Manchester United Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 2015 Mod Note Post #2331

bangkok

astradave wrote: »

This is all well and good but he is talking about the youth setup and scouting. He specifically said that.

These both have been pretty poor for a number of years. Before Moyes and Van Gaal took over. Both bemoaned these when they first came to the club. Moyes the scouting and Van Gaal the Youth setup

you do realise around that time that there was a major rule change that only allowed Man Utd and all other clubs sign young players within a 60min drive of Manchester or wherever?

and moyes bemoaned our youth set up?! lol

He was at Everton and would surely have known Ross Barkley was an exceptional talent, for 27.5m we could have easily signed him for that with change left over

Maximus Alexander

bangkok wrote: »

and moyes bemoaned our youth set up?! lol

That's not what he said.

ericzeking

bucketybuck wrote: »

Not withstanding the fact that our ambitions were supposed to be higher than that, do you think Van Gaal looks like he can get 4th place?

And I mean based on what we can see, not on faith.

Me personally? At the moment no, he doesn't look like he can get 4th, but that's not what I said. The point of the post is that I think the board thinks he is the best bet with the cards that are on the table at this juncture...my post also states that the board may have something lined up for the summer that means Mourinho isn't to be hired now, ie Pep or A.N Other.

In which case it boils down to a straight decision between letting a very experienced manager try to limp into 4th in a season where a number of rivals have faltered or taking a punt on Giggs or another caretaker and still ending up with nothing.

I would like LVG to be moved on at this stage and for us to start to excite again but I can absolutely see the logic in not sacking him immediately if there is a medium term plan in place.

bangkok

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

That's not what he said.

"Before Moyes and Van Gaal took over. Both bemoaned these when they first came to the club"

Mitch Connor

Pro. F wrote: »

Do you have any evidence that LVG isn't in charge of the youth setup at United? I haven't heard either way, but if he isn't then it would be a dramatic change from when SAF and Moyes were managing at the club. So I'd need to see some evidence before I'd believe it.



I've an interest in youth develepment and the competing methods that are used in football. From reading around on the topic there is near constant disagreement as to what works and the accusation of being "old fashioned" is thrown around in such a way as to be meaningless. The people who prefer one method will view all contrary methods as old fashioned and vice versa, so I'd be extremely hesitant to just believe what gets said about any club's YD set-up, good or bad. So could you describe the details of the structure that Fergie left behind?



That's not true at all. It could just as easily point to City taking in a lower standard of youth recruit than United. For all you know, these players would have preferred their kids to go to the United academy, but they didn't make the grade.

My opinions are formed from reading the comments and opinions of others, on other forums, who have a reputation with regards to getting and giving United information that is correct. One, for example is Andy Mitten, who has been commenting on the poor state of the United youth set up since prior to last summer. Others are less public, but are well respected sourse of information within the sites I use (RedIssue and UWS for the most part.) These people say the United youth set up is poorly thought of these days, thought lack of vision and investment.

I'm simply saying this to:

(1) respond to your comment
(2) state where my beliefs come from.

However, I also realise as I can't provide official comment from people at the club or the players involved, you will dismiss all of this as conjecture and probably lies (to suit my, or someone elses agenda) so there isn't any point in having a long discussion about it. I'll not be convinced that the United Youth set up is at the very top level or not in dire need of reform, and I've no way of convincing you.

Cantona's Collars

Match thread: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=98540581#post98540581

United and the Late Late Show on a Friday night,insomniacs everywhere will rejoice at finally finding something to help them sleep.

bucketybuck

ericzeking wrote: »

Me personally? At the moment no, he doesn't look like he can get 4th, but that's not what I said. The point of the post is that I think the board thinks he is the best bet with the cards that are on the table at this juncture...my post also states that the board may have something lined up for the summer that means Mourinho isn't to be hired now, ie Pep or A.N Other.

In which case it boils down to a straight decision between letting a very experienced manager try to limp into 4th in a season where a number of rivals have faltered or taking a punt on Giggs or another caretaker and still ending up with nothing.

I would like LVG to be moved on at this stage and for us to start to excite again but I can absolutely see the logic in not sacking him immediately if there is a medium term plan in place.

Yes, you personally, I get your point and was curious if you felt it was the right decision by the board.

For myself I would say that it would be far more sensible to have jettisoned Van Gaal months ago. It is as clear as day that he cannot improve that team so it takes a lot of blind logic to sit tight and hope that suddenly things will tun around. They might, but nothing in the past 18 months indicates that they will.

Far better to roll the dice than to sit quietly on a sinking ship.

Blatter

Pro. F wrote: »

That's not true at all. It could just as easily point to City taking in a lower standard of youth recruit than United. For all you know, these players would have preferred their kids to go to the United academy, but they didn't make the grade.

They were talking about this subject on the radio before and iirc, it was mentioned that the location of the respective academies is a major factor. Apparently City's is in an area where it's more viable traffic wise for parents to drop and collect their kids.

I also find it strange that the fact City literally have had a bottomless pit of money (that type of spending is not included under FFP) to spend on their academy is never mentioned. It's difficult to compete with that, even if you are as rich as United. But maybe they have been neglecting the academy, I just don't know. I wouldn't be letting comparisons with City sway me either way anyhow.

ericzeking

http://www.manutd.com/en/News-And-Features/Football-News/2016/Jan/nemanja-vidic-announces-retirement.aspx?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=post&utm_campaign=ManUtd

Vidic retired!

ericzeking

http://www.manutd.com/en/News-And-Features/Football-News/2016/Jan/nemanja-vidic-announces-retirement.aspx?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=post&utm_campaign=ManUtd

Vidic retired!

jayo26

ericzeking wrote: »

http://www.manutd.com/en/News-And-Features/Football-News/2016/Jan/nemanja-vidic-announces-retirement.aspx?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=post&utm_campaign=ManUtd

Vidic retired!

Would love him back at the club I don't know what his plans are but its a good sign if he chose to announce his retirement via united.

ericzeking

bucketybuck wrote: »

Yes, you personally, I get your point and was curious if you felt it was the right decision by the board.

For myself I would say that it would be far more sensible to have jettisoned Van Gaal months ago. It is as clear as day that he cannot improve that team so it takes a lot of blind logic to sit tight and hope that suddenly things will tun around. They might, but nothing in the past 18 months indicates that they will.

Far better to roll the dice than to sit quietly on a sinking ship.

How freqently do you keep rolling the dice?

If I was to hazard a guess, you were in the LVG out camp even last season?

And you were Moyes out after a week and a half?

Recently pretty much everyone seems to have come round to the line of thinking that it just isn't working for LVG, 18 months in, which I think is a pretty sensible amount of time to give a manager.

homerjay2005

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

We have spent like we have never before on transfer market past 2 seasons.

.

and this is the problem, the money spent in 2014 has hampered peoples opinions, it has made people think we have this amazing squad of top quality players - we dont. people for some reason get obsessed with money and spending money means things are great. people also ignore, that due to a lack of spending over the years (cash build up of £150-180m), and gross mismanagement of the squad especially in 2013 under Woodward, they had no choice. people ignore that we have also brought in, £116m in player sales in 14 months, players of which some should never have been allowed to leave the club.

so we are spending (or so it seems) yet there is very little to show for it. does that in itself, not tell you something?

according to latest projections, the club will take in £1billion pounds in the space of 26 months from last June to September 2017. however.

the actual outlay this summer was minimal. had the DDG deal not fallen through, our actual outlay after sales would have been around £7.1million - a f*ck up/dodgy fax machine brought it up to £28m - as i said, on a level with Palace (£13m outlay), West Ham (£28m) - including their two signings in Janyary, Newcastle have an outlay of £73.15m.

we turfed out a shed load of players, which saved us £60m on wages last summer after another £30m was saved on wages by selling out players the summer before so those who are praising the club for spending money, should also look at the cost savings measures that were imposed also, yet at same time left us with a very very bare squad devoid of world class talent.


we are a cash cow for the Glazers and not alot else right now.

TheDoc

Blatter wrote: »

If David Gill was CEO with Van Gaal as manager, what would likely be different? Aside from thinking that he may have sacked van Gaal a while back (I wouldn't be convinced of that), what else would he be doing differently that Woodward hasn't managed?

I'd be pretty confident in saying that we would not have secured the services of Martial, and possibly Memphis.

homerjay2005

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

I'm working tonight.

Sadly, I'm kinda glad.

i know a few lads going over to it and met a few lads on the flight home last saturday that are also heading over, bless them the poor souls.

be interesting to speak to them later tonight to gauge the feeling amongest the away support, they normally stand by the manager a bit more than the home crowd who turned on him a long time ago.

Maximus Alexander

homerjay2005 wrote: »

and this is the problem, the money spent in 2014 has hampered peoples opinions, it has made people think we have this amazing squad of top quality players - we dont. people for some reason get obsessed with money and spending money means things are great. people also ignore, that due to a lack of spending over the years (cash build up of £150-180m), and gross mismanagement of the squad especially in 2013 under Woodward, they had no choice. people ignore that we have also brought in, £116m in player sales in 14 months, players of which some should never have been allowed to leave the club.

so we are spending (or so it seems) yet there is very little to show for it. does that in itself, not tell you something?

according to latest projections, the club will take in £1billion pounds in the space of 26 months from last June to September 2017. however.

the actual outlay this summer was minimal. had the DDG deal not fallen through, our actual outlay after sales would have been around £7.1million - a f*ck up/dodgy fax machine brought it up to £28m - as i said, on a level with Palace (£13m outlay), West Ham (£28m) - including their two signings in Janyary, Newcastle have an outlay of £73.15m.

we turfed out a shed load of players, which saved us £60m on wages last summer after another £30m was saved on wages by selling out players the summer before so those who are praising the club for spending money, should also look at the cost savings measures that were imposed also, yet at same time left us with a very very bare squad devoid of world class talent.


we are a cash cow for the Glazers and not alot else right now.

You can't have it both ways. You can't on the one hand say "We've spent £250m and still can't break down crap teams" and then on the other say "actually we've spent nothing".

At least be consistent in how you apply criticism.

homerjay2005

TheDoc wrote: »

I'd be pretty confident in saying that we would not have secured the services of Martial, and possibly Memphis.

care to suggest why?

i think no matter who was the CEO was, those deals would have happened if the club wanted them.

Trigger

bangkok wrote: »

you do realise around that time that there was a major rule change that only allowed Man Utd and all other clubs sign young players within a 60min drive of Manchester or wherever?

and moyes bemoaned our youth set up?! lol

He was at Everton and would surely have known Ross Barkley was an exceptional talent, for 27.5m we could have easily signed him for that with change left over

astradave wrote: »

This is all well and good but he is talking about the youth setup and scouting. He specifically said that.

These both have been pretty poor for a number of years. Before Moyes and Van Gaal took over. Both bemoaned these when they first came to the club. Moyes the scouting and Van Gaal the Youth setup

It seems you intentionally miss read posts to suit your own agenda. No doubt using the 27m figure as another dig at Fellaini

TheDoc

Flint Fredstone wrote: »

In general, are our transfer dealings any different to what they were? We have always been losing out on the big names linked in the papers. Even to the likes of Chelsea and PSG towards the end of Fergie's reign.

I'd suggest that they have actually been better under Woodward, but that might be dictated by the fact Fergie could have worked with ****e and created a diamond, but also maybe Glazers singing off on lavish spending to regain top spot as quickly as possible.

Ferguson and Gill oversaw some terrible transfer windows and activity, frequently failed to land world class players and lost out on a number of top talents over the sake of a few million, based on principles.

Now don't equate that to doing a bad job. They did good work, but like every club there was success' and failures. But without doubt a lot of those we missed out on stings, even moreso when it became apparent as to why.

As normal we may never actually find out, or it will be years until a book comes out with a tidbit, but has Woodward missed out on any targets that were put to him, that we could really say he bundled? The problem being we probably can't say with certainty.

The first summer window was a total disaster, I think that is widely accepted now. Club caught on the hop and trying to run around organizing stuff they weren't prepared for. But I think the following summer, and last summer, has seen an improvement.

It would appear any player we wanted, he got, and the only player that appears to be a bit up in the air in terms of missing out on(that we know about) is Pedro. Although again it's for debate if we missed out or said no.

Is there players we have missed out on the last 2 summer window that there is a degree of certainty in terms of we were in for it?


I do preface everything with how the teams current fortune are probably forcing the hand in terms of signing players, but the transfer activity under Woodward for the last two seasons has been much more exciting and dare I say good, then under Gill for potential his last 5,6 even 7 years. Although I always give him a rough time along with Fergie for absolutely ruining our chances of probably becoming a european powerhouse after our CL success

homerjay2005

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

You can't have it both ways. You can't on the one hand say "We've spent £250m and still can't break down crap teams" and then on the other say "actually we've spent nothing".

At least be consistent in how you apply criticism.

did you actually read my post above at all? because it seems like you didnt and you have a notion that you can just twist and spin my points in what ever way you want. how can anybody say we have "spent nothing" when we have. its clouding peoples grasp of the reality though.

there is no denying we have spent the money, the players are under the clubs employment - however, its not this big pat on the back scenario that people are proclaiming Woodward as the next coming of jesus. other clubs have spend money also, except other clubs now have better players than us and they have less money available to them.

i stand by that point i made - irrespective of the background, LVG has brought in £250m worth of talent and this has not worked. £250m spent is alot of money to be given to a manager, however theres alot of context behind that and it came at a price - these are two totally different topics.

and the thing is, i think you are intelligent enough to see that also.

bangkok

astradave wrote: »

It seems you intentionally miss read posts to suit your own agenda. No doubt using the 27m figure as another dig at Fellaini

so moyes the scouting...... He knew we could sign fellaini for 24m but chose to pay 27.5 for him. He knew himself having worked with Ross Barkley that he was the next big thing coming out of Everton but chose not to go for him?! and he complained about the scouting? lol

TheDoc

bangkok wrote: »

lol

I totally appreciate and agree with where Mitch was coming from. Fergie displayed a public disdain for agents and the increasing evaluations in the transfer market (which I thought was always an excuse for covering up a blundered transfer) which left the club missing out on a lot of top quality players and youth prospects, leaving a squad that was massively reliant on his management, and very evidently couldn't function without him when he left. For all the great credit he gets, and deserves, for moving with the times in terms of man management and how he deployed his squad, he appeared to not also move along with the evolving transfer market.

Can you imagine Ferguson signing off on a potential 60m+ deal for Martial? This is the guy who said no to Hazard over a few million as far as I recall.

Arsenal appear they will have the same problem when Wenger leaves. As clubs started to adjust their models and structures to become resistant to managerial change, we didn't have to as Fergie was the fire in the engine room. But we didn't even make an attempt and putting in place some contingencies.

It's simply not viable and responsible any more to allow managers have the final say when it comes to potential expenditures of 50-100m each transfer window, and the club should be ensuring that when a manager leaves, it doesn't render half the squad obsolete also.

TheDoc

Tyson Fury wrote: »

We won the fa youth cup in 2007 and 2011, we also have some of the best facilities of any football team in the world. This blaming Fergie for the troubles of the current setup is laughable. He's a huge loss and so is David Gill.

They are partly culpable for the clubs current state.There is simply no denying, so the only thing laughable is trying to expunge them from any responsibility.

It's ok to say that Fergie did some things wrong. It's ok. He is not infallible.

Pro. F

Mitch Connor wrote: »

My opinions are formed from reading the comments and opinions of others, on other forums, who have a reputation with regards to getting and giving United information that is correct. One, for example is Andy Mitten, who has been commenting on the poor state of the United youth set up since prior to last summer. Others are less public, but are well respected sourse of information within the sites I use (RedIssue and UWS for the most part.) These people say the United youth set up is poorly thought of these days, thought lack of vision and investment.

I'm simply saying this to:

(1) respond to your comment
(2) state where my beliefs come from.

However, I also realise as I can't provide official comment from people at the club or the players involved, you will dismiss all of this as conjecture and probably lies (to suit my, or someone elses agenda) so there isn't any point in having a long discussion about it. I'll not be convinced that the United Youth set up is at the very top level or not in dire need of reform, and I've no way of convincing you.

I'm not really looking for official comment tbh. Just details of what the youth development set-up and methods actually are, so I could form my own opinion on whether they're old fashioned or not.

I wouldn't immediately assume that the criticisms are agenda driven lies. They could be, they could not be. That's not nearly as useful question as asking whether the criticisms are valid or not.

Given the nature of conflicting opinions on youth development, I wouldn't trust anybody's word on what is or is not effective. It would be like reading somebody telling you that a football team's tactics are good or bad and just believing them, even when they hadn't described what the tactics actually are.

Trigger

bangkok wrote: »

so moyes the scouting...... He knew we could sign fellaini for 24m but chose to pay 27.5 for him. He knew himself having worked with Ross Barkley that he was the next big thing coming out of Everton but chose not to go for him?! and he complained about the scouting? lol

You seem to be intentionally missing the point because someone dares to criticise your beloved Fergie. It's not about one player. It's about the whole scouting setup. It was about having to reorganise absolutely everything behind the scenes because it was left in a state. The scouting does not focus on one single player or team. It is a huge process that spans the world over. But hey I'm sure you know that!!

Mitch Connor

astradave wrote: »

It seems you intentionally miss read posts to suit your own agenda. No doubt using the 27m figure as another dig at Fellaini

also....

The rule WAS 90minutes. That changed when the academy structures came in to England a few years ago.

Players from the age of 12 up can be recruited natiaonally by category 1 academies - which United's has qualified as.

TheDoc

Pro. F wrote: »

Do you have any evidence that LVG isn't in charge of the youth setup at United? I haven't heard either way, but if he isn't then it would be a dramatic change from when SAF and Moyes were managing at the club. So I'd need to see some evidence before I'd believe it.

I think I remember Van Gaal in his first season making a comment that his focus was entirely on the first team(for that period) and that into his second and third season he will become more involved with the youth acadamy etc.

So potentially due to the pressures this season, he probably hasn't got that involved and maybe not having a youth director means there isn't a good conduit there to do so. But I am positive I remember him saying that he wouldn't get involved initially, but would increase his involvement as his contract continued.

As I say though, could fully understand why he would be focusing 100% attention to the first team

ElChe32

He comes from Serbia...he'll fúckin' murder ye!

Happy retirement to the Serb legend.

TheDoc

homerjay2005 wrote: »

care to suggest why?

i think no matter who was the CEO was, those deals would have happened if the club wanted them.

Ferguson and Gill said no to completing the Hazard deal, over a couple of million I believe. For what was the top youth prospect in European football at the time.

Same happened with Lucas Moura, at the time, outrageously highly rated talent.

They said no to Robben, again due to some financial disagreements. And the list goes on, right up to Paul Pogba.

I will be clear that in a lot of the cases above, I probably sided with manager and CEO at the time. And still would in certain cases. I'm not going to use hindsight here as some form of method to criticse the pair.

But I think it's a fair statement to say that the old combo might have passed on Martial, and possibly Memphis, as they typically had certain evaluations and caps on spending for youth prospects, where they moved out of the deals whenever the fees got past a point they thought reasonable.

Again to outline, this isn't a critique exactly. Just a statement that under Gill, it's likely Martial and Memphis would not have signed.

homerjay2005

TheDoc wrote: »

Ferguson and Gill said no to completing the Hazard deal, over a couple of million I believe. For what was the top youth prospect in European football at the time.

Same happened with Lucas Moura, at the time, outrageously highly rated talent.

They said no to Robben, again due to some financial disagreements. And the list goes on, right up to Paul Pogba.

I will be clear that in a lot of the cases above, I probably sided with manager and CEO at the time. And still would in certain cases. I'm not going to use hindsight here as some form of method to criticse the pair.

But I think it's a fair statement to say that the old combo might have passed on Martial, and possibly Memphis, as they typically had certain evaluations and caps on spending for youth prospects, where they moved out of the deals whenever the fees got past a point they thought reasonable.

Again to outline, this isn't a critique exactly. Just a statement that under Gill, it's likely Martial and Memphis would not have signed.

ya fair enough, ill agree with you on that. i think the Problem was fergie though and not gill. and the implosion of cash into the club commercially since 2013 has changed the landscape considerably also.

dr.kenneth noisewater

Just seen Vidic retired, legs were gone for awhile. signed for £7 million, what a bargain!

KH25

homerjay2005 wrote: »

ya fair enough, ill agree with you on that. i think the Problem was fergie though and not gill. and the implosion of cash into the club commercially since 2013 has changed the landscape considerably also.

Increased revenue for other teams too. Alongside clubs like Chelsea, City and PSG, smaller teams are now in a stronger financial position so they can value players more highly than before.

bucketybuck

ericzeking wrote: »

How freqently do you keep rolling the dice?

If I was to hazard a guess, you were in the LVG out camp even last season?

And you were Moyes out after a week and a half?

Recently pretty much everyone seems to have come round to the line of thinking that it just isn't working for LVG, 18 months in, which I think is a pretty sensible amount of time to give a manager.

You aren't going to make me feel bad for pointing out early that Van Gaal was doing a rubbish job, or for pointing out last season that our performances were atrocious. Yes I said all this last season, and most importantly I was right to say it last season. There is no vague length of time beyond which we need to wait before assessing a manager, we are allowed to look at what is in front of us and react accordingly.

That people have finally realised that the problems I was talking about were actually important doesn't make me wrong, it makes me right.

Same with Moyes. On this forum we get continual abuse and labelled "whingers" and "negative" for having the wherewithal to stand up and point out that the manager is failing. What seems to escape peoples mind is that we were right all along, Moyes was failing, just as Van Gaal is failing. Its a pretty strange thing for you to use me being correct as a criticism.

Anyway, onto your first line, I'm no maths genius but as everybody knows in probability each roll of the dice is independent of the previous. The results of one do not determine the results of the next. So just because Moyes failed doesn't mean Van Gaal couldn't fail, and doesn't mean the next manager might not fail either. You don't stick with a failed manager just because you had already sacked a failure previously, instead you keep rolling that dice until you get it right.

TheDoc

By the way for anyone that didn't see last night, there was a pretty hilarious fallout from the Sports Journalist awards that resulted in Neil Custis making a proper arse of himself, among others. Football 365 media watch has a little tldr now.

Just goes to show how sycophantic and cowardly journalists can be in press conferences. It's gone from Custis can take a joke, that he is now lashing out at any institutions that mention it, as abuse. If anything good comes from Van Gaals rain, is making that fella a laughing stock. Perfect

TheDoc

By the way for anyone that didn't see last night, there was a pretty hilarious fallout from the Sports Journalist awards that resulted in Neil Custis making a proper arse of himself, among others. Football 365 media watch has a little tldr now.

Just goes to show how sycophantic and cowardly journalists can be in press conferences. It's gone from Custis can take a joke, that he is now lashing out at any institutions that mention it, as abuse. If anything good comes from Van Gaals rain, is making that fella a laughing stock. Perfect

kstand

ElChe32 wrote: »

He comes from Serbia...he'll fúckin' murder ye!

Happy retirement to the Serb legend.

He always featured prominently whenever Mr Miyagi got his slot in the pre or post match chanting in the Bishops.

hufpc8w3adnk65

kstand wrote: »

He always featured prominently whenever Mr Miyagi got his slot in the pre or post match chanting in the Bishops.

Oh allways!!!


That and the Eric the king chant! You know it's match day then ha ha

TheDoc

TheDoc wrote: »

By the way for anyone that didn't see last night, there was a pretty hilarious fallout from the Sports Journalist awards that resulted in Neil Custis making a proper arse of himself, among others. Football 365 media watch has a little tldr now.

Just goes to show how sycophantic and cowardly journalists can be in press conferences. It's gone from Custis can take a joke, that he is now lashing out at any institutions that mention it, as abuse. If anything good comes from Van Gaals rain, is making that fella a laughing stock. Perfect

I don't believe in Karma but that was close enough for me gotta love those salty salty tears...

TheDoc

Memphis to score anytime and United to win 2-0. 20/1 Don't know why, but I feel thats a decent shout

kstand

MrMac84 wrote: »

Oh allways!!!


That and the Eric the king chant! You know it's match day then ha ha

The imaginary machine gun going off!
Then he's launch into "build a bonfire".

kstand

TheDoc wrote: »

Memphis to score anytime and United to win 2-0. 20/1 Don't know why, but I feel thats a decent shout

In fairness he hasnt done bad lately when he has come in. Not a bad shout.

IamtheWalrus

Journalists think they make the Premier League. One The Sunday Supplement, one of them was giving out about LVG's style, 'the fans don't like it, the players don't like it, the press don't like it..'.

The press? Excuse me? Like the press need to be appeased. Oh I mustn't play 442 in case it puts Neil Custis in a bad mood.

ericzeking

bucketybuck wrote: »

You aren't going to make me feel bad for pointing out early that Van Gaal was doing a rubbish job, or for pointing out last season that our performances were atrocious. Yes I said all this last season, and most importantly I was right to say it last season. There is no vague length of time beyond which we need to wait before assessing a manager, we are allowed to look at what is in front of us and react accordingly.

That people have finally realised that the problems I was talking about were actually important doesn't make me wrong, it makes me right.

Same with Moyes. On this forum we get continual abuse and labelled "whingers" and "negative" for having the wherewithal to stand up and point out that the manager is failing. What seems to escape peoples mind is that we were right all along, Moyes was failing, just as Van Gaal is failing. Its a pretty strange thing for you to use me being correct as a criticism.

Anyway, onto your first line, I'm no maths genius but as everybody knows in probability each roll of the dice is independent of the previous. The results of one do not determine the results of the next. So just because Moyes failed doesn't mean Van Gaal couldn't fail, and doesn't mean the next manager might not fail either. You don't stick with a failed manager just because you had already sacked a failure previously, instead you keep rolling that dice until you get it right.

Of course you start assessing the manager from the minute he gets the job, but you assess it in context.... it is a work in progress and if there appears to be a clear vision and plan-If there was one thing LVG has it is a plan (a philosophy).
I could always see what LVG was trying to do and was willing to give it time to see if it could click, as I said 18 months seems a sensible time to give him, before the whole process started I would have said 2 seasons but he looks beaten at this stage and his team are just going through the boring motions.

Assessing after a single figure number of weeks/months and saying 'Nope, this will never work' when you haven't even seen the full project is folly in my opinion, no matter who the manager (assuming the manager is appointed appropriately in the first place).
Just because what you prophesized looks like it will be the most likely outcome does not make it the right stance to take. We'd be sacking managers every 6 months.

Mitch Connor

I don't understand why it should take two years to implement a style of football - why anyone should wait two eyars to see if it 'clicks'.

I do get that you may not win trophies in those two years, and that shouldn't earn the sack. I do get that after two years you could still be looking for improvments - you should alsways be looking for improvements.

But I don't see why anyone should need to wait even 18 months to realise LVGs plan wasn't working, and that United were getting no better. It was absolutely clear early in this season. Once he got through a proper summer window of his own, without improving the play, style or success the writing was on the wall, imo.

Mitch Connor

I don't understand why it should take two years to implement a style of football - why anyone should wait two eyars to see if it 'clicks'.

I do get that you may not win trophies in those two years, and that shouldn't earn the sack. I do get that after two years you could still be looking for improvments - you should alsways be looking for improvements.

But I don't see why anyone should need to wait even 18 months to realise LVGs plan wasn't working, and that United were getting no better. It was absolutely clear early in this season. Once he got through a proper summer window of his own, without improving the play, style or success the writing was on the wall, imo.

bangkok

astradave wrote: »

You seem to be intentionally missing the point because someone dares to criticise your beloved Fergie. It's not about one player. It's about the whole scouting setup. It was about having to reorganise absolutely everything behind the scenes because it was left in a state. The scouting does not focus on one single player or team. It is a huge process that spans the world over. But hey I'm sure you know that!!

like I said before, the new rules (that were applied back then) that only allowed Man Utd and all other clubs only pick players no more than a 60min drive from the training ground hampered all youth development in England.

United once hosted a u16 tournament along with Barca.
United team consisted of all local players from Manchester, Barca's under 16 team was 6 players from all over spain, 3 from Africa and 1 from Argentina.

that seriously put England back a lot in terms of developing players, but that has changed now and The Elite Player Performance Plan has taken over but that has hugely effected smaller clubs as bigger clubs are free to go to their training grounds and if they like a player under a certain age can take them for small fee

bucketybuck

ericzeking wrote: »

Assessing after a single figure number of weeks/months and saying 'Nope, this will never work' when you haven't even seen the full project is folly in my opinion, no matter who the manager (assuming the manager is appointed appropriately in the first place).
Just because what you prophesized looks like it will be the most likely outcome does not make it the right stance to take. We'd be sacking managers every 6 months.

I think you can indeed look at certain things and confidently state that they aren't suitable. For example, early in Van Gaals reign he bullishly tried to play a system that simply was not suited to the players he had available, instead of incremental change he arrogantly thought to just plow ahead with his process and unsurprisingly it did not work. It was clear to anybody that it was a problem and we didn't need to wait and see before pointing it out.

If you see Lewis Hamilton drunkenly weaving back and forth on the track you don't need to wait until the finish line to say that something is wrong there. Football isn't really any different and to clarify something, I criticised Van Gaal plenty last season but I don't think I ever outright called for his sacking. I did give him time, I just didn't give him a free pass until that time was up.

Rayne Wooney

The players have learned the philosophy, it's just a rubbish one, I'm sure they learned it within the first couple of months of Van Gaal's arrival yet he milked the whole needing time thing for a whole season

He has turned recently into needing players which is laughable, the players are there to do better. Fair enough if we don't win a league but they should at least be getting top 4 and playing some entertaining football at the same time.

bangkok

TheDoc wrote: »

I totally appreciate and agree with where Mitch was coming from. Fergie displayed a public disdain for agents and the increasing evaluations in the transfer market (which I thought was always an excuse for covering up a blundered transfer) which left the club missing out on a lot of top quality players and youth prospects, leaving a squad that was massively reliant on his management, and very evidently couldn't function without him when he left. For all the great credit he gets, and deserves, for moving with the times in terms of man management and how he deployed his squad, he appeared to not also move along with the evolving transfer market.

Can you imagine Ferguson signing off on a potential 60m+ deal for Martial? This is the guy who said no to Hazard over a few million as far as I recall.

Arsenal appear they will have the same problem when Wenger leaves. As clubs started to adjust their models and structures to become resistant to managerial change, we didn't have to as Fergie was the fire in the engine room. But we didn't even make an attempt and putting in place some contingencies.

It's simply not viable and responsible any more to allow managers have the final say when it comes to potential expenditures of 50-100m each transfer window, and the club should be ensuring that when a manager leaves, it doesn't render half the squad obsolete also.

we probably would have signed him for £40m

Fergie never minded breaking records, he broke the world record fee for a teenage Ronaldo, paid huge money another world record for Wayne Rooney, Paid over 20m for a teenage Anderson.

RobertKK

The other day I was talking about the difference between the player and the person, and how the person can make one not like the player despite their talent.

Read this Sport Witness article about Vidic.
Shows what a great person he is, apart from being the great player he was.

https://twitter.com/Sport_Witness/status/693066538266578946

http://sportwitness.ning.com/forum/topics/nemanja-vidic-inspired-by-tragedy-to-become-a-man-united-great