Not exactly true that though, is it? Even Liverpool fans have been more patient with their managers than we have at United to my memory.
- Hodgson (their Moyes) survived until the 8th of January. Moyes survived until the 22nd of April. They were both equally shit.
- Kenny Dalglish (their Ole in steroids) survived 1.5 seasons. Ole survived 3 seasons. For what is worth Ole did better (54% vs 47% win rate) but also had a significant backing in transfers.
- Rodgers (probably the closest from ours would be ten Hag) survived 3.5 seasons. He probably would not have got as much time at United, but then he also did not have much backing in transfer market despite almost winning the league with squads that were nowhere as good as City and Chelsea.
- Klopp has been great for them and I do not think we have had an equivalent to that yet.
For what is worth, I think:
- Moyes got way too much time. While he shouldn't have been hired in the first place, he should have been sacked after those back-to-back losses at Old Trafford against Everton and Newcastle. It was clearly a wrong experiment that was going to end only in one way. We essentially gave up on that season by not firing him.
- Van Gaal should have got the second season, but I think should have been fired after failing to pass the group stage in a weak group in UCL, so in December. We were also not doing well in the league, he had had massive backing, and we couldn't score if our life was dependent on that. Mourinho was available too. We sacrificed the season by not firing him back in December.
- Mourinho definitely deserved the second season. However, by the middle of it, it was clear that he had reached the ceiling. I was advocating his sacking here (whatever that means) after the defeat at Sevilla. He definitely must have been sacked at the end of that season, his toxicity had become too much and we essentially sacrificed the next season by starting with him.
- Ole should have never got the permanent job. But for bad reasons, he got it. I think he started very bad the first full season and probably should have been fired by Christmas, but after covid/Bruno we played well and ended the season strong. On his second full season, it was clear that we have reached the ceiling with him and he should have been fired. Unfortunately, we continued the wrong experiment and sacrificed a season, by keeping him and not firing him earlier, especially after that disaterclass against Liverpool.
- Rangnick was a caretaker. He rightly was not allowed to continue.
- EtH was hit-and-miss in the first season, with more hits than misses. I think he deserved a second season (I think he would not have got it in most of the other big clubs), but if it is just a repeat of the first season (especially the very low quality of football), he should be sacked by middle/end of season.
I think all our previous managers got more time than they deserved (except Rangnick who got only as much). I never bought the worshipping of the manager, the 'support the club,
and the manager'. I do not think they should be in charge of transfers, and waste hundreds of millions in ill-thought transfers (all of them are culprits at this). They are a high-ranking employee, but at the end of the day, cheap to replace. The Real/Barca/Bayern/Chelsea philosophy of
fail fast where the managers are fired at the first sign of trouble and replaced until they hit the jackpot when it comes to managers has shown to be far more successful than our philosophy of
keeping the manager at least until 6 months after everyone realizes that they are shit, and at least until 2 months after they lose the dressing room, and in meanwhile giving to them full power over transfers, just in the idiotic hope that they will turn out to be Fergie MK2. Meanwhile, sacrifice a season so they are not fired a bit too early.