Is the United Way an actual style of football or emotional romanticising of previous eras?

People complain about the United way holding us back - were Moyes, Van Gaal and Mourinho anything like the United way at all?

The United way hasn't held us back in my opinion because its fairly simple. The use of young or homegrown players, the attacking play and the never say die attitude. We are not the only club who does variations of this - Ajax, Bilbao, Barcelona etc.

I think the only club where a tactical philosophy has been probably built in to its DNA is at Barcelona since the Cryuff years. It felt like the whole of Serie A had it at one point but that's dissappeared.

I feel like the only reason people complain about this "United DNA" is because:

  1. We can give managers longer time than they should be getting. This is nothing to do with United DNA, this is because we lasted 20 years under one manager & have a bit more patience towards our managers. The club was heavily run by SAF who was an influence on the running of the club rather than just being a manager of 11 players on the pitch. We see this when Van gaal joined the club. He buys poor players for Barcelona during his tenure and gets heavily pressured by the people on top of him - at United Van gaal completely obliterated the team due to his own view and philosophy and gets minimal pressure until he doesn't win or play to a standard expected.
  2. The players also get this patience & love too with long and heavy contracts that out do alot of their performances. This to me happens partly because we partly want players to be loyal to us - but also go about shouting like we are the biggest team in the world - just because we have the money and number of fans to show for it; nothing to do with our success levels. Soon as we go after a player the transfer price gets increase by a good 25% each and the wages are heavily increased - again for me showing that the people who ran the club after SAF'S ability to run the club alot by himself hasn't been good enough.

The United DNA is a very minimal thing that its hardly been seen under our last 3 managers.

When you look at Rangnick's potential views:

  1. Apparently targets only u23 players (young or potential homegrown players)
  2. Players with a certain mindset (a never say die attitude and energy)
  3. A forward passing group of players (an attacking way)

The United DNA will be there with Rangnick in my opinion - Rangnicks coaching and influencing approach over the next 6 months to 2 years will just move us on finally away from the SAF era which has been ghostly since he left; because to me he wasn't just a manager that concentrated on how 11 players should play on the pitch - he was running the club like a father looks after his child. Ever since he retired we have been like a club with no father - Rangnick can provide us the steps we need to knowing how this club/child should run and look after itself again.
 
gajender said:
Sir Alex would have certainly liked to win more CL , but if you think he would trade his PL titles for more CL trophies then you have no Idea about the man for him Domestic dominance came first and foremost .
Click to expand...

He got outplayed a lot in Europe. Earlier on because the Irish were classed as non British we had a couple of players missing. We got beaten by tactics too.
 
There’s never been a “United Way”. I can’t believe many fell for it. The only thing resembling such “philosophy” is that we must always keep winning. Never lose the hunger even after already winning so much.
 
It’s just another thing to blame and attack the club over. Playing attacking football, never say die attitude and bringing through youth. That’s basically what the club was built on.
 
This unbelievable unrivalled record we have held since 1938 for always having an academy player in our first team match day squad is the United way. We haven’t been winning trophies or matches consistently for over 80 years, we haven’t been playing attacking football with wingers consistently for over 80 years but giving youth a chance is the one constant throughout our history. This unbelievable record and wearing a red home kit are the United way, everything else is just sentimental.
 
Yes, it's entirely emotional with a side dish of "attacking football' and "academy players" thrown in. But this is down to people who would rather marinate in nostalgia and reduce football games, win streaks et. al down to things such as a 'never say die attitude'. There are people who need to feel part of some larger story, which is fine. But they can easily be manipulated as when former players who are completely unqualified sashay into the MUFC managerial job.
 
Grande said:
This gets tiresome to answer after I while, am I trad to think young fans should read up a bit on the great teams of United and draw some own conclusions rather than just posing it as an open question? Maybe so.

For a number of people (not everybody, but a number of them), the greatest eras of this club has been the Ernest Mangnall years of our first cup and league wins, the Busby era, phases of Tommy Doc and Ron Atkinson, and then Sir Alex. To me, the Solskjær years are up there with Docherty and Atkinson as generally enjoyable United kinda stuff, even if it stopped short of the legendary. Are there commonalities between the peaks og those eras? Yes, undoubtedly. Are they all completely similar? Of course not. But there have almost always been a portion of magic (Billy Meredith, Duncan Edwards, Georgie Best, Jesper Olsen, Ryan Giggs, Christiano Ronaldo), a measure of working class grit (Charlie Roberts and the Outsiders, Nobby Stiles, Lou Macari, Bryan Robson, Roy Keane), a dose of pure speed (countless speed merchants firing up the wings, for some reason Andy Kanchelskis stands out to me at this moment), a sprinkle of drama (Meredith and the Outsiders again, the phoenix of ‘58, Denis Law, Eric again, Tevez, Rooney, Berbatov) and the fresh breath of youth (The Babes, Sammy McIlroy, Norman Whiteside, The Class, Ron&Roon, Rash&Green). Identity has been all over Scotland and Ireland, to the first English team in Europe, to the World, yet always connected to Stretford, red brick houses, Madchester music etc.

Not unlike things that are important also at other clubs, but it is noteworthy when people like Dave Sexton (dull and cautious, Moyes (no panache), Van Gaal (slow football) and Mourinho (dour and all of the above). My money on why patience ran out with Ole in the end with alot of us, was not simply the lack of ‘patterns’, but also the fact that towards the end, we didn’t create enough chances and action, it became dour, cautious and feeble the last months. Then parience with bad results stooped.

How much of this is translatable to style of football? I don’t think it’s merely a question of fast and tricky wingers (but it certainly helps! Rashford and Sancho is a lot more enticing than anything much else if it clicks), but it’s certainly not Van Gaal style possession or Mourinho bus parking (and throwing under). Solskjær was along the right lines when Rashford and Martial had their best spells and Bruno provided flash and fast forwardness, but he couldn’t build on it. Don’t forget many people tired of the football under Fergie the later years, even when we won, because it became cautious and labored much of the time due to style changes. Anyone but Ferguson and it could have gone real sour.

So’ I’d say it’s a lot about speed, grit and that little extra panache is necessary at United, if not there will be a feel that something is missing. Formations is not the issue, but it’s clear to me that Klopp would be a perfect fit for us, Guardiola would be ok, but Mourinho was a catastrophe, notwithstanding the trophies.
Click to expand...
Pretty much sums up the United way, paper thin nonsense that's decades behind the rest of football.
 
L1nk said:
'The United Way' is not something that really exists, or that, it's not something that's unique to us. Alot of other top clubs do the exact things that the United way is supposed to represent;

Attacking wing play? - Other teams have done it for years, Bayern especially have done it for years and years and I believe I read a report that since LVG introduced the play of Robben and Ribery every coach since has had to have that wing play in the team.

Playing youngsters/youth from academy? - A multitude of other clubs do this, both big and small, in every country

Giving managers time? - Again, loads of clubs do this, true we may be patient enough to give them more time than most, but if you haven't noticed, it's actually been to our detriment more than anything else

Winning?
Never giving up?
Last minute winners/equalisers?

These were the Ferguson way, we're chasing this because we want to go back to an era of "winning", what people say about the United way, what they actually mean is the Ferguson way, the problem is we are drowning as a football club because football has moved on, Fergie has moved on, the game has changed, modernised, and because we are chasing the 1990's again we have been left behind
Click to expand...
Great post.
 
Even Sir Alex used to ditch the 4-4-2 from time to time. I remember people still used to call us kick and run merchants and glorified Stoke during that time.

United way is not a tactic or scoring late goals. It's the development of youth players in the first team and giving the manager full control over club's footballing matters(the second one is outdated).
 
Hammondo said:
Bollocks.
Click to expand...
No it isn't. The United way is similar to a lot of top clubs. The problem is that we haven't really stuck by it. None of the managers after SAF have followed it. And it's been used as an excuse by others (Ole) who never really practiced it as a manager. By simply uttering the word, and merely not being Mourinho, many fans latched onto the idea that Ole is continuing the United way. However, it's obviously false as his football was boring too and he was pretty conservative with youth.

So the United way does exist. Busby and Fergie both wanted attacking football, and youth integrated into the first team. The problem is the United board have not been able to because they can't, are unwilling, or are plain ignorant about it. So in that sense you can say it isn't a thing because it really hasn't been followed since SAF retired. However, it should be a thing because it's what Busby and Fergie preached.

Unlike those other clubs, United fans couldn't identify attacking football for anything. There has been no pressure from the fans in regards to attacking football like say Ajax and Barca fans. They don't just expect to win. They want their team to only win in a certain manner.

I think the only difference is that Barca fans want their football to be possession oriented, where as United have no such requirement. But again, this is all just hypothetical as the fans, board, and on the pitch performances have been the complete opposite of that the last decade.
 
Citing Ferguson when talking about the United way never made sense to me given that he had so many sides with different characteristics that there wasn’t even a Fergie way. Our 1994 side was nothing like the 1999 side which was nothing like the 2003 side who were nothing like the 2007 team who were unrecognisable from the 2013 team.
 
In Rainbows said:
No it isn't. The United way is similar to a lot of top clubs. The problem is that we haven't really stuck by it. None of the managers after SAF have followed it. And it's been used as an excuse by others (Ole) who never really practiced it as a manager. By simply uttering the word, and merely not being Mourinho, many fans latched onto the idea that Ole is continuing the United way. However, it's obviously false as his football was boring too and he was pretty conservative with youth.

So the United way does exist. Busby and Fergie both wanted attacking football, and youth integrated into the first team. The problem is the United board have not been able to because they can't, are unwilling, or are plain ignorant about it. So in that sense you can say it isn't a thing because it really hasn't been followed since SAF retired. However, it should be a thing because it's what Busby and Fergie preached.

Unlike those other clubs, United fans couldn't identify attacking football for anything. There has been no pressure from the fans in regards to attacking football like say Ajax and Barca fans. They don't just expect to win. They want their team to only win in a certain manner.

I think the only difference is that Barca fans want their football to be possession oriented, where as United have no such requirement. But again, this is all just hypothetical as the fans, board, and on the pitch performances have been the complete opposite of that the last decade.
Click to expand...
Everything described is what every team tried to do, and something we have only done some of the time. There is really nothing of note for United in any of these aspects.
 
"The United Way" isn't a specific formation, it's a brand of football. Entertaining winning football. Fusion of the world's best talents with promoted youth.

It was all about Entertaining the fans. The people who'd worked hard all week, to them come and watch their team play and be entertained.
 
I think that when talking about this I make the mistake of reading the United Way as something that is supposed to be unique to United instead of maybe just seeing it as something that defines United from the POV of United. If it's the latter then the United Way is about the ambition of entertaining, it's not about attacking Football per se, it's about being at the center of the local community, about developing and supporting young players through the academy but also from other places.

These things aren't unique to United, they apply to many clubs in the world and a simple example is Nantes, Barcelona, Ajax, Bayern, Athletic Bilbao and many clubs in South America. These clubs could be at their worst in lower leagues and they could still follow their "way". That's why I have an issue when certain pundits bring it because as strange or arrogant as it may sound some of them who are former players seem to not understand the history of the club and what makes its identity, it's as if they were too close to see the full picture.
 
red thru&thru said:
"The United Way" isn't a specific formation, it's a brand of football. Entertaining winning football. Fusion of the world's best talents with promoted youth.

It was all about Entertaining the fans. The people who'd worked hard all week, to them come and watch their team play and be entertained.
Click to expand...

That’s what every club aims for though. That’s as unique to United as enjoying cake is to dry cleaners
 
None of the last four managers have subscribed to any Utd way on the pitch, albeit only one ever claimed to
 
Set of values or principles rather than a playing style I take it, epitomised and perhaps heavily influenced by Sir Alex (maybe Busby too).

As many posters have said, these attributes are not necessarily unique to United. In fact, one could argue that since Fergie left, some of these principles have slipped a bit:

  • Conducting oneself in a humble, respectful and classy manner (inside the club and outside the club)
  • Promoting and trusting youth (what's our record again of academy players being in a match day squad?)
  • Being bold to express oneself and play attacking and entertaining football (mostly!)
  • Work hard, give your all to help your team
  • The club is bigger than any one individual
  • The manager is the most important person at the club (which perhaps translates itself to the patience we show managers)
 
Hammondo said:
Pretty much sums up the United way, paper thin nonsense that's decades behind the rest of football.
Click to expand...

Paper thin understanding in a paper thin answer. What exactly did you not agree with?

What is ‘decades behind the rest of football’ about Klopp? Or Rangnick?
And why did you become a fan of United? What was your first favorite team/era, and what did you like about that?
 
It's a load of shit. Rio and Co happened to be managed by a great, so they don't really understand the reality of the game.

You can say it's a mentality, or a culture, or even an attacking kind of play, but it's all nonsense. Every single big club has the same set of goals, every single one of the them expect to win.

Two talented people, one works hard the other doesn't, guess who succeeds?

If you have to believe in the United way, then at least accept it as the final piece of the puzzle, not the underlying foundation. We need modern, precise, ultra clear coaching, just like every team.
 
Mourinho's appointment buried everything what's associated to romanticism, except he won European trophy which gave us somekind of illusion of temporary state of success.
 
Grande said:
Paper thin understanding in a paper thin answer. What exactly did you not agree with?

What is ‘decades behind the rest of football’ about Klopp? Or Rangnick?
And why did you become a fan of United? What was your first favorite team/era, and what did you like about that?
Click to expand...
Because "magic" is vague and every team can say they have it, grit is something every team has or works towards, every team has speed, youth and drama is every team.

Not only this but we are not stand out in these, nor have we been consistent in these.

A lot of hollow words with player names written next to them.

Why are you comparing United to managers and not clubs?

Depends what you mean by favourite team, I think Peps Barcelona played the best football. My fav United team was probably 2008, though I did like the earlier 90s team.

That 2008 team had a well organised team, it was well balanced, it was dangerous with some amazing link up play from the forwards, we attacked space well and instinctly.
 
TeddyBear said:
The united way , whilst won us a lot domestically. Fell utterly short in the european front.

a club like the size of united should have comparable CL records with Liverpool at least, let alone Real Madrid

you fail to innovate and evolve, you risk left behind.

as great as SAF was, i bet he would have no qualms trading a few more CL for domestic ones.
Click to expand...

It should be pointed out that Sir Alex got us to 3 finals in 4 seasons.

The only thing standing in the way of "comparable CL records with Liverpool at least", and not falling "utterly short", is the very fact that he had to play against the greatest club side of all time in two of those finals!

Any side other than Barcelona '08-'11.....any side other than them, and we're looking at four CL titles probably, for him.
 
United way.. to put it simply is like the secret sauce every grandma says and their kids swore are the best in the business.

Truth is that's just some barbecue sauce with a variety of added home ingredients ranging from salt to probable parsley.

If you describe attacking play, youth, gentlement, etc without giving a hint it's united many teams would thought were talking about them.

Milan, juve, bayern, barcelona, hardly any different in their history. It's not like they're going to say we hate youth isnt it?

So it's just plain barbecue sauce
 
United way is a cultural philosophy not a tactical one.
 
Much like anything of this ilk, it's a nebulous term that means different things to different people. That's why it's hard to achieve - it's a bit of a chimera. That's not to see it doesn't mean ANYTHING, but it's not particularly unique to United. I suppose it's also one of those things where it's hard to articulate, but like Pornography, you know it when you see it.
 
Hoof The Ball said:
It should be pointed out that Sir Alex got us to 3 finals in 4 seasons.

The only thing standing in the way of "comparable CL records with Liverpool at least", and not falling "utterly short", is the very fact that he had to play against the greatest club side of all time in two of those finals!

Any side other than Barcelona '08-'11.....any side other than them, and we're looking at four CL titles probably, for him.
Click to expand...

2011 United is not as good as people think. Let's not forget how bad the central midfield was.

A number of other teams could have defeated 2011 United if they reach the final. 2011 Madrid would probably have destroyed United as well.
 
Kopral Jono said:
One of Fergie's best attributes as a manager was that he wasn't stubborn. Bloody-minded, yes, but never stubborn and always kept up with the times, be it on the pitch tactically (being of the early adopters of the false nine system) as well as off it with his tailored approach on certain high-profile players.
Click to expand...

True. I think winning was his only aim and he adopted whatever tactics got him there. People romanticise the past and some people have gotten so nostalgic about Ferguson that they make him sound as ideological as Pep.
 
Sky1981 said:
Gentlemen? Our teams of the past arent a nice gentle monster. They're a rude tough bastard. Keane tackle on halaand, cantona, etc.

We're hardly the good guys
Click to expand...
I'm not really talking on the pitch, but off the pitch and conduct of the players. Its why I think the media has been so harsh concerning us these last few years. Their not used to any commotion coming out of the club. Of course, a lot of that was the stability from SAF. This doesn't mean that we didn't have Cantona's or Keane's, but the aura coming out of the club was always respectful.
 
Vaultech said:
2011 United is not as good as people think. Let's not forget how bad the central midfield was.

A number of other teams could have defeated 2011 United if they reach the final. 2011 Madrid would probably have destroyed United as well.
Click to expand...
I think we were better than stated at the time. We were just a different team. We could attack, but we had a very strong and steady defensive unit. Once Vidic got injured in 2011, that's when we started looking a bit wobbly.
 
tjb said:
I think we were better than stated at the time. We were just a different team. We could attack, but we had a very strong and steady defensive unit. Once Vidic got injured in 2011, that's when we started looking a bit wobbly.
Click to expand...

There were numerous occasions when the midfield was overrun and the talk of Zombie football was a common theme.

2011 is a much inferior team compared to 2009. It was a relatively lucky draw in the CL that managed to avoid most of the big-hitters in the competition.
 
Zen86 said:
It’s just another thing to blame and attack the club over. Playing attacking football, never say die attitude and bringing through youth. That’s basically what the club was built on.
Click to expand...
Personally, I think the club has far less issues than have been stated in the media. I think we've simply hired the wrong managers, inspired by quick fixes and nostalgia. I think having Ole for the three years was really useful, as it gave the entire club time to reset and buy the right players without the type of pressure other managers would have had to face. We took a little bit of time to modernize, we now have a director of football and team. I don't think we've been dysfunctional, but Woodward leaving in December will allow the club to fully reset our image
 
Before Fergie we expected the team to play attacking football, those of us who remember Dave Sexton will remember the frustration at his style of football although he was at times unfairly criticised. Sometimes I do wonder if people think football started when the EPL was formed. United for as long as I can remember (60's) have always been expected to be exciting teams to watch. The Utd way is something I know of since Busbies days.
 
tjb said:
I'm not really talking on the pitch, but off the pitch and conduct of the players. Its why I think the media has been so harsh concerning us these last few years. Their not used to any commotion coming out of the club. Of course, a lot of that was the stability from SAF. This doesn't mean that we didn't have Cantona's or Keane's, but the aura coming out of the club was always respectful.
Click to expand...

InfiniteBoredom said:
Flashbacks to when Fergie literally told his players to kick and foul Arsenal out of the game, or when he referred to Newcastle as ‘a wee club up North’, or when he maintained a years long boycott of BBC and the club paid the fines, or when he called John Moss fat.

Real gentlemanly conduct right there from our greatest manager, and we all got behind it. All of these revisionism is tiresome. The Utd way, if it exists under Fergie, was to win.
Click to expand...
.

‘We are Man Utd we do what we want’.

You have to be incredibly blinkered to think fans of other clubs think of us as respectful and humble. Our Utd players used to maintain their own clique when on NT duty. We were the swaggering arrogant playground bully and it’s how it should be.
 
It is a very emotional argument when you look at it from a tactical perspective as a form of attacking football. What United way? Our best football for me came when Carlos Queiroz was assistant to Sir Alex.

The United way is something intangible, the attitude of never say die and never giving up and the big club winning mentality which we had with Sir Alex. That for me is the united way.
 
The United way is basically two things. 'Attacking philosophy' and 'youth players'

Basically the club should always be looking to play attacking football and bring through youth players.

Attacking philosophy is quite a loose term there are many ways to skin a cat, but the most important thing is when we attack it should be in numbers and we should be brave and willing to take risks.


Beyond that there's not really alot else to it other that the never say die attitude which is important aswell.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.