Would Roberto Mancini be a good short term fix?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Van Piorsing said:
Short term fixes are good for Glazers and conglomerate, as they can offer you another short term fix after the previous one fails.

That way we'll legitimise them for offering the solution for problem they created in the first place, every 3 years.
Click to expand...

stop hiding behind this, they won't back ole with 500M if top 4 is all they want.

Imagine how much money they can save by employing a better manager, cheaper than Ole. They might not be the smartest head on the block but this "they're happy with top 4" needs to stop becoming an excuse to safe ole.
 
Sky1981 said:
Brenda
Mancini
Potter
etc

Aren't half bad

But the biggest questions, and this is what annoys me with all the "what about X" type of thread is that.... Why settle for 5th or 6th best when we can just go for the best available candidate???

It's not like we can't afford the best and have to wheel and deal, aim for the top priority. If that man happens to be Ten Haag then so be it, offer him the world if necessary. Why do we need to short term fix things that we can fix properly? What's the point?
Click to expand...
Who would you say that is? Even Ten Hag (assuming that’s who you mean) is hardly a guaranteed instant hit.
 
I thought it said Roberto Martinez and was about to fume. I like Mancini but I don't think the board want someone short term.
 
Sky1981 said:
stop hiding behind this, they won't back ole with 500M if top 4 is all they want.

Imagine how much money they can save by employing a better manager, cheaper than Ole. They might not be the smartest head on the block but this "they're happy with top 4" needs to stop becoming an excuse to safe ole.
Click to expand...
It's not their money to begin with, so they'll throw as much as they can to shut us up in the summer. Imagine how much money they can save by employing a better manager, cheaper than Ole ? We're still waiting on a better manager to happen after 4 failed appointments.

They're getting money in dividents, not by paying less for a manager. Saving money was never their modus operandi, as they still operate in huge debt and will for next 10 years.
 
DWelbz19 said:
Who would you say that is? Even Ten Hag (assuming that’s who you mean) is hardly a guaranteed instant hit.
Click to expand...

Nobody is guaranteed anything, but a 90% probability of success is better than 50%

They might fail at the last hurdle, stopped at Final or Semi, or slip near the 36th game. But over the course of hundreds games quality doesn't lie.

Nobody knows the future, but Ten Haag is a safer bet than Ole fecking Solsksjaer who failed at Cardiff
 
Van Piorsing said:
It's not their money to begin with, so they'll throw as much as they can to shut us up in the summer. Imagine how much money they can save by employing a better manager, cheaper than Ole ? We're still waiting on a better manager to happen after 4 failed appointments.

They're getting money in dividents, not by paying less for a manager. Saving money was never their modus operandi, as they still operate in huge debt and will for next 10 years.
Click to expand...

You're contradicting yourself all over the post. I don't even know where to begin
 
Sky1981 said:
Nobody is guaranteed anything, but a 90% probability of success is better than 50%

They might fail at the last hurdle, stopped at Final or Semi, or slip near the 36th game. But over the course of hundreds games quality doesn't lie.

Nobody knows the future, but Ten Haag is a safer bet than Ole fecking Solsksjaer who failed at Cardiff
Click to expand...
No doubt — but I don’t think Ten Hag is any more guaranteed than Poch/Rodgers et al. I mean, he’s probably my first pick out of what’s left (Conte was my ideal man and I don’t think Zidane is an option) — but even still I’m not 100% convinced.
 
All a bit pointless when there is no vacancy at Old Trafford. I dont know what is more disgraceful. The abjectly passive performance against City or the fact Villa can take action over poor results before we do. And in terms of our standing in world football and money spent Ole's showing this season is way way below that of the departing Dean Smith.

Things are so dire and depressing i would actually rather see Mourinho back, knowing that Pogba will soon be departing Manchester, than put up with the continual ineptitude of our coaching set up.
 
DWelbz19 said:
No doubt — but I don’t think Ten Hag is any more guaranteed than Poch/Rodgers et al. I mean, he’s probably my first pick out of what’s left (Conte was my ideal man and I don’t think Zidane is an option) — but even still I’m not 100% convinced.
Click to expand...

Rodgers are guaranteed to be medicore among the best managers though

Poch still has an unknown quality at Spurs, but his less than brimming tenure at PSG tells alot.

With Ten Haag at least we still haven't figure out his ceiling.

I'd say he's 70-90 appointment, with Guardiola a high 85-95 so I'd take him more than Rodgers who I rate as 65-75 range manager.
 
DWelbz19 said:
None of the international managers that are worth looking at — Luis Enrique; Flick; maybe Mancini — are going to leave a year before the World Cup.
Click to expand...
This. I don't understand why these names keep getting brought up. All three have a good chance of winning football's biggest prize one year from now.
 
Yeah, I voted for him in the next manager thread. Short term if he’s crap and long term if he’s good. No point deciding he’s short term before he even starts.

Don’t think we’ll get him but he is the best fit out there IMO apart from the City link. But I don’t personally care much about that (as long as he wins). I also like Bielsa but he’s a bit too weird.
 
Mancini wont be leaving the Italian NT to come here right now, thats for certain.
 
Mancini is actually one of the worst picks club could possibly make. It seems to me that people really don't follow football all that much, saying he is different than Conte in terms of style and character and wanting to praise him by that actually.

Mancini has been managerial failure ever since winning title with City in 2012. Up until Italy job, he was actually Mourinho 2 in every way possible, unlike Conte who is unfairly compared to Mourinho.

And Mancini has stirred fighting with board and players almost everywhere he worked. But players even more than the board.

How he reinvented himself in Italy role is amazing, but that was also said about van Gaal in his Netherlands role, and we know how it ended up.

Mancini is one of the most difficult characters to work with in the whole world of football, and he's been that for years. He's become a different person in his Italy stint, but I'm really not sure it's smart to judge someone based on that alone.
 
Said for 8 years now that he is one of the few that would guarantee you success. Hopefully not
 
He'd be a good short or long term fit if it weren't for the world cup.

No chance he'd leave international football for 6 months to manage us then go back right before Qatar, would be ridiculous and the Italian FA would never allow it.
 
Going for Mancini as an interim manager while focusing long-term on Ten Haag is like working it out in the tropical sea while planning to climb Mount Everest.

The club should have a clear vision of what they want long-term. Adopting a strategy now that's opposite to what the manager in the Summer envisions will do more harm than good.

Plus, the World Cup issue completely rules out this move. Might as well close this thread.
 
At this point I wouldn't mind Moyes either, I just want Ole and whole class of 92 and ex players charade to get lost and leave the club and supporters alone.
 
DWelbz19 said:
No doubt — but I don’t think Ten Hag is any more guaranteed than Poch/Rodgers et al. I mean, he’s probably my first pick out of what’s left (Conte was my ideal man and I don’t think Zidane is an option) — but even still I’m not 100% convinced.
Click to expand...

Don't think any managers are any more guaranteed than others these days tbh, especially with how competitive EPL are, but at least shows us some actual tactical acumen and clear vision that can be seen on the pitch. If there's clear progress on the pitch don't think most of the fans are gonna complain this much

And most importantly, the board needs to make decisions quickly if things are not working, all 4 managers after Sir Alex are given too long imo.
 
He won't be the worst but for me the older generation managers are now better International managers.

We see this with the France manager, Van Gaal, Mancini and I'm sure there are some others.

It's why I think Jose will be a quite a good International manager - the old aspect of him won't be felt on an International level.
 
He would be my 2nd choice behind Ten Haag, as awesome as Pep has been at City those Mancini city sides played the best football in recent premier league history and the Job he has done at Italy is insane. It would be incredibly hard to get him away from Italy during a World Cup year
 
acnumber9 said:
Four league titles and six domestic cups?
Click to expand...

3 of those league title was during the calciopoli time, when Juventus was relegated and other clubs had points docked. It was a Auto win with Roma as challengers.

His second stint at Inter was very poor. He did great job for National team but then it's not same as club football.
 
Would take but there's no way he'd take up any job before the worldcup.
Our best bet is an short term manager till the worldcup and then go for him or Enrique, but if anyone is available after this season, we should be alert to it.
 
This thread feels pointless, given Mancini's got the opportunity to become a World Cup and Euros winning manager next year. There is no way in a million years he is going to be a caretaker manager at United this season, let's face it.
 
FeedTheGoat said:
Said for 8 years now that he is one of the few that would guarantee you success. Hopefully not
Click to expand...

He won't guarantee anything, only managers who are at that level are Pep and Klopp, maybe Conte too.
 
TrustInJanuzaj said:
Mancini is nothing like Conte. He’s got a good head of hair for a start. Also plays much more attacking football. Mancini would be brilliant, as would Louis Enrique but I can’t see us getting an international manager before the World Cup is played.
Click to expand...
Yeh, I’d take Mancini in a heartbeat…
 
Mancini vs Conte

Similarities

There's no doubt that work ethic, tactical discipline and a solid defense is the basis of both manager. Its basically the ethos of every Italian manager of that generation. Mancini is far more stable then Conte but won't shy away from going hard on areas he think that are not good enough even publicly. He did so during his time at City.

Differences as a player.

First of all it comes from their upbringing. Conte joined Juventus at age 22. Once retired he returned as their manager before he hit 50 years of age. The guy was raised in environment were second best is unacceptable. Character wise Conte was always a boy scout. Lippi would say that he was the only player he never had to explained tactics to. Conte knew what needed to be done and had the tactical awareness to do it. Mancini's career was different. First of all he was a no 10. It was one of the few positions were a player was allowed to express himself in a creative way. Secondly he always played in an underdog team whether its Sampdoria, Lazio or Bologna. Mancini was also a bit of a rebel. His prank on Sacchi costed him the WC of 92. If I had to compare the two it would be like comparing Keane to Bruno.

Difference as a manager.

Conte's career is divided in two. In the early part he managed small fry clubs. The stakes were low there and he stood out of the limelight. Then he moved to the top league and never looked back. That's were his uncompromising nature and his reluctance to accept second best could shine and in sometimes lead to self destruction.

Mancini's career was different. He started with Fiorentina and then moved to Lazio. These are ambitious clubs with high expectations, tough fan base and small budgets to work with. Fiorentina in particular was a nightmare. They were in deep financial crisis, they were selling their top players left right and center and sometimes they didn't had money to pay the manager.

Thus made Mancini more adaptable and compromising then Conte, which surprisingly played against him. Mancini was in fact one of the few managers in football to get sacked despite winning 3 Serie A league titles on a row and would go on for most of his career having to look at his shoulder (whether its Mourinho's or Pellegrini's shadow)

Conclusion

Conte is a far bigger name then Mancini and tactically he's better. However I find Mancini to be more suited for us then Conte is. First of all he's adaptable. He can play various formations (4-4-2, 4-3-3, 4-2-3-1 etc). Secondly his default formation (4-3-3) suits our game better then Conte's 3-5-2 system. That means that players like Sancho, Rashy and co can still have a great career with us in their natural role. Mancini is more board friendly then Conte but he's no yes man. He criticized City in public and he left Galatasaray when they didn't kept their word regarding the club's transfer policy. On top of that he's not afraid of giving a chance to young players. Under him the likes of Zaniolo and Tonali were given their national debut before making their debut in the Serie A.

Mancini can't care less about money. However if we sell him a great project then he'll probably take the job.
 
Is it just me or does anyone else want nothing to do with anyone that has been involved with Citeh or Liverpool?
 
red thru&thru said:
Well Conte's team also attack and score goals. Look at Inter last season. But it's clear that the 352 just wouldn't be adopted at United.
Click to expand...
Now we got a norwegian knockoff trying to implement 352 to save his dear job
 
Sviken said:
I think Gary is full of shit and is just protecting his mate. He'd have sacked Solskjaer 50 times if he was in charge of Salford. Remind me how many years Guardiola spent in his previous clubs? He spent 3 years at Bayern and 4 years at his beloved Barcelona. Both he left because he clashed with the owners. The only raeson he's stayed at City for so long is because they've basically laid the entire set-up for him, his friends are there and he as unlimited money to do what he wants. Managers are always gonna stay at the club they are happy at, no matter if it is Conte or Pep or whoever. The reason Conte left Juve and Inter is absolutely sensible. Imagine a club wanting to sell all your best players you fought so hard to get? You think Pep or Zidane are gonna stay in that situation? Zidane left Madrid twice because of disagreements with Perez.

We have to stop with the absurd notion that any manager that comes here first has to agree to be long-term appointment or else he's not hired. There's no such policy at any other top club. Managers are judged by their performances. If they perform, they can stay as long as they like. If they don't, they're shown the door. We're the only club stuck in the last century still waiting for the next Busby or the next SAF to lead us to the promised land. No such thing is ever going to happen by us looking at it. It might happen randomly, but never as a goal. I can assure you that SAF didn't come here with the idea of staying here close to 30 years, that's for sure. It's also funny to me when people say Mou left us in a state of havoc and chaos. Well, what state is Ole leaving us in? Roses and sunshines?

As for Mancini, he's not leaving the WC so even discussing his appointment is pointless. Might as well say that Guardiola or Klopp would be good short term fixes or something. It's about as realistic.
Click to expand...
I think that Solksjaer should have been sacked yesterday,so I completely disagree with Gary about giving him more time.But however I do agree with him when he says that Contes not a good fit at United.I would take Pochettino over Conte every day of the week….
 
Status
Not open for further replies.