I still can't believe they sent the only survivor to the Everton academy!
City v United for Sanchez isn't just about Money
- Thread starter IrishRedDevil
- Start date
Tim Howard and his American links
This needs to be hand written and delivered to Ballague. Brilliant response.
Least not forget.... Pep dropped him before! and lost him out on the left.
The media will tell you this is no issue. But clearly it might be.
The media will tell you this is no issue. But clearly it might be.
A crazy narrative is being spun by the ABUs that he's only coming to United for money. It's as if Manchester United is now the destination of mercenaries, whilst winners go to City. The world is upside down to these clowns. Not one of City's players would be there but for the money, yet the ABU line in relation to Sanchez is to conveniently forget he's signing for England's biggest and most successful club and suddenly try to take the moral high ground about player wages. Yes the same Man City who spent £100 million on John Stones and Kyle Walker; the same Man City who bid sixty million for Sanchez on deadline day just a few months ago! The ABUs can do contortion better than a snake; now trying to convince the world players only join United for money and not to win trophies. Unbelievable.
Last edited:
Who gives a feck what City fans say or think?
It's no different to what Arsenal fans said in the late 90's and early 2000's or Chelsea fans after that.
To be fair I think they have a bargain in Stones. No different to when United paid £30m for Ferdinand.
United fans have had to deal with this hypocrisy and jealousy from rivals for years and will do for many years to come.
It's no different to what Arsenal fans said in the late 90's and early 2000's or Chelsea fans after that.
To be fair I think they have a bargain in Stones. No different to when United paid £30m for Ferdinand.
United fans have had to deal with this hypocrisy and jealousy from rivals for years and will do for many years to come.
I don't give a feck if idiots think he's coming only for the money.
Pretty sure he'll give us 100%.
Pretty sure he'll give us 100%.
Or he has a reasonably more assured offer in case he can get huge injury between now and the end of the season! City can pull out of the deal when Sanchez has an injury or renegotiate for much worse deal or he was left without a club or forced to extend with Arsenal where he doesn't enjoy. Thing may not always go that bad (the injury), but it does happen and in real life you have to keep an open mind to think about these scenarios.
Last edited:
City might need to cover it up by saying that Sanchez rejected them. I still think City is the one who refused to pay what Arsenal asked, every rumours in these past days were saying City is Sanchez the club he wanted to join. Wages shouldn't be the issue for Sanchez to change his mind.
The british media have shown throughout they knew feck all about it
Di Marzio(one of the most reliable journos around) broke the news about united overtaking city on the race for alexis and explained it came down to wages on offer. Now you're seeing a lot of the more "reliable" british journos saying the same thing
British media were convinced Alexis still wanted City two days ago, while Di Marzio already said he'd pretty much accepted united's offer over city's. Fast forward "City feel the player wants too much"
Assuming Di Marzio is right, it's still doesn't make any sense why this is about money.
City offered more money than United in total of wages, contract & fees 6 months ago (120m total). Arsenal rejected it because they wanted 70m fees but city wanted 60m fees.
Now that they can match United's offered with less money (105m). Why can't they match the offer? Surely 105m is so much cheaper than 120m? And for a player like Sanchez even with only 6 months left in his contract, it's worthy especially you can also stop your rival to strengthen their squad.
Did Sanchez really reject City for more money? Or did City really walk over because they aren't willing to spend the money? Or Sanchez is just disappointed with City isn't taking this seriously, while United shows that they are taking this seriously and really wants to sign him?
The money thing is just weird in my opinion because clearly City is now can get him so much cheaper than 6 months ago.
Because deals don't happen in a vacuum. Last summer, City were coming off a trophyless season, Alexis was seen as probably the beat player in the league overall, and they felt it was a worthy investment
Now they're coming off one of the greatest starts in english football history, De Bruyne has emerged as the league's best player, most of their squads is pretty much getting underpaid relative to their performances
They just gave De Bruyne a new contract worth £300k a week
Justifying such an investment on Alexis is much more difficult now
Gary Neville might say that the dressing room argument doesn't work, but as a real madrid fan, i can bring several examples to prove him wrong
FFS, Cristiano Ronaldo is currently on €50m a year and is unhappy and wants to leave because we're unwilling to give him €105m a year(more than Messi). He signed his last contract in December 2016
When we signed Bale, we had to lie in public about his transfer fee because he was jelous, and it took the team a while to warm up to Bale, in part because he was instantly the second highest paid player on the team, in part because we sold the well-liked Ozil to make space for him...
Now they're coming off one of the greatest starts in english football history, De Bruyne has emerged as the league's best player, most of their squads is pretty much getting underpaid relative to their performances
They just gave De Bruyne a new contract worth £300k a week
Justifying such an investment on Alexis is much more difficult now
Gary Neville might say that the dressing room argument doesn't work, but as a real madrid fan, i can bring several examples to prove him wrong
FFS, Cristiano Ronaldo is currently on €50m a year and is unhappy and wants to leave because we're unwilling to give him €105m a year(more than Messi). He signed his last contract in December 2016
When we signed Bale, we had to lie in public about his transfer fee because he was jelous, and it took the team a while to warm up to Bale, in part because he was instantly the second highest paid player on the team, in part because we sold the well-liked Ozil to make space for him...
I think he's more likely to get the 4 in 4 at City. Looking at how well City are playing and how well organised the club is you have to put them as favourites. City are also in the CL mind you with an easy 2nd round draw they might do the double.
I don't think any serious top class footballer would choose Utd over City at the moment unless he was concerned about making the first team.
Just my opinion.
Winning late is mark of a title winning team, wasn't it the case when UTD use to win trophies under SAF? Truth is Man City is playing much than UTD at the moment and it is evident on points table. Yes Man city did grind victories but that's what win you titles and not surrendering leads or failing to break down relegation differ in your home ground or conceding a late goal against a ten men team.
Now I believe City isn't buying Sanchez not because they don't have the money but because they think he is not worth the money Arsenal and Sanchez's representatives are asking for. For them it doesnt make financial sense but for UTD it does because UTD desperately needs a title to get back on track because every passing year will put more and more stress on any newcoming manager, I am Liverpool but I do know UTD is very big club with very large fan following but longer the club stays away from holy grail harder it becomes to get it, because these same fans will grow impatient thus affording less time to new manager. Now Mourinho has track record of winning silverware so it makes sense to stick with him but I have feeling lots of fans have problem with the style of football, Mourinho plays. So they might be finding it little hard to support him. Of course nobody will care if he wins you guys a trophy.
Well put out, if Mr dogwithabone believes Sanchez will be a bit part player at city, how can he improve UTD enough to pip city for the title? Utd should save their money on Sanchez and spend it on real difference maker like griezeman.
Premier League minutes played by academy players 17/18:
- Manchester United 3.540
- Tottenham 2.738
- Arsenal 2.516
- Chelsea 1.335
- Liverpool 710
- Manchester City 7
That is surprising, considering how much UTD have spent and also Jose Mourinho isn't the coach reputed to give much chance to youngsters. I think most of these minutes are apparently due to Rashford and Lingard, which both have been on good form for some time.
Last edited by a moderator:
I think Pogba also counts, not sure though.
What's frustrating is that the contact with United, increased wages, larger agent's fee, etc has probably come about because we wouldn't jump the extra £5M or so to meet Arsenal nearer the start of this window which would have enabled the whole thing to be wrapped up much sooner. If so, the gamble to low ball the transfer fee this window has backfired. I would guess that's at the route cause of all this - the rest would never have happened if we'd agreed to pay a bit more in transfer fee and as a result, there would have been no noise about hold-ups to the deal, agent wouldn't have spoken to united, etc. We have been quite good in recent years at getting deals done quickly and relatively quietly, to avoid these sorts of problems but we've done the exact opposite with Sanchez and it's demonstrated why we normally try to work differently (again, only in recent years and of course, with some exceptions)
I don't know where do you get that info from about City just gave De Bruyne a new contract £300k a week. I googled it and took my time to do research and still couldn't find the news of De Bruyne just signed a new contract, all I can find is De Bruyne is no rush to sign a new contract that cost around 200k per week so nowhere near 300k per week.
Let's say if City is going to offer him a new contract for 200k per week this month. His current contract is at the moment 115k per week and expired until 2021 (3.5 years). If he gets an improve deal to 200k (double his current wages) that means it will only cost City around 15m and with signing-on fees probably around 20m-25m. So they only need 20m-25m to improve his contract. The difference between United offered right now on Sanchez & City's offered 6 months ago is about 20m. That should match their budget.
And assuming if his contract is going to be extended until 2022 that means total it will only cost city around 35m and add with signing-on fees probably around 40m-45m. So add 20m-25m to their current budget is a peanut for City. Especially if you can get a player like Sanchez and stop your rival for strengthened their squad. On top of that Yaya Toure their highest paid with 220k per week, his contract will be expired by end of the season which I doubt they will offer him a new one, that means Sanchez wages shouldn't be a financial issue.
In your original post, you said that Sanchez has turned City down because "United's offer was better", but from your latest post you made it sounds that City is the one who refused to pay because they think improving De Bruyne's contract right now (which still has 3.5 years) is more important than signing Sanchez.
I don't remember when Neville was talking about dressing room argument which won't affect City to sign Sanchez. And also you are talking about Ronaldo who is obviously has a big ego and wanted to be the highest paid because he thinks he's the best in the team. De Bruyne, Sane & Silva don't seem to have problem with Yaya Toure being their highest paid for a while now, surely they should have no problem if Sanchez becomes the club highest paid.
We are talking about Jose Mourinho who is considered to be a world class manager, Manchester United is considered to be one the biggest club in the world with a lot of success & fans, and we have shown that we make progress in our transition & project to win trophies. With City is not taking Sanchez's transfer seriously, I can see if Sanchez decided to turns his head and choose a manager and a team who actually seriously wants him and can give him more playing time. Leaving Arsenal for top club is obviously priority for any of their top players right now.
Yeah but stats don't mean anything, Jose hates youth, Cliff Richard is a bumbaseed, etc
I will add more.
Rashford, Lingard, McTominay & also Paul Pogba.
Talking about youngster, Jose played the most minuted youngster last season ahead of any other manager in PL such as Tuanzebe, Mensah, Rashford, and etc. His last PL game he field his XI almost with youngster from our academy.
James Ducker reported that KdB will earn 16 million with all the bonuses and image rights. 200K or something is basic pay.
This 3500 minutes is kind of misleading because Lingard and Rashford played close to 2300 minutes between them, they ain't academy players more they have already become part of the team. Pogba shouldn't really be considered academy player because he left and then UtD had to big money for him and he certainly isn't promising youngster but a proper baller.
Last edited by a moderator:
If that's the criteria then you have to removed Kane, Winks from Spurs. Almost all the players in first team squad.
So academy players are only those playing some random games, never break into first team by that logic then? May we close all the academies please. Waste of resource.
That's VVD and Sanchez that you refused to pay the extra few million for, two top players that would improve your team.
Has FFP got a part to play?
£5m is pocket change to your oil owners, so it's strange and I don't think the argument about walking about from the deal due to principles/morals has much substance. This is businsss and business is cut throat, dog eat dog, and this type of thing with agents happens regularly.
This potentially opens the door for future agents demanding extra money from City or they will go and phone a few extra PL clubs to see if they are interested.
If they come from the academy then they are academy players, regardless if they are a 'baller' or not.
Rashford is 20 years old and recently made his breakthrough straight from our academy as a total unknown, and you just want to omit him why?
They will be products of the United academy for the rest of their careers, it doesn't matter if they are a big part of the first team.
I wonder if it could be something as simple as Jose selling him UTD in a better way than Pep sold City. I imagine an air of arrogance due to City’s current league position.
Hasn't pretty much every footballer ever always gone where they have been offered the best financial package? Why has this suddenly become a big thing? Oh because a player chose us over city.
What the feck is an academy player then?!
Thanks, didn’t even bother correcting.
If they come from the academy then they are academy players, regardless if they are a 'baller' or not.
Rashford is 20 years old and recently made his breakthrough straight from our academy as a total unknown, and you just want to omit him why?
They will be products of the United academy for the rest of their careers, it doesn't matter if they are a big part of the first team.
Man my point is once an academy player has established himself as a squad player , it ain't fair to count his playing time towards academy players time because it gives you impression that every match you are having new academy player starting a match. Its more accurate to state UTD has provided platform to 2 youngsters to prove their worth and have helped them establishing themselves into squad.
Arrogance and as well as the fact that for city perceived value of Sanchez compared to wage he is demanding isn't as much as it is for UTD. City already have abundance of quality attacking players, Guardiola can only field maximum of 4 attacking players at a time and he has more then enough, sane, sterling, KDB and Jesus are all younger than Sanchez and can only get better, so why buy somebody for large fee and wage only to bench players who are future of City. Whereas he might be able to walk straight into UTD's starting eleven with better offer in table than city's.
The chasing pack will always have to offer more money. Chelsea did it with Hazard vs united, city did it with berbatov vs united
Who do you support?
Arsenal. Lot of pain.
Major changes coming down the N London tracks. Do you reckon AW is about to bale out?