I’m not disagreeing with your last comment because the rot is too ingrained, but all the things you point to: the politics of the old guard, the structure of the club, the lack of restructuring, the short term-ism (due to supporter pressure) and allowing Ferguson to hang around and stink the place out were all within the Glazers’ gift to address if they’d had the guts, self-confidence and vision to do so, given the passage of twenty years and the money the club generates. They’ve had the time and control of the organisation to address all these things if they were so inclined.Unfortunately, I still disagree.
Could the Glazers have effect some change? Sure. And they have by all accounts attempted to do so. Do they share some of the blame? Of course. Making the club a publicly traded interest alone was a major mistake that they are still struggling to manage now, beyond their extractive practices.
As I said in my OP, they are bad owners, both for the Rags and for the league.
But the main drivers of the truly breathtaking level of shiteness United now embody are beyond them.
There has been politics being played throughout their tenure, including at the executive level within the club, with dealing and rivalries, many of which they have not been able stop.
And the structure of the club itself is dysfunctional and, in some areas, outright toxic. That was the case before they arrived, and to fix that requires a complete restructuring (and rebuilding). Much of the persistence of those situations has been down the supporter pressures not allowing them to actually take steps toward that.
All of that in mind, I have to reiterate my overarching point: new owners are not going to get United back to anywhere near their level when Ferguson was in charge, not in the near term, anyway.
The club needs to be razed to the foundations and rebuilt. And the fans will never allow that.
And Ferguson should carry much of the blame for all of this, as well, as his caring more about his legacy than succession planning planted the seed for the immense dysfunction to come (and his management style had already created a morass in his final years).
TL;DR
New owners will not save United.
You are absolutely correct in blaming senior management BUT who employed them? An unpopular statement I know but the Glazers put this senior management in place and if they are sh1t, which they are, then they are to blame. The buck stops at the top.
I think because we are debating two different things.I don’t understand why this is even being debated.
Fantastic stuff so early in the season....just a shame the #SOPP thread has been seemingly deleted by mods unknown....he's gonna need us pretty soon.It’s on his own X.
So unless he’s been hacked…
Week 4, and public infighting breaks out.
<Windsor Davies meme>
It must be worrying for them. He was detached from reality during that sky interview. Lost all sense of logic and reason. I know they’ve had a bad result but you need more resolve than that at the top level. They have employed an unhinged individual, gone by March/April imo!!Moaning bastard TH.That was never a foul, never a penalty and the offside was given by VAR who can surely see it better than he can! He is getting a bit desperate already.
My answer would be “Yes”, at least in the timeframe we have seen them turn out club in to the immense powerhouse it is now.I’m not disagreeing with your last comment because the rot is too ingrained, but all the things you point to: the politics of the old guard, the structure of the club, the lack of restructuring, the short term-ism (due to supporter pressure) and allowing Ferguson to hang around and stink the place out were all within the Glazers’ gift to address if they’d had the guts, self-confidence and vision to do so, given the passage of twenty years and the money the club generates.
Put it this way - if Sheikh Mansour had bought United in 2008, do you think they’d be the same basket case they are today?
Because unless the answer is ‘yes’, then the blame ultimately rests with the Glazers.
Where did I say that?It seems you both are saying the buck stops at the top and that new owners can right the ship in the near term.
When? You say ‘well before’, but they won the Treble four years before the Glazers bought the club.And I maintain that much of the dysfunction causing this massive drop in performance started well before the Glazers bought the club.
'Big Sam to Old Trafford. Calling Big Sam to Old Trafford'Ten hag sounds more like Mourinho by the day. He is moaning about every decision and throwing players under the bus
I suspect he will be another one that bites the dust in the next 12 months
Ok, well we’ll have to disagree as what you are basically saying (given my question was whether they would be ‘the same basket case’) is that having Sheikh Mansour would have made no meaningful difference at all, which suggests united’s systemic problems were incurable in 2008, and I simply cannot accept that. I think he (or Khaldoon, rather) would have spotted the rot, restructured the club, invested in the infrastructure, got the right people in and the footballing landscape today would look very different.My answer would be “Yes”, at least in the timeframe we have seen them turn out club in to the immense powerhouse it is now.
Because I believe the rot runs that deep in that club.
Our owners actually saw in opportunity with us, but everyone at the club (and the city)—the previous ownership, the management, the players, the staff, and the fans—wanted a tear down and rebuild. That gave them the freedom to to take many of the necessary but painful actions to right the ship.
And to answer your question more fully: I am not even sure ADUG, after initial discovery, would have wanted to takeover United. Dysfunction had set in well before the Glazers arrived. I think the Glazers largely saw the opportunity in the chaos.
Dalot, I think. Maguire and Evans are too slow to get that close.Slabhead?
I was interpreting your post; happy to be corrected if you are not arguing that new owners could fix everything fairly quickly.Where did I say that?
When? You say ‘well before’, but they won the Treble four years before the Glazers bought the club.
Thankfully they are OURS, fuck united :POk, well we’ll have to disagree as what you are basically saying (given my question was whether they would be ‘the same basket case’) is that having Sheikh Mansour would have made no meaningful difference at all, which suggests united’s systemic problems were incurable in 2008, and I simply cannot accept that. I think he (or Khaldoon, rather) would have spotted the rot, restructured the club, invested in the infrastructure, got the right people in and the footballing landscape today would look very different.
I didn’t say no measurable difference, I said the timeline would be much longer. I think the Sheikh and the Shrewd could have righted the ship, but it would have taken 2+ decades of struggle, especially with their own fans.Ok, well we’ll have to disagree as what you are basically saying (given my question was whether they would be ‘the same basket case’) is that having Sheikh Mansour would have made no meaningful difference at all, which suggests united’s systemic problems were incurable in 2008, and I simply cannot accept that. I think he (or Khaldoon, rather) would have spotted the rot, restructured the club, invested in the infrastructure, got the right people in and the footballing landscape today would look very different.
Ferguson had the power the years before the retirement. And the fans made it almost impossible to change that.As much as I don’t really like him and the change of owners can be argued to be due to him, the lack of succession cannot.
The owners needed to sort that, they didn’t.
Ferguson left at a time he knew the tide was changing. He was probably one RVP signing away (if we had got him instead of them), of being in our rear view mirror.
Lucky for him they got him and he could leave as champions.
It was always going to be a tough job for United to replace him as he had been there so long and had so much control.
The choice of just getting Moyes and hoping he would do the same job was flawed and they have not caught up since.
Now Tan Hag is the new saviour and I feel he had a decent enough first season.
However, I’m a bit unsure of the current plan. They seem to want to play a brand of football not that dissimilar to ourselves. Assuming based on the theory City are a great team let’s play like them. However, they cannot really do it. All games seem like they play like Ole had them, defend deep and counter or they have the ball more and concede good chances.
They have a handful of decent players, that can help them win some games. But ultimately all their games there is a decent case for them losing/ drawing in all.
The FFP rules are beginning to hurt them, whilst we 115 charges pending aside seem to be managing with ease.
Bit of a rant but the owners are to blame for everything at United, but they are on for record revenues whilst ensuring they are in the box seat for future commercial opportunities. Whilst I believe they would like them to win the league, their operation is based around CL participation.
Dalot unfortunatelySlabhead?