Much maligned Moyes solely to blame

Ryan Giggs is probably best-placed to see the differences in the management for Fergie and Moyes. If this is true, it only confirms the fact the majority of senior United players are not 100% behind Moyes. http://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/467629/EXCLUSIVE-Ryan-Giggs-heading-for-Manchester-United-exit-after-David-Moyes-fall-out

United would be in a better position if all the players had Rooney's attitude. However, my point remains; motivating players to play at their best is the manager's responsibility. All the most successful managers are good motivators (find anyone that has won multiple trophies in a major competitions and that point will stand). That's why struggling teams often improve when a new manager comes in, they are all motivated to impress. After a pecking order gets established that motivation grows less and only good motivators can keep attitudes high. Very few players have that unrelenting desire to win that Rooney has. Furthermore, of course Rooney is going to back Moyes; Moyes just made him the highest paid player in the league.

11 There you go again trying to put words into my mouth.When Drew wrote his original draft he was blaming Moyes for ALL of United's troubles & I simply questioned that by saying IMO some of the players were not of a good enough standard to match it with the mega-rich clubs who just go out and buy what they need. I was shot down in flames. Seeing you are such an avid reader of Man U. media you will no doubt have read Wayne Rooney's latest interview done for MUTV where he lays it all on the line with constant use of the word "we" when talking about the Man City defeat. WE cant go on losing 6 games at home WE have to step up WE didn't deserve to win. We weren't clinical enough WE didnt create enough chances WE know WE have to respond. Tactics,selection,training ,coaching are never mentioned so one can only assume he is talking about the men selected to do a job on the field.For your interest the interview was headed "The fear is gone" Read it & you may just start to get an idea of where my comments have been coming from.Rooney appears to know something that some bloggers on here have not recognised. Now this is my final words on this subject for I am not a United fan, I look at top football through what I consider unbiased eyes & in this case I tend to agree with Wayne's assessment of the situation.rather than the overactive imaginings of people who are nowhere near enough to the behind the scenes "goings on" at Old Trafford to make some of the suggestions they have made.Ok? Cheers jb

Agree magnificent. The fact is Ferguson would have this same team top 3-4 as a minimum. Managers matter. They structure teams, choose lineups and tactics. They motivate players and leave out underperformers. Moyes is poor at all of the above. In 13 years he has never beaten a "top 4" side. Never! It says so much about Moyes that he can't tactically organise a team to even fluke a result. Mind you, this season they only have 2 wins against top half sides!

I can read but perhaps I'm missing your point. Are you saying that Moyes cannot bare all the blame because the players are not performing? If so I disagree. The coaching staff are responsible for the performance (as people in management positions are in all working environments). The players look disinterested and unmotivated, that's the coach's/manager's fault. Why do they have this attitude? I suspect that they don't respect him and thus don't put in the extra effort. Why don't they respect him? Usually a lack of respect is due to it not being earned. Why has it not be been earned? Because the coaching staff have not got a clear direction in playing style. The manager is completely accoutable for the performance. The players are not the problem because they have already proven themselves to be decent by winning the league last year.

11 Can't you read?. One thing I am reasonably good at is putting my thoughts into words. Nowhere is any of the foregoing blog have I said Moyes is doing a good job,yet once again you pose the question "Are you trying to tell me????" Where we differentiate is in the emphasis we place on the importance of a manager or a coach (you will have to pick what you mean for you obviously see a difference inasmuch you now call Fergie a good manager who hired good coaches) This morning I have watched a game where position for position City outclassed United.Now the man you mention,Moyes,was sitting on the sidelines taking no active part in the play,so if I could make a suggestion,turn down the sound and watch the game ,all the time asking would you pay any of the United players $150,000 a week for what they are producing. If you do that I think you may just start to see where I am coming from.Forget where Kagawa came from,or who played in last years teams,look at the number of passes that are overhit,or misplaced,or in Ferdinands case his being a yard slower than the goalscorer.That's what I see and I regard these people as very well paid professionals who are not supplying the goods. Whether their mentor/manager/ coach/ has any input into their on field performances is a bit hard for me to fathom for as highly paid men they should have pride in what they do and this morning they,the players,did not show they were capable of beating this City side,mind you put together at great expense,but nevertheless a team that has to be faced. Now as I suggested you and I are on completely different wavelengths on this matter so lets agree to disagree. Cheers jb.

I didn't say he had a bank balance of experience, I said he had a bank balance of success at Aberdeen. Moyes has experience. You didn't say Moyes should be given 3+ years, but you listed the league position of Ferguson in his first 4 years at United. So I thought you were implying that Moyes should be cut the same slack. The bottom line is that Moyes has a squad that won the league comfortablely last season and now has them in 7th place. What has changed, 2 extra players (one of which is very highly regarded), a different coaching staff and different CEO. The CEO can be partly blamed from the transfer dealings, but that still leaves Moyes with a league-winning squad. So the coaching staff is to blame (even when you factor in the improvement by Chelsea, City, Arsenal and Liverpool) It reflects badly on Moyes that a team he left is playing better without him. They are higher in the league with a much smaller budget. So are you going to tell me that Moyes is doing a good job, based on the evidence at hand? That's what the blog is about.

11 - You list yourself as a football Guru but this latest reply to a factor you cited ie You told me that Ferguson had a 'bank balance" of experience before he took over at United. I warned you that this was no prerequisite to success and cited the Walter Smith experience as an example,all checkable facts. For that I now get a lecture on what you consider to be necessary to have a successful team.You ask if I am suggesting Moyes be given 3+ .!!!!! where or when did I say that? You then appeare to go into a psychoanalysis of Moyes,his ideas,and methods. I have never met the man so cannot comment with any hope of accuracy. and with that in mind I cannot hope to have meaningful discussion with you on this matter,Cheers jb.

Agree completely Drew. The managerial change has been the biggest difference between last season's run away winners and this season's stuttering midtable side. The real measure of Moyes failure is that Ferguson won a title with the same squad and Mourinho, Cappello, Klopp, Hitzfeld (ie all of those managers who were suited for the job at one of the worlds top clubs) would have had them in a title chase. Moyes as United manager is akin to their signing of Djemba Djemba. Ok at what they do but miles off being good enough for Man U

Are you saying that Moyes should be given 3+ years because the deficiencies at United are so great? The midfield is a concern but they have stars up front and decent players at the back (decent isn't enough in midfield though). The football landscape has changed and 18 months is now seen as a patient amount of time. How much is enough time? Big clubs cannot afford to be out of the Champions League places for too long. The loss of revenue is only one aspect. Not offering UCL football means it's hard to attract and keep good players. Liverpool is a good example of this; in recent years they struggled to attract "big names" because of a lack of UCL. The lack of star names makes it hard to then compete against those clubs that do. Unless you have manager and coaching staff has a system of play that gets more out of the collective. Pre-seasons are so short so you have to be an excellent coach to get your message across. All this assumes that you have a clear message, which Moyes does not appear to have. United are no longer a good counter-attacking team. Their defence is not solid. They over-commit and get caught on the counter. They are not great at keeping possession (compared to the very best). They don't press, yet they don't sit deep either. They are too reliant on individual brilliance. There is no clear identity. He should haved been sacked on this evidence and the lack interest shown by some of the players. Give him time you say. He had time at Everton and the club's only identity was that they were battlers. Look at what Martinez and Pochettino have achieved early in their time at Everton and Southampton. Look at how quickly Hiddink transformed the Socceroos (he only had them for camps and not a daily basis). Good coaches get their message across quickly. And, they get the respect of the playing group quickly because the players see that there is a clear direction. Moyes is a mid-table coach and his team is producing mid-table performances. Truth be told, Ferguson was only an average coach too. However, he was an excellent motivator and man-manager. And, he hired good coaches.

11 -A dangerous example citing Ferguson's pre-United experiences.Aberdeen did rule the roost for a few years in Scotland accompanied by another out of town team Dundee United who also went to the heights in their European comps. Then we look to Walter Smith who managed Rangers for 8 years winning 8 titles,3 Scottish Cups,& 3 League Cups. Bouyed by this unprecedented success he moved to Everton around 1998 and lasted 4 years before the politics and financial shortcomings saw him leaving with the team languishing in the bottom half of the table. (He was succeeded by Moyes).Smith returned to Rangers after spells as assistant to Fergie both at United and the Scotland team but returned to Rangers in 2007 and won another plethora of prizes, both domestic &European.You may well ask what does this all prove. Smith too had "capital in the bank" but given only 4 years to turn the ship he failed.Fergie took 5 years to turn United.!!!!!!!!. PS Fergie and Walter Smith are great friends and compatriots. jb

Fair point. However, Ferguson had more "capital" in the bank. He had won the Scottish league with Aberdeen, breaking the old firm. He had won the Scottish cup and the old European Cup Winners Cup. Moyes has not won anything. Before you start on budgets, Aberdeen's budget was significantly less than Rangers and Celtic. United won't sack Moyes this season. They want to try and create a situation where a manager will stay there for at least 5 years. Stability has its virtues. They earn enough from other revenue streams that allow them to afford missing out on the UCL and higher revenues given to higher placed EPL teams. However, given the amount of debt put on the club by the Glazers they probably can't sustain lower table position for many seasons. He'll probably get two more transfer windows to shape his squad. Remove the players that don't respect him and address the midfield deficiencies. He'll get the sack if United aren't in the top 4 come next February/March. He might only get one more transfer windows and thus another 6 months or so. I didn't agree with the appointment because of Moyes lack of success and the style of football Everton played under him. However, there wasn't really any high-credential candidates available (except Marcelo Bielsa who doesn't speak English). They didn't want Mourinho because of the baggage. Come July this year people like Luis van Gaal and Guus Hiddink (I've heard rumours of Frank de Boer too). It's possible that van Gaal or de Boer would stay for long periods too. I personally would even give a upcoming manager that plays good football a chance e.g. a Pochettino or Martinez. However, I wonder whether Man Utd board would take such a risk after Moyes.

I said early and mid 20s and referred to the last 10 years (read it back). So the only exceptions are van der Sar and RVP (possibly Berbatov but I consider 27 mid 20s but I'll give you that one if you want). In every instance they all came from clubs that would have paid less. Perhaps the only exception is Silvestre because Inter was very high-paying at the time. Though, Silvestre himself moved up, in pecking order if not pay as well. Trust me, you're not going to beat me on this. I read more blogs, news and feature articles (and listen to more podcasts) on Manchester United than you do. As for your point on 20 year manager reigns, it has nothing to do with it. Yes it will probably never happen again. The point in question is whether Moyes is doing a good job. Some claim the squad is not good enough and he's doing ok. Others, like myself and the blogger, say the squad is better than 7th. It's all opinion but they opinions backed with the only truth in sport, stats, are the ones that have more credibility. 1st last season with a large margin, 7th so far this year with only with 2 news players and one player retired player that played like half the games last year. No season-ending injuries. All facts, not opinions.

11 Just noticed this remark and thought it deserved some examination. When Fergie took over in 1986 United had finished 4th,4th, 4th, 3rd, 3rd, in the previous 5 years, what one could describe as being perfectly acceptable even for United. Following his appointment the team dropped to 11th,13th,6th 2nd, and won the title again in 92.So it could be argued he took a reasonable performing team way down the league before making the changes and that rebuilding took him another 5 years. His record following that time speaks for itself but when one compares Moyes' job which has been around 8 months "his" 7th position is not that bad and may yet improve before season's end. jb

11 -Juan Veron joined United at the age of 26 in 2001.He moved to Chelsea before he left England having only played 7 games there so maybe it was more than the English life -style he didn't like. This got me to thinking about your statement so I went looking and surprise ,surprise in the last 13 years of Fergies reign I sampled 3 seasons and here is what I found. Van der Sar (35), Sheringham (31) ,Barthez (29),Schmeichal (28), Berbatov (27), Cantona (26),Van Nistleroy (25),Evra (25) , Vidic (24),Ferdinand (24),Solskjaer (23), Tevez (23),Keane (22), Silvestre (22).Their "joining age" in brackets. Now before you start to assail me about some of these players being in their "early 20's" it also has to be said they were signed from other clubs where it is fact they were having successful careers even (as you no doubt know) being international class in their home countries. I'll leave the discussion there for as 777 said it is all rather pointless when people have opinionated agendas against particular managers.These men will live or die on their results,that's the name of the game in today's football. How many Ferguson tenures of 20 odd years are we going to see in the future.? Even Barcelona and Real don't keep their men too long.As the French say C'est la vie. Cheers my friend jb

Also, I'm not just making observations about Ferguson's transfer policy; these are things he said. After Juan Sebastian Veron failed to adjust to the EPL (and life in England) Ferguson said he made a conscious decision to buy younger and slowly integrate the players into starting line-up. So even when they went 3 seasons without a league title (when Arsenal and Chelsea won), Ferguson bought players in their early and mid 20s. It paid off because they were able to win consecutive titles when those players started to come into their prime. In that period only van der Sar was bought to address a "concern" position. Arsenal have the same policy, except they buy even younger and because of financial constraints of building a new stadium and not renewing contracts early enough, they end-up selling players when they are in their prime. RVP was bought after City won the league, scoring significantly more than United. So again, an older established star was bought to address an immediate concern of his.