Erik Ten Hag

Manchester United chat
User avatar
dozer
Legend
Posts: 4090
Joined: 11 years ago

JoelfuckingGlazer wrote: 1 month ago Can you imagine what Fergie could have achieved with the backing of an entire oil-nation state?
Fergie didn't dominate Europe. I feel like he always considered Europe as a bonus. He only stepped up his game because Chelsea started spending galactico style. Beating Abramovich's Chelsea also meant having a team good enough to compete for the champions league. He always cared about saving money. In his autobiography, he bragged about having an average of just 5m net spend per season on transfers.

I guess he'd easily have dominated Europe if he had oil money.
User avatar
Felwin
Legend
Posts: 1574
Joined: 10 years ago
Location: Abroad

dozer wrote: 1 month ago
JoelfuckingGlazer wrote: 1 month ago Can you imagine what Fergie could have achieved with the backing of an entire oil-nation state?
Fergie didn't dominate Europe. I feel like he always considered Europe as a bonus. He only stepped up his game because Chelsea started spending galactico style. Beating Abramovich's Chelsea also meant having a team good enough to compete for the champions league. He always cared about saving money. In his autobiography, he bragged about having an average of just 5m net spend per season on transfers.

I guess he'd easily have dominated Europe if he had oil money.
Not sure this is wholly true. Don't remember him ever mentioning it in his first autobiography. He banged on about it later to justify Glazernomics and to set apart his achievements from Chelsea's/City's. My read of him is that he expected the chairman to back him, whatever the price, as that money is invested into the team, the community, the fans.

He's actually right to highlight it later tbf, because it was pretty spectacular that we competed for and won titles with regulars like Anderson, Cleverly, Park, the Da Silva twins, Young, Jones, Smalling, Kagawa. If they were in the current squad, we'd be moaning about them every week, but SAF got performances out of them beyond their capabilities, so fair fucks.

But I still think it's an afterthought that he tacked on in his last autobiography because the owners he enabled were telling him his budget was a fraction of his rivals.
User avatar
swampash
Legend
Posts: 3057
Joined: 10 years ago

dozer, my question was about where you go for news, not just football comments.
User avatar
Jason
Star Man
Posts: 849
Joined: 10 years ago

dozer wrote: 1 month ago
JoelfuckingGlazer wrote: 1 month ago Can you imagine what Fergie could have achieved with the backing of an entire oil-nation state?
Fergie didn't dominate Europe. I feel like he always considered Europe as a bonus. He only stepped up his game because Chelsea started spending galactico style. Beating Abramovich's Chelsea also meant having a team good enough to compete for the champions league. He always cared about saving money. In his autobiography, he bragged about having an average of just 5m net spend per season on transfers.

I guess he'd easily have dominated Europe if he had oil money.
Didn't win enough cl, but I wouldn't agree didn't dominate, it was fine margins in many of the years.
From 95 to 2010
4 finals
3 semis
5 qf
Didn't make qf in only 2 seasons, that's a decent record.
User avatar
dozer
Legend
Posts: 4090
Joined: 11 years ago

swampash wrote: 1 month ago dozer, my question was about where you go for news, not just football comments.
Oh OK, I thought you meant football news. I don't go to news sites. I generally don't follow the news because I find all news orgs peddle some propaganda and most news is fake anyway. More importantly it's too polarised and there's a lot of rage bait.

I invest in stocks so I again go to twitter where I get sudden news about a company or govt policy affecting certain sectors.
In twitter I can block words so I block most famous politicians names, political parties names and other trending news words I'm not interested in. Otherwise I'll have to read people's extreme views attacking the other side - this is almost always the case. I block any word that's the trend when it comes to outrage. For e.g., let's say some kid gets raped and killed and it becomes national news. I don't want to read angry comments all day. I just block the hashtags and certain names.

It mostly works.

It took a lot of work initially but it's worth it.
User avatar
swampash
Legend
Posts: 3057
Joined: 10 years ago

dozer wrote: 1 month ago
swampash wrote: 1 month ago dozer, my question was about where you go for news, not just football comments.
Oh OK, I thought you meant football news. I don't go to news sites. I generally don't follow the news because I find all news orgs peddle some propaganda and most news is fake anyway. More importantly it's too polarised and there's a lot of rage bait.

I invest in stocks so I again go to twitter where I get sudden news about a company or govt policy affecting certain sectors.
In twitter I can block words so I block most famous politicians names, political parties names and other trending news words I'm not interested in. Otherwise I'll have to read people's extreme views attacking the other side - this is almost always the case. I block any word that's the trend when it comes to outrage. For e.g., let's say some kid gets raped and killed and it becomes national news. I don't want to read angry comments all day. I just block the hashtags and certain names.

It mostly works.

It took a lot of work initially but it's worth it.
Alternatively you could try reading the Guardian, the FT and the Economist…
User avatar
swampash
Legend
Posts: 3057
Joined: 10 years ago

It’s all gone very quiet on Ten Hag…?
User avatar
Felwin
Legend
Posts: 1574
Joined: 10 years ago
Location: Abroad

swampash wrote: 1 month ago It’s all gone very quiet on Ten Hag…?
I honestly think they'd already decided to sack him but they're giving it 10-14 days to let the goodwill from the FA cup die down again. No way that "review" was planned IMO. They've spent the last 3-4 months reviewing, planning and monitoring.
User avatar
swampash
Legend
Posts: 3057
Joined: 10 years ago

Felwin wrote: 1 month ago
swampash wrote: 1 month ago It’s all gone very quiet on Ten Hag…?
I honestly think they'd already decided to sack him but they're giving it 10-14 days to let the goodwill from the FA cup die down again. No way that "review" was planned IMO. They've spent the last 3-4 months reviewing, planning and monitoring.
Probably De Zebri then, as it’s all gone very quiet around him too?
User avatar
Felwin
Legend
Posts: 1574
Joined: 10 years ago
Location: Abroad

swampash wrote: 1 month ago
Felwin wrote: 1 month ago
swampash wrote: 1 month ago It’s all gone very quiet on Ten Hag…?
I honestly think they'd already decided to sack him but they're giving it 10-14 days to let the goodwill from the FA cup die down again. No way that "review" was planned IMO. They've spent the last 3-4 months reviewing, planning and monitoring.
Probably De Zebri then, as it’s all gone very quiet around him too?
Maybe. Is he better than Ten Hag though? Obviously Brighton don't have a top squad but it's all gone slowly tits up for them this season. They've only won like 3-4 games since Christmas. I'm not as sure about him being a top coach as I was last summer.
Post Reply