Erik ten Hag | Currently unemployed

[VP89]

Whilst this may be true, can we refrain from using Sport Bible as a source?

 

[Sparky Rhiwabon]

It's press just trying to create drama till the formal announcement is made we have seen the same stuff several times with player transfers to United just sit back and relax .

Well, it depends how radical the demands are - say he wants a proper DOF instead of Murtough, would we cede to something like that?

 

[hellhunter]

Well, it depends how radical the demands are - say he wants a proper DOF instead of Murtough, would we cede to something like that?

Absolutely not, and neither should we. Where can you walk into a job and decide on your boss?

 

[JPRouve]

Well, it depends how radical the demands are - say he wants a proper DOF instead of Murtough, would we cede to something like that?

What makes Murtough not a proper DOF?

 

[Sparky Rhiwabon]

What makes Murtough not a proper DOF?

Doesn’t have DOF experience at comparable clubs?

 

[gajender]

Well, it depends how radical the demands are - say he wants a proper DOF instead of Murtough, would we cede to something like that?

He would be told to do one and rightly so but as I have said several times I am not buying this nonsense anyway .

 

[JPRouve]

Doesn’t have DOF experience at comparable clubs?

Which is fairly normal. Comparable clubs generally promote from within and successful DOFs don't really move much.

 

[gajender]

Doesn’t have DOF experience at comparable clubs?

And Does Ten Hag have the experience ? You are arguing for sake of it .

 

[Revaulx]

It seems like a mental block with him. He gives so many stupid passes or just mis hits random clearance dangerously, but is capable of good passes (especially kicking it out of his hands). He's never going to be a Neuer/Allison/Ederson, but the past few years he just makes some brain dead mishit passes that make it a lot worse.

All the improvements went out of the window when Jose arrived. He just wanted the ball hoofed as hard as possible; so what if it reached an opponent? Which it usually did.

I didn’t think our football under Jose was that bad to watch for the first season and a half, but De Gea’s hoofing made my blood boil.

 

[Sparky Rhiwabon]

And Does Ten Hag have the experience ? You are arguing for sake of it .

I’m just giving an example of what he could be demanding. A huge list of sporting demands doesn’t suggest he wants different colour cones.

 

[Tavern in the town]

Doesn’t have DOF experience at comparable clubs?

The only experience Michael Edwards had was as part of a failed regime under Comoli. He seems to be doing alright at Liverpool.

 

[L1nk]

I dont think any of it is bs, i think maybe exaggerated is the correct word. As an earlier poster said our reputation is not the best currently, Ten Hag would have not only seen himself, but been advised on the terrible footballing side of the club that’s been happening for years. I think he has every right to ask these questions as we’ve become a graveyard for managers and talented players. I just think he wants guarantees in the footballing side of the project and if things are changing now as they need to, and he wants to be a part of that seemingly

 

[gajender]

I’m just giving an example of what he could be demanding. A huge list of sporting demands doesn’t suggest he wants different colour cones.

I am just saying it's nonsense but we can just wait for few days .

 

[Tarrou]

I’m just giving an example of what he could be demanding. A huge list of sporting demands doesn’t suggest he wants different colour cones.

It's a done deal so all this talk of demands is likely the press filling the void until the announcement.

 

[phelans shorts]

I am just saying it's nonsense but we can just wait for few days .

There will be no announcement imminent as part of the agreement between the two clubs, to avoid derailing Ajax season. The only way this will change is if Ajax decide it’s in their interest to let it out for some grand farewell.

I fully suspect that it’s a done deal (or incredibly close) but we need to be realistic

 

[Adisa]

So the club shouldn't have a structure and should just follow whatever the head coach says?

The manager having all the power is exactly the structure we should be trying to move away from, that’s just not how successful modern clubs are run. The days of Fergie and Wenger making every single decision are done.

Of course we need structure. I am also against the coach having all the power. However, we have hired a coach with a specific way of playing football and we have some players we have paid a bit of money for who imo, might not fit into that way of playing. He should be given the licence to clear the decks and not being forced to shoehorn them into his system.

 

[Tarrou]

Of course we need structure. I am also against the coach having all the power. However, we have hired a coach with a specific way of playing football and we have some players we have paid a bit of money for who imo, might not fit into that way of playing. He should be given the licence to clear the decks and not being forced to shoehorn them into his system.

He's going to get plenty of freedom to clear the decks I am sure. He'll also have to 'make do' with some players he isn't perfectly happy with for a while.

But we can't give him full veto. A public company can't have one man solely making decisions with major financial implications, that is what boards are for.

 

[Cassidy]

He's going to get plenty of freedom to clear the decks I am sure. He'll also have to 'make do' with some players he isn't perfectly happy with for a while.

But we can't give him full veto. A public company can't have one man solely making decisions with major financial implications, that is what boards are for.

And thats why United is a commercial club and not a football one as LVG said

 

[hellhunter]

And thats why United is a commercial club and not a football one as LVG said

You think the manager at Bayern has full control? They're a football club, according to LVG, after all

 

[Cassidy]

You think the manager at Bayern has full control? They're a football club, according to LVG, after all

They wouldnt not sell a player because its has commercial implications as the poster was suggesting

If a player didn’t fit that they spent money on and the manager said they would get rid. Like Sanches

This club hoards players who are not good enough, alot who do not even play. Why?

 

[Tarrou]

And thats why United is a commercial club and not a football one as LVG said

It's a perfectly reasonable way to run a football club. We're primarily a commercial club because of the Glazers, really.

 

[hellhunter]

They wouldnt not sell a player because its has commercial implications as the poster was suggesting

Like letting go of Kroos and Alaba because of financial implications?

 

[MUFC OK]

If he was such a good Keeper he wouldn't be like the 10th choice GK for the Spanish NT. He only looks good because we currently have no identity and our defending is chaotic leading to us conceding tonnes of chances which suits his shot stopping. Once we're able to instill the basics of a possession based/high pressing game you'll see how much of a liability De Gea is if he hasn't been able to improve on other aspects(which he's been bad at since he joined us) besides shot stopping at 31 he never will they're things you either have or you don't

Another thing, we don’t win 50/50s not like he’s blindly giving it away all the time.

 

[gajender]

And thats why United is a commercial club and not a football one as LVG said

LVG is a bitter petty man who lacks self awareness and his big ego it seems can't come to terms with the fact he actually holds greater responsibility for his failure then anyone else at United .
And no Club worth it's salt should give complete veto to it's manager and United problem has been giving way too much powers to its Manager's rather than other way round .

 

[Cassidy]

Like letting go of Kroos and Alaba because of financial implications?

I said wouldn’t NOT sell a player
Every club has to maintain a wage structure

 

[United in sin]

I assume Bogard is in-charge of player's contracts?

He's an assistant coach

 

[Cassidy]

LVG is a bitter petty man who lacks self awareness and his big ego it seems can't come to terms with the fact he actually holds greater responsibility for his failure then anyone else at United .
And no Club worth it's salt should give complete veto to it's manager and United problem has been giving way too much powers to its Manager's rather than other way round .

Does not mean he wasn’t right. He was right about United that is clear.

Maybe things are different now. But if we force Ten Hag to keep players in the squad he doesn’t want for commercial reasons. We’re in big trouble, the dressing room is a mess for this reason

 

[JPRouve]

It's a perfectly reasonable way to run a football club. We're primarily a commercial club because of the Glazers, really.

It's not even a commercial thing. If you sell a player that is valuable from a football standpoint because the manager doesn't fancy him then his replacement better be worth the money that you swapped, otherwise you lost the value of the original player and have nothing to show for.

One could use De Bruyne being sidelined for Oscar, Chelsea effectively lost that swap. An other example could be Eto'o for Ibrahimovic.

 

[Cassidy]

It's not even a commercial thing. If you sell a player that is valuable from a football standpoint because the manager doesn't fancy him then his replacement better be worth the money that you swapped, otherwise you lost the value of the original player and have nothing to show for.

One could use De Bruyne being sidelined for Oscar, Chelsea effectively lost that swap. An other example could be Eto'o for Ibrahimovic.

That wouldn’t be for commercial reasons. If the club scouts believe the player is good enough and fits the clubs style thats a valid reason.

The poster clearly stated that some players may need to be kept for commercial reasons, or could not be sold due to commercial implications. That part is wrong (and clearly it is what we have been doing in the past).

If its for sporting reasons (club believes in the player fair)

If its purely commercial (club doesn't want to lose its investment in an expensive mistake) we’re going to have problems

 

[JPRouve]

That wouldn’t be for commercial reasons. If the club scouts believe the player is good enough and fits the clubs style thats a valid reason.

The poster clearly stated that some players may need to be kept for commercial reasons, or could not be sold due to commercial implications. That part is wrong (and clearly it is what we have been doing in the past).

If its for sporting reasons (club believes in the player fair)

If its purely commercial (club doesn't want to lose its investment in an expensive mistake) we’re going to have problems

Honestly I don't really see who suggested that it would be for commercial reasons. You mentioned it after @Tarrou talked about financial implications but no one else did.

 

[Cassidy]

Honestly I don't really see who suggested that it would be for commercial reasons. You mentioned it after @Tarrou talked about financial implications but no one else did.

Financial implications exactly. That is not sporting and purely commercial

 

[JPRouve]

Financial implications exactly. That is not sporting and purely commercial

Not really unless you think that the sporting side of Football is free. Players and coaches have to be paid and transfer fees financed.

 

[Cassidy]

Not really unless you think that the sporting side of Football is free. Players and coaches have to be paid and transfer fees financed.

If you decide to keep a player that does not fit with the club only due to financial implications. Then you devalue the asset you own.

It is clear you can separate sporting and financial even though they are linked.

Example. Why were Jones, Lingard, Pereira etc contracts renewed even when it was clear they were no longer useful playing members of the squad?

Purely financial because the club wanted to sell for a transfer fee. It didn’t instead it further devalued said players whilst keeping them on its books on inflated wages.

Purely from a sporting perspective said players would have left United at worst on a free years ago

 

[peridigm]

If the owners don’t give the new manager control over who stays and who comes in, they will fail. They can’t protect anyone from this squad. No one should be untouchable.

 

[United in sin]

This is very common practice particularly in Europe, and becoming more and more so. It’s much cheaper for clubs to sack and replace a manager if it goes tits up than an entire coaching team. Same concept as if a manager gets every player they want and it doesn’t really mesh with what the club want.

I'm aware of this, but you won't find many managers at a major European club without at least a number two, fitness or goalkeeping coach of their own choosing.

Xavi and Ancelloti brought their own to their recent appointments at Barcelona and Real for instance. Former Ajax coach Peter Bosz who Hag took over from took the same assistant he had at Ajax to Dortmund and Lyon where he presently manages. Can you name any other manager at a top club who's come in without an assistant of his own?

 

[JPRouve]

If you decide to keep a player that does not fit with the club only due to financial implications. Then you devalue the asset you own.

It is clear you can separate sporting and financial even though they are linked.

Example. Why were Jones, Lingard, Pereira etc contracts renewed even when it was clear they were no longer useful playing members of the squad?

Purely financial because the club wanted to sell for a transfer fee. It didn’t instead it further devalued said players whilst keeping them on its books on inflated wages.

Purely from a sporting perspective said players would have left United at worst on a free years ago

Two things first we were talking about players that are valuable on the field and are simply not the manager's cup of tea. For example Oscar vs De Bruyne or Ibrahimovic vs Eto'o, we are not talking about players that are not valuable/good on the field. Secondly the players that you mentioned didn't lose value with the extensions, you are talking about players that were becoming free agents, so unless you think that their value is inferior to zero, extending them didn't devalue said players, it would have been a good idea to let them go but they didn't lose value.

Finally the point is simply that there is no absolute, a head coach doesn't have complete authority and he has to justify his wishes because they have consequences. Sometimes you will follow his ideas because they suit the club and other times you won't because they don't serve the club.

 

[JPRouve]

If the owners don’t give the new manager control over who stays and who comes in, they will fail. They can’t protect anyone from this squad. No one should be untouchable.

So again we don't think that the DOF should have a job.

 

[phelans shorts]

I'm aware of this, but you won't find many managers at a major European club without at least a number two, fitness or goalkeeping coach of their own choosing.

Xavi and Ancelloti brought their own to their recent appointments at Barcelona and Real for instance. Former Ajax coach Peter Bosz who Hag took over from took the same assistant he had at Ajax to Dortmund and Lyon where he presently manages. Can you name any other manager at a top club who's come in without an assistant of his own?

Can I just point out that we have literally no idea who the coaching staff will be, making this rant all the more bizarre.

 

[Cassidy]

Two things first we were talking about players that are valuable on the field and are simply not the manager's cup of tea. For example Oscar vs De Bruyne or Ibrahimovic vs Eto'o, we are not talking about players that are not valuable/good on the field. Secondly the players that you mentioned didn't lose value with the extensions, you are talking about players that were becoming free agents, so unless you think that their value is inferior to zero, extending them didn't devalue said players, it would have been a good idea to let them go but they didn't lose value.

Finally the point is simply that there is no absolute, a head coach doesn't have complete authority and he has to justify his wishes because they have consequences. Sometimes you will follow his ideas because they suit the club and other times you won't because they don't serve the club.

I was not talking about players who were valuable on the field actually.

I specially was talking about the club not wanting to sell a player purely for the financial implications.

Example if Ten Hag wanted Maguire sold this summer

A head coach doesn’t need to have absolute control. But if a head coach tells you a player doesn’t fit the style the club wants to develop there are 2 problems.

1. The club and the manager clearly don’t agree on playing style, or if they do don’t agree on the players assessment. This is fair and can happen

2. The club agrees but decides not to sell because the players is a financial asset. Here we have a massive problem.

I am saying we are bringing in Ten Hag to implement a new style and take United in a new direction playing wise. He knows more about what is needed than anyone at the club at the moment. If he says we need to get rid of x player then we better.

City had to do the same with Pep and Joe Hart

 

[United in sin]

Can I just point out that we have literally no idea who the coaching staff will be, making this rant all the more bizarre.

It's not a rant, it's a discussion based on unconfirmed reports much like everything else in this thread and the next permanent manager thread.

However, Hag has never had a dedicated assistant and has sourced coaches from all his previous clubs, so it's likely true he'll be working with another new assistant with links to the club