The Swedish Rumble 🔰

Analysis of Manchester United after 0-3 loss against Bournmouth -"Facts are that you must live in la la land if you expect Manchester United to be much better than this." 👉What happened? This is a game United easily could have won. Didn't give up that much, and created a lot, but nor was it a game that United 'hardly could have lost'. 👉But that is the story of most of United's games this season, how is it possible? This is football, if a team is struggling and has structural flaws -- those flaws often gets exposed. It is not enough to win most games on points, if it was, Graham Potter would still be manager of Chelsea. You need to be a lot more dominant than Manchester United can be right now. 🔺We know that a shit storm is coming Ruben Amorim's way sooner rather than later, from the usual suspects -- but I think its time to take a step back and analyze Manchester United properly per the 22 December 2024, based on indisputable facts. Because that just isn't done by any of the pundits, to be brutally honest, which creates an environment based on false premises around the team, which in its turn leads to extremely poor decisions from management/owner, unreasonable expectations and what not. Facts are, that you must live in "la la land" if you expect Manchester United to be much better than this. The only valid question that should be asked is -- "why" should Manchester United be so dominant that it will win like 9 of 10 games like the one played today? Is there reason to expect United to be so good that it will win like 8 or 9 of 10 games like this? Because only if a compelling argument could be made for why United should completely dominate these games, can we expect United to be a solid top 3-4 team in today's PL. Lets break it down: 🔺"They have spent so much money!" -- To start with, three clubs in the Premier League is spending a lot more than United. City's wage bill is 140-150m larger than United's, i.e. 10x Rashford's contract. Chelsea has spent twice as much on transfers as United have. Liverpool's wage bill is what, 6x Rashford's contract higher than United? Secondly, of the money spent, the return for the investments in Sancho, Antony, Maguire, Casemiro, Mount and Eriksen is minimal. Take away the transfer fees and wages paid to these players alone -- and United does not have a squad that from a financial perspective should compete in the top 5-6 in the PL. This indisputable fact is obviously very hard to distinguish -- because the pundits seems to think that United is going into these games with some all-star squad. If a sober analysis is made of what the return United is getting from Sancho, Antony, Maguire, Casemiro, Mount and Eriksen -- the overall squad is very clearly behind like Tottenham in terms of how much has been invested in the rest. 🔺"But the players are better than this! Are you saying that Bournmouth and the likes have better squads?" -- Of course we are better than Bournmouth, Nottingham, Fulham and the likes. Like who had 60% possession and 23 shots and who had 40% possession and 10 shots tonight? But this type of 'barely win on points' is not enough to be a top 4 team in the PL. Arsenal, Tottenham and the likes loses a lot of pts in this league while being much more dominant. In addition, confidence and pressure just has a big impact in the PL, expectations that is way to big leads to failed performances and confidence issues. Undoubtedly. And the answer to the question, why is Manchester United not 'much more dominant' than the club is, is very easy to answer. The squad is just not good enough. ⚽️Harry Maguire is a glorified Championship player, the areas he contributes in, is not what makes a team a great PL team in this day and age. That is all that is relevant, is a player the type who makes a PL team great? Because the PL is a very unforgiving league in this day and age. I know this will upset a lot of Maguire fans tremendously (and this crew is more militant than ISIS and Newcastle fans) -- but I am sorry, look at the best teams around the football world and what their CB's contribute with, its different things than what Maguire contributes with. Go back to 2005 and it was different, but the game has changed. ⚽️Lissandro Martinez is in my world a top 20-30 CB in the football world -- but he is still adjusting to playing 3 in the back, he has to carry Maguire and Malacia next to him and he has missed what 1.5 seasons due to injuries. He hasn't been top 20 on average this season. ⚽️Tyler Malacia might or might not have had potential, but he just missed more than 1.5 seasons of football, a big weakness to have him on the pitch. ⚽️Mazraoui is pure quality, but has played 26 games this season already, and its starting to show. Sure, he can be a part of what it takes, but its not like he is so good that you build a team around him. Dalot is behind Maz, but also a solid player. Nothing more, nothing less. ⚽️Kobbie Mainoo is just 19, and has been asked to carry a way too big workload the last 12-14 months for club and country. Compare him to Pedri and Gavi -- how often have they carried Barca the last 12-24 months? With a season nowadays consisting of 70-75 games (club and country), you can't count on an 18-19 y/o to carry a PL team. It is absurd to do so. ⚽️Manuel Ugarte can definitely be a part of a great team -- but does he alone significantly contribute to a team becoming great like say a prime Kroos did? Far from it. And I mean -- even with Ugarte who I really love -- you get what you pay for. Chelsea paid 125m for Caicedo and Enzo, Ugarte went for 50-60 twice for a reason. ⚽️Zirkzee/Rasmus -- I like both, think Rasmus is a great fit for Amorim. Does he make a PL team a great team? Nope. United's total commitment to Rasmus is worth around £80m over 5 years, City's total commitment to Haaland is worth about £350m over 5 years. Bruno -- is -- a great player (who has some problematic aspects to his game). Amad has been great lately. But is the above squad good enough to result in a team on the pitch that comfortably is top 3-4 in the PL? Not even remotely. And this is something we knew going into this season. It is quite frankly, very hard to see a logical argument for the contrary. 🔺As I have covered repeatedly the last years -- way -- too little is invested in the squad to expect any kind of performance in the PL. At no point, has there been anything other than absurd to expect what has been spent, to be sufficient to be a steady top 3-4 team in the PL. I fully stand by that claim. From the end of the 21/22 season, 2 players remains that contributes something, Bruno and Dalot, 3 if Rashford is included. You don't get more from Lindelof and Maguire than what you get from CB's that can be picked up for free basically. In any event -- that leaves about 18-19 spots that needed to be filled from within/the academy and on the transfer market. United has spent £530m during these 3 summers. The £170m spent on Antony, Casemiro and Mount is providing little to no return at this point. The £140m spent on Yoro, Zirkzee and Rasmus has been spent with an eye towards the future. This is 6 players, leaves at least 12 spots to be filled, on which 220m has been spent. De Ligt, Ugarte and Mazraoui are "quality" signings for the present. Mount should have been in this category. Facts are that the 22/23 squad was extremely flawed. Just look back it. The 23/24 squad had way to big holes at CB and CDM/CM. And given the injury history so many players had going into 24/25, this year's squad is also (a) way too thin and (b) without the nukes. 🔺But Ole finished 2nd? ETH finished 3rd with the absurdly flawed 22/23 squad? And? It is not 2020, you could argue that the PL is tougher than it ever has been, etc etc etc. But it still doesn't help us win a game of football in December 2024. 🔺What must improve? What must be done? A very big issue is that the punditry around this team, isn't in touch with reality. Or at least haven't been, I actually like what I have heard from GNev lately. When Ineos came in -- the unison message to Ratcliffe was that all it would take was management persons that just wouldn't make stupid decisions, if he made sure we got that, getting back to top 2-3 wouldn't be hard. Right? It wasn't in touch with reality then, and its not in touch with reality today. The "reality" around MUFC cannot be allowed to be written in this delusional fashion. Reality is that MUFC's top 3-4 rivals largely has (1) much better squads than MUFC, (2) much bigger financial resources to spend on the squad (Utd would be closer to them if it didn't have a a 1bn debt and fascilities in urgent need of being rebuilt) and (3) aren't run by incompetent persons. It is quite frankly the definition of "delusion" to expect MUFC to compete with that, by ensuring that its just not run by incompetent persons. Right? Facts are that even if United evened out (2) in relation to City, Chelsea, Liverpool and Arsenal -- we still have to make a lot smarter signings than them, to even out (1), like they still have a head start. Over time, the success you have building a team goes up and down, so that is not impossible. But in other words, even if we get a lot more backing financially than we have had the last 3 years, we still can't expect to make up ground on our top rivals over night. How long could it take? If we don't get that financial backing, we have to do what Liverpool did in 2020. It took Liverpool 30 years, from 1990 to 2020, to build a strong team again without dominant financial backing. Arsenal won the league in 04' and was a real title contender in 05'. After that, it took about 18 years to get back to the top without dominant financial backing. I think these are very realistic cycles to compare with, you can get to the top and stay there for 6-7 years without dominant financial backing, once every 20-30th year. Lastly, the group behind the top 3-4 of City, Arsenal, Liverpool and Chelsea, is stronger than ever before. Newcastle has unlimited financial resources. Tottenham has done a great job on the transfer market. Aston Villa. After that 2nd tier of clubs, a team that ranks like 15-16 in spending in the PL, is what top 3-4 in spending in all other leagues in the world. These are the teams - save for 1-2 -- that United has to be able to completely dominate, to become a steady top 3 team in the PL. How fast are we getting there, if we only are signing players like Rasmus, Yoro and Ugarte? By -- every single season -- entering it with big big flaws on the squad, like no healthy Left Back? By having Casemiro and Eriksen as the only back-ups to a 19 Kobbie Mainoo? By having players who are unstable mentally? If we give this approach a try for 20-30 years, sooner or later we would get there. But we can't expect to become a consistent top 3 in the coming 5 years with this approach. So no, what United needs it not just a competent manager, its not just a football director that isn't a Glazer appointee. It also needs a heck of a lot more support from Jim Ratcliffe. Can Ratcliffe provide that? He doesn't own the full club? The Glazers might stop him? This is what it is. But if he can't provide it, we can't expect Ruben Amorim to deliver a steady top 3-4 PL team in the near future. To talk about anything other than a top 6-7 finish is just wishful thinking.