"massive ceiling" based on what?
Alejandro Garnacho (out) | Chelsea make enquiries
- Thread starter Luca[4]
- Start date
"massive ceiling" based on what?
He is small and the room is big.
Why did we have to spend 150m on Antony and Sancho?
They claim to be best in class - they haven't done anything to prove it. In fact, the ETH debacle was anything but best in class, being where we are in the league is anything but best in class. Also 70m is what we're asking - I find it hard to believe we won't budge even a little below that when we're already negotiating and the first offer was 40m - we'll get somewhere around 65m at best. Spending 65m on Yoro and selling Garnacho for 65m - one of our only goal threats in the most threadbare United attack in the Premier League - is anything but best in class.
Also what bullshit about teams wanting them out. Dortmund didn't want Sancho out - we paid a premium precisely because they didn't want them out. They had the comfort to pick their buyer we paid for the privilege of being that buyer.
Ha, gonna close this thread while it's on a high
Huge wages.
We don’t play with a left winger anymore. So the more relevant question would be who is the talented LWB or left 10 who is replacing him? And the answer to that is I have no fecking clue but we haven’t even sold Garnacho so what does it matter until we do?
The point remains - maybe Garnacho is not seen as such a big talent that he can’t be replaced by someone more suited to Amorim’s system, to the betterment of the team.
Because Rashford and Snacho have been shite, otherwise he would have hardly got a look in. He's only played because we haven't had any options, and he's done well but he wouldn't have played this much otherwise.
Ah I wondered how long it would be before Salah and KDB got a mention, the same argument raised whenever selling Martial and Pogba came up also, look how that turned out.
I have explicitly said multiple times that he should be sold if the valuation of above £50m is met because he won't go on to become world class. For some reason for you that means we should sell him on the cheap for a laugh, or we should accept the offer and send them Antony instead because we should sell the rubbish players first.
You’re posts in this thread are fecking bizarre to say the least have a word with yourself
For 70 million pounds I’d sell him as well, I personally don’t think his ceiling is as big as some and I don’t think he has a defined place in the team.
Says you!? Puskas award winners, name them, where did they go after winning the award and how much for?Damn.
Unless the money is reinvested in a better replacement then there is no upside to this.
Nah it was more the Dwight McNeil is a better player. Should have been an instant block back then in all honesty
It’s one thing to have an opinion but your posts are borderline slagging the lad off like I said it’s just bizarre
£60mil sounds fair. Shame Chelsea snapped up Estavio. Brazilian commentators think hes has a higher ceiling than vin junior. Though South American talent is always over hyped
Exactly, and this is one of the things Manchester United is supposed to be about. We should be getting rid of actual deadwood and adding quality for exciting young players like Garnacho to support and learn from.
This.
Casemiro, Rashford, Antony, and Mount on more than a million a week, and we're selling Garnacho to raise funds. What a shameful state of affairs.
The ethos of the club is long gone, I had and bought more shares to stop it happening so spare me the top red, soap box nonsense about trading success for history etc.
There is so much wrong with that post I don’t know where to start but if you are still stuck on the misguided idea that selling Garnacho is somehow going to be a profit for SJR and the Glazers then it’s a lost cause.
The club cannot continue being run like it has been for nearly two decades. If the new leadership weren’t open to selling someone like Garnacho to help rebuild the team I’d be more worried. Personally I wouldn’t sell him but it might be a very good idea and some of the melodrama that it would be the end of the world is just getting silly.
Odd to be reminiscing about the Ronaldo sale, I was much more offended by that and him subsequently being replaced by Valencia, Obertan, Diouf and Owen.
Last edited:
And maybe if we sell Garnacho it’s because we don’t think he’s actually as big a talent as some fans think, and that the money can be better used on other talents. I don’t for a second think Garnacho would be sold without other players coming in.
Just because we’re in a different situation to City, doesn’t mean we can’t improve as a team by letting some players go so we can bring new ones in.
They’ve also let other highly touted youth prospects go that they haven’t regretted. The fundamental disagreement between fans here is whether Garnacho is a Cole type talent, and I’m really not sure he is.
Fair but if we don’t think he’s good enough yet spend nearly 40m on Zirkzee then it’s even worse than I thought because those running the football side of things who we had huge hope for are obviously fecking idiots
Because Woodward, Murtough and the Glazers are fecking clowns? You know why we spent that money.
I'm not saying they're best in class, I'm as skeptical as you, but you look at our business recently and it's younger players with potential who will grow into the side, we just signed a lad no one's heard off for £7m or whatever it was, he didn't cost £70m. We all prefer those kind of signings and the players generally turn out to be decent. I think Garnacho could go for £50m + £20m future add ons depending on performance and appearances, and that's if he does go at all. If the price is any lower than that we should just keep him around for 3 years and sell him for £30m if he doesn't improve.
Dortmund, the biggest stepping stone club in the world, who only sign players they can later sell, absolutely wanted to sell Sancho. The same for Haaland, the same for Bellingham, it's their entire model. If you remember we could have got Sancho a season earlier if we paid an extra £20m but they decided against it.
I agree that we're not a good environment for young players to thrive in, but like I said, nothing about him as a player makes me think he will explode into a 100 million player.
I think the absolute best teenage / early 20s talents we had in the last 10 years were Rashford, Martial, Greenwood, Shaw, Januzaj, and now Yoro, Mainoo, Amad and Hojlund. I think all of these players were way more talented as teenagers after they broke through / made their debuts at United, and you knew with most of them, that they could reach the top and be among the best players in the world in their respective positions. I'd even include Sancho here as I think with him it wasn't the lack of ability that ruined his United career.
With Garnacho, I don't see that kind of ceiling at all, otherwise I wouldn't even entertain the idea of selling him, like I wouldn't (have) with the players I listed above. To me, Garnacho is more of an Elanga type of talent. Solid player with a good skillset, but doesn't have a world class ceiling.
Like who?
I’m not convinced he’s playing at a higher level. The other two were playing as wingers for us at a time when we were competing for leagues and champs leagues.
From a cursory inspection of those two’’s stats (when they were playing as wingers and not as full backs) I think the numbers are pretty comparable. They were both a touch older, and playing in a much much better team though, so I’ll concede the point.
But I’m never particularly bowled over by his skill and pace. His main trait for me is his determination and persistence. He’ll keep at it if it’s not working at first, which is much better than some of our other wingers who
He’s decent, but not a keep at all costs player for me.
Edit: forgot about the sulk and non celebration because people were big meanies to him online.
So I'm not slagging the lad off then if it's boarder line am I? There's no shame in a seasoned PL winger being more consistent than a 20 year old, he's got a better cross for a start. You're reading these posts through tears it seems so you're taking everything very emotionally.I haven't said we should sell him on the cheap and get McNeil in so calm down. I said if the valuation is right he should be sold because he isn't worth £70m and probably never will be. We've had the same 'potential' valuation chat with every young player in recent years and none of them fulfil their potential in the end. If Napoli can't find £70m then keep him for the next 3 years and sell him for around £30m then if we feel he isn't progressing.
That's why I have been against that system from day one. At first it mainly affected smaller clubs and no one cared about it, now people are crying because it affects the big club that they support. It's a shitty system that benefits the ones that are at the top and punishes everyone else.
Agreed, the decision to purchase Zirkzee was a huge red flag for me. But we have changed managers since then, and our new manager who has shown promising signs does not seem to rate Garnacho as highly as Amad for example. And on the face of it, Garnacho does not seem to suit his system as well. So I would not be surprised or upset to see him sold to fund other incomings who Amorim thinks might perform better in his system.
He's on peanuts to be fair. 50k per week apparently, which also must make him a more sellable asset.
Aren't they all up for sale? Can we sell players that don't have bids? "Sorry Napoli, we're not allowed to sell Garnacho unless you buy Antony also"
Fair enough. I would add though that a winger/wide player at such a young age especially in the PL is a real tough role. Amad had a failed loan at Rangers and was playing in the lower leagues at Sunderland let’s not forget
I generally believe he’s got the quality to be a really top player. Maybe not to the levies of a Yamal but good enough to be a good player at an elite club without a doubt
The narrative that we need to sell him for financial reasons is standing on a dodgy fundament anyway
Genuine question for those think 60m is a good price - who do you think we'll realistically get for that amount that will help fill the void of goals that Garnacho currently leaves behind?
Screw that, let's just look at value for money. Here are players the club has bought for around 60-70m over the last decade. Imagine signing them now, and them having the same career with us all over again.
- Hojlund
- Mount
- Casemiro
- Licha
- Bruno
- AWB
- Fred
- Martial
How many of them would you say offered more value to the team than Garnacho does by staying for, say, 3 more years? I would say one definite answer is Bruno - what do you think our chances are of finding another Bruno? For about 60m, the math says 12.5%. Even if you added Casemiro and Licha (I don't agree with either), it's 37.5%.
Which very roughly means that there is only a 12.5% chance (37.5% if you're arguing for the sake of arguing) that we add more value to the team by selling Garnacho than keeping him - unless you think we're going to buck all trends and find the right purchase when everybody and their dog knows we are desperate for goalscorers.
Screw that, let's just look at value for money. Here are players the club has bought for around 60-70m over the last decade. Imagine signing them now, and them having the same career with us all over again.
- Hojlund
- Mount
- Casemiro
- Licha
- Bruno
- AWB
- Fred
- Martial
How many of them would you say offered more value to the team than Garnacho does by staying for, say, 3 more years? I would say one definite answer is Bruno - what do you think our chances are of finding another Bruno? For about 60m, the math says 12.5%. Even if you added Casemiro and Licha (I don't agree with either), it's 37.5%.
Which very roughly means that there is only a 12.5% chance (37.5% if you're arguing for the sake of arguing) that we add more value to the team by selling Garnacho than keeping him - unless you think we're going to buck all trends and find the right purchase when everybody and their dog knows we are desperate for goalscorers.
Who? There’s plenty of players they’ve let go playing around the Premier League who Pep would probably like having in their squad right now. I’m not sure he will be as good as Cole Palmer, but he’s certainly done a lot more in the game than Palmer had by 20, who managed one goal in the 14 Premier League games he played for city that season.
Either way, I don’t want United to be run like city. We play our best players from the academy and give them a chance to make it here.
That logic just broke Ed Woodward's brain.
I haven't said we should sell him on the cheap and get McNeil in so calm down. I said if the valuation is right he should be sold because he isn't worth £70m and probably never will be. We've had the same 'potential' valuation chat with every young player in recent years and none of them fulfil their potential in the end. If Napoli can't find £70m then keep him for the next 3 years and sell him for around £30m then if we feel he isn't progressing.
You just seem to be buzzing that he’s being sold. Like the player or not the fact he’s been one of our better attacking players in the last 2 years as a kid coming though the first team whilst hundreds of millions worth of talent have stunk the place out speaks volumes
Whilst Sancho was AWOL and Rashford was putting in 8 goals in 2 seasons he was a regular in the side and an important player scoring some big goals it’s not easy in a struggling club for a young lad you’re well underrating him in my opinion
The irony in the bolded text is incredible. I'll tell you of a young player with potential who grew into the side, a lad no one's ever heard that we signed for 400k, or whatever it was, 4 years ago - Garnacho.
We don't sell Garnacho because he's become valuable and can be sold for a profit so we can buy another young talent who will grow into someone valuable and be sold for a profit so we can buy another young talent who will grow into someone valuable and be sold for a profit --- do you see how the recursion means that we're a selling club?
Top clubs get a lot of good players by keeping the few good ones they have at first. We are not a top club, we are clearly a joke.
I'm not buzzing about anything. Selling a player that isn't worth £70m for £70m is a great deal and one we should take if its on the table. That's my stance.
And you're overrating him in my opinion, this might be as good as it gets for him and then we'll be bemoaning the fact we didn't sell him for whatever Napoli offered in 3 seasons. I'd rather take the risk and keep him around unless Napoli offer daft money. As I've said before, he's not doing anything in my opinion to suggest he's going to be world class, and we've seen some world class players at United in the last 30 years.
We've been here before with many exciting prospects and hardly any of them kick on.
Like who? Who did we sell for financial reasons when they didn't actively push for a transfer or we wanted to get rid because they're not good enough?
That's fine, but I think he's far from irreplaceable. I think we could start looking on the market and find a few wingers that are at least as good as Garnacho without much hassle. If his sale could escalate our rebuild I'd be tempted to sell him.
And if the lad we just signed gets an offer for £70m in 3 seasons and it's clear he isn't worth £70m, we should sell him also. There's nothing wrong with selling players for daft money they aren't worth.
Well we've sold or released most of our academy prospects since the beginning of time so maybe we are a selling club? Or if we're not being hysterical for a moment, we can appreciate that sometimes you can sell a player for a high valuation and it's not the end of the world because it's a good deal for us.
We're not Dortmund so lets not pretend we're a selling club. We aren't selling Garnacho unless Napoli offer daft money and there's nothing wrong with that.