Bayern who is currently the best team in Europe and better run than us got him on loan. They certainly don't think he isn't better than nothing
Get behind the manager and club
- Thread starter Nou_Camp99
- Start date
That is another myth which his friends Neville and Scholes started and fans bought it. Not backed? Ridiculous. First window we agree that he is backed.
In this window he got :
1) Excellent attacking left back. Not just backup for Shaw, player for first 11.
2) VDB. 40 mil for one of most wanted midfielders last year.
3) Cavani. Lets put aside his age. He got proven striker for backup.
He didn't get Sancho. Wow, we decided to not spent 120+ mil on one player in this post covid era. And club is to blame for it?
And what else? Defender? Really? After he spent 80 mil on one?
Ole: Ed, i need 60 mil for Upamecano
Ed: But i bought you Maguire to fix defence.
Ole: Yeah, but i need another who will make Maguire better.
Ed: But, why the hell you bought broken defender at first place then?
A myth?
2) Most wanted midfielder? Thats why we were the only club in for him.
Regarding Sancho - just because we didnt get him, doesnt mean we didnt need a RW. Did I say because we didnt get Sancho he didnt get backed?
It's not really about Sancho. It's about how the window unfolded. We didn't make any significant moves till last week, except VDB who was a Bruno back up and perhaps the lowest on the priority list.
For e.g. if they would have decided to get Cavani in July / August then we would have him fit and ready to play from game 1. We are now 2 months into the season and he just played his first full game.
Also, the RW was sorted with 2 transfers who are nowhere close to the first team. We have resorted to playing Mata there! That was the most glaring issue in the squad. If it was not going to be Sancho, we should have moved on alternatives and got it done.
Nobody has any idea whether Ole was backed, so its a worthless discussion. We don't know who he wanted besides Sancho, and theres no way the media were aware of everything we were doing.
What does it matter anyway? Will anyone go any easier on him? He got the players he got, and actually as the season is developing its looking like a pretty decent window for us, one that could become even better if Diallo lives up to the hype. We now have a much deeper looking squad. Granted, the right wing still looks to be a problem for us, but its usually better to wait for the right man rather than bring someone in to plug a leak. At worse, it'll give Greenwood plenty more opportunities to develop his game.
We likely weren’t the only ones in for Cavani @Shiva87 and by all accounts he had some wage demands that he climbed down on when the window looked like closing and he still had no club. Sometimes a signing is an opportunity that presents itself (kind like Arsenal getting Auba when months earlier every team in Europe wanted him) and this one appears to be just that.
Important thing is that he got a striker in. And he’s been clearly fit for a while if he could do a 90 min shift like that last night.
absolutely Bilbo.
Especially when the last 9 games have 6 wins, 1 draw and 2 losses since the Spurs game, which confirm that preseason was a real issue. Still 66% win rate including the CL. We have to keep that ratio and try to improve it now until the end of the season.
I think we need more poetry and made-up scenarios which are detailed in excessively long flowery posts about when he seals his treble and Busby whispering in his ear or something
Its always ideal when a club can have signings there before pre-season, but I think people get too hung up about the timing of these things. Cavani, as you described, is proof of how situations can develop towards the end of a window and a deal that was unworkable two months ago suddenly works for the club. It will always be that way.
Besides, a football season is long. We've had a lot of twists and turns already this season and its barely gotten going.
He struggled with City's squad in season one. They came 4th and had world class players. He is struggling this season by definition then also as they are below us and our manager is useless apparently.
Cant have it both ways
Perisic is on the LW, you might as well argue we can put Rashford at RW and Martial LW with Cavani/Greenwood up top and be better off that way.
Costa, serious? The man is a crock. In fact he's injured again and yet to debut for Bayern
And Bale? For his wages, and watching him play right now? You're just naming players for the sake of it now. Marquee over the hill names like Bale are exactly what we are trying to move on from.
There was no viable alternative, how many fecking times.
[
We spent 250-300mil euros under Ole. That i call backing. Fans like you believe that manager of big club comes and say "i want Grealish, Upamecano, Kane, Sancho and Telles. Chop chop, sign them."
I agree about right winger. We needed that. If Ole gave B, C or D options and we failed then it is only thing where he wasn't backed. But maybe he said Sancho or nothing. Who knows?
Yes, a myth. You said "why to hire manager if you will not buy him players that he wants". People behave like clubs operate with monopoly money. Clubs have budget you know? There is no single club in the world (yes, even City) who will and can buy all players who manager wants. Because it is impossible. Manager gets budget, asks for players, maybe says few specific names and club spend what it can spend and sign who they can. Then manager adapts. In many clubs outside PL managers even work purely as coaches. Have minimum impact of transfers.
We spent 250-300mil euros under Ole. That i call backing. Fans like you believe that manager of big club comes and say "i want Grealish, Upamecano, Kane, Sancho and Telles. Chop chop, sign them."
I agree about right winger. We needed that. If Ole gave B, C or D options and we failed then it is only thing where he wasn't backed. But maybe he said Sancho or nothing. Who knows?
No I'm not just naming players for the sake of it. Those we were four players we were linked with as stop gap loans and were available for loan. I wouldn't want any of them naturally but if you asked me back then at the dying hourd of the window to take any of these players or no first team RW then I would have taken either Perisic or Costa as they are better than nothingPerisic is on the LW, you might as well argue we can put Rashford at RW and Martial LW with Cavani/Greenwood up top and be better off that way.
Costa, serious? The man is a crock. In fact he's injured again and yet to debut for Bayern
And Bale? For his wages, and watching him play right now? You're just naming players for the sake of it now. Marquee over the hill names like Bale are exactly what we are trying to move on from.
We are linked to 100's of players in any given window. Not one credible source linked us to Bale and Perisic. Costa is basically paying wages for nothing, the man is a crock and cant recreate his old form and he's not even appeared yet for Bayern so you can defend them all you want but it's working out pretty shit.
In the dying hours of the window I was fine with seeing Diallo in for January. Sancho was too expensive and I didn't want us trying to scurry to get a player just "because it's better than nothing". That's not how clubs should operate, it's not supermarket sweep. We had Greenwood who got 19 goals from the right, we have Rashford who can adjust there and Cavani adds to our attacking dimension too. It's not ideal but I'd rather wait for the right profile than feck up and buy a player for the sake of it.
I feel we did this with Maguire because we panicked and now we're sort of fecked trying to fix 2 slow center backs in our formation.
Last edited:
Please tell me when I have said sign Grealish, Upamecano, Kane, Sancho and Telles?
Also, just because you said that, LVG came out and said he thought Manutd could sign anyone, which is what these managers get promised. End up with Fellaini.
Fans like you who spend time on FM or Fifa think the club have a meeting in June and say, here you go £100m to spend go spend it.
No. Thats not how it works. Why do you think clubs have scouts? why do you think we invested so heavily on a stat based scouting software? You dont honestly think the manager scouts his own players?
https://www.redcafe.net/threads/ivan-perisic-or-bale-as-short-term-solution.457445/
Reading the first page makes my opinion sound less ridiculous than you're making it look as some posters didn't mind either
I'm not even defending Bayern. The Costa deal is working out shit for them but the Perisic deal didn't. These type of deals are low risk high reward depending on the wages. It's a one year loan deal not a 3 year contract. I'm not sure about Costas wages but if they are high then I retract my statement. As for the bolded bit that's what we were doing with Dembele. It's your opinion really but I would have taken Dembele or Perisic or whoever you think is potential deadwood on loan because they are low risk and better than nothing and we have no back up to Greenwood that as RW.
Last edited:
Okay, if you say so. The absolute nature of your statement is so odd. You really believe that there were 'NO' alternatives which were viable to play for United at RW. Sounds insane, right?
The reality is more like, the club did not do any work to figure if there are any viable alternatives, and the pricing for them. They let the whole summer come down to an aspirational acquisition of Sancho which they thought was done, only to realize that Dortmund were not bluffing about their terms. In my mind, 120 m for one player in this environment would have been stupid money, but we should have walked away much earlier than we did.
Bayern also have Sane, Gnabry and Coman. As a 4th choice wing option, who will barely get a realistic look in to even be on the bench most games? Sure. As a potential starter, and at the very least regular squad option? He'd be shit.
That is the difference between us and Bayern.
What were our options at RW before the window closed asides Greenwood.
Sure, Stone is credible but he just says they are names that have been mentioned. I don't think either were ever serious targets, in fact Bale was flatly rejected by various sources during the course of the window.
Also, re. Dembele we started the process on considering his loan a good few days before the end of the window, it was a simple deal but drew out because Barca wanted to get rid and we wouldn't cave (thank god). I don't think thats scurrying as such. Scurrying for a replacement would be panicking and going from Dembele to loan offering for Coman, then Costa, then others. I don't think any of them were at a serious stage because the club knew what they wanted and it was Sancho, Dembele stop gap or nothing.
It's not odd and it's not insane. There wasn't a right winger capable of benching Greenwood that wasn't injured all the time or who fit our profile as an energetic, explosive winger. Feel free to name them
To be honest we could have walked away from Sancho, or played the 50/50 bluff that they would cave at £90m close to deadline day. I'm happy we tried the latter just because there's always that chance that it goes through. Dortmund won't get a better deal than that anyway. Even if we walked away from Sancho a month earlier, no right winger that can elevate the team was really available. Who was there that could walk in and displace Greenwood? I'm trying to rack my brains - Koman I think is a left winger mainly, Perisic is out left, Grealish was left - no need to just punt them on the right wing for the same of it. Costa was a crock, Sarr wouldn't bench Greenwood and was a silly price for a stop gap, etc.
If the club isn't behind Ole they would have sacked him long time ago. The fact that he's still here till now shows he's getting crazy support from Woodward.
So what's the plan then. Sancho or bust? We will keep going for Sancho every window because we can't find another good alternative?
You can be behind somebody, but not fully back them.
Asking a manager who they want is kinda a useless point if nearly every time its a cheaper alternative or waiting until that player becomes cheaper after some time...
They gave a 10th August deadline, we disrespected them by ignoring it. How people think its 50/50 going into deadline day that they will sell when they need to replace the player?
Theres every chance that we will go back for Sancho in the summer if the price is right. It goes to show how much of our business we keep in house now when 4 of our 5 signings this summer were largely unreported prior to them being at an advanced stage.
What we can be confident about is that United will have a long list of potential signings at RW, and they will all be watched this season. All of these Bale, Perisic, Coman type links over the summer were very uninspiring and really quite lazy from a journalistic viewpoint, and besides we all need to get a proper look at Diallo before we can decide how badly we need to recruit.
No I do not think it's Sancho or bust. I think there are players that burst on to the scene within seasons and you keep an eye on them too, Sancho will still be a target and we have brought in Diallo for a good £40m so there might well be high expectation from him (he's extensively scouted and if we value him that high for a transfer fee there must be something about him). Reyes for Dortmund seems to have exploded, and others might in European football too. You always get new targets that pop up as the seasons progress.
I just dont think our club did that badly at all in the last window when you consider the environment was far from ideal for world football. They had a price for Sancho, they knew the environment wasn't kind on Dortmund as it wasn't to them and they thought in this financial uncertainty the club may back down from 120m EUR if 1) Sancho wants the move and 2) they don't receive any other offers toward deadline day. They held firm but I can understand the logic in trying to smoke them out rather than walk away. I think even if we walked away we were't magically going to find a right winger that's better than what Greenwood had done for us last season.
Not really they're backing him as much as they can. The club was simply not able to pay 120m for a player. Lack of alternative for Sancho means there was no planning for what will happen if we don't get him, which should be the manager planning for this ?
Last summer they put the majority of the budget in Maguire because he was Ole's top choice even though he's not really a marketable player Woodward would have usually preferred putting this much money in.
For me Woodward has tried to back Ole as much as he backed LVG and Mourinho in their first 2 seasons. "Not backing" means Woodward decided to veto the manager's signing, but what happened was we tried and failed. We can criticize this failure but we can't say they didn't back him.
I look back hungrily to the immediate post 99 seasons, where the talk was would we clinch the title if we maintained our 7 point lead come Christmas. Now we're rationalizing and finding comfort in only being 5 points off the top. In a way I do want this ideology of supporting the United manager whatever the financial, psychological, and social cost, to go on. I don't want Ole to be sacked 'prematurely'.
I never quite got this narrative, Ferguson was the ultimate anomaly. I could flip what you say and say if Chelsea listened to the give managers time brigade and kept faith with AVB (not just at United but at other clubs too) we wouldn't have had the greatest night of our history or if Real said "we should give Benitez time because you can't sack a manager before they have a full season" they wouldn't have made history with 3 CL's on the spin.
I'm not giving an opinion on Ole either way as you lot watch his tactics more regularly so are more qualified to do so but whenever i see the (and quotes similar to) "what should we do keep sacking managers?" line (from any fanbase) the answer is if you have too absolutely yes, if a manager's doing shit you sack him and try again, if a manager had success but stagnates you sack him and start again (like we did transitioning from Mourinho to Conte via Hiddink or Real from Ancelotti to Zidane via Benitez). If you can find a suitable long term manager then ofcourse that's the ideal, but joining the sacking culture is infinity times a better option than giving a manager who's not cutting it time.
Isnt that an issue though. Were not saying hes backed them as much as possible, but instead hes backed them as much as hes backed the rest.
We got Ole for a 'cultural reset'. Sure, thats all good and fine. But surely you would want to fully back him knowing hes not a super coach, but ideal for where the club wants to go.
If the rumours of him wanting Grealish, Sancho, Haaland are true, you would think we should be getting at least one of them.
Yes we paid big for Maguire, but again, thats to assist with the reset and due to the change in prices. Sure a pandemic is happening, but maybe I need to reword it to 'fully back'. Go with his choices and not get cheaper alternatives.
Or hire somebody who will do similar and then just tell Ole, youre the coach, and we will give you players, make it work.
That's a different argument. On a cost-benefit analysis, getting Costa in, with his poor injury record and Daniel Jamesesque end product would not be worth the outlay for us. We need someone of proven quality and ideally someone for the long-term. Costa was neither of those.
For Bayern, he can be the break glass in case of emergency option and he'd be fine but for us we needed someone who would be a starter or someone who could be that first change option of the bench and Costa suits neither of those roles.
We tried. Sancho for 120 and Grealish for 80m are just crazy numbers. People talk alot about Chelsea spending but they spent only 60m or so max on every player they got. They didn't splash a large sum on one player only, all their players were for reasonable price. As for Haaland, the deal failed because of the release clause thing. I don't think United should accept such thing in general, if you ask me.
The targets are just not realistic for me. It shows by the fact that both Sancho and Grealish stayed in their team and no other team actually made a successful move for them.
I think Woodward is a terrible negotiator in general and not a great CEO but he's definitely trying to back Ole as much as he can, and the fact he's keeping him in charge till now proves he's fully into Ole's project. I can criticize his failure of landing one target or taking long time to finalize a deal but I won't say he's not backing him.
As I said, in my lifetime we've only had two managers win the league out of 12 we've employed. That's since Sir Matt, not a good record would you not agree?
I never said we're not a big club, I said we're not entitled to win the league just because that's what some supporters expect.
Mostly with players that were already there. It's not as if he joinred a club in freefall after a toxic cnut of a manager.But he won the Premier League in his 2nd and 3rd year. Not a bad record.
That’s the mindset, back OgS cause one of the greatest managers in sporting history had a slow start at the same club.
Your thought process is just as, if not more flawed than people calling for OgS to be sacked with no succession plan.
I’m neither in nor out cause I’m past caring but could you enlighten me as to the ‘thought process of an Ole outer’? I’m seeing a lot of fans that doubt OgS being spoken of as a monolith but it’s seemingly stoic to back OgS based on what sir Alex did in the 90s.
Both sides can make rather reasoned arguments but mentioning SAF & OgS is an unreasonable reach.
This forum is rife with ***** who actually seem ashamed of our success & want to wear this period of our history as some badge of honour where they ‘backed the manager & the club’.
If I could be bothered to trawl their post history the same sanctimonious lot are more than happy to let players they don’t like & the owners [you know, members of ‘the club’ they claim to wholeheartedly support] have it with both barrels.
You have to be Ole in or Ole out; Fred has to be the most underrated midfielder in England or crap, Maguire has to be a brilliant ball playing CB or a cart horse - you’re not allowed any nuance on here.
If OgS leaves a failure he won’t be the first manager to do so at a big club & he certainly won’t be the most astute one to have done so either. That said, he may actually come good but instead of quarrelling over what might have been it’s about time his results are judged on what occurs in the 90 minutes of football played instead of what our xG says should of happened etc.
I want nothing more than for OgS to be Fergie incarnate but that doesn’t mean I can’t also be realistic with his limitations.
If we give time and more time to ron Atkinson Fergie wouldnt happened.
This thread is the exact reason why ole, a fan favorite ex legend was hired by the club. Despite being unqualified manager while many others are still available.
It divides fan opinion and helps board to deflect blame and buy time. Any other manager with this level of no clueless performances that depends on individual brilliance this much, you'd be calling for his head. But not a club legend. You just can't.
I exaggerate but you get the point.
It divides fan opinion and helps board to deflect blame and buy time. Any other manager with this level of no clueless performances that depends on individual brilliance this much, you'd be calling for his head. But not a club legend. You just can't.
I exaggerate but you get the point.