But we are lucky that it is Newcastle and if he cannot beat Newcastle then he does not deserve to be here I guess.
Would you sack or keep Ole? (Poll reopened)
- Thread starter MrSingh2002
- Start date
- Status
If Poch does become our manager he's going on ignore instantly regardless of how results go
If Poch does become our manager he's going on ignore instantly regardless of how results go
And it would mean City would have a much lesser manager than they currently have.
Though it might mean we make another terrible appointment (seen Hughes tipping Giggsy for the job recently).
The decision makers do worry me if I'm honest.
Anyone who thinks Giggs is the one to be the next manager of Manchester United should be put in a mental hospital.
"Woodward’s shortcomings make it even more important to have a really good coach in place". Taylor absolutely spot on there.
Actually this would fit Woodward's MO perfectly. Club legend, underqualified, too grateful to rock the boat. Protection for his asset stripping operation in other words.
No because they aren't shortcomings. Woodward knows exactly what he's doing. Calling them shortcomings is to miss the big picture.
Nice theory. Of course they are asset stripping. That's the whole point to their ownership. However, spending money wisely is better business, makes for more asset stripping. Competency in key roles will yield more financial and sporting success.
Did we not do Giggs once already?? 
It doesn't matter who the manager is - the outcome will be the same.
We will never win the league while The Glazers own the club.
We managed it with the greatest manager of all time in charge - but we won't with mere mortals at the helm.
We will never win the league while The Glazers own the club.
We managed it with the greatest manager of all time in charge - but we won't with mere mortals at the helm.
Did we not do Giggs once already??
yes he got the gig one time.
Haha. Yeah, I know. Was taking the piss.
Simple. We just have to have the best manager in the league then. Like most clubs that win the title do.
The common denominator among recent title winning clubs is not necessarily having the best manager (although don't get me wrong, it does help) - but in fact one thing they all have in common is they're not in £500m+ debt.
This is really something that we need to wrap our minds and come to terms with as a fanbase. Woody has done a below par job as our CEO and chief negotiator and whatever the hell else he does. We should have more football people involved in the decision making of the club. We should be run as a football club not a corporate entity. We should have some clear direction on where we want to go as a football club. I'm not going to say any of those things are not true. However, the crux of the matter is that no matter how much we agitate, Woody is going nowhere. Even if we judge his job to be below par, by whatever metrics the Glazers use to judge him, he is doing his job to their liking, and nothing we do will change that.
The only solution going forward as it is right now, as said here, is to get managers/coaches that are as good as possible, so as to mitigate the deficiencies in other areas. It's not ideal, but it's the situation that we find ourselves in, and moaning about what it should and 'Woody out' isn't going to get us heading in any sort of positive direction.
And I will repeat this one more time. As Manchester United fans, we should know above all else just how important the right manager is. Our club has been successful under two managers, with a load of not very much between them. We need the best/second best/third best manager in the league to compete. That's always been the case anyway.
The only time in the last 7 years or so that you could say the PL winning club didn't have one of the three best managers in the league was when Leicester won it. Being in debt hasn't stopped us from spending a ridiculous amount of money on players.
I don’t get how it being in debt helps to be honest? Real Madrid have pretty much been in debt since I’ve known football. I’ve witnessed them win 5 Champions League titles.
I’m going to say that the manager is more important and our chances of finishing higher than City increase I’d we swap managers regardless of debt. I don’t think it matters if we swapped debt positions.
We were talking about THE best manager in the league though, not "top three" - that wasn't the criteria.
Their debt owed to banks is very small compared to ours and let's remember their debt is due to actual investments in the club, not due to a leveraged buyout.
Thats nice but my point is it has sweet fa to do with us not winning the league.
There were times when Sir Alex was manager that we lost the league to the second/third best manager in the league. I would say having one of the top three managers in the league is what you need to win it.
Being in debt isn't the issue. Not spending money isn't the issue - because we've spent money. Being badly ran resulted in four successive bad managerial appointments - a bunch of has been and never will be's. That's it.
I believe football teams have a good chance of doing well if they have one of two - a great coach or great management (CEO, DOF or whatever). We didn't have either in the last seven years. We're not going to change when it comes to how the club is being ran, unfortunately. So we need to get a managerial appointment right in order to have a chance.
I believe football teams have a good chance of doing well if they have one of two - a great coach or great management (CEO, DOF or whatever). We didn't have either in the last seven years. We're not going to change when it comes to how the club is being ran, unfortunately. So we need to get a managerial appointment right in order to have a chance.
And yet Ed must know he is unqualified to made football decisions, only financial ones. So must the Glazers. So why is he being allowed to if it's costing money?
Answer...it isnt. It is making money.
Absolutely. May I also add that I think too much consideration is given by the club management to the so called pundits in some of their decision making. They have all appointed managers on this after the sacking of Moyes.
I also think the management is not strong enough to withstand the buffeting and only is reactive instead of being proactive.
I personally don't believe that Woodward is going to buy a player that the manager is refusing. He could very well reject to buy a player that the manager wants depending on the financial circumstances.
So Maguire is an Ole purchase. He is suitable for a Jose team but not to a team that plays a high line.
We need a top class coach to make our players play to their full potential. Not newbie coaches without any experience in a top club.
That's the right question. But I'm sure there's a different answer. Referring to my previous post, they'll always make money, but being sensible will make them more money.
This. Ed is a moron, but people forget who our board is at this point - they are even more clueless, bigger morons. They don't fully realize what Ed is doing to this club and how much more money club can be making. Besides - if United keeps being shit long- term, how many of its global fans are going to stick around? Local, die-hard fans are only enough for a club of the size of Everton even that a maybe. Apologies for a harsh truth but it is what it is.
Honestly, myself - I have never entertained changing my love and loyalty to this club despite all the shit we've been through this past 7 years. But I am afraid that if this clueless clown sucks Ole - that will be the final straw for me. I can't watch this circus forever. I will always love United but it will be more of a melancholic love of a has-been. I have no desire to closely follow and support United if Ole needs to pay for Ed's feck ups (+replace "Ole", in that sentence, with all future managers, as long as Glazers and Woodwards own this club)
I hope the rumors are just a dirty PR campaign (albeit most likely coming from Ed)
But they spend money on players. We simply happen to buy the wrong players and pay them ridiculous wages. Being in debt is not the problem. We service our debts. It is the footballing side that is wrong. Wrong people making the wrong decisions. Getting Ole in the first place as the permanent manager was the wrong starting point.
He was appointed as a caretaker manager and even now I still see him as a caretaker manager. Obviously we knew his managerial career so I can't get angry at him, this is probably the best that he can do.
Last edited:
Whatever way you look at it, I think Mauricio Pochettino will be Manchester United manager.
But.... but United way and DNA and all that jazz...
That is my opinion as well. We all know that the structure is rotten to the core, so the best we can hope for is the best manager available who gets the maximum out of this bunch and has maybe at least a small say about players going in and out.
I have said this at least once before, but i think its wort repeating for some context
In 2017 i was on a flight to Manchester and sat next to some guy in his 40's from Molde. He was on his way to Liverpool, but despite that he was a decent bloke and we of course got talking about football. He claimed to be good mates with Daniel Berg Hestad who is a "Molde legend" but also was club captain there for most of his career and of course played under Ole there. Anyways this guy claimed that Ole was not a "handa on coach" at all. He would of course have a plan/vision for how he wanted the team to play, did the team talks and stuff like that, but the training sessions themselves he was very little involved in. Either he was just observing and a lot of the times he was not even present. Now of course this was just some bloke on a plane, but i dont understand why he would lie about it
Anyways, i dont really know if our coaches are good or not and i honestly cant tell if we are badly coached or not. During our winning run post lockdown we looked well drilled and organized and this season we look like we never have even played football. Football is not that mechanical so i dont get how people can be so certain in this whole "coaching is the sole reason we are shite" explanation.
Want all of Fergie's disciples as far away from the club as possible. Has to be a good example for the younger ones on why you never model yourself after the 1%. Seems they also want to emulate Fergie's intangibles while retaining his weaknesses
I think the wrong starting point started way before we hired Ole.
The last couple of years SAF was here the writing was on the wall regarding poor planning and lack of knowledge in the transfer market coupled with average negotiating skills.
Ole isn't the problem - he's the best managerial appointment we've had since SAF and deserves more time and credit for what he is trying to do.
Truth is - under the current structure of the club whoever we appoint has no chance. Not a single iota of a chance of success.
We are run so poorly - we are simply getting by on past glory and reputation only. We aren't a very competitive football club in todays terms. Thats not on Ole - Thats on the owners and they're vision of the club
Why are we run poorly that our managers are incapable of succeeding on the pitch?
Oles actually the manager who would struggle by far the most under a DOF/Sporting Director if it is to be believed he leaves the coaching to the likes of Carrick and McKenna.
Any director of football would be asking him, what the feck is his role then? Because if we do change structure, transfer activity/squad make up would be under a DOFs remit. If Carrick and McKenna are the guys in charge of the training ground, what is Ole bringing to the picture?
So Woodward/board got the managerial appointment right according to you. So he is competent in that department. He makes the club a lot of money so he is competent in that department as well.
The only issue you seem to have is not buying players. Is that the case?
Fair enough this squad is unlikely to win the league but it definitely should get 3rd.
Isn't that obvious? Doesnt warrant a reply IMO
- Status