Alejandro Garnacho (out) | Chelsea make enquiries

Eugenius said:
It's not even that. At worst Garnacho at 20 is a PL level (if inconsistent) winger, at best he can become world class. If I look at our squad and look for people who actually are contributing as you would expect / in line with their wages - he is actually one of the few.

We're struggling for goals and flogging one of our biggest attacking threats so we can sign some unproven LWB who had half a season in Italy (because...formation). It's not like we're selling Garnacho to bring in a world class attacker.
Click to expand...
This sums up exactly how I feel about it. As much as he's still in the potential category at the moment (which is OK as players peak at different times), he's one of only three players we have who offers goals and any real level of consistent threat.

I think he looks fairly talented and I wouldn't be surprised if he turns out to be a quality player whether with us or somewhere else.

It's a poor decision in my mind to take away one of the only attacking threats we have if we're not replacing it with something better, if the replacement is a left wingback, that's not going to help us all that much. Yes we really need one, but not at the expense of a half decent attacker.

Even worse if we decide to sell to Chelsea for about 60million when they sold us a player that's always injured and was in the last year of his contract for a similar amount. I think I might be done with the club for a while if that happens, would struggle to support decision making like that unless I'm wrong and we genuinely see improved performances and results.
 
red_de_pologne said:
Although I'm 100% against the sale of the Garnacho, I'm pretty sure we would be replacing him with an attacking midfielder
Click to expand...

We’re linked with virtually no one and there’s a week left in the window i can’t wait to see this squad changing transfer take place

*Narrator voice*

It didn’t
 
Maybe it will be different in the summer but I can’t see Chelsea offering enough to buy him this window. Just need to keep playing him now and see if he can start to adapt to the system as season goes on.
 
Yesterday I saw a Chelsea fan poll about whether we need Garnacho or not and 90% of the thousands that voted said no. I have to say I fully agree with the majority there and for the life of me I can't understand why the club seem so adamant on spending big money on yet another winger when we have much more pressing concerns that should be addressed first.

I don't particularly rate Garnacho that highly to begin with, but me being against this potential signing has less to do with Garnacho's level as a player and a lot more about what our squad needs. If we're to spend big money on another winger, it should at least be someone who offers a consistent goal threat as we already have more than enough players who are alright at taking the ball into the attacking areas but not enough players who can actually put the ball in the back of the net. The likes of Sancho, Madueke, Felix and Neto are all good or at the very least decent players for what they bring to the table but none of them are good goalscorers. Adding Garnacho to that bunch would be just more of the same rather than someone who offers a different kind of option. Right now our goal threat outside of Palmer and Jackson is pretty much non-existent because the wingers, midfielders and defenders just don't chip in with enough goals.

With Napoli publicly backing out this has become a one horse race and to me it just looks like the price tag doesn't represent good enough value. If it were at least a cheap punt I could see some sense in taking a gamble and seeing if Garnacho can up his game enough to offer that consistent goal threat with a bit of development as he matures but right now I'd 100% pass on this and focus the funds on other areas instead.
 
sleepehead said:
I think the goal is to go after Gyokores at the end of the season, but that would require selling one of Hojlund or Zirkzee. And I still can't decide who to keep. At least Hojlund is a little younger but he'll be harder to get value back at his current state. I think we can at least get our money back for Zirkzee but I doubt we make a profit on him

Selling Garnacho would help because teams wouldn't be able to use our financial situation to twist our arm but I don't think now is the time to sell him. At least wait until the summer to potentially get more suitors in the mix
Click to expand...
The problem with Hojlund and Zhirkee is both of them has obvious qualities and weaknesses but as strikers both of them are shit and unreliable. Zhirkee we can extract most value from since the it was a recent transfer and he was part of Serie A team of the year.

I am perplexed regarding these two. As a pure technical player, Zhirkee looks better and more assured with his passing etc. Hojlund is faster and has shown good finishing. But they are not Antony level where he does not seem to have anything going for him.
 
laughtersassassin said:
Selling Garnacho just doesn't sit right with me.

If it happens surely we sign two attackers. If it's Garnacho out and one in then it doesn't make much sense. Needs to enable us to properly strengthen if we do it.

So Garnacho goes I expect to see a LWB, 10/Winger and a striker brought in.

Anything less than that and selling him is a disgrace.
Click to expand...

No chance United could afford to do this with the money, especially if you expect a potential top-level CF.
 
davidmichael said:
The fact Garnacho is only 20 years old suggests that with the right coaching he can become a player who can play inside or outside and someone who can score 15-20 goals a season seeing as he’s on 8 this season and if I’m not mistaken is our top scorer this season whilst playing in a dysfunctional team.

If we were a properly functioning team we’d see how Garnacho drawing two men to him a lot of the time frees up space for others but we change our midfield every game and have probably used a left footed wing back 2-3 times since Amorim came in.

Now if it’s strictly a PSR move that’s a different matter and we’re the masters of our own destruction through horrific management and bringing players in on ridiculous fees that are square pegs for round holes then giving them even more ridiculous wages and our even further ridiculous wage structure meaning we can’t move players on.

If we’ve have the choice between keeping Garnacho and coaching him into the role Amorim whilst moving Rashford on and covering some of his wages or selling Garnacho to pay over the odds for players in January whilst keeping Rashford then I personally would keep Garnacho and move Rashford on, bring a left wing back and a striker in on loan.

This season outside of Europa and the FA Cup is a write off and accepting mid table in the league whilst maybe a cup win (a Europa win would be CL football next season) is the best we can aim for whilst Amorim is trying to implement his system, so we should keep the better players whilst moving the ones who aren’t wanted (Rashford, Casemiro, Antony, Lindelof) to free up funds and bring in loans as no one wants to sell their best players mid season and as seen with Dorgu we’d be quoted ridiculous sums because it’s January.
Click to expand...
I think everyone would prefer that option, but unfortunately it appears not to be an option at all.
 
As I said above, Ineos can feck off if they sell Garnacho now and replace him with Patrick Dorgu.
 
Will be a shame to move him on. His application and effort levels impressed me last night. worked his balls off.
 
EireRed_GS said:
Will be a shame to move him on. His application and effort levels impressed me last night. worked his balls off.
Click to expand...
In an ideal world with a squad full of players and no PSR constraints we would keep hold and see if he can kick on, but reality bites, another way of looking at it is we purchased for £500k and if we sell will probably do so for north of £50m, posters are constantly saying this is a practice we should be following
 
Dans said:
I think everyone would prefer that option, but unfortunately it appears not to be an option at all.
Click to expand...
The thing is it IS an option but Ineos refuse that option, Dortmund haven’t bothered with Rashford because we won’t pay some of his wages as we’re apparently ‘relaxed about the situation’ but if we had say agreed to pay a third of his wages we’d be saving around £250K a week.

It’s the same with Casemiro, his wages put people off on top of a fee but if we’d paid some of his wages for the remaining 18 months we’d have him off our books and would save money, we’re literally doing it with Antony with Betis where we’re saving around £3 million over the rest of the season.

Hypothetically say we pay £100K of both Rashford’s and Casemiro’s wages that’s around £2 million a month saved which over the rest of the season so around £11 million for the rest of the season which added to Antony’s £3 million is the same more or less of Alvaro’s buy back clause which gives us a left footed left wing back whilst Andre Silva who’s an experienced and decent striker is available on loan.

It’s almost as if Ineos are as blind or arrogant to the problems as the fecking Glazer’s are and their vision is horribly short term outside of the stadium plans, much like keeping Martial and Shaw around for so long and relying on them to remain fit without bringing in replacements we’re doing the same in hoping Rashford will find form once reintegrated in February after not moving him on whilst selling Garnacho who’s the better long term investment for us.
 
Eugenius said:
It's not even that. At worst Garnacho at 20 is a PL level (if inconsistent) winger, at best he can become world class. If I look at our squad and look for people who actually are contributing as you would expect / in line with their wages - he is actually one of the few.

We're struggling for goals and flogging one of our biggest attacking threats so we can sign some unproven LWB who had half a season in Italy (because...formation). It's not like we're selling Garnacho to bring in a world class attacker.
Click to expand...
My point was we are the only ones looking at him as if he can become world class. Other clubs/fans aren’t. He could become a good player and maybe he doesn’t. But the club also needs money now and he doesn’t really seems to fit Amorim’s formation or way of playing. Because of his potential we can get a lot of money for him now. Maybe in a couple of years you get less, or maybe more. But we need money now.
 
Wing Attack Plan R said:
Zirkzee shouldn’t be here regardless of other doings, Højlund should be a backup and given time to determine if he’s going to kick on, Mount might be unable to play professional football based on his muscle twangs, and Eriksen’s time has come and gone.
Click to expand...
I was talking about those players being back up until the summer, I think all 4 could be sold in Summer 2025.

I repeat we should only sell Garnaucho if it allows a complete overhaul of our attacking options, I know it’s a long shot but if we could get rid of Rashford, Garnaucho and Antony this January and get Osimhen, Cunha and young English prospect like Tyler Dybling, I would consider that to be great business, and then we can look at 1/2 more in the summer, we are so broke as an attacking unit we must make radical changes !
 
Why do so many people think we are replacing Garnacho with Dorgu? Dorgu is obviously someone we want to buy regardless what happens with Garnacho.
 
Gaidal said:
Why do so many people think we are replacing Garnacho with Dorgu? Dorgu is obviously someone we want to buy regardless what happens with Garnacho.
Click to expand...
Mainly because we're not being linked to anyone else. At least there my reason. Of course transfers happened out of the blue, but it's not a regular occurrence for us
 
He is perhaps (bar Amad now) the most direct player we have.
The problem is, he is highly inefficient right now. I Was trying to check old Rashford videos to ascertain how closely he emulates the young Marcus qualities (or issues).
Thus he is often frustrating.

At this point of time, he isn't a £70-80m player. The price tag is largely a prediction of his ceiling that people consider is still high. He is 21, some players grow to their ceiling when they#'re 24-26. He still has a long to go - his passing / crossing is suspect, his dribbling isnt top notch.


The problem isnt Nacho. Any top quality team should have a few young players in and around the first team. The problem is how we expect him to be a world beater now. He isnt. I think i saw a stat somewhere that suggests he has the highest %age of loosing the ball when he attempts to dribble pass a player.

So it all goes back to this:
  1. Having Nacho as starting LW - LAM is probably going to cost us points because he is still young. He might pan out, he might grow and become a Nani type of player. He could also turn out to be Adnan.
  2. Selling Nacho for £60-70m would allow us to probably reinvest in a more 'serviceable now' kind of player. Personally i'd exchange him for that Cherkri guy + £30m in the put to get us a LWB. You'd turn one frustrating but promising player, to perhaps 2. We wills till be shit but we're diversifying our assets.
  3. We need to stop expecting young players to perform week in week out. The quality of our squad is bad right now and with inexperience come problems. Be patient people.
 
Wolfbot said:
It's a poor decision in my mind to take away one of the only attacking threats we have if we're not replacing it with something better, if the replacement is a left wingback, that's not going to help us all that much. Yes we really need one, but not at the expense of a half decent attacker.

Even worse if we decide to sell to Chelsea for about 60million when they sold us a player that's always injured and was in the last year of his contract for a similar amount. I think I might be done with the club for a while if that happens, would struggle to support decision making like that unless I'm wrong and we genuinely see improved performances and results.
Click to expand...
For Garnacho he is the victim of Amorim's system. Dorgu a left footer would be replacing Dalot as LWB, then someone like Bruno or Mount would be playing left side of the attack like usual this season.

Last night Garnacho played left side 10 and Bruno was put back as one of the two central midfielders. Usually Bruno would be playing where Garnacho is, at least on paper.

For Garnacho to stay he'd have to play as a left 10 or LWB. Both Rashford and Garnacho don't fit the managers plans and are just optional subs and useful for games like last night. Garnacho would have to oust Bruno from his left 10 position. Bruno would have to be alongside Ugarte.

The bad thing is if Amorim is gone and we go back to a 4213 which really suits Bruno central behind a front line of say Garnacho wide left. Fans like to see attacking players like him but Amorim calls for a Bruno/Mount Eriksen either side of a CF and robust LWB/RWB that cover a lot of ground up and down the pitch that Garnacho/Rashford are not going to favour and would rather be elsewhere.
 
Gaidal said:
Why do so many people think we are replacing Garnacho with Dorgu? Dorgu is obviously someone we want to buy regardless what happens with Garnacho.
Click to expand...

He is the only player we are being linked with, the window closes in one week, about 50% of the fee we get for Garnacho is going straight on Dorgu and United are short of cash and struggling to comply with PSR.

While United will no doubt look at getting another attacking player in the summer, it is reasonable to assume at this stage that if Garnacho leaves, he won't be replaced in this window.
 
pacifictheme said:
They also play Neto and Felix there. They really have no space in their attack for a developing player like garnacho. For us, he's one of our best attackers, which is a reflection on how shite many of the others are.
Click to expand...
I actually think they do have space for him. Mudryk has a drugs ban hanging over him and one of Felix/Nkunku could leave.

They potentially have these options, most of which can cover multiple positions.

LW: Sancho and Garnacho
CAM: Palmer and Felix
RW: Madueke and Neto
 
Our attack is one of the worst in the league. If we had a functioning attack that could actually score it would compensate for the fact we have brainfarts happening across the defence. Now the club are considering selling one of the only players we have that at least looks like a threat and contributes goals and who has the potential to become better with time and good coaching. It is almost like INEOS want us to be relegated.
 
RedRoach said:
Our attack is one of the worst in the league. If we had a functioning attack that could actually score it would compensate for the fact we have brainfarts happening across the defence. Now the club are considering selling one of the only players we have that at least looks like a threat and contributes goals and who has the potential to become better with time and good coaching. It is almost like INEOS want us to be relegated.
Click to expand...

Does that really man he's good enough though? Our standards are so low that we are praising what is nothing more than decent performances, with a handleful of great games and the rest poor/average.

If we had money and a functioning team then of course we should keep him, but we don't and we need to improve with quality far beyond Garnacho.

The only way we improve our team in January is by selling Garnacho (and even then we have left it incredibly late).
 
hellhunter said:
Mainly because we're not being linked to anyone else. At least there my reason. Of course transfers happened out of the blue, but it's not a regular occurrence for us
Click to expand...

Dorgu would replace Dalot as LWB for most games. Bruno or this type of player would be where Garnacho was last night for most games, it's where Bruno starts most games now. Last night Bruno was moved back into central midfield so Garna could start. It's the reason why we're selling as Amorim will want a Mount/Bruno/Eriksen type on the left front in a first choice 11 for most games. Rashford/Garna become redundant unless they want to stay being a sub or play lesser games.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.