Transfer Tweets - Manchester United - 2022/23 | Follow the OP rules and check the quality of your sources before posting. STAY ON TOPIC!

Status
Not open for further replies.
mazhar13 said:
Click to expand...


Sounds like the type of deal we'd be looking for. He was atrocious at Burnley but at least he seems to have gotten back to scoring form in Turkey. Think he'd only be a backup for us and Martial probably remains 1st choice. Expect we will see this move relatively quickly if there's anything to it.
 
Problem is this does not solve the issue of needing someone better than martial who is back to his usual goal shy self.
 
croadyman said:
Would give us options but cannot see three loan deals in one window,mind you Spurs did a couple this time last year.
Click to expand...
I'll see if I can find the tweet but it lines up with the fact that apparently the owners want to give EtH the ability to have attacking options at his disposal this January.
 
Thanks to @UnitedSofa in the João Félix thread:


Source (Tier 2 - Dawson, Tier 4 - Ogden):


EDIT: Replaced link with Tweet to the same article
 
Last edited:
Plant0x84 said:
Personally be happy with Weghorst and Felix. Would be a cracking reinforcement for the squad.
Click to expand...

Yeah someone who gives us a different dimension up front and a creative player capable of playing in multiple positions
 
Why are people talking about us getting more than one in, if what we are reading is right then it will be one and for cheap.
 
I would remind the scoffers that the same Wout was an absolute pain in the arse against us at Turf Moor. Laid one on a plate for Rodriguez and deserved one himself. Caused us loads of problems in a 1-1 draw. He's not sexy but we have nobody who'll cause chaos in the box at the moment and I think he could be a very useful addition.
 
Well - if we badly need a goal, throwing him on and do a Moyes against Fulham probably isn't a bad idea.....
 
mazhar13 said:
This doesn't necessarily indicate more than one signing (i.e. this may have been translated without context), and on top of that, this is the journalists' conjectures rather than anything conclusive.
Click to expand...

Yeah that is very true
 
lysglimt said:
Regardless of who is to blame. With your reasoning - we are asking our best goalkeeper who has over the last 7-8 years been our best or at least close to our best performer to take an insane paycut - not because we have to because of finances, not because he is overpaid in terms the wages we have at our club, but because you think its his market value. If we give DeGea £150.000 a week - we would demote him from one of our best performers, to one of the least paid first-team regulars. The only way to do something like this (if you have a TINY understanding of human behaviour) - is if you want to chase DDG out the door. Because that is what will happen - no sane person will accept a 60% paycut - unless maybe to save the club from bankrupcty as a gesture of goodwill.

But what you don't seem to grasp - is that if there are just 2 clubs with money competing for a 32 year DDG, "the market value" thing doesn't really count. Simply because since there is no transfer fee involved, clubs can afford to offer him a bit more to win a bidding war. But maybe you are right, maybe they will only offer him say £180.000 and a 4-year contract- of course they will likely sweeten that deal by a huge signing on fee. Let's for sake of argument that amount is £15 million - which isn't unlikely. Then that will be the equivalent to £75-80.000 extra a week over his contract period - so that renders your "market value"-theory rather void. Players who sign on free transfer don't get market value in their contracts. When Sol Campbell joined Arsenal from Spurs, the latter refused to give him £100.000 a week. Arsenal reportedly give him that and roughly £8-10 million in signing-on-fee. Which over his 5 year contract added another £30-40.000 a week.

You also make it sound impossible that anyone would give him above market value - market value is what anyone is willing to pay for him, not what similar goalkeepers get paid. The fact is - in Spain, there is a club DDG knows really well. Jan Oblak is their best paid player - almost on the same wages as DDG. Let's theoretically say that Oblak hands in a transfer request - Atletico sell him for £70 million and are short one goalkeeper. And they get DDG back for £15 million in signing on fee, and give him £300.000 a week - still £50.000 less than Oblak reportedly has. So when you say "it's really that simple" - you really over-simplify that. It's never that simple.

We gave him a contract of that amount a few years ago (which was too much granted) - I am sure we can get him to accept a slightly lower wage in his new contract- but your reasoning of an insane wage-reduction is only valid if your idea is to allow DDG to leave on a free. Because that is what will happen, and then we have to spend £50 million to replace him with a goalkeeper who may or not be just as good.
Click to expand...

Our wage structure is a running joke which ETH and Richard Arnold are desperately now trying to rectify.

Your post disregards this fact so I stopped reading.

A club that pays well above average wages for average and below average performers gets relegated. Stop being soft.
 
With respect to the multiple loan discussion - The maximum loans in one season is 4 - and Dubravka and Butland take up 2. So limit now would be 2 more loans. I'll be happy if we get 2 more options, but suspect it'll only be 1.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.