We didn't need a massive overhaul last summer. We too needed a couple of tweaks but it all went haywire. Let me just rephrase the question for you. A couple of seasons ago, we were the league winners, had SAF at the helm and had just signed RvP. Chelsea on the other hand had no manager, had not won the title and were themselves in need of an overhaul. Yet, Hazard chose them over us. Were they more alluring than us back then as well? Obvious answer is no. So you cannot just go into such hypothetical situations to prove a point.
- Status
We didn't need a massive overhaul last summer. We too needed a couple of tweaks but it all went haywire. Let me just rephrase the question for you. A couple of seasons ago, we were the league winners, had SAF at the helm and had just signed RvP. Chelsea on the other hand had no manager, had not won the title and were themselves in need of an overhaul. Yet, Hazard chose them over us. Were they more alluring than us back then as well? Obvious answer is no. So you cannot just go into such hypothetical situations to prove a point.
By history if you mean just a season back, then yes we can talk about our history. You guys keep harping on as if we have won diddly squat over the last decade. One poor season does NOT change the fact that we are still one of the biggest clubs in the world. It's like saying when Bayern missed out on the CL, then someone like Wolfsburg of Schalke became more attractive. It does not work like that. Especially since we now have an excellent manager at the helm.
Fortunately for Bayern though, Wolfsburg and Schalke weren't taken over by billionaire owners. It's a completely different story in England.
United fans need to get over the fact that we aren't a bigger draw than Chelsea. I know it's something for some to hold onto, but really it's how it is.
1) Jose Mourinho:
Say what you like about Mata and Oscar's situations deterring future signings. But they weren't Mourinho's signings. History shows that when Mourinho signs a player (bar the few Abromovich crazy signings) he usually has a plan for them.
Being completely honest, who would the likes of Barkley and Shaw see as a bigger pull in the English game than Mourinho?
As much as we've all decided Van Gaal is the best thing since sliced bread suddenly (he wasn't in any polls last summer) he's not relevant to Shaw or Barkley (or someone like that) in the same way Mourinho is.
For any player who was a teenager about five six years ago, they'll know a hell of a lot about Mourinho and the success he had here (and at Inter), the players he improved, and the way players speak highly of him.
He's as close to guarantee that you'll win something each year. If he wants to sign you, and make you a part of his almost inevitable success, that's a huge draw on it's own.
2) On our side we've obviously lost Sir Alex. With him, I'd give us say we're level with Chelsea.
Not only did he represent the same 'guarantee' of success as Mourinho, but he offered players continuity that they couldn't get at any other club.
And the very reason for United's success was him.
He's gone. And though we may still win things, it's far from a given at all any more. I'd back Chelsea to win more than us in the next five years, so long as Mourinho's there, and we don't get in Guardiola.
Van Gaal is one of a number of highly regarded managers in the league (but not at Mourinho's level), whereas Sir Alex was the most highly regarded.
We don't offer that unique continuity either any more. We're very much (to the naked eye, at least) a club who'll be changing managers like the majority of clubs, for a while at least.
3) Chelsea also have won plenty in the recent past. They're very much a club that wins trophies. Which some seem to be forgetting.
That's without even mentioning that Chelsea are as big as, if not bigger than, us in Africa. African (or African origin) players, such as Lukaku and Zouma have seen some of their biggest heroes play for Chelsea in the last decade, which has an impact too.
Though we'll probably have first dibs on Dutch talent for a while.
1) Jose Mourinho:
Say what you like about Mata and Oscar's situations deterring future signings. But they weren't Mourinho's signings. History shows that when Mourinho signs a player (bar the few Abromovich crazy signings) he usually has a plan for them.
Being completely honest, who would the likes of Barkley and Shaw see as a bigger pull in the English game than Mourinho?
As much as we've all decided Van Gaal is the best thing since sliced bread suddenly (he wasn't in any polls last summer) he's not relevant to Shaw or Barkley (or someone like that) in the same way Mourinho is.
For any player who was a teenager about five six years ago, they'll know a hell of a lot about Mourinho and the success he had here (and at Inter), the players he improved, and the way players speak highly of him.
He's as close to guarantee that you'll win something each year. If he wants to sign you, and make you a part of his almost inevitable success, that's a huge draw on it's own.
2) On our side we've obviously lost Sir Alex. With him, I'd give us say we're level with Chelsea.
Not only did he represent the same 'guarantee' of success as Mourinho, but he offered players continuity that they couldn't get at any other club.
And the very reason for United's success was him.
He's gone. And though we may still win things, it's far from a given at all any more. I'd back Chelsea to win more than us in the next five years, so long as Mourinho's there, and we don't get in Guardiola.
Van Gaal is one of a number of highly regarded managers in the league (but not at Mourinho's level), whereas Sir Alex was the most highly regarded.
We don't offer that unique continuity either any more. We're very much (to the naked eye, at least) a club who'll be changing managers like the majority of clubs, for a while at least.
3) Chelsea also have won plenty in the recent past. They're very much a club that wins trophies. Which some seem to be forgetting.
That's without even mentioning that Chelsea are as big as, if not bigger than, us in Africa. African (or African origin) players, such as Lukaku and Zouma have seen some of their biggest heroes play for Chelsea in the last decade, which has an impact too.
Though we'll probably have first dibs on Dutch talent for a while.
Last edited:
The period couple seasons ago you're referring to is when we won the CL title under Di Matteo. While we were shit in the league, the CL win more than made up for it, and probably played a part in Hazard's choice (along with money, location, etc.).
People keep talking about the club global appeal, but for most players it's all about "what you can do for me now". The footballer's career is short, the time frame to make money and possibly win trophies is small and you're always one major injury away from being finished at the top level at any given moment. I'm sure it's an ideal scenario for, let's say Luke Shaw, to join CFC and win trophies in a club he grew up supporting. But in reality, he'll have no problem joining MU and getting a nice pay cheque while playing for the biggest club in England. For foreign players, it's even less of a bother. They look at where they will live, how much they'll be paid and then everything else.
Wolfsburg are a pretty rich club themselves.
I completely agree with what you have asserted. I was replying to someone who claimed that Chelsea are more attractive than us because we have missed out on CL football for one season.
Not anywhere close to City and Chelsea rich though. It's the point I was making before, we simply don't have the luxury that the likes of Bayern have in their league, when in reality, we should.
I don't know about this either.
If money was equal, it would very much come down to who sells their club best: Which manager sells his vision, which chairman, and the plans they put forward.
It wouldn't be as straight forward as "Just because they're United". Not for a player with options.
City are Champions, and have some huge names playing for them, which is validation in itself that they're possibly a club worth playing for.
Though I'd agree that for an older player, like Xavi or Schweinsteiger, our history would make us a bigger draw.
Last edited:
He said African origin.
Oops
It's guess work on my part. Maybe I'm wrong, and I'm not claiming it certainly would be the case, but I can imagine it having an impact, should we both go in for a top young African (especially West African) player.
But obviously the same could be said about us with a top young East Asian footballer.
For those footballers, many of them would join us just because we're Chelsea and United respectively, as we saw with Lukaku.
Deal to Chelsea done, announced at 4.
Avert your eyes, Gooners
Chelsea will be in with a big shout next season
That looks very weird. Hopefully he'll be another Torres.
His talk about the prodigy coming at home for 2 years now look even more ridiculous than ever.Harsh!
To a midfield as mediocre as ours they have gone on to add Matic and Cesc in 6 months while we dabble what to do with Fellaini and how to incorporate the trio of Rooney, Mata and Kagawa.
This is depressing.
This is depressing.
How quickly things change in football though. He couldn't wait to leave Arsenal to join his dream club in what was a huge transfer saga and now he's heading back to London, to Chelsea of all clubs. Bizarre owl game, football.
Anybody fancy making a collage of Peterstorey's moments in this thread?
They'll piss on the league next season. Mourinho is always very strong on the second year and with the additions of Cesc, Costa and an another player or two they'll have the best team in England by some distance (unless City significantly improve their defense).
Would be my favorites also for UCL (with Madrid not being eligible to win it, City being City, Barca being a bit weak and Bayern not looking scary under Pep).
Avert your eyes, Gooners
Looks fake, tbh. Are you sure it's legit?
This
Come again?
Funny thing, most likely he will cost around the same amount of money as Fellaini.
I don't doubt that he's heading there, but I don't think that photo is real.
Defending champions of UCL
Not announced yet on the Chelsea page so doubt it's official, yet.
Same here. His head looks kinda big there and doesn't he have some tattoo's on his arms?
Defending champions of UCL
I think after you win it, you're still allowed to compete the year after! Madrid will probably be the favourites next year alongside Bayern again, but Chelsea are definitely going to be up there with Courtois, Fabregas and Costa all coming in.
He probably means no club ever won it twice in a row.
Spoiled shits. I'll admit that I'm bitterly jealous of them at this moment in time.
They are allowed to play on it, but not to win it.
Obviously it was my fancy way of saying that Madrid despite being great is very unlikely to win it considering that no team ever has managed to win UCL 2 times in a row.
A photo of a screen at a weird angle is usually a good indication of something being not quite right.
Especially when it is a screenshot from a computer.
But anything to joke with peterstorey. However, it looks pretty obvious that ultimatelly he'll go there.
- Status