Erik ten Hag | 2022/23 & 2023/24

Status
Not open for further replies.
It's wasted money however you want to spin it

- overpaid
- better spent on a CM
- most likely back up unless Bruno doesn't perform

I agree he's not the biggest waste of money in the £400m (which is why you're focusing on it)

Bear in mind that he would have been free this summer. He is definitely the biggest waste of money out of any of the ETH signings.
 
Bear in mind that he would have been free this summer. He is definitely the biggest waste of money out of any of the ETH signings.
Antony way out ahead. Casemiro for me second unless Saudi bail us out.

We've been somewhat unlucky with the Mount injuries to not really get any use from him.
 
It is far too impatient to demand ETH's dismissal on the basis of the current season, when you were so satisfied with the last one. And I'm not a fan of ETH, but just think it's too impatient. And I haven't forgotten the tactical changes - I just don't see them as decisive for the worse season this year.

Too impatient because fans were satisfied with the last one - makes zero sense. Any top club with respectable ambitions would have sacked ETH months ago. Probably after the CL humiliation.

As for thinking the tactical changes havent been decisive in turning the team into an insipid, joyless bunch of habitual losers... :lol: Oh, wait, let me guess, it's actually all purely because of injuries?
 
It is strange that fans do not seem to recognize that there are ups and downs when trying to rebuild a team. It is far too impatient to demand ETH's dismissal on the basis of the current season, when you were so satisfied with the last one. And I'm not a fan of ETH, but just think it's too impatient. And I haven't forgotten the tactical changes - I just don't see them as decisive for the worse season this year.
Of course it's not impatient, you can justify keeping a manager when results are as bad as they have been when you can point to improvements in the quality of football, you can't when the same poor results are actually better than the performances deserve. Two years is more than enough time to have impacted that. I didn't want to get rid earlier in the season either, but an entire season of this is inexcusable unfortunately.
 
Yes, spending 60m on a pseudo 10 coming off a poor season riddled with injuries, going into his final year under contract, and now having another entire season riddled with more injuries was a very astute signing. Brilliant logic.

Oh and the position he was signed to play he had never had success in at his previous club. Everything was theoretical based on his attributes as a player to whether our vision would work out (next to Bruno of all people)

It’s the type of gamble you take if you’re already a top team and see value in getting squad depth with a versatile player as a supplementary signing and experiment with where he works best. You don’t make him the marquee midfield choice and slap the 7 on him. It was a fecking ludicrous decision that has turned out even worse because he’s been unavailable for much of the year.

Spot on. In hindsight this is the type of signing that gets a manager sacked cuz that signing has meant we have had to rely on Casemiro as our only real DM and he has been either injured or out of form.

The only way the Mount signing can be justified is if he is an integral part of the first XI.
 
It is strange that fans do not seem to recognize that there are ups and downs when trying to rebuild a team. It is far too impatient to demand ETH's dismissal on the basis of the current season, when you were so satisfied with the last one. And I'm not a fan of ETH, but just think it's too impatient. And I haven't forgotten the tactical changes - I just don't see them as decisive for the worse season this year.
'so satisfied' ..... lets be clear here, people were satisfied because we were back on the right track. 3rd and a mickey mouse cup isn't some amazing season unless we're Brighton or something. A club with our resources should always be expected to finish top 4 minimum. Otherwise what do we pay him 10m a year for?
 
It's wasted money however you want to spin it

- overpaid
- better spent on a CM
- most likely back up unless Bruno doesn't perform

I agree he's not the biggest waste of money in the £400m (which is why you're focusing on it)
Wasted is not the same as overspent. This should not need to be explained to you.
 
Casemiro, Mainoo, Bruno is the first choice. Don’t really understand how you could dispute this.
Has Mctominay started in the last three games Casemiro has started? Yes or no?

Also worth pointing out me in the same previous post agreeing with a poster that he wouldn’t be first choice if everyone is fit…

And you don’t know that’s the first choice either. We haven’t seen what he does with Mount now available.
 
You can't argue with facts.

Mount, Onana, Antony, Martinez, Casemiro, Hojlund, Malacia = 7/16

Bayandir, Evans, Amrabat, Reguilon, Weghorst, Butland, Sabitzer, Eriksen, Dubravka = 9/16

Again most of our transfers under ETH have been free, on loan or cheap punts...

Ah adding the cheap punts in now to beef the numbers up are we. :lol:

It was originally just free transfers and loans.

It is a myth that we have bought poorly when most of the transfers we have made under ETH have been either free transfers or loans.

The players we paid money for have had a pretty decent success rate with a few notable exceptions.
 
Has Mctominay started in the last three games Casemiro has started? Yes or no?

Also worth pointing out me in the same previous post agreeing with a poster that he wouldn’t be first choice if everyone is fit…

And you don’t know that’s the first choice either. We haven’t seen what he does with Mount now available.
Are you alright in the head mate?
 
I think Mount was a good buy and we should have got him for 40m, not £55m plus 5. We also overspent on Hojlund who is still an asset.
I think Murtough should have been able to turf out players better to fund the CM.

My comment is actually that you can't call mount a waste of money but still insinuate he has a potentially key role next season. Those are two mutually exclusive statements.

How can you say Mount was a good buy when he's barely even played? You could say he has the potential to be good, but considering he's been bought purposely to play ETH's system of two 8's - which he has routinely failed to implement successfully - even his potential to be a good buy is in doubt. This is not even considering the implications of not being able to sign more important positions due to his purchase.
 
How can you say Mount was a good buy when he's barely even played? You could say he has the potential to be good, but considering he's been bought purposely to play ETH's system of two 8's - which he has routinely failed to implement successfully - even his potential to be a good buy is in doubt. This is not even considering the implications of not being able to sign more important positions due to his purchase.
Because my point about Mount isn't limited to what I think hel do this season.
 
Wasted is not the same as overspent. This should not need to be explained to you.
Paying 80M fee and 10M/year salary for a player you could have had for 50 M fee and 7M/year salary is overspending. It’s also wasting 30M on fees and 3M/year on wages.
 
Been discussed at length you can find what I've said in the thread.

I know I literally just quoted your original post that I replied to.

All I was pointing out was that most of his signings haven't been frees and loans.
 
Where is the 3m on wages extra coming from?
The hypothetical example in the post you quoted… 10 M vs 7 M….

If we were to consider Mount, I believe he is earning 13M/year(250k/week)… if we could have had him or an equivalent player for 10M/year, then we are de facto wasting 3M/year that could have been used elsewhere.
 
He has another year. We have to be realistic that this great new structure, which may well turn out to be shite, won't be much use for next season anyway as Berrada won't be in place until June and Ashworth probably won't be until after the summer while more appointments are still to be made, the best run clubs will already have a lot of their plans in place for the summer so we're going to be behind the curve.

That may be the best argument for keeping Ten Hag, I think this year and the way the team has played all season definitively proves that he's not the man for the job if we want to get anywhere closing to challenging again but maybe we should let him be the man to deal with the transition and then bring in another manager once the structure is place.
If we keep him until his contract expires, do we let him choose the players or do we sign players to fit a style of play SJR and his staff want?
 
How can you say Mount was a good buy when he's barely even played? You could say he has the potential to be good, but considering he's been bought purposely to play ETH's system of two 8's - which he has routinely failed to implement successfully - even his potential to be a good buy is in doubt. This is not even considering the implications of not being able to sign more important positions due to his purchase.

Casemiro signing is horrible regardless of last season - paying 70 million and putting him on a fat 5 year contract when he's losing his legs at his age is genuinely outrageous and displays a lot of short-term thinking from Erik. Also, the issue is not just the signings themselves, but the utterly erratic nature of them. Why would Ten Hag chase FDJ then go for Casemiro who is a completely different type of midfielder? Then he goes for Mount (another terrible signing) who is also completely different to FDJ. The Eriksen signing is not terrible in a vacuum, but when you realize Eriksen is the only midfielder he's signed that can progress the ball from deep and that responsibility is largely thrust upon him - then yes it's a god-awful signing. You can't even argue it was an emergency either considering the amount of money wasted on the likes of Mount, Antony + Case.

So you can claim he's a "terrible signing"? Back in November as well :lol:
 
Paying 80M fee and 10M/year salary for a player you could have had for 50 M fee and 7M/year salary is overspending. It’s also wasting 30M on fees and 3M/year on wages.
Correct. So say what is a waste, and not use the entire transfer fee to get to the £400m mark and peddle a stupid narrative. It's something @Leftback99 is constantly guilty of. Glad he outed himself with the Mount example.

The premise of my point is Mount and Hojlund both have value and both were over spends (not complete wastes of a transfer).
 
So the big signings there are:
Antony - Fail
Casemiro - Excellent 1st season, injured/poor 2nd
Martinez - Excellent 1st season, injured 2nd

Mount - Injured all season thus far
Højlund - Injured start but coming good
Onana - Poor start but coming good

The only complete abject failure of a bigger signing is Antony and Ten Hag doesn’t negotiate the fees (and also reportedly wanted a striker that window).

Weghorst and Sabitzer were emergency loan responses to Ronaldo being a cnut and us losing Eriksen to injury. Hardly fair to claim them to be proper “signings”.

Amrabat, Evans and Reguillon were all signed too because of injury concerns. Amrabat was due to Mainoo being injured, Evans due to everyone loll and Reguillon because it’s April and we’ve still not had our LBs fit.
Again, he doesn't decide the fees.
Does anyone have a source on “Ten Hag doesn’t decide fees”???

My understanding is that the board gives a budget to Ten Hag and the scouting team / Murtaugh. Once both the scouts/Ten Hag agree on the player, Murtaugh then begins the acquisition process. I believe Ten Hag has some accountability for blowing his budget on bad buys. If Murtaugh comes back to him and says, “They want 85m, you sure you want to pay that much for Antony? This will impact our pursuit of other positions to fill.” Ten Hag must have the veto there as well.
 
Does anyone have a source on “Ten Hag doesn’t decide fees”???

My understanding is that the board gives a budget to Ten Hag and the scouting team / Murtaugh. Once both the scouts/Ten Hag agree on the player, Murtaugh then begins the acquisition process. I believe Ten Hag has some accountability for blowing his budget on bad buys. If Murtaugh comes back to him and says, “They want 85m, you sure you want to pay that much for Antony? This will impact our pursuit of other positions to fill.” Ten Hag must have the veto there as well.
The sources are everywhere. I suggest you read the Athletic deep dive into the Murtough summer where it was documented how Murtough had a ceiling of 42m for Mount and walked out with 55+5. He knew Hojlund was told he can go for 52m or so, and walked out paying 75+m.

It also confirmed checks and balances for the Antony fee were all made above the manager.

Im in full agreement that Ten Hag isn't blameless, but prime blame for money spent goes to those above him.
 
Yeah, I find it stranger that so many people in all topics operate based on faith or refuse to adapt their opinion based on up-to-date observations. I genuinely don't understand why people think that mindless faith is normal or desirable.

And that applies to ETH, today I don't understand or have any trust in his decisions but that could change in the future, because my opinions are based on what I have observed, if I observe something new then my opinion will have to adapt.
I think they should open up the Sack ETH poll again. It would be interesting to see if the needle has moved again.
 
The sources are everywhere. I suggest you read the Athletic deep dive into the Murtough summer where it was documented how Murtough had a ceiling of 42m for Mount and walked out with 55+5. He knew Hojlund was told he can go for 52m or so, and walked out paying 75+m.

It also confirmed checks and balances for the Antony fee were all made above the manager.

Im in full agreement that Ten Hag isn't blameless, but prime blame for money spent goes to those above him.
I read the article awhile back. I remember feeling like all were to blame.

I think though, if we had to do it again, we wouldn’t buy Antony at any price, Mount at any price, Malacia at any price, Lisandro is a question mark… he is injured so often, Onana we overpaid, Casemiro I have a soft spot for.

It’s not just the money, you could argue they aren’t the right players to begin with….
 
Does anyone have a source on “Ten Hag doesn’t decide fees”???

My understanding is that the board gives a budget to Ten Hag and the scouting team / Murtaugh. Once both the scouts/Ten Hag agree on the player, Murtaugh then begins the acquisition process. I believe Ten Hag has some accountability for blowing his budget on bad buys. If Murtaugh comes back to him and says, “They want 85m, you sure you want to pay that much for Antony? This will impact our pursuit of other positions to fill.” Ten Hag must have the veto there as well.
No they decide on a list of players per position and work down the list depending on availability/budget.

I believe that’s how it works. Multiple people have vetos I believe also.
 
Correct. So say what is a waste, and not use the entire transfer fee to get to the £400m mark and peddle a stupid narrative. It's something @Leftback99 is constantly guilty of. Glad he outed himself with the Mount example.

The premise of my point is Mount and Hojlund both have value and both were over spends (not complete wastes of a transfer).
Keep digging. You're just showing yourself up now (as usual)
 
I think they should open up the Sack ETH poll again. It would be interesting to see if the needle has moved again.


Doubt it the Ten Hag in posters have got to be the most deluded people on the planet. I honestly put them on the same pedestal as Trump supporters.

They will not admit they were wrong and just bury their heads in the sand making excuse after excuse for his failures
 
If we keep him until his contract expires, do we let him choose the players or do we sign players to fit a style of play SJR and his staff want?
I wouldn't let him sign the players because none of his signings have yet convinced and in fairness he didn't have that responsibility at Ajax but was given it here for some reason. I honestly don't know what we do this summer.

Presumably they will have a style of play they want in mind and will recruit players and potentially a manager to fit that but who is determined that style of play and the recruits to fit? It can't be Ashworth so is it Ratcliffe and Brailsford? That's not a good situation.
 
Doubt it the Ten Hag in posters have got to be the most deluded people on the planet. I honestly put them on the same pedestal as Trump supporters.

They will not admit they were wrong and just bury their heads in the sand making excuse after excuse for his failures

Takes some audacity to spew something so severely unhinged and call others deluded. Go learn some football before you talk down to anyone.
 
I think they should open up the Sack ETH poll again. It would be interesting to see if the needle has moved again.
No request for this after the Liverpool win interestingly.
 
Doubt it the Ten Hag in posters have got to be the most deluded people on the planet. I honestly put them on the same pedestal as Trump supporters.

They will not admit they were wrong and just bury their heads in the sand making excuse after excuse for his failures
Wrong about what?

Is there anything I’ve said that is factually incorrect?
 
Now that we are getting some very competent football people in senior roles above ETH, I do wonder what their weekly conversations are?

“Hi Erik, just wondering why you’ve played without a midfield all season?”

Surely they must be challenging him on his ideologies or are they just sat back and waiting for him to tie his own noose?
 
Keep digging. You're just showing yourself up now (as usual)
Says the man who tried to write off the entirety of Mounts fee as a waste whilst saying he's also able to be of value to the next manager. Good work, really.
 
Doubt it the Ten Hag in posters have got to be the most deluded people on the planet. I honestly put them on the same pedestal as Trump supporters.

They will not admit they were wrong and just bury their heads in the sand making excuse after excuse for his failures

out of intrest, what are Trump supporters deluded about?

please PM so we avoid off topic in this thread
 
I read the article awhile back. I remember feeling like all were to blame.

I think though, if we had to do it again, we wouldn’t buy Antony at any price, Mount at any price, Malacia at any price, Lisandro is a question mark… he is injured so often, Onana we overpaid, Casemiro I have a soft spot for.

It’s not just the money, you could argue they aren’t the right players to begin with….
I certainly agree there, the targets were weird (though I still like the Mount signing).

I'd have preferred to see us just revolutionise our defence and work upwards. Consistency is built from the back.
 
Says the man who tried to write off the entirety of Mounts fee as a waste whilst saying he's also able to be of value to the next manager. Good work, really.
A reminder of the post that you believe says I'm writing off the ENTIRETY of Mount's fee.
£400m spent and 2 maybe 3 of them are likely to be first team starters under the next manager. That's buying players poorly.
Again making statements up in your head for the umpteenth time.

With the audacity to lecture me on the English language (and get promptly put back in your place) :lol:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.