McKenna or Tuchel?

Wilt said:
People underestimate as to how tough the PL is, which is multiplied when managing a club the size of United and all it’s expectations.

Managers arguably better qualified than McKenna such as Gerrard and Lampard have quickly been found out in the PREM.
Click to expand...

I don't think many are underestimating how tough the job is. Hardly any in fact. But I do think some people are seriously overestimating the extent to which previous experience prepares you for the job.

You seek safe hands, when there aren't any. Ten Hag is doing worse than Ole did in his first two seasons, on every conceivable metric. And yet the former was the inexperienced manager (Cardiff & Molde) and the latter was the experienced manager who ticked every box. Whoever comes, they'll have some serious pressure and they'll have to adapt and grow while on the job, if they are to succeed. Given the state of the club, their chances of long term success are minuscule, whoever that new manager is. Jose, LVG, Ten Hag have all failed. Is Tuchel a better, safer bet than those guys?

But now I have to ask, in what way were Lampard and Gerrard more qualified than McKenna?
 
Sensible approach is Tuchel then McKenna. If McKenna really is good, then he will go from strength to strength over the next year or two. And I might be wrong, but it feels like we've got the connection with him and could bring him in ahead of other clubs if we did want to move for him.

Let's see how he does at Ipswich, but if he goes to Brighton then that would equally be a great opportunity for him. I could genuinely see him shining if he got the Brighton job, but think his stock may take a hit at Ipswich in the PL. Kompany had Burnley playing great football in the Championship and look how things have nosedived this season, through no real fault of his own really.
 
pocco said:
Sensible approach is Tuchel then McKenna. If McKenna really is good, then he will go from strength to strength over the next year or two. And I might be wrong, but it feels like we've got the connection with him and could bring him in ahead of other clubs if we did want to move for him.

Let's see how he does at Ipswich, but if he goes to Brighton then that would equally be a great opportunity for him. I could genuinely see him shining if he got the Brighton job, but think his stock may take a hit at Ipswich in the PL. Kompany had Burnley playing great football in the Championship and look how things have nosedived this season, through no real fault of his own really.
Click to expand...

Again though, for the 100th time. 42% of promoted clubs get relegated and 90% of them get involved in the relegation battle.

Kompany just went through the average experience of a coach of a promoted club. Nothing better, nothing worse. If he failed at anything, it was to be above average, to punch above his weight. A failure for me, is to punch well below your weight. You know, like we're currently doing under Ten Hag. Kompany is hardly a failure. The fact he didn't save Burnley doesn't mean he would have done poorly with a much better club. Or that he is a poor manager.

Trying to survive with a newly promoted club is a huge challenge. And it's a challenge some managers are lucky to avoid. Pep is fantastic coach, perhaps the best ever, yet he has only ever coached Barca, Bayern and City. All clubs a the peak of their respective leagues when he took over. Never had a newly promoted club to keep up against the odds. Arteta has only coached Arsenal. Would Arteta of 3-4 years ago, have done better with Burnley this season. Debatable. I would argue, no. Yet now he's considered one of the best young coaches.

If Arsenal took a bet on Arteta, why is McKenna a more risky bet for United?
 
pcaming said:
Exactly this...
Click to expand...
What did you expect a newly promoted side to do? Finish in Europe? They get relegated back down 9/10 times, hardly a failure.

you can’t call someone crap just because they got a team promoted and then didn’t manage to stay in the next league up
 
MadMike said:
So, just like every other manager who took the high profile job at Manchester United? Did Jose or Ten Hag get an easy ride from the press?
Click to expand...
Well that's partly the point. If seasoned media operators with incredible CVs are getting a very tough time during rough spells of performance then what chance does a novice have? Unless the decision makers are convinced that the novice is very special then I don't see how it works.

Red Royal said:
I don't think McKenna is ready, but this applies to all United managers. The amount of stick TenHag gets compared to Poch for instance, and to a lesser extent Postecoglou, De Zerbi etc. is testimony to this.
Click to expand...
Yea, agreed. Which is why I think having that presence and media management ability is key to whoever gets the job next, as there will be many more performance related bumps in the road to come before the club is where it wants to be.
 
Last edited:
Wilt said:
People underestimate as to how tough the PL is, which is multiplied when managing a club the size of United and all it’s expectations.

Managers arguably better qualified than McKenna such as Gerrard and Lampard have quickly been found out in the PREM.
Click to expand...
Why are Gerrard and lampard better qualified? McKenna has been coaching and then managing for years. I’d say he’s far more qualified than the two you mentioned
 
MadMike said:
Again though, for the 100th time. 42% of promoted clubs get relegated and 90% of them get involved in the relegation battle.

Kompany just went through the average experience of a coach of a promoted club. Nothing better, nothing worse. If he failed at anything, it was to be above average, to punch above his weight. A failure for me, is to punch well below your weight. You know, like we're currently doing under Ten Hag. Kompany is hardly a failure. The fact he didn't save Burnley doesn't mean he would have done poorly with a much better club. Or that he is a poor manager.

Trying to survive with a newly promoted club is a huge challenge. And it's a challenge some managers are lucky to avoid. Pep is fantastic coach, perhaps the best ever, yet he has only ever coached Barca, Bayern and City. All clubs a the peak of their respective leagues when he took over. Never had a newly promoted club to keep up against the odds. Arteta has only coached Arsenal. Would Arteta of 3-4 years ago, have done better with Burnley this season. Debatable. I would argue, no. Yet now he's considered one of the best young coaches.

If Arsenal took a bet on Arteta, why is McKenna a more risky bet for United?
Click to expand...
I’m on your page. Said it a few times. Managing a newly promoted Burnley or Ipswich has no bearing on how you would fair with a bigger better team with better players.
 
Smores said:
In other circumstances I'd maybe side with McKenna but I think we need to go with the lower risk given our current situation.

I'd rather we secure top 4 for a couple of years to stabilise and I think Tuchel is the better option for that.
Click to expand...

There's no such thing, it's an oxymoron. A managerial change only ever happens at United when the club is destabilised.

If Tuchel comes and gets us top 4, and so long as he keeps getting us top 4, he's not getting sacked. The only way he would leave is if he gets sacked, and he would only get sacked if we fail to get top 4. And then we'll be back here again and people will be keep arguing the exact same thing: "We need stable hands to stabilise, to get top 4, and then...".
 
Zlatan 7 said:
I don’t see the logic in people saying give him a year at Ipswich to see how he does in the prem first. It’s a total different kettle of fish and wouldn’t prove or show anything. They were league 1 just a year ago, they’re going to get smashed in the prem no matter what or who is there I’d feel.

As for Tuchel or McKenna, I’d go McKenna everytime, Im not getting the Tuchel love and never have really.
Click to expand...

So, if McKenna stays at Ipswich this season and proceeds to get shit on a la Sheffield or Burnley, it doesn't matter? He is still good enough to be given one of the most demanding jobs in football?

Uhh, no. That is what has no logic. It's not like anyone is expecting him to win the title with Ipswich. If he manages to avoid relegation or misses it nearly, then maybe he should be considered. And if Ipswich bomb nonetheless, he will still get some offers after that. At the very least he should manage a club like Brighton, Brentford, Fulham, etc. first. Be better for him, too, to see if this club gets its shit together or not.
 
MadMike said:
I don't think many are underestimating how tough the job is. Hardly any in fact. But I do think some people are seriously overestimating the extent to which previous experience prepares you for the job.

You seek safe hands, when there aren't any. Ten Hag is doing worse than Ole did in his first two seasons, on every conceivable metric. And yet the former was the inexperienced manager (Cardiff & Molde) and the latter was the experienced manager who ticked every box.

But now I have to ask, in what way were Lampard and Gerrard more qualified than McKenna?
Click to expand...
In fairness I did say “arguably” :wenger: ….but I’ll try.

Undeniably both Gerrard and Lampard were very highly rated success footballers. Gerrard did well with Rangers along with several individual managerial awards, touted by all pundits as the next Liverpool messiah. Lampard lesser so but still well regarded by those in the know and not many questioned it when he was given the job at Chelsea.

A bit vague I know but I can’t see what McKenna has done better?

Personally think Tuchel as the only realistic option (he’s actually won more trophies than Klopp) but now seems that ship has sailed as being reported the Bayern players want him to stay.

What a bloody mess :(
 
Telsim said:
So, if McKenna stays at Ipswich this season and proceeds to get shit on a la Sheffield or Burnley, it doesn't matter? He is still good enough to be given one of the most demanding jobs in football?

Uhh, no. That is what has no logic. It's not like anyone is expecting him to win the title with Ipswich. If he manages to avoid relegation or misses it nearly, then maybe he should be considered. And if Ipswich bomb nonetheless, he will still get some offers after that. At the very least he should manage a club like Brighton, Brentford, Fulham, etc. first. Be better for him, too, to see if this club gets its shit together or not.
Click to expand...
Ipswich were in league one a year ago. What do you really expect to happen in the premier league who ever they have as manager
 
I'm more interested in McKenna but I want to see him in the EPL first. I wanted Tuchel but I fear his soft skills are not needed at this moment with our nascent structure.
 
There has been so many managers who have looked like the next big thing in the championship, only to struggle in the PL. Not saying he'll be one of those, but he could be. The positive for him is his experience already with us, and he's clearly worked wonders at Ipswitch.

I don't think people are overly in love with hiring Tuchel, I'm certainly not, but it's a logical and clearly more sensible approach than taking a punt on McKenna. It's just too soon.
 
Telsim said:
So, if McKenna stays at Ipswich this season and proceeds to get shit on a la Sheffield or Burnley, it doesn't matter? He is still good enough to be given one of the most demanding jobs in football?

Uhh, no. That is what has no logic.
Click to expand...

It matters, but not in the way you think. It will matter reputationally. A top 4 club only approaches managers without significant pedigree after a season where they did something spectacular, where they exceeded expectations. It will not approach a coach who just got relegated. However, reputation and quality ("is he stool good enough") are two different things.
 
Zlatan 7 said:
Why are Gerrard and lampard better qualified? McKenna has been coaching and then managing for years. I’d say he’s far more qualified than the two you mentioned
Click to expand...
Fair question which I’ve tried to answer in reply to @MadMike

Point of interest…. prior to McKenna being suddenly linked to the Utd job, don’t think his name was ever mentioned?
 
Zlatan 7 said:
Ipswich were in league one a year ago. What do you really expect to happen in the premier league who ever they have as manager
Click to expand...

Show good performances. It can be quite visible when a team is coached well, but just lacking in quality. And it's not like they will be competing with Manchester City and Arsenal. Their competition with will be Nottingham Forest, Everton, Leicester, and whoever else is promoted. Tough, but not impossible to show good play, even if they go down.
 
Wilt said:
Undeniably both Gerrard and Lampard were very highly rated success footballers. Gerrard did well with Rangers along with several individual managerial awards, touted by all pundits as the next Liverpool messiah. Lampard lesser so but still well regarded by those in the know and not many questioned it when he was given the job at Chelsea.

A bit vague I know but I can’t see what McKenna has done better?
Click to expand...

What are you even talking about? What does their footballer career have to do with their managerial credentials. And Lampard failed to get promoted to the Premiership with Derby County before getting the gig at Chelsea. He lost the play-offs and Derby remained in the Championship. McKenna got Ipswich back to back promotions. Getting them to Championship from League One. Then he got the newly promoted club from the Championship into the Premiership on the first attempt. And you can't see how that is clearly better than Lampard? Really?
 
Tuchel is the Di Matteo of managers. Lucked a UCL because Pep dropped Rodri and tried to be cute, goes to decent teams and under achieves.

Falls out with everyone, plays negative, shit on a stick football but also apparently has a mega drug problem (from Chelsea fans and forum).

McKenna all day. Sell 11 players, buy under 24, hungry players and let it rip.
 
Telsim said:
Show good performances. It can be quite visible when a team is coached well, but just lacking in quality. And it's not like they will be competing with Manchester City and Arsenal. Their competition with will be Nottingham Forest, Everton, Leicester, and whoever else is promoted. Tough, but not impossible to show good play, even if they go down.
Click to expand...

I would argue the complete opposite but everyone can have their opinion. A team severely lacking in quality compared to the competition can easily fall apart and appear badly coached. I'm certain 99% of people in the audience would be unable to tell the difference. Given they know nothing about football coaching in the first place.
 
Wilt said:
Fair question which I’ve tried to answer in reply to @MadMike

Point of interest…. prior to McKenna being suddenly linked to the Utd job, don’t think his name was ever mentioned?
Click to expand...
He has been mentioned a lot over the past couple of weeks, even before the promotion was secured.
 
MadMike said:
It matters, but not in the way you think. It will matter reputationally. A top 4 club only approaches managers without significant pedigree after a season where they did something spectacular, where they exceeded expectations. It will not approach a coach who just got relegated. However, reputation and quality ("is he stool good enough") are two different things.
Click to expand...

Sounds kind of like prisoner-of-the-moment hiring to me. Not exactly a wise strategy. If he is a good coach, he is a good coach. Getting relegated doesn't change that. He will still get offers from medium sized clubs where he can show what he can do and get some experience, if he doesn't get any calls from the big clubs. It's not like he is going to disappear. United can always hire him afterwards... once he has proven he's got the chops.
 
Dont think there's a serious argument for McKenna here. Its fair to say that moving to a DOF and first team coach approach reduces the need for big name managers, but the reality is our dressing room is a tough place and someone without a single top flight or CL campaign under their belt is going to struggle to keep things in order, no matter what support they get from above. We should definitely move the club to a position where we can take calculated risks on up and coming coaches. But we're not there now.
 
Telsim said:
Sounds kind of like prisoner-of-the-moment hiring to me. Not exactly a wise strategy. If he is a good coach, he is a good coach. Getting relegated doesn't change that. He will still get offers from medium sized clubs where he can show what he can do and get some experience, if he doesn't get any calls from the big clubs. It's not like he is going to disappear. United can always hire him afterwards... once he has proven he's got the chops.
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter. That's how big clubs recruit, reputation matters for high profile companies.

Also, the people who are considered the best managers today got their high profile jobs without proving their chops a the highest level first. Strictly because of legendary footballer status. Pep got the job at Barca without proving anything. Arteta the same at Arsenal. Xabi Alonso at Leverkusen the same...
 
OsloRed said:
He has been mentioned a lot over the past couple of weeks, even before the promotion was secured.
Click to expand...
Fair enough, personally hadn’t seen any mention of him.

It’s all irrelevant as doubt there’s any chance INEOS would give him the Utd job. There’s too much money at stake to gamble on a championship manager.
 
quadrant said:
Dont think there's a serious argument for McKenna here. Its fair to say that moving to a DOF and first team coach approach reduces the need for big name managers, but the reality is our dressing room is a tough place and someone without a single top flight or CL campaign under their belt is going to struggle to keep things in order, no matter what support they get from above. We should definitely move the club to a position where we can take calculated risks on up and coming coaches. But we're not there now.
Click to expand...

Yet Ole, without top flight or CL campaign under his belt, did better than Ten Hag who had it.
 
quadrant said:
Dont think there's a serious argument for McKenna here. Its fair to say that moving to a DOF and first team coach approach reduces the need for big name managers, but the reality is our dressing room is a tough place and someone without a single top flight or CL campaign under their belt is going to struggle to keep things in order, no matter what support they get from above. We should definitely move the club to a position where we can take calculated risks on up and coming coaches. But we're not there now.
Click to expand...
I don't think that is necessarily true, it all depends on multiple factors. Say the start is great and we play great football - won't that win whoever is coaching the respect of the players? Respect is earned, the players won't start a new campaign with a new manager already questioning whoever is in charge. Another factor is the personality of the coach, some people are really good at keeping order, no matter the specific experience. There are a lot of sweeping statements being thrown around, it is a lot more nuanced than reading here might make it seem.
 
Wilt said:
Fair enough, personally hadn’t seen any mention of him.

It’s all irrelevant as doubt there’s any chance INEOS would give him the Utd job. There’s too much money at stake to gamble on a championship manager.
Click to expand...
What about someone like Arsenal gambling on someone who’s never even been a manager, or Barca gambling on someone who’s only ever managed u21s.

Managers of big clubs have to start at a big club at some point. It’s always a gamble, whether you hire proven winners (lvg mourhino eth) or little experience (ole) there is no right answer
 
quadrant said:
Both managers failed at this club, I don't understand what point you're making.
Click to expand...

Sure, I'll spell it out. The point that I'm making is that your stated requirement for the success of a new coach, does not correlate at all with success. Ergo, it's a meaningless requirement.
 
It's funny for a place that hates sentimental choices from the club, I don't think he'd have as many backers, at this point in his career, if he'd not already worked here. Maybe I'm wrong.
 
MadMike said:
Sure, I'll spell it out. The point that I'm making is that your stated requirement for a new coach, does not correlate at all with success. Ergo, it's a meaningless requirement.
Click to expand...

A) Its not a requirement, its one factor B) Its not the only factor, there are others and C) I didn't say they couldn't succeed, I said they'd struggle without it. Apart from that, great comment, thanks.
 
Zlatan 7 said:
What about someone like Arsenal gambling on someone who’s never even been a manager, or Barca gambling on someone who’s only ever managed u21s.

Managers of big clubs have to start at a big club at some point. It’s always a gamble, whether you hire proven winners (lvg mourhino eth) or little experience (ole) there is no right answer
Click to expand...
Don’t see Arteta as much of a gamble, ex player who’s worked years with the worlds best manager.

Let‘s see if ENIOS take the gamble ….I doubt very much they will.
 
Judas said:
It's funny for a place that hates sentimental choices from the club, I don't think he'd have as many backers, at this point in his career, if he'd not already worked here. Maybe I'm wrong.
Click to expand...

I don't think you're wrong. Reputation within a club matters a lot in football. It's all about reputation and connections. That's why I keep asking, would Pep, or Xavi have got their jobs at Barca if they didn't have that reputation within the club? Or Ole at United. Or Arteta at Arsenal? You don't get those jobs as a young manager without some internal connections.

But reputation and connection is a thing aside from your coaching skills. McKenna seems to also be a good coach.
 
Wilt said:
Don’t see Arteta as much of a gamble, ex player who’s worked years with the worlds best manager.
Click to expand...

So an ex-player who got the job purely due connections/reputation and no managerial experience whatsoever is not the definition of a gamble now?
 
MadMike said:
So an ex-player who got the job purely due connections/reputation and no managerial experience whatsoever is not the definition of a gamble now?
Click to expand...
Give it a rest now eh?

Wait see what happens then can argue the toss.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.