hellhunter
Eurofighter
Only way it ever made sense was if we planned to sell BrunoThe Mount signing has never made sense and never will
Only way it ever made sense was if we planned to sell BrunoThe Mount signing has never made sense and never will
Oh dearThat Mount is mediocre player and Rashford (with all his shortcomings) is more talented than him?
Yes, I stand by my evaluation of Mason Mount.
All that talent means nothing if you don't make an effortI would Rather take a player like Rashford with better talent over a nothing player and pay him 250 just because he is nice.
When was the last time we as a team have consistently put in good performances? Last time I checked, we have 23 points in 20 matches. We lost multiple games with Rashford out of the team. In the context of some of the awful teams that he has played in, his record is better than you want to admit. Players in bad teams don't normally perform at a high level. No Ballon d'Or winners playing in teams that are barely above the relegation zone.If all you do when you get the ball is shoot at the net occasionally you hit the target, a broken clock is right twice a day...
Based on the sheer amount of games the modern footballer plays he has scored a decent amount of goals, but when you look at his goals per game ratio he is down at 78th in the all time list of United players, even Hojlund is way ahead of him in that list, as are a number of other players, Zlatan, Ruud, Chicarito, Berbatov, Tevez, Bruno, etc, etc.
When was the last time he put in a good performance, not scored a goal or two, but put in a good performance. If you can find one, let me know.
It’s from an ESPN article hardly nowhere. You just can’t handle being wrong.Well that is a load of shit you just plucked from nowhere. No respectable source said that they wanted him at any cost. Anyhow, enough about that mediocre player Mount he has a complete own thread to talk about how stupid (and obvious stupid for most fans at the time) this deal was.
Off course we are stupid. Buying a talentless player like Mount is a crime itself let alone paying superstars money.
Rashford is on 300k. Morata is on 195k including bonuses and Morata ia many years older than Rashford.
If Rashford would go there on the same salary of morata (10m euros per year) the difference is 15m euros. You can not tell me that we can't get more than 15 million euros for Rashford from AC Milan.
He's seriously angry over Mount for some reasonIt’s from an ESPN article hardly nowhere. You just can’t handle being wrong.
No alcohol for LashfordSo what's a dry loan?
United drinks partner has to take care of hydration?
Mount wasn't injury prone (he had one injury that did require surgery at the end of his time with Chelsea, but before that he had almost Bruno-like availability) and he was bought when ETH moved to a system that used two #10's, similar to what Amorim does now. It was a stupid system that obviously didn't work, but Mount was bought to fit that system. Questions can definitely be asked about the fee of £55m with one year left on his contract, his fairly average form in his last season, and whether he was the right player to sign even if those weren't the case, but people seem to focus on the things that aren't particularly valid issues.I mean you don't spend 60m on an injury prone player with big wages and 1 year left on his deal if it's not a position of need in your starting 11, especially not when you have loads of problems in your lineup. That's a clear example of shit business. If anything, Mount is incredibly fortunate that we brought in Amorim as his formation can fit in both Bruno and Mount without unbalancing it, and it's given Mount the chance to actually be more than a backup here.
The writing has been on the wall for about 12-18 months. The usual Clean Slate FC thinking whenever a new manager comes in might have been over stated by Rashford's camp. But the lack of interest and unwillingness to go anywhere near him because of his wages should be a bit of an ego check on him.
Please show me when I brought up Hazard... ?
Indeed you did say Havertz but I assume that is also ‘false’ and poor examples using your own logic as Mount and Havertz were few years younger than Rashford in same way Aubamayeng and Ozil were older.
25% reduction with no champions league is supposedly in all the players contracts. So 225k ish. But 300k or 350k sounds so much more dramatic.But is he really on 300k? I thought the wages were reduced because we failed to qualify for CL.
But even so what would the amount be for 5 month loan? Around 6 m ...
I get not wanting to pay a loan fee but if the seriosly propose we pay half his wages they should feck off
Havertz is 25 and Rashford is 27... Ozil left when he was 34... but okay 7 years and 2 years is the same for you.. Makes sense.
Can easily see him saying and training with the kids for 4 weeks, Amorim just doesn’t rate him at all even from the bench.
The Havertz fee and wages were a mistake by Arsenal, similar to us with Mount. I doubt any clubs will be stupid enough to make the same mistake.I have not ignored wages. Arsenal paid £65 Million for Havertz and gave him £285K. Rashford is more talented than Havertz. So no we should not give away Rashford to Arsenal for £20M. Stop talking to me about wages and transfer fees. I'll repeat myself AGAIN..Rashford has to go on loan to raise his value, as I have said repeatedly.
I don't think a preference in Walker is relevant to what clubs think of Rashford, this is an Italian team and their first preference is nearly always a defensive playerYep, its interesting that AC Milan were the front runners, seemed like his agent was pushing him and probably pushing Milan into the move however; the fact that they prefer Walker just shows what clubs think of Rashford.
His best bet is to go to Saudi and get paid. His footballing career is finished.
25% reduction with no champions league is supposedly in all the players contracts. So 225k ish. But 300k or 350k sounds so much more dramatic.
When was the last time we as a team have consistently put in good performances? Last time I checked, we have 23 points in 20 matches. We lost multiple games with Rashford out of the team. In the context of some of the awful teams that he has played in, his record is better than you want to admit. Players in bad teams don't normally perform at a high level. No Ballon d'Or winners playing in teams that are barely above the relegation zone.
Even Postecoglou said that Salah would struggle at Spurs and Spurs are ahead of us in the table. Salah is one of the best players in the world but he also plays in one of the best teams. The team plays a huge part in individual success.
If you want to talk about how poor Rashford is then you also have to speak about how poor most of the teams he has played in have been. But providing context wouldn't fit your narrative.
But please let us know about these great team performances.
Mount was one of the 3 best/key players on a CL winnerMount is a mediocre player many levels below what Rash have shown in the past 8 years. On top of that he is a nothing player, he secured a contract on the same level if Rashford.
Every one involved in signing mount should be fecking investigated.
I mean, you're missing the part where Rashford said he was ready for a new challenge, just two days after being dropped from the match day squad. He reckons SAF would of booted him out the door after those comments.i mean, it's not like Amorim is playing him, Teddy...
I mean, you're missing the part where Rashford said he was ready for a new challenge, just two days after being dropped from the match day squad. He reckons SAF would of booted him out the door after those comments.
TBH SAF would have booted him out long before he'd gotten to that pointI mean, you're missing the part where Rashford said he was ready for a new challenge, just two days after being dropped from the match day squad. He reckons SAF would of booted him out the door after those comments.
Its irrelevent really, Teddy is speaking into Rash's response just two days after being dropped. Two days !! Hope you understand:-)how many minutes has Rashford played since those comments?
It is what it is. He thinks he is worth 350k per week and wants to play in top European level.What annoys me in this is the fact that the player wants to leave, we seemingly want him to leave, someone wants to buy him, his performances haven't been up to scratch, and yet United are expected to fund some of his salary because he wants to keep his £350k* a week.
If a club wants him, then they pay his market value, and then they go to Rashford and say, "Actually bud, we can only give you £150k a week, soz, take it or leave it". None of this, "We really want him, but Marcus wants to keep his massive wage so we're going to deduct the difference from our bid".
Sick of it.
Surely one of the PL teams can put together 4-5m for loan for half a season. It's not _that_ much money even if you think the weekly wages of 225k p/w are high. He'd be stellar in a counter attacking side like Forest. Hell, Elanga has been good for them and I know for a fact that Rashford's better than Elanga.
That's fine, but why the feck should a club he doesn't want to play for stump up for it. It's mind blowing. I know football is it's own bubble, but imagine I do shit at work, they decide they don't want me any more and I want to leave so I go to another company and get a pay cut, but then expect my current company to make up the shortfall. It's madness.It is what it is. He thinks he is worth 350k per week and wants to play in top European level.
But you seem to be taking that as it will happen 1000% when in reality based on his whole career and especially the last 2/3 years what you're more likely to get is the same shite we've seen recently, so his value is more likely to go down if anything!I have not ignored wages. Arsenal paid £65 Million for Havertz and gave him £285K. Rashford is more talented than Havertz. So no we should not give away Rashford to Arsenal for £20M. Stop talking to me about wages and transfer fees. I'll repeat myself AGAIN..Rashford has to go on loan to raise his value, as I have said repeatedly.
It’s because if we don’t offer to cover his wages he’d be more than happy to sit around collecting his mega wages doing feck all. Don’t have an issue with it - it’s just how the business side of it works.What annoys me in this is the fact that the player wants to leave, we seemingly want him to leave, someone wants to buy him, his performances haven't been up to scratch, and yet United are expected to fund some of his salary because he wants to keep his £350k* a week.
If a club wants him, then they pay his market value, and then they go to Rashford and say, "Actually bud, we can only give you £150k a week, soz, take it or leave it". None of this, "We really want him, but Marcus wants to keep his massive wage so we're going to deduct the difference from our bid".
Sick of it.