- Joined
- Mar 27, 2021
- Messages
- 3,388
We really need to win this game
In a way it is perfect because it will take pressure off of him. Having difficult start to season means he will likely not be judged adversely for picking up few points because there will be understanding that it’s largely driven by fixture difficult. Eg if we are sitting on 6-7 points from these 6 games he won’t be at risk. Having easy start would be more tricky and would have come at a greater pressure.Those first 6 fixtures are very hard if we go by last seasons standards. If there is no improvement the pressure will be so huge.
How many shots will we concede in those first 6 games?
It's what he has played for the vast majority of his coaching career and a huge reason we hired him in the first place.This isn't going to help without having a front-foot possession football coach though, right?
That’s why I keep saying that we need take a cue from Arsenal and focus on 25 and under players, as it’s a long term project and expensive older players will not benefit us much. You can’t sign a Casmeiro and expect him to play this way - he’s never done it, he’s not young enough to change and moreover he’s never really been the kind of midfielder we needed anyway (helping us control games).
How many shots will we concede in those first 6 games?
Understandable too I suppose as that’s partly what some people see a forum for. There’s just a lot of negativity, unnecessarily I feel, at times. Then it breeds.Far too reasonable that. A lot of people would rather come in here to just blow of steam.
Agreed. He even said he had to play a more direct style with us.Indeed, because it definitely didn't seem like Ten Hag was trying to implement possession based football.
TrueOn balance I'd have been fine with sacking or keeping ETH. But I think what has tilted me (and probably INEOS) to be satisfied with ETH staying on is his ability to bed in and improve young players. A constant complaint post-Fergie is how most of our players seem to deteriorate even if they've had a breakout year.
It's certainly a huge financial incentive for INEOS.
Depends. Are we going to address the midfield and defence? Will shaw be back fit, martinez? If so, it might not be as bad as previous.
I agree with you but we have to remember, they are new owners and are trying to undo alot of wrongs.
Like you mention, things will change once the structure is in place, so why not wait till the structure is in place before we make big decisions on the manager?
They clearly went to various managers to sound them out and were not convinced with any of them, so do you think its worth sacking Ten Hag, paying him off and hire someone the hierarchy is not convinced with?
Or, we can keep Ten Hag, get structure sorted, identify how to move forward and let Berrada and Ashworth identify the type of manager, if Ten Hag doesn't do well, they will sack him.
But the French league and winning the Bundesliga with Bayern barely scrapping by is of great value to you?
You don't need to come and outright say it for me to understand where you're coming from. It's obvious that your idea is the Chelsea approach - sack any manager that fails and repeat this process ad infinitum.
The reason why I criticized Tuchel is because aside from the CL I mentioned... he has done nothing noteworthy in football that would prompt me to sack ETH for him. For what reason? Your logic is that we sack ETH to get someone whose coming from an arguably worse season than ETH, finishing third with Bayern and failing to win zero trophies. There is no logic in that except let's just blindly play whack-a-mole and see what hits. You're not in favor of sacking ETH because you have some plan for this club and where you want it to go, you're in favor because you just want ETH gone.
Am I? When Klopp left Dortmund they finished 9th after a disastrous season. His stock wasn't at an all time highest and many people were saying he was gonna flop in England.
This is a meaningless stat.
The kamikaze ball seemed to have the backing of Murtough - he's gone now. I don't think Wilcox and co. are going to tolerate more of the same.
Whatever you think of Ten Hag, he's still a good coach and capable of drilling a team to play different styles. The problem isn't ability or know how it's stubbornness. He needs to show he can be flexible if he wants to keep his job.
Neither of them gets a pass. ETH had a good first season mostly because Rashford had an amazing one. And that would be fine if ETH could keep Rashford performing, but since Rashford was absolutelly terrible and in total had 1 good season in 3, that doesn't seem like a good bet for us.I agree with you on Sancho.
But Rashford gets a pass for me if ETH gets a pass. They both did decently last season and then stunk up the place the next.
And yet we have seen zero elements of possession based football last season. In fact, totally opposite, vertical, very direct football. What is more relevant? Eric's last two years in England or whatever image we have of his teams from the past?It's what he has played for the vast majority of his coaching career and a huge reason we hired him in the first place.
Based on what? The only difference between him and Ole is ETH has a "reputation" of being a good coach based on the "stories" we have from Ajax, but you can't really say that based on his United days.The kamikaze ball seemed to have the backing of Murtough - he's gone now. I don't think Wilcox and co. are going to tolerate more of the same.
Whatever you think of Ten Hag, he's still a good coach and capable of drilling a team to play different styles. The problem isn't ability or know how it's stubbornness. He needs to show he can be flexible if he wants to keep his job.
I personally thought we largely played good football in his 1st season, Ronaldo tantrums and Rashford goals aside. The media clearly thought so too, and it's a big reason why many were anticipating his 2nd season - yet were left perplexed with his tactics and management as early as pre-season.Neither of them gets a pass. ETH had a good first season mostly because Rashford had an amazing one. And that would be fine if ETH could keep Rashford performing, but since Rashford was absolutelly terrible and in total had 1 good season in 3, that doesn't seem like a good bet for us.
And yet we have seen zero elements of possession based football last season. In fact, totally opposite, vertical, very direct football. What is more relevant? Eric's last two years in England or whatever image we have of his teams from the past?
Based on what? The only difference between him and Ole is ETH has a "reputation" of being a good coach based on the "stories" we have from Ajax, but you can't really say that based on his United days.
As early as second half of his first season actually, Sabitzer was the first "second #10" he used and that's clearly what he was trying to implement for second part of 22/23 and entire 23/24 campaign.I personally thought we largely played good football in his 1st season, Ronaldo tantrums and Rashford goals aside. The media clearly thought so too, and it's a big reason why many were anticipating his 2nd season - yet were left perplexed with his tactics and management as early as pre-season.
It's less pathetic than banning a word to control the discourse.What's pathetic is so-called adults calling each other cultists because of their opinions on the manager. It's incredibly juvenile.
And yet we have seen zero elements of possession based football last season. In fact, totally opposite, vertical, very direct football. What is more relevant? Eric's last two years in England or whatever image we have of his teams from the past?
So you want to replace ETH with managers you consider in the same tier... in order to start a rebuild all over again? Make it make sense. As far as league standings go, the French and German leagues might be richer, but they are not more competitive, so your argument is bonkers. Winning a title with Ajax is much, much harder (even though they are generally speaking the club with most resources in the division) than winning a title with PSG or Bayern in their respective leagues. Come on, at least you have to admit that if not anything else.I didn’t say nor imply this. In fact, one of the things I said to you was that Ten Hag is very much in the same tier of managers we were reportedly in discussions to replace him with. I don't get why you choose to argue against non-existent positions. If you just want to have a convo with yourself you can just post without quoting other people.
But for clarification, yes, both the Bundesliga and French league are higher in my estimation than the Eredivisie
Is he underperforming? 2 trophies in 2 seasons in 3 finals in a club that hasn't won a trophy in 8 years prior to that. Top 3rd finish in the first season, granted disappointing second season but with a heck of a lot problems that were out of ETH's hand. Furthermore I'm not dismissive of Tuchel's CL, I just argue that that is his only real accomplishment in football and putting our faith blindly in a manager that has a record of generally not winning trophies and leaving his clubs in ablaze in 2 seasons at best is just not a good idea. As I said, do you really want a Mourinho 2.0 with not even half of his accomplishments? Might as well just go for Conte if that's the case, he's way more accomplished than Tuchel, and ETH as well.I evidently do as you concocted "you want instant glory" out of thin air. When, again, there's a lot of space between "instant glory" and "worst prem campaign ever". But yes, I do think underperforming managers, like anyone else, should be sacked - not that this is in anyway relevant to our conversation, which was about you being dismissive regarding Tuchel's CL and trying to prop up Ten Hag with "two trophies"
What goalposts am I moving exactly? You seem to just indulge in non-arguments constantly, afraid of admitting you're wrong. I'm gonna say this for the 99th time. The FA Cup and the league cup isn't the be all end all for our club, but it's a good start for a club that hasn't won shit in almost a decade prior. And I'm not judging ETH on the 2 cups, I'm judging him on his resume as a whole and the spectacular work he has done in 3 clubs prior to taking over United - Bayern II, Utrecht and Ajax. You say I'm dismissive of Tuchel's titles at PSG. Hell yeah I am. Has PSG stopped winning titles prior or after Tuchel? Nope. Has Ajax stopped winning titles prior or after ETH? Yes.Once you stop moving goals posts and pivoting, you'll see that my logic is - if one of the pillars of your criticisms for Tuchel is "the only noteworthy thing to his name is the CL he won with Chelsea... something any manager can do since it's a cup competition." You can't then turn around and say "2 trophies" for Ten Hag, as if we're not aware of what those trophies were. It's comical. Even more so when you compound it by holding Ten Hag in great esteem for his CV (presumably titles with Ajax) and then turn around and are dismissive of Tuchel's titles with PSG.
You randomly started talking about sackings, etc, when that's a moot conversation. Ten Hag is seemingly here to stay.
No, he wasn't. In fact people were even claiming he wouldn't hack it in the PL. His stock was absolutely not that high after his last season with Dortmund.By the time Klopp left Dortmund he was already one of the best managers in the world and much more accomplished than Ten Hag
You're the type of guy that watched Barcelona dominate Chelsea for 180 minutes and claims that Chelsea were the better team because they managed to nick a lucky goal with a scoreline of 1-0. No, stats don't paint the full picture, they never have and it's incredibly short-sighted to just rely on them. Again, our treble team won the league with 79 points. We've achieved much higher points since then but the only team I'd argue that could possibly be better is our 2007/2008 teamYou can ascribe whatever meaning you want to it. It is factual. It was our worst prem campaign ever and Ten Hag presided over it.
That's because the crop of managers nowadays isn't really all that decent. I mean just look at the names that have been reported for the United job. He's still upper tier manager, don't get me wrong, but he isn't the type I want managing United and least of all the type I would sack ETH for. If we are to sack ETH, we should be looking for young, progressive managers who can be employed preferably longer than 3 years and who don't leave every job kicking and screaming. Hell, McKenna as a manager is far more preferable to me and excites me more, but I think it's too early and I want to see a little more before taking such a huge gamble.No one is beyond criticism, it just seems you're taking it a bit far. Tuchel has been hired by PSG, Chelsea and Bayern Munich, that's hard to do with a weak CV. Chelsea hired him after he narrowly lost a CL final, and then he immediately took them to a CL final which they won. Are we to think that was a coincidence?
Yeah, as I said the behaviour of ‘Ten Hag out’ posters has been much more ‘cultish’. Every shred of info is dissected and turned on its head to blame the manager. I don’t want to name names.For feck sake, all you do is moan about how Ten Hag has had to endure VALID criticism after guiding us to an 8th place, negative goal difference season.
It was a shit season, with a bunch of injuries, poor tactics, poor leadership from Glazers/Ineos, and a poor transfers. I can see the nuance, not everything is ETH’s fault, of course not.
The most hilarious bit is someone in the Ten Hag in crew actually complained that their feelings were being hurt by the use of the word C U L T. That’s a fecking joke.
I mean, seriously, grown men getting their panties in a bunch because the word
C U L T was used to describe them?
It's less pathetic than banning a word to control the discourse.
We can do many things, but let's not pretend like any of those elements of control are incorporated in our style/setup to defend Ten Hag. Again, the fact someone tells me he used to play different football at Ajax means very little to me.For me the more relevant thing is the club he's at now and how it has played prior to him . His concern , is how to get from that to his ideal.
The logical way ( to me ) is to look at the players on board and assess how the team score goals . We are clearly a transition side, every oppo coach highlights this .
Do we have to completely disregard that , is it even wise to do so ? or is there a way to shorten the transitions? Instead of winning it on the edge of our box and releasing Rashford ( our favoured modus operandi ) is it possible to want to stop the oppo / win the ball higher and be closer to goal ? It's still a transition ? Klopps best Liverpool , did exactly that . Were they a possession side? Not strictly , but they played in the opponents half more than their own because they won the ball higher consistently .
Vertical / direct does not mean the intention is not to have more possession . Ten hags ajax were vertical , best klopp is vertical .
The evolution of deep transition to higher transition doesn't have to include some weird period of time ( lvg ) where we knock it around the middle aimlessly .. so we can say , aah look possession . That doesn't have to be any part of it .
We can become a more dominant side by focusing on making the area the oppo can play smaller .
As early as second half of his first season actually, Sabitzer was the first "second #10" he used and that's clearly what he was trying to implement for second part of 22/23 and entire 23/24 campaign.
The fact we played good football only in "first quarter" of his regime is a huge worry as it indicates it had little to do with his coaching, rather getting the right players together. All his ideas from last season prove he's a terrible, inflexible and stubborn coach.
It is not all or nothing. We have players for fast transitions, so always pressing high with a high back line would not benefit us.For me the more relevant thing is the club he's at now and how it has played prior to him . His concern , is how to get from that to his ideal.
The logical way ( to me ) is to look at the players on board and assess how the team score goals . We are clearly a transition side, every oppo coach highlights this .
Do we have to completely disregard that , is it even wise to do so ? or is there a way to shorten the transitions? Instead of winning it on the edge of our box and releasing Rashford ( our favoured modus operandi ) is it possible to want to stop the oppo / win the ball higher and be closer to goal ? It's still a transition ? Klopps best Liverpool , did exactly that . Were they a possession side? Not strictly , but they played in the opponents half more than their own because they won the ball higher consistently .
Vertical / direct does not mean the intention is not to have more possession . Ten hags ajax were vertical , best klopp is vertical .
The evolution of deep transition to higher transition doesn't have to include some weird period of time ( lvg ) where we knock it around the middle aimlessly .. so we can say , aah look possession . That doesn't have to be any part of it .
We can become a more dominant side by focusing on making the area the oppo can play smaller .
"It's literrally just a group of posters slagging of our manager...". Everything happens for a reason. Under ten Hag the club reached it's worst PL place, including several embarrassing results, degraded key players like Rashford, etc. What to like about him? Nothing. Seriously, this is Manchester United not Brentford.
No one is beyond criticism, it just seems you're taking it a bit far. Tuchel has been hired by PSG, Chelsea and Bayern Munich, that's hard to do with a weak CV. Chelsea hired him after he narrowly lost a CL final, and then he immediately took them to a CL final which they won. Are we to think that was a coincidence?
It's less pathetic than banning a word to control the discourse.
C’mon, you’re better than this…How can you tell a simpletonist from a c.ultist?
A simpletonist isn't busy pre-preparing a list of excuses in June for why the manager is allowed to fail again next season.
Yeah I thought it was clear last season that he's learning on the job. Hopefully he's learnt well otherwise we'll be in limbo come November.As early as second half of his first season actually, Sabitzer was the first "second #10" he used and that's clearly what he was trying to implement for second part of 22/23 and entire 23/24 campaign.
The fact we played good football only in "first quarter" of his regime is a huge worry as it indicates it had little to do with his coaching, rather getting the right players together. All his ideas from last season prove he's a terrible, inflexible and stubborn coach.
When EtH started at United it was very close to how United played (successfully) under Ole: Not exactly a low block, but a compact team in the middle of the pitch that was able to launch counter attacks or similar attacks from possession. By moving to a much higher press EtH reduced the space in behind of the oppositions defence - which is the space Rashford thrives when he can run into it. The changing tactics resulted in reducing the area of the pitch Rashford excels in, it's no wonder that Rashford's performances dropped.Degraded Rashford? ...mmm . Interesting take. Any Idea how he managed to do that?
You can say that after 5, maybe 10, maybe even 20 games of poor performances/results. But at some point where you see poor performances (forget results) week in week out for a full season, you have to call it what it is - just bad ideas or bad implementation.It's quite clear that he wants the team to play a certain way rather than maximize short term results. The fact that our players are not suite to his vision mean that we inevitably have to take our share of beatings in the meantime, but as Berrada, Ashworth and Wilcox will do whatever they can to bring him the players he needs to fulfil his vision at a higher level, performances will improve. I don't think he's the type of coach that will easily deviate from the path once taken, we are likely going to see same approach and tactics next year but hopefully with the players that can execute it better (hopefully picked by ETH or at least with his clear approval).
Another question is who actually benefited from that switch in our team? Can we agree on a single player that looks better in this new system?When EtH started at United it was very close to how United played (successfully) under Ole: Not exactly a low block, but a compact team in the middle of the pitch that was able to launch counter attacks or similar attacks from possession. By moving to a much higher press EtH reduced the space in behind of the oppositions defence - which is the space Rashford thrives when he can run into it. The changing tactics resulted in reducing the area of the pitch Rashford excels in, it's no wonder that Rashford's performances dropped.
This is a bit oversimplified and I don't think it's the only reason, but I do think that this tactical shift actively went against Rashford's strengths. If you like you can call that "degrading" him, from someone the tactics is optimized for to someone who just has to play a role in a system that isn't his best.
You can say that after 5, maybe 10, maybe even 20 games of poor performances/results. But at some point where you see poor performances (forget results) week in week out for a full season, you have to call it what it is - just bad ideas or bad implementation.
It's fine to use this excuse of "not having the players to fulfil his vision", but we are at a point that you need to be absolutely sure that his vision is the right one, otherwise we'll be wasting money for players that work in a system that is not effective in the first place. I have ZERO trust in Ten Hag vision after last season. The fact the review took so long also indicates that INEOS are not so convinced either, so it's very unlikely that ETH will get any saying in transfers. But if that is the case, why continuing with such a stubborn and inflexible manager?