Ralf Rangnick | Austria manager

[Isotope]

If Rangnick doesn't leave anything behind that makes his appointment even more pointless, doesn't it?

His tenure here showed ETH which players won't suit his high pressing, aggressive and technical style. You can tell by the positions ETH are looking to upgrade.

 

[erikcred]

They look like examples of long term planning because they were successful in the short term

Liverpool I agree with you. It starts and ends with them just getting lucky that Klopp happened to be available at the right time. But City had been planning for Guardiola years before he arrived by hiring his Barca buddies. I think they would have stuck with the plan regardless of wither Mancini or Pellegrini succeeded.

 

[erikcred]

His tenure here showed ETH which players won't suit his high pressing, aggressive and technical style. You can tell for the positions ETH are looking to upgrade.

What if these players just didn't like Rangnick, but ETH somehow manages to charm them into playing well the way Ole once did?

 

[Lyng]

They look like examples of long term planning because they were successful in the short term

Where did Liverpool end in Klopps first season....

 

[Adnan]

If Rangnick doesn't leave anything behind that makes his appointment even more pointless, doesn't it?

And Rome wasn't build in a day if you are a mess and then hire a very idealistic coach to sort it out while trying to play ambitious footba that also increases the risk of the whole thing backfiring significantly. If Ten Hag is successful then fair enough, the management can claim credit for their long term vision, but if he doesn't they will have to ask themselves whether they wanted too much too soon.

Rangnick was a unplanned appointment at a time when the club was looking for a permanent long-term solution. He wasn't brought in to leave anything behind, but you always hope something positive is left behind in such circumstances. So it's more hope than expectations, especially with how things unravelled with most of the coaching staff leaving, not long after Solskjaer.

Rome definitely wasn't built in a day, so it was actually surprising to see the club not go for the quick fix, and actually wait for the ideal candidate to become available. In the past i'm sure Ed Woodward would've gone for the quick fix.

 

[Zehner]

They look like examples of long term planning because they were successful in the short term

Not really. City prepared for the signature of Guardiola for years. They even stayed firm on signing him when he went to Bayern instead of Manchester. And it took Klopp two or three seasons to create the beast Liverpool currently is. The club was willing to wait that long because they could see progress on the pitch.

Long term beats everything. The reward for it is so high that it's definitely worth sacrificing multiple seasons for it. Real is actually quite a good example of that as well if you leave the coach out of the equation.

 

[Isotope]

What if these players just didn't like Rangnick, but ETH somehow manages to charm them into playing well the way Ole once did?

Well, ETH wouldn't need those new players now, then. He could just give everyone a clean slate to assess them. But we know that's not what happen, don't we? If news are true, we're looking for 4-5 new players; which probably only restricted by the budget itself. That's almost half of the starting XI. I guess action speaks louder than a mere talk of "team with high potential".

But then, you're probably right. We're all just speculating here.

 

[Iker Quesadillas]

Overemphasis on the short term is one of the things that brought United into this mess. Madrid might be a break of the norm but most of the top clubs out there do best when they implement an overarching idea of a playing system and prioritize this approach over short term success.

I don't think most of the top clubs out there do this.

Disagree. City and Liverpool are prime examples of long term planning. Bayern as well.

I don't agree that City and Liverpool are prime examples of this. Liverpool in particular is a poor example, they gave three years to Rodgers, his project wasn't looking good so they fired him in October. Then they brought in Klopp, who played a completely different style of football, and changed most of the squad within a few years. They reacted to the circumstances.

Klopp and Guardiola have been around for long because they have reached reasonable targets every single season except maybe Klopp's first (which wasn't even a full one).

 

[Lyng]

I don't think most of the top clubs out there do this.



I don't agree that City and Liverpool are prime examples of this. Liverpool in particular is a poor example, they gave three years to Rodgers, his project wasn't looking good so they fired him in October. Then they brought in Klopp, who played a completely different style of football, and changed most of the squad within a few years. They reacted to the circumstances.

Klopp and Guardiola have been around for long because they have reached reasonable targets every single season except maybe Klopp's first (which wasn't even a full one).

Liverpool ended 8th in the first season under Klopp. If they didnt believe in long term planning surely they would have sacked him.

 

[Grande]

Rangnick was a unplanned appointment at a time when the club was looking for a permanent long-term solution. He wasn't brought in to leave anything behind, but you always hope something positive is left behind in such circumstances. So it's more hope than expectations, especially with how things unravelled with most of the coaching staff leaving, not long after Solskjaer.

Rome definitely wasn't built in a day, so it was actually surprising to see the club not go for the quick fix, and actually wait for the ideal candidate to become available. In the past i'm sure Ed Woodward would've gone for the quick fix.

Rome wasn’t built in a day, but going for Mourinho after the experience they had with Nero …

I do see do.ob’s arguments about recent coaching experience, big ego experience and likely implementation time.

On the other hand, we know that Team Solskjær made several attempts at making us play a higher line and press earlier, and that this also was his plan for the past season. If the conclusion was that Solskjær had his strengths and the right ideas, but not the acumen to succesfully implement this kind of collective pro- active defence at top level (a reasonable conclusion), then getting Rangnink in to head the same coaching team in the same process would make sense, particularily if there already was an idea that this is the direction of football we would want to continue with under eg Poch or Ten Hag (who both have things in common in this part of the game).

I am not sure wether Murtoughs ideas are theoretically sound, wether he is the right guy in praxis to grind out success, or if the Glazer set up makes it almost impossible, but the decision to appoint Rangnick still seems consistent to me in hindsight, even if it went tits up, and even if there were warning signs.

Cancelling the consultancy project (regardless of whose decision it was first and foremost) also makes sense, looking at how it played out.

 

[::sonny::]

 

[Tavern in the town]

Liverpool ended 8th in the first season under Klopp. If they didnt believe in long term planning surely they would have sacked him.

There was just the small matter of him reaching two cup finals and impressive wins at City and Chelsea, without a summer window or a pre season.

 

[Iker Quesadillas]

Liverpool ended 8th in the first season under Klopp. If they didnt believe in long term planning surely they would have sacked him.

The simple counterargument is that if they believed in long-term planning they wouldn't have sacked Rodgers in October.

Klopp did fine in his first season. They got 60 points; 62 hadn't been enough to sack Rodgers, so why would it be enough to sack Klopp when he didn't have a pre-season and was hired in October?

Anyway, the more important point here is that I don't think "next season" constitutes "the long term." Mid-term at most.

 

[Iker Quesadillas]

To frame it in a different way, people here sometimes undervalue competence and overvalue over-arching plans and philosophies and whatnot.

Whether United pursued short-term goals, mid-term goals, or long-term goals, they weren't going to achieve them very well because the club doesn't know how to buy players. The players bought over the last 8 seasons are simply not good enough.

 

[Adnan]

Rome wasn’t built in a day, but going for Mourinho after the experience they had with Nero …

I do see do.ob’s arguments about recent coaching experience, big ego experience and likely implementation time.

On the other hand, we know that Team Solskjær made several attempts at making us play a higher line and press earlier, and that this also was his plan for the past season. If the conclusion was that Solskjær had his strengths and the right ideas, but not the acumen to succesfully implement this kind of collective pro- active defence at top level (a reasonable conclusion), then getting Rangnink in to head the same coaching team in the same process would make sense, particularily if there already was an idea that this is the direction of football we would want to continue with under eg Poch or Ten Hag (who both have things in common in this part of the game).

I am not sure wether Murtoughs ideas are theoretically sound, wether he is the right guy in praxis to grind out success, or if the Glazer set up makes it almost impossible, but the decision to appoint Rangnick still seems consistent to me in hindsight, even if it went tits up, and even if there were warning signs.

Cancelling the consultancy project (regardless of whose decision it was first and foremost) also makes sense, looking at how it played out.

Going with Mourinho was Woodward's attempt at building Rome in a day.

Solskjaer clearly stated in one of his early pressers about wanting to press high, and I also watched re-runs of his Molde team, and they were definitely playing in a compact high block. But I feel Solskjaer surrounded himself with the wrong people, and listening to Mike Phelan, it's obvious that he was stuck in a bygone era that didn't correlate to the present day reality. But I do agree, that Solskjaer wanted to implement a high pressing game style, because he said so, and his Molde team were a high pressing team.

I think it's important to surround yourself with people who are on the same page when it comes to implementing a vision.

 

[Zehner]

They look like examples of long term planning because they were successful in the short term

Not really. It took Klopp a while to get results at Liverpool, especially titles. He finished 6th and 5th in his first two Dortmund seasons as well. He took over Liverpool at 10th and finished 8th, then finished 4th in the following season. Even Guardiola needed a season to get going with City. Especially when you are far behind, it's best to plan for the long term.

 

[Zehner]

To frame it in a different way, people here sometimes undervalue competence and overvalue over-arching plans and philosophies and whatnot.

Whether United pursued short-term goals, mid-term goals, or long-term goals, they weren't going to achieve them very well because the club doesn't know how to buy players. The players bought over the last 8 seasons are simply not good enough.

United's players weren't good enough because they played in a dysfunctional team. The club signed big names for huge money without an idea of how to get the best out of them. It's no coincidence that players suddenly look like frauds when arriving in Manchester, especially when some of them look good enough again after leaving (Di Maria says high).

 

[giorno]

Where did Liverpool end in Klopps first season....

4th, back in CL, which was their goal

 

[giorno]

Liverpool I agree with you. It starts and ends with them just getting lucky that Klopp happened to be available at the right time. But City had been planning for Guardiola years before he arrived by hiring his Barca buddies. I think they would have stuck with the plan regardless of wither Mancini or Pellegrini succeeded.

Maybe so, but they wouldn't have stuck with Guardiola if he wasn't successful

 

[giorno]

Not really. City prepared for the signature of Guardiola for years. They even stayed firm on signing him when he went to Bayern instead of Manchester. And it took Klopp two or three seasons to create the beast Liverpool currently is. The club was willing to wait that long because they could see progress on the pitch.

Long term beats everything. The reward for it is so high that it's definitely worth sacrificing multiple seasons for it. Real is actually quite a good example of that as well if you leave the coach out of the equation.

City sacrificed 1 season for Guardiola, Liverpool sacrificed nothing. In Klopp's first full season they finished 4th, which was the goal. Second season, 4th again with a CL final. Third season won CL. It only took them that long because of where they started. Guardiola broke every PL record in his second season. If he finished 3rd again, third season would have been make or break for him over there

You can't plan looking at long term in football. Nobody lasts long enough for there to be a long term without short term success

 

[Iker Quesadillas]

United's players weren't good enough because they played in a dysfunctional team. The club signed big names for huge money without an idea of how to get the best out of them.

This only describes a few players like Pogba or Di Maria. The majority are simply poor signings. For example, the amount of effort devoted to signing Ander Herrera, who wasn't even a second tier Spanish talent from that generation. Players like Darmian, Dalot, Schneiderlin, Blind, Depay, Rojo, Wan Bissaka, Mkhitaryan, who've never shown they can play at the top top level.

 

[Blood Mage]

David Alaba, a world-class CL winning footballer, has praised Rangnick already. Our players are a fecking joke who are already plotting when to leak negative stories about Ten Hag to the press.

 

[Lyng]

4th, back in CL, which was their goal

Second season. First season he ended on place 8

 

[stevoc]

The way I see it is that if our plan revolves around making top 4, then we'll repeat the mistakes of the past where we've selected managers based on their CV/resume/experience, rather than a vision on how we want to play the game.

And with Erik ten Hag there's genuine hope we can potentially see that vision come to fruition with a bit of patience. And I think this is how we'll make better use of our funds, which will hopefully lead to us being champions league proof under him, at the very least.

I get what you are saying mate and I largely agree but there wasn't much stopping the club focusing on finishing top 4 this season and hiring a good manager permanent or otherwise in the hope of getting top 4 and then just paying them off at the end of the season and hiring Ten Hag anyway. Other top clubs do it all the time.

 

[giorno]

Second season. First season he ended on place 8

First season he took over in November, made 2 cup finals, a few high profile big wins under the belt while preparing for his "true" first season. Liverpool didn't hire Klopp just to salvage 15/16, obviously they wanted him to be their manager going forward. And they where were they at this time, too. This wasn't a contender, or a team that was supposed to be one evidently. They'd finished 6th the season before and were mid table at the time he took over with a side that clearly lacked talent. They still wanted to see some real improvement in that season, which happened, but the test of Klopp was always going to be 16/17. Giving a good manager with a clear track record of success - recent success - who got you to 2 cup finals in his first half season in charge a full season to properly evaluate him isn't long term planning, it's common sense

 

[stevoc]

His tenure here showed ETH which players won't suit his high pressing, aggressive and technical style. You can tell by the positions ETH are looking to upgrade.

Did it really show ETH anything or has he just identified the weakest areas of the squad that everyone already knew about?

Last summer Solskajer was after and we were mostly linked to the following positions CB, RB, CM, RW and a striker. We didn't get a CM or a RB, the CB we signed is largely injury prone and the striker we signed is 37.

This year the positions of the players we've been linked to is CB, RB, CM, RW and striker. So nothing much has changed in a year.

 

[Zehner]

City sacrificed 1 season for Guardiola, Liverpool sacrificed nothing. In Klopp's first full season they finished 4th, which was the goal. Second season, 4th again with a CL final. Third season won CL. It only took them that long because of where they started. Guardiola broke every PL record in his second season. If he finished 3rd again, third season would have been make or break for him over there

You can't plan looking at long term in football. Nobody lasts long enough for there to be a long term without short term success

City had already devoted multiple seasons to Guardiola before he even signed the contract. Bayern's success in the last 10-15 years is a direct result of them signing van Gaal. The idea behind that playing style coins the team ever since. Strategy is key and the single most determining success factor in football. It's actually funny that Real Madrid fans of all are the ones who disagree on that so strongly. I mean, you guys didn't even sign a replacement for Cristiano Ronaldo and many of your most important players these days took lots and lots of patience to develop.

 

[giorno]

City had already devoted multiple seasons to Guardiola before he even signed the contract. Bayern's success in the last 10-15 years is a direct result of them signing van Gaal. The idea behind that playing style coins the team ever since. Strategy is key and the single most determining success factor in football. It's actually funny that Real Madrid fans of all are the ones who disagree on that so strongly. I mean, you guys didn't even sign a replacement for Cristiano Ronaldo and many of your most important players these days took lots and lots of patience to develop.

Oh I agree with that. But that doesn't change the fact nobody makes long term plans ignoring what happens in the now. Nobody can afford that

Doesn't matter how many seasons they'd devoted to landing Guardiola, they still did their best to win without him, and they certainly weren't going to just give Guardiola unlimited time to realize his vision before success came. Bayern hired Van Gaal and in his first season they won league, cup, and lost CL final. Second season was a failure so he was sacked, and they hired Heynckes, a CL-winning manager known to them and who'd been doing really good work at smaller german sides of late, first season a failure but still made CL final, second season they decided to move on for Guardiola midway through and he went on to win a treble anyways. Guardiola signed a 3 year deal, won the league all 3 seasons, made CL semifinal all 3 seasons, and the team was incredible all 3 seasons. Kovac won the league and was sacked. How long do you think they were planning to keep Flick? How long do you think Nagelsmann has got if things don't improve?

 

[PedroMendez]

Football is fast moving. If a club makes good decisions over a summer, you'll see improvement on the pitch. Either you see short-term improvements or its likely, that you just don't move in the right direction. These elaborate long-term plans, where the positive development only becomes visible after a prolonged period of suffering, when everything falls into its places, are a pipedream. United is a big enough (=rich enough) club, that two good summers would be enough to become competitive in league and cl again. You don't need to lay an elusive and mythical foundation, but start to make good decisions.

 

[do.ob]

Rangnick was a unplanned appointment at a time when the club was looking for a permanent long-term solution. He wasn't brought in to leave anything behind, but you always hope something positive is left behind in such circumstances. So it's more hope than expectations, especially with how things unravelled with most of the coaching staff leaving, not long after Solskjaer.

Rome definitely wasn't built in a day, so it was actually surprising to see the club not go for the quick fix, and actually wait for the ideal candidate to become available. In the past i'm sure Ed Woodward would've gone for the quick fix.

What I mean by "Rome wasn't built in a day" is that the club seem to be trying to fix everything at once by appointing someone like Ten Hag (will face a lot of circumstances that are new to him, while he tries to implement an extremely ambitious tactical style), while also trying to reorganize the club and rebuild the squad at the same time.
It's looking like a pretty big risk to me and as sort of a down payment they club has already missed out on top four this season. It's a bit like going all-in on hopes and dreams of a long term payoff. I think the much safer choice would have been for the club to appoint Conte, while following a transfer strategy that doesn't commit too heavily on pure "Conte-players".

 

[Idxomer]

First season he took over in November, made 2 cup finals, a few high profile big wins under the belt while preparing for his "true" first season. Liverpool didn't hire Klopp just to salvage 15/16, obviously they wanted him to be their manager going forward. And they where were they at this time, too. This wasn't a contender, or a team that was supposed to be one evidently. They'd finished 6th the season before and were mid table at the time he took over with a side that clearly lacked talent. They still wanted to see some real improvement in that season, which happened, but the test of Klopp was always going to be 16/17. Giving a good manager with a clear track record of success - recent success - who got you to 2 cup finals in his first half season in charge a full season to properly evaluate him isn't long term planning, it's common sense

People forget Liverpool reaching the EL final in 2016 with far better football than what United displayed in their win the next year, that was an early indication of the direction Klopp was taking them.

 

[RacingClub]

People forget Liverpool reaching the EL final in 2016 with far better football than what United displayed in their win the next year, that was an early indication of the direction Klopp was taking them.

I don't know if they forget it or wilfully ignore it in order to further their agendas but it's bizarre.

 

[Andy_Cole]

So United were the problem. Who knew.

 

[pascell]

So United were the problem. Who knew.

Obvious by now that a large % of our squad severely lack in footballing IQ and knowledge. The same will be shown by said players next season, then ten Hag will have them out the door.

 

[city-puma]

Going with Mourinho was Woodward's attempt at building Rome in a day.

Solskjaer clearly stated in one of his early pressers about wanting to press high, and I also watched re-runs of his Molde team, and they were definitely playing in a compact high block. But I feel Solskjaer surrounded himself with the wrong people, and listening to Mike Phelan, it's obvious that he was stuck in a bygone era that didn't correlate to the present day reality. But I do agree, that Solskjaer wanted to implement a high pressing game style, because he said so, and his Molde team were a high pressing team.

I think it's important to surround yourself with people who are on the same page when it comes to implementing a vision.

I am not sure it’s so much due to the people around the coaching team. The most likely case is due to the existing squad. EPL is so hard in every aspect than any other league. A great portion of the teams are playing high press elements in their game. It’s impossible to shift all players out. It takes years and he has to try to utilize what’s available to win games. Thus, he has to be flexible to play different opponents rather than purely doing press and counter press. That won’t win your enough games by our standard. Matic and Pogba are a great example why we can’t match those team physically. But we can’t ship out Pogba due to pandemic. Unfortunately, his transfer of VDB, and the transfer of last summer almost all went wrong for different reasons. The midfield issue therefore was not addressed for two seasons. I hope know more on what contributed to last season’s downfall. Time will tell I guess. But, you are probably right his transfer decision has been negatively effected by some.

 

[El Jefe]

I hope ETH does well so this awful thread can die a quick death.

I can't think of another top team where Rangnick will have supporters after the shitshow he served up. Imagine Arsenal fans defending Ljunberg, Liverpool fans justifying Hodgson or Spurs fans blaming Nuno's era on their players.

This was easily the worst period as a United fan in my 25+ years as a fan, I'm trying to forget Rangnick immediately and look to the future with Ten Hag. I would think most fans should be trying to do the same rather than following Austria's results under a failed manager.

 

[Garethw]

He’s hardly going to come out and call his new international coach a useless cnut is he?

Rangnick was a disaster and more time would not have made a blind bit of difference.

 

[Garethw]

I hope ETH does well so this awful thread can die a quick death.

I can't think of another top team where Rangnick will have supporters after the shitshow he served up. Imagine Arsenal fans defending Ljunberg, Liverpool fans justifying Hodgson or Spurs fans blaming Nuno's era on their players.

This was easily the worst period as a United fan in my 25+ years as a fan, I'm trying to forget Rangnick immediately and look to the future with Ten Hag. I would think most fans should be trying to do the same rather than following Austria's results under a failed manager.

Well said mate.

 

[Isotope]

Did it really show ETH anything or has he just identified the weakest areas of the squad that everyone already knew about?

Last summer Solskajer was after and we were mostly linked to the following positions CB, RB, CM, RW and a striker. We didn't get a CM or a RB, the CB we signed is largely injury prone and the striker we signed is 37.

This year the positions of the players we've been linked to is CB, RB, CM, RW and striker. So nothing much has changed in a year.

Possibly. Although Ole had us play differently than ETH's, thus his type of players might be different. So after getting a CB, RW, and striker last year, we're still interested to get (possibly) a CB, RW, and striker this summer.

 

[Isotope]

I am not sure it’s so much due to the people around the coaching team. The most likely case is due to the existing squad. EPL is so hard in every aspect than any other league. A great portion of the teams are playing high press elements in their game. It’s impossible to shift all players out. It takes years and he has to try to utilize what’s available to win games. Thus, he has to be flexible to play different opponents rather than purely doing press and counter press. That won’t win your enough games by our standard. Matic and Pogba are a great example why we can’t match those team physically. But we can’t ship out Pogba due to pandemic. Unfortunately, his transfer of VDB, and the transfer of last summer almost all went wrong for different reasons. The midfield issue therefore was not addressed for two seasons. I hope know more on what contributed to last season’s downfall. Time will tell I guess. But, you are probably right his transfer decision has been negatively effected by some.

Ole had 400+m and two seasons to mold this team into whatever his "original" philosophy was. I think he's just a shite manager.