Dan Ashworth 2024/2025

AltiUn said:
I don't think it's easily 7/10 at all. Like I said, happy with the defensive reinforcements, extremely unhappy with the attacking ones.
Click to expand...
I get your point but next summer will probably be the attacking transfer window. The main goal this summer was to strengthen defence because we conceded way too many goals last season and to have a big clear out. Hopefully the new defensive players work out and that's United sorted for a few years.
 
AltiUn said:
I don't think it's easily 7/10 at all. Like I said, happy with the defensive reinforcements, extremely unhappy with the attacking ones.
Click to expand...
How many signings did you expect? Are you unhappy with Zirkzee, or just unhappy he was the only one?
 
AltiUn said:
I don't think it's easily 7/10 at all. Like I said, happy with the defensive reinforcements, extremely unhappy with the attacking ones.
Click to expand...
So you expected the defence, midfield and attack to be sorted in one window? Sounds reasonable.
 
JJ12 said:
So you expected the defence, midfield and attack to be sorted in one window? Sounds reasonable.
Click to expand...
I expected one of the lowest scoring United teams to improve the attack, yes, I think that is reasonable actually. All we've done is brought in 12 goals in Zirkzee and lost 10 goals in McTominay. We didn't even bring in any creative midfielders.
OsloRed said:
How many signings did you expect? Are you unhappy with Zirkzee, or just unhappy he was the only one?
Click to expand...
Unhappy that he was the only one, we needed another winger.
 
AltiUn said:
I expected one of the lowest scoring United teams to improve the attack, yes, I think that is reasonable actually. All we've done is brought in 12 goals in Zirkzee and lost 10 goals in McTominay. We didn't even bring in any creative midfielders.

Unhappy that he was the only one, we needed another winger.
Click to expand...

Have you ever heard of player development? How about putting some expectations on the manager to improve players he has on hand as opposed to stockpiling on players.

Last season - Hojlund 18 g+a, Garnacho 15 g+a, Rashford 14 g+a, Amad 3 g+a, & Antony 5 g+a

Ten Hag and the coaching staff have to squeeze more output from the current crop first. Simple.
 
idek2346 said:
Have you ever heard of player development? How about putting some expectations on the manager to improve players he has on hand as opposed to stockpiling on players.

Last season - Hojlund 18 g+a, Garnacho 15 g+a, Rashford 14 g+a, Amad 3 g+a, & Antony 5 g+a

Ten Hag and the coaching staff have to squeeze more output from the current crop first. Simple.
Click to expand...
I have plenty of expectations on the manager, still isn't a great selection of players though.
 
Ashworth has done a good job so far. Only mistake is keeping Ten Hag, but the sacking is just postponed, for some reason I don't quite get. Maybe Dan didn't have much say about it, since he only "officially" joined after the decision on ETH was already made.
 
At the start of the window we had several key objectives, and went into it with a worldwide reputation for being a soft touch in the market and over paying for players. The first objective achieved is that we’ve effectively eradicated the perception of the club in one window. We’ve driven hard bargains for all our incomings and secured our primary targets in all positions for really eye catchingly reasonable fees.

We’ve brought in five first choice, first team players, addressing all our major concerns in one window. This is exceptional work. We’ve gotten the player we wanted in each position and we’ve gotten them at a price we were comfortable with. Figures way below what we would have paid in the past. We have also secured permanent deals away, or released, a huge clutch of unwanted or unneeded players, including the coup de grace in Jadon Sancho.

There is undoubtedly still work to be done, but it is completely unrealistic for us to have done more in this window than we have. Not least due to financial restrictions. We have put ourselves in a position now to be able to move in January, if we need to, or more likely, be more aggressive for key targets next summer.

When you look at the age profile of some of our key forwards, such as Amad, Hojlund, Zirkzee and Garnacho…..it is reasonable to expect that significant development can occur over the next 12 months. At their ages players can go from being potentially good enough, to bonafide stars, in the space of a season. But that only happens if you give them the space and minutes to actually succeed. One can’t have a commitment to youth, but then never play them consistently.

All of those players have enormous possibilities to really kick on this year and become key players for the club, the two attacking options with real question marks over their heads are Antony, of course, and Rashford. I would expect the club to make their replacement next summer a priority, if one or both have poor seasons. They’ve shown a ruthlessness this summer that I think is a hallmark of things to come. Antony seems highly unlikely to come good, and would imagine his departure and replacement is a matter of when, not if. Rashford is certainly on the chopping block, but also has the ability (demonstrable) to turn it around here.

I think of much greater concern for the club, isn’t so much the attacking personnel right now, it’s the lack of a cohesive attacking game plan. And that comes down to the manager. In hindsight, despite my protestations to the contrary, I think Ineos made the right choice strategically to keep Ten Hag. I wanted him gone, and highly doubt he’s the right man for the job, but in a summer of massive change all over the club, maintaining a consistent focal point for the players was probably quite important. It was also an important message to send to prospective managers that we would give Ten Hag a chance to succeed under a proper structure. It was also the message that was needed to be sent to fans, especially the match going fans, who were baying for his continuity after the cup win. I wouldn’t say this was acquiescing to fan pressure, I would say this was a balanced acknowledgement of a significant factor in decided whether to sack him or not; and ultimately Ineos are playing the long game.

To get United back to the top isn’t happening in one summer, it’s happening over a 3-5 year window. In that context, giving Ten Hag another season as they reshape the squad and infrastructure - on their terms - is a very understandable and strategically smart move. I suspect they are fully prepared - and perhaps even anticipatory - for his potential failure. The open talks with other coaches, before decided to keep Ten Hag, effectively put the club in a proactive state, should the manager need replacing; instead of finding themselves in a reactive position. They essentially already interviewed several potential replacements in advance.

Ineos are clearly putting a sporting infrastructure in place that can move on with or without Ten Hag and are quite comfortable to give him some time to fulfil his promises to challenge for the title. If he fails this season, and by that I mean he finished outside the top 4 or 5, they will move on from him with full fan support, and having built a squad that is a brilliant basis for a new coach.

Next summer, with the outgoings and wage reductions we’ve accomplished, and several more amortisation’s coming off the books, I would expect us to target a young, potentially world class forward to bolster our ranks. A player in the Nico Williams or Kvarataskelia mould. That was always an impossibility this summer, and I think Ineos have achieved everything they possibly could’ve achieved when you look at the realities of the situation. For me it’s a 10/10 window.
 
Last edited:
Kag said:
Southgate being unemployed is a scary thought, mind.
Click to expand...
Especially considering the more obvious candidates we already talked to them in the summer, and somehow concluded we're better sticking with Ten Hag.

So assuming we don't go back to the candidates we discarded this summer, we're not left with many options..
 
Robertd0803 said:
Has there ever been such a massive clear out to this extent?

The only ones I can think of off hand are when Rio/Vidic/Evra left or even further back when Ince/Hughes/Kanchelskis were sold but thats more of first team names than wholesale offloading like this summer.

Incredibly theres still Lindleof,Eriksen, Casemiro,Antony and probably Maguire still to go.

Still feel we have left ourselves a little short in some areas but thats some foundation to build on for a first transfer window.
Click to expand...
Yes, the first ETH summer where Pogba, Matic, etc were let go. We lost like 9 players.

Just that we had to loan out a few more and also most of those players we let go were free transfers.
 
AltiUn said:
Bruno will be 30 this year, think he'll be naturally phased out over the coming seasons anyway. I'd prefer us to move to a more conventional 4-3-3 with specialised #8s going forward.
Click to expand...
Formation shouldn't matter to fans.

Just that we play good football that produces results and academy players get a chance.
 
OsloRed said:
The Athletic reported that even ten Hag was shocked at the fee spent for Antony. He just wanted a player he thought he could trust in the position, and apparently thought that Antony would be attainable at a much lower fee than we ended up paying.
Click to expand...
ETH would have to be an idiot to not know what was going on and that we'd be taken to the cleaners once he pressed again for Antony after we'd decided to not continue earlier that summer.
 
OsloRed said:
The Athletic reported that even ten Hag was shocked at the fee spent for Antony. He just wanted a player he thought he could trust in the position, and apparently thought that Antony would be attainable at a much lower fee than we ended up paying.
Click to expand...
Well, ultimately the biggest problem with Ten Hag's role in the Antony transfer was the fact he identified him as United quality in the first place, no? If we'd have paid £45 million instead, it's still not a good signing as he'd be considered deadwood after two years.

The point is it's a clear sign that Ten Hag's not a great judge of talent, and not a great judge of how to build an elite team at a big club. To even put his name forward in the first place is a mistake in itself, but once he got wind that we'd have to spend 80 million to get him, he should have said "lads, he's not that good. Find me a different player instead".

If he wanted a left footed attacker he should have let the club find him one instead of insisting on bringing in a player he knows that isn't anywhere near good enough.

Now, the club should veto the signing instead of letting the manager pick whoever he likes. But it's possible for more than one person to be at fault.
 
AltiUn said:
I expected one of the lowest scoring United teams to improve the attack, yes, I think that is reasonable actually. All we've done is brought in 12 goals in Zirkzee and lost 10 goals in McTominay. We didn't even bring in any creative midfielders.

Unhappy that he was the only one, we needed another winger.
Click to expand...
The whole team structure has been shit. We needed to build from the back in my opinion, that in part should help with attack. However we will need to add attacking players next summer and provided this window is fruitful we should be in a really good place.

Of course we all would've loved more attacking players, and a LB but we can't solve every issue. If I were to complain, im not sure Zirkzee was the profile of player we needed but the jury is out on him and can't form much of an opinion until he's had extensive minutes.
 
Dominos said:
Well, ultimately the biggest problem with Ten Hag's role in the Antony transfer was the fact he identified him as United quality in the first place, no? If we'd have paid £45 million instead, it's still not a good signing as he'd be considered deadwood after two years.

The point is it's a clear sign that Ten Hag's not a great judge of talent, and not a great judge of how to build an elite team at a big club. To even put his name forward in the first place is a mistake in itself, but once he got wind that we'd have to spend 80 million to get him, he should have said "lads, he's not that good. Find me a different player instead".

If he wanted a left footed attacker he should have let the club find him one instead of insisting on bringing in a player he knows that isn't anywhere near good enough.

Now, the club should veto the signing instead of letting the manager pick whoever he likes. But it's possible for more than one person to be at fault.
Click to expand...
We can all agree Antony isn't good enough, but he was already on the clubs radar as a 30 million rated winger before ten Hag joined the club. How we ended up paying what we did is insane, and not really on ten Hag - he does not have the power to sanction deals.
 
philippexyz said:
Ashworth has done a good job so far. Only mistake is keeping Ten Hag, but the sacking is just postponed, for some reason I don't quite get. Maybe Dan didn't have much say about it, since he only "officially" joined after the decision on ETH was already made.
Click to expand...
I think changing the manager in a haste could have seen as a risky move. Maybe they wanted to first get the structure in place and then assess the manager's situation. I don't see that as a bad move.
 
idek2346 said:
Have you ever heard of player development? How about putting some expectations on the manager to improve players he has on hand as opposed to stockpiling on players.

Last season - Hojlund 18 g+a, Garnacho 15 g+a, Rashford 14 g+a, Amad 3 g+a, & Antony 5 g+a

Ten Hag and the coaching staff have to squeeze more output from the current crop first. Simple.
Click to expand...
This, the manager and his players have to take responsibility and we can't expect players to remain static in terms of progression. We should expect more output from Garnacho, Amad and Rashford or decisions will need to be made in the summer. That's enough grace period.

Furthermore, wide positions are amongst the easiest positions in which to blood in young players so Ten Hag can give out a few more debuts to promising kids. Financially it wasn't feasible to do more than what has been done this summer imo and this is what we needed most.
 
OsloRed said:
The Athletic reported that even ten Hag was shocked at the fee spent for Antony. He just wanted a player he thought he could trust in the position, and apparently thought that Antony would be attainable at a much lower fee than we ended up paying.
Click to expand...

That makes sense. It was a shocking fee, after all.

And I don't blame ETH for the fee - to be clear.
 
Johnthedevil said:
Isn't it Eddie Howe's nephew that's the issue there?
Click to expand...
Interesting that Mitchell has slagged off Newcastle’s scouting capabilities and fees paid in past for recruited players.

Feels like Howe is not acting in his nephew’s best interests by having him join Newcastle from Bournemouth; can’t he secure a position on his own merit and if Howe leaves or is sacked it seems highly unlikely the nephew stays.
 
simonhch said:
At the start of the window we had several key objectives, and went into it with a worldwide reputation for being a soft touch in the market and over paying for players. The first objective achieved is that we’ve effectively eradicated the perception of the club in one window. We’ve driven hard bargains for all our incomings and secured our primary targets in all positions for really eye catchingly reasonable fees.

We’ve brought in five first choice, first team players, addressing all our major concerns in one window. This is exceptional work. We’ve gotten the player we wanted in each position and we’ve gotten them at a price we were comfortable with. Figures way below what we would have paid in the past. We have also secured permanent deals away, or released, a huge clutch of unwanted or unneeded players, including the coup de grace in Jadon Sancho.

There is undoubtedly still work to be done, but it is completely unrealistic for us to have done more in this window than we have. Not least due to financial restrictions. We have put ourselves in a position now to be able to move in January, if we need to, or more likely, be more aggressive for key targets next summer.

When you look at the age profile of some of our key forwards, such as Amad, Hojlund, Zirkzee and Garnacho…..it is reasonable to expect that significant development can occur over the next 12 months. At their ages players can go from being potentially good enough, to bonafide stars, in the space of a season. But that only happens if you give them the space and minutes to actually succeed. One can’t have a commitment to youth, but then never play them consistently.

All of those players have enormous possibilities to really kick on this year and become key players for the club, the two attacking options with real question marks over their heads are Antony, of course, and Rashford. I would expect the club to make their replacement next summer a priority, if one or both have poor seasons. They’ve shown a ruthlessness this summer that I think is a hallmark of things to come. Antony seems highly unlikely to come good, and would imagine his departure and replacement is a matter of when, not if. Rashford is certainly on the chopping block, but also has the ability (demonstrable) to turn it around here.

I think of much greater concern for the club, isn’t so much the attacking personnel right now, it’s the lack of a cohesive attacking game plan. And that comes down to the manager. In hindsight, despite my protestations to the contrary, I think Ineos made the right choice strategically to keep Ten Hag. I wanted him gone, and highly doubt he’s the right man for the job, but in a summer of massive change all over the club, maintaining a consistent focal point for the players was probably quite important. It was also an important message to send to prospective managers that we would give Ten Hag a chance to succeed under a proper structure. It was also the message that was needed to be sent to fans, especially the match going fans, who were baying for his continuity after the cup win. I wouldn’t say this was acquiescing to fan pressure, I would say this was a balanced acknowledgement of a significant factor in decided whether to sack him or not; and ultimately Ineos are playing the long game.

To get United back to the top isn’t happening in one summer, it’s happening over a 3-5 year window. In that context, giving Ten Hag another season as they reshape the squad and infrastructure - on their terms - is a very understandable and strategically smart move. I suspect they are fully prepared - and perhaps even anticipatory - for his potential failure. The open talks with other coaches, before decided to keep Ten Hag, effectively put the club in a proactive state, should the manager need replacing; instead of finding themselves in a reactive position. They essentially already interviewed several potential replacements in advance.

Ineos are clearly putting a sporting infrastructure in place that can move on with or without Ten Hag and are quite comfortable to give him some time to fulfil his promises to challenge for the title. If he fails this season, and by that I mean he finished outside the top 4 or 5, they will move on from him with full fan support, and having built a squad that is a brilliant basis for a new coach.

Next summer, with the outgoings and wage reductions we’ve accomplished, and several more amortisation’s coming off the books, I would expect us to target a young, potentially world class forward to bolster our ranks. A player in the Nico Williams or Kvarataskelia mould. That was always an impossibility this summer, and I think Ineos have achieved everything they possibly could’ve achieved when you look at the realities of the situation. For me it’s a 10/10 window.
Click to expand...
I have the same opinion.
I also think and am hopeful that players who have been signed are on contracts which give us flexibility to move them on easily if it doesn’t work out.

I’d go a step further regarding a WC attacker, I think over the next 12mo we need to see a roster of 4-6 attackers develop with atleast 2-3 being consistent match winners.
Kvara, Rodrygo, Gordon would be players we should begin dialogue with ASAP.
 
OsloRed said:
The Athletic reported that even ten Hag was shocked at the fee spent for Antony. He just wanted a player he thought he could trust in the position, and apparently thought that Antony would be attainable at a much lower fee than we ended up paying.
Click to expand...
I mean, the fact that Arnold and Murtough didn't immediately lose their jobs over it stuns me. Shocking waste of resources.
 
OsloRed said:
The Athletic reported that even ten Hag was shocked at the fee spent for Antony. He just wanted a player he thought he could trust in the position, and apparently thought that Antony would be attainable at a much lower fee than we ended up paying.
Click to expand...
How the feck did he not know the price? How stupid can you be to ask for a player and not ask for updates during the process in terms of how much Ajax are asking? It reeks of him not wanting to take responsibility for another mistake of his and just wants to keep passing the buck.
 
RDCR07 said:
How the feck did he not know the price? How stupid can you be to ask for a player and not ask for updates during the process in terms of how much Ajax are asking? It reeks of him not wanting to take responsibility for another mistake of his and just wants to keep passing the buck.
Click to expand...
He can pretend to be oblivious all he wants but he would have put pressure and asserted the importance of the player who whatever the feck his footballing vision is.
 
simonhch said:
At the start of the window we had several key objectives, and went into it with a worldwide reputation for being a soft touch in the market and over paying for players. The first objective achieved is that we’ve effectively eradicated the perception of the club in one window. We’ve driven hard bargains for all our incomings and secured our primary targets in all positions for really eye catchingly reasonable fees.

We’ve brought in five first choice, first team players, addressing all our major concerns in one window. This is exceptional work. We’ve gotten the player we wanted in each position and we’ve gotten them at a price we were comfortable with. Figures way below what we would have paid in the past. We have also secured permanent deals away, or released, a huge clutch of unwanted or unneeded players, including the coup de grace in Jadon Sancho.

There is undoubtedly still work to be done, but it is completely unrealistic for us to have done more in this window than we have. Not least due to financial restrictions. We have put ourselves in a position now to be able to move in January, if we need to, or more likely, be more aggressive for key targets next summer.

When you look at the age profile of some of our key forwards, such as Amad, Hojlund, Zirkzee and Garnacho…..it is reasonable to expect that significant development can occur over the next 12 months. At their ages players can go from being potentially good enough, to bonafide stars, in the space of a season. But that only happens if you give them the space and minutes to actually succeed. One can’t have a commitment to youth, but then never play them consistently.

All of those players have enormous possibilities to really kick on this year and become key players for the club, the two attacking options with real question marks over their heads are Antony, of course, and Rashford. I would expect the club to make their replacement next summer a priority, if one or both have poor seasons. They’ve shown a ruthlessness this summer that I think is a hallmark of things to come. Antony seems highly unlikely to come good, and would imagine his departure and replacement is a matter of when, not if. Rashford is certainly on the chopping block, but also has the ability (demonstrable) to turn it around here.

I think of much greater concern for the club, isn’t so much the attacking personnel right now, it’s the lack of a cohesive attacking game plan. And that comes down to the manager. In hindsight, despite my protestations to the contrary, I think Ineos made the right choice strategically to keep Ten Hag. I wanted him gone, and highly doubt he’s the right man for the job, but in a summer of massive change all over the club, maintaining a consistent focal point for the players was probably quite important. It was also an important message to send to prospective managers that we would give Ten Hag a chance to succeed under a proper structure. It was also the message that was needed to be sent to fans, especially the match going fans, who were baying for his continuity after the cup win. I wouldn’t say this was acquiescing to fan pressure, I would say this was a balanced acknowledgement of a significant factor in decided whether to sack him or not; and ultimately Ineos are playing the long game.

To get United back to the top isn’t happening in one summer, it’s happening over a 3-5 year window. In that context, giving Ten Hag another season as they reshape the squad and infrastructure - on their terms - is a very understandable and strategically smart move. I suspect they are fully prepared - and perhaps even anticipatory - for his potential failure. The open talks with other coaches, before decided to keep Ten Hag, effectively put the club in a proactive state, should the manager need replacing; instead of finding themselves in a reactive position. They essentially already interviewed several potential replacements in advance.

Ineos are clearly putting a sporting infrastructure in place that can move on with or without Ten Hag and are quite comfortable to give him some time to fulfil his promises to challenge for the title. If he fails this season, and by that I mean he finished outside the top 4 or 5, they will move on from him with full fan support, and having built a squad that is a brilliant basis for a new coach.

Next summer, with the outgoings and wage reductions we’ve accomplished, and several more amortisation’s coming off the books, I would expect us to target a young, potentially world class forward to bolster our ranks. A player in the Nico Williams or Kvarataskelia mould. That was always an impossibility this summer, and I think Ineos have achieved everything they possibly could’ve achieved when you look at the realities of the situation. For me it’s a 10/10 window.
Click to expand...

That’s a great post.
 
simonhch said:
At the start of the window we had several key objectives, and went into it with a worldwide reputation for being a soft touch in the market and over paying for players. The first objective achieved is that we’ve effectively eradicated the perception of the club in one window. We’ve driven hard bargains for all our incomings and secured our primary targets in all positions for really eye catchingly reasonable fees.

We’ve brought in five first choice, first team players, addressing all our major concerns in one window. This is exceptional work. We’ve gotten the player we wanted in each position and we’ve gotten them at a price we were comfortable with. Figures way below what we would have paid in the past. We have also secured permanent deals away, or released, a huge clutch of unwanted or unneeded players, including the coup de grace in Jadon Sancho.

There is undoubtedly still work to be done, but it is completely unrealistic for us to have done more in this window than we have. Not least due to financial restrictions. We have put ourselves in a position now to be able to move in January, if we need to, or more likely, be more aggressive for key targets next summer.

When you look at the age profile of some of our key forwards, such as Amad, Hojlund, Zirkzee and Garnacho…..it is reasonable to expect that significant development can occur over the next 12 months. At their ages players can go from being potentially good enough, to bonafide stars, in the space of a season. But that only happens if you give them the space and minutes to actually succeed. One can’t have a commitment to youth, but then never play them consistently.

All of those players have enormous possibilities to really kick on this year and become key players for the club, the two attacking options with real question marks over their heads are Antony, of course, and Rashford. I would expect the club to make their replacement next summer a priority, if one or both have poor seasons. They’ve shown a ruthlessness this summer that I think is a hallmark of things to come. Antony seems highly unlikely to come good, and would imagine his departure and replacement is a matter of when, not if. Rashford is certainly on the chopping block, but also has the ability (demonstrable) to turn it around here.

I think of much greater concern for the club, isn’t so much the attacking personnel right now, it’s the lack of a cohesive attacking game plan. And that comes down to the manager. In hindsight, despite my protestations to the contrary, I think Ineos made the right choice strategically to keep Ten Hag. I wanted him gone, and highly doubt he’s the right man for the job, but in a summer of massive change all over the club, maintaining a consistent focal point for the players was probably quite important. It was also an important message to send to prospective managers that we would give Ten Hag a chance to succeed under a proper structure. It was also the message that was needed to be sent to fans, especially the match going fans, who were baying for his continuity after the cup win. I wouldn’t say this was acquiescing to fan pressure, I would say this was a balanced acknowledgement of a significant factor in decided whether to sack him or not; and ultimately Ineos are playing the long game.

To get United back to the top isn’t happening in one summer, it’s happening over a 3-5 year window. In that context, giving Ten Hag another season as they reshape the squad and infrastructure - on their terms - is a very understandable and strategically smart move. I suspect they are fully prepared - and perhaps even anticipatory - for his potential failure. The open talks with other coaches, before decided to keep Ten Hag, effectively put the club in a proactive state, should the manager need replacing; instead of finding themselves in a reactive position. They essentially already interviewed several potential replacements in advance.

Ineos are clearly putting a sporting infrastructure in place that can move on with or without Ten Hag and are quite comfortable to give him some time to fulfil his promises to challenge for the title. If he fails this season, and by that I mean he finished outside the top 4 or 5, they will move on from him with full fan support, and having built a squad that is a brilliant basis for a new coach.

Next summer, with the outgoings and wage reductions we’ve accomplished, and several more amortisation’s coming off the books, I would expect us to target a young, potentially world class forward to bolster our ranks. A player in the Nico Williams or Kvarataskelia mould. That was always an impossibility this summer, and I think Ineos have achieved everything they possibly could’ve achieved when you look at the realities of the situation. For me it’s a 10/10 window.
Click to expand...

Despite the length, this is a good post and it is well argued and surprisingly sensible.
 
Weren't there rumours that Howe had much more power than Ashworth at Newcastle?

 
Other than failing to sack ETH, one of the biggest issues we're currently facing that Ashworth and co should be held accountable for is failing to address the lack of goals in the team.

We were clearly struggling to score last season. Hojlund while clearly has potential, was not enough.

So what do they do? Sign another young player who has no record of being a top goal scorer. I'm not giving up on Zirkzee yet, but I think counting on young players to address a massive issue in a struggling team is simply setting them up to fail.

Goal scorers can make all the difference in the world. It's something that Fergie prioritized over anything else. How was that not addressed?
 
Someone said:
Other than failing to sack ETH, one of the biggest issues we're currently facing that Ashworth and co should be held accountable for is failing to address the lack of goals in the team.

We were clearly struggling to score last season. Hojlund while clearly has potential, was not enough.

So what do they do? Sign another young player who has no record of being a top goal scorer. I'm not giving up on Zirkzee yet, but I think counting on young players to address a massive issue in a struggling team is simply setting them up to fail.

Goal scorers can make all the difference in the world. It's something that Fergie prioritized over anything else. How was that not addressed?
Click to expand...

PSR and the fact that the defense needed serious investment.

The assessment is likely that the squad needs time to develop with the mix of young players and unreliable senior pros so they focused on the back, signed a young striker who should get better and will help the wide players, as well one of the most promising young strikers in Europe for the future
 
Someone said:
Other than failing to sack ETH, one of the biggest issues we're currently facing that Ashworth and co should be held accountable for is failing to address the lack of goals in the team.

We were clearly struggling to score last season. Hojlund while clearly has potential, was not enough.

So what do they do? Sign another young player who has no record of being a top goal scorer. I'm not giving up on Zirkzee yet, but I think counting on young players to address a massive issue in a struggling team is simply setting them up to fail.

Goal scorers can make all the difference in the world. It's something that Fergie prioritized over anything else. How was that not addressed?
Click to expand...

It's not their age that is the problem... Zirkzee is not a prolific player, he isn't now and he won't be in 10 years.

Haaland scores for fun and he's only a year older and he has scored for fun since he was young.

The right profile of player scores regardless of their age.
 
Drainy said:
PSR and the fact that the defense needed serious investment.

The assessment is likely that the squad needs time to develop with the mix of young players and unreliable senior pros so they focused on the back, signed a young striker who should get better and will help the wide players, as well one of the most promising young strikers in Europe for the future
Click to expand...
You don't sign a young striker to support a young striker. Both were green with no great record prior to joining United. And we had a massive problem, as big as our defensive issues that needed addressing.
 
Someone said:
You don't sign a young striker to support a young striker. Both were green with no great record prior to joining United. And we had a massive problem, as big as our defensive issues that needed addressing.
Click to expand...

Ok, so you have £100m to invest with last seasons squad, who do you buy then?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.