Would you rather sign Shaw for £30m or...

Sparky Rhiwabon

New Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2013
Messages
16,946
Would you rather us sign Luke Shaw for the likely £30m price needed
or
Sign three cheaper options who have been linked such as Blind, Indi and Vermaelen for around the same combined amount and then be able to spend more money on central midfield and a winger?

The three that I mentioned above would give us plenty of cover at left back - Blind and Vermaelen can both play there as well as Evra. Vermaelen and Indi can play centrally whilst Blind gives us a midfield option as well.

I wonder if this is the way LVG is thinking?
 
I would rather buy Shaw this season, learning one year from Captain Patrice, playing 20-30 games this season and being the next left back for the next 10 years.
 
Shaw as he's a comfortably better left back than those 3 & we need a left back more than we need a winger.
 
whats got to be done has to be done now. We may get a bargain from now and them but its going to be extremely rare. Shaw has shown his potential and just thinking about what he would achieve under LvG would get anyone excited. Vermaelen is not a player we should be going for, we need someone reliable not injury prone.
 
Shaw easily. What's the point of buying lots of specialist utility players? Our youth system should be good enough to provide us with them.
 
Quality over quantity, even if the stories about us offering Shaw £160,000 a week are true then it would still be cheaper than handing out 3 contracts as Vermaelen must already be on £80,000 or so. We shouldn't have to pay Shaw that much to come here, we're still a big club but that's beside the point.
 
Shaw could sort out left back for a decade or more. No brainer really for me.
 
Sign both Blind and Shaw :) If Blind is adept in midfield - he will give us lots of options
 
Sparky Rhiwabon said:
Would you rather us sign Luke Shaw for the likely £30m price needed
or
Sign three cheaper options who have been linked such as Blind, Indi and Vermaelen for around the same combined amount and then be able to spend more money on central midfield and a winger?

The three that I mentioned above would give us plenty of cover at left back - Blind and Vermaelen can both play there as well as Evra. Vermaelen and Indi can play centrally whilst Blind gives us a midfield option as well.

I wonder if this is the way LVG is thinking?
Click to expand...

Indi can play LB too and did so quite a lot initially for Feyenoord.

If it means more money to spend on centre mid I'd definitely be all over getting Blind, BMI and Verm instead of Shaw.
 
Last edited:
I would take Blind. I seen him a fair bit and think he is class and would excel even more under LVG and playing with better players. Also, he is less than half of what Southampton are asking for Shaw.
 
The aims for next season should be a return to the top four, with a secondary objective of a decent Cup run.

I think Van Gaal's aim should be to build a new side, beginning with Central Midfield. That is where the majority of the money should be spent, with a functioning MF: Mata, Rooney and RvP and no European football - that should be more than enough to achieve those objectives.

I don't think we should be pressured into spending 30m and possibly damaging the club wage structure on an 18 year old who's had one good season for a small mid-table side.
 
Juan't Mata said:
Indi can play LB too and did so quite a lot initially for Feyenoord.

If it means more money to spend on centre back I'd definitely be all over getting Blind, BMI and Verm instead of Shaw.
Click to expand...

Money is no issue, we have loads of it, attracting top level players in the problem.
 
Manucho the boss said:
Money is no issue, we have loads of it, attracting top level players in the problem.
Click to expand...

No, we aren't an oil baron's plaything. Even with our masive turnover etc, we have, and always will have a finite budget for transfers. When looking at any potential signing, the opportunity cost (in the case getting three players for the price of what one would cost) is hugely important.

Thinking we have an unlimited budget is naive and foolish.
 
I don't want Vermaelen and not really Indi either. I would consider Blind if he way 15-20 million cheaper than Shaw. In that case, I think it might be the more sensible choice. Left-backs usually aren't that expensive and frankly there's a reason for that.
 
Blind's an average left back & a lot of people just seem to be basing their opinion of him on the Spain game where he played wing back as opposed to full back. I don't think he's good enough positionally for left back and he's a bit on the slow side. He'd be a good squad option to have, especially as he's good in midfield, but there's no way we should be considering him or BMI & Verm as alternatives to Shaw.
 
I get the feeling that the price tag, whether high or low, means nothing to LVG. He just wants players that will fit the system. Even age means nothing to him. I think whether we strongly pursue Shaw or not will be little to do with money at all. If LVG wants him the Glazers will sanction the transfer, if he doesnt they will allow LVG to bring in Blind or whoever else he prefers. This is a guy who made what many were calling an "average" Dutch side, look world beaters vs Spain. I have faith in Van Gaals targets
 
Shaw every day. If this was a less financially solvent club then yes, the three mentioned would be the sensible option but the money is there and if its not spent it goes into the pockets of the Glazers.

Being prudent with finances only benefits the Glazers so I dont get why everyone looks for value in a deal.
 
Other options.

People need to understand that club's money is finite. First of all, if we do spend such a ridiculous amount on such a young, unproven player though a talented one, every agent/club will take us for a ride. And then secondly we would not be able to get any other top reinforcements in.
 
Shaw.

Especially since not one of the three options you mentioned is actually a LB. Vermaelen is better as a CB, Martins Indi is unquestionably a CB, and Blind is best as a Milner-esque 'wide midfielder', not as a defender.
 
Lane said:
Other options.

People need to understand that club's money is finite. First of all, if we do spend such a ridiculous amount on such a young, unproven player though a talented one, every agent/club will take us for a ride. And then secondly we would not be able to get any other top reinforcements in.
Click to expand...
United's money is finitie (just as Chelsea or City's is) but not capped so low so that investing 30 million is a risk. We are making profits in the hundreds of millions annually most of which is being syphoned out of the club. We can well afford to spend over £100 million making sure the club is competetive.

When people question United's transfer funds they dont question if we could come up with £200 million, just whether the Glazers will stump up the cash from their profits. £30 million on a young defender with huge potential could be a brilliant investment and its LVG's job to make that call.
 
Last edited:
Lane said:
Other options.

People need to understand that club's money is finite. First of all, if we do spend such a ridiculous amount on such a young, unproven player though a talented one, every agent/club will take us for a ride. And then secondly we would not be able to get any other top reinforcements in.
Click to expand...
Well I don't think we have unlimited amounts to spend however, I can't see how buying Shaw for 30M stops another top target coming. We do seem to have a big chunk to spend.
 
Ricardo Rodriquez & a versatile CB.
I think Shaw is overrated TBH, however I would take him either way.
 
Blind is a central midfielder. Shaw is a great option at left back, with Ricardo Rodriguez the obvious alternative (better going forward, but reckless in defence).
 
GBBQ said:
United's money is finitie (just as Chelsea or City's is) but not capped so low so that investing 30 million is a risk. We are making profits in the hundreds of millions annually most of which is being syphoned out of the club. We can well afford to spend over £100 making sure the club is competetive.

When people question United's transfer funds they dont question if we could come up with £200 million, just whether the Glazers will stump up the cash from their profits. £30 million on a young defender with huge potential could be a brilliant investment and its LVG's job to make that call.
Click to expand...

1) It is a serious risk. At 30m he will be 3-rd or 4-th United most expensive signing and like 3-th or 4-th most expensive defender in the world. And given that he had only 1,5 season in top flight and is only 19 years old, the risk just gets bigger.

2) People saying we have money, and fair enough we do. But i also remember United pulling out of Hazard's transfer and Moura's one, just to name a few, exactly because of money concerns. It was widely reported that Fergie was reluctant to pay young Hazard 150k a week. But that was a guy with actual CL exp. and now we are ready to pay a bit more than that to a young full back.
I don't think we will spend 100m net this summer, nor i think we have that kind of money. So Shaw investment will mean we can't go all-in, make a huge offer for more established players.

3) I am not saying lets give a guy in reserve a chance. You know that Janko or something, austrian one i think. I am suggesting we look at different options. Rodriguez from Swiss team is not worse than Shaw. If not better actually. But he will cost twice as less in wages and transfer. And if we get an equally good player in for say 10 mil pounds, lets say even 14m, then we could probably use this other 10m to seriously sweeten the deal for a CM signing we want. I mean PSG and City bought a lot of top players when they were not even in CL and were not a top teams. City bought Toure from Barca for example. How? By splashing cash. I am all for splashing cash, if it'll get us Vidal or the likes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.