I agree to a point, but put McFred in mid, Smalling and Lindelof in defence and Lingard in attack and it's going to look very bad again.
We are an averagely coached team
- Thread starter Desert Eagle
- Start date
Smalling was bought 12 years ago as a promising CB/squad CB for a fee rumoured to be around the 15-18m mark. Football had changed since then and he failed to fulfil his full potential. Having said that no one was able to put him on the bench fair and square and he was sold (on a similar fee btw) during the smiling administration not because he was shit but as a way to recoup some of the astronomical money we spent on the inferior version of Steve Bruce.
Fred was one of Ole's best players in the midfield. Sure he was not a star but the smiling manager preferred to spend the dosh in defence (179m in Telles, Maguire, AWB and the only useful defender he bought aka Varane), the flanks (120m on James, the winger that need cuddles, Diallo and Pellistri) and of course the tons of mates he got back (Heaton, McShane, Ronaldo etc). We did 'strengthen' the midfield with VDB (30m) and of course his only great signing aka Bruno. The latter would have probably not signed if United gave the nod to Ole's initial target ie the Longstaff guy from Newcastle.
Lindelof was a 30m signing who salary/fee slot him right as a squad player while Lingard, well, West Ham did want to buy him for good money but we refused to sell him only to first let him rot on the bench and then finally let him go on free.
We are right to complain about the Glazers money pinching ways. On the other hand we also have to admit that the guys who managed United did throw hundreds of millions in the frigging bin. Its amazing how there are still people who defend our football side of things and/or their fixers.
I agree with all of that. The managers we had, made, for the most part, very bad signings, including our former one.
My point was that the team we have now, is actually miles better in terms of quality of the individual. That is all. Credit is to much given IMO to training and too little to player acquisition.
On paper you're right but in practice things are different. We've got an 80m CB and a 50m RB whose are barely mid table EPL level player, our 80m winger need cuddles and he's on 350k a week, DDG is on 375k a week, we lack a forward cover and the only striker we've got is inconsistent and on 250k a week. ETH had done miracles but its evident that United had ran out of juice and it seems that years of bad management had finally caught upon us.
IMO the major issue is we did not get the best for a very long time. We looked for "option" and occasionally we made big signings, but usually by desperation. The times of losing Ronaldos and Tevezs and replacing them with Obertans eventually took a slice of reality. We got weaker while our rivals got strong. We talked about value in the market while the Harzads and Silvas were flying by. This was the era o future decline.
It is then no actual surprise that the team is doing well with a WC defender in Varane, a WC (arguably the best ever) in Casemiro. The desire from us fans has been for the top while having players little better then average.
What United lacked the most was structure. In the past we had a vision ie
a- invest heavily on the infrastructure (ex stadium). Actually the youth academy is the best example to give. At best it gave us an army of top talent (ex class of 92), in normal circumstances it gave us good squad players (Fletch, Wes etc) and at worse it paid for itself as youth talent could be sold off which in turn made the academy a self sufficient enterprise. The scouting department is another great example. The likes of Vidic, Ole, Schmeichel and co were top notch
b- have a tier system (first teamers, squad players and youths) each slotting in well defined salary brackets/fees. A Phil Neville might kill half a Liverpool squad on his own but he would never be paid like Roy Keane. When his salary went up a bit too much he fount himself at Everton a year later.
c- beefen up the squad with a mix of youth academy players, rough gems (ex Chicarito) and unknown talent. The later were more miss then hit (for every Vidic there was a Bebe, an Obertan and a Kleberson) but that's not really an issue. Their salary and fee was relatively low so they could easily be sold off with a minimum deficit.
d- With the money spared thanks to A, B and C we would go for the very best young talent. Money was never an issue in getting the likes of Rooney, Rio, Keane and co.
e- a consistent style allowed United to build a squad that lasted a dynasty. It also meant that players with the right skills could slot in and do well.
Once the Glazers came in, A started going out of the window. D was also put on hold as SAF was growing old and they didn't want to spend big on an ageing manager. Once SAF left, D went out of the window first then B then C and then E. The result is this mess were players with the wrong attitude/lack of talent are paid silly money
We need experienced people across the entire football spine to change this entire mess. We can't have DOFs whose only good to nod at the manager as he ask for players on silly fees.
I will argue with you, successfully, that most of that is a result of the leadership. United had that under 2 managers, Madrid has that regardless of managers. A culture of wining coming from the top; United and most clubs had that in doses. A real winning mentality, as a club, that is not there and never was. Clubs like United make that about people while Real makes it about the club.
A spine with severe scoliosis, but a spine nonetheless.
It has also been my feeling that arsenal and to some extend Tottenham and Newcastle have over performed while Liverpool and United have under performed. Usually these things balances out over a season which is why I still think City will catch Arsenal and Liverpool will reach top 4
Martial and Rashford have both finished decently, they're matching/modestly overperforming their xG: 3 goals/2.3xG and 5 goals/4.6xG.
Looking at the squad, it's 21 league goals from an xG of 21.3 - hitting the mark. The main culprits have been Eriksen (1/2.5) and Ronaldo (1/1.9).
Basically, it's hard to square the stats in this tweet with the fbref stats. And I can't remember a PL game where the missing ingredient was finishing. The losses (Villa, City, Brentford, Palace) have all been deserved where the opposition was much better.
Completely agree with your posts.
There has to be ambition from the very top, which has never been there with the Glazers. And the problems started with David Gill who neglected the academy and the scouting at the club which needed fixing. We used to sign players under Fergie via Fergie's coaching staff. For example Jimmy Ryan who was a member of Fergie's coaching staff was sent to scout a Norweigan CB (Ronny Johnsen) and stumbled upon a young striker called Solskjaer by chance. And Jimmy Ryan himself mentioned this on a podcast on MUTV.
We could get away with the above before but the bar has been raised considerably in the last 10 years.
Same as we paid for Antony or thereabouts.
Totally. We've got the points we deserved...
The whole squad is showing what proper coaching can do. I loved Ole but the step up with EtH is phenomenal.
Quite telling that this thread hasn't been bumped since January. We've had a handful of good performances since then.
I think ETH does understand modern football principles and is trying to implement them but he has to take the blame for our players being unable to showcase his vision. Has he improved or developed Rashford or Brunos game? Do we see him making game changing tactical decisions or subs very often? Our pressing is better and I like what he's done with bringing some kids through but this season is a big one for ETH.
I think ETH does understand modern football principles and is trying to implement them but he has to take the blame for our players being unable to showcase his vision. Has he improved or developed Rashford or Brunos game? Do we see him making game changing tactical decisions or subs very often? Our pressing is better and I like what he's done with bringing some kids through but this season is a big one for ETH.
https://theanalyst.com/eu/2023/08/premier-league-stats-2023-24/
Interesting to look through this. You can see we've tried to become less direct but it's lead to us being a bit in limbo stylistically, our closest comparable teams are Villa and Fulham. The control zones really paint the picture of weak flanks and a complete lack of goal threat/penetration in attacking areas which sadly is true. No real surprise to see how similar Chelsea, City, Arsenal and Brighton are on this metric.
Interesting to look through this. You can see we've tried to become less direct but it's lead to us being a bit in limbo stylistically, our closest comparable teams are Villa and Fulham. The control zones really paint the picture of weak flanks and a complete lack of goal threat/penetration in attacking areas which sadly is true. No real surprise to see how similar Chelsea, City, Arsenal and Brighton are on this metric.
Interesting stuff. Tottenham looking impressive, while we look really week on left wing. This will be however affected by left back issues but still.
We're quite behing the pack chasing City, what seems about right.
I can agree with every single word you've said and still think ETH is going to get sacked by the end of the season, and both stances would not contradict each other.
We’re very middle of the pack which I guess reflects our league position in most metrics. Agree the left wing is a real shock but I guess Shaw being out is a blow - Rashford probably wouldn’t score that high regardless as it’s based on touches and he’s a direct player.
Clear issue for me aside from LW which is very much on Hojlund, Bruno and Mount’s shoulders is that area centrally outside the box. If you look through the teams the best high possession teams control that area and the more direct teams like Pool at least get a lot of penetration down the flanks instead of centrally. We have neither.
ETH might get sacked maybe even deservedly. He's chosen to double down on our reliance on Bruno and Rashford along with questionable use of a large transfer fund which is actually a management/ownership issue. It all leads back to the same shit creek which is without a knowledgeable and motivated and well funded ownership/management in place who understand how to build a culture of winning, we can change all the managers and players we want and it'll still feck up.
What you said would be valid if you do understand how the ownership/management of say, Arsenal, or Liverpool, or Brighton understood how to build a culture of winning. If you understand that, then I bow to your superior knowledge. I on the other hand, don't understand that area of football, so understandably I can only discuss what I can understand.
At the very least they've managed to put more competent people in charge judging by results. You can win with terrible/bad ownership but you need a great manager and great players. Maybe that's where my point is weakest because ultimately you do need great talent on the football side and we haven't had enough of that either.
You need a great manager who makes his own luck. Martin Edwards, our chairman for half of Sir Alex's reign, was not even chosen because of his capacities. He got the job because of NEPOTISM. His father, Louis Edwards, died and the idiots ultimately appointed his son his successor. This is the same Martin Edwards who tried to sell the club to Michael freaking Knighton, and servants to the club like Sir Bobby had to raise awareness and put a stop to that. Edwards just happened to be the guy who was there when Sky and their pots of money came calling and of course Sir Alex had his say in United's history as well. Great managers, my point is, make their own luck.
Sure but we shouldn't just rely on the luck of the draw, there is skill and competence involved in hiring and devolving talent which the glazers lack.
I'm just a fan who is replying in context to the thread's theme, 'We are an Averagely Coached Team'. I just happen to think the bucks stop with the manager, unless the latter is forced to explain his tactics to the team with his eyes blindfolded and his more useful hand tied behind his back. Anyway, I have said what I wanted. I got no stakes in fuelling this debate.
Last edited:
I agree 100% on the great manager.
I'm no fan of the Glazers but Fergie had no bother dominating football under their ownership for a decade. They didn't even spend money in his later years. They've offered far more funds to all the managers who followed but they've all been subpar.
Remember, we failed to win the title for 26 years between Busby's last and Fergie's first. Was that the owners too?
The fact is, top managers win and we haven't had a top manager post Fergie.
Give Guardiola or Klopp the money we've spent this past 9 years and they'd dominate.
One thing I hate Glazers for is their lack of knowledge in appointing proper football administrators. Any good business school grad would run this club better than the current clowns. How is it that the Glazers see the shitshow for the past decade and still don't appoint proper people? For the money spent if they hired proper consultants, we'd be much better off.
Agree with most of your post other than the bolded. I'm not sure how it shows that we are trying to become less direct? To my eyes I haven't seen use try and play as direct as we have this season for a very long time, we have been continually looking for a diagonal ball over the top, it's a clear tactic because as whoever is playing the pass is shaping up, we have 3, sometimes 4, attackers making the same run from left, right and centre. I can't actually remember it working but we keep trying it, must have done so 4 times in the first half vs Palace for example. The stats on your link seem to agree with that too, with us 2nd for "direct attacks" and 4th for "direct speed", but our "sequence time", "passes per sequence" and "build up attacks" being mid table level. That alongside the control zone paints a pretty negative picture for me on our present tactical set up.
In the interim I found these. This first one was the season we were the most direct team in the league, " In the Premier League 2019-20 season, Manchester United had more direct attacks (82) than any other team." https://theanalyst.com/eu/2021/03/possessions-and-sequences-in-football/
This is from 21/22.
This article sums up quite well what I think has happened with us. https://thebusbybabe.sbnation.com/2...ysis-how-erik-ten-hag-fixed-manchester-united
ETH arrived, quickly saw we didn't have the players to transition to a possession based playing style, reverted to what we know works (direct attacks) but added in a decent press, we are now top of the league for high turnovers for example. The issue is we win the ball back a lot but decision making is terrible.
I think the original plan was to try and move towards the higher possession style with the idea of Mount as an 8 but since the injuries and results, we are reverting back to being direct again. Worth noting we are joint 2nd with Spurs for 'direct' attacks which is defined as "The number of open play sequences that starts just inside the team's own half and has at least 50% of movement towards the opposition's goal and ends in a shot or a touch in the opposition box." so I'm not sure I read that as whacking balls long all the time, more that we will quickly transition the ball forwards but it can through dribbling or multiple passes or any combination of these.
When I watch us I often think we are a hodge podge of players with half a plan, some seem suited to Oleball, some much more savvy in possession. I believe more than ever ETH has to commit to either moving away from what we're seeing (which I think we should do even if it costs us) or commit to us being direct and counter attacking in the hope it gets CL football and buys him another season.
We're a team right now that doesn't seem to have the quality of players to match the high pressing/high transition style of play we want to produce.
If we as fans want to see football progression in this team, it's not going to be these players in their current state that can do the job unfortunately.
If we as fans want to see football progression in this team, it's not going to be these players in their current state that can do the job unfortunately.
The stats you've referenced are interesting, for example you mentioned that we were the most direct side in the league in 19/20 with 82 direct attacks in the full 38 games, this year we are already on 21 from 7. I'm not suggesting all our direct attacks are long balls, I'm just noting that on the eye-test we are certainly trying a lot more long diagonals than we have done previously, and it appears to be more of a planned tactic than an off the cuff "Rashford is in space" ball like it has appeared previously. Similarly our sequence/directness stats aren't favourable to 20/21 and 21/22 at present, though I am hopeful that will improve over time.In the interim I found these. This first one was the season we were the most direct team in the league, " In the Premier League 2019-20 season, Manchester United had more direct attacks (82) than any other team." https://theanalyst.com/eu/2021/03/possessions-and-sequences-in-football/
This is from 21/22.
This article sums up quite well what I think has happened with us. https://thebusbybabe.sbnation.com/2...ysis-how-erik-ten-hag-fixed-manchester-united
ETH arrived, quickly saw we didn't have the players to transition to a possession based playing style, reverted to what we know works (direct attacks) but added in a decent press, we are now top of the league for high turnovers for example. The issue is we win the ball back a lot but decision making is terrible.
I think the original plan was to try and move towards the higher possession style with the idea of Mount as an 8 but since the injuries and results, we are reverting back to being direct again. Worth noting we are joint 2nd with Spurs for 'direct' attacks which is defined as "The number of open play sequences that starts just inside the team's own half and has at least 50% of movement towards the opposition's goal and ends in a shot or a touch in the opposition box." so I'm not sure I read that as whacking balls long all the time, more that we will quickly transition the ball forwards but it can through dribbling or multiple passes or any combination of these.
When I watch us I often think we are a hodge podge of players with half a plan, some seem suited to Oleball, some much more savvy in possession. I believe more than ever ETH has to commit to either moving away from what we're seeing (which I think we should do even if it costs us) or commit to us being direct and counter attacking in the hope it gets CL football and buys him another season.
Totally agree with the bolded by the way. At the moment it looks to me like ETH is torn between doing what he think suits the players available and really doubling down on his own vision. It's the first time I've seen anything resembling doubt from him in truth and it's a little worrying, for me he needs to double down and really imprint the style of play on the team, it is the only way to see the long term benefit, rather than just limping into 4th playing a style he'll try and move away from again next summer. Don't get me wrong I still think we can get into the top 4 playing a style more suited to what his likely vision is, but if it doesn't it doesn't. ETH needs to back himself, the teams currently in the top 6 are managed by people who refuse to compromise on their visions for the game.
Yes it's interesting as there are a few teams on course to absolutely smash that 82 number, I have no doubt the tactic from these teams (United and Spurs in particular despite a differing playing style) of being so direct is also why we both score so high on turnovers. If you get the ball forward loads, you'll have more chances of turnovers.
Last para I agree with. If you offered me 4th with what we're seeing now versus 8th but with a great run at the end of the season, a genuine change in how we play, dominating teams home and away and all metrics up ticking, I'd take the latter. I doubt this will happen though and as you say I think ETH doesn't know what to do because he can't really drop Bruno or Rashford and they are very much suited to the direct football we are seeing.
Crystal Palace are above us in every single metric and yet we expect our team to beat theirs. Heh.
I think the whole squad really needs an overhaul and whilst the palace game had a lot of new folk in (mount, hojlund, Amrabat, casemiro), I think we still carry a lot of passengers. It will ultimately take many windows to fix and despite our bad start to the season I do think we have the right manager for the job.
His coaching methods are well established and progressive, but like most overhauls it gets uglier before it gets better.
From what I've seen from us so far, average is being kind to Ten Hag. Ole was accused (quite rightly) of being a poor coach and the truth is £400m later, we don't look any different.
I mean, they quite clearly aren't...
I’m still behind him, but there’s doubts now that weren’t there before and I can’t shake the feeling that he still hasn’t adapted to the league, or underestimates what’s required to be effective here.
I think the squad is such a mishmash of previous managers that it is hard to get all of them pulling in the right direction when they suit different style profiles. Some say that they are downing tools as a collective, but I simply think some just can’t cope with what’s being asked of them. We’re unique in this sense because everyone else has a DoF who is pulling more recruitment strings than the manager so when new coaches do come in, they have a set of players that suit the vision of said DoF rather than the coach, weeks makes them more malleable and amenable than a squad that has 3 or 4 managerial profiles in it.
Agree it’ll take multiple windows to fix, or mega bucks owners buying players out of contracts to expedite the process.
9. Crystal Palace
10. Manchester United
Four times over. Where is that not the case?
Yeah I think you hit the nail on the head when you say they aren't capable of doing what is asked of them.
I agree with the questions too, for example I disagree with making Rashford a star player with the shiny new contract. For large periods of the previous seasons including this one I'd literally take a player like Bowen ahead of him.
But Ten Hag has also been astute in getting players that believe in him to join the club. A lot of people trash in the Antony signing for example but they also underweight the importance of having a player that says he'll follow the manager anywhere. Licha loves him and having a core handful that is on his side is vital when controlling the squad.
I think hel get it right, it's just an ugly period for us. The threads talking about sacking or successors are over the top.
I don't understand, just go on filter through. This isn't to say bloody Palace are the benchmark but what you've said is categorically untrue.
We are better than them for Shots, xG they have scored more and are better from set plays. They face more shots than us but being a defensive team (and us being cack) have better defensive stats than us. We pass more than them, transition the ball forwards faster than them and have better stats for both building attacks (10+ passes) and direct attacks. We beat them on all pressing stats as well bar goal saving actions (which is quite niche given they have 1, we have 0 and the highest score is 3 from Spurs)
I hope you read the piece before posting next time or just refrain from being sensationalist. This is not correct.
Heh.