Agree with this. I often wonder if LVG or Zlatan have stayed longer, would Rashford and maybe even Pogba's career would have turn out better with stronger role models in the club to guide them.
Finally!! Player Power has been shown the door!A great statement from us, I don't think Rashford will want to stay at Villa in the summer but we need him to do well there, to make it a possibility, or to attract another club to pay 40m in the summer.
This is all that remains that we have to hope for.
That would be bad for the club, we need him to perform. £40m in the summer and his wage off the books would be substantial.Hope he sucks for them...
Hope he sucks for them...
I'm sure they at least have a sense of what he wants. The issue is the current wages will probably make the option unfeasible unless we pay Rashford a big bonus.Apologies if it’s already been answered, but can anyone tell me whether wages (between player and new club) are already agreed as part of the “option to buy”? Or would they need to negotiate those if the clause is triggered by Villa?
If the answer is yes, then Villa have set themselves up quite well. If Rashford shows some effort and scores 8 goals before the end of the season, they will snap him up for £40m (and £80m player at that stage). But if they STILL need negotiate with him, it isn’t quite as good of a situation.
Pogba is 10 times Rashford will ever be and his trophy cabinet is something the latter will never remotely achieve even in his wildest dreams.
Rashford is the symbol of the Glazer's era and everything that's wrong with MU. Absolute scrubs being worshipped, put on a pedestal and given a king's ransom to just show up and somewhat play football when they can be arsed.
This emotional investment for bang average players as well as the unconditional love and infinite patience for utterly limited try-hards just because they run a lot, is why MU have stopped to be relevant for more than a decade. The same can be said for the managers. Small-time mentality which lead MU to be run as a family business and not the international football juggernaut it once was.
INEOS want to shake things up and it should rightly start with Rashford.
Well Wazza said this lack of effort has been going on for 2 years so I’m pretty sure it’s really bad. I mean anyone who hasn’t put a shift in their job, whatever their sphere is going to be resented by their colleagues and peers. Sooner he’s out the fecking better.I am wondering what he is like when the cameras aren't on him....you know, behind closed doors?
Have you considered that Villa wouldn’t be paying the amount they are (in wages), without the buy option in place?I'm torn about a £40m buy option - but not a guarnteed one.
Yes, it seems a good figure now, and if we were selling him now for £40m - when his stock is at it's lowest - I'd be delighted with the amount.
But we're not selling him now. We're only loaning him out. And not even a loan with a guarantee to buy. So a bad loan, and his stock even lower, we don't get £40m. A good loan - like Lingard had at West Ham - and his stock going high again, suddenly he's marketable for much more than £40m, with other suitors probably interested then, but Villa get to buy him for that figure.
I guess we're not in a strong negotiating place once again, but it does seem that Villa get a win-win situation for them - they either get to jettison him if he fails, or snap up a striker below market value if he's a success; while we either get lumbered with an even bigger flop returning from a failed loan, or miss out on the potential for a bigger sale if the loan goes well.
My hope now is that the loan goes well enough for Villa to take up the option, but not so well that it'll feel like we could've been getting more than that if we'd just used the loan to put him in the shop window for the summer.
Just sounds like the the usual contrived stuff we hear.I don't really remember mate. My mum is sick and I'm following football sparsely at the moment. It could be the caf, some of the YouTube channels I follow or the transfer news
Webby and O'Neill mentioned it as well and they are very well respected in the YouTube world
Correct me if I'm wrong, but is a buy option mandatory? Villa may have first option on him, but say he does smash it and the likes of Barcelona do decide to spend £50m on him - isn't that still possible? He could even reject Villa if his desired clubs re-entered the chat. All very unlikely though.I'm torn about a £40m buy option - but not a guarnteed one.
Yes, it seems a good figure now, and if we were selling him now for £40m - when his stock is at it's lowest - I'd be delighted with the amount.
But we're not selling him now. We're only loaning him out. And not even a loan with a guarantee to buy. So a bad loan, and his stock even lower, we don't get £40m. A good loan - like Lingard had at West Ham - and his stock going high again, suddenly he's marketable for much more than £40m, with other suitors probably interested then, but Villa get to buy him for that figure.
I guess we're not in a strong negotiating place once again, but it does seem that Villa get a win-win situation for them - they either get to jettison him if he fails, or snap up a striker below market value if he's a success; while we either get lumbered with an even bigger flop returning from a failed loan, or miss out on the potential for a bigger sale if the loan goes well.
My hope now is that the loan goes well enough for Villa to take up the option, but not so well that it'll feel like we could've been getting more than that if we'd just used the loan to put him in the shop window for the summer.
I'm in this camp. One of the biggest pisstakers the club has ever put up with. Every excuse in the book and huge media defending him. If he were foreign would be ripped to shreds by them
Ambling around the pitch and half arseing it in training isn't 'people around him'
Great post, 100% agree, there are people still today writing emotional posts about him. He lies to the media that he breathes the club etc.
Carries on regular late night partying and then as soon as a manager that demands effort comes, he downs tools during our most difficult period. And still has no shame, won't even take a wage cut to join giants clubs like Milan or a Barca. He is lucky even Villa took him to be honest.
I have zero sympathy for him, even his most ardent supporters cannot defend his actions. I don't care if you came through the youth, or Manchester, you just earn your place. Amad is the complete opposite, get treated badly by the previous manager, puts his head down and does even more effort, even though he is the main players signs a very good contract not greedy at all and runs like Ruben terms: a mad dog and is now our star player, he should get the No10 shirt as a big good riddance to Rashford.
Spot on.I want him gone and have done for a long time, but I’d be reluctant to be this harsh on him personally.
I’m more sad at how things have transpired. The club has obviously been toxic for a long time, and the culture within simply hasn’t been conducive to developing well rounded men or serious footballers.
Rashford, along with Sancho, Pogba, Lingard and many others are symptoms of this, perhaps even victims to some extent, rather than causes. We developed him into what he has become, so we have to take some responsibility for that - just as we would’ve taken credit if he’d turned out world class.
It doesn’t mean we should be keeping him and it doesn’t mean he doesn’t shoulder some personal responsibility as well. But he's perhaps the clearest example in football of someone being given too much too young and having his head ruined.
Getting rid of him is essential to resetting and building a new culture that better serves our young players from here on out. But the departments responsible for turning exceptional talents into serious pros should be using his example as a case study in what not to do.
Baggio was the best player in the world for 2-3 years at Juventus and was still world class at Milan, he just didn’t like the limelight that being a footballing superstar brought with it whereas Rashford is the opposite and loves the fame United bring him whilst not wanting to actually put in the work that should go with being classed in the media as a superstar.According to Mitten, Rashford had been an issue with every manager he played with. His performances had flip flopped under each of these managers and there had been disciplinary issues under them as well. Some players seem not suited to play at a top club. Taibi for example was untouchable at Piacenza, Buffonesque level, Milan signed him back, he was dog shit there, he recovered his form at Venezia and was dog shit with us. Roberto Baggio was 10 times the player prime Rashford ever was but he always struggled at big clubs and he felt more comfortable playing at smaller clubs like Fiorentina and Bologna. Similarly to Rashford, Baggio is an incredibly shy and introvert person. The difference lie with the friends Baggio surrounded himself with, the application in training and of course talent.
Thank you, good infoI'm sure they at least have a sense of what he wants. The issue is the current wages will probably make the option unfeasible unless we pay Rashford a big bonus.
Rashford is on ~£300k a week. He might be willing to take a small paycut to facilitate a move, but rationally he probably won't cut wages by 50%. Villa's current top earners are on a reported £150k a week.
So, maybe Rashford takes £250k a week for a new deal with Villa? In order to fit into their wage structure at £150k, that means we'd have to cover the extra £100k a week difference (£5M a year).
Mechanically, that could mean Villa exercises the £40M option contingent on us paying. £15M back to Rashford as bonus to get him to accept £150k a week for 3 years with Villa. We did similar actions with AWB and McT supposedly, paying part of their transfer fee back to them as bonus.
I'm using some conjecture here, but 1) I don't think there's any chance Villa pays Rashford £300k a week after the loan deal, 2) I don't expect Rashford to take a massive paycut on his guaranteed money. Still a good deal for us overall. Saving 3.5 years of wages and getting a £25M net transfer is worth approximately £75M.
I don't really remember mate. My mum is sick and I'm following football sparsely at the moment. It could be the caf, some of the YouTube channels I follow or the transfer news
Webby and O'Neill mentioned it as well and they are very well respected in the YouTube world
Hit the nail on the head there. I've always looked at him as the symptom rather than the cause. The pressure and the scrutiny he's had over years had to take it's toll eventually. If he broke through under Fergie he would have been some player.I want him gone and have done for a long time, but I’d be reluctant to be this harsh on him personally.
I’m more sad at how things have transpired. The club has obviously been toxic for a long time, and the culture within simply hasn’t been conducive to developing well rounded men or serious footballers.
Rashford, along with Sancho, Pogba, Lingard and many others are symptoms of this, perhaps even victims to some extent, rather than causes. We developed him into what he has become, so we have to take some responsibility for that - just as we would’ve taken credit if he’d turned out world class.
It doesn’t mean we should be keeping him and it doesn’t mean he doesn’t shoulder some personal responsibility as well. But he's perhaps the clearest example in football of someone being given too much too young and having his head ruined.
Getting rid of him is essential to resetting and building a new culture that better serves our young players from here on out. But the departments responsible for turning exceptional talents into serious pros should be using his example as a case study in what not to do.
I think it's different sides of the medal ie the inability to handle the fame coming from being the top guy at a top club.Baggio was the best player in the world for 2-3 years at Juventus and was still world class at Milan, he just didn’t like the limelight that being a footballing superstar brought with it whereas Rashford is the opposite and loves the fame United bring him whilst not wanting to actually put in the work that should go with being classed in the media as a superstar.
The odds of him going for "much more" than £40M are exceedingly small IMO. Even £40M seems quite optimistic (and I imagine it was set that way; no reason to set an option lower than expected value).I'm torn about a £40m buy option - but not a guarnteed one.
Yes, it seems a good figure now, and if we were selling him now for £40m - when his stock is at it's lowest - I'd be delighted with the amount.
But we're not selling him now. We're only loaning him out. And not even a loan with a guarantee to buy. So a bad loan, and his stock even lower, we don't get £40m. A good loan - like Lingard had at West Ham - and his stock going high again, suddenly he's marketable for much more than £40m, with other suitors probably interested then, but Villa get to buy him for that figure.
I guess we're not in a strong negotiating place once again, but it does seem that Villa get a win-win situation for them - they either get to jettison him if he fails, or snap up a striker below market value if he's a success; while we either get lumbered with an even bigger flop returning from a failed loan, or miss out on the potential for a bigger sale if the loan goes well.
My hope now is that the loan goes well enough for Villa to take up the option, but not so well that it'll feel like we could've been getting more than that if we'd just used the loan to put him in the shop window for the summer.
The commute rumour came from Henry Winter.
That's a fair point to add, yeah.Have you considered that Villa wouldn’t be paying the amount they are (in wages), without the buy option in place?
If they help turn him around, then they should be allowed to benefit, because it’s them that are taking the risk on him.
I'm torn about a £40m buy option - but not a guarnteed one.
Yes, it seems a good figure now, and if we were selling him now for £40m - when his stock is at it's lowest - I'd be delighted with the amount.
But we're not selling him now. We're only loaning him out. And not even a loan with a guarantee to buy. So a bad loan, and his stock even lower, we don't get £40m. A good loan - like Lingard had at West Ham - and his stock going high again, suddenly he's marketable for much more than £40m, with other suitors probably interested then, but Villa get to buy him for that figure.
I guess we're not in a strong negotiating place once again, but it does seem that Villa get a win-win situation for them - they either get to jettison him if he fails, or snap up a striker below market value if he's a success; while we either get lumbered with an even bigger flop returning from a failed loan, or miss out on the potential for a bigger sale if the loan goes well.
My hope now is that the loan goes well enough for Villa to take up the option, but not so well that it'll feel like we could've been getting more than that if we'd just used the loan to put him in the shop window for the summer.
