Adnan Januzaj

Status
Not open for further replies.
decorativeed said:
I've heard that his agent wants a Thiago-style clause in any contract we give him, that guarantees him starting a certain number of games per season. As we've never done that with any players to my knowledge, it's hard to imagine he'll get it.
Click to expand...


Nor should he.

A club has come to a pretty pass when they're dictated to by agents regarding their clients' playing time.

And didn't Pogba's agent demand something similar?
 
decorativeed said:
I've heard that his agent wants a Thiago-style clause in any contract we give him, that guarantees him starting a certain number of games per season. As we've never done that with any players to my knowledge, it's hard to imagine he'll get it.
Click to expand...

If Barcelona can give such a clause to Thiago, why should we hesitate to do so for a top, young player? It's not the nineties anymore, and United has been somewhat slow to drag itself into the 21st century on transfer fees, and now on attitudes to young players. The days when the club called all the shots are over.

We shouldn't worry too much about 'precedents'. How often does a talent like Pogba or Januzaj come along? Better to give a guarantee of playing time, allowing them to leave for less than market value should it's terms not be met, than be guaranteed they will walk away for nothing if we don't.
 
Will Absolute said:
If Barcelona can give such a clause to Thiago, why should we hesitate to do so for a top, young player? It's not the nineties anymore, and United has been somewhat slow to drag itself into the 21st century on transfer fees, and now on attitudes to young players. The days when the club called all the shots are over.

We shouldn't worry too much about 'precedents'. How often does a talent like Pogba or Januzaj come along? Better to give a guarantee of playing time, allowing them to leave for less than market value should it's terms not be met, than be guaranteed they will walk away for nothing if we don't.
Click to expand...


And have you forgotten what has happened with Thiago?
 
Will Absolute said:
If Barcelona can give such a clause to Thiago, why should we hesitate to do so for a top, young player? It's not the nineties anymore, and United has been somewhat slow to drag itself into the 21st century on transfer fees, and now on attitudes to young players. The days when the club called all the shots are over.

We shouldn't worry too much about 'precedents'. How often does a talent like Pogba or Januzaj come along? Better to give a guarantee of playing time, allowing them to leave for less than market value should it's terms not be met, than be guaranteed they will walk away for nothing if we don't.
Click to expand...


Agreed, some players are worth it.
 
Genius Me! said:
And have you forgotten what has happened with Thiago?
Click to expand...

No. He left because Barca didn't meet the terms of the clause. They got E25m for him, which is E25m better than nothing.

He stayed. They got an extra year to fit him in the team. Things might have worked out differently and he might still be there.

There's not much downside to such a deal. Only football conservatism is against it.
 
Will Absolute said:
If Barcelona can give such a clause to Thiago, why should we hesitate to do so for a top, young player? It's not the nineties anymore, and United has been somewhat slow to drag itself into the 21st century on transfer fees, and now on attitudes to young players. The days when the club called all the shots are over.

We shouldn't worry too much about 'precedents'. How often does a talent like Pogba or Januzaj come along? Better to give a guarantee of playing time, allowing them to leave for less than market value should it's terms not be met, than be guaranteed they will walk away for nothing if we don't.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Principles are all very well, but if it's a principle that says "we can keep you and not play you - even though someone offers a reasonable fee" then what's good about it? Particularly if it's a feature of the international market. It's just another contract clause.

Genius Me! said:
And have you forgotten what has happened with Thiago?
Click to expand...

I remember that he decided to leave because he needed to play more and that Barcelona got rather more for their reserve player than anyone would offer for someone who was a benchwarmer for us.

It's not a principle, it's just another term in a modern contract. Stick to local or unambitious players who don't expect clauses like that or play the game like the rest of Europe. If you want to pick players that attract international interest, play it like you understand what that means.
 
Will Absolute said:
No. He left because Barca didn't meet the terms of the clause. They got E25m for him, which is E25m better than nothing.

He stayed. They got an extra year to fit him in the team. Things might have worked out differently and he might still be there.

There's not much downside to such a deal. Only football conservatism is against it.
Click to expand...

Of course there's a downside. It's a ridiculous situation when the manager is picking teams at the business end of the season with one eye on the contracts of your best young players who might be able to walk for a fixed price in a few weeks time, whether the club want to sell him or not.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Of course there's a downside. It's a ridiculous situation when the manager is picking teams at the business end of the season with one eye on the contracts of your best young players who might be able to walk for a fixed price in a few weeks time, whether the club want to sell him or not.
Click to expand...

The Barca manager said he wasn't even aware of the clause. And if he was aware, he clearly didn't allow it to influence him. The manager's remit remains unchanged - to pick the team on merit.
 
Will Absolute said:
The Barca manager said he wasn't even aware of the clause. And if he was aware, he clearly didn't allow it to influence him. The manager's remit remains unchanged - to pick the team on merit.
Click to expand...

If he wasn't aware of the clause, he should have been. And it could obviously have been relevant to decisions about team selection.
 
Sort of feel at this point that we're pissing in the wind trying to fight the influence of agents and player power. I absolutely understand the principle as well as the need to take a hard stance on players who have achieved nothing in the game, but then I wonder how much such a stance will actually end up damaging us in the end. If we did end up losing Januzaj, with Pogba and Daehli also having gone elsewhere, there needs to be a rethink if nothing has been gained other than the satisfaction of not being bossed around by no marks. Particularly if these players go on to set the world alight like Pogba may well end up doing.

It may cause problems with other youngsters, we could lose others for below market value, and we might even suffer trying to fit a youngster into the team who is clearly talented but playing poorly. On the other hand, it could spur players on to become really top drawer if they know there's a better chance of first team football and a hefty contract, not to mention that there'll be far less chance of losing top drawer youngsters for nothing at all. We'll have to act on this at some point soon though, you'd think. It leaves us reliant on loyalty and patience - things which we may well see from the youngsters brought all the way through the academy, but perhaps not the really top talents picked up from all around Europe. This would be less of a problem if English football wasn't in the state it was in, but that's the way it is, and it makes it all the more important to adapt if the need arises.
 
It's all part of the steady creep of player (meaning agent) power which has left so many clubs in dire financial straits. They obviously don't need to be run as charities but a line has to be drawn somewhere. I would suggest that young players wanting guaranteed appearance clauses written into their contract is as good a place to start as any.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Of course there's a downside. It's a ridiculous situation when the manager is picking teams at the business end of the season with one eye on the contracts of your best young players who might be able to walk for a fixed price in a few weeks time, whether the club want to sell him or not.
Click to expand...

I agree there is a downside. Ideally such clauses shouldn't exist. But they do - and then it becomes a question of principles versus pragmatism for a club like us. If we refuse to give a young talent a contract of this kind, we lose him there and then in all likelihood. Giving him the contract at least gives us a year to assess him further. And hopefully, if he doesn't rack up thirty appearances or whatever the contract specifies this means either that he isn't all that - or that we have sufficiently good players in his position to let him go confidently, pocketing a decent fee for him as well.

In one sense this is precisely what happened in the case of Thiago. And he is clearly more talented, and a safer bet for future world beater status, than most young players who will feature in such a scenario.
 
I don't really see the downside of the clause, its not like you're forced to play him. If you didn't play him, he'd want to leave anyway and for free, so its win win for both parties.
 
The downside is that you may end up losing a talent who isn't quite ready to feature in X games per season, but who looks likely to become a starter eventually. The clause means a young player can force his way out, as it were, before you get the chance to offer them the games you are indeed willing to give - only not just yet.
 
Raees said:
I don't really see the downside of the clause, its not like you're forced to play him. If you didn't play him, he'd want to leave anyway and for free, so its win win for both parties.
Click to expand...
Same. These clauses don't kick in immediately anyway. There's usually a reasonable period by when he should featured in a certain amount of games or played certain number of minutes. I wouldn't mind us going along with something like that at all.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
It's all part of the steady creep of player (meaning agent) power which has left so many clubs in dire financial straits. They obviously don't need to be run as charities but a line has to be drawn somewhere. I would suggest that young players wanting guaranteed appearance clauses written into their contract is as good a place to start as any.
Click to expand...


It is, but only until the good stops outweighing the bad. This is something we'll only be able to properly judge over the course of the next few years I imagine, and is a stance that will have to be revisited if things don't pan out as intended. If Cleverley/Welbeck (Pearson, Keane, Wilson, etc...) do not become top drawer, and if Januzaj goes elsewhere and goes on to do what Pogba looks like he's going to do, then we'll surely have to change our approach. It's a frustrating situation but we can't be stubborn given our situation in comparison to the rest of Europe's elite. Real Madrid/Barcelona are a more attractive proposition for players, Bayern Munich have a monopoly on the best players in Germany, City/Chelsea/PSG have ludicrous amounts of money to chuck around....

United cannot afford to lose players like Pogba and Januzaj too often. We are more reliant on producing and keeping top talent than other teams so we need to get this aspect of things spot on.
 
If it's the release clause or lose him for free at the end of the season then I'd choose the clause. Its good to have principles but not when you end up with nothing but your principles.

Is this hypothetical or is it definitely the sticking point here?
 
Pogue Mahone said:
It's all part of the steady creep of player (meaning agent) power which has left so many clubs in dire financial straits. They obviously don't need to be run as charities but a line has to be drawn somewhere. I would suggest that young players wanting guaranteed appearance clauses written into their contract is as good a place to start as any.
Click to expand...

I don't want us to draw any lines which hamper our ability to compete at the top of world football. If that's the outcome, the line is in the wrong place.
 
Is giving young players this sort of power gonna help us keep hold of them? Or keep hold of them a little longer?

I dunno, I don't like the practice of giving into player demands, letting players dictate who plays in the team, or anything else - especially at a young age.. that sort of behavior will mostly contribute to a bad attitude and lack of respect for the player and diminish the qualities that we (Fergie) has always expected (determination, work ethic etc.etc.) in a United player.

Of course, we can't be losing top young talents - but this isn't the way to go about it for me. We should be giving them playing time because they deserve it, because that's what we do - we support youngsters, we give them a chance.. we take a risk on them.

We don't do it to get them to stay with the club, we do it because it's the United way, it's the alternative to the approach of other clubs - it is what makes United different.

For people talking about other teams; who does hold onto their players? Bayern Munich are the only team who really stand out to me, with Hummels being the only player in recent years I can think of who has left and then gone onto big things.

Barcelona for example? Jordi Alba, Pique, Fabregas, Reina, Thiago - I know they managed to get 3 back with their pulling power, which is lame, but still.. they lost them.
 
I must say that I'm uneasy about this situation. I never try to second-guess a player's motives, that has proved fruitless many times. Until he signs, the fact is - he is leaving. I mean, it can't be considered a surprise if he leaves next summer when he will be leaving due to him no longer having a contract! (given that it is not a secret that he will no longer have a contract).

I said before, our Essien calculators led us to conclude Hazard and Thiago would choose us, or that Bale would want to go to United over any other team, although no real facts backed that up. No point predicting 'he will not play at x club, or he seems happy here'. If Januzaj hasn't signed up by January, I will be almost certain he will leave. At this stage, nothing signals any intention to stay other than him signing.
 
Decotron said:
Its such a dangerous bench mark to set though. Personally Id always be against it.
Click to expand...


I think its a smart move by young players to guarantee their future and career progress, they need to look after number one in my opinion. That said, Janzuaj should realise that there is a role for him in the first team very soon if he is patient - there is barely any competition for the LW spot.
 
“I’m really enjoying myself,” Adnan explains to United Review, the official matchday programme. “I played quite a few games in the Reserves last season and I thought I did well, and from there I had the chance to go on tour in the summer. It was a good opportunity for me to show what I could do for the team.
“That was a great experience for me and ever since then I’ve been working hard. Now the manager has given me my chance in the first-team at Wembley and against Crystal Palace. That was my first Premier League game for United and my first at Old Trafford, so it felt very special. I was in front of another big crowd and I was shocked to get about 25 minutes. When I got the call to say I was coming on, I was surprised. But I went on and tried to play my game.”

“First, I’d like to stay in the squad,” he says. “I want to play as many games as I can and become the best player I can possibly be. But I know that I need to keep working hard every day to achieve that.”
Click to expand...

http://www.manutd.com/en/News-And-F...s-more-first-team-opportunities.aspx?pageNo=2

All sounds positive to me.
 
Alock1 said:
Is giving young players this sort of power gonna help us keep hold of them? Or keep hold of them a little longer?

I dunno, I don't like the practice of giving into player demands, letting players dictate who plays in the team, or anything else - especially at a young age.. that sort of behavior will mostly contribute to a bad attitude and lack of respect for the player and diminish the qualities that we (Fergie) has always expected (determination, work ethic etc.etc.) in a United player.

Of course, we can't be losing top young talents - but this isn't the way to go about it for me. We should be giving them playing time because they deserve it, because that's what we do - we support youngsters, we give them a chance.. we take a risk on them.

We don't do it to get them to stay with the club, we do it because it's the United way, it's the alternative to the approach of other clubs - it is what makes United different.

For people talking about other teams; who does hold onto their players? Bayern Munich are the only team who really stand out to me, with Hummels being the only player in recent years I can think of who has left and then gone onto big things.

Barcelona for example? Jordi Alba, Pique, Fabregas, Reina, Thiago - I know they managed to get 3 back with their pulling power, which is lame, but still.. they lost them.
Click to expand...

It isn't what we do though really. I mean, we play them in the Capital One Cup, but when points are at stake, it's generally experience over form/talent. We've been more likely to play players out of position, even for the first time in a new role than just play the reserve.

It's very hard for a youngster to break in here because the stakes are so high. We like to champion that we are paramount for playing young players, but I'd argue that it is in a player's interest to have at least one top flight season elsewhere before coming to us. Unless he's a right-back or something, we play those to be fair.
 
Rozay said:
It isn't what we do though really. I mean, we play them in the Capital One Cup, but when points are at stake, it's generally experience over form/talent. We've been more likely to play players out of position, even for the first time in a new role than just play the reserve.
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more, it's annoying to see players being played only for their experience. I requires balls from a manager to field a player on merit of his talent regardless of fixture.

You only have to take a look at the average age of the team we fielded against City. You have players like Rio (34), Vidic (31), Evra (32), Carrick (32), Young (28), Rooney (27) and Valencia (28). It's a depressing thought to think that our most influential players are +27 years of age.
 
Rozay said:
I must say that I'm uneasy about this situation. I never try to second-guess a player's motives, that has proved fruitless many times. Until he signs, the fact is - he is leaving. I mean, it can't be considered a surprise if he leaves next summer when he will be leaving due to him no longer having a contract! (given that it is not a secret that he will no longer have a contract).

I said before, our Essien calculators led us to conclude Hazard and Thiago would choose us, or that Bale would want to go to United over any other team, although no real facts backed that up. No point predicting 'he will not play at x club, or he seems happy here'. If Januzaj hasn't signed up by January, I will be almost certain he will leave. At this stage, nothing signals any intention to stay other than him signing.
Click to expand...

He has a contact till the summer of 2015. He'd never have played as much as he has if there was any inkling of him leaving.
 
Don't worry people, it's only media bollocks. Well, he hasn't showed anything yet, doesn't deserve money and playng time. feck it, he's not all that anyway, the greedy little cnut. FFS, why do you people bring up this thread every time he scores a hattrick? Move the feck on!
 
Rozay said:
It isn't what we do though really. I mean, we play them in the Capital One Cup, but when points are at stake, it's generally experience over form/talent. We've been more likely to play players out of position, even for the first time in a new role than just play the reserve.

It's very hard for a youngster to break in here because the stakes are so high. We like to champion that we are paramount for playing young players, but I'd argue that it is in a player's interest to have at least one top flight season elsewhere before coming to us. Unless he's a right-back or something, we play those to be fair.
Click to expand...

Yeah I posted that on the last page,but people still want to be hysterical.
 
I liked how we he didn't get knocked off the ball at the end, needs to get more games.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.