the problem imo opinion resurfaced after saf left and big mouth ed woodward told the world we had more money than sense in his attempt to flex his financial muscle
—
Absolutely unforgivably stupid thing to do.
Imagine been owned by the press as much as the OP seems to be
comment by julian weigl-the regista we need (U13920)
posted 1 hour, 28 minutes ago
for those who do not remember this was also a problem for many years under saf.
especially when peter kenyon left to join chelsea and we seemingly lost out on many targets : essien and ronaldinho.
saf and gill sorted this issue out when we signed evra, vidic carrick vds etc.
the problem imo opinion resurfaced after saf left and big mouth ed woodward told the world we had more money than sense in his attempt to flex his financial muscle
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As much as I dislike Woodward, I don’t think his comments have really had that big on influence on this. It’s hardly a well kept secret Manchester United make stupid money, clubs already know this so Woodward’s comments don’t change much.
Perhaps not, but still a very foolish thing to come out and say..
Only because it makes him look like an idiot, not because it has any significant impact on negotiations.
comment by Ed The King Woodward (U10026)
posted 12 seconds ago
Only because it makes him look like an idiot, not because it has any significant impact on negotiations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why did he say it? What need was there for him to utter that?
I do feel the same frustrations as with the OP in regards to the duration process of transfers (speculations?)
But you also have to factor in several big factors.
- The bidding club - in this case cash cow United.
Who has had a recent history of blowing ridiculous money on worthless transfers. Which has created a trend of 'get as much out of United as we can, because they are in a mess' problem.
- The 'stubbornness' of selling clubs.
- The money flowing into the game.
- Other better attractive clubs.
- Players' greed.
- Ed Woodward's lack of direction/expertise outside of his expertise.
- The instability of United.
Other wealthy/stabilised clubs such as City and Madrid during this window can get their deals done more smoothly because they have better enabled people to take care of this than we do.
comment by Prem (U7618)
posted 3 hours, 26 minutes ago
I do feel the same frustrations as with the OP in regards to the duration process of transfers (speculations?)
But you also have to factor in several big factors.
- The bidding club - in this case cash cow United.
Who has had a recent history of blowing ridiculous money on worthless transfers. Which has created a trend of 'get as much out of United as we can, because they are in a mess' problem.
- The 'stubbornness' of selling clubs.
- The money flowing into the game.
- Other better attractive clubs.
- Players' greed.
- Ed Woodward's lack of direction/expertise outside of his expertise.
- The instability of United.
Other wealthy/stabilised clubs such as City and Madrid during this window can get their deals done more smoothly because they have better enabled people to take care of this than we do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m not defending Woodward - I hate the cant more than most, I promise you - but none of City, Liverpool, Spurs, Arsenal, PSG, Bayern and more have signed more players than we have so far.
Few of them have managed to shift players on anything other than a free transfer either.
I say it again:
EVERY FAN BELIEVES - AND SAYS EVERY TRANSFER WINDOW - THAT THEIR CLUB IS SLUGGISH IN TRANSFER DEALINGS.
Have a look around the other boards and listen to other fans. People are impatient, and they have absolutely no idea what an elite player transfer involves.
We are talking about satisfying multiple parties (usually minimum four separate entities) with conflicting and different interests in a multi-million pound business service deal comprising multiple separate yet interdependent legal contracts.
It’s massively, massively, massively complicated business.
According to Sky sources, Atletico Madrid paid Chelsea €65m (£58.3m) for the permanent signing of Alvaro Morata.
————————
If this is true... How the heck do Chelsea get such good prices when they sell??!! I’d be surprised if we sold Pogba for much more than that knowing our negotiating, assuming he does leave
comment by JonVeron (U6514)
posted 3 minutes ago
According to Sky sources, Atletico Madrid paid Chelsea €65m (£58.3m) for the permanent signing of Alvaro Morata.
————————
If this is true... How the heck do Chelsea get such good prices when they sell??!! I’d be surprised if we sold Pogba for much more than that knowing our negotiating, assuming he does leave
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For a highly marketable player with a better than one-in-two record in Spain and Italy, yet to enter his prime, with three years left on his contract?
comment by JonVeron (U6514)
posted 30 minutes ago
According to Sky sources, Atletico Madrid paid Chelsea €65m (£58.3m) for the permanent signing of Alvaro Morata.
————————
If this is true... How the heck do Chelsea get such good prices when they sell??!! I’d be surprised if we sold Pogba for much more than that knowing our negotiating, assuming he does leave
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If we get anything over 100m for pogba would be amazing, given how poor he’s been at times.
comment by rosso is facking happy (U17054)
posted 54 minutes ago
comment by JonVeron (U6514)
posted 3 minutes ago
According to Sky sources, Atletico Madrid paid Chelsea €65m (£58.3m) for the permanent signing of Alvaro Morata.
————————
If this is true... How the heck do Chelsea get such good prices when they sell??!! I’d be surprised if we sold Pogba for much more than that knowing our negotiating, assuming he does leave
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For a highly marketable player with a better than one-in-two record in Spain and Italy, yet to enter his prime, with three years left on his contract?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Forgetting the fact he was utterly useless at Chelsea?!
Tbf I don’t know how well he did last season. Still, not a bad fee
comment by rosso is facking happy (U17054)
posted 5 hours, 4 minutes ago
comment by Prem (U7618)
posted 3 hours, 26 minutes ago
I do feel the same frustrations as with the OP in regards to the duration process of transfers (speculations?)
But you also have to factor in several big factors.
- The bidding club - in this case cash cow United.
Who has had a recent history of blowing ridiculous money on worthless transfers. Which has created a trend of 'get as much out of United as we can, because they are in a mess' problem.
- The 'stubbornness' of selling clubs.
- The money flowing into the game.
- Other better attractive clubs.
- Players' greed.
- Ed Woodward's lack of direction/expertise outside of his expertise.
- The instability of United.
Other wealthy/stabilised clubs such as City and Madrid during this window can get their deals done more smoothly because they have better enabled people to take care of this than we do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m not defending Woodward - I hate the cant more than most, I promise you - but none of City, Liverpool, Spurs, Arsenal, PSG, Bayern and more have signed more players than we have so far.
Few of them have managed to shift players on anything other than a free transfer either.
I say it again:
EVERY FAN BELIEVES - AND SAYS EVERY TRANSFER WINDOW - THAT THEIR CLUB IS SLUGGISH IN TRANSFER DEALINGS.
Have a look around the other boards and listen to other fans. People are impatient, and they have absolutely no idea what an elite player transfer involves.
We are talking about satisfying multiple parties (usually minimum four separate entities) with conflicting and different interests in a multi-million pound business service deal comprising multiple separate yet interdependent legal contracts.
It’s massively, massively, massively complicated business.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree that it is a massively complicated business proceedings. But we can't help but feel that when it is concerning United, that some of these hurdles are magnified tenfold.
And while I do realise that City haven't bought that many players during this window thus far. I was referring more to their efficiency in doing transfers. They have a proper structure in place and it works more smoothly than ours.
comment by Prem (U7618)
posted 1 hour, 52 minutes ago
comment by rosso is facking happy(U17054)
posted 5 hours, 4 minutes ago
comment by Prem (U7618)
posted 3 hours, 26 minutes ago
I do feel the same frustrations as with the OP in regards to the duration process of transfers (speculations?)
But you also have to factor in several big factors.
- The bidding club - in this case cash cow United.
Who has had a recent history of blowing ridiculous money on worthless transfers. Which has created a trend of 'get as much out of United as we can, because they are in a mess' problem.
- The 'stubbornness' of selling clubs.
- The money flowing into the game.
- Other better attractive clubs.
- Players' greed.
- Ed Woodward's lack of direction/expertise outside of his expertise.
- The instability of United.
Other wealthy/stabilised clubs such as City and Madrid during this window can get their deals done more smoothly because they have better enabled people to take care of this than we do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m not defending Woodward - I hate the cant more than most, I promise you - but none of City, Liverpool, Spurs, Arsenal, PSG, Bayern and more have signed more players than we have so far.
Few of them have managed to shift players on anything other than a free transfer either.
I say it again:
EVERY FAN BELIEVES - AND SAYS EVERY TRANSFER WINDOW - THAT THEIR CLUB IS SLUGGISH IN TRANSFER DEALINGS.
Have a look around the other boards and listen to other fans. People are impatient, and they have absolutely no idea what an elite player transfer involves.
We are talking about satisfying multiple parties (usually minimum four separate entities) with conflicting and different interests in a multi-million pound business service deal comprising multiple separate yet interdependent legal contracts.
It’s massively, massively, massively complicated business.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree that it is a massively complicated business proceedings. But we can't help but feel that when it is concerning United, that some of these hurdles are magnified tenfold.
And while I do realise that City haven't bought that many players during this window thus far. I was referring more to their efficiency in doing transfers. They have a proper structure in place and it works more smoothly than ours.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How do you know that?
comment by rosso is facking happy (U17054)
posted 12 hours, 13 minutes ago
comment by JonVeron (U6514)
posted 3 minutes ago
According to Sky sources, Atletico Madrid paid Chelsea €65m (£58.3m) for the permanent signing of Alvaro Morata.
————————
If this is true... How the heck do Chelsea get such good prices when they sell??!! I’d be surprised if we sold Pogba for much more than that knowing our negotiating, assuming he does leave
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For a highly marketable player with a better than one-in-two record in Spain and Italy, yet to enter his prime, with three years left on his contract?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The only time moratas been 1 in 2 or better was in Reals youth team
He's not as bad a player as people make out tbf, but 60 million or thereabouts is over priced
Not as overpriced as when Chelsea bought him tho obv
comment by rosso is facking happy (U17054)
posted 5 hours, 37 minutes ago
comment by Prem (U7618)
posted 1 hour, 52 minutes ago
comment by rosso is facking happy(U17054)
posted 5 hours, 4 minutes ago
comment by Prem (U7618)
posted 3 hours, 26 minutes ago
I do feel the same frustrations as with the OP in regards to the duration process of transfers (speculations?)
But you also have to factor in several big factors.
- The bidding club - in this case cash cow United.
Who has had a recent history of blowing ridiculous money on worthless transfers. Which has created a trend of 'get as much out of United as we can, because they are in a mess' problem.
- The 'stubbornness' of selling clubs.
- The money flowing into the game.
- Other better attractive clubs.
- Players' greed.
- Ed Woodward's lack of direction/expertise outside of his expertise.
- The instability of United.
Other wealthy/stabilised clubs such as City and Madrid during this window can get their deals done more smoothly because they have better enabled people to take care of this than we do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m not defending Woodward - I hate the cant more than most, I promise you - but none of City, Liverpool, Spurs, Arsenal, PSG, Bayern and more have signed more players than we have so far.
Few of them have managed to shift players on anything other than a free transfer either.
I say it again:
EVERY FAN BELIEVES - AND SAYS EVERY TRANSFER WINDOW - THAT THEIR CLUB IS SLUGGISH IN TRANSFER DEALINGS.
Have a look around the other boards and listen to other fans. People are impatient, and they have absolutely no idea what an elite player transfer involves.
We are talking about satisfying multiple parties (usually minimum four separate entities) with conflicting and different interests in a multi-million pound business service deal comprising multiple separate yet interdependent legal contracts.
It’s massively, massively, massively complicated business.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree that it is a massively complicated business proceedings. But we can't help but feel that when it is concerning United, that some of these hurdles are magnified tenfold.
And while I do realise that City haven't bought that many players during this window thus far. I was referring more to their efficiency in doing transfers. They have a proper structure in place and it works more smoothly than ours.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How do you know that?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well it all aligns in with the manager that they targeted for a while before they got him in. Now he’s in place and set a foundation. They also have a specific technical director in who’s worked closely and effectively alongside Guardiola back at Barcelona. They have have a blueprint of player criterias that they try to adhere to.
Over here at United, the transfer policies has been fluctuating from bizarre to okay to desperation. Not all of our buys have been a disaster, but many of them just haven’t worked out for multiple reasons. And bad planning has been one of them.
comment by Shugs (U14253)
posted 2 hours, 52 minutes ago
comment by rosso is facking happy(U17054)
posted 12 hours, 13 minutes ago
comment by JonVeron (U6514)
posted 3 minutes ago
According to Sky sources, Atletico Madrid paid Chelsea €65m (£58.3m) for the permanent signing of Alvaro Morata.
————————
If this is true... How the heck do Chelsea get such good prices when they sell??!! I’d be surprised if we sold Pogba for much more than that knowing our negotiating, assuming he does leave
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For a highly marketable player with a better than one-in-two record in Spain and Italy, yet to enter his prime, with three years left on his contract?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The only time moratas been 1 in 2 or better was in Reals youth team
He's not as bad a player as people make out tbf, but 60 million or thereabouts is over priced
Not as overpriced as when Chelsea bought him tho obv
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope; for Real’s seniors, his record was actually better than a goal every 90 minutes.
For Juve, he hit better than a goal every 180 minutes and got close to a goal or assist a game.
comment by Prem (U7618)
posted 2 hours, 42 minutes ago
comment by rosso is facking happy(U17054)
posted 5 hours, 37 minutes ago
comment by Prem (U7618)
posted 1 hour, 52 minutes ago
comment by rosso is facking happy(U17054)
posted 5 hours, 4 minutes ago
comment by Prem (U7618)
posted 3 hours, 26 minutes ago
I do feel the same frustrations as with the OP in regards to the duration process of transfers (speculations?)
But you also have to factor in several big factors.
- The bidding club - in this case cash cow United.
Who has had a recent history of blowing ridiculous money on worthless transfers. Which has created a trend of 'get as much out of United as we can, because they are in a mess' problem.
- The 'stubbornness' of selling clubs.
- The money flowing into the game.
- Other better attractive clubs.
- Players' greed.
- Ed Woodward's lack of direction/expertise outside of his expertise.
- The instability of United.
Other wealthy/stabilised clubs such as City and Madrid during this window can get their deals done more smoothly because they have better enabled people to take care of this than we do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m not defending Woodward - I hate the cant more than most, I promise you - but none of City, Liverpool, Spurs, Arsenal, PSG, Bayern and more have signed more players than we have so far.
Few of them have managed to shift players on anything other than a free transfer either.
I say it again:
EVERY FAN BELIEVES - AND SAYS EVERY TRANSFER WINDOW - THAT THEIR CLUB IS SLUGGISH IN TRANSFER DEALINGS.
Have a look around the other boards and listen to other fans. People are impatient, and they have absolutely no idea what an elite player transfer involves.
We are talking about satisfying multiple parties (usually minimum four separate entities) with conflicting and different interests in a multi-million pound business service deal comprising multiple separate yet interdependent legal contracts.
It’s massively, massively, massively complicated business.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree that it is a massively complicated business proceedings. But we can't help but feel that when it is concerning United, that some of these hurdles are magnified tenfold.
And while I do realise that City haven't bought that many players during this window thus far. I was referring more to their efficiency in doing transfers. They have a proper structure in place and it works more smoothly than ours.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How do you know that?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well it all aligns in with the manager that they targeted for a while before they got him in. Now he’s in place and set a foundation. They also have a specific technical director in who’s worked closely and effectively alongside Guardiola back at Barcelona. They have have a blueprint of player criterias that they try to adhere to.
Over here at United, the transfer policies has been fluctuating from bizarre to okay to desperation. Not all of our buys have been a disaster, but many of them just haven’t worked out for multiple reasons. And bad planning has been one of them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, I know and agree with all that.
I don’t see how any of it helps them get individual transfers done more efficiently and smoothly though.
comment by rosso is facking happy (U17054)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Shugs (U14253)
posted 2 hours, 52 minutes ago
comment by rosso is facking happy(U17054)
posted 12 hours, 13 minutes ago
comment by JonVeron (U6514)
posted 3 minutes ago
According to Sky sources, Atletico Madrid paid Chelsea €65m (£58.3m) for the permanent signing of Alvaro Morata.
————————
If this is true... How the heck do Chelsea get such good prices when they sell??!! I’d be surprised if we sold Pogba for much more than that knowing our negotiating, assuming he does leave
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For a highly marketable player with a better than one-in-two record in Spain and Italy, yet to enter his prime, with three years left on his contract?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The only time moratas been 1 in 2 or better was in Reals youth team
He's not as bad a player as people make out tbf, but 60 million or thereabouts is over priced
Not as overpriced as when Chelsea bought him tho obv
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope; for Real’s seniors, his record was actually better than a goal every 90 minutes.
For Juve, he hit better than a goal every 180 minutes and got close to a goal or assist a game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Make up your mind on what stat you're using... Goals per game or per minute played
At juve his goal per game was less than 1 in 3... Which is about his average overall i think
Goals per minutes.... Different stats... If he was really all that then the question is why didn't he play more minutes
comment by rosso is facking happy (U17054)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by Shugs (U14253)
posted 2 hours, 52 minutes ago
comment by rosso is facking happy(U17054)
posted 12 hours, 13 minutes ago
comment by JonVeron (U6514)
posted 3 minutes ago
According to Sky sources, Atletico Madrid paid Chelsea €65m (£58.3m) for the permanent signing of Alvaro Morata.
————————
If this is true... How the heck do Chelsea get such good prices when they sell??!! I’d be surprised if we sold Pogba for much more than that knowing our negotiating, assuming he does leave
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For a highly marketable player with a better than one-in-two record in Spain and Italy, yet to enter his prime, with three years left on his contract?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The only time moratas been 1 in 2 or better was in Reals youth team
He's not as bad a player as people make out tbf, but 60 million or thereabouts is over priced
Not as overpriced as when Chelsea bought him tho obv
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope; for Real’s seniors, his record was actually better than a goal every 90 minutes.
For Juve, he hit better than a goal every 180 minutes and got close to a goal or assist a game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So, basically Chelsea are shiiiit and couldn’t provide for him?
Rosso
Would you be happy if Ed spunked 58 million on Morata?
comment by Shugs (U14253)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by rosso is facking happy(U17054)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Shugs (U14253)
posted 2 hours, 52 minutes ago
comment by rosso is facking happy(U17054)
posted 12 hours, 13 minutes ago
comment by JonVeron (U6514)
posted 3 minutes ago
According to Sky sources, Atletico Madrid paid Chelsea €65m (£58.3m) for the permanent signing of Alvaro Morata.
————————
If this is true... How the heck do Chelsea get such good prices when they sell??!! I’d be surprised if we sold Pogba for much more than that knowing our negotiating, assuming he does leave
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For a highly marketable player with a better than one-in-two record in Spain and Italy, yet to enter his prime, with three years left on his contract?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The only time moratas been 1 in 2 or better was in Reals youth team
He's not as bad a player as people make out tbf, but 60 million or thereabouts is over priced
Not as overpriced as when Chelsea bought him tho obv
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope; for Real’s seniors, his record was actually better than a goal every 90 minutes.
For Juve, he hit better than a goal every 180 minutes and got close to a goal or assist a game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Make up your mind on what stat you're using... Goals per game or per minute played
At juve his goal per game was less than 1 in 3... Which is about his average overall i think
Goals per minutes.... Different stats... If he was really all that then the question is why didn't he play more minutes
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hold on, hold on.
You cannot judge him on total appearances at Real, in particular, when the majority of his games there were off the bench with ten minutes here and there
It was the same at Juve, wasn’t it? More appearances off the bench than starts, or close to that anyway.
Also, what is 'highly marketable' about Morata.
This is the kind of utter $hit that Nobb comes out with.
comment by rosso is facking happy (U17054)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Shugs (U14253)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by rosso is facking happy(U17054)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Shugs (U14253)
posted 2 hours, 52 minutes ago
comment by rosso is facking happy(U17054)
posted 12 hours, 13 minutes ago
comment by JonVeron (U6514)
posted 3 minutes ago
According to Sky sources, Atletico Madrid paid Chelsea €65m (£58.3m) for the permanent signing of Alvaro Morata.
————————
If this is true... How the heck do Chelsea get such good prices when they sell??!! I’d be surprised if we sold Pogba for much more than that knowing our negotiating, assuming he does leave
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For a highly marketable player with a better than one-in-two record in Spain and Italy, yet to enter his prime, with three years left on his contract?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The only time moratas been 1 in 2 or better was in Reals youth team
He's not as bad a player as people make out tbf, but 60 million or thereabouts is over priced
Not as overpriced as when Chelsea bought him tho obv
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope; for Real’s seniors, his record was actually better than a goal every 90 minutes.
For Juve, he hit better than a goal every 180 minutes and got close to a goal or assist a game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Make up your mind on what stat you're using... Goals per game or per minute played
At juve his goal per game was less than 1 in 3... Which is about his average overall i think
Goals per minutes.... Different stats... If he was really all that then the question is why didn't he play more minutes
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hold on, hold on.
You cannot judge him on total appearances at Real, in particular, when the majority of his games there were off the bench with ten minutes here and there
It was the same at Juve, wasn’t it? More appearances off the bench than starts, or close to that anyway.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its 2 seasons at real coming on as a late sub that distort his goals per minutes played stats
Do we discount the goals given some games were likely dead and buried
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 7 minutes ago
Also, what is 'highly marketable' about Morata.
This is the kind of utter $hit that Nobb comes out with.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Same twisting of stats to suit his argument too
Sign in if you want to comment
Transfers
Page 2 of 3
posted on 6/7/19
the problem imo opinion resurfaced after saf left and big mouth ed woodward told the world we had more money than sense in his attempt to flex his financial muscle
—
Absolutely unforgivably stupid thing to do.
posted on 6/7/19
Imagine been owned by the press as much as the OP seems to be
posted on 6/7/19
comment by julian weigl-the regista we need (U13920)
posted 1 hour, 28 minutes ago
for those who do not remember this was also a problem for many years under saf.
especially when peter kenyon left to join chelsea and we seemingly lost out on many targets : essien and ronaldinho.
saf and gill sorted this issue out when we signed evra, vidic carrick vds etc.
the problem imo opinion resurfaced after saf left and big mouth ed woodward told the world we had more money than sense in his attempt to flex his financial muscle
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As much as I dislike Woodward, I don’t think his comments have really had that big on influence on this. It’s hardly a well kept secret Manchester United make stupid money, clubs already know this so Woodward’s comments don’t change much.
posted on 6/7/19
Perhaps not, but still a very foolish thing to come out and say..
posted on 6/7/19
Only because it makes him look like an idiot, not because it has any significant impact on negotiations.
posted on 6/7/19
comment by Ed The King Woodward (U10026)
posted 12 seconds ago
Only because it makes him look like an idiot, not because it has any significant impact on negotiations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why did he say it? What need was there for him to utter that?
posted on 6/7/19
I do feel the same frustrations as with the OP in regards to the duration process of transfers (speculations?)
But you also have to factor in several big factors.
- The bidding club - in this case cash cow United.
Who has had a recent history of blowing ridiculous money on worthless transfers. Which has created a trend of 'get as much out of United as we can, because they are in a mess' problem.
- The 'stubbornness' of selling clubs.
- The money flowing into the game.
- Other better attractive clubs.
- Players' greed.
- Ed Woodward's lack of direction/expertise outside of his expertise.
- The instability of United.
Other wealthy/stabilised clubs such as City and Madrid during this window can get their deals done more smoothly because they have better enabled people to take care of this than we do.
posted on 6/7/19
comment by Prem (U7618)
posted 3 hours, 26 minutes ago
I do feel the same frustrations as with the OP in regards to the duration process of transfers (speculations?)
But you also have to factor in several big factors.
- The bidding club - in this case cash cow United.
Who has had a recent history of blowing ridiculous money on worthless transfers. Which has created a trend of 'get as much out of United as we can, because they are in a mess' problem.
- The 'stubbornness' of selling clubs.
- The money flowing into the game.
- Other better attractive clubs.
- Players' greed.
- Ed Woodward's lack of direction/expertise outside of his expertise.
- The instability of United.
Other wealthy/stabilised clubs such as City and Madrid during this window can get their deals done more smoothly because they have better enabled people to take care of this than we do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m not defending Woodward - I hate the cant more than most, I promise you - but none of City, Liverpool, Spurs, Arsenal, PSG, Bayern and more have signed more players than we have so far.
Few of them have managed to shift players on anything other than a free transfer either.
I say it again:
EVERY FAN BELIEVES - AND SAYS EVERY TRANSFER WINDOW - THAT THEIR CLUB IS SLUGGISH IN TRANSFER DEALINGS.
Have a look around the other boards and listen to other fans. People are impatient, and they have absolutely no idea what an elite player transfer involves.
We are talking about satisfying multiple parties (usually minimum four separate entities) with conflicting and different interests in a multi-million pound business service deal comprising multiple separate yet interdependent legal contracts.
It’s massively, massively, massively complicated business.
posted on 6/7/19
According to Sky sources, Atletico Madrid paid Chelsea €65m (£58.3m) for the permanent signing of Alvaro Morata.
————————
If this is true... How the heck do Chelsea get such good prices when they sell??!! I’d be surprised if we sold Pogba for much more than that knowing our negotiating, assuming he does leave
posted on 6/7/19
comment by JonVeron (U6514)
posted 3 minutes ago
According to Sky sources, Atletico Madrid paid Chelsea €65m (£58.3m) for the permanent signing of Alvaro Morata.
————————
If this is true... How the heck do Chelsea get such good prices when they sell??!! I’d be surprised if we sold Pogba for much more than that knowing our negotiating, assuming he does leave
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For a highly marketable player with a better than one-in-two record in Spain and Italy, yet to enter his prime, with three years left on his contract?
posted on 6/7/19
comment by JonVeron (U6514)
posted 30 minutes ago
According to Sky sources, Atletico Madrid paid Chelsea €65m (£58.3m) for the permanent signing of Alvaro Morata.
————————
If this is true... How the heck do Chelsea get such good prices when they sell??!! I’d be surprised if we sold Pogba for much more than that knowing our negotiating, assuming he does leave
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If we get anything over 100m for pogba would be amazing, given how poor he’s been at times.
posted on 6/7/19
comment by rosso is facking happy (U17054)
posted 54 minutes ago
comment by JonVeron (U6514)
posted 3 minutes ago
According to Sky sources, Atletico Madrid paid Chelsea €65m (£58.3m) for the permanent signing of Alvaro Morata.
————————
If this is true... How the heck do Chelsea get such good prices when they sell??!! I’d be surprised if we sold Pogba for much more than that knowing our negotiating, assuming he does leave
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For a highly marketable player with a better than one-in-two record in Spain and Italy, yet to enter his prime, with three years left on his contract?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Forgetting the fact he was utterly useless at Chelsea?!
Tbf I don’t know how well he did last season. Still, not a bad fee
posted on 7/7/19
comment by rosso is facking happy (U17054)
posted 5 hours, 4 minutes ago
comment by Prem (U7618)
posted 3 hours, 26 minutes ago
I do feel the same frustrations as with the OP in regards to the duration process of transfers (speculations?)
But you also have to factor in several big factors.
- The bidding club - in this case cash cow United.
Who has had a recent history of blowing ridiculous money on worthless transfers. Which has created a trend of 'get as much out of United as we can, because they are in a mess' problem.
- The 'stubbornness' of selling clubs.
- The money flowing into the game.
- Other better attractive clubs.
- Players' greed.
- Ed Woodward's lack of direction/expertise outside of his expertise.
- The instability of United.
Other wealthy/stabilised clubs such as City and Madrid during this window can get their deals done more smoothly because they have better enabled people to take care of this than we do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m not defending Woodward - I hate the cant more than most, I promise you - but none of City, Liverpool, Spurs, Arsenal, PSG, Bayern and more have signed more players than we have so far.
Few of them have managed to shift players on anything other than a free transfer either.
I say it again:
EVERY FAN BELIEVES - AND SAYS EVERY TRANSFER WINDOW - THAT THEIR CLUB IS SLUGGISH IN TRANSFER DEALINGS.
Have a look around the other boards and listen to other fans. People are impatient, and they have absolutely no idea what an elite player transfer involves.
We are talking about satisfying multiple parties (usually minimum four separate entities) with conflicting and different interests in a multi-million pound business service deal comprising multiple separate yet interdependent legal contracts.
It’s massively, massively, massively complicated business.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree that it is a massively complicated business proceedings. But we can't help but feel that when it is concerning United, that some of these hurdles are magnified tenfold.
And while I do realise that City haven't bought that many players during this window thus far. I was referring more to their efficiency in doing transfers. They have a proper structure in place and it works more smoothly than ours.
posted on 7/7/19
comment by Prem (U7618)
posted 1 hour, 52 minutes ago
comment by rosso is facking happy(U17054)
posted 5 hours, 4 minutes ago
comment by Prem (U7618)
posted 3 hours, 26 minutes ago
I do feel the same frustrations as with the OP in regards to the duration process of transfers (speculations?)
But you also have to factor in several big factors.
- The bidding club - in this case cash cow United.
Who has had a recent history of blowing ridiculous money on worthless transfers. Which has created a trend of 'get as much out of United as we can, because they are in a mess' problem.
- The 'stubbornness' of selling clubs.
- The money flowing into the game.
- Other better attractive clubs.
- Players' greed.
- Ed Woodward's lack of direction/expertise outside of his expertise.
- The instability of United.
Other wealthy/stabilised clubs such as City and Madrid during this window can get their deals done more smoothly because they have better enabled people to take care of this than we do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m not defending Woodward - I hate the cant more than most, I promise you - but none of City, Liverpool, Spurs, Arsenal, PSG, Bayern and more have signed more players than we have so far.
Few of them have managed to shift players on anything other than a free transfer either.
I say it again:
EVERY FAN BELIEVES - AND SAYS EVERY TRANSFER WINDOW - THAT THEIR CLUB IS SLUGGISH IN TRANSFER DEALINGS.
Have a look around the other boards and listen to other fans. People are impatient, and they have absolutely no idea what an elite player transfer involves.
We are talking about satisfying multiple parties (usually minimum four separate entities) with conflicting and different interests in a multi-million pound business service deal comprising multiple separate yet interdependent legal contracts.
It’s massively, massively, massively complicated business.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree that it is a massively complicated business proceedings. But we can't help but feel that when it is concerning United, that some of these hurdles are magnified tenfold.
And while I do realise that City haven't bought that many players during this window thus far. I was referring more to their efficiency in doing transfers. They have a proper structure in place and it works more smoothly than ours.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How do you know that?
posted on 7/7/19
comment by rosso is facking happy (U17054)
posted 12 hours, 13 minutes ago
comment by JonVeron (U6514)
posted 3 minutes ago
According to Sky sources, Atletico Madrid paid Chelsea €65m (£58.3m) for the permanent signing of Alvaro Morata.
————————
If this is true... How the heck do Chelsea get such good prices when they sell??!! I’d be surprised if we sold Pogba for much more than that knowing our negotiating, assuming he does leave
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For a highly marketable player with a better than one-in-two record in Spain and Italy, yet to enter his prime, with three years left on his contract?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The only time moratas been 1 in 2 or better was in Reals youth team
He's not as bad a player as people make out tbf, but 60 million or thereabouts is over priced
Not as overpriced as when Chelsea bought him tho obv
posted on 7/7/19
comment by rosso is facking happy (U17054)
posted 5 hours, 37 minutes ago
comment by Prem (U7618)
posted 1 hour, 52 minutes ago
comment by rosso is facking happy(U17054)
posted 5 hours, 4 minutes ago
comment by Prem (U7618)
posted 3 hours, 26 minutes ago
I do feel the same frustrations as with the OP in regards to the duration process of transfers (speculations?)
But you also have to factor in several big factors.
- The bidding club - in this case cash cow United.
Who has had a recent history of blowing ridiculous money on worthless transfers. Which has created a trend of 'get as much out of United as we can, because they are in a mess' problem.
- The 'stubbornness' of selling clubs.
- The money flowing into the game.
- Other better attractive clubs.
- Players' greed.
- Ed Woodward's lack of direction/expertise outside of his expertise.
- The instability of United.
Other wealthy/stabilised clubs such as City and Madrid during this window can get their deals done more smoothly because they have better enabled people to take care of this than we do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m not defending Woodward - I hate the cant more than most, I promise you - but none of City, Liverpool, Spurs, Arsenal, PSG, Bayern and more have signed more players than we have so far.
Few of them have managed to shift players on anything other than a free transfer either.
I say it again:
EVERY FAN BELIEVES - AND SAYS EVERY TRANSFER WINDOW - THAT THEIR CLUB IS SLUGGISH IN TRANSFER DEALINGS.
Have a look around the other boards and listen to other fans. People are impatient, and they have absolutely no idea what an elite player transfer involves.
We are talking about satisfying multiple parties (usually minimum four separate entities) with conflicting and different interests in a multi-million pound business service deal comprising multiple separate yet interdependent legal contracts.
It’s massively, massively, massively complicated business.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree that it is a massively complicated business proceedings. But we can't help but feel that when it is concerning United, that some of these hurdles are magnified tenfold.
And while I do realise that City haven't bought that many players during this window thus far. I was referring more to their efficiency in doing transfers. They have a proper structure in place and it works more smoothly than ours.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How do you know that?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well it all aligns in with the manager that they targeted for a while before they got him in. Now he’s in place and set a foundation. They also have a specific technical director in who’s worked closely and effectively alongside Guardiola back at Barcelona. They have have a blueprint of player criterias that they try to adhere to.
Over here at United, the transfer policies has been fluctuating from bizarre to okay to desperation. Not all of our buys have been a disaster, but many of them just haven’t worked out for multiple reasons. And bad planning has been one of them.
posted on 7/7/19
comment by Shugs (U14253)
posted 2 hours, 52 minutes ago
comment by rosso is facking happy(U17054)
posted 12 hours, 13 minutes ago
comment by JonVeron (U6514)
posted 3 minutes ago
According to Sky sources, Atletico Madrid paid Chelsea €65m (£58.3m) for the permanent signing of Alvaro Morata.
————————
If this is true... How the heck do Chelsea get such good prices when they sell??!! I’d be surprised if we sold Pogba for much more than that knowing our negotiating, assuming he does leave
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For a highly marketable player with a better than one-in-two record in Spain and Italy, yet to enter his prime, with three years left on his contract?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The only time moratas been 1 in 2 or better was in Reals youth team
He's not as bad a player as people make out tbf, but 60 million or thereabouts is over priced
Not as overpriced as when Chelsea bought him tho obv
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope; for Real’s seniors, his record was actually better than a goal every 90 minutes.
For Juve, he hit better than a goal every 180 minutes and got close to a goal or assist a game.
posted on 7/7/19
comment by Prem (U7618)
posted 2 hours, 42 minutes ago
comment by rosso is facking happy(U17054)
posted 5 hours, 37 minutes ago
comment by Prem (U7618)
posted 1 hour, 52 minutes ago
comment by rosso is facking happy(U17054)
posted 5 hours, 4 minutes ago
comment by Prem (U7618)
posted 3 hours, 26 minutes ago
I do feel the same frustrations as with the OP in regards to the duration process of transfers (speculations?)
But you also have to factor in several big factors.
- The bidding club - in this case cash cow United.
Who has had a recent history of blowing ridiculous money on worthless transfers. Which has created a trend of 'get as much out of United as we can, because they are in a mess' problem.
- The 'stubbornness' of selling clubs.
- The money flowing into the game.
- Other better attractive clubs.
- Players' greed.
- Ed Woodward's lack of direction/expertise outside of his expertise.
- The instability of United.
Other wealthy/stabilised clubs such as City and Madrid during this window can get their deals done more smoothly because they have better enabled people to take care of this than we do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m not defending Woodward - I hate the cant more than most, I promise you - but none of City, Liverpool, Spurs, Arsenal, PSG, Bayern and more have signed more players than we have so far.
Few of them have managed to shift players on anything other than a free transfer either.
I say it again:
EVERY FAN BELIEVES - AND SAYS EVERY TRANSFER WINDOW - THAT THEIR CLUB IS SLUGGISH IN TRANSFER DEALINGS.
Have a look around the other boards and listen to other fans. People are impatient, and they have absolutely no idea what an elite player transfer involves.
We are talking about satisfying multiple parties (usually minimum four separate entities) with conflicting and different interests in a multi-million pound business service deal comprising multiple separate yet interdependent legal contracts.
It’s massively, massively, massively complicated business.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree that it is a massively complicated business proceedings. But we can't help but feel that when it is concerning United, that some of these hurdles are magnified tenfold.
And while I do realise that City haven't bought that many players during this window thus far. I was referring more to their efficiency in doing transfers. They have a proper structure in place and it works more smoothly than ours.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How do you know that?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well it all aligns in with the manager that they targeted for a while before they got him in. Now he’s in place and set a foundation. They also have a specific technical director in who’s worked closely and effectively alongside Guardiola back at Barcelona. They have have a blueprint of player criterias that they try to adhere to.
Over here at United, the transfer policies has been fluctuating from bizarre to okay to desperation. Not all of our buys have been a disaster, but many of them just haven’t worked out for multiple reasons. And bad planning has been one of them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, I know and agree with all that.
I don’t see how any of it helps them get individual transfers done more efficiently and smoothly though.
posted on 7/7/19
comment by rosso is facking happy (U17054)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Shugs (U14253)
posted 2 hours, 52 minutes ago
comment by rosso is facking happy(U17054)
posted 12 hours, 13 minutes ago
comment by JonVeron (U6514)
posted 3 minutes ago
According to Sky sources, Atletico Madrid paid Chelsea €65m (£58.3m) for the permanent signing of Alvaro Morata.
————————
If this is true... How the heck do Chelsea get such good prices when they sell??!! I’d be surprised if we sold Pogba for much more than that knowing our negotiating, assuming he does leave
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For a highly marketable player with a better than one-in-two record in Spain and Italy, yet to enter his prime, with three years left on his contract?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The only time moratas been 1 in 2 or better was in Reals youth team
He's not as bad a player as people make out tbf, but 60 million or thereabouts is over priced
Not as overpriced as when Chelsea bought him tho obv
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope; for Real’s seniors, his record was actually better than a goal every 90 minutes.
For Juve, he hit better than a goal every 180 minutes and got close to a goal or assist a game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Make up your mind on what stat you're using... Goals per game or per minute played
At juve his goal per game was less than 1 in 3... Which is about his average overall i think
Goals per minutes.... Different stats... If he was really all that then the question is why didn't he play more minutes
posted on 7/7/19
comment by rosso is facking happy (U17054)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by Shugs (U14253)
posted 2 hours, 52 minutes ago
comment by rosso is facking happy(U17054)
posted 12 hours, 13 minutes ago
comment by JonVeron (U6514)
posted 3 minutes ago
According to Sky sources, Atletico Madrid paid Chelsea €65m (£58.3m) for the permanent signing of Alvaro Morata.
————————
If this is true... How the heck do Chelsea get such good prices when they sell??!! I’d be surprised if we sold Pogba for much more than that knowing our negotiating, assuming he does leave
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For a highly marketable player with a better than one-in-two record in Spain and Italy, yet to enter his prime, with three years left on his contract?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The only time moratas been 1 in 2 or better was in Reals youth team
He's not as bad a player as people make out tbf, but 60 million or thereabouts is over priced
Not as overpriced as when Chelsea bought him tho obv
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope; for Real’s seniors, his record was actually better than a goal every 90 minutes.
For Juve, he hit better than a goal every 180 minutes and got close to a goal or assist a game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So, basically Chelsea are shiiiit and couldn’t provide for him?
posted on 7/7/19
Rosso
Would you be happy if Ed spunked 58 million on Morata?
posted on 7/7/19
comment by Shugs (U14253)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by rosso is facking happy(U17054)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Shugs (U14253)
posted 2 hours, 52 minutes ago
comment by rosso is facking happy(U17054)
posted 12 hours, 13 minutes ago
comment by JonVeron (U6514)
posted 3 minutes ago
According to Sky sources, Atletico Madrid paid Chelsea €65m (£58.3m) for the permanent signing of Alvaro Morata.
————————
If this is true... How the heck do Chelsea get such good prices when they sell??!! I’d be surprised if we sold Pogba for much more than that knowing our negotiating, assuming he does leave
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For a highly marketable player with a better than one-in-two record in Spain and Italy, yet to enter his prime, with three years left on his contract?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The only time moratas been 1 in 2 or better was in Reals youth team
He's not as bad a player as people make out tbf, but 60 million or thereabouts is over priced
Not as overpriced as when Chelsea bought him tho obv
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope; for Real’s seniors, his record was actually better than a goal every 90 minutes.
For Juve, he hit better than a goal every 180 minutes and got close to a goal or assist a game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Make up your mind on what stat you're using... Goals per game or per minute played
At juve his goal per game was less than 1 in 3... Which is about his average overall i think
Goals per minutes.... Different stats... If he was really all that then the question is why didn't he play more minutes
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hold on, hold on.
You cannot judge him on total appearances at Real, in particular, when the majority of his games there were off the bench with ten minutes here and there
It was the same at Juve, wasn’t it? More appearances off the bench than starts, or close to that anyway.
posted on 7/7/19
Also, what is 'highly marketable' about Morata.
This is the kind of utter $hit that Nobb comes out with.
posted on 7/7/19
comment by rosso is facking happy (U17054)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Shugs (U14253)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by rosso is facking happy(U17054)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Shugs (U14253)
posted 2 hours, 52 minutes ago
comment by rosso is facking happy(U17054)
posted 12 hours, 13 minutes ago
comment by JonVeron (U6514)
posted 3 minutes ago
According to Sky sources, Atletico Madrid paid Chelsea €65m (£58.3m) for the permanent signing of Alvaro Morata.
————————
If this is true... How the heck do Chelsea get such good prices when they sell??!! I’d be surprised if we sold Pogba for much more than that knowing our negotiating, assuming he does leave
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For a highly marketable player with a better than one-in-two record in Spain and Italy, yet to enter his prime, with three years left on his contract?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The only time moratas been 1 in 2 or better was in Reals youth team
He's not as bad a player as people make out tbf, but 60 million or thereabouts is over priced
Not as overpriced as when Chelsea bought him tho obv
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope; for Real’s seniors, his record was actually better than a goal every 90 minutes.
For Juve, he hit better than a goal every 180 minutes and got close to a goal or assist a game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Make up your mind on what stat you're using... Goals per game or per minute played
At juve his goal per game was less than 1 in 3... Which is about his average overall i think
Goals per minutes.... Different stats... If he was really all that then the question is why didn't he play more minutes
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hold on, hold on.
You cannot judge him on total appearances at Real, in particular, when the majority of his games there were off the bench with ten minutes here and there
It was the same at Juve, wasn’t it? More appearances off the bench than starts, or close to that anyway.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its 2 seasons at real coming on as a late sub that distort his goals per minutes played stats
Do we discount the goals given some games were likely dead and buried
posted on 7/7/19
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 7 minutes ago
Also, what is 'highly marketable' about Morata.
This is the kind of utter $hit that Nobb comes out with.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Same twisting of stats to suit his argument too
Page 2 of 3