I'm against loans when it comes into senior team players to be honest. They tend to come back and haunt us later. Either we loaning player in or out... it rarely ends well. Either leave or not. Nothing in between.
Marcus Rashford (out)
- Thread starter Mainoonited
- Start date
I just look at the morale and commitment of the lads that play since he was isolated. No way we can bring him back. If I was a buying club I would want United to pay off his surplus wages (out of the transfer fee) so he comes in on a respectable wage. Means we might get a fee of 40-60M but need to write a 20M cheque out of it. Would be a good outcome all round.
I know it’s not practical for many reasons but if we get to door 3 I would love to just make him help fix the roof, paint the stands, pull pints on match days or whatever to see what real work is like for the suppporters who ultimately pay him if he refuses to accept whatever the best available offer is. I’ve nothing against him, he gave us some great moments but it’s not right to take that salary and not put in the work. If he wants to be paid and not work at football let him do something useful.
It's London, baby!
You say that but what if the buying team can’t afford the wages and fee involved? Just let Rashford hang around the training ground all season? Maybe get a few minutes here and there?
And who’s come back to haunt us? Loan players can’t even play against their parent club?
I don't really see why you oppose option #1 "under any circumstances"? It certainly seems far better than option #3. We'd get minimum £5M to loan him out, probably closer to £10M with a loan fee. That's better than paying him to sit at home.
You keep repeating yourself about his value whilst completely ignoring his wages. Yes, he's worth more than 20m but he's not worth anything close to his salary.
Which club(s) do you think will pay a large transfer fee AND match his salary?
I am not afraid of letting go of Rashford.. its more that I think we need to give some of our players more a chance.
I want Rashford gone, no question about that but if I didn't know the ins and outs of Rashford, mainly his off the ball work / off field issues and was presented with his numbers, I guarantee you, the figure if we were to sign a 27 year old would be north of £50m.
We need to get demand good money, thats all.
I think a loan is the only possibility and I doubt it would be such a bad thing. Get something around 10m as a loan fee and I'm sure he will be doing better wherever he goes. The added motivation and the chance to change the narrative to absolve him of all blame and instead blame it all on "United" for whatever is going on.
Similar to the Sancho and Joao Felix situations. Hopefully that really bumps his value and we can finally get rid in the summer.
Someone mentioned that Napoli can't get him due to the non-eu quotas. Don't think anyone in Spain will take a punt and PSG are going for Kvara. That leaves Milan/Juve in Italy or the German/English clubs. Hope our executives have something up their sleeve.
Similar to the Sancho and Joao Felix situations. Hopefully that really bumps his value and we can finally get rid in the summer.
Someone mentioned that Napoli can't get him due to the non-eu quotas. Don't think anyone in Spain will take a punt and PSG are going for Kvara. That leaves Milan/Juve in Italy or the German/English clubs. Hope our executives have something up their sleeve.
Arsenal need a goal scorer badly. Hopefully they’re watching reels of Rashford’s “playing for a new contract” season rather than his many “usually I can’t be fecking arsed” seasons.
I think that’s the main issue with Rashford’s stats — in the PL he’s never been more than a 1 in 3 at best. His best seasons have decent goal tallies in all comps, but he’s never been that clinical in the PL
Europa league beast
Hopefully we get a reasonable fee for him and then we can stop the nonsense of selling garnacho.
I’m getting fed up with this. I know it probably makes sense from a business point of view to subsidise his wages and hope he impresses enough on loan for someone to buy him in the Summer but it’s infuriating having to pay him to play somewhere else because he’s not doing enough to get in our squad.
We should loan him to Arsenal. They need a striker, and are one of the few who can pay his whole wage.
Maybe a bit too farfetched.
Maybe a bit too farfetched.
You really think there's someone desperate enough to shell out 10m for half a season of Rashford? Even if they don't pay a cent of his wages, that's the equivalent of ~417k/wk for him.
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2015
- Messages
- 18,939
- Supports
️
Milan is a good choice for him, they are the most vertical side in Serie A.
Their highest paid player is Morata on about £130k per week and I don't think they'd be willing to pay more than that.
United would have to pay £170k or no chance of it happening.
United would have to pay £170k or no chance of it happening.
I'm sure there's a big discrepancy, but Italian wages are often reported after tax, so need to be careful not to compare apples and oranges
I mean Chelsea payed 10m for Felix for a half season loan, I'd argue Rash is in a better position as a player than he was at that time. Environment and motivation matters a lot for players. One live example is that of Sancho, while he's not tearing any trees he looks like a completely different player for them than he did for us.
We've seen worse players move for more.
You can’t demand good money for someone earning 300k a week when their ability in no way deserves it. It’s a pipe dream we are going to get a big fee for him unless most of the money goes straight into Rashford’s pocket.
We need give to players less of a chance, players can do very little at Utd and be kept on for years and renew their contracts. We need to think long and hard about renewing a lot of these players or will just repeat the cycle of getting stuck with players who aren’t up to it.
It's world class money for a slightly above average PL forward.
He will surely get rehabilitated if he doesn't get a move out in this January window. Though he would have lost his earlier status in the team, and probably Amorin will make it a prerequisite for him to run to play in the team.
I believe what he alludes to is that we pay (way) over the odds - in terms of wages - for quality others can acquire for a portion of the price and without the added drama. The player he mentioned is on about 1/4 of Rashford's salary, runs his socks off on the pitch because he actually has to earn a better contract at this level, and he tries to fit in the manager's system. Whereas Rashford doesn't really have to try and become a better player or fit in any plans because his status within the club dictates (or used to?) that the attack has to be built around his strengths. It's a self-inflicted problem. Attackers who rely on pace more than anything else and thrive mostly in open spaces usually don't cost 350 grand p/w.
im fed up with this pr bullshitI am sure we'll ask for a loan fee in addition to them covering a part of his wages. That would take care of the part (at least partially) they are not covering.
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.
Last edited:
So what's a dry loan?
United drinks partner has to take care of hydration?
United drinks partner has to take care of hydration?
A straight loan, no option.
God these Italian clubs are broke. Last summer Juve wanted Sancho on a 'dry loan' as well.
No dice - wet loans only.
Can't we dry loan ourselves a striker from somewhere?
Cheers.
Would prefer it to be a straight sale. If he's only in Milan for 5 months I don't really see any point for them to have much faith in him if he doesn't hit the ground running.
I still don’t understand why United should pay any wages to Rashford either on loan or if we sell him. He spoke on record that he was ready for a new challenge; well, sorry sir, but that might just come at a lower wage
To be honest its more than his goal tally, even during the season he scored 30 goals, his game other than goals was a bit meh and hampered our team's play! I dont think he deserve to come back again just for taking things granted and not putting hard work over the years!!
No option to buy I presume
They can dry hump themselves with these proposals. Broke ass bitch clubs.
If he's that desperate for a new challenge and to earn a place back in the England squad, then why can't he taker a pay cut? May as well keep him as a backup until the summer if we're going to
be paying half his wages
be paying half his wages
Thank you.
With this attitude we will never sell a player with a good price. All the player has to do is to mentally checks out and then well will pay other clubs for our players.
Make him stay and fight if we do not have serious buyers, if he is still with negative attitude, fine the feck out of him until he starts acting like an adult again.