Manchester United Thread

Ugh, apparently our converted winger/starting FB Ashley Young has a serious injury now too. Unlikely to see much of Valencia, Shaw or Young for the rest of the season.

Desperately need a full back in the window. Darmian is okay on the right, but we have no one now to play on the left. With Rojo and Jones still out, Blind has to play CB.

Sigh.
 
We haven't scored in 11 consecutive first halves at OT.

LVG remains in job.

I wonder if we could petition Adidas. Only way to get through to Ed.

There are rumours of a first half boycott for the fans. That would be amazing. All the home fans outside the stadium for the first 45...but they'd still have paid for the second, so the Glazers will not give 2 f*cks.
 
Good summary of 'British football' from Shane Long there. Can't get the ball on Mane's cross, so just lowers his shoulder and basically throws himself into Darmian while the Italian heads it away. Breaks a couple ribs. Down to no fit first team fullbacks.

Not even a foul.

The standard of refereeing in this league is an absolute joke. This from Mike Jones who oversaw Terry's excellent equaliser last week.
 
I'm now a Spurs and Leicester fan for the next month or so.

Ed is going to keep his friend in a job until the Top 4 is mathematically impossible. So hurry up and make it so.

Blind had a shot from about 40 yards that the keeper caught in the 20th minute or so. That was our last shot on goal. In the match.

Man United's worst ever points tally after 23 games in Premier League history. 3 worse than under Moyes.
 
Even if he's Ed's man, I can't see LVG surviving now ..that's if he doesn't walk

1 shot on target - a speculative 35 yarder from Blind straight at GK.
 
I've been at the point where if I have an errand to run or something else to take care off.. I dont even bother to try and schedule it around watching United like I used to. Didn't watch today s game either and it doesn't sound like I missed a thing. Hopefully LVG s organizational changes pay off like at Bayern,but he is not the man to be our manager. I really wanted him to work out for us.
 
LVG is on Netflix these days.

Screen-Shot-2016-01-08-at-10716-PM.png
 
haha, Sorry, I was away and had no internet so I missed the game and I think i'm glad that i missed it....everything I read so far seems to say that it was a miserable game...which is turning out to be a norm now for our matches...

To answer gerd's question, I think our team will play more free-flowing football without Fellaini on our team and I think he'd play better if he's not in this system. So I do agree that it'd be a win win situation if he were to be sold. (Don't hate the guy, just feels that he's in a wrong system) Same as Di Maria...great guy, love him, but with LvG, he's just always held back and he didn't enjoy it and played miserably. There are certain players that just don't fit into the system that LvG plays. And I hate that system....

Anywayz, I do agree that maybe Man Utd will never be where SAF had them ever again, but as a fan, you do hope that the team at least strives for that level. You can't just say "Well, SAF is gone, there goes our title hopes and we'll settle to be a mid-table club now playing boring football" cause if that's true, then I'm really disappointed at the club (at any club who does that for that matter). Clubs should always strive to be the best or at least heading to be the best. Even small clubs, after promotion, you strive to stay in the league, then strive to become in the top half, then European football and championships. Once you reach there, you try your best to stay up there and not go down. There will always be ups and downs and sometimes, your team will struggle and fall a few places, but after that, you fight to reach up there again. That must be how clubs are run, if not, then it's just a business and there's no passion in it. Football is about passion, that love...if not, why are we even here discussing it as if there's something that connects us to this business?
 
Totally agree with the post, and the difference with United is that is no longer a football club. It's a vehicle for a very rich family to become richer. That happens to involve football. It could just as easily have been a bread delivery company, or another set of strip malls.

Fergie was the key to ensuring we remained a historic football club. Because he was the real power, despite the Glazers and Woodward holding the deeds. If Fergie had done what was right and spoken out against the owners in the G&G time, the fans would have gone with him. But he did the opposite, pocketed a HUGE amount of money and sailed off into the sunset.

With him gone, there are no football men at the table. And it's showing on the pitch.

All we can hope is that something major changes - the board agree that Fergie needs to join them with a seat, or that it would be helpful to have someone knowledgeable about the industry running the club.

You see it all the time. One of the FB founders bought the Washington Post thinking he could bring his knowledge to a different industry. Failed. Same thing here. For better or worse, running a football club is not like running a successful business.
 
Godotelli said:
Who do you want as manager?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure it matters, depressingly. At this point change is needed for change's sake - we could probably appoint the kitman and get a decent bump from the players being allowed to just PLAY football again.

Longer term it's a huge problem. There isn't a standout option (assuming you've got Pep). Even he is a slight risk imo - do tactical managers actually succeed in the prem? Where some matches seem to be won by whomever works harder? Where fouls are less predictable?

Mourinho has shown in has last season at CFC that he just can't be trusted to clean up his act. Results wise he's more than the obvious choice. He also clearly wanted the job post Fergie, and hopefully would be well motivated to show he hasn't lost it. But he develops 0 youth talent, and leaves clubs in turmoil. Then again, we've now gone longer than at any point since 1989 (!!!) without winning a trophy. So maybe Jose would be an answer at least.

And who else is out there? Why would Simeone leave? Ancelotti got picked up by Bayern. Where are all of the young up and comers? Where is the next SAF? There are managers that have done well in the Championship, but very few have made the transition to the top flight.

I think if there were an obvious, available answer, they'd already be in charge.
 
In the EPL alone there are a couple of very good managers who could be an excellent choice for Man Utd: Hughes, Pocchettino (i hope not), Eddy Howe.

I also think Gary Monk has done well at Swansea.

Perhaps also Borussia Dortmund's manager.

And of course i have a Belgian candidate: Hein Van Haezebroeck, the current coach of AA Gent.
He is now the second season in Gent.

When he took over the team was a shambles. The first season they won the title and now they are outstanding in Belgium (the past week they outclassed Anderlecht, Brugge and Standard) and have done exceptionally well (for a Belgian team) and all this without star players.

The manager i would love to see in the EPL (and with a big team: Bielsa).

It now seems as if Pep is the only good manager for big clubs, there are others and perhaps even better.
 
I recently read a quote, don't quite recall who it was, but he said that he thought Pep and Bielsa are the only two managers who are really influential in terms of style now because they make you believe in their plan and thus make you really believe in them as managers who know what they're doing.

I would love one of those two (I would also love Pochettino but that won't happen in the next year).
 
gerd said:
In the EPL alone there are a couple of very good managers who could be an excellent choice for Man Utd: Hughes, Pocchettino (i hope not), Eddy Howe.

I also think Gary Monk has done well at Swansea.

Perhaps also Borussia Dortmund's manager.

And of course i have a Belgian candidate: Hein Van Haezebroeck, the current coach of AA Gent.
He is now the second season in Gent.

When he took over the team was a shambles. The first season they won the title and now they are outstanding in Belgium (the past week they outclassed Anderlecht, Brugge and Standard) and have done exceptionally well (for a Belgian team) and all this without star players.

The manager i would love to see in the EPL (and with a big team: Bielsa).

It now seems as if Pep is the only good manager for big clubs, there are others and perhaps even better.
Click to expand...

Hughes is an interesting one. He seems to have some beef with United though. Pochettino should stay at Spurs, he's building something great there and tbh has a better first XI.

THe risk of someone like Howe or Monk is how do you justify that as Big Ed to the board? They've won nothing. I understand that problem.
 
It's hard though as some managers do great at smaller clubs with less expectations and less egos in the dressing room. Once you get these highly paid millionaire divas, it's tough to sell your style of play unless you are Guardiola or someone who has that track record to get them to shut up. Also, you need the board to be strong and to back the guy over the players as Man Utd have done before with SAF allowing him to sell the star players that doesn't listen to him so others all must respect the manager. It's so much easier to just ease with the star diva who sells more shirts and tickets, than with the manager. (Also easier to just sack one than to sack the whole team of players). As much as I love Guardiola to coach us, and his record is great, I do think he may struggle a bit in the EPL as the league is quite different than La Liga and Bundesliga. With no disrespect to those two leages, but the teams that he took over were All-Star teams and the rest of the league aren't as competitive and rarely will there be any shockers even before he took over. Where as in the EPL, if you are caught napping, most teams can punish you as shown this season especially. Even some players say that each game is competitive where as in the Bundesliga, there are matches where you can turn off and still cruise to win.

Anywayz, with that said, it would still be very interesting to see Guardiola in the EPL and with whichever team he chooses, it should be interesting to see.

But with regards to Man Utd, I'm thinking that we should change Ed Woodward quicker than changing LvG. A few reasons behind this (Take it with a hint of salt as most of the reasons here are taken from tabloid articles which...well...aren't the most reliable)
1) He is a great businessman. With him in charge, we have been one of the most successful economically and commercially. However, as a football club, it doesn't relate as he seems to have lots of trouble signing new talent or renewing contracts. He seems to be a few steps late all the time and with Fellaini's transfer, pays over the odds unneccesarily
2) Not sure if it is really up to him, but since he took over, the PR angles of the club has been horrible! When some poor news erupts about the team, they'd "leak" news of them trying to sign Neymar, James, Bale and all the superstars of the world rather than keeping quiet or let the manager handle it instead. From a PR perspective, this is really poor in just avoiding the problems and letting them hang over the team ever week.
3) We are linked with every single player! This may be agents and journalists fault more than Woodward, but in the past with Gill, he's always quiet about the transfer businesses and he gets stuff done fast and early without any news leaking out. That is the best way to keep prices low and competitors away. The way Woodward handles his business, we're always paying over the odds and we get players a few days before the transfer window closes (or a few hours) and it doesn't give them enough time to learn the new system, settle into the team and then they're thrown into the flame with a match right after. It doesn't make the manager's job any easier as well

and finally, the reason why I'm writing so much

4) If the tabloids recently are to be believed, it appears that LvG has asked to step down twice during the festive season and Woodward has talked him out of it. After Saturday when LvG saying "I'm very disappointed that I cannot reach the expectations of the fans. They have -- or they had -- great expectation of me and I cannot fulfill them, so I am very frustrated because of that." Woodward has asked him to go home for a few days, discuss with his family before coming back on Tuesday. This is a man who says he cannot (not have not, or would not, but CANNOT) meet the expectations of the fans. So someone who admits he cannot do his job, and the boss asks him to stay. Shouldn't it be the other way around where LvG gives reasons why he should stay to Woodward who should be warning or firing him??? Does this guy have any idea how to run a football club? Van Gaal who "maybe" has the intellectual honesty to realize that he's not getting it done and, for the good of the club, somebody else ought to be given a chance -- and Woodward talks him out of it? That is ridiculous!!! I understand that stability is good and I was just posting about how it's rare for board members to back a manager rather than players to instill a sense of power to the manager, but this is for a guy who's football isn't entertaining nor is he providing the results. Visually and statistically this man isn't providing results. Why stand by to him?

Anywayz, thank you for reading this blurb/rant. I may not have thought stuff through yet, but I really needed a place to vent. Maybe some of you guys can provide better insight and see why he should stay.
 
Woodward made the decision - apparently drove it - to appoint LVG. Admitting LVG's failure is to admit his own. Which is something I don't believe he can do.

I really think it's that simple.
 
So United appear to be abandoning youth football. Or at least de-prioritising it. This from numerous articles this week on relative spends (compared to CFC/MCFC), a large loss to the Chelsea U18 (who are, admittedly, the best in Europe) and general disarray with staff.

Initially my reaction was to be obviously upset: we have produced more premier league footballers than any other club in England, and have had a youth player in the matchday squad for over 70 years.

But, if I put on my pure business hat, does youth football help the very top level? I'm not sure. Apparently City have spent upwards of 250m on developping youth facilities. And it is ridiculously impressive according to all that have been there. Indeed some United players have their kids train there. But, it's hardly helped City's first XI, despite being in place for 5 seasons. Chelsea is even more stark, they've been the best U21 and U18 team in the country more or less for half a decade, and who has made the first team? Loftus-Cheek?

Then you look at United, we have players that have made it - Welbeck, Janujaz, Cleverley, Lingard, McNair, Morrison, FB of the week - but are any of them actually good enough to win leagues? The best youth player we've had we poached from Le Havre and then refused to bend to Raiola's contract demands.

Anyway, point being, if you want to be the best team in the prem, might money be better spent just buying proven talent at a young age? Ie, let Southampton or WHU develop the kids through 17/18, have excellent youth scouting and then buy them when they're ready to train with the first team? Would cost more per player, but for the entire facility?

Soulless football 101 I know, but seems that's what our friend Ed has decided.
 
Just want to say one big THANKS for everything to one of the best defenders I've seen and such a great leader, a guy who, since he's been gone, has been greatly missed - a true warrior on the pitch. What a great career he had... we miss you, Vida! :WORSHIP:


C_71_article_1471232_image_list_image_list_item_0_image.jpg
 
What a monster. Legend. Bit sad his career didn't go on longer, but a rock when at his peak. He and Rio were the best pairing we've had in my lifetime.
 
beachryan said:
So United appear to be abandoning youth football. Or at least de-prioritising it. This from numerous articles this week on relative spends (compared to CFC/MCFC), a large loss to the Chelsea U18 (who are, admittedly, the best in Europe) and general disarray with staff.

Initially my reaction was to be obviously upset: we have produced more premier league footballers than any other club in England, and have had a youth player in the matchday squad for over 70 years.

But, if I put on my pure business hat, does youth football help the very top level? I'm not sure. Apparently City have spent upwards of 250m on developping youth facilities. And it is ridiculously impressive according to all that have been there. Indeed some United players have their kids train there. But, it's hardly helped City's first XI, despite being in place for 5 seasons. Chelsea is even more stark, they've been the best U21 and U18 team in the country more or less for half a decade, and who has made the first team? Loftus-Cheek?

Then you look at United, we have players that have made it - Welbeck, Janujaz, Cleverley, Lingard, McNair, Morrison, FB of the week - but are any of them actually good enough to win leagues? The best youth player we've had we poached from Le Havre and then refused to bend to Raiola's contract demands.

Anyway, point being, if you want to be the best team in the prem, might money be better spent just buying proven talent at a young age? Ie, let Southampton or WHU develop the kids through 17/18, have excellent youth scouting and then buy them when they're ready to train with the first team? Would cost more per player, but for the entire facility?

Soulless football 101 I know, but seems that's what our friend Ed has decided.
Click to expand...

The City Football Academy opened in October 2014


Spending on Youth football isn't much for any team but regardless I think it's worth it. If you bring through a top player he's less likely to jump at the chance to play for Real or Barca down the road. And if you can get a few to supplement the first 11 you're left with more money to sign quality over quantity.


Surprised Vidic has retired at 34.
 
Last edited:
Godotelli said:
The City Football Academy opened in October 2014


Spending on Youth football isn't much for any team but regardless I think it's worth it. If you bring through a top player he's less likely to jump at the chance to play for Real or Barca down the road. And if you can get a few to supplement the first 11 you're left with more money to sign quality over quantity.


Surprised Vidic has retired at 34.
Click to expand...

I remember mocking the ELITE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME far earlier than that?

But yeah, one class player...versus 10s if not 100s of million on the whole thing. Dunno. I'd much prefer youth, but the days of seeing youth players feature prominently in a prem winning team are gone. (until Arsene wins this year ;))
 
beachryan said:
I remember mocking the ELITE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME far earlier than that?

But yeah, one class player...versus 10s if not 100s of million on the whole thing. Dunno. I'd much prefer youth, but the days of seeing youth players feature prominently in a prem winning team are gone. (until Arsene wins this year ;))
Click to expand...

The EDS is just the name of the U21/reserves

The CFA, which includes the 1st team training ground (male and female) and youth academy, opened last year and it's that which cost 200-250m
 
Spurs couldn't win the league this year. And this with a very young Squad with several YouTube products.

Also look at Barcelona and the class of 92 teams. Teams with Players that come from the OWN academische are also lovend by the fans who come to matches.

Youth products are also the only way modest team can be succesfull, look at Porto and Ajax who both won the CL with youth products.

For even smaller clubs it's better. My favourite team in Belgium is Genk (Origi, Ferreira-Carrasco, Mertens, Benteke, Courtois and De Bruyne). Since then They attract promisimg players from all over the world. Two recent examples: Leon Bailey and Milenkovic Savic who is now playing for Lazio. In the Belgian under 17 team that ended third in the WC last year. In the selection of 23 there were 7 Genk players. Scouts from all over Europe come watching them and they will well them with a Nice profit when They are older.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom