Not sure what you're waffling about. We make enough revenue to be successful. The owners simply don't care about that
Fabian Ruiz
- Thread starter jamesjimmybyrondean
- Start date
ok...... about this bridge ...
When will people learn not to believe every fecker on Twitter who says we are linked to X player.
PSG were only interested in Sanches after Campos arrived. And you don’t know if United could have convinced him or not. Vitinha would have improved us but Im happy with Eriksen on a free.
Main point was they signed 3 midfielders for not alot of money. Some seem to think these things are impossible
And we spend the revenues that we make, our issues have little to do with ambition. One obvious issue with our midfield is that the players we currently have are not that well rounded which limits the possible combinations and the type of players that we can target. The other issue is that we routinely spend a fortune on relatively average players which has mid term consequences, it limits our ability to sell them if it doesn't work and limits our future funds.
I wish this notion that the Glazers don't spend would die a horrible death. Our issue is not the amount, it's who we (used to) spend it on
The thing that made Carrick so good is that he was able to do both roles. Good enough defensively to be the main defensive midfielder, and good enough on the ball to be our main playmaker (although obviously he played second fiddle when next to Scholes). There are obviously midfielders who are/were better in one aspect than him, but very very few could match him in both. What I'd give to have a young Michael Carrick at the base of our midfield.
With it being pretty much impossible to find someone that provides that near-perfect balance, we have to choose to prefer one or the other. Much of the fanbase seem to want us to favour the defensive side of things, whereas ETH certainly seems to favour the ball-playing ability. Which should hopefully be fine as long as the player next to him does a good amount of defensive work himself.
Our recruitment is shambles. PSG taking piss with number of players they have for midfield.
But who can spend 40million quid and have the sit in the bench as 3rd choice?
Resources also ensure that there is oy a marginal drop-off after your first 11.
Also allows you to correct for your botchups. With the Woodward's disaster we have very little rope to play with.
Bet City, psg or now Newcastle will have an infinite length of rope to make the necessary course correction if they were inflated with a similar disaster.
Don't think this touches the point I was trying to make, but of course you're right having a limitless budget somewhat reduces the risk of expensive signings. Just look at City buying a new £50m defender every season until they found a pairing that works
We also pay out dividends and pay off debt. Overall I agree but you seem to be suggesting we couldn’t sell and replace a midfielder to give more rounded options, which isn’t true
Look at how cheap PSG revamped their entire Midfield.
Meanwhile look at us......
Meanwhile look at us......
I agree about the 1.3billion spent. The glazers can't be accused of being like an owner like an Ashley.
Nobody hits a home run with every CEO/regime.
Having unlimited resources would have allowed us to do any course correction without skipping a beat.
Do they have a choice? They have Messi, neynar and mbappe to pay for. Something has got to give
Both right. We spend money, we just spend it awfully.
I had hoped having a Football Director would help change this. However, so far, it's just more of the same.
Indeed, Rafinha and Drexel can also play centrally in a 343/523 formations, but I think they are also on the transfer list too.
Let's see what PSG do with regards to outgoings, they need to clear out the additional midfielders they hoarded unnecessarily
Wouldn't surprise me. Even if De Jong was presented with a Chelsea shirt they'd probably claim it's not a good enough source judging from what I've seen of that thread.Going by how people react to news in the FDJ thread: “It’s in the bag“
Tot be fair we spend less and less these days.
We on. 45 mil net spend or something with a squad that needs another 5 good players pronto.
But yes we could also spend better.
Main thing is we waste dall the money in previous years and now the new manager gets fecked over.
All started and completed within 24 hours … back to the FDJ thread I guess
In order to sell and replace players you need to have buyers, it has nothing to do with ambitions.
Its reported we turned down offer for McTominay this summer because we see him as essential to our plans.
One thing is I never mentioned ambitions, Im saying it is not impossible with a proper plan and also doesn’t need to cost a lot of money
Do you not think repeatedly spending it poorly is linked to ambition? If the glazers truly gave a shit about our pretty horrendous results to resource ratio due to the ineptitude of footballing decisions made do you think maybe they’d have actually made tangible change to the decision making powers? If a company isn’t performing usually changes are made. Woodward left of his own accord and our new team are people here before so you’d have to assume from their perspective we are performing. Todd Boehly has come in, decided to give whatever the manager needs to compete in one season and on top of that is doing everything he can to get Michael Edwards - a proven winner - for the future. When have we ever shown ambition like that under this ownership? Every season the message is it’s a process and we can’t do everything in one summer.
I care more about winning trophies more than our owners. I’d be a great owner if I had billions of oil money.
That's a completely different argument though. And one I agree with. Didn't mean to absolve the Glazers of any blame, I just don't think the financial effort is the issue. The structure and staff they installed and allowed to underperform for a decade is an entirely different beast, something they really have to take responsibility for
You are bound to spend less every years when you massively increase your wage bill, it's not as if your revenues increase at a similar pace. An analogy would be that if I have 200€ to spare every month and purchases something that costs me 150€ per month, unless I make more money I only have 50€ to spare instead of previously 200€.
I was getting dogs abuse in there for saying that. I don’t know what they are holding onto
Not that it matters now, but if you mean the graphic that @sullydnl posted, then you read it wrong. He gets dispossessed less often than de Jong, despite being on the ball more often.
The point of my post was about ambition because it was the topic of the conversation. No one told you that it was impossible to do anything without a plan or under different circumstances.
Oh I totally agree. You can’t argue with the funds we have spent on transfers and wages.
Pretty sure you said we couldn't sign Sanches because he only wanted PSG which is untrue.
If we want to talk about ambition, we haven’t shown enough yet. Hiring a competent manager is a start
Which has nothing to do with the post you responded to.
We are assuming that Mctough and ETH are not stupid and that they know what's going on within the 2 other parties.
You were getting 'dogs abuse' because you behaved like a twat
The response.
We also pay out dividends and pay off debt. Overall I agree but you seem to be suggesting we couldn’t sell and replace a midfielder to give more rounded options, which isn’t true
You suggested we didn't have offers to shift midfielders. In the end its excuses because that again is untrue.
Ambition would be forgoing dividends to increase the budget too. All in all you can rightly question ambition at United.
I responded to a general point made by andysmith about ambition and someone's wealth. You can read and know it, so move away with your nonsense and trying to find suggstions that aren't there.
Yep, presumably because he dribbles less. Though that also means you don't get the benefit that brings.
He is right though, we spend a ton of money, not much less than city and yet we are 6th.
Indeed. An ambitious club looks at the performances, comes to the conclusion Woodward and everyone he's hired is not fit for purpose, and proceeds to hire the best people available to maximise the performance in relation to money spent, therefore providing the best possible chance to win trophies.
I’m a twat and you’re a stalker. We’re a match made in heaven.
In theory I agree with that. The only issue and that's where I stand based on what the Glazers have also done in the NFL, their issue is with competency. What you described only applies to someone that is competent.