Erik ten Hag | 2022/23 & 2023/24

Status
Not open for further replies.
Adisa said:

Essentially what I’ve been saying for months.
I was Moyes out, then I was LVG out then I was Mouronho out, then I was Ole out. At some point you have to old your hands up and say, there’s something wrong here. All these managers can’t be this crap. We have a structure that cannot support success under any coach.
Click to expand...




The root of the problem is the structure. That's certainly the case. There's essentially no specialized people to supervise different departments to work with harmony, barely any specialized people to make certain departments work effectively (ex recruitment) and we had often taken a knee jerk approach were a manager is sacked and we go on bringing in a new manager whom in turn has a completely different approach from a tactical perspective hence needing a new squad to work it effectively. However let's be honest here. Ole and Moyes weren't good enough, Mou and LVG was at the dusk of their career and Rangnick wasn't even a manager at that point of his career. Its not as if anyone of them went to Real or Juventus and won the treble.

Which leads us back to were we started. Why on earth did we go for managers who were either not good enough or washed up?
 
AFC NimbleThumb said:
I’m not blaming EtH for Shaw’s medical issues. His injuries came long before EtH & will probably blight him for the rest of his career. What I’m saying is a manager selects the team & chose to pick a player the world could see was unfit. Is this EtH responsibility alone? Of course not but a manager isn’t some passive actor in team selection.

What is ‘insane’ are people like yourself who seem to support the manager more so than the club itself. EtH has been nothing more [or less] than mediocre. Will that change with a change of CeO & football structure? Who knows but learn to read & comprehend first before wading in.
Click to expand...

She (?) seems to comprehend just fine, this is just rude.

Shaw was declared fit to play by medical staff, end of story.
 
AFC NimbleThumb said:
I’m not blaming EtH for Shaw’s medical issues. His injuries came long before EtH & will probably blight him for the rest of his career. What I’m saying is a manager selects the team & chose to pick a player the world could see was unfit. Is this EtH responsibility alone? Of course not but a manager isn’t some passive actor in team selection.

What is ‘insane’ are people like yourself who seem to support the manager more so than the club itself. EtH has been nothing more [or less] than mediocre. Will that change with a change of CeO & football structure? Who knows but learn to read & comprehend first before wading in.
Click to expand...

Apologies for the insane remark, I edited that.

At 9-2-24, ETH has a win stat of 60%, the best of any Manchester United manager. I cannot compute that as being mediocre. Can you explain why you do, even after the new part owner said the structure, environment around Ten Hag at United is not good?

https://www.90min.com/posts/how-erik-ten-hag-compares-to-other-man-utd-managers

I'm all for fair criticism and I think Ten Hag made some mistakes - he is human after all but at this moment, the last 2 or 3 months but also seeing the above figure, is doing what I expect him to do as manager of this club with the players at his disposal.

I actually really like Shaw, and he plays amazing in this managers system. But others have posted a stat on his injury record the last few seasons and i've come to the conclusion good as he is, we have a continuation problem at left back.

In addition, I feel its very refreshing to stop aiming all the anger at one person, one manager when in today's modern game, professional Premier League club the level of succes is the result of much more than just a new manager. The sale is now done, we have new management coming in. The future looks good. Lets give Ten Hag some more space I say. If he doesnt perform we can always change and get someone else. At the moment he is getting the max out of this group and in this 'environment'.
 
We havent had a structure above a manager where they have had a vision to play x style of football, bought/brought a manager in to implement that style and bought/brought through players to implement that style. Thats why we have a ragtag bunch of footballers, all used to one style, but cant or wont usually adapt to the next manager, as his style of football is different from the one before. The structure above the manager needs to have a system where the players are identified for their style and the manager has a limited say on players bought/brought through. TH has been as bad as every other manager with spending big bucks on some players that are simply no good at Utd.
 
His transfer record has been quite disappointing so far as has been discussed ad nauseam but his promotion of youth has been decent I'd say even if it may be out of desperation, gave garnacho and mainoo their place in the team while potentially bringing in a guaranteed starter in Rasmus who's quite young as well.
 
To be fair, a player like Antony had a good profile for this club. His performances have been nowhere near his baseline.

All the talk about an institutional playstyle sounds good on paper. I think LvG talked about it, but his style didn‘t fit MU as evidenced by the mass fan revolt in his second season.

It would be interesting what MU fans have in mind. Personally I think a hybrid gegenpressing/transition approach does fit the club. Pep ball decidedly doesn’t imo.
 
NLunited said:
She (?) seems to comprehend just fine, this is just rude.

Shaw was declared fit to play by medical staff, end of story.
Click to expand...
Of all the posts on this forum.

Again, comprehension matters. Who said Shaw wasn’t declared for to play by medical staff?

Starting him was a risk given he’d gone off the week previous, EtH took said risk & he’s now out for 3 months. If you read my posts you’d see I don’t ’blame’ EtH solely.

I’m saying the manager was given due warning a week prior, Shaw was declared ‘fit’ & had to go off against Villa so when he chose to do the same thing a week later he holds some accountability. Read some, not all.

Too many people get precious with EtH to the point you stop reading what’s written.

miliebrowndivorceattorney said:
Apologies for the insane remark, I edited that.

At 9-2-24, ETH has a win stat of 60%, the best of any Manchester United manager. I cannot compute that as being mediocre. Can you explain why you do, even after the new part owner said the structure, environment around Ten Hag at United is not good?

https://www.90min.com/posts/how-erik-ten-hag-compares-to-other-man-utd-managers

I'm all for fair criticism and I think Ten Hag made some mistakes - he is human after all but at this moment, the last 2 or 3 months but also seeing the above figure, is doing what I expect him to do as manager of this club with the players at his disposal.

I actually really like Shaw, and he plays amazing in this managers system. But others have posted a stat on his injury record the last few seasons and i've come to the conclusion good as he is, we have a continuation problem at left back.

In addition, I feel its very refreshing to stop aiming all the anger at one person, one manager when in today's modern game, professional Premier League club the level of succes is the result of much more than just a new manager. The sale is now done, we have new management coming in. The future looks good. Lets give Ten Hag some more space I say. If he doesnt perform we can always change and get someone else. At the moment he is getting the max out of this group and in this 'environment'.
Click to expand...
No worries about the insane remark, I bit back so I apologise as well.

As for my mediocre comment. Barring the recent resurgence I believe that EtH’s form/performance has actually trended downward. He did well last season so much so he’s given himself a cushion in terms of win percentage, which you rightly point towards, that could withstand the 14 losses we saw in 30-odd games to begin the season.

Going strictly by a stat like win percentage ignores what we are witnessing on the field. I am also of the thinking that with a better organisation around him he may well fair better but one thing I think people are ignoring with the Ineos investment is that the pressure will actually ramp up not down.

Once all the departments are in situ EtH can’t just carry over these performances & they will need to get better. To some extent this season has been a free hit & bar Mainoo + Garnacho there’s little, for me, in the way of tangible things on the pitch that tell me it’ll be easier for him when we get an Ashworth or Wilcox or B [can’t spell his name] from Citeh.

Next year, due to FFP, the squad isn’t going to be dramatically dissimilar to what we see now so if he’s struggling with what he has at his disposal currently then why wouldn’t he struggle with largely the same group next year?

For me, until you reach, Fergie/Klopp/Ancelotti levels at a club then management is a series of interviews for the opportunity to carry on next season. I worry that giving EtH this season as some free run is ignoring the likelihood that he is just another poor Glazer appointment.

Sorry to go on so long. I think EtH is a good manager, I just don’t see him spearheading this club to where we all eventually want it to be.

On Shaw. I’ve long wanted us to buy a true competitor at LB due to his injuries. I think given the leg break etc. he gets a lot of goodwill from us fans but when I look back on some of our worst performances in recent years there’s usually an anonymous Luke Shaw performance in there. Personally I don’t see him being an integral part of the next good United side.
 
Adisa said:
At some point you have to old your hands up and say, there’s something wrong here. All these managers can’t be this crap. We have a structure that cannot support success under any coach.
Click to expand...
They were, though. We can have crap managers and a structure that doesn't adorn their qualities. Both can be true at the same time.

Crap being a relative term here.
 
Seems like Ratcliffe will give him a fair chance under the new structure… like he said…. We’ve had quite a few managers and none have been successful under the environment that we’ve had.
 
devilish said:
The root of the problem is the structure. That's certainly the case. There's essentially no specialized people to supervise different departments to work with harmony, barely any specialized people to make certain departments work effectively (ex recruitment) and we had often taken a knee jerk approach were a manager is sacked and we go on bringing in a new manager whom in turn has a completely different approach from a tactical perspective hence needing a new squad to work it effectively. However let's be honest here. Ole and Moyes weren't good enough, Mou and LVG was at the dusk of their career and Rangnick wasn't even a manager at that point of his career. Its not as if anyone of them went to Real or Juventus and won the treble.

Which leads us back to were we started. Why on earth did we go for managers who were either not good enough or washed up?
Click to expand...
You likely have answered your own question. We know we spoke to other managers but they chose other clubs - when you look at the structure we have, is it that surprising that Klopp, for example, was not swayed by the Disney Land sell? Behind United being able to spend big, if we're really honest, there has been a team of completely unqualified people in key roles for years. Any manager with good options would have taken one look at the setup and ran a mile.
 
NLunited said:
To be fair, a player like Antony had a good profile for this club. His performances have been nowhere near his baseline.

All the talk about an institutional playstyle sounds good on paper. I think LvG talked about it, but his style didn‘t fit MU as evidenced by the mass fan revolt in his second season.

It would be interesting what MU fans have in mind. Personally I think a hybrid gegenpressing/transition approach does fit the club. Pep ball decidedly doesn’t imo.
Click to expand...

That's a load of garbage, his style didn't fit because we could hardly score a goal during that second season (we scored 49 total league goals); not because people didn't like a "possession based approach". When we dominated Spurs or at Juanfield the Cafe all agreed it was some of the best performances we'd put in on the ball in years. I mean even know majority of people frustrated with Ten Hag were excited that he'd BRING a more possession based approach similar to what we see from other top teams. If Pep had been hired here instead of City people would be worshipping him and would have loved the football if we were scoring 100+ a year and winning leagues.
 
Valencia Shin Crosses said:
That's a load of garbage, his style didn't fit because we could hardly score a goal during that second season (we scored 49 total league goals); not because people didn't like a "possession based approach". When we dominated Spurs or at Juanfield the Cafe all agreed it was some of the best performances we'd put in on the ball in years. I mean even know majority of people frustrated with Ten Hag were excited that he'd BRING a more possession based approach similar to what we see from other top teams. If Pep had been hired here instead of City people would be worshipping him and would have loved the football if we were scoring 100+ a year and winning leagues.
Click to expand...
City looks stale often, Pool‘s style is a much better example imo. Possession football does not fit this club‘s dna, it would be a big change.

If we do go that route, I‘m fine with it if it works. I can stand it a lot better than the British because I‘m Dutch. I don‘t think it would be a good fit here.
 
NLunited said:
City looks stale often, Pool‘s style is a much better example imo. Possession football does not fit this club‘s dna, it would be a big change.

If we do go that route, I‘m fine with it if it works. I can stand it a lot better than the British because I‘m Dutch. I don‘t think it would be a good fit here.
Click to expand...

Sure Liverpool plays the most pleasing football in the world under Klopp (when in full flow, as they can also be terrible to watch at times when it's just endless whipped crosses). I think everyone would agree that's the "ideal" way in that it's both effective at an elite level and also still hits the nostalgia of past great United teams for us.

I'm just saying I think far too many put an emphasis on the "United Way" as if fans wouldn't be happy with anything else, when the truth is probably that as long as we are always an attack minded/team club that looks to get at the opposition people won't be bothered by how we achieve that. LVG failed in that we were unbelievably defensive in our possession, any club in the world would hate watching that not just United fans. But if SAF was still managing us and had adapted to the modern Pep/Arteta/etc. style system of condensing space, dominating territory, recycling the ball, and building from the back and we were scoring plenty and back at the top people would be thrilled.
 
DJ_21 said:
Seems like Ratcliffe will give him a fair chance under the new structure… like he said…. We’ve had quite a few managers and none have been successful under the environment that we’ve had.
Click to expand...
I think if we get into the UCL, ETH gets a chance to show what he can do within the new structure. If we don't, it's a reset across the board and he goes.

I reckon he's been told this, which is why only thing that matters for him in to win, regardless of how.
 
FrankWhite said:
I think if we get into the UCL, ETH gets a chance to show what he can do within the new structure. If we don't, it's a reset across the board and he goes.

I reckon he's been told this, which is why only thing that matters for him in to win, regardless of how.
Click to expand...

I guess we will find out in May whether ETH is kept or not and we are only trying to read between the lines with SJR.

But, I’m not so sure qualifying for the CL would be a deciding factor. It would possibly play a role but either they think he’s good enough or he’s not.

They have suggested that everything is on the table , even on Greenwood. I could see a situation where we don’t get CL and ETH is kept. I could equally see a situation where we do qualify for CL and he still gets the boot. We just don’t know what exactly are gonna be the defining factors that will determine ETH fate.
 
NLunited said:
All the talk about an institutional playstyle sounds good on paper. I think LvG talked about it, but his style didn‘t fit MU as evidenced by the mass fan revolt in his second season.
Click to expand...
Come on... The reason fans were fed up is because we were languishing outside the top 4 places all season, got knocked out the CL group stage, and couldn't score a goal which lead to poor results.

The fact we had a lot of possession wasn't the problem, it's that we couldn't score a goal and couldn't win games. No style of football is tolerated here when you finish 5th and regress from the previous season.
 
https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...not-set-up-for-success?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
“We have to look at the organisation of the club, because it is not good at the moment,” Ratcliffe told the Belgian newspaper De Tijd. “Take the head coach [Erik ten Hag] for example: he must report directly to the CEO. That is no longer possible in a modern football organisation.
Click to expand...

This puts all the managers' struggles into into perspective. If you're wondering why the upper executives wouldn't change this or alter the structure below them, it's because this structure has been incredibly effective at keeping them all in their jobs.
 
People say the managers post SAF have been all over the place style wise. But apart from LVG they've all been counter attack/don't care about possession managers. The style of football has barely changed in the last 7 years, it's more that that style is awful and those managers have been shit.
 
devilish said:
The root of the problem is the structure. That's certainly the case. There's essentially no specialized people to supervise different departments to work with harmony, barely any specialized people to make certain departments work effectively (ex recruitment) and we had often taken a knee jerk approach were a manager is sacked and we go on bringing in a new manager whom in turn has a completely different approach from a tactical perspective hence needing a new squad to work it effectively. However let's be honest here. Ole and Moyes weren't good enough, Mou and LVG was at the dusk of their career and Rangnick wasn't even a manager at that point of his career. Its not as if anyone of them went to Real or Juventus and won the treble.

Which leads us back to were we started. Why on earth did we go for managers who were either not good enough or washed up?
Click to expand...

That’s without mentioning the manager is reporting to the CEO. That shouldn’t happen. Ratcliffe did touch on this. He stated in a modern club the manager shouldn’t really be speaking to the CEO often at all. That’s why you have DOF. A DOF specialises in football operations, a CEO doesn’t. They’ll have their fingers in many pies so how can they really concentrate on supporting the manager? Along with the fact we have had accountants at the top for so long. No wonder managers struggle so much here.
 
All this talk of high intensity systems is great, but none of them can executed properly when players just start playing from their heels for an arbitrary 15-20 minutes in each half. ETH’s future depends on if he can put a stop to it because the system he ideally wants to run is high intensity.
 
Dominos said:
Come on... The reason fans were fed up is because we were languishing outside the top 4 places all season, got knocked out the CL group stage, and couldn't score a goal which lead to poor results.

The fact we had a lot of possession wasn't the problem, it's that we couldn't score a goal and couldn't win games. No style of football is tolerated here when you finish 5th and regress from the previous season.
Click to expand...
Actually we were top of the table when the ‚revolt‘/negativity began. That, and the injury crisis brought on a terrible streak of bad results.
 
UDontMessWith24 said:
All this talk of high intensity systems is great, but none of them can executed properly when players just start playing from their heels for an arbitrary 15-20 minutes in each half. ETH’s future depends on if he can put a stop to it because the system he ideally wants to run is high intensity.
Click to expand...

The problem is we often play TOO high intensity, especially in the midfield and attack, and it’s inefficient in how it’s applied. We don’t close spaces down effectively and efficiently enough to ensure our off the ball work and energy is being put to good use enough times. Sure it results in some dangerous turnovers and we can create chances from these occasionally. But often times it will get bypassed and now Garnacho/Hojlund/Bruno etc. have to track all of the way back to near their own box to get into our resting defense in our own half. And then when we regain possession we look to break with a single pass meaning our attackers then have to make long sprints back down the pitch to the opposite end.

It was noticeable last game and it’s why our attack is shattered often times in the 75th minute: they are endlessly sprinting up and down the length of the pitch at max intensity because we rarely calm play down when in possession nor do we shrink spacd well enough out of it. Just watch City and how they press at high intensity and you can see the difference. The distances each player has to sprint are far less because they condense space so well, and in possession they break when there is an opportunity but also of course will slow the tempo to a walking pace if need be, which gives that front 5 time to recharge.
 
NLunited said:
To be fair, a player like Antony had a good profile for this club. His performances have been nowhere near his baseline.

All the talk about an institutional playstyle sounds good on paper. I think LvG talked about it, but his style didn‘t fit MU as evidenced by the mass fan revolt in his second season.

It would be interesting what MU fans have in mind. Personally I think a hybrid gegenpressing/transition approach does fit the club. Pep ball decidedly doesn’t imo.
Click to expand...

Ten Hag at the start of the season mentioned about trying to be the best "transitional side" in the premier league. I feel we are heading there this season but
- playing too fast
- giving the ball away cheaply (I've never seen a team that's so careless in possession when attacking)
-- thus getting exposed to counter
-- thus putting pressure on defense

is all being counter productive to this. Casemiro isn't the most agile and isn't very good when attackers are running past him, so we are basically playing to his weakness.

If Ten Hag doesn't get sacked, I'm quite sure we'll see a dramatic improvement next season when we replace some players ill suited to this style with proper ones.
 
bringbackbebe said:
Ten Hag at the start of the season mentioned about trying to be the best "transitional side" in the premier league. I feel we are heading there this season but
- playing too fast
- giving the ball away cheaply (I've never seen a team that's so careless in possession when attacking)
-- thus getting exposed to counter
-- thus putting pressure on defense

is all being counter productive to this. Casemiro isn't the most agile and isn't very good when attackers are running past him, so we are basically playing to his weakness.

If Ten Hag doesn't get sacked, I'm quite sure we'll see a dramatic improvement next season when we replace some players ill suited to this style with proper ones.
Click to expand...
Your second point is most important; Ten Hag wants us to attack quickly but we have to be more ‚tidy‘ and have better decision making. This should improve over time.

We also need a dm who can eat grass better than an aging Casemiro and a fairly fast cb to complement Martinez.
 
First 50 premier league games
Klopp - 92 points
ETH - 96 points

How dare he, the fraud....
 
On Sky Sports, there's an interview with Pep about letting unhappy players leave. Short excerpt:

"Bobb's integration into the squad ensures that the blend of youth and experience remains. Is that something that Guardiola thinks about? "I would say the sporting director has to think about it more than me," he laughs. "But yes, of course. The balance is important."

Erik has made mistakes but if he achieves Champions League, he deserves to stay on to rectify them and to work under a proper structure.
 
redcarpet said:
On Sky Sports, there's an interview with Pep about letting unhappy players leave. Short excerpt:

"Bobb's integration into the squad ensures that the blend of youth and experience remains. Is that something that Guardiola thinks about? "I would say the sporting director has to think about it more than me," he laughs. "But yes, of course. The balance is important."

Erik has made mistakes but if he achieves Champions League, he deserves to stay on to rectify them and to work under a proper structure.
Click to expand...

I don't really judge Erik on the transfer market. Personally, I don't even think he's done that bad of a job. I think Mount will eventually be useful, but we haven't had a chance to truly integrate him.

My concern with him is the product on the pitch. I was so supportive of him last season, but this season has irritated me so much. At the outset of the season, I attributed the opening gaps in midfield to fitness. However, I was hopeful that it would be resolved in due course. I was very happy with our passing from the back in and around the Arsenal game. All of that vanished after the game, and we haven't looked like that since. The openness in middle never improved, indicating a tactical flaw.

I had lost faith in him after that. awful performance after awful performance on both ends of the pitch, with no tweaking or modification despite understanding how important it is for United to play decent football. I'm bothered by the sense of urgency. Whereas Pep urgently seeks layered solutions or increased efficiency in current systems, Ten Haag remained content with a failed system. That was very disheartening. Mourinho came to England with a 4312, realized it wasn't working out as well as he had hoped, and moved to a 433. I've seen Conte switch from a 433 to a 343 in an attempt to get his tactics working in England, which worked so well that they won the league that season. Pep frequently changed things up when they became stale. Adjusting his 4141 to have inverted full backs provides greater defensive security. They had to adapt to a modified 442 since they didn't have a striker. All the way to shifting a defender into midfield, allowing his more inverted full backs, like as Walker, to stay deep and secure a treble victory. When the going got tough, instead of finding ways to adjust his 4141 to something that better suits the English game, from October to December he made the decision to play hoofball and completely bypass midfield in an effort to survive.
 
Dazzmondo said:
Comments on ETH make it pretty clear to me we're looking at alternatives for next season
Click to expand...

"... In 11 years Manchester United has had quite a few capable and successful coaches, who all have failed at Manchester United. So that says there's something wrong with the environment."

How on earth did you get that take that that quote?

There is nothing in that which says "lets change the manager again".
 
Last edited:
Unsure if it is down to his methods or something but it needs to be examined why we get so many muscle injuries. It's truly incredible, and the lack of available funds / forward planning for the recurring injuries players get (not necessarily Hojlund) really makes the rest of the season a terrible slog now.
 
Vault Dweller said:
Unsure if it is down to his methods or something but it needs to be examined why we get so many muscle injuries. It's truly incredible, and the lack of available funds / forward planning for the recurring injuries players get (not necessarily Hojlund) really makes the rest of the season a terrible slog now.
Click to expand...
Probably need to go into the injuries to be fair.

- Hojlund joined us injured, didn't have a pre season and is playing a lot of games despite that.
- Licha injury now was impact, nothing to do with training.
- Malacia has been out for a year.
- Shaw has had fitness issues since before Ten Hag.

Liverpool themselves have lost Trent, Slob, Jota, Salah (after just recovering from the AFCON injury) and Darwin.

Villa have had a host of injuries themselves. Newcastle also had a range of muscle injuries.
 
VP89 said:
Probably need to go into the injuries to be fair.

- Hojlund joined us injured, didn't have a pre season and is playing a lot of games despite that.
- Licha injury now was impact, nothing to do with training.
- Malacia has been out for a year.
- Shaw has had fitness issues since before Ten Hag.

Liverpool themselves have lost Trent, Slob, Jota, Salah (after just recovering from the AFCON injury) and Darwin.

Villa have had a host of injuries themselves. Newcastle also had a range of muscle injuries.
Click to expand...

Yeah it's a fair point that a lot of teams are struggling but for ourselves, we haven't been able to play, say, 10 of our best players consistently for any period of longer than 4-5 games. There are extenuating circumstances with the likes of Shaw and even Hojlund, but the alarm is how often it happens and having players injured for so many games. I hope it's something Ineos are looking into and how to minimise this in future. I like Shaw, but we can't plan around him anymore. Martial, chronically unavailable. Malacia...heaven knows what's happening. Then Mount, Licha, Varane and Evans get a few, AWB and on and on. It's incredible, and if we really want to get anywhere it's something that needs to be examined and planned for properly.
 
Vault Dweller said:
Yeah it's a fair point that a lot of teams are struggling but for ourselves, we haven't been able to play, say, 10 of our best players consistently for any period of longer than 4-5 games. There are extenuating circumstances with the likes of Shaw and even Hojlund, but the alarm is how often it happens and having players injured for so many games. I hope it's something Ineos are looking into and how to minimise this in future. I like Shaw, but we can't plan around him anymore. Martial, chronically unavailable. Malacia...heaven knows what's happening. Then Mount, Licha, Varane and Evans get a few, AWB and on and on. It's incredible, and if we really want to get anywhere it's something that needs to be examined and planned for properly.
Click to expand...
Its more an indictment on the squad than it is on our training for me.

Mount was a crock before we bought him, Evans had a lot of injury problems as a free agent, Martial was also quite dead. Varane basically couldn't do more than 1 game a week since Ole days, Casemiro isn't exactly a spring chicken.

This is why I don't wana Olise. The guys a crock already. Just go for players that can stay fit.
 
Pretty hopeless injury list for him now for the run in, which is unfortunate. Questions should be asked within the club how training is affecting injuries though. Are the players just not physically ready for what is required, or should ten hags training be adjusted and is he causing injuries? Impossible to say from the outside but it's a valid question.
 
Sir Jim said 3 year rebuild. Made me think. If ETH is staying that gives him 5 years. That's a long time. If he stays then how long are people expecting it to take before we get good? And by that I mean at least competing for the league - 90 points ish. Or 5 ish points off winners. I would think next year he should be doing that
 
Status
Not open for further replies.