When Manchester United finally decided to push ahead with plans to appoint Mauricio Pochettino after a decade of interest, two considerations were key. One was “experience” of a club of this size. Another was “something extra”.

That latter idea had previously formed one of the concerns that some of the United hierarchy had about Carrick on appointing him for the full-time job back in spring. The thinking at the time was that the former midfielder would offer the stability that everyone was talking about, surely returning United to the Champions League that season, but they wondered whether he had the “x factor” for a proper title push. Many felt there was opportunity, because of how many big clubs were going through periods of upheaval, with Pep Guardiola's exit at Man City, while Xabi Alonso and Andoni Iraola begun adventures at Chelsea and Liverpool respectively.

They just didn’t expect United to be one of them. The speed of the collapse has shocked the club leadership.

Those at the top, in the words of one source, “didn’t know which way to turn”. They firmly believed a stability had been restored, only to be stunned as performances were immediately dismal.

A problem with that kind of thinking is that, as much as Carrick deserved the job for the work he did last season, it was easy to see it going like this.

And some insiders - including players - now believe a few different issues made this much likelier.

The first problem, which had been flagged throughout last season, was Carrick’s need to expand his idea of play.

The run which eventually secured him the job had mostly been founded on specific game-plans tailored to each match, as best witnessed in the calculated use of decoy runs to beat Manchester City.

While that is brilliant for one-off occasions, a problem is that you need something more from the long term, and also that you can generally only execute such ideas once.

Carrick did attempt to start imposing a more expansive game where United would seize the initiative, but a number of other problems then manifested.One was that the squad was just not primed for this. The relative flatness of a backline, that has some of United’s longest-serving players, was repeatedly exposed, allowing huge gaps to form in every match.

As a source at another club who beat United says, “you just didn’t fear them in any way”. “You’d play them knowing you could easily get at them.”

Even some of the same players believe this was accentuated by the biggest problem of all: recruitment.

Carrick is too much of a gentleman to publicly complain, but there is fury about transfers. He just wasn’t backed in the way that was anticipated.

This is where the long-term effects of the Glazer ownership and Sir Jim Ratcliffe’s approach have started to really become clear.

United, in the words of numerous figures, “just don’t have the money”.

In every major pursuit for a player this summer, they just weren’t at the races. They ended up a full £30m off Manchester City’s bid for Elliott Anderson.The midfielder had been open to joining United. Such restricted approaches nevertheless make a player reconsider whether a club really value him, and Forest were obviously never going to do a deal when they knew City would go so high.

Even before City’s guilty verdict in the long-running investigation, however, there was a suspicion that they had deliberately gone so high on Anderson to skew the market.

The knock-on effect ended up pricing United out of a move for Morgan Rogers, too. Chelsea were instantly pointed to the price Anderson went for.So, United ended up opting for more compromised options. That approach nevertheless makes it all the more surprising they went to £50m for Andrey Santos.

The move reflects a strange squad, where a lot of the areas don’t really make sense.

United would contend that they were following the approach of rebuilding the squad line by line, but this way of thinking has baffled rivals.

As one experienced figure says, other executives were “laughing at them," adding: “They did midfield one year, and did it awfully, but then you’re leaving a problem area like defence for two seasons. It’s so odd to do and also means you’re just building up sections of the pitch as opposed to the whole thing being integrated as one - in the way teams are actually built. And that’s also why you’re cycling through different managers and styles.”

An awareness of all this has placed further focus on the leadership of Omar Berrada and Jason Wilcox, amid a lot of murmurs that the club are considering further change there. The Glazers are widely said to have been more involved over the past few weeks.

How couldn’t they given they’re witnessing the value of their asset tank in real time?

If so, it also changes the dynamic of this week’s Monaco meeting on the club’s next course of action. The duo may have had to come up with a name to secure their own positions.

A further issue there is that it would be very odd to put in a new permanent manager, and then change either the chief executive or sporting director, since they are supposed to be responsible for such decisions.

Then again, that might be entirely in-keeping with the oddity of some of United’s strategy.

It should be stressed that Ratcliffe has been a huge admirer of Wilcox, and greatly values his football views.

Others say that just comes down to knowing how to “manage” a personality as abrasive as the billionaire, especially since many in football don’t quite share such opinions on Wilcox.

As one experienced football executive said this week, “he’s a lovely guy but you don’t see the vision you do with other top sporting directors”.

Others insist Wilcox is due some slack since it is merely an issue of over-promotion as this wasn’t the role he was brought in to do. That has arguably been witnessed in how some of United’s few recent successes have been in younger signings and academy graduates, which he is seen as much more adept at.

There is also lasting respect for the business of the summer of 2025, which saw Benjamin Sesko, Bryan Mbeumo, Matheus Cunha and Senne Lammens arrive.

A bad one in 2026, however, has been a huge factor in the collapse, with Andrey Santos, Youri Tielemans and an injured Carlos Baleba joining.

The lack of intensity in the team’s play soon seemed to be mirrored in a lack of energy in mindset.

People have been shocked at how quickly United have been opened by everyone from Atletico Madrid to Como to Aston Villa.

It was as this was happening that United were increasing thinking about Villa’s manager: Unai Emery. One well-placed source says it was “always there in the background”.

That is said to have explained some of Villa’s agitation around the subject, especially with how they were long keen for the Basque to sign a new contract.Ultimately, United could never execute.

As written in this newsletter before, Stuttgart’s Sebastian Hoeness was a name broached but his inexperience was immediately discounted.

The United hierarchy are aware that the sheer size of the club in this situation can “break” people who are not primed.

And that was another argument in Pochettino's favour.

He’s had the experience of massive clubs, such as Paris Saint-Germain and Chelsea.

Staff at both clubs still speak highly of him, where they said he did create a good atmosphere. United States sources were also keen to talk up his impact, and the good effect he has had on the culture.

What United now need more than anything, though, is the intensity that Pochettino’s Tottenham displayed a decade ago.

Then, around the summer of 2016 and that famous meeting with Sir Alex Ferguson, the Argentine was one of three coaches being considered to succeed Louis Van Gaal. The others were Ryan Giggs and Jose Mourinho, who they eventually appointed.

The thinking at the time was that the Portuguese was “a winner” and that he could elevate Van Gaal’s team to a title.

That arguably shows the folly of thinking in such labels.

United don’t necessarily need a winner, or even someone of “experience”. They need someone who just fits the situation as it is.

For now, they’ve decided that’s Pochettino.

The article above is the lead column from the award-winning Miguel Delaney: Inside Football newsletter.

Inside Football members and Independent Premium subscribers can get the full column – plus additional reporting from inside the Premier League, Champions League and more – delivered to their inbox every Friday at midday.This week’s members-only newsletter also includes:

New Inside Football members can enjoy their first month FREE. After that, membership costs just £3 per month or £30 per year. Join HERE.