I wasn't on the caf, but my opinion was that he was an average manager, not good enough for United but at least able to take rational decisions. He lost me the day of his first press conference, that's when I realized that we were screwed.
The Argument for Giggs as our Next Manager
- Thread starter Walrus
- Start date
- Status
I wasn't on the caf, but my opinion was that he was an average manager, not good enough for United but at least able to take rational decisions. He lost me the day of his first press conference, that's when I realized that we were screwed.
I'm wrong about a lot of things. But regarding Moyes I was 100% right. I knew he was average, said to my bro (as a joke) that we'd only sign Baines and Fellaini that summer. I said Moyes would never win the league. It really was so obvious that it was never going to work out...
I didn't like him at all -but of course, I didn't realise he was bloody stupid. The shit he came out with made me feel embarrassed. But I was still in shock at how much the job destroyed every bit of confidence he had. As bad as it was for us, it was fascinating to see this happen.
Funnily, I saw Giggs' face when Arsenal were killing us - his body language was defeatist - another nail in the coffin for me with him - too emotional. If Moyes could crumble like that, Giggs will be a train wreck.
Bollocks. I saw you on the Mancunian Way selling "The Chosen One..." sticks of rock.
Not near as irrational as comparing Giggs to Guardiola though.
Here. Not polite or diplomatic as Adebesi, obviously
Hopefully not G.Neville. If that will be the cae, then in 5 years United and England will have the exact same team.
Speaking for myself, I was against his appointment from the off. He was appointed for all the wrong reasons and I said that at the time (being rinsed by the hive is hardly new territory for me
). I thought we should have gone with Mourinho as a short term fix to steady the ship and handle the post-Fergie transition, while looking for the next long term manager.In the most polite way: who gives a shit? The longevity is something almost exclusive to United fans, clouded by Fergie's achievement here. Yet, it is not the only way of doing it, and almost certainly, not the best way? In the last 10 years, Barca which was managed by 5 managers (6 if you count the assistant manager in Tito's year) won more than United won in the last 45 years (and in more than half of those years it had a single manager, and continuity). Real Madrid, the most succeful club of all time change the manager every year or two. Bayern who nowadays seems to be the benchmark of managing well a football club have had 18 managers since we appointed Fergie (during that time we have had just 4 managers).
In terms of trophies, all these clubs are above United, with Madrid miles ahead.
Moral of the story: you can be succesful, even more succesful than we were under Fergie with many managers and without caring for longevity. There are countless examples on that, as are examples on longevity not neccesarily making a club succesful (Arsenal with Wenger).
At the end of the day, the top managers are all around the same quality. Having 5 top managers in 15 years doesn't make it better or worse than having a top manager in 15 years. If nothing else, it makes it a bit more exciting, going into the wild unknown, different tactics and different style. I enjoyed Fergie's years and the stability we had with him, but I am not expecting something similar in the future. Two reasons for that: 1) chances of that happening are extremely low, there is a reason why we rarely see a manager being in a job for more than 3 years; 2) it isn't neccesarily the best way of doing it.
Imagine in 10 years a thread in RAWK called 'Redcafe went into meltdown' when posters there will laugh at the delusion and romanticism of redcafe.
Personally I'd prefer one successful manager over managerial musical chairs tbh...
To be fair you could have a Redcafe meltdown thread anytime you want. Imagine a thread on RAWK after Giggs lifts our fifth CL and they are still playing musical chairs with the latest trendy coach. I'd much rather to imagine that.
There is a difference between Gerrard and Giggs (one is totally unqualified, while the other is merely heavily under-qualified) but it doesn't really undermine the basic point about the risk of sentiment clouding logic.
Thanks for the moral. It is easier to follow a long term plan without whoring the club to the next 'proven manager' every 3 years you tart.
As for Arsenal, I like the way they run their club. I'd sooner be like them than the clowns at Real or closer to home, Chelsea
I think we should go all out for Pep Guardiola and keep Giggsy as his no2 .. More learning from another top manager.
Then we can release the beast!
Then we can release the beast!
Haha you got me.
Basically what I'm saying is that we should prepare the transition with a lot more foresight and planning than we did when SAF retired..
I personally would love Giggs to manage us, however I'd also hate to see him fail..
Well prepared, trained and coached by the best should be the basis of success... I'm not one of those thinking he has to go out and prove it at another club first..
I personally would love Giggs to manage us, however I'd also hate to see him fail..
Well prepared, trained and coached by the best should be the basis of success... I'm not one of those thinking he has to go out and prove it at another club first..
That isn't the point. We always laughed at RAWK imaging things which had low probability of succeding (like them winning the treble in 2009 with Nando). It is the same here, when we are imaging things that just aren't going to happen. And I bet that fans of rival teams are loving the idea of Giggsy taking charge. Similar how they loved the idea of Moyes becoming our manager.I couldn't give a flying feck what RAWK thinks. Christ!
On other words, you would rather want United to have 0 European Cups than 10 European Cups, if it meant having a long term plan. Kudos to you!
That would be my best case scenario...
I think giggs should give it go on his own first away from the club, let's see how good he actually is.
I used to dream of keano or ole managing the club, but it didn't work for them, even with legends like Bryan Robson it didn't work, even the moderately successful ones like hughes and bruce most people wouldn't want them here because they aren't good enough.
We need someone big to replace van gaal, someone proven, we don't need to repeat the mistakes made by liverpool in the past, as we've seen with moyes, the fall could happen really fast, and the premier league has never been this competitive.
I used to dream of keano or ole managing the club, but it didn't work for them, even with legends like Bryan Robson it didn't work, even the moderately successful ones like hughes and bruce most people wouldn't want them here because they aren't good enough.
We need someone big to replace van gaal, someone proven, we don't need to repeat the mistakes made by liverpool in the past, as we've seen with moyes, the fall could happen really fast, and the premier league has never been this competitive.
This is the attitude that is frustrating in this thread. That the anti-Giggs crowd constantly want to state with 100% certainty that it cannot work, that there is no logic or merit to the appointment, that it is only about romanticism etc.
There has been enough discussion in this thread, and enough hints given by LVG/the club, that even if you dont agree with it, you should at least be able to see that there is a logical argument in favour of Giggs.
No, clearly I don't mean that. I'm saying that it would be preferable to win things without being a twat of a club. Having a long term plan, is one of the ways we can avoid being said twat.
I don't want Giggs to take over from van Gaal. I get that he's learnt from both him and SAF and learnt what not to do from Moyes but that does not make him ready by any means. I think he either goes out and proves his managerial credentials elsewhere or, if possible, we keep him as no.2 to Guardiola. I think he'd still have a lot to learn from Guardiola given that Pep was in a similar situation at Barcelona when taking over to what Giggs will be facing if he does get given the job.
If we can't get Pep, we target Ancelotti, if we can't get him we take a risk and go for someone like De Boer. All this could change over the next year or 2 but that's my opinion right now.
If we can't get Pep, we target Ancelotti, if we can't get him we take a risk and go for someone like De Boer. All this could change over the next year or 2 but that's my opinion right now.
Same was said for Moyes here, when I was criticizing him.
It really there is no zero logical argument to make Giggs as our manager, if there are world class managers available in getting the job. Obviously, if it becomes Giggs or Pochetino/Martinez then we can discuss, but Giggs or Pep/Ancelotti/Mourinho/Simeone is batshot crazy. It is destroying the club with the knowledge that you're doing so. It is doing Seppuku without knowing why you're doing it.
You can have long term plan even if you change your managers every few years. Both Barca and Bayern have long term plans, far better than we have. Everything is set on motion there, and it isn't depended on an individual.
He never was. Obviously he was influenced by Cruyff, Bielsa and LVG (most likely in that order) but he was never assistant manager or anything like that. He was always his own boss, and he learned his stuf by doing. He wasn't groomed for the Barca job, he just went and got it because he showed unparallelled vision and knowledge.
I do see the logical argument for appointing Giggs, but don't consider LVG saying it should be Giggs as part of that. People keep asking LVG if he should succeed him, I'm not sure what else he can say really? It would totally undermine his own assistant if LVG said Giggs shouldn't get the job.
The logical factors for me are; he austomatically commands respect, he knows the club inside-out, he's learned under Fergie and LVG, he's good with the media, and he's been an incredibly successful player.
And those factors aren't enough, us, fans can't answer those question, is he a good coach? is he a good communicator (with the players), is he a good manager, can he take the pressure for the entire club(not just himself), is he tactically knowledgeable, is he tactically astute, is he good at diagnosing problems, is he good at solving problems?
Giggs knows the club but he doesn't know the job of manager, and that's the key, we don't know him as a manager and what he did or experienced as a player is irrelevant.
In terms of having limited managerial experience but knowing a big club inside out through playing the majority of their career there and then taking over as the boss, there really isn't anyone more qualified to advise Giggs in that respect.
And how do you know Giggs hasn't got a wealth of knowledge and a good vision for the club going forward once LvG is gone? Everything potentially good about Giggs is completely written off straight away as if it can't possibly be true.
Guardiola's only experience prior to taking over at Barcelona was a single season in the Spanish 4th tier with the B team (not the 2nd tier as many appear to believe), which as far as I'm aware, isn't at professional level and consists of a shit load of regional leagues. His experience was very, very limited prior to taking the Barcelona job.
As for the references to Solskjaer and Keane made by others, I think this is another thing going for Giggs. Solskjaer was doing very well at Molde before taking the Cardiff job, with some discussing him as a potential United manager one day. I don't think becoming Cardiff's manager at that time was ever going to end well for anyone. Now his stock has fallen dramatically and he's no longer part of the discussion. As for Keane, I think his nature is too confrontational to have ever been a success at a top club, but once again, starting at Sunderland then moving to Ipswich is hardly preparation for United anyway.
One of the main pieces of ammunition targeted at Moyes was that he'd never managed a big club and/or never won anything. You can't have it both ways all of the time. I see little sense in sending Giggs off to manage a poor side to gain 'experience' when it's going to be absolutely nothing like managing Manchester United anyway.
Yeah, you're right. There are just too many unknown variables to take the risk at this stage. I'm just saying, I don't think there's no logic at all as some are suggesting.
This says all you need to know. Even his biggest fans here, don't think that Giggs can go manage other teams and eventually become a top manager and get the United job. By top manager I don't mean an another Moyes who does an okay job with a midtable team. Why can't Giggs go and do a Mourinho or Simeone or Ancelotti or Klopp there? If he shows that he can win trophies and play excellent football then he'll get the job, otherwise it is gambling on it.
Guardiola was always a leader, Guggs wasn't. Pep captained Barca in his twenties, Giggs allowed people 7-8 years his junior and who have been at United a few decades less than him captain United. Pep was articulate, Giggs sounds as boring as Sir Bobby Charlton when he talks for football. Seriously, have people looked at Giggs interview when he was our temporary manager and compare it with interviews with other top managers. Or him discussing tactics. Then of course, the elephant in the room: Guardiola travelled all over the world to get experience and knowledge for football. Giggs hasn't gone out of UK unless he was going to play football.
And anyway, Guardila is an outlier, not the norm. It might well be that Giggs will be an other outlier (though I doubt it, but stranger things have happened), but the probability is against him. If he gets the job then I suspect all United fans to initially support him. That doesn't mean that until then we are going to delude ourselves and claim that Giggs will be great for us, when in all likelihood he'll be a disaster.
There is a logic but it's an extremely flawed one, I'm not going to name anyone but when asked about all the uncertainties some posters responded that we didn't know for sure that if he was incompetent, I'm not going to qualify that logic but everyone knows what it is.
The problem with the pros Giggs isn't that they want him as LVG successor, it's that they are pretending that it is a sensible stance, it's not sensible, it's charming and a lot of us would love it but it's not sensible.
If you look at the history of the game, being a top player for the club hasn't been that much correlated with being a top manager in that club.
Sir Alex wasn't a United player, Sir Matt was a City ex-player and a Liverpool legend, Bill Shankly played for Preston, Mourinho didn't play at all, same about Sacchi, Herrera played for a bunch of clubs, neither of them being in Italy, Ancelotti was a Roma legend and while he played for Milano, he started managing them only after he gained experience in Reggiana, Parma and Juventus etc etc. Neither of these great football managers knew the club inside out or played for that club (bar Ancelotti).
However there are occurrances when a manager was a great player at that club. Cruyff and Guardiola are the best examples of that, but both were in unique scenarios. Cruyff as one of the most intelligent players of all time was way ahead of his time. If 'student of the game' means anything, then I doubt that there are many people who can claim to be it more than Guardiola. And finally, there is Bob Paisley with whom Giggs can have the most similarities. Like Giggs, Paisley was a legend of his club. Like Giggs, Bob Paisley was a part of the coaching staff at his team. Unlike Giggs, Paisley spent 20 years in those positions starting from a self taught physio, to a coach on the reserve team, to a coach in the main team, to assistant manager, to the man who was responsible for tactics during Shankly era and finally he became the manager. He didn't get the job cause he was a great player, he took the job cause he was a great manager.
Now if we can agree that being a top manager doesn't require knowing the club inside out, or even being a top player in first place (Pele, Maradona, Di Stefano, Best, Charlton, Platini, Eusebio, Garrincha are all top 10 players and whichever of them tried to do a job at management was shown to be an utter failure) then Giggs being a top player and a United legend becomes irrelevant in his likelihood of being a top manager.
Bow if we can talk about Giggs being a fantastic coach, a student of the game, having a wonderful knowledge of tactics (something that every top manager had), then there would be an interesting debate on that. But the closest we have seen Giggs talking for tactics is this:
And here you can see Giggs' charisma:
Now, compare it with Pep Guardiola:
That second video just had to be a 4-4-2 formation didn't it?
Of course, but he spent his entire career playing in that formation so it is normal to go with a 4-4-2.
There is no argument for it other than sentimental Class of '92 bollocks.
That's bullshit. Few years before Fergie retired, there'd been a rumor that Moyes could be our next manager. Everyone here on Caf thought that was absolutely a terrible idea.
There weren't many ( in fact there were many, including myself) aiming their pitchfork at Moyes on the day he was announced as United manager because we rather wishing him the best of luck, he was one of us after all.
Last edited:
If Simeone, Guardiola were available in 2017, are there people in this thread that would prefer Giggs?
I'd give him a go. Why not? Worth the gamble just to see Giggs in charge.
- Status