RedDevilRoshi
Full Member
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2017
- Messages
- 14,093
We are crap on the pitch, but who gives a shit the cash is still rolling in.
They are the virus.
We are crap on the pitch, but who gives a shit the cash is still rolling in.
Sounds like something my 5 year old cousin would say.I hope if we sign a Longstaff, we can use it to beat a woodworm over the head with it.
They are the virus.
In terms of getting they want early ?Very few clubs can do what Madrid are doing and we're not one of them i'm afraid. Perez knows how to get his man and with a manager like Zidane who knows what he wants it makes for a lethal combination.
Because Fergie was one off. It barely works anywhere else, stop tunneling vision it. And no, nobody praised Gill. He was unpopular among Caf at the time. The only reason we're making comparison because Woodward is worse.
Success rate post Fergie in that very system is zero if we only count league title. Rational people would start asking the question where's the problem. The first step to fix anything is to admit there's problem in the first place. Most people should know it by now rebuilding United is not a one man's job, manager needs to have a platform to build from. For that to happen, we need long-term plan and proper structure. Things that United don't have atm.
You're just typical Dunning Kruger here.
If you think that Ed Woodward should be allowed to continue in his current position at United, then you are either an idiot or a Liverpool fan.
Are any of the other CEOs linked to making footballing decisions? The whole point is that a CEO delegates the football side of things to a DoF (aka Football CEO). The issue with Woodward is that he seems to be the one making the decisions or at the very least the one with final authority.
That you think it’s the managers choice to renew contracts speaks volumes. It’s this that should end the conversation irrespective of whether Ed should go or not.
I would vehemently disagree with point one. Van Gaal was about to retire so unless there was a plan to bring in a dynamic manager who played in a similar mold his hiring was a mistake.
Mourinho being hired was a colossal mistake because of what happened at Chelsea and Madrid. Sure they won but then things became nuclear toxic at both clubs because of Jose.
The problem again goes back to not having a DoF put into place before Fergie left.
You put a DoF in place like Tito that is respected and maybe you get Pep or Klopp and avoid all this mess. Certainly nothing is guaranteed.
Van Gaal + Mourinho were terrible hires because they didn’t fit the direction needed for the club and both were short term answers bereft of long term Vision.
Points 2-4 are true but it is all for naught when you make two terrible managerial selections and still have no clue what is you are trying to achieve.
This was further compounded by hiring sentimental favorite who has shown nothing to suggest that he is capable.
Funny how in the end no one answered your question...
Thing is most players want to play for Madrid just for the love of it, so its easy to coax them. We have to convince players by offering loads of money to come and a few teams can quite easily match us in this department as well. Comparing Madrid and Utd at this present time is like choosing to watch a blockbuster film on a smart tv with surround sound, or on a black and white one.Very few clubs can do what Madrid are doing and we're not one of them i'm afraid. Perez knows how to get his man and with a manager like Zidane who knows what he wants it makes for a lethal combination.
In terms of getting they want early ?
I think he changed his mind, and decided he already has the best man for the job, himself.Whatever happened to the DOF Ed was going to hire?
I think he changed his mind, and decided he already has the best man for the job, himself.
Anyone care to take a stab at it finally?
If a manager (ANY MANAGER), demands X Player (ANY PLAYER) is kept at any cost (something to that effect)...
The example I gave was Jose demanding Fellaini be kept...so we've a manager demanding an average player stay at the club.
Who is to blame?
A) The manager for demanding the average player remain and get the pay rise?
B) The CEO for supporting his manager?
Fully expect this will be ignored yet again.
We have had this discussion before I believe, but there is no way that you can convince me that the manager would not be involved or even being able to veto a signing like Sanchez. Very well aware of what it would mean for the possibilities of other signings in the summer.Both bear responsibility, of course. But with the Fellaini example, that's more on Jose. A manager wanting a player to remain is quite different to, IMV, a manager wanting a player bought. The former is much easier to achieve. Also, actively selling a player a manager wants to stay, is more undermining than not being able to recruit a specific player the manager wants.
Let's assume Jose identified Sanchez and wanted him "at any cost", I'd say the responsibility of that move (3 and a half years for a 29 y/o on 350/400K wages, breaking our wage structure) is on the board. The "at any cost" argument is misleading, unless the manager is throwing his whole weight behind it, issuing an ultimatum whereby he walks if player x is not bought.
We have had this discussion before I believe, but there is no way that you can convince me that the manager would not be involved or even being able to veto a signing like Sanchez. Very well aware of what it would mean for the possibilities of other signings in the summer.
I dont buy this idea that there are firewalls between the manager and the club either. I dont know if that is what you mean but your post indicates that you agree with this strange narrative: that Mourinho or whoever is manager just gives a list of players to the club and then the club returns with a signed player like Santa Claus on christmas. Here, merry christmas, hope it was in line with what you wished for. Sorry if it cost too much; so you might not get any gifts next year. Strangely that seems to be what people believe actually happens.
I think a lot of it is because some fans on here just want to see this line of conflict between the club (often represented quite falsely by Woodwards name) and the manager so they can blame someone higher up in the hierarchy.
I would be shocked if there was not detailed daily conversations between the club and the manager regarding the negotiations with different players, how they are proceeding and which to focus and concentrate on. And of course how much they will cost. Im sure that the head of scoutings opinion will be heavily valued as well and that he is involved in these discussions as well.
I believe that the transfers at the club are much more of a team effort than people like to believe. And that there is much more consensus than conflict. This idea to categorize signings as "woodwards" or "mourinhos" is completely illogical and should be left to click-baiting articles of ABU-media.
That said I also think that the final decision since Sir Alex left on any transfer or renewal has always been down to the manager.
I’ve answered that question him in a broader way. But @Keefy18 kept dismissing my answer and kept asking me to answer his question.Both bear responsibility, of course. But with the Fellaini example, that's more on Jose. A manager wanting a player to remain is quite different to, IMV, a manager wanting a player bought. The former is much easier to achieve. Also, actively selling a player a manager wants to stay, is more undermining than not being able to recruit a specific player the manager wants.
Let's assume Jose identified Sanchez and wanted him "at any cost", I'd say the responsibility of that move (3 and a half years for a 29 y/o on 350/400K wages, breaking our wage structure) is on the board. The "at any cost" argument is misleading, unless the manager is throwing his whole weight behind it, issuing an ultimatum whereby he walks if player x is not bought.
We have had this discussion before I believe, but there is no way that you can convince me that the manager would not be involved or even being able to veto a signing like Sanchez. Very well aware of what it would mean for the possibilities of other signings in the summer.
I dont buy this idea that there are firewalls between the manager and the club either. I dont know if that is what you mean but your post indicates that you agree with this strange narrative: that Mourinho or whoever is manager just gives a list of players to the club and then the club returns with a signed player like Santa Claus on christmas. Here, merry christmas, hope it was in line with what you wished for. Sorry if it cost too much; so you might not get any gifts next year. Strangely that seems to be what people believe actually happens.
I think a lot of it is because some fans on here just want to see this line of conflict between the club (often represented quite falsely by Woodwards name) and the manager so they can blame someone higher up in the hierarchy.
I would be shocked if there was not detailed daily conversations between the club and the manager regarding the negotiations with different players, how they are proceeding and which to focus and concentrate on. And of course how much they will cost. Im sure that the head of scoutings opinion will be heavily valued as well and that he is involved in these discussions as well.
I believe that the transfers at the club are much more of a team effort than people like to believe. And that there is much more consensus than conflict. This idea to categorize signings as "woodwards" or "mourinhos" is completely illogical and should be left to click-baiting articles of ABU-media.
That said I also think that the final decision since Sir Alex left on any transfer or renewal has always been down to the manager.
I’ve answered that question him in a broader way. But @Keefy18 kept dismissing my answer and kept asking me to answer his question.
My answer was the manager is responsible for the micro footballing decisions. Woodward is responsible for the macro decision sanctioning contracts for Sanchez, negotiating deals etc. They both have an impact on the club.
We did not have a scouting network when Fergie left. It was non-existent. It took two or three years to build up and was not really in place until Van Gaals last year. Then Mourinho did not want to work with it or even clashed with them dependning on what stories you do believe. So the years under Mourinho says nothing.Of course there are discussions but Woodward oversees all of it. If the head scout’s input it bad, it’s Ed’s responsibility to sack him and bring in someone better. If our bloated scouting network can’t identify a single under-priced gem since Fergie, it’s Ed’s responsibility to rectify the situation. Not just wallow in mediocrity.
Him not taking any significant action to rectify a system that has failed dramatically for 6 years makes him a bad CEO by default. And that’s without even touching on his own personal judgment which doesn’t seem to be that good either. He’s like your average FM/FIFA player with a Dunning Krueger complex.
But those two posters will just dismiss any answer to them and rehashing. I admire their spirit in defending Woodward and the Glazer. Stockholm syndrome to the tee.I was just making the same point to @Johan07 here. But you put it more clearly, hence my quoting you here.
I am all for criticising the guy but some of the posts here are baseless.
For example a single google search -
We did not have a scouting network when Fergie left. It was non-existent. It took two or three years to build up and was not really in place until Van Gaals last year. Then Mourinho did not want to work with it or even clashed with them dependning on what stories you do believe. So the years under Mourinho says nothing.
Therefore its way to early to judge our scouting network. Which will be difficult to do in another couple of years since its basically teenagers they are mostly following. What we do need is a manager who is ready to work with the setup we do have. If not its never gonna work.
Both bear responsibility, of course. But with the Fellaini example, that's more on Jose. A manager wanting a player to remain is quite different to, IMV, a manager wanting a player bought. The former is much easier to achieve. Also, actively selling a player a manager wants to stay, is more undermining than not being able to recruit a specific player the manager wants.
Let's assume Jose identified Sanchez and wanted him "at any cost", I'd say the responsibility of that move (3 and a half years for a 29 y/o on 350/400K wages, breaking our wage structure) is on the board. The "at any cost" argument is misleading, unless the manager is throwing his whole weight behind it, issuing an ultimatum whereby he walks if player x is not bought.
I’ve answered that question him in a broader way. But @Keefy18 kept dismissing my answer and kept asking me to answer his question.
My answer was the manager is responsible for the micro footballing decisions. Woodward is responsible for the macro decision sanctioning contracts for Sanchez, negotiating deals etc. They both have an impact on the club.
Woodward isn’t doing a job though...
i did not say that LVG had any input regarding the scouting setup. He most likely had not. I havent seen any reports saying anything like that. You are making a strawman argument.Maybe because he realized it was a shit, bloated set-up? LVG has always been bad at identifying prospects at other clubs, all his successful youth players were in place already. He’s only good at spotting talent when he can see them on his own training pitch every day.
Look at the disaster he inflincted on the entire Dutch youth system with his ”Master plan” that he presented to the KNVB in 2001. It’s been widely acknowledged as a disaster that eventually had to be salvaged by Cruyff. But I wouldn’t expect Woodward to even be aware of that.
So I definitely wouldn’t trust LVG’s input on how to set up a scouting network. If his philosophy is still in place in United’s scouting network, that could very bad for us going forward.
i did not say that LVG had any input regarding the scouting setup. He most likely had not. I havent seen any reports saying anything like that. You are making a strawman argument.
What is on the record is Moyes being shocked over the non-existent scouting network at United even compared to Everton.
If anything the decision to put more resources and money in our scouting network has been the clubs own.
And a separate, independent and self-sustaining scouting scouting network is a must if we are going to operate with a DoF. One of the biggest problems with our scouting system is that each manager has wanted to use his own, beginning with Moyes (understandable, since we did not have one) and especially with Mourinho and his Mendesian contacts.
If we ever are going to operate as a club with a DoF and be able to change managers more flexibly, an independent (or rather club-owned, overseen by the DoF) scouting system is essential. It has to be separate from the manager himself.
Woodward and the club should be complimented for putting resources in to that as well as the youth setup that was also severelly lacking compared to other clubs when Fergie left.
Both things are essential for a more progressive setup of the club with a DoF.
Manchester United have allegedly dismissed a scout who advised executive vice-chairman Ed Woodward to consider buying Ajax pair Frenkie de Jong and Maathijs de Ligt.
Derek Langley, 68, who spent 16 years as the head of youth recruitment at Old Trafford, said he recommended the youngsters to United chiefs before he was ‘removed’ from his job in 2016.
De Jong and De Ligt are now two of the hottest prospects in the game and Langley was disappointed the club didn’t take his suggestions more seriously.
In an interview with the Manchester Evening News, Langley said: “Players that they turned down? Matthijs de Ligt. We had God knows how many reports on Matthijs de Ligt.
“Frenkie de Jong and all these players now are sort of around Europe.
“Dayot Upamecano, who is now at Red Bull Leipzig, was another.
“This was one of the reasons why I had a meeting with Ed Woodward and I told him that I wasn’t convinced with the competency of certain people at the club.
“I told Ed Woodward quite straight: ‘If you think I’m going to sit here and just tell you what you want to hear, I’m not that man because I’m going to tell you exactly how I see it.'”
This is so old and been discussed in so many threads so I am not giving it the time of day. Disgruntled sacked employee that says that he recommended De Jong and De Ligt. to the club.Why are you trying to imply United had no scouts? Of course we had, it simply wasn’t as bloated as today.
Here’s what a SAF era United scout had to say last year, as reported by Manchester Evening News via Talksport. I think I will go with his judgment over fecking Moyes’:
https://talksport.com/football/4593...-frenkie-de-jong-matthis-de-ligt-ed-woodward/
The original DOF story leaked over 12 months ago.There's been talks, Rio confirmed.
Its an important role so I don't mind if it takes time to find the right candidate.
Folks piss n moan that Ole was a rushed appointment, then piss n moan about it going slow over a DoF.
Can't win.
https://www.skysports.com/football/...an-united-return-and-frank-lampard-at-chelsea
Yep, question was answered a long time ago. Why keep zooming in only one of the myriad of bad decisions made at the club.I’ve answered that question him in a broader way. But @Keefy18 kept dismissing my answer and kept asking me to answer his question.
My answer was the manager is responsible for the micro footballing decisions. Woodward is responsible for the macro decision sanctioning contracts for Sanchez, negotiating deals etc. They both have an impact on the club.
Woodward isn’t doing a job though...
That’s if your last name is Glazer
It really is unbelievable the lengths they will go to. Beginning to wonder if they're on the United marketing team payroll at this point.But those two posters will just dismiss any answer to them and rehashing. I admire their spirit in defending Woodward and the Glazer. Stockholm syndrome to the tee.
Tbf, the first DoF story leaked even earlier. At least as a principle. Already under LvGs first year, who in retrospect seems to have advocated it himself.The original DOF story leaked over 12 months ago.
Moyes is the disgruntled ex-employee desperately trying to salvage his legacy. There were systems in place that Moyes could have used. But he thought using them even initially was beneath him and he wanted to build his own legacy immediately.This is so old and been discussed in so many threads so I am not giving it the time of day. Disgruntled employee that says that he recommended De Jong and De Ligt. to the club.
Duh, the couple have been followed by every top clubs scouting network since they basically kicked their first ball at Ajax. They have been scouted to a microlevel since they were fifteen. By everyone. If that is supposed to be one of our "top scouts" if anything it underlines what I am saying:
Its a fact that we did not have a scouting network under Sir Alex. We had Jim Lawlor and what maybe in the best case can be described as a couple of freelancers. Everything else was Sir Alex himself and his contacts.
Now we have close to 60 scouts employed on a world-wide basis. You just dont build such a network in a couple of years and expect it to give immediate results. Especially if the manager does not want to work with them.
Try to reply to one of the points I actually made next time btw.
The original DOF story leaked over 12 months ago.
No it was not. Did I say that? Did I even discuss it? You are throwing strawmen all over the place and making yourself look stupid.Moyes is the disgruntled ex-employee who is desperately trying to salvage his legacy. There were systems in place that Moyes could have used. But he thought using them even initially was beneath him and he wanted to build his own legacy immediately.
Cleaning out the backroom staff on day 1 wasn’t exactly a good decision. That’s part of the reason everything had to be rebuilt from scratch starting in 2014, with poor results so far.
Stop trying to rewrite history to shift as much blame away from Woodward at every turn. I know you’re a shareholder and have a vested interest in him being perceived as competent, but you’re turning into Baghdad Bob mate.
Whatever happened to the DOF Ed was going to hire?
No it was not. Did I say that? Did I even discuss it? You are throwing strawmen all over the place and making yourself look stupid.
It was stupid to get rid of the backroom staff. Which was on Moyes. Or do you blame Woodward for that too?
The scouting system is something completely different. Apples and oranges. There are plenty of objective information both in Ferguson´s own books and from what Moyes has said about how our scouting system was structured or not structured back then.
I dont know how it is defending Woodward stating the obvious facts that we were way behind the top-clubs in the PL and the rest of Europe both when it came to scouting system and youth setup when Ferguson and Gill left.
Do you think the club should have done nothing about this?
So what would you have done differently? I would respect you more as a poster if you actually could provide some decent arguments and solutions?Woodward has had 5 years to ”do something about it”. It has failed so far.
You were the one who started sidetracking the discussion by cherry-picking one sentence and ignoring my main argument. Which was that Woodward has overseen all of our failed rebuilding for 5 years. You can try to pin all individual decisions on his henchmen as much as you want, but it has all been under his supervision. His employees and himself are failing miserably.
Our value has dropped -8% since last year, so it seems all the compounded incompetence is finally starting to affect the bottom line.
It’ll be interesting to see your excuses when Woodward has been in charge and failed for 10 years. 15. 20. It’s never his fault because we are in an ”eternal revolution”. The exact same phrase dictators who have been in power for 50 years use to pin their failures on their presecessors.
There's been talks, Rio confirmed.
Its an important role so I don't mind if it takes time to find the right candidate.
Folks piss n moan that Ole was a rushed appointment, then piss n moan about it going slow over a DoF.
Can't win.
https://www.skysports.com/football/...an-united-return-and-frank-lampard-at-chelsea
So what would you have done differently? I would respect you more as a poster if you actually could provide some decent arguments and solutions?
I am not at all "-pro-Woodward". But I do think he has done a decent job with the hand he was dealt.
He was appointed with Moyes already in place, at Carrington on a six-year contract that Gill gave him. He had to fire Moyes after nine months with Gill and Ferguson who put him there then at the advisory board of directors. The club appointed LvG and then the club spent a feckload of money on players that summer. And the year after, and the year after.
Since that summer of LvGs arrival we have spent a feckload of money on players and wages, not to mention the scouting network and youth setup. Plus that we started up a womens team as well.
It would be very different for me if the owners and Woodward had cut the spending, but if anything its been the opposite. What is it that you are so fecking upset with? Honest question.
LVG: failed appointment, which in turn led to failed signings. And yes, plenty of people said he was a dinosaur already back then. This was the guy who nearly relegated Barcelona in 2003 and was sacked when they were hovering 3 points off relegation. Then he spent years on the managerial dumpster heap in AZ Alkmaar before winning the league with Bayern (yawn) and getting third with Robben, RVP and Sneijder.
Mou: complete opposite philosophy to LVG, which led to incompatible signings and a mess of a team.
Ole: even David Squires is mocking Ed for giving him a permanent contract after 2 losses with absolutely no competition for his signature. The jury’s still out, but do you seriously think giving ole the permanent job so soon while foregoing available managers of a much higher calibre was shrewd?
Then we have all the ridiculous contracts which Ed is ultimately responsible for. And a scouting network that has proven useless so far.
And that’s just what we can directly observe. From LVG saying he has no clue about football, to Mourinho hating him, to SAF employees venting their frustrations with him there’s a lot of smoke pointing to incompetence behind closed doors.