Rashford - New contract or sell?

[CloneMC16]

Seeing at this poll closed months ago, I think we need a need thread and poll with this as the OP

Yes, we do. This poll is outdated. Most of us voted based on his form from the 2nd half of 20/21 and 21/22.

I'm pretty sure a new one will be a lot different.

 

[Desert Eagle]

I am not denying it is transcational, I am pointing out that your argument is flawed when it comes to assessing the value of the transcation. You are looking at wages as the price, without understanding the value of what you get for that price. These magical stories are what sell the clubs to the next generations of fans (customer acquisition), and what attracts new top players to the club (increased valuation). These stories are what help United sell merchandise across the globe so they can spend a billion over a decade of failed experiements and still put in 250m more for another summer's worth of purchases. The number of people who buy these stories, the sense of community it generates among those who believe it and the money this generates is what keeps the club going. Be it noodle sponsors or players like Van Persie, these stories are what set the club apart from others. (These stories are also, perhaps, the reason why you and I have almost a combined 22,000 posts on a United forum, generating revenue for RedCafe's evil overlords.)

My argument is simple. The price (say an 'undeserved' extra 1.5m/year) the club pays to Marcus Rashford is far less compared to the value he brings in return. If he is exploring options to move away in a market where we cannot replace him easily, we should convince him to stay.

Wages are the price but not the only one, you mention a few others but the value he brings off the pitch is of little value to me. What he offers on the pitch is my main concern. You're making the same special treatment argument that Keane and Rio made for Ronaldo. Where were all those it's magical to have Ronaldo back in United red when he fecked off the team? What is his social media draw doing for us when he's shite on the pitch?


Hopefully we agree that letting him walk for free is the worst transaction that could be made, sentimental or otherwise.

We agree.

If Barcelona were to offer the 2017's equivalent of 150m today for Rashford, and if there are immediate replacements for much lesser than that price who can replace or better his value who wish to come to United, we do not turn it down. Till there are such replacements, however, he is simply not for sale.

I doubt you're so naive that you think replacing a player should only be done if a better replacement is guaranteed. There are no guarantees in sport however you make the rational, calculated decision based on what is best for the team. You seem to be suggesting we get emotional about this decision because he's one of our own and has a "magical" story.

It's funny how you should mention Coutinho, because that was the result of Liverpool exploiting Barca's Neymar fee, much like how any other club will exploit United for Rashford's astronomical fee. Also worth pointing out that Liverpool remain a rare case of a team actually strengthening after a mega sale, as opposed to the usual when clubs struggle to use the funds. Like Barcelona's finances going up in flames after Neymar. Or Monaco after Mbappe, or Spurs after Bale, or Madrid after Ronaldo, or Leicester post Maguire, or Everton post Lukaku, or - and this should have come in earlier - United after Ronaldo.


News flash- We're Manchester United and we overpay anyways. Some clubs might have struggled to spend the funds well but again you seem to be conflating that with the sale being a bad decision. Those are two separate actions and one has no effect on the other.

Hopefully the people in charge whose expectations actually matter have a more long-sighted view of affairs, and a better understanding of Marcus Rashford's value.

My view is based on the long term. I don't want Rashford on a contract like Bruno and De Gea are on, fecking up the wage structure and rewarding average performances because of fan sentimentality. If he can accept a reasonable offer and stay then great , everybody is happy. But if he overestimates his value then the club need to be unemotional enough to make the correct choice based on value on the pitch not off it.

 

[TheReligion]

@Desert Eagle you seem fixated on wages at the moment. You’re the same in the De Gea thread.

 

[wolvored]

I hoped that the club dont do anything rash (no pun intended) and give him a new contract before the end of the season. He is doing better this season than last, but does this form last? He has had some indifferent games this season.
Everyone who is hailing him now, most probably wanted him gone last season.
If he can go and score another 15+ goals before the end of the season then reward him.

 

[Desert Eagle]

@Desert Eagle you seem fixated on wages at the moment. You’re the same in the De Gea thread.

Wages as compared to performance on the pitch.

With De gea it's very simple, he's been paid as the best keeper in the world. He is far from that. He wouldn't get anything close on the open market.

With Rashford it's trickier to estimate what he could command but something similar to Saka, Sancho, Sane etc seems reasonable.

 

[roonster09]

Wages as compared to performance on the pitch.

With De gea it's a very simple, he's been paid as the best keeper in the world. He is far from that. He wouldn't get anything close on the open market.

With Rashford it's trickier to estimate what he could command but something similar to Saka, Sancho, Sane etc seems reasonable.

Sane earns just under 20 million euros per year, which is around 380K euros per week, are you sure Rashford should be on that much money?

Maybe Bayern fans can correct this, this is the info from Bild (reported in third party sites).

 

[Desert Eagle]

Sane earns just under 20 million euros per year, which is around 380K euros per week, are you sure Rashford should be on that much money?

Maybe Bayern fans can correct this, this is the info from Bild (reported in third party sites).

No he shouldn't but that's what his team will want. Saka's new deal is reportedly around 200k. I guess Sancho and Sane both got huge wage spikes after their move so are around 350k I'd be okay with something in the 250k range. The wages we're giving Sancho are a joke as well but that's what it took to sign a player with a similar profile to rashford so I don't think we'll get away with anything less than 300k.

300k a year , 5 plus 1 year contract is my prediction. Ultimately like Gandalf said the off the field stuff he brings to club will make them pay this amount happily.

 

[Gandalf Greyhame]

Wages are the price but not the only one, you mention a few others but the value he brings off the pitch is of little value to me. What he offers on the pitch is my main concern.

So you know you're blinkered in your view, and you refuse to have it any other way.

You're making the same special treatment argument that Keane and Rio made for Ronaldo. Where were all those it's magical to have Ronaldo back in United red when he fecked off the team? What is his social media draw doing for us when he's shite on the pitch?

United's stock market value rose by £212m immediately after Ronaldo's return. Here's a direct report from Reuters:

LONDON, Oct 6 (Reuters Breakingviews) - Soccer star Cristiano Ronaldo has so far helped Manchester United’s (Man Utd.N) share price more than its on-field results. The $3 billion club’s equity value has risen 12% since the Portuguese striker signed in late August, a period in which the team has only won three in seven games. That’s not lost on the controlling Glazer family, two members of which are selling a combined $186 million worth of shares.

That's 5 years of Ronaldo's wages, and 20 years of Rashford's wages. But I'm sorry - I forgot this is of little value to you because Ronaldo messes up our play for a few games.

I doubt you're so naive that you think replacing a player should only be done if a better replacement is guaranteed.

You answered this yourself.
"There are no guarantees in sport however you make the rational, calculated decision based on what is best for the team."
The rational, calculated decision is to retain value and offer him a new contract till he can be replaced with better value. Not to bin him because he doesn't fit your incorrect world view of wages needing to correspond to some imaginary sense of on-field performance.

You seem to be suggesting we get emotional about this decision because he's one of our own and has a "magical" story.

I'm not sure if you've done me the courtesy of reading through my entire post or just stopped after 'magical'. It's in the best interests of the club, it's owners and the fans to keep Rashford in the side until better value is found in the market. And you should really start respecting the financial value of magical stories and sentiments, given that most of the world's economies are affected by and sometimes even build on these things.

News flash- We're Manchester United and we overpay anyways.

And you're suggesting that overpaying 1.5m a year per player (say 15m/year if 10 such players are overpaid) on wages is somehow worse than spending 20-50m more on a new player who has no guarantee of improving the team on the pitch and will definitely be worth less off it.

Got it.

Some clubs might have struggled to spend the funds well but again you seem to be conflating that with the sale being a bad decision. Those are two separate actions and one has no effect on the other.

I am not saying some clubs have struggled. I am telling you that most clubs have struggled. Ignoring the difficulty of navigating a transfer market when your suitors know you have money to spare and a position you need to fill is downright stupid.

Regarding the bolded bit, you should write to Barcelona. Or realize that's just nonsense, just like your imaginary take on the all-important metric of wages and wages only.

My view is based on the long term. I don't want Rashford on a contract like Bruno and De Gea are on, fecking up the wage structure and rewarding average performances because of fan sentimentality. If he can accept a reasonable offer and stay then great , everybody is happy.

There is no evidence to suggest that an imbalanced wage structure is a problem for Manchester United. In fact, there is evidence to suggest otherwise - that it may actually part of our appeal and if it gets us to succeed, it's one of the cheapest ways to pay for success. You should read up more on where United's money comes from and where it goes, and the exponential difference in value generated because of the wages and the price paid for it.

But if he overestimates his value then the club need to be unemotional enough to make the correct choice based on value on the pitch not off it.

That would not be unemotional decision making, that would be stupid decision making.

 

[city-puma]

I feel I have a very different view of the game than quite a few people here.

I look at Rashford as a magical story. The debut days when he stepped up with insane goals out of nowhere when LVG needed them. How he scored on almost every debut he had as a teenager, and how he celebrated them as a local lad who'd come through the academy and grown up loving the club. How he idolized Rooney and ended up taking over the goalscoring burden from his idol while keeping his head down and going to school. How he handled the inevitable drop off under Mourinho and turned up under Ole again. His insane big game record when we had that fairytale run under Ole, that PSG game in particular. How he single handedly got a government to reverse its decision to let children go hungry, and how he did it while facing racism and unfair criticism from quite a large part of the country including his own club's fans. His ability to always keep himself available, even though it came at the cost of his injuries. The sheer joy of some of his goals. Knuckle ball free kicks, elastico skills before selling defenders (White, Demechellis, Dunk, T. Silva off the top of my head) and slotting home, being a terror in counter attacks with pace, control and finishing, his intelligence in link up play.

I felt incredibly proud when he scored that 100th goal. He may not end up in the list of greatest left wingers or center forwards, but he's definitely had a very special career both on and off the pitch already, with many years and a peak still left in the tank.

I do not understand how we can reduce this story to a mere binary decision of sell or not sell, based solely on the arguable impression that he may not be the best player we could have there. Money may buy you a better player, but it can't guarantee better results. United fans who jeer at "mercenary" players and have witnessed almost a billion pounds wasted on big name players who never turned up should know.

Even keeping the priceless nature of his time at United aside, the sell argument seems incredibly naive to me from a logistical perspective.

Is there a clear cut replacement who is guaranteed to be demonstably better AND wants to come play for us? Sancho had better numbers and he's struggling to break through. Before him, Martial kept getting injured and didn't run enough under Mourinho, and we know what happened with Alexis Sanchez. Bar the likes of Neymar, Mbappe or Vinicius Jr, who is demonstrably better?

But let's assume there is. Let us assume there exists such a player who'll want to come to United and replace Rashford in the starting XI. Maybe Sane, Dembele or Son. In that case, do we not need a backup or a rotation option? Would it not be stupid to let go of a young, homegrown, rapid, hard working, versatile big game player who has shown the professionalism to sit on the bench and fight for his place? In a market where options are far and few and all expensive? It's not like we need to make money from sales.

This thread is madness. It's full of FIFA rating-based reasoning where people apparently know the price of everything and the value of nothing.

I do like the magic story part of your post, but the highlight of the highlights is the end. “… apparently know the price of everything and the value of nothing“.

 

[JeffFromHK]

I would prefer a 3+1 extension at the same contract wage, no increase or decrease.

 

[Desert Eagle]

So you know you're blinkered in your view, and you refuse to have it any other way.

I care about how we perform on the pitch. I'm sure you're you loved the Woodward era as we were so successful off the field.

United's stock market value rose by £212m immediately after Ronaldo's return. Here's a direct report from Reuters:
That's 5 years of Ronaldo's wages, and 20 years of Rashford's wages. But I'm sorry - I forgot this is of little value to you because Ronaldo messes up our play for a few games.

And what is that stock price at now pray tell? Did we also have the lowest stock price ever with Ronaldo still in the team? The price rose for a week then has slowly been coming down, so unless you're a trader making money on United stock, that 212 million isn't being used to pay anybodys wages. We had a 115 million net loss last financial year.

You answered this yourself.
"There are no guarantees in sport however you make the rational, calculated decision based on what is best for the team."
The rational, calculated decision is to retain value and offer him a new contract till he can be replaced with better value. Not to bin him because he doesn't fit your incorrect world view of wages needing to correspond to some imaginary sense of on-field performance.

Now you're just spouting nonsense. Wages don't need to correspond to on field performance ?

I'm not sure if you've done me the courtesy of reading through my entire post or just stopped after 'magical'. It's in the best interests of the club, it's owners and the fans to keep Rashford in the side until better value is found in the market. And you should really start respecting the financial value of magical stories and sentiments, given that most of the world's economies are affected by and sometimes even build on these things.

If by magical stories and sentiments you're actually referring to marketing/advertising then sure. I read your entire post and i notice you don't mention a single negative thing about Rashford. You even strawman the other side into " I do not understand how we can reduce this story to a mere binary decision of sell or not sell, based solely on the arguable impression that he may not be the best player we could have there. Money may buy you a better player, but it can't guarantee better results

"Arguable impression that may not be the best player we could have there" Nice way of saying we can't do better and shouldn't even try. Also better players usually equals better football fyi

And you're suggesting that overpaying 1.5m a year per player (say 15m/year if 10 such players are overpaid) on wages is somehow worse than spending 20-50m more on a new player who has no guarantee of improving the team on the pitch and will definitely be worth less off it.

Got it.

I didn't say any of that. Stop making up stuff to respond to.

I am not saying some clubs have struggled. I am telling you that most clubs have struggled. Ignoring the difficulty of navigating a transfer market when your suitors know you have money to spare and a position you need to fill is downright stupid.

Regarding the bolded bit, you should write to Barcelona. Or realize that's just nonsense, just like your imaginary take on the all-important metric of wages and wages only.

I said wages are one metric out of many, while you respond to a strawman. I don't care what happens with Barca, try to stick to talking about Rashford. We will try to sign a striker soon and both the conditions you mention will also apply. It's completely normal for big clubs to navigate tricky transfer markets almost every summer.

There is no evidence to suggest that an imbalanced wage structure is a problem for Manchester United. In fact, there is evidence to suggest otherwise - that it may actually part of our appeal and if it gets us to succeed, it's one of the cheapest ways to pay for success. You should read up more on where United's money comes from and where it goes, and the exponential difference in value generated because of the wages and the price paid for it.

That would not be unemotional decision making, that would be stupid decision making.

Provide the evidence then. From where i'm sitting our wage structure becoming imbalanced happened in the post fergie era which also coincides with our least successful period.

 

[Gavinb33]

Wages as compared to performance on the pitch.

With De gea it's a very simple, he's been paid as the best keeper in the world. He is far from that. He wouldn't get anything close on the open market.

With Rashford it's trickier to estimate what he could command but something similar to Saka, Sancho, Sane etc seems reasonable.

I am sure its reported Sancho is on north of 300k pw

 

[Desert Eagle]

I am sure its reported Sancho is on north of 300k pw

Yeah the range for a Rashford type seems to be around 250-350k a bit higher than I originally thought. Like I said in an earlier post, I'd be surprised if he doesn't resign for something around 300k.

 

[Chairman Steve]

If you’re giving an extension then incentivise the latter years of the contract, like a significant pay rise in the second year of the contract if KPIs are met, so that he keeps improving and maintaining his latest levels.

The cynical view at the moment is he’s playing for a new contract and potentially to go to the World Cup. Giving him everything he wants right off the bat is extremely risky, especially for someone literally a few months ago was strolling around the pitch looking like hed rather be anywhere but a football pitch, and 1 in 6 for goals last season.

 

[Doracle]

Yeah the range for a Rashford type seems to be around 250-350k a bit higher than I originally thought. Like I said in an earlier post, I'd be surprised if he doesn't resign for something around 300k.

The issue is how much we are reportedly paying Sancho. It’s hard to follow why we had to pay him quite that much.

As it is, if Sancho really is on as much as suggested, it’s very hard to see how we can justify not putting Rashford on a similar salary, if he remains our starting LW when negotiations commence. He would easily get that from PSG or City anyway if we let his contract expire.

 

[Isotope]

One thing I've learned over decades as a football fan. Homegrown players would feck and suck their "love of my life" Clubs dry if it means they're better off by doing that.

And it's a two-way street, tbf.

(of course, with the exception of Paul Scholes. There's always an outlier in everything).

 

[shaky]

New contract, same wage, more performance related bonuses. That will be acceptable. He can't expect a pay rise if he isn't consistent year on year.

 

[calodo2003]

The fan fiction in here is something else.

He’s had a good run of it this season, let’s see where he stands at the end of the campaign & then make a decision on the contract. Hopefully he can maintain his current form for the entirety of the games.

 

[Swiss_Red89]

I feel I have a very different view of the game than quite a few people here.

I look at Rashford as a magical story. The debut days when he stepped up with insane goals out of nowhere when LVG needed them. How he scored on almost every debut he had as a teenager, and how he celebrated them as a local lad who'd come through the academy and grown up loving the club. How he idolized Rooney and ended up taking over the goalscoring burden from his idol while keeping his head down and going to school. How he handled the inevitable drop off under Mourinho and turned up under Ole again. His insane big game record when we had that fairytale run under Ole, that PSG game in particular. How he single handedly got a government to reverse its decision to let children go hungry, and how he did it while facing racism and unfair criticism from quite a large part of the country including his own club's fans. His ability to always keep himself available, even though it came at the cost of his injuries. The sheer joy of some of his goals. Knuckle ball free kicks, elastico skills before selling defenders (White, Demechellis, Dunk, T. Silva off the top of my head) and slotting home, being a terror in counter attacks with pace, control and finishing, his intelligence in link up play.

I felt incredibly proud when he scored that 100th goal. He may not end up in the list of greatest left wingers or center forwards, but he's definitely had a very special career both on and off the pitch already, with many years and a peak still left in the tank.

I do not understand how we can reduce this story to a mere binary decision of sell or not sell, based solely on the arguable impression that he may not be the best player we could have there. Money may buy you a better player, but it can't guarantee better results. United fans who jeer at "mercenary" players and have witnessed almost a billion pounds wasted on big name players who never turned up should know.

Even keeping the priceless nature of his time at United aside, the sell argument seems incredibly naive to me from a logistical perspective.

Is there a clear cut replacement who is guaranteed to be demonstably better AND wants to come play for us? Sancho had better numbers and he's struggling to break through. Before him, Martial kept getting injured and didn't run enough under Mourinho, and we know what happened with Alexis Sanchez. Bar the likes of Neymar, Mbappe or Vinicius Jr, who is demonstrably better?

But let's assume there is. Let us assume there exists such a player who'll want to come to United and replace Rashford in the starting XI. Maybe Sane, Dembele or Son. In that case, do we not need a backup or a rotation option? Would it not be stupid to let go of a young, homegrown, rapid, hard working, versatile big game player who has shown the professionalism to sit on the bench and fight for his place? In a market where options are far and few and all expensive? It's not like we need to make money from sales.

This thread is madness. It's full of FIFA rating-based reasoning where people apparently know the price of everything and the value of nothing.

Brilliant post.

 

[MUFC OK]

This place.. 85% wanted him gone.

 

[roseguy64]

New contract, same wage, more performance related bonuses. That will be acceptable. He can't expect a pay rise if he isn't consistent year on year.

Sensible. This.

He's too young to get him on reduced wages like we would De Gea if we extend his contract. That's a guaranteed wage cut. Best hope with Rashford is same wage or a slight bump with achievements increasing the wage. Win-win.

 

[InspiRED]

I got a lot more faith in the current regime giving out new contracts than in the past.

I don't think it can be argued against that Rashford's last contract was a disaster really when paired with his performances from last few seasons. He is playing at top form now however, under good coaching and it feels like he is currently value for the money being paid. Considering the pathetic way we have dealt with contracts in the past we still need to stop the rot, so I say trigger his one year extension and then if he is still at this level at the end of the season then start contract talks. Even then any raise should be minimal, it should be pointed out to him that the contract he was on before was insane compared to what he was providing, that contracts like that are a thing of the past and that any increase will be small or involve extremely hard to attain stats as performance related incentives.

Do think he's got a load of potential and who knows under this coaching setup... I'm still reeling from watching him tower above defenders for headers like Drogba after watching him mince out of them 100% of the time over his entire career so far/

 

[Orange Tree]

I'd sell any players in the squad, if the price is right. I'd already fallen out of love for this squad after last season.

Rashford has a great profile and is in a great form, so the valuation should be higher. If anyone wants to pay like 100+ millions, they can take him. Otherwise negotiate a new contract and extend if needed.

 

[Doracle]

I got a lot more faith in the current regime giving out new contracts than in the past.

I don't think it can be argued against that Rashford's last contract was a disaster really when paired with his performances from last few seasons. He is playing at top form now however, under good coaching and it feels like he is currently value for the money being paid. Considering the pathetic way we have dealt with contracts in the past we still need to stop the rot, so I say trigger his one year extension and then if he is still at this level at the end of the season then start contract talks. Even then any raise should be minimal, it should be pointed out to him that the contract he was on before was insane compared to what he was providing, that contracts like that are a thing of the past and that any increase will be small or involve extremely hard to attain stats as performance related incentives.

Do think he's got a load of potential and who knows under this coaching setup... I'm still reeling from watching him tower above defenders for headers like Drogba after watching him mince out of them 100% of the time over his entire career so far/

Rashford signed his new contract in 2019. He has had one bad season last year, coming back from injury under a poor manager. In the other three seasons (19-20, 20-21 and 22-23), he has 80 GA in 117 games, mainly playing LW. He’s generally been an absolute monster for us since signing that contract. It’s as far from a “disaster” of a contract as it’s possible to be.

 

[InspiRED]

Rashford signed his new contract in 2019. He has had one bad season last year, coming back from injury under a poor manager. In the other three seasons (19-20, 20-21 and 22-23), he has 80 GA in 117 games, mainly playing LW. He’s generally been an absolute monster for us since signing that contract. It’s as far from a “disaster” of a contract as it’s possible to be.

No, this is revisionist bollocks. He has not been a monster for us at all, what a lunatic thing to say. He has shown spots of great potential amidst a load of pretty substandard performances where he'd give the ball away 9 times out of 10. He did do well with goals and assists but he was part of a very poorly functioning team and probably the worst when it came to retaining possession.

I'm all for credit where it's due but 'generally been an absolute monster for us since signing that contract' what a load of absolute horseshit that is.

 

[Rightnr]

Rashford signed his new contract in 2019. He has had one bad season last year, coming back from injury under a poor manager. In the other three seasons (19-20, 20-21 and 22-23), he has 80 GA in 117 games, mainly playing LW. He’s generally been an absolute monster for us since signing that contract. It’s as far from a “disaster” of a contract as it’s possible to be.

Dear, oh, dear

 

[Mr PG]

Rashford thrives in big games. A rare quality in football and now he has a manager who knows how to use him...and has improved him a lot. He now passes the ball when he should and has started heading the ball really well. Man we'd be crazy to sell.

 

[calodo2003]

Rashford signed his new contract in 2019. He has had one bad season last year, coming back from injury under a poor manager. In the other three seasons (19-20, 20-21 and 22-23), he has 80 GA in 117 games, mainly playing LW. He’s generally been an absolute monster for us since signing that contract. It’s as far from a “disaster” of a contract as it’s possible to be.

Monster?

 

[Doracle]

No, this is revisionist bollocks. He has not been a monster for us at all, what a lunatic thing to say. He has shown spots of great potential amidst a load of pretty substandard performances where he'd give the ball away 9 times out of 10. He did do well with goals and assists but he was part of a very poorly functioning team and probably the worst when it came to retaining possession.

I'm all for credit where it's due but 'generally been an absolute monster for us since signing that contract' what a load of absolute horseshit that is.

The stats don’t lie. Bar last season, he contributes a goal or an assist about once every 1.5 games, from LW. That’s top drawer.

If we can get a CF on his level (I’m hopeful Antony can make RW his own) we will have a fearsome attack, as that will in turn create space for Rashford to exploit. As it is, there’s only been that short spell when we had Martial and Greenwood firing where we’ve had a frontline that properly supported him.

It’s no coincidence that our “very poorly functioning team” was dragged to 2nd place and cup finals when Rashford and Bruno were driving us through matches time and time again. As soon as Rashford suffered injury/lost form, and when Bruno also struggled, we were a complete disaster. Did our fan base on here cut Rashford any slack at all? No, instead we have this absolute car crash of a thread where 85% wanted to sell him.

 

[InspiRED]

The stats don’t lie. Bar last season, he contributes a goal or an assist about once every 1.5 games, from LW. That’s top drawer.

If we can get a CF on his level (I’m hopeful Antony can make RW his own) we will have a fearsome attack, as that will in turn create space for Rashford to exploit. As it is, there’s only been that short spell when we had Martial and Greenwood firing where we’ve had a frontline that properly supported him.

It’s no coincidence that our “very poorly functioning team” was dragged to 2nd place and cup finals when Rashford and Bruno were driving us through matches time and time again. As soon as Rashford suffered injury/lost form, and when Bruno also struggled, we were a complete disaster. Did our fan base on here cut Rashford any slack at all? No, instead we have this absolute car crash of a thread where 85% wanted to sell him.

Oh dear lord, were you one of the very vocal Ole supporters per chance? It's like a pathology I swear.

 

[acnumber9]

I'd sell any players in the squad, if the price is right. I'd already fallen out of love for this squad after last season.

Rashford has a great profile and is in a great form, so the valuation should be higher. If anyone wants to pay like 100+ millions, they can take him. Otherwise negotiate a new contract and extend if needed.

And who do we replace him with? I swear the stupidity amongst our fan base never fails to amaze.

 

[Orange Tree]

And who do we replace him with? I swear the stupidity amongst our fan base never fails to amaze.

I'm not advocating to let him go for free, am I?

There are many attainable potential players to replace Rashford, I don't need to list them, we have a scouting department for that.
It will be the same discussion again, like who will replace Ronaldo.

 

[Doracle]

Oh dear lord, were you one of the very vocal Ole supporters per chance? It's like a pathology I swear.

I generally am fairly patient with managers compared to this forum as a whole and I wouldn’t have sacked him after finishing 2nd and losing a Europa final on pens, which seemed the consensus on here. I felt he was given a good crack of the whip and we moved on at a sensible point.

Anyway, the above has nothing to do with Rashford. If you think Ole was a terrible manager, then Rashford’s performances in the two full Ole seasons should be seen as even more remarkable. Imagine what he can do with a decent manager in charge?

 

[stw2022]

I've said before no player epitomises our decline more and the last couple of pages of talk about keeping him around for the purposes of (paraphrasing) 'magical sentimentality' really isn't helping.

I know he isn't dead but such comment is surely enough to make Fergie enquiries about whether they sell auto-turning graves.

 

[studs]

This Alice in wonderland story needs to stop with him. Move him on, he will never work hard for this team.

 

[Judas]

Oh does everyone want him gone again? This thread is giving me whiplash.

 

[InspiRED]

I generally am fairly patient with managers compared to this forum as a whole and I wouldn’t have sacked him after finishing 2nd and losing a Europa final on pens, which seemed the consensus on here. I felt he was given a good crack of the whip and we moved on at a sensible point.

Anyway, the above has nothing to do with Rashford. If you think Ole was a terrible manager, then Rashford’s performances in the two full Ole seasons should be seen as even more remarkable. Imagine what he can do with a decent manager in charge?

I don't really doubt what Rashford is capable of with the right mentality and the right manager, I think we had started to see what he is capable of in recent games. Doesn't change the fact that for a good chunk of his time with us, despite yes coming up with the goals and assists, his overall play was often pretty miserable and he spent about 90% of the time not looking like a £250k per week top player in the league. Agree to disagree I guess, I don't think this thread would exist at all if he had been tearing the league up consistently, but nm I guess.

 

[Wilt]

This Alice in wonderland story needs to stop with him. Move him on, he will never work hard for this team.

How do we move him on? Who would take him?

He’s not going to want to go, so it’s either he goes on a free or the more likely he gets another ridiculous new contract.

 

[wolvored]

How do we move him on? Who would take him?

He’s not going to want to go, so it’s either he goes on a free or the more likely he gets another ridiculous new contract.

Didnt him and his bro contact PSG? I think the right deal for him and he would go. Hes not a top player as he is way too inconsistent. I think if we took the 1 year option and put him up for 50 mill, some team would bite.

 

[Raven]

He's been good so far this season, today he was awful but he was also out of position and in a poor team. Talk of selling him is nonsense.