The Mourinho Thread: Should he stay or go? | Sacked

[cheeky_backheel]

Why?

Would you want to follow Mourinho with another safety first manager?

Isn’t it time to look to our past in order to embrace the future?

The clubs current 'DNA' is Glazers and they will appoint whichever manager will protect and/or pursue their interests.

Any philosophical notions about damning consequences to wait 10yrs for some youth products, while someone else foots the bill, is simply from a false self aggrandized importance

 

[tenpoless]

Get your point but no thanks. One bus-Parker for another.

What the board and a section of our fans need to see and embrace is that this clubs DNA is fast exciting adventurous football!

If that means rebuilding the football side from the youth teams up for the next 10 years so be it. If it means no trophies so be it as long as the groundwork for an exciting new group of young players, hungry for success at Manchester United, is laid

This was realistic maybe like 10-15 years ago, where football fans were more loyal and even watching a football match itself was seen a big entertainment. Nowadays if you go 10 years without any trophy you'd lose a lot of supporters, (potential) supporters/watchers, sponsors and ultimately revenue.

Less revenue means less resources to be able to compete with the other clubs, football is much more than only players and managers these days. It's sad but it's a business now, a very healthy one and no sane owners would like to get behind the other, let alone if They own Manchester United.

 

[Xixak17]

Gonna demand an answer to this from Mourinho's fan club.

Many of you keep saying one of the major issues with the team is right wing, no? So why is Andreas Pereira not getting any playing time.

He started 13 games at RW for Valencia last year and produced 4 assists in those matches, a rate that would equate to roughly 15 assists over a 38 game season (assuming he doesn't play the full 90 every week). Source: https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/and...&verein=&liga=&wettbewerb=&pos=12&trainer_id=

Now I know what the first BS counter-argument is going to be, "Valencia is a weaker team and in a pub league!" Well I'm not letting you get away with that, because Mourinho himself basically said Valencia is on our level and that we're competing with them for 2nd in our CL group not competing with Juve for 1st. Source: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...wed-be-fighting-valencia-for-second-hhvd0sw6j

So explain it to me then. A player who was good enough to start at RW, a position that is supposedly a major weakness for us, cannot even get a game in that position for us. Why has Mourinho not given him a chance to show what he can do there? Why does he not see the pitch?

I want an answer to that right now. I'm really getting tired of playing nice or playing patty cake with Mourinho supporters who refuse to look at or accept objective facts.

 

[golden_blunder]

Don’t get hung up on the number, I plucked that out of my arse

 

[Fracture90]

and atletico have been running the same scheme since simeone took over. Playing out from the back vs kicking long is how you build your attack and not part of your defensive scheme.

You seem more concerned about a defender's ability to play from the back than his ability to defend in of itself

Exceptions are only that - exceptions. Empirical evidence supports that matured domestic transfers are more likely to succeed than young foreign ones.

Also Matic integration was a success last season. The issue has been his decline.
Luckily for me I dont rely on the opinion of others on a forum to judge my sensibility.

Your argument is only worth considering if you can show how keeping Mikhi, who was also in decline and had been consigned to the doldrums, would have made us a better squad. Sanchez provided another goal scoring threat that we needed.

But most here are revisionist who seem to have forgotten how we struggled offensively in the December prior and many were glad at the signing of Sanchez while i was one of the few to object to it.
what he would have cost us then and potentially costing us now can be debated.
- A year from now, he would be a year older.
- We might not make CL and he becomes less interested in joining us.
- Other clubs might also be interested at the lowered price point.
- A better negotiator might have gotten him for less than 70 and/or included one of our unwanted CB in the package.
- With him we might have had a better defence and be higher up in the table.

But all those are speculations. The facts though are that we needed, and the manager wanted, a better CB. Ed deemed Toby, and all the other candidates identified by the manager, as not worth their asking price. Yet we failed to sign anyone that was 'worth it'. The outcome is that our defence is as poor as it has always been, if not poorer.

So we will keep waitiwa for the stupid club owner that will sell us a quality CB at the price that we think is 'worth it'. All the while we keep firing managers cos its the managers' fault!

You keep trying to twist facts so they can fit your narrative, you're a WUM.

 

[cheeky_backheel]

You keep trying to twist facts so they can fit your narrative, you're a WUM.

which facts have been twisted?

 

[amolbhatia50k]

They play regularly enough to be considered part of the regular selection.

Every manager has to use a lot of managers from the previous regine. That Mourinho has spent as much as he's done and not gotten us flying yet is alarming and says everything about his performance (or lack thereof) at Manchester United. Essentially this is the sort of weak excuse people come up with when they don't have a legitimate defence.

 

[Fracture90]

which facts have been twisted?

Great majority of those raised but I'll just leave "Sanchez has improved us" one here.

 

[cheeky_backheel]

Great majority of those raised but I'll just leave "Sanchez has improved us" one here.

So you think we were better off keeping Mkhi?

 

[Fracture90]

So you think we were better off keeping Mkhi?

Again, you're a WUM.

You're trying to twist the facts, shift through stances, whatever it takes to fuel your narrative, whether is that because of your ego not letting you to be proven wrong, or you actually believing in that despite proven wrong is of less importance now.

This isn't Miki vs. Sanchez, it's you, who even with the power of hindsight is actually defending your stances that Sanchez has improved us with actually nothing to back that claim up.

The fact you're trying to push "Sanchez improved us" as a "Sanchez vs. Miki what could have been" type of scenario to defend your "Sanchez has improved us" bs, even tho all things present are suggesting he actually made us look worse both on and off pitch is quite comical.

That apologist deflection of the highest level.

 

[cheeky_backheel]

Again, you're a WUM.

You're trying to twist the facts, shift through stances, whatever it takes to fuel your narrative, whether is that because of your ego not letting you to be proven wrong, or you actually believing in that despite proven wrong is of less importance now.

This isn't Miki vs. Sanchez, it's you, who even with the power of hindsight is actually defending your stances that Sanchez has improved us with actually nothing to back that claim up.

The fact you're trying to push "Sanchez improved us" as a "Sanchez vs. Miki what could have been" type of scenario to defend your "Sanchez has improved us" bs, even tho all things present are suggesting he actually made us look worse both on and off pitch is quite comical.

That apologist deflection of the highest level.

Where is the twist - did we not exchange Sanchez for Mkhi? Is this not an historical fact?

The scenarios are simple - we either did the exchange or not. To say Sanchez didnt make us better is to say that we would have been better off with Mkhi cos that is the alternative scenario.

It is not my fault if the facts do not suit your imagined narrative.

 

[In Rainbows]

I'm in agreement that it was worth swapping Mkhitaryan with Sanchez. In that specific context Mourinho did a good job. Just like how I believe Mourinho has already proven he's taking United nowhere and should be sacked, the same reason should be used for the January deal. Mkhi clearly wasn't working like we all thought it would and it was worth trying another option. I don't have a problem with Mourinho in that instance.

However, Mourinho went and ruined what little praise that swap warranted by playing Sanchez in place of Martial. Sanchez did not improve us one bit in fact we can all argue he made us worse by making that left side's production non-existent in comparison to what it was in the 1st half of the season.

 

[Fracture90]

Where is the twist - did we not exchange Sanchez for Mkhi? Is this not an historical fact?

The scenarios are simple - we either did the exchange or not. To say Sanchez didnt make us better is to say that we would have been better off with Mkhi cos that is the alternative scenario.

It is not my fault if the facts do not suit your imagined narrative.

And with the added benefit of hindsight, has Sanchez improved us since he joined us?

 

[JPRouve]

Why?

Would you want to follow Mourinho with another safety first manager?

Isn’t it time to look to our past in order to embrace the future?

I agree with you simply because I don't even think that this approach suits our best players who are all relatively young.

 

[cheeky_backheel]

And with the added benefit of hindsight, has Sanchez improved us since he joined us?

I have already answered that question.

If you disagree, then please present your argument of how we were better off keeping Mkhi

 

[JPRouve]

I have already answered that question.

If you disagree, then please present your argument of how we were better off keeping Mkhi

It wasn't his argument but the simple answer is cost. Sanchez costs a lot more than Mkhi did while the performances are comparable, if not worse for Sanchez.

 

[cheeky_backheel]

It wasn't his argument but the simple answer is cost. Sanchez costs a lot more than Mkhi did while the performances are comparable, if not worse for Sanchez.

But bring up cost is a different debate cos that becomes a question of value and worth i.e. was the improvement (or lack of it) worth the cost.

At no point have I said it was worth it (only that it was a squad improvement). Even when he was expected to perform much better than he turned out, I never thought he was worth it.

 

[JPRouve]

But bring up cost is a different debate cos that becomes a question of value and worth i.e. was the improvement (or lack of it) worth the cost.

At no point have I said it was worth it (only that it was a squad improvement). Even when he was expected to perform much better than he turned out, I never thought he was worth it.

Which is clearly not the case, Sanchez didn't improve the team to the point where he became a substitute.

Edit: Last season, Sanchez played slightly more minutes than Mkhi for United in the league. And the latter still registered more goals+assists.

 

[Bestietom]

If the board are not going to back him in transfer market, he should go now.

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

Gonna demand an answer to this from Mourinho's fan club.

Many of you keep saying one of the major issues with the team is right wing, no? So why is Andreas Pereira not getting any playing time.

Because he, Carrick and Mourinho have made it public knowledge the club want to groom him into Carrick's playing position long term

NB: I dont even like Mourinho.....
...........

 

[golden_blunder]

I agree with you simply because I don't even think that this approach suits our best players who are all relatively young.

Exactly. They play attacking football at the levels below, which brings out the best in Chong etc then they hit the first team where it’s safety first. It doesn’t match. We need a system where the progression is seamless in terms of style through the levels so that they are in effect trained for the first team setup

 

[cheeky_backheel]

Which is clearly not the case, Sanchez didn't improve the team to the point where he became a substitute.

Edit: Last season, Sanchez played slightly more minutes than Mkhi for United in the league. And the latter still registered more goals+assists.

So are you saying Mkhi was a better player than Sanchez?

Last season PL, before joining us Sanchez had 7 goals 3 assists for Arsenal but had only 2 goals + 3 assists with us , while Mkhi had 1 goal + 5 assist before the trade and had 2 goals and 4 assists for Arsenal. This season so far, Sanchez has had 1 goal 2 assists while Mkhi has had 2 goals +1 assist for Arsenal, with Sanchez playing slightly less minutes. Given all that, is it not more likely that being a mid season transfer affected both players resulting in drops in their productivity. This season, so far, Sanchez is slightly ahead in the productivity department even if we seem to have a poorer attack than Arsenal.

Sanchez has always been, and remains the better player, and if you add a better player to your squad, your squad improves.

 

[Reddy Rederson]

Every manager has to use a lot of managers from the previous regine. That Mourinho has spent as much as he's done and not gotten us flying yet is alarming and says everything about his performance (or lack thereof) at Manchester United. Essentially this is the sort of weak excuse people come up with when they don't have a legitimate defence.

Or, its the kinda of post people come up with when some other poster says theres only 2 or 3 players being used from the previous managers squad. And once again, Jose didnt spend that money, woody spent that money. Woody over paid for those players and gave them all ridiculous wages. Since when did spending big guarantee anything?

 

[Fracture90]

I have already answered that question.

If you disagree, then please present your argument of how we were better off keeping Mkhi

I have actually presented my arguments more than once but you choose which ones to acknowledge and which ones to completely ignore.

Actually after all that you've written it's begs have you even been watching our games with Sanchez? I mean that can be the only explanation for your claims.

I mean you saying Sanchez has improved us back in January, even then one could make a point that he was quite visibly on the decline during his last 6 months at Arsenal, but you actually claiming he improved us even today is mind-boggling. Albeit he was supposed to improve us, at least on the paper...

Not only that his appearances have been shockingly bad, his wages have made every future transfer/extension deal far more difficult, Mourinho's persistence with him has cost us development of some of our most talented players.

At this point I'm actually hoping that you're a WUM, because if you're not and you actually do believe in the stuff you're writing…

 

[JPRouve]

So are you saying Mkhi was a better player than Sanchez?

Last season PL, before joining us Sanchez had 7 goals 3 assists for Arsenal but had only 2 goals + 3 assists with us , while Mkhi had 1 goal + 5 assist before the trade and had 2 goals and 4 assists for Arsenal. This season so far, Sanchez has had 1 goal 2 assists while Mkhi has had 2 goals +1 assist for Arsenal, with Sanchez playing slightly less minutes. Given all that, is it not more likely that being a mid season transfer affected both players resulting in drops in their productivity. This season, so far, Sanchez is slightly ahead in the productivity department even if we seem to have a poorer attack than Arsenal.

Sanchez has always been, and remains the better player, and if you add a better player to your squad, your squad improves.

No, I'm simply telling you that his purchase didn't improve us. At best it didn't change anything, at worse we spent more for similar production.

And no, adding a presumably better player doesn't improve your squad, only his actual performances improve your squad. You are judging reputation instead of performances which is baffling.

 

[cheeky_backheel]

No, I'm simply telling you that his purchase didn't improve us. At best it didn't change anything, at worse we spent more for similar production.

And no, adding a presumably better player doesn't improve your squad, only his actual performances improve your squad. You are judging reputation instead of performances which is baffling.

If we were to follow your logic, even if we assembled the worlds best players, (note not saying this was the case with Sanchez), but the manager decides to leave them on the bench or play them out of position, resulting in poor performances, then adding those world class players did not improve our squad and we are better off with poor quality players that the manager likes.

If he is the better player then he improves the squad cos the quality of the squad is dependent on the quality of the players in it and not on how much you spent acquiring those players or how well the manager utilizes the squad. So it is a simple question: Who was and/or who is the better player: Mkhi or Sanchez?

 

[Cloud7]

Or, its the kinda of post people come up with when some other poster says theres only 2 or 3 players being used from the previous managers squad. And once again, Jose didnt spend that money, woody spent that money. Woody over paid for those players and gave them all ridiculous wages. Since when did spending big guarantee anything?

Well don’t you lot say the only reason that City are better than us is because of spending more? And absolutely nothing to do with coaching?

 

[cheeky_backheel]

I have actually presented my arguments more than once but you choose which ones to acknowledge and which ones to completely ignore.

Actually after all that you've written it's begs have you even been watching our games with Sanchez? I mean that can be the only explanation for your claims.

I mean you saying Sanchez has improved us back in January, even then one could make a point that he was quite visibly on the decline during his last 6 months at Arsenal, but you actually claiming he improved us even today is mind-boggling. Albeit he was supposed to improve us, at least on the paper...

Not only that his appearances have been shockingly bad, his wages have made every future transfer/extension deal far more difficult, Mourinho's persistence with him has cost us development of some of our most talented players.

At this point I'm actually hoping that you're a WUM, because if you're not and you actually do believe in the stuff you're writing…

You are the one who cant seem to make a simple comparative argument but still claim to have made said arguments. All you have repeatedly done is try to frame your position in absolutes instead of the appropriate comparison.

We exchanged Mikhi for Sanchez, so the question of Sanchez making us better or not is exactly a question of Mkhi vs Sanchez cos the alternative is that we had kept Mkhi. That is the valid comparison.

 

[Fracture90]

You are the one who cant seem to make a simple comparative argument but still claim to have made said arguments. All you have repeatedly done is try to frame your position in absolutes instead of the appropriate comparison.

We exchanged Mikhi for Sanchez, so the question of Sanchez making us better or not is exactly a question of Mkhi vs Sanchez cos the alternative is that we had kept Mkhi. That is the valid comparison.

This keeps getting better and better.

I've basically listed the arguments to why (despite the huge expectations) Sanchez signing didn't improve us in case you somehow missed it.

So your basis for that "Sanchez has improved us" claim is him being the better player than Miki, so in theory adding a bigger name player to your squad list should improve the given squad, yes?

 

[Reddy Rederson]

Well don’t you lot say the only reason that City are better than us is because of spending more? And absolutely nothing to do with coaching?

Nope. Not said that once. It’s because they have better everything. Scouting, deal makers, facilities, blah blah blah.

I’m not “you lot”. I’m not just not “you”.

 

[JPRouve]

If we were to follow your logic, even if we assembled the worlds best players, (note not saying this was the case with Sanchez), but the manager decides to leave them on the bench or play them out of position, resulting in poor performances, then adding those world class players did not improve our squad and we are better off with poor quality players that the manager likes.

If he is the better player then he improves the squad cos the quality of the squad is dependent on the quality of the players in it and not on how much you spent acquiring those players or how well the manager utilizes the squad. So it is a simple question: Who was and/or who is the better player: Mkhi or Sanchez?

So to you the best players are inherently best, this status has nothing to do with their actual contribution in relation to other players? You are also arguing that Sanchez was played out of position(mainly on the left wing) and/or benched for no good reason?

As for who is the better player? Neither, they have given us the same level of performances.

 

[cheeky_backheel]

This keeps getting better and better.

I've basically listed the arguments to why (despite the huge expectations) Sanchez signing didn't improve us in case you somehow missed it.

So your basis for that "Sanchez has improved us" claim is him being the better player than Miki, so in theory adding a bigger name player to your squad list should improve the given squad, yes?

bigger name? Dont care about the name.

Its a simple question of quality - better quality of players => better squad. Thus if you replace a player with another of better quality, the squad improves.

 

[Fracture90]

You are the one who cant seem to make a simple comparative argument but still claim to have made said arguments. All you have repeatedly done is try to frame your position in absolutes instead of the appropriate comparison.

Hey you remember that time I pointed out to Toby's mistake vs. PSV which enabled PSV to score and used it as an argument that Tottenham would have conceded even less if it wasn't for that mistake?

And do you remember how after a lot of trying to talk your way around it you came up with an "argument" that it wasn't Toby's mistake he controlled the ball poorly, he failed to notice Lozano sneaking around him and ultimately his mistake of making a poor pass towards Lloris, you actually blamed Sanchez for making a pass to Toby in the first place?

So it was Sanchez's fault for taking the safer option on passing the ball towards his seasoned pro teammate in Toby and it was Sanchez's fault for Toby bottling it...

 

[Random Task]

bigger name? Dont care about the name.

Its a simple question of quality - better quality of players => better squad. Thus if you replace a player with another of better quality, the squad improves.

And no one has thought to inform Jose of this new revelation?

 

[cheeky_backheel]

So to you the best players are inherently best, this status has nothing to do with their actual contribution in relation to other players? You are also arguing that Sanchez was played out of position(mainly on the left wing) and/or benched for no good reason?

As for who is the better player? Neither, they have given us the same level of performances.

Saw this coming from a mile away but guessed you missed the part in my post stating (note not saying this was the case with Sanchez).

The best players attain that status on their ability to contribute more. That they failed to contribute iat the expected level in a particular situation does not mean they subsequently lack the quality. For example, we have seen Messi struggle to reach club performance levels with the NT, does that then mean he is no longer one of the best players in the world and thus the NT is better off without him?

Sanchez is the better player and that judgement should not rely on the isolated case of the current team.

 

[Fracture90]

bigger name? Dont care about the name.

Its a simple question of quality - better quality of players => better squad. Thus if you replace a player with another of better quality, the squad improves.

Nothing against that way of thinking. Pretty sure majority of us thought Sanchez was going to improve us based on his formerly shown quality. But that was back in January 2018...

Now after watching Sanchez perform for the last 10 months, his performances after founding out about his wages that have crushed our wages structure and after seeing how Mourinho's persistence with him has costed us development of some other players...what are your arguments that we are an improved team now that we have Sanchez in our squad?

 

[cheeky_backheel]

Hey you remember that time I pointed out to Toby's mistake vs. PSV which enabled PSV to score and used it as an argument that Tottenham would have conceded even less if it wasn't for that mistake?

And do you remember how after a lot of trying to talk your way around it you came up with an "argument" that it wasn't Toby's mistake he controlled the ball poorly, he failed to notice Lozano sneaking around him and ultimately his mistake of making a poor pass towards Lloris, you actually blamed Sanchez for making a pass to Toby in the first place?

So it was Sanchez's fault for taking the safer option on passing the ball towards his seasoned pro teammate in Toby and it was Sanchez's fault for Toby bottling it...

The flaw with your argument is that the pass to Toby was not the safer option and I provided two passes that should have been made. Given Lozano's position, Toby was bound to come under pressure immediately he received the pass and give the location on the field Sanchez made a poor decision in putting Toby in that situation when he was under no direct pressure and could have made two other safer passes.

Also, I stated that Toby could have done better and that obviously, playing out from the back was not his strong suit, but that his ability (or inability) to play from the back should be of lesser importance than his actual defensive abilities.

Of course you kept on about how he couldn't play from the back

 

[cheeky_backheel]

Nothing against that way of thinking. Pretty sure majority of us thought Sanchez was going to improve us based on his formerly shown quality. But that was back in January 2018...

Now after watching Sanchez perform for the last 10 months, his performances after founding out about his wages that have crushed our wages structure and after seeing how Mourinho's persistence with him has costed us development of some other players...what are your arguments that we are an improved team now that we have Sanchez in our squad?

We have an improved squad n(cos Sanchez is still better than Mkhi imo) but it just wasnt worth the cost

 

[amolbhatia50k]

People have reached a new low when the Sanchez signing is being used to herald Mourinho's "squad improvement"

 

[Random Task]

We have an improved squad n(cos Sanchez is still better than Mkhi imo) but it just wasnt worth the cost

When both players are consistently performing at their maximum potential, yes, Sanchez is clearly the better player.

On current form, there is absolutely nothing between them. The here and now is where it's at.