Rate the post SAF managers

Moyes - 5 replaced greatest manager of all time with guy who might be similar because he's Scottish and a bit grumpy. Blamed not getting the signings he wanted yet chose to sign Fellaini. Relentless subbing on of Hernandes.

LVG - 4 Accompanied by army of online cult fans who thought because he used the word "philosophy" a lot, he must be a tactical genius, and that they could therefore prove they are too by constantly defending him like a messiah. Same people who used blogs and pointless tactics board graphics to try and justify why decisions like playing Di Maria in central midfield or bringing James Wilson on to man mark the opposition striker, weren't completely insane. Queens Park Raisins, Strawberries Town, Mike Smalling, etc.

Jose 5 - it would be a 7 but his midweek game preparation descended into scouring every media outlet on the planet for comments about himself and then using every press conference to attack anyone who'd said anything even vaguely negative about him. I didn't like that man utd were referred to endlessly as"Jose Mourinho's Man Utd". Now speaks fondly about the club despite apparently hating everything about it when he was here.

Ole - 6 an 8 that had to be minused 2 points because he failed to win a trophy after assembling a hugely talented squad of attacking players, and basically because the club sacked him 6 months too late so his reign was tarnished by us being really shite for a prolonged spell at the end of it. Tactically weak but the only post Ferguson manager who seemed able to motivate a squad for more than 5 minutes.

Rangnick - 3 I mean I liked him but it was a really dumb situation to bring him into. Failed miserably at the task of not getting sacked from the job he had already been pre sacked from before being appointed.

ETH - 5 really positive first season (until everyone got injured). Unfortunately then seemed to go completely insane and decided he could replace having a midfield with Mason Mount, amd then everyone got injured. Highly skilled at making sure everyone got injured.

RVN - 10 unknown managerial ability but looks good in a suit.
 
People having OGS over Jose or LVG just shows the lack of understanding of football; it is seriously just mind-boggling.

I get the romanticism over Ole - hell, give me a big glass of whiskey right now and I want Ruud to get the full time job.

Both Jose and LVG were so above the rest it is not even a discussion, really.
 
noodlehair said:
Moyes - 5 replaced greatest manager of all time with guy who might be similar because he's Scottish and a bit grumpy. Blamed not getting the signings he wanted yet chose to sign Fellaini. Relentless subbing on of Hernandes.

LVG - 4 Accompanied by army of online cult fans who thought because he used the word "philosophy" a lot, he must be a tactical genius, and that they could therefore prove they are too by constantly defending him like a messiah. Same people who used blogs and pointless tactics board graphics to try and justify why decisions like playing Di Maria in central midfield or bringing James Wilson on to man mark the opposition striker, weren't completely insane. Queens Park Raisins, Strawberries Town, Mike Smalling, etc.

Jose 5 - it would be a 7 but his midweek game preparation descended into scouring every media outlet on the planet for comments about himself and then using every press conference to attack anyone who'd said anything even vaguely negative about him. I didn't like that man utd were referred to endlessly as"Jose Mourinho's Man Utd". Now speaks fondly about the club despite apparently hating everything about it when he was here.

Ole - 6 an 8 that had to be minused 2 points because he failed to win a trophy after assembling a hugely talented squad of attacking players, and basically because the club sacked him 6 months too late so his reign was tarnished by us being really shite for a prolonged spell at the end of it. Tactically weak but the only post Ferguson manager who seemed able to motivate a squad for more than 5 minutes.

Rangnick - 3 I mean I liked him but it was a really dumb situation to bring him into. Failed miserably at the task of not getting sacked from the job he had already been pre sacked from before being appointed.

ETH - 5 really positive first season (until everyone got injured). Unfortunately then seemed to go completely insane and decided he could replace having a midfield with Mason Mount, amd then everyone got injured. Highly skilled at making sure everyone got injured.

RVN - 10 unknown managerial ability but looks good in a suit.
Click to expand...
And that is what I was waiting for in this thread :lol:
 
noodlehair said:
Moyes - 5 replaced greatest manager of all time with guy who might be similar because he's Scottish and a bit grumpy. Blamed not getting the signings he wanted yet chose to sign Fellaini. Relentless subbing on of Hernandes.

LVG - 4 Accompanied by army of online cult fans who thought because he used the word "philosophy" a lot, he must be a tactical genius, and that they could therefore prove they are too by constantly defending him like a messiah. Same people who used blogs and pointless tactics board graphics to try and justify why decisions like playing Di Maria in central midfield or bringing James Wilson on to man mark the opposition striker, weren't completely insane. Queens Park Raisins, Strawberries Town, Mike Smalling, etc.

Jose 5 - it would be a 7 but his midweek game preparation descended into scouring every media outlet on the planet for comments about himself and then using every press conference to attack anyone who'd said anything even vaguely negative about him. I didn't like that man utd were referred to endlessly as"Jose Mourinho's Man Utd". Now speaks fondly about the club despite apparently hating everything about it when he was here.

Ole - 6 an 8 that had to be minused 2 points because he failed to win a trophy after assembling a hugely talented squad of attacking players, and basically because the club sacked him 6 months too late so his reign was tarnished by us being really shite for a prolonged spell at the end of it. Tactically weak but the only post Ferguson manager who seemed able to motivate a squad for more than 5 minutes.

Rangnick - 3 I mean I liked him but it was a really dumb situation to bring him into. Failed miserably at the task of not getting sacked from the job he had already been pre sacked from before being appointed.

ETH - 5 really positive first season (until everyone got injured). Unfortunately then seemed to go completely insane and decided he could replace having a midfield with Mason Mount, amd then everyone got injured. Highly skilled at making sure everyone got injured.

RVN - 10 unknown managerial ability but looks good in a suit.
Click to expand...
Thread can be closed after this. No other opinion will be correct. That's how opinions work, right?
 
1. Mourinho
2. Ole
3. LVG
4. Moyes
5. ETH

Mourinho - a toxic, unpleasant time that really kicked off the caf civil wars that persist to this day carrying remnants of the same unpleasant, foreboding energy. Jose's routine of picking a few punching bags amongst his players also saw fans turn against said players in their droves. On a personal level, the most un-enjoyable of all the tenures that turned a lot of people mean-spirited mini me's of the man himself. Actively sabotaging us to make a point to the board is also treasonous.

Having said that, like him/it or loathe it/him, a Jose on the way down was still of the stock that should be the lowest bar Manchester United ever set. We weren't a great watch under him, but we were no marks or easy points for anyone; until he sabotaged us, he maintained the principles of being competent and competitive above all else. Clearly the most effective of all the managers, also brought us the biggest of the minor trophies.

Ole. Instinctively I would have put him lower, but that would be remembering only the dire end and the bad stuff rather than the entire tenure, which, in comparison, is worthy of 2nd place.

Ole's time is extremely dichotomous - he did a lot of good and a lot of bad that we have borne the brunt of to this day.

Initially, as caretaker and gloom-lifter after Jose's meltdown and toxic throes, Ole did the best job seen since SAF himself with an insane run of form and feel good energy, lifting the smog-stained cloud of darkness Jose left in his wake. The football was fun and full of abandon with players being simply delighted that they could express themselves again. Nobody who believes this was the most uplifting of times post-Fergie could be chided for their view. There was a euphoric air to the club and fanbase. Hindsight suggests that got carried too far and a better management team would have not given Ole the full-time gig.

Ole's football was honest, naive to a fault and vulnerable to tactical capitulation if exploited. At the same time, he made it so teams had to worry about our ability on the counter and if a team weren't able to score first or handle our breakneck counters, they were in for a rough ride despite knowing exactly what our intentions were. Initially, that was effective, but once top teams downloaded our idiosyncrasies and tendencies, it led to some of the most humiliating and depressing defeats I can remember in my entire time supporting the club.

Many cite the Liverpool 0-5 as the worst of the lot, but the 0-2 to City, where we looked like a Make A Wish team, is the most uncompetitive game I've ever seen us play. A total and utter embarrassment from start to finish that looked like a pro team playing against under 12's. Brutal doesn't even begin to cover that game.

Ole also played players injured and actively worsened their condition potentially for a career. That's a cardinal sin and something that seems to have been swept under the rug in this thread.

Finally, the tipping point between releasing the strictures to having a squad of coddled players who were entitled and pandered to was just as toxic to the club as Jose was, on the opposite end of the spectrum.

Evaluating Ole is a lot more complex than any of the others, but his bottom line is that we were a solid CL-qualifying team under him, until we weren't, on top of that, the CL didn't look like a competition we shouldn't be in under him, so 2nd is fair, for all the cons that accompany his pros.

LVG. Not much to say about him. The only manager who gave us a playing style you could put stock in - a few star turns away from making us a lot stronger than we were; those foundations of his were laid with a bigger plan in mind. Many didn't like how we played then and definitely weren't interested in the broader strokes of his intent. Can't quibble with his sacking as this was the era of tactical shifts and LVG wasn't part of that. Heavy metal football and insane levels of possession into dominant displays and goals were the two prevailing schools of thought and we were nowhere near either, exacerbating the feeling of antiquated ideology and being left behind by modern football.

Moyes. He came in and not only sipped from the poisoned chalice, but downed the bottle it was served from. The idiot doing away with an experienced and battle-hardened staff should simply not have been allowed. That was the beginning of the end, as a deer in headlights surrounded by yes men, is not only going to get run over; it's going to get pulped whilst on its knees, Platoon style, which is precisely what happened.

A large part of Moyes failing was on us having people above him who were both clueless and learning on the job thus ensuring the blind led the blind into assured mutual destruction.

Moyes gets 4th because he wasn't backed plus the players undermined him *and* most importantly, he was not in the hotseat long enough to cause long lasting damage to the club.

ETH. The only manager of the lot I was delighted we went for, but by far the biggest failure of the lot, who, in hindsight, had his only great run pre League Cup in his first season - the season in which he had not implemented his own vision.

The most backed. The most leniency afforded. The most inflexible. The most porous. The most humiliated. The most outclassed. The most out of his depth. An entire second season of routine humiliations and failures to adapt and, with even more of his players in, an even worse extrapolation on his third season. Factually, we got worse and worse the longer he was in the hotseat. Led us to our worst ever post-war Liverpool defeat and our worst ever league position of the PL era as well as the most losses by 3 or more you better pray we ever witness.

Garnacho is his strongest positive (Mainoo was destined for the top since a child), and bringing him up and through cannot be taken away from him, but never should we ever see a worse sum of parts manager here again. Pound for pound (literal), a strong argument for the worst manager in the PL for doing so poorly with such an expensive squad.

His runs in Europe were abysmal, too.

The FA Cup and League Cup cannot be taken away from him, but the offset in performance in both the league and Europe is the worst of all the managers. £600m of investment simply would not look as bad in the hands of any of the others.

Considering this is the guy I wanted the most, it is a bitter disappointment how incapable he proved to be. The next guy in the door has a hell of a lot of work to do to not only restore these players, but also fans who have convinced themselves that this squad is as bad as ETH made them look.
 
Last edited:
Fortitude said:
1. Mourinho
2. Ole
3. LVG
4. Moyes
5. ETH

Mourinho - a toxic, unpleasant time that really kicked off the caf civil wars that persist to this day carrying remnants of the same unpleasant, foreboding energy. Jose's routine of picking a few punching bags amongst his players also saw fans turn against said players in their droves. On a personal level, the most un-enjoyable of all the tenures that turned a lot of people mean-spirited mini me's of the man himself. Actively sabotaging us to make a point to the board is also treasonous.

Having said that, like him/it or loathe it/him, a Jose on the way down was still of the stock that should be the lowest bar Manchester United ever set. We weren't a great watch under him, but we were no marks or easy points for anyone; until he sabotaged us, he maintained the principles of being competent and competitive above all else. Clearly the most effective of all the managers, also brought us the biggest of the minor trophies.

Ole. Instinctively I would have put him lower, but that would be remembering only the dire end and the bad stuff rather than the entire tenure, which, in comparison, is worthy of 2nd place.

Ole's time is extremely dichotomous - he did a lot of good and a lot of bad that we have borne the brunt of to this day.

Initially, as caretaker and gloom-lifter after Jose's meltdown and toxic throes, Ole did the best job seen since SAF himself with an insane run of form and feel good energy, lifting the smog-stained cloud of darkness Jose left in his wake. The football was fun and full of abandon with players being simply delighted that they could express themselves again. Nobody who believes this was the most uplifting of times post-Fergie could be chided for their view. There was a euphoric air to the club and fanbase. Hindsight suggests that got carried too far and a better management team would have not given Ole the full-time gig.

Ole's football was honest, naive to a fault and vulnerable to tactical capitulation if exploited. At the same time, he made it so teams had to worry about our ability on the counter and if a team weren't able to score first or handle our breakneck counters, they were in for a rough ride despite knowing exactly what our intentions were. Initially, that was effective, but once top teams downloaded our idiosyncrasies and tendencies, it led to some of the most humiliating and depressing defeats I can remember in my entire time supporting the club.

Many cite the Liverpool 0-5 as the worst of the lot, but the 0-2 to City, where we looked like a Make A Wish team, is the most uncompetitive game I've ever seen us play. A total and utter embarrassment from start to finish that looked like a pro team playing against under 12's. Brutal doesn't even begin to cover that game.

Ole also played players injured and actively worsened their condition potentially for a career. That's a cardinal sin and something that seems to have been swept under the rug in this thread.

Finally, the tipping point between releasing the strictures to having a squad of coddled players who were entitled and pandered to was just as toxic to the club as Jose was, on the opposite end of the spectrum.

Evaluating Ole is a lot more complex than any of the others, but his bottom line is that we were a solid CL-qualifying team under him, until we weren't, on top of that, the CL didn't look like a competition we shouldn't be in under him, so 2nd is fair, for all the cons that accompany his pros.

LVG. Not much to say about him. The only manager who gave us a playing style you could put stock in - a few star turns away from making us a lot stronger than we were; those foundations of his were laid with a bigger plan in mind. Many didn't like how we played then and definitely weren't interested in the broader strokes of his intent. Can't quibble with his sacking as this was the era of tactical shifts and LVG wasn't part of that. Heavy metal football and insane levels of possession into dominant displays and goals were the two prevailing schools of thought and we were nowhere near either, exacerbating the feeling of antiquated ideology and being left behind by modern football.

Moyes. He came in and not only sipped from the poisoned chalice, but downed the bottle it was served from. The idiot doing away with an experienced and battle-hardened staff should simply not have been allowed. That was the beginning of the end, as a deer in headlights surrounded by yes men, is not only going to get run over; it's going to get pulped whilst on its knees, Platoon style, which is precisely what happened.

A large part of Moyes failing was on us having people above him who were both clueless and learning on the job thus ensuring the blind led the blind into assured mutual destruction.

Moyes gets 4th because he wasn't backed plus the players undermined him *and* most importantly, he was not in the hotseat long enough to cause long lasting damage to the club.

ETH. The only manager of the lot I was delighted we went for, but by far the biggest failure of the lot, who, in hindsight, had his only great run pre League Cup in his first season - the season in which he had not implemented his own vision.

The most backed. The most leniency afforded. The most inflexible. The most porous. The most humiliated. The most outclassed. The most out of his depth. An entire second season of routine humiliations and failures to adapt and, with even more of his players in, an even worse extrapolation on his third season. Factually, we got worse and worse the longer he was in the hotseat. Led us to our worst ever post-war Liverpool defeat and our worst ever league position of the PL era as well as the most losses by 3 or more you better pray we ever witness.

Garnacho is his strongest positive (Mainoo was destined for the top since a child), and bringing him up and through cannot be taken away from him, but never should we ever see a worse sum of parts manager here again. Pound for pound (literal), a strong argument for the worst manager in the PL for doing so poorly with such an expensive squad.

His runs in Europe were abysmal, too.

The FA Cup and League Cup cannot be taken away from him, but the offset in performance in both the league and Europe is the worst of all the managers. £600m of investment simply would not look as bad in the hands of any of the others.

Considering this is the guy I wanted the most, it is a bitter disappointment how incapable he proved to be. The next guy in the door has a hell of a lot of work to do to not only restore these players, but also fans who have convinced themselves that this squad is as bad as ETH made them look.
Click to expand...
Wow, this is a brilliant post, probably the best football related post I’ve read here in years.

Completely agree with every word of it.
 
Fortitude said:
1. Mourinho
2. Ole
3. LVG
4. Moyes
5. ETH

Mourinho - a toxic, unpleasant time that really kicked off the caf civil wars that persist to this day carrying remnants of the same unpleasant, foreboding energy. Jose's routine of picking a few punching bags amongst his players also saw fans turn against said players in their droves. On a personal level, the most un-enjoyable of all the tenures that turned a lot of people mean-spirited mini me's of the man himself. Actively sabotaging us to make a point to the board is also treasonous.

Having said that, like him/it or loathe it/him, a Jose on the way down was still of the stock that should be the lowest bar Manchester United ever set. We weren't a great watch under him, but we were no marks or easy points for anyone; until he sabotaged us, he maintained the principles of being competent and competitive above all else. Clearly the most effective of all the managers, also brought us the biggest of the minor trophies.

Ole. Instinctively I would have put him lower, but that would be remembering only the dire end and the bad stuff rather than the entire tenure, which, in comparison, is worthy of 2nd place.

Ole's time is extremely dichotomous - he did a lot of good and a lot of bad that we have borne the brunt of to this day.

Initially, as caretaker and gloom-lifter after Jose's meltdown and toxic throes, Ole did the best job seen since SAF himself with an insane run of form and feel good energy, lifting the smog-stained cloud of darkness Jose left in his wake. The football was fun and full of abandon with players being simply delighted that they could express themselves again. Nobody who believes this was the most uplifting of times post-Fergie could be chided for their view. There was a euphoric air to the club and fanbase. Hindsight suggests that got carried too far and a better management team would have not given Ole the full-time gig.

Ole's football was honest, naive to a fault and vulnerable to tactical capitulation if exploited. At the same time, he made it so teams had to worry about our ability on the counter and if a team weren't able to score first or handle our breakneck counters, they were in for a rough ride despite knowing exactly what our intentions were. Initially, that was effective, but once top teams downloaded our idiosyncrasies and tendencies, it led to some of the most humiliating and depressing defeats I can remember in my entire time supporting the club.

Many cite the Liverpool 0-5 as the worst of the lot, but the 0-2 to City, where we looked like a Make A Wish team, is the most uncompetitive game I've ever seen us play. A total and utter embarrassment from start to finish that looked like a pro team playing against under 12's. Brutal doesn't even begin to cover that game.

Ole also played players injured and actively worsened their condition potentially for a career. That's a cardinal sin and something that seems to have been swept under the rug in this thread.

Finally, the tipping point between releasing the strictures to having a squad of coddled players who were entitled and pandered to was just as toxic to the club as Jose was, on the opposite end of the spectrum.

Evaluating Ole is a lot more complex than any of the others, but his bottom line is that we were a solid CL-qualifying team under him, until we weren't, on top of that, the CL didn't look like a competition we shouldn't be in under him, so 2nd is fair, for all the cons that accompany his pros.

LVG. Not much to say about him. The only manager who gave us a playing style you could put stock in - a few star turns away from making us a lot stronger than we were; those foundations of his were laid with a bigger plan in mind. Many didn't like how we played then and definitely weren't interested in the broader strokes of his intent. Can't quibble with his sacking as this was the era of tactical shifts and LVG wasn't part of that. Heavy metal football and insane levels of possession into dominant displays and goals were the two prevailing schools of thought and we were nowhere near either, exacerbating the feeling of antiquated ideology and being left behind by modern football.

Moyes. He came in and not only sipped from the poisoned chalice, but downed the bottle it was served from. The idiot doing away with an experienced and battle-hardened staff should simply not have been allowed. That was the beginning of the end, as a deer in headlights surrounded by yes men, is not only going to get run over; it's going to get pulped whilst on its knees, Platoon style, which is precisely what happened.

A large part of Moyes failing was on us having people above him who were both clueless and learning on the job thus ensuring the blind led the blind into assured mutual destruction.

Moyes gets 4th because he wasn't backed plus the players undermined him *and* most importantly, he was not in the hotseat long enough to cause long lasting damage to the club.

ETH. The only manager of the lot I was delighted we went for, but by far the biggest failure of the lot, who, in hindsight, had his only great run pre League Cup in his first season - the season in which he had not implemented his own vision.

The most backed. The most leniency afforded. The most inflexible. The most porous. The most humiliated. The most outclassed. The most out of his depth. An entire second season of routine humiliations and failures to adapt and, with even more of his players in, an even worse extrapolation on his third season. Factually, we got worse and worse the longer he was in the hotseat. Led us to our worst ever post-war Liverpool defeat and our worst ever league position of the PL era as well as the most losses by 3 or more you better pray we ever witness.

Garnacho is his strongest positive (Mainoo was destined for the top since a child), and bringing him up and through cannot be taken away from him, but never should we ever see a worse sum of parts manager here again. Pound for pound (literal), a strong argument for the worst manager in the PL for doing so poorly with such an expensive squad.

His runs in Europe were abysmal, too.

The FA Cup and League Cup cannot be taken away from him, but the offset in performance in both the league and Europe is the worst of all the managers. £600m of investment simply would not look as bad in the hands of any of the others.

Considering this is the guy I wanted the most, it is a bitter disappointment how incapable he proved to be. The next guy in the door has a hell of a lot of work to do to not only restore these players, but also fans who have convinced themselves that this squad is as bad as ETH made them look.
Click to expand...

Now this is the good stuff!

I agree with the order too. Coin flip between Jose and Ole. It's a matter of results versus enjoyment. But still: not good enough.
 
Damien said:
What would you propose the poll to be? It can only either be single choice or multiple choice and I think most if not all would agree Mourinho was the best.
Click to expand...

Ah, I see. Didn't think that through :lol:
 
Moyes - 4 - Out of his depth. Left with a decent squad and made a shambles of it

LVG - 5 - not much better, great at keeping the ball but some of the worst boring uncreative football ive ever seen. Sideways passes for 90mins

Jose - 6 - Had high hopes for this one, he had us playing well for a while and thought we were on the up, but as per usual with Jose, hit the self destruct button and goes out trying to burn the place down around him. Had to go in the end.

Ole - 5/ 5.5 - no trophy, but..Best post SAF football was under Ole. He got big results against some big managers, in particular Pep. Some bad results against lower teams, then with the absolute car crash stuff at the end , he had to go. Felt sorry for him the most probably as the players seemed to just give up on him. He did himself no favours though at times

Rangnick - 4.5 - he had no chance from the get go. The players had downed tools under Ole and kept them down for Rangnick as he wasnt a big name. He had a specific plan and it was clear the players had no interest in implementing it as he was temporary. Good to see him doing well now with austria

EtH - 5.5 - He won 2 trophies. cant really ignore that. But pretty much since the caraboa cup vs newcastle, all last season and this season, we have been getting away with murder. Play half decent the odd game but most games we were far far too easy to play against, massive gaps on the pitch, players look clueless. Was too constant to be anything else but coaching. He started well, but it became untenable.

Giggs / Carrick / Ruud - hard to rate really, amazing to see some ex players have a go too. Would have loved to have seen Giggs given a longer go. had hoped at the time he would go somewhere else and prove himself then if hes lucky come back for round 2. but hes clearly had plenty on his plate since then.


id say Jose prob done the best at the time, but its just a shame he went back to being typical Jose. In hindsight it was almost guaranteed that would happen. In fairness, Jose went from a man I really really couldnt stand, to someone i have a soft spot for now. I like how he still gets a warm reception from Utd fans today
 
Last edited:
From best to worst,

1) Ole - The only manager that managed to get some league consistency going with back to back top 4 finishes and brought an acceptable style of football to the club.

2) Van Gaal - Awful football but at least somewhat steady results.

3) Ten Hag - Same as Van Gaal really but was just given more time to make even more of a mess of things. The two are pretty interchangable.

4) Mourinho

5) Moyes - Completely out of his dept unfortunately. Took over after Sir Alex and made a complete mess of things. From 1st to 7th in the space of a few months.

A bit harsh on Mourinho perhaps but I find him just a very toxic and unpleasant individual in general, who really made a mess of the dressing room. Very unpleasant time as a United fan. Found his style of football pretty garbage for the most part as well.
 
I’d have Solskjær ahead of Mourinho and Ten Hag - it’s strange because what many can get behind it seems, was that he brought some of the most entertaining, optimistic and joyful periods post Fergie, whereas other where more tactically astute, more cynically successful or left the club in a better place. My take is a bit different. There were joyful times and there were boring times under Ole, yes. There were plenty of huge wins, and the time when Bruno, Rashford, Martial and Pogba were clicking at once and we set a club record in consecutive three goal victories, is the best we’ve been since 2008. Still, playing parked busses could be pretty dull and frustrating, particularily in the first seasons. I would rather suggest that tactically, Ole set up the most master classes of the bunch. We had the best results against top opponents under him, in the PL as well as Europe, beating City several times, PSG, Liverpool, beat Red Bull 5-0, butchering Real Sociedad away and Roma. When it comes to success, he was the one who didn’t get a trophy, but he really did the most of what is needed to get to a trophy getting to 2nd and 3rd place behind a financially fraudulent team, losing a European final on a coin toss and getting to five SFs and a CL QF. You could argue that Mourinho winning 2-0 vs teenage Ajax and Solskjær losing on pens to Emery’s Villarreal is down to Mourinho being better tactically or having a winning knowhow or something, but I think at that point it was more down to luck. Compare the EL runs, where Mourinho had us under the cosh of Celta and Anderlecht, scraping by with deflections and extra time huge misses, whereas with Solskjær we humiliated Sociedad, Roma, Granada and put down Milan to boot. Emery’s Villarreal were a much tougher proposition in Europe at the time than Boschs Ajax, not to speak of Celta Vigo, swap those opponents and you have IMO Solskjær as the only European winner since Ferguson and not Mourinho.
 
Based on excitement and not so much results cus they've been pretty shite. They all pretty much had terrible endings to their reign so I'll focus a bit on the highs in general play.

Solskjær 6.5 / 10
Mourinho 6 / 10
ten Hag 5.5 /10
van Gaal 5.5 / 10
Moyes 3 / 10

Ish.

I enjoyed Solskjærs counter style. Was super entertaining. It all turned to shite when he wanted to evolve. Mourinho had us looking quite solid for a period of time then it became toxic as hell. ten Hag never really settled a style very well. Mostly just chaotic. I liked what van Gaal tried to do. I had wanted to see how we'd look trying to dominante possession and defend with the ball. It never quite clicked and became a bit boring. Moyes was just shit. Ageing squad but it was still a very strong squad.

Something everyone have in common is mostly shite transfers. But that's not only their fault. Woodward was shite.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.