I wonder how the Muppetier guy will spin all this. He's got a knack in making INEOS and Rashford look good irrespective of circumstances.
To be fair, I don't think fans' views on Qatar had any impact on the deal either wayYour hatred for Qatar and the idea of sports washing has put this club in the depths of hell for the foreseeable future (minimum of 5 years). Job well done.
Keep in mind that INEOS will always talk about ambition and such on their end. They might even be more ambitious with United than they are with their other clubs. However, they'll always hedge their bets hard. The Glazers before INEOS and their CEOs after Gill never did that because they assumed that United will remain a cash cow. INEOS, however, isn't treating United as such (makes sense), so they'll always cap their ambition on the current state of the club. Unfortunately, they seem to be taking this even further at this time and are looking to sell United's talented young players for high fees in order to bring more young punts on a cheap and hope that they get a talented young side. This is how Wilcox operated at Southampton for the most part. Chelsea are different as they're going after highly sought-after young players alongside their punts. For example, United would never go after a more hyped-up young/experienced player unless their value's less than whatever sale they made in the same area.Must admit, the start to the INEOS reign is worrying.
While not wanting the Qatar bid either, my worries about INEOS were what they'd 'achieved' - not achieved - at Nice and Lausanne. The way they'd run those - failing with their money to take them particularly high in much smaller leagues as they seemed to run their clubs more for sustainability than success.
And the words, tone and early actions so far suggest they'll be doing the same here. We seem to be being run like a post-Abramovich Chelsea - targeting a very young squad for sell on value and cheaper wages, treating the academy as a cash cow rather than as something to be proud of the players it produces for the first team, etc. All done with an eye on the books, not onfield success. Certainly in the short term.
It's still early days of course. And if it wasn't for the early models already creating that worry before they arrived then probably wouldn't stand out as an issue already. But it's certainly look like that's the plan here as well - initially at least. As @mazhar13 said on a thread yesterday when I mentioned similar, maybe we'll start to benefit when the new PL financial rules come into place.
Except we are not Southampton and have higher expectations than Southampton.Keep in mind that INEOS will always talk about ambition and such on their end. They might even be more ambitious with United than they are with their other clubs. However, they'll always hedge their bets hard. The Glazers before INEOS and their CEOs after Gill never did that because they assumed that United will remain a cash cow. INEOS, however, isn't treating United as such (makes sense), so they'll always cap their ambition on the current state of the club. Unfortunately, they seem to be taking this even further at this time and are looking to sell United's talented young players for high fees in order to bring more young punts on a cheap and hope that they get a talented young side. This is how Wilcox operated at Southampton for the most part. Chelsea are different as they're going after highly sought-after young players alongside their punts. For example, United would never go after a more hyped-up young/experienced player unless their value's less than whatever sale they made in the same area.
Ashworth seemed to have more ambition about him hence United spending bigger in the summer for bigger names, and him being let go of is probably a sign that INEOS changed their direction after ten Hag's poor start. After all, Ashworth wanted to keep the women's team competitive, and he was looking at managers who he knew alongside the other names.
The biggest club in the country. The second most valuable football club in the world after Real madrid. Have only Garnacho 20, Amad 22, Zirkzee 24 and Hojlund 21, It's a disgrace.
How long was Ruben's contract and if quite short, would it be worth him just walking away in the summer and tell them where to stick their job?Of course they bloody are. They aren't the ones copping the flak on the touchline each week. Amorim needs to go ballistic with Ineos over this. Each and every one of them. He's been sold down the river completely. Pressure him with an ultimatum to come in November and have him deal with a shitshow of a squad then don't back him when it's needed. His reputation could be shot by this, and the recruitment team are 'relaxed'. They should be getting shot out of a canon if they don't solve this issue by the end of the day.
"Very smart moves from United now willing to panic in the winter, while perspective targets are being lined up for proper reinforcement in the summer. United will not be pushed into panic buys like before, which can hurt long-term vision."
Something along those lines. The bottom line is, we had to bring at least one more attacker, and I don't see how a loan without an obligation would hurt us financially.
Agreed, hence United looking at some more expensive players in Nkunku, Tel, and Bailey for this window. They aren't purely operating like Southampton, but they also won't pay large sums of money unless they have a major sale to inject some more funds into their team. We wouldn't be seeing the reports about Garnacho and Mainoo otherwise.Except we are not Southampton and have higher expectations than Southampton.
Must admit, the start to the INEOS reign is worrying.
While not wanting the Qatar bid either, my worries about INEOS were what they'd 'achieved' - not achieved - at Nice and Lausanne. The way they'd run those - failing with their money to take them particularly high in much smaller leagues as they seemed to run their clubs more for sustainability than success.
And the words, tone and early actions so far suggest they'll be doing the same here. We seem to be being run like a post-Abramovich Chelsea - targeting a very young squad for sell on value and cheaper wages, treating the academy as a cash cow rather than as something to be proud of the players it produces for the first team, etc. All done with an eye on the books, not onfield success. Certainly in the short term.
It's still early days of course. And if it wasn't for the early models already creating that worry before they arrived then probably wouldn't stand out as an issue already. But it's certainly look like that's the plan here as well - initially at least. As @mazhar13 said on a thread yesterday when I mentioned similar, maybe we'll start to benefit when the new PL financial rules come into place.
Yes, good point about Chelsea spending bigger on some highly promising youths, whereas we now seem to be mostly going down the Southampton / Brighton type path of more affordable gambles.Keep in mind that INEOS will always talk about ambition and such on their end. They might even be more ambitious with United than they are with their other clubs. However, they'll always hedge their bets hard. The Glazers before INEOS and their CEOs after Gill never did that because they assumed that United will remain a cash cow. INEOS, however, isn't treating United as such (makes sense), so they'll always cap their ambition on the current state of the club. Unfortunately, they seem to be taking this even further at this time and are looking to sell United's talented young players for high fees in order to bring more young punts on a cheap and hope that they get a talented young side. This is how Wilcox operated at Southampton for the most part. Chelsea are different as they're going after highly sought-after young players alongside their punts. For example, United would never go after a more hyped-up young/experienced player unless their value's less than whatever sale they made in the same area.
Ashworth seemed to have more ambition about him hence United spending bigger in the summer for bigger names, and him being let go of is probably a sign that INEOS changed their direction after ten Hag's poor start. After all, Ashworth wanted to keep the women's team competitive, and he was looking at managers who he knew alongside the other names.
There’s no point letting two forward players go on loan for 6 months if you’re not going to replace them ffs. We’ve literally saved millions in wages by sending Rashford and Antony out on loan.
The manager needs some support.
i mean i get it. The season is absolutely fecked at this point. Doesnt make much sense to bring in panic transfers. As long as we dont get relegated things will be fine.
But for fecks sake at least bring in some short term loans. Find a 3 month loan for anyone whos primary position is right wingback since we bought a lwb. Loan in a cover at cm since we dont want to play casemiro. Loan in a damn body in the attack to rotate, as we barely have enough quality there to fill a starting slot at this point. Yes we understand these loans wont be top notch, but unless we plan on bedding in more youth it just helps make sure shit doesnt go down after an injury or two.
Madness to let 2 attackers go and bring nobody in. The squad is lacking any sort of options in attack it’s ridiculous
To succeed in football you need to be reckless and spend happy, not this penny pinching approach. It’s never gonna work.
To be honest, there is nothing to play for in the league now and our cup form has actually been pretty good with the current crop. I’d much rather struggle to the end of the season and go after our top targets then. The way we’re playing at the moment I’m not sure even if we had a world class striker up front it would make much differenceJoke of a setup. No depth to see the season out. Ruben hasn’t a Hope, club has clearly seen this season as a write-off and aren’t arsed.
Too busy pulling themselves about a shiny new stadium, worse than Everton we are.
Going backwards, worse than total Glazer control this.
Well we only play with 3/11 attackers but I agree.Madness to let 2 attackers go and bring nobody in. The squad is lacking any sort of options in attack it’s ridiculous
Not winning the Champions League, doesn’t make them an utter failure. Failed, so far, in a their primary objective? Arguably. But are PSG much better off with them?You need to scroll up the page, I’ve already answered your points.
It'd be greater incompetence to let Rashford and Antony stay, or get shafted in negotiations for another albatross.
Psg still cannot win the only trophy which matters.
Folly to think Ineos could alleviate a decade-plus of chronic mismanagement within one season, and the alternative (Qatar) may improve finances, but fail where it matters most.
Except you haven't done this at all. The talk about Garnacho seemed to be just talk in the end, you actually seem to have rebuffed approaches from both Napoli and Chelsea. You also apparently turned down a bid from Como for Gabriele Biancheri. Instead Barrada and Wilcox have brought in Obi-Martin and Heaven. The whole United selling young talent story hasn't materialised at all instead you're bringing in young talent.Unfortunately, they seem to be taking this even further at this time and are looking to sell United's talented young players for high fees in order to bring more young punts on a cheap and hope that they get a talented young side.
The biggest club in the country. The second most valuable football club in the world after Real madrid. Have only Garnacho 20, Amad 22, Zirkzee 24 and Hojlund 21, It's a disgrace.
Except you haven't done this at all. The talk about Garnacho seemed to be just talk in the end, you actually seem to have rebuffed approaches from both Napoli and Chelsea. You also apparently turned down a bid from Como for Gabriele Biancheri. Instead Barrada and Wilcox have brought in Obi-Martin and Heaven. The whole United selling young talent story hasn't materialised at all instead you're bringing in young talent.
The biggest club in the country. The second most valuable football club in the world after Real madrid. Have only Garnacho 20, Amad 22, Zirkzee 24 and Hojlund 21, It's a disgrace.
I guarantee you that we won't get our business done early.I sincerely hope we get all our business done within the first 2 weeks of the next window or this new hierarchy can get to feck.
I agree with Ineos approach here to be fair, seems like Arsenal do as well.So Tel wanted UTD
Spurs bid for him and he rejected.
UTD were in talks for a loan
Talks failed
Spurs sign him on a loan
WTH ?
Man UTD lost to Spurs on a loan for a player that wanted them first
INEOS are turning out to be incompetent. Not as bad as the Glazers but incompetent none the less. The mistakes add are starting to add up
- Not firing ETH
- Spending 200 mill on ETH when you didn't believe in him
- Spending 10 mil to get Dan Ashworth and then firing him few months later
- In a season where you are struggling, you can only get 1 one player and while letting multiple leave on loan
- Raising ticket prices for piss poor product
I agree with Ineos approach here to be fair, seems like Arsenal do as well.
You have to have an option to buy on these loans for young players otherwise you are just helping Bayern. It's not like they're loaning a proven older striker as an emergency short term loan - they have basically farmed him out to Spurs after he rejected going there full time to get game time. He might absolutely smash it, I'd rather he came to us permanently as I think he will become a great player, but he's a kid. Better stick with our current strikers and either improve them or improve the chances of selling them.
If we have the funds in summer and he is keen, it will be useful to see him in the PL before committing to paying a decent fee as well.
How?Forget about SJR, the worrying thing now it seems Berrada and Wilcox are not better than Arnold and Murtough. We are in much deeper mess now!
What’s bullshit about having no footballing structure and going from manager to manager and formation to formation and rebuild to rebuild ? The wing back we’ve bought in is a kid and the one we’re linked with in the summer not even 18 years old yet whilst our centre backs have shown it isn’t so easy at all to switch from a back 4 with 2 centre backs to a back 3 with 3 centre backsThere’s so much bullshit in this it’s hard to know where to start.
The wingback weve bought is quite adept at playing as a winger. So too the one we’re linked with in the summer. Centrebacks can easily switch between a 3 and 2 system. Come on.
The squad is rubbish. It still needs an overhaul. You make it sound like Amorim’s system is something from Mars - get real and settle down.
They aren't selling unless they get the price they want. If Garnacho was truly for sale, like Rashford, then they'd have been open to selling at a lower price. They took the same approach as the Portuguese clubs do for the players who they aren't putting up for sale. Napoli wanted a lower fee, which United rebuffed consistently, whilst Chelsea waited in the background to see what United's lowest limit was.Except you haven't done this at all. The talk about Garnacho seemed to be just talk in the end, you actually seem to have rebuffed approaches from both Napoli and Chelsea. You also apparently turned down a bid from Como for Gabriele Biancheri. Instead Barrada and Wilcox have brought in Obi-Martin and Heaven. The whole United selling young talent story hasn't materialised at all instead you're bringing in young talent.
EDIT: Actually thinking about it even more, the clubs selling far more young talent than you are Man City and Arsenal
If he said no to Spurs permanent I feel it's unlikely.Fair play you can be so measured, personally could see Spurs signing him permanently in the summer. Quite honestly not bothered what we do in next window as trust went when they kept Ten Hag.
