25 Apr 2016 13:23:13
SomersetRed - I'm hoping the Eds will let me post this response here as the current discussion has been consigned to 'banter 2'.
The key argument from everybody claiming that LVG should get credit for the emergence of some of our youth players seems to be that he intentionally trimmed the size of the squad down in order to give our youth players a chance when injuries occurred. Is that really the case though?
Ed002 mentioned several times last season that our wage bill was too high and, as a result, that we were at risk of breaching FFP rules. It therefor stands to reason that last summer we needed to trim our wage bill.
RVP, Falcao and Di Maria were all huge earners and none of them had really done enough last season to warrant their place in the squad (not forgetting that neither Falcao nor ADM wanted to stay) . Van Gaals bust up with Valdes meant that he realistically had to go and Clevs' contract expired so we didn't have much choice there either.
On top of that we lost Chico (who wanted first team football), Evans, Nani (who was incredibly inconsistent) and Rafael (who was always injured) .
In their place we signed Basti, Morgan, Martial, Depay, Darmian, Romero and, according to Ed002, were looking to sign 2 more CBs and a RW.
Had we signed those extra 3 players we'd have lost 9 first team players and signed 9 first team players - leaving the squad at the exact same size as before. From a wage point of view - had Ramos been one of those CBs (which he himself recently said was a distinct possibility) we would probably be around the same level.
Ed002 also mentioned that the board pulled the plug on at least 2 transfers in January which again would have left us with a squad more or less the same size.
The above suggests to me that the squad being a little smaller this season is down to a need to trim the wage bill and our inability to sign the players that LVG wanted to sign rather than by design - but let's give LVG the benefit of the doubt and assume that the squad is a little smaller because he wanted it to be.
Next we come to why the squad is smaller. For the first half of the season - we heard about how the number of injuries are affecting results. Then CBJ broke on to the scene, the press got interested and all of a sudden LVG came out with the 'small squad gives youth a chance' line. Once the hype around CBJ died down - LVG went back to blaming injuries and 'Murphys Law' until Rashford breaks onto the scene. All of a sudden it was all part of the master-plan again.
It seems a little convenient to me - but once again - let's give LVG the benefit of the doubt and assume that he really did plan for things to go this way rather than seizing opportunities to take credit for things that were entirely out of his control.
That finally brings us to the question - was it a good plan?
Whilst there have been three or four good young players come through this season - Marcus Rashford is arguably the only one who has made a real difference when it comes to results.
Even those who believe that LVG deserves credit for the emergence of our youth seem to be in agreement that Rashford was given his chance out of necessity as a result of an unpredictable string of injuries and Wilson being out on loan. Had Keane, Wilson, Rooney and Martial been available - Rashford would not have played against Midtjylland.
Let's imagine then that either Keane had been fit or that Rashford had not been as good as he is (or not ready to make the step up to the first team) .
In those instances we would probably have been knocked out of the Europa League by Midtjylland, not beaten Arsenal and City (thus ending any lingering question of a top 4 finish) and would not be going to Wembley next month.
Had Rashford not come through when he did (and the way that he did) - would we be talking about giving LVG credit for allowing CBJ a chance when everybody else was injured and then dropping him once others returned despite him having played well?
I don't think so myself. Prior to Rashford we were all pointing out how foolish it had been to let Chico leave the club - and how thin the squad was. We were, after all, top of the table before the injuries started to pile up.
IF LVG did choose to trim the squad and IF it was to give youth a chance - I think that it was an incredibly risky decision that LVG could not possibly have seen coming off in the way that it has (it very nearly did not) . In many ways I think the negative impact our thin squad has had on our season far outweighs the few small positives (Rash, TFM and CBJ) .
With more quality cover we may well have had the chance to compete for the title this year and were it not for Rashford (who LVG was incredibly lucky with) we would have nothing to play for right now and the manager would have been sacked.
If you believe that LVG foresaw everything that has happened happening exactly the way that it has and that it was worth sacrificing our chance at the title this year to give young players a chance when others are injured - then by all means give him credit.
Personally I don't believe any manager could foresee things panning out the way that they have (certainly not one that can't beat Norwich at home) and think that it was incredibly irresponsible for him to take that risk (assuming that he did and is not just taking credit for circumstances beyond his control) .
I'm not hoping to change anybodies mind on this issue as everybody is entitled to their own opinions - but would quite like to feel that I am entitled to mine rather than constantly having to hear how those that don't give LVG credit are 'blinkered' or unnecessarily hating on the manager.
25 Apr 2016 14:01:40
Thanks redseven. This is pretty much what I started to write yesterday but then decided I couldn't be bothered!
25 Apr 2016 14:04:04
Seeing as were working in the realms of what IF's
You mention injuries so what IF luke shaw hadnt have got injured. At the time he got injured we had 10 points from 5 games. That comes to an average of 2 points per game. Dragged out over the season that means we would have 76 points which would probably put us in the title shake up.
So i can plausibly argue that the injury to luke shaw has cost us a title challenge and maybe lvg his job.
Now i don't neccessarily subscribe to this school of thought but if we are working in the realms of what's IFs. It works both ways and can make lvg look fortunate and unfortunate.
25 Apr 2016 14:19:50
I am fairly confident if Shaw hadn't got injured we would have got through the Champions League group as well, we lost the first game as a direct result of the injury and then never seemed to be able to recover from that.
25 Apr 2016 14:40:57
We also tried to sign two fullbacks on loan in January.
LVG did everything in his power to bring in new players to counter what he called an unprecedented injury crisis before Christmas. If his position wasn't tenuous, he would have been able to bring in a few of these players. It's only after his initial plans fell apart that he has been claiming that it was always his plan to put his faith in youth.
But obviously we should give van Gaal full credit for a situation he actively tried to avoid in the January window.
25 Apr 2016 14:41:05
DSG - I agree entirely with that point; but I think it only goes to further strengthen my argument. If LVG intentionally trimmed the squad to give youth a chance then it has been detrimental to our season.
Evra is no longer good enough to be our first choice LB (I'd never suggest that he was) - but a backup? He's managed to make over 30 appearances for Juventus this season (6 in the Champions League) in what will more than likely be a double winning campaign (in which they also managed to make it out of a much more difficult Champions League group) .
Barring some miracle - this season we will record our lowest goal difference and lowest goals scored totals of the Premier League era and there's a good chance our league position will be decided by goal difference. Would keeping Chico or RVP not have helped in that department?
There are a hell of a lot of ifs and buts when it comes to the way in which our season has panned out - and that is why I find it impossible to believe that things have happened as LVG planned. He has been unfathomably lucky when it comes to Rashford in particular - but ultimately him finding Rashford is the equivalent of a drunk finding £10 down the back of the couch after he's blown his rent money on booze. I'm not going to give him credit for blind stupid luck.
25 Apr 2016 14:49:44
Redseven
About sums it up for me.
Serendipity! Use a dictionary if you need to.
25 Apr 2016 15:18:52
There are loads of what if's, ultimately we can only guess at the reasoning behind the decisions that have been made.
The fact of the matter is LvG is remembered for the players he gives a chance as much as for the trophies he has won.
Regardless of what happens between now and when LvG departs, if several of the youngsters he has given a debut to go on to become huge successes then they will be chalked down to him whether you agree with it or not. That is the way of the world. Time also will be kind on him, when the hatred has ebbed away over the years people will find their view on LvG softens. That is the way of the human mind. Kind of how you have fond memories of school but only long after you left.
The real issue you may have stumbled upon though is that actually the squad isn't really that thin. We are as you say only a couple of players away from having the same size squad as last season. If CBJ, TFM and Rashford are considered full members of the first team squad going forward then you can argue the squad is the same size. All deserve to be on merit.
So if the squad isn't really that much smaller then the issue has to be one of two things, either the players we have aren't good enough or we have far too many injury prone players. Maybe a bit of both. Jones and Schweinsteiger have been known physio hogs for a few years. Carrick, Rojo, Smalling, Valencia and Rooney have also been known to miss chunks of the season through injury. That's around a quarter of the squad. Then there is the perceived lack of quality in those left not regularly on the injury list, Fellaini, Young, McNair. Or those who lack consistency such as Januzaj, Memphis or Darmian.
Is it possible that one of the reasons LvG has failed is down to a lack of quality in the squad more than a lack of numbers?
25 Apr 2016 15:38:08
Top post Redseven.
LVG also made a rash comment about maybe having to play an U14 player because the squad is so small because of injuries. So he struck lucky with Rashford beyond belief, don't forgot Martial was meant to be "one for the future" as well, so again the Dutchman was very fortunate that Martial adjusted as quickly as he has, because Depay was meant to be the one ahead of Martial this season.
We have had tons of luck with DDG staying and top teams failing this season, but to still not be sure of top 4 and have crashed out of the CL is a farce considering the luck we have had.
25 Apr 2016 15:56:41
Redseven intentionally trimming the squad to allow youth players to come through may have been detrimental this season.
But i'm sure if these players develop it will help us in the years to come. A short term pain long term gain sort of thing.
25 Apr 2016 16:06:07
Shappy - I think that's a big part of it too, yes.
Unfortunately however, LVG has been given vast sums to build the squad that we have today. It's his squad and it consisting of substandard or injury prone players is entirely down to him.
Jones being injury prone wasn't exactly a big secret when he came in and so I have to wonder why he kept Jones and let Evans (who was arguably our best CB in SAFs last season) go. Bastian was out injured a lot too in his last few seasons with Bayern - so why sign him?
I find the issue of youth development such an interesting one because when you look at each of the things that define a managers success - it is the only one that might not go down as an absolute failure.
Success: At best two 4th place finishes and an FA Cup. Abysmal ECL campaign this year. Nowhere near good enough for Manchester United - especially given the financial backing he has been given. He's turned us into Arsenal.
Recruitment: Spent record amounts of money on players - many of whom are either injury prone or not good enough. Let a few players go that many would have kept while keeping others that weren't good enough. Built a squad without adequate cover when first team players are out injured or suspended which has impacted results.
Training: Record amount of injuries this season. Certain players look worse under LVG than elsewhere.
Media Engagement: Talks about philosophy. A lot. Gets drunk at the end of season awards and embarrasses himself. Insults the fans. Blames the referee when we win?! Admits that our performances bore even him. Tells us that we should get used to this.
Playing Style: Boring. Very few shots. Very few goals. Not the Manchester United way. Faffed around for months at the start of his time with us trying to play 3 at the back before eventually dropping it.
Team selection: Generally not far off the mark although certain players seem to get game time ahead of others despite poor performances. Substitutions are usually bizarre, confusing and often too late.
Man Management: Fallen out with numerous players. Failed to get the best out of numerous players. Has a history of doing this.
All that's left is youth development - and in all honesty I'd say that this has been very successful under LVG. We've seen a record number of players given their debuts and a few bright sparks like CBJ, MR and TFM.
25 Apr 2016 17:04:51
Redseven, you forgot to mention he demoted some of the physio team as he blamed them for the amount of injuries and brought in his own guy.
25 Apr 2016 17:26:01
Redseven, I agree on many of those points. He has in the eyes of the fans failed in many areas. But it is not the fans who employ him. So it will be how many objectives he has failed in compared to how many he has succeed in and the extent of those successes and failures which will determine his fate.
Success? If he wins a trophy then that will count as success, be careful not to come across arrogant. For many fans of many clubs a domestic cup will go down as a massive success, be careful not to down play it. To do so in incredibly insulting to fans of other clubs. As for two 4th placed finishes, under Sir Alex that would have been abject failure, under Moyes though? We are a massive club going through a massive transition, maintaining UCL football under such circumstances can be considered a success.
Recruitment? Is such a hard one to judge, how much do we credit LvG for Herrera and Shaw? yet they happened under his watch. Did he really want Di Maria or was that Ed Woodward wanting to prove he can sign some of the worlds best players. How many of our signings were totally pushed by LvG and how many were made under the influence of scouts or even agents? Unless we know for a fact that the players we signed we pushed for by LvG then how can we hang their success or failure around his neck?
Training? We keep hearing about him being a dinosaur and that he has fitness heavy training sessions. But many of the top managers put a lot of importance on fitness levels and train their players accordingly. Pochettino at Spurs runs his players ragged, as does Simeone at Atletico and Mourinho has been known to train his players hard. Can we blame the injuries on that? Maybe, maybe not. I don't think the level of training had much of an effect on Shaw (who at the time was our best player) getting injured. Blind has been an almost ever present in our line up and has suffered little to no injuries. Many players have made it through the season uninjured. I don't think the training has had much impact on our injuries.
Media, Team selection and playing style are such subjective things it really is hard to judge a man on such. Some thought him getting drunk at the end of season awards ceremony looked bad, others found it endearing. At the end of the day if you weren't suppose to drink at these things then why sell/ distribute alcohol? I enjoy his honesty in the press conferences even if I don't always agree with his opinion. Its a shame as since December he has gotten steadily more defensive in his press conferences, probably due to the constant asking of the same questions and the issue of his long term future. Playing style and team selection are so closely linked I don't think you can separate them, how you want to play a specific game will influence who you select, like wise who is available will also effect how you want/ can play. Personally I prefer a progressive forward thinking style, but how you achieve that is completely up for interpretation. Pep's Barca, Simeone's Atletico, Klopp's Dortmund and Pochettino's Spurs all play a progressive forward thinking style, yet all play the game differently. So its horses for courses.
Man Management again is down to personal opinion. Yes LvG has fallen out with many players over a long career. But so did Sir Alex and Jose Mourinho who are both lauded for their man management ability. Ultimately you won't please everyone all the time, in fact its bloody hard work pleasing some of the people some of the time. He has helped Smalling and Young play beyond themselves, and he has for the most part kept the squad happy. I haven't heard many players complaining about him, only Di Maria actually. Hernandez even came out and defended LvG last week, a player who was loaned out then sold by LvG without really being given a chance. So he can't be completely without man management ability.
I happen to agree with a lot of what you have said, but none of it is conclusive. There is no hard evidence. Just feeling and opinion.
25 Apr 2016 18:05:09
Shappy - A really good reply mate.
I agree that a lot of my opinions are based on what I have seen outwardly rather than what may or may not be going on within the club - but what else do we fans have to go by?
I do not for a moment think that winning the FA Cup is without merit (I actually said that I thought it was a great achievement a little further up the page when Beast suggested as much) - but is that alone good enough for a club of our size given the amount of money that has been invested in the side?
You point out that what LVG has achieved is good when compared with Moyes - but I think most felt that Moyes' time at the club was a complete failure and his eventual sacking one year into a six year deal was somewhat indicative of that. When deciding if LVG has been a successful manager - should we not be comparing him to another successful manager rather than a failure? Even when compared with Moyes - I'd say he performed worse in Europe and only marginally better in the league in terms of results.
Recruitment is difficult to judge but again - we can only go on what we have seen. It seems incredibly unlikely that a man new to the job like EW would go out and purchase players that the manager didn't want. LVG himself called for us to sign ADM in a press conference if I recall and his links with many of our signings (Blind, Bastian, Depay, Romero) lead me to believe that they were all his choices (or at the very least green-lighted by the manager) . I could be wrong - but I don't see what EW would have to gain by signing players that the manager did not want - especially given the amount spent.
When it comes to man-management, you're right. Every manager makes mistakes or has issues with certain players - but none seem to at the same rate as LVG. He may have got the best out of Smalling and Young - but he's failed to get the best out of Falcao, ADM, Schneiderlin, Darmian, Depay, Chico and a number of other players in his short time with us. All of them looked fantastic before coming to United and yet have failed to perform consistently (or at all in some cases) under LVG. If it was one or two players I'd maybe put it down to the players - but 6+ in just two seasons suggests that the problem lies with the manager.