MagMal Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 3 hours ago, Tiresias said: I don't imagine he will be made to wait till 2026 to start work (and indeed Man U will look elsewhere if that is the case one would think), some amount will get paid to ease it through but making him wait till after summer transfer window at least feels sensible. There is no need to be either overly vindictive by refusing any amount of money in lieu of seeing out contract (that I guess could have some repercussions with future hires), he is after all perfectly entitled to want to go work for his mate at Man U, especially if things haven't worked out here quite how he hoped. The noise seems to imply a little that he and Howe aren't quite aligned with Howe having more say and power than him in areas of Ashworth's remit. Who knows if true. It's just disappointing for someone who is meant to be dealing with the long term to allow Howe to focus short term has lasted nowhere near as long as hoped I imagine. We can't be rollovers either, they want him soon they need to pay. They think price is silly they can give a counter offer and we'll see hardly rocket science. Not that bothered, our backroom set up leaves a lot to be desired still but we'll get that whomever is in post. Could it be that he had more say at his previous club due to the manager not been as stubborn or controlling, not that I think Eddie is in a bad way I just thick he has his ideas of what he wants, if that's the case he is going to have the same with Ten Hag at man u, not that I like him but he hasn't half had to deal with some shit so there is no way he going to roll over and let half pint Dan tell him what to do. I have a sneaky feeling it will all go tits up for him in Manchester. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobsonsWonderland Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 Im still to be convinced that a dof at Brighton will be as successful as a dof at Newcastle or Manchester. A big part of Brightons success was scouting in the pools nobody else was looking and providing them the opportunity to learn, get game time, flop or succeed and then be sold on either way Almost up front about being a stepping stone and be ballsy about that approach. We tried it with cabaye and everyone flipped. So unless man u follow that approach he has to convince a lot of players on huge sums to leave the club and others big stars to join. Oh and I can't imagine his mates in the Saudi League will be coming to spend millions oh his cast offs now Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty66 Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 (edited) It's not so much they scouted where nobody is looking they had a data model that could find players who had value. For example players who's buy price was much lower than it should be or who's talent is much better than the level or league they were playing in. Couple that with the data that suggests they would fit in well in the PL and you're onto a winner. This is absolutely the future of football scouting and we need to get up to speed. Brighton owner was years ahead of everyone and it's how his made so much money and became so successful. Same applies to Brentford. Edited February 20 by Scotty66 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
STM Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 The biggest mistake everyone seems to be making is that DA or any sporting director is a scout or that they are the sole contributor to transfers. Signing senior players is a small fraction of what DA does. He was building and overseeing the whole footballing operations at our club and that's what Man United want him for. I suspect a change in Sporting Director will have minimal impact on the sort of transfer business we intend to do..... unless we've decided we intend to use this opportunity to tweak our model... which is more than possible. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
toon25 Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 I think the big progress factor at any football club is the owner. Everyone else - probably bar the manager - is pretty auxiliary to long term, lasting, progress that'll push your club on. 'Sir Jim' and his investment in a Glazer-owned club is only going to go one way eventually. A director of football will only be as influential as the owner allows them to be. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbandit Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 Just now, toon25 said: I think the big progress factor at any football club is the owner. Everyone else - probably bar the manager - is pretty auxiliary to long term, lasting, progress that'll push your club on. 'Sir Jim' and his investment in a Glazer-owned club is only going to go one way eventually. A director of football will only be as influential as the owner allows them to be. This is it, Jim likes a vanity project and he likes pulling together a team of top experts. Fair play but football is vastly more complicated at the very top level when a team has flagged for so long than almost any other sport, certainly non-US team sport. The amount of money that’s involved, luck and continued good decisions needs someone who is able to be in it for a long time and keep pumping money in when it’s seemingly not going right. It’s not going to work out for Jim and his pals long-term even if they have a little boost for a year or so. What could save Man U is if they have some incredible players coming through their academy who love the club, think that might be their only hope because it’s still rotten to the core Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbydazzla Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 (edited) Jim Ratcliffe has turned the all conquering Team Sky into Ineos Grenadiers and they’ve become a shadow of their former selves. They’re also-rans on the cycling world tour these days Equivalent would be turning current era Man City into mid table plodders He might have a few quid, a flouncy barnet and know a lot about chemicals, but that doesn’t guarantee sporting success Edited February 20 by bobbydazzla Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr.Spaceman Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 1 hour ago, STM said: The biggest mistake everyone seems to be making is that DA or any sporting director is a scout or that they are the sole contributor to transfers. Signing senior players is a small fraction of what DA does. He was building and overseeing the whole footballing operations at our club and that's what Man United want him for. I suspect a change in Sporting Director will have minimal impact on the sort of transfer business we intend to do..... unless we've decided we intend to use this opportunity to tweak our model... which is more than possible. This needs to be stickied. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
midds Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 5 minutes ago, bobbydazzla said: Jim Ratcliffe has turned the all conquering Team Sky into Ineos Grenadiers and they’ve become a shadow of their former selves. They’re also-rans on the cycling world tour these days Equivalent would be turning current era Man City into mid table plodders He might have a few quid, a flouncy barnet and know a lot about chemicals, but that doesn’t guarantee sporting success Isn't that because they just stopped taking loads of drugs? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt1892 Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 Reading this and you wonder if they can afford a high compensation figure to sign him early. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2024/02/20/sir-jim-ratcliffe-manchester-united-transfer-budget-spend/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack27 Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 2 minutes ago, Matt1892 said: Reading this and you wonder if they can afford a high compensation figure to sign him early. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2024/02/20/sir-jim-ratcliffe-manchester-united-transfer-budget-spend/ Hilarious. Doing your executive shopping by the media has fucked them? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbydazzla Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 (edited) 7 minutes ago, midds said: Isn't that because they just stopped taking loads of drugs? Aye right, if there’s one thing Ratcliffe excels at it’s chemicals innit Poor rider recruitment and retention, poor management retention, lost their team identity, other teams around them got better whilst Ineos floundered Edited February 20 by bobbydazzla Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joelinton7 Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 34 minutes ago, Jack27 said: Hilarious. Doing your executive shopping by the media has fucked them? Stymied Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanji Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 Stats are for losers; prefer to scout players via 1) if they are a good lad, 2) the level of their banter 3) how they do at cold, wet, rainy away days and 4) the power of which they deliver their reducer tackles Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghandis Flip-Flop Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 1 hour ago, bobbydazzla said: Jim Ratcliffe has turned the all conquering Team Sky into Ineos Grenadiers and they’ve become a shadow of their former selves. They’re also-rans on the cycling world tour these days Equivalent would be turning current era Man City into mid table plodders He might have a few quid, a flouncy barnet and know a lot about chemicals, but that doesn’t guarantee sporting success Not had a great record with their F1 involvement either. It’s almost as if Brailsford's marginal gains stopped adding up, once people got wind of the magic inhalers Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Jinx Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 I assume we’ll have to change our model a bit, unless whoever comes in has an instant grasp of the structure and then just builds on it in their own way. And that’s probably for the best anyway.. you don’t want Dan Ashworth working for a competitor who knows exactly what our process is should they be going for some of the same types of players in the transfer window. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
huss9 Posted February 21 Share Posted February 21 10 hours ago, SUPERTOON said: Anything interesting in there ? eddie is mates with michael edwards... well sort of. they were together at portsmouth. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mighty__mag Posted February 21 Share Posted February 21 Eddie came over seemingly not that arsed if Ashworth leaves, for me that's enough to say it really doesn't matter a huge deal. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mag3.14 Posted February 21 Share Posted February 21 5 hours ago, midds said: Isn't that because they just stopped taking loads of drugs? hmm, possibly - With him and Brailsford at the helm, maybe we should be suggesting more frequent drugs checks for Man Utd players in future Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtype Posted February 21 Share Posted February 21 2 hours ago, mighty__mag said: Eddie came over seemingly not that arsed if Ashworth leaves, for me that's enough to say it really doesn't matter a huge deal. To be fair, Howe is a little self-interested here. By necessity, this will result in him having more influence on transfer dealings. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
r0cafella Posted February 21 Share Posted February 21 Putting aside the relationship element here, but is Ashworth really the right appointment for them? Isn’t the structure ok in terms of academy medical, women’s team? Aren’t they basically dogshit at buying players and this isn’t really Ashworth strong suit either. Also, I know the media are wanting themselves silly over Ineos but haven’t they essentially made a pigs ear over this already? You’d have thought they would have reached out to us in double quick time to get us on side and playing ball, instead they’ve been leaking to the media non stop and grand standing about we will wait and we won’t pay whatever they want? To me it looks like they’ve gone into this with zero leverage and without a proper planning to try and get a mate on the cheap. All this talk of Barrada but is this even his appointment? If so, how can that be the case when he’s also on gardening leave and hasn’t started his role yet? It seems to be as though the media narrative and reality are quite different. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbandit Posted February 21 Share Posted February 21 Dunno like, their club culture is rotten to the core. Their ground and facilities are falling apart and decades behind some teams. There’s obviously been major disillusionment which has set in due to the Glazers. Is Dan the best person to resolve all these things? Really not easy to say as the amount of investment required is huge but it’s almost impossible to put a price on changing a club’s culture, especially when the Glazers are still there in the mix Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
teohgk Posted February 21 Share Posted February 21 Always hate Manure and after what these cunts asking for Lingard loan? Pay up or they can kiss my ass, end of story Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Posted February 21 Share Posted February 21 The Glazers really are the ultimate grifters, 1. Buy the biggest club in the world with the clubs own money. 2. Take money out of the club to pay huge interest payments but don't actually pay off debt. 3. Hire numpty after numpty to turn them into a mid table team. 4. Take out dividends for their entire tenue as payment for their financial mess. 5. Vote to take Man U into the super league for yet more cash, fan outrage. 6. Sell the running of the football club for £1.3 billion to a bloke that will take all the flak, meanwhile keeping a controlling percentage. 7. Same bloke will put in his OWN cash to fund the running of the club. 8. Glazers put in zero capital for this rebuild. 9. Same debt. 10. Continue to take dividends. 11. Success means mote cash for them by doing absolutely nothing. 12. Failure means Radcliffe loses, Glazers unaffected. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Froggy Posted February 21 Share Posted February 21 17 minutes ago, Ben said: The Glazers really are the ultimate grifters, 1. Buy the biggest club in the world with the clubs own money. 2. Take money out of the club to pay huge interest payments but don't actually pay off debt. 3. Hire numpty after numpty to turn them into a mid table team. 4. Take out dividends for their entire tenue as payment for their financial mess. 5. Vote to take Man U into the super league for yet more cash, fan outrage. 6. Sell the running of the football club for £1.3 billion to a bloke that will take all the flak, meanwhile keeping a controlling percentage. 7. Same bloke will put in his OWN cash to fund the running of the club. 8. Glazers put in zero capital for this rebuild. 9. Same debt. 10. Continue to take dividends. 11. Success means mote cash for them by doing absolutely nothing. 12. Failure means Radcliffe loses, Glazers unaffected. Absolute cunts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now