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

keane2097 wrote: »

The players that the outgoing manager and guy in charge of transfers said weren't needed.

I don't care what any of them say. They all have good reasons to lie about everything.

bucketybuck wrote: »

Why are you banging on about top four when that was never what Keane2097 said? He made his point quite clear
Its a very valid point and has nothing to do with any basic aim of finishing top four. What was supposed to be one of the biggest clubs in the world got handed to a new manager with zero top class defenders and zero top class midfielders, it's actually shocking that it was the case.

I was clear from the start that my point was Fergie left the club in a situation where finishing in the top four was comfortably achievable. Keane replied to my post and made every indication that he disagreed with that point, so we discussed it. If he wants to bring up a different argument - that Fergie should have left a squad capable of winning the league when in the care of a lesser manager - then I'll deal with it, but I'm not sure Keane is bringing thst into it. At the moment we are still engaged in the fist argument.

Since you bring up that seperate argument I'll give you a response to it:
What the club was "supposed to be" is irrelevant. What the club actually was was the third biggest spenders in the league. The fact that Fergie managed to continuously win the league while being outspent by his rivals has blinded people to what our expected performances should be. Third or fourth most years is perfectly acceptable for a club with our spending power. With the squad and funds available, Fergie left us well positioned to achieve that.

Mitch Connor wrote: »

The financial position of the club is vastly different now in comparison to when Fergie left.

Share sales, debt pay down have reduced the debt payments each year by lots - it is now down to around 20million a year according to Andy Green. Add to that all the new sponsors including the massive Aon and adidas deals and there is a lot more money available to spend. It is quite conceivable that the money wasn't there to compete when Fergie was in charge. It doesn't have to flow that just because we spent fortunes last summer that the money was there all along.

Also, there is a train of through that United were always a bit weary of Moyes (so why hire him...) and wanted to see how he did with the current squad before entrusting him with fortunes.

That's true. I still think the money we spent on Fellaini and Mata was really poorly used. Not to say that they aren't good players, but they were not what was needed.

Pro. F wrote: »

That's true. I still think the money we spent on Fellaini and Mata was really poorly used. Not to say that they aren't good players, but they were not what was needed.

Yep.

Fellaini was too expensive (said so at the time) but I did expect more of him last season. Proving more useful this season. Not worth the money paid but he is a useful player in the squad.

Mata is a fantastic player but the money spent could have been better spent on a CM (Matic moved same window) and a centre back. It is fairly clear Mata was not a Moyes signing too - which irritates me. Moyes had no idea how to integrat him into the side (playing him on the wing a lot) so I think it was a transfer pushed by Woodward and accepted by Moyes (i mean who would say no to Mata?).

Now, we can't say United are not spending the money, but we can still say (imo) that we aren't spending it smartly.

Herrera is looking to be another massive waste of money. I think he is a great player and I think we would be a lot better off with him in midfield instead of Rooney and Rooney up top instead of Falcao or RVP. However, if the manager isn't going to play him it doesn't matter if he was Messi (or, more fittingly, Riquelme) 28million is a waste on a player who never plays.

Pro. F wrote: »

. What the club actually was was the third biggest spenders in the league.

While I in theory agree with your point. You are not the 3rd biggest spenders ,Ye are by any fair measurment the second biggest spenders and arguably the biggest spenders over the life of the premiership.Both Chelsea and City had to inject large amounts of cash to try and catch up their squads to Utds when they were bought by there sugardaddys but since that intial jump of cash Utd have outspent their rivals.

City Net Spend
1 years 28
3 years 133
5 Years 318
7 Years 536

Utd
1 years 133
3 years 255
5 Years 301
7 Years 267

Chelsea
1 years 18
3 years 125
5 Years 282
7 Years 292

Oh goody, a net spend argument.....

Bandana boy wrote: »

While I in theory agree with your point. You are not the 3rd biggest spenders ,Ye are by any fair measurment the second biggest spenders and arguably the biggest spenders over the life of the premiership.Both Chelsea and City had to inject large amounts of cash to try and catch up their squads to Utds when they were bought by there sugardaddys but since that intial jump of cash Utd have outspent their rivals.

City Net Spend
1 years 28
3 years 133
5 Years 318
7 Years 536

Utd
1 years 133
3 years 255
5 Years 301
7 Years 267

Chelsea
1 years 18
3 years 125
5 Years 282
7 Years 292

Are those figures counting back cumulatively from present? And what is the source?

I also disagree that spending that was done 20 years ago should be used to rank who were the biggest spenders in Fergie's last seasons. But I'd still like to see the source for United being the biggest spenders over the history of the PL.

Edit: And before somebody says it, I know that wages are just as important as transfers. I'm only discussing transfers because I don't have enough sources to compare wages.

beno619 wrote: »

Ahh lads not this rewriting history stuff again.

You took the words out of my mouth.

Some choice quotes from Ian Ladyman.

Yes there will be big money spent at United this summer. The Strootman thing was a definite until the injury. I think they will go in big for Marquinhos, the centre half at PSG who they have been trying to buy for a while

I also expect them to spend heavily on a centre forward. I can't see Falcao staying and that only leaves Van Persie - past his best - Wilson - still young - and. Rooney, who Van Gaal does not see as a centre forward anymore

If LVG lets Falcao leave after one season at UTD, a player that any team in the world would jump at the chance to have, after one seaon where he has hardly been used, well then LVG will come accross as a very stubborn fool imo.

Falcao is quality, younger then our other two strikers and looks like he can handle the physical side of the EPL. His attitude is great, he always seems prepared to drop back and get stuck in when he's getting no service.

If he's allowed to leave it will be one of the dumbest moves a UTD manager has ever made. Very very dumb.

http://thepeoplesperson.com/2015/02/05/ian-ladyman-on-de-geas-contract-falcao-and-man-utds-transfer-ambitions-72068/

Forget everything else, the most worrying thing I've seen on the past few pages is that Van Gaal doesn't see Rooney as a forward any more


That is a colossal waste of money for an average enough midfielder, club captain or not