Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Manchester United Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread - Read Mod Warning in OP 7/1/15

1138139141143144328

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,917 ✭✭✭Whatsisname


    The fact it shows Rooney at £300k a week shows it's untrue


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,889 ✭✭✭✭The Moldy Gowl


    Man United wages revealed... by somebody... that's probably guessing...

    My company regularly release my confidential information, even breaks down my monthly salary into weekly because they are sound like that

    Don't yours?



    Id like to see how much tax they pay.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,709 ✭✭✭✭Cantona's Collars


    B8Y1iiTIgAMsNbW.jpg:large

    Dunno about the validity but hopefully it's true.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 17,638 ✭✭✭✭bangkok


    well Man Utd now have the biggest wage bill in England so id say them figures are correct


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,901 ✭✭✭Julez


    Yeah. The sports bible get access to confidential information.

    But... but, there is a United crest in the corner... it must be official?

    :pac:


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 17,638 ✭✭✭✭bangkok




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,219 ✭✭✭✭Pro. F


    bangkok wrote: »
    well Man Utd now have the biggest wage bill in England so id say them figures are correct

    Worst. Logic. Ever.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,917 ✭✭✭Whatsisname




  • Closed Accounts Posts: 12,832 ✭✭✭✭Blatter


    Well the Shaw figure is one that's almost certainly incorrect. It was widely reported that his wage was ~£100k/week.

    Mourinho even chimed in about it and I doubt we'd see that if Shaw was on only £50k/week.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,527 ✭✭✭fatherted1969


    Hulk Hands wrote: »
    The current squad is easily good enough for top 4. We are top 4 at the moment after a ridiculous run of injuries, we should get there comfortably with any sort of normal luck along the way.

    I'd say that as United fans we should be hoping for far more, that simply making Champions League isnt good enough and in that sense i hope we strengthen. But if top 4 is simply the aim this year, then it'll be the players and LVG's fault if we dont get there. The squad provided by Woodword and the board is easily good enough to achieve that task

    I think we used up all this seasons and next seasons luck during our unbeaten run before xmas. Were you not watching ?

    Anyhoo I think its becoming fairly obvious now that Rooney RVP Falcao and Mata cannot play in a 11. Some hard decisions have to be made and if it means some of our flair players are out in place of a more workmanlike midfield then so be it. Our defence is continually exposed and everyone is slating them and the midfield is getting off scot free.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 17,638 ✭✭✭✭bangkok


    Its £250k a week, earning up to £50k for image rights.

    where does it mention image rights?

    another article from the very reliable BBC..

    http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/26246939


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,547 ✭✭✭Your Airbag


    I think we used up all this seasons and next seasons luck during our unbeaten run before xmas. Were you not watching ?

    Anyhoo I think its becoming fairly obvious now that Rooney RVP Falcao and Mata cannot play in a 11. Some hard decisions have to be made and if it means some of our flair players are out in place of a more workmanlike midfield then so be it. Our defence is continually exposed and everyone is slating them and the midfield is getting off scot free.


    If I had to pick its bye bye RVP, Mata being the next in line for the chop.


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 42,995 Mod ✭✭✭✭Lord TSC


    If I had to pick its bye bye RVP, Mata being the next in line for the chop.

    Can I start beating my "Rooney is a big problem" drum again? :pac:

    So long as Rooney is having to be crammed into positions he's not suited for, we're going to have problems. Would happily see him moved on and his wages used to pay for players who are naturals in midfield and CAM.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,917 ✭✭✭Whatsisname


    bangkok wrote: »
    where does it mention image rights?

    another article from the very reliable BBC..

    http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/26246939

    Nevermind the £50k image rights, it says he gets taxed £140k, so there ya go


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,547 ✭✭✭Your Airbag


    Lord TSC wrote: »
    Can I start beating my "Rooney is a big problem" drum again? :pac:

    So long as Rooney is having to be crammed into positions he's not suited for, we're going to have problems. Would happily see him moved on and his wages used to pay for players who are naturals in midfield and CAM.


    Rooney/Falcao > Rooney/RVP imo but Mata as a no 10 > Rooney as a no 10, so it is a tricky one.

    It all depends on where LVG see's the team going next year and what formation he settles on.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,061 ✭✭✭WallyGUFC


    Lord TSC wrote: »
    Can I start beating my "Rooney is a big problem" drum again? :pac:

    So long as Rooney is having to be crammed into positions he's not suited for, we're going to have problems. Would happily see him moved on and his wages used to pay for players who are naturals in midfield and CAM.
    I'd prefer RVP gone and Rooney up front with Falcao. RVP must be getting a decent wedge too.


  • Posts: 19,923 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Rooney/Falcao > Rooney/RVP imo but Mata as a no 10 > Rooney as a no 10, so it is a tricky one.

    It all depends on where LVG see's the team going next year and what formation he settles on.

    Rooney was immense from behind the striker earlier in the season. Mata was not.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 17,638 ✭✭✭✭bangkok


    Nevermind the £50k image rights, it says he gets taxed £140k, so there ya go

    yea but Man Utd are paying him 300k a week........


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,199 ✭✭✭✭bucketybuck


    Even accepting that the figures from the earlier link are probably not accurate, paying Rooney, RVP and Falcao all £200,000+ is another example of how terrible our squad planning has been this past 4/5 years. There's definitely diminishing returns in having 3 world class strikers instead of only having the two, especially considering how many tens of millions we have to spend to get that 3rd striker in permanently.

    We had two world class strikers and a very capable supporting cast in Hernandez and Wellbeck, spending money on Falcao was a complete waste even without considering our problems in other areas. Hopefully we see sense and don't compound the error by paying another £45m for him in the summer.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,889 ✭✭✭✭The Moldy Gowl


    Oppurtunity cost is the word you are looking buck.

    It's the alternative use for x amout being spent. I have 10 euro. I can either buy 8 cans of Bavaria or a Chinese.

    Diminishing marginal returns is I'll get less benefit from each additional item.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,199 ✭✭✭✭bucketybuck


    Oppurtunity cost is the word you are looking buck.

    It's the alternative use for x amout being spent. I have 10 euro. I can either buy 8 cans of Bavaria or a Chinese.

    Diminishing marginal returns is I'll get less benefit from each additional item.

    No, not opportunity cost, though that applies as well, but for my point I meant diminishing returns.

    Two world class strikers will get us X goals per year.

    Three world class strikers will still only get us X goals per year.

    Add a 4th WC striker and we will still only get X goals per year.

    If we had no strikers Falcao would bring a good return. If we only had one striker Falcao would be less important but still a good buy. When we already have 2 WC strikers we don't need what he brings at all. Its still the same player, but he brings us less in each instance. Diminishing returns.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,432 ✭✭✭chupacabra




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,002 ✭✭✭beno619


    Liam O wrote: »
    Rooney was immense from behind the striker earlier in the season. Mata was not.

    Scoring a few goal doesn't mean he was immense, Rooney is a poor #10/midfielder.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 17,638 ✭✭✭✭bangkok


    chupacabra wrote: »
    Shocking? Sensationalist journalism at its finest.

    have you not seen us this season?! we have been rubbish, the stats just back up the claim


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,709 ✭✭✭✭Cantona's Collars


    Preston/Sheffield United vs Cambridge/ Manchester United - 7.45pm Monday 16th February (live on BBC1)

    Fooking Monday night,stupid tv schedules. (Although if the performance is like the last 2 FA Cup ties,I think I'd prefer to be in work than watching it)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,889 ✭✭✭✭The Moldy Gowl


    No, not opportunity cost, though that applies as well, but for my point I meant diminishing returns.

    Two world class strikers will get us X goals per year.

    Three world class strikers will still only get us X goals per year.

    Add a 4th WC striker and we will still only get X goals per year.

    If we had no strikers Falcao would bring a good return. If we only had one striker Falcao would be less important but still a good buy. When we already have 2 WC strikers we don't need what he brings at all. Its still the same player, but he brings us less in each instance. Diminishing returns.

    I get you.

    I don't think we can simplify soccer into economic equations.


    Unfortunely


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,709 ✭✭✭✭Cantona's Collars


    Fergie's signings from 2007-2012,some serious dross in there amongst the few gems.


    2007
    Owen Hargreaves: £17m from Bayern Munich
    Anderson: £20m from Porto
    Nani: £21m from Sporting Lisbon
    Tomasz Kuszczak: Undisc from West Brom
    Carlos Tevez: £20m from West Ham

    2008
    Manucho: Undisc from Petro Atletico
    Rafael: Undisc from Fluminense
    Fabio: Undisc from Fluminense
    Rodrigo Possebon: Undisc from Internacional
    Dimitar Berbatov: £30m from Tottenham

    2009
    Zoran Tosic: Undisc from Partizan
    Paul Pogba: Undisc from Le Havre (can't really call him a bad signing, can we?)
    Ritchie De Laet: Undisc from Stoke
    Antonio Valencia: £16m from Wigan
    Michael Owen: Free from Newcastle United
    Gabriel Obertan: £3m from Bordeaux
    Mame Diouf: Undisc from Molde

    2010
    Bebe: £7.4m from Vitoria de Guimaraes
    Chris Smalling: £10m from Fulham
    Javier Hernandez: Undisc from Guadalajara

    2011
    Anders Lindegaard: £3.5m from Aalesund
    Phil Jones: £16.5m from Blackburn Rovers
    Ashley Young: £17m from Aston Villa
    David de Gea: £19m from Atletico Madrid

    2012
    Nick Powell: £6m from Crewe
    Shinji Kagawa: £12m from Borussia Dortmund
    Robin van Persie: £24m from Arsenal
    Angelo Henriquez: Undisc from Universidad de Chile
    Alexander Buttner: Undisc from Vitesse
    Wilfried Zaha: Undisc from Crystal Palace


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,432 ✭✭✭chupacabra


    bangkok wrote: »
    have you not seen us this season?! we have been rubbish, the stats just back up the claim

    QPR have made far more non-backwards passes than us this season yet are second from bottom and Chelsea have made MORE backwards passes than us and are top. Meaningless statistics.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 792 ✭✭✭KombuchaMshroom


    chupacabra wrote: »
    Shocking? Sensationalist journalism at its finest.

    Exactly!

    An entire article written based on the fact we have a higher percentage than most teams of backwards passes, yet little gets said about the fact the "runaway" leaders that everyone has been raving about all season has an even higher percentage.

    Lazy journalism is all that is really.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement