If he is stepping aggressively into midfield to win duels and compress the space from a central position, that is fine. Its essentially what John Stones has done a lot for City. But then you need three other defenders who are top athletes and really comfortable playing high up the pitch to form a back three. Stones can do that because behind him are three players from the Walker/Dias/Ake/Gvardiol/Akanji group.
Strategies to get United out of this mess?
- Thread starter Jericholyte2
- Start date
If he is stepping aggressively into midfield to win duels and compress the space from a central position, that is fine. Its essentially what John Stones has done a lot for City. But then you need three other defenders who are top athletes and really comfortable playing high up the pitch to form a back three. Stones can do that because behind him are three players from the Walker/Dias/Ake/Gvardiol/Akanji group.
It took long enough! But there's your answer. Not the specifics, but:
1. Identify a style of play you want. Doesn't matter if it's Pep-ball, Klopp's gegenpressing, or defensive solidity and counter attacks.
2. Get a manager who does that.
3. Get players who do that, and give the manager carte blanche to bin current players who don't fit.
In all seriousness, I feel for you guys. A misfit squad and a misfit manager really sucked the joy out of football for a couple of years. But an actual process is the way out of it.
Didn't we actually do this when appointing ETH? This is what we thought we were doing. Nobody could have known ETH to change his style completely.
The post misses the key thing. You need experienced management at top of club, strong scouting and recruitment under an experiencd DoF. Then you do some of this. But you dont give manager carte blanche over anything.
I think ETH may have been a mistake. And I say that as someone who wanted him at Arsenal when I was texting #ArtetaOut to all my football friends. I thought he was the real deal for a certain style of play. In retrospect, it may just have been that it was the style of play that was expected at Ajax, and Overmars was giving him the right players for it, and he couldn't recreate it on his own.
So trust the process? Or replace him with someone else and start over again?
Step 1: buy two athletic bully's for centerbacks, who are fast and athletic and strong and good in the air.
I know nothing about tactics or playing style or any of that, but it seems like Arsenal's success is built on having their two destroyers at the back.
ETH was on to a loser from day one. It's as important if not more to move players on who don't fit the style before signing more. We can't move the deadwood, meaning he can't play his football.
Now his signings have been terrible so I'm not in the camp that he is innocent in this, but half the squad should still be at the club.
They made some good signings but the signings of Saliba, Gabriel at CB with Partey in midfield along with the much criticised Xhaka, created a strong defense where Arsenal could now defend higher up the pitch and control larger spaces. This then allowed Arteta to sacrifice defensive stability for goals. When you have strong duellers at the back and in midfield that cover ground quickly and can defend the channel in 1v1s, then you have a strong foundation to develop a team with the aim of playing the game in the opponent's half.
Arsenal don't have a world class striker but their players in the first phase are dominant at controlling large spaces and hence it allows Arteta to commit a high volume of players into the final third and the result is that they can pin teams in their own half and create a high volume of chances with multiple players being a threat. We don't have those type of players and our midfield also lacks power and athleticism which gives even the smaller teams a chance against us due to their superior athletic capabilities.
Ten Hag likely won't survive with Graham Potter being someone that Ashworth will likely go for. But I believe if he did get one more season and signed players to raise the physical and athletic levels of the team by replacing the likes of Maguire, Lindelof and even Casemiro who are all weak at managing large spaces, we'll see a big change.
If the aim is to score goals and play a proactive attacking play style by implementing a higher defensive line, then the CBs have to have the pace and power to handle the transition in the channel and the midfield needs to have the ability to control spaces centrally hence we have to focus on far more than what we do in possession. A midfield and CBs are far more important to how a attack minded team functions than a striker imo.
We might need 4-5 years to turn the squad around but look at teams, like Spurs, who have improved dramatically with a good manager. We might only just be behind Spurs but look at the points turn around from us and then last season to now and their current style of play - we’d all take that right now, and with good investment they can only get better.
We can only hope the new structure is as good as it’s shaping up to be. If so, then tell ETH he needs to play like this, or get a new manager in to do it. Regardless, we can’t go on like we are set up now as it doesn’t play to any strength and is killing us fans.
We can only hope the new structure is as good as it’s shaping up to be. If so, then tell ETH he needs to play like this, or get a new manager in to do it. Regardless, we can’t go on like we are set up now as it doesn’t play to any strength and is killing us fans.
We did attempt to sign Amadou Onana but Scott Mctominay refused to leave per reports. We then tried to loan in Youssouf Fofana on loan which was a attempt turned down by Monaco. We then settled for Amrabat on loan, but what that showed is that had the money been there or had McTominay agreed to leave, Amrabat would not have been signed.
Maguire also refused to leave after the club accepted a offer from West Ham with Todibo reportedly being the replacement. So the issue wasn't that ten Hag or the football department overlooked the traits you described but rather we just couldn't get those deals done for reasons stated above. And not getting those players in hurt us imo.
The priority according to most people was that a striker and GK was needed above all else. But for me, the priority was a GK, CB and midfielder before a striker and many disagreed with me which I expected. But the reason I wanted to see us prioritise the aforementioned positions was due to the lack of athleticism we have in the first 11. So if we had signed Amadou Onana along with Todibo, then I'm pretty confident we'd be sitting in 4th place right now.
The strategy according to reports was that to sign either Todibo and Onana was to move on Maguire and Mctominay. Both refused but Fred departed and we replaced him with Mount. And Mount may not be everyone's cup of tea, but he's a player that is far more suited to the positional play principles than Bruno Fernandes is.
Maguire, McTominay, or most player won't give up money in their contracts and agree to leave without proper compensation.
Please explain why it will take 4-5 years? 4-5 windows yes, but not years.
I know a number of Arsenal fans who couldn't understand how Arteta was still in a job. But I think since Josh Kroenke has taken a active interest in the football club, things have improved a lot for Arsenal. He's got rid of a number of unwanted players for Edu and Arteta to build the team going forward.
And imo, the simple reason as to why Arteta wasn't sacked was due to his vision. And that vision was to develop the team from the back to front and hence play the game in the opponent's half with the ability initiate attacks from the back, press as a collective and control the defensive transition with players who have the pace, power and athleticism to control large spaces.
Arsenal have Josh Kroenke actively involved, makes a difference.
Liverpool have Mike Gordon actively involved, makes a difference.
City have Khaldoon Al Mubarak actively involved, makes a difference.
United have had no one from the Glazers actively involved which is one of the main reasons things have deteriorated in the last decade. We've now got Dave Brailsford who we hope will have a similar impact as INEOS's main guy.
I don't blame either player, but it's just what was inherited from the previous regime and there isn't always a simple solution to these issues and it's about being patient, but being patient isn't everyone's strong point.
That’s where we need to take a head out of Arsenal's book and be ruthless.
Tell them they are going, we will compensate them a fair amount and move on. We should have just paid Maguire the £5-10m and got Todibo in. We should have just been very firm with Scott and said, you’re not the right player we need for this project, thank you and good bye.
Hopefully with better people in charge to make these decisions and convey these decisions to players we will see a change in this department. Sir Alex used to just boot people out no questions.
I am not sure this is true based on the Amazon documentary. He definitely backed Arteta and Edu, and approved to write off the value of Ozil, Aubameyang and all other players that were released for free though.
That's what I'm referring to. Josh Kroenke willing to write off player contracts and hence playing a active role in supporting both Edu and Arteta is something we don't have at the club. Neither did you guys it seems, until the son came into to do the job the father had neglected for so long.
1. Bring in top tier executives and staff.
2. Formulate a vision of how the team should play.
3. Hire a head coach that fits the vision.
4. Set KPI’s for player recruitment according to said vision, e.g. hard-working, technical, injury free, leadership etc.
5. Manage economy in salary and transfer income/outcome.
6. Player overhaul.
2. Formulate a vision of how the team should play.
3. Hire a head coach that fits the vision.
4. Set KPI’s for player recruitment according to said vision, e.g. hard-working, technical, injury free, leadership etc.
5. Manage economy in salary and transfer income/outcome.
6. Player overhaul.
It depends what was offered in those conversations. Maguire should have been told, this is how are going to play this year, we think you’re a great defender but not for this system. With that in mind you are going to be well down the pecking order and your minutes will be very limited and we appreciate this is not ideal for you with England. We’ve agreed a fee with West Ham where we believe your attributes will be better suited and you’ll be first name in the team sheet. Here’s £5m compensation for the time left on your contract.
It shouldn’t be a hard conversation to have. We just need the right senior people in place to convey it.
If it’s a case that we won’t stump up the extra few quid in compensation then that is so shortsighted. If we agree to pay off Maguire we could have got Todibo in, and who knows, our season could have gone completely different and easily got top 4, which makes up for the extra couple mill Maguire had asked for.
All comes back to a lack of vision and a lack of competent people in charge to create and execute said vision. This is why I’m confident it will change quickly under INEOS, I don’t see Jim wanting to take 4-5 years, he even said in his interview 2-3 seasons right?
Not a personal view, just picking up on general comments in the media etc.
Maguire must've have known that he was unwanted when we had accepted a offer from West Ham. But he refused to leave and I'm not sure we were ever in a position under the Glazers to just sideline him. Jim as you say might be able to do that and back the football personnel like the Glazers couldn't but if a player refuses to leave and is happy picking up a wage you can't force him to leave.
The question beside player recruitment is, how to identify and determine which manager you can trust even when result is bad? In most big clubs if the head coach doesn't get the result they got fired right away. Just look at Xavi, Tuchel, Nagelsmann, Flick etc. Let alone Utd has so many retired legends talked about the performance of utd manager every day.
I don't think you can use Arsenal as an inspiration because fundamentally everything comes down to the inspiration of the manager. Arteta even in those poor league finishes at times demonstrated the ability to be consistent because for periods at a time Arsenal would go on unbeaten runs. That is always the hallmark of a great manager it's whether it can be duplicated from season to season.
In two and a half seasons he finished 5th (statistically) and in three and a half seasons he challenged for the league all the while being a manager within his infancy basically doing work experience at the highest level. Many are overlooking this aspect and it's why he has a very high ceiling, he's one of the best managers in Europe given some context.
I think Erik's misdealing's this season have been largely substantiated by his poor tactical assessment of the teams identity and the flaws that have come alongside trying to mediate balance. Injuries have certainly had an effect in more competitive games but where the injuries lose credibility is United look the same irrespective of the quality of the opposition. There's been almost nothing to cause separation between the team playing the likes of a Bournemouth at home and a top eight club.
In two and a half seasons he finished 5th (statistically) and in three and a half seasons he challenged for the league all the while being a manager within his infancy basically doing work experience at the highest level. Many are overlooking this aspect and it's why he has a very high ceiling, he's one of the best managers in Europe given some context.
I think Erik's misdealing's this season have been largely substantiated by his poor tactical assessment of the teams identity and the flaws that have come alongside trying to mediate balance. Injuries have certainly had an effect in more competitive games but where the injuries lose credibility is United look the same irrespective of the quality of the opposition. There's been almost nothing to cause separation between the team playing the likes of a Bournemouth at home and a top eight club.
Last edited:
That's the biggest issue nothing in terms of the performances and the managers philosophy has shown any form of being sustainable in the long run. It's totally permissible for a manager to be given exemptions with results if there's clear and concise evidence of what they are trying to do and it having some semblance of success in application which is the caveat with this manager. The fact that we can hardly assess players in the market who will drastically change the managers and teams fortunes is a strong example of this.
These players are far better than what they are achieving cohesively as a team at present. Like anything recency bias will always alter perspectives and have fans determine that the teams quality is rubbish. However, run through the forum last season when all 38 games were played and assess how many posts addressed player quality. The expectation threads on average had this team comfortably finishing fourth and the more optimistic mentions said of a league challenge.
The reality of what happened is that last season this team had miniscule periods of success (performance wise) and there were some breadcrumbs whereby if the manager had more prudence, he could have used the ingredients of the previous campaign as a foundation to build from. Unfortunately what happened was the manager changed the directive of his desire for the team in the second season. He proclaimed the intention to be rudimentary in the transition, opted for a more suicidal shape and purchased players to accommodate that adjustment (Mount) despite not actually testing his idea to assess it's relativity in a competitive fixture. First game of the season arrives against Wolves (with minimal squad injuries) and the opposition decimated the midfield. It was that drastic that the best player in the previous season (Casemiro) looked like an old man overnight given the demands of him having to cover more spaces then his maneuverability could cater for. Fast forward to the present day and as Carragher highlighted, the same issues are apparent as the Wolves game, because it's not a personnel problem but a shape / coaching one.
Last edited:
Noise on social media that Musiala is on the market this summer.
If there any truth to that we need to be in for him.
Core for the future with Mainoo, Musiala, Garnacho & Hojlund.
If there any truth to that we need to be in for him.
Core for the future with Mainoo, Musiala, Garnacho & Hojlund.
Or we could just recruit really competent people to the football department and let them sort it out?
Considering the dearth of managers market at the moment, I would give ETH one more year with few adjustments.
1-Get rid of bad apples
2-Take him off from recruiting and help him by bringing in right technical players (He was successful at Ajax because Overmars took care of transfers)
3-Give players basic salary contracts with additional performance bonuses.
1-Get rid of bad apples
2-Take him off from recruiting and help him by bringing in right technical players (He was successful at Ajax because Overmars took care of transfers)
3-Give players basic salary contracts with additional performance bonuses.
Why would Bayern sell him?
How much would he cost? £100m?
And if they were willing, why would he choose us over basically any of the other sides that would be interested?
Firstly, the manager has to go. I hear you saying but look at the injuries he has had to deal with. That's just a poor excuse considering the money spent and he's made them worse than last season.
Players have under preformed, some a taking the piss just picking up the money. Others are just not good enough to play for United.
Players have under preformed, some a taking the piss just picking up the money. Others are just not good enough to play for United.
Stop making dumb decisions?
What´s the most notable change the talent whisperer Rangnick made? He played Elanga. What did ETH/United do? Sell Elanga. Elanga has more scorer points total (5+7) and assists than every single United player this season. That´s stuff that does not happen under Rangnick´s command. He´s keeping Elanga and the 90M for Anthony pocketed for use elsewhere. Garner is top 10 in tackles made. He also has provided three assists. He´s basically Casemiro. Another 70M down the drain. Pereira has five assists. More than any United player except for Bruno, who has the most touches on United. Onana is #3 on the touches list btw. Only keepers with more touches are from Fulham and Brentford. Says a lot about the playing style of United and the ability of the defenders with the ball at their feet, that are hoofed over by Onana, except Dalot. That basically means you pressure United, it becomes hoofball. Basically you still haven´t gotten through the concept that you need young legs and willing minds. Then you buy expensive (prime players) for the leadership roles.
What´s the most notable change the talent whisperer Rangnick made? He played Elanga. What did ETH/United do? Sell Elanga. Elanga has more scorer points total (5+7) and assists than every single United player this season. That´s stuff that does not happen under Rangnick´s command. He´s keeping Elanga and the 90M for Anthony pocketed for use elsewhere. Garner is top 10 in tackles made. He also has provided three assists. He´s basically Casemiro. Another 70M down the drain. Pereira has five assists. More than any United player except for Bruno, who has the most touches on United. Onana is #3 on the touches list btw. Only keepers with more touches are from Fulham and Brentford. Says a lot about the playing style of United and the ability of the defenders with the ball at their feet, that are hoofed over by Onana, except Dalot. That basically means you pressure United, it becomes hoofball. Basically you still haven´t gotten through the concept that you need young legs and willing minds. Then you buy expensive (prime players) for the leadership roles.
Unfortunately that's were politics comes in. A new manager would want his men especially in a toxic environment were one word can be enough to lose the dressing room. HoRs arent stupid and they tend to sell these players at a premium knowing that the manager would be desperate for them. Money needs to come from somewhere thus current players will need to be sold to partially fund the deal. Again DOFs and HoRs aren't stupid and won't spend huge money on deadwood. Thus the club will have to sell players that are useful.
Its the reason why so many clubs are creating distance between the players and transfer strategy.
A- It reduce short termism. The manager can't just pile up the squad with his loyalists
B- It reduce player power. Bad performances hit managers not sporting directors
C- Having specialized recruitment people working 24/7 on transfers means that its easier for a given club to sell its deadwood for a reasonable price
But you need to be smart about it. Garner + Elanga brought like 30M. Casemiro + Antony cost 150M. So that imho is 120M down the drain without any significant improvement in quality.
Furthermore I think Rangnick might have rated McKenna. He would not have been afraid to make him the manager (see the hiring strategies of RedBull), if he believed in his ideas and concept.
Of course that would have meant to give Rangnick full power, so the players couldn´t undermine McKenna as a rookie manager. Rangnick said the club needed open heart surgery, and I doubt he refered just to the team. It´s the whole club infrastructure. I actually believe a young unknown manager in his 30s like McKenna has the drive and energy for such a project. Old guys want paycheques and a perfectly made bed. United´s bed is a mess. Something to really think about with the next appointment. This is not a club for a Zidane, Emery, Conte or Ancelotti. It needs an young energetic coach.
United wasted so much money, even since they put ETH in charge. Hojlund was a great transfer. Excellent scouting. Fernandes´s underlying stats outside of his dumb hero passes/turnovers suggest he can be a very good player. You just need to discipline him. If he doesn´t learn, you sell him.
Garnacho Hojlund Elanga
Fernandes
Garner Mainoo
I believe this would be a better team than what you have now with 120M in the bank to purchase a star central midfielder to lead the team. What really needs fixing though is the (central) defense. You cannot play out of the back, if three of your back four only pass backwards to Onana. Dalot is the only one that goes the other way and he has his own (defensive) flaws.
United have a long road ahead.
Of course it's not smart but that's why our current system is so flawed. The manager decides transfers but he's also vulnerable to losing the dressing room which in our case is ridiculously toxic. Thus once the manager joins the club then he's in a race were he has to bring in as many of his people as possible to try and even the odds before that dressing room turns against him. Unfortunately that requires loads of cash which means sales are inevitable and since clubs aren't idiots they only tend to spend good money on players that are worth the money. But that's not all. Once the manager leaves and a new manager comes out then some of his players will find themselves in a scenario were they have a huge salary and were they aren't the manager's pet anymore. Thus they might slide into the toxic crowd camp which in turn makes it difficult to get rid off and an obstacle for the new manager to beat. Take Martial as an example. How many managers had he buried? Does he even give a feck if we win, lose or draw?
Regarding Rangnick once again its down to politics and stupidity. Murtough brought an interim manager whose better in the DOF/Sporting director's job (ie that of a sporting director) then that of a a manager. Its the typical Turkeys voting for Christmas situation. Luckily for Murtough, he had the owners at his side + Rangnick speaks too much for such thin skinned owners. That contributed for the great survivor (the Athletic words, not mine) to survive yet another blunder.
We need to build a structure were all jobs are well defined, its filled with best in class people and were the damage of politics and player power can be managed and is limited. Take for example the system INEOS is building. The sporting director will probably take disciplinary actions alongside the CEO and possibly the football side of the board (Brailsford and Blanc). SJR being a decent owner not some ahole who barely ever visit Manchester will probably be involved as well. Thus if a player decide to go with a quit quitting attitude because his matey was kicked out of the squad then he's only damaging himself. That's because all the names I mentioned before are immune to player's power and the performance on the field.
This is so overlooked. If Martinez and Varane were both fit and playing at their level our attack would look totally different, even with the same personnel. We have a defence lacking pace, power and positional sense without them.
Proposing various players now won't do much. The strategy has to get a new owner (or partial owner) who hires a proper executive team and manager. Once thats in place, the players they bring in will probably start delivering results.
I think that's a great thread 
Probably everybody agrees by now that a club needs a shared vision across all its units of how it wants to play football to be successful in this day and age which most likely requires lots of radical changes in terms of organization structure and personnel. The more interesting part is IMO the transfer strategy the new leadership should pursue.
The good news is, even if you ran into some FFP problems lately, you're one of the richest clubs around. The bad news is that the last decade sort of ruined your reputation. So if you approach a top player that has many interests, you only have the financial argument on your side but a footballer who is more long term oriented and prioritizes a positive career trajectory over quick money (which is the kind of character you build successful teams around) will most likely pick another team. Which in consequence means the big money signings you can land probably don't have their priorities straight.
So what you need first, IMO, is a functioning squad that can be a foundation to build upon. Instead of going for star players that "make the difference", you need the complementary type of players that allow those to shine and ensure that you never drop below a certain bottom level. If you take a look at best practices, regardless if it is a top club that was able to turn the ship around like Liverpool or a smaller club punching above its weight like Brighton, they all try to identify underrated players which are great value for money. Often that involves data driven scouting. Those players might be grateful for the chance and willing to take their chance with your project because they don't have as many options as the most sought after.
So for the time being, ignore the "too good to pass" type of talents and sign those who are very good at doing the unspectacular basics right: Positional play, clean and reliable technique, good work ethic, tactically sound, etc. The Endo-transfer by Liverpool was laughed at by many but I think that is exactly the type of business you should be looking at in the long term. I believe people underestimate how many genuinely good players are out there. Better you sign two or three of them and bet that at least one makes it than betting all your money on a marquee signing.
In essence, this is also about realizing how mad the whole football business has become. I mean, Moses Caicedo has upped his market value from 4.5m to 116m in the span of two years. You can pay those sums if a player is the missing piece and the market doesn't offer many alternatives right now but building your whole team with such transfers is absolutely crazy. Which is why all great teams that don't have almost unlimited resources decide very carefully when they invest these sums and try to secure many intelligent transfers, often working on them over multiple years.
It's also important to make it clear to yourself that the strategy you pursued in the past started a negative spiral. Teams know that you pay huge sums so they take you to the cleaners. Players saw the chaos at your club so they pick other options or join you despite of the rather bad perspective because of money. That you have to convince them with money means you pay more. You need to break out of this cycle and start all over again. When you pursue players that are good but not without peers, you can afford to switch to another target when the selling clubs demands too much money. That sends a message to other clubs as well and will make future business easier because you proved that you're willing to talk away if your conditions aren't met. Once you've formed a good team that indeed only lacks difference makers, you have a much better chance of luring top players to you because they have genuine interest in the project and not because you paid them more money than anyone else as 'compensation'.
Probably everybody agrees by now that a club needs a shared vision across all its units of how it wants to play football to be successful in this day and age which most likely requires lots of radical changes in terms of organization structure and personnel. The more interesting part is IMO the transfer strategy the new leadership should pursue. The good news is, even if you ran into some FFP problems lately, you're one of the richest clubs around. The bad news is that the last decade sort of ruined your reputation. So if you approach a top player that has many interests, you only have the financial argument on your side but a footballer who is more long term oriented and prioritizes a positive career trajectory over quick money (which is the kind of character you build successful teams around) will most likely pick another team. Which in consequence means the big money signings you can land probably don't have their priorities straight.
So what you need first, IMO, is a functioning squad that can be a foundation to build upon. Instead of going for star players that "make the difference", you need the complementary type of players that allow those to shine and ensure that you never drop below a certain bottom level. If you take a look at best practices, regardless if it is a top club that was able to turn the ship around like Liverpool or a smaller club punching above its weight like Brighton, they all try to identify underrated players which are great value for money. Often that involves data driven scouting. Those players might be grateful for the chance and willing to take their chance with your project because they don't have as many options as the most sought after.
So for the time being, ignore the "too good to pass" type of talents and sign those who are very good at doing the unspectacular basics right: Positional play, clean and reliable technique, good work ethic, tactically sound, etc. The Endo-transfer by Liverpool was laughed at by many but I think that is exactly the type of business you should be looking at in the long term. I believe people underestimate how many genuinely good players are out there. Better you sign two or three of them and bet that at least one makes it than betting all your money on a marquee signing.
In essence, this is also about realizing how mad the whole football business has become. I mean, Moses Caicedo has upped his market value from 4.5m to 116m in the span of two years. You can pay those sums if a player is the missing piece and the market doesn't offer many alternatives right now but building your whole team with such transfers is absolutely crazy. Which is why all great teams that don't have almost unlimited resources decide very carefully when they invest these sums and try to secure many intelligent transfers, often working on them over multiple years.
It's also important to make it clear to yourself that the strategy you pursued in the past started a negative spiral. Teams know that you pay huge sums so they take you to the cleaners. Players saw the chaos at your club so they pick other options or join you despite of the rather bad perspective because of money. That you have to convince them with money means you pay more. You need to break out of this cycle and start all over again. When you pursue players that are good but not without peers, you can afford to switch to another target when the selling clubs demands too much money. That sends a message to other clubs as well and will make future business easier because you proved that you're willing to talk away if your conditions aren't met. Once you've formed a good team that indeed only lacks difference makers, you have a much better chance of luring top players to you because they have genuine interest in the project and not because you paid them more money than anyone else as 'compensation'.
That's... what we've been doing for the past 6 months...