There remains power in Carrick staying on, but Poch also aligns to the United game model.
Curious why Poch's name isn't being mentioned around the United job. Empowers players. Great at developing younger talent. Great at getting players fit. Press-first approach. School of Bielsa and bit Iraola in how he likes his team's to attack. US job showed his ability to bait + accelerate in current tactical meta. PL proven. He'd be my pick if Carrick were to go.
OT finally turns.
This shows in recent media interviews where Carrick insists on finer details needing to become sustained periods of games rather than one off moments (which can only be achieved with aligned natures).
Whilst the captain recently spoke out about not full pressing (even though united have attempted to), but did not raise any issues with sitting back in a completely pragmatic approach under RA, after RA instance of improving the following year in exchange for placing a system above results in his first year - which does not align to united philosophy.
These ‘foundations’ still exist within the intentions of the united squad now but also completely suits some long standing senior players, hence the difference in natures within these collective pressing situations, and therefore all blame cannot be shifted to fitness.
This passage of play amplifies many of the current issues at united.
The lack of empathy, connection and the increased tempo/weight on passing showcase a complete disconnection amongst the players before any fitness issue is to be raised.
The weight and importance of 2 touch passing compliments dynamism. PSG often play with a flow around 2 touch passing which also triggers movement from surrounding teams on the first touch. This completely merges the dyamic-positional model.
Here united are firing the passes into players with already questionable first touches ('interiors' that cannot be proficient in central areas due to '343 system' tailored recruitment), and this will be passed of as them being ‘aggressive, on the front foot or up for it’ - it is a technical issue cover up.
True lack of natures on a technical level cannot be disguised at this level, which now plays on psych aspects - ‘going through the motions’.
This shows in recent media interviews where Carrick insists on finer details needing to become sustained periods of games rather than one off moments (which can only be achieved with aligned natures).
Whilst the captain recently spoke out about not full pressing (even though united have attempted to), but did not raise any issues with sitting back in a completely pragmatic approach under RA, after RA instance of improving the following year in exchange for placing a system above results in his first year - which does not align to united philosophy.
These ‘foundations’ still exist within the intentions of the united squad now but also completely suits some long standing senior players, hence the difference in natures within these collective pressing situations, and therefore all blame cannot be shifted to fitness.
This brings me back to the structure above the coach and squad. 3 seasons, 3 sets of coaches.
Initially a dynamic & 1v1 philosophy (eth) wrongly was asked to change. Followed by a philosophy rooted in static-positional approach (ra). The players then reacted extremely well when dynamic concepts were reintroduced (mc interim). This season returning to a static-positional approach again (mc permanent).
The question becomes where is the bottleneck encouraging the deployment of this static approach as Carrick’s coaching team has shown importance on dynamism and care with the ball.
• retweeted
introducing the rhythm & tempo signature model.
in a nutshell, this model profiles every player’s rhythm and tempo as two radar charts.
it is my attempt to quantify a player’s style & behaviour and i use it to scrutinise manchester united’s transfer business over the summer.
Jürgen Klopp on Florian Wirtz’s best position:
“We have to look at where he is most valuable for us, and that is definitely in the half-spaces. There’s no question about that.
“He can also play out wide, but as soon as we have the ball, he should move back into the half-spaces. That’s definitely where he feels most comfortable.
“For Flo, the left half-space would be the perfect position. For his goal, he moved into the centre, and that’s exactly where he needs to be as well.”
Last season in Carrick's initial games, we saw a good balance of concepts which supported the players by covering limitations and as byproduct, maximising strengths.
In some games, we saw a shift toward a more static-positional approach, in the attempt of increasing possession. This positional approach has been the clearer theme this season, with limited but some dynamism (singular counter movements and 3rd man runs) layered on top.
I stated in March 2026, we would have to wait to see where the coaching teams ideology lies, after initial application of strategies that suited the group.
over-iso blind side arrival to maximise the strategy and allow isolated winger to receive the ball at a more favourable angle, which allows an instant attack (2v1).
this strategy promotes dynamism, but through attracting opponents into rondo situation, it enables a rhythm change - unpredictability is within rhythm changes.
Coaching meets collective.
xitter.cf/cirotexts/status/20995…
Layering dynamism on positional foundations requires timed movements.
Currently we are seeing counter movements between 2 players creating a form of dynamism. However when timed incorrectly, the idea remains positional.
There is a sweet spot to be struck with this united squad. Heavy static-positional approaches expose technical limitations as well as approaches on the other end being heavy dynamic-motion.
Coaching meets collective. Applying more concepts as 'fail-safes' to protect the limitations of the players but also increase motion (aesthetics). The squad needs a balance of the correct concepts to become effective. Timed movement being a key pillar.
In an era of increased pragmatism, reduced footballing solutions (and where I believe directors of football are recruiting more ‘playbook’ coaches, with limited ceiling ‘systems’ which suit their data recruitment approaches).
It is refreshing to see aggressive-proactive philosophies/managers being given the time to embed their concepts at clubs.
2 teams I’ve solely focused on and tracked over past few seasons have reached a high level early on this season on multiple attacking concepts - which become flow state.
The reference thread below highlights how a FB or CM rolled out, positioned higher in the 2-4 build up can act as a wall pass player or possess the ability to access inside the pitch diagonally.
This concept benefits the united attackers who aren't efficient back to goal or in the pockets, as receiving on the diagonal can help roll the defender in one action, opposed to having to protect the ball and then progress it.
xitter.cf/cirotexts/status/20180…
Initially starting with the 2-4 build up with aims to attract pressure centrally, to then release the wide players.
Once with the wide players, accessing the central players playing in the pocket or on the last line with a diagonal pass to help minimise limitations and progress play.
Progressing play once limitations are covered for, then allows to connect in 3's, including give-goes as shown in the last two clips.
These pass in 3 actions including vertical UBTs are the automatisms which connect an approach based around players first ('freedom').