we're paying the price of that lack of structure/strategy at every level. I feel like an absolute Tory cu** saying that.

We also had far too many players in ambassador roles. That has been something that has needed looking at for years. I'd much rather the club scrapped 90% of those roles. Give them a job, by all means, schmoozing sponsors etc but make it an actual job with actual responsibilities and targets etc.

Now, what they've brought in is still questionable. It's easy enough (as unpopular as it is) to make cutbacks but to actively change that culture/strategy is something very different.

Martin Edwards and Peter Kenyon (both tw**) were probably the last two Chairmen/CEOs to actually implement some kind of proper strategy behind the scenes. Gill was a safe pair of hands but knew Fergie would lead on the football side so his job was relatively easy. It's the end part of Gill's period where we started to fall behind because we stopped thinking long term in pretty much all areas.
 
acnumber9 said:
I don’t know why you’re so desperate to support everything Ratcliffe does.
Click to expand...
It’s not about being desperate to support Ratcliffe. It’s about a) not attributing the Glazers monumental mismanagement and incompetence to any other party either forgetting who is really to blame or absolving them some how and b) not immediately shitting on those trying to sort it out, mostly because of a temper tantrum because we lost a game of football again.

INEOS have clear not been perfect, and there will be bumps along the way but the club is such a mess it’ll take a long time to sort
out and rebuild. I will judge them on results, but now isn’t the time for that.

Football is supposed to be fun and entertaining so forgive me if I chose to look on things positively where possible instead of revelling in doom and gloom and rage and ruin.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.