He's not that desperate for a place in England squad if he would need to take a 50% pay cut.
Marcus Rashford (out)
- Thread starter Mainoonited
- Start date
Ofcourse you can... I have examples.... Chelsea sold Mount on good money and good fee with 1 year left.
Chelsea sold Havertz with good money and good wage...
Now I bet you will say.. oh but its Manutd and Arsenal, the point is, if there is a will there is a way.
Chelsea have sold numerous players for good money who were on good wages.
Paying half the wages for next few months is possibly still better than paying all of it.
But then I’m shocked there’s no real interest in buying him. His stock is so low now and a bad loan spell will make it worse.
But then I’m shocked there’s no real interest in buying him. His stock is so low now and a bad loan spell will make it worse.
He can't go boozing whilst there.
Wet loan would be he can get shitfaced and rip a wet one occasionally.
Mount was earning like 80k a week at Chelsea. You also had the English tax on the fee.
Fecking reject. We cant be that stupid. Pay them so he can play for them? We are fecking thin in atrack and not getting anyone good instead. I would rather have unmotivated Rashford over Kolo fecking Muani. If he so badly wants to leave let him cut his own wages.
He didn't elaborate on what that challenge was, for all we know that could be 3 years of training to become FIFA 2028 champion
If United want him out it's going to cost them one way or another
I didn't realise Rashford was not English.
What are you talking about?
You're talking about English tax...
Chelsea could sell Mount because there was a club at the time being run by a band of idiots they could easily exploit.
We're not going to get the better of any club in the transfer market for our duds, especially in the era of PSR.
Mount 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.
Mount wasn’t even on 100k a week at Chelsea so he wasn’t due a huge pay off like Rashford is. Hazard was playing all the time for Chelsea and Madrid were desperate to sign him.
Those examples make no sense in relation to your point. Better examples are Ozil and Aubamayeng, Rashford is much closer to their situation than he is to Eden Hazard’s.
The difference being they sold players who didn't have an attitude problem like Rashford
Apples and oranges.
Right, I knew you would say that but Arsenal also signed Havertz for big fee and wages.. so its not just 1 club is it?
There were multiple clubs in for Mount at the time. United chose to pay a premium for him to get him rather than risk it and wait for his contract to expire.
False... actually go check Ozil and Auba age. they were over 30 compare to Rashford who is in his prime, unless you can show me a player in his prime who went for free.
The difference is also Rashford is a proven goal scorer.
There are alot of players with attitude issues that get signed by teams.
No serious club wanted to buy him or pay him insane wages, they wanted him on free the year after with low wages. That is why no other club but our donkey board took the bite. Utter idiocy from the club that ordinary fans predicted it months before happening.
Why is it important what he was on rather what he is on right now. He is on 250k and he is a nothing player. A club that buys Rashford should pay him whatever he deserves and we should come to an agreement with him for a severance deal to let him go.
Liverpool were heavily interested if I remember correctly. Which is why we moved for him when we did.
I would Rather take a player like Rashford with better talent over a nothing player and pay him 250 just because he is nice.
You can say that but none of these clubs were stupid enough to pay anywhere near £60m for him with 1 year left, I don’t think Arsenal or Pool would have even considered him at half of that fee.
Also no one else would have offered him anything close to 250k a week, 3x his wages at Chelsea. We offered him a contract like he was a free agent, despite also doing the deal for him and not waiting for his contract to expire
Well now that first line is a load of bollocks anyway
I had forgotten about him until I read this post
Easy to say that in hindsight but the move made a lot of sense at the time and without the injuries would still.
Because salaries impact transfer fees and he’s only on 250k a week because some idiots at Utd agreed to it. No one else would have been stupid enough to pay him that. We were willing to pay Mount more for some reason does anyone seriously think another club will match or better Rashford’s salary.
And how much are those teams going to pay Rashford, 125-150k a week so Rashford has a shortfall of about 25-30m that he’ll want Utd to pay.
You can't just fine a player. Well if he goes clubbing and it's agains the rules, sure. But you can't just continue fining a player.
They were not "heavily" interested, they cautiously interested in him for free transfer in one year or very reduced deal with a salary not more than rotation players in their team. He would never get more than 150k there. Just look at the salaries of ther midfielders.
No it didnt. And from the mood around here I’d say about 90% of the forum recognised this at the time.
Well that's me proved wrong then.
Nah the majority on here and online were questioning the move. Some just don't rate him while others just looked at it like he was a player with 1 year left on his contract who was having loads of injuries, and played in a position where our best player and captain played in (and a player who never really needs rotating). So it never made much sense because nobody also thought that a system with both of them would be the slightest bit balanced.
There will be more interest in the summer. No one has a loads of money just sitting around to be spent in January.
I doubt you'll find many people that were enthusiastic about signing Mount for that kind of money
Well now that first line is a load of bollocks anyway
That Mount is mediocre player and Rashford (with all his shortcomings) is more talented than him?
Yes, I stand by my evaluation of Mason Mount.
There are numerous reasons why he was a sensible signing. Admittedly we overpaid but it still made sense.
He was:
Approaching his best years
England international (helps with HG rules)
Tactically versatile and hard working
Good set piece taker
Injuries have really screwed him over but he is a very solid player. Says a lot that Ruben was so full of praise for him on arrival.
Yes we overpaid but the deal still made a lot of sense.
Even more frustrating is that the reason he's not in the squad and the manager is not having him is because he is lazy, not a lack of talent. It's a tough pill to swallow.