This is my second post to the one I uploaded a little while ago and even though Garnacho was specific to that post, he wasn't the problem. A problem yes, but not the problem.
He is a symbol of what has been wrong with our club for so long and why we've gotten to this point.
Please go and give that post a read ππ.
β
My issue isn't at any one player nor any one individual. It's as a collective and it all starts at the top. The owners are responsible for everything that goes on at a business or in this case, football club. Or perhaps maybe we are a business considering the way the 'football club' is run. They set the tone.
And if they set no tone or do nothing to try and put it right when it has gone wrong, then we get what we've gotten for the past 12 years.
It probably would have been more than 12 years had the Glazers not had Sir Alex Ferguson as manager when they took over in 2005. The genius that he was meant that United managed to succeed even with such poor owners.
But if you look over time whilst they were in charge and Sir Alex was manager, the quality of the team did deteriorate as it was no longer the powerhouse it had been years before.
β
The 2013 title-winning side is a great example. A top team indeed but it didn't have superstar world-beaters everywhere nor players in their prime. Wayne Rooney and Robin van Persie were perhaps the only two players that you would say were world class from that side.
The others were still very good but you had aging players like Patrice Evra, Rio Ferdinand, Nemanja Vidic, Ryan Giggs and others, as well as those who were just coming through or who were squad players at best: Danny Welbeck, Tom Cleverly, David de Gea, Chris Smalling, Ashley Young and more.
At least those youngsters had top experienced players to learn from though. Unlike today.
Not the most amazing squad yet it comfortably won the title because of Sir Alex. He set the standard every day, never let it drop and it was instilled into his players as well.
'Never give in' were the famous words the manager would put onto his players and was the reason why we saw such incredible football with immense success.
Once he left though, everything changed.
β
I don't know how long this is going to be nor how it's going to go, but I'm just going to go with it. Note that on this particular day of writing this, I am quite frustrated particularly with the fan base and I'll tell you why later on.
β
The owners
But we start of with the problem.
Garnacho, Amorim, past players, past managers, all may have been problems at the club. They may all have not been good enough nor good enough at the current moment. The same could be said of other staff but this again all comes down to the tone set by the owners.
There is no tone.
The way the Glazers bought the club was something that sparked much debate because that way of loading debt onto the club is now illegal.
β
When they put it out there that they wanted to sell the club in 2023, every United fan felt like there was a chance at freedom and a chance at actually getting our club back.
I'm not going to go into too much detail into all the bids and deals that followed but we obviously didn't get what we want and the Glazers ended up staying.
Sir Jim Ratcliffe and INEOS saved them and perhaps inadvertently meant that United would continue to decline to the point where we are now.
INEOS came in and made many changes most of which have been terrible with the major one being the sacking of hundreds of staff. Like I said earlier, there are probably those that needed to be sacked because they weren't great at their job but to have let go of 400-450 staff is unbelievable and they've only been here are year.
To have two bad owners is something we now know is worse than just the Glazers themselves.
β
How club was bought
The club was bought by the Glazers back in 2005 via a leveraged buyout which was controversial as it ended up putting the club into debt.
They borrowed around Β£540m from banks as well as a Payment In Kind loans (a type of loan where the borrower pays interest by adding it to the principal balance (capitalizing it) rather than making cash payments). These loans were then put onto the club rather than the Glazers' own wealth.
The American owners then acquired over 90% of shares which meant that they could remove United from the stock exchange and make it private.
United had no debt before the Glazers took over but thanks to this leveraged buyout, all of that debt was put onto the club. That Β£540m has grown over time due to interest.
β
The money that United make as revenue was used to pay interest on loans, for financial restructurings and the most famous of them all, for the Glazers to take dividends which comes to a total of Β£166.6m since they started doing so in 2016.
The only year they didn't take dividends was in 2023 after poor results and fan pressure.
β
The debt is of course is still there and has risen to nearly $1bn ($974m) or Β£780m - Β£800m. This could increase even further because of outstanding transfer payments. They have also not put any of their own money into the club since taking over in 2005. 20 years of using the club's revenue.
β
Rotting stadium. Outdated training ground
You know how terrible Old Trafford looks. Those who've been there would no doubt tell us that it's even worse than just the leaks, although when the leak looks more like a waterfall...
Old Trafford is one of the most iconic grounds in all of sports history. Being the home of United, people think about it's rich history and the success that the stadium saw throughout its 115 year lifespan. There's also been dark days and tragedy that the Theatre has had to endure yet still prevailed as an arena of Dreams.
However, it's probably about to endure it's darkest days yet.
β
There has been little and less renovations and improvements to the stadium since the Glazers took over in 2005. Other than the odd lick of paint, there hasn't been any proper upgrades to OT since 2006 although the expansion of the north-west and north-east quadrants were approved in February 2004, almost two years before the Glazers became owners.
β
Since then, there's been the leaks ('Old Trafford falls' was the fourth-highest 'waterfall' in England!) There were leaks in the away team dressing room as well as the conference room as seen while Ruben Amorim was conducting his post-match presser after United's 3-0 loss to Bournemouth.
There's also been talks of rats and even the restrooms are notably disgusting with instances of pee all over the floor of the men's toilet.
People have also complained about the quality of the food that was served in the stadium during matchdays.
All of this comes at a pretty price of Β£66 but could rise to Β£97 according to the BBC.
β
And the football is shite. Suppose that's apt to complete the full matchday experience, isn't it?
β
You then compare Old Trafford to other stadiums across the world and England and ours looks like it belongs in the stone ages versus the Tottenham Hotspur stadium and new Santiago Bernabeu.
This has caused the decision to be made of a new stadium to be built which will be this modern arena but at the cost of Old Trafford which WILL NOT be United's home once this new stadium is built.
How sad is that?
INEOS are taking a lot of the flack for this but it really is all on the Glazers. They allowed Old Trafford to rot to a point where this new stadium is needed. The current one is so bad that renovating it appears more difficult than a completely new home ground.
Imagine Man Utd not playing at Old Trafford anymore π’.
The current state of Old Trafford is a perfect metaphor for where we're at as a club.
β
Hiring wrong people
Then there is the people they put in charge of certain areas of the club.
David Gill was the Chief Executive for a long time and was one of if not Sir Alex Ferguson's most trusted ally during one of the club's most successful periods.
Gill was a superb chief executive and did some great business over the years.
To then have that replaced with a "merchant banker" in Ed Woodward was perhaps not a good idea. Those words btw, aren't mine but of the co-owner Sir Jim Ratcliffe π.
I wonder if the Glazers appreciated their new partner in crime saying such things about a former mate of theirs.
And that's just it, Woodward was/is a friend of the Glazer's. As we know, he was the one who helped them 'buy' the club. This is where their friendship began with Woodward eventually becoming the CEO in 2013 before he left in 2022.
There was also the likes of Richard Arnold who Ratcliffe claimed was a "rugby man" as well as John Murtough although at least with Murtough, he did have a background in football as he has a degree in sports science whereas Arnold was a man of business similarly to Woodward.
To have two of the three main figure heads of the Manchester United FOOTBALL Club board not be involved in football before joining United was probably not a wise move.
It turned out to be so as they were part of the worst decade we've seen at the club in a long time.
β
They didn't know what they were doing and came off as a bit unprofessional and tasteless at times. Sacking Louis van Gaal just two days after lifting the FA Cup (which was the club's first in a decade) was pretty unseemly which brought criticism onto Woodward who was the one to inform LvG of his contract termination.
Then there's the fact that they've sacked so many managers throughout their time: David Moyes, Louis van Gaal, Jose Mourinho, Ole Gunnar Solskjaer, Ralf Rangnick who wasn't actually supposed to be the manager as he had a consultancy role lined up after his interim stint, yet they got rid of him before doing the job he was actually brought in for. Rangnick was also one of the best Director's of Football out there and was seen as a good appointment at the time.
I actually thought that hiring him was one of the best decisions the club made. Sacking him was one of the worst. His open heart surgery comment is still correct today, three years later.
β
On top of all this, they signed countless players who were never good enough to play for United, they paid ridiculously high fees for them and gave them stupid wages.

β
Alexis Sanchez has got to be one of the worst deals we've ever done which is saying a lot because there have been quite a few of those.
Paying him upwards of Β£400k-a-week was unbelievable and while he was Arsenal's best player and it was great to be taking that away from them (again), to be paying him such a high amount was diabolical. He even famously said that he wanted to leave the club after one training session.
Other dumb deals such as Antony, Casemiro, Rasmus Hojlund, Mason Mount, Jadon Sancho followed. These are just in the past three years π. There are more β .
β
The fact that the Glazers are supposed to be these great businessmen yet their employees make such stupid deals truly shows how little they care about Man Utd. What businessman allows this type of waste of money?
This board and owners also never truly backed the manager. They more often than not had to make do with third, fourth or fifth choice targets and try to make a success of things.
Who did the board think these managers were? Sir Alex Ferguson?
And even he towards the end, had to deal with an okay squad yet he managed to win the league because he was a master.
I believe that the club hoped (and still hope in the future) that whoever the next manager is, will replicate this level of genius like SAF.
They also never really got rid of the players managers deemed not good enough. Mourinho became boss in 2016 and wanted the likes of Anthony Martial, Marcus Rashford and Luke Shaw out of his squad. Two of those are still here, six-and-a-half years after Mourinho's departure. Martial officially left the club last year.
β
Final Thoughts
I must end part two here because there is so much more to say it would take a lifetime to read π .
This shows just how bad the Glazers were and still are from the days of their now somewhat illegal manner of a takeover to today. The Glazers have certainly cocked up big time over their 20 years in charge.
Now, they share the stage with INEOS who take some of the recent blame and also reduces some of the pressure on the American owners who are solely responsible for where we are.
Give me your thoughts on part 1 and now part 2. Part 3 will be out when it is out (I can make no guarantees when) but that will be more focused on INEOS as even though they've only been official co-owners since February last year, they have done quite a lot, and most of it hasn't been great.
β
Sir Jim Ratcliffe | Image credit: Getty Images via Goal