The Science of Transfers....

Litch

Full Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2013
Messages
10,712
The science of transfers...well there isn't any but managers and clubs do have a MO. Real, Barca sit at the top table and rarely do the players who are considered 'the best in the world' dont end up wearing either shirt of those two teams (sometimes both).

Its rare to have the best Spanish player, playing outside of Spain. Interesting how we rarely have the best (or any) England players applying their trade elsewhere but thats another debate?

Bayern and us generally will always buy the best of each respective country's talent. We've had the last 2 or 3 record transfers for young talent, and we also paid quite large figures for Carrick at the time, and recently Smalling, Jones and even Zaha weren't bought cheap. We generally have first pick when English players come available as do BM with Germans.

Our history in signing 'so called' big players isn't great, which isn't down to the transfer fee or salary. Not sure its down to the 'London factor' either cause that would be making a massive assumption that all players want the bright lights of capital cities rather than the tranquility of something more rural. We also have expensive property, shops and even roads and airports up north too...(!)

It's amazing how City didn't do too bad in signing and keeping Ageuro, Kompany, Dzeko, Nasri, Toure.......?

I can only think we take a more organic approach to transfers, and prefer to grow our own 'superstars' rather than buy them in ready made. More chance of keeping them too.....

By the look of the last two signings, even under LVG, nothings changed.....which I feel is a good thing cause its the Utd way.....
 
Last edited:
Couldn't agree more

I've always said - we can't outspend city and chelsea, so we have to outsmart them.

IMO that involves buying the next best thing and give them playing time to develop into a top player. If you're man city, you can't buy a player like Ronaldo or Messi, you have to take a risk and give them chances and produce them. City might not be comfortable with giving luke shaw the #3 slot at 18 and riding out the bumps in his form etc. We did that with De Gea recently and have been rewarded with a top GK for 15 years. It's paid off in the past, lets hope it pays off with Jones/Smalling/ Welbeck in the coming years
 
Couldn't agree more

I've always said - we can't outspend city and chelsea, so we have to outsmart them.

IMO that involves buying the next best thing and give them playing time to develop into a top player. If you're man city, you can't buy a player like Ronaldo or Messi, you have to take a risk and give them chances and produce them. City might not be comfortable with giving luke shaw the #3 slot at 18 and riding out the bumps in his form etc. We did that with De Gea recently and have been rewarded with a top GK for 15 years. It's paid off in the past, lets hope it pays off with Jones/Smalling/ Welbeck in the coming years

Agree. City and Chelsea models are about buying players that are around or entering their peak. If they get 2-3 seasons out of them before they more, and they win a couple of trophies, then I guess it will be seen as successful. That model is expensive and the teams always in a state of flux but with the right manager it can work but its not the utd way. I agree, lets hope Jones, Smalling and Welbeck at 27/28 have developed into world class players, cause it will also be good for the country and will encourage other young players to the club as its shows we have a clear pathway in developing young talent.