I wonder what discussions we will have if we get Mbappe:
“950 k per week I can live with, but 990 k, no way’”
“950 k per week I can live with, but 990 k, no way’”
Marcus Rashford new contract thread | It's officially signed
- Thread starter golden_blunder
- Start date
- Status
You are talking as a fan of a club who just has 3 other amazing goal scoring attackers waiting on the bench who are just waiting for Rashford to leave so they can score for fun for United.
Whereas in reality Rashford is currently our only goal scorer and every other striker we are linked with will cost 100 mil plus the wages Rashford is demanding or slightly less. But the 100 mil fee will still be there (even if we get a striker who demands half of the wages, the total transfer costs will still be insane). And we already need one. If Rashford leaves we need two quality goal scorers.
Also what other clubs are paying is just a reference point. At the end what matters most is what Rashford is worth to United. How important is he for the club. How highly does the manager rate him.
What Spurs pay their players will hardly matter when making a decision about Rashford.
I just feel this is more Woodward type thinking we've seen over the last decade, we're desperate so let's pay over the odds every single time because we don't have a choice, but we get seen as an easy mark basically, so we end up paying 20% more than any other club would for the same player. Even city with their oil millions don't seem to get fleeced like we do. And this idea of well we don't want him to leave so give him what he wants is just more of the same
The point is that’s what players are being paid.
Moaning about Rashford getting a potential contract that puts him on terms similar to his peers is nonsensical.
If you could re-write history & start again then fine make that argument but offer him less & he walks. £80mil gets you a Mudryk & Antony in this market, that’s without wages. The proposed wage for Rashford is better business.
Let’s all come into your world for a minute, we offer Rashford whatever you feel is acceptable & he refuses what next? Are you buying a similar player for the £20 million you’re on about wages & fees included per year?
Who are you replacing Rashford with if he walks after rejecting your 275k a week deal?
Exactly. @jm99 wants to roll the clock back to zero and start paying players what he thinks they are worth.
It’s not give him what he wants. Don’t exaggerate. I am sure he wants even more. He probably didn’t ask for exactly 375 k or whatever.
The club has probably been working on a package and considering the structure of bonus, etc. If the club just gave him what he wanted then the contract would have been signed ages ago.
Why do you keep reverting back to this hypothetical? If someone who hasn't performed to Rashford's level and who is replacable pulls this same move, for example Wan Bissaka, then we can refuse to pay him what we wants. Just like we did with Lingard and Pogba. You seem to be getting worked up over imaginary scenarios that you've created in your own head.
Exactly. @jm99 wants to roll the clock back to zero and start paying players what he thinks they are worth.
I want the club to change, we've spent nearly a billion in the last decade, but gotten about 500m worth of talent from that, while City spending similar amounts have gotten value for their money.
No one’s arguing that though, they’re arguing you aren’t going to get him at the lowball number you’ve suggested.
You can tell when someone’s argument is failing when the strawman arrives.
Because we've seen it happen at other clubs like Barcelona and we've seen it happen here after sanchez' contract which set a precedent that let de gea ask for even mote, which meant varane felt justified getting that amount too.
Underpaying your best players isn’t the way to do that. Not overpaying your worst players is.
I don't think 300k a week is low ball for rashford in any sense and if he'd rather get 400k a week at psg than 300k a week here then he's a mercenary and can feck off to paris
300k a week is not underpaying rashford who's biggest accomplishment is winning a league Cup ffs
It is when the cost of a replacement is 100-150 million and is paid even more
If you pay Rashford whatever he wants up to a max of transfer + wages of another replacement, then what do you do with Bruno? Shaw? Even AWB? That sort of thinking is moronic imo, and misses the bigger picture.
We have to run at a profit to exist, unlike some of our peers. Therefore our incomings have to exceed outgoings, the largest for us being wages. And Big Ed completely f'ckd that up by making decisions just like the above.
Give Marcus a great offer. Make him one of the top 20 in the prem. But don't make him the highest just because of fear.
A sensible wage structure at United will make us a better team in the end. Not Spurs sensible, but not us over the last 10 years either.
We have to run at a profit to exist, unlike some of our peers. Therefore our incomings have to exceed outgoings, the largest for us being wages. And Big Ed completely f'ckd that up by making decisions just like the above.
Give Marcus a great offer. Make him one of the top 20 in the prem. But don't make him the highest just because of fear.
A sensible wage structure at United will make us a better team in the end. Not Spurs sensible, but not us over the last 10 years either.
It is changing. ETH will clear house. It looks like we will have a new owner soon who will hopefully hire competent people - as long as ETH is manager that will be ensured.
Just because we have made mistakes in the past, it doesn't mean that we now put a line in the sand and try and underpay Rashford. He has given us great service for years and under ETH i think he's only going to get better.
Jesus. Another imaginary scenario that you're getting worked up over. Rashford and the club have been quietly negotiating a new contract these past few months. During that period, we haven't heard one leak about how he would be open to moving to PSG like we heard every month from Pogba’s camp. All he wants is the best possible deal from his boyhood club. There's nothing wrong with that. We'd all do the same in his position.
So when It's time to renew Bruno, let's give him the same yeah? Because it would cost more to replace him. So we then have 3 players (Bruno, varane and rashford) on a combined 60m wage bill plus sancho on the same so 80m for those 4, do people realise how far behind city we are? We can't afford to throw this kind of money at these players who while good aren't top 5-10 in the league.
Guaranteed Next season when rashford has a downturn in form there's going to be lots of cries of wtf did we give him 20m a year for 4 years
Of course we woukd, i dont blame him, I don't blame Maguire for us spending 90m on him or sancho for spending 80m on him and giving him 375k a week, but I can criticise thr decision
But why is 15m a year underpaying?
Hang on a second. You were not long ago saying.....
...who we all know has won four fifths of feck all!
Rashford holds all the cards here, he's about to enter his prime years, United either sell him now or give him a big contract, because if they don't he'll be walking in a year's time, United can't afford to not giving him the big contract unless they can guarantee a top level striker is arriving to replace him
Kane has had 6 20+goal league seasons and 4 25+ goal league seasons, is England's record scorer and on course to be the prem record scorer, these things are still achievements
Rashford has had one seaosn in his career where he's scored more than 25 in all comps, and not a single one where he's broken 20 league goals. He scored 5 in 32 last year, it's an enormous risk to be giving 20m a year to a player for 4 or 5 years when 2 years ago he was a goal every 6 game player, who's only broken a 1 in 2 ratio once in his career, this season, and his ratio was 0,53 goals per game.
None of this suggests 375k a week is anything close to appropriate
But look at other well run clubs in Europe, salah isn't even on 375k a week for liverpool, real Madrid sold varane, sold Ronaldo let ramos go rather than bow to their demands. We look at these clubs and wish we could be as well run as them, then when someone suggests doing things the way they do, everyone loses their mind
Because others are getting more.
You keep ignoring, the fact that others were signed with huge transfer fee's is part of the equation.
The Enzo Fernández deal is costing Chelsea 550k a week over 9 years (wages + transfer fee). And likely more if he kicks up a stink after a few years and demands a higher salary.
You are also not answering who you replace Rashford with?
United are doing the right thing here. Every day they don't sign Rashford to a long term deal, his market value drops.
You want to let Rashford go on a free, in a market where Atalanta want 70mil for Rasmus Hojlund after 9 league Serie A goals?
That'd really show everyone we meant business.
Salah is getting less though, and he's a much better player, that's how well run clubs operate, that's why we've spent about twice as much as Liverpool and ended up with about half the talent.
I don't know who I'm replacing him with, I don't have access to endless scouting reports, real madrid got vinicius for 40m, Liverpool got salah for less.
What has rashford actually done to earn this. A 30 goal sesosn, that came right after a 5 goal seaosn. He's been far too inconsistent to warrant 20m a year locked in for 5 years. What if he reverts to his form from last season and we're stuck spending 100m on a 5 goal a seaosn player?
Ronaldo and Ramos were in their 30's, there's no comparison, if Salah was signing his deal now at the same age he'd be looking for the same money
United just finished top 4, do you think we'll finish top 4 again without Rashford or an even more expensive replacement because I don't.
No I want to offer rashford an amount commensurate with his ability and accomplishments and hopefully he'll accept, I don't think anyone bar psg is going to pay him 400k a week. Didn't pogba try the same gambit, run his contract down, turned down a contract from us and ended up having to take less from juventus because no one would oay the 500k a week he thought he would get?
This is exactly the metric that it should be based upon. United know it, Rashford's agents know it.
Ronaldo at 33 was a better player than has rashford has ever been or will ever be. He scored 81 league goals in 3 years at juventus, Rashford currently has 76 league goals for us total
Pogba's agents thought the same, turned down an offer from us because he assumed he'd get more as a free agent and had to take less than 200k a week from juventus because it turned out he wouldn't
Pogba was crocked and deluded, he was never going to get what he wanted
Rashford knows that PSG will pay him 400K a week, it's especially with Messi and most like Mbappe leaving, not really a gamble for him
How do you know they didn't and he rejected it?
For a free transfer, clubs would be climbing over themselves to get Rashford. Look at what they are giving to bang average players in terms of contract + transfers right now.
Pogba different - he was always injured and seen as a declining, problematic player. Rashford coming into his prime on the back of his best season. Come on man - use your loaf!
I honestly think that some fans begrudge giving the top salaries to home grown players. They would rather bank on their loyalty and expect them to take less.
And with the Saudis most of our first teasers could get 500k a week tax free so maybe that shouldn't be the metric, 300k a week in the best league in the world is better than 400k a week wasting your career in France, there's a reason mbappe doesn't want to stick around despite getting about 2 million a week
We should have sold (still should sell) him for £100million he’s too inconsistent and when he’s bad he contributes nothing.
- Status