Marcus Rashford (out) | signs for Villa on loan

[elisha27]

Fair points. I didn't even see us getting as much as you proposed. £10M loan fee plus £280k a week for 20 weeks is £15.6M. That's a lot!

I figured we could get £8M or so total (loan fee plus any wages). That would cover all his wages the rest of the year. I think that's reasonable to expect.

Of course we as fans want him gone, but I think a loan with option or straight loan is more likely. I see Arsenal as a potential fit with Saka and Jesus both hurt. £8M for them is reasonable and low risk to pair Rashford with Havertz, Martinelli, and Trossard, their only other healthy forwards. Rashford may even be better than 1-2 of them.

I imagine the sticking point in negotiations is we're trying to get an obligation to buy built in. I imagine Arsenal would ball at that, as would I. But you'd think we could work out a loan to cover all (or nearly all) his wages at least.

To me, that is far better than Rashford sitting the sidelines the rest of the year. Theres a fair chance he rebuilds some of his value in a better squad, and in the meanwhile we get wage coverage. If things work out poorly, it'll be hard to sell him in the summer. But it'll probably be hard to sell him anyway if he goes 9 months without playing football, and we could always try to reintegrate him next summer if there are no takers.

This all assumes Rashford is basically done at United for now. If we could reintegrate him now, I'd be more judicious in negotiations. But if not, covering his wages the rest of the year in a straight loan deal would be sufficient for me.

Arsenal already have Neto and Sterling on loan, and so cannot take on anyone further from Premier League clubs.

 

[Tarrou]

Arsenal already have Neto and Sterling on loan, and so cannot take on anyone further from Premier League clubs.

its also kinda wild because he's complete rubbish and people think he's gonna leave a struggling PL team for one of the best ones, despite being comfortably one of his teams worst performers for two years

 

[mav_9me]

its also kinda wild because he's complete rubbish and people think he's gonna leave a struggling PL team for one of the best ones, despite being comfortably one of his teams worst performers for two years

Not to mention the fact Arsenal are one of the best pressing teams. And Rashford one of the worst at pressing

 

[Tallis]

The Glazers made many mistakes in the transfer market. But the biggest one is definitely offering these big contracts which broke the wage structure of the club and makes it so difficult to get rid of players.

Letting the odd player go on a free is better than these big contracts. At least, they showed some courage in not bowing down to De Gea & Pogba.

 

[andy0]

I haven't seen any discussion of whether Rashford's contract includes a buy out option

He arranged to be interviewed to say he wanted to leave

End the contract and send him an invoice

 

[led_scholes]

I’m not expert with this stuff but please humor me..

From what I’m seeing online, Rashford is on 350k a week, and his contract runs until June 2028. That’s approximately 42 months from now. 4 weeks a month is 42*4 = 168 weeks.

Assuming there are no performance or appearance related clauses in his contract, at 350k a week, he stands to earn 350k * 168 = 58.8 million by June 2028. He will be 30 years old by then and probably play 3-4 years more at the highest level. So presumably in 2028, he’ll get his last significant contract as a free agent aged 30.

Now, let’s assume he wants to play regular football and let’s say joins Arsenal on a 4.5 year deal at 250k a week - on Declan Rice wages. Then his hypothetical contract at Arsenal will run for 54 months and he’ll make 54 million. He’ll be out of contract by age 31 (or 32), with probably no big contract coming his way.

Of course if his contract has some performance and appearance related clauses, he will get slightly less at United. But it does appear that just sitting on his contract is the better deal for him. I wouldn’t be surprised if he pulls a Bale at Madrid for the rest of his contract at United, all the while focusing on off field stuff.

If he stays here till 2028 and doesnt play, how can he find another big contract at 30? Staying under these circumstances is like retiring. Thus, all the news that he wants to fight for a spot in the NT are fake.

 

[devilish]

As per usual we tackled this all wrong. Rashford should have been sold the moment managers started highlighting that he's got disciplinary problems. He would be rushed out of the door, we would have made a killing out of his deal, the fans would complain just as we did when Ince/Beckham left and somehow down the line we'll learn that actually the club was right in selling.

We opted to keep him way past his time which in turn ended up with the dirty laundry being aired and now the entire world know that we want to get rid of him and he wants to leave.

I hope we learn from this with Garnacho. If he's got disciplinary issues then we should sell now before this degenerate into another Rashford.

 

[Xeque_279]

Pulisic had to be subbed last night after pulling up injured. Looked like a hammy. Does that force Milan to make the move? Although I'm not sure how well Rash would do on the right.
A front line of Leao, Tammy (Morata), Rash. Looks pretty decent on paper.

 

[devilish]

I’m not expert with this stuff but please humor me..

From what I’m seeing online, Rashford is on 350k a week, and his contract runs until June 2028. That’s approximately 42 months from now. 4 weeks a month is 42*4 = 168 weeks.

Assuming there are no performance or appearance related clauses in his contract, at 350k a week, he stands to earn 350k * 168 = 58.8 million by June 2028. He will be 30 years old by then and probably play 3-4 years more at the highest level. So presumably in 2028, he’ll get his last significant contract as a free agent aged 30.

Now, let’s assume he wants to play regular football and let’s say joins Arsenal on a 4.5 year deal at 250k a week - on Declan Rice wages. Then his hypothetical contract at Arsenal will run for 54 months and he’ll make 54 million. He’ll be out of contract by age 31 (or 32), with probably no big contract coming his way.

Of course if his contract has some performance and appearance related clauses, he will get slightly less at United. But it does appear that just sitting on his contract is the better deal for him. I wouldn’t be surprised if he pulls a Bale at Madrid for the rest of his contract at United, all the while focusing on off field stuff.

Its way more complex then that. First of all Rashford's salary increase and decrease according to club's performance. If we don't qualify into Europe that his salary gets a hit.

A big chunk of Rashford's money also comes from his social media footprint and PR. There's adverts to be taken in consideration and the D N May Ltd (owned by his brother) who relies heavily on him for exposure. Rashford needs to be at the center of attention which is why he needs to play regular football at a top club and its also why he refuses to go to Saudi despite the latter had promised to double his salary. No one would give a feck what Rashford does if he plays for Damac or Al Hilal.

 

[Marwood]

Akways been that way, you agree a contract and that's it until you negotiate another one

I believe contract law became in a thing in the 18th century

No I mean this idea when a player moves his income MUST stay the same.

When Andy Cole wanted to leave there was no talk of it being really difficult because who could pay his wages. That we'd have to sell really cheap as a result.

He just took a paycut.

 

[Tarrou]

No I mean this idea when a player moves his income MUST stay the same.

When Andy Cole wanted to leave there was no talk of it being really difficult because who could pay his wages. That we'd have to sell really cheap as a result.

He just took a paycut.

He wasn’t contractually obliged to though so nothing has changed legally. Some players still do it today if they are motivated enough… this is Rashford though!

he’d have to be stupid to not take most of the money that’s owed to him in this contract because he’s 27? and already in decline.

 

[Marwood]

He wasn’t contractually obliged to though so nothing has changed legally. Some players still do it today if they are motivated enough… this is Rashford though!

he’d have to be stupid to not take most of the money that’s owed to him in this contract because he’s 27? and already in decline.

Yeah my point isn't let's just pay Rashford less. Obviously not.

I'm saying when did this culture kick in where a player thinks he's still entitled to the same wage when he moves to a lower level.

When Rooney left for Everton he took a pay cut.

That's how it always was. You moved because you weren't getting picked. Likely dropped a level so you became a starter. With that came a drop in wages.

I'd argue stupidity is sitting around doing nothing when you could have a career. For the sake of enhancing a financial situation that's already ludicrously wealthy.

 

[Tarrou]

Yeah my point isn't let's just pay Rashford less. Obviously not.

I'm saying when did this culture kick in where a player thinks he's still entitled to the same wage when he moves to a lower level.

When Rooney left for Everton he took a pay cut.

That's how it always was. You moved because you weren't getting picked. Likely dropped a level so you became a starter. With that came a drop in wages.

I'd argue stupidity is sitting around doing nothing when you could have a career. For the sake of enhancing a financial situation that's already ludicrously wealthy.

Yeah I understand you weren’t arguing that

It came when the money came. Andy Cole’s contracts were probably worth a few million. A lot of money for sure but nothing compared to today’s sums. Now players get proper protections and representation.

People might disagree but I think those players in the past were probably exploited and lot of coercion went on. Not everyone of course, but some. If you have a contract the laws states you are entitled to the money.

And of course I agree, if players could have a career they should take that chance. But we’re talking about Rashford here, he doesn’t look arsed and he’s definitely not going to the World Cup.

 

[AndyMUFC]

I don’t know what’s going to happen with this one to be honest.

His wages are a massive stumbling block, and his form has been poor for a long time now so teams won’t think he’s worth it.

 

[ElDiabloRojo]

I don’t know what’s going to happen with this one to be honest.

His wages are a massive stumbling block, and his form has been poor for a long time now so teams won’t think he’s worth it.

They know he isn't worth it, and comes with massive ego and entitlement. He was never worth it.

 

[edgecutter]

He's here till the summer at least, and even then I don't think the club will get many offers. What we pay average players is mental.

 

[AndySmith1990]

He wasn’t contractually obliged to though so nothing has changed legally. Some players still do it today if they are motivated enough… this is Rashford though!

he’d have to be stupid to not take most of the money that’s owed to him in this contract because he’s 27? and already in decline.

I take issue with saying a footballer would have to be stupid to take less money. We're talking about ridiculous amounts of money. Rashford will make in 5 years more than an average person will make in multiple lifetimes.

He's entitled to the wage United owe him, whilst he's still contracted to United. No one would argue that, it's a legally binding fact. But if he wants to get regular football and move to another club then it shouldn't be an expectation that United continue to pay half his wages. At that point he has two options. Stay and play less football, or move and take a pay cut. Half his wages for 5 years still amount to a life changing sum of money, and any sensible person would be able to live a comfortable life with those savings.

 

[Roboc7]

I think he’ll go on loan to Milan with them covering his wages, maybe with a small fee to Utd.

Utd are still aiming for some sort of profit with Rashford but I think the reality is he will end up being sold for a fee that goes into his pocket to cover the loss of wages he’ll have to accept to go elsewhere. Best case scenario now for us is he goes in the summer and it doesn’t involve a loss.

 

[romufc]

Add to that Casemiro and Antony's wages and we look like the dumbest company even outside the football world.

Yes, this was the issue we had under the old regime, big contracts for almost every player.

The issue is we are rectifying it but certain fans dont like it, they think we INEOS are being cheap rectifying the issues from previous.

 

[stepic]

I take issue with saying a footballer would have to be stupid to take less money. We're talking about ridiculous amounts of money. Rashford will make in 5 years more than an average person will make in multiple lifetimes.

He's entitled to the wage United owe him, whilst he's still contracted to United. No one would argue that, it's a legally binding fact. But if he wants to get regular football and move to another club then it shouldn't be an expectation that United continue to pay half his wages. At that point he has two options. Stay and play less football, or move and take a pay cut. Half his wages for 5 years still amount to a life changing sum of money, and any sensible person would be able to live a comfortable life with those savings.

This is working under the assumption he suddenly wants to give two fecks about playing football. All the wanting to play for England stuff is all pr bullshit for me - he clearly doesn’t care given his form and commitment to United the last few years.

 

[romufc]

I’m not expert with this stuff but please humor me..

From what I’m seeing online, Rashford is on 350k a week, and his contract runs until June 2028. That’s approximately 42 months from now. 4 weeks a month is 42*4 = 168 weeks.

Assuming there are no performance or appearance related clauses in his contract, at 350k a week, he stands to earn 350k * 168 = 58.8 million by June 2028. He will be 30 years old by then and probably play 3-4 years more at the highest level. So presumably in 2028, he’ll get his last significant contract as a free agent aged 30.

Now, let’s assume he wants to play regular football and let’s say joins Arsenal on a 4.5 year deal at 250k a week - on Declan Rice wages. Then his hypothetical contract at Arsenal will run for 54 months and he’ll make 54 million. He’ll be out of contract by age 31 (or 32), with probably no big contract coming his way.

Of course if his contract has some performance and appearance related clauses, he will get slightly less at United. But it does appear that just sitting on his contract is the better deal for him. I wouldn’t be surprised if he pulls a Bale at Madrid for the rest of his contract at United, all the while focusing on off field stuff.

In theory what you are saying is correct.

The one thing we dont know is what clauses players have in their contracts.. I.E if we dont get CL they get a pay cut, or any bonus payments. Generally, the reported salaries are what they can get if they achieve the bonuses.

Also.. there is no way Rashford sits for 3 years and then leaves when he is 30 and plays at the highest level.

He can barely get a club at the highest level now, what makes you think not playing regularly for 3 years will get him a club.

The next move will show his ambition, if he goes on loan, he only cares about money. If he decides to take a pay cut and leave on a permanent then his ambitions would be to play in the WC.

 

[LukeChadwick36]

I believe contract law became in a thing in the 18th century

Haha!!

I do get this point though.

Would Radcliffe be tempted to say - ok marcus, you want a move to rejuvenate your career / world cup hopes etc. you need to accept you wont get those wages elsewhere. Agree to a move on whatever wages you can get. Otherwise we will let your 20s run out with you training with the kids. Effectively finishing a players career at the top level (if they stay then the club can paint the player as a winston bogarde type who only wants the easy money).

It would be a bit of a see who blinks first situation.

 

[The Firestarter]

Yes, this was the issue we had under the old regime, big contracts for almost every player.

The issue is we are rectifying it but certain fans dont like it, they think we INEOS are being cheap rectifying the issues from previous.

I think what people have issue with is the cutting of tiny expenses that would have e contributed to the well-being of our staff, compared to what our spending on players is. A cancelled Christmas party can't even make up Rashford's weekly.

 

[EnviedRed]

As per usual we tackled this all wrong. Rashford should have been sold the moment managers started highlighting that he's got disciplinary problems. He would be rushed out of the door, we would have made a killing out of his deal, the fans would complain just as we did when Ince/Beckham left and somehow down the line we'll learn that actually the club was right in selling.

We opted to keep him way past his time which in turn ended up with the dirty laundry being aired and now the entire world know that we want to get rid of him and he wants to leave.

I hope we learn from this with Garnacho. If he's got disciplinary issues then we should sell now before this degenerate into another Rashford.

Exactly. We Took him out of the squad, told the entire world we don't want him. We did everything possible to devalue the player. That's why I said the only solution right now is to loan him so that he can try to raise his value again.

 

[MaMa given red]

This reeks of a loan on deadline day to Spurs.

No one seems to want him, and Amorims not going to start using him either.

Would Spurs even want hi though? Son plays in his position.

 

[Red in STL]

I take issue with saying a footballer would have to be stupid to take less money. We're talking about ridiculous amounts of money. Rashford will make in 5 years more than an average person will make in multiple lifetimes.

He's entitled to the wage United owe him, whilst he's still contracted to United. No one would argue that, it's a legally binding fact. But if he wants to get regular football and move to another club then it shouldn't be an expectation that United continue to pay half his wages. At that point he has two options. Stay and play less football, or move and take a pay cut. Half his wages for 5 years still amount to a life changing sum of money, and any sensible person would be able to live a comfortable life with those savings.

Footballers aren't always sensible though, look how many ex-player are broke a few years after they stop playing, most are going from earning a lot to zero income with most of their life ahead of them and they don't know how to handle it

 

[Shark]

You named outliers and have conflated that with 'plenty'. The exception doesn't disprove the rule.
Suarez and RVP are 2 of the best ever strikers and their teams weren't as bad as this current team. We have 23 points in 20 matches with a negative goal difference. All of our players are inconsistent. We are a historically bad team for a club of our size.

You think Lewa playing against Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia and Moldova helps his goal scoring record? Because I do. Poland are better than many of the teams they play. You aren't making the point that you think you are.

As I said before, Postecoglou said that Salah would struggle at Spurs because the elements aren't there for him to perform but I'm sure you think you know more than a manager.

The best players generally play in the best teams. Most players levels will drop as the team performs worst. We can always name exceptions that doesn't mean the rule is no longer true.

Should Rashford not be an ''outlier'' based on his current wage at the club? that's the problem, we bring up players like Suarez and RVP and somehow it's a bridge too far, despite you trying to prove that he's one of ''the best players who should be playing in one of the best teams''.

 

[croadyman]

That salary really makes the club look like a fool... no one in the world outside of City and maybe Madrid can afford that. And they don't want him. Imagine having an asset with ONLY TWO potential customers in the world. Half of that and there'd be plenty of clubs interested. We deserve it.

The trouble was there no one at the club who thought to say hang on these wage demands aren't acceptable and will hurt us down the line

 

[bgoodall]

Get him out and off the books no matter what it takes. If he decides to stay then banish him to train alone when the team is off and dont indulge any press questions about him. Remove his name from everything in and around the club and pretend he doesn’t exist.

 

[Green55]

Get him out and off the books no matter what it takes. If he decides to stay then banish him to train alone when the team is off and dont indulge any press questions about him. Remove his name from everything in and around the club and pretend he doesn’t exist.

 

[KiD MoYeS]

Just read that Milan will need to pick between Rashford and Walker because of restrictions over non-EU players so we could be diddled here, lads.

Brexit means Brexit. Thanks Jim.

 

[Green55]

Get him out and off the books no matter what it takes. If he decides to stay then banish him to train alone when the team is off and dont indulge any press questions about him. Remove his name from everything in and around the club and pretend he doesn’t exist.

Couldn't agree more. Every time I click on this I am hoping that he's on his way.

 

[Smores]

The trouble was there no one at the club who thought to say hang on these wage demands aren't acceptable and will hurt us down the line

It's not even that the wages are excessive (they are) it's that they're guaranteed. Why football has found itself in a situation where you pay for a players presence rather than their form I'll never understand. If Rashford had been on 100k a week guaranteed with the rest split as appearance and performance pay then we wouldn't now be having this issue.

 

[Iker Quesadillas]

It's not even that the wages are excessive (they are) it's that they're guaranteed. Why football has found itself in a situation where you pay for a players presence rather than their form I'll never understand. If Rashford had been on 100k a week guaranteed with the rest split as appearance and performance pay then we wouldn't now be having this issue.

Performance is too subjective in most cases, and in the cases where it isn't (goals), you risk over-encouraging the player to reach individual targets at the expense of what happens to the team.

Risk goes both ways, sometimes a club doesn't want to play the player, sometimes the player doesn't want to be at the club, ideally it all balances out.

 

[Vidooq]

So, when is that meeting with Milan today?

 

[Red in STL]

It's not even that the wages are excessive (they are) it's that they're guaranteed. Why football has found itself in a situation where you pay for a players presence rather than their form I'll never understand. If Rashford had been on 100k a week guaranteed with the rest split as appearance and performance pay then we wouldn't now be having this issue.

Form is subjective, you only need to look at the performance threads to ss that, would you take a job where your wages were dependent on what someone thinks of how well you're doing on a weekly basis?

 

[Nevilles.Wear.Prada]

As long as he rots in the reserves for three years and effectively ends his career then so be it. That’s the trade off we have to force him to make here.

He must leave. A player who is earning say 80k pw, sees this lazy bum doing feck all getting 350k pw will be very very demotivating.

 

[EnviedRed]

Should Rashford not be an ''outlier'' based on his current wage at the club? that's the problem, we bring up players like Suarez and RVP and somehow it's a bridge too far, despite you trying to prove that he's one of ''the best players who should be playing in one of the best teams''.

Because Suarez and RVP are better than Rashford. It's an absurd comparison. Prime Suarez could demand £500k per week in today's market. He would make more than Rashford. I have seen reports that Haaland is getting £600k+ per week from City. We have also been playing relegation level football for the better part of the last 18 months. Can you name these world class players in relegation level teams? Players also need the right environment to thrive.

There are players who earn more than Rashford. You act like Rashford is the highest paid player in the world which just isn't the case. If you are going to debate, you need to provide contex. You really aren't making the point that you think you are.

 

[DevilRed]

Get him out and off the books no matter what it takes. If he decides to stay then banish him to train alone when the team is off and dont indulge any press questions about him. Remove his name from everything in and around the club and pretend he doesn’t exist.

Tell em how you really feel then lad

Bit harsh on one of our own, even though he has fallen out of favor.

 

[Escobar]

As if an Italian team would make a decent offer