Bruno Fernandes | Signed
- Thread starter Sassy Colin
- Start date
- Status
That sounds like an excuse to me to be honest. Wolves net spend was £81m so was higher.
The fact we are even being compared in the same sentence to that club tells you everything. The way this club has been ran has been shocking from top to bottom.
Seems to be a lot of people going with that story.
It would be a big boost to the squad if we could wrap this up by the weekend...
Agree. I tend to disagree with their opinion plenty...
We spunked 80 million for a defender when that type of money should be buy an attacker.
Just pay the 60 million and bonues.
Just pay the 60 million and bonues.
And Neither have as much turnover as us. Actually you could add both their turnover wouldnt be anywhere near as ours.
Putting things into perspective, we probably have a lower wage to turnover ratio than both the clubs.
So much of a breakthrough that he will still play tonight
With tears at the end of the game, and a United tattoo on his back to celebrate with.Although more are reporting it now...we can but Muppet!
I generally do too but I don't know enough about Fernandes to pick a side. Maybe they are right or maybe you are.
We’ll get him. Problem is. We need 3 more
^ This 100%. Maguire is a solid deffender but was he worth 80m and is he THAT much of an upgrade on smalling? The 80m should have been spent on 2 CM options.
Regarding our pre-Glazer spending I'd argue you are being far too selective. The only clubs who even come close to our spending in the 90s and early 00s were one or two Italian teams (Serie A was awash with cash at the time). Domestically we were light years ahead of the competition until Abramovic arrived, followed by the Glazers within two years, and a combination of petro dollars and Glazernomics turned the tide drastically.
In terms of statistics, I would repeat what I said previously- we held the domestic transfer record for 20 of the 25 years up to 2006. This wasn't just an anomalous large single deal either (like Newcastle signing Shearer and putting them top for a few years), we continually broke the record and pushed the British record higher during that period for players like Robson, Bruce, Cole, Ferdinand, Veron etc.
Your point about the wage structure is interesting- whilst you are correct that Ferguson made his frustrations with the wage structure well known, I would raise two points in defence- firstly, missing out on players is a fact of life for every team, and as angry as Ferguson presumaly got during the Giggs and Batistuta situations, it never really affected the on-field success of the team (we continued to be successful, attract world class talent and didn't lose players). Secondly, you only need to look at the state of the squad under Woodward's management to see what not having a consistent wage policy leads to. To use a contemporary example, I'm sure Liverpool's strict adherence to wage structure and policy of early contract renewals has seen them lose out of many a player (from memory I think this is why Goetze didn't sign?), and I'm sure there have been times when it has caused Klopp to spit feathers. However, it's also the reason why all of their important players are tied down to long-term contracts and is why they are able offer massive % increases to important players who deserve them (because their original wages were relatively meagre), which I'm sure helps for squad morale.
This post was much more long-winded than I was originally planning. The TLDR is that we were more financially dominant before the Glazers, and also that throwing our wage policy out of the window when Woodward came in is a big reason for the mess we're in now.
Pps- minor correction but the Glazers had less than 3% of shares and no decision making influence of the club prior to 2003, so the reason the PLC ran the way it did has nothing to do with Malcolm Glazer.
And the rest.
Does anyone remember the Veron transfer? I wish it could be like that these days, where you just wake up in the morning and your team has signed a world class player and you didn’t have every football journalist trying to pass themselves off as Nostradamus
Lindelof was the Smalling replacement,really.
Now a Smalling+Maguire partnership looks alot better.
Now a Smalling+Maguire partnership looks alot better.
Hopefully some truth in the breakthrough and hopefully this money is allotted from the underspend of the past 3 windows. It'll take another 100 million net in the summer (not including any Pogba funds if he leaves) to bring the squad up to competing.
Bring Smalling back and we might actually be able to defend corners.
You just know Burnley will score a set piece tomorrow.
Roma conceded from a freekick the other day where Smalling misjudged a header.
McDonnell generally doesn't know shit, I don't know who Gardener is, but he seems to write for the Express and Lopes is a known bullshitter. So a trifecta of awful sources.
No, it sounds like an inconvenient truth, and one you will readily shrug off.
You're cherry picking at this point and ignoring every other club at your own convenience.
Since 2015 only City have a higher net than us in world football. Over the past 10 seasons only PSG and City have a higher net spend in world football. We spent the most in the summer transfer window. In terms of net spend, Wolves was £62m, ours £74m. Villa was an outlier this season which they won't repeat again. We also spent the highest single fee on a single player, all while having the second highest wage bill in the world. Our spend had consistently been amoung the highest in Europe. This isn't up for debate.
Conversely, top of the league and European champions Liverpool don't even make it into the top 10 highest spenders since 2015. That's a net spent lower than Bournemouth. Real Madrid are even below Liverpool and Barca come in at 7. These are the two teams you held up as an example.
I'll reiterate. It's not the amount we've spent that's the issue, it's how we've spent it.
Last edited:
It's getting sourcey in here, bad sources, but still.
In that they’re back at a deadlock instead of being plain dead
Is this deal ever going to happen?
Another 48 hrs
I give it to the end of the month, if it doesn't before then I doubt it'll happen this month.
No chance, Smalling is the English Baresi. Until he comes back to play for us again, and then everyone will remember his actual ability level.
And the only two teams higher than us in world football in terms of turnover are well below us over the past 5 years and the past 10 years in terms of spend. Since 2015, Liverpool and Madrid both have a lower net spent than Bournemouth. Both favourites to win their respective league. Liverpool actually turned a profit in the summer. Putting things into perspective, the numbers ain't all that bad. How we've spent it is inexcusable.
It’ll happen because we desperately need it to.
The Glazers business model with us changed 2 years ago. The big spending on Transfers and wages effectively ended with the Alexis Sanchez signing. Since then we have spent barely anything on transfers in comparison to what we make, and have gutted the squad to the sorry pathetic state it is in now, all to save money on wages seemingly. If it was any other business you would look at it and say the decks are being cleared before the company went bust. Thankfully for the Glazers they will still get their dividends so they will stay owning the club, all while keeping costs down now.
How anyone can still talk about what we spent 3,4 and 5 years ago at this point is unreal.
We spent 150m odd last summer
"According to sources in Portugal"
Sources who are telepathic and know exactly what Manchester United's negotiation strategy will be.
Why are you so determined for this to be bullshit? If the deal does go through, are you prepared to look foolish?
This deal is dragging on, we'd like it to be wrapped up asap. I think one of the elements here though is no-one else is for him. We aren't competing with anyone, if another club were interested it might have forced our hand to act quicker. Both clubs playing poker face. We need a midfielder, is he the one, I have reservations but right now we need help. I don't think he's Ole's first choice, if he were I don't think they'd be so reluctant to pay the money. Sporting needs to be careful too though, he doesn't go now in Jan, his price will drop in the summer and again bar Spurs interest in the summer there isn't a queue of clubs lining up for him. Hopefully a resolution this week.
I read your post and don't necessarily agree but still accept your point. But the light years part is questionable for example if I'm not mistaken between 1990 and 2000 United spent 107.5m€ while Arsenal spent 109m€ and Liverpool spent 146.67m€ but interestingly between 2000 and 2006 we spent 298m, Arsenal spent 189m and Liverpool 216m. And that's kind of my point here, during the 90s we weren't light years above the rest in terms of spendings and not close to Italian clubs but it's true that we spent big in the early 2000 particularly between 2001 and 2005 which coincedes with Arsenal giving us a real run for our money.
And just to compare with Inter in the 90s, they were at +400m€, Italian clubs weren't in the same division when it came to spendings.
It’s probably more to do with the shitty newspapers “sources” rather than wanting the deal to fall through.
The details of this deal change from one day to the next, so no wonder people are frustrated.
No, we simply didn't - we sold Lukaku for 50% of that amount and did you not notice that we didn't complete the Maguire deal until the ink was dry on Lukaku's transfer? Funny that isn't it, considering that the fee was known for some time prior to us confirming the deal. If we didn't sell Lukaku, Maguire would 100% have not been signed, and our overall spend would again have been around £70m. The same as the summer before after Jose came 2nd.
Also, the rumours in the media all summer were that we had a maximum budget of £100m to spend despite being in dire need of a rebuild, remember. We didn't even hit that.
- Status