Rolaholic
Full Member
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2016
- Messages
- 12,396
I firmly believe this as well, but I always feel like I'm in the minority even amongst United fans. Whenever I listen to debates about all time PL strikers, I often get the impression that United fans are too busy fighting Rooney's corner that they forget to bring up Van Nistelrooy. For me, it goes:
1) Ruud
2) Henry
3) Shearer
4) Rooney
5) Aguero
Even if EtH gets a new contract it doesn’t guarantee him being here for long. They have to give him a new contract or else he’s a lame duck manager with an expiring contract at the end of the season.That can happen to any manager he is an assistant to.
And ETH is getting a new contract, buddy. He is here to stay for a while.
He has 64.7% win percentage with PSV and won a cup trophy. Surely, that’s more than enough to be in the conversation for a manager role at Burnley. Not just about his iconic and name in the football world.A lot of people who i spoke who worked at the club or worked with him, described him as an amazing person but tactically insufficient with a capital letter. It surprises everyone that he is in the conversation for a manager role at Burnley and it seems to do more with his iconic status and name in the football world than rather with his qualities as manager. It seems to us that this is also one of the reasons why he is getting this job as an assistant. Although, I have to say i think the role as an assistant suits him more than a manager role in modern football. Yet he still needs a lot to learn.
Interesting back ground stuff! It makes it also more understandable how he could be more interested in a coaching spot at United under ETH than a manager role at Burnley. But what do you or others who have followed him at PSV (or Netherlands) think of his candidacy for an assistant coach at Man Utd?He did do well based on the results. A lot of things happened with some financial restrictions from the board, some keyplayers who had to be sold, etc. It was not an easy year for any trainer who would have had his seat at PSV from that point of view.
However, football tactical and technical wise he didn't do well at all. There was for example not a clear vision in how to play. One match we would press very high and aggresive, another time we would try to dominate and control the possession game. There were also enough matches (most of them) were we would play an old fashioned kick and rush or catenaccio style of play. In modern football this doesn't work. You have to have a clear style of play. Characteristic was an interview in the beginning of the season were he said he wanted to defend like Simeone and attack like Bielsa. You don't have to be rocket scientist to understand that those are two completely different worlds of football which you cannot tactically combine.
And all this was furthermore amplified by the fact that a lot of Ruud's tactical principles were outdated. In possession everything was very rigid. There weren't much vertical runs, the positional formation was very rigid with hardly any rotations, no use of halfspaces, etc. Defensively everything was man-marked which made it easy for opponents to dismantle our defensive structure using simple rotations and runs without the ball. During the whole season, every match there were phases where the length between the striker and last man during pressing/gegenpressing/transition was around 60 meters.
Eventuallty this lead to the situation were a lot of players didn't take him seriously because tactically he wasn't up to the job. Some influential went behind his back to the board to say this could not go any further like this. The board also didn't have a lot of trust in Van Nistelrooij which eventually lead to his resignation. The reason he got the job in the first place is a bit vague and there are a lot of different rumors. What is clear is that the former general manager (who didn't have a lot of football knowledge) clearly had a prejudice for ex-profs from the club instead of measuring people based on their qualities. It is for that reason in the first place Van Nistelrooij got the U19/U18 job and a few years later the U21/U23 job, while it was widely known on the youth side of the club that he wasn't up to this task at all.
A lot of people who i spoke who worked at the club or worked with him, described him as an amazing person but tactically insufficient with a capital letter. It surprises everyone that he is in the conversation for a manager role at Burnley and it seems to do more with his iconic status and name in the football world than rather with his qualities as manager. It seems to us that this is also one of the reasons why he is getting this job as an assistant. Although, I have to say i think the role as an assistant suits him more than a manager role in modern football. Yet he still needs a lot to learn.
Our current manager has a win 59% win percentage with two trophies and half the forum want him to sack!He has 64.7% win percentage with PSV and won a cup trophy. Surely, that’s more than enough to be in the conversation for a manager role at Burnley. Not just about his iconic and name in the football world.
If Højlund and Rashford can't learn positioning for tap-ins from this guy....they never will learn
Ruud had been at United when we were a bigger club with higher expectations than nowMakes perfect sense. Ruud gets to learn how a big club operates and what the expectations are without any pressure. Some invaluable experience for him.
I remember ETH doing something similar when he went from Utrecht to Bayern II, so that he could study under Pep. Proved to be the correct decision as well.
Completely agree. Not to knock RvN, he might be a great coach, but buzzwords and knowing some tactical setups isn’t really what makes a good coach these days, it’s about getting your host of money rich young men to give their all for you. That’s why I think the former players get the nod so often despite not being ‘qualified’ because they come in with some respect.Always amazing how easily fans are impressed by a bit of jargon or a few diagrams. Essentially 'Jack Fawcett' thinks 'wow, this man whose entire life has been spent at the very highest level of professional football, as a player and a manager, knows some ideas and words I have picked up from seven years of Football Manager and my 'Performance Analysis' BSc.' No shit.
That’s a scathing endorsement if anything. Basically he’s tactically clueless and doesn’t know what’s he’s doing.He did do well based on the results. A lot of things happened with some financial restrictions from the board, some keyplayers who had to be sold, etc. It was not an easy year for any trainer who would have had his seat at PSV from that point of view.
However, football tactical and technical wise he didn't do well at all. There was for example not a clear vision in how to play. One match we would press very high and aggresive, another time we would try to dominate and control the possession game. There were also enough matches (most of them) were we would play an old fashioned kick and rush or catenaccio style of play. In modern football this doesn't work. You have to have a clear style of play. Characteristic was an interview in the beginning of the season were he said he wanted to defend like Simeone and attack like Bielsa. You don't have to be rocket scientist to understand that those are two completely different worlds of football which you cannot tactically combine.
And all this was furthermore amplified by the fact that a lot of Ruud's tactical principles were outdated. In possession everything was very rigid. There weren't much vertical runs, the positional formation was very rigid with hardly any rotations, no use of halfspaces, etc. Defensively everything was man-marked which made it easy for opponents to dismantle our defensive structure using simple rotations and runs without the ball. During the whole season, every match there were phases where the length between the striker and last man during pressing/gegenpressing/transition was around 60 meters.
Eventuallty this lead to the situation were a lot of players didn't take him seriously because tactically he wasn't up to the job. Some influential went behind his back to the board to say this could not go any further like this. The board also didn't have a lot of trust in Van Nistelrooij which eventually lead to his resignation. The reason he got the job in the first place is a bit vague and there are a lot of different rumors. What is clear is that the former general manager (who didn't have a lot of football knowledge) clearly had a prejudice for ex-profs from the club instead of measuring people based on their qualities. It is for that reason in the first place Van Nistelrooij got the U19/U18 job and a few years later the U21/U23 job, while it was widely known on the youth side of the club that he wasn't up to this task at all.
A lot of people who i spoke who worked at the club or worked with him, described him as an amazing person but tactically insufficient with a capital letter. It surprises everyone that he is in the conversation for a manager role at Burnley and it seems to do more with his iconic status and name in the football world than rather with his qualities as manager. It seems to us that this is also one of the reasons why he is getting this job as an assistant. Although, I have to say i think the role as an assistant suits him more than a manager role in modern football. Yet he still needs a lot to learn.
He did do well based on the results. A lot of things happened with some financial restrictions from the board, some keyplayers who had to be sold, etc. It was not an easy year for any trainer who would have had his seat at PSV from that point of view.
However, football tactical and technical wise he didn't do well at all. There was for example not a clear vision in how to play. One match we would press very high and aggresive, another time we would try to dominate and control the possession game. There were also enough matches (most of them) were we would play an old fashioned kick and rush or catenaccio style of play. In modern football this doesn't work. You have to have a clear style of play. Characteristic was an interview in the beginning of the season were he said he wanted to defend like Simeone and attack like Bielsa. You don't have to be rocket scientist to understand that those are two completely different worlds of football which you cannot tactically combine.
And all this was furthermore amplified by the fact that a lot of Ruud's tactical principles were outdated. In possession everything was very rigid. There weren't much vertical runs, the positional formation was very rigid with hardly any rotations, no use of halfspaces, etc. Defensively everything was man-marked which made it easy for opponents to dismantle our defensive structure using simple rotations and runs without the ball. During the whole season, every match there were phases where the length between the striker and last man during pressing/gegenpressing/transition was around 60 meters.
Eventuallty this lead to the situation were a lot of players didn't take him seriously because tactically he wasn't up to the job. Some influential went behind his back to the board to say this could not go any further like this. The board also didn't have a lot of trust in Van Nistelrooij which eventually lead to his resignation. The reason he got the job in the first place is a bit vague and there are a lot of different rumors. What is clear is that the former general manager (who didn't have a lot of football knowledge) clearly had a prejudice for ex-profs from the club instead of measuring people based on their qualities. It is for that reason in the first place Van Nistelrooij got the U19/U18 job and a few years later the U21/U23 job, while it was widely known on the youth side of the club that he wasn't up to this task at all.
A lot of people who i spoke who worked at the club or worked with him, described him as an amazing person but tactically insufficient with a capital letter. It surprises everyone that he is in the conversation for a manager role at Burnley and it seems to do more with his iconic status and name in the football world than rather with his qualities as manager. It seems to us that this is also one of the reasons why he is getting this job as an assistant. Although, I have to say i think the role as an assistant suits him more than a manager role in modern football. Yet he still needs a lot to learn.
I doubt he'd simply just be that. I'm sure this appointment is happening is clearly because everyone at the club can see we need more attacking coaching. We need new ideas and players need to be drilled on them and RVN will do that. There is a misconception that it's the manager that coaches the players in training, it's the coaches and assistants that mostly do it and having the best can change the outlook of the whole team. For example under SAF it was his coaches that handled training and he oversaw it all. That's obviously what INEOS want a world class coaching team that will get the team well prepared. The whole way the team attacks will be part of RVNs remit not merely just working with attacking players and finishing practice etc.He’s clearly still got a lot to learn so I’m sticking by my original prediction that he’s earmarked as McCarthys replacement for 1:1 work with the forwards
I think Rudd would be a good addition hopefully we can get it done, also I've never understood the hate Fabrizio Romano gets the guy gets a lot of exclusives he was the first to report this, no?
Ten Hag played in the midfield for the final. FC Twenty have the full match on their YouTube channel... What was Ten Hag doing taking the kickoff as a centre half anyway?
Paul?
I think Rudd would be a good addition hopefully we can get it done, also I've never understood the hate Fabrizio Romano gets the guy gets a lot of exclusives he was the first to report this, no?
No obviously but I can’t wait till he works with them individually. Said it last season, I wanted him in to work with Hojlund. There’s things to iron out and no better man to do itI doubt he'd simply just be that. I'm sure this appointment is happening is clearly because everyone at the club can see we need more attacking coaching. We need new ideas and players need to be drilled on them and RVN will do that. There is a misconception that it's the manager that coaches the players in training, it's the coaches and assistants that mostly do it and having the best can change the outlook of the whole team. For example under SAF it was his coaches that handled training and he oversaw it all. That's obviously what INEOS want a world class coaching team that will get the team well prepared. The whole way the team attacks will be part of RVNs remit not merely just working with attacking players and finishing practice etc.
Ten Hag played in the midfield for the final. FC Twenty have the full match on their YouTube channel
Yeah a strange level of excitement about it.The romanticism of it all is great... but is he the best coach we can find? Surely bringing back club legends is only the right move if they're the best in their field?
I just don't see other clubs doing this sort of stuff, you wouldn't see City appointing Aguero as their attacking coach.
I firmly believe this as well, but I always feel like I'm in the minority even amongst United fans. Whenever I listen to debates about all time PL strikers, I often get the impression that United fans are too busy fighting Rooney's corner that they forget to bring up Van Nistelrooy. For me, it goes:
1) Ruud
2) Henry
3) Shearer
4) Rooney
5) Aguero
The romanticism of it all is great... but is he the best coach we can find? Surely bringing back club legends is only the right move if they're the best in their field?
I just don't see other clubs doing this sort of stuff, you wouldn't see City appointing Aguero as their attacking coach.
It's close between Aguero, Kane and Cole. The top 4 are in a league of their own though in my opinion.Aguero over Kane?
It's close between Aguero, Kane and Cole. The top 4 are in a league of their own though in my opinion.
Personally, I always thought that in pure finishing Ole was even better. Ruud was obviously better at positioning himself to get on the end of chances and in most other aspects of being a striker (especially being a lone #9) so would score quite a lot more, but if I had to pick one of them to be on the end of a chance to save my life, I'd go for Ole.
Maybe this is Ruud playing 4d chess and he s gonna take Erik's job Game of Thrones style.Ten Hag snitch
I agree that’s likely the top five. I can’t say I necessarily agree with the order mind you. But that’s pretty subjective. I think based on talent, Henry is the best of the best. And Shearer was absolutely brilliant, and for so long. But I definitely have Ruud in my top three.
On another note, number six, for me, is probably Andy Cole. A criminally underrated striker by many. His catalogue of goals is phenomenal and in todays game he’d be worth 150m+