Jose Mourinho to replace LVG as Man U manager?

[Benji]

I thought Giggs was supposed to be next in line for the throne.

 

[Liam_SWFC]

Wonder if Giggs will still be a part of the coaching set up, maybe it's his time to take the leap into management elsewhere.

 

[Pagnell]

Since Ferguson left Manchester United have spent £200m net, and £288m net in the last five years. That is second only to Manchester City. And with Mourinho now coming in, who is generally regarded as the biggest chequebook manager in the game, you have to believe they will be number one over the last five years by the time the first ball is kicked this coming season. Whilst most United fans won't give a shit providing it brings success, it can't be comfortable reading for some fans like Scruff.

 

[smat]

I hope Giggs stays and Mourinho has to work with him. Could be some power struggles and general INTRIGUE.

 

[citylee]

meh. pep>jose.

he'll flop.

 

[JaseTheVillain]

meh. pep>jose.

he'll flop.

When was that proved? When Jose beat him to La Liga, breaking Barca's utter dominance of that division? Around then by any chance?

 

[Renegade]

Van Gaal has now officially been sacked.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/36356584

Best Monday ever.

 

[sl1k]

Since Ferguson left Manchester United have spent £200m net, and £288m net in the last five years. That is second only to Manchester City. And with Mourinho now coming in, who is generally regarded as the biggest chequebook manager in the game, you have to believe they will be number one over the last five years by the time the first ball is kicked this coming season. Whilst most United fans won't give a shit providing it brings success, it can't be comfortable reading for some fans like Scruff.

To which prior we averaged an expenditure of 30 mill a season over 10 years. The squad was criminally neglected and only kept up with competitors thanks to Fergie voodoo.

Louis spunked the money, yeah, but the narrative you're pushing using those figures is lazy, misleading and a load of balls mayte. Try harder.

 

[Stevencc]

Ray Wilkins - "Football managers getting sacked is the most horrible thing in the world".

 

[Pagnell]

To which prior we averaged an expenditure of 30 mill a season over 10 years. The squad was criminally neglected and only kept up with competitors thanks to Fergie voodoo.

Louis spunked the money, yeah, but the narrative you're pushing using those figures is lazy, misleading and a load of balls mayte. Try harder.

In which case I'm curious, how does that differ from the "buying success" narrative so many United fans were only too happy to throw in Chelsea's and, in particular, Manchester City's direction when they first won the Premier League a couple of seasons before Ferguson left? Granted, United fans weren't the only ones saying it, but they were certainly the loudest. And using your logic, City were starting from an even worse position. Or is it all OK now your own club is basically doing the same thing?

From where I'm sitting, United are only better insofar as their expenditure and income at least compare from a business perspective, where as City is basically a loss leader and Chelsea aren't even that.

 

[Christian Slater]

Since Ferguson left Manchester United have spent £200m net, and £288m net in the last five years. That is second only to Manchester City. And with Mourinho now coming in, who is generally regarded as the biggest chequebook manager in the game, you have to believe they will be number one over the last five years by the time the first ball is kicked this coming season. Whilst most United fans won't give a shit providing it brings success, it can't be comfortable reading for some fans like Scruff.

Most United fans were clamouring for the club to throw its weight around in the transfer market. You seem to love to bring this up every day or so, but United should be the biggest spenders in the country, the fact they're third overall since the PL began is impressive.

Here's a better financial stat: Liverpool have spent over £650m (net) just on players in the last ten years and have a measily League Cup to show for it. The same haul as Birmingham City.

 

[sl1k]

 

[Pagnell]

Most United fans were clamouring for the club to throw its weight around in the transfer market. You seem to love to bring this up every day or so, but United should be the biggest spenders in the country, the fact they're third overall since the PL began is impressive.

Here's a better financial stat: Liverpool have spent over £650m (net) just on players in the last ten years and have a measily League Cup to show for it. The same haul as Birmingham City.

You can hear the ring of that nerve being hit from here.

As for your £650m net figure for Liverpool, I strongly suggest you recheck your calculations given that, by my reckoning, we've spent around half that. Don't worry though, you were no doubt in a rush to respond so probably pressed the wrong buttons on the calculator. It must be said though, even putting aside your mistake, I'd be the first to say we've spent far too much and too poorly. Fortunately, Liverpool aren't the team under discussion here though.

 

[Christian Slater]

You can hear the ring of that nerve being hit from here.

As for your £650m net figure for Liverpool, I strongly suggest you recheck your calculations given that, by my reckoning, we've spent around half that. Don't worry though, you were no doubt in a rush to respond so probably pressed the wrong buttons on the calculator. It must be said though, even putting aside your mistake, I'd be the first to say we've spent far too much and too poorly. Fortunately, Liverpool aren't the team under discussion here though.

Not really, I want us to be competing financially. If you feel my response finally justifies you posting about it every few days then you can give yourself a well deserved pat on the back for your efforts.

I might have fucked up on the net bit. Regardless, it's rich for a Liverpool fan to be talking about money when your spend to success ratio is amongst the worst.

Also, we're entering into a new financial dynamic with the new influx of cash. Newcastle spent £70m net this year and went down. United are financially successful, we should spend the fruits of our labour. The divide between our clubs is the same as the one between Liverpool and Everton, you're just at a lower level on the pole.

 

[Pagnell]

And if you feel that your best way of responding is to exaggerate how often I've discussed this matter, then feel free to give yourself an equally deserved pat on the back. We can even see if we can do it at the same time.

And rich it might be, but the shit both City and Chelsea fans got from United fans, especially their neighbours, can't be denied. Yet all of a sudden it's fine because their own club is doing the same.

 

[Christian Slater]

And if you feel that your best way of responding is to exaggerate how often I've discussed this matter, then feel free to give yourself an equally deserved pat on the back. We can even see if we can do it at the same time.

And rich it might be, but the shit both City and Chelsea fans got from United fans, especially their neighbours, can't be denied. Yet all of a sudden it's fine because their own club is doing the same.

Let's see:

Well, quite clearly a team can do that, just look at the league table. It says a lot about the general quality on display this season that United have played the uninspiring shite they have yet are in 2nd place.



That makes no sense unless I was claiming Liverpool didn't waste money. I've never understood this rather stupid viewpoint that, simply because an individual's own team is bad in the context under discussion, that individual is in no position to make a comment about another team. This forum would be boring and half it's size if people could only make comments on an aspect of an opposition team if their own team has zero issues in that same area.

Besides, even putting all that aside, United have spent nearly double what Liverpool have in the last 5 seasons (£300m in comparison to £160m).

Van Gaal has been no better than Moyes. In fact, after 18 games two seasons back, Moyes had more points, which really should have anyone even contemplating defending Van Gaal thinking twice. He's spent shit loads, and they've gone backwards.

United supporting mate of mine claims he heard off a reliable source Mourinho will be in charge within a week. Looks like United have gone against their original post-Fergie plan to take things long term and have panicked into bringing in the world most famous impact manager. Top 4 looks in danger at the moment so they have to try something I guess, two seasons in three not finishing in the CL spots given the money they have spent would be hilarious.

Guardiola coming in without Manchester City having Champions League would be highly amusing, there is no way in hell he'd have signed up if he'd known that was going to happen. However, for me, United missing out on the Champions League for the second time in three seasons, despite the money they have spent in that time, would be far better. And there is still a chance they'll stick with Van Gaal if they finish 5th anyway. After all, they're hardly spoilt for choice outside of Mourinho, and I still think he'd be a bad idea for them in the long run.

So City drawing and, short of United winning their last game by 19 goals, that's Van Gaal confirmed to somehow managing to finish outside the top 4 despite a truly ridiculous amount spent.

Please keep him on.

Chelsea and City get shit because they've done nothing to earn it. You know this, yet you're getting desperate trying to denigrate United.

 

[sl1k]

Haha where's Mantis, Pagz just got dossier'd

 

[Pagnell]

Let's see:

Right. So it's gone from "every few days" to five occasions ranging from this month back to November last year. Sorry Slater me old muck, you weren't exaggerating at all, I take it all back. Well done for finding them all though, it wasn't a bit sad at all.

 

[sl1k]

Chelsea and City get shit because they've done nothing to earn it. You know this, yet you're getting desperate trying to denigrate United.

That bit still stands though

 

[Stevencc]

You might want to search using these terms Christian, something may have slipped through the net.

 

[Christian Slater]

Right. So it's gone from "every few days" to five occasions ranging from this month back to November last year. Sorry Slater me old muck, you weren't exaggerating at all, I take it all back. Well done for finding them all though, it wasn't a bit sad at all.

It took two minutes to find as shown by the timing on my response and they were just some of the results on the first page. Your response isn't one of somebody that's just been rattled though.

 

[Pagnell]

Your response isn't one of somebody that's just been rattled though.

As opposed to someone claiming they weren't exaggerating only to go out their way to find proof that they were?

 

[Christian Slater]

I've provided the cold, hard facts, mate.

 

[merseyboyred]

Fair play to United fans, caring more about Liverpool fans reaction to this news than actually giving their own. T'was ever thus.

My reaction for you all: . A number of excellent managers and big signings coming into the league next season, should be entertaining.

 

[Christian Slater]

Fair play to United fans, caring more about Liverpool fans reaction to this news than actually giving their own. T'was ever thus.

My reaction for you all: . A number of excellent managers and big signings coming into the league next season, should be entertaining.

They've been the most vehement about it. Only fair to respond.

Too true.

 

[Pagnell]

That bit still stands though

Nah, it was always more about how it's gone from a laugh and point matter when City were doing it, to something that's acceptable now. United spending shit loads isn't something that bothers me, it's not as if it's resulted in much in recent seasons. And as I said, at least they have the football-related income to back it up unlike the other two.

 

[PDS]

The fans want more exciting, attacking football and yet they're happy with Mourinho?

 

[Nilsson]

Mourinho is a has been.

Considering this time last year he had just won the Premier League, i'd be interested to see your workings out on that one.

The fans want more exciting, attacking football and yet they're happy with Mourinho?

No, we want winning football. But as others have said, Mourinho has shown throughout his career that he's able to play attractive football (as recent as the start of the 14/15 season, Chelsea were a joy to watch).

 

[JimJams]

I don't think it needs arguing that Mourinhos football is at least more entertaining that LvG's.

 

[Stevencc]

WELL WE NEED TO ARGUE ABOUT SOMETHING.