Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
The 2015-2016 Football Thread
- Thread starter Lord Blackadder
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I thought you might be pleased!
As it gives West Ham a Europa league spot in pretty happy for them to
[doublepost=1463895398][/doublepost]
Think he'll do a good job? I give it a year.
I thought you might be pleased!
As it gives West Ham a Europa league spot in pretty happy for them to
[doublepost=1463895398][/doublepost]
Think he'll do a good job? I give it a year.
A year? Perhaps a year and a half, two at most.
Actually, I think it appalling firstly, that he has been appointed - the man is a destructive narcissist, and secondly, much more importantly, I am appalled at the shabby way in which this was done.
Louis van Gaal has his shortcomings as a manager, but it is extraordinarily bad form to leak this - and make this appointment the story rather than United's victory - on the night his team won the FA Cup, - the first trophy, as he pointed out to the media after the match - that United have won since the departure of Sir Alex.
This will end badly, and if the Pompous One (or his entourage) have been behind the leak, not only does it serve as a pointer to how they will do business when running United (devoid of class, generosity, manners or decency), but it may also serve as an interesting indicator as to how the Mr Mourhino's own tenure may end. Not just badly, but with strategically placed and timed leaks, and underhand tactics.
LVG has been treated a little shabbily, perhaps, but he has been in this business long enough to know how things work and he has been very well paid. Moreover, he has spent a gigantic amount of money at Man Utd, and has squeaked out an FA cup against Crystal Palace as a return on investment. Champions League football is the gold standard - and he did not maintain that standard in the end.
The decision to hire Mourinho has a certain unassailable logic behind it. No manager is a more reliable winner in the short term; Mourinho has won a major trophy or league title everywhere he has gone, and done it quickly - which is just as important these days. Man Utd's rivals are not standing still, and if they stuck with LVG I'd predict a downward trajectory from a competitive standpoint. Mourinho is the perfect solution to the challenges of modern football - at least in the eyes of most owners and club suits.
On the other hand, by bringing on Mourinho Man Utd are becoming the antithesis of the kind of club they claim they were, as exemplified by the Ferguson era. Mourinho never hangs around very long, even when he succeeds, and his departures (with very few exceptions) have been acrimonious. He breeds a hysterical mentality at clubs, creates distracting scandals, and is contemptuous of club culture (i.e. the Man Utd Way) - under Mourinho, there is one way: his way. Once the environment has become too poisonous, he packs his bags. There will always be another club desperate to get him.
With Pep and Mourinho reigniting their rivalry in England, there's no telling what will happen. Chelsea also have a new boss (newly cleared of criminal charges - and just in time too!), Pochettino has crafted Spurs into a force to be reckoned with, Liverpool retain high hopes for the Klopp era, and it would be churlish to count Leicester out just weeks after they lifted the title. Arsenal - well, they'll finish top four again, but it's hard to expect them to do anything other than that in a league with both Pep and Mou.
The decision to hire Mourinho has a certain unassailable logic behind it. No manager is a more reliable winner in the short term; Mourinho has won a major trophy or league title everywhere he has gone, and done it quickly - which is just as important these days. Man Utd's rivals are not standing still, and if they stuck with LVG I'd predict a downward trajectory from a competitive standpoint. Mourinho is the perfect solution to the challenges of modern football - at least in the eyes of most owners and club suits.
On the other hand, by bringing on Mourinho Man Utd are becoming the antithesis of the kind of club they claim they were, as exemplified by the Ferguson era. Mourinho never hangs around very long, even when he succeeds, and his departures (with very few exceptions) have been acrimonious. He breeds a hysterical mentality at clubs, creates distracting scandals, and is contemptuous of club culture (i.e. the Man Utd Way) - under Mourinho, there is one way: his way. Once the environment has become too poisonous, he packs his bags. There will always be another club desperate to get him.
With Pep and Mourinho reigniting their rivalry in England, there's no telling what will happen. Chelsea also have a new boss (newly cleared of criminal charges - and just in time too!), Pochettino has crafted Spurs into a force to be reckoned with, Liverpool retain high hopes for the Klopp era, and it would be churlish to count Leicester out just weeks after they lifted the title. Arsenal - well, they'll finish top four again, but it's hard to expect them to do anything other than that in a league with both Pep and Mou.
Last edited:
Excellent post and analysis.
I hold no brief for Louis van Gaal as a manager - he has been stubborn and dogmatic, and unwilling to learn from his mistakes - but I think that basic human decency and fairness should have ensured that the news of his dismissal, or the termination of his contract not be released - even as a leak - until later in the week.
Give the man at least 24 hours to enjoy his position as the manager of the the team that has won the first trophy at Manchester United since the departure of Sir Alex. Then terminate his contract. This treatment is shabby but unsurprising.
The fact of the termination does not bother me unduly; however, the manner of the termination is ungracious, and ungenerous, and yes, pretty shabby, and - unfortunately - is entirely characteristic of the attitudes, mindset, and values that Mourinho espouses.
Last edited:
It's worth pointing out that with Mourinho comes his agent and grey eminence Jorge Mendes, a man every bit as manipulative and ambitious as Mourinho himself. If half the anecdotes about his behavior during Mourinho's Real Madrid years are true, Man Utd is in for a ride with this man.
Oh yes. Team Mourinho are every bit as manipulative, arrogant and ambitious, not to say every bit as ruthless, (and often downright nasty, too) as the Narcissistic and Pompous One himself. Agreed.
But, such people rarely travel in a vacuum. They come trailing baggage, history and entourages.
Yes, interesting times (in the Chinese sense of that word) ahead for Manchester United.
At the moment, England look like they are planning to bring the 'excitement' of last season's Premier League to the Euros. Unfortunately for England, that means both good (Kane and Vardy are natural finishers, England can move the ball very quickly at times) and bad (lots of errors, especially in defense). The league may be exciting, but it remains to be seen whether the quality of play is up to European tournament standards...
USA cruised to an easy win against Puerto Rico today (though the Puerto Ricans did score a lovely goal); we didn't learn much from the match though, at the moment the USA are at a bit of a low point competitively. Klinsy needs a good tournament performance to rebuild his reputation and squad confidence.
USA cruised to an easy win against Puerto Rico today (though the Puerto Ricans did score a lovely goal); we didn't learn much from the match though, at the moment the USA are at a bit of a low point competitively. Klinsy needs a good tournament performance to rebuild his reputation and squad confidence.
I thought you might be pleased!
As it gives West Ham a Europa league spot in pretty happy for them to
[doublepost=1463895398][/doublepost]
Think he'll do a good job? I give it a year.
I'm not a real big fan of his, but I do hope he does a good job.
Time will tell. I wonder what reception they'll give him at Chelsea?
Although I despise the values of the man, and dislike his narcissism and arrogance, I rather imagine that he will do pretty well the first year. However, I expect some manner of catastrophic falling out somewhere during the period of the second year of his contract.
Mr Mourinho used to stay in clubs well into a third year, but, his more recent posts have seen this cycle reduced somewhat.
To be quite candid, I'll be astonished if he manages to last into a third year. This is a man with a long - and growing - history of very burnt bridges.
Chuckles.
I daresay you mean that in the Chinese sense of the word? As in, the old blessing (or curse) 'may you live in interesting times.'
Last edited:
The 'Same Old, Same Old-O-Meter' is maxed out as Barca, Bayern and Man Utd win their respective cups.
Which is one of the reasons why Leicester City's success in winning the League (handsomely, by a margin of ten points) was so refreshing.
Interesting piece by Daniel Taylor in the Guardian about how Louis van Gaal's 'tactics had left Manchester United players close to mutiny'.
However, - in a well argued and well researched piece, while stating that they're will be little sympathy for Louis van Gaal, Taylor does concede that it was 'a low stunt' to leak the news of his impending dismissal on the very night he had managed the team to victory in the FA Cup.
Yeah he was rubbish; should've sent off Delaney and Cabaye, plus he was happy to penalize Manchester United players and let Crystal Palace off the same offences.
---
Up yours commentators and pundits; priceless watching/hearing them try to get the words out.
Jose:
The Knees Up Mother Brown Lads Club which is the core of the English football press will be happy, as they have been to piss on LVG's fireworks.
The man himself, oh boy, compounded if he brings that rat Rui Faria. Still, I don't have a problem with us against them, Ferguson used it.
Mendes; he's been around for a while - Ronaldo etc.
LVG:
He got on with the clear out - something Moyes avoided and a process likely to make you new enemies. On the treatment of players, Ferguson and Jim Leighton springs to mind - a manager isn't your friend.
A decision was made to reduce the squad to allow the introduction of younger players. Clearly, injuries meant he used more than he would've wanted, but to say he only played young players because he was forced to is nonsense.
He gambled on the forwards and lost; likely he expected Memphis Depay to chip in with at least 10 league goals - the player let everyone down, including himself.
He was aware more speed was needed, and when it was available the team put in better performances - the form of Memphis and the injury to Shaw were big blows.
He made mistakes, a fair amount of the football was poor - too slow - but some of it was very good, a normal level of injuries would've seen Champions League football, as it is he leaves with the FA Cup - more than some and needed.
Transfers:
Sell Rojo and Jones, give Schneiderlin and Memphis until January, bring in a centre back, midfielder, winger and striker - at least 2 should be world class.
Premier League:
Battle of the managers; Pep, Darth Sidious, Wenger, Conte, Klopp, De Boer?, and the rest.
Cheers,
OW
Sort of true, but but Ferg managed the "us against them" in a different - and clearly more sustainable - way. With Mourinho, at some point in year two he always starts to lose the dressing room and/or boardroom. It's just too much to bear.
But year one is usually very successful, for reasons I muse on below.
It's very difficult to predict what the league is going to look like next season...Both Manchester clubs have gambled on top-rated but short-term managers who will command great resources and almost certainly win trophies, but who will also probably be gone within three years.
The more I watch the off-pitch happenings, the more I see that the popular notion of the team-building cycle gives is a false image of reality: the conventional wisdom is that you start with an owner to provide a stable financial base, recruit a manager with a desirable "system", purchase appropriate players (a mix of youth and experience), and eventually this combination matures into a competitive team that can tick over with minimal maintenance for years.
In reality, the cycle is one of perpetual abortion and rebuild (due to many factors that could consume pages of text), so that we are always at the beginning stages - the stages where failure is brushed off as mere symptoms of the initial phase of a "project" that is never brought to completion and perpetually being destroyed in favor of the next "project." This is because blame is much harder to assign when "the lads are just getting to know each other" and the manager is "bedding in."
Even teams that are ostensibly stable, such as Arsenal, are perennially being described as some sort of work in progress, just a couple pieces away from being finished. But the way the club is run at the top ensures that this "project" will never be finished.
In reality, when a manager arrives, he has (if he is lucky) one summer of solid recruitment and training to create success. If he doesn't win something that next season, the odds he will do so at that club begin to plummet. Even if he is "given time", the collective will to support the "project" will fade and new "miracle weapons" in the form of another troubleshooting manager with a "war chest' will be sought.
In sum, we have become massively short-termist, and the rise of men like Mourinho and Allardyce illustrate this point. Nobody likes them because of their tactical approaches, their loyalty, their personality (well - the media like their personalities, but for specific reasons) or their ability to develop young players into stars. They are sought out because they can transform substantial amounts of cash into results very quickly. As long as that model is in fashion, the idea of "building" a team over time is going to be the exception rather than the rule.
Last edited:
Excellent and thoughtful post, but there is another dimension to this discussion which I think might be worth pondering over a little.
Manchester United used to make most of its income from fans who used to watch them playing football, and - since the 90s - they have also made money from television rights. They started - as did everyone else - as a football club that made most of its money by selling football matches to a paying audience, fans at the turnstiles, and fans who paid to watch them on TV. That is now a secondary part of the business, as that particular source of income is now becoming less important - and so - for that matter - are the opinions of those (the fans) - who finance it.
A piece I read argued that 2016 is projected to be the first year in which more than 50% of United's income derives from commercial sources - such as merchandising, sponsorship deals, and new growth areas such as 'mobile ad content'.
This is a significant shift, and is, - I think - an important tipping point, as, for the first time, most of United's income will not be derived from their primary business activity, (playing football), but from their usefulness as an advertising platform for other businesses.
These days, increasingly, United's most important customers are no longer the audiences who pay to watch them play football, rather they are the corporate partners who pay to be associated with the brand. And, once branding becomes the point of the exercise - rather than football - what matters is ratings, and the audience itself, not the football, or the teams or the players. And it is that audience that is increasingly the point - capturing, retaining, and selling that audience to others.
It is only with the idea of selling Manchester United as a dramatic soap opera, or a theatrical spectacle (and not a football team) that the appointment of Mr Mourinho (already primed and prepared to face an epic opponent - an antagonist both personal and professional with much mutual 'history' and much mutual dislike, in Pep Guardiola across the city) makes some kind of sense.
If it is about nurturing young talent, or slowly encouraging incremental growth, the kind that puts down roots, then, clearly, the Special One is not the person you would appoint. Nor is he the person to appoint if you wonder and worry about how his previous two outings as manager have ended. And nor is he someone compatible with the values of how Manchester United - traditionally - have seen themselves as embodying.
But if your aim is to be the first port of call for everyone when the Saturday results are being discussed, then, yes, the Special One will deliver ratings, notice, attention, and endless and deadly, drama. If it is about being the centre of media attention, as you craft epic battles out of the local derby, and manufacture conflict - 'us against them' - where little exists previously, you write your own script of increased ratings. And once the ratings soar, quibbles of principle and philosophy - along with the old values - will all - unfortunately - be considered expendable.
Last edited:
The Jose Mourino TM saga continues.
Aparantly Chelsea own the naming rights to 'Jose Mourino'!
You couldn't make this stuff up.
Looking to get Brian Kidd as his assistant. Given what he did under Alex Ferguson that looks like a shrewd move.
Aparantly Chelsea own the naming rights to 'Jose Mourino'!
You couldn't make this stuff up.
Looking to get Brian Kidd as his assistant. Given what he did under Alex Ferguson that looks like a shrewd move.
Yes, I have been reading about this; it is hilarious.