Why? because our managers are backed more than anyone in world football bar City (by like 50mill)I feel you are being disingenous. The issue is constant bad appointments which I was happily blame them.
Glazers / Woodward out! (One down)
- Thread starter Icemav
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) and Imran (@Annihilate Now!) are here to discuss Amad saving our blushes in a win against Southampton as well as our now annual loss at home to Brighton. They discuss Amorim's post-match comments, revisit how mid-table we may or may not be, and discuss some transfer news.
And therein lies the crux of the matter.
Its like the 80s, expect something, get nothing, be happy with anything.
Shite state of affairs.
We appoint Klopp in 2016, this thread doesn't exist.
The main issue is the quality of the appointments.
We have let three of the greatest managers of a generation in their prime move to our rivala..
The main issue is the quality of the appointments.
We have let three of the greatest managers of a generation in their prime move to our rivala..
This is absolutely spot on. The irony is if they hired Klopp they probably would have saved a fortune in transfer fees as well.
Klopp didn't want to come because he recognised there are structural issues with the club that make it hard for any manager to succeed. This is the real problem. The fact that we get second rate managers is a symptom of the malady, not the cause.
He didn’t want to come cause he was at BVB with no plans on leaving when we approached him (when Moyes was fired). Then things went tits up there and he left. United had finished fourth in the league though, which means we were not planning to fire LVG (which was stupid) and so we did not approach Klopp when he was available.
Bullshit. Klopp didn't want to come because we never offered him the job after he left Dortmund. "Structural issues"? You got to be kidding me. Liverpool were in the dirt were he took over there. As bad as we were, they were ten times worse. Our genius of a man Woodward simply decided to stick with Van Gaal. We fecked up massively, but if only that was our only mistake. It's been a plethora of absurdities ever since Fergie left us.
He pretty much said later on that he didn't think we were a football first club and Liverpool were. He could have been bullshitting but that's what he said. And i think he's an honest guy.
He's telling the truth, but yeah, it wasn't after Dortmund, but during. Klopp is on record on having said that he had conversations with Utd and Woodward, and he didn't respond well to Woodward's description of Utd as like "an adult version of Disneyland." (Honigstein, biography on Klopp)
Klopp is a bullshitter though, we all know that. The reason he didn't want to join us when Woodward asked him, and I said this before, is that Woodward sent an offer when he was still managing Dortmund and was in a good position. When Liverpool asked him, him and Dortmund were parting ways and he wanted to leave. This is the real truth. He remained loyal to Dortmund until him and Dortmund wanted to part ways, taking them the furthest he possibly could. This is when we should have gone for him. Instead Woodward abandoned the idea and stuck with Van Gaal who was not working out even in his first season.
Liverpool are no more of a football club than us, let's be honest. Their owners are a slightly better version of the Glazers at best. But they had their golden opportunity and took it while we sat with our thumbs in our mouths.
I don't think he is a bullshitter. There is certainly some truth in what you say as well so both may be right. But I think if both him and Ed had been really keen on the appointment it would have found a way. Did we ever make an offer or was it just a meeting?
However you slice it, the big picture is that we have not been able to attract a top class manger since SAF left. Not really surprising given that they all practice high press and our squad would require big surgery to switch to that - surgery that would probably not be funded by the owners.
I don't think there was ever a concrete offer, just an enquiry.
Yeah Ed started banging on about Disneyland and Jurgen pretended to go to the toilet and ran out the backdoor of the restaurant.
The problem has been that they continuously appoint poor managers. What takes the cake is hiring Ole as a caretaker untill the summer, to give us time to look for a manager, and then hiring Ole after a good ten game run. Why not take the time until summer and do a comprehensive search??
Signing Van Gaal and Mourinho based on their names.
They spend a lot of money that the club makes, so they get a freer pass than they should. But it's still the club's money. We as a club are constantly trying to go forward in spite of them, not because of them, and it's hard. I thoroughly trust them to screw up the next managerial appointment and hire Zidane or Conte because of their names.
Signing Van Gaal and Mourinho based on their names.
They spend a lot of money that the club makes, so they get a freer pass than they should. But it's still the club's money. We as a club are constantly trying to go forward in spite of them, not because of them, and it's hard. I thoroughly trust them to screw up the next managerial appointment and hire Zidane or Conte because of their names.
We approached Klopp in 2014. Dortmund were second on the table and still had 2/3 years on his contract. it was an uphill task to get him. The following season, Dortmund and Klopp had a disaster campaign. They decided to part ways in 2015. United were not prepared to sack manager that had come fourth.
We made the same mistake in the winter of 2015. There were rumours that Pep would leave Bayern at the end of the season. We were second on the table just behind Leicester. I remember the club releasing a brief before the Wolfsburg game that we didn't care where Pep went, Luis Van Gaal was our man. Things went proper tits up after that.
Two situations where the top two coaches in their prime became available but the club didn't have any foresight, so wasn't interested.
Those decisions will.always go.down as this board's greatest mistake.
We made the same mistake in the winter of 2015. There were rumours that Pep would leave Bayern at the end of the season. We were second on the table just behind Leicester. I remember the club releasing a brief before the Wolfsburg game that we didn't care where Pep went, Luis Van Gaal was our man. Things went proper tits up after that.
Two situations where the top two coaches in their prime became available but the club didn't have any foresight, so wasn't interested.
Those decisions will.always go.down as this board's greatest mistake.
Please buy United as well
My hope is also for Conor, for buying the club
So they are bleeding useless owners then, surely?
Given that the Glazers have absolutely no ability in appointing decent managers, which at this point, surely even they must realise is the reality… and given that due to this fact, there is now a massive squad of quality players all suited to different types of football, the best strategy for them as owners would be to adopt a quick trigger approach regarding managers in order to try and find the right one and get new manager bounce at crucial points - like Chelsea have done - surely cheaper (and less embarrassing) than bringing in badly thought through appointments, giving them needlessly long contracts and then waiting until they’ve failed abysmally (and thus costing you at least a season) before paying them off.
The irony is that the approach they adopt is completely the opposite…
They act as though their ridiculous appointments are THAT GOOD that they must be given massive contracts, and that they ‘might turn it ‘round’, when it’s absolutely clear that they won’t!
They behave as though they’re good at choosing managers, when they are literally laughably bad at it.
Awful owners, and as football moves on they just get worse and worse and more and more pointless and redundant.
The clowns of the football world.
The irony is that the approach they adopt is completely the opposite…
They act as though their ridiculous appointments are THAT GOOD that they must be given massive contracts, and that they ‘might turn it ‘round’, when it’s absolutely clear that they won’t!
They behave as though they’re good at choosing managers, when they are literally laughably bad at it.
Awful owners, and as football moves on they just get worse and worse and more and more pointless and redundant.
The clowns of the football world.
Someone posted this on a different forum, excellent post but alarming !
Signing Ronaldo was the worst thing United have done for a long time from a footballing perspective. He has taken over what was being built with the youth and energy and all the rest and completely derailed it. They didn't need him because Cavani is just as good and doesn't expect everything to revolve around him. But from a commercial perspective - the only thing the Glazers care about - signing CR7 was perfect. The signing caused an immediate 15% gain in the United share price, which the Glazers have immediately taken a profit on by selling another £137m of shares at a higher unit price than they would otherwise have achieved. Signing Ronaldo has put £18m straight into their pockets.
It's bewildering how these financial mechanisms can be made to work. The Glazers put £270m into buying United, the rest of it (£540m) was borrowed and that debt was then immediately loaded onto the previously debt-free club leaving the Glazers with the shares but not the interest liabilities (which cost United around £50m a year to service last time I looked). The cost of that debt servicing has been estimated to have cost the club upward of £1bn so far without reducing the principal (they still have debt levels over £500m). Meanwhile the Glazers can can sell shares whenever they see a profitable time to do so, with the receipts not paying off the debt but going straight to them, along with the various consultancy fees and such that they pay themselves. With the latest share sale they will have taken their direct profit from this manipulation to well over £400m.
You might think that with such a dodgy setup there would be questions. Well, there would be if the United business were registered in New York or London. It wouldn't meet the corporate governance standards required by either major stock exchange. That's why the Glazers registered it in the Cayman Islands and noted this in the 2019 financial report:
"A company registered overseas does not have to follow the standard corporate governance standards of the New York stock exchange. Accordingly, we follow the corporate governance practices of our home country, the Cayman Islands. Specifically, we do not have a board of directors composed of a majority of independent directors, or a remuneration committee composed entirely of independent directors."
The purpose of independent, or non-executive, directors is to apply objective scrutiny of how a company is being run and hold its executives to account. That's what they have primarily avoided by the Cayman Islands registration though doubtless it is beneficial in terms of tax as well.
Anyway, so back to OGS. All of the above explains why he is there. He was brought in to mollify and pacify the fans - a nice guy, history as a player, a Ferguson devotee, play for the shirt, greatest club in the world, all of that guff. Whatever is necessary so the Glazers can divert attention while they keep the money pipe open with a good and constant flow into their own pockets. Performance on the field just needs to be good enough to support that objective really.
Signing Ronaldo was the worst thing United have done for a long time from a footballing perspective. He has taken over what was being built with the youth and energy and all the rest and completely derailed it. They didn't need him because Cavani is just as good and doesn't expect everything to revolve around him. But from a commercial perspective - the only thing the Glazers care about - signing CR7 was perfect. The signing caused an immediate 15% gain in the United share price, which the Glazers have immediately taken a profit on by selling another £137m of shares at a higher unit price than they would otherwise have achieved. Signing Ronaldo has put £18m straight into their pockets.
It's bewildering how these financial mechanisms can be made to work. The Glazers put £270m into buying United, the rest of it (£540m) was borrowed and that debt was then immediately loaded onto the previously debt-free club leaving the Glazers with the shares but not the interest liabilities (which cost United around £50m a year to service last time I looked). The cost of that debt servicing has been estimated to have cost the club upward of £1bn so far without reducing the principal (they still have debt levels over £500m). Meanwhile the Glazers can can sell shares whenever they see a profitable time to do so, with the receipts not paying off the debt but going straight to them, along with the various consultancy fees and such that they pay themselves. With the latest share sale they will have taken their direct profit from this manipulation to well over £400m.
You might think that with such a dodgy setup there would be questions. Well, there would be if the United business were registered in New York or London. It wouldn't meet the corporate governance standards required by either major stock exchange. That's why the Glazers registered it in the Cayman Islands and noted this in the 2019 financial report:
"A company registered overseas does not have to follow the standard corporate governance standards of the New York stock exchange. Accordingly, we follow the corporate governance practices of our home country, the Cayman Islands. Specifically, we do not have a board of directors composed of a majority of independent directors, or a remuneration committee composed entirely of independent directors."
The purpose of independent, or non-executive, directors is to apply objective scrutiny of how a company is being run and hold its executives to account. That's what they have primarily avoided by the Cayman Islands registration though doubtless it is beneficial in terms of tax as well.
Anyway, so back to OGS. All of the above explains why he is there. He was brought in to mollify and pacify the fans - a nice guy, history as a player, a Ferguson devotee, play for the shirt, greatest club in the world, all of that guff. Whatever is necessary so the Glazers can divert attention while they keep the money pipe open with a good and constant flow into their own pockets. Performance on the field just needs to be good enough to support that objective really.
Spot on
Fantastic post. Solskjaer isn't good enough to lead us to success that is clear. We should still never forget the biggest problem at this club though.
The Glazers running of the club has been hampering us since before Ole started managing us and it will still be hampering us once he's gone. The pressure we placed on the parasites last season never should have been allowed to die down.
Ultimately, until the head is cut off the snake, they'll just continue to feast on their cash cow from beneath the shadows for as long as they possibly can.
Enquiry in 2014 when we were sacking Moyes. He wanted to continue in BVB, so we got LVG.
No enquiry or any contact in 2015 when Liverpool got him after he had left BVB.
These guys are going to be on the receiving end of some more protests at some point this season because they are going to continue to allow the team play horrendously with no accountability. Fan anger will be directed their way.
Can this notion that Woodward is some kind of business maverick please stop?
Between Hererra and Pogba, he'll have let £120 million worth of talent walk out the door for absolutely nothing, by the end of this season, all within 3 seasons.
A great business man my arse.
Between Hererra and Pogba, he'll have let £120 million worth of talent walk out the door for absolutely nothing, by the end of this season, all within 3 seasons.
A great business man my arse.
Probably more relevant here than the Ole thread.
We are a club without a footballing vision.
We are a club without a footballing vision.
I'd bloody hope so. Fans will have to start protesting again if we are out of PL title race before Christmas and Ole is still in charge.
Very good read. Thank you!
Great read, thank you.
You do sense that real on field success isn't the be all and end all for success. However, the club have spent a lot of money in the transfer window recently...at all levels at the club.
But the crooks of the matter is, the people who have been left to make the footballing decisions aren't good enough. Even our marketing guy's have fell below par. We're a bit stagnated and need new owners with fresh new ideas.
I still can't understand why a club like Man United considered David Moyes after SAF. The person who greenlit that move should be nowhere near a football club, much less in a position of power like that.
That doesn't make any sense though. The article says we are built on showcasing our history and success. But if we don't continue that, why would there be a fan following with the newer generation?
Sure, United is a massive club and has a global fanbase today. But if we continue without winning for the next 5 years, the younger generation fans who have no affiliation with any club would rather choose the more successful clubs. Especially true for the global audience, who have no links to Manchester or England.
This only makes sense if the Glazers are planning to get out within the next 5 years or so.
Also, the article states that we are signing the big names for entertainment? Surely, any half competent manager can actually go on and win things. Isn't success AND entertainment better than fecking drama alone?
Also can't really take an article which mentions United as a 'meme-able' club and compares our marketing strategy with Ross's divorce story in FRIENDS. Wtf 
We compete with Oil clubs in terms of transfers and wages quite comfortably. Since Ole came here we have spent more than any club in the world as well. Woodward isn't great on the footballing side but business wise he is great.
I don't like Glazers because obviously we can spend even more without them. We could even get one Pedri with the 1 Billion or so that they have taken out.
It's not Ole fault that with his incompetency he still has the biggest job in world football for more than 3 years. That tell you everything you need to know about the owner and their ambition.
Ed is leaving he won't make the call to sack Ole.
Glazers are in the USA watching baseball.
Who is going to make the call? Truly an Adult Disneyland.
Glazers are in the USA watching baseball.
Who is going to make the call? Truly an Adult Disneyland.
I fear the decision to sack Ole might be delayed until the new men are in their posts.
Think Ole will quit before he gets sacked
Just want them out of Utd so much.
Want them out of the PL.
They have no place here. They’ve brought nothing to the table.
Just feck off already.
Want them out of the PL.
They have no place here. They’ve brought nothing to the table.
Just feck off already.
And throw away £25m...will.not happen.
Woodward should sack Ole but he shouldn't be hiring the next manager, the new guy should.