The Argument for Giggs as our Next Manager

Status
Not open for further replies.
I agree with all that. All I'm asking is what is your big plan to get us a step ahead? And how is appointing Giggs anathema to that?
My big plan is sack LvG at the end of the season bring in a big hitter, Ancelotti being my choice, and ride out the next three seasons being competitive whilst Giggs is building up his rep sheet elsewhere. If he is good it will show by the time Don Carlo is moving out, Giggs is still young enough to come in and give us ten to fifteen years.
The idea behind this is we as a club are still fragile from the Moyes debacle and we need trophies to get the belief back and I think LvG is too set in his ways to ever really succeed in this league and his style too sedate to dominate this league. For Giggs I think he will ruin his one and only shot at the big time if he jumps in prematurely and I have stated, before and people haven't really noticed, the bar for former players like him, Enrique, Simmeone and Conte is not set really high as proven by the latter duo. If Giggs went to a place like Swansea and got them into the Europa, claimed a few notable sculps and just proved that he is not a managerial idiot he will get his shot. A lot will happen over the next few years so if he really prepared himself on the practical side he will manage this club but if he jumps in it could turn ugly and this experience will render him unemployable forever.
 
Are you open to being proved wrong? If Giggs is appointed and succeeds will you admit that he was a sensible appointment?

Even though you didn't asked me, he will never be a sensible appointment, he can be successful but he will never be sensible. It's like betting your house on the red at the roulette, you might win big but it will never be sensible.
 
Are you open to being proved wrong? If Giggs is appointed and succeeds will you admit that he was a sensible appointment?

Of course I'm open to being proven wrong. I'd love for him to succeed here as well.
 
Give Giggs the Wales job. If he fecks it up, only the Taffs will suffer.;)

:lol: Bale's efforts have made Giggsy's contribution to the national team look pretty crappy, so bugger having Ryan as manager. :D
 
So let him do the reserves job then, like Guardiola did. Let him fulfill his insatiable appetite for learning by travelling the world, learning about different styles of management. It feels like Guardiola was champing at the bit for management. I am no expert on this, the most illuminating thing I have read about this was from @Invictus (check out post #516 and either side of it if you want to know more detail about the rise of Guardiola), and I dont know if he was positioning himself for the Barca job specifically, or if he was just a natural born manager waiting for an opportunity of some sort and things just fell into place. But I dont get the impression there was this same sense of entitlement. If that job hadnt come up he would have done something else because that is what he was interested in doing. With Giggs it just feels like he is sitting around waiting for things to happen, assuming that he is earning the necessary qualifications by osmosis, just by sitting next to some great managers.
Why does he necessarily need to carbon copy Guardiola path in order to achieve success here :confused:
I know many people doubt Giggs lack of experience. But presumably he will take over LVG after his contract is up, by then he would always have 4 years of experience as assistant manager of the club. Does it not count as something at all? I know it isn't exactly the same, but they are not so totally different either.
 
Fair enough, but based on what exactly ? He's never managed before.
Based purely on my knowledge of Giggs having been a player in our most successful era - an era in which our success came about by playing the brand of football I mentioned.

The opinion that he would be a success is equally as valid as any that he won't, given, as you say, he hasn't managed before therefore there's no evidence either way. Let's face it, appointing any manager is a risk and a leap into the unknown. Even the most experienced manager can fail, of which there are many examples. Even Van Gaal can't yet be said to have been a success.
 
That still doesn't address my original point about Paisley. Liverpool dominated for years by promoting from within. IF we had the right assistant manager at the time Ferguson left we should have done the same. We didn't that is history now. But hopefully Giggs will be that candiate at the end of next season. I can't wait for the meltdown on here :lol:. And I can't wait to really get behind a manager we can say is truly one of our own. And a born winner to boot.

Correct me if I am wrong but Paisley was left with a magnificent side. Not to forget competition wasn't that great at the time either. The clubs are less reliant to the youth academy, there's more choice in terms of bring players in and clubs can spend ridiculous amount of money every year. Managers are rarely given the time needed to learn the role.

Also why should Giggs take the role out of pure nepotism? If he's good enough to lead United why cant he prove himself at other clubs first? Surely Liverpool fans think Paisley could do that!
 
Why does he necessarily need to carbon copy Guardiola path in order to achieve success here :confused:
I know many people doubt Giggs lack of experience. But presumably he will take over LVG after his contract is up, by then he would always have 4 years of experience as assistant manager of the club. Does it not count as something at all? I know it isn't exactly the same, but they are not so totally different either.

Well it certainly is enough to get him a job with a small club like it did with Mclaren. However 4 years as assistant manager means jack shit unless that person is responsible of producing the best talent group football had seen in the past 20 years (as Guardiola did)
 
As usual the same old argument is resorted to. Being a good footballer doesn't necessarily make you a poor manager either. The same as having a CV doesn't guarantee success. Each individual should be assessed on their own individual merits. Giggs, in my view offers something few other candidates can offer. I don't care if other ex-legends 'failed' at other clubs. I'm interested in seeing Giggs trying to succeed at United.

He managed for just 4 games for example
 
half the battle with a new manager is to gain the trust and respect of the players. I'm sure Giggs will get that. The other half is the tough part.
Half the battle will be getting the players not to see him as a pushover, as soon as they see a weakness in him they will attack it.
He has virtually zero experience in management, he needs to start at the bottom.
 
That still doesn't address my original point about Paisley. Liverpool dominated for years by promoting from within. IF we had the right assistant manager at the time Ferguson left we should have done the same. We didn't that is history now. But hopefully Giggs will be that candiate at the end of next season. I can't wait for the meltdown on here :lol:. And I can't wait to really get behind a manager we can say is truly one of our own. And a born winner to boot.

Your opportunity for a boot room tradition died when Moyes flushed the toilet.

That whole operation was about more than just promoting one guy from within. It worked because they had a whole system of people all working with methods ahead of their peers, all would get input from their predecessors when needed, etc.

Also, I think it only really worked after shankly left. He was a one of a kind. Paisley was a genius and probably more gifted, but he approached the game in ways that could be passed on more readily. Fagan, Dalglish and Moran could all draw on the help of their predecessors and had support for their methods from the continuity within the coaching staff.

That's gone for your lot now.
 
The funny thing is that the most successful managers at this club came from outside. One lead Aberdeen to local and European glory at a time when Scottish football was still taken seriously. The other was a former City player with coaching experiences at Liverpool. Thank god we didn't work with the United way strategy back then. Imagine what would have happened if we Sir Bobby Charlton instead of SAF just because the former knew the club inside out.
 
Why does he necessarily need to carbon copy Guardiola path in order to achieve success here :confused:
I know many people doubt Giggs lack of experience. But presumably he will take over LVG after his contract is up, by then he would always have 4 years of experience as assistant manager of the club. Does it not count as something at all? I know it isn't exactly the same, but they are not so totally different either.
It doesn't have to be a carbon copy.

In answer to you final question, it doesn't count for much as far as giving me confidence goes. But of course it may well be enough for the club, given they'll have far better visibility regarding what kind of input he had.
 
The funny thing is that the most successful managers at this club came from outside. One lead Aberdeen to local and European glory at a time when Scottish football was still taken seriously. The other was a former City player with coaching experiences at Liverpool. Thank god we didn't work with the United way strategy back then. Imagine what would have happened if we Sir Bobby Charlton instead of SAF just because the former knew the club inside out.

So because two of our appointments came from outside and were successful we have to stick with that model?

Since the Busby era SAF, LVG, Moyes, Atkinson, Sexton, Doherty and O'Farrell were all outside appointments. That is SIX outside appointments that didn't lead us to the top of tree (LVG may well do in time).

The only 'internal' appointment was Wilf McGuinness. In case you don't know what happened there, McGuinness was appointed reserve team coach in 1969 and when Busby retired at the end of the 69 season he was promoted to first team manager. He was 31. It lasted at year.

So the reality is, we've have 2 outside appointments that were transformational (Busby and Ferguson), 6 that have been mediocre (at best) and 1 internal appointment that was by all accounts botched.

We have never groomed a club legend to take over the top job. Appointing Giggs is breaking new ground. And I'm all for it.
 
So because two of our appointments came from outside and were successful we have to stick with that model?

Since the Busby era SAF, LVG, Moyes, Atkinson, Sexton, Doherty and O'Farrell were all outside appointments. That is SIX outside appointments that didn't lead us to the top of tree (LVG may well do in time).

The only 'internal' appointment was Wilf McGuinness. In case you don't know what happened there, McGuinness was appointed reserve team coach in 1969 and when Busby retired at the end of the 69 season he was promoted to first team manager. He was 31. It lasted at year.

So the reality is, we've have 2 outside appointments that were transformational (Busby and Ferguson), 6 that have been mediocre (at best) and 1 internal appointment that was by all accounts botched.

We have never groomed a club legend to take over the top job. Appointing Giggs is breaking new ground. And I'm all for it.

So it's not even about romanticism, but only about hipsterism, you want it because it's ground breaking.
 
So because two of our appointments came from outside and were successful we have to stick with that model?

Since the Busby era SAF, LVG, Moyes, Atkinson, Sexton, Doherty and O'Farrell were all outside appointments. That is SIX outside appointments that didn't lead us to the top of tree (LVG may well do in time).

The only 'internal' appointment was Wilf McGuinness. In case you don't know what happened there, McGuinness was appointed reserve team coach in 1969 and when Busby retired at the end of the 69 season he was promoted to first team manager. He was 31. It lasted at year.

So the reality is, we've have 2 outside appointments that were transformational (Busby and Ferguson), 6 that have been mediocre (at best) and 1 internal appointment that was by all accounts botched.

We have never groomed a club legend to take over the top job. Appointing Giggs is breaking new ground. And I'm all for it.

Im actually ridiculing the idiotic concept some people have about the United way, We're were we are because people outside the club came at United and brought changes which, back at the time, shocked the club and British football as a whole. Sir Matt went toe to toe with the FA so he could see United participate in the CL. The tragedy of Munich is clear testament to that. SAF on the other hand literally kicked the pub mentality out of the club sacking a substantial number of players in the process. He did it again with the double double squad and again in the transition period between the treble and the third CL. Radical Change had always brought good news to United. Imagine how United would have been if some player from the United's Pre Busby era took over instead of that former Manchester City player and former Liverpool coach or if Sir Bobby with his proven track record as manager took over instead of that Scottish manager who lead Aberdeen. That would have been a disaster

If Giggs is good enough than he can work up the ranks and earn the job rather than expect nepotism to bail him up . Sir Alex started as a part time manager of tiny East Stirlingshire while Mourinho started as a school coach and than as an interpretor for Sir Bobby Robson. Some believe that nowadays its nearly impossible to start from the lowest ranks and work up to the top but that's simply not true. Guys like Mourinho, Simeone and Klopp started at relatively low level clubs. Are we saying that Giggs isn't good enough to do the same things these people had done?
 
He needs to manage the reserves team or get some more experience.

Unless LVG is planning to get giggs manage us in the league cup but even then its not enough.

He needs more experience as manager
 
@devilish I will add Rudy Garcia who started his career at the lower divisions in France, I think that it's the equivalent of the 7th division.
 
I'm just going to say this as an outsider looking in. Giggs has shown nothing to suggest that he has the makings of a top manager at a top club. In fact, from what I have seen and read, he has shown himself to be completely incompetent in this respect and making him the manager would be a huge risk that you should not take.
 
I'm proposing the logic of the Giggs appointment could be a revaltion. Kind of 'outside the box' thinking. As I said above, the CV approach doesn't guarantee success and, arguably doesn't even increase the odds of success. A Giggs appointment could have something unique and magical that a more "obvious" appointment ever would have. I think most of us would love to see Giggs succeed. We'd probably enjoy that more than a Klopp or a Pep. Why? Because of the romance, you can't buy that.
I'm sorry but that is nonsense. If the Cv approach does not increase the odds of success, why is it the most widely used approach in almost all walks of life? Of course, it doesn't guarantee success but what approach does? If when making decisions your object is to guarantee success, you would never make a decision. All you can do is try and make a rational decision that maximises the chance of success and I'm afraid choosing Ryan over other more proven managers isn't a rational choice at all.
 
I'm just going to say this as an outsider looking in. Giggs has shown nothing to suggest that he has the makings of a top manager at a top club. In fact, from what I have seen and read, he has shown himself to be completely incompetent in this respect and making him the manager would be a huge risk that you should not take.
When you hear he would have given Rio and Vidic new contracts if it was up to him, you start to wonder. I am very hopeful this appointment won't happen.
 
When you hear he would have given Rio and Vidic new contracts if it was up to him, you start to wonder. I am very hopeful this appointment won't happen.
I can understand him having some loyalty to long term team-mates back then and perhaps he felt obliged to say that about friends but come 2017 I don't think he will be compromised to the same degree and should be able to make objective decisions.

For people to base their decision on his 4 games after Moyes left, that's ridiculous. The team were all over the place and no way did he have enough time to put his own stamp on it.

Its obviously a risky gamble but if he gets the ok from SAF and LVG then perhaps they might see more of what he can actually do than any of us do. What I would like about the appointment is he's bound to go with a more attacking formation. Can't imagine he would go for control type football when he was so often the focal point of our attacking wing play.
 
I'm sorry but that is nonsense. If the Cv approach does not increase the odds of success, why is it the most widely used approach in almost all walks of life? Of course, it doesn't guarantee success but what approach does? If when making decisions your object is to guarantee success, you would never make a decision. All you can do is try and make a rational decision that maximises the chance of success and I'm afraid choosing Ryan over other more proven managers isn't a rational choice at all.

CVs are meant to provide a potential employer with information on the applicant, given that applicants are usually unknown prior to application. You don't always hire the person with the best CV on paper though and often I have seen people promoted from within over getting a more overall experienced person from outside.

I think the club knows more about Ryan Giggs than any of us and I trust that their more intimate knowledge of him would contribute to any decision on his future at the club.
 
I'm just going to say this as an outsider looking in. Giggs has shown nothing to suggest that he has the makings of a top manager at a top club. In fact, from what I have seen and read, he has shown himself to be completely incompetent in this respect and making him the manager would be a huge risk that you should not take.

Examples?
 
CVs are meant to provide a potential employer with information on the applicant, given that applicants are usually unknown prior to application. You don't always hire the person with the best CV on paper though and often I have seen people promoted from within over getting a more overall experienced person from outside.

I think the club knows more about Ryan Giggs than any of us and I trust that their more intimate knowledge of him would contribute to any decision on his future at the club.

This sums up some of what I have been trying to say pretty well.
 
There's a gamble involved every time you recruit someone, player or manager. I know Giggs was a great player and I've seen him come across really well in press conferences (including one where he sat alongside Moyes and sounded more like a United manager than Moyes ever did). On the downside I don't think he ever struck me as an on-field organiser or communicator, and to me he sounded like a non-entity in that TV program about his month in charge.

Those inside the game, and in particular those inside the club will know him better. Mind you, I seem to remember saying the same about Moyes as part of my general, hope for the best, approach to all things United.

Comparisons with Pep are largely redundant, different character as a player and a different actual history on his CV. To us, it sounds like a huge gamble for Barca to take him on. But he was minor gamble from their point of view. They knew him. The offered him a short contract. They agreed a transfer strategy (using their existing DoF approach). There was no massive overhaul of the rest of the coaching/support staff involved - he was the coach, not the "manager".

They'd have sacked Pep at Christmas if it hadn't been working out - with no misgivings and no hard feelings. At the post-dismissal press conference there would even have been a reminder that they would welcome him back later with some more experience under his belt.

If you choose someone with no real managerial track record, then you have to be prepared to sack them if they don't hit the ground running. Continuity is only useful if it actually continues a pattern of progress or success.
 
They're, without all the romantism bullshit aside.

An ex legend that has won things (respective to their club expectations)
Nah I think someone like Carragher would be a fairer comparison. I don't think it would have been mental if we heard that Carragher was being groomed for the eventual managers job under Brendan Rodgers. Stevie g isn't a fair comparison as he just doesn't seem like management material.
 
They're, without all the romantism bullshit aside.

An ex legend that has won things (respective to their club expectations)

These silly straw man arguments do nothing to help your cause. Gerrard has not been employed in a coaching role. Gerrard has not been groomed for the job. Gerrard has shown himself to be undisciplined and narcissistic....the list goes on.

I hate these silly "If you support Giggs then why not Gerrard/Phelan/Joe off Redcafe/Steve who runs my corner shop?" arguments. They are not comparable.
 
I dont remember reading anything like that at the time. About how LVG was forced with a gun to his head to take on Giggs as #2. It honestly seems like a bit of creative revisionism and rewriting history to suit your argument. My recollection was that LVG wanted to have a "native" assistant manager, a link between him and the players, someone with existing extensive knowledge of the club etc.

No, I'm just going off numerous articles from the time period where it was said that one of the things LvG had to agree to as part of taking the job was to take Giggs on as one of his assistants. It was obvious from the start that this stupid idea of Giggs being groomed under him was being set in motion.

While on the subject, I really dont get why Moyes keeps being brought up, as the two cases are like night and day. I have used Moyes as an example myself of how having experience managing at a decent level (in the PL, no less) doesnt mean anything when it comes to managing United. I find it strange that the Giggs critics are all too happy to cite Moyes as some kind of forewarning of what it would be like under Giggs, while at the same time dismissing any comparisons to Pep...

That's because it's not about just appointing experience, it's about appointing a proven managerial winner, Moyes wasn't that, he was a 10 year water treader and that is why most didn't want him and why most here don't want Giggs, as he not only has no track record because he's never managed, but he has no managerial experience of any kind. Pep is one of the rare exceptions, Moyes is among the huge amount of statistics that represent what happens when you appoint someone that has not proven anything as a manager.
 
If you choose someone with no real managerial track record, then you have to be prepared to sack them if they don't hit the ground running. Continuity is only useful if it actually continues a pattern of progress or success.

That's the thing. I fear that if Ryan failed to start with a winning flourish, the knives would be out very swiftly - one poor result, and many fans would be quick to charge him with being an incompetent know-nothing. Faith would be very quickly lost, whereas someone like LVG could get away with a start of 13 points in 10 games because his CV and reputation gave people faith that he'd get it right eventually; Ryan won't have that luxury.
 
The only thing Giggs and Pep have in common is the status at the clubs they're synonymous with. Giggs might have more staying power at a club in a managerial sense, but that's only going to come into play if he's a success.
 
That's the thing. I fear that if Ryan failed to start with a winning flourish, the knives would be out very swiftly - one poor result, and many fans would be quick to charge him with being an incompetent know-nothing. Faith would be very quickly lost, whereas someone like LVG could get away with a start of 13 points in 10 games because his CV and reputation gave people faith that he'd get it right eventually; Ryan won't have that luxury.

Indeed. That said, Giggs does have several old pals in the media - which might help, or might misfire horribly on the club.
 
No, I'm just going off numerous articles from the time period where it was said that one of the things LvG had to agree to as part of taking the job was to take Giggs on as one of his assistants. It was obvious from the start that this stupid idea of Giggs being groomed under him was being set in motion.

Again this seems to be revisionism at its finest. Giggs was already part of the coaching staff since 2013. He was not "forced" on LVG - do you really think that someone with LVGs personality would accept that? Think about it for a second.

That's because it's not about just appointing experience, it's about appointing a proven managerial winner, Moyes wasn't that, he was a 10 year water treader and that is why most didn't want him and why most here don't want Giggs, as he not only has no track record because he's never managed, but he has no managerial experience of any kind. Pep is one of the rare exceptions, Moyes is among the huge amount of statistics that represent what happens when you appoint someone that has not proven anything as a manager.

So basically what you are saying is that the only way to succeed is by appointing a manager with a track record of success, except when a manager without that track record succeeds, and in that case it doesnt count?
How about Monk? Martinez? Recent examples in the PL of internal appointments who have done well.


The key point here is that you say that someone like Moyes, who had managed a good, top-half PL team for several years, was completely unsuitable, but then in the same breath you say that Giggs needs to go out and get experience before he can be considered.

The question I pose is one that was discussed much earlier in this thread - what would Giggs actually have to do for you to think he is qualified for the United job?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.