Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

Someone's having a real laugh - sperm of gollum to Utd.


Iceman
 Share

Recommended Posts

33 minutes ago, The Guest said:

The DOF thing is a red herring.  It doesn’t work in English football.  The fella picking the team needs to be the one with the final decision on whether a player joins or not.  If the manager has that ability then what’s the point in a DOF.  If the manager doesn’t have that say then why isn’t the DOF picking the team.  If the manager fails how do you know it was the managers fault if he’s had players forced on him.

 

It’s the most non-footballing person idea in football which is ironic really because loads of mong fans think that it’s taking decisions away from non footballing people like that divvy they’ve got in charge at Old Trafford.  It’s something clubs introduce to try to mitigate the possibility of a manager failing.  They think that having some all seeing genius overseer above the manager will stop them signing players that don’t fit a style they’re going for or blowing massive money on short term signings.  It’s fucking daft because if he was that much of a genius he’d be a manager himself and if he overruled signings or forced different players on the manager then how do you know who is the one failing when things go wrong?

 

The answer to United’s problems a while ago was don’t hire has been managers who will happily bankrupt your club to win a league cup.  The problem they have now is that years after winning the league they no longer have the patience to see out a half decent young manager who can navigate them to getting closer to us and city and that’s the only way they’ll do it and also it’s the only thing theyll achieve.  They won’t see it like that obviously and it’s why it’s going to be an even bigger car crash than people imagine.

It does work, as we have shown, but you need a manager who has a strong enough influence to be able to put his foot down while also having the humility to accept working with other people. Clubs where managers pick all the players to recruit are living in the past.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, The Woolster said:

http://global.espn.com/football/club/manchester-united/360/blog/post/3832011/man-united-rebuild-must-follow-in-footsteps-of-hated-rivals-liverpool

 

Them trying to replicate what we have done is great news if you ask me, because I don't think they will be able to do it successfully whilst the Glazers/Woodward are in charge. Their only hope would be to get a really top quality DoF and completely delegate all football decisions to him.

 

And it comes with the added bonus of being patient with Solskjaer and giving him at least 3 years!

Hilarious. I remember when loads of people wanted us to sign ready made 28 year old world class players like United always did. How the turn tables.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, The Guest said:

The DOF thing is a red herring.  It doesn’t work in English football.  The fella picking the team needs to be the one with the final decision on whether a player joins or not.  If the manager has that ability then what’s the point in a DOF.  If the manager doesn’t have that say then why isn’t the DOF picking the team.  If the manager fails how do you know it was the managers fault if he’s had players forced on him.

 

It’s the most non-footballing person idea in football which is ironic really because loads of mong fans think that it’s taking decisions away from non footballing people like that divvy they’ve got in charge at Old Trafford.  It’s something clubs introduce to try to mitigate the possibility of a manager failing.  They think that having some all seeing genius overseer above the manager will stop them signing players that don’t fit a style they’re going for or blowing massive money on short term signings.  It’s fucking daft because if he was that much of a genius he’d be a manager himself and if he overruled signings or forced different players on the manager then how do you know who is the one failing when things go wrong?

 

The answer to United’s problems a while ago was don’t hire has been managers who will happily bankrupt your club to win a league cup.  The problem they have now is that years after winning the league they no longer have the patience to see out a half decent young manager who can navigate them to getting closer to us and city and that’s the only way they’ll do it and also it’s the only thing theyll achieve.  They won’t see it like that obviously and it’s why it’s going to be an even bigger car crash than people imagine.

Don't even know where to start with this.

 

You mock the idea of having a "genius overseer above the manager" but it's demonstrably better than lurching from one style of play to another every couple of years when you change managers, with a trail of players in your wake bought to suit one manager who don't suit another.

 

We live in a world where the average manager lasts roughly one season. It's completely daft to say that the answer to United's problems is to go out and find one of the maybe 5 managers in world football who you can say with near-certainty will be a big enough success to leave them in a job long enough to shape the team the way they like. All of those managers are already at other big clubs, and if you go and get one who you think is "up and coming" then the odds he'll turn out to be who you think he will go way down.

 

In other words, the sensible approach in today's game is to hire someone at a level above the manager, a person who isn't responsible for any one thing but who shapes the club's overall footballing style and identity. That person can then bring in managers who fit that style and identity, and if they don't work out (and some won't, no matter how smart you were in choosing them), sack them and pick another. Most importantly, they can shape recruitment for the long-term so that players are bought with the goal of fitting into the club's plans for the duration of their contract, not the goal of allowing the manager to stay in a job for an extra season or two.

 

Obviously this requires a manager who can set aside his ego to realise that the long-term goals of the club take precedence over him surviving to the next season. If you're looking at a manager and he refuses to do that, then you shouldn't be hiring him, regardless of what he can do for you in the short-term. Because if you do you'll get what United have gotten since Ferguson left - a lot of players bought (and handed huge long-term contracts) for the explicit purpose of getting the manager another season in his job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, 3 Stacks said:

It does work, as we have shown, but you need a manager who has a strong enough influence to be able to put his foot down while also having the humility to accept working with other people. Clubs where managers pick all the players to recruit are living in the past.

You’ve completely missed the point as you normally do.  Edwards is not a director of football.  He’s not stopping Klopp signing players or forcing players on him.  He’s the guy making money decisions on how to get the players Klopp wants for as cheap as possible and how to get players out of the door for the most money.  Again though I think Klopp even has a decent say on that as he put a stop to Tiago ilori and Luis Alberto wastes of money.

 

There have always been scouting departments and people suggesting players to the manager.  We’ve clearly got that here as there is no way Klopp knew who Robbo was and he’s admitted as much that the scouts absolutely cased him to sign Salah.  He trusts them obviously.  Man Utd want somebody above the manager that will tell somebody like Mourinho you aren’t signing Lukaku because he’s a 16 stone yard dog with a shit first touch and when we sack you for being a negative cunt who everyone hates we don’t want to be stuck with your overpriced overpaid signings.  As good as that sounds in principle it’s a guaranteed way of failing.  There hasn’t been a sustained period of success for any club operating under that method.  The long term success United and Liverpool yearn for is done by giving the best manager you can employ autonomy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Ne Moe Imya said:

Don't even know where to start with this.

 

You mock the idea of having a "genius overseer above the manager" but it's demonstrably better than lurching from one style of play to another every couple of years when you change managers, with a trail of players in your wake bought to suit one manager who don't suit another.

 

We live in a world where the average manager lasts roughly one season. It's completely daft to say that the answer to United's problems is to go out and find one of the maybe 5 managers in world football who you can say with near-certainty will be a big enough success to leave them in a job long enough to shape the team the way they like. All of those managers are already at other big clubs, and if you go and get one who you think is "up and coming" then the odds he'll turn out to be who you think he will go way down.

 

In other words, the sensible approach in today's game is to hire someone at a level above the manager, a person who isn't responsible for any one thing but who shapes the club's overall footballing style and identity. That person can then bring in managers who fit that style and identity, and if they don't work out (and some won't, no matter how smart you were in choosing them), sack them and pick another. Most importantly, they can shape recruitment for the long-term so that players are bought with the goal of fitting into the club's plans for the duration of their contract, not the goal of allowing the manager to stay in a job for an extra season or two.

 

Obviously this requires a manager who can set aside his ego to realise that the long-term goals of the club take precedence over him surviving to the next season. If you're looking at a manager and he refuses to do that, then you shouldn't be hiring him, regardless of what he can do for you in the short-term. Because if you do you'll get what United have gotten since Ferguson left - a lot of players bought (and handed huge long-term contracts) for the explicit purpose of getting the manager another season in his job.

No top manager in world football is going to turn up and say yeah you sort out the recruitment and I’ll just coach them.  It’s absolute nonsense. They will just go somewhere else.  We see it almost every season.  When clubs try to go above a manager it causes murder and they either fuck off or go into meltdown.

 

The average for managers in the top 6 jobs is now a lot longer than a year and there’s a reason for that.  The longer a manager is in charge the more chance the club has of success.  Smaller clubs who need new manager boosts to stave off relegation sack their managers all the time because of the inevitability of their situation.

 

United picking attacking minded managers consecutively doesn’t require a director of football.  It’s really simple.  If you have a guy forcing players on a manager you have no way of telling whether things are going wrong because of the manager or the DOF.  Who is directing the DOF?  The whole thing is fucking stupid and always has been.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, The Guest said:

The DOF thing is a red herring.  It doesn’t work in English football.  The fella picking the team needs to be the one with the final decision on whether a player joins or not.  If the manager has that ability then what’s the point in a DOF.  If the manager doesn’t have that say then why isn’t the DOF picking the team.  If the manager fails how do you know it was the managers fault if he’s had players forced on him.

 

It’s the most non-footballing person idea in football which is ironic really because loads of mong fans think that it’s taking decisions away from non footballing people like that divvy they’ve got in charge at Old Trafford.  It’s something clubs introduce to try to mitigate the possibility of a manager failing.  They think that having some all seeing genius overseer above the manager will stop them signing players that don’t fit a style they’re going for or blowing massive money on short term signings.  It’s fucking daft because if he was that much of a genius he’d be a manager himself and if he overruled signings or forced different players on the manager then how do you know who is the one failing when things go wrong?

 

The answer to United’s problems a while ago was don’t hire has been managers who will happily bankrupt your club to win a league cup.  The problem they have now is that years after winning the league they no longer have the patience to see out a half decent young manager who can navigate them to getting closer to us and city and that’s the only way they’ll do it and also it’s the only thing theyll achieve.  They won’t see it like that obviously and it’s why it’s going to be an even bigger car crash than people imagine.

 

No, the view that a DoF, if they are a proper DoF, has the final decision in transfers or that its only transfers that they are involved in is the red herring. They should be covering everything football related, 1st team, academy, medical, sport science, scouting, maybe even the women's team.

 

Some 'DoFs' may have a different job titles, and some with the DoF job title might not really be a 'DoF' if all they are doing is sorting out transfers. But there have been some successful ones in England already. You could even argue that the most successful was Alex Ferguson.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, The Guest said:

You’ve completely missed the point as you normally do.  Edwards is not a director of football.  He’s not stopping Klopp signing players or forcing players on him.  He’s the guy making money decisions on how to get the players Klopp wants for as cheap as possible and how to get players out of the door for the most money.  Again though I think Klopp even has a decent say on that as he put a stop to Tiago ilori and Luis Alberto wastes of money.

 

There have always been scouting departments and people suggesting players to the manager.  We’ve clearly got that here as there is no way Klopp knew who Robbo was and he’s admitted as much that the scouts absolutely cased him to sign Salah.  He trusts them obviously.  Man Utd want somebody above the manager that will tell somebody like Mourinho you aren’t signing Lukaku because he’s a 16 stone yard dog with a shit first touch and when we sack you for being a negative cunt who everyone hates we don’t want to be stuck with your overpriced overpaid signings.  As good as that sounds in principle it’s a guaranteed way of failing.  There hasn’t been a sustained period of success for any club operating under that method.  The long term success United and Liverpool yearn for is done by giving the best manager you can employ autonomy.

You're arguing against a situation that doesn't exist. All DoF's and managers are supposed to work together. There's no big club where the Director tells the manager to shut up and accept the players I tell you you're getting.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, The Woolster said:

 

No, the view that a DoF, if they are a proper DoF, has the final decision in transfers or that its only transfers that they are involved in is the red herring. They should be covering everything football related, 1st team, academy, medical, sport science, scouting, maybe even the women's team.

 

Some 'DoFs' may have a different job titles, and some with the DoF job title might not really be a 'DoF' if all they are doing is sorting out transfers. But there have been some successful ones in England already. You could even argue that the most successful was Alex Ferguson.

 

10 minutes ago, 3 Stacks said:

You're arguing against a situation that doesn't exist. All DoF's and managers are supposed to work together. There's no big club where the Director tells the manager to shut up and accept the players I tell you you're getting.

 

 

Do you not think United already have that in place?

 

What United fans have talked and written about is wanting somebody at the club who could have said no to Mourinho when he wanted to sign Lukaku, Matic or told him to play more attacking football when he was playing 6 at the back etc.  That’s what I’m saying doesn’t work.

 

This “they work together” is bullshit.  At some point a situation comes up where they disagree on a player and if the manager can’t say no I don’t want him or is told no you need to sign a different type of player then you’re fucked before you begin.  If you want somebody to oversee all those other things then yes I agree that’s obviously a no brainier but United will already have all that.  That’s not the conversation that’s being had.  It’s one about stopping a manager managing the way he thinks will make the club successful because somebody less qualified than him sees a bigger picture.  If you don’t want yard dog players who will struggle to play “the United way” or whatever bullshit they come up with then don’t hire negative managers who sign players like that.  The answer isn’t to still hire the manager but stop them from signing players.  You can’t have somebody above the manager telling him what players he can and can’t sign given the budget they have and what type of football they need to play.

 

That’s not what will be happening here or at City.  Hire the manager give him the support system and give him the responsibility.  It’s only genuine way of getting sustained success

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, The Guest said:

 

Do you not think United already have that in place?

 

What United fans have talked and written about is wanting somebody at the club who could have said no to Mourinho when he wanted to sign Lukaku, Matic or told him to play more attacking football when he was playing 6 at the back etc.  That’s what I’m saying doesn’t work.

 

This “they work together” is bullshit.  At some point a situation comes up where they disagree on a player and if the manager can’t say no I don’t want him or is told no you need to sign a different type of player then you’re fucked before you begin.  If you want somebody to oversee all those other things then yes I agree that’s obviously a no brainier but United will already have all that.  That’s not the conversation that’s being had.  It’s one about stopping a manager managing the way he thinks will make the club successful because somebody less qualified than him sees a bigger picture.  If you don’t want yard dog players who will struggle to play “the United way” or whatever bullshit they come up with then don’t hire negative managers who sign players like that.  The answer isn’t to still hire the manager but stop them from signing players.  You can’t have somebody above the manager telling him what players he can and can’t sign given the budget they have and what type of football they need to play.

 

That’s not what will be happening here or at City.  Hire the manager give him the support system and give him the responsibility.  It’s only genuine way of getting sustained success

No. The point is that they need to get someone who can advise that idiot Woodward on who to hire as manager, someone who has a coherent style. Then, those two can work together. It's like that Txiki guy at City who had ties to Guardiola and had the "Barcelona philosophy" so the latter then decided to go there. That's their problem clearly, because they've hired 3 absolute duds in a row, plus the novice they have right now. They need direction.

 

Or, yes, as an alternate if they can get a real top, top manager on their own, you give him a structure to support him, but United have failed miserably at attracting those.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, The Guest said:

 

Do you not think United already have that in place?

 

 

Not that I can tell. They have Woodward, who was an accountant/investment banker and is the money man, but I don't think there is anyone below him who is covering all areas of the football side of things

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, 3 Stacks said:

No. The point is that they need to get someone who can advise that idiot Woodward on who to hire as manager, someone who has a coherent style. Then, those two can work together. It's like that Txiki guy at City who had ties to Guardiola and had the "Barcelona philosophy" so the latter then decided to go there. That's their problem clearly, because they've hired 3 absolute duds in a row, plus the novice they have right now. They need direction.

 

Or, yes, as an alternate if they can get a real top, top manager on their own, you give him a structure to support him, but United have failed miserably at attracting those.

They’ve got Ferguson and Bobby Charlton who clearly have done that.  They advised on Moyes when a load of other football people were advising on Mourinho.  They managed to sandwich butthead inbetween the two.  The txiki guy is another one who City were clearly advised by Guardiola to hire in advance of him going there.  He’s not above Guardiola either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, The Guest said:

They’ve got Ferguson and Bobby Charlton who clearly have done that.  They advised on Moyes when a load of other football people were advising on Mourinho.  They managed to sandwich butthead inbetween the two.  The txiki guy is another one who City were clearly advised by Guardiola to hire in advance of him going there.  He’s not above Guardiola either.

 

Err, Txiki Begiristain was hired by City in 2012. Guardiola joined Bayern in 2013 and was there for 3 seasons, at what point did he advise City to hire him?

 

I think Bgiristain is Director of Football of the entire City Football Group, he is most definitely above Guardiola.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...