Not for now I agree. But it also depends how far we proceed by the time Giggs take over. We have many good players in our squad who havn't exactly reach their peak yet or very likely still at their peak in 2 years time: Martial, Memphis, Januzaji, Mata, Pereira, Herrera, Schneiderlin, Shaw, Smalling, Jones, Darmian, De Gea
The Argument for Giggs as our Next Manager
- Thread starter Walrus
- Start date
- Status
Yes, no one knows. But then again, Barca was a different story as Pep was in charge of a team before (even if it's a u-21 team) and they had a brilliant team already. Your 4th point shows how big of a gamble that is. Why should we have again a manager that needs to grow into the role? What's wrong about him taking over another team and proving himself first? I remember that everyone said we need to have OGS as our next coach and look where that ended. United is not the club we used to be before Fergie took over and it will help us if we have another professional voice to the romantic one of SAF and Charlton.
I think it depends whether LVG manage to win something before Giggs take over. If he did then it will be less of gamble as Giggs is also big part of the success in co-managing title winning squad (being no.2 with long term view to take over as no.1) with most key players still yet to reach the peak. But let's say if LVG turns out to be a failure, it would surely be a very big gamble on Giggs to take over.
And I don't think he should prove himself elsewhere first. It's now or never situation for him and for us, given LVG won't extend his stay in 2 years time, and we'd rather prefer a young manager to grow with us if that's how we want to do it, as he will know all our current players strength and weakness well rather to start it all over again, and especially after all the rebuild work we've done.
Do you wish for another major rebuild in 2 years time should another big name manager come and take us over?
Last edited:
I imagine LVG and United will want to have a stronger settled team for him when he takes over. I still imagine Bale is a huge part of that plan.
I seriously doubt we would be in Pep's Barcelona position. I think that some things need to be acknowledged in this thread
a- Appointing Giggs as manager is not the United way. Both Busby and SAF came from outside the club and they bought brought revolutionary ideas which shook the club to the core. Sir Matt revolutionized the youth academy and challenged the FA so that United would be allowed to play in the CL. SAF sold a substantial number of players, he removed the club's pub mentality and turned the club from a complacent sleeping giant into a successful story off and on the pitch.
b- Most of the successful home grown managers inherited fantastic sides. Paisley inherited Shankly's side, Capello inherited Sacchi's fantastic Milan side, which is probably the strongest team the world have ever seen. Pep inherited a Barca side at the cusp of greatness and then he moved to Bayern who had just won the treble. We may have a solid side, but I doubt that there's that kind of talent at United.
I have followed clubs who used this system for quite some time with very mixed results. However there's one thing they tend they have in common. Once the manager shows the first hints that he's out of depth, than he gets kicked out immediately irrespective of his history and links with the club. Some of them lasted less than six months (ex Seedorf). Now are we ready to be as ruthless with Giggsie? Can the club handle such situation? I mean can you imagine how the media (ex Gaz) and the fans would react if we appoint Ryan Giggs as manager, he bring in Phil Nev, Paul Scholes etc only for the club to show them the door after 1 year or less? Especially since such grievous mistake (no CL qualifications etc) may even cost SAF and Charlton their jobs.
Yes that's the downside of it. But if we set out minimum reasonable expectation to balance out with romance factors (say top 6 or 7 in first year and top 4 of 5 in 2nd). Then if he still fail and get shown the door, I don't think that will become an issue with media and fans at all.
Deeper trouble is when for long term he couldn't manage to get one single trophy but yet manage to always stay around the 4th or 5th, now that would present a very difficult situation for us all and may keep dragging us for long. He either be brilliant or shite, for best of everyone.
An interesting thought. What would be a reasonable expectation? How much leeway would people here be willing to give Giggs? I remember Gary Neville mentioning that Moyes should be given more time despite the downward spiral the club was in. Would people similarly believe Giggs should be given time to turn things around if we're languishing around 10th spot after half a season/full season/two years? Personally, if LvG takes us to the top 2 by the time Giggs takes over, I'd ask for 'minimum top 4 by the end of your first season or you're out'.
Last edited:
With all due respect but anyone who puts United below 4-5th place should be executed at OT during half time.
Seriously, that is exactly what worries me about this appointment. Any other manager who takes United below that level would be rightfully crucified. The club spend millions year in year out in terms of talent and the minimum aim (with the current side, hopefully LVG will leave a better side) will be a top 4 spot. However such rules doesn't apply for Giggs because 'he's one of our own', 'he is the United way', 'he give jobs to the class of 92', 'he's British' etc. If Giggs want to be a United manager and is using Guardiola as an example than he has to abide to the same standards and yardstick. If he's out of the CL group than he should be on the way out just like Moyes was and just how LVG would be if he fails that target
Minimum expectation really depends on circumstance, the strength of the other teams at the time, the strength and quality of our own squad etc. Top four should generally be a minimum however, except in extreme circumstances.
= When you have Ryan Fecking Giggs as your manager?
If any United manager fails to finish in the top four, they can have no gripes if they're sacked irrespective of their name or status. The resources available to them is just too great to fail to finish at least fourth.
Giggs is around 40 years old. He will have enough chances to come back. 40 for a manager at a top club is extremely young
Didn't everyone expect Bobby Charlton to be a great manager? - knew the club inside out, managed by the best, great player (even won the World Cup!)...
Normally it's top 4 regardless of who taking over, given our previous 2 years finished as 7th and 4th, and how likely other top teams in England willing to keep spending big.
With Giggs taking over we may have to accept a slightly lower expectation for sentimental reason alone in his first 1 or 2 years I reckon (for which not everyone would agree) Yes the appointment may not be fair and acceptable at first place, but let's say if there's any sign of good playing style I reckon it's good to gamble abit there. (Let's say finish 5th in his first season with high tempo attacking football, I would still give him another year)
The more I think about it, I think the decision was made to make Giggs the next manager when they decided to remove Moyes. Van Gaal was brought in not just to steady the ship but to 'coach' Giggs and build a team for him to take over. What I believe they decided to do was to keep the structures and culture that made United the success it became under SAF.
I think Giggs,Woody and a committee of perhaps one or two former United people will facilitate new players.
I think Giggs,Woody and a committee of perhaps one or two former United people will facilitate new players.
The financial impact of not making it to the CL would be horrendous. Unless we don't manage to do that, then the manager should be in the firing line irrespective if he's OT's darling or a foreigner
Yes but we are rich enough to stand another year or 2 of no CL football. Of course failure to finish top 4 would be sackable offense, but it also depends on lots of things added together (1.Giggs being a young coach and probably needs abit more time 2. We aren't far off from top 4 and 3. assume our football style is attractive and in right direction etc). It's all matter of how much we willing to take short term risk for long term gain in acceptable manner. It's just like trusting a youngster with potential by giving him
abit more time on pitch vs buying a ready made world class replacement at wrong end of 20.
So in few words the club should lose millions and risk hindering if not losing its global attraction just because the Manchester United's rose need time to learn how to be a manager? Jeez I thought that the United way claimed that no one is bigger than the club. I guess I was wrong
What @devilish said. If he is a young coach and needs some time to learn the ropes, why would we appoint him? Let him learn the ropes somewhere else.
Lowering our expectations for sentimental reasons. Sheesh! These are the Glazers we are talking about.
I don't think one season alone could do all these damages, you are underestimating level of our global attraction. Fact is we are still doing fine coming through Moyes period, in terms of global standing and attractiveness.
That's like saying why shouldnt I shoot myself in the foot? My body has the ability to regenerate itself.
Why not just NOT shoot yourself in the foot? Yes your body will heal but it will bloody hurt.
I still fail to understand why the club should risk millions just to give a chance to the darling of Manchester. Ultimately the club is a business and not some charity house for washed up players. If Giggs is good enough than he will get us at the top 4 spot. If he's not than he get fired. Its already ridiculous that someone with no managerial experience would end up managing a top side out of pure nepotism
The Glazers has nothing to do with it. If a manager fails to reach the minimum expectations set than his job should be on line irrespective if he's the darling of Manchester or Johnny Foreigner. This is supposed to be a serious club and not a place were the class of 92 or anybody else can play football manager life
The Glazers will expect whoever takes up LVG squad to improve it and continue challenging for titles from the off. That is why I'm convinced it won't be Giggs.
I agree.
That is the very reason I think They have decided it will be Giggs. They want to replicate what the most successful manager of all time has done.
And to prove your own point you predict that Liverpool still won't dine at the top transfer table. I'm not saying you're wrong but it's nicely ironic.
I didn't predict anything really. I gave my own opinion and how things might go. Of course Ryan Giggs might turn out to be the best manager of all time or might turn out to be the worst. It's more unpredictable as he's new to the role (or will be) but this is part of the issue too.
My opinions and ideas are simply that and subject to change when new information or evidence arrives, as everyone's should be, but it'd be a terribly dull forum if nobody was allowed opinions on these things until after they have already happened wouldn't it?
I'm curious though. As the person in charge of appointing a new manager at United, hypothetically, would anyone pick Giggs if any of those other, proven world class managers were available? I certainly would not and this is why my opinion is that this could be a very bad (and potentially very damaging) situation in our near future.
I want to add, I want whoever will keep United at the top in England and help us dominate Europe. I think from looking at how the owners have acted so far, they will appoint Giggs.
He kept winning in Germany. Something Bayern have been doing for decades anyway. He hasn't exactly taken them to this mythical 'next level' in Europe has he?
I've noticed a number of times that Paul Hayward (Telegraph) is promoting the view that 'Giggs + class of 92' is the best solution . Do the pro-Giggs posters here agree with Hayward that if Giggs were to be appointed, that he should surround himself with the CO92?
In my opinion, if Giggs were to get the hot seat, it's essential that he has the very best coaches at his disposal to support his inexperience, and not Neville, Scholes, Butt etc. If people like Meulensteen, or a Stuivenberg, or a Hoek, i.e. people who specialise in coaching, don't make up the backroom staff, then God help us.
In my opinion, if Giggs were to get the hot seat, it's essential that he has the very best coaches at his disposal to support his inexperience, and not Neville, Scholes, Butt etc. If people like Meulensteen, or a Stuivenberg, or a Hoek, i.e. people who specialise in coaching, don't make up the backroom staff, then God help us.
Holy feck, now it's acceptable for him to take the team backwards after LvG goes and some fecking muppet journo thinks the Class of '92 should all come back in, absolutely suicide that would cost us huge. The past needs to stay in the past.
The journos want it as they know it'll see us take a huge fall and they'll enjoy it. Other than Neville the other Class of '92 players come off as dated and clueless when they talk about football.
You are looking at the risk only but not the potential gain. No pay no gain.
To take such a huge risk, you should be looking at a correspondingly huge upside. I don't see what gain Giggs offers that other, proven managers do not (with less risk). The only arguments I can see are this mythical United Way (which, in as much as it defines a style of football, is counterproductive as we need to continue to evolve in line with tactical developments in football) and the fixation on the longevity of a manager (which I thought the Moyes disaster had torpedoed).
Ill accept that to a certain extent, though we can get 99% of that potential gain with less risk. Its really all about the club succeeding, Giggs leading us would only be a cherry on top.
The benefit of having Giggs as manager instead of someone more established but without any former connection to the club is kind of intangible. I can see it. But if we were winning the league, competing for the CL and playing good football with someone else - Guardiola for example - would we be pining for the one that got away?
The goal here is to win football matches, the rest of it is a distraction. That being the case, I think my previous point still stands. Its an unnecessary risk to go with Giggs, in pursuit of an unlikely payoff that is not as important as just establishing ourselves back at the top - and romantic notion of what we should be doing.
Top 4 is the minimum expectation, I agree on that. But what if when the scenario is, in his first season he doesn't do quite well at the start but 2nd half of season he starts winning a lot with great attacking football and some convincing win against other top teams, and finally finished as 5th. Would you give him another year? It's all hypothetical, but with sentimental reason and evidence of progressive improvement over the season, I would.
That's pretty much his point. Guardiola is good but he managed two absolutely outstanding sides, both possessing an amount of talent that we can only dream of at the moment. Which is why comparing us potentially appointing Giggs to Barcelona having appointed Guardiola back then is pointless.
My God, this post takes me back to the Moyes season! What if he starts winning in the second half of the season? What if he shows progress?
What about we get someone who doesnt have to learn as he goes along?
- Status