Rooney not signing a new contract?

TheBig_Sam
On Skype with Sir Alex there. He didn't want to talk about Rooney. Or anything else. We just sat there in silence. Naked, awkward silence.

Meeting between Fergie and Gill is over apparently with a statement due shortly.

I think this situation is about money AND ambition. Lets say there is a £140,000 a week deal on the table. We know he'd get closer to £200,000 or more at city, Madrid, Barca etc. Now if Utd still had caliber like Ronaldo, Tevez and the like. Even if they had gone after Ozil, Khadeira etc rather than Bebe and Hernandez etc. I think Rooney would have stuck around, even in the knowledge there was alot more money to be made elsewhere.

However, if he see's that there is less money on the table, plus a lack of ambition/funds etc at the club, then he probably thinks, 'What is the point in sticking around'.
I think anyone who doesn't see that United are a club in trouble need to look at the situation closer. I think, unlike Rafa Benitez, Ferguson is managing the issue for the sake of the club. Whereas benitez would kind or murmur about discontent etc, Ferguson is trying to save the reputation of utd, and is actually hiding the fact that the club are in trouble.

Oh yeah and Fergie, that whole thing about saving Rooney for England, Not a feckin chance I'd believe that! Fergie a football philanthropist? I think not:)

I think the fees reported for Nani and Anderson are greatly over exaggerated. I have no doubt that over time and reaching certain goals, achievements and milestones that the figures reported could/would be reached but i'm pretty sure that United did not pay 18m upfront for each.

JimiTime wrote: »

I think this situation is about money AND ambition. Lets say there is a £140,000 a week deal on the table. We know he'd get closer to £200,000 or more at city, Madrid, Barca etc. Now if Utd still had caliber like Ronaldo, Tevez and the like. Even if they had gone after Ozil, Khadeira etc rather than Bebe and Hernandez etc. I think Rooney would have stuck around, even in the knowledge there was alot more money to be made elsewhere.

However, if he see's that there is less money on the table, plus a lack of ambition/funds etc at the club, then he probably thinks, 'What is the point in sticking around'.
I think anyone who doesn't see that United are a club in trouble need to look at the situation closer. I think, unlike Rafa Benitez, Ferguson is managing the issue for the sake of the club. Whereas benitez would kind or murmur about discontent etc, Ferguson is trying to save the reputation of utd, and is actually hiding the fact that the club are in trouble.

Oh yeah and Fergie, that whole thing about saving Rooney for England, Not a feckin chance I'd believe that! Fergie a football philanthropist? I think not:)

If United hadn't snapped up Hernandez for the money they did, I feel that based on the World Cup and the international games he played afterwards (he has 11 goals in 20 games for Mexico) the news papers/forums would have been mentioning him alongside the likes of Khedira, Suarez and Prince-Boateng and Ozil during the transfer window.

It was a great bit of business by United, I'll be surprised if he doesn't emerge as a top player.

smokedeels wrote: »

If United hadn't snapped up Hernandez for the money they did, I feel that based on the World Cup and the international games he played afterwards (he has 11 goals in 20 games for Mexico) the news papers/forums would have been mentioning him alongside the likes of Khedira, Suarez and Prince-Boateng and Ozil during the transfer window.
It was a great bit of business by United, I'll be surprised if he doesn't emerge as a top player.

Thats a joke right?

Funny how people are talking about Man Utd not buying players. How about Chelsea? Man Utd net-spent more this past summer transfer window.

FatherTed wrote: »

He's right though. His transfer fee was 7mil. After the WC it would have doubled.

not quite.

i've no doubt it may have increased.

he'd never have been mentioned alongside Ozil, Suarez and Khedira, which is what people were ridiculing. they were the Players of the Tournament just about for fúck's sake.

smokedeels wrote: »

If United hadn't snapped up Hernandez for the money they did, I feel that based on the World Cup and the international games he played afterwards (he has 11 goals in 20 games for Mexico) the news papers/forums would have been mentioning him alongside the likes of Khedira, Suarez and Prince-Boateng and Ozil during the transfer window.

It was a great bit of business by United, I'll be surprised if he doesn't emerge as a top player.

Come off it will you.

FatherTed wrote: »

Funny how people are talking about Man Utd not buying players. How about Chelsea? Man Utd net-spent more this past summer transfer window.

the issue is NOT that utd are not buying. Its that they are in need of much better players in certain positions, and they haven't spent. If they had Chelsea's squad, there would be no questions. The fact that utd's squad quality has so dipped in the recent times without a PROPER dip into the market is the issue. They spent on Bebe and Chico, but the wages of these players would be considerably lower than those of the likes of Ozil, Van Der Vaart etc.

SlickRic wrote: »

i just can't agree with this, though i see where you're coming from.

yes, debt is a huge issue for Utd.

but in terms of the playing squad and manager they're in a different league to us right now really. unless Fergie has told Rooney he's leaving in a matter of months, and that the successor is someone of a sub-standard calibre, then there is no rational reason for Rooney to believe that Utd aren't ambitious.

Torres would be more than right to leave, because we've shown little or no ambition for 2/3 years, sacked a great manager for a journeyman, aren't in the Champions League, and show little sign of getting back in.

Rooney's getting out far, far earlier than that. unless he's Mystic Wayne in his spare time, he's no fúcking clue, and if he had any balls whatsoever he'd stay and try to lead the club into the next few years, which might be slightly more difficult.

i've no doubt that with a firing Wayne Rooney, under Fergie, United would be there or thereabouts for the forseeable future. it's not like the rest of the team is Championship standard.

like i say, Rooney is talking complete shíte.

that, or he's completely spineless.

In fairness, we should drop the Torres comparison because Rooney is hardly thinking about Pool.

Rooney has obviously been briefed on United future plans financially. He has to make a judgement call and decide where he will more trophies. It is his opinion, he could be right or it could turn out a disaster of a move. Personally, if it was United or City, I'd go City because the potential is huge.

That was a funny rant from Holloway. I'm a real fan of Holloway, he is an excellent manager. I think both himself and Di Matteo have long successful management careers ahead of them.

On Rooney I can understand him wanting to leave if its about winning things. With Ferguson expected to retire at the end of the season and a bunch of important older players possibly going to follow him out the door its something he could be thinking about alright. Especially with the owners seemingly unwilling to spend big to keep the club at the top.

If its about money though the its just plain wrong. And if he goes to City then he is a fool. It was totally different with Carlos Tevez, he wasn't an automatic starter at United and they didn't take the option to secure him when they had the chance. Rooney has always been first choice and loved by the United fans so to cross the City is just well it shouldn't be allowed.

karma_ wrote: »

What's hilarious is just how quick the United fans have turned against young wazza. Did we hear shouts of 'mercenary' when he left Everton? In fairness we did, but only from the Everton fans.

As for not being a legend, you know you don;t have to be a United player to earn that status, Wayne can earn that at City when he joins.

I have admit that I am enjoying the MU internet meltdown as much as the next man.

He was a 17 year old kid when he left Everton who were a club with no money at the time. Everton got very well embursed for that sale, I'd even go so far as to say that they would not have been as successful without that cash injection. I don't think you can call a young teenager a mercenary. Its different when you have played for a club for this length of time, won countless medals and then decide to leave for money. I'm quite sure when he left Everton it was for medals and success not money.

If its about money he is very wrong. If its about looking to win things I can understand it as I just said above.

Ah Ian Holloway, will the real David Brent please stand up?