He’ll be playing till late 30s. One that actually properly earned his big contract. Glad he stays.
Bruno Fernandes | New contract until 2027
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
He should be our top earner. If this deal makes him that, then good. What we need to do is get rid of the high earners who aren’t performing, not the guy who is
Slippery slopes arguments may make valid points at times but this is a complete landslide. You’ve chucked in completely new, twisted words and thoughts into what I said. If this still isn’t clear, I’ll be happy to help.
Just curious: Who was our best paid player before him?
I am. But being a fan of the club doesn't necessarily mean being a fan of every player. And the level of fandom, this player has collected is definitely something that I am incapable of.
Bruno was one of the highest paid players already, there was no need to increase it. Its as if you go to Tesco and pay them 13 pounds for a radio even though its price is 9.99. Just because you really really really like that radio.
Rashford, Sancho and Casemiro are supposed to be on higher wage than him (>=300). Varane probably was as well. With Mount there is a chance, but not entirely sure.
You were talking about being demotivated and potentially toxic due to wage imbalance. I said why that line of thought might be problematic. Then you spend two posts stuttering about a mess. Now you act as if you want to help me. I am pretty good thanks. I am happy to read an answer about the initial reply, the high horse doesn't really suit you.
It might not even have increased re weekly wage, it might even have decreased weekly and they’ve added on more clauses to be fair. All the headline say is he’s entering the top earners (and he likely was top earner last year!) so I doubt it’s some mega contract akin to what we used to see back in the day.
I don’t think he was pushing for loads more money, i think it was more timing - this age now is when you can get your peak contract level in my opinion, after this it slowly declines unless you’re Messi or Ronaldo who are more brands.
I was against renewing by the way. But I assume Ineos have basically said he’s your old deal + a bit of an uplift but with the added security until 2027.
You’d have fuxking hated the bloke we called the king then.
What an avalanche of utter drivel to pin that on me. I was clearly alluding to how some players may think, which isn't my own personal view. In a subsequent post I also then agreed with another poster that it's great that we've cleared a lot of the problematic players in the dressing room, got good leaders and man managers in the coaching staff...
If you've never had to manage people to have that empathy, and if this still isn't clear enough why your post is problematic, I genuinely can't help you.
I'm just surprised you're doubling down on what appears to be very bizarre projection, and subsequent moral high ground pontification. Do it to others in your life, I'm not a willing recipient. Cheers.
Fuxk me I’d love to be your boss when that time of the year comes round and is time to talk about your pay rise
“Listen Niles, you’re like a condom, and I like condoms, they do their job 99.9% of the time, but I can buy a condom for 2 quid, so why would I pay 2 quid 50 for the same condom”.
“Have a good day Niles, & a great Christmas”.
You might be right, I guess in the coming weeks maybe some more info will come out about it. Won't change my personal stance significantly though because no matter what kind of incentive he got, it feels unnecessary at this point in time. And I am actually a bit suprised that this mere thing even is contested on here. But each to their own, not saying other standpoints are invalid.
Maybe it turns out he doesn't make more money now, but to me the more plausible explanation is that his agent told him that they should try to go for it. Especially given Uniteds reputation in terms of contracts in the past and Brunos status at the club and with the fans. Again, I don't condemn that, the player and his agent have every right to go for it, my disappointment (my personal one) is on the club for letting their hands get forced when it wasn't necessary. Because everything has consequences, the same way, player will now see that performance gets rewarded, the same way agents will see that United is ready to extend contracts before they have to, as long as you create the right environment for it. Casemiro had a standing due to his time with Real, Sancho because he was so good for Dortmund and Rashford because he had a good scoring streak - yet here we are today regretting it to a degree. I am worried that this will repeat with Bruno, while his standing today warrants a payrise and long contract, it might not be like that in a year or two. And what is now said about his ability to perform when he gets older is the exact same stuff people said about Kane or Casemiro.
The king that helped turn the club around winning numerous league titles and a double. Yeh ok.
Maybe. Who knows, it was before my time. And just fyi, I don't hate Bruno at all. I know this is some your favorite killer-argument but it is not the case. He isn't my cup of tea but I absolutely appreciate him as a player and apparently also as a bloke away from the pitch. Nobody needs an emotional personal relation to a footballer to form an opinion about football or football strategy.
Not sure I get the joke, is that two people called Niles having a conversation? Or one guy speaking to himself?Fuxk me I’d love to be your boss when that time of the year comes round and is time to talk about your pay rise
“Listen Niles, you’re like a condom, and I like condoms, they do their job 99.9% of the time, but I can buy a condom for 2 quid, so why would I pay 2 quid 50 for the same condom”.
“Have a good day Niles, & a great Christmas”.
And as long as we don't know which changes there have been to Brunos contract, we can only guess. My guess is it increased to around 275k, which is around 2 million more per year. It isn't a huge sum but in a situation where you don't have to spend it, it still doesn't seem sensible to me. Do you really think the player would have gone in a strike or anything? Because I can't really see any other way to force the clubs hand.
Last edited:
fantastic news, best player at the club and never injured
Personally, I’m not a fan of him stylistically, but he is currently our best player and deserves to be paid at that level.
As others have said the new contract length is pretty much perfect too. This is a good thing.
As others have said the new contract length is pretty much perfect too. This is a good thing.
Hopefully he's been given a sizeable wage increase to reflect his performances, alongside the extension. Show the others if you play well enough you will be rewarded.
If you read the last sentence the answer to your question is right there.
The thing is that Manchester United can sustain paying very high (300k+) wages. Even easier when the club is succesful and reaching the latter stages of the CL.
The issue is the wrong players receiving the very high wages. Not the very high wages itself. I dont see an issue in paying very high wages to players who are actually world class in their position.
Supposedly he was on 240k, Cas on 350k Marcus on 300k. Sancho 290k Mount 250k Who knows how they are all broken down to a base level but surely we must be talking 300k+ to have him inline with our top earners.
Interestingly Garnacho, 50k, Mainoo 20k Rasmus 85k Yoro 115k Zirkzee 105k. So I believe Mainoo is in discussions on a new contract. Surely he must be thinking 100k+
The numbers in line 2 sound fair enough, no issues increasing Garnacho and Mainoo if they become regulars in our team. First line though is an absolute tragedy. I mean bar Bruno the whole line of players is severly underperforming. Just shows how BS such wages are and while getting Bruno up there makes sense, chances are that he will be the reason for other crazy wages in the future. Just like "give Rashy the money, he scored 30 goals" or "give Sancho what he wants, he'll nail down our RW for years to come" and "we have to pay up to get a 5times CL winner" sounded sensible at some point in time, it leads to issues later on.
The joke is that all of us get and want pay rises, especially if we take on extra responsibility at work (being club captain for example).
If you went for your annual payrise conversion with your boss and he/she compared you to a radio, and why would he/she pay you more when he/she already has you for less money now, you’d be fecking miffed.
Roy Keane wanted more money, Rooney, Rio, and so do I when I talk to my boss etc etc etc. United want Bruno as club captain to commit to at least one more guaranteed year and to give them an option of a further year after that, taking away the possibility of strengthening his hand massively next Summer with one year remaining. Bruno in return wants a bit more money as our best player and captain.
You’re talking as though all clubs are dickheads for giving payrises, when it’s pretty standard practice in a situation like this.
You “don’t have to spend it”, seems a sure fire way to lose a lot of players on shit fees with one year remaining or on bosmans.
Caved. "Among the top earners", does that mean 300-350K? There is no one at the club who warrants that kind of money.
We know his agent did just that, absolutely, with no joy whatsoever. He was on big money + had two years left + people aren’t really spending as freely as we’ve seen, plus he has had a couple of lesser seasons than when he came. But still, he is a good player and it depends on the terms, hopefully we get more details.
I see, thanks for clarification. Obviously I wouldn't have used that example when talking about Bruno in such a situation. It was merely to illustrate the point that normal economics don't have pay more for something than the offerer asks for.
Again, nothing wrong with those guys wanting more money. My issue is with giving it to him. I don't really see how it would have strengthen his hand next summer, I mean, it could happen but at the same time, everybody is a year smarter, knows about potential decline, downward trends and so on. There is also quite a chance, that we will have a different coach next year - maybe one who wants to build on other player types. Those rather pessimistic scenarios aren't less likely than the optimistic ones.
At the end of the day, one would do the math, what makes more sense, giving away more money for sure now or potentially losing money later on. I know what would do, I can also see why it is difficult to make that decision which is why I don't get why they didn't go for the obvious: doing nothing. Heck I think even in redcafe the majority was saying that the contract shouldn't be extended this year just for the sake of it.
And I don't know about standard practices - but to me it sends a strange message: giving away payrises when the latest increase is from 2 years ago, after a really bad year that ended on 8th place and during a time where apparently the club tries to save money everywhere. Even if it would be "standard practice" I'd say maybe those are times to make an exception. It's also not a time where it would seriously harm the clubs objectives, I can't imagine that anybody thinks we are playing for the title in any competition.
And if we have a great year and Bruno as the club expects is brilliant, what happens if he and his agent then decide they want 400k a week and 3 years because Man City are offering him that and because he just lit up the place.
Do we risk losing him on a free or do we do what Arsenal begrudgingly did with RVP, Sanchez and cash in at a pretty shitty rate and sell to a rival?
All so we could save 2m quid.
Pure and simply… no clubs want their best players getting down to 12 months, it puts them into an absolute shite negotiation positions and puts them at risk of losing a player that want.
There’s a reason the standard practice at every club is to renegotiate a new deal with 2 years remaining, it protects the clubs position and their asset.
Let's create a situation in our minds as a coping mechanism and act like it can happen.
You're acting like Bruno is in Rooney stratosphere, (2010) situation.
It's incredible how people level of success and demands and standards are this days...
Imagine Bruno Fernandes holding Manchester United hostage by asking for a salary increment when he currently earns 240,000 a week. These are players who have achieved absolutely nothing tangible with United, but the level of royalty they get is astonishing.
Probably it's like the coping mechanism of being in a abusive relationship..
What really warrants Bruno earning more than 240,000 a week which in itself is enormous?
And 2 wrongs don't make a right. If another substandard players are paid 300k, doesn't justify paying another player to those sums, yet on the pitch nobody delivers anything tangible...
These are chaps, who have been involved in
- TWO SEASON of 60 points and below league finishes. THE WORST PERIOD AND FINISHES in United Premier League history.
- We have scored LESS THAN 60 goals in the last 3 seasons consecutively.
Nobody deserves even to be paid over 180k in this current team. No one. Nobody is even worth our persistence as club in this current team.
Mainoo might end up like Rashford, it can go both ways. BTW.
We can't pay Mainoo 250k in his next contract because he seems he will be a top player, he needs to deliver success to us to qualify for such wages.
We have players earning KDB/Halland salary while delivering Aston Villa - esque quality. Can't be.
Let's create a situation in our minds as a coping mechanism and act like it can happen.
You're acting like Bruno is in Rooney stratosphere, (2010) situation.
It's incredible how people level of success and demands and standards are this days...
Imagine Bruno Fernandes holding Manchester United hostage by asking for a salary increment when he currently earns 240,000 a week. These are players who have achieved absolutely nothing tangible with United, but the level of royalty they get is astonishing.
Probably it's like the coping mechanism of being in a abusive relationship..
What really warrants Bruno earning more than 240,000 a week which in itself is enormous?
And 2 wrongs don't make a right. If another substandard players are paid 300k, doesn't justify paying another player to those sums, yet on the pitch nobody delivers anything tangible...
These are chaps, who have been involved in
- TWO SEASON of 60 points and below league finishes. THE WORST PERIOD AND FINISHES in United Premier League history.
- We have scored LESS THAN 60 goals in the last 3 seasons consecutively.
Nobody deserves even to be paid over 180k in this current team. No one. Nobody is even worth our persistence as club in this current team.
Mainoo might end up like Rashford, it can go both ways. BTW.
We can't pay Mainoo 250k in his next contract because he seems he will be a top player, he needs to deliver success to us to qualify for such wages.
We have players earning KDB/Halland salary while delivering Aston Villa - esque quality. Can't be.
"KDB/Haaland salary"
Bruno in 2024 is a better, more important, more impactful, more reliable player than KDB.
I'm still not sure what our exact motivation was for this. We already had him tied down up till 2026 with an option for extra year, and was already on £200+k a week? And we've rewarded him for a season where everyone was absolutely dreadful, he was just less bad than most of the others.
The benefit of having your best players on long term deals is protects their sales value if someone decides to buy them, and prevents from losing them on a free.
1. We already had him tied down for another 2+1 years so there was no imminent danger of losing him on a free
2. He's frankly not good enough or young enough for the elite clubs in Europe to come and take him from us, so there's no danger of him forcing his way out to a Madrid/City/Bayern.
There's also the elephant in the room that we'll never be able to keep possession of a football with a turnover machine at the heart of everything we do, and I don't see us winning the league in his time here so it probably would have made sense to try build with a younger player in his position when we find that player and are in a position to make that move. But that's for another thread I guess.
So this is where you draw the line? ^^ Bad year is enough for 40-60k more per week but a brilliant year is not enough for 160k?
I really don't get that, somebody asked me whether I am a United fan and I think I am and I don't like being subject of player power at all. If a player wants to take advantage of me then he can feck right off.
Apart from that, I guess I get your point about the two years. Still unsure if this should apply to older players but as a general rule I guess you have a point.
Reading the caf, half the team is secretely world class or "just one step short". Really it doesn't stop us from looking like a subpar team. Seriously, people rave about Martinez, Shaw, Dalot, Mainoo, Bruno and Garnacho. Add Amad in here since the pre season. You'd find a good chunk of people who would add Rashford as well.
Seems like getting 8th with a tendency to be even lower is simply a misunderstanding on anybody elses part
Sure, I didn't mention any of those players apart from Bruno. If you'd like to respond to what I said I'll be better placed to engage further.
When we got second and third did that make Lindelof a world class player? No. Judging 1 individual player based on a single season is probably a bit of an over simplification. Especially as season where they performed very well individually.
Supposedly we bumped him from 240k a week for 2 years to 350k for 3. Is that really a good deal for the club? We get an extra year, but we effectively pay him 570k a week for that final year (350k a week in year 3 plus 110k per week more than he was slated to get in year 1 and 2).
It's a pretty massive amount to lock him in for one year. Not sure if he has an option on the previous deal, but if not there's some value in that for the club.
I hear the idea of fairly paying great players. But is that fair, when it only goes one way? Antony and Case surely aren't giving the club back any of the money they're overpaid by. Should the club always rectify any good deals it happens to strike with new contracts? If Bruno had no means to get out of his contract, I think I would've kept him at 240k for 2 years over 350k for 3. Decent odds we just added another bad contract in a year or two, isn't it?
It's a pretty massive amount to lock him in for one year. Not sure if he has an option on the previous deal, but if not there's some value in that for the club.
I hear the idea of fairly paying great players. But is that fair, when it only goes one way? Antony and Case surely aren't giving the club back any of the money they're overpaid by. Should the club always rectify any good deals it happens to strike with new contracts? If Bruno had no means to get out of his contract, I think I would've kept him at 240k for 2 years over 350k for 3. Decent odds we just added another bad contract in a year or two, isn't it?
Last edited:
The contract extension is not something I would celebrate or criticise. It is merely a natural result of all our prior mistakes. When you have an utterly broken wage structure exasperated by years of mistakes with mediocre players on elite wages, you can’t avoid your best player wanting to be on par / better than that. I’m just glad it’s not a super long contract so that if Bruno declines, we can let him go and replace him in a few years.
My general stance on Bruno is that he’s a terrific footballer who isn’t the perfect fit for the best teams and the way they tend to play. So right now he is our talisman and we need him badly, hence there is no question of him being 5th next paid or whatever that was. But going forward, we need to revise this silly structure we have and also look to bring in a player to take over from him by 2026.
My general stance on Bruno is that he’s a terrific footballer who isn’t the perfect fit for the best teams and the way they tend to play. So right now he is our talisman and we need him badly, hence there is no question of him being 5th next paid or whatever that was. But going forward, we need to revise this silly structure we have and also look to bring in a player to take over from him by 2026.
We had him under contract until 2026. If we want someone to take over for him by then, why did we just hand him a £350k a week deal for 2027?
I'm not an expert, but I don't think you're right that we couldn't have just let his contract play out. What was Bruno's recourse? To sit out? I doubt he'd have done that, personally. The Golden State Warriors had Steph Curry on a massive bargain 2nd pro contract for years and one two titles with several players paid more highly than him. He's one of the greatest players of all-time, and still loves the franchise.
It's a different sport, but I don't see why it should be so different. Bruno's a great player, but what exactly would've happened that would've been so detrimental if we told him we just wanted to let the contract play out?
Imagine you'd been performing at a very high level in your job for years, frequently bailing your team out of hot water, operating as a senior figure. Wouldn't you feel you're due a pay rise? And wouldn't your employer be motivated to keep you?
Fans seem to forget footballers are people sometimes.
Has never created an off field issue unlike so many of United’s attacking players of late. He is seemingly always available to play and has had to interact with a lot of selfish and/or sub standard midfielders/attackers but finally is playing with players more comfortable on the ball (amad, mainoo, garnacho and hopefully zirkzee etc) which could improve his own output further as Saturday showed. He puts the team first: dropping deep against Liverpool in the fa cup, playing false 9/wide right/midfield let alone forgoing penalties to try and kick start Rashford’s confidence last season (Everton away). If only other better paid players still at utd displayed a modicum of his unselfishness and professionalism, the club/team would be in such a better place.
Given his best every game (whether its sufficient for manutd or not is another matter) and always fit. If some magic happens on the pitch, you can be sure it goes thru him somehow. Seems like a solid pro too, for me the one redeeming player of the past few years. Give him what he wants.
It might have created huge disruptions in the dressing room. Sadly we are very deprendent on Bruno right now given how so many major signings have flopped. In fact earlier in the thread I did say that the new contract was not needed but on second thought imagine your star performer being 5th highest earner - it’s not healthy for the psychology behind the scenes.
Footballers are not your day to day 9-5 employees who get a yearly pay review to keep up with inflation to ensure they can pay their gas bill. These employees can also go find another job when they want.
He's already on over 200k a week which was a contract signed just 2 years ago which was given to reflect his contribution to the team.
1. He was dreadful for most of last season
2. He didn't bail us out of anything, we finished 8th
3. We could keep him without the pay rise. No elite club is going to take him from us as he's not good enough or young enough to get the likes of Madrid or Bayern to spend the money on him.
The main argument for this is to stop him sulking that the likes of Casemiro/Rashford earn more than him. What I don't buy is that it's a good idea to take the ludicrous contracts handed out by the previous regimes and use them as a benchmark for what we should be paying going forward.
Ultimately, unless Bruno planned on not bothering to put any effort in for the next 2 years, which wouldn't happen, then I'm not sure what leverage he had on us to get a big pay jump and contract extension.
Looks like a 3+1 deal, which will take him to aged 32/33. Granted, he's 30 next month.
Hopefully he remains unbreakable for the foreseeable future.
Hopefully he remains unbreakable for the foreseeable future.