Re: Moyes on the way out?
Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2014 7:10 am
David Johnson wrote:
"There those on here that argued that he got dealt a bum deal from Ferguson in being left a team in need of a comprehensive rebuild. Those claims have been proved worthless given that the team are on course for their lowest points total ever in the Premier League and will miss out on the Champions League for the first time since '95. How many times has the United team been rebuilt since then whilst maintaining success?"
I'm one of those, who in another thread, claimed the United squad weren't fit for purpose. If the squad is so strong, David, why have media commentators and pundits been talking about having to spend ?100m, ?150m or even ?200m in the summer? Why have United supporters themselves suggested there was a need for wholesale changes as early as last summer? Was it because the squad was superb, or because the squad was shite? Ask any Liverpool supporter which Man Utd players they'd like in their squad? Same of Man City and Chelsea supporters? The list of coveted payers will not be long.
While Moyes was never going to be another Ferguson, he was left with a poor squad of players.
The Glazers have much to answer for... Maurice Watkins (one of the top lawyers in the north of England) was allowed to leave and replaced by a nobody. The Chief Executive, David Gill, was also allowed to leave at the same time as Ferguson. Sorry, but the Glazers should have said, one of you can retire this season, but the other will have to wait a while. No business can properly survive when so many at the pointy end of the management structure leave at the same time. You had a situation where both the football manager and the club's chief executive left at the same time! Stupid beyond belief. And why did all of this come about? Because the Glazers want to cut costs.
Moyes was championed as a manager who could do great things on small resources (ideal for a club leveraged to the hilt). That's why he got given the job.
Does anyone really think that if Klopp or van Gaal come in, they'll be given ?150m to spend? They never gave Ferguson that sort of money in the last few years when he most needed it.
Playing a 40 year old Giggs and bringing Scholes out of retirement where his answer to the midfield problems. "There's no value in the market" we kept hearing Ferguson say... yet Man City got Toure for a decent price, Chelsea got Mata for a decent price, Liverpool got Coutinho for a bargain price! The real reason was because "the Glazers won't give me any money"
You also have to question Ferguson regarding why players like Paul Pogba were allowed to leave when the midfield was so sparse... he even admitted two years earlier that it would be stupid NOT to play him and allow him to leave on a free.
Is Moyes a tactical genius? Absolutely not. But the blame for United's poor season shouldn't be left at his feet alone.
"There those on here that argued that he got dealt a bum deal from Ferguson in being left a team in need of a comprehensive rebuild. Those claims have been proved worthless given that the team are on course for their lowest points total ever in the Premier League and will miss out on the Champions League for the first time since '95. How many times has the United team been rebuilt since then whilst maintaining success?"
I'm one of those, who in another thread, claimed the United squad weren't fit for purpose. If the squad is so strong, David, why have media commentators and pundits been talking about having to spend ?100m, ?150m or even ?200m in the summer? Why have United supporters themselves suggested there was a need for wholesale changes as early as last summer? Was it because the squad was superb, or because the squad was shite? Ask any Liverpool supporter which Man Utd players they'd like in their squad? Same of Man City and Chelsea supporters? The list of coveted payers will not be long.
While Moyes was never going to be another Ferguson, he was left with a poor squad of players.
The Glazers have much to answer for... Maurice Watkins (one of the top lawyers in the north of England) was allowed to leave and replaced by a nobody. The Chief Executive, David Gill, was also allowed to leave at the same time as Ferguson. Sorry, but the Glazers should have said, one of you can retire this season, but the other will have to wait a while. No business can properly survive when so many at the pointy end of the management structure leave at the same time. You had a situation where both the football manager and the club's chief executive left at the same time! Stupid beyond belief. And why did all of this come about? Because the Glazers want to cut costs.
Moyes was championed as a manager who could do great things on small resources (ideal for a club leveraged to the hilt). That's why he got given the job.
Does anyone really think that if Klopp or van Gaal come in, they'll be given ?150m to spend? They never gave Ferguson that sort of money in the last few years when he most needed it.
Playing a 40 year old Giggs and bringing Scholes out of retirement where his answer to the midfield problems. "There's no value in the market" we kept hearing Ferguson say... yet Man City got Toure for a decent price, Chelsea got Mata for a decent price, Liverpool got Coutinho for a bargain price! The real reason was because "the Glazers won't give me any money"
You also have to question Ferguson regarding why players like Paul Pogba were allowed to leave when the midfield was so sparse... he even admitted two years earlier that it would be stupid NOT to play him and allow him to leave on a free.
Is Moyes a tactical genius? Absolutely not. But the blame for United's poor season shouldn't be left at his feet alone.