Erik ten Hag | 2022/23 & 2023/24

[Atheist]

When was that said?

Here's a recent example https://www.redcafe.net/threads/eri...united-manager.470032/page-2562#post-31939723 There's some more suggestions in the thread if you go over it, completely playing down the expectations of what a Man Utd manager is supposed to achieve.

 

[stevoc]

They realistically should, because there's a new set of owners and a new game model that the manager now has to abide by.

I don't see why if Ratcliffe and Ineos for some reason decide to keep him on then it wouldn't be unreasonable for them to expect more from a guy in his 3rd season than a new manager in their first.

If the slates being wiped completely clean then there's probably not much benefit to retaining Ten Hag as opposed to hiring a younger coach more suited the the play style and philosophy they want to implement.

As this season as shown Ten Hag has a very particular setup he wants to use. No guarantee that matches what the road the new owners want to go down.

 

[stevoc]

INEOS are saving every penny they can for FFP.....maybe this all comes down to keeping him on to finish his contract so they won't have to pay the 15 mil the would owe him? If it still isn't working out after next season, sack him, pry Nagelsmann away from Germany or maybe Ancelotti or at that poing McKenna.

It wouldn't be £15m. And there's a good chance it would cost more to sack him midway through next season than it would this summer. As he almost certainly has a minimum performance clause in his contract related to CL qualification.

 

[stevoc]

Nah, don’t think so. I think we might even win at Brighton and will then massively outperform our worst ever PL season (by TWO points) which will be considered good enough, and against City a 2-goal loss will be considered a great result and we are more than capable of delivering it. I think he has saved his job with Newcastle game.

My that is significant.

 

[tomaldinho1]

I'd say the players they've bought, with the possible exception of Rice, weren't obvious "big" names, even if the fees paid were significant. They clearly have the ability to identify what they need from a player and/or see how that player fits into the current system or improves it.

Bringing this back to Ten Hag, if we'd improved this season in terms of a consistent and coherent system, even if it didn't work all the time and even if, in the end the league position didn't improve, it'd be fair to say he needs more time and is building towards something. As it is, there's no evidence of that. We've regressed. The players he's brought in have not improved us or moved us towards whatever system he's trying to play and in the end, it's descended into total chaos. How a top class manager can think it's acceptable to concede so many chances I don't know. His stubbornness is also a huge red flag.

The key point here is that Arsenal have been proven right to stick with Arteta, and they're getting the benefit. But I would say that even relatively early on you could see that there was a coherence in what he was trying to do and a direction of travel. We seemed to have that last year, at least until the Carabao Cup final.

I'm not suggesting you're saying this but some seem to push the idea that just because Arteta came good, Ten Hag will as well is clearly flawed. You could use that argument for any failing manager.

I've asked this question on here loads and have never had a coherent or clear answer from anyone: what exactly is he doing well? What can anyone point to to say that with more time and more money there's more chance that not he'll come good? Pointing to another manager who did come good isn't an answer.

Ten Hag has had a lot of bad luck to be fair to him. The question is whether the club proceed on blind faith and give him more time with a single year left on his deal and the risk the players/type of player he want's won't be wanted by the next man in. However they proceed, it's a big call for INEOS. If they get this wrong they lose credibility.

They've been generally quite well known players and then they added some big transfers this season in the hope to push them to the title.

Re Arsenal - I don't know if anyone on here believes in blind faith but context is also important. Arteta's team is almost exclusively his own signings, Saka and Saliba (arguably their two best players alongside Odegaard and Rice) were there already but otherwise the entire 1st team and essentially all the subs are Edu's choices that I assume he will give the 'ok' to. We don't have that setup, recruitment has been a joke for a decade.

Re ETH and what he does - I'm happy to give my thoughts. I do think, as ever in these types of scenarios, the pendulum of rationality has long swung into absurdity with how people are talking about ETH, like he's a random bloke from down the pub who chanced upon the managerial role at United. I'll break it into 2 seasons because he's had two very different years with us.

1st season. All round results were very good considering what we'd come from. 3rd, 75 points, good defense with a less potent attack. We won a cup, lost in the final of another and stylistically we knew it wasn't what he planned to do, but then he essentially inherited a counter attacking team made up of Mou/Ole signings. Licha was excellent, malacia good for the price, Case was great that first season, even Antony did well in his limited way by making us incredibly hard to get at down that side.

2nd season. It's worth saying here how previous coaches made a song and dance about wanting to move to this system but never doing it, either because they couldn't or wouldn't risk it. You could hire any half decent coach, fund them as our managers have been funded and play counter attack and probably hover around 6th-3rd but we wouldn't win anything major. The fact ETH is trying to do it and move us, about 10 years too late, to the single DM is a positive for me, despite how awful watching the non existent midfield setup we have has been. Injuries have been a joke, people seem to be tired of hearing about it but all teams have tanked with key injuries, ours have just been all across the defence and then people ask why are we conceding so many chances and why is Onana having to make so many saves...in part because we've gone to the single DM (which doesn't really work with a 10 in the way we play), in part because our core is slow, mostly old players but mostly because we've basically had a different back four every game. It's been atrocious to watch at times make no mistake but since Hojlund returned there have been a lot more goals and lot more influence from Bruno so something has clicked in the offensive unit, the issue is our defensive injuries have been a joke.

2 points I think many posters deliberately ignore on ETH. Youth development. I can't tell you how excited I was when Ole gave the press conference the summer after he was made permanent to say the recruitment was changing and young, hungry players were now how he would build the team. He ended up signing guys like Cavani, Ronaldo, Varane.. ETH's single older signing was Case who wasn't his choice, the rest are all younger players who need to be coached/developed. Are we so used to the awful style of recruitment we complained for so long about, we have forgotten than a 21 year old Hojlund likely won't perform at the same level as Ibra or Cavani (I think he's actually outperformed Cavani now I think about it)? Point being he actually wants to work with these younger players which is something that is important and Dalot looks the best he's looked, Mainoo I think is being managed well, Garnacho has improved massively off the ball, Hojlund is improving and really it's only Amad people are bummed about, and he is coming off a serious knee injury so is the club not right to be quite cautious with him.

The other part, which really is the most important, is you can't really doubt his knock out credentials. It's not chance that the 3 experienced CL level managers we've hired (LVG, Mou, ETH) all won cups and domestically he's been quietly good there. Caraboa win and back to back FA cup finals, I can't see us winning vs City but no other manager post SAF has done what he's done; Top 4 and a cup in a season. If we somehow beat City he'll also be the first with back to back cups.

I do think injuries have been a big factor and the real red flags for me are how he thought Mount would work, I remember having a long argument with someone on here about how every team would simply run straight through a midfield that Case/Mount/Bruno, and obviously Antony. But if Ineos are now taking transfer input away from him, that issue is gone, and I think back to games where I think we've looked good - think of Bayern before the Onana howler for example, we looked like a genuinely top class team, and there is something there when we have most of the squad and players shut out the noise/do their jobs on the field.

I have said many times I suspect he will be moved on in the summer, this is a results based business and we will inevitably lose the final to a much better team than us and the season will have been below the standards most expected. But I don't see many standout candidates to come in and really change things. Plus it irks me that it seems many players have an issue with a manager finally holding them accountable for fitness work (which contrary to the caf myth about us playing like a basketball team, we run less distance and sprint less than other teams, we're about 10th overall in the Sky article) which we've lagged behind others on for so long.

In summary, I think there are/were a lot of positives but they were drowned out by the shitshow this season.

 

[TrustInJanuzaj]

But even with everyone fit, we had a positive patch of form last season, and thats about it. Injuries are one thing, but as a manage, he's managed them awfully this season. The way he set us up, and the way we've gone into games tactically has been appalling. Would we have had a better season if everyone was fit? I would have expected so, but it's all hypothetical, the reality is we've been dog shit.

I've said it a million times, I want to believe in him, I want him to succeed and do well. I just don't have much reason to have faith in him after what he's delivered.

We have had one game (ONE WHOLE GAME!) this season with our first choice 11 against West Ham, and we played so much better. I don't think it's that hypothetical to see that we are on a different side when our best players are fit. The biggest issue is that our squad players are truly garbage and simply don't match the aspirations of the playing style. Take out the best players, and it's a double whammy; we now have players who are not good enough on an individual level and who also don't match the desired play style and tactics either. It's no surprise in that context that the wider team then massively suffers.

I know from your posts that you're not a problem poster or overly negative, and I completely get the lack of belief because I've faltered and changed on it numerous times this season. But I do fundamentally believe Ten Hag to be a top-class coach based on his track record at Ajax and isolated spells at Utd. Its one game, one spell but that game against Barcelona last season was a good as we have looked post Fergie. For once, we actually approached a big team with the correct attitude and tactical prowess. Now, obviously, that's a fleeting moment, and there's been more negative than positive, but surely we knew when Ragnick left this was a big, big job and not an easy fix. We needed almost an entirely new 11, and we still need 7/8 new players who all have to be bang on. I just don't know that I believe in the vision some are promoting, another short-term fix (i.e. Tuchel) that will get better short-term results, but likely get us nowhere in the bigger picture of competing for top honours.

 

[Lewnited]

1) Our attack isn't good enough. I said it in the summer, and I'll say it again now: we need to add some serious firepower to this team regardless of any manager.
2) It's a team game at the end of the day. If there's a disconnect between GK and Defence, Defence and Midfield and Midfield and Attack, you will have problems. The injuries have hit us harder than most teams because we have so many weak links outside of our strongest 11 (hell, even our strongest 11 contains weaknesses). I think you're right in attributing some of the blame to our training, but then can we really moan as fans when we have been highlighting our team's work rate as a weakness for years? Ten Hag is right to try and address that and increase the player's intensity; if anything, it just helps to show who isn't good enough to cope long-term.

I'm not going to argue that we have been horrendous this season, as bad a Manchester Utd side as I've seen; however, I still think it's less bleak than under Mourinho. We are being punished right now for trying to take on a more progressive and aggressive playing style without the playing personnel. I remember a MNF from a few years ago where Carragher argued Arteta should abandon his style to try and get better short-term results being more negative. Neville argued that was short-sighted and that the very best managers will rigidly stick to their preferred style because how else can you find out who is suitable to play it? We currently are so far short of the technical and athletic profile of the top sides in world football, and those that are a good fit (i.e. Martinez and Shaw, to name a couple) have been injured all season and replaced by not only inferior players but also players completely unable to fulfil a role in this system.

That's my two cents. Get the structure right (in progress), I hope they can rectify the biggest issue for Manchester Utd - the recruitment. Give the manager the chance to make this system click with players who are actually capable of playing that style; then, we can analyse if the style itself is the problem. There's all this talk at the moment of INEOS interviewing a manager who gets what Manchester Utd is about, is willing to follow the club's game model, be progressive on the pitch and fulfil our identity of giving young players a chance. How many managers on the market actually tick as many of those boxes as Ten Hag? Thats why I'm firmly behind giving him a final chance to prove he's the man.

This is fair but isn't the issue with Ten Hag that we've been repeatedly watching his system fail regardless of which players we field?

Off the back of a 2nd full pre-season with his choice fully fit 11, we watched Wolves repeatedly waltz through our midfield towards our goal and near enough every team has proceeded to do the same since, no matter who we've fielded. I don't know if the midfield trio has been born yet that can cover the amount of space that he seems willing to give up.

2 pre-seasons and four transfer windows later we know what his style is, but he's shown weekly that it doesn't work and that he's not willing to deviate from it.

 

[Roboc7]

And there's every chance his head does roll. But there's a portion of fans here that are ignoring the wider context and attributing blame to the manager when the finger could and should be pointed elsewhere.

The context does not impact the fact that his management has been really poor this season, irrespective of injuries and everything else his decision to just repeat the same tactics and set up when it clearly didn’t work was nonsense.

Even with average management we’d have qualified for Europa at least this season and the focus would be a lot more on other factors. He has been so bad that he’s made himself a problem and brought all this on himself, people just shrug their shoulders and say no one can do better but reality is they can.

 

[hobbers]

Two 8th placed finishes for Arteta, who looked out of his depth, and for the vast majority on this board, we thought he would be sacked. If that was Utd, I can guarantee you we would have some of the same posters crying about lack of standards and the rest. For Klopp, his initial period at Liverpool was quite linear; he looked to be getting the team better season after season. However, he still took a long time to find the balance; at first, he couldn't seem to stop his team from conceding chances/goals. He also wouldn't have planned to have two seasons where injuries completely derailed them and they ended up out the top four. Thats not progression, the only difference is Klopp had enough goodwill to ensure he survived them.

I'm so sick of this misrepresentation of Arteta's start. How many times is it going to have to be corrected in this thread? 50 times? 500? It's not difficult to go and look back at 19/20-21/22 seasons and see Arsenal's progression under Arteta.

He had his roughest period in the first 4 months of his first full season, when he was less than 12 months into the job, and when he'd just won the FA cup, which bought him enough good will to survive it. He also only made 2 significant signings in his first summer, and of those Partey only started playing at the end of October, with Arteta's rocky spell peaking 1 month later.

They turned it around after Christmas and he still ended up improving on the prior half-season by no. wins, goal difference and points. Then in his second full season they again improve by all these metrics and finish 5th.

So he started in a far worse position than ETH, a much lower baseline, spent a lot less money (less than half) in his first 2 seasons, and improved incrementally.

 

[TrustInJanuzaj]

If we spend 200-300m this season, that would put the spending to 600-700m. That's enough to make a title-challenging team even if you start without any player at all, providing that the decision makers and the manager know what they are doing.

I wouldn't focus on the costs. Football prices have gone crazy, and frankly, it doesn't really help. It's kind of irrelevant how much we have spent thus far because, as we have established, the decision-makers in the past decade have been hugely underqualified. What matters is getting it right from here on out because, make no mistake, this team and club are going nowhere (under any managers) unless we sort our shite out on that front. The reality of the situation is that we still need 7/8 new players for the first-team and first-team squad. As for what that costs, who knows and frankly, who cares, providing they actually get it right this time?

 

[TrustInJanuzaj]

Here's a recent example https://www.redcafe.net/threads/eri...united-manager.470032/page-2562#post-31939723 There's some more suggestions in the thread if you go over it, completely playing down the expectations of what a Man Utd manager is supposed to achieve.

He's not wrong, though. A second-place finish in isolation is irrelevant if we aren't actually getting any closer to truly competing. Would you rather finish 8th, 8th and then 1st or 4th, 3rd, and, then second? Progression isn't always linear.

 

[stevoc]

Don't even think it's close. At least Liverpool fans in general were deluded about their entire club.

Manchester United fans for the most part hate everything about their own club bar the manager

They despise the players, they hate most of the footballing staff (apart from the manager) and even the non-footballing staff have come under fire recently.

Sadly that's the natural consequence of revering the manager more than they deserve. Because obviously the manager isn't the problem.

I genuinely don't know if there's another fanbase where large sections of it despise most of their own players. Every time we have a bad season we need to gut the entire squad again.

It's odd.

 

[NLunited]

It‘s been hard this season to figure out what was going on with the new strategy and injuries disrupting progress.

I‘m mystified how Amrabat suddenly looks like the player we thought we were getting, and couldn‘t give us those performances earlier in the season. In this form, we should keep him.

People aren‘t overestimating the impact Martinez has in our defense; against Newcastle he showed why we missed him when he came on.

Our young players are promising but not ready to carry the team.

Without the disruption of too many injuries, we would have scraped top four. Scraped, because at full strength we don‘t have a squad strong enough to compete with the top three.

Considering both seasons I think we could continue with Ten Hag and improve the squad and our game. It is a gamble either way.

 

[UnofficialDevil]

I'm so sick of this misrepresentation of Arteta's start. How many times is it going to have to be corrected in this thread? 50 times? 500? It's not difficult to go and look back at 19/20-21/22 seasons and see Arsenal's progression under Arteta.

He had his roughest period in the first 4 months of his first full season, when he was less than 12 months into the job, and when he'd just won the FA cup, which bought him enough good will to survive it. He also only made 2 significant signings in his first summer, and of those Partey only started playing at the end of October, with Arteta's rocky spell peaking 1 month later.

They turned it around after Christmas and he still ended up improving on the prior half-season by no. wins, goal difference and points. Then in his second full season they again improve by all these metrics and finish 5th.

So he started in a far worse position than ETH, a much lower baseline, spent a lot less money (less than half) in his first 2 seasons, and improved incrementally.

This post should be pinned to the thread, I'm also sick and tired of the sillly Arteta comparison

 

[Iker Quesadillas]

For Klopp, his initial period at Liverpool was quite linear; he looked to be getting the team better season after season. However, he still took a long time to find the balance; at first, he couldn't seem to stop his team from conceding chances/goals. He also wouldn't have planned to have two seasons where injuries completely derailed them and they ended up out the top four. Thats not progression, the only difference is Klopp had enough goodwill to ensure he survived them.

That didn't happen. They only dropped out of the top four last season.
The season after the PL title was not great and injuries were a problem, but a wobble was expected after 2+ seasons with 90something points. They finished 3rd and made it to CL QFs.

 

[Revan]

I wouldn't focus on the costs. Football prices have gone crazy, and frankly, it doesn't really help. It's kind of irrelevant how much we have spent thus far because, as we have established, the decision-makers in the past decade have been hugely underqualified. What matters is getting it right from here on out because, make no mistake, this team and club are going nowhere (under any managers) unless we sort our shite out on that front. The reality of the situation is that we still need 7/8 new players for the first-team and first-team squad. As for what that costs, who knows and frankly, who cares, providing they actually get it right this time?

I do not disagree with that, but that is primarily cause we fecked up in both recruiting and manager.

Throw 600-700m to any random EPL team, recruit wisely and have a good manager, and in 2-3 years it should be easily able to challenge. That was the plan with EtH, the problem is that we outsorced recruiting to him too, and he showed to be an awful manager.

I do not think in any circumstances he should get a blank state and pretend that everything starts now from scratch. That would be madness even for our own (lack of) standards.

 

[stevoc]

This season wasn't a free hit, it still counts. Going into his 3rd season, we should be challenging for the title. He's already failed to deliver what you'd want and expect from a second season, if he is lucky enough to get another, the expectations should be high, he's got a lot to make up from this years mess.

That's not on Erik's radar, he came in talking about ending eras.

But only a few weeks ago he said with the right signings and some luck, we could, maybe challenge for 4th next season.

 

[NLunited]

Sadly that's the natural consequence of revering the manager more than they deserve. Because obviously the manager isn't the problem.

I genuinely don't know if there's another fanbase where large sections of it despise most of their own players. Every time we have a bad season we need to gut the entire squad again.

It's odd.

Bollocks. The players that are ‚hated‘ are the ones that don‘t perform like Rashford, who should work harder. Or Sancho, who hasn‘t performed for us and shown a bad attitude.

MU fans are more fair and supportive than most.

We need to gut the squad because we need to gut the squad.

 

[stevoc]

The trouble is, this isn't high expectations; it's delusions. Do you truly believe even with signings this squad is anywhere near the pace? Some of that is partially down to Ten Hag, but a far bigger issue, are the legacy players left by previous managers. I just think this line of 'expectations' builds everyone up for disappointment. Better to be realistic and just demand progress next season.

Circa 2022 what were your expectations for year 3 of the Ten Hag era?

 

[TrustInJanuzaj]

They've been generally quite well known players and then they added some big transfers this season in the hope to push them to the title.

Re Arsenal - I don't know if anyone on here believes in blind faith but context is also important. Arteta's team is almost exclusively his own signings, Saka and Saliba (arguably their two best players alongside Odegaard and Rice) were there already but otherwise the entire 1st team and essentially all the subs are Edu's choices that I assume he will give the 'ok' to. We don't have that setup, recruitment has been a joke for a decade.

Re ETH and what he does - I'm happy to give my thoughts. I do think, as ever in these types of scenarios, the pendulum of rationality has long swung into absurdity with how people are talking about ETH, like he's a random bloke from down the pub who chanced upon the managerial role at United. I'll break it into 2 seasons because he's had two very different years with us.

1st season. All round results were very good considering what we'd come from. 3rd, 75 points, good defense with a less potent attack. We won a cup, lost in the final of another and stylistically we knew it wasn't what he planned to do, but then he essentially inherited a counter attacking team made up of Mou/Ole signings. Licha was excellent, malacia good for the price, Case was great that first season, even Antony did well in his limited way by making us incredibly hard to get at down that side.

2nd season. It's worth saying here how previous coaches made a song and dance about wanting to move to this system but never doing it, either because they couldn't or wouldn't risk it. You could hire any half decent coach, fund them as our managers have been funded and play counter attack and probably hover around 6th-3rd but we wouldn't win anything major. The fact ETH is trying to do it and move us, about 10 years too late, to the single DM is a positive for me, despite how awful watching the non existent midfield setup we have has been. Injuries have been a joke, people seem to be tired of hearing about it but all teams have tanked with key injuries, ours have just been all across the defence and then people ask why are we conceding so many chances and why is Onana having to make so many saves...in part because we've gone to the single DM (which doesn't really work with a 10 in the way we play), in part because our core is slow, mostly old players but mostly because we've basically had a different back four every game. It's been atrocious to watch at times make no mistake but since Hojlund returned there have been a lot more goals and lot more influence from Bruno so something has clicked in the offensive unit, the issue is our defensive injuries have been a joke.

2 points I think many posters deliberately ignore on ETH. Youth development. I can't tell you how excited I was when Ole gave the press conference the summer after he was made permanent to say the recruitment was changing and young, hungry players were now how he would build the team. He ended up signing guys like Cavani, Ronaldo, Varane.. ETH's single older signing was Case who wasn't his choice, the rest are all younger players who need to be coached/developed. Are we so used to the awful style of recruitment we complained for so long about, we have forgotten than a 21 year old Hojlund likely won't perform at the same level as Ibra or Cavani (I think he's actually outperformed Cavani now I think about it)? Point being he actually wants to work with these younger players which is something that is important and Dalot looks the best he's looked, Mainoo I think is being managed well, Garnacho has improved massively off the ball, Hojlund is improving and really it's only Amad people are bummed about, and he is coming off a serious knee injury so is the club not right to be quite cautious with him.

The other part, which really is the most important, is you can't really doubt his knock out credentials. It's not chance that the 3 experienced CL level managers we've hired (LVG, Mou, ETH) all won cups and domestically he's been quietly good there. Caraboa win and back to back FA cup finals, I can't see us winning vs City but no other manager post SAF has done what he's done; Top 4 and a cup in a season. If we somehow beat City he'll also be the first with back to back cups.

I do think injuries have been a big factor and the real red flags for me are how he thought Mount would work, I remember having a long argument with someone on here about how every team would simply run straight through a midfield that Case/Mount/Bruno, and obviously Antony. But if Ineos are now taking transfer input away from him, that issue is gone, and I think back to games where I think we've looked good - think of Bayern before the Onana howler for example, we looked like a genuinely top class team, and there is something there when we have most of the squad and players shut out the noise/do their jobs on the field.

I have said many times I suspect he will be moved on in the summer, this is a results based business and we will inevitably lose the final to a much better team than us and the season will have been below the standards most expected. But I don't see many standout candidates to come in and really change things. Plus it irks me that it seems many players have an issue with a manager finally holding them accountable for fitness work (which contrary to the caf myth about us playing like a basketball team, we run less distance and sprint less than other teams, we're about 10th overall in the Sky article) which we've lagged behind others on for so long.

In summary, I think there are/were a lot of positives but they were drowned out by the shitshow this season.

Great post and it summarises my feelings well. Like you, I think Ten Hag will probably be shown the door at the season's end, and I also agree that he can't really have anyone to blame because the results just haven't been good enough. One thing you have to say, though, is he has been incredibly brave as Manchester Utd manager, and that's something I don't think any of our previous managers have been. He has been brave to trust in young players over more experienced heads, and he's been brave to try and implement his vision of a more attacking team before all the pieces are in play. That's why, with the other options on the table, I think it would be quite bold of INEOS to go against the crowd and give him another season.

 

[Chumpsbechumps]

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/54...d-injury-analysis/?source=user_shared_articleManchester United’s issues with injuries in 2023-24: How bad is the problem?

Interesting piece. Overall we’ve had the world issues this season in most of the metrics in that report.

I’d love to see probable starting 11s lost to injuries stats.

Spurs , who many quoted as having it as bad as us at times, don’t come close to United.

klopp was whining a bit about injuries but they’ve been grand in that table. Funny how the media parroted Klopp and regularly talked about pool injuries in a empathetic way and as an excuse for ETH.

Arsenal , Liverpool , spurs , Newcastle and Vila all have far less defensive partnership changes. In fact they are all in the top teams with least amount of defensive changes. Cities were more rotational than anything else. Suggests having a consistent defence is imperative.

 

[stevoc]

Bollocks. The players that are ‚hated‘ are the ones that don‘t perform like Rashford, who should work harder. Or Sancho, who hasn‘t performed for us and shown a bad attitude.

MU fans are more fair and supportive than most.

We need to gut the squad because we need to gut the squad.

What's bollocks exactly?

Which players are hated and which aren't then? Can you make two lists?

 

[TrustInJanuzaj]

I'm so sick of this misrepresentation of Arteta's start. How many times is it going to have to be corrected in this thread? 50 times? 500? It's not difficult to go and look back at 19/20-21/22 seasons and see Arsenal's progression under Arteta.

He had his roughest period in the first 4 months of his first full season, when he was less than 12 months into the job, and when he'd just won the FA cup, which bought him enough good will to survive it. He also only made 2 significant signings in his first summer, and of those Partey only started playing at the end of October, with Arteta's rocky spell peaking 1 month later.

They turned it around after Christmas and he still ended up improving on the prior half-season by no. wins, goal difference and points. Then in his second full season they again improve by all these metrics and finish 5th.

So he started in a far worse position than ETH, a much lower baseline, spent a lot less money (less than half) in his first 2 seasons, and improved incrementally.

I completely disagree with that. This United job is easily the hardest job in world football currently. The quality of the team is so far below the fans' expectations.

 

[Revan]

Great post and it summarises my feelings well. Like you, I think Ten Hag will probably be shown the door at the season's end, and I also agree that he can't really have anyone to blame because the results just haven't been good enough. One thing you have to say, though, is he has been incredibly brave as Manchester Utd manager, and that's something I don't think any of our previous managers have been. He has been brave to trust in young players over more experienced heads, and he's been brave to try and implement his vision of a more attacking team before all the pieces are in play. That's why, with the other options on the table, I think it would be quite bold of INEOS to go against the crowd and give him another season.

Garnacho and Mainoo. He trusted 2 young players. Such bravery.

Ole trusted Greenwood and Williams. Mourinho trusted Pereira and McTominay. LvG trusted Rashford and threw a bunch of random young players.

There is hardly any difference between EtH and our previous managers in this aspect. Except LVG who actually trusted kids for real.

A better question is, why he persisted playing Antony when he had Amad? Actually, why we needed Antony in the first place when we had a young players there in Sancho and 2 promising young players in Amad and Nacho.

 

[Iker Quesadillas]

This post should be pinned to the thread, I'm also sick and tired of the sillly Arteta comparison

The Arteta comparison is seriously weakened by the fact that he came in after Emery.

Since leaving Arsenal, Emery has done a solid job at Villareal and a solid job at Aston Villa. He's clearly a good manager.

How is the lesson supposed to be "sacking a good manager when things are going poorly is bad" when that's literally what Arsenal did?

 

[NLunited]

What's bollocks exactly?

Which players are hated and which aren't then? Can you make two lists?

You want me to back up your own statement?

I think the players aren‘t ‚hated‘ by the fans except for the ones I mentioned.

 

[Revan]

I completely disagree with that. This United job is easily the hardest job in world football currently. The quality of the team is so far below the fans' expectations.

I find this funny.

The fact that EtH is still our manager shows best how easy this job is. You can underperform in everything, fall short of any target, and still be in job.

As I said many times, there isn't an easier job in football than being United manager. You can miserably fail and still applauded, probably get a new contract in process.

If EtH performed like this for a genuinely big club, I would have feared for his life. But he still gets treated as a hero at Old Trafford.

 

[JPRouve]

I'm so sick of this misrepresentation of Arteta's start. How many times is it going to have to be corrected in this thread? 50 times? 500? It's not difficult to go and look back at 19/20-21/22 seasons and see Arsenal's progression under Arteta.

He had his roughest period in the first 4 months of his first full season, when he was less than 12 months into the job, and when he'd just won the FA cup, which bought him enough good will to survive it. He also only made 2 significant signings in his first summer, and of those Partey only started playing at the end of October, with Arteta's rocky spell peaking 1 month later.

They turned it around after Christmas and he still ended up improving on the prior half-season by no. wins, goal difference and points. Then in his second full season they again improve by all these metrics and finish 5th.

So he started in a far worse position than ETH, a much lower baseline, spent a lot less money (less than half) in his first 2 seasons, and improved incrementally.

It's a lost cause, I made that point several times and the goalpost is just moved or reality is ignored.

 

[Atheist]

He's not wrong, though. A second-place finish in isolation is irrelevant if we aren't actually getting any closer to truly competing. Would you rather finish 8th, 8th and then 1st or 4th, 3rd, and, then second? Progression isn't always linear.

So the insinuation is that we’re more likely to finish 1st if we finished 8th in a season as opposed to 2nd or 3rd (or even 5th)? In that scenario, would you accept getting relegated if it means we come back up and win the title in 2 seasons? I mean it causes pain but presumably that could be worth it for the supposedly long-term transition/vision of Ten Hag.

 

[TrustInJanuzaj]

Garnacho and Mainoo. He trusted 2 young players. Such bravery.

Ole trusted Greenwood and Williams. Mourinho trusted Pereira and McTominay. LvG trusted Rashford and threw a bunch of random young players.

There is hardly any difference between EtH and our previous managers in this aspect.

A better question is, why he persisted playing Antony when he had Amad? Actually, why we needed Antony in the first place when we had a young players there in Sancho and 2 promising young players in Amad and Nacho.

Because Amad was injured half a season, Antony cost £82 million, and Ten Hag has managed him before. I'd have liked to have seen Amad play more in the last few months, but it's pure revisionism to pretend he should have been a bonafide starter all season long. Antony has been a massive disappointment, but again it's not surprising that he's getting some minutes, considering his transfer fee and and the potential the club clearly saw in him. Ten Hag has actively gone out to sign a player like Hojland, who, by his own admission, is not the finished article, rather than targeting a player in their prime. That's literally the complete opposite of what Mourinho would have done. Why can't people just give credit where it's due and criticism where it's due rather than trying to portray everything as if it's the worst thing ever?

 

[Gehrman]

When a manager gets sacked we still feel bad even if it's the right decision. It's like blowing a puppy's face off with a shotgun. I mean, sure, it's normally really easy to do but imagine if that puppy gave you a speech moments beforehand about begging teams to win and saying 'heuh?", whilst sounding more and more like an extra in District 9 as he went on? I don't know about you but I'd take a few extra seconds before finally splashing that little doggos brains against the barn wall.

Bascially what I'm trying to say is that we're too nice.

I like your analogy.

 

[TrustInJanuzaj]

I'm so sick of this misrepresentation of Arteta's start. How many times is it going to have to be corrected in this thread? 50 times? 500? It's not difficult to go and look back at 19/20-21/22 seasons and see Arsenal's progression under Arteta.

He had his roughest period in the first 4 months of his first full season, when he was less than 12 months into the job, and when he'd just won the FA cup, which bought him enough good will to survive it. He also only made 2 significant signings in his first summer, and of those Partey only started playing at the end of October, with Arteta's rocky spell peaking 1 month later.

They turned it around after Christmas and he still ended up improving on the prior half-season by no. wins, goal difference and points. Then in his second full season they again improve by all these metrics and finish 5th.

So he started in a far worse position than ETH, a much lower baseline, spent a lot less money (less than half) in his first 2 seasons, and improved incrementally.

So hand on heart, you foresaw Arteta doing what he's done now? If you did fair play, but I was one of many Utd fans begging Arsenal to keep him, and there was a vast majority of Arsenal fans who would have happily seen him walk. I'm absolutely not misrepresenting those facts; his progression was far from linear, which was the whole point. They made strides very quickly when it was expected to take a significantly longer period.

 

[TsuWave]

He's not wrong, though. A second-place finish in isolation is irrelevant if we aren't actually getting any closer to truly competing. Would you rather finish 8th, 8th and then 1st or 4th, 3rd, and, then second? Progression isn't always linear.

Is this an argument in favour of keeping Ten Hag?

Just want to be sure because - “Would you rather finish 8th, 8th and then 1st or 4th, 3rd and then second?” followed by “progression isn’t always linear”; framed as the aforementioned would be crazy.

 

[stevoc]

You want me to back up your own statement?

I think the players aren‘t ‚hated‘ by the fans except for the ones I mentioned.

No yours obviously, you said I'm talking bollocks. If that's the case then I assumed you'd have no problem explaining why and providing the lists of which players are hated and which are not. As you must have the definitive knowledge of these things.

 

[hobbers]

So hand on heart, you foresaw Arteta doing what he's done now? If you did fair play, but I was one of many Utd fans begging Arsenal to keep him, and there was a vast majority of Arsenal fans who would have happily seen him walk. I'm absolutely not misrepresenting those facts; his progression was far from linear, which was the whole point. They made strides very quickly when it was expected to take a significantly longer period.

What I foresaw Arteta doing is surely irrelevant. He kept his job because he met performance milestones and goals on each step of the way. Progression was consistent and only in one direction, never took a giant step backwards. He didn't go from 3rd to 8th or from +15 GD to -3.

Klopp's first 4 seasons had similar progression.

Both also had an identifiable style of play that was easy on the eye. Opposite to the hideous "best transition team in the world" football Ten Hag has us playing. The only reason neutrals enjoy watching our games is because they enjoy watching our unlikeable array of players getting absolutely battered for 90 minutes, concede 25 shots and usually lose or capitulate in a mortifying way.

 

[Revan]

Because Amad was injured half a season, Antony cost £82 million, and Ten Hag has managed him before. I'd have liked to have seen Amad play more in the last few months, but it's pure revisionism to pretend he should have been a bonafide starter all season long. Antony has been a massive disappointment, but again it's not surprising that he's getting some minutes, considering his transfer fee and and the potential the club clearly saw in him. Ten Hag has actively gone out to sign a player like Hojland, who, by his own admission, is not the finished article, rather than targeting a player in their prime. That's literally the complete opposite of what Mourinho would have done. Why can't people just give credit where it's due and criticism where it's due rather than trying to portray everything as if it's the worst thing ever?

How do you know?

Under Mourinho we signed quite a few of young players too. Lindelof was 23, Bailly was 22, Pogba was 23, Lukaku was 24, Dalot was 19.

I see no reason to give him credit for wasting close to 400m, making us significantly worse in the process.

 

[TrustInJanuzaj]

So the insinuation is that we’re more likely to finish 1st if we finished 8th in a season as opposed to 2nd or 3rd (or even 5th)? In that scenario, would you accept getting relegated if it means we come back up and win the title in 2 seasons? I mean it causes pain but presumably that could be worth it for the supposedly long-term transition/vision of Ten Hag.

No, but the point is it's about a long-term commitment to reaching that level. Its not once size fits all. Here's the facts as I see them.
- Ten Hag inherited a terrible squad unsuited to a progressive style of play.
- A progressive style of play has proven with irrefutable evidence to be the only consistent way to compete for top honours in the modern game.
- A commitment to that style was always likely to have significant growing pains considering the squad inherited, the shocking recruitment team above the manager (hopefully to change now) and the culture inherited.

Overall that then leaves us with two options. We either decide we are never going to be able to get to that level again. Okay, so under that approach, we are probably best getting a short-term pragmatic manager who can get the most out of our players under a largely negative counter-attacking style. We could probably expect to hover between 6th on a bad season and 2nd on a good season, hell we might even nick a title in an odd season, but there's likely to be no real long term possibility of continuous success.

Or, and this is the braver and more difficult option, we commit to trying to get back to the top and playing a proactive style that is a requirement for that success, knowing (as we do) that this team is 7/8 players short (at least) of reaching that goal. We are also aware that while we bed in that proactive style, the team will suffer badly with short-term results and inconsistencies largely because the current personal are either not good enough or completely unsuited to that style of play. We have taken option B, and we have to see it through because if we don't, we just won't stand a chance of regularly competing for top honours. Now I don't for one second think Ten Hag is the only manager in the world who can commit to that, but of the available options out there right now, I'm just not convinced there's many that tick as many boxes for Utd.

 

[Revan]

So hand on heart, you foresaw Arteta doing what he's done now? If you did fair play, but I was one of many Utd fans begging Arsenal to keep him, and there was a vast majority of Arsenal fans who would have happily seen him walk. I'm absolutely not misrepresenting those facts; his progression was far from linear, which was the whole point. They made strides very quickly when it was expected to take a significantly longer period.

Why on Earth people insist on this? Here is a graph:

x-asis is the year, y-axis number of points.

Except in the fourth year when there was a massive jump, he basically improved over each season with almost the same amount of points.

Year 1 to 2: +5 points
Year 2 to 3: +8 points
Year 3 to 4: +15 points
Year 4 to 5: +5 points (assuming he wins the match this weekend).

That is very close to linear.

Now, see the Arteta vs EtH graph:

Do you see the similarities between them? No, you do not. Because there aren't any.

NB: You get a similar picture in goals scored, goal difference etc.

 

[VP89]

I don't see why if Ratcliffe and Ineos for some reason decide to keep him on then it wouldn't be unreasonable for them to expect more from a guy in his 3rd season than a new manager in their first.

If the slates being wiped completely clean then there's probably not much benefit to retaining Ten Hag as opposed to hiring a younger coach more suited the the play style and philosophy they want to implement.

As this season as shown Ten Hag has a very particular setup he wants to use. No guarantee that matches what the road the new owners want to go down.

Ten Hag has multiple set ups, shown by the teams he's managed and how they've evolved. I agree this one us probably an example of "how to be open and lose a lot of games" though

But I think the point from my side is that he's adaptable to different styles, and this broken style is steps toward a model that was aligned with Murtough (fast counter transition whatever bullshit).

The Berrada and Wilcox model may be possession focused who knows. If it is, he's got pedigree in implementing that style from Ajax. Whether that can be translated to United is another question, but I don't think he's been trying to do that up until he's told otherwise.

 

[Dec9003]

So hand on heart, you foresaw Arteta doing what he's done now? If you did fair play, but I was one of many Utd fans begging Arsenal to keep him, and there was a vast majority of Arsenal fans who would have happily seen him walk. I'm absolutely not misrepresenting those facts; his progression was far from linear, which was the whole point. They made strides very quickly when it was expected to take a significantly longer period.

Arsenals progress under Arteta has been linear though. They’ve been better each season since he started, and have got more points and/or a better position in the league each season. Arteta hasn’t had a season like we’ve just had where we went backwards, probably because they didn’t have the initial good season until the foundations had been put in place by the manager and DOF.