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

Maximus Alexander

Lord TSC wrote: »

Its still more than Giggs has done. Zidane also was assistant manager to Carlo when they won the Champions League, spent time working under Jose and was the Sporting Director for a while too.

Thats not saying he's a good idea; I'd be surprised if he lasts any longer than any other coach at Real. But it strikes me he does have more behind the scenes experience than Giggs does.

I've also always gotten the impression, and I might be wrong, that the managerial role at Madrid is a bit different than at United. There seems a lot of string pulling and decision making coming from above, whereas at United the prospect of putting Giggs in a Fergie type role where he has total control over the footballing operations at the club is just madness.

jayo26

Lord TSC wrote: »

Its still more than Giggs has done. Zidane also was assistant manager to Carlo when they won the Champions League, spent time working under Jose and was the Sporting Director for a while too.

Thats not saying he's a good idea; I'd be surprised if he lasts any longer than any other coach at Real. But it strikes me he does have more behind the scenes experience than Giggs does.

Could be wrong here mate but I don't actually thing he worked as an assistant or coach under jose wasn't he brought back in 2009 as some sort of an advisor and carlo brought him into the first team.

Yhh he may have more experience then giggs but in the grand scheme of things what experience he has is worth fek all.

Look at as if he got the same Experience in England it be the equivalent of managing a team in league one for less then two seasons having a few top players and failing to get promoted. Now imagine us giving a novice league one manager the job instead of giggs?? I'd rather chance giggs all day long at least he knows what the club is about and what to demand from players.

But there is a lot of premier league managers better qualified to take over the club that will not get then chance.

bangkok

homerjay2005 wrote: »

based on last summer, Stones would cost about £40m, crazy money for a player that young who has alot of developing to do. ive kept a close eye on him this season and while he has been good at times, he does not look like a £40m player.

he apparently wants to play for United (could also be false reports) but it would be a huge risk.

the sad reality is, there isnt a huge amount of choice out there, top class center halves are rare.

can we use a time machine and re sign Rio Ferdinand aged 24?

Lord TSC

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

I've also always gotten the impression, and I might be wrong, that the managerial role at Madrid is a bit different than at United. There seems a lot of string pulling and decision making coming from above, whereas at United the prospect of putting Giggs in a Fergie type role where he has total control over the footballing operations at the club is just madness.

It certainly seems that Perez buys the players and tells the manager who to play.

homerjay2005

tvercetti wrote: »

I doubt he'd be got for £40m. Not because of his talent but more due to who the buying team is, who the selling team are and the fact he's English.

well that is more reason to be cautious here, it would be a crazy risk. for every player like Rooney and Rio who were worth the money, theres multiple players who cost big money as teenagers and it didn't work out, its hit or miss and potential doesn't always guarantee you success.

really shows the importance of getting our academy in gear asap, something that appears to have been regressing alarmingly in recent years - for example our u-18 team have lost 8 games in a row in their league which is shocking.

Your Airbag

I understand the objections to Giggs getting the managerial job, what I don't understand is some of the hateful comments he is getting. " making him manager would be worst decision ever" "disaster" and "his sideline show was pathetic".

Giggs is a UTD legend, and although this in should no way mean he has a right to be the manager it does mean, for me at least he should get a little more respect when being talked about. You'd swear he was clueless and destined to be a total flop with some of the talk on here.

He managed four games, won two, lost one and drew one. There is not enough of a sample size there to indicate what type of manager he would be but it seems some people have already made up their mind that he would be useless based on nothing.

He is the most decorated footballer in history iirc and gave UTD so much. After the final Southampton game he managed Giggs admitted to breaking down in tears, in part due to the pressure of managing United, and also said he had struggled to sleep during the period.

The man has a great passion for UTD and he deserves a little more respect than he is getting.

Mitch Connor

homerjay2005 wrote: »

well that is more reason to be cautious here, it would be a crazy risk. for every player like Rooney and Rio who were worth the money, theres multiple players who cost big money as teenagers and it didn't work out, its hit or miss and potential doesn't always guarantee you success.

really shows the importance of getting our academy in gear asap, something that appears to have been regressing alarmingly in recent years - for example our u-18 team have lost 8 games in a row in their league which is shocking.

academy and scouting. Its not like Stones is a product of the everton youth system.

I would suggest basically all sctructures at the club need a massive revamp and modernisation. It appears we are lagging quite badly in youth setup and scouting - with the club still not fully on track in those respects since Fergie left, and left behind a relatively antiquated structure. Moyes put a lot of work into revamping and modernising the scouting - but a lot of that work and reports left with him and his staff. I beleive LVG has also brought in his own scouting team or structures but that they would likely leave with him too. I think scouting information and structures should be relatively independent of the manager so that if/when they leave, there isn't a loss of player and scouting knowledge, as appears to have been the case when Fergie and Moyes left.

That we have been leaderless at Youth level for 6 months to a year is fairly damning imo, and points to neglect and carelessness at the top levels at United.

Scouting and Youth structures need proper management and vision to even bring it in to line with the competition in England, never mind up with the best in England or the World. I hear very little good about the United structures from people who have some knowledge of them - particularly the youth set up from people involved in 'grass routes' football around Manchester, who feel City are far more active and better set up.

Maximus Alexander

Your Airbag wrote: »

I understand the objections to Giggs getting the managerial job, what I don't understand is some of the hateful comments he is getting. " making him manager would be worst decision ever" "disaster" and "his sideline show was pathetic".

Giggs is a UTD legend, and although this in should no way mean he has a right to be the manager it does mean, for me at least he should get a little more respect when being talked about. You'd swear he was clueless and destined to be a total flop with some of the talk on here.

He managed four games, won two, lost one and drew one. There is not enough of a sample size there to indicate what type of manager he would be but it seems some people have already made up their mind that he would be useless based on nothing.

He is the most decorated footballer in history iirc and gave UTD so much. After the final Southampton game he managed Giggs admitted to breaking down in tears, in part due to the pressure of managing United, and also said he had struggled to sleep during the period.

The man has a great passion for UTD and he deserves a little more respect than he is getting.

It's not about making your mind up that he's useless, it's about accepting that there's no evidence or reason to believe he'll be any use. And there needs to be, to be manager at Manchester United.

I have great respect for what Giggs has done at United, he was one of my idols growing up, but that doesn't make the prospect of him being made manager based on a couple of years sitting beside one any less ridiculous.

René Meulensteen sat on the bench beside a much better manager for years, and also had actual managerial experience, why didn't he succeed Fergie?

bangkok

homerjay2005 wrote: »

well that is more reason to be cautious here, it would be a crazy risk. for every player like Rooney and Rio who were worth the money, theres multiple players who cost big money as teenagers and it didn't work out, its hit or miss and potential doesn't always guarantee you success.

really shows the importance of getting our academy in gear asap, something that appears to have been regressing alarmingly in recent years - for example our u-18 team have lost 8 games in a row in their league which is shocking.

I seriously doubt the club is too worried by this.

Even if 1 player came out of that u-18 side into the first team it would be a success. The reason for youth teams, u18, u21 and reserve side is to get a player capable of playing in the first team. that is the ultimate goal. If the players are not good enough, they will be let go by the club. Loads get released every year. no big deal.

the key is picking good players by the scouts who will develop in the u18 side etc and hopefully have a future in the first team

Your Airbag

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

It's not about making your mind up that he's useless, it's about accepting that there's no evidence or reason to believe he'll be any use. And there needs to be, to be manager at Manchester United.

I have great respect for what Giggs has done at United, he was one of my idols growing up, but that doesn't make the prospect of him being made manager based on a couple of years sitting beside one any less ridiculous.

René Meulensteen sat on the bench beside a much better manager for years, and also had actual managerial experience, why didn't he succeed Fergie?

Well a lot of people have made their mind up seemingly that he would be a disaster so my post was directed at them.

I don't know why Rene didn't succeed Fergie and that has nothing to do with my post so I'm not sure why your asking. I have no desire for Giggs to succeed LvG either, my point was about how people have predicted how bad Giggs would be based on nothing, a point you totally missed by the looks of it.

Drumpot

My biggest concern is whether the owners simply don't really know how to run the club or they are too loyal to Woodward who many believe is not particularly good in his role.

Did anybody at the club actually watch Moyes or LVG teams play before hiring them? It the club is professing itself to be wanting to play a certain brand of football and is even pitching it to sponsors , why were these men appointed managers? It's a question that many fans refuse to really consider.

I believe that owners and CEOs of clubs can hide behind managers when things go wrong all too easy. It's not to say managers don't play a huge part in success , but owners and people running clubs seldom, if ever get objectively identified as a problem.

A part of this is because their roles can be ambiguous. Take for example the person deciding on budget and players to buy. Many People conveniently presumed, without any evidence, Moyes was the reason for uniteds terrible transfer dealings the season he was in charge. What's more likely to be the problem? A manager with over a decades experience struggling to decide who to buy or a new Chief exec taking on a role he had never done in his life?!

The headlines "LVG spends 250mil on players" isn't really correct. Woodward is the man negotiating/spending the money and the owners are the ones deciding to give it the all clear. I don't believe LVG (or Moyes) is necessarily going "here is my list of players", but people presume its the case because it was probably the way it was with SAF. Yes, I take it that the manager has input, but not in the football manager kind of input where they decide who specifically to buy all the time.

Then we look to hiring managers. What was the expected goal from hiring Moyes or LVG? I don't think anybody who watched teams managed by these managers would expect free flowing football, so why is it ok for media to have a go at both managers for not playing football they are not renowned for coaching? Surely it's the owners fault for hiring them?

I think there is more substantial evidence to suggest that the owners are the ones out of their depth then anything else. Gill and Ferguson made their jobs easy. Up until then all they had to do was market and whore the club to anybody they could. Woodward was the main man at this.

Then when they have to step up and take control they make their best salesman/accountant the top guy at the club.

LVG has IMO brought a feeling of stability to the club. He appears calm and confident and the players do appear to be actually trying to play for him (unlike the clowns at Chelsea).

The results and performances have been erratic and unacceptable but every club has to go through a transition at some stage. After decades of success United may need to go through even more then others.

The alternative to my suggestion that the owners are incompetent , is that they actually have a good long term strategy. That the managers they hire are primarily to help the club stabilise and get back to winning ways.

Jose would be instant success , so why not sign him? Because he leaves clubs in sh*t after 3 seasons. Hiring Moyes and LVG suggests they actually want a manager who will reform and build a legacy or squad that can be passed onto replacement manages. This would mean that the target is not so much success as it is progress.

But most people measure success by results or performances. Now that a bit of pressure is on, will the glazers stand firm or press panic button again? If this strategy was easy, everybody would be doing it.

I would have a lot more respect and time for the owners if they were actually trying something different, but I'm not sure I can give them the benefit of the doubt. My guess is that they don't know what to do and entrust the running of the club to a man out of his depth.

bangkok

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

It's not about making your mind up that he's useless, it's about accepting that there's no evidence or reason to believe he'll be any use. And there needs to be, to be manager at Manchester United.

I have great respect for what Giggs has done at United, he was one of my idols growing up, but that doesn't make the prospect of him being made manager based on a couple of years sitting beside one any less ridiculous.

René Meulensteen sat on the bench beside a much better manager for years, and also had actual managerial experience, why didn't he succeed Fergie?

from a fans point of view, yes there is no evidence.

no one knows what he is doing behind the scene's, in meetings etc he could be very good and impressing everybody at the club

Maximus Alexander

Your Airbag wrote: »

Well a lot of people have made their mind up seemingly that he would be a disaster so my post was directed at them.

I don't know why Rene didn't succeed Fergie and that has nothing to do with my post so I'm not sure why your asking. I have no desire for Giggs to succeed LvG either, my point was about how people have predicted how bad Giggs would be based on nothing, a point you totally missed by the looks of it.

I did not miss your point - I pointed out that you appear to be conflating the idea that appointing Giggs would be a terrible decision with the idea that Giggs would definitely be a terrible manager. These are not the same.

I have not actually seen anyone here state that "Giggs would definitely be a terrible manager", but if they have then I will happily withdraw my comment.

Rene was used as a comparison, a tool that you've surely seen employed in discussions before. Many people would think that employing Rene as manager would have been a terrible decision, despite having a much better CV than Giggs. This does not necessarily equate to a certitude that Rene would have been a terrible manager.

bangkok wrote: »

from a fans point of view, yes there is no evidence.

no one knows what he is doing behind the scene's, in meetings etc he could be very good and impressing everybody at the club

You're absolutely right, but we are fans and not privy to those meetings, so we can only form opinions based on what we know.

bangkok

I see in Man City are linked with a 40m for Sane. Didn't think he would cost that much, a player I think we should try and sign but not for that much

TheDoc

Your Airbag wrote: »

I understand the objections to Giggs getting the managerial job, what I don't understand is some of the hateful comments he is getting. " making him manager would be worst decision ever" "disaster" and "his sideline show was pathetic".

Giggs is a UTD legend, and although this in should no way mean he has a right to be the manager it does mean, for me at least he should get a little more respect when being talked about. You'd swear he was clueless and destined to be a total flop with some of the talk on here.

He managed four games, won two, lost one and drew one. There is not enough of a sample size there to indicate what type of manager he would be but it seems some people have already made up their mind that he would be useless based on nothing.

He is the most decorated footballer in history iirc and gave UTD so much. After the final Southampton game he managed Giggs admitted to breaking down in tears, in part due to the pressure of managing United, and also said he had struggled to sleep during the period.

The man has a great passion for UTD and he deserves a little more respect than he is getting.

There is a pretty large, and I mean, really large, sample size of former players, former great players, that then move into management.

And what you find, it's very much more miss then hit. Any managerial appointment contains an element of risk, just like any signings of a player contains an element of risk. You want to ensure you are making a decision that contains the smallest risk.

Giggs being handed the reins of United would be a MASSIVE risk. Massive.

Giggs being anywhere near the job is part of the "Search for Pep 2.0" that pretty much every big club has looked at since Guardiola emerged. Disregarding the fact he is a pure anomoly.

There is enough history and use cases there to indicate that former players going into management rarely succeed or do well. So that for a start is a pretty big indication to cause worry.

And while you are totally correct in terms of his four games is not a real sample size to judge anyone by, he did lose to Sunderland......

Depending on which side of the fence you are on, or how you viewed it, the Norwich incident was him trying to salvage himself from the sinking ship and impress fans and the board to take over, which is pathetic

Or Van Gaal told him to get out there and lash them out of it, as he does with Albert Stuivenberg frequently, who you can see on the sidelines now and then giving tactical instructions. Either or, his sideline show failed to do anything (not that I put too much stock into that stuff anyway)

It's nothing about being disrespectful to the man himself, it's about his credentials, and the proposals being put forward for his suitability to the role. I've heard next to nothing to indicate any tangible benefit Giggs provides, apart from Van Gaal praising him for his detailed work he performs. And that work was outlined as collating information provided by Marcel Bout to form an analysis pack on the opposition.

Like some papers made out that Giggs let lose on Memphis and his lifestyle, where as the player himself was quoted as saying he is receiving help from Giggs in learning the PL and playing on the left wing. Considering Memphis form at present, you could argue thats not working either.

Basically there is no real guarantees or evidence to outline how it will go. But I'd argue there is more evidence and patterns pointing towards his appointment not going well for the club, as opposed to being a success.

And I think planning for or advocating for him to become manager, based purely on his success as a player, is ludicrous.

Pro. F

Drumpot wrote: »

Many People conveniently presumed, without any evidence, Moyes was the reason for uniteds terrible transfer dealings the season he was in charge. What's more likely to be the problem? A manager with over a decades experience struggling to decide who to buy or a new Chief exec taking on a role he had never done in his life?!

Moyes had a long history of being a ditherer in the transfer market before he came to United. And since he left Moyes has said that the reason he didn't sign Hererra himself was because he wanted to give it more time to see if Hererra had gotten over an injury (Hererra had been an ever present in the Athletic side for over half a season after the injury).

So yeah, I'd say it was more likely that Moyes was the problem rather than the CE.

IamtheWalrus

Pep wants the EPL.

http://www.skysports.com/football/news/11661/10119896/pep-guardiola-says-he-is-ready-for-a-premier-league-job

homerjay2005

Rooney named England player of the year for 2015 - he seems to be playing much better for them than he is for us.

he has 13 goals in his last 20 games whereas he is struggling for goals in the United team (though the standard of opposition is higher in the PL of course and he scored 1 or 2 pens in that run.)

TheDoc

Pro. F wrote: »

Moyes had a long history of being a ditherer in the transfer market before he came to United. And since he left Moyes has said that the reason he didn't sign Hererra himself was because he wanted to give it more time to see if Hererra had gotten over an injury (Hererra had been an ever present in the Athletic side for over half a season after the injury).

So yeah, I'd say it was more likely that Moyes was the problem rather than the CE.

There was however an issue that the club had not budgeted or accounted for large summer spending, as the assumption was the title winning squad would be sufficent to continue and challenge the following season.

I always harp back to the massively bundled presser from Gill, and comments from Ferguson, how the squad could challenge for years, and the acadamy provide the stars of the future.

A number of indications(depends on how reliable or insightful you'd judge them) appeared to outline Moyes quickly identified some areas that needed strengthening, along with general re-enforcements to freshen the title winning squad, and the club was caught totally on the hop and not prepared.

Moyes did indeed have that reputation, and it appears to have been correct, but I don't think he was helped out by the clubs ill preparation for the targets he did identify or the areas he wanted to strengthen.

Discodog

If Giggs wants to manage he should get a managers job & prove his ability. It smacks of being scared to take responsibility unlike G Nev who leapt at the opportunity.

This combined with his comments about losing sleep etc makes me seriously question his ability & ambition.

TheDoc

homerjay2005 wrote: »

Rooney named England player of the year for 2015 - he seems to be playing much better for them than he is for us.

he has 13 goals in his last 20 games whereas he is struggling for goals in the United team (though the standard of opposition is higher in the PL of course and he scored 1 or 2 pens in that run.)

In fairness he did set a new goal scoring record so in isolation it is well deserved.

I'm sure there will be some questions about it, problem being with English fans, they struggle to separate the Club and National team, as can a certain extent us as nearby neighbours.

homerjay2005

Discodog wrote: »

If Giggs wants to manage he should get a managers job & prove his ability. It smacks of being scared to take responsibility unlike G Nev who leapt at the opportunity.

This combined with his comments about losing sleep etc makes me seriously question his ability & ambition.

it appears that Giggs thinks if he leaves and it doesnt go well, he may never get his chance at United.

TheDoc

Discodog wrote: »

If Giggs wants to manage he should get a managers job & prove his ability. It smacks of being scared to take responsibility unlike G Nev who leapt at the opportunity.

This combined with his comments about losing sleep etc makes me seriously question his ability & ambition.

G.Nev making a bit of a meal already at Valencia. No wins in his first month, increasing unrest with fans, along with his obscure comments about not actually planning to be a manager longterm. Really weird comments to make, and was a bit cringy seeing him backtrack.

jayo26

So pep has said the reason he doesn't want to renew his bayern Contract is because he wants to manage In premier league,

jayo26

TheDoc wrote: »

G.Nev making a bit of a meal already at Valencia. No wins in his first month, increasing unrest with fans, along with his obscure comments about not actually planning to be a manager longterm. Really weird comments to make, and was a bit cringy seeing him backtrack.

Yhh didn't understand this from nevile I thought he would of been alot more up to speed on the media and interviews.

Maximus Alexander

IamtheWalrus wrote: »

Pep wants the EPL.

http://www.skysports.com/football/news/11661/10119896/pep-guardiola-says-he-is-ready-for-a-premier-league-job

.

Hococop wrote: »

Say the line Futureguy

Pro. F

TheDoc wrote: »

There was however an issue that the club had not budgeted or accounted for large summer spending, as the assumption was the title winning squad would be sufficent to continue and challenge the following season.

I always harp back to the massively bundled presser from Gill, and comments from Ferguson, how the squad could challenge for years, and the acadamy provide the stars of the future.

A number of indications(depends on how reliable or insightful you'd judge them) appeared to outline Moyes quickly identified some areas that needed strengthening, along with general re-enforcements to freshen the title winning squad, and the club was caught totally on the hop and not prepared.

Moyes did indeed have that reputation, and it appears to have been correct, but I don't think he was helped out by the clubs ill preparation for the targets he did identify or the areas he wanted to strengthen.

There is no reliable evidence that the club were unwilling to back Moyes in the transfer market. There was a lot of fanciful speculation.

Mitch Connor

Pro. F wrote: »

There is no reliable evidence that the club were unwilling to back Moyes in the transfer market. There was a lot of fanciful speculation.

So the only player moyes wanted to add to the squad that summer was Fellaini, and the club only bothered to sign him in the last minutes, for millions more than they could have bought him for a month previous.

Seems unlikely Moyes got all he asked for that summer.

RobertKK

IamtheWalrus wrote: »

Pep wants the EPL.

http://www.skysports.com/football/news/11661/10119896/pep-guardiola-says-he-is-ready-for-a-premier-league-job

It would be great planning by United if they have a concrete plan - keep Van Gaal but have Pep lined up to takeover, put Pep on a wage a year earlier than he starts if necessary.
Like the way Bayern have Ancelotti signed up for next season. United should do similarly.

glued

Pro. F wrote: »

There is no reliable evidence that the club were unwilling to back Moyes in the transfer market. There was a lot of fanciful speculation.

The club made a balls of buying players that Summer. Giggs making a fcuk out of the Thiago deal being the number one problem that summer which in turn caused United to spend more money on Fellaini as his clause had expired.

Flint Fredstone

glued wrote: »

The club made a balls of buying players that Summer. Giggs making a fcuk out of the Thiago deal being the number one problem that summer which in turn caused United to spend more money on Fellaini as his clause had expired.

What's this now?

TheDoc

Pro. F wrote: »

There is no reliable evidence that the club were unwilling to back Moyes in the transfer market. There was a lot of fanciful speculation.

I suppose like with most of the scenarios behind the scenes, hard to take anything at face value. Jamie Jackson felt it accurate enough to put it into his A Season in Red book, and I remember reading it a handful of times around the January window under Moyes.

I also believe there was a Woodward quote from a finance briefing where he mentioned the clubs finances were not aligned and budgeted for his first transfer window, but steps were being taken to ensure finance was properly available during the second summer window. Think it might be possible to actually see that in the Financial report for that year, under the projected summer expenditure, and it was astonishingly low.

either or, I take your point, I just feel that it wasn't solely down to Moyes, and that there was failings on both sides of the equation.

StringerBell

bangkok wrote: »

now that Zidane has been given the Madrid job, is it any crazier than giving Giggs the Man Utd job?

Its Madrid.

TheDoc

RobertKK wrote: »

It would be great planning by United if they have a concrete plan - keep Van Gaal but have Pep lined up to takeover, put Pep on a wage a year earlier than he starts if necessary.
Like the way Bayern have Ancelotti signed up for next season. United should do similarly.

That's not a bad idea.

Van Gaal clearly going at end of contract. Would be sweet to get Pep nailed down, let him take his little sabbatical again, coming back energized and fired to take over

I suppose the proposed downside would be the affect it will have on players. I'd maybe argue that having that sort of continuity would be a massive boost to the players. They will know they are being watched and judged, by the manager coming in down the line.

Pro. F

Mitch Connor wrote: »

So the only player moyes wanted to add to the squad that summer was Fellaini, and the club only bothered to sign him in the last minutes, for millions more than they could have bought him for a month previous.

Seems unlikely Moyes got all he asked for that summer.

I don't think it's at all unlikely that a ditherer like Moyes would take too long deciding on who to buy when he's come into a new team and end up only buying one senior player. All the evidence that I have seen of Moyes' work (ie interviews with Moyes and his staff) is that he spends months and years scouting players before he can make a decision. So it makes sense to me that he'd struggle to make decisions quickly enough when assessing his new squad and identifying the transfer targets needed for the new level he had found himself at.

Headshot

Pep wont be going near utd I reckon

Pro. F

TheDoc wrote: »

I suppose like with most of the scenarios behind the scenes, hard to take anything at face value. Jamie Jackson felt it accurate enough to put it into his A Season in Red book, and I remember reading it a handful of times around the January window under Moyes.

I also believe there was a Woodward quote from a finance briefing where he mentioned the clubs finances were not aligned and budgeted for his first transfer window, but steps were being taken to ensure finance was properly available during the second summer window. Think it might be possible to actually see that in the Financial report for that year, under the projected summer expenditure, and it was astonishingly low.

either or, I take your point, I just feel that it wasn't solely down to Moyes, and that there was failings on both sides of the equation.

Fire away, that would make a strong argument if you had it.

StringerBell

homerjay2005 wrote: »

it appears that Giggs thinks if he leaves and it doesnt go well, he may never get his chance at United.

That would be all the more reason he should never get the job if true

Blatter

TheDoc wrote: »

I suppose like with most of the scenarios behind the scenes, hard to take anything at face value. Jamie Jackson felt it accurate enough to put it into his A Season in Red book, and I remember reading it a handful of times around the January window under Moyes.

I also believe there was a Woodward quote from a finance briefing where he mentioned the clubs finances were not aligned and budgeted for his first transfer window, but steps were being taken to ensure finance was properly available during the second summer window. Think it might be possible to actually see that in the Financial report for that year, under the projected summer expenditure, and it was astonishingly low.

either or, I take your point, I just feel that it wasn't solely down to Moyes, and that there was failings on both sides of the equation.

Didn't it come out in a few places afterwards that United had bid more than Madrid for Bale that Summer but he opted to go to Madrid. Afair, Moyes indicated this to be true in an interview after his deserved sacking.

If so, it would certainly quash any theory of United not being willing to spend a certain amount of money that Summer.

TheDoc

TheDoc wrote: »

G.Nev making a bit of a meal already at Valencia. No wins in his first month, increasing unrest with fans, along with his obscure comments about not actually planning to be a manager longterm. Really weird comments to make, and was a bit cringy seeing him backtrack.

Could be wrong but I thought when G.Nev tok the job first he said the same thing and also he would never manage United. I imagine he is just taking all the pressure off himself, if he suceeds he stays on in management if not no biggy didn't want it anyways.

Very early to be judging him but I know how fickle fans in Spain can be, If Negrado had stuck that chance near the end the result would have bought him a good bit more time.

TheDoc

Pro. F wrote: »

Fire away, that would make a strong argument if you had it.

I'll have a dig later if I remember to

It was around when these stories emerged that I believe there was a public document made available, and I know we discussed it here in depth(might be mixing it up with the previous years report, with the forecast for Moyes first term in charge, but dont think so)

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/manchester-united-edward-woodward-admits-2253711

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/news-and-comment/manchester-united-manager-david-moyes-will-have-money-at-his-disposal-as-executive-vice-chairman-ed-9124142.html

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/ed-woodward-promises-substantial-summer-spending-manchester-united-1436151

The above arn't proof or anything, just a reminder of the timelines of that specific brief.

TheDoc

Blatter wrote: »

Didn't it come out in a few places afterwards that United had bid more than Madrid for Bale that Summer but he opted to go to Madrid. Afair, Moyes indicated this to be true in an interview after his deserved sacking.

If so, it would certainly quash any theory of United not being willing to spend a certain amount of money that Summer.

Yeah they did indeed. And there was various reports on the specifics of the deal, but all of them indicated that it was a relatively low fee up front, with the rest of the deal being paid over a number of years.

I also believe at the time most of the deals we were making(again this is basically speculation based of second hand information, but down to if you trust some journos or not) a lot of our deals were low upfront fees, with the rest being paid over a number of installments.

I'm not so sure that the actual capital and finances not being in place was a big problem, I'd imagine the bigger problem was the club not expecting to have to sign a number of players in that window. Gill made clear a big criteria for selecting the new manager would be someone inheriting the squad and continuing it's developement, not someone to come in and start tearing it apart.

As much as Moyes was a clear ditherer, I also believe whole heartily the club was caught entirely on the hop.

Reality is probably we won't ever "really" know until he writes an inevitable book, which even then will still be weighted to his side of the story.

Blatter

TheDoc wrote: »

G.Nev making a bit of a meal already at Valencia. No wins in his first month, increasing unrest with fans, along with his obscure comments about not actually planning to be a manager longterm. Really weird comments to make, and was a bit cringy seeing him backtrack.

I don't think this is true at all.

From what I've heard, the vibes at Valencia are quite positive towards Neville. Results haven't been great but he's only been there a few weeks and the fixtures have been tough. Apparently he has the team working much harder and they're beginning to look a lot better. By all accounts he was taking over a mess in terms of form and injuries. I read that they've already had something like twice as many injuries as the entirety of last season and Neville has to deal with integrating many of them back into the side as well as other issues.

StringerBell

TheDoc wrote: »

Yeah they did indeed. And there was various reports on the specifics of the deal, but all of them indicated that it was a relatively low fee up front, with the rest of the deal being paid over a number of years.

I also believe at the time most of the deals we were making(again this is basically speculation based of second hand information, but down to if you trust some journos or not) a lot of our deals were low upfront fees, with the rest being paid over a number of installments.

I'm not so sure that the actual capital and finances not being in place was a big problem, I'd imagine the bigger problem was the club not expecting to have to sign a number of players in that window. Gill made clear a big criteria for selecting the new manager would be someone inheriting the squad and continuing it's developement, not someone to come in and start tearing it apart.

As much as Moyes was a clear ditherer, I also believe whole heartily the club was caught entirely on the hop.

Reality is probably we won't ever "really" know until he writes an inevitable book, which even then will still be weighted to his side of the story.

The vast majority of deals these days, particularly the big ones have an initial fee, monthly fees and other potential clauses to them.

The Ronaldo deal was very unique in that United insisted on the entire 80.3 million being paid up front.

Transfer fees are spread out over the during of the contract generally speaking.

Mitch Connor

StringerBell wrote: »

Transfer fees are spread out over the during of the contract generally speaking.

No, they are accounted for over the course of the contract - the actual payments can be made over a very different period.

bucketybuck

bangkok wrote: »

from a fans point of view, yes there is no evidence.

no one knows what he is doing behind the scene's, in meetings etc he could be very good and impressing everybody at the club

We might not know what is happening behind the scenes but we can see the effects on the pitch, and since Giggs joined the coaching staff at United form and performance has dropped off a cliff. That won't be solely down to him but it cannot be ignored either.

If he is good in meetings let him join the marketing team, but until he proves he can be a successful manager he should not even be considered as a candidate.

bangkok

Don't like the way Pep is going on while he is still the Bayern manager. not classy at all. If I was a Bayern fan I don't think I would be too happy.

not sure if he is the right man for United either.

I mean most manager would do well with both the Barca and Bayern teams he has managed. He hasn't been really tested. some of the defensive aspects of his coaching will be exposed in the premier league, he also changed a lot of what was good about Bayern for the worse imo

StringerBell

Mitch Connor wrote: »

No, they are accounted for over the course of the contract - the actual payments can be made over a very different period.

That is what I meant. I already said they can get paid monthly, they can also be paid yearly. It really depends on the individual deal. The point is that installment transfers are the norm, not the exception.

Lord TSC

bangkok wrote: »

Don't like the way Pep is going on while he is still the Bayern manager. not classy at all. If I was a Bayern fan I don't think I would be too happy.

The club have already announced the replacement. As far as I'm concerned, that's the club giving him the ok to talk about his future.

bangkok

Lord TSC wrote: »

The club have already announced the replacement. As far as I'm concerned, that's the club giving him the ok to talk about his future.

you are not a Bayern supported though?

Imagine van gaal was leaving in the summer and he was talking about managing in spain etc many a united fan wouldnt be happy (actually they probably would be because he has been crap so far)