4 games is what he had, and of course for the majority of this forum thats enough for him to be judged.
The Argument for Giggs as our Next Manager
- Thread starter Walrus
- Start date
- Status
Oi watch it Walrus! I agreed with your OP but don't go knocking Cheltenham. They are my local team haha
Really like this point... Maybe with the exception of Chelsea there. Barca have changed their manager a couple of times since Pep. The first time it was too big a change the other time it worked because Enrique plays the Barca way with small tweaks which is good because you need to adapt.
If the circumstances are right then maybe it would be a good appointment? A lot though will depend on how we get on under LVG and where the club is at. Perhaps another 2/3 years of not winning anything and it would be a poor choice...
I'd give it a go.
TBH, I think clubs like Man United, Chelsea, Liverpool don't even need that amazing of a tactician. What we need is a winner. Someone who has that mentality. Giggs would be good for us. It's just my gut feeling.
TBH, I think clubs like Man United, Chelsea, Liverpool don't even need that amazing of a tactician. What we need is a winner. Someone who has that mentality. Giggs would be good for us. It's just my gut feeling.
To put it another way - if you stuck Mourinho, Guardiola or Klopp at West Ham, what realistically do you think they would achieve? And would those achievements truly merit (by themselves) a chance at a big job?
Mine too bud!
Only picked them because I was trying to think of a shite team and they were naturally the first that came to mind
Oi watch it Walrus! I agreed with your OP but don't go knocking Cheltenham. They are my local team haha
Mine too bud!
Only picked them because I was trying to think of a shite team and they were naturally the first that came to mind
Both Klopp and Mourinho were in even smaller clubs than West Ham.
To put it another way - if you stuck Mourinho, Guardiola or Klopp at West Ham, what realistically do you think they would achieve? And would those achievements truly merit (by themselves) a chance at a big job?
Mine too bud!
Only picked them because I was trying to think of a shite team and they were naturally the first that came to mind
See it's a really good point... Like you say Moyes was a success at Everton but that didn't work out very well. And maybe Klopp or Pep wouldn't be a huge success at someone like West Ham. Problem is its all ifs buts and maybes. Unless we give Giggs a chance we will never know. He clearly feels he could do the job otherwise he'd surely be out there now gaining actual management experience? Instead he's still lesrning the trade with LVG.
Cheltenham boy are you? Whereabouts mate? To be fair it was a good example... Cheltenham do suck haha.
Mourinho was ironically enough promoted from the AM job at Benfica to become the full time manager, and by all accounts (by which I mean Wikipedia) they said they were wrong to let him go.
Whilst I am not comparing Benfica directly to United, they are still a pretty big club.
Either way, I do feel that the point stands that if you stick a "great" manager at a low calibre club, there are only certain limits to what they can achieve, and these achievements are not by themselves going to tell you if that manager is going to be a success at a huge club. There is always an element of risk - and with Giggs I dont think that risk would really be any smaller if he had spent a few years at a smaller club, successful or not.
That would be terrible. Probably the only worse idea than appointing a newbie manager, is appointing a newbie manager assisted by some newbie assistant managers.
If Giggs takes charge, the only way to be succesful is if he is helped by experienced coaching stuff who have been there before and won things. I.e take Van Gaal's stuff with him.
I agree with this and it was one of the things I included in my OP, that - at least initially - Giggs can and should take advantage of the backroom staff (with whom he should already enjoy a good relationship) left behind by LVG, assuming Louis retires after leaving United and thus does not take them with him.
That said, I would be happy to see Scholes and Neville returning onto the coaching team or the likes, if they were willing.
I meant Uniao, not Benfica. IIRC, Benfica was just an internal appointment and he was an interim manager or something like that.
On Klopp's case, Mainz.
No thanks.
One appointment cause of [devilish] nepotism [/devilish] is too much for my liking. Add another two and you are very deep into gambling (gambling your house in order to get back your car). It would be nice if it goes right, but chances that three people with no experience in managing can manage a top club are zero (not close to it). Even when the LVG's staff retires, Giggs should still have top assistants, not some friends who happened to be great players a decade ago. Even SAF, the greatest of them all, got himself top assistants, not ex Rangers players.
I forgive you.
You seem to think I want Giggs in charge. I can't debate with you starting with that premise. I don't want Giggs in charge, nor do I think "spending time under Fergie's wing" is enough. I have made my point several times now. Probably not well - but I have made it.
There are differences definitely, but to say it is 'completely different' as if we're saying that Giggs winning the Conference with Woking proves he deserves the hotseat at United is disingenuous.
The skills required to pick and manage your backroom staff may change as you move from five to fifty, but the tactical, motiviational, and perceptual nous for managing football teams remains constant. Certainly between the likes of West Ham and United.
And even we are to assume that being manager of Manchester United has no parralel in the world of the football, surely experience at 'lower' level clubs will prove more beneficial and lead to less of a chance of disaster than none at all? Because the club exists for more than just making Giggsy's dreams come true.
So thats the thing isnt it - Mourinho got the Chelsea job on the back of doing well at Sporting. Would be see a similar appointment from them now that they are an established big club? Their appointments since then have exclusively been "top tier" coaches with buckets of experience. Mourinho was definitely the right person for them at the right time, but for me I couldnt see a Chelsea or Real Madrid appointing someone purely on the back of their success at Sporting (no disrespect to Sporting of course).
Klopp was at Mainz for 7 years and managed to get them into the Bundesliga for the first time, but they were relegated again under his tenure. Would an equivalent performance from Giggs - taking a championship team into the PL for a year or two after a fairly long stint at the club - really be sufficient for him to have "proved himself" for the United job? I am inclined to say no. Dortmund took a chance on Klopp, just as Chelsea took a chance on Mourinho.
The point I am making here is to ask what level of independent success Giggs would need to achieve as a manager outside of United, for him to be deemed a worthy and low-risk candidate? He would surely have to exceed Moyes' Everton tenure since we all know how that ended up. Again, the job Giggs is being groomed and prepared for is to manage United, and nobody else.
That is my thinking too. It won't provide any guaranteed success (like for example a Mourinho-like appointment would do) but it will give us a proof that a manager is shit, if that is the case (i.e Keano).
Mourinho did well with Uniao (a nothing club) geing third in the table, before he was appointed by Porto (not Sporting, a far bigger club in their own) and then won UEFA CUp and the league, and then continued by winning the treble.
About Klopp, it was shown that there is some great potential there (similar to the new manager of BVB). You don't need to win, you need to show something. Btw, Mainz gave the Dortmund job, not Real Madrid's or Bayern's job.
Giggs starting with a lower table EPL club (or Championship club) doing well there, before geting Everton/Spurs and doing even better (lets say an FA Cup win, some good performances in Europe and playing attacking football) wouldn't guarantee success for us with him in charge, but would give us a good indication that Giggs might be a good manager for us. If he can't do that and fails, then maybe it gives an indication that he isn't the right man. At the moment, appointing Giggs is complete gambling and so it has a high probability of ending in disaster.
Btw, the closest I can think of that did this is Luis Enrique. He wasn't directly appointed to Barca, but he earned his way to the top. At some clubs he did well, at some others less well, but in general he showed signs that he can be a success if he gets the big job.
If others can do it, so can Giggs. And if he can't, then we should not lose hundreds of millions and a few years by trying something which rationally will end in failure.
Well I have to partially disagree, as I think managing a club of Uniteds size and stature definitely requires a different skillset to a smaller club. SAF wasnt generally considered a tactical genius, but it was his ability (amongst other things) to deal with the pressure, to handle the media and to keep everything at the club behind closed doors, that helped him throughout his time at United (I feel that doesnt do him justice, but you get the drift).
Tactics? We currently have a 'tactical genius' in LVG and every week we are crying for him to stop overcomplicating things and just to play players in their natural positions and let them play their natural games a bit more.
No, I think at United, when as you said you have fifty backroom staff, the individual expectations on the manager himself are different to at a smaller club. You have a huge scouting network and head scout reporting, you have a coaching staff and assistant manager etc. Again to reference Fergie, by the end of his time at the club he was barely involved in training but rather delegated it to the AM and others. One of Moyes' well documented failures was his attempt to take on too much work and try to do everything himself. This is where the United job is different. I would say it is different even to other huge clubs, as many others now operate with a DoF or similar, whereas at United the manager has virtually total control over almost every aspect of the club, to a greater degree than perhaps any other big club in the game.
This is by no means an exhaustive attempt at pointing out differences, just the sort of thing that occurs to me that require a specific skillset from the man in charge - and that is the skillset that Giggs is being taught and groomed in. Combined with his extensive knowledge of the club, the experienced backroom staff that will likely be left to him by LVG, and the continuity factor, this is why I feel that Giggs is a risk worth taking.
Skip to 27:00 for Giggs and his staff deciding on their team for the game. It's a real tactical master class.
What you and others in the ProGiggs camp are discounting is the fact that for these type of legendary former players the bar isn't that high. No one is demanding that he wins titles at Everton or that he drags Newcastle to CL glory - that ain't happening. What he needs to prove is that his tactics and methods work, he knows how to build a team....stuff like that. Matching Rodgers/Monk's achievements at a team like Swansea will get him the job because everyone knows that he's got the mental and press side covered, we all know that he knows what's expected, Gary, Rio and Keane do. All he has to do is prove that his ideas work and he can impart them - Enrique didn't achieve much at his previous job a good season was all it took to get him the Barcelona job.
They look like some complete random people who have won the lottary on being in charge of United.
However, that Giggs and Giggs who has been 3 years the assistant of LVG will be two completely different persons (tactically).
Sorry I got mixed up between Sporting and Porto!
Regarding the bolded part though - I hate to have to go back to Moyes again but he really is the perfect example of how success at a Spurs/Everton level club is not any measure of suitability for the United job.
I do agree that sending him to a smaller club would be a way of ruling out if he is just a complete dud - but based on comments by both SAF and LVG, I honestly dont think that is the case [that he is just a shite manager]. And the reason I would prefer him to take straight over at United is due to the framework/backroom staff situation all lending themselves to him stepping in, in my book.
Lets say Giggs does as you said, and manages Spurs, wins an FA cup. Of course at this point we are well beyond LVG and probably looking at a replacement for Klopp, or whoever the long term replacement was. Appointing Giggs at that point then signals the start of a big transition from the previous regime, a different set of backroom staff (or hoping that Giggs has developed his own backroom team that is deemed sufficient calibre for United), a different style of play and tactical setup to what he is used to. None of these are obstacles that a good manager couldnt overcome of course, but they are obstacles nonetheless, whereas at the moment (or rather, in a year or two when LVG steps down) it feels like the stars have aligned somewhat in that everything is perfectly set in place for Giggs to come in without any major transition needed.
Finally, I mentioned it briefly before, but Giggs is United through and through - if he is doing a bad job as manager, I would expect him to be aware of that and to act appropriately - either offering his resignation or seeking advice from the likes of SAF and LVG. Not ideal, but again, any manager could fail, the difference for me is that if it is Giggs that is failing, we arguably have an easier "out" than otherwise would be the case. We try Giggs for a year or two and it isnt working, we get someone else. What do we lose? Money? Not a huge amount since like I have been saying, appointing Giggs should minimise the transitional period and therefore minimise the amount of investment in the team (compared to a Klopp or Guardiola coming in and overhauling the entire squad like LVG has done). Time? OK, but no different to any other manager.
The difference in the potential upside however (Giggs vs other manager) is dramatic. If Giggs turns out to be a success, then we have our manager sorted for perhaps the next 10-20 years - far more than could be expected of most others, and with very little risk one would imagine, of them leaving. Not to mention the romantic factors and the "United through and through" sort of stuff.
You brought up West Ham as an example club that is 'completely different' to manage. They also have scouting networks, coaches that handle specific types of training, and media relations. Now, these things might be to different degrees, but surely having handled these things independently in some context is better than not doing so at all? This kind of experience also shows his managerial aptitude in an independent setting, which we wouldn't get from a Giggs that stayed embedded in United's backroom staff. If he has no natural talent in this area, all the grooming in the world wouldn't compensate for this.
Its a fair point - my answer to this is that I wouldnt expect Giggs to simply be handed the United job on a platter. I would be looking for LVG and perhaps SAF to be vouching for him. Of course they could be wrong - SAF was most definitely wrong about Moyes - but LVG will have been working with Giggs for 3 years or so at this point, and I would think that he would have a very good idea of whether Giggs has the right temperament, tactical nous etc, to take over stewardship of the club. As fans looking in from the outside, we have no idea whether Giggs has any natural talent or not as a manager, I agree, but those inside the club should have a pretty good idea I would have thought.
I was convinced that Moyes will be an utter failure. Dull pre-historic tactics, no away win against top 4 in 50 games, no cups in 11 years, etc. Not my definition of what is a success. He offered stability but very clearly that was his upper level.
Same SAF who chose Moyes? And recommended the likes of McLeish and McLaren. Sorry if I don't take his opinion seriously when it comes to managers.
A bit what the other top clubs do? Can't see anything wrong on that.
We don't know Giggs the person, matey. And from what little we know, he doesn't look the purest soul. Maybe he won't resign and what then? OT was applauding Moyes like he cured AIDS and cancer when we were getting humiliated, imagine the support Giggs would have. He would need a couple - if not more - of catastrophic seasons in order to be sacked. That would hurt us even more than Moyes.
I think that Ed is a rational and very smart person. He won't make Giggs our new manager, IMO.
Probably, probably not. Barca won 4 UCL in the last 10 years (more than we did ever) despite that they changed 5 managers. Getting a manager for long term (even if he is SAF) doesn't guarantee more success than changing it every few years. And as much as I love SAF, I would have taken these 10 years of Barca above any 10 years of United under SAf regime. Point is, having the same manager for a long time is a bit overrated.
Charisma is also not a uniform and linear quality. It simply means having the chutzpah to make people want to listen to you. What we do know about Giggs the player is that he was a cheeky chap in the dressing room, doing his best to increase morale and unify the group (love life aside!). As a wealthy man who had won everything in the game as a player (and by then hopefully a few trophies as an assistant too), I think a 45 year old Giggs would be very inspirational for a generation of players half is age like Depay, Shaw, Januzaj and the others who would be at our club at the time.
Im also assuming he will have learnt most of the theory and strategies of elite level football from his years under SAF and LVG. That hands on experience must be worth as much as appointing a more qualified manager who has no empathy or insight into managing our club.
There is a big difference between appointing Giggs in 2 years vs appointing Moyes who did not posses the requisite skill or knowledge of the club to be able to be successful. Giggs has the knowledge of the club and would have acquired the management theory. The only uncertainty would be whether he could practically apply that theory. Its not as much as a risk as some would have us believe.
very good points. I feel he needs to prove his creds at another club too.
I wasnt in favour of the Moyes appointment either, he was appointed for all the wrong reasons, but that is for another thread.
I have made the same arguments before myself, but between him, LVG and the rest of the club I am sure they can suss out whether Giggs is an idiot or not. Remember we arent talking about some external candidate like those you mentioned, but someone who has been in the club for 20+ years. Bit of a difference when it comes to forming a sound judgement.
Sure, but as I have mentioned unlike a lot of other top clubs, we entrust the manager with pretty much total control over the footballing side of the operation. If we were changing manager every couple of years like some teams, we would be permanently in transition and never getting anywhere. If we want to "do what the other top clubs do" then you pretty much need to go the whole hog, at which point I think the "losing our identity" arguments start to hold some merit.
Difference is that Giggs loves the club. Just because he shagged his brothers wife doesnt change that, nor does it change that he isnt completely stupid. Doing what you are suggesting and refusing to resign if things were going wrong would only damage his reputation at the club and with his United-friends. Possible? Sure. Realistic? Not at all.
At this point I start to wonder if United is really the club for you....
Jokes aside though, I understand what you mean, but you say yourself that changing manager every few years doesnt guarantee success either. Personally, I believe that continuity is a big factor in long term success. You called Mourinho a guaranteed success earlier and it is easy to see why - but also look at the wake he has left with some of the clubs he has managed. There is no record of youth development, no record for being able to maintain success over more than a few years. Mourinho does pretty much guarantee success, but only in the short term. Personally I am yet to be convinced by his ability to successfully manage a club over a longer period than say 3 years. One thing which is certain, if you simply appointed a Mourinho every 3 years I think your club would go bankrupt pretty quickly, trophies or not.
People who want Giggs usually don't want continuity, they want Giggs to go back to how it was before LvG and before Moyes.
Agree.
I personally think - and pretty sure that this will be the case - that SAF won't be involved - in any capacity - in our search for the new manager. LVG output will be valuable but we won't know how much biased he has been (with Giggs being his assistant and probably his friend). Lets hope that Ed is a good judge of character and he is keeping Giggsy under the loop.
To be fair, I think that a sporting director is the way to go - and was the way to go since SAF left. It isn't a worse model in any way than the model we had (long term management) and is a better model than what we currently have (all powerful manager but who will leave in a couple of years, so no continuity guaranteed).
Would agree mostly with it. However a person doing a bad job doesn't neccesarily mean that he will resign. He may think that he can still fix it. Moyes was very sure that he hasn't been doing anything wrong and he'll eventually be a success. While he didn't love the club, he wasn't an idiot.
Chelsea are spending less than us and have a significantly lower wage bill than us. When Mourinho took charge, they had finished 15 points or so below us. Just putting it there as a matter of perspective.
NB: while I wanted Mourinho after SAF and thought that he was back then the only right choice, I very likely wouldn't want him now. He will win trophies, but I think that we can win trophies and be more watchable than Mourinho teams. Wouldn't complain if we get him though, but would prefer someone more fancy.
If LVG is a success here, Pep is the right choice. Very similar philosophy and tactics.
The problem with those inside the club judging on a Giggs that has never left is that while they can guess at how his personality and aptitude would suit being manager of Manchester United, they wouldn't have any track record of actually him occupying that position at any other club, and hence their decision would always be a leap of faith.
And as mentioned, I don't think Ferguson vouching for someone means much any more.
The only reason I don't want us to try Giggs out as manager as I'd hate to see it go wrong. A massive club legend, who has spent all his career at United, becoming a manager here and failing thus forcing us to sack him (unless he steps down) is just too painful.
Ideally I'd like to see him be an assistant manager again for the manager after LVG. Let him learn from a few top class managers. He may not have been assistant under Fergie but I'm sure he absorbed a great deal of knowledge. Fergie, LVG....give him one more manager to shadow and hopefully we'll have a managerial prodigy right here ready for us.
Ideally I'd like to see him be an assistant manager again for the manager after LVG. Let him learn from a few top class managers. He may not have been assistant under Fergie but I'm sure he absorbed a great deal of knowledge. Fergie, LVG....give him one more manager to shadow and hopefully we'll have a managerial prodigy right here ready for us.
An interesting OP but there is very little in the "Pros" column that couldn't also be credited to Scholes, Neville, Beckham. Christ even Rio.
The only obvious differences are:
Maybe Giggs is currently impressing those involved at the club with his innovation, diligence, tactical nous and inter-personal skills thus leading to him being shown the faith such an appointment would require. He really needs to make an impact somewhere whether that be u-21's or through his input as assistant in order to come close to justifying his consideration.
As fans we currently can't pretend to have such insight and therefore any calls to appoint him over and above a "proven" candidate are largely going to be emotively driven.
I for one have never seen anything in his personality/character that leads me to believe he is made for the job. He has never struck me as a leader although, to give him his dues, he did set a good example to players as regards diet, training and preparation.
I'm quite happy to be proven wrong because it would make a fabulous story (the same reason I wanted to see Bebe succeed) but we have to remember that it is Manchester United we are talking about not some Hollywood script.
The only obvious differences are:
- Having worked under the tutelage of LVG (Beckham has worked under a greater number of managers/coaches of similar repute and actually has experience of different teams and leagues in his favour).
- Time served as assistant manager and coach at the club (this time sadly coincides with a streak of quite tumescent football and the teams two worst league positions in 20 years, although we have no reason to blame this on Giggs).
Maybe Giggs is currently impressing those involved at the club with his innovation, diligence, tactical nous and inter-personal skills thus leading to him being shown the faith such an appointment would require. He really needs to make an impact somewhere whether that be u-21's or through his input as assistant in order to come close to justifying his consideration.
As fans we currently can't pretend to have such insight and therefore any calls to appoint him over and above a "proven" candidate are largely going to be emotively driven.
I for one have never seen anything in his personality/character that leads me to believe he is made for the job. He has never struck me as a leader although, to give him his dues, he did set a good example to players as regards diet, training and preparation.
I'm quite happy to be proven wrong because it would make a fabulous story (the same reason I wanted to see Bebe succeed) but we have to remember that it is Manchester United we are talking about not some Hollywood script.
At best, I see Giggs as a great coach and he has all the attributes to support that claim. But I don't seem as a manager that would command respect nearly the same way as SAF or LVG. Where is the charisma? Where is the attitude that would strike fear into a player if he fecks up in a match? How would he stand up to an egotistical diva in the dressing room? Is he even capable of dishing out the hairdryer treatment? What indicates that he has anything close to a father-figure-type personality? And these are basic qualities needed to manage smaller clubs.
With us, there also comes the interactions with the whole corporate and commercial structure and commanding the respect from them, which is surely a different monster than commanding respect from players. There's also the burden of being in the headlines every single day. Even more so for Giggs because of history with the club. I don't see that mixing well with his seemingly modest personality. And another thing I'm concerned with in his leadership qualities is him never being the main captain in all his playing years other than the occasional match when the other main captains were absent? Seriously, this is something that has no room for romanticism. Not for a club (aka billion dollar business) this size.
With us, there also comes the interactions with the whole corporate and commercial structure and commanding the respect from them, which is surely a different monster than commanding respect from players. There's also the burden of being in the headlines every single day. Even more so for Giggs because of history with the club. I don't see that mixing well with his seemingly modest personality. And another thing I'm concerned with in his leadership qualities is him never being the main captain in all his playing years other than the occasional match when the other main captains were absent? Seriously, this is something that has no room for romanticism. Not for a club (aka billion dollar business) this size.
Good point. I also wonder what kind of divide it would create amongst the fans if that happens.
Before reading your post I was also in the no brigade but you really made some great points, nice post.
I always thought Giggs' issue would be bringing in other players. This summer has shown it probably won't be an issue with how little LvG has been involved and how much Ed sorts out.
I always thought Giggs' issue would be bringing in other players. This summer has shown it probably won't be an issue with how little LvG has been involved and how much Ed sorts out.
It'll probably be Giggs and I'm fine with that.
Is Wilson any good in the hole
His standing spring in the 6 yard box has proved invaluable since this was filmed.
- Status