Maybe I meant they underrate the amount of overrating that goes on. At this time in the morning I dont know what Im talking about to be honest.
Wayne Rooney | 2012-14 Performances
- Thread starter gooDevil
- Start date
- Status
We've not got another goalscorer like RVP, whereas we've got other creative (or whatever you want to brand Rooney as) players in the team.
In Continental Europe, Rooney is widely regarded as one of the finest players in the world. We'd be absolutely nuts to let him go, and SAF knows it... as was shown in 2010 when we bowed down to Rooney's demands. Yes, we've got RVP now, but why weaken a considerably strenghtened team by selling one of our top two players?
I don't think anyone would advocate selling Rooney for absolutely no reason, that would be insane. I think the discussion revolves around whether an offer such as £50m would be acceptable, if it were used to strengthen the squad. IE for the figures being quoted, if all were reinvested, could we end up with a stronger squad? As I said before selling him for £50m, as a whole package would give us probably £110m to reinvest over a 5 year period.
Obviously it would depend which players would be available, but I believe that with kind of money there is a good chance we'd be stronger, if not immediately, then in the long term.
Where will the goals come from?!
Of all the problems we've had over the last few years goalscoring has never been one of them.
Van Persie's class, obviously, but I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here.
If RVP isn't scoring then Rooney will step up like he always has.RVP makes United better but Rooney has been scoring for years for Man United.
Finneh, that's a lot of ifs.
Broken record time, but the Ronaldo money wasnt reinvested. Or if it was then the Glazers welched on their stated annual net spend numbers. It doesnt really matter now, given what has happened in that time. But to say, "would it be good IF we got this amount of money and IF that was reinvested in the squad" is taking an already hypothetical conversation way into the realms of fantasy. It just doesnt work like that.
Playing your game though, I think it is far from certain we would get a player of Rooney's quality for the same price or less than we sold Rooney for. There is always a premium on players coming to the club. If we could take our pick of players that would be one thing. But other clubs may not be as eager to sell their best players as some of our fans seem to be. (I know people keep saying "no we dont actually want to sell Rooney, we are just asking," but into the third or fourth day of this conversation, sorry, it really seems like some of you WOULD like to sell Rooney and reinvest the money in other players. Fair enough, each to his own.) So £50m may not be enough to sign whichever world class players people have in mind.
There is also the possibility that other people, especially foreign players, may not settle as well as hoped in Manchester. It has happened many times in the past. Whereas Rooney is here and has done the business for years. He is the devil we know, in all senses of the phrase.
Broken record time, but the Ronaldo money wasnt reinvested. Or if it was then the Glazers welched on their stated annual net spend numbers. It doesnt really matter now, given what has happened in that time. But to say, "would it be good IF we got this amount of money and IF that was reinvested in the squad" is taking an already hypothetical conversation way into the realms of fantasy. It just doesnt work like that.
Playing your game though, I think it is far from certain we would get a player of Rooney's quality for the same price or less than we sold Rooney for. There is always a premium on players coming to the club. If we could take our pick of players that would be one thing. But other clubs may not be as eager to sell their best players as some of our fans seem to be. (I know people keep saying "no we dont actually want to sell Rooney, we are just asking," but into the third or fourth day of this conversation, sorry, it really seems like some of you WOULD like to sell Rooney and reinvest the money in other players. Fair enough, each to his own.) So £50m may not be enough to sign whichever world class players people have in mind.
There is also the possibility that other people, especially foreign players, may not settle as well as hoped in Manchester. It has happened many times in the past. Whereas Rooney is here and has done the business for years. He is the devil we know, in all senses of the phrase.
But isn't it a completely pointless and redundant argument? You could say that about every single player in our team (or any other team in the World).
If we get a huge fee for (enter player here) and that money is re-invested in the team there's a chance we could be stronger on the whole, if not immediately, then in the long term.
It won't. In the hypothetical situation, if we sell Rooney for 50m and buy 2 or 3 players for that sum, those guys will command total wages in the region of 200K, which is reportedly the same as what Rooney earns currently. So, I don't know how it will give us £110m to invest.
Selling one of our two best players sounds preposterous to me, when he is only 27 years old.
There's a reason for that.
I see your point, but I disagree for two resasons.
1.) It may sound weird, but it seems we don't really need the money. I'm no financial expert by any means, but all the projections show a massive increase in revenue over the next 3-4 years, with our cash reserves growing and the turnover/wage ratio actually going down towards 40%. We will be a real cash cow in 2017 when the bond matures and the debt will be no issue anymore. So I don't think these estimates of £100m will really matter, because getting replacements in still won't give us as much as Rooney does.
2.) We've just considerably strenghtened with the arrival of a true world class player in RVP... we can now afford to rest either RVP or Rooney without a considerable drop in quality upfront. Yes, I have very big hopes for Welbeck and Hernandez, but it's still clear that our overall play suffers if one of RVP/Rooney is not on the pitch (think it was evident just last week at Loftus Road). Why give up on that advantage? We will spend money anyway in the next few years, there will be tons of money available as suggested above. I also think we are already going to be incredibly strong with the players we have, many of them are still far off their peak, but they need world class player to drag them through their inconsistent games... like RVP and Rooney.
I would not accept a fee of £50m, and neither would Sir Alex IMO. Ronaldo is quite clearly the better player than Rooney, but just to underline my point SAF feels we undervalued at £80m... Real got themselves a bargain there. I think any team getting Rooney for £50m would feel the same, especially as he is now fully approaching his peak.
I didn't get it, Simon.
Yes the difference with Ronaldo is he wanted to go so we didnt have much leverage. Rooney I cant imagine will be pushing for a move, so we have leverage - or rather, nobody has leverage over us. So we wont be forced to sell, meaning they would have to offer something really daft for us to bother looking at it. i.e. more than £50m. A lot more.
It sounds preposterous because it is.
Of course there are a lot of ifs. The fact is no-one would ever want to sell or get rid of any player if we didn't get a replacement in. People have been saying Scholes/Giggs should retire for years, but this is only on the premise that we adequately replace their contribution.
Not at all. Most players wouldn't command a fee big enough for the team to potentially be stronger if it was reinvested. Rooney in my opinion would command a fee potentially bigger than his contribution because he's such a big name (in my opinion).
For example watching Rafael I feel he could be as valuable to United as Gary Neville was. There is no chance we'd get a fee anywhere near matching that kind of potential importance.
Of course the wages would be taken into account, that's obvious. Only an idiot would compare one player with his wages vs several without their wages (apples with oranges!). The point was that if you replaced him with one player mentioned - Wilshere, I'm sure you'd get him for a lower transfer fee and with probably under 50% of the wages. I'm sure you'd be left with around £35m afterwards for a player and his wages (say £20m fee and £60k a week).
Again it's the theoretical example of reinvesting what Rooney is worth on a top replacement or two. I feel that if we got such an offer as is being touted, we could replace Rooney. Most will disagree but that's fair enough.
Obviously if we had the choice financially of Rooney and A.N. Other World Class player then of course it would be mad to sell.
Why would we even contemplate selling one of our best if not our best player? Madness I tell you, let's build around him and RVP. The more world class players the better I remember when we won the European cup we had Rooney Ronaldo Tevez Vidic Rio and Scholes all at the top level. Now we only have Rooney Carrick and RVP arguably Valencia albeit form of late.
Carrick is world class now? Hmmm.....
If Tevez was Carrick certainly is.
I'd be more worried about him saying that Valencia arguably is.
Okay. Could we all please take a step back to look at the wider picture re Rooney's contribution at Utd.
I feel that with Rooney the team possesses a synergy that is lacking when he is absent, no matter who else we have in the team... I remember in Ronaldo's truly amazing seasons, even though CR might make the obviously winning contribution (assist or goal), if you looked at how the team played as a whole, that was far more dependant on Rooney's presence than Ronaldo's.
Now obviously this did depend somewhat on Rooney's form that day, it was much less relevant when he was doing his 'returning after long layoff, touch of a rapist on PCP' impression. But generally it was true.
I would suggest it is only a little less true now.
I feel that with Rooney the team possesses a synergy that is lacking when he is absent, no matter who else we have in the team... I remember in Ronaldo's truly amazing seasons, even though CR might make the obviously winning contribution (assist or goal), if you looked at how the team played as a whole, that was far more dependant on Rooney's presence than Ronaldo's.
Now obviously this did depend somewhat on Rooney's form that day, it was much less relevant when he was doing his 'returning after long layoff, touch of a rapist on PCP' impression. But generally it was true.
I would suggest it is only a little less true now.
Holy feck it's FeedingSeagulls.
True, but Rooney was a better player then (and in the season after Ronaldo left) IMO.
Yeah, I'd agree 100% with this. 9 times out of 10 we are still a far better team with Rooney in our side that when he's not there and people even suggest he looks like he doesn't care. If that was the case he would be sacrificing his chances for a goal at the Bernabeu for a more team based role if that was the case. He is one of the elite players in the world, and to suggest otherwise is crap in my opinion.
But Rooney can be a scorer like RVP, well I would RVP is slightly better in that regard but there isn't as much in it as people like to make out there is. Look at the previous 3 seasons last year Rooney scored 36 goals, ok the season before he only got around 16 but lets not forget the personal problems he had and injury so he never got a goal until new year he proved his quality taking us to the league title and CL final in the second half of the season. The year before that I think he scored 36 goals again playing the last part of the season through injury (which I believe played a big part in his sluggish start the next season) and when he picked up that injury against Munich I think he was level or very similar in terms of goals as Messi was at the same point that season.
People seem to have a short memory on this board, since we signed RVP people seem to have forgot just what Wayne Rooney can do in a number 9 role, even playing in a deeper a role in a injury hit season he still averaging about a goal every other game. We are lucky that we have both players but we are even luckier that Rooney can play other roles to a amazing level otherwise we probably wouldn't have signed RVP because when played in the number 9 role Wayne Rooney is very much a goal scorer like Van Persie.
This for me is the key. There is so much short-sightedness in this thread. Last season Rooney scored only 3 fewer PL goals than RvP yet now it seems some think there is a gulf between them and having RvP has made Rooney suddenly disposable.
I've just watched the video in the spoiler in Danny1982s earlier post. Really great vid. I recommend it.
why not? He has done it before
Yep, but the club is in a far better position squad-wise now then it was in 2010. We have added a world class player in RVP, potential world class talents in De Gea, Jones, Kagawa etc. and are in a fantastic position, even in financial terms, for the upcoming decade. No doubting that Rooney was an idiot in 2010, but he would be nuts to question the club again.
Beckham-esque
Great goal, not so great performance.
People this week were calling Rooney average this week!
Are you shitting me?! He's been sensational! fecking hell, you have to have 'Messi' written on your back to impress some.
I only saw one minute out of every two, and that blurry, but I thought he was terrible for most of the match.
He was really poor in the first half, a bit better in the second, and finished well.
2 assists and 1 screamer. Ill take that thank you very much.
Need a gif (Olly please) cause I didn't catch it
This.
World Class.
Got better as Norwich attacked (if you can call it that...) and the game opened up a bit.
- Status