|
|
Norway28699 Posts
I think Ole is a bit of an opposite-Mourinho. He's not the most gifted analyst or the most brilliant tactician in the game (leaning towards him being a bit underrated in both those departments tho). However, he's one of the best managers of people out of anyone in the game. This is important. Mourinho would get results, often quick, immediate results, but his teams always ended up crashing by the third season, there were always cliques being formed, and he always ended up losing the dressing room. (*exception for his Inter reign and prolly also for his first Chelsea period.)
With Ole, they really seem motivated to play their best, to work hard to improve, and all the players support each other. As a pedagogue, I'm inclined to favor this skillset for long term results, but I can respect a difference of opinion here.
Klopp seems to have the people-management down equally well while being a more gifted analyst and tactician. Pep has good people-management while also being the most gifted tactician there is. No problem accepting that those two are better managers, and that they'd be even better choices. However, they happen to be managing the two main rival teams of United, so they're pretty clearly out of reach, and have been since before Ole got the job.
I think there's absolutely no point in bringing in your Ancelottis or your Capellos or whatever old, proven manager people might insist on. United fans want continuity more than most others (as their biggest success period coincided with one of the longest reigns of any manager for any top team) - a manager that doesn't want the job for at least a 5 year period imo isn't a good choice. (So - Tuchel, sure - he's young and has proven himself. But again, he's also busy.)
The next month will be like the 7th time Ole has a 'he has to perform well over the next few matches or else' kinda threat looming over him. The first 6~ all worked out wonderfully, so let's see how it goes now. xD
|
Northern Ireland25875 Posts
On October 03 2021 03:08 evilfatsh1t wrote:
ole getting the job permanently was 100% the best decision. man united were lost and although fans want success what the fans more subtely want is longevity. im not convinced poch would have done a better job to begin with, but for arguments sake even if poch and tuchel were successful there would be doubts about what happens after they leave. would we be in another mourinho kind of situation? or would they have rebuilt the club the "united" way like what ole has somewhat done? at least with ole it was certain that some foundations would be laid within the club that were reminiscent of the fergie era.
also people give ole way too much shit about not having won trophies, when in reality he hasnt been anywhere near as bad. a 3rd and 2nd finish, still unbeaten away record, multiple semis and a final. obviously the lack of trophies cant keep going on but to say ole is clueless when he has clearly been the best manager out of all post fergie managers, thats just hating.
I’m not saying it was a bad decision to give him the gig necessarily, it was a bad decision to make him the permanent manager off of a good streak.
They could have given him the rest of that season on a caretaker basis, and subsequently given him it permanently. There was no pressure whatsoever to make it a permanent appointment at that point, you’ve a guy who loves the club in a job way beyond his CV. Ole isn’t going to play hardball if he’s kept as a caretaker for a bit. Instead they locked themselves out of pursuing any other options, to appease who?
It’s just typical of United’s mismanagement on the football front for years.
He’s not been terrible no, and he’s done good stuff. Chelsea don’t have a transfer embargo any more, or Frank Lampard as their manager. Liverpool seem back on track after a hugely unlucky season with injuries.
A 3rd and 2nd on paper sound pretty good until we consider how close to 1st were they and equally, what kind of shape are the teams they displaced for those finishes in now?
I’d wager if those three fire this season then United will be a distance behind but comfortably in 4th, and with a squad that’s young and capable of growth.
|
Ole is definitely a lesser klopp in all regards
But klopp is for me the best mamager in the world by far. The success he has done with mainz, dortmund and liverpool while being on a smaller budget than all other "worldclass" managers make him the best
Without him bvb,mainz and liverpool wouldn't be where they are right now
|
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51493 Posts
Cant use smaller budget at Scouse though, Van Dijk Allison transformed his top 4 struggling team into what they are now simple as that. Fabinho Keita to boot weren't cheap.
|
|
|
51486 Posts
if solskjaer gets sacked this season, trying to figure out who would replace him (just out of those unemployed at the moment):
conte - probably the top choice since he's won the premier league before.
zidane - i think i said it before in that i don't think he's interested because he wants the france job once it opens up.
he's my personal choice but i don't think his english is that great and feel like he won't adapt to the premier league.
blanc - former united player but has demonstrated ability to perform (albeit at psg)
|
No problems with giving him the permanent job at that point, he brought a good mood back to the club after Mourinho left and generally did well in the transfer window. But you can say the rebuild is done and there's no more excuse for mediocre results and shit performances. The past few seasons were subpar but Ole got a pass because the team was in rebuild stage, but it's not something we should continually expect from Man Utd.
Again this is not Good Vibes United. He has to go with if we don't challenge.
|
The Ronaldo transfer was probably more about the club stature and opportunity than any bigger plan, but he's also United's "win now" option. If you're building up for a contender in 2 years or so, there are probably systems that fit players like Sancho and Pogba better.
|
On October 03 2021 05:42 Pandemona wrote:
Cant use smaller budget at Scouse though, Van Dijk Allison transformed his top 4 struggling team into what they are now simple as that. Fabinho Keita to boot weren't cheap.
Liverpool's net spend since Klopp arrived has been significantly lower than that of the other big clubs, even Chelsea, who had a transfer ban and were forced to play their youth. So obviously he's on a tighter budget.
|
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51493 Posts
On October 03 2021 16:25 InFiNitY[pG] wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2021 05:42 Pandemona wrote:
Cant use smaller budget at Scouse though, Van Dijk Allison transformed his top 4 struggling team into what they are now simple as that. Fabinho Keita to boot weren't cheap. Liverpool's net spend since Klopp arrived has been significantly lower than that of the other big clubs, even Chelsea, who had a transfer ban and were forced to play their youth. So obviously he's on a tighter budget.
That is true its like £190 million for scouse and 250 for Chelsea i think and in that time Chelsea won a lot more....however that wasn't the point he said he hasn't spent money which he has and like i said he bought in the biggest pieces to his squad with that money for big chunks. Great manager of course that is no doubt, but he didn't do it without money in this league and he suffers from the "lesser" spend this season and last due to his best 11 is literally title winning but outside of that Liverpool struggle.
Also if you look at financial records they should not be on a lesser budget in terms of transfers than other clubs it is just they have American owners who are milking the club
|
On October 03 2021 21:18 Pandemona wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2021 16:25 InFiNitY[pG] wrote:On October 03 2021 05:42 Pandemona wrote:
Cant use smaller budget at Scouse though, Van Dijk Allison transformed his top 4 struggling team into what they are now simple as that. Fabinho Keita to boot weren't cheap. Liverpool's net spend since Klopp arrived has been significantly lower than that of the other big clubs, even Chelsea, who had a transfer ban and were forced to play their youth. So obviously he's on a tighter budget. That is true its like £190 million for scouse and 250 for Chelsea i think and in that time Chelsea won a lot more....however that wasn't the point he said he hasn't spent money which he has and like i said he bought in the biggest pieces to his squad with that money for big chunks. Great manager of course that is no doubt, but he didn't do it without money in this league and he suffers from the "lesser" spend this season and last due to his best 11 is literally title winning but outside of that Liverpool struggle. Also if you look at financial records they should not be on a lesser budget in terms of transfers than other clubs it is just they have American owners who are milking the club
Who said Klopp hasn't spent money?
Also what does your "also" point prove? Their bad owner makes Klopp's achievements less great?
Chelsea was leagues in a better position than Liverpool when Klopp took over. You are arguing against Klopp by saying "well in the same time period Chelsea stayed great" lol so bitter
Where did you even get that fake 190mil from?
|
Watford have sacked their coach ALREADY! Source
Watford FC confirms Xisco Muñoz has left his post as the club's Head Coach.
The Board feels recent performances strongly indicate a negative trend at a time when team cohesion should be visibly improving.
The Hornets will always be grateful to Xisco for the part he played in securing last season's promotion and wish him well for his future career in football.
No further club comment will be available until the imminent announcement of a new Head Coach.
The Pozzos are insane, who in their right mind would want to work for them? They've won 2 games it's not like they are bottom of the league jesus
|
On October 03 2021 21:18 Pandemona wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2021 16:25 InFiNitY[pG] wrote:On October 03 2021 05:42 Pandemona wrote:
Cant use smaller budget at Scouse though, Van Dijk Allison transformed his top 4 struggling team into what they are now simple as that. Fabinho Keita to boot weren't cheap. Liverpool's net spend since Klopp arrived has been significantly lower than that of the other big clubs, even Chelsea, who had a transfer ban and were forced to play their youth. So obviously he's on a tighter budget. That is true its like £190 million for scouse and 250 for Chelsea i think and in that time Chelsea won a lot more....however that wasn't the point he said he hasn't spent money which he has and like i said he bought in the biggest pieces to his squad with that money for big chunks. Great manager of course that is no doubt, but he didn't do it without money in this league and he suffers from the "lesser" spend this season and last due to his best 11 is literally title winning but outside of that Liverpool struggle. Also if you look at financial records they should not be on a lesser budget in terms of transfers than other clubs it is just they have American owners who are milking the club
Since the 16/17 season it's actually Liverpool 168m Euro Chelsea 289m, so close to double. City and United spent upwards of 600m during that period. And again, noone claimed Klopp spent NO money, just way less than any other top team. The fact that the owners make it harder for him to buy the players he wants makes his achievements even more impressive. Add to that the fact that Liverpool were basically no longer a top6 team when he took over. Can you imagine what he would have done with United or City kind of money in 5 years compared to someone like Ole?
|
Norway28699 Posts
Ole's progress is comparable to Klopp's so far.. Klopp's first season was 2015-16 (he took over Liverpool like 10 games into it, so not fully his season, but they ended up in 8th place, with 62 points. (They had 62 points and 6th place the season before.) Then 2016-17, 4th place, 76 points. 2017-18, 4th place, 75 points. )
(Compare with Ole - 6th place his first season (where he took over in march and was an immediate success (before they collapsed at the end)), then third place his first full season, second place his second full season)
The fourth season was where Klopp's results became great (they won the CL and got second place in the premier league). This is Ole's fourth season (although he's had half a year less than Klopp had when his fourth season started). To reiterate - I agree that Klopp is a better manager than Ole. But Klopp is a great example of why continuity matters when you are rebuilding a team. Even a manager as great as Klopp needed three seasons to build the team before they could mount a challenge, and the Liverpool he inherited wasn't really any worse than the Manchester United Ole inherited (even if Ole has had more money to spend).
|
On October 03 2021 13:01 Dante08 wrote:
No problems with giving him the permanent job at that point, he brought a good mood back to the club after Mourinho left and generally did well in the transfer window. But you can say the rebuild is done and there's no more excuse for mediocre results and shit performances. The past few seasons were subpar but Ole got a pass because the team was in rebuild stage, but it's not something we should continually expect from Man Utd.
Again this is not Good Vibes United. He has to go with if we don't challenge.
i think the rebuild is mostly done, but i would say midfield is still an issue
|
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51493 Posts
On October 03 2021 21:41 sharkie wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2021 21:18 Pandemona wrote:On October 03 2021 16:25 InFiNitY[pG] wrote:On October 03 2021 05:42 Pandemona wrote:
Cant use smaller budget at Scouse though, Van Dijk Allison transformed his top 4 struggling team into what they are now simple as that. Fabinho Keita to boot weren't cheap. Liverpool's net spend since Klopp arrived has been significantly lower than that of the other big clubs, even Chelsea, who had a transfer ban and were forced to play their youth. So obviously he's on a tighter budget. That is true its like £190 million for scouse and 250 for Chelsea i think and in that time Chelsea won a lot more....however that wasn't the point he said he hasn't spent money which he has and like i said he bought in the biggest pieces to his squad with that money for big chunks. Great manager of course that is no doubt, but he didn't do it without money in this league and he suffers from the "lesser" spend this season and last due to his best 11 is literally title winning but outside of that Liverpool struggle. Also if you look at financial records they should not be on a lesser budget in terms of transfers than other clubs it is just they have American owners who are milking the club Who said Klopp hasn't spent money? Also what does your "also" point prove? Their bad owner makes Klopp's achievements less great? Chelsea was leagues in a better position than Liverpool when Klopp took over. You are arguing against Klopp by saying "well in the same time period Chelsea stayed great" lol so bitter Where did you even get that fake 190mil from?
You said he spent no money and this is a reply from infinity saying he didn't spend that much and now his rebuttle on my point that he has spent a fair bit even with his hands tied by owners. You the only one who thinks they spent no money.
|
On October 03 2021 22:56 Pandemona wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2021 21:41 sharkie wrote:On October 03 2021 21:18 Pandemona wrote:On October 03 2021 16:25 InFiNitY[pG] wrote:On October 03 2021 05:42 Pandemona wrote:
Cant use smaller budget at Scouse though, Van Dijk Allison transformed his top 4 struggling team into what they are now simple as that. Fabinho Keita to boot weren't cheap. Liverpool's net spend since Klopp arrived has been significantly lower than that of the other big clubs, even Chelsea, who had a transfer ban and were forced to play their youth. So obviously he's on a tighter budget. That is true its like £190 million for scouse and 250 for Chelsea i think and in that time Chelsea won a lot more....however that wasn't the point he said he hasn't spent money which he has and like i said he bought in the biggest pieces to his squad with that money for big chunks. Great manager of course that is no doubt, but he didn't do it without money in this league and he suffers from the "lesser" spend this season and last due to his best 11 is literally title winning but outside of that Liverpool struggle. Also if you look at financial records they should not be on a lesser budget in terms of transfers than other clubs it is just they have American owners who are milking the club Who said Klopp hasn't spent money? Also what does your "also" point prove? Their bad owner makes Klopp's achievements less great? Chelsea was leagues in a better position than Liverpool when Klopp took over. You are arguing against Klopp by saying "well in the same time period Chelsea stayed great" lol so bitter Where did you even get that fake 190mil from? You said he spent no money and this is a reply from infinity saying he didn't spend that much and now his rebuttle on my point that he has spent a fair bit even with his hands tied by owners. You the only one who thinks they spent no money.
He said smaller budget - reading comprehension D-. You are pulling arguments out of your ass.
|
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51493 Posts
On October 03 2021 23:06 InFiNitY[pG] wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2021 22:56 Pandemona wrote:On October 03 2021 21:41 sharkie wrote:On October 03 2021 21:18 Pandemona wrote:On October 03 2021 16:25 InFiNitY[pG] wrote:On October 03 2021 05:42 Pandemona wrote:
Cant use smaller budget at Scouse though, Van Dijk Allison transformed his top 4 struggling team into what they are now simple as that. Fabinho Keita to boot weren't cheap. Liverpool's net spend since Klopp arrived has been significantly lower than that of the other big clubs, even Chelsea, who had a transfer ban and were forced to play their youth. So obviously he's on a tighter budget. That is true its like £190 million for scouse and 250 for Chelsea i think and in that time Chelsea won a lot more....however that wasn't the point he said he hasn't spent money which he has and like i said he bought in the biggest pieces to his squad with that money for big chunks. Great manager of course that is no doubt, but he didn't do it without money in this league and he suffers from the "lesser" spend this season and last due to his best 11 is literally title winning but outside of that Liverpool struggle. Also if you look at financial records they should not be on a lesser budget in terms of transfers than other clubs it is just they have American owners who are milking the club Who said Klopp hasn't spent money? Also what does your "also" point prove? Their bad owner makes Klopp's achievements less great? Chelsea was leagues in a better position than Liverpool when Klopp took over. You are arguing against Klopp by saying "well in the same time period Chelsea stayed great" lol so bitter Where did you even get that fake 190mil from? You said he spent no money and this is a reply from infinity saying he didn't spend that much and now his rebuttle on my point that he has spent a fair bit even with his hands tied by owners. You the only one who thinks they spent no money. He said smaller budget - reading comprehension D-. You are pulling arguments out of your ass.
Well the year he got those players he net spent £130 million and his paying for it ever since? The year before he wins title he spends the most....so he had to spend big money to win the league just like every other club (apart from Leicester)
|
The year he won the league they actually made a transfer proft, so your argument is completely void. Cherry picking the one season in which they actually spent money to support your non-sensical argument shows that you are running out of ideas. This is ignoring the fact that this wasn't even the point in question in the first place, which actually was success during their tenure as coach realtive to money spent.
|
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51493 Posts
Question is different if asked 18 months ago though ill concede as the last 3 transfer windows pretty key for that net spend figure.
However winning champs league and premier league in 5 seasons isn't to bad a return i guess.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
