When ETH had taken us to 77 points, 2 finals and 1 cup, he did not spend 467m EUR and it's important to note that he inherited a team with far more holes in it than Ole.
It's pretty damning that Ten Hag is still better (albeit marginally, if not the same) with this many injuries. It's actually insane because we all know if Ole had 2 key midfielders out, 2 key center backs out, his first choice LB in/out for most the season, he'd be pretty cooked far earlier on. Collapse is a strong term to be honest, if we have hands on hips players giving up and no actual style of play whilst failing to bounce back from losses, being abused on the pitch by relegated sides then sure I think we're at Ole levels of collapse.
He had to beat an extremely in form Brighton side in the semi's, and a Newcastle side that was Champions League form in the final. Some of Ole's cup exits were against the likes of Wolves and Leicester too, so you can understand my doubt when you claim rather lazily "meh, Ole would have beaten em". What we do know is that Ole was with us for almost 4 seasons and oversaw our longest trophy drought, being knocked out to some teams that we were better than despite having a long time in the job and a lot of windows to supplement what was already a decent squad.
Does it matter if Ole went out to choke anyway? Ten Hag has beaten City, Arsenal, Liverpool, Chelsea before. He has shit away form yes. And he has a lot of injuries this season which can certainly add context to some big losses this year (recall Arsenal away where our defence literally collapsed with injuries before their last minute winner). But he has proven to be able to beat these sides, so I don't think its fair to discredit his cup form when he has a cup in 1/4 of the time taken and Ole doesn't. Ole went on to choke in certain games, and there was a well noted mental fragility that festered because of it. I don't really give a feck if you beat City in a league cup if you're also getting your ass handed to you by Wolves and Leicester.
My bad, 75 points in year 1, which is a better total than what Ole managed in 3.5 years of attempts.
Well, a whole 1 point more than Ole managed in his best season in which we also folded for the last few games as we were preparing for EL final and dropped pretty much all the points.
They finished 4th and qualified for the Champions League. In a cup the recent form of 8-9 games isn't really material and it is a whole "form goes out the window" mentality. Broadly speaking, that Newcastle side was quality and over the season showed a lot of growth, more growth and more of a ceiling than what Wolves and Leicester showed vs Ole for example. The same goes for Brighton.
He beat Ole's record having not managed a single PL game prior to taking the United role, whilst also reaching 2 finals and winning a cup.
My apologies - they were not in UCL form, they were a side that proved to be CL quality. And they were CL quality. They were at least, much better than the Leicester and Wolves sides that Ole choked to, so when you come out and say "ole would have beaten them", that's basically bullshit. You don't actually know what Ole would have done, but given he had a team of chronic chokers in cups I don't think he is guaranteed to do the same.
Yes, it is actually mental.
I mean, if AWB propelled them back into the champions league spots, won a cup, got to another final and also got more points in that season then yeah it's tough to argue that season isn't better than any of what Redknapp had.
Well he came here as one of the most promising managers around and had managed a successful CL team before as opposed to Ole who came here with basically zero top level experience, and they’ve both basically produced pretty much the same outcome, which was not good enough under Ole and is not good enough now.
It doesn't matter what he came here as - in the debate manager B outperformed manager A so the revisionism that manager A football was better or the time under him was better or that he performed better as a coach for us is just absolute nonsense.
And if we didn't beat Newcastle in the final, they'd have gone on to win the League Cup. What's your point? They may have been a good side, but they weren't as good as Newcastle. And even if we agree they're on par, Ten Hag did his job against them and Ole didn't. It's really that simple, so to argue that Ole would have beaten a Newcastle side that went on to qualify for the CL in the league cup final is a bit of a weak point to discredit Ten Hag.
22-23 has a massive Asterix on it given the injuries that Ten Hag has been dealt. How do you think Ole fares with the same injuries?
In an isolated point yes, but when you consider the fact that he did it in less time, needed more surgery on the squad immediately, dealt with some structural ownership uncertainty in that year and also won a cup then it's quite clear who is better.
Okay, but how do you think Ole would fare with the same injuries dealt?
So in isolated games you think he'd do better. Regarding goals I'm unsure you can hang your hat on that. Remember 2-3 key center backs out, the left back broadly out (and the back up LB) and 2 first choice midfielders out. I'd be shocked if Ole managed the same form to be honest. But that's all hypotheticals, there's no value in wasting time on that.I reckon we would beat Galatasaray at home. Everyone beats Galatasaray at home in Europe. Their biggest away win in recent years before United was against St. Johnstone
I think Ole has the team scoring more than 22 goals. Injuries aren't an excuse to be outscored by Luton who would love to have the attacking players we have available.
My apologies, I was referring to 23-24 and misread your post. I see you were comparing Ten Hag's debut year to Ole's peak year. Which in itself is a flawed comparison for obvious reasons.
Martial is a crock (thanks to Ole overplaying him with injections), Maguire has had an extended period out, Ole also bought Varane who is generally a crock, Lindelof has been out for extended periods of time this season too (just needed surgery in fact), Shaw being available in half the games is pretty massive considering he was at Ole's diposal at his peak. AWB was actually out for the first 4-6 weeks of the season too. Matic was injured a fair bit for Ole but he at least was able to call on his experience in some key games. I think missing some big experienced players in Matic/Mata is important too. Ten Hag has tried to address that with Evans this year (which I think is quite clever objectively speaking).
Must be feeling bullish after the audio of him heckling Sancho went viralI see VP is bigging up Ten Hag and laying the snack down on Ole despite their PL stats being almost identical. I think Ten Hag has 1 more point combined? Conceded more goals and scored a lot less, has a better win percentage but a significantly worse loss percentage. Spent roughly the same amount of money no?
It's a lesson against fanboyism. Don't do it lads, stay clear! Good night.
I get what you're saying, but a lot of these players are drilled differently now and ill suited to anything that's essentially not counter attacking football. So if ten hag is brought in to press, be direct, be attacking and strangle teams up the pitch whilst being comfortable playing out, then it's hard to do when Dalot is on the opposite flank, wan bissaka isn't good at dribbling out, Maguire / Lindelof aren't suited to a high line and so on.
Im not bigging Ten Hag up, just citing the obvious in him outperforming Ole in year one in a fraction of the time and half the money spent.I see VP is bigging up Ten Hag and laying the snack down on Ole despite their PL stats being almost identical. I think Ten Hag has 1 more point combined? Conceded more goals and scored a lot less, has a better win percentage but a significantly worse loss percentage. Spent roughly the same amount of money no?
It's a lesson against fanboyism. Don't do it lads, stay clear! Good night.
Getting past the Champions League group is worth more than the EFL Cup both in prestige and money so objectively isn't a fitting term.
