Club Sale | It’s done!
- Thread starter JB08
- Start date
- Status
No cheeseburger fries or a well done steak in sight.
Cheers now Shaw's crying.
Louis Edwards was as dodgy as any oil rich nation, Google him if you don't know about him
To be honest with you mate, my clash with you or anyone else over John Murtough was due to a narrative being put forth about the man that wasn't in any way true imo. And I apologise if I may have come across as being untoward in our argument in the past. You're more than entitled to disagree with me, because I'm just as fallible as anyone else.
But for me John Murtough only became the defacto DoF, after both Solskjaer and Woodward left the building. And then he had to contend with making hiring and firing calls after the mess he inherited. So he was in a position where the transfer window was on the horizon with a scouting network being led by two men who were put in place by Ed Woodward. He made the decision to fire both heads of scouting and went with ten Hag picks. He's subsequently replaced both head scouts and the new scouts at the top of the chain along with the news data science department will need to be influential in the next summer window or else there will be far more questions than answers over the football structure.
And if we compare both Murtough and Michael Edwards as far as experience goes before they were installed as DoFs. Then I believe Murtough was the more experienced man out of the two. Because he wasn't just a sports scientist or performance analyst, but he was also very experienced at modernising football clubs when it came to staffing and developing scouting networks which is documented in the piece by Laurie Whitwell in The Athletic.
I personally believe from what I've read and heard about Murtough, that he's been good for the club. And a change of ownership could well see a turnover of staff on the football side of the club. But I personally think it would be sensible to keep hold of Murtough because his experience on the structural side of the football club would be valuable.
I thought it was 20m and it was 1989 - I was in the Stretford End the day of that ridiculous stunt on the pitch, we were all gobsmacked thinking who the feck is this moron!
Doubt it, his preference as I understand it are pies
Not by his carb heavy pre season meal menu snap..
You keep going back to the same points you've made yet also contradicted multiple times.
You state Ratcliffe is a bad man for supporting Brexit, but are happy with filthy rich ME owners,
You state that Ratcliffe has a Chelsea season ticket yet were advocating for an American investment firm who own shares in another Premiership club to take over!
You keep stating Brailsford is a bad man for being embroiled in controversy, yet also want ME owners, and have no response to the fact that a team blowing the league apart in Newcastle wanted his expertise to assist them at the start of the season.
Also you claimed that Adnan is the most knowledgeable about John Mutough on here which is also far from the case, plenty of other posters don't have to use Google for their knowledge.
You are blinkered, close minded and shortsighted. All bad things when trying to engage in debate.
Can you tell us what exactly Brailsford assisted Newcastle over and how it has benefited them?
I hope you don't run away like you usually do, Champ.
It's water down the bridge mate and I hope that I won't be re-opening this discussion once again. I only mentioned you because you're the most knowledgeable pro Murtough poster I know and while you weren't able to change my mind on the guy, you certainly gave me ample food for thought. As you well know I am ill suited to defend Murtough which is why I involved you in the first place.
Regarding the guy I thought Murtough was getting a job that he had little experience. That might have worked if we had a solid structure in place but we didn't. The whole structure was being lead by people with little/no experience in the job from the owners right to the manager.I still think that Murtough had Woodward's ear throughout his entire time at United, that he's inappropriate for the DOF job and that this summer kind of vindicated it (we couldn't provide alternatives to ETH's target, the Rabiot/De Jong mess and the fact that we overpaid for players both in terms of fees and salaries). However I can't deny his work at youth level/women's team so if he is ready to accept a role were he focused solely on one/two of them then I guess he could still provide some valid contribution for the club.
That's fair enough mate.
In the kitchen
I made my argument clear regarding why I don't think SJR is not suited to the role which spans from the moral sight (which TBH most of our prospective buyers would fail in but at least they don't blow smoke up their arse by claiming to be United supporters), right on how much investment he made in the club, his football credentials, the progress his football clubs had made and the lack of credibility and football experience his man on top has. If you wish to stop the debate then fair enough. Personally I'd rather see Adnan pick up the tab at this point as he's a far better communicator then I am.
Having said that let's me say one thing. Speaking about engaging in debate, well, I am not the one attacking the poster rather then the argument.
Wasnt Martin Edwards supposed to have some anti-social behaviour in the toilets too?
Brailsford took the ‘opportunity to share his renowned approach to sporting culture, mindset and performance as well as taking questions from several members of the squad and backroom team.’
Ashworth said: “I’ve known Sir Dave for a number of years, working across various different sports and he is without doubt the best in world sport at creating high-performance culture and turning that into winning.
High praise indeed. Granted they are mates, but speaks volumes that Ashworth felt the need to bring someone like Brailsford in to spend time on his project.
You don't have a valid argument that exists, as you flit around from point to point depending on what you read that same day.
It's far from an attack on you, moreso your viewpoint which exists only to belittle one potential buyer for the same contradictory reasons you'd want another buyer for.
I don't wish to stop the debate, just would rather the debate gets widened so it actually encompasses INEOs' potential offer as a valid one, as the reasons you give for it not being a valid option can be attributed to near enough every other potential bid.
Your contradictions are what's stopping the debate from growing.
Sunchoke and creamed is my Grindr profile wishlist
According to Goldbridge, it’s more likely we’ll be sold to US bidders, possibly a consortium and the sale will proceed fairly quickly, as the Glazers have been in negotiations with a buyer for a while. Based on the simple reason that its easier to buy a PL club than an existing US franchise such as a NFL club, plus the strength of the dollar, this outcome seems fairly plausible.
Goldbridge (real name Brent Di Cesare because Mark is just a character he plays) knows nothing.
He’s in this game for the money. And click bait nonsense makes him lots of it.
Take no notice of Goldbridge he knows as much as we do
Pretty sure all billionaires have dollars as their currency?
Is it better than kfc and ketchup?
Hopefully, you have a lot more to offer than your tiny, but crispy albeit sunchoke watercress.
I didn’t know about that. I also didn’t know (or had forgotten maybe) about his son Martin resigning from the United Board after getting a police caution for a “toilet peeping incident!”
Hopefully, you have a lot more to offer than your tiny, but crispy albeit sunchoke watercress.
Not at my age, love
Always felt this. I don't believe for a second the Glazers have ever dropped their 100% silence vow over every decision they've ever made and suddenly started leaking to Goldbridge and his like. It's pure guess work
Speaking of which I do wonder if it's the estimates they've got on stadium redevelopment that had made them change their minds about ownership. Maybe they've concluded to build new or refurbish isn't viable in current financial climate and the yearly costs just to maintain at current standards would be too much going forward as the old place falls further into disrepair
In the NFL, rich owners can just strong arm the local government into paying for a new stadium as a bribe for not taking the franchise away. Doesn't work here, once the stadium is a pit and needs money filling in its on you to stump up the cash. Yet another damning indictment on the Glazers that they duck out on the first sign of actually having to invest.
Exactly people interested should just Google the Bucs stadium and how that came about.
It doesn't just apply to the Glazers or the Bucs. It's pretty much the only model whether you are talking about NBA, NFL or NHL, it's one of the reasons why many fanbases don't look at new ownership that positively since there is the risk of seeing the franchise move to a new city that is willing to pay for brand new infrastructures.
I never got that whole 'moving the franchise' thing, which probably why American fans seem as emotionally attached to their sports team as you might be with a Netflix series you quite like
"Go Team!"
Imagine a new team pitching up in Manchester, London or Liverpool. They'd be hated.
Goldbridge will know feck all
It's common that new stadiums and facilities are being paid by taxes, that's probably why the owners haven't done shit for OT the tax payers aren't ready to pay for it. It's one of the things that happened with the Bucs stadium back in the 90's they also paid portion of the new renovations. To be fair bit City and West Ham are using tax payers paid stadiums. Our owners are not willing to finance the renovation of OT fully out if their pockets.
You can't really make a direct comparison because professional and amateur Football are directly linked and intertwined, almost all professional clubs from amateur local amateur clubs. In the US professional sport aren't organically created, they come from the will of an association(NFL, MLB, NHL or NBA), the professional franchise is a local entity of the larger association.
College sport is the closer equivalent of how sports are organized outside of the US, not professional sport.
true but hardly any of their wealth would be in cash anyway
I get where you are coming from but I feel that there is a bit of naivety here. We are talking about a massive investment, one that the Glazers can't afford themselves, they don't have that kind of money. If I was to look around, Lyon is a good example, they had wealthier owners than United in mainly Seydoux, he spent a fair amount on the club over the years but when it came to funding new infrastructures, he shared the bill with Aulas and the club itself which has led to Lyon not spending on the transfer market and reducing their wage bill for a nearly 5 years.
That's where I feel people are a bit naive. Unless the owner of the club is stupidily wealthy, he won't finance that kind of things fully out of his pockets, most of it will be paid by the club itself or it will be postponed until someone with ridiculously deep pockets and little care for money comes along. The other alternative being a stadium financed through taxes.
Wluld it not be surprising if he was not stupidly wealthy? I mean, who will buy Man Utd or Liverpool now for the type of money being mentioned with less FFP and more competion from Abu Dhabi and Saudi? What will be their motivation? Probably not the free cash flow?
The point was about the Glazers, they are not stupidly wealthy. But even in the case of a stupidly wealthy new owner a fair amount of them care about money and care about not throwing it out of the window. To some extent fans need to pay attention to these things, a financially reckless owner can be worrisome. There is a balance to have between the willingness to spend and being senseless.
I really hope it wont be a condominium that own the club
- Status