Manchester United Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours 2019/2020

Mitch Connor wrote: »

We signed Matic with no likely profit on resale.

I’d say through gritted teeth, but wasn’t he 27 at least when we signed him?. How many players at that level has the club bought since the glazers were in charge? Sanchez and Van Persie, who else the last 10 years?

We don’t buy much proven talent, ready to improve the team immediately.

2009 - Valencia (sort of proven at Wigan )
2010 - None
2011 - Ashley young (proven , sort of at Aston villa)
2012 - van Persie (first real proven class for a long time)
2013 - Mata
2014 - Di Maria
2015 - schweinstager? Schneiderlain (at Southampton! !!!)
2016 - Pogba
2017 - lukaku and matic
2018 - Fred ?
2019 - ?

I mean you could argue that some of them where not proven at the highest level but were proven at far inferior clubs. Go back further and you find a similar pattern. We don’t buy like a super power and we don’t buy proven quality all that often.

I’d argue that if we look at players not at the wrong side of their careers that’s really only Van Persie, Mata , Di Maria , Pogba and matic being anywhere near the level of ambitions the club should be at in terms of its financial standing in the game. These should be the benchmark quality , not the exceptions. If the rumours about united being able to spend 300mil a season or thereabouts are true then united could easily match city for comparable quality signings but instead we get rojo, lindegard, bailly quality (circa half the price city spend on certain defenders)

Part of the problem is that while it appeals to us all that the club has a youth targeted transfer strategy, there is no functioning strategy. This means that more then likely the club does a kind of moneyball equation when calculating who to sign. It doesn’t need to do this but they get away with it by peddling horsesh*t like “Manchester United hired Jose to continue its long standing strategy of building Squads with youth”. (I have to believe nobody was gullible enough to buy that crap). United they prioritize younger players cause it’s cheaper in the long run and more expensive to buy proven quality. I suppose the fact that they have bought poorly is an issue but the solution is to maybe get more competent people in the player targeting department, not to default to just buying young players.

What do clubs comparative to united like Madrid or Barca do when they don’t win leagues or champions leagues? They super size their squads in ways that would shame any of our transfer seasons. United have the same kind of finances but because the owners have been so bad at spending money some fans want more frugal signings! Over a decade of under investment meant the glazers had more then enough for a few crazy spending seasons but we didn’t get that. Do Madrid or Barca fans marvel at many of our transfer windows? It’s so sad how resignedly beaten we are as a fan base that we keep lowering our expectations to make the owners bullsh*t reign palatable.

Zeek12 wrote: »

There may be a few missing off that list.

Fellaini was a proven Premier league performer.
The fact that some don't like his style and how he performs is another debate. But he arrived in his mid 20s with a proven level of performance in the PL.

Kagawa was a Bundesliga title winner when he joined us in 2012.

Mkhitaryan also arrived with a big reputation.

Darmian was Italy's first choice RB at the World Cup before joining us. It hasn't worked out particularly well, but I don't believe it's because he arrived too early in his career

Proven at what level?

Fellaini was considered a signing of how unambitous the club was and unfair as he was treated IMO, he wasn’t considered proven at the level we would be expecting. Never a man united player was I believe the thing often thrown at him.

Kagawa could just as easily been a PR stunt for our Asian market, although he did come with reasonable expectations to be fair. Miki was a punt that didn’t pay off but again like Kagawa came with reasonable expectations, not sure I’d say proven talent at the top level to be honest. Neither was darmian, playing for Italy at a time when they weren’t particularly any good.

But i would argue that there was a strong chance these weren’t necessarily our best alternatives who were more expensive. It’s hindsight of course to say they were a failure but since nobody knows how the decision was arrived to sign the players we don’t know what was the defining factor.

There is not even anecdotal evidence that united signs it’s top targets most seasons. For every reasoning people decide to apply to how Woodward deserves the benefit of the doubt there is a just as plausible counter reason, neither of which are verifiable. It’s a case of looking when the club is and asking how they could be in such a bad state after spending so much. Surely the people signing off on signings and transfer policy are fair game after 7 years of relative failure?