bidding 50 million is a proof we dont have any money.
Marcus Rashford new contract thread | It's officially signed
- Thread starter golden_blunder
- Start date
- Status
Bayern is reportedly offering 17m a year to Kim Min Jae.
Salah started kicking it with Liverpool at 26. Same for De Bruyne at City, who became the player he is now around 25yo
That post was clearly sarcastic and I find it a little odd that anyone could interpret in any other way. "the window's been open for a whole week and we haven't signed anyone" is clearly fecking mocking the fans panicking when we made most of our signings far later than this last year
bidding 50 million is a proof we dont have any money.
Yes that's obviously sarcasm. How the feck could anyone think otherwise?
The OP of that thread, which is deleted, said he thought ten hag had spent all our money last summer and we had none this year, so saying bidding 50m for mount prices we have no money is clearly a joke
Tbf if you have the same level of financial understanding as this post indicates you do understanding the written word, it's no wonder you think 20m a year for rashford is good business
I don't think they'll pay that much to him. Maybe they will, they have just sacked their backroom staff after all. But they've generally been a well run club and avoided mercenaries seeking massive paydays
And how many League goals does the 'clearly miles better Vinicius' have over the past 4 seasons?
33 is it? Completely taken out of context it looks a lot worse and he's clearly not miles better but there are nuances and mitigating factors behind that.
I think vinicius is clearly miles better, he plays as more of a traditional winger than rashford, and he's 22 not 25. If rashford was as good as vinicius was, 3 years ago we'd have never let his contract run down to a year, we'd have had it all settled
A quick google search would tell you that Shaw has had a couple contract extenstions and he played very well before signing that extension under Ole in 2019 and now in 2022-23 he had a good season. He has been inconsistent af otherwise.
Salah was shite for like 3 months before the WC scoring only 5 goals in the league. He picked up form later on.
I was able to see the sarcasm there in the other thread so maybe you need a day off.
Is this season proof he tails of after he signs a contract extension?
Salah signed a new contract last summer, began slowly then picked up as you yourself said. So does that prove your point?
If Mane and Salah were good players, they wouldn't have entered last year of their contracts.
Usually that's something you expect from old players. Shaw has been consistent since Jose got sacked and Rashford signed contract in 2019, 3 out of 4 seasons ended up with 30-35 goals + assists.
One more thing which is not clear yet you claim its clear.
I dont know how people can agree with giving Rashford 375k pw and obviously there would be some bonuses attached to it.
He had a great season but not 400k pw season. His form also went down the gutter after the cup final that we won.
His agents are taking full advantage of our situation right now as we are short on forward options, we dont have any bargaining power. We also dont have any money to spend on his replacement so I'm fine with what the club is doing.
But the salary is not what he deserves in my opinion.
He had a great season but not 400k pw season. His form also went down the gutter after the cup final that we won.
His agents are taking full advantage of our situation right now as we are short on forward options, we dont have any bargaining power. We also dont have any money to spend on his replacement so I'm fine with what the club is doing.
But the salary is not what he deserves in my opinion.
Okay lets ignore Shaw and Salah because I cba but why are you conveniently ignoring other names I mentioned? Have you never seen anyone resting on their laurels after a huge contract renewal?
Exactly. Just one more myth they're trying to peddle out there.
Mane and salah are great players, they also aren't a 22 yesr old vincius who I think was ranked as the most valuable player in the world. What I'm trying to get across is that 2 years ago, no one would have suggested a 20m a year contract for Rashford, his two seasons since have not been good enough to warrant that either, and handing out contracts like that is a sign that nothing has changed since getting rid of woodward
What other names, 2 names?
It happens but its not so common as you say. I dont know if it was you who said it happens all the time.
Also we dont know still if its 375 with bonuses, why are you coming out with 400k now?
It's obvious you just dont rate him.
Yeah, for older players it's a risk as a small physical decline brings a big change in their games.
I think it is clear, this is the listing of the most valuable players in the world from transfermarket that has vinicius worth almost double rashford
https://www.planetfootball.com/quic...rs-world-2023-mbappe-haaland-saka-bellingham/
It's worth noting that vincius played a role in Madrid winning the champions league, scored the winner in the champions league final. I think anyone thinking rashford is even close to vincius has some very clear bias
Yes you're right for once, I dont rate him for the money we are going to pay him.
If someone has anti Rashford bias its you.
You're picking and choosing points which suit your very clear agenda.
If you want to criticize him you number the goals across seasons which fit the agenda and if you want to prove Vincinius is clearly better you quote transfermarket but dont touch the numbers.
Thanks for admitting, kudos.
Again you're extremely selective in your criteria and not being objective.
I used that nonsense statistic to illustrate the fallacy of your argument and you give me an explanation behind it which I didn't need, but it wasn't a very detailed one.
I have another one for you: Vinicius, just before his 23rd birthday (12th July), has just finished the season with 10 league goals and 9 assists in 33 games.
At the same age (2019/2020 as Rashford turned 23 in Sep 2020) Rashford had 17 goals and 9 assists in 31 league games.
I've said we should offer him an upper limit of 300k a week, putting him in the top 15 players in the league in terms of wages. That is not biased in any sense of the word, its just recognising that while he's a very good player, he isn't on the level of kane or de bruyne or salah and shouldn't be paid as though he is
Vinicius and rashford don't play the same roles he's far more of a traditional winger, and he wa playing in an attack with benzema as the focal point, while rashford was the focal point of our attack. I'm genuinely in disbelief anyone would consider rashford on the level of vinicius
You're completely missing the point again. I'm showing you that your narrow and selective use of stats proves absolutely nothing and I can find stats to show the opposite of what you think your proving.
You also quoted their respective values but length of contract and age comes into that. Rashford being older and having one year left and Vinicius being younger and having 4 years left. However, ultimately its a crowd sourced guess at evaluation and is claiming Rashford is worth 40-60m Euros which is ridiculous so your shallow analysis again proves very little.
It had rashford at 80m and vinicius at 150m. 80m for rashford seems about right. If he wasn't our player I certainly wouldn't want us to spend 100m on him
This is another one from a different site that I think is quite week respected, and takes contract into account more, mbappe was only around 65m or so on this one and vinicius is ranked as the most valuable in the world, rashford isn't mentioned
https://football-observatory.com/Most-expensive-players-Vinicius-Junior-at-the-top
If contracts were dictated solely by a player's performance levels then I'd agree that 375k (if that's what we end up paying him) is too much.
But they're not, nor have they ever been. Context matters, as does the market when they negotiate that contract. That's why the top 10 highest paid players aren't the current best 10 players in the world.
And the context in this case is:
1) Rashford has one year left in his contract and will be available for free next summer.
2) If he leaves for free he will easily get multiple 325k+ contract offers from other clubs. We've already had reports of PSG alone offering him a 400k contract, more again than the 375k offer we've allegedly made.
3) He's contextually more valuable to us than he is to other clubs. Because those other clubs aren't already extremely dependent on his output, nor is he a product of their academy and a big part of the "face" of their club, nor are they going into a summer transfer window with a lot of business to do and potential restrictions on their ability to do so due to both FFP and an unresolved ownership situation.
In that context, if you restrict your offer to max 300k (as someone suggested above) the reality is that there's a high chance he leaves. Because aside from the reported 100k extra a week he could get at PSG, teams within our own league (like Chelsea, for one) would be extremely likely to offer him significantly bigger wages than that if they were signing him on that free transfer.
Whether you think he deserves it or not, that's the reality of what the market will be willing to pay him next year, so that's what you're competing with in your contract offer. Not an abstract valuation based on what you think he should ideally be worth.
If we were dealing with this with more than a year on his contract, with a stronger team less dependent on his output, not already needing to do as much business as we do this summer, not potentially disrupted in our ability to make transfers by the ownership situation and generally in a position where we could feel comfortable selling him this summer if he didn't agree to lower terms, that would be one thing. But that's absolutely not the situation we're in.
At this point in time keeping Rashford for the next several years would likely be worth 375k a week to us, not just because of what he will offer as a player over the multiple years of that contract but also to ward off the potentially very damaging need to replace him at a point where we're atypically ill-equipped to do so.
But they're not, nor have they ever been. Context matters, as does the market when they negotiate that contract. That's why the top 10 highest paid players aren't the current best 10 players in the world.
And the context in this case is:
1) Rashford has one year left in his contract and will be available for free next summer.
2) If he leaves for free he will easily get multiple 325k+ contract offers from other clubs. We've already had reports of PSG alone offering him a 400k contract, more again than the 375k offer we've allegedly made.
3) He's contextually more valuable to us than he is to other clubs. Because those other clubs aren't already extremely dependent on his output, nor is he a product of their academy and a big part of the "face" of their club, nor are they going into a summer transfer window with a lot of business to do and potential restrictions on their ability to do so due to both FFP and an unresolved ownership situation.
In that context, if you restrict your offer to max 300k (as someone suggested above) the reality is that there's a high chance he leaves. Because aside from the reported 100k extra a week he could get at PSG, teams within our own league (like Chelsea, for one) would be extremely likely to offer him significantly bigger wages than that if they were signing him on that free transfer.
Whether you think he deserves it or not, that's the reality of what the market will be willing to pay him next year, so that's what you're competing with in your contract offer. Not an abstract valuation based on what you think he should ideally be worth.
If we were dealing with this with more than a year on his contract, with a stronger team less dependent on his output, not already needing to do as much business as we do this summer, not potentially disrupted in our ability to make transfers by the ownership situation and generally in a position where we could feel comfortable selling him this summer if he didn't agree to lower terms, that would be one thing. But that's absolutely not the situation we're in.
At this point in time keeping Rashford for the next several years would likely be worth 375k a week to us, not just because of what he will offer as a player over the multiple years of that contract but also to ward off the potentially very damaging need to replace him at a point where we're atypically ill-equipped to do so.
Rashford and Salah have near identical GA (exc penalties) over three of the last four seasons:
22/23 - R - 40, S - 42
20/21 - R - 36, S - 30
19/20 - R - 27, S - 33
When you factor in that Salah has played for arguably the second best team in the world over that period and that Rashford has been in a team that has generally been struggling, arguably Rashford’s stats are more impressive.
Vinicius is also clearly not miles better. You are just massively underrating how good Rashford is. Rashford would absolutely tear it up playing in that Madrid team, off Benzema. If we do actually get a world class CF (Kane) I’d expect him to go up another level.
I think £375k base is a bit high (but suspect it probably actually includes bonuses if it is indeed accurate, as our figures often seem to, which would put it in line with what I’d regard as reasonable and it presumably also includes the usual 25% discount if we fail to reach the CL in a season). Even if it is a slight overpayment for one of the best LW in the world, we also need to bear in mind that Rashford is the face of the club and probably our most marketable player. This isn’t a decision which jumps out as manifestly wrong.
He's obviously a very good player, but I believe his decision making and consistency are glaring flaws. He's incredibly thick and selfish at times. He'll never be world class because of it and the elite CL clubs have better players in attack.
Not worth £300k plus or whatever we'll end up paying, but we're not in a position to let a player like him leave because we lack quality in almost every other position.
No doubt some will rage and jump on me for daring to be critical, but it is what it is. Very good player on his day, but with obvious weaknesses
Not worth £300k plus or whatever we'll end up paying, but we're not in a position to let a player like him leave because we lack quality in almost every other position.
No doubt some will rage and jump on me for daring to be critical, but it is what it is. Very good player on his day, but with obvious weaknesses
I get where you're coming from, I just think that when Woodward left this should be the time to show we've moved on from those days of sky high contracts to players who don't really deserve them, if we give rashford a 4 or 5 yesr contract at 20m a year, that's us saying that that's our wage structure that we're happy with. If we look to sign kane, and rashford has just been given 375k a week, kane's well within his rights to ask for 500k a week when before 375 would have been about his level, we saw it with sanchez and de gea and how that affected sancho and varane coming and what they could ask for.
Look at Madrid with Ronaldo, had they kept him another few years and got his juventus level combined with the rest of the side they had, they might have won another champions league, 4 in a row potentially. But flo didn't budge and he sold him, they could have been like Barca and given Ronaldo a ludicrous contract but it would have encouraged others.
Being a well run club doesn't come about by magic, it means making financially prudent decisions even when they aren't the easy decisions, because if you're only financially prudent until a player gives you an ultimatum then immediately relent, that's how you end up with two league cups and a europa league to show for a billion pounds in transfer fees and feck knows how much in wages over thr same period
Part of the issue here is that the season you've removed was Salah's best goalscoring wise. It also equates goals and assists in the league cup and europa league to the Premier league and champions league.
Vinicius is also definitely miles better than rashford and I imagine most non united fans feel the same way.
He wasn't even first choice for England at the world cup
Definitely, clearly, miles...
Which probably cost England the World Cup…
Ah OK, so even though he isn't first choice for his country that's actually a positive for him because he might have done something had he been first choice?
Again rashford has ok stats, but if you look at pl only rather than the europa league and the league cup (two competitions that aren't rated that highly) then they certainly don't look like those of a 375k a week player
Definitely, clearly, miles...
Yes, thr same way haaland is definitely better than Gabriel Jesus and de bruyne is clearly better than Bruno. It's not controversial to say these things
Yeah, true, expect its not the same way at all.
I would understand if you'd claim he's marginally better or just better but to keep saying he's miles better is just laughable.
There you go, you continue to pick and choose.
Its not pick and choose, if we signed Harry kane and he was average in the Premier league but great in the Europa and league Cup, I'd be very disappointed with that signing, again I wouldn't have thought it was controversial to say that performances and stats from the Premier league and champions league should be valued far higher than two second rate competitions
Vinicius is probably a top 5 player in the world, rashford is nowhere near that level, probably not even top 10 in the pl
- Status