Actually, I think the Glazers are pretty fast learners. I would be in shock if they repeated the same mistake as they did with Moyes. These people are all about the balance sheet, and they saw how much the Moyes decision cost them. I cannot believe they would make the same mistake twice - it would be astonishing from a business point of view.
The Argument for Giggs as our Next Manager
- Thread starter Walrus
- Start date
- Status
Let's be fair here, if Giggs thinks he's good enough, cocks it up and gets sacked in less than a season then that's on him. Why some of you think he is going to get a pass I don't know, if he fails he goes. The board won't be in favor of dragging it out, the fans (judging by comments on here) will be quick to make their feelings known.
If he then doesn't get a a second crack later on down the line, again, that's on him, it's something for him too think about...
That's pretty much as I see it too. Giggs is looking forward to when Van Gaal's contract is up and his backers are making all the right noises. But after getting burned by the Moyes affair, I think Woodward may shy away from letting one of Fergie's acolytes take control.
Unsurprisingly the same guys who pushed Moyes down our throats are now doing the same, only this time the impact won't just be financial - if Giggs fails, and the odds aren't in his favour, it will be heartbreaking seeing him turning into the joke that Moyes became amongst the fan base. The other thing is can we recover from another disastrous managerial appointment so soon after Moyes?
I'm talking about the current era post-Fergie. Not the last century, 30 years ago. Of course appointing Fergie was the right thing to do and he built the club into what it is today. My point is I want someone to continue what he has built.
I think that is very likely too.
That is one of the biggest reasons why I don't want Giggs. While any manager would be judged objectively, Giggsy will get at least 2 years on being absolutely terrible or 3-5 years on being just mediocre (fight for the fourth place). If Van Gaal fails on doing his job, he'll get sacked and no-one will miss him. If Giggsy fails on it, it is still our Giggsy, give him time.
In modern football, picking an unexperienced manager who is also a legend of the club is a recipe for disaster. Not only that the chances are against him (lets face it, most of top footballers nowadays fail in their first job) but it is also the feeling that they don't get judged like other managers.
Like always, the best decision is a rational one. And a rational decision is to get one of the top 5 managers in football (Pep, Klopp, Simeone, Mourinho and Ancelotti). If none of them is available though, then Giggs vs De Bour or Martinez or any other second/third tie manager might be a debate. Which again most likely won't favorize Giggs.
Really? Or have you just made that up?
My issue is the bit in bold - I seriously doubt these would be the reasons we would appoint Giggs unless we had sentimental idiots on the board
Why does that have to be someone from within, though? Fergie did an incredible job after coming from outside the club.
If LVG wins 2 or more major trophies with United, then appointing Giggs would be the right decision.
'IF'
'IF'
The fans were applauding David Moyes in the end of his spell, like he had just discovered the cure for cancer, AIDS and Alzheimer.
The board also isn't a single entity. There are the football people (SAF, SBC etc) and the money people (Ed, Arnold etc) which may have different ideas and goals.
You take a very odd tone in your posts. Of course Manchester United shouldn't be a mid-table club and of course I wouldn't 'happily see us turned into' one. I would give Giggs time is all I'm saying, an 8th place finish in year 1 would be dreadfully disappointing obviously but provided we made progress and headed back to top four in year 2 I don't see why we shouldn't support him as our manager. You know there used to be a time when football supporters got behind a club and its manager, when they used to see the bigger picture and understood what a manager was trying to achieve. I'd love to see us be a top club with supporters who get behind a manager for the long haul. How many years of mediocrity? Manchester United should never stand for mediocrity but the reality is we can't dominate the English game ad infinitum. Personally nothing would please me more than to see Giggs installed as manager, Giggs champion local and international youth at the club and Giggs eventually lead us back to the top. That would be much much sweeter than parachuting in some 'quick fix'. As a matter of interest how long would you give a new manager of United before you'd call for the chop?
In theory, this seems like what the club would do, but I don't think this would happen. Unfortunately for Giggs, what the sponsors, owners, shareholders etc people want are results of some sort as that keeps the money coming in. No way, would they allow us to indulge ourselves as they would surely feck us off. We can't afford to have that happen, that's the reality, so with that in mind, Giggs would unfortunately be sacked if he can't get the results. It would be awful to sack Giggs, but the money people won't allow us to indulge him.
It doesn't have to be someone from within. I just want it to be someone from within.
Yes but you aren't actually saying anything, no offense... Do you think he would get a pass, just because he's Giggs? From fans and board?
Your post says that you'd let Giggs be in it for the long haul: my reply was that if Giggs was to have a terrible year, it wouldn't make sense to keep him. If he had another one? It would be beyond any comprehensible logical to do so.
People do get behind managers. Not wanting a manager and not getting behind them are massively different. Just because people don't want Giggs doesn't mean they wouldn't back him.
It's not about understanding the bigger picture either: it's not as if what Giggs would be trying to achieve would be some incomprehensible idea. He'd be trying to gain success for us. If he fails, and there's no indication that he's good enough to do so, then he gets sacked.
Your idea seems to be based upon the argument that Giggs is eventually guaranteed to come good - it doesn't matter if we have four poor years, because we're supposedly bound to do well eventually. It's incorrect. It could happen. But if Giggs has three poor years, it's likely that he's just a poor manager. Not every manager who does a poor job is just a year away from suddenly achieving success, and it's dangerous to assume so.
As for how long I'd give a manager? It depends. Moyes should've been gone by about February 2014, and was rightfully sacked. If LVG had been here for 3 or 4 years and we hadn't progressed, I'd move on. As for Giggs? It depends on our circumstances before he takes over. If he comes in and we're 3rd, for example, then I'd give him the benefit of the doubt if we come 4th. If we were to then finish 5th the following season, I'd sack him barring extraordinary circumstances. That's perfectly reasonable.
For what it's worth, I like the idea of giving managers time. But I also think it's incredibly dangerous to just give managers time upon the assumption that they have to be good eventually: if the evidence is that they're not very good at their job, you sack them.
Yes, definitely. Even Moyes got a pass * cause he was British and SAF' pick. Giggs most likely will be untouchable in his first year - bar relegation - and likely will survive the next year by making some progress (which well may be Europa League). Or being less extreme, he won't be judged objectively, compared to any other manager.
About the second part, there are different voices, opinions and agendas in the board. While Ed will have the final say, even for him would be more difficult sacking Giggs if the likes of SAF, SBC and class of 92 support Giggs.
* It is all relative obviously. Some people here might think that we were disgraceful in our behavior to Moyes and he should have had at least full six years. On Madrid and Barca fans would have been actively pushing for his sacking in October, and in Roma they would have physically attacked him after some of his interviews. All in all, I think we tolerated him a few more months than we should have. But then, it might have been for contract reasons.
Ok, so post Moyes... You think we would give Giggs a pass if it goes tits up? I can't see that happening but at least I can see where you're coming from now...
What about those cookies you promised?
I don't think Woodward wants anyone to have the same degree of control that Fergie had. I don't think he'd want the Class of '92 dipping their oars in either from the sidelines.
This co92 stuff again... How much say do you think they have in... Anything? regarding MUFC? Honestly?
You know what? Don't answer that...
I don't think I've argued anywhere that Giggs would eventually come good. You asked me how long I'd give him and I gave you a hypothetical scenario, nowhere have I suggested Giggs is a guaranteed success. You've just neatly made my point for me, fans seem to think nowadays that a club can make an appointment and guarantee success, thats kind of ludicrous in my opinion. The sole premise of my 'argument' for Giggs becoming manager is to maintain a link with the Ferguson era and, in turn, to maintain our identity as a club. That really is my sole argument.
The OP of this thread asks for the argument 'for' and 'against' Giggs and there are plenty of posters on here giving the rational arguments against him being manager. I am merely putting forward an alternative view, one that is based on the emotional argument for Giggs. And do you know what, I wouldn't ignore the power of that emotional argument in shaping the success or failure of anything in life. The whole field of Behaviour Economics looks at how the intangible, the emotional and the irrational can actually lead to remarkable outcomes. I think the Giggs appointment would be a bit like that, he has the potential to offer a link to the clubs greatest era and to build on the work of SAF. I like that idea, I like the potential for magic that a Giggs appointment could have. Guarantee of success? Obviously not. But I can't think of any appointment that guarantees success.
Sadly I think you are right. But I think he's missing a trick.
So you'd happily appoint someone based on their association with the club ahead of managerial ability? Managers should be decided on whether we think they're good enough or not, as opposed to their links to the club. If they're linked to the club and we think they're good enough, then great. But it's an utterly bizarre manner in which to determine a managerial appointment.
Its likely the main factor, otherwise any number of assistants like Rene or Phelan would have equal justification as having been training by Fergie. Alternatively, to think that he is being considered strictly based on his managerial credentials despite never having managed is comparably laughable and probably worth questioning the credibility of who is making the decisions.
You just love having the last word don't you?
Its an irrational manner in which to determine a managerial appointment yes, I fully acknowledge that. The reality is NO appointment will have demonstrated managerial ability in managing Manchester United. Unless we reappoint Ferguson!!
It would be nice if those supporting him would transparently admit what you have - that you want Giggsy because he's Giggsy and that would give you a sense of comfort, in contrast to a manager with no prior affiliation with the club.
No, but plenty will have demonstrated managerial ability in management. Which is far more impressive than Giggs.
Yea the missus hates it... It's nothing personal
Well speaking for myself, I would support Giggs just like I'd support other managers. I don't want Giggs over other managers, I'm just not against his appointment and would find it satisfying.
So those ‘supporting‘ Giggs aren't all of one mind...
Last edited:
Yep. I think I am talking about more than just a sense of comfort. I'm really talking about a romantic notion that we could take a punt on one of Fergie's fledlings and a bit of the magic will return to OT once more. I refuse to get into any arguments for Giggs in a 'rational' manner, you simply won't win that argument when you compare Giggs as a candidate to experienced managers. For me the only argument in favour of him is that we literally 'believe' in the idea of Giggs continuing Fergie's legacy. Kind of a mad idea I know but I like it.
I get you mate...
BELIEVE!
So many of the things we have done have come about organically, winning with kids, growing to be one of the biggest clubs... As opposed to sugar daddies, managerial roulette and galacticos... Believe indeed
There was a journalist who made a good point, he seems in favour of the class of 92 and thinks Giggs should be the next manager. He'll bring in the ex players and create an identity again. All sounds nice and romantic.
But he made the point that Glazers and Woody are financially driven and smart business people. Bringing in the Class of 92 could create divisions in the club with people siding one or the other. Also if it goes wrong it'll be very difficult to sack him. For that reason alone, I don't think Giggs will be the next manager unless Giggs is good mates with Woody and are on the same page.
But he made the point that Glazers and Woody are financially driven and smart business people. Bringing in the Class of 92 could create divisions in the club with people siding one or the other. Also if it goes wrong it'll be very difficult to sack him. For that reason alone, I don't think Giggs will be the next manager unless Giggs is good mates with Woody and are on the same page.
Again, sadly I think you are correct. Or if they do appoint him they won't give him time.
Pretty sure we won't be finishing 8th as some are suggesting (Unless he's really clueless) if given 250 million to splash around in a year like LVG has been given.
Infact had Moyes straight up gone and spent 150 million after taking over he would have probably finished 4th also even with the added burden of dealing with a collosus like SAF leaving straight up.
Infact had Moyes straight up gone and spent 150 million after taking over he would have probably finished 4th also even with the added burden of dealing with a collosus like SAF leaving straight up.
My preference list when Van Gaal quits would currently look like this with Klopp sadly Liverpool bound....but for sure other great managers will emerge in next year and a half
1. Pep
2. Simeone
3. Conte
4. Joachim Low or Giggs
1. Pep
2. Simeone
3. Conte
4. Joachim Low or Giggs
The only thing that is giving me good vibes in regards to Giggs becoming manager is that LVG has stated on more than one occasion that he sees a lot of good work from him and that he has publicly backed him to be his successor. It's a massive risk but if he has spent the three years under LVG marrying the philosophy with everything that made Fergie great, we might just see something beautiful at Utd.
- Status