Brentford Manager and 6 stats that show Manchester United are slipping under Carrick compared to Amorim
brentford manager Keith Andrews may have offered the clearest outside verdict on Manchester United’s recent revival, but the numbers tell a more complicated story. Michael Carrick has lifted United from sixth to third after taking charge until the end of the season, yet the statistical picture from his first 12 Premier League games suggests the team may be generating less and conceding more than it did in Ruben Amorim’s last 12. That tension matters because results and underlying performance do not always move together.
Why the rise in the table does not tell the whole story
United’s climb from sixth to third is the headline fact, and it is a meaningful one. Carrick has collected 26 points across his first 12 league matches, comfortably more than the 18 points recorded across Amorim’s last 12. But the deeper question is whether that improvement reflects a stronger team or simply a better points return from similar, or even weaker, performances. In modern analysis, the gap between outcomes and underlying numbers often reveals whether a reset is sustainable or fragile. On that measure, the early Carrick spell looks less comfortable than the table position suggests.
Six Premier League stats behind the debate
The clearest warning sign is chance quality. United’s average expected goals per game under Carrick is 1. 37, down from 1. 70 in Amorim’s final 12 league games. That indicates United are producing less value in their attacking possessions despite the better results.
At the other end, Carrick’s side are allowing more danger. Their average expected goals against per game is 1. 30, compared with 1. 16 under Amorim. That shift points to a looser defensive structure, even if the scoreboard has been kinder so far.
Goals scored show only a marginal difference. United scored 23 in Amorim’s last 12 league matches, an average of 1. 92 per game. Under Carrick, they have scored 22 in 12, or 1. 83 per game. That is not a dramatic collapse, but it does not match the sharper upward narrative created by the table.
The same pattern appears in chance creation. Carrick’s team are averaging 2. 58 big chances per game, below the 2. 75 average from Amorim’s final dozen league games. Possession has also dropped: Carrick’s side are averaging 50. 58 percent, compared with 55. 00 percent previously. Even territory has shifted, with United averaging 24. 17 touches in the opposition box per game under Carrick, down from 29. 25 under Amorim.
What Keith Andrews’ comments reveal about trust
Keith Andrews, the Brentford manager, sharpened the debate by pointing to something beyond numbers: belief. In his press conference, he said it was “very evident” that United’s spirit and performances are there in abundance, adding that the club has “real trust” in what Carrick is building. That language matters because it suggests the most important change may be psychological rather than tactical.
Andrews’ remarks also align with the broader explanation emerging from United’s recent form: Carrick has made decisions that empower players rather than constrain them. The context provided around the squad suggests that individuals are being used in their natural positions, with structure giving them room to thrive. That is a sharp contrast with the preceding period, when there was a lingering sense that the system was not getting the best out of the squad.
Manchester United’s deeper problem under the surface
This is where the Carrick debate becomes more than a short-term results story. If a team can rise three places while its average xG, xG against, big chances, possession share and touches in the opposition box all move in the wrong direction, the issue is not simply whether the manager is winning enough games. It is whether the team is becoming more efficient, or merely surviving on stronger moments and better buy-in.
That is why the Brentford manager’s assessment matters. He is describing a team that looks trusted and liberated, but the underlying data suggests that the liberation has not yet translated into a dominant statistical profile. The structure may be clearer, and the mood may be better, but the performance baseline still looks mixed. In that sense, the question is not whether Carrick has improved United immediately. It is whether the improvement is built on something stable enough to last.
What it means for the run-in and beyond
If Manchester United can stay in third, the caretaker spell will be judged as a success on the most visible metric. But if the underlying numbers continue to trail Amorim’s final stretch, the club may still face a difficult decision about what type of football it wants to back long term. The key takeaway is that Carrick has changed the mood, and perhaps the trust, but the statistical gains are not yet as convincing as the league position.
That leaves one final question hanging over Old Trafford: if trust is back and results are up, why do the numbers still suggest that the team may be moving in the wrong direction under brentford manager scrutiny and public praise alike?
