Manchester United Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread - 2013/14

UnitedIrishman

Swear to god, if we don't sign anyone this transfer window I might just go all Full Metal Jacket on Eyeore.

Leftist

it's not happening. woodward will drag his heels on the costs. Try to hammer out 2m a year for 20 years or something stupid.

GavRedKing

RobertKK wrote: »

If it is upto Jose Mourinho, then United have a great chance of signing Mata.

The main reasons - he gets rid of a player he doesn't want for lots of money, he gets to help out a club he wants to manage sometime in his career - who can also put a test upto his main title contenders if they get the confidence, form and injured players back.

It is a win/win/win for all three parties involved - the two clubs and the player.

Ye've better chance of Roman buying out the Glazers then Jose rocking up at Old Trafford in the next decade.

RobertKK

Leftist wrote: »

it's not happening. woodward will drag his heels on the costs. Try to hammer out 2m a year for 20 years or something stupid.

Woodward is under pressure too like Moyes. Ed has been great at generating the cash at United with the sponsor deals, but he is under pressure like Moyes to deliver top players - who in themselves help generate more cash.

Woodward needs this deal as badly as Moyes does.

Lord TSC

Yeah, I think the dream of Jose at United is gone now tbh.

Anyway, I get excited everytime I log on and see this topic, the Chelsea one and the transfer topic bumped, hoping to see some good news :P

kstand

If Jose was ever going to manage United it would have been when Fergie stepped down. It'll never happen now.

Leftist

RobertKK wrote: »

Woodward is under pressure too like Moyes. Ed has been great at generating the cash at United with the sponsor deals, but he is under pressure like Moyes to deliver top players - who in themselves help generate more cash.

Woodward needs this deal as badly as Moyes does.

i hope you are right but i have no faith in him.

with gill you had someone who could negotiate fees for football players with football clubs. Obviously he had to learn how to get there but his behavior was to conduct these matters as quietly as possible. For a club trying to buy big but avoid competition with large sum bidders, it's common sense.

woodward has no football backround, it's one thing bidding for a deal for mr. potato, it's another thing entirely for a footballer and why does all these stories keep getting leaked?

RobertKK

GavRedKing wrote: »

Ye've better chance of Roman buying out the Glazers then Jose rocking up at Old Trafford in the next decade.

I think Jose will want to show his nomadic ways are over at Chelsea this time and will only leave if sacked by Roman.

It is his nomadic ways which went against him for the United job. Jose needs a long term stint at Stamford Bridge to be in contention in the future for a job he clearly wanted.
btw I think it is good for Chelsea if Roman leaves Jose to buy and sell the players he wants, as it can only be good for the team, and this could lead to a long term stint at the club this time.

I agree with you apart from the Glazers selling out to Roman :P

RobertKK

Leftist wrote: »

i hope you are right but i have no faith in him.

with gill you had someone who could negotiate fees for football players with football clubs. Obviously he had to learn how to get there but his behavior was to conduct these matters as quietly as possible. For a club trying to buy big but avoid competition with large sum bidders, it's common sense.

woodward has no football backround, it's one thing bidding for a deal for mr. potato, it's another thing entirely for a footballer and why does all these stories keep getting leaked?

Transfer stories always get leaked, there are very few surprises these days, the age of the internet has changed things.

Soldie

How I feel right now:



How I'll feel if Utd pull off the deal:



How I'll feel if the deal falls through:

GavRedKing

RobertKK wrote: »

I think Jose will want to show his nomadic ways are over at Chelsea this time and will only leave if sacked by Roman.

It is his nomadic ways which went against him for the United job. Jose needs a long term stint at Stamford Bridge to be in contention in the future for a job he clearly wanted.
btw I think it is good for Chelsea if Roman leaves Jose to buy and sell the players he wants, as it can only be good for the team, and this could lead to a long term stint at the club this time.

I agree with you apart from the Glazers selling out to Roman :P

He should be here to stay but Roman is nigh on impossible to predict, I'm willing to bet had it being Chelsea in Utds position, a manager would have been on the dole by now but thats the difference in the clubs and its something hopefully bringing Jose back addresses, some medium to long term stability.

Leftist

united had their chance with jose but thanks to sir bobby and alex, they choose someone they expected to be at the club for 10 years +.

What other top sides in europe have a manager for long term anymore?

none of them. it's not the 1980s anymore but sir bobby and alex wish it was, so instead of bringing in someone who can help make the club a great success, they chose someone who will stick about for a while.

grandad romanticism.

keane2097

supersean1999 wrote: »

Did you ever hear the way Fergie bought Cantona. The good old days where two managers are talking and he asked about him in conversation. No need for 25 agents and cling ons

Didn't work out too well for Leeds in the end. Not surprising player discussions have a few more failsafes built into them when you consider that deranged transfer.

ericzeking

Leftist wrote: »

united had their chance with jose but thanks to sir bobby and alex, they choose someone they expected to be at the club for 10 years +.

What other top sides in europe have a manager for long term anymore?

none of them. it's not the 1980s anymore but sir bobby and alex wish it was, so instead of bringing in someone who can help make the club a great success, they chose someone who will stick about for a while.

grandad romanticism.

In their opinion, and the opinion of many supporters long term stability breeds success.

It is also in keeping with the traditions of the club.

You wanted a quick fix, some instant gratification, quite a few see the bigger picture, including 2 legends of the club who you have just shamelessly disrespected.

Backstreet Moyes

What's the story with this idea that Mourinho wants the United job. I have read here the last few days some deluded ideas.

Mourinho was all smiles at the United game.
He backed Moyes instead of sticking the knife in like with other clubs.
He could sell Mata to keep good relations with United.

If United wanted Mourinho and if he wanted the United job he would have been here in the summer. This bizzare obsession with some people that Mourinho want's the United job is a bit tedious.

kstand

Didnt Wilinson ring up to enquire about signing Denis Irwin - and then Fergie ask him if Cantona was available after telling him Irwin was not for sale?

Backstreet Moyes

Leftist wrote: »

united had their chance with jose but thanks to sir bobby and alex, they choose someone they expected to be at the club for 10 years +.

What other top sides in europe have a manager for long term anymore?

none of them. it's not the 1980s anymore but sir bobby and alex wish it was, so instead of bringing in someone who can help make the club a great success, they chose someone who will stick about for a while.

grandad romanticism.

You have no idea if United had their chance with Mourinho. It's far more likely bring the person he is he had the goal of winning the Champions League with Chelsea.

TheDoc

Nuts102 wrote: »

What's the story with this idea that Mourinho wants the United job. I have read here the last few days some deluded ideas.

Mourinho was all smiles at the United game.
He backed Moyes instead of sticking the knife in like with other clubs.
He could sell Mata to keep good relations with United.

If United wanted Mourinho and if he wanted the United job he would have been here in the summer. This bizzare obsession with some people that Mourinho want's the United job is a bit tedious.

Agreed. I think the favour Mourinho shows is simply out of respect. He clearly had a close relationship with SAF and there is no real reason for animosity. I think Mourinho reserves that for Liverpool

adox

While the idea of Mata signing is very exciting, he will still be playing under Moyes and his tactics, which is kinda depressing.

I dont think we will see the full potential of this team and squad, no matter who is signed, until we get a new manager in.

I hope I`m completely wrong, Moyes changes tactics completely, the players start believing in him etc, but I just dont see it happening.

Leftist

ericzeking wrote: »

In their opinion, and the opinion of many supporters long term stability breeds success.

It is also in keeping with the traditions of the club.

You wanted a quick fix, some instant gratification, quite a few see the bigger picture, including 2 legends of the club who you have just shamelessly disrespected.

really?

where else in europe has stability bred success in the past 20 years?

It bred success for Alex Ferguson. That's about it. So it's absolute tripe to suggest otherwise.

Also the traditions of the club; two managers, Sir Matt and Alex.

They earned stability and long term employment.

Where's the stability when big ron, sexton or the doc were incharge?

absolute tripe.

tallaghtmick

Leftist wrote: »

really?

where else in europe has stability bred success in the past 20 years?

It bred success for Alex Ferguson. That's about it. So it's absolute tripe to suggest otherwise.

Also the traditions of the club; two managers, Sir Matt and Alex.

They earned stability and long term employment.

Where's the stability when big ron, sexton or the doc were incharge?

absolute tripe.

I liked your post but ill say Arsenal....of a few years ago :pac:

Mitch Connor

Nuts102 wrote: »

What's the story with this idea that Mourinho wants the United job. I have read here the last few days some deluded ideas.

Mourinho was all smiles at the United game.
He backed Moyes instead of sticking the knife in like with other clubs.
He could sell Mata to keep good relations with United.

If United wanted Mourinho and if he wanted the United job he would have been here in the summer. This bizzare obsession with some people that Mourinho want's the United job is a bit tedious.

Mourinho did want United, and for a long time United wanted him. Why Gill/Fergie changed their mind in 2013 I don't know. I thought he was nailed on for the job.

I would strongly doubt that he still wants the job now, given how things have panned out, but I don't doubt that he thought it was his right up to the day after Fergie announced his retirement.

2moreMinutes

TheDoc wrote: »

Yeah the good old days

At the same time the money your talking about these days is massive, with a lot more complex contracts, deals and structures of deals. It's not just "here is your 40 million", although in some cases paying full sums up front can be beneficial and a tactic, the deals are usually complexly structured and payments made out over time. So that takes a big of working out to do.

A number of structures are worked out beforehand, that's what preparing a bid is, you give essentially your first offer, but if its rejected you have alternatives already prepared, not wasting another few days going back to the drawing board.

I always figured transfer negotiations were very much like Mrs Doyle in Father Ted.
MUFC: We'll give you 30m
CFC: We want 40m
MUFC: 35m. Ah go on go on go on
CFC: No. 38m
MUFC: 36.5m. Are you sure you don't want it? Ah go on go on go on.

Leftist

tallaghtmick wrote: »

I liked your post but ill say Arsenal....of a few years ago :pac:

could also be argued that stability has stagnated them, when was the last time their stable manager has won a competition?

batistuta9

there's been stories for years that mourinho wouldn't get the united job because charlton didn't like his 'antics', etc.

Mitch Connor

adox wrote: »

While the idea of Mata signing is very exciting, he will still be playing under Moyes and his tactics, which is kinda depressing.

I dont think we will see the full potential of this team and squad, no matter who is signed, until we get a new manager in.

I hope I`m completely wrong, Moyes changes tactics completely, the players start believing in him etc, but I just dont see it happening.

My hope is that the current style is dicated by the players available to him, and the performances of players - and that when/if we sign players like Mata, Gundogan or Vidal, our style of play will evolve based on the new players and their strengths. If that isn't the case, Moyes needs shooting cause spending 40million (perhaps) on Mata, who wouldn't fit the current style, would be madness.

On signing Mata in this window - while I would be delighted, and hope it signals (at last) the start of an actual transition, I would worry we don't have the central midfield or left back capable of supporting him (and Rooney, RVP, Januzaj)

Mitch Connor

batistuta9 wrote: »

there's been stories for years that mourinho wouldn't get the united job because charlton didn't like his 'antics', etc.

Charlton has been cited as a big reason for Mourinho not getting the job - not sure how far that is the case though. I would have thought the opinions of Gill and Fergie would have carried far more sway, so I would say it is those two that decided on Moyes, and United/Woodward went with it.

kippy

Leftist wrote: »

could also be argued that stability has stagnated them, when was the last time their stable manager has won a competition?

Unfortunately for Arsenal fans it wasnt about winning competitons.

CSF

batistuta9 wrote: »

there's been stories for years that mourinho wouldn't get the united job because charlton didn't like his 'antics', etc.

Probably not true, but if true you'd have to question his continued role in the decision making process.

TheDoc

Leftist wrote: »

really?

where else in europe has stability bred success in the past 20 years?

Erm, what a lot of people consider one of the greatest club teams of all time, Barcalona?

After gaining massive success under Rikjaard, but starting to see signs of diminishing powers and slacking players, the club brought in a completely untried and untested Pep from within their own ranks. They could have picked pretty much anyone from the higher class of managerial roundabouts, but went with someone who came from the club, was involved in the club, and could continue and excel the integration and advancement of their youth system.

That's stability, that's continuation. He had experience working with the younger players, knew what was in the youth academy and was previously a Barca player.

That's a form of stability. It's not an introduction of a new manager from a different country with new ideas and changing everything. They brought in someone who had his own ideas in terms of playstyle alright, but was able to utilise the tools available to him, and implement the tactics and philosophy he was already developing with the B teams and younger sides.

Stability is not just having manager in place X years, it's having that manager understand and embrace the club's successfull models and using the tools available, while also obviously putting his own twist on things.

Backstreet Moyes

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Mourinho did want United, and for a long time United wanted him. Why Gill/Fergie changed their mind in 2013 I don't know. I thought he was nailed on for the job.

I would strongly doubt that he still wants the job now, given how things have panned out, but I don't doubt that he thought it was his right up to the day after Fergie announced his retirement.

Can you show a link providing proof that Mouinho wanted the United job?

CSF

TheDoc wrote: »

Erm, what a lot of people consider one of the greatest club teams of all time, Barcalona?

After gaining massive success under Rikjaard, but starting to see signs of diminishing powers and slacking players, the club brought in a completely untried and untested Pep from within their own ranks. They could have picked pretty much anyone from the higher class of managerial roundabouts, but went with someone who came from the club, was involved in the club, and could continue and excel the integration and advancement of their youth system.

That's stability, that's continuation. He had experience working with the younger players, knew what was in the youth academy and was previously a Barca player.

That's a form of stability. It's not an introduction of a new manager from a different country with new ideas and changing everything. They brought in someone who had his own ideas in terms of playstyle alright, but was able to utilise the tools available to him, and implement the tactics and philosophy he was already developing with the B teams and younger sides.

Stability is not just having manager in place X years, it's having that manager understand and embrace the club's successfull models and using the tools available, while also obviously putting his own twist on things.

You'd have to argue that was an exceptional case though and there wouldn't be so many cases where a club could see the genius so clearly, because aside from Mourinho, I can't think of anyone else who has had it so evident and so early on in their career.

A different kettle of fish to the way even Ferguson came to prominence.

kryogen

Post Busby United, other then Frank O Farrell they have all gotten time, Sexton got 4 years, Docherty got 5 and Atkinson got 5

Moyes will get time and when you compare his win % even in this awful season he is still well ahead of the former managers besides Fergie (who is 4% ahead)

Obviously his sample size is too small to be of any significance yet, but United managers do get time, stability doesnt mean keeping a manager on for 10 years regardless, 4 or 5 years is plenty long enough to see if a manager is heading in the right direction or not.

So, no, not tripe, thats tripe.

The club does not fire managers hastily, that is stability for a manager, he knows he will be given time to mould the club how he wants it.

For long term employment he needs to be successful

Nuts102

Nuts102 wrote: »

Can you show a link providing proof that Mouinho wanted the United job?

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2013/sep/26/jose-mourinho-cried-manchester-united

Bet he regrets the eye poking incident now!

bucketybuck

TheDoc wrote: »

Erm, what a lot of people consider one of the greatest club teams of all time, Barcalona?

After gaining massive success under Rikjaard, but starting to see signs of diminishing powers and slacking players, the club brought in a completely untried and untested Pep from within their own ranks. They could have picked pretty much anyone from the higher class of managerial roundabouts, but went with someone who came from the club, was involved in the club, and could continue and excel the integration and advancement of their youth system.

That's stability, that's continuation. He had experience working with the younger players, knew what was in the youth academy and was previously a Barca player.

That's a form of stability. It's not an introduction of a new manager from a different country with new ideas and changing everything. They brought in someone who had his own ideas in terms of playstyle alright, but was able to utilise the tools available to him, and implement the tactics and philosophy he was already developing with the B teams and younger sides.

Stability is not just having manager in place X years, it's having that manager understand and embrace the club's successfull models and using the tools available, while also obviously putting his own twist on things.

Thats all just to fit your narrative to be honest. Its just as true to say that Barcelona promoted Pep Guardiola not because of any stability reasons, but because they recognised that he had the potential to be an excellent coach.

If Guardiola hadn't been getting results with their reserve teams and displaying serious potential then they would have looked outside the club and stability be damned.

Not to mention the obvious point that if the club were so invested in stability then they would have continued with the previously successful Rikjaard. Its strange to write a paragraph praising their stability when you start it at the point where they have just sacked a successful coach.

TheDoc

Nuts102 wrote: »

Can you show a link providing proof that Mouinho wanted the United job?

There was a number of well documented and sourced accounts from people at Madrid that Mourinho was visibly perplexed and disturbed when the announcement came about Moyes.

Worth remembering that he had not agreed to join Chelsea at the time, and had advised Ferguson privately during a friendly discussion he was interested in going back to Chelsea. And as we know, he got first wind in the footballing arena of Fergusons retirement. He most likely expected to be approached.

Getting pretty "sighface" at the amount of "Show link for X" Proof Y with quote". It doesn't take a genius to understand that footballers, managers and clubs don't just come out and tell the story straight. And it doesn't take a genius to piece together a few things, isolate what rubbish, and form a decent hypothesis on what has happened.

By your reckoning this whole Mata thing is a load of bollox , because the club said they are not pursuing anything.

mitosis

zorro2566 wrote: »

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2013/sep/26/jose-mourinho-cried-manchester-united

Bet he regrets the eye poking incident now!

The article ends thusly:

Mourinho's adviser Eladio Parames has denied the book's account. "This story does not have any sense," he is quoted by the Portuguese newspaper O Jogo. "It is completely false. It has no head or tail."

Not what I would call a "proof"

keane2097

It's hard not to lol at the people still looking for "proof" of soccer stuff. It's so dumb. What would you accept? Mourinho stating in public that he was mad to take over United and gutted not to get it? Why would you believe him even if he said that?

Leftist

TheDoc wrote: »

Erm, what a lot of people consider one of the greatest club teams of all time, Barcalona?

After gaining massive success under Rikjaard, but starting to see signs of diminishing powers and slacking players, the club brought in a completely untried and untested Pep from within their own ranks. They could have picked pretty much anyone from the higher class of managerial roundabouts, but went with someone who came from the club, was involved in the club, and could continue and excel the integration and advancement of their youth system.

That's stability, that's continuation. He had experience working with the younger players, knew what was in the youth academy and was previously a Barca player.

That's a form of stability. It's not an introduction of a new manager from a different country with new ideas and changing everything. They brought in someone who had his own ideas in terms of playstyle alright, but was able to utilise the tools available to him, and implement the tactics and philosophy he was already developing with the B teams and younger sides.

Stability is not just having manager in place X years, it's having that manager understand and embrace the club's successfull models and using the tools available, while also obviously putting his own twist on things.

I totally disagree with the argument that barcelona kept stability because pep came from inside the club.

it's not stability, it was a change of manager, no matter how much you want to dress it otherwise.

CSF

zorro2566 wrote: »

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2013/sep/26/jose-mourinho-cried-manchester-united

Bet he regrets the eye poking incident now!

Do you think United appointed someone with big bulgy eyes to tease him?

TheDoc

bucketybuck wrote: »

Thats all just to fit your narrative to be honest. Its just as true to say that Barcelona promoted Pep Guardiola not because of any stability reasons, but because they recognised that he had the potential to be an excellent coach.

If Guardiola hadn't been getting results with their reserve teams and displaying serious potential then they would have looked outside the club and stability be damned.

Not to mention the obvious point that if the club were so invested in stability then they would have continued with the previously successful Rikjaard. Its strange to write a paragraph praising their stability when you start it at the point where they have just sacked a successful coach.

Rijkaard had started to faulter with his squad, and there was constant unrest, and disciplinary issues within the ranks at Barca. The writing was on the wall for him big time.

It's also stupidly easy and crast in hindsight to say how Barca " spotted the genius", give me a break. He was successful with a B team side, no senior management experience what so ever.

There is extensive accounts in the book "Barca" as well that Pep gave a pretty impressive interview for the position, but was not their first choice. There was a number of candidates that were enquired about first.

This was a team filled with superstars, had won the champions league a few times, La Liga and was slowly becoming a dominating force. That's a massive gamble to place onto a man whose football career completely went into obscurity during his years away from Spain, whose coaching methods and analytical methods were highly questioned, and who had ZERO experience with first team players, and to be honest any player in a coaching capacity over the age of 22.

His interview and presentation was regarded as so impressive because of his understanding of the club, it's functions, the tools it had and also the talent residing in the youth academy, and how he felt that could be used as a source for replenishment for years to come.

It was an appointment made for stability, continuity and with a view to success. It was by his unusual work ethic that caused burnout and his departure, otherwise he would still be there racking up titles.

TheDoc

Leftist wrote: »

I totally disagree with the argument that barcelona kept stability because pep came from inside the club.

it's not stability, it was a change of manager, no matter how much you want to dress it otherwise.

Clearly vastly differing views on stability.

Stability is not a measure of time. It's a combination of a number of factors.

You could change a manager every season, and if they never changed the training, tactics, formations, team talks etc, that would be stability. The players, would be operating under the same familiar conditions continuously. That is stability. For better or worse, well there is arguments on both sides.

When you bring in a manager every few seasons, or every season ( at this rate 18 months with most clubs) it typically beings a change in staff, personal, training, tactics, formations, playing staff, team talks, vision etc. etc.

This is not stability, this is a change, again, debatable for better or worse.

The_Kew_Tour

This place is going into meltdown as it is.

Christ if we dont sign Mata(dont hold you breath) then this place will go mental

Backstreet Moyes

TheDoc wrote: »

There was a number of well documented and sourced accounts from people at Madrid that Mourinho was visibly perplexed and disturbed when the announcement came about Moyes.

Worth remembering that he had not agreed to join Chelsea at the time, and had advised Ferguson privately during a friendly discussion he was interested in going back to Chelsea. And as we know, he got first wind in the footballing arena of Fergusons retirement. He most likely expected to be approached.

Getting pretty "sighface" at the amount of "Show link for X" Proof Y with quote". It doesn't take a genius to understand that footballers, managers and clubs don't just come out and tell the story straight. And it doesn't take a genius to piece together a few things, isolate what rubbish, and form a decent hypothesis on what has happened.

By your reckoning this whole Mata thing is a load of bollox , because the club said they are not pursuing anything.

Mitch said Mourinho wanted the United job. I asked for a link i have no problem speculating but if somebody states something as fact they should have proof. None of us have any idea if Mourinho wanted the United job at all.

For me looking at the young talent they had, his unfinished business and more money to spend makes me speculate he wanted the Chelsea job.

Backstreet Moyes

Leftist wrote: »

could also be argued that stability has stagnated them, when was the last time their stable manager has won a competition?

Wenger went their and won loads of trophies at the start. Over the past number of years he has spent nothing which helped finance the stadium. While Chelsea and City had sugardaddys and United were top dog he has without fail qualified for the Champions League every season. I would call that stability considering the circumstances.

TheDoc

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

This place is going into meltdown as it is.

Christ if we dont sign Mata(dont hold you breath) then this place will go mental

Just a case of vastly differing expectations to be honest. And you can't overly fault anyones despite what they might be. I'm pretty calm with the whole ordeal, while obviously frustrated when I'm watching the derp in standards from some of our players, I came into the season with my expectations set.

Felt we could defend our title, and that the top teams would all be slipping up as they settle their feet. I also felt that this season was very much going to be sporadic, and was for Moyes to get settled, shake off Fergies shadow, get over the wow factor, and get a feel for what the squad was, and what he needed.

The slipups came thick and fast from City and Chelsea (City who I felt would be our main title rivals) but unfortunately so did ours. We couldn't/didn't capitalise on those slipups and it became harder and harder. I put too much reliance and took too much for granted our squad, title winners, some of them multiple, being able to essentially navigate things on the field while the manager finds his feet. Turns out we are vastly short of any form of leader.

Felt that Christmas was make or break, if we could mount a good run that we could make up any gap, and then gain confidence going into the second half of the season where we are historically stronger. Again didn't pan out exactly to an ideal situation, and the slipups from City and Chelsea stopped.

Pellegrini and Mourinho have settled faster for sure, then again, they were following managers who were unpopular, loosing confidence of the dressing room and whose stock essentially on the slide. Moyes was following someone who left on a high, in an unusual situation ,so it's normal that it was going to take somewhat longer.


In summary, thought we could defend the title, expected sporadic performances and results. Didn't expect players levels to drop drastically and them forgetting how to win matches.

I've re-evaluated those expectations now, with looking for a top 4 finish, a good showing in the CL, league cup final, and looking forward to what I hope is a rebuilding process in the summer.

If next season is more of the same, I might raise my eyebrows, but at the moment I'm taking it as atleast a 3 year stint for Moyes, and see no point in flipping my **** out six months into it.

Backstreet Moyes

Looking again Mata to stay at Chelsea 11/4 that is massive. I don't think SkyBet would be offering that price unless Mata leaving is at a very advanced stage. Usually a few Euro shortens these markets but this has stayed the same or increased in price.

Leftist

TheDoc wrote: »

Clearly vastly differing views on stability.

Stability is not a measure of time. It's a combination of a number of factors.

You could change a manager every season, and if they never changed the training, tactics, formations, team talks etc, that would be stability. The players, would be operating under the same familiar conditions continuously. That is stability. For better or worse, well there is arguments on both sides.

When you bring in a manager every few seasons, or every season ( at this rate 18 months with most clubs) it typically beings a change in staff, personal, training, tactics, formations, playing staff, team talks, vision etc. etc.

This is not stability, this is a change, again, debatable for better or worse.

so if moyes lasted 4/5 years and was sacked, the club replaces him with ryan giggs.

hyopethetical situation, but is that change or stability?

Rijkaard was sacked.

and pep changed the tactics, formation, mentaility and training.

xavi is quoted as saying that he was amazed at the training sessions when pep took over and mentioned to iniesta that they better adapt and adapt fast.

other points of change:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/barcelona/9683924/How-Pep-Guardiola-got-the-Barcelona-players-on-his-side-to-halt-teams-decline-into-decadence.html

so, no, barcelona cannot be held as an example of success from stability.

The_Kew_Tour

TheDoc wrote: »

Just a case of vastly differing expectations to be honest. And you can't overly fault anyones despite what they might be. I'm pretty calm with the whole ordeal, while obviously frustrated when I'm watching the derp in standards from some of our players, I came into the season with my expectations set.

Felt we could defend our title, and that the top teams would all be slipping up as they settle their feet. I also felt that this season was very much going to be sporadic, and was for Moyes to get settled, shake off Fergies shadow, get over the wow factor, and get a feel for what the squad was, and what he needed.

The slipups came thick and fast from City and Chelsea (City who I felt would be our main title rivals) but unfortunately so did ours. We couldn't/didn't capitalise on those slipups and it became harder and harder. I put too much reliance and took too much for granted our squad, title winners, some of them multiple, being able to essentially navigate things on the field while the manager finds his feet. Turns out we are vastly short of any form of leader.

Felt that Christmas was make or break, if we could mount a good run that we could make up any gap, and then gain confidence going into the second half of the season where we are historically stronger. Again didn't pan out exactly to an ideal situation, and the slipups from City and Chelsea stopped.

Pellegrini and Mourinho have settled faster for sure, then again, they were following managers who were unpopular, loosing confidence of the dressing room and whose stock essentially on the slide. Moyes was following someone who left on a high, in an unusual situation ,so it's normal that it was going to take somewhat longer.


In summary, thought we could defend the title, expected sporadic performances and results. Didn't expect players levels to drop drastically and them forgetting how to win matches.

I've re-evaluated those expectations now, with looking for a top 4 finish, a good showing in the CL, league cup final, and looking forward to what I hope is a rebuilding process in the summer.

If next season is more of the same, I might raise my eyebrows, but at the moment I'm taking it as atleast a 3 year stint for Moyes, and see no point in flipping my **** out six months into it.

I have said for past while that I aint getting carried away with any rumour.

I know the Mata deal is on. But they're far greater snags then what has been mentioned. This whole"it will be done by weekend" illustrates that to me clearly.

I just think if this goes go to pot and it could, that first thing people will do is blame Moyes and Woodward when it is not them at the table.

It might be done in a hour, it might be done by weekend or it might not be done at all, but people will get carried away if this does not happen.

I would say its about 30-40% chance of getting him. Its on, but I wont be shocked if it falls through.

batistuta9

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Charlton has been cited as a big reason for Mourinho not getting the job - not sure how far that is the case though. I would have thought the opinions of Gill and Fergie would have carried far more sway, so I would say it is those two that decided on Moyes, and United/Woodward went with it.

CSF wrote: »

Probably not true, but if true you'd have to question his continued role in the decision making process.

it might not be true but it's been going around that long that i'd at least believe there's something in - he doesn't like him - the influence he had on the decision is anyones guess or who's really listening to who