At what point are we going to acknowledge that we're not an elite side anymore?

Elite obviously refers to our competitive ability. Not how many fecking shirts we sell online ffs.

In real life, these are connected.

To win the competition you need the best (manager-players) and to get the best you need money. Money is the root of all success in football (see the current treble winners).

Sure, we are not great today. But because of the great number of our fans, the money is still flowing. And sooner or later, the money will get us again to the top. It is inevitable.

That's why we are still elite, and we are going to remain elite as long as we are one of the most popular clubs in the world.
 
At the risk of upsetting as few, have we ever been a top-level elite side? I don't think City are even at that level yet but they may eventually end up there.

We've been world class for long periods with domestic dominance and have had success in Europe and even some near-misses in terms of winning the CL.

But to put things into perspective, between 2013- 2018, Real Madrid won 4 out of 5 European finals.

Also, I think we should focus on being league title contenders first as 'being elite' is a long long way away.
 
In real life, these are connected.

To win the competition you need the best (manager-players) and to get the best you need money. Money is the root of all success in football (see the current treble winners).

Sure, we are not great today. But because of the great number of our fans, the money is still flowing. And sooner or later, the money will get us again to the top. It is inevitable.

That's why we are still elite, and we are going to remain elite as long as we are one of the most popular clubs in the world.
The club is shot not because of our shitty negligent owners but because of all you bastards who don’t buy shirts. Bastards.

Nevermind the incompetence of those spending the money which is supposed to get us back to the top, just spend more! :rolleyes:
 
In real life, these are connected.

To win the competition you need the best (manager-players) and to get the best you need money. Money is the root of all success in football (see the current treble winners).

Sure, we are not great today. But because of the great number of our fans, the money is still flowing. And sooner or later, the money will get us again to the top. It is inevitable.

That's why we are still elite, and we are going to remain elite as long as we are one of the most popular clubs in the world.

We literally couldn't sign the players we wanted this season because of budget constraints, have had to increasingly turn to free transfers and loans, and have recently been given a fine for breaching FFP.

The money is drying up.
 
At the risk of upsetting as few, have we ever been a top-level elite side? I don't think City are even at that level yet but they may eventually end up there.

We've been world class for long periods with domestic dominance and have had success in Europe and even some near-misses in terms of winning the CL.

But to put things into perspective, between 2013- 2018, Real Madrid won 4 out of 5 European finals.

Also, I think we should focus on being league title contenders first as 'being elite' is a long long way away.

City are the current treble winners, they have the best manager in the world, they have some of the best players in the world, they had the most players in top 10 of ballon d'or.

If City are not "elite" today, then nobody is!
 
The fanbase is meaningless outside of commercial deals.

Bragging about the number of fans as if it
means anything is the sort of shit we laugh at Newcastle for when they claim to be one of England's biggest clubs.
If your point is that it is pathetic to brag about specific club attributes, especially commercial ones, while we languish with terrible results, archaic football ops, and insipid performances, then i am in total agreement.

However, it is hard to argue that United isn't elite in terms of brand and number of fans. Does that make United an elite football club? I don't know, but it doesn't really matter. We are a club on the decline and what needs to change has been obvious for awhile: ownership, structure and facilities. Until that happens we will continue to drift further and further away from all permutations of the definition of "elite".
 
16-17 probably just edges it over 17-18 for me. Still short of elite those seasons but had least had quality and physicality. Lacking in both now.
The presence of Matic(in his last of prime years) was massive.
 
We literally couldn't sign the players we wanted this season because of budget constraints, have had to increasingly turn to free transfers and loans, and have recently been given a fine for breaching FFP.

The money is drying up.

In the past 2 years, we have spent as much as anyone. Our manager got it all wrong, but that's a different discussion.

And our valuation is 6 billion. There aren't many clubs in the world worth 6 billion.
 
At the risk of upsetting as few, have we ever been a top-level elite side?
Yes of course we have. We have won the UEFA cup/CL 3 times. We were also dominant in domestic football for the best part of 25 years.
We are historically one of the grand old clubs of Europe. The likes of Barca, Real, Milan, Ajax, Bayern and dare I say it Liverpool. Right now we are a lifetime away from that.
 
City are the current treble winners, they have the best manager in the world, they have some of the best players in the world, they had the most players in top 10 of ballon d'or.

If City are not "elite" today, then nobody is!
Agreed, not even esteemed sportsman Lance Armstrong could be considered elite if City aren't!
 
I was happy with Lukaku at the time (the striker market was weak) but it was caused by the Ibra injury when we could gave spent those funds elsewhere and still had a better striker with it.

I'd have had Maguire for £16m in 2017 instead of Lindelof for £40m (and £80m later on). I didn't know much about Salah but Bernardo/Mahrez were obvious buys to me at the time, I'll have posted as much on here.

It takes some doing for us to get transfers as wrong as we have done from that point alone, never mind what came 2013-16.

So was I at the time, but I've now changed my mind on that mindset. If the market is weak for a position, you should just navigate around it and choose not to indulge in it.

It was why I was so vehemently against the Antony signing even if there wasn't an obvious RW on the market. Just go for a stop gap or ask your manager to work with what he's got for now, rather than committing to an underwhelming option.
 
In the past 2 years, we have spent as much as anyone. Our manager got it all wrong, but that's a different discussion.

And our valuation is 6 billion. There aren't many clubs in the world worth 6 billion.
No. We spent so much because we over paid in most cases. The manager identified the players maybe but he didn’t physically spend the cash - that’s on those agreeing the deals.
Also our valuation isn’t 6bn, it’s 3.18bn - the 6bn figure is just the over inflated wet dream of our Greedy parasitic owners
 
Hasn't been a great campaign but it's not over yet, still finished above Liverpool, Tottenham and Villa last year. With better injury luck I'd think we'd be in the mix for the top spot, no worse then third.

Things can change quickly. If we get the recruitment right and plenty of time still for the likes of Mount and Hojlund to come good. I think we're closer then you think.

Having said that don't trust the current board to bring in the right players.
 
Last edited:
Comparing any English team to the foreign giants like Madrid and Bayer is asinine, the leagues in those countries are structured for those teams to succeed, the league here has always been cyclic with one team dominating and others coming in here and there to win it since the mid 70's.

I think what people can't accept is just that United now are a team that can finish between 2nd and 6th but not dominating because they grew up with United dominating and know nothing else
 
Happened soon as Fergie left and we appointed Moyes and Woodward.

Bookies in 2013/14 didn't have us making top 4 after winning the league by a large points total and we finished 7th.

Only Jose had us briefly heading back with 81 points and a Europa Cup but it went up in smoke.

I get the point of the thread though I think, we still have many glib comments about dropping standards as if we're elite or just hanging on, they had some weight many years ago.
 
I don’t agree. We didn’t get Tchouameni, Camavinga, FDJ, DeLigt, Bellingham or Haaland (twice).
We are loaning Weghorst, Sabitzer, Amrabat and Reguilon. These aren’t elite players at the top of their game.
I’d also argue that the very reason we had to pay record fees and wages for the likes of Pogba, Maguire, Sancho and Hojlund is precisely because we aren’t elite and it was the only way to secure those players. Elite clubs do good value business and don’t get bent over every time they approach a player.
We didn't get Ronaldinho, matt let tissier or shearer either during our dominant days and we signed David may and dion Dublin.

My point is no team gets everyone they go for even when they're dominating
 
No. We spent so much because we over paid in most cases. The manager identified the players maybe but he didn’t physically spend the cash - that’s on those agreeing the deals.
Also our valuation isn’t 6bn, it’s 3.18bn - the 6bn figure is just the over inflated wet dream of our Greedy parasitic owners

Couldn't every club argue this though? That was the market price.

EtH isn't going to hand over a wish list and then that's his contribution done. He'll be told the valuations and given a say on whether the deal goes ahead or not. Yes it's on the negotiators to lower the valuation but it's also up to the decision makers to decide if the valuation is fair or to deny the deal and move on. EtH for example trained with Antony every day so should surely know if his fee was overpriced or not. He's literally the best person to gauge it no? Yet it still went ahead. He takes responsibility for those transfers but it's not on just him. It's all those involved, from those negotiating the deals to those agreeing with the estimations and letting it go ahead.
 
EtH and Murtough both have to agree on the deal. If either doesn't they have the power to veto the deal. Common knowledge no?
True, but you make out like if the manager insists the club just bend over and pay up and the owner has no say in that.
You should know that the decision to pay £95m for Antony for example rest far higher in our food chain than Erik.
 
True, but you make out like if the manager insists the club just bend over and pay up and the owner has no say in that.
You should know that the decision to pay £95m for Antony for example rest far higher in our food chain than Erik.

Huh, no I'm not. Did you even read the last sentence? It's all those involved that are at fault, from the negotiators to EtH and Murtough. But to give EtH a pass is daft, he's told the valuations the negotiating team have been able to arrange and then it's up to him and Murtough to decide if it goes ahead. So using Antony as an example, he asked the club to get him, they negotiated the fee and wages and then both EtH and Murtough agreed for it to go ahead. The difference with this specific deal to one like Mount is that EtH had in depth knowledge of Antony and clearly decided that the valuation seemed fair, if he thought he was only worth say £40m then he'd have gone "feck no, this kid isn't worth that much!" and Veto'd it.

See my point? It's like if we continued this same transfer setup and we brought in Emery in the next few weeks and in the Summer we agreed a fee for Watkins of £80m. Again, Emery would have in depth knowledge of Watkins and would know if he is/isn't worth it. Far more than a scout would, he's trained with him every day. So if Watkins then crashes and burns, questions would be rightly raised on Emerys transfer judgement.

Your second sentence suggests that the owners deny transfers. When all we ever do is spend very high on dumb ass transfers. Wouldn't the fans also know whether transfers were denied by the owners by now as that's just yet more anti Glazer ammunition. I can't think of any examples? Generally the transfer team works off budgets and i'm assuming they're competent enough to know how budgets work.
 
Your second sentence suggests that the owners deny transfers. When all we ever do is spend very high on dumb ass transfers. Wouldn't the fans also know whether transfers were denied by the owners by now as that's just yet more anti Glazer ammunition. I can't think of any examples?
  • It was decided early on we couldnt compete with City for Haaland.
  • It was decided this past summer that chasing Kane was futile by Arnold and JG.
  • RA also veto’d Arnautovic after backlash from the fans.
  • Ole got DVB instead of Grealish because the club/owner wouldn’t sanction the finds
  • We waited 2 years for Sancho because our hierarchy

There are plenty of examples.
 
At the risk of upsetting as few, have we ever been a top-level elite side? I don't think City are even at that level yet but they may eventually end up there.

We've been world class for long periods with domestic dominance and have had success in Europe and even some near-misses in terms of winning the CL.

But to put things into perspective, between 2013- 2018, Real Madrid won 4 out of 5 European finals.

Also, I think we should focus on being league title contenders first as 'being elite' is a long long way away.
I actually thought about this recently. But i decided yes we were. Although our European success is a bit thin, our domestic success plus some European success is enough.
 
It just isn’t. It’s widely reported that JG signs off on transfer spending. Even RA when he was here didn’t have that autonomy.

No fecking shit he signs it off. He's the owner. I don't remotely understand your point? Are you saying that he's the only one responsible for our transfers and everyone that provides the green light to do that deal is not responsible because they aren't the ones pressing the "go" button.

  • It was decided early on we couldnt compete with City for Haaland.
  • It was decided this past summer that chasing Kane was futile by Arnold and JG.
  • RA also veto’d Arnautovic after backlash from the fans.
  • Ole got DVB instead of Grealish because the club/owner wouldn’t sanction the finds
  • We waited 2 years for Sancho because our hierarchy

There are plenty of examples.

1. Haaland - yes, that's down to our budget.
2. Kane - yes, that's down to our budget.
3. Arnautovic - His agent actually said he pulled out not that United did.
4 Ole - The structures changed.
5 See above.

Do you actually think EtH provides a list of names to our Directors with the best players in the World and expect to get them all? We have budgets, EtH knows the budgets.
 
In real life, these are connected.

To win the competition you need the best (manager-players) and to get the best you need money. Money is the root of all success in football (see the current treble winners).

Sure, we are not great today. But because of the great number of our fans, the money is still flowing. And sooner or later, the money will get us again to the top. It is inevitable.

That's why we are still elite, and we are going to remain elite as long as we are one of the most popular clubs in the world.
They are connected, but one does not equal the other.
 
Obviously we're not elite in terms of results but just because we're managed and run by buffoons doesn't mean you can discount the spending. These guys are spending enough money to run a small country and will presumably continue to do so. How many clubs in the world can spend like we do? Twenty? What's Brighton's most expensive signing? Caicedo at a quarter of the price we paid for Pogba?
 
No fecking shit he signs it off. He's the owner. I don't remotely understand your point? Are you saying that he's the only one responsible for our transfers and everyone that provides the green light to do that deal is not responsible because they aren't the ones pressing the "go" button.
I’m saying that Erik isn’t solely responsible for transfers and the utter shambles we’ve seen in every window since 2013. I’m also saying that if we had competent people in position above and around Erik it wouldn’t matter if he knew the players or not because they would know there onions and it would be glaringly obvious that Antony wasn’t a £95m player and Ajax were pulling our pants down, just as an example. You can say the same for Hojlund, Sancho etc.
The club, the owners and to an extent the fans are too happy to boast about how much we spend, or use it as a sheild to deflect criticism, when in truth we should be fecking ashamed and raging about how poorly it is spent. I believe the manager ( ETH or otherwise) cares little about the cost if the club says they can do a deal for a player he wants and thinks will improve the team. Blaming a manager for transfer spending is as misguided as blaming a player for their transfer price. It’s not something they deal with directly.
 
Have you read this forum? It's absolutely full to the brim of people who think we're the right managerial appointment away from a return to the glory days.

Both Arsenal and Liverpool underwent wholesale changes around the same time as they hired their managers.

It's also funny that you've brought them up.

What was on Arteta's CV before Arsenal hired him that distinguished him from that bloke from the Norwegian league? And how did his first couple of seasons go? Do you think that'd have kept him in a job here?

Liverpool are widely considered an elite side, and yet after winning the league, have found themselves relying on last minute goals from their goalkeeper to overtake Brendan Rodgers' (now-relegated) Leicester City in the final few games to qualify for the Champions League (a season in which he also finished behind that bloke from the Norwegian league), and last season didn't even qualify for the Champions League at all.



I didn't say we should. In fact, I've referenced the likelihood of the current manager being sacked twice in that post.

The fact is that people have essentially been beating their chests, shouting "we're Manchester United!" in response to any suggestion that we perhaps need to be a little bit more realistic with our short-term expectations. As I said, it's RAWK levels of delusion.

If anything, it's a disservice to RAWK, because at least those bastards were relentlessly and sickeningly positive more often than not.

Absolutely right. I would like to add, this mentality that we have to see elite results NOW and EVERY YEAR, by our fans is preposterous.

Half the forum wants to sack ETH, I find it perplexing. What do they expect a new manager to do? They will claim they want a style of play but I guarantee you that if there is a style of play without results to match (e.g. Finishing 6th), the fans will flip. In the same way people complained after Copenhagen and gala games despite us playing really well for large parts but coming unstuck due to GK errors and a ridiculous red. There was no free pass then. Fans just want that new manager hit and to abandon long term strategies whenever the going gets tough and it'll take you nowhere.

The squad is bang average. Meaning that even if you instill a style of play the output on the field will be inconsistent at best. It means a few injuries to key players and you're stuck with bringing in Evans, reguilon, and martial. It means a couple of key players out of form like rashford and you can no longer score goals.

Since ten hag came in, our striker options have been martial, Ronaldo (the worst version), weghourst, and a 20 year old from a diff league. At no point did we have more than 2 options at a time. In what world can any manager get more out of these lot??

Sure, blame his signings, but the football structure is not there to guide signings. His arrival coincided with a complete overhaul of the scouting dept and negotiation team. There was a vacuum there and it's led to the signings we've acquired. Half his signings are loans (the bad kind) and freebies. Most of the money spent was done so in a reactionary way that lead to us overpaying loads for players like Antony. We did this by opening new credit lines! That's not on him.

So now as we transition into a ownership model he needs to be given the benefit of the doubt for the remaining year. Even if this year turns out to be a total disaster. We must follow through with it. We can't be so ridiculously delusional to think a very good season last year was bound to be followed by a good season this year, especially when accounting for everything happening off field. I mean even Liverpool rarely string two good years together.

TL:DR Our fans are delusional and despite the evidence in front of our faces demand results NOW despite claiming otherwise.
 
Couldn't every club argue this though? That was the market price.

EtH isn't going to hand over a wish list and then that's his contribution done. He'll be told the valuations and given a say on whether the deal goes ahead or not. Yes it's on the negotiators to lower the valuation but it's also up to the decision makers to decide if the valuation is fair or to deny the deal and move on. EtH for example trained with Antony every day so should surely know if his fee was overpriced or not. He's literally the best person to gauge it no? Yet it still went ahead. He takes responsibility for those transfers but it's not on just him. It's all those involved, from those negotiating the deals to those agreeing with the estimations and letting it go ahead.

Pretty sure we paid more than market price on more than one occasion
 
Everyone has been saying this for the last 10 years. Of course we haven’t been elite since SAF left. This is obvious?

I think the OP is criticising people that think we're a season away from being elite but I don't think any fan thinks that. They also mentioned the "if this was Bayern" comparisons which I agree are dumb.
 
Although we didnt know it at the time, the day Fergie stood on the Baggies pitch after the 5-5 draw, we stopped being an elite club. We should have brought in an elite manager, not fecking Moysey. He systematically destroyed everything Fergie had built, instead of giving himself 12 months to assess everything.