Has there been anything said about this or has this term just been used when the new hierarchy has been referred to, and how this is something new? Even Erik is using the term now, whereas before he used "philosophy". Have they adapted to his vision, is he adapting to theirs, is there a clear unified vision that is being worked towards?
What is United's "game model" ?
- Thread starter Bastian
- Start date
Not seen a model or philosophy in the 2+ years he has been here. It feels more like swimming up for a breathe than anything else.
United game model has always been "play the ball forward". Ferdinand, Carrick, Giggs, Scholes, Van Persie have openly talk about that. And thats what represent the United culture.
At the moment it seems like it’s running around like a bunch of headless chickens.
That's the United DNA™, and even if that's the game model, it has not been stated by Erik nor any of the footballing execs at the club has it?
Vibes and moments. The latter are becoming increasingly rare though.
Trust the process
- Caring: give points to the opponents with worse squads. We are part of the community and should act like one
- Transparent: tell details about your game plan in press conference and post match interviews
- Performance Metrics: Use statistics to explain past performances and then do nothing about it and sack the data scientist
- Adaptability: to never have a pattern of play or playstyle. Surprise the opponent. Play 1-1-8 formation, 4-3-3 with no width, or 5-4-1 ala Moyes' Everton. The imagination is endless
- Mentorship Opportunities: Offer people that are incompetent at the job who have failed to meet expectations opportunities after opportunities. We have the best in class executives that are able to provide mentorship
https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5794187/2024/10/06/manchester-united-ten-hag-game-model/
there's more at the link, but I'm not sure if I'm allowed to post the whole thing
there's more at the link, but I'm not sure if I'm allowed to post the whole thing
Unknown. Ducker reported that Wilcox was going to develop one but nothing has been reported on its contents or how much progress has been made so far.
Put in 3 shit performances, let it linger, put in decent performance. Rinse and repeat.
Cheers for that (was not aware Anka had posed that question) . I don't think you are allowed to post the whole thing but these workarounds have been accepted: https://archive.ph/UEeM8
In terms of Erik he's said contradictory things in terms of what he actually wants from the team. Now he's playing Dalot in that inverted role which is absolutely terrible for Martinez and likely part of his bad form and also for Rashford, while another less mobile player like Eriksen tends to take up the left back spot on the halfway line to collect the ball while Dalot is somewhere in a crowd of players. The most damning part is us conceding 7 of 8 in the league from our left side.
What I'm interested to know is since this "game model" jargon started to be pushed, which in essence is just the vision for our style of play, has there been anything said about it? What it is?
Erik came in with the expectation that he'd somehow make us a more possession dominant team that would press from the front and be quick passing. He obviously inherited a team that was nowhere near capable for that so of course he was going to need time and then last season if we allow for almost all of it to be explained by the injury absences of key players (I'm not saying it should be) then the sample size of what we've got is this season with the absolute only caveat being that he doesn't have a left back - hence the nightmare situation described above - and in terms of the early matches it hinted at higher and more effective pressing (with Mount and Bruno effectively playing as a pair of false nines), winning the ball more often in the opposition's third, and higher chance creation (which the players have really squandered to a magnificent degree and deserve a special praise for fluffing so many great opportunities to get footholds in matches or get matches over the line).
But for the hierarchy, I don't think I've seen anything from them directly or indirectly about how United should play and the players bought this summer also do not seem to me to be a coherent collection of players.
Press to try and get ball turned over and rush forward in overwhelming numbers and hopefully score. Unfortunately, if we don't score, then hope your central defenders can cope with the inevitable counter attack in which they are vastly outnumbered.
Erik said he wants United to be the best transition team in the world, it is relatioanted to the "United DNA"... Two years later we are far from it.
Buy high, sell low.
The ability of every footballer at this club shall plummet far below the potential they had before playing for us.
Is this another wanky football phrase I have to learn?
Impeccable vibes though.
ten percent luck, twenty percent skill
Fifteen percent concentrated power of will
Five percent pleasure, fifty percent pain
Fifteen percent concentrated power of will
Five percent pleasure, fifty percent pain
Ten percent Hag
One percent Hag!
winning, attacking, entertaining football
I remember those words used in an article about Wilcox who is supposed to oversee implementation of a coherent style throughout age groups.
I admit there was a good amount of entertaining games, mostly for neutrals though.
I remember those words used in an article about Wilcox who is supposed to oversee implementation of a coherent style throughout age groups.
I admit there was a good amount of entertaining games, mostly for neutrals though.
Accurate because it's been painful.
And a hundred percent reason to turn off the game
Swashbuckle football without a sword.
At the moment it's get the ball out to the left winger which is either Rashford or Garnacho and we rely on them to cut in on their right and have a shot at goal.
Not a coached team and we never have patterns of play in the final 3rd.
Not a coached team and we never have patterns of play in the final 3rd.
No one knows yet. Ugarte's profile is interesting through as I assume it means they do not want super high positional possession.
Obviously what Ineos want and what TH provides is miles apart. With the above manager appointments I would expect that when TH is sacked, then the next manager will show the vision of the club. I would expect it to be an hybrid of City now, due to Barrada/ Wilcox connection and how we used to play under Fergie, as how JR wants us to play. So a fast possession play with wing play and CF concoction.
I think it's a central concept to the new leadership, since they're trying to modernise the structure at United and make us more in line with what everyone else is doing. It seems like a lot of the forward thinking clubs now have a set of overarching principles outlining how to attack and defend, which then filters through to recruitment, coaching, fitness, perhaps even sports psychology and so on.
I suspect that's the main reason Ten Hag is referring to it explicitly. Kind of like how a lot people will adopt the language of a new manager in other walks of life to at least make them think that you're on board with their ideas. I'm sure he meets with Ashworth, Wilcox and so on and has been actively involved in outlining the content of the game model, but I get the feeling that he is still mainly following his own ideas underneath it all. Maybe he has adjusting them slightly to be able to defend his decisions upstairs within the context of what they've agreed on. But I don't really think they're aligned in the way they probably would be if INEOS had hired their own manager. The power of his current contract and whole situation in the summer of botching the recruitment of his replacement has probably made for a pretty strained working relationship I would imagine.
I don't think we have any real information about the content of the game model, or at least I don't remember hearing or reading anything about it. I actually considered writing into the Talk of the Devils podcast to ask Carl Anka about this, since he keeps mentioning the game model too, and I would really like to know more about it. Like, is it in line with traditional thinking about the vaunted 'United way', and if they're doing this to emulate the succes of our rivals, how unique would the content really be? If you look at City, it doesn't look to me like they set up a game model independently of Guardiolas ideas. It always seemed to me like they were recruiting and shaping their playstyle in order to get the club ready for him to arrive, and then his ideas have been at the center of whay they've done ever since.
I was thinking that something could possibly be deduced from the signings made this summer or any observable and consistent changes to the way we play. This is all just based on my own perception, so keep that in mind, but maybe something like...
Of course the game model doesn't really work, when you don't have a coach that can implement the tactics that it requires or have the players needed to execute them.
So we're intense and vertical, but we lose the ball constantly by playing terrible passes at the wrong time or trying too quickly to play in behind. This creates a kind of yoyo effect that quickly drains our players mentally and physically by constantly switching between being in and out of possession.
We play a physically demanding style, but a lot of our players aren't really up to the levels required, so we get lots of injuries and also tire out way before the game is over. We don't have enough fast and physical players yet that can play in the first team.
We bravely commit our players forward and try the complicated, audacious combinations or finishes, leaving us completely exposed to counter attacks when we inevitably lose the ball. With a suspect rest defence setup and players incapable of keeping up with fast attackers we basically offer the opponent a free highway to our goal a lot of the time.
And we run around pressing our opponents, but it's not coordinated properly and we don't play a sufficiently compact shape. So there is too much time and space for the opposing team to work their way through us.
I suspect that's the main reason Ten Hag is referring to it explicitly. Kind of like how a lot people will adopt the language of a new manager in other walks of life to at least make them think that you're on board with their ideas. I'm sure he meets with Ashworth, Wilcox and so on and has been actively involved in outlining the content of the game model, but I get the feeling that he is still mainly following his own ideas underneath it all. Maybe he has adjusting them slightly to be able to defend his decisions upstairs within the context of what they've agreed on. But I don't really think they're aligned in the way they probably would be if INEOS had hired their own manager. The power of his current contract and whole situation in the summer of botching the recruitment of his replacement has probably made for a pretty strained working relationship I would imagine.
I don't think we have any real information about the content of the game model, or at least I don't remember hearing or reading anything about it. I actually considered writing into the Talk of the Devils podcast to ask Carl Anka about this, since he keeps mentioning the game model too, and I would really like to know more about it. Like, is it in line with traditional thinking about the vaunted 'United way', and if they're doing this to emulate the succes of our rivals, how unique would the content really be? If you look at City, it doesn't look to me like they set up a game model independently of Guardiolas ideas. It always seemed to me like they were recruiting and shaping their playstyle in order to get the club ready for him to arrive, and then his ideas have been at the center of whay they've done ever since.
I was thinking that something could possibly be deduced from the signings made this summer or any observable and consistent changes to the way we play. This is all just based on my own perception, so keep that in mind, but maybe something like...
- Intensity in attack. We play fast, physically demanding and vertical football that is supposed to put the opponent on the back foot, and when we lose the ball we aggressively try to recover it. When the team isn't flailing totally or using game specific tactics (like Aston Villa away), I think there is some evidence of this in the way we try to pass the ball quickly, use a lot one touch wall-passes to bypass pressing attempts and often try to get in behind the opposition by playing over the midfield and into the channels to exploit a high line.
- Risk brings reward. We commit players forward and encourage our attackers to shoot and attempt creative solutions in the final third instead of being more patient. We're also seeing a lot of our players staying high when we have the ball, leaving progression up field to our goalkeeper, defenders and a single pivot.
- Dominance in and out of possession. We are looking to control the game through possession and actively attempt to press and harry the opponent, when we don't have the ball. I haven't looked at the numbers, but I think we would be considered a pressing team in most of the games we have played this season and the last one.
Of course the game model doesn't really work, when you don't have a coach that can implement the tactics that it requires or have the players needed to execute them.
So we're intense and vertical, but we lose the ball constantly by playing terrible passes at the wrong time or trying too quickly to play in behind. This creates a kind of yoyo effect that quickly drains our players mentally and physically by constantly switching between being in and out of possession.
We play a physically demanding style, but a lot of our players aren't really up to the levels required, so we get lots of injuries and also tire out way before the game is over. We don't have enough fast and physical players yet that can play in the first team.
We bravely commit our players forward and try the complicated, audacious combinations or finishes, leaving us completely exposed to counter attacks when we inevitably lose the ball. With a suspect rest defence setup and players incapable of keeping up with fast attackers we basically offer the opponent a free highway to our goal a lot of the time.
And we run around pressing our opponents, but it's not coordinated properly and we don't play a sufficiently compact shape. So there is too much time and space for the opposing team to work their way through us.
I think there is a game model. But also believe the manager forgets to:
Python:
erik manage.py makemigrations
erik manage.py migrateYep.
Of all the signings we made this summer, that perhaps offers the best steer in terms of the direction going forward. Because we know it was a club-led signing, and we know Ugarte's incompatability with the sort of approach someone like Enrique takes.
Though thinking of most of the managers being mentioned on this forum in terms of potential successors to ETH, I'm not sure how many it actually rules out.
Who the hell knows, one week we are pushing really high and leaving a 1 man midfield to leave us completely wide open and the next week we are parking the bus, it's not and hasn't been sustainable.
Wing play. Hit it to the wing and let the wingers cut in and shoot.
It really isn't. It's a very simple concept and once all clubs are doing or will move towards because it makes recruitment so much easier.
It doesn't mean you will suddenly become good, but it puts a lot more structure into place for a) which incoming players will have the best chance of succeeding and b) which players might seem good on paper but won't be a tactical fit.
Berrada leaves it to Ashworth. Ashworth pushes it to Wilcox. Wilcox hopes ETH get it right. ETH is clueless and can't believe that he is still in the job.
The model I can see now is that Onana takes 5 mins to play a simple pass to Martinez. Martinez then walk with the ball and make a short pass to De Ligt. Rinse and repeat. Keep doing that even though when we are chasing game. No urgency at all. Our attack is too predictable. Our midfield and defence are prone to counter attack or players can run straight through.
The model I can see now is that Onana takes 5 mins to play a simple pass to Martinez. Martinez then walk with the ball and make a short pass to De Ligt. Rinse and repeat. Keep doing that even though when we are chasing game. No urgency at all. Our attack is too predictable. Our midfield and defence are prone to counter attack or players can run straight through.
You say it is a simple concept but yet so few clubs did it, why is that?
I'm not sure you understand what it is though from the last paragraph, ETH is a legacy pre Ineos manager so a) they did not choose him and b) it would not really matter what he wanted, he is now a head coach not the manager. There is also every chance that Wilcox is not as great as he is made out to be. I do not put much stock in this side of it though, i.e. I could literally be hired and simply list the buzzwords 'high press, aggressive, attacking, use youth players etc.' but it would not actually mean anything.
The part that is not hot air though is that once the model is defined, especially with all the huge scouting databases being built out, the recruitment side of things should be far more accurate. There will be strict profiles for every position and no more scattergun signings. That part also helps a lot more with how you then develop youth players as well.
“If we have the players available”. That’s a never ending caveat right there