One thing I will say is that all young players benefit enormously from having a standardized system to stick to. The reason I imagine is when you are making a step up, there is a huge difference between reserves/first team. As such, most players have 0 experience and 0 mental clarity as to what they are supposed to do on a bigger stage. Having a proven system will make this transition a lot easier as it eliminates the uncertainty that comes from lack of experience at the top level. It's a lot easier when you constantly know what to do, as opposed to constantly making decisions on how to progress the play.
That's why LVG was so good with youth. He had a "system" where the likes of McNair, Blacket, Varela all looked decent for a good amount of time.
Now imagine how players like Amad, Pellistri, Laird, Hannibal, Shoretire, Elanga and even Savage would benefit by being coached by ETH.
I completely agree, and it creates a stability on the pitch, which can only help a young player, rather than the chaos we've experienced for far too long at United.
But the difference is that attacking football can be developed in a few different ways. We can go the high energy route where we look to fast transition via the wide receivers and hence by-pass the midfield and use our midfielders to win the ball back high up the pitch. In such a approach, players with high energy like the McFred duo are important due to their energy levels in midfield and playing through or around the opposition isn't of paramount importance. Pochettino had Wanyama and Sissoko in midfield for that exact reason.
Then on the other hand one can approach the game by looking to control the defensive transitions and offensive transitions by implementing positional play both in and out of possession. But it's what this approach requires in possession, which is important. And if you look at our best youth players both still in the reserves/academy or out on loan, then it's very clear that they're players of potentially a high technical level. And these players are more suited to a coach who looks to implement positional play on the ball, rather than a coach who looks to by-pass the midfield with two high energy players in deeper midfield areas. It's why Rangnick prefers playing Elanga and hasn't yet introduced Hannibal, because Hannibal even though he's someone of a high work rate, is a player of a technical profile. And Rangnick placing heavy emphasis on counter pressing has shown that he prefers his deeper midfielders to be of the high energy variety, like we saw at RB Leipzig, where under him they had the likes of Laimer, Demme and Sabitzer as the players who weren't there to necessarily create in possession but to help the team win the ball back quickly via the counter press .
And according to reports, the 4 candidates for the role are EtH, Enrique, Pochettino and Lopetegui. But who is the odd one out in this reported list, stylistically? The odd one out is Pochettino, because unlike the other 3 coaches who adhere to the positional play principles whilst not sacrificing the counter press. Pochettino doesn't adhere to the positional play principles on the ball and hence like Rangnick, prefers his teams to get from A-Z without placing heavy emphasis on controlling the build up phase.
And it's for that reason I believe someone like a Erik ten Hag would potentially be a better fit for us if the mid to long-term is also factored into our thinking. And I personally prefer watching football that promotes technical play without sacrificing the high intensity, rather than sacrificing the technical aspects for a approach centred around winning the ball back quickly.
