Walking into an under-achieving football club is never easy. I know, because I spent my career taking on such challenges. That was the task Michael Carrick took on in January when he was appointed Manchester United's interim manager and took over a club that was drifting deeper and deeper into mediocrity. Supporters talk about seeing a bounce when new managers take over and, from my own experiences, I do believe that to be the case. Michael certainly experienced a fantastic period where results and performances improved. In his case, United's improvement to finish third and in the Champions League places was exceptional - and he also calmed the water behind the scenes. Yet, with every bounce, there almost always comes a return to normality. You see players who raised the level of their performance return to the level they are used to, and everything often slips back to the way it was before. That seems to be what is happening at United now but, while Carrick appears to be under increasing pressure, the club's problems are definitely not just down to who their manager is. Here, I've tried to explain what he needs to do to sort some of his issues out.
To properly judge Michael, you have to balance up everything he has inherited and consider whether United could be a successful organisation. United have invested enormous amounts of money in recruiting a lot of players in the past five years. Since 2021, they have had three other permanent managers - Ole Gunnar Solskjaer, Erik ten Hag and Ruben Amorim, who spent more than £1bn on 27 major signings and many of whom are still at the club. This year, under Michael, they have invested another £150m, but the bulk of it was on three midfielders and if you assess his entire squad I would still seriously question how many players he would have chosen out of the group he now has. As a manager going into troubled clubs, you have to immediately set your non-negotiable principles with your players - things like hard work and a collective spirit in the dressing room were imperative for me. You give everyone the same opportunity to jump on board and then quickly recognise the players who are capable of going on the ride with you, and those who can't, or won't.
Michael will know all those things about his squad by now, good and bad, but what can he really do about it? In my experience, and I am talking about Premier League clubs, my owners were keen on my views on the players I had just inherited - not just in terms of their ability on the pitch but their value as assets on budget sheets and in the transfer market. I was always continually asked if I could make players better, and also if I could recover money from those I did not rate or want, so as to help the club's financial position. I understood why - my position as manager was to 100% help the club and try to achieve maximum performances on and off the pitch - but it can be hard to do both. It means when you are taking over a group of players your club has invested in, you cannot always be completely honest about certain players in that group. You know the club has a vested interest in holding the player's value and the fact you have to portray positivity to protect that is sometimes unbelievably difficult. Criticising them in the media can't happen, because of your loyalty to the club, so you are left hoping the people who watch your games week in, week out, understand and recognise your dilemma around your squad. The club's recruitment strategy has been publicly questioned recently, of course, by defender Lisandro Martinez - and I am sure a lot of supporters agree with him and/or would like some clarity on that subject. But, from a manager's perspective, Martinez's outburst also raises serious questions about the player himself. Him saying what he did does make me wonder whether he believes he has been a success personally. If so, then how many more players in United's first-team squad also believe themselves to have been successful, rat...
Source: BBC Sport Football · Summarized by HeadlinesBriefing