Man Utd set to appoint Director of Football (when hell freezes over)

[el3mel]

Excuse me you go and re-read what you said. You told me that the board should have told Mourinho to go get so and so instead. Well if we want to debrief the brefing they did, they told him to get Varane. But I’m not stupid and I’m sure your not but that was obviously a clear example of what they believe is value for money. Which is young and established with room for improvement.

How are seriously believing this Varane BS that they briefed ? It's no different than Wenger saying he could have got Ronaldo and Mbappe but couldn't. It's a means to save face not the opposite. Even the hardest core fan of the board won't believe this lame excuse they throw in this brief.

Saying they have no problem in paying 100m for Varane is no different than saying we have no proplem enquiring from Barca about Messi availability in the market. Varane has always been considered the future of Madrid's defense for ages. He's priceless and will never be sold even for 200m, not when he was starting to nail on the starting position they were preparing for him to take it.

Approaching impossible players to buy is a lame and exposed way to tell everyone "We're ready to spend but the options aren't available" while in fact you didn't want to spend from the start anyway, again no different from Wenger's thousands of quotes about players he could have got, simply a way to save face and appear faultless in front of everyone.

 

[edgar allan]

Jose won't walk. He should have walked at Chelsea second time. The team were 1 point off relegation and he still didn't walk.

If you want Jose out you will have to sack him. He will argue a lack of support and unfair dismissal. He will get his full contract (2 and half years?) paid up. That's about £37.5m.
It's a scandal.

It is never Jose's fault. The Special one is never to blame. It's always the players, boards, fans , referees, physios etc fault
37.5 million to get Jose out of our club? Cheap at twice the price and half of what he would have wasted on Willian

 

[Cloudface]

Excuse me you go and re-read what you said. You told me that the board should have told Mourinho to go get so and so instead. Well if we want to debrief the brefing they did, they told him to get Varane. But I’m not stupid and I’m sure your not but that was obviously a clear example of what they believe is value for money. Which is young and established with room for improvement.

Your argument in favour of Woodwards position is that they told Mourinho to go get Varane? Never mind he is a player Mourinho already scouted and bought and played at Real Madrid at a much younger age causing friction between himself and senior squad member Pepe. But he is now probably the most unobtainable defender in world football. If that is the sort of help he's getting from his board when discussing transfers then god help us.

That whole briefing was Ed covering his arse with bullshit excuses after messing up the window.

 

[Mainoldo]

How are seriously believing this Varane BS that they briefed ? It's no different than Wenger saying he could have got Ronaldo and Mbappe but couldn't. It's a means to save face not the opposite. Even the hardest core fan of the board won't believe this lame excuse they throw in this brief.

Saying they have no problem in paying 100m for Varane is no different than saying we have no proplem enquiring from Barca about Messi availability in the market. Varane has always been considered the future of Madrid's defense for ages. He's priceless and will never be sold even for 200m, not when he was starting to nail on the starting position they were preparing for him to take it.

Approaching impossible players to buy is a lame and exposed way to tell everyone "We're ready to spend but the options aren't available" while in fact you didn't want to spend from the start anyway, again no different from Wenger's thousands of quotes about players he could have got, simply a way to save face and appear faultless in front of everyone.

@Cloudface do you guys read what I write or just skim over it. Where did I say Woodward told him to get Varane? Where?

Come back to me with a proper argument when you answer my actual question. I underrated the stupidity.

 

[el3mel]

@Cloudface do you guys read what I write or just skim over it. Where did I say Woodward told him to get Varane? Where?

Come back to me with a proper argument when you answer my actual question. I underrated the stupidity.

Excuse me you go and re-read what you said. You told me that the board should have told Mourinho to go get so and so instead. Well if we want to debrief the brefing they did, they told him to get Varane. But I’m not stupid and I’m sure your not but that was obviously a clear example of what they believe is value for money. Which is young and established with room for improvement.

LOL.

You're right. There's no proper argument from the start.

 

[Mainoldo]

LOL.

You're right. There's no proper argument from the start.

So the sentence after doesn't exist? Fool loool.

 

[el3mel]

So the sentence after doesn't exist? Fool loool.

No point in continuing this any farther as you'll properly change goal posts again. I noticed you completely shifted the post from your ridiculous claim based on no evidence that Mourinho didn't approve Bailey and Pulisic signings, even though he apparently has no problem signing a 19 years old RB in the same window.

 

[Mainoldo]

No point in continuing this any farther as you'll properly change goal posts again. I noticed you completely shifted the post from your ridiculous claim based on no evidence that Mourinho didn't approve Bailey and Pulisic signings, even though he apparently has no problem signing a 19 years old RB in the same window.

You told me that the board should have gave him alternatives to what he came up with based on no evidence they didn't? Right? He also had no problem signing Lindelof but 12 months after he wants a more experienced CB?! Wonder what RB he would have wanted next summer. Thank god we wont find out.

 

[sunama]

Pretty much how I feel.

Nobody is going to take a decision on Woodward bar the Glazers and frankly, he hasn't done much wrong as far they're concerned.

What we can do is play better fecking football. We don't need 11 world class players to do that.

That's pretty much the conclusion I have come to.
I have also accepted that we won't be attempting to win the title anytime soon. Top 4 is our aim from now on and to maximise our profits.

 

[el3mel]

You told me that the board should have gave him alternatives to what he came up with base on no evidence they didn't? Right? He also had no problem signing Lindelof but 12 months after he wants a more experienced CB?! Wonder what he would have wanted next summer. Thank god we wont find out.

Bring your evidence that he didn't approve Bailey and Pulisic signings. Till you do this there's no point of going any farther in this point. I won't allow another goal posting shift.

Pep signed Nolito and Bravo and have no problem chopping and replacing them off the next summer for better players when they were proved as flops. Didn't speak poorly about Pep I believe. Flops happen all the time. If you're willing to keep a flop because your current manager spent on him and has to wait for a new manager to chop him off, you'll never move one step up then.

Fergie signed several flops and threw them out once he gave up on them. No problem at all.

When the next manager has the same problem with our board and Ed don't forget to ask them to sack him as well.

 

[Mainoldo]

Bring your evidence that he didn't approve Bailey and Pulisic signings. Till you do this there's no point of going any farther in this point. I won't allow another goal posting shift.

Any excuse not to answer my questions I see. You should do Politics. Does Mourinho identify that type of player for his RW. Yes or No?

Pep signed Nolito and Bravo and have no problem chopping and replacing them off the next summer for better players when they were proved as flops. Didn't speak poorly about Pep I believe. Flops happen all the time. If you're willing to keep a flop because your current manager spent on him and has to wait for a new manager to chop him off, you'll never move one step up then.

Well our flops consist of Martial, Pogba, Mhkitaryan (Who we allowed to do what your example states), Lindelof, Bailly, Shaw, Mata, Jones, Smalling, Sanchez, Rashford. Non of these player play good, so do we get rid of all of them because they aren't working just like Nolito and Bravo?

Fergie signed several flops and threw them out once he gave up on them. No problem at all.

When the next manager has the same problem with our board and Ed don't forget to ask them to sack him as well.

He did but guess what, he WON and he actually got players playing well. Phil Jones played a whole season in Center Midfield yet this manager can't even get him to pass.

 

[el3mel]

Any excuse not to answer my questions I see. You should do Politics. Does Mourinho identify that type of player for his RW. Yes or No?

I'm not the one who put a ridiculous claim then refused to give evidence on.

Well our flops consist of Martial, Pogba, Mhkitaryan (Who we allowed to do what your example states), Lindelof, Bailly, Shaw, Mata, Jones, Smalling, Sanchez, Rashford. Non of these player play good, so do we get rid of all of them because they aren't working just like Nolito and Bravo?

The only flops out of this list are Mikhi and Lindelof. There's difference from player playing some poor games in mid of very good ones and one who has done nothing at all despite all the chances he got and ended up being useless on the bench. Thus best option is to chop him and replace him instead of waiting to get a new manager to get rid of the deadwood of the previous one like we did with both Moyes and LVG and this policy had fecked us. LVG had to shift +20 players of the team in 2 years and Mourinho did get rid of most of LVG players and I'm pretty sure the new manager will get rid of the likes of Lindelof as well. Why wait for a new manager instead of chopping these now like any good board does ?

He did but guess what, he WON and he actually got players playing well. Phil Jones played a whole season in Center Midfield yet this manager can't even get him to pass.

Pep won feck all his first season, didn't even mount a title challenge on the league, finished 3rd, got out of both cups and got eliminated from round of 16th against not a big name (Monaco). His first summer was considered at this time a failure as only Jesus and Sane could nail a starting spot. Gundogan got injured, Stones had an underwhelming season and was getting laughed at and Nolito and Bravo were absolute failure. Their season had some humiliating defeats as 4-0 to Everton and 4-2 to Leicester.

Still the board supported him even far more than his first summer and splashed the cash, spending 200m and enforcing the whole squad and thus ripped the results and dominating the league.

Klopp's first summer at Liverpool was absolute failure as well, as the only good player they signed was Mane and they went on and finished the league barely 4th ( could have even lost 4th by the end of the season to Arsenal, they secured it in the last 2 games only ) and won feck all. The board went on and splashed the cash unlike their policy of the previous years.

According to your great logic, both City and Liverpool should have told Pep and Klopp to feck off and win with what they have first before they bring them good players or chop any flops they signed, and both would have properly been sacked by now if their board had done this, but their board actually wanted success and knew that the problem isn't in the manager alone, they're ripping the fruits now.

 

[Speedicut75]

Not that I like Woodward, or what he represents, or the commercial priorities he seems to have, but I feel he is absolutely vital in the current landscape to make sure we are financially competitive where elite level football is concerned.

Maybe he could be better understood as a "necessary evil", because our model of ownership makes clear the acquisition of money is absolutely fundamental for the continued success of the club. And in this highly corporate guise he is a superb operator; who is without rival in securing copious amounts of filthy, sponsor-based, cash.

I don't like the fiscal directives that increasingly drive our ambitions, but without a benevolent, sovereign-backed, perto-dollar, state, I just can't see why anyone would clamour for the removal of the ever-ovulating goose, that is laying golden egg after golden egg. In saying that I definitely do believe Ed is overstepping his remit in respect of denying the manager signings, where he indicates whether he/board think said players are competent footballers ( see Gary Neville's opinion piece ), but I reckon things could get a great deal more perilous for our club if he heeds the banner's advise and buggers off, leaving us to the tender mercies of the Glazers, et al.

 

[Mainoldo]

I'm not the one who put a ridiculous claim then refused to give evidence on.

It wasn't a ridiculous statement it was a point if he wanted what the board perceive as 'value' he would have got it, but he wanted Willian and Perisic or is nothing facts until it's briefed or written on paper. If so lets just stop it here as everything is built on pretty much speculation when it comes to football.

The only flops out of this list are Mikhi and Lindelof. There's difference from player playing some poor games in mid of very good ones and one who has done nothing at all despite all the chances he got and ended up being useless on the bench. Thus best option is to chop him and replace him instead of waiting to get a new manager to get rid of the deadwood of the previous one like we did with both Moyes and LVG and this policy had fecked us. LVG had to shift +20 players of the team in 2 years and Mourinho did get rid of most of LVG players and I'm pretty sure the new manager will get rid of the likes of Lindelof as well. Why wait for a new manager instead of chopping these now like any good board does ?

We don't need to identify what is a flop or not it's like a who's world class debate at the end of the day the players I listed haven't performed to the level required; some just haven't got it some are under-performing as the World Cup has shown, one of which happens to be on your list, funny that.

Pep won feck all his first season, didn't even mount a title challenge on the league, finished 3rd, got out of both cups and got eliminated from round of 16th against not a big name (Monaco). His first summer was considered at this time a failure as only Jesus and Sane could nail a starting spot. Gundogan got injured, Stones had an underwhelming season and was getting laughed at and Nolito and Bravo were absolute failure. Their season had some humiliating defeats as 4-0 to Everton and 4-2 to Leicester.

Still the board supported him even far more than his first summer and splashed the cash, spending 200m and enforcing the whole squad and thus ripped the results and dominating the league.

Klopp's first summer at Liverpool was absolute failure as well, as the only good player they signed was Mane and they went on and finished the league barely 4th ( could have even lost 4th by the end of the season to Arsenal, they secured it in the last 2 games only ) and won feck all. The board went on and splashed the cash unlike their policy of the previous years.

According to your great logic, both City and Liverpool should have told Pep and Klopp to feck off and win with what they have first before they bring them good players or chop any flops they signed, and both would have properly been sacked by now if their board had done this, but their board actually wanted success and knew that the problem isn't in the manager alone, they're ripping the fruits now.

Your argument holds no water because that very season we finished 6th below City, so it wasn't really a success by all means we was lucky a Europa win mean Champions League Qualification otherwise it wouldn't have been much different from LVG's previous season incharge. I say that to say this we still went out that summer and got the manager 3 out of his 4 identified targets (According to him as we all know you deal with facts). So did our board not want success? was Mourinho not backed like Pep? It's not the boards fault Pep's signings worked for him the board don't manage the team. So lets not just 'move goalposts' to suit your argument give us your version of Mourinho's two summer transfer window's hell even add in the January ones if you want to show us how the board didn't back him?

You point out Pep and Klopp but I think (Notice i said i think this time)... another reason they have not given him the cheque book this summer is because they see what those managers have done with similar budgets and thought why shouldn't you be able to compete. Do we have to literally 'Buy you the title Jose' and the answer quite obviously is Yes.

 

[Sandikan]

Despite the sarcastic tone of this post I wouldn’t be surprised if this was close to the truth.

I don’t think Woodward intended for things to spiral out of control like this. The way Phil de Bruin tells it Karen Shotbolt was giving a press briefing and Ed Woodward chanced by. The briefing we’ve got, which Gary Neville confirmed came from Ed defending himself to journalists, I think mostly happened because Ed got cornered and reached for some explanations he thought would be well accepted.

The more I look at the situation, and the way United is now trying to prop up Mourinho, I wouldn’t be surprised if Woodward never even considered Jose’s position would be fatally undermined by what he said. He was probably thinking ‘I’m getting flack here so I’m gonna deflect a bit.’ I could be wrong but the mixed messages don’t give the impression that there was a coordinated plan to do for Jose.

I’m not sure Woodward realised what he said would be interpreted as ‘Woodward doesn’t back Mourinho.’ Both by the media but also the players and their agents. In fact, based on the latest briefings about Zidane, I am guessing Woodward would never have said anything had he anticipated Mou’s authority would be hurt to the point that Pogba’s agent started trying to run roughshod over United in public.

This could all have been a series of very bad coincidences.

PS) In a world where Pep was able to replace Hart, Clichy, Sagna, Kolarov, Zabaleta, DeMechellis etc. Then replace some of the replacements, Bravo with Ederson, Stones with Laporte, £30m per centre back is nothing. Stones & Laporte alone cost over £100m.

No sarcasm meant at all. I think it was exactly like that and how you expand on it.

I think he completely has been caught out by the transfer market explosion and has realised that statements about how we can do amazing things that others can't look ludicrous.

City pumped in 50m for numerous defenders before that was a standard price.
We have been locked in a galactico type obsession for a while now without any sort of idea of fusing a team together.
The way we don't ever look very smooth means we've actually done quite amazingly to come 2nd and win and compete for cups recently.
It does in a strange way give hope for what happens if it properly clicks

 

[Sandikan]

Pep signed Nolito, flopped, chopped him next summer and replaced him by B.Silva. He signed Bravo, flopped, broke the bank on Ederson.

Flop signings happen all the time. It's useless to keep on flops because you signed them instead of being ruthless and replace them. Fergie signed several flops and had no problem throwing them out after he gave up. You make a great deal of these flops.

And spending 70m on Maguire is far, far better than this money going into Glazers pockets.

Yep to the last line.

We have dealt with flops though. Di maria, falcao,schneidy, schweiny, mhky all moved on fairly promptly.

Im worriedl lindelof and bailly aren't looking very good. When you then start looking at Jose's transfers we aren't left with a great result.

 

[Nikelesh Reddy]

I hope the supporters don’t go ahead with the plan to hoist that stupid banner before the game.Its an utterly pointless exercise,the owners will not sack Woodward come what may....He’s not a manager who can be replaced by someone else...Woodward’s pretty much indispensable to the owners...

 

[Mainoldo]

I hope the supporters don’t go ahead with the plan to hoist that stupid banner before the game.Its an utterly pointless exercise,the owners will not sack Woodward come what may....He’s not a manager who can be replaced by someone else...Woodward’s pretty much indispensable to the owners...

He's indispensable to us too. Other club would gladly have him.

 

[el3mel]

It wasn't a ridiculous statement it was a point if he wanted what the board perceive as 'value' he would have got it, but he wanted Willian and Perisic or is nothing facts until it's briefed or written on paper. If so lets just stop it here as everything is built on pretty much speculation when it comes to football.

If what the board perceived as value was Varane we would have never got anyone. The standard the board set as a value to spend according to the briefing means that they weren't ready to spend any farther but wanted to save face and show that they have intent but didn't find good targets, exactly what was Arsenal were doing for years. If you're fooled with that, Ok.

We don't need to identify what is a flop or not it's like a who's world class debate at the end of the day the players I listed haven't performed to the level required; some just haven't got it some are under-performing as the World Cup has shown, one of which happens to be on your list, funny that.

Some of these players have performed pretty well for Mourinho on several occasions, Pogba, Jones, Smalling, Bailly, Rashford, hell even Martial all had pretty good games mixed with some bad ones. They haven't poor the whole run at all. Mikhi and Lindelof are the ones who were mostly rubbish here thus can be considered flops.

Pogba has performed in World Cup in a role that Mourinho wants him to do here. A CM with defensive duties and can launch counters, play simple football and be a part of the team. People were talking about Pogba should be given a free roam role without restrictions but when he actually did well with restrictions at World Cup they're using this as a base. That's the funny thing.

Your argument holds not water because that very season we finished 6th below City, so it wasn't really a success by all means we was lucky a Europa win mean Champions League Qualification otherwise it wouldn't have been too different from LVG's. I say that to say this we still went out that summer and got the manager 3 out of his 4 identified targets (According to him as we all know you deal with facts). So did our board not want success was Mourinho not backed like Pep. It's not the boards fault Pep's signings worked for him the board don't manager the team. So lets not just 'move goalposts' to suit your argument give us your version of Mourinho's two summer transfer window's hell even add in the January ones if you want to show us how the board didn't back him?

You point out Pep and Klopp but I think yes I said I think, so it might not be true... another reason they have not given him the cheque book this summer is because they see what those managers have done with similar budgets and thought why shouldn't you be able to compete. Do we have to literally 'Buy you the title Jose' and the answer quite obviously is Yes.

I'm talking about the current season.

We have finished second last season, ahead of everyone bar one. The next step was to improve the team farther to close the gap with City and mount a title challenge, to move from second spot to challenging the first who has unlimited funds, like what City did for Pep after his first season when finished 3rd, 15 points away from first spot or what Liverpool did for Klopp after finishing 4th, 17 and 25 points in respective away from the top. They now have a better and more balanced team than us thanks to their board plans.

Instead, we decided to feck up the market, don't sign any targets and told the manager to feck off and do with what he had, different from City approach with Pep after he finished 3rd and win nothing. He said he gave a list of 5 players, then said he wanted 2 but got only 1, didn't get any. That means we got him 2/5 or something of the targets that we were supposed to continue improving and move from second spot to challenge for the first.

If you reached the point in which you don't trust the manager and think his targets are shite and not suited for the club, that he won't improve anyone and it's useless to spend more money for him, why even keep him in charge ? Sack him immediately and bring another one to spend money for. How is that concept very hard for some to gather ?! You're fine with your board not backing the manager in his 3rd season, ok, what's your point of them not sacking him then ?

The end is the situation became a manager who the board didn't trust and decided to not back him any farther, but also decided to not sack him and left him to manage a squad that he wanted to improve and doesn't trust some of its players.

Your board has simply written this season off before it even began. They didn't sack Mourinho but refused to back him any farther. How can both happen exactly in any decently managed club ? Impossible.

Back him or sack him, but don't leave the team in a fecking nutshells at the start of the season. If you trust your manager ideas of the team like what City and Pool did away from the results, back him to the heart and bring him all his targets. If you don't like the approach of your manager and think his targets are too old and don't represent value for money, sack him immediately and bring a manager who suits your ideas as a CEO. Both situations are much better than the shite show we decided to make.

What we did is the board decided to write this season off completely and wait for the next one. No good managed or well run club will do this shite. More importantly, no club board will do this and be appreciated by the fans like what you're doing. The only reason for that is that it's coming under a hated figure of a manager from the most like Mourinho. Any other manager having the same problem and I doubt the reactions would have been the same.

 

[Judas]

Why would people want Woodward sacked? He's good at part of his job, we just need him to give up the part he's clearly cack at.

 

[#07]

No sarcasm meant at all. I think it was exactly like that and how you expand on it.

I think he completely has been caught out by the transfer market explosion and has realised that statements about how we can do amazing things that others can't look ludicrous.

City pumped in 50m for numerous defenders before that was a standard price.
We have been locked in a galactico type obsession for a while now without any sort of idea of fusing a team together.
The way we don't ever look very smooth means we've actually done quite amazingly to come 2nd and win and compete for cups recently.
It does in a strange way give hope for what happens if it properly clicks

Sorry for misinterpreting you.

 

[Hughie77]

It's a fecking mess. Money is coming in that's all they want. I had to reregister on Utd website because of new set up didn't recognise my old one, the first thing that comes up is to buy a shirt with your name on if? Unbelievable there just screwing as much money out of the fans as possible.
Woodward, Glazers don't give a fiddle about where or how the money gets in there pockets. Forget the football forget the fans who want to see a successful side.
I'm a long long long time Utd follower and this is a bad period for us as fans. Money money money seems to be the root of it, were the richest club in the world with a team that is maybe scrapping top 4.. disgraceful attitude of the money men.

 

[Kapardin]

Why would people want Woodward sacked? He's good at part of his job, we just need him to give up the part he's clearly cack at.

Trouble is, he won't give up that part of the job we want him to give up. His briefs sound like a defiant little child clinging onto his favorite toy.

I like Ed and I don't think he deserves to be sacked (he means well, heart in right place, brain way out in left field though...), but I also think people are overrating the sponsorships he gets in based on the outlandish noodle and tractor companies. What he's done has been swell, but there is nothing to say in this day and age that another CEO won't do the same. Even if he makes less money for the club than Woodward, its' not as though all the millions are reinvested back into the club. We will always have that 200 million (this summer not withstanding) as a transfer budget. And if not many sponsors, a few should be enough for the club to remain healthy.

You look at Liverpool who don't do nearly as much as United on the non-sporting side, but they are able to get in the players they want thanks to favorable owners, football men in charge of transfers and a healthy financial status.

 

[Mainoldo]

If what the board perceived as value was Varane we would have never got anyone. The standard the board set as a value to spend according to the briefing means that they weren't ready to spend any farther but wanted to save face and show that they have intent but didn't find good targets, exactly what was Arsenal were doing for years. If you're fooled with that, Ok.



Some of these players have performed pretty well for Mourinho on several occasions, Pogba, Jones, Smalling, Bailly, Rashford, hell even Martial all had pretty good games mixed with some bad ones. They haven't poor the whole run at all. Mikhi and Lindelof are the ones who were mostly rubbish here thus can be considered flops.

Pogba has performed in World Cup in a role that Mourinho wants him to do here. A CM with defensive duties and can launch counters, play simple football and be a part of the team. People were talking about Pogba should be given a free roam role without restrictions but when he actually did well with restrictions at World Cup they're using this as a base. That's the funny thing.



I'm talking about the current season.

We have finished second last season, ahead of everyone bar one. The next step was to improve the team farther to close the gap with City and mount a title challenge, to move from second spot to challenging the first who has unlimited funds, like what City did for Pep after his first season when finished 3rd, 15 points away from first spot or what Liverpool did for Klopp after finishing 4th, 17 and 25 points in respective away from the top. They now have a better and more balanced team than us thanks to their board plans.

Instead, we decided to feck up the market, don't sign any targets and told the manager to feck off and do with what he had, different from City approach with Pep after he finished 3rd and win nothing. He said he gave a list of 5 players, then said he wanted 2 but got only 1, didn't get any. That means we got him 2/5 or something of the targets that we were supposed to continue improving and move from second spot to challenge for the first.

If you reached the point in which you don't trust the manager and think his targets are shite and not suited for the club, that he won't improve anyone and it's useless to spend more money for him, why even keep him in charge ? Sack him immediately and bring another one to spend money for. How is that concept very hard for some to gather ?! You're fine with your board not backing the manager in his 3rd season, ok, what's your point of them not sacking him then ?

The end is the situation became a manager who the board didn't trust and decided to not back him any farther, but also decided to not sack him and left him to manage a squad that he wanted to improve and doesn't trust some of its players.

Your board has simply written this season off before it even began. They didn't sack Mourinho but refused to back him any farther. How can both happen exactly in any decently managed club ? Impossible.

Back him or sack him, but don't leave the team in a fecking nutshells at the start of the season. If you trust your manager ideas of the team like what City and Pool did away from the results, back him to the heart and bring him all his targets. If you don't like the approach of your manager and think his targets are too old and don't represent value for money, sack him immediately and bring a manager who suits your ideas as a CEO. Both situations are much better than the shite show we decided to make.

What we did is the board decided to write this season off completely and wait for the next one. No good managed or well run club will do this shite. More importantly, no club board will do this and be appreciated by the fans like what you're doing. The only reason for that is that it's coming under a hated figure of a manager from the most like Mourinho. Any other manager having the same problem and I doubt the reactions would have been the same.

I appreciate we have a different opinion but your biases is overlooking the actually truth in the matter. We are not Arsenal and are run nothing like that even with there impressive penny signings this season (Which seems to have been swept under the carpet) we have spent more money than them. So lets throw that one out.

Our players aren't performing for the manager, Brighton showed it and there have been much more example this year of how they under perform which is why the World cup was a breath of fresh air to some. The Pogba role for France makes no sense too, as in if Dechamps should he can play it, why can't he do it for us? Maybe because we fail at playing a good form of counter attacking football, hell i don't know what we play.

Okay i fully agree with your last bit but I also back the board and i'll tell you why. Building Mourinho's team to win the league comes with too big of a price, what we are left with is 6 CB's, two good seasons from a RW, no Martial, no Luke Shaw and a disinterested Pogba and Rashford. It's not going to last the squad would need a further rebuild with more money pumped into positions through isolating too many players. What's the point in my opinion they should have stuck it through and got rid. Instead we have to watch this thing until it crashes.

 

[el3mel]

I appreciate we have a different opinion but your biases is overlooking the actually truth in the matter. We are not Arsenal and are run nothing like that even with there impressive penny signings this season (Which seems to have been swept under the carpet) we have spent more money than them. So lets throw that one out.

Our players aren't performing for the manager, Brighton showed it and there have been much more example this year of how they under perform which is why the World cup was a breath of fresh air to some. The Pogba role for France makes no sense too, as in if Dechamps should he can play it, why can't he do it for us? Maybe because we fail at playing a good form of counter attacking football, hell i don't know what we play.

Okay i fully agree with your last bit but I also back the board and i'll tell you why. Building Mourinho's team to win the league comes with too big of a price, what we are left with is 6 CB's, two good seasons from a RW, no Martial, no Luke Shaw and a disinterested Pogba and Rashford. It's not going to last the squad would need a further rebuild with more money pumped into positions through isolating too many players. What's the point in my opinion they should have stuck it through and got rid. Instead we have to watch this thing until it crashes.

I have no problem if the board doesn't trust him, sack him and bring a new one. If they are willing to keep him manage this season and even gave him contract extension earlier in the same year, they should have backed him then. They did neither, neither sacked nor backed him. That means they decided to write this season off and wait for the upcoming season with a new manager. That's unacceptable imo.

The players they would have signed this season for Mourinho would have helped the upcoming manager as well. Don't know why signing someone like Willian or Toby would have benefited Mourinho alone not the new manager after him. It would have kept the team steady this season and helped the new manager later on instead of this mess.

Next season loads of players will have their contract running out and we'll up to either renew all these deadwood contracts, keeping the team exactly at the same spot or letting most of them leave while having a hell of battle to replace all of them for the upcoming manager. Next summer can easily end up in a complete disaster. Should have secured some of the replacements for this season to get rid of the deadwood whose contracts are running out next summer like Mata, Young, Jones ..etc. Instead we're here. Complete lack of vision or long term planning imo.

 

[doriandun]

I have no problem if the board doesn't trust him, sack him and bring a new one. If they are willing to keep him manage this season and even gave him contract extension earlier in the same year, they should have backed him then. They did neither, neither sacked nor backed him. That means they decided to write this season off and wait for the upcoming season with a new manager. That's unacceptable imo.

The players they would have signed this season for Mourinho would have helped the upcoming manager as well. Don't know why signing someone like Willian or Toby would have benefited Mourinho alone not the new manager after him. It would have kept the team steady this season and helped the new manager later on instead of this mess.

Next season loads of players will have their contract running out and we'll up to either renew all these deadwood contracts, keeping the team exactly at the same spot or letting most of them leave while having a hell of battle to replace all of them for the upcoming manager. Next summer can easily end up in a complete disaster. Should have secured some of the replacements for this season to get rid of the deadwood whose contracts are running out next summer like Mata, Young, Jones ..etc. Instead we're here. Complete lack of vision or long term planning imo.

Your analysis is correct, but what people are also forgetting is it will cost 35 million plus to sack Mourinho, then another 30 million plus to install Pochiettino, the Alderweireld signing was such an important signing this summer, as it would steady the back four, and allow the team to push up higher up the pitch, and linderof and bailly would be ahead of the curve in their development, [Mourinho is confident the two will be ok in the future] and so this time next year most of the mistakes would be ironed out, and even if Alderweireld got injured mid season, progress would of been made, with those two in understanding their role and application in the back four.What Woodward should of done this summer is get rid of more of the dead wood, Rojo, Darmain, one of Jones and Smailling, i would of also allowed Martial to leave, as i don't see the point of having both Martial and Rashford, keeping Rashfor as he could be the understudy of both Sanchez and William.

Also with Pogba's inconsistency issues, and the right hand side of the team non existent, next summer is gonna need a massive injection of cash to rectify the problem, also cover for both fulll back postions, signing William, would of also allowed Chong to develop, or even Pereira to develop as an understudy.


Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool will be in a much better position come next season than Man Utd,and if the boards gamble is to move Mourinho on, and the team does not finish in the top four this season, thats another 60 to 70 million of loss revenue.

 

[AbusementPark]

Woodward needed to back Mourinho financially this summer, he didnt and the lack of investment will result in a difficult season ahead. We finished 19 points behind City, got knocked out of the Champions League by Sevilla who we should be beating comfortably. This shows how far off we are from competing at the top level again. We made it to the FA Cup final and lost to a poor Chelsea side, due to defensive mistakes. We needed to back Mourinho fully or whats the point in having a manager, no wonder he is calling himself a head coach and not manager anymore. It does nothing for Mourinhos confidence and nothing for the teams confidence that the Manager doesnt trust his current squad.

It just seems to me that Woodward is looking out for the financial side of things and that is why there was a lack of signings, hes after bargain buys. Even if we go for young players they will still cost a fortune, look at Mbappe. He had a decent season for Monaco and PSG paid a fortune for him, but it paid off. We need to get rid of the dead wood in the team for good money and bring in players that hopefully make the grade. Not all signings will be a success as evident in some of our signings. Look at the players Mourinho has brought in Paul Pogba, Romelu Lukaku, Henrikh Mkhitaryan, Victor Lindelof, Eric Bailly, Nemanja Matic and Zlatan Ibrahimovic. Out of the players he has brought in I would say Mkhi and Lindelof are the only real flops from that list, from one of the flops we got Sanchez in return. His track record with United transfers is a success, maybe 2 more players would have been enough to maybe challenge better for the league, RW and a defender were definitely needed. I can see maybe Dalot playing as RB or RW with Valencia playing the other position.

 

[Jim Beam]

Didn't blame him so much before, but 5 years on it's pretty clear... We don't have a clear structure, no adaptability or progressive thinking, no vision and no major success on the pitch.

Whether it's up to him or those above him, it doesn't matter, the problem is certainly not solely down to the manager. I actually think that the idea about DoF came into the process just because others have it in place and not as a result of thorough and strategic thinking where we want to be as a club in a few years time. Hope I'm wrong, though.

 

[Rajma]

Just figured that his father was a big United fan, maybe he actually has the best intentions at heart but he seriously needs some help from football people to provide him some guidance.

 

[The Yak]

Ed's been a qualified success for the Glazers. He played a major role in the take-over ( as a top man in Morgan Stanley) - He's delivered huge growth in revenue stream allowing Utd to spend big.

Where he's struggled is in appointing Managers. He gets a free(ish) pass on Moyes as apparently, Fergie had a big in-put here. He's got to take the blame for LVG and we've got to wait to see how Jose will work out.

Ed is obviously used to success - he doesn't want any more blips on his CV. It's a clever move to appoint a DOF - in effect, a possible fall guy who will pick Jose's successor (whenever that might be)

Ed doesn't need a banner over Turf Moore to tell him when it's time to change tactics - Ed has seen how failure in football ends. Ed will be associated with success (Financial) and will be happy to see his exposure to potential failure reduced.

Ed's position is rock solid and he's taking steps to ensure he stays smelling of roses.

 

[RedRover]

Bailly was signed in the same summer Stones was bought for 50m.

Also, 2 summers earlier, PSG set the standard with their 50m move for Luiz.

So what? What point are you trying to make? Were they not expected to be first team players ahead of Rojo, Smalling or Jones?

My point is, and was that clearly the manager thought they were good enough to challenge for the first team.

 

[RedRover]

Laporte and Stones are arguably higher quality because they cost basically double what Lindelof and Bailly did, so you'd expect them to become fixtures.

Laporte and Stones also have the advantage of playing alongside Kompany and Otamendi, experienced centre halves who can guide them through games. That's exactly what Jose wanted to give Bailly and Lindelof. Nowhere has it been suggested that Mourinho wanted to sell Bailly or Lindelof. All the talk was actually of Rojo going. What he was looking for is an older head to guide two centre backs in their early 20s so that, by time they get to their mid to late 20s, they've been brought along to the point they can be leaders in their own right.

I don't understand what benefit it is to the team to avoid bringing in an experienced top level centre back. We've seen with Smalling and Jones' development that, without an experienced figure around, it can be hard to bring players along.

Why does Woodward need to show he's in charge? We know he's in charge. I'm honestly baffled by your point of view that he needed to do something to prove that. However, we clearly aren't going to agree so let's end this here.

If Jose is spending £60 million (and another fortune in wages etc) on two players he expects to be no better than what he has then that’s a disgrace. I’m not having that. He clearly thought they were good enough or why bring them in?

Had he wanted Stones, for example, what’s to say the board wouldn’t have gone to £50 million?

My point was that if he no longer thinks they are good enough it’s reasonable for the board to to ask why before they hand him another fortune to address a position he thinks needs addressing.

As I said above, I suspect there is fault on both sides. As a fan though, what I’d prefer is that the club don’t blindly back managers hand over fist, especially where that Manager seems not to be happy and looking to pick fights all over - as he has in the last.

If he goes - which isn’t impossible, whoever comes in will want money to spend. Whilst I’ve been critical of the board before, here I can see why they’re reticent to back him.

 

[RedRover]

Each of the City defenders was bought for the combined total we paid for Bailly and Lindelof. We know from accounts inside the club that Lindelof for sure was a "value purchase" to avoid paying the required fee for the finished article. Like so many purchases since the Glazers took over, United have tried to find quality players on the cheap without the required investment. And this has led to the current problems under Mourinho. How anyone can blame Mourinho for our lack of investment in quality defenders since 2011 is beyond me. Each time we've gone to the market in recent years, we've tried to find a player who can be bought for a low fee or who can be sold for a high value later. Players like VVD, Laporte, Maguire, Godin, don't meet these standards despite being what the club requires in the defence.

So is the suggestion that a Mourinho didn’t want those players? That he wanted others? No evidence for that as far as I can see although I’ll happily stand corrected.

The fact that the club spent big on Pogba and Lukaku, as well as giving a mega contract to Sanchez suggests there’s not much merit in that argument.

 

[el3mel]

So what? What point are you trying to make? Were they not expected to be first team players ahead of Rojo, Smalling or Jones?

My point is, and was that clearly the manager thought they were good enough to challenge for the first team.

My point was that they weren't expensive, and you can revert back to the time we signed them and you'll see everyone saying that a very reasonable price for Bailly at the this time.

PSG bought Luiz for 50m and City bought Stones for 50m before Neymar deal so you can't say 60m for someone like Laporte was due to the market going sky high.

30m for Bailly was a reasonable business. Nothing expensive about it and almost everyone at this time thought that. Funny they became expensive now.

 

[RedRover]

This isn't quite true though is it? Laporte and Stones were 120million pounds worth of backup defenders to Kompany and Otamendi last season. We have Bailly and Lindelof as 60million pounds worth of backup defenders to Smalling and Jones. The difference in quality in the first choice defenders is stark enough without getting into how much was spent on young reserve defenders. It's the same for the fullback positions as well.

They were clearly both brought into City to be starters, as they are now.

If you think the club brought in Bailly and Lindelof to be long term “backups” to Jones and Smalling, in my opinion you’re mad.

 

[RedRover]

Lindelof looks like a long term purchase, and Mourinho asked for a seasoned player to help him and the other defenders along. Sounds not very difficult to understand.

Should the board have expected Mourinho to come in 1st last year? What better performance do you think the board was expecting?

I think what’s reasonable would be to expect a better standard of football and more from what he has at his disposal.

It’d be nice to see him get something close to attacking football from the likes of Pogba and Sanchez.

In the past his teams parked the bus in tight games, and I thought that was fair enough - it wins you titles. But they still scored goals and played some decent stuff at times. Better that has been served up so far here.

 

[RedRover]

My point was that they weren't expensive, and you can revert back to the time we signed them and you'll see everyone saying that a very reasonable price for Bailly at the this time.

PSG bought Luiz for 50m and City bought Stones for 50m before Neymar deal so you can't say 60m for someone like Laporte was due to the market going sky high.

30m for Bailly was a reasonable business. Nothing expensive about it and almost everyone at this time thought that. Funny they became expensive now.

It’s a non-point unless you think it follows that he didn’t want them or wanted other players instead.

My point is that if we assume he’s half the player for half the money (which I assume is what yours saying) then why did we bring him in - unless the managers believes he’s better than what he has?

I don’t accept Jose asked the board to sign a player he didn’t believe would be s long term, first team fixture when we were so light on quality in defence.

 

[el3mel]

It’s a non-point unless you think it follows that he didn’t want them or wanted other players instead.

My point is that if we assume he’s half the player for half the money (which I assume is what yours saying) then why did we bring him in - unless the managers believes he’s better than what he has?

I don’t accept Jose asked the board to sign a player he didn’t believe would be s long term, first team fixture when we were so light on quality in defence.

What's your point ? No one is saying Bailly was a wrong purchase. He was definitely bought to be a main player and for most of the previous 2 seasons whenever he was injury free he was playing as a starter, except the ending of last season. Lindelof who was probably bought as a backup but Bailly was a starter from his first day here.

What I'm saying is we didn't overpay for any of them. At this time 30m was a cheap price and you can revert back to when we signed them and no one said we overpaid for them. Some were even saying getting Bailly for 30m when Stones was costing +50m was a bargain.

The problem is that beside Bailly we needed a cool headed leader in the back like Toby. We have a list of good defenders, but most of them crumple under pressure and none is cool or leader. If you're going to pay for a leader defender, a real top one not a good prospect as Bailly, expect to pay double the price you paid for Bailly then.

What if Mourinho was thinking to revert to 3 defenders this season with Toby in the center of it ? He said he was planning for something and has to change to after the market failure. We don't know.

 

[RedRover]

Fully agree with your thoughts. I don't understand why our fans all of a sudden are moaning that we didn't overspend on players in a position we have the most bodies in. Imagine the meltdown if we spent 70m on Alderweireld when he's available for 25m next summer, all we'd see is "typical Ed" type posts. I swear everyone is losing their minds now that we've lost the security blanket that was Fergie. Welcome to the world of normal Football clubs fellas!

Indeed.

Criticise City’s huge spending.

Also criticise United not over spending.

Odd.

Bottom line for me. I wanted Jose here because he’s a winner. I think Ed should stick to business and we need a “buffer” between the two.

But so far, Jose has spent a fortune on a few poor players and a few very good ones. Unfortunately those quality players look poor and a bit lost.

Spending is the way to get closer to City, but it all seems scattergun to me. I don’t know what’s going on behind the scenes but to me it seems all a bit toxic.

 

[Amir]

Fully agree with your thoughts. I don't understand why our fans all of a sudden are moaning that we didn't overspend on players in a position we have the most bodies in.

Because signing players has become our most exciting activity.