The values of the club mean something to me, I don't find it a pretentious concept.
Intrepid
Redoubtable
Defiant
Invincible
Expedition
Victory
IRDIEV?
What are Manchester United's "values"?
- Thread starter Brwned
- Start date
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
IRDIEV?
Gazza
Full Member
Having 2 managers in charge for 50 years of the club's existence (accounting for about 80% of the post-war period to the modern day) means that there are values associated with the club which were basically set by Sir Matt and Sir Alex. Commercialism aside, it's unique among British clubs (the nearest equivalent is Liverpool with Shankly and Paisley) and a big reason for the idea of United representing something different.
Trizy
New Member
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2014
- Messages
- 12,009
Entertaining, exciting and attacking football regardless of the result.
Was
Mr. MUJAC
Manchester United Youth Historian
Values at a football club are set by the manager.
Supporters don't listen to the finance people or look at the balance sheet regardless of what the commercial department are doing.
Fans just turn up to watch the team play.
Thus the manager determines style, tactics, process, formation and so on. This drives the culture of the club.
When you have three new managers every year your values get lost as no manager is around long enough to set out his vision and values for the future.
Liverpool did it in the 1970's and 1980's really well.
We have been lucky in our history to have very few managers so it's been easier to set our course.
I would say our values are (in no particular order):
1. Pioneering - first into Europe, first to field a team of youngsters, first with ground development in the 1960's, first with a formal youth policy
2. Youth Development - started in 1932…most internationals, most to hit first team…most successful trophy wise…most league appearances…
3. Attacking play - started by Crickmer in late 1930's and continued by Busby and by virtually all managers since
4. Resilience - Bankrupt in 1902 and 1932…bombed out in WW2…Munich…never say die
5. Family - both Busby and Ferguson made it very familial
The poor performance over the last couple of seasons doesn't wipe out 80 years of history.
Supporters don't listen to the finance people or look at the balance sheet regardless of what the commercial department are doing.
Fans just turn up to watch the team play.
Thus the manager determines style, tactics, process, formation and so on. This drives the culture of the club.
When you have three new managers every year your values get lost as no manager is around long enough to set out his vision and values for the future.
Liverpool did it in the 1970's and 1980's really well.
We have been lucky in our history to have very few managers so it's been easier to set our course.
I would say our values are (in no particular order):
1. Pioneering - first into Europe, first to field a team of youngsters, first with ground development in the 1960's, first with a formal youth policy
2. Youth Development - started in 1932…most internationals, most to hit first team…most successful trophy wise…most league appearances…
3. Attacking play - started by Crickmer in late 1930's and continued by Busby and by virtually all managers since
4. Resilience - Bankrupt in 1902 and 1932…bombed out in WW2…Munich…never say die
5. Family - both Busby and Ferguson made it very familial
The poor performance over the last couple of seasons doesn't wipe out 80 years of history.
Getsme
Full Member
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2013
- Messages
- 11,236
Let's not kid ourselves here, without those fans we wouldn't have the success we've had today.And its a fecking shame we are. Get a ticket in the wrong part of OT and you're surrounded by idiots who take selfies the whole match and haven't got a fecking clue what our songs are. Its the price of success, but its a pretty soul destroying one for matchday fans.
Actually the commercial side has had a more adverse impact on match going fans. The matchday experience isn't the same as it was 15 years ago. Its the same on tv though.
NoLogo
Full Member
But isn't it often like this that one or two prominent manager figures end up giving clubs their "identity", implementing a certain club ethos or philosophy on how to interpret the beautiful game? Barca has their identity since Curyff implemented a way of thinking about football and football education that he brought along from Ajax Amsterdam which developed this approach under Rinus Michels and so on.
Isn't it just logical that our club now is synonymous with the values that were implemented by it's two greatest manager Busby and Ferguson? Attacking football, young players and a "never give up" attitude? I always loved these values about our club and I'm not even sure they are really dead yet. We are in a transitioning phase, probably the biggest we have ever gone through after a quarter of a century under Ferguson and for me it's still too soon to say if we have fundamentally changed just because we now play a more possession oriented style or if it's a matter of building the right team again and finding the right manager.
Isn't it just logical that our club now is synonymous with the values that were implemented by it's two greatest manager Busby and Ferguson? Attacking football, young players and a "never give up" attitude? I always loved these values about our club and I'm not even sure they are really dead yet. We are in a transitioning phase, probably the biggest we have ever gone through after a quarter of a century under Ferguson and for me it's still too soon to say if we have fundamentally changed just because we now play a more possession oriented style or if it's a matter of building the right team again and finding the right manager.
Values at a football club are set by the manager.
Supporters don't listen to the finance people or look at the balance sheet regardless of what the commercial department are doing.
Fans just turn up to watch the team play.
Thus the manager determines style, tactics, process, formation and so on. This drives the culture of the club.
When you have three new managers every year your values get lost as no manager is around long enough to set out his vision and values for the future.
Liverpool did it in the 1970's and 1980's really well.
We have been lucky in our history to have very few managers so it's been easier to set our course.
I would say our values are (in no particular order):
1. Pioneering - first into Europe, first to field a team of youngsters, first with ground development in the 1960's, first with a formal youth policy
2. Youth Development - started in 1932…most internationals, most to hit first team…most successful trophy wise…most league appearances…
3. Attacking play - started by Crickmer in late 1930's and continued by Busby and by virtually all managers since
4. Resilience - Bankrupt in 1902 and 1932…bombed out in WW2…Munich…never say die
5. Family - both Busby and Ferguson made it very familial
The poor performance over the last couple of seasons doesn't wipe out 80 years of history.
Redcafe should have the "like" system just for me to favorite this post.Even for the young generation of fans like me (2) to (5) were my initial impression of what this football club is about.Shame we seem to be in a period of the circle where these values weren't shown much in our football.
pacifictheme
Full Member
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2013
- Messages
- 8,050
Let's not kid ourselves here, without those fans we wouldn't have the success we've had today.
Not saying i disagree. Doesn't mean i like it. But like i say, people who don't go to OT aren't affected by it, so they have no reason to care.
gooDevil
Worst scout ever
There are 3.
Attack
Attack
Attack
Attack
Attack
Attack
2. Youth Development - started in 1932…most internationals, most to hit first team…most successful trophy wise…most league appearances…
this is the big one for me and its great to see LvG carry on the tradition
Mockney
Not the only poster to be named Poster of the Year
It's madness the way some people in this thread are implying that those 60 years of history counts for nothing,
It's not really 60 years though, is it? It's an 18 year halcyon period of success under Fergie, a slightly shorter but more poignant period under Busby, and a slightly longer period of dross in between. Unless you count O'Farrell, Sexton, Docherty and Atkinson as part of that glorious, romantic 60 year heritage?
Obviously our history counts for a lot, and sets us apart from most, if not all English clubs. But at the same time, having a successful, youth orientated, attacking history doesn't exactly set us apart from Barca, or Bayern, or Ajax, or Juve, or most of the other big clubs in our tier. Even Madrid had a domestically successful team of youngsters in the 80s, and as far as "history" goes they pretty much steamroll us. As do a few others tbf.
Depressing as it might be, the only thing that truly sets us apart in a global sense probably is our savvy in embracing the modern commercial side of football so early and so effectively. It's the main reason we can justify calling ourselves the "biggest club in the world" despite being nowhere near the most successful. Everything else can be matched by our peers.
That's not to say we're the same as everyone else by any means. Just that we're probably not quite as special as we like to think we are either. Ironically (or possibly not?) if we were a player we'd probably be Beckham. A great with a successful career and a powerful narrative, but whose unrivalled status in the game is slightly elevated by a strong grasp of the commercial side.
Last edited:
Needham
Full Member
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2013
- Messages
- 11,939
IRDIEV?
End to end football
Visionary management
Illustriousness
Lucrative East Asian sponsorship deals
Porco Rosso
Full Member
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2013
- Messages
- 171
Values? We're talking about a football club - a bunch of blokes kicking a ball around and another bunch trying to bring in commercial revenue on the back of it - it's not a political party ffs!
Eyepopper
Lowering the tone since 2006
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2006
- Messages
- 67,335
I think values in top level sport (not just football btw) are a long and distant memory. Once income from commercial activities overtook that provided by gate receipts, match day revenue & prize money 'values' began to draw their final breaths.
The fact of the matter is that money trumps values every time.
Since the inception of the PL and the subsequent influx of huge money values in football have all but disappeared completely. Utd were lucky to be slightly different in that we had a manager who was from the old school in charge for so long and successfully managed to maintain some of our values while the club also became a massive brand (due in no small part to the fact that the values the manager instilled provided success on the field).
Now all clubs are essentially run as businesses, and managers come and go regularly meaning the idea of instilling values from the manager down is gone. Boards and owners will generally, and rightfully be primarily concerned with the business aspects of their club and ensuring viability.
In recent years, with the onset of players becoming the stars, with individual commercial deals and their own 'brands' I think 'values' have been pushed even further to the back of the list of priorities. Players like Giggs, Neville, Scholes, Gerrard, Carragher and even the likes of Terry and Lampard - players who are synonymous with their club - are also becoming more and more a thing of the past which further adds to teams being transient.
Football has gone from being a sport to being sports entertainment.
The fact of the matter is that money trumps values every time.
Since the inception of the PL and the subsequent influx of huge money values in football have all but disappeared completely. Utd were lucky to be slightly different in that we had a manager who was from the old school in charge for so long and successfully managed to maintain some of our values while the club also became a massive brand (due in no small part to the fact that the values the manager instilled provided success on the field).
Now all clubs are essentially run as businesses, and managers come and go regularly meaning the idea of instilling values from the manager down is gone. Boards and owners will generally, and rightfully be primarily concerned with the business aspects of their club and ensuring viability.
In recent years, with the onset of players becoming the stars, with individual commercial deals and their own 'brands' I think 'values' have been pushed even further to the back of the list of priorities. Players like Giggs, Neville, Scholes, Gerrard, Carragher and even the likes of Terry and Lampard - players who are synonymous with their club - are also becoming more and more a thing of the past which further adds to teams being transient.
Football has gone from being a sport to being sports entertainment.
It's not really 60 years though, is it? It's an 18 year halcyon period of success under Fergie, a slightly shorter but more poignant period under Busby, and a slightly longer period of dross in between. Unless you count O'Farrell, Sexton, Docherty and Atkinson as part of that glorious, romantic 60 year heritage?
Obviously our history counts for a lot, and sets us apart from most, if not all English clubs. But at the same time, having a successful, youth orientated, attacking history doesn't exactly set us apart from Barca, or Bayern, or Ajax, or Juve, or most of the other big clubs in our tier. Even Madrid had a domestically successful team of youngsters in the 80s, and as far as "history" goes they pretty much steamroll us. As do a few others tbf.
Depressing as it might be, the only thing that truly sets us apart in a global sense probably is our savvy in embracing the modern commercial side of football so early and so effectively. It's the main reason we can justify calling ourselves the "biggest club in the world" despite being nowhere near the most successful. Everything else can be matched by our peers.
That's not to say we're the same as everyone else by any means. Just that we're probably not quite as special as we like to think we are either. Ironically (or possibly not?) if we were a player we'd probably be Beckham. A great with a successful career and a powerful narrative, but whose unrivalled status in the game is slightly elevated by a strong grasp of the commercial side.
While a lot of that is true, I think you have downplayed the youth angle too much. Real might have had success with youth in the past and Barca are well known for it now, but neither can boast the kind of continuous history of youth development that we can. Our stat of having a homegrown player in every matchday squad goes back even longer than 60yrs so can surely be considered one of the core values of the club and something that sets us apart from our peers.
RedFish
Full Member
I think values in top level sport (not just football btw) are a long and distant memory. Once income from commercial activities overtook that provided by gate receipts, match day revenue & prize money 'values' began to draw their final breaths.
The fact of the matter is that money trumps values every time.
Since the inception of the PL and the subsequent influx of huge money values in football have all but disappeared completely. Utd were lucky to be slightly different in that we had a manager who was from the old school in charge for so long and successfully managed to maintain some of our values while the club also became a massive brand (due in no small part to the fact that the values thte manager instilled provided success on the field).
Now all clubs are essentially run as businesses, and managers come and go regularly meaning the idea of instilling values from the manager down is gone. Boards and owners will generally, and rightfully be primarily concerned with the business aspects of their club and ensuring viability.
In recent years, with the onset of players becoming the stars, with individual commercial deals and their own 'brands' I think 'values' have been pushed even further to the back of the list of priorities. Players like Giggs, Neville, Scholes, Gerrard, Carragher and even the likes of Terry and Lampard - players who are synonymous with their club - are also becoming more and more a thing of the past which further adds to teams being transient.
Football has gone from being a sport to being sports entertainment.
A director of football would theoretically be one way in which a club could ensure it steered the club along it's 'philosophy' through inevitable changes in manager. This would be through recruitment policy, academy objectives and youth policy to wider ranging club activity. It makes a lot of sense to me. The club would be more secure by not being so dependent on who the next manager was. as he would have to operate within the United framework laid out.
A director of football would theoretically be one way in which a club could ensure it steered the club along it's 'philosophy' through inevitable changes in manager. This would be through recruitment policy, academy objectives and youth policy to wider ranging club activity. It makes a lot of sense to me. The club would be more secure by not being so dependent on who the next manager was. as he would have to operate within the United framework laid out.
Rather than a DOF we have people like Bobby Charlton who has seen several managers (and chairmen/owners) come and go over the decades but has remained a director of the club throughout - he is the link that goes all the way back to the Busby days that keep some of our historic values going.
Charlton was involved in picking Fergie as manager back in the 80s and it is no coincidence that both Moyes and Van Gaal have a history of promoting youth players to the first team, I am sure that link to the historic values of the club was important when selecting the manager.
There are a lot of cynical posts in this about how football is just business nowadays and that we are the most commercial club of the lot so historic values are not important anymore, but I dont fully agree with that.
Charlton is the main one, but there are several ex-players who are involved with the club in various capacities and that is surely to try and keep some of the same feeling about 'the United way' in place over time.
SalfordRed1960
Full Member
Just to be argumentative, ask yourself what United did pre-war, post-war but pre plc and then from the Plc era.Prompted by Sammy's post in the Guardiola thread about aspiring to a different set of values. What are they? What values immediately come to mind when you think of United now?
Personally for me it's hard to look at the modern iteration of United without seeing commercialism written all over it. They must be the only club in the world with an "official noodle partner" for Christ's sake.
This idea of United being "different" is a bit pretentious for me given they are probably the most commercial football club in the world and commercialism is seen by many as the biggest issue in football behind corruption.
Did their values change in giving back to the community, did their values change in giving youth a chance, did their contributions non-league football change, their views on UEFA, their involvement in charities and world organizations.
If these, and others I have missed off the top of my head, have changed little then it would suggest United still live, walk and talk to the same values. If they have dropped some at the expense of say making the owners wealthy then you can argue change.
Before I moved to the USA, evidence suggested that United increased their contribution to the local community and world organizations. I did not see any drop in attitudes and behaviors to youth, and I think all the big clubs put the greater good of football before their own wealth. Many times United, Arsenal and Co have decided not to support votes that would severely impact lower league and non-league football.
As for them being a money making machine who really cares, unless it is through ripping off fans, which I have not witnessed.
RedFish
Full Member
Rather than a DOF we have people like Bobby Charlton who has seen several managers (and chairmen/owners) come and go over the decades but has remained a director of the club throughout - he is the link that goes all the way back to the Busby days that keep some of our historic values going.
Charlton was involved in picking Fergie as manager back in the 80s and it is no coincidence that both Moyes and Van Gaal have a history of promoting youth players to the first team, I am sure that link to the historic values of the club was important when selecting the manager.
There are a lot of cynical posts in this about how football is just business nowadays and that we are the most commercial club of the lot so historic values are not important anymore, but I dont fully agree with that.
Charlton is the main one, but there are several ex-players who are involved with the club in various capacities and that is surely to try and keep some of the same feeling about 'the United way' in place over time.
I do take some reassurance from Charlton and the like being there as 'guardians' of the club's values, and I suppose if that link is always there, then we shouldn't worry. They won't be here forever though which means it is important that modus operandi is instilled into the those who make those crucial appointments and decide on United's 'direction' on and off the field. Charlton's presence and role at the club does fill me with pride,as the man has palpable class.....
RedFish
Full Member
Just to be argumentative, ask yourself what United did pre-war, post-war but pre plc and then from the Plc era.
Did their values change in giving back to the community, did their values change in giving youth a chance, did their contributions non-league football change, their views on UEFA, their involvement in charities and world organizations.
If these, and others I have missed off the top of my head, have changed little then it would suggest United still live, walk and talk to the same values. If they have dropped some at the expense of say making the owners wealthy then you can argue change.
Before I moved to the USA, evidence suggested that United increased their contribution to the local community and world organizations. I did not see any drop in attitudes and behaviors to youth, and I think all the big clubs put the greater good of football before their own wealth. Many times United, Arsenal and Co have decided not to support votes that would severely impact lower league and non-league football.
As for them being a money making machine who really cares, unless it is through ripping off fans, which I have not witnessed.
I'd only add that it would do no harm whatsoever if United pulled into line with all but one other club in the PL, and support the Women's game by running a Women's team. I think we should be take an active part in promoting women in sport, being one of the most recognisable brands in sport the world over, we can only reinforce the value of equal opportunities.....
Born2Lose
Full Member
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2015
- Messages
- 2,723
Giving a player like Lingard a chance whereas another unnamed team signed a bright english prospect to meet their quota.
Share: