You must know that you are not the only one that realises that the structure above the manager has been shit for a decade. It's not news.
Ten Hag can still be a worse manager than what we need despite of that.
That Joel Glazer or Murtough are horrible doesn't prevent Ten Hag from setting the right tactics, selecting the right players and running a good training.
They can all the shit.
We would all love to find a new Fergie, but this is modern football and the manager is 'just' the manager, he can be replaced just as we replace a player.
I’d be more worried we find the new Ferguson and they fail simply because of the club’s dysfunction. Ferguson didn’t just become manager and everything fell into place, it took a fair bit of time for him to steer the ship and it wasn’t always an upward trajectory. But let’s not go down that route of discussion.
I don’t want United to need a Fergie because that’s a once in a generation manager and you will be a longtime going through managers looking for one. Theres a good chance we miss out on good managers who don’t like the look of United. I mean there’s a decent chance Pep saw the circus (was it the term “Disneyland” that Woodward used ?) setup and United and would never of taken the position. You said it yourself that people know united is a mess, well potential managers know that aswell. ETH even alluded to it that some people thought he was mad taking the job. United is a basket case club in the eyes of many no matter how much money we throw at our sh*tness.
Just like a lot of players are probably avoiding us, we get the ones who want a payday, not necessarily the ambitious ones. If United is run better then a good manager can do really well. I don’t think all our managers are as bad as their record with us showed, anymore then pretty much every player we buy is as bad as they play for us.
And It’s not that I think I’m the only the one who sees the club issues. It’s that people act as though it’s not really relevant “cause manager manages players” and they want to keep throwing managerial bodies at it. 10 years on and we are no closer to seeing progress. We’ve had 4 managers and a couple of interim in that time and some people go on like we keep managers for years.
And it’s not that ETH is infallible either, it’s that a lot of sh*t has happened , even more drama/issues then any of our previous managers have had, that may really explain alot of the poor form.
When you say ETH doesn’t pick the right players or tactics , I’m wondering how often it’s said when we have no decent subs to bring on or alternatives to start with. Or how often he’s had to shift things around due to injuries. People will say other clubs have issues but they play a certain style. What sort of pressure is there at these clubs? What happens when they play poor? This matters. Because if there’s more pressure on you to do well , then setbacks can be harder to navigate relative to clubs and with less pressure.
I’m not certain ETH can succeed but I’m equally not certain anybody could have done much better given all the things that have happened and been going on. Maybe we would have seen better football but that doesn’t guarantee results. The players usually down tools for our managers so it’s unusual that they don’t necessarily seem to think ETH is an abject failure.
As far as INEOS goes, it’s a different future and hopefully a better one. Regardless of what happens, ETH had an awful bout of misfortune. Even though I don’t know what’s so special about Potter (no more experience then ETH or Moyes ) , I will accept and support what INEOS do, not because we have a new manager but because of the promise of a new way of the club being run. If we are run well, Potter should do ok, but I don’t see why ETH might equally do better when the cast of police academy are replaced. Last season wasn’t a disaster under ETH, so why can’t he do better with a better setup?