Maguire | he stays!

[Adnan]

I'm sure seeing them perform better than United in the opening stages does this no harm. Surely the middle ground is a fixed fee with an obligation to buy after a few matches. If this gets going again and the sticking point is the payoff it's in the club's or the player's best interest to leak what the stumbling block is. If they're paying 30m for him, we can subsidise his wages for the next two years in a lump sum. Certainly better than having a player who doesn't fit the tactical style of play sat on the bench on 190K whilst simultaneously preventing us from getting in a defender who fits.

Romano is saying that United won't accept a straight loan. So i'd assume they'd accept a loan with a obligation to buy.

But the stumbling block is his wages and the Glazers won't give him the £12m pay off he reportedly wants. So it'll be interesting to see how things develop because it seems like Todibo has been lined up if he departs.

 

[Plastic Evra]

I would imagine WHU would cover wages to the same levels they planned to offer previously... So 60-70% give or take ? United covering the rest, probably, but it would be much less controversial within the frame of a loan : it's expected.

Let's be coldly calculating : He'll have better value next summer playing than riding the bench. He'll want to move next year at the latest anyway, in all likelihood.

The only part that is a problem is how to replace him and depending on the loan conditions financially that can maybe be worked out on MU's side.

They're the only takers we have, so if we want him gone...

 

[Jeppers7]

Do one you bell end

 

[Tyrion]

Loan would be a piss-take, we need to sell him. If he goes out on loan his value will only tank once he starts having his "performances"

He was good at Leicester and in his first season here. The problems started when we tried to be more open and he got exposed and his confidence dropped. If he played for a more defensive team like he does for England, I can imagine him doing pretty well.

 

[Bastian]

Romano is saying that United won't accept a straight loan. So i'd assume they'd accept a loan with a obligation to buy.

But the stumbling block is his wages and the Glazers won't give him the £12m pay off he reportedly wants. So it'll be interesting to see how things develop because it seems like Todibo has been lined up if he departs.

Yeah, that's what I assume to be the case too. If reports are to be believed, they'd rather save 6m on one of the biggest transfer mistakes in during their incompetent era than pay him the 12m without the manager using him and getting no one else. Which may bring all sorts of problems with it. Varane's fitness cannot be relied upon, nor Lindelof's, and we're really well positioned to get one of those young centre backs to be mentored by Varane. If it's sensible, they're not interested.

 

[TsuWave]

He was good at Leicester and in his first season here.

I disagree

 

[Tyrion]

I disagree

So we bought him for 80 million for fun?

Edit: looking at the discussion here when we signed him, it seemed most of the caf thought he'd be brilliant.

 

[mu4c_20le]

I disagree

Hindsight is 20/20. Why did the club try to sign him twice?

 

[RedOrange]

Obligation to buy doesn’t mean anything if player refuse to move which Maguire has already done. Next year he will have one year left and will seriously force our hand for a payoff to move on. At this point, anything else than a sale is bad deal for us. Pay him and let him rot in reserve to send out a signal will be better in long term

I'd imagine those involve the player signing a pre-contract agreement before the deal is concluded. The buying and selling club negotiate the potential fee, then the buying club and player agree to a potential contract and sign the agreement, then the overall deal is signed.

 

[RedOrange]

There's a big difference between the head of development and the head scout. The head of development is basically the DoF and Murtough was the DoF at youth level and he put in place the recruitment structure at youth level where he appointed David Harrison as the head of youth scouting to oversee the recruitment at youth level. Harrison was at Man City previously and his role as the head of scouting at youth level is very different to the role of the person who is the head of performance, which is another title which describes a football director, DoF, head of football etc.

And when he was promoted to the first team he was operating within a structure put in place by Ed Woodward who had Bout & Lawlor directing the recruitment with the manager also operating with his own people when it came to recruitment. So my argument always was that you had to allow him to restructure the recruitment structure at first team level and appoint his own people or you'll be judging him on the work of a manager and head scouts put in place by someone else. But most on here don't have a clue about how a recruitment structure functions and hilariously think that a DoF just goes about signing players on his own whim.

Little clubs like Hoffenheim and RB Leipzig operate differently to United but have the advantage of being financially doped up by billionaire owners who have put vast amounts of money into the aforementioned clubs to make them relevant. It's much easier to be a DoF under the RedBull ownership compared to United due to how wealthy the RedBull ownership is compared to the Glazers and the lower expectations that come with a club like RB Leipzig who have struggled to top Dortmund consistently, nevermind Bayern. It's not difficult to be a DoF at the RedBull clubs because the ownership has provided the conditions for the football people to thrive. And how they've done that is by owning 6 other clubs not named Leipzig and Salzburg which gives their scouts a greater scope to stock-pile talent in almost every continent in the world.


Paul Mitchell was a head scout who was given the role of DoF at Monaco and he did a below par job. He almost got fired in his first season and in his second season Monaco finished 6th and didn't even come close to making the champion's league.

I will support any DoF who is given the gig at United. But the DoF role isn't as straight forward as most of you guys think. A club can appoint me to oversee recruitment and I would bring in the young exciting players but would fans show the patience required for those young players to develop like what happens at the Red Bull clubs or Brighton who have a strategy that doesn't necessarily involve winning trophies but rather their aim is to develop and sell players for a profit whilst developing a proactive attacking play style? I don't think you would and in the current EPL where nation states and wealth funds are breaking FFP rules with impunity, it's sensible to re-evaluate your expectations under a ownership that doesn't want to win but wants to instead extract dividends and make a profit on their asset.

Another great Adnan post.

 

[Adnan]

Yeah, that's what I assume to be the case too. If reports are to be believed, they'd rather save 6m on one of the biggest transfer mistakes in during their incompetent era than pay him the 12m without the manager using him and getting no one else. Which may bring all sorts of problems with it. Varane's fitness cannot be relied upon, nor Lindelof's, and we're really well positioned to get one of those young centre backs to be mentored by Varane. If it's sensible, they're not interested.

We really could do with him leaving and then bringing in a replacement like Todibo. But if it is a loan with obligation to buy, then we might also have to try and loan Todibo with a obligation to buy.

 

[Tyrion]

There's a big difference between the head of development and the head scout. The head of development is basically the DoF and Murtough was the DoF at youth level and he put in place the recruitment structure at youth level where he appointed David Harrison as the head of youth scouting to oversee the recruitment at youth level. Harrison was at Man City previously and his role as the head of scouting at youth level is very different to the role of the person who is the head of performance, which is another title which describes a football director, DoF, head of football etc.

And when he was promoted to the first team he was operating within a structure put in place by Ed Woodward who had Bout & Lawlor directing the recruitment with the manager also operating with his own people when it came to recruitment. So my argument always was that you had to allow him to restructure the recruitment structure at first team level and appoint his own people or you'll be judging him on the work of a manager and head scouts put in place by someone else. But most on here don't have a clue about how a recruitment structure functions and hilariously think that a DoF just goes about signing players on his own whim.

Little clubs like Hoffenheim and RB Leipzig operate differently to United but have the advantage of being financially doped up by billionaire owners who have put vast amounts of money into the aforementioned clubs to make them relevant. It's much easier to be a DoF under the RedBull ownership compared to United due to how wealthy the RedBull ownership is compared to the Glazers and the lower expectations that come with a club like RB Leipzig who have struggled to top Dortmund consistently, nevermind Bayern. It's not difficult to be a DoF at the RedBull clubs because the ownership has provided the conditions for the football people to thrive. And how they've done that is by owning 6 other clubs not named Leipzig and Salzburg which gives their scouts a greater scope to stock-pile talent in almost every continent in the world.


Paul Mitchell was a head scout who was given the role of DoF at Monaco and he did a below par job. He almost got fired in his first season and in his second season Monaco finished 6th and didn't even come close to making the champion's league.

I will support any DoF who is given the gig at United. But the DoF role isn't as straight forward as most of you guys think. A club can appoint me to oversee recruitment and I would bring in the young exciting players but would fans show the patience required for those young players to develop like what happens at the Red Bull clubs or Brighton who have a strategy that doesn't necessarily involve winning trophies but rather their aim is to develop and sell players for a profit whilst developing a proactive attacking play style? I don't think you would and in the current EPL where nation states and wealth funds are breaking FFP rules with impunity, it's sensible to re-evaluate your expectations under a ownership that doesn't want to win but wants to instead extract dividends and make a profit on their asset.

I get most of what you're saying bar the last part. United spend enough on transfers to challenge for the title. The problem seems (to me) to be that the people in charge are appointed based on business reasons and don't care about the football side. Woodward should have been sacked years earlier and if he had have been, the Glazers could have actually saved themselves money on wasted transfers. Maybe Murtaugh will make a big difference but the signings of the likes of Antony suggests we're not buying players good enough to win, famous enough to sell shirts or cheaply enough to sell on for a profit. Either way, it seems are business is flawed.

 

[TsuWave]

Hindsight is 20/20. Why did the club try to sign him twice?

The same club that didn't want to sign him previously? The same club that evidently hasn't stumbled through the transfer market with poor decisions over the years? /s. Am I supposed to take United buying a player as corroboration that they're good?

So we bought him for 80 million for fun?

Edit: looking at the discussion here when we signed him, it seemed most of the caf thought he'd be brilliant.

We bought him for 80m because the manager at the time pushed for him. We had an opportunity to sign him earlier for cheaper and decided against it. What's that supposed to mean?

I disagree with a lot of seemingly common views on redcafe - where do we go from here?

I said, we should sell him rather than loan him as I expect his value to tank if we loan him - you said you think he was good xyz years ago for Leicester and supposedly for United - I said I disagree. I watch football with my eyes and form my own opinions, linking me to what random usernames here think won't sway my stance.

 

[GoldanoGraham]

If he doesn’t go permanently then don’t let him leave - let him have limited minutes and see how he takes that - hopefully by Jan he will have got the message

 

[mu4c_20le]

The same club that didn't want to sign him previously? The same club that evidently hasn't stumbled through the transfer market with poor decisions over the years? /s. Am I supposed to take United buying a player as corroboration that they're good?

Didn't want to sign him for the amount that was requested. Not sure why you insist on dying in this hill of hindsight. Saying he isn't a good player now doesn't make you a visionary, in fact you come off as reactionary, and fickle.

 

[Adnan]

I get most of what you're saying bar the last part. United spend enough on transfers to challenge for the title. The problem seems (to me) to be that the people in charge are appointed based on business reasons and don't care about the football side. Woodward should have been sacked years earlier and if he had have been, the Glazers could have actually saved themselves money on wasted transfers. Maybe Murtaugh will make a big difference but the signings of the likes of Antony suggests we're not buying players good enough to win, famous enough to sell shirts or cheaply enough to sell on for a profit. Either way, it seems are business is flawed.

The issue is that what happened before is creating problems now. And it wasn't just Woodward and Judge who made mistakes but also the managers who were culpable. And when everything went up in flames during Ole's tenure with Woodward also departing, they said 'okay John, over to you now'.

So my argument has always been that you have to allow Murtough to restructure the first team football structure like he did at youth level/development level. Or otherwise we will be judging him on the work of the previous head scouts and Matt Judge who was the head of transfer and contract negotiations.

So when he sacked the head scouts at first team level near the end of the season, then it was pretty clear he would be relying on ten Hag for recruitment because he surely couldn't rely on the work of the people he had just sacked. I said this at the time and mentioned that we should see the influence of the new recruitment structure after they had a season to carry out their work. And from what we know thus far, the signings of Hojlund, Mount and the inclusion of Kobbie Mainoo are all borne out of the scouting structure put in place by Murtough. And the only player they've missed out on was the signing of Mike Maignan from AC Milan due to Milan wanting 100m for the GK (according to The Athletic), hence it was sensible to turn to Onana for a much cheaper price.

The Antony signing was definitely overpriced but it came at a time when we had sacked Bout and Lawlor who were the recruitment heads and we also moved Matt Judge on and replaced him with a placeholder in Tom Keane who oversaw the transfer negotiations in the summer of 2022 in a temporary basis. The fulltime replacement only joined in June 2023 from Adidas. I mentioned most of the above last year because I knew once he got rid of the heads of scouting, there could be a few issues.

The damage that has been done previously won't be undone quickly under the current ownership. We have to either follow Arsenal's blueprint where we build/develop a strong team over a number of years or hope the Glazers sell to someone who has the ambition to make us the best again.

 

[caid]

3 games in with a few enforced defensive subs, shaky performances and 0 minutes playing time. Has to be reconsidering staying now surely?
At the same time we're one injury away from playing casemiro at centre back or something so need to bring in a fee for him. How far should we stretch to move him on?

 

[Sakura]

Apparently not accepting a pay cut to move to West Ham is a crime too. It’s quite crazy that people think accepting a huge pay cut is something Maguire should willingly do when when most people wouldn’t even accept a 10% pay cut at their own job.

Imagine if your boss gives you nothing to do all day until you quit.

Some Anti-Work bullshit right there.

Yet, this is what our fans recommend.

 

[TsuWave]

Didn't want to sign him for the amount that was requested. Not sure why you insist on dying in this hill of hindsight. Saying he isn't a good player now doesn't make you a visionary, in fact you come off as reactionary, and fickle.

Nothing that you’ve said in your post applies to me.

Spoiler: Hindsight - Fickle - Reactionary

My post history is consistent regarding Maguire. You may have needed hindsight to think he’s not good - I didn’t - It’s not reactionary nor fickle when that has always been your stance and I’m not trying to come off as a “visionary”. I just don’t think he’s good, and that we should sell him rather than loaning because I expect his value to tank if we loan him. You come off as emotional and needy - you want to be right about Maguire supposedly have been good to the point you tried to use United buying him as corroboration.

I simply just don’t think he’s good or ever was.

 

[mu4c_20le]

Nothing that you’ve said in your post applies to me.

Spoiler: Hindsight - Fickle - Reactionary

My post history is consistent regarding Maguire. You may have needed hindsight to think he’s not good - I didn’t - It’s not reactionary nor fickle when that has always been your stance and I’m not trying to come off as a “visionary”. I just don’t think he’s good, and that we should sell him rather than loaning because I expect his value to tank if we loan him. You come off as emotional and needy - you want to be right about Maguire supposedly have been good to the point you tried to use United buying him as corroboration.

I simply just don’t think he’s good or ever was.

I said the same things about Maguire, this has nothing to do with being right or wrong. He was a solid player back then and Mourinho walked from the job because we didn't sign him. You seem angry with this subject so we'll just leave it there.

 

[Tarrou]

Imagine if your boss gives you nothing to do all day until you quit.

Some Anti-Work bullshit right there.

Yet, this is what our fans recommend.

Or I could get a new job doing more work and for less pay. Tough one!

 

[TsuWave]

I said the same things about Maguire, this has nothing to do with being right or wrong. He was a solid player back then and Mourinho walked from the job because we didn't sign him. You seem angry with this subject so we'll just leave it there.

So now Mourinho being fired is being rewritten as "walked from the job because we didn't sign Maguire"? Incredible stuff

I disagree that he was a "solid" player - and I'm not arguing being right or wrong - that seems really important to you, I just don't care. I came into this thread and said I hope for a permanent move not a loan as I expect his value to tank with a loan, and someone else said they thought Maguire was good x amount of years ago - and I politely said "I disagree". It then weirdly became an exercise for you and said poster to try and sway me by using United transfer policy or redcafe posts as corroboration - and when I said those things won't move me, you started projecting - to which I replied with my post history regarding Maguire to highlight your projections aren't applicable to me.

I'm not angry, I just think this whole exchange has been odd. You randomly started projecting and then went further with "being right or wrong" What's going on? I just want the player sold rather than loaned, and I disagree with people that think he was good - he never was for me - but I don't feel the need to go out of my way to convince people otherwise, I just say "I disagree" and go about my day.

 

[Sky1981]

The issue is that what happened before is creating problems now. And it wasn't just Woodward and Judge who made mistakes but also the managers who were culpable. And when everything went up in flames during Ole's tenure with Woodward also departing, they said 'okay John, over to you now'.

So my argument has always been that you have to allow Murtough to restructure the first team football structure like he did at youth level/development level. Or otherwise we will be judging him on the work of the previous head scouts and Matt Judge who was the head of transfer and contract negotiations.

So when he sacked the head scouts at first team level near the end of the season, then it was pretty clear he would be relying on ten Hag for recruitment because he surely couldn't rely on the work of the people he had just sacked. I said this at the time and mentioned that we should see the influence of the new recruitment structure after they had a season to carry out their work. And from what we know thus far, the signings of Hojlund, Mount and the inclusion of Kobbie Mainoo are all borne out of the scouting structure put in place by Murtough. And the only player they've missed out on was the signing of Mike Maignan from AC Milan due to Milan wanting 100m for the GK (according to The Athletic), hence it was sensible to turn to Onana for a much cheaper price.

The Antony signing was definitely overpriced but it came at a time when we had sacked Bout and Lawlor who were the recruitment heads and we also moved Matt Judge on and replaced him with a placeholder in Tom Keane who oversaw the transfer negotiations in the summer of 2022 in a temporary basis. The fulltime replacement only joined in June 2023 from Adidas. I mentioned most of the above last year because I knew once he got rid of the heads of scouting, there could be a few issues.

The damage that has been done previously won't be undone quickly under the current ownership. We have to either follow Arsenal's blueprint where we build/develop a strong team over a number of years or hope the Glazers sell to someone who has the ambition to make us the best again.

Money is never an issue. We just dont know what to do with it. The amount of money we squandered on dross is bordering blasphemy

There absolutely no reason that we cant play functional tactics and good football after spending half a billion on practically new players, let alone still needing 2 DM, 2CM, RW, and the never-ending story.

 

[Idxomer]

Haha slabheaded prick. He can get fecked

I’m too good to play for West Ham and too good for a pay cut.

oh but actually I’ve just realised I’m 6th choice, the manager hates me and I’m going to lose my England place. So can I have a loan where I get to play and get my full wages paid. Meanwhile you can’t sign a replacement because I’m still on your books.

Yep, this is all very obvious. I did predict he would want to go when he doesn't see the pitch in the first few weeks of the season.

I would say keep him as a 5th or a 6th choice if he doesn't want to go permanently. Maybe if there's a 10m loan fee or something, we could let him go.

 

[mu4c_20le]

So now Mourinho being fired is being rewritten as "walked from the job because we didn't sign Maguire"? Incredible stuff

I disagree that he was a "solid" player - and I'm not arguing being right or wrong - that seems really important to you, I just don't care. I came into this thread and said I hope for a permanent move not a loan as I expect his value to tank with a loan, and someone else said they thought Maguire was good x amount of years ago - and I politely said "I disagree". It then weirdly became an exercise for you and said poster to try and sway me by using United transfer policy or redcafe posts as corroboration - and when I said those things won't move me, you started projecting - to which I replied with my post history regarding Maguire to highlight your projections aren't applicable to me.

I'm not angry, I just think this whole exchange has been odd. You randomly started projecting and then went further with "being right or wrong" What's going on? I just want the player sold rather than loaned, and I disagree with people that think he was good - he never was for me - but I don't feel the need to go out of my way to convince people otherwise, I just say "I disagree" and go about my day.

No one is trying to sway you. Why did Mourinho get fired again? Tell me the right answer.

 

[AndySmith1990]

Apparently not accepting a pay cut to move to West Ham is a crime too. It’s quite crazy that people think accepting a huge pay cut is something Maguire should willingly do when when most people wouldn’t even accept a 10% pay cut at their own job.

For millions of people a 10% pay cut would mean the difference between being able to pay their rent and not, or being able to eat more than beans on toast every day.
For those with good careers and a good wage it's really not uncommon to take a pay cut to move to a place of work that makes them happier. I know this because I took less pay to move from a shitty Manchester City center to work in an office located in a quiet little village in Chester, and I'm not the only one.
If Maguire would rather sit on his arse doing nothing for the sake of an extra few million, it says a lot about him as a person

 

[Regulus Arcturus Black]

Imagine if your boss gives you nothing to do all day until you quit.

Some Anti-Work bullshit right there.

Aye, footballers only work one day a week

It’s actually the equivalent of having to work as much as everyone else at work in the week, but doesn’t get to go to the fun weekend party. Or actually, he has to go to the party but aint allowed inside.

 

[Wednesday at Stoke]

For millions of people a 10% pay cut would mean the difference between being able to pay their rent and not, or being able to eat more than beans on toast every day.
For those with good careers and a good wage it's really not uncommon to take a pay cut to move to a place of work that makes them happier. I know this because I took less pay to move from a shitty Manchester City center to work in an office located in a quiet little village in Chester, and I'm not the only one.
If Maguire would rather sit on his arse doing nothing for the sake of an extra few million, it says a lot about him as a person

All it says about him is that he is a rational human being.

 

[Oranges038]

So now Mourinho being fired is being rewritten as "walked from the job because we didn't sign Maguire"? Incredible stuff

I disagree that he was a "solid" player - and I'm not arguing being right or wrong - that seems really important to you, I just don't care. I came into this thread and said I hope for a permanent move not a loan as I expect his value to tank with a loan, and someone else said they thought Maguire was good x amount of years ago - and I politely said "I disagree". It then weirdly became an exercise for you and said poster to try and sway me by using United transfer policy or redcafe posts as corroboration - and when I said those things won't move me, you started projecting - to which I replied with my post history regarding Maguire to highlight your projections aren't applicable to me.

I'm not angry, I just think this whole exchange has been odd. You randomly started projecting and then went further with "being right or wrong" What's going on? I just want the player sold rather than loaned, and I disagree with people that think he was good - he never was for me - but I don't feel the need to go out of my way to convince people otherwise, I just say "I disagree" and go about my day.

Not exactly true, he was sacked because the results were shit, the football was shit and the players clearly didn't like him.

But from the moment Jose was told no about a few players, he went into his usual self sabotage mode, to make sure he was getting sacked.

 

[Zoo]

 

[Plastic Evra]

The dream is (re-)dead.

 

[Slevs]

Give the guy a stupid contract, face the consequences.

As much as I want him gone, he's well within his rights to sit on his arse the entire day (if that's what the manager wants) and get his agreed upon paycheck.

Makes me laugh when people say they'd leave, go to another place, work more and get paid less. Yeah right.

 

[Marwood]

Give the guy a stupid contract, face the consequences.

As much as I want him gone, he's well within his rights to sit on his arse the entire day (if that's what the manager wants) and get his agreed upon paycheck.

Makes me laugh when people say they'd leave, go to another place, work more and get paid less. Yeah right.

Because some people might want to actually achieve something from their work? Have that feeling of contributing, being part of something.

Besides that all these comparisons between footballers and people who work regular jobs are a bit silly.

 

[Marcus]

Unless we really have an player concretely already lined up, keeping Maguire is an ok state of affairs. Rather keep him than lose him with no replacement.

 

[Plastic Evra]

Makes me laugh when people say they'd leave, go to another place, work more and get paid less. Yeah right.

Some did and do, it happens. But it's not uncommon for people to keep bad jobs because of pay (one might say that's the default state of most employees, in a sense). There's a very absolutist, black and white approach to those discussions largely driven by what we project in that mythical professional athlete image.

 

[UnofficialDevil]

Massive downer

 

[philippexyz]

This ship has sailed, loan does nothing for us. Only permanent transfer with enough time to bring in a replacement, but it's too late now - he rejected it when it was possible. Let him sit on the bench as the 4th choice CB and pray that whenever he is on the pitch, forced by circumstances, it doesn't end up in a disaster.

Another, among countless consequences of the Glazer(Woodward) Apocalypse/Tragedy that we'll have to endure. Harry will be here for two more years sitting on the bench and collecting fat paychecks, and there's nothing we can really do about it. That's life.

 

[TheRedDevil'sAdvocate]

Because some people might want to actually achieve something from their work? Have that feeling of contributing, being part of something.

Besides that all these comparisons between footballers and people who work regular jobs are a bit silly.

I'm with you, but that notion is truly dead and gone with the money in the game nowadays at the highest level. Once players break into that 1% of the privileged footballers who play for the top clubs, all they care about is adding zeros to their banking accounts. If you're good at popular sports, the sports entertainment business can be an El Dorado in this age. When the money becomes that much and you see everyone else around you getting their hands on it, it's all you think about.

 

[Champ]

Because some people might want to actually achieve something from their work? Have that feeling of contributing, being part of something.

Besides that all these comparisons between footballers and people who work regular jobs are a bit silly.

By all accounts Maguire wants to fight for his place back at United, which is commendable and should be encouraged in my eyes.

 

[Fortitude]

Imagine if it’s West Ham who are indifferent toward Maguire… literally an entire summer window and no takers, not even Moyes. Imagine that.

I’d wager it’s a bluff though; they’re sensing a bargain basement purchase.