Transfer Tweets - Manchester United - 2024/25

GBBQ said:
100% this. Getting rid of Antony and Rashford was necessary as they are nowhere near to justifying their decision wages. Bringing in a player for the right money should be an option.

At this stage we need to limp to the end of the season and have our Finances in order to get the right players in, not the ones who happen to be available.
Click to expand...
I really need to see what is this magical fix for our finances in 4 months time, because I bet we’re looking at more of the same. You know what actually will fix them? Winning EL. But we really managed to put that nail in the coffin.
 
Dazzmondo said:
Tbf that was probably the case even if we did sign someone. I'm just hoping we avoid relegation at this stage (think we'll just squeak it out)
Click to expand...
We have a really good chance at the Europa league this year. No one in it should be a big threat.
 
Amorim is done really if there's no reinforcements.

Players won't magically change their capabilities, a wingback who has everything to prove when the conditions for major changes were needed is abysmal. INEOS are a top disgrace.
 
Bit daft of United to weaken an already very weak squad in this window. Poor planning on the part of those involved.
 
Mickeza said:
He wanted rashford out and we needed money to buy a LWB.
Click to expand...
I’m pretty sure it was briefed that the reason he let Antony go was on the proviso he was going to get another attacking body in.
 
groovyalbert said:
See Morata has gone on loan to Gala. Would have been a very sensible loan move given the system/area we're lacking.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that seems the exact kind of short term - ready to make an immediate impact - out and out #9 that we need before deciding on a permanent choice in the summer.

I hope the club aren't getting so blinded to the idea of 'no expensive old players - we must sign young players with sell on value' that they won't even consider an older, experienced player when it's a short term loan.

I know we're trying not to make the same mistakes as the past, but to overlook an option like this - especially if we end up with no one and desperately short of attacking options - seems an even bigger mistake. Just because we don't want to make expensive aging signings like Casemiro nowadays, doesn't mean we shouldn't add a bit of much needed experience when they're cheap (free or on loan) and short term.

Feels like a mistake, made just because they think it'll send the wrong message that it's the kind of signings we'd have made under the old regime. But we just happen to find ourselves in the position where we do need that type of signing and the bigger mistake is stubbornly ignoring that need.
 
I thought we sanctioned Antony and Rashford exits to allows us to bring players in. Weird if you don’t bring anyone else besides Dorgu
 
TsuWave said:
I thought we sanctioned Antony and Rashford exits to allows us to bring players in. Weird if you don’t bring anyone else besides Dorgu
Click to expand...
That’s exactly why Amorim allowed Antony to go. Unsure about Rashford, as I think he was already out in the cold anyway.

The club have failed Amorim if they don’t replace Antony with another body.
 
DJ_21 said:
We have a really good chance at the Europa league this year. No one in it should be a big threat.
Click to expand...
Our EL record this year is hardly something to shout about and I’ve lost all confidence in us getting remotely close to winning it. We’re absolutely dog shit.

We keep having the same little moments we did under ETH (in all comps) where we put in a result or performance that makes us think we might be turning a corner, only to revert back to being awful again.
 
Bertie Wooster said:
I wouldn't say it's been particularly prompt this window. With the exception of youngsters, most of the senior movement is taking place in the final stages of the window.

And none sold for any money to help with PSR. But hopefully it looks like we're going to get a few of them loaned out in the last few days. And a couple of late defensive additions as well.

Leaves us even shorter on attacking numbers than we were in the first half of the season, but looks like we'll have to get through to the summer before addressing that - barring a late move for Tel.
Click to expand...

laughtersassassin said:
Club couldn't be more incompetent. Wait till the last day of the window and panic. Absolute geniuses.

Literally no goals in the team and have t even tried to fix it. Should have been two attackers in minimum by now
Click to expand...
To be fair they have had to wait for the outgoings to clear a path for incomings they are playing a weak hand due to decades of mismanagement.

Unfortunately the architects of that mismanagement still own the majority of the club so the question is whether it is really going (slowly) in a better direction.
 
TrailMonkey said:
Our EL record this year is hardly something to shout about and I’ve lost all confidence in us getting remotely close to winning it. We’re absolutely dog shit.

We keep having the same little moments we did under ETH (in all comps) where we put in a result or performance that makes us think we might be turning a corner, only to revert back to being awful again.
Click to expand...
While that's true don't forget that, despite that, we did win a trophy in each of ETH's seasons. And we still had the EL (unbeaten) and FA Cup (very good win away at Arsenal) to go for this season.

So there are / were still trophy opportunities to play for. But as everyone is aware, we really need another attacking addition at this stage as we're now very low on numbers (and still low on quality #9's).
 
groovyalbert said:
Not true at all. He wasn't great and he isn't prolific but he managed 15 goals in his first season and almost 1 in 2 during his second. He would have been excellent for Europa and taken some of the pressure off our current hapless set of strikers.
Click to expand...
I’d rather keep Rashford for 15 goals personally.
 
DWelbz19 said:
That’s exactly why Amorim allowed Antony to go. Unsure about Rashford, as I think he was already out in the cold anyway.

The club have failed Amorim if they don’t replace Antony with another body.
Click to expand...

I’m even still very confused about what transpired with Rashford. Like, I get he wasn’t lighting up trees, but no one else is/was (Amad aside). And I get he had that interview where he said he wanted a new challenge, but that was after like two weeks of briefings that the club was looking to sell him - so I just assumed it was to get his wages off the table and bring someone else in - because Rashford - for all his shortcomings - is one of the few players that actually scored under Amorim.

Odd squad planning if this is all there is to our business. Whole thing is odd to me.
 
Widow said:
We needed just a bit of good news tonight, the thought of facing the remaining season with what we have is so depressing.
Click to expand...

I mean the season is a write off anyway. We should be looking at the remainder as some sort of a pre-season and it kinda looks like that with Ruben experimenting with players in diffirent positions. Didn't he put Mainoo as a false 9 against Palace today?
 
Bertie Wooster said:
Yeah, that seems the exact kind of short term - ready to make an immediate impact - out and out #9 that we need before deciding on a permanent choice in the summer.

I hope the club aren't getting so blinded to the idea of 'no expensive old players - we must sign young players with sell on value' that they won't even consider an older, experienced player when it's a short term loan.

I know we're trying not to make the same mistakes as the past, but to overlook an option like this - especially if we end up with no one and desperately short of attacking options - seems an even bigger mistake. Just because we don't want to make expensive aging signings like Casemiro nowadays, doesn't mean we shouldn't add a bit of much needed experience when they're cheap (free or on loan) and short term.

Feels like a mistake, made just because they think it'll send the wrong message that it's the kind of signings we'd have made under the old regime. But we just happen to find ourselves in the position where we do need that type of signing and the bigger mistake is stubbornly ignoring that need.
Click to expand...
They aren't. Tel wasn't their #1 choice according to Plettenberg; they had a more experienced option ahead of him (Nkunku, possibly). INEOS, however, want to make a profit on every possible incoming transaction, so even if United's revenues are decent, they don't want do spend more on their total incomings than their total outgoings. This is how INEOS operate their other clubs like Lausanne and Nice. They seem to use PSR as a reason for not being able to spend more, but that seems more like a convenient excuse for them in their chase of profiting off of United's transfers. I say this because they're no longer paying as much in the salaries of the players that they loaned out, and the players they brought in this month aren't likely to be on big contracts, either.

They want to grow their profits so that their shares appreciate in value. I wouldn't be surprised if, in the summer, the same narratives come out about having to sell before they can buy more players.
 
TsuWave said:
I’m even still very confused about what transpired with Rashford. Like, I get he wasn’t lighting up trees, but no one else is/was (Amad aside). And I get he had that interview where he said he wanted a new challenge, but that was after like two weeks of briefings that the club was looking to sell him - so I just assumed it was to get his wages off the table and bring someone else in - because Rashford - for all his shortcomings - is one of the few players that actually scored under Amorim.

Odd squad planning if this is all there is to our business. Whole thing is odd to me.
Click to expand...
I think most assume his attitude stunk behind the scenes and Amorim decided that he can’t rely on this guy when the chips are down, which they certainly aRe right now
 
Mickeza said:
It was briefed he let Antony go to get a wingback in.
Click to expand...
Is that right? I don’t think so. Malacia was/is going (and would be gone if the Benfica deal didn’t fall through) and Dorgu is his replacement.

I don’t think 1 player replaces 3. I think it was Dorgu + a Tel/Nkunku loan type that was envisaged.
 
DWelbz19 said:
Is that right? I don’t think so. Malacia was/is going (and would be gone if the Benfica deal didn’t fall through) and Dorgu is his replacement.

I don’t think 1 player replaces 3. I think it was Dorgu + a Tel/Nkunku loan type that was envisaged.
Click to expand...
I mean the departing 3 players are utter shit. That one player is a huge upgrade on the 3 that have left and seems to be regarded as perfect for Amorim’s system. Tbh this season is a write off anyway. Aim to win the Europa and try sell as much of this shit squad as possible.
 
Maguire extension stretched out his fee over an addition year. That plus the Anthony loan financed Dorgu.

Malacia and Rashford don't affect that. Once Rashford was loaned we freed up around 3m for thecrest of the season.

We are so close to the margins on PSR Ineos are not making one deal until the other one is concrete. We don't want to be in a position where we have to accept any lowball offer to balance the books.
 
Well this is going swimmingly. Brinkmanship where we lose in the end isn’t the aim of the game, is it?
 
mazhar13 said:
They aren't. Tel wasn't their #1 choice according to Plettenberg; they had a more experienced option ahead of him (Nkunku, possibly). INEOS, however, want to make a profit on every possible incoming transaction, so even if United's revenues are decent, they don't want do spend more on their total incomings than their total outgoings. This is how INEOS operate their other clubs like Lausanne and Nice. They seem to use PSR as a reason for not being able to spend more, but that seems more like a convenient excuse for them in their chase of profiting off of United's transfers. I say this because they're no longer paying as much in the salaries of the players that they loaned out, and the players they brought in this month aren't likely to be on big contracts, either.

They want to grow their profits so that their shares appreciate in value. I wouldn't be surprised if, in the summer, the same narratives come out about having to sell before they can buy more players.
Click to expand...
That doesn't sound good at all.

I must admit, while not fancying the Qatari bid either, I was always wary of INEOS' history with Nice and Lausanne during the takeover. In two relatively small leagues - where the kind of money they had should have brought success and trophies - they didn't win anything and seemed to run them sustainably rather than for achieving sporting success.

Does look worryingly like the same approach here.
 
groovyalbert said:
See Morata has gone on loan to Gala. Would have been a very sensible loan move given the system/area we're lacking.
Click to expand...
You mean one of the most useless and annoying CFs that ever played premier league? The guy who was useless even when he was younger, but is now long past his expiration date?

Ok
 
AndySmith1990 said:
We've played against the sort of dross that would struggle to get promoted from the championship
Click to expand...
Can only beat what’s in front of you. And most of them teams are either at the top of their league or near the top.
 
Paul778 said:
Is it brinkmanship when all of the options are going in the wrong direction?
Click to expand...
Yeah... just not the kind of brinksmanship we intended. The walk away bluff not working hurts us more than anyone we're dealing with and they know that.
 
Bertie Wooster said:
That doesn't sound good at all.

I must admit, while not fancying the Qatari bid either, I was always wary of INEOS' history with Nice and Lausanne during the takeover. In two relatively small leagues - where the kind of money they had should have brought success and trophies - they didn't win anything and seemed to run them sustainably rather than for achieving sporting success.

Does look worryingly like the same approach here.
Click to expand...
Competing for (and winning) major honours at this time is an expensive endeavour in football. The more profitable approach is to be good enough to be in the the top flight and qualify for the European competitions for the extra revenues whilst profiting off of the player transfers.

When the squad cost rules come into effect, that's when INEOS may start to become more competitive knowing that their squad expenses will never exceed their revenues. By then, they'll have cut enough costs elsewhere to get away with it.
 
Redstain said:
Amorim is done really if there's no reinforcements.

Players won't magically change their capabilities, a wingback who has everything to prove when the conditions for major changes were needed is abysmal. INEOS are a top disgrace.
Click to expand...

What did you want INEOS to do? Our finances are fecked from years and years of mismanagement.
 
Plant0x84 said:
I’d rather keep Rashford for 15 goals personally.
Click to expand...
Same but he clearly needs a new environment.

Tel would have been a bad loan option anyway. The team needs an experienced forward like Osimhen or Morata. Hell even Nkunku would have been fine as long as it was a loan and Garnacho wasn't going the other way.
 
Marcelinho87 said:
What did you want INEOS to do? Our finances are fecked from years and years of mismanagement.
Click to expand...
Which they have continued. First they keep ten hag then sack him at great expense, then recruit ashworth and sack him at great expense, spend a shit load of money on transfers which don't improve the team then recruit a manager that requires a huge amount of money to make his system work. Its a shambles and just saying it was a mess to begin with doesn't cut it
 
Marcelinho87 said:
What did you want INEOS to do? Our finances are fecked from years and years of mismanagement.
Click to expand...

Yes and it's their decisions which have created the current circumstances, INEOS hired Amorim in the midst of the season not waiting until the summer. They opted for a manager that requires total recreation of the squad given the demands of his philosophy and system. They knew the manager would have one window being in winter, the hardest market to negotiate essentially being his pre season of opportunity.

INEOS didn't do what FSG did by assessing alternatives to Amorim, not due to his lack of credentials but the feasibility of his management with the present group of players available. INEOS have created the situation United are concurrently in, the lack of finances only compounds the issue but all in all it is demonstrable of poor planning. Now we all as spectators can have an opinion but time isn't required to measure competence. Their handling of Erik, Ashworth, Amorim (giving him a deadline to join) and now the window has exposed their ineptitude.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.