comment by ginodepotters (U21367)
posted 3 minutes ago
Very unfair to Mourinho. All of his signings were spot on. It's not his fault that Moyes spunked loads of cash on Fellaini or that LVG overpaid on massive flops.
You are doing better in every aspect since Mou took over. It is far from being a smooth ride but at least you don't have to witness the Moyes / LVG shįt-shows.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
sad when opposition fans are talking more sense than most of the united fans on show today.
i've said all along with jose's signings that they may have been overpriced - well, one may have been - but i'd rather see the club spend £90m on a £50m player, who actually adds something to the team, than £20-40m on players who add nothing at all (bastian, morgan, memphis etc).
and i'll bet large sums of money that 3 of jose's 4 signings so far become key members of the team over the next 3-5 years.
I don't think your performances in Europe have been anything noticeably any better than what we saw before.
.................
They haven't really. We had a few good results against gash teams, but we did the same with LVG.
The home game against Rostov was one of the most painful games I have seen us involved in for some time.
comment by redmisty (U7556)
posted 24 minutes ago
I don't think your performances in Europe have been anything noticeably any better than what we saw before.
_____________
Me neither.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
👍
It was hardly the group of death we came out of and we still haven't played anyone of note
Weve just done enough to get to where we are at present
but i'd rather see the club spend £90m on a £50m player, who actually adds something to the team, than £20-40m on players who add nothing at all
_________________
Spot on. Been saying this for ages.
comment by puffinthebushkangaroo (U1950)
posted 1 hour, 15 minutes ago
comment by rossobianchi #EquipaLulaDaAlegria (U17054)
posted 6 minutes ago
Last time I post this, because I've done it a hundred times:
If we keep sacking managers every season, we will keep going backwards.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As you will if you sign the wrong manager.
Let's say you are driving somewhere and you realise you took the exit off a roundabout. How does continuing down the same wrong in the wrong direction actually help. Surely one should check out where you currently are, make a decision to U-turn and head in the rght direction.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Here is a far more sensible and applicable analogy, based on my experiences in the world of Change Management.
Let's say an organisation is retiring a legacy computer software system. This system was tailor made for the organisation - a perfect fit -, integrated well with the rest of the organisation's systems (some of which were bought specially to complement the software in question), was subject to continuous development over the years to ensure it continued to provide the evolving business with appropriate support, the employees know it inside out and trust it, etc. But every software system is retired eventually, inevitably.
The organisation looks at other software on the market, settles on a similar looking product, and invests heavily in a programme of change to implement not only the new software, but the changes in process and personnel required to get it up and running. The project fails within twelve months - the changes the business needs to undertake to support the new software aren't even complete by the time the project is abandoned, as the executive management see too much risk in continuing with the new software. Productivity and income are down so much that they see less risk in wrapping up the implementation and going back to market.
So they pick another product off the shelf. This one is also ageing, but is trusted, has an excellent track record, and has been used by some of the other big players in the same market. At massive expense, a new project is initiated. It requires new support staff - even some of the brand new staff brought in to help with the implementation of the previous project are jettisoned, at massive cost (on top of having to continue paying for the software licence the company has now rendered valueless). Processes are to change again. People are confused, some people who liked the previous new Scottish software are angry and frustrated, some people who liked the old Scottish software are just fed up.
The company give the new programme two years. Two years of massive investment, once again, which see productivity and income stabilise a little, and then start to rise very slowly.
But they are still way down on the revenues they were seeing with the legacy software. The new Dutch implementation team ask for one more year - they are certain that as staff continue to adapt to the new processes and protocols, as the program continues its expensive and lengthy integration with the wider system, further progress will come. But before full stability and normalisation are reached, the management go once again back to the drawing board in search of a product they may never find.
Change is inevitable. Change is hard. Change is costly. Sometimes changes see an organisation take an enforced and necessary step backwards.
Successful delivery and implementation of change takes time. Sometimes there is no quick solution or any solution that will demonstrate a real term improvement, regardless of cost or resources.
Replacing Fergie is like trying to get up an icy hill. You cannot do it quickly. You can jump on an expensive mountain bike, pedal like fack, and get nowhere. Bin off the mountain bike for a scooter and repeat. Bin off the scooter for a go kart... It doesn't matter.
Make a decision. Commit to it. Take it slowly and give it time.
(There, you've got two analogies for the price of one.)
comment by rossobianchi #EquipaLulaDaAlegria (U17054)
posted 53 seconds ago
comment by puffinthebushkangaroo (U1950)
posted 1 hour, 15 minutes ago
comment by rossobianchi #EquipaLulaDaAlegria (U17054)
posted 6 minutes ago
Last time I post this, because I've done it a hundred times:
If we keep sacking managers every season, we will keep going backwards.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As you will if you sign the wrong manager.
Let's say you are driving somewhere and you realise you took the exit off a roundabout. How does continuing down the same wrong in the wrong direction actually help. Surely one should check out where you currently are, make a decision to U-turn and head in the rght direction.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Here is a far more sensible and applicable analogy, based on my experiences in the world of Change Management.
Let's say an organisation is retiring a legacy computer software system. This system was tailor made for the organisation - a perfect fit -, integrated well with the rest of the organisation's systems (some of which were bought specially to complement the software in question), was subject to continuous development over the years to ensure it continued to provide the evolving business with appropriate support, the employees know it inside out and trust it, etc. But every software system is retired eventually, inevitably.
The organisation looks at other software on the market, settles on a similar looking product, and invests heavily in a programme of change to implement not only the new software, but the changes in process and personnel required to get it up and running. The project fails within twelve months - the changes the business needs to undertake to support the new software aren't even complete by the time the project is abandoned, as the executive management see too much risk in continuing with the new software. Productivity and income are down so much that they see less risk in wrapping up the implementation and going back to market.
So they pick another product off the shelf. This one is also ageing, but is trusted, has an excellent track record, and has been used by some of the other big players in the same market. At massive expense, a new project is initiated. It requires new support staff - even some of the brand new staff brought in to help with the implementation of the previous project are jettisoned, at massive cost (on top of having to continue paying for the software licence the company has now rendered valueless). Processes are to change again. People are confused, some people who liked the previous new Scottish software are angry and frustrated, some people who liked the old Scottish software are just fed up.
The company give the new programme two years. Two years of massive investment, once again, which see productivity and income stabilise a little, and then start to rise very slowly.
But they are still way down on the revenues they were seeing with the legacy software. The new Dutch implementation team ask for one more year - they are certain that as staff continue to adapt to the new processes and protocols, as the program continues its expensive and lengthy integration with the wider system, further progress will come. But before full stability and normalisation are reached, the management go once again back to the drawing board in search of a product they may never find.
Change is inevitable. Change is hard. Change is costly. Sometimes changes see an organisation take an enforced and necessary step backwards.
Successful delivery and implementation of change takes time. Sometimes there is no quick solution or any solution that will demonstrate a real term improvement, regardless of cost or resources.
Replacing Fergie is like trying to get up an icy hill. You cannot do it quickly. You can jump on an expensive mountain bike, pedal like fack, and get nowhere. Bin off the mountain bike for a scooter and repeat. Bin off the scooter for a go kart... It doesn't matter.
Make a decision. Commit to it. Take it slowly and give it time.
(There, you've got two analogies for the price of one.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Go Agile mate
comment by ginodepotters (U21367)
posted 17 minutes ago
Very unfair to Mourinho. All of his signings were spot on. It's not his fault that Moyes spunked loads of cash on Fellaini or that LVG overpaid on massive flops.
You are doing better in every aspect since Mou took over. It is far from being a smooth ride but at least you don't have to witness the Moyes / LVG shįt-shows.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They haven't gotten better in every aspect though. Some areas have regressed - such as the development of a few of the younger stars.
If LVG was still in charge of United, what do you think their position would currently be? Personally, I think they would be in a similar position - in or around the PL top 4 and with a realistic chance of winning the Europa.
They haven't gotten better in every aspect though.
................
This is correct.
comment by The Sniper (U21079)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by ginodepotters (U21367)
posted 17 minutes ago
Very unfair to Mourinho. All of his signings were spot on. It's not his fault that Moyes spunked loads of cash on Fellaini or that LVG overpaid on massive flops.
You are doing better in every aspect since Mou took over. It is far from being a smooth ride but at least you don't have to witness the Moyes / LVG shįt-shows.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They haven't gotten better in every aspect though. Some areas have regressed - such as the development of a few of the younger stars.
If LVG was still in charge of United, what do you think their position would currently be? Personally, I think they would be in a similar position - in or around the PL top 4 and with a realistic chance of winning the Europa.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They'd probably be a few quid better off though.
knees
Agile, as a tool, is useful for smaller-scale, piecemeal or modular software deliveries. It's not going to help you manage huge change programmes overseeing the fundamental restructuring/redevelopment of processes, people and systems.
But, yeah
I don't get this Mourinho doesnt give youngsters an opportunity business. Rashford, Lingard and Martial have had plenty of game time this season.
If by youngsters people are referring to Forsu Mensah, and Tuanzebe, I dont see the point as defensively Utd have one of the better units in the league.
Utd's problems this season lie in their failure to convert chances. Who else can they call upon?
Changing the manager again is not the answer. Too many of Utd's players are going through the motions and need a kick up the ass. Some of those will undoutably shown the door this summer.
comment by HNIC - Number Juan (U5574)
posted 3 hours, 35 minutes ago
Is the OP just stupid? Mourinho has been underwhelming but where the feck has it got us sacking managers left right and centre? He deserves a second season, and frankly there's no one out there better than him who can replace him either.
----
Settle down re t ard reporter and run along to Twitter or wherever the feck u jack off.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That came out of nowhere
comment by Who's Kissing Cameras. (U1703)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by HNIC - Number Juan (U5574)
posted 3 hours, 35 minutes ago
Is the OP just stupid? Mourinho has been underwhelming but where the feck has it got us sacking managers left right and centre? He deserves a second season, and frankly there's no one out there better than him who can replace him either.
----
Settle down re t ard reporter and run along to Twitter or wherever the feck u jack off.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That came out of nowhere
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He came in like a wreeeecking baaaall
How can we not back Jose. The 9 draws at home aint his fault. We dominated, outplayed the opposition in all areas but the players failed to take their chances in front of goal!!
comment by Cantona 7 (U11258)
posted 1 minute ago
How can we not back Jose. The 9 draws at home aint his fault. We dominated, outplayed the opposition in all areas but the players failed to take their chances in front of goal!!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Has Wahl changed his name again?
comment by kneerash-23 Cara Gold (U6876)
posted 2 hours, 23 minutes ago
comment by rossobianchi #EquipaLulaDaAlegria (U17054)
posted 53 seconds ago
comment by puffinthebushkangaroo (U1950)
posted 1 hour, 15 minutes ago
comment by rossobianchi #EquipaLulaDaAlegria (U17054)
posted 6 minutes ago
Last time I post this, because I've done it a hundred times:
If we keep sacking managers every season, we will keep going backwards.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As you will if you sign the wrong manager.
Let's say you are driving somewhere and you realise you took the exit off a roundabout. How does continuing down the same wrong in the wrong direction actually help. Surely one should check out where you currently are, make a decision to U-turn and head in the rght direction.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Here is a far more sensible and applicable analogy, based on my experiences in the world of Change Management.
Let's say an organisation is retiring a legacy computer software system. This system was tailor made for the organisation - a perfect fit -, integrated well with the rest of the organisation's systems (some of which were bought specially to complement the software in question), was subject to continuous development over the years to ensure it continued to provide the evolving business with appropriate support, the employees know it inside out and trust it, etc. But every software system is retired eventually, inevitably.
The organisation looks at other software on the market, settles on a similar looking product, and invests heavily in a programme of change to implement not only the new software, but the changes in process and personnel required to get it up and running. The project fails within twelve months - the changes the business needs to undertake to support the new software aren't even complete by the time the project is abandoned, as the executive management see too much risk in continuing with the new software. Productivity and income are down so much that they see less risk in wrapping up the implementation and going back to market.
So they pick another product off the shelf. This one is also ageing, but is trusted, has an excellent track record, and has been used by some of the other big players in the same market. At massive expense, a new project is initiated. It requires new support staff - even some of the brand new staff brought in to help with the implementation of the previous project are jettisoned, at massive cost (on top of having to continue paying for the software licence the company has now rendered valueless). Processes are to change again. People are confused, some people who liked the previous new Scottish software are angry and frustrated, some people who liked the old Scottish software are just fed up.
The company give the new programme two years. Two years of massive investment, once again, which see productivity and income stabilise a little, and then start to rise very slowly.
But they are still way down on the revenues they were seeing with the legacy software. The new Dutch implementation team ask for one more year - they are certain that as staff continue to adapt to the new processes and protocols, as the program continues its expensive and lengthy integration with the wider system, further progress will come. But before full stability and normalisation are reached, the management go once again back to the drawing board in search of a product they may never find.
Change is inevitable. Change is hard. Change is costly. Sometimes changes see an organisation take an enforced and necessary step backwards.
Successful delivery and implementation of change takes time. Sometimes there is no quick solution or any solution that will demonstrate a real term improvement, regardless of cost or resources.
Replacing Fergie is like trying to get up an icy hill. You cannot do it quickly. You can jump on an expensive mountain bike, pedal like fack, and get nowhere. Bin off the mountain bike for a scooter and repeat. Bin off the scooter for a go kart... It doesn't matter.
Make a decision. Commit to it. Take it slowly and give it time.
(There, you've got two analogies for the price of one.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Go Agile mate
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agreed it would save on the costs massively
Not read any comments, but I will end up doing at some point, so if someone's said what I'm about to say already, well done Robb,
If you take the purplest patch we had last season, say over 6 -8 weeks or more (not a game or three) then this season has been far far far better.
Finally this year when we're playing like a well oiled attacking machine with tricks, flicks, confidence and a bit of arrogance, I was looking forward to games for the first time in a long time.
For me, that is an improvement that nobody can deny me
Sign in if you want to comment
Has Jose improved us?
Page 7 of 7
6 | 7
posted on 6/4/17
comment by ginodepotters (U21367)
posted 3 minutes ago
Very unfair to Mourinho. All of his signings were spot on. It's not his fault that Moyes spunked loads of cash on Fellaini or that LVG overpaid on massive flops.
You are doing better in every aspect since Mou took over. It is far from being a smooth ride but at least you don't have to witness the Moyes / LVG shįt-shows.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
sad when opposition fans are talking more sense than most of the united fans on show today.
i've said all along with jose's signings that they may have been overpriced - well, one may have been - but i'd rather see the club spend £90m on a £50m player, who actually adds something to the team, than £20-40m on players who add nothing at all (bastian, morgan, memphis etc).
and i'll bet large sums of money that 3 of jose's 4 signings so far become key members of the team over the next 3-5 years.
posted on 6/4/17
I don't think your performances in Europe have been anything noticeably any better than what we saw before.
.................
They haven't really. We had a few good results against gash teams, but we did the same with LVG.
The home game against Rostov was one of the most painful games I have seen us involved in for some time.
posted on 6/4/17
comment by redmisty (U7556)
posted 24 minutes ago
I don't think your performances in Europe have been anything noticeably any better than what we saw before.
_____________
Me neither.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
👍
It was hardly the group of death we came out of and we still haven't played anyone of note
Weve just done enough to get to where we are at present
posted on 6/4/17
but i'd rather see the club spend £90m on a £50m player, who actually adds something to the team, than £20-40m on players who add nothing at all
_________________
Spot on. Been saying this for ages.
posted on 6/4/17
comment by puffinthebushkangaroo (U1950)
posted 1 hour, 15 minutes ago
comment by rossobianchi #EquipaLulaDaAlegria (U17054)
posted 6 minutes ago
Last time I post this, because I've done it a hundred times:
If we keep sacking managers every season, we will keep going backwards.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As you will if you sign the wrong manager.
Let's say you are driving somewhere and you realise you took the exit off a roundabout. How does continuing down the same wrong in the wrong direction actually help. Surely one should check out where you currently are, make a decision to U-turn and head in the rght direction.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Here is a far more sensible and applicable analogy, based on my experiences in the world of Change Management.
Let's say an organisation is retiring a legacy computer software system. This system was tailor made for the organisation - a perfect fit -, integrated well with the rest of the organisation's systems (some of which were bought specially to complement the software in question), was subject to continuous development over the years to ensure it continued to provide the evolving business with appropriate support, the employees know it inside out and trust it, etc. But every software system is retired eventually, inevitably.
The organisation looks at other software on the market, settles on a similar looking product, and invests heavily in a programme of change to implement not only the new software, but the changes in process and personnel required to get it up and running. The project fails within twelve months - the changes the business needs to undertake to support the new software aren't even complete by the time the project is abandoned, as the executive management see too much risk in continuing with the new software. Productivity and income are down so much that they see less risk in wrapping up the implementation and going back to market.
So they pick another product off the shelf. This one is also ageing, but is trusted, has an excellent track record, and has been used by some of the other big players in the same market. At massive expense, a new project is initiated. It requires new support staff - even some of the brand new staff brought in to help with the implementation of the previous project are jettisoned, at massive cost (on top of having to continue paying for the software licence the company has now rendered valueless). Processes are to change again. People are confused, some people who liked the previous new Scottish software are angry and frustrated, some people who liked the old Scottish software are just fed up.
The company give the new programme two years. Two years of massive investment, once again, which see productivity and income stabilise a little, and then start to rise very slowly.
But they are still way down on the revenues they were seeing with the legacy software. The new Dutch implementation team ask for one more year - they are certain that as staff continue to adapt to the new processes and protocols, as the program continues its expensive and lengthy integration with the wider system, further progress will come. But before full stability and normalisation are reached, the management go once again back to the drawing board in search of a product they may never find.
Change is inevitable. Change is hard. Change is costly. Sometimes changes see an organisation take an enforced and necessary step backwards.
Successful delivery and implementation of change takes time. Sometimes there is no quick solution or any solution that will demonstrate a real term improvement, regardless of cost or resources.
Replacing Fergie is like trying to get up an icy hill. You cannot do it quickly. You can jump on an expensive mountain bike, pedal like fack, and get nowhere. Bin off the mountain bike for a scooter and repeat. Bin off the scooter for a go kart... It doesn't matter.
Make a decision. Commit to it. Take it slowly and give it time.
(There, you've got two analogies for the price of one.)
posted on 6/4/17
comment by rossobianchi #EquipaLulaDaAlegria (U17054)
posted 53 seconds ago
comment by puffinthebushkangaroo (U1950)
posted 1 hour, 15 minutes ago
comment by rossobianchi #EquipaLulaDaAlegria (U17054)
posted 6 minutes ago
Last time I post this, because I've done it a hundred times:
If we keep sacking managers every season, we will keep going backwards.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As you will if you sign the wrong manager.
Let's say you are driving somewhere and you realise you took the exit off a roundabout. How does continuing down the same wrong in the wrong direction actually help. Surely one should check out where you currently are, make a decision to U-turn and head in the rght direction.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Here is a far more sensible and applicable analogy, based on my experiences in the world of Change Management.
Let's say an organisation is retiring a legacy computer software system. This system was tailor made for the organisation - a perfect fit -, integrated well with the rest of the organisation's systems (some of which were bought specially to complement the software in question), was subject to continuous development over the years to ensure it continued to provide the evolving business with appropriate support, the employees know it inside out and trust it, etc. But every software system is retired eventually, inevitably.
The organisation looks at other software on the market, settles on a similar looking product, and invests heavily in a programme of change to implement not only the new software, but the changes in process and personnel required to get it up and running. The project fails within twelve months - the changes the business needs to undertake to support the new software aren't even complete by the time the project is abandoned, as the executive management see too much risk in continuing with the new software. Productivity and income are down so much that they see less risk in wrapping up the implementation and going back to market.
So they pick another product off the shelf. This one is also ageing, but is trusted, has an excellent track record, and has been used by some of the other big players in the same market. At massive expense, a new project is initiated. It requires new support staff - even some of the brand new staff brought in to help with the implementation of the previous project are jettisoned, at massive cost (on top of having to continue paying for the software licence the company has now rendered valueless). Processes are to change again. People are confused, some people who liked the previous new Scottish software are angry and frustrated, some people who liked the old Scottish software are just fed up.
The company give the new programme two years. Two years of massive investment, once again, which see productivity and income stabilise a little, and then start to rise very slowly.
But they are still way down on the revenues they were seeing with the legacy software. The new Dutch implementation team ask for one more year - they are certain that as staff continue to adapt to the new processes and protocols, as the program continues its expensive and lengthy integration with the wider system, further progress will come. But before full stability and normalisation are reached, the management go once again back to the drawing board in search of a product they may never find.
Change is inevitable. Change is hard. Change is costly. Sometimes changes see an organisation take an enforced and necessary step backwards.
Successful delivery and implementation of change takes time. Sometimes there is no quick solution or any solution that will demonstrate a real term improvement, regardless of cost or resources.
Replacing Fergie is like trying to get up an icy hill. You cannot do it quickly. You can jump on an expensive mountain bike, pedal like fack, and get nowhere. Bin off the mountain bike for a scooter and repeat. Bin off the scooter for a go kart... It doesn't matter.
Make a decision. Commit to it. Take it slowly and give it time.
(There, you've got two analogies for the price of one.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Go Agile mate
posted on 6/4/17
comment by ginodepotters (U21367)
posted 17 minutes ago
Very unfair to Mourinho. All of his signings were spot on. It's not his fault that Moyes spunked loads of cash on Fellaini or that LVG overpaid on massive flops.
You are doing better in every aspect since Mou took over. It is far from being a smooth ride but at least you don't have to witness the Moyes / LVG shįt-shows.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They haven't gotten better in every aspect though. Some areas have regressed - such as the development of a few of the younger stars.
If LVG was still in charge of United, what do you think their position would currently be? Personally, I think they would be in a similar position - in or around the PL top 4 and with a realistic chance of winning the Europa.
posted on 6/4/17
They haven't gotten better in every aspect though.
................
This is correct.
posted on 6/4/17
comment by The Sniper (U21079)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by ginodepotters (U21367)
posted 17 minutes ago
Very unfair to Mourinho. All of his signings were spot on. It's not his fault that Moyes spunked loads of cash on Fellaini or that LVG overpaid on massive flops.
You are doing better in every aspect since Mou took over. It is far from being a smooth ride but at least you don't have to witness the Moyes / LVG shįt-shows.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They haven't gotten better in every aspect though. Some areas have regressed - such as the development of a few of the younger stars.
If LVG was still in charge of United, what do you think their position would currently be? Personally, I think they would be in a similar position - in or around the PL top 4 and with a realistic chance of winning the Europa.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They'd probably be a few quid better off though.
posted on 6/4/17
knees
Agile, as a tool, is useful for smaller-scale, piecemeal or modular software deliveries. It's not going to help you manage huge change programmes overseeing the fundamental restructuring/redevelopment of processes, people and systems.
But, yeah
posted on 6/4/17
I don't get this Mourinho doesnt give youngsters an opportunity business. Rashford, Lingard and Martial have had plenty of game time this season.
If by youngsters people are referring to Forsu Mensah, and Tuanzebe, I dont see the point as defensively Utd have one of the better units in the league.
Utd's problems this season lie in their failure to convert chances. Who else can they call upon?
Changing the manager again is not the answer. Too many of Utd's players are going through the motions and need a kick up the ass. Some of those will undoutably shown the door this summer.
posted on 6/4/17
comment by HNIC - Number Juan (U5574)
posted 3 hours, 35 minutes ago
Is the OP just stupid? Mourinho has been underwhelming but where the feck has it got us sacking managers left right and centre? He deserves a second season, and frankly there's no one out there better than him who can replace him either.
----
Settle down re t ard reporter and run along to Twitter or wherever the feck u jack off.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That came out of nowhere
posted on 6/4/17
comment by Who's Kissing Cameras. (U1703)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by HNIC - Number Juan (U5574)
posted 3 hours, 35 minutes ago
Is the OP just stupid? Mourinho has been underwhelming but where the feck has it got us sacking managers left right and centre? He deserves a second season, and frankly there's no one out there better than him who can replace him either.
----
Settle down re t ard reporter and run along to Twitter or wherever the feck u jack off.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That came out of nowhere
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He came in like a wreeeecking baaaall
posted on 6/4/17
How can we not back Jose. The 9 draws at home aint his fault. We dominated, outplayed the opposition in all areas but the players failed to take their chances in front of goal!!
posted on 6/4/17
comment by Cantona 7 (U11258)
posted 1 minute ago
How can we not back Jose. The 9 draws at home aint his fault. We dominated, outplayed the opposition in all areas but the players failed to take their chances in front of goal!!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Has Wahl changed his name again?
posted on 6/4/17
comment by kneerash-23 Cara Gold (U6876)
posted 2 hours, 23 minutes ago
comment by rossobianchi #EquipaLulaDaAlegria (U17054)
posted 53 seconds ago
comment by puffinthebushkangaroo (U1950)
posted 1 hour, 15 minutes ago
comment by rossobianchi #EquipaLulaDaAlegria (U17054)
posted 6 minutes ago
Last time I post this, because I've done it a hundred times:
If we keep sacking managers every season, we will keep going backwards.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As you will if you sign the wrong manager.
Let's say you are driving somewhere and you realise you took the exit off a roundabout. How does continuing down the same wrong in the wrong direction actually help. Surely one should check out where you currently are, make a decision to U-turn and head in the rght direction.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Here is a far more sensible and applicable analogy, based on my experiences in the world of Change Management.
Let's say an organisation is retiring a legacy computer software system. This system was tailor made for the organisation - a perfect fit -, integrated well with the rest of the organisation's systems (some of which were bought specially to complement the software in question), was subject to continuous development over the years to ensure it continued to provide the evolving business with appropriate support, the employees know it inside out and trust it, etc. But every software system is retired eventually, inevitably.
The organisation looks at other software on the market, settles on a similar looking product, and invests heavily in a programme of change to implement not only the new software, but the changes in process and personnel required to get it up and running. The project fails within twelve months - the changes the business needs to undertake to support the new software aren't even complete by the time the project is abandoned, as the executive management see too much risk in continuing with the new software. Productivity and income are down so much that they see less risk in wrapping up the implementation and going back to market.
So they pick another product off the shelf. This one is also ageing, but is trusted, has an excellent track record, and has been used by some of the other big players in the same market. At massive expense, a new project is initiated. It requires new support staff - even some of the brand new staff brought in to help with the implementation of the previous project are jettisoned, at massive cost (on top of having to continue paying for the software licence the company has now rendered valueless). Processes are to change again. People are confused, some people who liked the previous new Scottish software are angry and frustrated, some people who liked the old Scottish software are just fed up.
The company give the new programme two years. Two years of massive investment, once again, which see productivity and income stabilise a little, and then start to rise very slowly.
But they are still way down on the revenues they were seeing with the legacy software. The new Dutch implementation team ask for one more year - they are certain that as staff continue to adapt to the new processes and protocols, as the program continues its expensive and lengthy integration with the wider system, further progress will come. But before full stability and normalisation are reached, the management go once again back to the drawing board in search of a product they may never find.
Change is inevitable. Change is hard. Change is costly. Sometimes changes see an organisation take an enforced and necessary step backwards.
Successful delivery and implementation of change takes time. Sometimes there is no quick solution or any solution that will demonstrate a real term improvement, regardless of cost or resources.
Replacing Fergie is like trying to get up an icy hill. You cannot do it quickly. You can jump on an expensive mountain bike, pedal like fack, and get nowhere. Bin off the mountain bike for a scooter and repeat. Bin off the scooter for a go kart... It doesn't matter.
Make a decision. Commit to it. Take it slowly and give it time.
(There, you've got two analogies for the price of one.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Go Agile mate
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agreed it would save on the costs massively
posted on 6/4/17
Not read any comments, but I will end up doing at some point, so if someone's said what I'm about to say already, well done Robb,
If you take the purplest patch we had last season, say over 6 -8 weeks or more (not a game or three) then this season has been far far far better.
Finally this year when we're playing like a well oiled attacking machine with tricks, flicks, confidence and a bit of arrogance, I was looking forward to games for the first time in a long time.
For me, that is an improvement that nobody can deny me
Page 7 of 7
6 | 7