Well we need a source that also isn't specific to CL winners.
Absolutely! Pep too, just bagged a bunch of trophies post 50.
Erik ten Hag | 2022/23 & 2023/24
- Thread starter sewey89
- Start date
- Status
Well we need a source that also isn't specific to CL winners.
Absolutely! Pep too, just bagged a bunch of trophies post 50.
We had the chance to sign Kim but we passed it up. It would have been the first transfer of the summer, his buyout clause was valid until the end of June or whatever it was but he was passed up on because, and I quote, we had a player of similar attributes in Martinez. This is also the reason we passed up on Timber, who joined Arsenal despite him being our first choice the summer before.
I'm sure if you ask Ten Hag he will say he wants 23 new players, but the reality is, he and Murtough planned 3 summer signings to improve the squad. Anything else would be a loan or bargain bin opportunity.
There were also reports of United not having an infinite amount of money, so when EtH sanctioned the deals of Antony (not needed, not good), Onana (De Gea was nowhere that big of a problem despite that the Caf thought that replacing him would make us play sexy football while forgetting that you must not ignore the midfield) and Mount.
In other words, when you spent 400m within 14 months, you cannot complain much for not being able to spent more,
As I said, we didn't only want 3 players in the summer, there was talk of more than that. We wanted Kim, we wanted another midfielder, we ideally wanted two strikers.
A lot of it also depended on Murtoughs ability to sell, which he failed at. As he did with negotiating.
Ten Hag alone doesn't sanction deals. The decision on Antony was unanimous (if anything Ten hag was initially reluctant to turn to Ajax).
Checks and balances for Antony were made above Ten Hag.
It makes a lot of sense but even if ETH did that, he would play Mount as second striker and Mainoo as #10. "Hope" tactics.
This is what will happen under the next manager though. I see Mount being far more important for the team than Bruno, just because he's more universal player than him (and it's not like Bruno is anywhere close to being productive enough).
Well you're the one making the claim, so you should provide sources for that. Where's the data that managers are more successful pre 50 and lose more post 50?
Just take this list of PL most successful managers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Premier_League_managers#Premier_League_title-winning_managers
Most of them were still successful (and probably more successful) after 50yo.
Last edited:
The scouts (read: club) rated Antony at 25m and when Ajax demanded more, we withdraw.
EtH knowing the finances of the club, still insisted on it. Murtough being the muppet he is, decided to go back to that signing. EtH, assuming that he is intelligent, should have known that if you spent 80m+ on him (after spending over 120m on Casemiro and Martinez) will affect our signings next season. He also, assuming that he is intelligent, should have known that after spending 200m the previous season, it probably is not a great idea to spend 100m in luxury signings such as Onana and Mount who do not improve us at all, and then 70m on a kid with 19 goals, when you need to also improve the midfield and attack.
Now, if he is a muppet, like it seems he is, he might now have known that United does not have an unlimited amount of money for transfers. But if Caf knows it, so he should have known. It is pretty basic stuff.
Then why didn’t we get them? Kim had a buyout of £15m, we didn’t even make a bid? Why?
ETH managed him at Ajax. The buck stops entirely with him for the Antony signing I’m afraid. There’s no way anyone sanctions signing him if ETH expressed any misgivings.
So what? Antony isn't a bad player, his 80m fee has made him flop even harder but if he came in at half that amount I don't think he'd get the attention.
Again, Ten Hag alone didn't punt on Antony. The decision was unanimous among him and the United scouts.
If it was such a bad move that didn't need hindsight then it can easily be argued those above Ten Hag should have vetoed it.
Moreover there are nuggets in the Athletic that explain the budgets weren't even made clear to Ten Hag during certain windows. Also there are cases where the higher ups failed to disclose all associated fees for players (for example Ole with Diallo).
So it's fair to assume there's more to it than "ETH sanctioned this" in isolation.
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2015
- Messages
- 18,538
- Supports
️
@JPRouve How exactly are you defining success here?
Because we need to define the success part before we can even begin to look into this.
Also some people get into management through different routes so it’s not true you would have to be on top for 10-15 years. Some managers don’t get their first big job until later.
Klopp? Sir Alex too?
Im not sure this holds up based on how I’d define relevant success to discussing Ten Hag.
Antony and Mount - officially now no longer wastes of money. Because some clubs might still pay £20m and £30m for them.
So only wastes of money in the sense of over 100% depreciation and in the sense of the incalculably huge opportunity costs of not signing players good enough to play for us, instead of them.
The thread that keeps on giving
So only wastes of money in the sense of over 100% depreciation and in the sense of the incalculably huge opportunity costs of not signing players good enough to play for us, instead of them.
The thread that keeps on giving
I think Liverpool would easily take Mount still.
Chelsea will be a good measure, we will have a mostly fit squad, both teams have been poor this season, in the earlier match up we had one of our best games, despite conceding lots of chances.... I suspect it Chelsea will be getting their revenge based on our recent form.
I'm more defining waste in the sense of whether they can prove to be a valuable asset for the club in the medium to long term. That's why I don't see Mount as a waste but I agree in Antony (sadly at 80m we will struggle to see half that value)
We'll struggle to get £15-20m for Antony. Look at how impossible VdB was to sell and Antony is on higher wages.
If I'm not too lazy but I manually checked the average age of CL winners since 2000, which is admittedly a crude way of showing this but the average age is 47.3 years old. And a manager over 55 years old only won it 5 times(Ancelotti, SAF, Flick and Heynckes). 14 times the manager is under 50 years old and 9 times he is under 45 years old.
This is where the Glazers come in though. We seemingly prioritised a GK and ST which is fair as we were in dire need for both. Less so in CM and CB becasue we had players. A combination of poor negotiation and Glazers austerity due to incoming takeover forced us into a loan of Amrabat and Reguilon and also the free trnasfer of Evans.
Agree - had a look online and come up with nothing that backs up the claim. The most successful managers in the PL were all aged 50+.
Also winning the Bundesliga at 43 isn't anywhere near as comparable to winning you first PL title at 53yo (Klopp).
I think off the back of last season Antony was probably a £30m+ showing. He nosedived this year but my view is he's capable of being a lot more than that.
I agree with the sentiment that his transfer can be seen as a waste nonetheless.
you said over 50 not over 55... can you post your list here? with the ages of the managers each time they won.
It's relative to each manager. You are free to pick whatever metric you want and I'm pretty sure that you will see that the manager had more success in the early part of his career compared to the later part, with some exceptions.
There is always going to be someone left unmarked unless you go completely man to man.
The 3 cb‘s were pressed by Højlund, a cm and another cm or winger.
The issue wasn‘t the pressing structure but the execution.
After the first fifteen minutes we stopped tracking back, stopped aggressively challenging and continuously turned the ball over. I think it is fair to assume that in addition the players stopped following Ten Hag‘s tactical instructions leaving Brentford players in acres of space.
Please stop.
Urm no.
Antony could be an OK player in the right system but that would require a dominant style with a lot of ball, he cannot possibly thrive in counter attacking, fast transition system because he lacks the basics to succeed at that. This makes his signing so baffling because ETH had managed him at Ajax and he should have known that before he requested the board to go all in for him (which I still believe happened, I don't buy into 'club wanted him more than ETH' narrative).
I don't really follow the point that you are making and no I will no post the list, it's easily accessible.
I said that managers tend to have success before 50 and decline in their early 50s. Under 50 is before 50 and under 55 is early 50s.
Use this list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Premier_League_managers#Premier_League_title-winning_managers
pre 50 vs post 50yo.
because its bullshit and you have no sources for this claim at all. You can't just invent stats and expect it not to be questioned.
If this list of manager who won the CL and their ages at the time is easily accessible - then post a link to it.
Our CMs (which was the primary area where there was a massive gap) were McT, Bruno and Mainoo. Do any of them strike you as lazy or the type of players who don’t do their best to follow the manager’s instructions?
Even if it was the case that the midfielders stopped following his instructions after 15 minutes, why do you think that would be? Surely the most likely reasons would be either that the tactics they are being asked to employ are unsustainable for longer or that the fitness regime isn’t up to scratch? Who is overall responsible for those aspects of squad preparation?
There is no need for this level of rudeness and aggression.
Wait, you think that I don't have a source for CL winners and the birth date of the managers? Really?
Wait, you think that I don't have a source for CL winners and the birth date of the managers? Really?
Not what i said... i said post that information here. No point me spending ages doing the math when you have an easily accessible list of their ages when they won the UCL.
We didn't though. Ten Hag decided in the last month of the previous season that he was done with De Gea and got the terms of his new contract offer changed, at that point we were in dire need of a new GK but all things considered we could have been as equally shite this year with De Gea still around but a new CF, MC, or CD instead.
The plan has always been, no matter who is in charge, 3 players in the summer, no expense spared for the right people. You guys can do all the mental gymnastics you want to try and absolve Ten Hag from any or all responsibility but the fact of the matter is he made some pretty big errors of judgement regarding recruitment and it will ultimately cost him his job. Same for Murtough and whomever else was involved in these plans.
questioning someone's stats is aggression? get a grip.
Re-read what you wrote. There's ways to ask and ways not to.
- Status