The Footie Thread

[Arthur Wedge]

I would 100% give the job to Carrick.
I would 100% make sure the contract is just for one year with an extension based on results.

Playing possibly 60+ games a year takes a load more player/squad management than this season's 40 games.

1 year contract doesn’t show much faith in someone ?

If he is their man then surely you offer more than a year

 

[AmandaJR]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/cm2pn84y1r3o

Hmmm.

 

[Slime]

1 year contract doesn’t show much faith in someone ?

If he is their man then surely you offer more than a year

He has to prove himself over a full season with a full schedule, in my opinion of course.
Also, as I said, an extension based on results.

 

[irip]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/cm2pn84y1r3o

Hmmm.

I think that sometimes it’s unavoidable.
The problem is the more successful the team the more fixtures.
Personally I would like to see the season stretched out a bit more. Finish a bit later but it’s tough with internationals and other tournaments.
I guess it’s why a lot of teams play squad players and youngsters in the earlier rounds of cup competitions.
Don’t think we are far off 12 month football with players having 2 games a week for 52 weeks of the year.

 

[Arthur Wedge]

He has to prove himself over a full season with a full schedule, in my opinion of course.
Also, as I said, an extension based on results.

That’s prob the same with any manager coming into a new team but giving them just one year just shows a lack of faith in them

 

[Pin-seeker]

That’s prob the same with any manager coming into a new team but giving them just one year just shows a lack of faith in them

But give him a long contract & you’d be calling it crazy,& typical Man Utd

 

[Slime]

That’s prob the same with any manager coming into a new team but giving them just one year just shows a lack of faith in them

At a club the size of United, a proven manager is essential.
Give him a full year/schedule to prove himself, that's what I'd do.

 

[Billysboots]

Carrick should’ve been appointed by now, the longer they wait, the more there is doubt around him.

Utd need to planning for next season and discussing players with the manager.

He deserves the job and I honestly believe it would give the players and the fans a lift to put the doeculstion to bed.

Absolutely disagree.

They did it with Solskjaer. Appointed him as an interim, went on a run of results, got carried away and appointed him full time before the end of the season, and the results then fell off a cliff. No way even United are stupid enough to fall for the same one twice.

 

[Billysboots]

I think Utd need to wait and then make a call at the end of the season. Look at which managers are available and which direction they want the playing style to go.

Carrick has done an amazing job but there's there's a huge difference between making common sense changes as a caretaker and actually implementing a style and seriously contending. You could argue Ole came in and was more impressive in both the attacking style and results in the CL.

It's going to be a difficult call but given a lack of top class managers on the market, it might be a wise move to give him a two year deal and make sure the signings all fit into the long term goal of the club. He might be the man for the next year or so but not the man to win the title. That's fine though as it will give the club time to rebuild further.

Would any Utd fans welcome Rashford back given Carrick will probably be able to get the best out of him? He's going to end up with near enough 20 goals for Barca despite being a squad player. He would be a huge upgrade on the left if it was the focused Rashford.

Agree wholeheartedly but not the bit about Rashford. Never want to see him in a United shirt again.

 

[Swango1980]

That’s prob the same with any manager coming into a new team but giving them just one year just shows a lack of faith in them

They only gave him the caretaker role to begin with, which could have shown their lack in faith in him as a full time manager

Didn't stop Carrick doing a decent job with the players

 

[Arthur Wedge]

At a club the size of United, a proven manager is essential.
Give him a full year/schedule to prove himself, that's what I'd do.

A club the size of Man Utd shouldn’t then be somewhere for a manager to prove themselves

I agree that he will need to prove he can do the job but if the club think he is the manager that will be permanent going forward then you give him at least 2/3 years not just a single year , that puts so much pressure onto him or makes him think they don’t believe in me

 

[Billysboots]

A club the size of Man Utd shouldn’t then be somewhere for a manager to prove themselves

I agree that he will need to prove he can do the job but if the club think he is the manager that will be permanent going forward then you give him at least 2/3 years not just a single year , that puts so much pressure onto him or makes him think they don’t believe in me

It’s a balancing act whichever manager ANY club appoints.

 

[Arthur Wedge]

It’s a balancing act whichever manager ANY club appoints.

It is indeed - but imo the minimum a contract needs to be is 2 or 3 but not 1

 

[Billysboots]

It is indeed - but imo the minimum a contract needs to be is 2 or 3 but not 1

I tend to agree a year is too short.

 

[Arthur Wedge]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/cm2pn84y1r3o

Hmmm.

As we were talking about a while back , Prem etc won’t make changes to help

 

[Lord Tyrion]

It is indeed - but imo the minimum a contract needs to be is 2 or 3 but not 1

I tend to agree a year is too short.

If you are trying to bring players in then a manager on a one year deal isn't going to fill you full of confidence and seal the deal. If the board doesn't trust them for longer than a year, why should a player?

The opposite of that is the Chelsea madness but a 2yr deal would suit I'd have thought.

 

[Arthur Wedge]

If you are trying to bring players in then a manager on a one year deal isn't going to fill you full of confidence and seal the deal. If the board doesn't trust them for longer than a year, why should a player?

The opposite of that is the Chelsea madness but a 2yr deal would suit I'd have thought.

Yeah don’t need to go full Chelsea and throw a 25 year contract at him but 2 or 3 year one seems sensible

 

[Hobbit]

Carrick’s first season at the Boro was excellent. But Boro needed to balance the books. Top players were sold, and the loanee’s that did well weren’t brought back on loan nor bought. Similarly, his second season went the same way. Imagine selling Morgan Rogers mid season, and imagine selling Emmanuel Latte Lath in peak goal scoring form mid season. Imagine selling Chuba Akpom at the end of a season in which he scored 28 league goals.

On the one hand, he did well in spite of the selling but selling Latte Lath killed that season and, ultimately, his time at the Boro. Equally, as the team struggled he was criticised for being a one trick pony, but maybe he had little choice with what he had.

Like a few younger British managers, I’d like to see Carrick given a chance at a decent club.

 

[Swango1980]

The question began as simply do people want/think Carrick should get the job on a permanent basis.

Now we are drafting up a detailed contract for him. No stone left unturned in this thread

 

[Lord Tyrion]

The question began as simply do people want/think Carrick should get the job on a permanent basis.

Now we are drafting up a detailed contract for him. No stone left unturned in this thread

It's all in the detail