Woodward (old thread)

Should Studward remain as CE of Manchester United?

  • No - he should be sacked also.

    Votes: 40 22.6%

  • Yes - he should stay.

    Votes: 137 77.4%
  • Total voters
    177
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
You know, he does actually have other things to do at the club.

I mean, there could be a leak in one of the toilets and he has taken the company CC with him and doesnt want to do a transaction over the phone.

Or maybe he needs to be back here to choose some wall paper for the press room.

WHO KNOWS.
 
Hamadovich86 said:
But this time he was scheduled to leave right? Its not "urgent" like last year no?
Click to expand...

Just all speculation at the moment, I'm not even sure he has left or if MEN have jumped the Twitter gun.

IF he has left, it seems a little strange to me, we have only been Stateside for 2 days...
 
You have to wonder why he bothers going on these tours, don't you?
 
Woodward's a corporate snake. And a bit of a gnome too. But hey.

Still, I hope those singing his praise are a bit, you know, ironic and all. 'Cause to actually be a fan of Woody - well, I'd call that perverse. As long as he tries his best to provide the manager with the signings he's after, he's done his job, well done, nice one, etc.

The noodles and whatnot is a bit beyond what I actually give a feck about, truth be told.
 
Behind door number 1: A perpetually naive Ed Woodward who will always be hoodwinked by duplicitous agents.

Behind door number 2: A sharp Ed Woodward who had a steep learning curve last summer, which was exacerbated by a dithering new manager. Based on last year's lessons learned and a partnership with a more decisive manager will perform better this summer.

Behind door number 3: Ed Woodward who bestrides the football world as a colossus.

I choose door number 2.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
The similarities with last summer persist...
Click to expand...

We've already signed two players in positions that need strengthening and not as it looks the wrong player, who might not be good enough for us, in midfield at the last moment. There's a difference. I agree that actions speak louder than words and we heard it all before, but I won't complain until we've done all our business. Currently I am optimistic and hope I don't have to complain at all.
 
Chesterlestreet said:
Woodward's a corporate snake. And a bit of a gnome too. But hey.

Still, I hope those singing his praise are a bit, you know, ironic and all. 'Cause to actually be a fan of Woody - well, I'd call that perverse. As long as he tries his best to provide the manager with the signings he's after, he's done his job, well done, nice one, etc.

The noodles and whatnot is a bit beyond what I actually give a feck about, truth be told.
Click to expand...
What makes you say corporate snake/gnome?
 
nahealai said:
Woodward's left the US tour this morning (still a.m Stateside).

I think it's safe to say that, coupled with his claims in his latest interview and the fact he won't repeat last summer's cock-ups, this means business.

In the words of the Great Man himself, "Watch this space"...
Click to expand...
So this is the bit where he completely disappears for weeks and re-appears after the transfer window has closed.....yes?

Nothing new, seen it all before.
 
bucky said:
We've already signed two players in positions that need strengthening and not as it looks the wrong player, who might not be good enough for us, in midfield at the last moment. There's a difference. I agree that actions speak louder than words and we heard it all before, but I won't complain until we've done all our business. Currently I am optimistic and hope I don't have to complain at all.
Click to expand...

I'm the same. Things are completely different this summer (so far). We haven't got Moyes anywhere near the club and have replaced him with a proven winner, thank god.
 
DJ Jeff said:
What makes you say corporate snake/gnome?
Click to expand...

He's corporate (that's obvious enough). He's a Glazer man through and through (hence snake, take that how you will - he clearly ain't pissing without Joel's or Avram's permission). And he looks gnomish enough, surely. Not that I hold that against him. My aunt looks like a gnome. But he does.
 
ravelston said:
Weird how the obsession with net spend persists - thought it was fully discredited by now. Still, if you insist, the net spend for the first three (financial) years was £71m and for the first two £42.8m. It helps if you look at the audited financials rather than transferleague.com (who have racked up an enormous cumulative error since the takeover). It also helps to remember that more than £20m of the transfer budget in the first two years was taken up by paying the more than 50% of the Rooney and Ronaldo transfer fees that were unpaid at the time of the takeover.
Click to expand...

Links please regarding the funding of previous years... If You are going to make a sweeping statement about the financials at least supply evidence that backs up your point...

Also thanks for ignoring the majority of the rest of my post in relation to rivals and increase in revenue. It's clear you are just arguing for the sake of it. To suggest on any level that the glazers invested in the squad proportionately to the success on the field is downright thick.
 
Last edited:
Drummer said:
Links please regarding the funding of previous years... If You are going to make a sweeping statement about the financials at least supply evidence that backs up your point...

Also thanks for ignoring the majority of the rest of my post in relation to rivals and increase in revenue. It's clear you are just arguing for the sake of it. To suggest on any level that the glazers invested in the squad proportionately to the success on the field is downright thick.
Click to expand...

The Andersred blog has links to financials here:

http://andersred.blogspot.com/p/resources_28.html

Rounding from each year's consolidated cash flow statement yields the following net spend, calculated by subtracting proceeds of players' registrations from purchases of players' registrations.

2006: £32.4M net spend
2007: £10.5M net spend
2008: £26.5M net spend

Total of £69.4M, which is consistent with @ravelston's post.
 
Last edited:
Pexbo said:
I reckon he likes me. I've been championing his cause all year.

Hi Ed, keep up the top work and hurry up and announce Vidal.
Click to expand...
If Ed doesn't pull off Vidal, then I suspect a few of your future comments during the ensuing breakdown might put Ed off you
 
Sied said:
If Ed doesn't pull off Vidal, then I suspect a few of your future comments during the ensuing breakdown might put Ed off you
Click to expand...

Nonsense, signing the best midfielder in the world isn't easy.
 
NoWinNoFee said:
He should sign both Pogba and Vidal then, £85m should do the trick :drool:

If James Rodriguez is worth £75m then surely these 2 would be worth an £85m investment, would make us one of the best teams in the world even without Champions League football.

----- Pogba Vidal
Adnan------------Mata
--------Rooney
---------RVP

:drool:

or


----- Pogba Vidal
Rooney---Herrera------Mata
---------RVP

More :drool:<---
Click to expand...
Surely you would only sign one of Vidal and Pogba so you can play Herrera in the deeper role, thus allowing Mata to play in his favoured #10 position and then spend the money you saved by only buying one midfielder on a better winger or a centre back?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.