United Thread | 2024/25

Status
Not open for further replies.
For Manchester City fans, the past decade has been nothing short of a dream. The sky has turned blue, and the balance of power in Manchester—and arguably English football—has decisively shifted. Since Slur Alex Ferguson waved his teary goodbye in 2013, Manchester United has descended into a spiral of mediocrity, mismanagement, and identity crises. For City fans, it’s a fascinating case study in how a once-dominant giant can implode, especially when juxtaposed with City’s meteoric rise under Sheikh Mansour and Pep Guardiola.

The Ferguson Vacuum

Let’s start with the obvious: Slur Alex was a genius. Love him or loathe him, the man could turn average squads into champions, blending tactical acumen, man-management, and a siege mentality that made United a relentless force. But Ferguson’s departure exposed a glaring truth—United’s dominance was as much about him as it was about the institution. Without him, the club floundered.

David Moyes, handpicked by Ferguson, was out of his depth. Louis van Gaal brought a rigid, joyless style. José Mourinho’s tenure oscillated between short-term success and long-term toxicity. Ole Gunnar Solskjær offered nostalgia without substance. Erik ten Hag, the latest in a revolving door of managers, has had fleeting success but remains bogged down by the club’s deeper issues.

For City fans, watching this managerial chaos has been amusing. The “Chosen One” banner at Old Trafford quickly became a symbol of misplaced arrogance. In contrast, City’s succession planning—transitioning from Roberto Mancini to Manuel Pellegrini and then to Pep Guardiola—highlighted a clear vision and a club-wide philosophy.

Spending Without Strategy

United’s post-Ferguson transfer strategy has been another comedic subplot. While City have built one of the most balanced and cohesive squads in football, United have thrown money at the problem with little thought. From Ángel Di María to Paul Pogba to Jadon Sancho, the list of expensive flops is staggering.

The irony? United have consistently outspent City in many transfer windows. Yet, for every Harry Maguire at United, there’s a Ruben Dias at City. For every Fred, there’s a Rodri. The difference lies in recruitment strategy. City buy players who fit a system; United buy players to appease their fanbase or chase commercial gains.

The Commercial Club

And that brings us to perhaps the most glaring difference: United’s obsession with branding. While City have built a football empire with an emphasis on the pitch, United seem more focused on selling shirts. From cringe-worthy sponsorship announcements to over-the-top social media campaigns, United have become the poster child for football’s commercialisation.

The Glazer family’s ownership has turned the club into a cash cow, with little concern for footballing success. Meanwhile, City’s owners have invested in infrastructure, youth development, and a long-term vision that transcends just winning trophies.

The Guardiola Effect

And then there’s Pep Guardiola. Since his arrival in 2016, City have revolutionised English football. From 100-point seasons to treble-winning campaigns, City have reached a level of dominance that United fans once boasted about. Guardiola’s City have not just outplayed United—they’ve humiliated them. Remember the 6-3 drubbing in 2022? Or the sheer dominance of City’s midfield in derby after derby?

United fans like to talk about history, but the truth is that City have been writing their own over the past decade. While United struggle to finish in the top four, City are setting benchmarks that future generations will talk about.

What Next for United?

For City fans, the demise of Manchester United is bittersweet. On one hand, it’s satisfying to see our once-mighty rivals reduced to a shadow of their former selves. On the other hand, the derby just doesn’t feel as competitive anymore.

United’s problems are deep-rooted: poor ownership, a lack of footballing identity, and an inflated sense of their place in the modern game. Fixing them will require years of patience, humility, and the kind of structural overhaul that City underwent a decade ago.

Conclusion

The demise of Manchester United since Slur Alex left has been a masterclass in how not to run a football club. For City fans, it’s hard to feel sympathy. After decades of living in their shadow, we’re finally basking in the glory of our own success while watching them flounder.

The power shift in Manchester is complete, and the blue moon is shining brighter than ever. If United want to challenge again, they’ll need more than just nostalgia—they’ll need to learn from the club that now owns their city.
 
Last edited:
giphy.gif


Think this sums up our perspective quite succinctly.
 
Kippax. said:
For Manchester City fans, the past decade has been nothing short of a dream. The sky has turned blue, and the balance of power in Manchester—and arguably English football—has decisively shifted. Since Slur Alex Ferguson waved his teary goodbye in 2013, Manchester United has descended into a spiral of mediocrity, mismanagement, and identity crises. For City fans, it’s a fascinating case study in how a once-dominant giant can implode, especially when juxtaposed with City’s meteoric rise under Sheikh Mansour and Pep Guardiola.

The Ferguson Vacuum

Let’s start with the obvious: Slur Alex was a genius. Love him or loathe him, the man could turn average squads into champions, blending tactical acumen, man-management, and a siege mentality that made United a relentless force. But Ferguson’s departure exposed a glaring truth—United’s dominance was as much about him as it was about the institution. Without him, the club floundered.

David Moyes, handpicked by Ferguson, was out of his depth. Louis van Gaal brought a rigid, joyless style. José Mourinho’s tenure oscillated between short-term success and long-term toxicity. Ole Gunnar Solskjær offered nostalgia without substance. Erik ten Hag, the latest in a revolving door of managers, has had fleeting success but remains bogged down by the club’s deeper issues.

For City fans, watching this managerial chaos has been amusing. The “Chosen One” banner at Old Trafford quickly became a symbol of misplaced arrogance. In contrast, City’s succession planning—transitioning from Roberto Mancini to Manuel Pellegrini and then to Pep Guardiola—highlighted a clear vision and a club-wide philosophy.

Spending Without Strategy

United’s post-Ferguson transfer strategy has been another comedic subplot. While City have built one of the most balanced and cohesive squads in football, United have thrown money at the problem with little thought. From Ángel Di María to Paul Pogba to Jadon Sancho, the list of expensive flops is staggering.

The irony? United have consistently outspent City in many transfer windows. Yet, for every Harry Maguire at United, there’s a Ruben Dias at City. For every Fred, there’s a Rodri. The difference lies in recruitment strategy. City buy players who fit a system; United buy players to appease their fanbase or chase commercial gains.

The Commercial Club

And that brings us to perhaps the most glaring difference: United’s obsession with branding. While City have built a football empire with an emphasis on the pitch, United seem more focused on selling shirts. From cringe-worthy sponsorship announcements to over-the-top social media campaigns, United have become the poster child for football’s commercialization.

The Glazer family’s ownership has turned the club into a cash cow, with little concern for footballing success. Meanwhile, City’s owners have invested in infrastructure, youth development, and a long-term vision that transcends just winning trophies.

The Guardiola Effect

And then there’s Pep Guardiola. Since his arrival in 2016, City have revolutionized English football. From 100-point seasons to treble-winning campaigns, City have reached a level of dominance that United fans once boasted about. Guardiola’s City have not just outplayed United—they’ve humiliated them. Remember the 6-3 drubbing in 2022? Or the sheer dominance of City’s midfield in derby after derby?

United fans like to talk about history, but the truth is that City have been writing their own over the past decade. While United struggle to finish in the top four, City are setting benchmarks that future generations will talk about.

What Next for United?

For City fans, the demise of Manchester United is bittersweet. On one hand, it’s satisfying to see our once-mighty rivals reduced to a shadow of their former selves. On the other hand, the derby just doesn’t feel as competitive anymore.

United’s problems are deep-rooted: poor ownership, a lack of footballing identity, and an inflated sense of their place in the modern game. Fixing them will require years of patience, humility, and the kind of structural overhaul that City underwent a decade ago.

Conclusion

The demise of Manchester United since Slur Alex left has been a masterclass in how not to run a football club. For City fans, it’s hard to feel sympathy. After decades of living in their shadow, we’re finally basking in the glory of our own success while watching them flounder.

The power shift in Manchester is complete, and the blue moon is shining brighter than ever. If United want to challenge again, they’ll need more than just nostalgia—they’ll need to learn from the club that now owns their city.
Click to expand...
Good summary 8-)
 
Kippax. said:
For Manchester City fans, the past decade has been nothing short of a dream. The sky has turned blue, and the balance of power in Manchester—and arguably English football—has decisively shifted. Since Slur Alex Ferguson waved his teary goodbye in 2013, Manchester United has descended into a spiral of mediocrity, mismanagement, and identity crises. For City fans, it’s a fascinating case study in how a once-dominant giant can implode, especially when juxtaposed with City’s meteoric rise under Sheikh Mansour and Pep Guardiola.

The Ferguson Vacuum

Let’s start with the obvious: Slur Alex was a genius. Love him or loathe him, the man could turn average squads into champions, blending tactical acumen, man-management, and a siege mentality that made United a relentless force. But Ferguson’s departure exposed a glaring truth—United’s dominance was as much about him as it was about the institution. Without him, the club floundered.

David Moyes, handpicked by Ferguson, was out of his depth. Louis van Gaal brought a rigid, joyless style. José Mourinho’s tenure oscillated between short-term success and long-term toxicity. Ole Gunnar Solskjær offered nostalgia without substance. Erik ten Hag, the latest in a revolving door of managers, has had fleeting success but remains bogged down by the club’s deeper issues.

For City fans, watching this managerial chaos has been amusing. The “Chosen One” banner at Old Trafford quickly became a symbol of misplaced arrogance. In contrast, City’s succession planning—transitioning from Roberto Mancini to Manuel Pellegrini and then to Pep Guardiola—highlighted a clear vision and a club-wide philosophy.

Spending Without Strategy

United’s post-Ferguson transfer strategy has been another comedic subplot. While City have built one of the most balanced and cohesive squads in football, United have thrown money at the problem with little thought. From Ángel Di María to Paul Pogba to Jadon Sancho, the list of expensive flops is staggering.

The irony? United have consistently outspent City in many transfer windows. Yet, for every Harry Maguire at United, there’s a Ruben Dias at City. For every Fred, there’s a Rodri. The difference lies in recruitment strategy. City buy players who fit a system; United buy players to appease their fanbase or chase commercial gains.

The Commercial Club

And that brings us to perhaps the most glaring difference: United’s obsession with branding. While City have built a football empire with an emphasis on the pitch, United seem more focused on selling shirts. From cringe-worthy sponsorship announcements to over-the-top social media campaigns, United have become the poster child for football’s commercialisation.

The Glazer family’s ownership has turned the club into a cash cow, with little concern for footballing success. Meanwhile, City’s owners have invested in infrastructure, youth development, and a long-term vision that transcends just winning trophies.

The Guardiola Effect

And then there’s Pep Guardiola. Since his arrival in 2016, City have revolutionised English football. From 100-point seasons to treble-winning campaigns, City have reached a level of dominance that United fans once boasted about. Guardiola’s City have not just outplayed United—they’ve humiliated them. Remember the 6-3 drubbing in 2022? Or the sheer dominance of City’s midfield in derby after derby?

United fans like to talk about history, but the truth is that City have been writing their own over the past decade. While United struggle to finish in the top four, City are setting benchmarks that future generations will talk about.

What Next for United?

For City fans, the demise of Manchester United is bittersweet. On one hand, it’s satisfying to see our once-mighty rivals reduced to a shadow of their former selves. On the other hand, the derby just doesn’t feel as competitive anymore.

United’s problems are deep-rooted: poor ownership, a lack of footballing identity, and an inflated sense of their place in the modern game. Fixing them will require years of patience, humility, and the kind of structural overhaul that City underwent a decade ago.

Conclusion

The demise of Manchester United since Slur Alex left has been a masterclass in how not to run a football club. For City fans, it’s hard to feel sympathy. After decades of living in their shadow, we’re finally basking in the glory of our own success while watching them flounder.

The power shift in Manchester is complete, and the blue moon is shining brighter than ever. If United want to challenge again, they’ll need more than just nostalgia—they’ll need to learn from the club that now owns their city.
Click to expand...

They’re not in the same city as us mate.
 
Ferguson was a genius, don't make me laugh. His tactical plan was run down the wing, kick it in the box and look for a rebound.
He filled his team with players poached from his rivals for transfer fees that were ridiculous at the time, Rooney and Ferdinand for instance.
On the whole a fair synopsis of the rag cunts.
 
tweety said:
Ferguson was a genius, don't make me laugh. His tactical plan was run down the wing, kick it in the box and look for a rebound.
He filled his team with players poached from his rivals for transfer fees that were ridiculous at the time, Rooney and Ferdinand for instance.
On the whole a fair synopsis of the rag cunts.
Click to expand...
He was certainly no tactical genius, but as an administrator he was pretty good. He got decent coaches to cover his tactical deficiencies pretty well.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top