What exactly changed in Arnold, Murtough and Ten Hag era?

Giggsy13 said:
What’s incredible is that OP actually thinks the damage caused by Woodward could be corrected in such a short amount of time. You cannot sell players for much of a profit when they’re average and on premium contracts. To think 2 years would be enough for a complete turn around is naive and shortsighted. Firm judgments being made about our current window when we’re two games into the season is also completely off the mark. What we’ve seen under Murtough and ten Hag is that we’re more decisive with our targets and move on them quicker than we ever did under Woodward who took a complete scatter gun approach and was enamoured by big names. We’ve also seen the end of offering contracts to players to preserve value. It was a disastrous policy, which has also contributed to our inability to maximize our transfer budget.

There has been a lot of progress made by ten Hag and you could use Liverpool and most recently Arsenal as the template on how things can be turned around if you give it time. Those expecting a title charge this season were bound to be disappointed. Top 4, improved points, a good run in Europe and another domestic trophy is more than acceptable and a sign things are turning around under ten Hag and Murtough.

To those who have leaped to the conclusion that there has been no progress, what would you expect the club to do with deadwood players in VDB, Martial, Maguire and McT who are paid well and no one wants? We are handcuffed to these players of a different era unless you want to sell at a ridiculously low fee or pay them off, which many of you will blast Murtough for as well. Damned if you do, damned if you don’t. Judge the club in another 2 to 3 years where we can see the impact of Murtough and ten Hag not in year 2 of the rebuild.
Click to expand...

We can see in a short space of time that all that has changed are tweaks to what was happening previously rather than the huge change in direction that was required.

When Arnold met fans he spoke of Woodward spending a billion and not being able to see it on the pitch, since he took over already a third of way through that and can’t see it on the pitch.

The manager is still driving recruitment despite fact he will most likely not be at the club in 2 years time. Murtough and Arnold fell at the first hurdle.

Even the FFP concerns haven’t prompted a big rethink, which shows there is just no intent to do anything differently.
 
Roboc7 said:
We can see in a short space of time that all that has changed are tweaks to what was happening previously rather than the huge change in direction that was required.

When Arnold met fans he spoke of Woodward spending a billion and not being able to see it on the pitch, since he took over already a third of way through that and can’t see it on the pitch.

The manager is still driving recruitment despite fact he will most likely not be at the club in 2 years time. Murtough and Arnold fell at the first hurdle.

Even the FFP concerns haven’t prompted a big rethink, which shows there is just no intent to do anything differently.
Click to expand...

“Tweeks” - Unless I’ve counted wrong, 6 players in the starting 11 yesterday are ten Hag’s signings or players he’s promoted from the reserves. Hojlund would likely make it 7. Isn’t that what everyone wanted, it’s a complete overhaul.

Again everyone wants to dodge the elephant in the room, how do you get rid of terrible contracts given to average players without sustaining a loss? We can pay off Maguire but if it doesn’t significantly add to the transfer budget or doesn’t add at all how does it help at all, we’re handcuffed to that player. If you have the secret on how to get rid of the 4 players I’ve mentioned leading to a net benefit, bolstering the transfer budget. If Murtough gave contracts to and signed the likes of Maguire, Martial, Bailly or VDB, by all means go after him. However, he’s cleaning the mess left by his predecessor.
 
Giggsy13 said:
With your sense of timing, you must do incredibly well in job interviews when asked “where do you see yourself in 5 years”….
Click to expand...
Well, no wonder some of you are happy with pathetic failure at this club if you think short term in football is 2 years.

Says more about you people's expectations than anything else.
 
It all comes down to the manager IMO. A world class manager would do wonders. We have to hope if we want to compete with City and Liverpool that Ten Hag is a top 20 manager.

I recall alan hansen saying that when ferguson won his second last title i think, that ferguson could have managed any other top four team and he would have won the title with them too. Present day since ferguson retired reminds of liverpool when fergie was in charge of us and they would spend big each summer and yet they couldnt match us because we had ferguson.

So we really have to hope ten hag comes good. Like really good.
 
Lentwood said:
On the subject of transfers, again, I think we are seeing signs of change. Problem is, you can't undo a decade of negligence in 18-months. You could argue we'd actually fallen behind even before SAF left.

The numbers of players that have left in the last 12-months is a good change in the right direction and I think all of signings have added something to the team to varying degrees.

On tactics, some of these lads have never had a "modern coach". As good a footballer as Luke Shaw is, for example, he can't just learn an entirely new way of playing in a few months. It needs to become muscle memory, and that's going to take a long time unfortunately.

If you look at Arsenal under Edu and Arteta, it actually had to get much worse before it got better...and I think that will be the case again here.
Click to expand...

We haven't made any positive changes.

We signed Antony for £80m because the manager wanted him. Mount for £50m for the same reason. I'm fairly sure from what I've seen of Hojlund he'll still be fairly. For £70m. Spunking big money on players largely because the manager wants them - just like with Sancho and AWB etc under Ole. No real scouting, just names the manager likes.

@Adnan used to post about the changes we've made in the recruitment at the club, but it's clear that something hasn't worked. Players like Tonali, McAlister, Szobolozsai have on average moved for about what we paid for Mount.. instead we go for the one guy if you watch England or Chelsea is average most of the time.

Until we get a proper modern recruitment team and strategy in place we're going to continue spunk money and then wonder why we never improve.

On Arsenal, they already had good attacking players like Saka, a RW that you just can't buy in the modern day. Martinelli isn't as good as Rashford but offers something similar. They then added Odegaard, a great AM, and Trossard who I've rated highly for a while. Good signings. And of course Jesus but I don't really rate him that much. We've signed what comparitely, Mount Antony and Hojlund? Between them I'd be surprised if they score more than 15 goals this season.
 
Giggsy13 said:
“Tweeks” - Unless I’ve counted wrong, 6 players in the starting 11 yesterday are ten Hag’s signings or players he’s promoted from the reserves. Hojlund would likely make it 7. Isn’t that what everyone wanted, it’s a complete overhaul.

Again everyone wants to dodge the elephant in the room, how do you get rid of terrible contracts given to average players without sustaining a loss? We can pay off Maguire but if it doesn’t significantly add to the transfer budget or doesn’t add at all how does it help at all, we’re handcuffed to that player. If you have the secret on how to get rid of the 4 players I’ve mentioned leading to a net benefit, bolstering the transfer budget. If Murtough gave contracts to and signed the likes of Maguire, Martial, Bailly or VDB, by all means go after him. However, he’s cleaning the mess left by his predecessor.
Click to expand...

Every manager has had an overhaul, but it’s all been done using same approach that’s the issue and why nothing has or will change.

We are all aware how difficult it is to offload players on big wages which is why you don’t pay double what Anthony is worth and pay him ludicrous wages. It’s why you don’t pay Casemiro 300k a week when he turns 31 not long after signing.
 
Not much. We keep overpaying for small slow players such as Antony and Mount and surrender the midfield to our opponents. Martial and Höjlund will make us more balanced up front but CM is a huge concern so far, preseason included.
 
Roboc7 said:
Every manager has had an overhaul, but it’s all been done using same approach that’s the issue and why nothing has or will change.

We are all aware how difficult it is to offload players on big wages which is why you don’t pay double what Anthony is worth and pay him ludicrous wages. It’s why you don’t pay Casemiro 300k a week when he turns 31 not long after signing.
Click to expand...

Antony is not on big wages and we didn’t buy Casemiro for resale value. Anything else you want to complain about?
 
Giggsy13 said:
They should stick to making crying TikTok videos…
Click to expand...
You should know. The reasoning and level of sophistication of your posts makes TikTok look like War and Peace.
 
Nothing has changed in terms of recruitment and planning. We're still as poor as ever.
 
Andycoleno9 said:
With Lingard we missed sales because we asked too much money and because manager said that he wants depth.
Same as with McT this summer.

Look at Chelsea's and City's sales; if offer is good and player is not key player, they sell.
Click to expand...
I thought Rangnick was happy for Lingard to leave?
 
marktan said:
We haven't made any positive changes.

We signed Antony for £80m because the manager wanted him. Mount for £50m for the same reason. I'm fairly sure from what I've seen of Hojlund he'll still be fairly. For £70m. Spunking big money on players largely because the manager wants them - just like with Sancho and AWB etc under Ole. No real scouting, just names the manager likes.

@Adnan used to post about the changes we've made in the recruitment at the club, but it's clear that something hasn't worked. Players like Tonali, McAlister, Szobolozsai have on average moved for about what we paid for Mount.. instead we go for the one guy if you watch England or Chelsea is average most of the time.

Until we get a proper modern recruitment team and strategy in place we're going to continue spunk money and then wonder why we never improve.

On Arsenal, they already had good attacking players like Saka, a RW that you just can't buy in the modern day. Martinelli isn't as good as Rashford but offers something similar. They then added Odegaard, a great AM, and Trossard who I've rated highly for a while. Good signings. And of course Jesus but I don't really rate him that much. We've signed what comparitely, Mount Antony and Hojlund? Between them I'd be surprised if they score more than 15 goals this season.
Click to expand...
Really - Onana isn't a positive change?
 
Red in STL said:
Really - Onana isn't a positive change?
Click to expand...
I meant in our recruitment strategy (i.e allowing the manager to pick targets).

It's worked for some of the lower priced ones like Onana and Martinez for sure. Casemiro is a borderline one because he wasn't even the first choice for ETH, looked great but I was worried about big money for a player that's put a ton of mileage in his legs for Real. And I say that as someone who was always a big fan of his. But the other big money ones in Mount and Antony aren't great, and Hojlund is unlikely to hit the ground running either.
 
Giggsy13 said:
Antony is not on big wages and we didn’t buy Casemiro for resale value. Anything else you want to complain about?
Click to expand...

But I thought Maguire was on big wages?. Not sure how Anthony who reportedly earns more is not though. We don’t buy anyone for resale value but I can’t think of many 30 year old we’ve given 4 years contracts to 300k a week to.

They are repeating the same mistakes you are complaining they need to solve. Mount, Casemiro and Anthony is 700k a week, early 200m on transfer fees. It’s Woodward 2.0. I’m not complaining it’s just apparent the approach is the same and will have same consequences if it doesn’t. Hopefully it all works out but I wouldn’t bet on it.
 
Last edited:
Rightnr said:
I'm not the one posting consecutive and responding to people like a know-it-all, so I suggest you go take your own advice.
Click to expand...

It’s not that I know it all, it’s just many of us who are posting opposing views just sound more sensible than you. Now go on, take a deep breath…
 
Giggsy13 said:
It’s not that I know it all, it’s just many of us who are posting opposing views just sound more sensible than you. Now go on, take a deep breath…
Click to expand...
No, what you sound like is a deluded fan who thinks being positive about this shitshow makes him some sort of a moral compass.

I have time and again been proved right with plenty of my criticism and in pretty much every single instance there's a couple of you super 'reasonable' fans who think you're some foresight geniuses by not deeming it necessary to criticise a hierarchy that's literally had years to effect change.

Then what happens is you end up looking like clowns and disappearing off the board like that guy that was criticising a potential Qatar of United and was pulled up supporting the Newcastle Saudi takeover 18 months prior.
 
Giggsy13 said:
Antony is not on big wages and we didn’t buy Casemiro for resale value. Anything else you want to complain about?
Click to expand...
Antony is reportedly on 200k/week, which if true is ludicrous for a 22 year old with everything to prove and who we had a free run at signing.
 
Roboc7 said:
But I thought Maguire was on big wages?. Not sure how Anthony who reportedly earns more is not though. We don’t buy anyone for resale value but I can’t think of many 30 year old we’ve given 4 years contracts to 300k a week to.

They are repeating the same mistakes you are complaining they need to solve. Mount, Casemiro and Anthony is 700k a week, early 200m on transfer fees. It’s Woodward 2.0. I’m not complaining it’s just apparent the approach is the same and will have same consequences if it doesn’t. Hopefully it all works out but I wouldn’t bet on it.
Click to expand...

Did Murtough or ten Hag sign Maguire to that ridiculous deal?

Again Casemiro was bought to make an immediate impact, we aren’t banking on resale, so who cares about his wages. If ultimately Antony and Mount don’t work out here and we’re in a position where we’re forced to sell then complain, but we’re in year 2 of Antony and the first two games of Mount, perhaps wait and see if they make an impact before casually calling it woodward 2.0.
 
Giggsy13 said:
Antony is not on big wages and we didn’t buy Casemiro for resale value. Anything else you want to complain about?
Click to expand...
Antony is on 200k. He was on 25k in Ajax with market value of 30 mil.
We were only ones who wanted him. And we payed 100 mil and gave him 200k. Why to give him 200k? He would sign for us for same wage as he had in Ajax.
Mount was on 80k. We gave him 250k.
Hojlund was on 10k in Atalanta and we gave him 85k.

Makes no sense.
 
Last edited:
Andycoleno9 said:
Antony is on 200k. He was on 25k in Ajax with market value of 30 mil.
We were only ones who wanted him. And we payed 100 mil and gave him 200k. Why to give him 200k? He would sign for us for same wage as he had in Ajax.
Mount was on 80k. We gave him 250k.
Hojlund was on 10k in Atalanta and we gave him 85k.

Makes no sense.
Click to expand...

We pay certain players a wage (and also a transfer fee in most cases) which is supposed to makes ourselves convinced that we’ve signed a premium player. Too often we’ve handed out stupid contracts. What’s the point of handing out massive wages to players who no one else is chasing? Was there a realistic chance that Maguire or even Sancho would’ve said no to us had we offered a significantly lower contract?
 
Giggsy13 said:
Did Murtough or ten Hag sign Maguire to that ridiculous deal?

Again Casemiro was bought to make an immediate impact, we aren’t banking on resale, so who cares about his wages. If ultimately Antony and Mount don’t work out here and we’re in a position where we’re forced to sell then complain, but we’re in year 2 of Antony and the first two games of Mount, perhaps wait and see if they make an impact before casually calling it woodward 2.0.
Click to expand...

Why are you asking a question you know the answer to and ignoring your false claim that Anthony isn’t on big wages?. If Murtough and Arnold understand the problems caused by players like Maguire why are they repeating same mistakes, especially given our FFP issues. Like I said it’s the same approach, tweaks not a new direction.

No one cared about Maguire’s wages when he signed, or Sancho’s or Anthony’s or countless others until you have to get rid of them. Then suddenly everyone cares, if Casemiro’s legs have gone everyone will care about that contract and his wages. And with FFP tightening how much everyone earns is more important than ever, especially a 60m fee and 60m contract for a short term signing.

You are just proving my point with your explanation for Casemiro it’s same approach with same type of justifications that have same consequences.

Will this same approach lead to same results, I would guess yes but be delighted to be wrong.
 
Roboc7 said:
Why are you asking a question you know the answer to and ignoring your false claim that Anthony isn’t on big wages?. If Murtough and Arnold understand the problems caused by players like Maguire why are they repeating same mistakes, especially given our FFP issues. Like I said it’s the same approach, tweaks not a new direction.

No one cared about Maguire’s wages when he signed, or Sancho’s or Anthony’s or countless others until you have to get rid of them. Then suddenly everyone cares, if Casemiro’s legs have gone everyone will care about that contract and his wages. And with FFP tightening how much everyone earns is more important than ever, especially a 60m fee and 60m contract for a short term signing.

You are just proving my point with your explanation for Casemiro it’s same approach with same type of justifications that have same consequences.

Will this same approach lead to same results, I would guess yes but be delighted to be wrong.
Click to expand...

But they haven’t, so what exactly is the problem? He’s 31 not 38. We needed an immediate upgrade in our midfield and he will provide 3 to 4 years of stability. It’s a problem if Murtough offers to extend Casemiro’s contract, which all signs say he will not.
 
Giggsy13 said:
But they haven’t, so what exactly is the problem? He’s 31 not 38. We needed an immediate upgrade in our midfield and he will provide 3 to 4 years of stability. It’s a problem if Murtough offers to extend Casemiro’s contract, which all signs say he will not.
Click to expand...

We hope he will give 3-4 years of stability, like any transfer it’s not guaranteed. Like I said it’s something Woodward would have done, it might work out, it might not but it’s same approach.

A different approach would be not to pay double what Anthony was worth, just like Woodward did with Maguire. Or pay him 200k a week just like Woodward did with Maguire. Maybe pay him a 100 if you have to so you can actually get rid of him if he flops. That would show you are making changes and set a benchmark. If he doesn’t like it he can stay at Ajax and sign your alternative.
 
Last edited:
Nickelodeon said:
We pay certain players a wage (and also a transfer fee in most cases) which is supposed to makes ourselves convinced that we’ve signed a premium player. Too often we’ve handed out stupid contracts. What’s the point of handing out massive wages to players who no one else is chasing? Was there a realistic chance that Maguire or even Sancho would’ve said no to us had we offered a significantly lower contract?
Click to expand...

This isn't actually an issue - it's a faux issue caused by whomever is responsible for signing off on sales and incoming transfers. Maguire would be out the door if we agreed to pay him £8M over 2 years - someone blocked that. We've seen the same with numerous players the last few years. We set an asking price that doesn't match their real valuation for various reasons, and we refuse to budge from that - despite needing to offload players. We re-sign players on long-term contracts to protect their "value", which increases what we consider an acceptable fee - and basically leaves us straddled with deadweight. When their perceived value eventually fall below their real value, we sell them. This leaves us with a bloated squad of players we can't actually use and a budget that is severely hampered. This is happening every single year.

It doesn't help that we are terrible at protecting their value through the media and seem unable to build good relationships with other clubs that would result in good loan-moves and sales.
 
Laurencio said:
This isn't actually an issue - it's a faux issue caused by whomever is responsible for signing off on sales and incoming transfers. Maguire would be out the door if we agreed to pay him £8M over 2 years - someone blocked that. We've seen the same with numerous players the last few years. We set an asking price that doesn't match their real valuation for various reasons, and we refuse to budge from that - despite needing to offload players. We re-sign players on long-term contracts to protect their "value", which increases what we consider an acceptable fee - and basically leaves us straddled with deadweight. When their perceived value eventually fall below their real value, we sell them. This leaves us with a bloated squad of players we can't actually use and a budget that is severely hampered. This is happening every single year.

It doesn't help that we are terrible at protecting their value through the media and seem unable to build good relationships with other clubs that would result in good loan-moves and sales.
Click to expand...
It's both. We pay too much on the way in, and we refuse to bite the bullet and cut our losses on the way out.
 
Roboc7 said:
We hope he will give 3-4 years of stability, like any transfer it’s not guaranteed. Like I said it’s something Woodward would have done, it might work out, it might not but it’s same approach.

A different approach would be not to pay double what Anthony was worth, just like Woodward did with Maguire. Or pay him 200k a week just like Woodward did with Maguire. Maybe pay him a 100 if you have to so you can actually get rid of him if he flops. That would show you are making changes and set a benchmark.
Click to expand...
The default setting of most people is to defer to the moral authority of those in charge, to lead themselves to believe that those in charge have applied logic to and made informed decisions in all matters. But like we have all seen in big corporate failures leaders don't always make the best decisions, they don't usually account for their biases when making those decisions.

There were as many questions on the Antony signing re - his ability to adjust to this league, his average offensive output etc; as they were on the Maguire one re - his lack of pace which limited him to a very good defender but not a world class one. I am sure those questions would have been raised in the club had those signings not been driven by the managers with the complete backing of the CEOs.

In my view Murtough was emasculated by Woodward walking on eggshells to avoid offending Ole, I remember a lot of effort being expended on stressing the point that the Football Director was not the manager's boss, that he wouldn't be in charge of recruitment etc. We then brought in Ragnick and even though he failed as a manager what he said made sense and if we had listened to him I believe we would still be trophyless, out of the CL but healthier and with a brighter future.

Arsenal, under Aterta, had to step back and forget about top four hunts then without the pressure for immediate CL qualification have emerged with a side that looks ready to challenge over multiple seasons. I believe we need to do the same, forget about the instant gratification of making up the numbers in the CL, build a young tenacious but technical side and get rid of the lazy brainless idiots that panic the moment the heat is raised up a notch.

Whether Ten Hag will be the guy to lead that resurgence depends entirely on him. If things/signings are not working then he needs to look to the youth. I don't think a guy like McTominay would offer us anything that we wouldn't get from Meijbri, Antony isnt better that Amad and Pellistiri for example. If guys like Bruno and Rashford are hellbent on playing like morons then drop them until they get on with the program. That will require us fans to be patient, to see that what's wrong at our club can't just be solved by firing the manager and buying new players we also need to get rid of many who have been part of failed preceding regimes.
 
As a big Ten Hag fan, his biggest flaw and possibly the start of his downfall will be from his insistence to sign familiar faces. Names suggested by RR would have elevated us to the next level. only Martinez and Cassemiro are guaranteed starters and both of them with limited physical attributes for team that want to play a high line.
 
Giggsy13 said:
But they haven’t, so what exactly is the problem? He’s 31 not 38. We needed an immediate upgrade in our midfield and he will provide 3 to 4 years of stability. It’s a problem if Murtough offers to extend Casemiro’s contract, which all signs say he will not.
Click to expand...
Well, it's only the start of his 2nd season and he's providing the complete opposite of stability at the minute. He's also very clearly physically declined from his prime already.
 
I realise this is old school but I think the manager should have major say on transfers. That’s not to say he should dictate salaries or transfer fee bids.

Ideally the manager should agree a strategy with the scouts and senior management and work with them to identify targets, rank them, discuss budgets, discuss priorities, discuss long term planning, and decide, together, whether to proceed with each transfer. I would be surprised if all of that isn’t happening but who knows?

Unless you have a very good DoF in charge of this stuff, the only sensible way is to get the manager heavily involved.

One thing I don’t like is when you don’t have good football people in the right jobs and yet they interfere with football decisions. The classic one, for me, is when Mourinho wanted to sell Martial but the suits said no. Great fecking decision that was, btw, but it seemed to be happening quite a bit before EtH, back in the Woodward days.

So I’d say the manager is maybe respected a bit more, now, as being the most skilled football mind at the club (which is why we brought him here).

Most people don’t want the manager to have power or control of transfers but taking it away from him causes more problems than it solves.

Oh and let me also say “Brighton”. (In case anybody wants me to “just look at them”).
 
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/footbal...rets-manchester-uniteds-great-summer-rebuild/

Murtough was only empowered to make genuine changes from January 2022:
Although Murtough was appointed football director 15 months ago, not long after turning down a big strategic role with David Beckham’s Inter Miami in the US, and he led the search for Ten Hag, his power base only truly began to widen once Woodward exited in January and Arnold gave him autonomy over football operations
Click to expand...

There was a major problem with a disconnect between recruitment and other members of staff:
One centres around some but by no means all of the “legacy” staff who are set in their ways and think the old rules still apply at a club that was once the best but has just finished 35 points behind champions Manchester City.

The other - and much more corrosive - revolves around what sources have described as the “fear of speaking up”. Those who have been prepared to stick their head above the parapet have too often found themselves shot down, sidelined or, worse still, ignored. Over time, it has encouraged a culture of silence, obedience and disillusionment, according to insiders.

“You’d hear of technical board meetings where the minute someone criticises recruitment they get ostracised so is it any wonder people have been s--- scared of speaking up?” one source said. “It’s like a membership club. The weak people at the top employed weak people below them who don’t argue, who don’t speak their mind and it meant no elite environment where you openly question and challenge each other. It has infected the entire club.”
Click to expand...

Murtough removed the former heads of recruitment and promoted Mayorga. This happened last summer so that window (2022) we had to rely more heavily on EtH for recruitment.

People moaning that we are not hiring the best in class. Well we are trying to do so, but you cannot just replace 1000 staff all in one go. It doesn't make sense to do that.

Whether chief executive Richard Arnold and football director John Murtough prove successful or not, though, neither have given the impression of being happy to sit back and maintain the status quo. Since taking over as chief executive in February [2022] from Ed Woodward, Arnold has driven a strategic review and overhaul of the whole club.

“It has felt like a hurricane coming in,” one source said. It is understood internationally renowned organisational consulting giants, Korn Ferry, have been enlisted to lead an aggressive headhunting process designed to identify and recruit “best in class” talent. As part of that process, existing employees are finding themselves subjected to thorough interviews by Korn Ferry’s specialist consultants as they seek to establish where new skills and change are needed.
Click to expand...

Here is an example of hiring people from other teams to complete projects in the club:
In the background, United are working with architects KSS on a longer-term plan to develop a new state of the art training complex. In January, the club recruited Mags Mernagh from Leicester as programme director to oversee the project after she had worked closely with KSS on the creation of Leicester’s new training ground.
Click to expand...

The most important point is that there must now be agreement between the DoF (and by extension the recruitment) and EtH before a player signs. This means effectively that every signing we have made this summer has had that approval and staff are working together:
Ten Hag has already met the recruitment staff and fed in what he wants. Murtough is there to “provide challenge” and only when he and the manager are ultimately aligned will deals be progressed further - a player cannot be signed without the backing of both parties.
Click to expand...

Some of the takes in this thread are also absolutely bizarre. When EtH was hired, we had a long list of problems in the team. Since his arrival these are some of the things he has done to the squad:
- remove de Gea
- remove Maguire from the team and attempt to move him on
- sign a ball playing defender
- sign a defensive midfielder
- remove the McFred monopoly
- sign a RW
- sign a striker

Whether his signings have worked or not, the point is, he has made signings to key areas nearly every United fan felt needed improvement. The main reasons why we haven't done more always comes back to the ownership and not the manager, the DoF or even the CEO.

Whether EtH works or not, the structure in the club is much better, the recruitment is far more targeted and we are signing players now that are, objectively, better on the ball. Over the next few windows we will continue to see this and the overall team will improve as a result.
 
0le said:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/footbal...rets-manchester-uniteds-great-summer-rebuild/

Murtough was only empowered to make genuine changes from January 2022:


There was a major problem with a disconnect between recruitment and other members of staff:


Murtough removed the former heads of recruitment and promoted Mayorga. This happened last summer so that window (2022) we had to rely more heavily on EtH for recruitment.

People moaning that we are not hiring the best in class. Well we are trying to do so, but you cannot just replace 1000 staff all in one go. It doesn't make sense to do that.



Here is an example of hiring people from other teams to complete projects in the club:


The most important point is that there must now be agreement between the DoF (and by extension the recruitment) and EtH before a player signs. This means effectively that every signing we have made this summer has had that approval and staff are working together:


Some of the takes in this thread are also absolutely bizarre. When EtH was hired, we had a long list of problems in the team. Since his arrival these are some of the things he has done to the squad:
- remove de Gea
- remove Maguire from the team and attempt to move him on
- sign a ball playing defender
- sign a defensive midfielder
- remove the McFred monopoly
- sign a RW
- sign a striker

Whether his signings have worked or not, the point is, he has made signings to key areas nearly every United fan felt needed improvement. The main reasons why we haven't done more always comes back to the ownership and not the manager, the DoF or even the CEO.

Whether EtH works or not, the structure in the club is much better, the recruitment is far more targeted and we are signing players now that are, objectively, better on the ball. Over the next few windows we will continue to see this and the overall team will improve as a result.
Click to expand...
You know what, that is a bloody good post.
 
0le said:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/footbal...rets-manchester-uniteds-great-summer-rebuild/

Murtough was only empowered to make genuine changes from January 2022:


There was a major problem with a disconnect between recruitment and other members of staff:


Murtough removed the former heads of recruitment and promoted Mayorga. This happened last summer so that window (2022) we had to rely more heavily on EtH for recruitment.

People moaning that we are not hiring the best in class. Well we are trying to do so, but you cannot just replace 1000 staff all in one go. It doesn't make sense to do that.



Here is an example of hiring people from other teams to complete projects in the club:


The most important point is that there must now be agreement between the DoF (and by extension the recruitment) and EtH before a player signs. This means effectively that every signing we have made this summer has had that approval and staff are working together:


Some of the takes in this thread are also absolutely bizarre. When EtH was hired, we had a long list of problems in the team. Since his arrival these are some of the things he has done to the squad:
- remove de Gea
- remove Maguire from the team and attempt to move him on
- sign a ball playing defender
- sign a defensive midfielder
- remove the McFred monopoly
- sign a RW
- sign a striker

Whether his signings have worked or not, the point is, he has made signings to key areas nearly every United fan felt needed improvement. The main reasons why we haven't done more always comes back to the ownership and not the manager, the DoF or even the CEO.

Whether EtH works or not, the structure in the club is much better, the recruitment is far more targeted and we are signing players now that are, objectively, better on the ball. Over the next few windows we will continue to see this and the overall team will improve as a result.
Click to expand...

Heard all this kind of talk before, there’s nothing bizarre about recognising we are on a very similar path, maybe results will be different but if they aren’t we’ll be hearing same things rehashed all over again.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/f...rd-looking-build-United-six-dismal-years.html
 
0le said:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/footbal...rets-manchester-uniteds-great-summer-rebuild/

Murtough was only empowered to make genuine changes from January 2022:


There was a major problem with a disconnect between recruitment and other members of staff:


Murtough removed the former heads of recruitment and promoted Mayorga. This happened last summer so that window (2022) we had to rely more heavily on EtH for recruitment.

People moaning that we are not hiring the best in class. Well we are trying to do so, but you cannot just replace 1000 staff all in one go. It doesn't make sense to do that.



Here is an example of hiring people from other teams to complete projects in the club:


The most important point is that there must now be agreement between the DoF (and by extension the recruitment) and EtH before a player signs. This means effectively that every signing we have made this summer has had that approval and staff are working together:


Some of the takes in this thread are also absolutely bizarre. When EtH was hired, we had a long list of problems in the team. Since his arrival these are some of the things he has done to the squad:
- remove de Gea
- remove Maguire from the team and attempt to move him on
- sign a ball playing defender
- sign a defensive midfielder
- remove the McFred monopoly
- sign a RW
- sign a striker

Whether his signings have worked or not, the point is, he has made signings to key areas nearly every United fan felt needed improvement. The main reasons why we haven't done more always comes back to the ownership and not the manager, the DoF or even the CEO.

Whether EtH works or not, the structure in the club is much better, the recruitment is far more targeted and we are signing players now that are, objectively, better on the ball. Over the next few windows we will continue to see this and the overall team will improve as a result.
Click to expand...
This sounds nice and all, but if you look at our actual activity and the profiles of the players we've targeted and signed, there's no empirical evidence that any actual change has taken place beyond just lines on an org chart.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.