I see a lot of people on here saying a lot of negative things about these two and it suprises me a little TBH.
Now I agree with some of what some people say, eg scholes can play for only 60 mins then tires, but to say these guys should just go is naive IMO.
Let me explain. I have always felt that the reason for SAF's success hasnt always been the rooneys, ronaldos, cantonas etc (although of course they are major players). The real success has been due to the likes of Oshea, park and even Gibson.
These are players happy to sit on the bench but come on and do a job when needed. Gibson for example was 5th choice in midfield and for that he did really well. You can never have say a shweinsteiger and a keane in a squad unless both are playing every game. You need a gibson/oshea to fill in when needed but largely stay on the bench.
Scholes and Giggs will be the new oshea/Gibson etc regardless of who we sign. With the injuries this season these 2 could be vital if they occur again.
You simply cannot go out and buy another top class midfielder 'in case', you need the 'mr averages', 'not UTD quality' etc. Because their role is simply a 'when needed' or 'can do a job' but happy to sit out.
Dont know about anyone else but Giggs and Scholes (even at 40) are a brilliant option on the bench compared to say Gibson. Scholes starting for even 60 minutes if ando gets injured is better than Gibson for 90.
thoughts?
Scholes and Giggs
posted on 10/7/12
I think in a way De Gea was a free signing. In the fact that at some point in the next 4 or 5 years he'll go to Madrid or Barcelona for a profit.
posted on 10/7/12
think in a way De Gea was a free signing. In the fact that at some point in the next 4 or 5 years he'll go to Madrid or Barcelona for a profit.
-----------
i dont think he will, i think he'll spend a lot longer at united.
having said that, we could probably sell him in 10 years for more than what we paid for him.
posted on 10/7/12
I'm glad we signed De Gea, but I would have rather have seen a top cm come in and played Lindegaard (who is pretty solid).
There does seem to be a lack of top cm's out there, but that shouldn't be the reason for not improving on what we currently have.
Arteta would have been a great stop gap until Anderson and or Cleverly fulfill their potential, or a top cm becomes avaiable.
Most Arsenal fans will tell you how good he was last season, especially in the department we have a problem with most: retaining posession.
posted on 10/7/12
OP I understand your point, but when I think about all the young players this season alone that we have lost due to lack of game time, leaves me feeling that we're not build for the future quick enough.
If Alex Ferguson back in 94/95 had not of let Hughes, Ince and Kanchelskis go when he did, there would have been no chances for likes of Giggs, Scholes and Beckham to have come through when they did.
What he did back then was a very brave decision in letting three of our main players go all at once. I feel he needs to make another one of those gut wrenching decisions and bring youth through now. I don't think we are moving on quick enough in terms of bringing the younger players through like we did and keeping the old guard around isn't helping!
posted on 10/7/12
Rock Steady
I get what you're saying, especially about 1995 but times are different. Teams that win leagues now do it with a higher points total than ever before (give or take a couple of seasons). See last season, how we won a massive percentage of games but still came second. In 1995 you could lose 6 or 7 games but still win the title so it was easier to blood the younger players.
Now, if a young player comes in and (naturally) makes a mistake and it costs us the game, that can be the difference between winning the title or not.
posted on 10/7/12
Rock Steady, the difference was that the young players he had then were clearly good enough to replace the old guard, and a step up in some cases, whereas these youngsters aren't the same calibre as those young guys, and I'm guessing Fergie doesn't think they're good enough (yet?) to replace this old guard.
posted on 10/7/12
Darren & Funrob
Since 94/5, if we have not been able to bring through the same kind of high calibre player on a constant basis , makes me wonder how good or how worthwhile or cost effective our youth developments system is?
posted on 10/7/12
I don't think any club can consistently bring great youth players through all the time. We were very lucky in 1992 to have a bunch of players that came through together but since then we've only brought through O'Shea, Fletcher, the Twins, Cleverley and Welbeck with a couple of others.
I think the rule that came in a few years back where we could only recruit players from a few mile radius of the club may have hindered us and also the Chelsea/City factor which means we have to hit the ground running every season just to keep up with the Petrocash means that the business is a lot more ruthless than ever.
posted on 10/7/12
We were lucky to have got so many great young players all come through at the same time.
I agree with that. I agree with funrob that the competitiveness has made it harder to blood young talent, but Rooney, Ronaldo, Rafael, Rio and Nani were all getting regular games at a young age.
Coincedentally none of them came through our youth ranks. If you're good enough you're old enough. Evidently our youth system isn't good enough.
posted on 10/7/12
Funrob
I think the rule that came in a few years back where we could only recruit players from a few mile radius of the club may have hindered us
-------------
You make a good point there one of which i had forgotten!