Manchester United Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours 2018/2019

Technophobe wrote: »

You said your can't see Ole being a long term success.. that's your opinion and you are entitled to it..what's deemed success is relative too tho.
Ole has certainly been a huge success so far; can't see how anyone would disagree at this point in time..
So I am interested in what you regard as successful..For Klopp to be regarded as successful for example, what does he need to do??

I'm not quite sure I understand your thought process, but it's an interesting enough area to get into I suppose....

We judge any manager through expectation based upon history. Generally speaking, top level clubs hire managers with a higher expectation of success built upon the foundations of their careers to date. Using Klopp as an example, as you mentioned, he achieved success at Mainz, and then Dortmund, and so when he joined Liverpool, fans (and more importantly board members) had a tangible, quantifiable benchmark of what he could do. Is that any guarantee of what he would do? of course not, but on the risk/reward sliding scale, it sets you up for a better chance of getting where you want to be.

So the question of Ole or Poch, looking at the same scale, would lead one to move towards Poch of course. His tangible, long term record at clubs in better quality leagues is obviously superior. What makes it muddy is Ole's short term, but high value success. He's there, right now, doing well. So it feels like a risk to drop a current performer, in favor of a different, but higher rated quantity.

The risk is; do you hope the initial, and largely unexpected, form will continue, as it did (in the champions league at least) for Zidane at Real Madrid. Or does the short term performance-improvement bubble burst when faced with the longer term harsh realities, like Dalglish at Liverpool, and Di Matteo at Chelsea.

On balance, I would say the cold logical decision should be to go with the more-proven-over-time bet of Pochetino. But football doesn't generally follow cold logical thinking, so Ole will get the job. It's not necessarily a bad choice - I don't think there is a bad choice in this situation - but it's the riskier choice.

<Edit> As another way of thinking about it. Let's say you're an oil baron , and you just bought a random premier league club with the intention of pushing the top teams all the way. You need a great manager to take charge of the rebuild, and get your team into the champions league. Do you bring in Ole Gunnar Solskjær, or Mauricio Pochettino? For me, there's only one answer there. For the longer term, I would want someone who had proven themselves at all aspects of top league management, over someone who - while inspiring great form and results - is still untried in many aspects of modern management, as those challenges simply haven't presented themselves yet. Executing long term strategy is about much more than short term motivational improvement. This is where Dalglish and Di Matteo fell down quite quickly after that short term motivation ended.

redzerdrog wrote: »

Not sure you understand the concept of boards

Whats the concept of a superthread again?

Anyone?

~Rebel~ wrote: »

I'm not quite sure I understand your thought process, but it's an interesting enough area to get into I suppose....

We judge any manager through expectation based upon history. Generally speaking, top level clubs hire managers with a higher expectation of success built upon the foundations of their careers to date. Using Klopp as an example, as you mentioned, he achieved success at Mainz, and then Dortmund, and so when he joined Liverpool, fans (and more importantly board members) had a tangible, quantifiable benchmark of what he could do. Is that any guarantee of what he would do? of course not, but on the risk/reward sliding scale, it sets you up for a better chance of getting where you want to be.

So the question of Ole or Poch, looking at the same scale, would lead one to move towards Poch of course. His tangible, long term record at clubs in better quality leagues is obviously superior. What makes it muddy is Ole's short term, but high value success. He's there, right now, doing well. So it feels like a risk to drop a current performer, in favor of a different, but higher rated quantity.

The risk is; do you hope the initial, and largely unexpected, form will continue, as it did (in the champions league at least) for Zidane at Real Madrid. Or does the short term performance-improvement bubble burst when faced with the longer term harsh realities, like Dalglish at Liverpool, and Di Matteo at Chelsea.

On balance, I would say the cold logical decision should be to go with the more-proven-over-time bet of Pochetino. But football doesn't generally follow cold logical thinking, so Ole will get the job. It's not necessarily a bad choice - I don't think there is a bad choice in this situation - but it's the riskier choice.

<Edit> As another way of thinking about it. Let's say you're an oil baron , and you just bought a random premier league club with the intention of pushing the top teams all the way. You need a great manager to take charge of the rebuild, and get your team into the champions league. Do you bring in Ole Gunnar Solskjær, or Mauricio Pochettino? For me, there's only one answer there. For the longer term, I would want someone who had proven themselves at all aspects of top league management, over someone who - while inspiring great form and results - is still untried in many aspects of modern management, as those challenges simply haven't presented themselves yet. Executing long term strategy is about much more than short term motivational improvement. This is where Dalglish and Di Matteo fell down quite quickly after that short term motivation ended.

What he said

manufan16 wrote: »

The influx to the thread leads me think Liverpool recently won a game again that was comfortable , nerves have dissapated and confidence is high and mighty throughout. I missed MOTD.

Wait till Everton beat them on the weekend.

GSPfan wrote: »

Wait till Everton beat them on the weekend.

I wish but must be 10 years or something stupid since they've beaten them

nullzero wrote: »

Welcome to the new Manchester United super thread, you'll never walk alone.

Mod note: Don't post that in this thread again.

Is what I would say if I was a mod.

Shanotheslayer wrote: »

Are you telling me you wouldn't have TAA and Robertson(Who is probably the best Left back in the league this season) get in ahead of Shaw and Young(?) no idea who the starting FB's you would be referring to in a strongest XI then.

I may be wrong but isn't one of the main positions that most United fans want a new signing in Full Backs?

Utter Madness and extreme bias

Whatd you expect hah. Id say winnaldum would be 50/50 with herera for that spot.

SScope wrote: »

Here, how about you take your Liverpool love in to the Liverpool thread and **** off out of here?

This all started because of a Liverpool fans noncence, if you want to do combined 11's get the Utd vs Pool match thread reopened.

The ****housery from blow ins here is a joke

Calling someone a blow in with 146 posts...

SScope wrote: »

Not a blow in just comment when I feel like it. As opposed to talking ****e for the sake of it

The only one talking sh1te is you. The rest were actually just discussing something like the way the forum works..

Dozyart wrote: »

How the f@ck do you lads get away with posting sh1te in a Utd thread over and over?

I really hate just adding to the nonsense, but just look back over the past few pages at who has derailed it. Any mention of liverpool has come from Utd fans. The mention of some combined 11 came from a Utd fan. All the derailment of 'fans from t'other side' has come from Utd fans.

Myself and the other liverpool fan were actively trying to have a discussion about the merits of Ole V Poch. And instead of a single post answering any point I raised, there's just complaints that I posted at all.

I have no interest in stoking up 'banter', i post in whatever thread looks a bit active during the Irish night time (or daytime for me).

If people just stuck to the thread title, we'd all be grand.

pjohnson wrote: »

I assume this has the caveat that cross posting in one thread is forbidden if that team say lost a CL final. Different rules for each superthread I guess.

“As long as it’s done in the right spirit” is important the bit you skipped there.

I’m no fan of anyone setting out to actively antagonise people on any thread, especially when there’s any of the nastiness we often see on boards.

You’re talking like there’s some sort of “us Vs them” in what I’m talking about. There isn’t. I don’t represent liverpool, or the Liverpool thread. I represent me, and my opinions. I don’t like to see people acting the langer in the Liverpool thread. I don’t like to see it in the Chelsea thread. I don’t like to see it in the Utd thread.