Marcus Rashford new contract thread | It's officially signed

[Withnail]

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?

What if he reverts to his worst ever season, that was a shitshow from start to finish for everyone involved, with one manager who wasn't good enough and the players had clearly lost faith in on his way out replaced by a clueless interim, with nobody playing very well and also while recovering from surgery/injury? Is that very likely?

This season he's continued on the upward trajectory that was interrupted by injury/surgery so it's a return to form this season. The poor form was a blip imo.

 

[jm99]

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.

What has rashford done to elevate himself to this stratosphere, because last year most people said they'd bite PSG's hand off for 60m, so is it entirely based on one good season. He did well, but 300k a week already puts him in the top 15 earners in the league, he doesn't warrant top 5

 

[jm99]

What if he reverts to his worst ever season, that was a shitshow from start to finish for everyone involved, with one manager who wasn't good enough and the players had clearly lost faith in on his way out replaced by a clueless interim, with nobody playing very well and also while recovering from surgery/injury? Is that very likely?

This season he's continued on the upward trajectory that was interrupted by injury/surgery so it's a return to form this season. The poor form was a blip imo.

Even this seaspn he's been inconsistent, he's had great periods but also periods where he offers very little. I don't think that warrants top 5 salary in the league .

Wilson at Newcastle and toney at Brentford both outscored him in les games, would anyone want them in on 375k a week?

 

[ThierryHenry14]

Because if the only metric is what would replacing him cost, then you could argue that 500k a week would be worth it, when it clearly isn't. Which 30 goal player is available for less than 100m for a transfer fee and wages over a 4 year contract? That's why it's stupid to say let's base it only on what it would cost to replace him. How much more will it cost when every other player adds 50k a week onto their demands to renew when they see what rashford gets

This is probably my last reply on this topic.

If Rashford's agent test the water in the open market that he can get a 500k contract else where (for example PSG), then he will probably ask for somewhere close to 500k. There is a risk that he may get injured next season, or his performance may not be as good as last season. That is a risk he needs to take, so it makes sense for him to accept a lower offer from Man Utd. Does it make sense? I am sure both Rashford's agent and Man Utd did the homework.

For a club with the status like Man Utd, you keep your best player and keep looking to improve the squad to make it more competitive, rather than selling your best player entering his prime, unless the player doesn't want to stay, or it becomes too expensive and the club can't afford to keep him, like Messi to Barca. Does it make sense? Man Utd is not Brighton. If Caicedo plays for Utd and ask for a new contract, Utd will award him a new contract that reflect his market value, rather than sell him, right?

 

[jm99]

This is probably my last reply on this topic.

If Rashford's agent test the water in the open market that he can get a 500k contract else where (for example PSG), then he will probably ask for somewhere close to 500k. There is a risk that he may get injured next season, or his performance may not be as good as last season. That is a risk he needs to take, so it makes sense for him to accept a lower offer from Man Utd. Does it make sense? I am sure both Rashford's agent and Man Utd did the homework.

For a club with the status like Man Utd, you keep your best player and keep looking to improve the squad to make it more competitive, rather than selling your best player entering his prime, unless the player doesn't want to stay, or it becomes too expensive and the club can't afford to keep him, like Messi to Barca. Does it make sense? Man Utd is not Brighton. If Caicedo plays for Utd and ask for a new contract, Utd will award him a new contract that reflect his market value, rather than sell him, right?

Almost any player can get 500k a week at Saudi Arabia, is that what we now have to pay because that's the new market rate?

 

[Red in STL]

Almost any player can get 500k a week at Saudi Arabia, is that what we now have to pay because that's the new market rate?

Not yet but it might very well be the case in future, and there's one or two still awaiting a response on who your alternative to Rashford is

 

[jm99]

Not yet but it might very well be the case in future, and there's one or two still awaiting a response on who your alternative to Rashford is

And if I had the resources of united's scouting department I'd give them an answer, I don't know who's available and for how much, I don't know what we actually have to spend this year, what I do know is giving players 20m a year for 4 or 5 years after one good season is symptomatic of the Ed Woodward years and I don't want to see that continue. Plus are we selling rashford in this hypothetical or is he running down his contract?

 

[cyberman]

And if I had the resources of united's scouting department I'd give them an answer, I don't know who's available and for how much, I don't know what we actually have to spend this year, what I do know is giving players 20m a year for 4 or 5 years after one good season is symptomatic of the Ed Woodward years and I don't want to see that continue. Plus are we selling rashford in this hypothetical or is he running down his contract?

One good season?

 

[united_99]

People don’t need to worry about Bruno. He signed a new contract recently until 2027. Shaw also signed recently.

On another note Ronaldo was getting around 500 k from us and I don’t see any of our other players asking for the same.

Rashford has everything in his favour currently (age, form, home grown, attacking player, profile/marketable).

People don’t unnecessarily need to worry about scenarios which are not happening.

 

[Withnail]

Even this seaspn he's been inconsistent, he's had great periods but also periods where he offers very little. I don't think that warrants top 5 salary in the league .

Wilson at Newcastle and toney at Brentford both outscored him in les games, would anyone want them in on 375k a week?

Every goal scorer that isn't Ronaldo, Messi or Haaland is 'inconsistent' by that logic.

He's our main goal threat. We need to complement him with more goalscorers not bin him off because you think the reported wages (which haven't been verified) are too high.

Toney scored 14 non-penalty goals and Wilson 15 to Rashford's 16 and they pretty much only had PL games to worry about so the extra rest would have helped them. They're also both CFs so it's not really like for like.

 

[jm99]

One good season?

Well certainly no one would have suggested 375k a week after last season. So the bulk of it is based on this one good season, most people wanted to sell him after last season, to go from that to double his salary is based off basically one good season yeah. And again I'm not saying don't give a pay increase but 375k feels way overboard. And I can guarantee next year there will be a lot of people moaning about it

 

[gaffs]

What has rashford done to elevate himself to this stratosphere, because last year most people said they'd bite PSG's hand off for 60m, so is it entirely based on one good season. He did well, but 300k a week already puts him in the top 15 earners in the league, he doesn't warrant top 5

On a macro level, if there was a magical metric to calculate exactly what each players is worth, there is an argument to say that Rashford should be a top 10 / top 15, paid player. I agree, if i was picking my top 10 players in the league, he probably wouldn't be in it.

But that is not how it works in reality, which has been explained at nauseam.

Rashford is....
an absolutely vital player for United right now.
at a club with one of the biggest budgets in world football (which could increase under new ownership)
coming off his best season.
about to be in his last year of his contract.
almost impossible to replace for a better price.

All this adds up to a very easy negotiation for his agents.

 

[jm99]

Every goal scorer that isn't Ronaldo, Messi or Haaland is 'inconsistent' by that logic.

He's our main goal threat. We need to complement him with more goalscorers not bin him off because you think the reported wages (which haven't been verified) are too high.

Toney scored 14 non-penalty goals and Wilson 15 to Rashford's 16 and they pretty much only had PL games to worry about so the extra rest would have helped them. They're also both CFs so it's not really like for like.

Rashford was the key man in our attack, so it doesn't matter that he wasn't cf, because he plays better off the wing. Its not every goal scorer that isn't Ronaldo Messi or haaland, rahsford has 49 league goals in the last 4 seasons. If he played for another team would anyone want him brought in as the highest paid player in the league?

 

[jm99]

On a macro level, if there was a magical metric to calculate exactly what each players is worth, there is an argument to say that Rashford should be a top 10 / top 15, paid player. I agree, if i was picking my top 10 players in the league, he probably wouldn't be in it.

But that is not how it works in reality, which has been explained at nauseam.

Rashford is....
an absolutely vital player for United right now.
at a club with one of the biggest budgets in world football (which could increase under new ownership)
coming off his best season.
about to be in his last year of his contract.
almost impossible to replace for a better price.

All this adds up to a very easy negotiation for his agents.

That doesn't change that we're definitely overpaying, and that this seems like more of the Woodward shit. Tbh we should never let players get down to their last year anyway

 

[gaffs]

Again @jm99

Who you bringing in if Rashford walks?

@jm99 still not answering this.

 

[Red in STL]

And if I had the resources of united's scouting department I'd give them an answer, I don't know who's available and for how much, I don't know what we actually have to spend this year, what I do know is giving players 20m a year for 4 or 5 years after one good season is symptomatic of the Ed Woodward years and I don't want to see that continue. Plus are we selling rashford in this hypothetical or is he running down his contract?

Well the closest in age and ability that might be available plays for Napoli. Kane aside, everyone else who appears attainable are young and unproven, do we really want to go in to next season with only a yoing unproven striker and Martial?

As for selling him, he's in the same position contract wise as Kane is and Spurs are being mostly slammed for not cashing in, if he refuses to sign a new contract then yes we should sell him

 

[jm99]

@jm99 still not answering this.

I've answered a couple of times, I don't know who. I don't have access to man united's scouts, I don't know who's available. I, like most people, get yo mainly watch my own clubs games and maybe some other big cl games, I don't have scouts going to watch atalanta or napoli.

This is such a weird gotcha, oh you don't know exactly who to bring in to replace rashford, we should definitely pay him 20m a year for 4 years then

 

[jm99]

Well the closest in age and ability that might be available plays for Napoli. Kane aside, everyone else who appears attainable are young and unproven, do we really want to go in to next season with only a yoing unproven striker and Martial?

As for selling him, he's in the same position contract wise as Kane is and Spurs are being mostly slammed for not cashing in, if he refuses to sign a new contract then yes we should sell him

But look at likee vinicius, Madrid got him for 40m and he's far better, I don't know who we should get,though. Manchester United pay scouts so that they can get an idea. I just feel that 375k a week for rashford feels like Woodward never left. It feels like the kind of deal that could backfire on us, rashford at his best is great, but he never feels consistent enough to warrant that kind of pay

 

[Withnail]

Rashford was the key man in our attack, so it doesn't matter that he wasn't cf, because he plays better off the wing. Its not every goal scorer that isn't Ronaldo Messi or haaland, rahsford has 49 league goals in the last 4 seasons. If he played for another team would anyone want him brought in as the highest paid player in the league?

Well he was also played out of position a fair bit and he was our main attacker because we had no CF to speak of in a disjointed front line.

We all know he had a dip in form but there are a lot of mitigating factors for that. If we were to sell him we would get upwards of 100m and he'd be on very high wages elsewhere. I don't even see how that is up for debate.

 

[Withnail]

But look at likee vinicius, Madrid got him for 40m and he's far better, I don't know who we should get,though. Manchester United pay scouts so that they can get an idea. I just feel that 375k a week for rashford feels like Woodward never left. It feels like the kind of deal that could backfire on us, rashford at his best is great, but he never feels consistent enough to warrant that kind of pay

Watch Real Madrid every week do you? We got Rashford for nothing and Vinicius scored 10 La Liga goals last year.

 

[gaffs]

I've answered a couple of times, I don't know who. I don't have access to man united's scouts, I don't know who's available. I, like most people, get yo mainly watch my own clubs games and maybe some other big cl games, I don't have scouts going to watch atalanta or napoli.

This is such a weird gotcha, oh you don't know exactly who to bring in to replace rashford, we should definitely pay him 20m a year for 4 years then

That is the point. There are few, if any available replacements. Part reason why Rashford can command this salary.

 

[gaffs]

Watch Real Madrid every week do you? We got Rashford for nothing and Vinicius scored 10 La Liga goals last year.

What would Vini command? I doubt Real would sell for 180mil.

 

[Jeppers7]

I’m not really bothered about the wage. Rashford is a local academy product and one of the best players in the league. He was phenomenal last season and tying him down for the foreseeable future should be the clubs priority.

 

[gaffs]

As for selling him, he's in the same position contract wise as Kane is and Spurs are being mostly slammed for not cashing in, if he refuses to sign a new contract then yes we should sell him

Spurs are playing a risky game, but i think Levy will offer a record breaking contract to keep Kane. There is no way he lets him walk on a free without offering him something huge. Replacing Kane is impossible, especially when you are at Spurs' level.

 

[Red in STL]

But look at likee vinicius, Madrid got him for 40m and he's far better, I don't know who we should get,though. Manchester United pay scouts so that they can get an idea. I just feel that 375k a week for rashford feels like Woodward never left. It feels like the kind of deal that could backfire on us, rashford at his best is great, but he never feels consistent enough to warrant that kind of pay

We're told he's better, but is he really?

He's certainly not a better goal scorer, 34 in 150 for RM and 3 in 22 for Brazil vs 76 in 239 for MU and 16 in 53 for England

 

[Red in STL]

Spurs are playing a risky game, but i think Levy will offer a record breaking contract to keep Kane. There is no way he lets him walk on a free without offering him something huge. Replacing Kane is impossible, especially when you are at Spurs' level.

But the argument is that we shouldn't offer something huge to Rashford who contract wise is in the same position, I don't disagree with you re: Kane though

 

[Rhyme Animal]

@jm99 still not answering this.

FFS, why do people keep doing this!?

‘The NHS surgeon messed up the old lady’s operation’

‘Oh really!? How would YOU have conducted her hip replacement, in detail please?’

‘I can’t, it’s not my job’

‘Then the NHS did nothing wrong’

It’s so weird. We’ve had it all season with Weghorst - ‘so who else moved in January for the same or less money that would’ve been better!?’.

@jm99 doesn’t need to find Rashford’s fecking replacement in order to point out that giving him 375k a week is batshit.

Rashford won’t fecking go anywhere anyway. He loves the club. Offer him 275k a week and get rid of Sancho somehow.

 

[gaffs]

We are seeing it with Mount and Chelsea. Clubs seem to expect that players from their academy shouldn't be paid what the expensive foreign signings command.
It is somehow like they expect them to be thankful and do the club a favor. Often they will have family or small agents, who don't play the game like a Mendes or a Zahavi.

Good on Arsenal for rewarding Saka and same for United giving Rashford his due.

 

[Red in STL]

FFS, why do people keep doing this!?

‘The NHS surgeon messed up the old lady’s operation’

‘Oh really!? How would YOU have conducted her hip replacement, in detail please?’

‘I can’t, it’s not my job’

‘Then the NHS did nothing wrong’

It’s so weird. We’ve had it all season with Weghorst - ‘so who else moved in January for the same or less money that would’ve been better!?’.

@jm99 doesn’t need to find Rashford’s fecking replacement in order to point out that giving him 375k a week is batshit.

Rashford won’t fecking go anywhere anyway. He loves the club. Offer him 275k a week and get rid of Sancho somehow.

No he'll argue that 275K is too much because 300K is too much

 

[cyberman]

Well certainly no one would have suggested 375k a week after last season. So the bulk of it is based on this one good season, most people wanted to sell him after last season, to go from that to double his salary is based off basically one good season yeah. And again I'm not saying don't give a pay increase but 375k feels way overboard. And I can guarantee next year there will be a lot of people moaning about it

But you’re basing your point off of one bad season when in reality it’s an outlier in his progression?

 

[gaffs]

FFS, why do people keep doing this!?

‘The NHS surgeon messed up the old lady’s operation’

‘Oh really!? How would YOU have conducted her hip replacement, in detail please?’

‘I can’t, it’s not my job’

‘Then the NHS did nothing wrong’

It’s so weird. We’ve had it all season with Weghorst - ‘so who else moved in January for the same or less money that would’ve been better!?’.

@jm99 doesn’t need to find Rashford’s fecking replacement in order to point out that giving him 375k a week is batshit.

Rashford won’t fecking go anywhere anyway. He loves the club. Offer him 275k a week and get rid of Sancho somehow.

That is a pretty shit analogy.

It is @jm99 and now you who is calling out what Rashford is worth. You are both apparently qualified to do this, but not qualified to name a replacement? The point of asking for a replacement name was that in this market, finding one is like finding rocking horse shit.

Relying on his "loyalty" to stiff him out of his market value. Nice way to look after your own.

Good luck in getting rid of Sancho.

 

[Withnail]

But you’re basing your point off of one bad season when in reality it’s an outlier in his progression?

He will not accept or even acknowledge that point. What's hilarious is that it's a tabloid rumour that he may get 375k.

 

[jm99]

We're told he's better, but is he really?

He's certainly not a better goal scorer, 34 in 150 for RM and 3 in 22 for Brazil vs 76 in 239 for MU and 16 in 53 for England

Yes he is, he's more of a traditional winger, he's also not the main man in real's attack benzema is. Also he's 22 and rashford is 25, vincius is nearer mbappe than he is rashford

 

[Rhyme Animal]

That is a pretty shit analogy.

It is @jm99 and now you who is calling out what Rashford is worth. You are both apparently qualified to do this, but not qualified to name a replacement? The point of asking for a replacement name was that in this market, finding one is like finding rocking horse shit.

Relying on his "loyalty" to stiff him out of his market value. Nice way to look after your own.

Good luck in getting rid of Sancho.

FFS 275k a week is more than Vinicius JR is paid. It’s more than Kane is paid. It’s in the region of what Salah gets paid.

All these players are superior to Rashford.

The only reason it’s even a fecking conversation is because of the comical contract the club deludedly handed to Jadon Sancho.

Two wrongs don’t make a right lads.

Rashford is a lovely player, and 275k a week is still a very generous contract. It’s more than Kane and Son earn.

If you wanna change the wage structure at the club and get it in order you have to get it on a level that reflects ability.

Rashford shouldn’t be United’s star player, he’s streaky and isn’t good enough to fire a team to a CL or a PL imo. He’s very good, but he’s not at that level. 300k plus is for the elite of the elite.

 

[jm99]

But you’re basing your point off of one bad season when in reality it’s an outlier in his progression?

Before that bad seaosn would you have given him 375k a week? If not then two seasons since then, one bad and one good doesn't warrant a doubling of his wages

 

[zaafi]

We're told he's better, but is he really?

He's certainly not a better goal scorer, 34 in 150 for RM and 3 in 22 for Brazil vs 76 in 239 for MU and 16 in 53 for England

He's one of the world's best attacking players, so he's quite comfortably a better player.

 

[jm99]

That is a pretty shit analogy.

It is @jm99 and now you who is calling out what Rashford is worth. You are both apparently qualified to do this, but not qualified to name a replacement? The point of asking for a replacement name was that in this market, finding one is like finding rocking horse shit.

Relying on his "loyalty" to stiff him out of his market value. Nice way to look after your own.

Good luck in getting rid of Sancho.

Yeah, only paying him 15 million a year, it's basically making him destitute. You talk abiut market value, but Rashford is not worth 20 million a year in any world. As rhyme animal, the only other sane poster here, said he's a very good player, but 400k is Kevin de bruyne level or Harry kane level once he moves, rashford can play a part in our attack going forward but as long as he's our best attacking player (and at 400k a week he'd basically have to be) we won't win a league title. People talk abiut progression, he's 25, not 21, he's not suddenly going yo become a 30 goal a league season player

 

[Rhyme Animal]

We're told he's better, but is he really?

He's certainly not a better goal scorer, 34 in 150 for RM and 3 in 22 for Brazil vs 76 in 239 for MU and 16 in 53 for England

Vinicius Jr is to Rashford as Rashford is to Antony.

 

[gaffs]

FFS 275k a week is more than Vinicius JR is paid. It’s more than Kane is paid. It’s in the region of what Salah gets paid.

All these players are superior to Rashford.

The only reason it’s even a fecking conversation is because of the comical contract the club deludedly handed to Jadon Sancho.

Two wrongs don’t make a right lads.

Rashford is a lovely player, and 275k a week is still a very generous contract. It’s more than Kane and Son earn.

If you wanna change the wage structure at the club and get it in order you have to get it on a level that reflects ability.

Rashford shouldn’t be United’s star player, he’s streaky and isn’t good enough to fire a team to a CL or a PL imo. He’s very good, but he’s not at that level. 300k plus is for the elite of the elite.

I agree, he is not the elite of the elite.

But United are in a bind with him. I said earlier....

Rashford is....
an absolutely vital player for United right now.
at a club with one of the biggest budgets in world football (which could increase under new ownership)
coming off his best season.
about to be in his last year of his contract.
almost impossible to replace for a better price.

All this adds up to a very easy negotiation for his agents.

What are you going to say to Rashford. "Sorry mate, we paid Sancho too much, we fecked up there. You mind getting paid less than him?"

Especially potentially days before a state takeover of the club. United are lucky Rashford is not holding out for the takeover to negotiate. I would.

 

[gaffs]

Yeah, only paying him 15 million a year, it's basically making him destitute. You talk abiut market value, but Rashford is not worth 20 million a year in any world. As rhyme animal, the only other sane poster here, said he's a very good player, but 400k is Kevin de bruyne level or Harry kane level once he moves, rashford can play a part in our attack going forward but as long as he's our best attacking player (and at 400k a week he'd basically have to be) we won't win a league title. People talk abiut progression, he's 25, not 21, he's not suddenly going yo become a 30 goal a league season player

What is your alternative, beyond hoping that he takes less? Let him go on a free? Replace him?

YOU HAVE NONE!