Nothing sound more like long term success than bringing a 53 years old manager that has never been successful.
Erik ten Hag | 2022/23 & 2023/24
- Thread starter sewey89
- Start date
- Status
Nothing sound more like long term success than bringing a 53 years old manager that has never been successful.
feck off I'll take Ten hag every day of the week and twice on Sundays over this shite
Ten Hag is a dead man walking at this stage but I'd keep him on for another season if it meant Southgate didn't get the gig.
Gareth. Matt Law must be his mouthpiece.
Yep, I think that'd be the final nail in the coffin for me. Especially after enduring this season.
Glad the Telegraph paywall is so easy to get around, would suck to actually reward them for such thin clickbait.
Essentially we're not requiring people to have won trophies, so the writer extrapolates that Southgate has a shot.
I agree.
We deserve Sourhgate
Harry Maguire.
I have to say I'm quite perplexed by the whiplash reaction against Southgate, especially from ETH fans who have accepted his excuses and lowering of standards to make up for his failings.
Will he win us trophies any time soon? Probably not. But he seems good value for a stable top 4/5 finish. That's what's all the rage these days because we can't "hope to compete with City," isn't it?
Will he win us trophies any time soon? Probably not. But he seems good value for a stable top 4/5 finish. That's what's all the rage these days because we can't "hope to compete with City," isn't it?
Based on?
Yup, he's just putting 2+2 together and deducing that Southgate must be one of the favorites. Nothing concrete in it.
Even forgetting his managerial cv which isn't impressive by any means, clubs have players/people they are antagonistic to. Southgate is one of those for me, he's just an anti united cnut and shouldn't be allowed the privilege.
there is no way INEOS goes for Southgate they aren’t that stupid.
64% win ratio with England in the last 5 years. Reached semis in the WC, finals in Euro 2020.
Will he get any much further than a 3rd-5th place finish? No. Is he impressive or out of the ordinary by any means? No. Would I want him at the club long-term? No.
But at face value, he seems to fulfill the low standards many fans supposedly want out of our manager. So I don't know why there's so much backlash against him.
Southgate is the nightmare scenario right now for me (irrational, I hope - but he's talked about a lot).
Imagine him on a five year contract.
But I refuse to believe they're stupid enough to do that.
Imagine him on a five year contract.
But I refuse to believe they're stupid enough to do that.
Is he? He hasn't coached on a daily basis for 8 years and he wasn't exactly a top 4/5 caliber manager when he was doing it. He could be a revelation but to me he looks like one of the biggest gamble a club could take.
Southgate feels very INEOS and especially very Dave Brailsford. Absolute peak marginal gains/world-class basics with minimal substance underneath. I doubt he's their preference ahead of Tuchel or giving Ten Hag another year but I would imagine he's very high up their list of options if they do make a change.
Actually think Southgate could build a decent foundation but it would need someone a bit more tactically adept to take over and get us further IMO.
What do you mean by that?
He has gotten fairly far in a few international tournaments with a stack of talent and unbelievably lucky draws. The one and only time he's beaten a decent side at a tournament was under the circumstances of being able to play every game at home with virtually no opposition fans allowed to attend. In all other cases, he's gone out to the first decent team England played.
Even if he did have an unequivocally good record in international management, which he isn't close to, it is nothing like the club game. The limited time allowed with players means that it's much more tactically basic, less well drilled and slower paced than club football. With a team like England's current squad, keeping a solid shape and being a decent man manager is basically all you have to do to give yourself a chance of going far.
The entirety of his club managerial career is a 29% winrate and relegation with Middlesbrough 15 years ago.
No I didn't unfortunately. Were they laughing or something?
Antony was moaning about somebody
The backlash is because his body of work at club level is completely non-existent. His England side beat who they are supposed to beat and lose against any nation who are their equal or superior. Also, he's a very dull personality.
That can't possibly be the ambition level for Manchester United.
It is possible to compete with City even with all their cheating - and doing so must be the ambition.
There is absolutely no reason whatsoever why United should be fine with a "stable top 4/5 finish".
And I actually think Jim would agree with me there. He hasn't made this move in order to oversee "stable top 4/5 finishes", why the feck would he be bothered with that?
United absolutely has the resources to compete with City. We just need competence.
I wouldn't trust Deschamps and he has actually won things and reached a CL final.
Yeah, that's the international stage. There are a couple of very obvious reasons on why it's stupid to compare international cups to club football.
He also had cake walks in his tourneys and got his arse handed to him every time he got a proper test. He's dogshite.
Southgate isn't INEOS/Dave Brailsford, he's Ashworth's man from his time at England. I would be absolutely stunned if we appoint Southgate and I'd ask big questions immediately of Ashworth. We rightfully give Ten Hag stick for only signing people he knows, this would be more of the same.
I’m not going to treat you like you’re stupid and tell you out signings have been great, because clearly they have been dreadful. From Erik’s first season a blind man could see we needed a prolific striker, and at least one decent CB, maybe even one to partner Licha and one to cover him, so naturally we signed a CM and a GK.
The Athletic (L Whitwell in particular) have repeatedly said ETH took control of transfer targets when he realised the structure wasn’t there to support him and do it for him.
Rather than identifying players for the manager, seemed to be a lackie who would fetch and carry for the manager rather than direct. I think this is commendable from Erik trying to succeed inspite of our crappy structure.
This I feel will be a key change under INEOS when we have a DOF taking an overview, a hands on technical director Working with the coach, and a recruitment specialist identifying and evaluating targets. The head coach is then left to concentrate on coaching.
My personal reluctance to sack Erik isn’t out of any great love for the current manager. It’s more out of concern at being in the middle of a ‘process’ and if we change our direction midway everytime - as we have seen we never arrive at our destination. It’s also a concern that so much change will set us back too, so even with improved structures and processes we are starting from way behind our rivals. That’s all.
Only other point if you believe reports would be that he seems to have convinced INEOS keep him on, even if only for now.
In fairness to Southgate England have been better under him than they were for a long time and players seem more enthused to play for them than they had at any stage in my life. I think he has cultivated a good culture which is largely in line with what Brailsford has always been very keen to espouse as the keys to his success in the past (if you ignore the jiffy bags and brazen use of TUE's). I can just see that appealing to him and to INEOS' general ethos as to what traits lead to success. Plus he has a pre-existing relationship with Ashworth who also clearly rates him.
Personally I would have greater reservations based on his lack of charisma (albeit he has more than Ten Hag), his performance as a club manager and the fact that he has always come up short tactically and with his in-game management in the biggest games. As I said I obviously have no inside knowledge and am just projecting but I'm not surprised by the widespread reports that he's a serious contender if we do change manager in the summer.
Not to mention that he got the England job on "merit" after falling to get out the group stage in two successive u-21 world championships.
The talent he's had at his disposal at both u-21's and national team and accomplished nothing.
Yeah, he was given the England job because somebody chucked a brown envelope off a cliff and Big Sam followed it.
After that, they just gave the job to the biggest yes man they could find who wouldn't rock the boat. That's the extent of his qualifications for the England job, let alone the fecking United one.
Not keen on him at all, but if we're looking for positives with Southgate then one must surely be that he's managed to stay in the job as England manager for 8 years, which is an achievement in itself, as I suppose it also means that he's managed to gain and retain the respect of the players for all that time. There haven't been many negative stories regarding player dissatisfaction during his time, right? I mean that's something I guess?
Southgate being a similar component to Ole, great atmosphere builder and an environment the players enjoy but no tactical astuteness and it would certainly feel like the team have a ceiling.
I could see United under Southgate as a flat track bully, much like how this current England side has been.
I could see United under Southgate as a flat track bully, much like how this current England side has been.
I understand that.
And I would be 100% on board with that line of thinking if there was an identifiable "process" there that I could appreciate.
But there isn't, I'm sorry.
(I'm not saying there isn't a process - I'm only saying that there isn't an obvious process that I, as a lowly fan, can identify and appreciate.)
The Southgate links seem very thin. The ones making decisions is going to be Berrarda and Wilcox for now. Doubt they have that they have him at the top of their wishlist.
These rumours started because of Ratcliffe, but he is not the one making decisions.
Also, if we do have to take an ex-middlesbrough, english manager , then I would rather take Carrick
These rumours started because of Ratcliffe, but he is not the one making decisions.
Also, if we do have to take an ex-middlesbrough, english manager , then I would rather take Carrick
I will shed actual tears if this happens.
The two most recent times we were knocked out in a major tournament were against Italy in the Euros and France in the World Cup, right? Do you honestly think it’s accurate to describe it as ‘having his arse handed to him’ in those cases? We lost one game on penalties after extra time, (having knocked out Germany earlier in the tournament),and the other by a single goal, with Kane missing a penalty to equalise right at the end. We had 58% to 42% in possession and 16 to 8 in shots against France too. Feels like you have decided he’s crap and fitted the narrative to match that. I think he has limitations as a manager, but having his arse handed to him just doesn’t match reality.
But that in itself has been the issue for years. The complete inability of a manager to take the next step in the second or third season to make the transition from conservative, dull football to a better, more proactive title challenging quality. The managers have said as much themselves, although I personally don't believe Mourinho.
Jose: Said he wanted to 'evolve' the team in his third season and play more from the back (honestly, not sure i believe this one to be fair). Result= sacked
Ole: Said he wanted to change the team into something more proactive in his third season. Buys Varane, Sancho, Ronaldo, moves away from a low block. Result= sacked.
EtH: said in a recent interview he wants the team to stick to the plan in his second season even if it's a painful learning curve and refuses to be more pragmatic like last season. Result= almost certainly sacked.
Hiring another manager to play pragmatic football just seems to run the risk of repeating the same thing again and again.
- Status