Regardless of the theory, we've signed too many players on bloated wages and had issues down the line; either they haven't performed as expected (and possibly led to other players thinking they should be on more money) or we struggle to shift them.
Getting rid of some of the players who are on mega-money probably isn't a bad strategy at all. I'm sure then when ETH and the squad building team are having discussion about recruitment, contracts etc, the wages issue is taken into consideration.
Why on earth would he penny pinch for the Glazers?
Some of these internet conspiracies are as idiotic as the people who believe them.
It's quite simple really.
For superstar wages you need superstar performances.
You don't get them from players then they're not good value.
The amount they paid and continue to pay shows otherwise tbh. Just about every single player in that list were seen as questionable to bad signings. For that point to be proven right does not mean we are trying to save money by getting rid of them. The are krap. You throw it away and get a new one.
Varane has been injury prone for the longest time. Everytime he comes back, he seems a bit slower, a bit laggy. We have signed faulty goods for years. It's our M.O.
There are limits on spending nowadays, players on massive wages could hinder spending within the rules even if the club had wealthy backers
I think it's more that there's often a correlation with the highest earners and those who are the big names who are the wrong side of 30. Casemiro, Ronaldo, Varane, Ibra, Cavani, Sanchez, Falcao and Schweinsteiger in recent years are the sorts of players we need to avoid in future.
We need to look more for the players in their mid 20s who have shown plenty of talent but with room to still improve and importantly are hungry for success. I'd imagine these sorts of players will be demanding far less in wages than those who have won it all and nearing their retirement.
not sure that Glazers are counting the pennys. Not just yet, anyway.
If you want superstar signings then you have to pay for them. And if you are in the current mess Man United are have got themselves in, add another 30m+ to the fee and another 100k to his weekly wage.
comment by manutd1982 (U6633)
posted 58 minutes ago
I think it's more that there's often a correlation with the highest earners and those who are the big names who are the wrong side of 30. Casemiro, Ronaldo, Varane, Ibra, Cavani, Sanchez, Falcao and Schweinsteiger in recent years are the sorts of players we need to avoid in future.
We need to look more for the players in their mid 20s who have shown plenty of talent but with room to still improve and importantly are hungry for success. I'd imagine these sorts of players will be demanding far less in wages than those who have won it all and nearing their retirement.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What do we do with mount and van DER Beek. I agree in general though. Whenever a big club are willing to let that 29 year old "world class" player, buyer beware
The theory that the Glazers are penny pinchers has always been hilarious. We’ve piiiiissing money up the wall for over a decade.
That said, even if we are trying to reduce the wage bill and get rid of high earners it’s not exactly a bad thing if those high earners are not justifying the wages, which is usually the case at Manchester United.
Our stupid wage bill is one of the reasons for the shiiiiiit culture at the club. They don’t really need to win to be rewarded and there’s not been any consequence for failure.
I think the main problem United have had in recent years has been the urgency to get results that keep them competing for the CL places.
This short-termist strategy is what's led them to overpaying to lure perceived 'quick fixes' instead of signing some of the most promising youngsters around and giving them the time they need to develop.
Youngsters don't normally command the same level of wages as the consolidated stars until they actually prove they deserve them.
The irony, of course, is that they erred the target when they did actually push the boat out on a youngster in Sancho, but even then, it was under the illusion that they were getting something close to the finished article.
comment by it'sonlyagame (U6426)
posted 11 minutes ago
The irony, of course, is that they erred the target when they did actually push the boat out on a youngster in Sancho, but even then, it was under the illusion that they were getting something close to the finished article.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
he's pretty much finished at united, no irony there
Tomatoes
Maybe not give up on Mount as he’s only been at the club for a few months and has struggled with injuries. The club seem to be trying to get rid of VdB but have had no luck yet.
Casemiro was signed when ETH was there. BS
comment by it'sonlyagame (U6426)
posted 1 hour, 34 minutes ago
I think the main problem United have had in recent years has been the urgency to get results that keep them competing for the CL places.
This short-termist strategy is what's led them to overpaying to lure perceived 'quick fixes' instead of signing some of the most promising youngsters around and giving them the time they need to develop.
Youngsters don't normally command the same level of wages as the consolidated stars until they actually prove they deserve them.
The irony, of course, is that they erred the target when they did actually push the boat out on a youngster in Sancho, but even then, it was under the illusion that they were getting something close to the finished article.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Don’t really agree with this. We’ve spent big plenty on perceived young stars, as well as our academy players, and paid them facking handsomely, whilst affording them plenty of time to develop. Issue is they rarely develop.
What we haven’t actually done is sign enough established players in their prime. The quick fix, past it players, that we’ve signed seem to have been with a view to the youngsters developing. The failure of the younger players makes the signing of the older ones look worse than they should have been in theory. But relying on players that are past it or not it yet has been the biggest problem. You don’t compete without reliable players in their prime, and the ones we have had either weren’t good enough and, or, there wasn’t enough of them anyway.
It's mostly come from Mike LUHG and his equally obnoxious and moronic band of followers on Twitter. It's a nonsense theory but exactly what anybody familiar with his tweets would expect
De Gea wasn’t treated the best imo but he had accepted a reduced contract. Surely if ETH and the Glazers were in cahoots in penny pinching, the obvious choice would have been to keep him rather than splash out 50 million to replace him. I’m sure Onana isn’t exactly on minimum wage either.
—
Can’t believe that oaf cost 50m
Wage bill was highest in the world last season. Ronaldo and DDG leaving as well as a few others have dropped us down to 5th.
I would think that's likely to drop again when you look at some of the players who people are thinking might leave.
Whether that's a deliberate ploy or not is unknown. You can look at it both ways though. I'm sure the incoming Sir Jim and his team are mystified at some of the wages we are currently paying out though, especially to one who is sat at home on his playstation.
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 2 hours, 57 minutes ago
comment by it'sonlyagame (U6426)
posted 1 hour, 34 minutes ago
I think the main problem United have had in recent years has been the urgency to get results that keep them competing for the CL places.
This short-termist strategy is what's led them to overpaying to lure perceived 'quick fixes' instead of signing some of the most promising youngsters around and giving them the time they need to develop.
Youngsters don't normally command the same level of wages as the consolidated stars until they actually prove they deserve them.
The irony, of course, is that they erred the target when they did actually push the boat out on a youngster in Sancho, but even then, it was under the illusion that they were getting something close to the finished article.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Don’t really agree with this. We’ve spent big plenty on perceived young stars, as well as our academy players, and paid them facking handsomely, whilst affording them plenty of time to develop. Issue is they rarely develop.
What we haven’t actually done is sign enough established players in their prime. The quick fix, past it players, that we’ve signed seem to have been with a view to the youngsters developing. The failure of the younger players makes the signing of the older ones look worse than they should have been in theory. But relying on players that are past it or not it yet has been the biggest problem. You don’t compete without reliable players in their prime, and the ones we have had either weren’t good enough and, or, there wasn’t enough of them anyway.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Who are these promising teenagers you've signed and given a platform to develop? Your Valverde, Rodrygo, Vini Jr, Camavinga, Tchouameni...?
Martial, Sancho, Antony, AWB, Depay. You could also add Diallo who’s been at the club for over 3 seasons.
Shaw is the only ‘young star’ we’ve bought who’s turned out well and that took about 5-6 years to happen.
Add to that the youth players like Rashford, Lingard, Henderson, Williams and Greenwood who we’ve given far too big contracts.
In terms of developing anyone post Ferguson we’ve been appalling. We mainly buy players for big fees and wages, fail to develop them then struggle to move them on until their contracts up. We also sometimes extend contracts of these failed players because we think we somehow have a chance of getting a fee.
comment by manutd1982 (U6633)
posted 20 minutes ago
Add to that the youth players like Rashford, Lingard, Henderson, Williams and Greenwood who we’ve given far too big contracts.
In terms of developing anyone post Ferguson we’ve been appalling. We mainly buy players for big fees and wages, fail to develop them then struggle to move them on until their contracts up. We also sometimes extend contracts of these failed players because we think we somehow have a chance of getting a fee.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I prefer it than giving Highly valued players we already spent a lot of money on transfers. Nothing wrong with securing them here. Also allows us to keep them while we decide if we want to sell of for a profit at least. Paying the youths where the least of the worries to me.
Well it hasn’t worked for us has it. Maybe pay players a more realistic wage rather than one they don’t deserve. Who have we sold on for a profit?
comment by manutd1982 (U6633)
posted 56 minutes ago
Martial, Sancho, Antony, AWB, Depay. You could also add Diallo who’s been at the club for over 3 seasons.
Shaw is the only ‘young star’ we’ve bought who’s turned out well and that took about 5-6 years to happen.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
PAUL POGBA!
comment by manutd1982 (U6633)
posted 1 hour, 34 minutes ago
Martial, Sancho, Antony, AWB, Depay. You could also add Diallo who’s been at the club for over 3 seasons.
Shaw is the only ‘young star’ we’ve bought who’s turned out well and that took about 5-6 years to happen.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's an extremely poor list considering you've gone back 10 years to compile it, and they'd already broken through at high profile clubs.
Daz, Pogba's a Fergie era player who you signed back as a 23 or 24-year-old Juventus starter with multiple titles to his name.
Sign in if you want to comment
The theory that ETH is penny pinching
Page 1 of 2
posted on 8/12/23
Regardless of the theory, we've signed too many players on bloated wages and had issues down the line; either they haven't performed as expected (and possibly led to other players thinking they should be on more money) or we struggle to shift them.
Getting rid of some of the players who are on mega-money probably isn't a bad strategy at all. I'm sure then when ETH and the squad building team are having discussion about recruitment, contracts etc, the wages issue is taken into consideration.
posted on 8/12/23
Why on earth would he penny pinch for the Glazers?
Some of these internet conspiracies are as idiotic as the people who believe them.
posted on 8/12/23
It's quite simple really.
For superstar wages you need superstar performances.
You don't get them from players then they're not good value.
posted on 8/12/23
The amount they paid and continue to pay shows otherwise tbh. Just about every single player in that list were seen as questionable to bad signings. For that point to be proven right does not mean we are trying to save money by getting rid of them. The are krap. You throw it away and get a new one.
Varane has been injury prone for the longest time. Everytime he comes back, he seems a bit slower, a bit laggy. We have signed faulty goods for years. It's our M.O.
posted on 8/12/23
There are limits on spending nowadays, players on massive wages could hinder spending within the rules even if the club had wealthy backers
posted on 8/12/23
I think it's more that there's often a correlation with the highest earners and those who are the big names who are the wrong side of 30. Casemiro, Ronaldo, Varane, Ibra, Cavani, Sanchez, Falcao and Schweinsteiger in recent years are the sorts of players we need to avoid in future.
We need to look more for the players in their mid 20s who have shown plenty of talent but with room to still improve and importantly are hungry for success. I'd imagine these sorts of players will be demanding far less in wages than those who have won it all and nearing their retirement.
posted on 8/12/23
not sure that Glazers are counting the pennys. Not just yet, anyway.
If you want superstar signings then you have to pay for them. And if you are in the current mess Man United are have got themselves in, add another 30m+ to the fee and another 100k to his weekly wage.
posted on 8/12/23
comment by manutd1982 (U6633)
posted 58 minutes ago
I think it's more that there's often a correlation with the highest earners and those who are the big names who are the wrong side of 30. Casemiro, Ronaldo, Varane, Ibra, Cavani, Sanchez, Falcao and Schweinsteiger in recent years are the sorts of players we need to avoid in future.
We need to look more for the players in their mid 20s who have shown plenty of talent but with room to still improve and importantly are hungry for success. I'd imagine these sorts of players will be demanding far less in wages than those who have won it all and nearing their retirement.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What do we do with mount and van DER Beek. I agree in general though. Whenever a big club are willing to let that 29 year old "world class" player, buyer beware
posted on 8/12/23
The theory that the Glazers are penny pinchers has always been hilarious. We’ve piiiiissing money up the wall for over a decade.
That said, even if we are trying to reduce the wage bill and get rid of high earners it’s not exactly a bad thing if those high earners are not justifying the wages, which is usually the case at Manchester United.
Our stupid wage bill is one of the reasons for the shiiiiiit culture at the club. They don’t really need to win to be rewarded and there’s not been any consequence for failure.
posted on 8/12/23
I think the main problem United have had in recent years has been the urgency to get results that keep them competing for the CL places.
This short-termist strategy is what's led them to overpaying to lure perceived 'quick fixes' instead of signing some of the most promising youngsters around and giving them the time they need to develop.
Youngsters don't normally command the same level of wages as the consolidated stars until they actually prove they deserve them.
The irony, of course, is that they erred the target when they did actually push the boat out on a youngster in Sancho, but even then, it was under the illusion that they were getting something close to the finished article.
posted on 8/12/23
comment by it'sonlyagame (U6426)
posted 11 minutes ago
The irony, of course, is that they erred the target when they did actually push the boat out on a youngster in Sancho, but even then, it was under the illusion that they were getting something close to the finished article.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
he's pretty much finished at united, no irony there
posted on 8/12/23
Tomatoes
Maybe not give up on Mount as he’s only been at the club for a few months and has struggled with injuries. The club seem to be trying to get rid of VdB but have had no luck yet.
posted on 8/12/23
Casemiro was signed when ETH was there. BS
posted on 8/12/23
comment by it'sonlyagame (U6426)
posted 1 hour, 34 minutes ago
I think the main problem United have had in recent years has been the urgency to get results that keep them competing for the CL places.
This short-termist strategy is what's led them to overpaying to lure perceived 'quick fixes' instead of signing some of the most promising youngsters around and giving them the time they need to develop.
Youngsters don't normally command the same level of wages as the consolidated stars until they actually prove they deserve them.
The irony, of course, is that they erred the target when they did actually push the boat out on a youngster in Sancho, but even then, it was under the illusion that they were getting something close to the finished article.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Don’t really agree with this. We’ve spent big plenty on perceived young stars, as well as our academy players, and paid them facking handsomely, whilst affording them plenty of time to develop. Issue is they rarely develop.
What we haven’t actually done is sign enough established players in their prime. The quick fix, past it players, that we’ve signed seem to have been with a view to the youngsters developing. The failure of the younger players makes the signing of the older ones look worse than they should have been in theory. But relying on players that are past it or not it yet has been the biggest problem. You don’t compete without reliable players in their prime, and the ones we have had either weren’t good enough and, or, there wasn’t enough of them anyway.
posted on 8/12/23
It's mostly come from Mike LUHG and his equally obnoxious and moronic band of followers on Twitter. It's a nonsense theory but exactly what anybody familiar with his tweets would expect
posted on 8/12/23
De Gea wasn’t treated the best imo but he had accepted a reduced contract. Surely if ETH and the Glazers were in cahoots in penny pinching, the obvious choice would have been to keep him rather than splash out 50 million to replace him. I’m sure Onana isn’t exactly on minimum wage either.
—
Can’t believe that oaf cost 50m
posted on 8/12/23
Wage bill was highest in the world last season. Ronaldo and DDG leaving as well as a few others have dropped us down to 5th.
I would think that's likely to drop again when you look at some of the players who people are thinking might leave.
Whether that's a deliberate ploy or not is unknown. You can look at it both ways though. I'm sure the incoming Sir Jim and his team are mystified at some of the wages we are currently paying out though, especially to one who is sat at home on his playstation.
posted on 8/12/23
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 2 hours, 57 minutes ago
comment by it'sonlyagame (U6426)
posted 1 hour, 34 minutes ago
I think the main problem United have had in recent years has been the urgency to get results that keep them competing for the CL places.
This short-termist strategy is what's led them to overpaying to lure perceived 'quick fixes' instead of signing some of the most promising youngsters around and giving them the time they need to develop.
Youngsters don't normally command the same level of wages as the consolidated stars until they actually prove they deserve them.
The irony, of course, is that they erred the target when they did actually push the boat out on a youngster in Sancho, but even then, it was under the illusion that they were getting something close to the finished article.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Don’t really agree with this. We’ve spent big plenty on perceived young stars, as well as our academy players, and paid them facking handsomely, whilst affording them plenty of time to develop. Issue is they rarely develop.
What we haven’t actually done is sign enough established players in their prime. The quick fix, past it players, that we’ve signed seem to have been with a view to the youngsters developing. The failure of the younger players makes the signing of the older ones look worse than they should have been in theory. But relying on players that are past it or not it yet has been the biggest problem. You don’t compete without reliable players in their prime, and the ones we have had either weren’t good enough and, or, there wasn’t enough of them anyway.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Who are these promising teenagers you've signed and given a platform to develop? Your Valverde, Rodrygo, Vini Jr, Camavinga, Tchouameni...?
posted on 8/12/23
Martial, Sancho, Antony, AWB, Depay. You could also add Diallo who’s been at the club for over 3 seasons.
Shaw is the only ‘young star’ we’ve bought who’s turned out well and that took about 5-6 years to happen.
posted on 8/12/23
Add to that the youth players like Rashford, Lingard, Henderson, Williams and Greenwood who we’ve given far too big contracts.
In terms of developing anyone post Ferguson we’ve been appalling. We mainly buy players for big fees and wages, fail to develop them then struggle to move them on until their contracts up. We also sometimes extend contracts of these failed players because we think we somehow have a chance of getting a fee.
posted on 8/12/23
comment by manutd1982 (U6633)
posted 20 minutes ago
Add to that the youth players like Rashford, Lingard, Henderson, Williams and Greenwood who we’ve given far too big contracts.
In terms of developing anyone post Ferguson we’ve been appalling. We mainly buy players for big fees and wages, fail to develop them then struggle to move them on until their contracts up. We also sometimes extend contracts of these failed players because we think we somehow have a chance of getting a fee.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I prefer it than giving Highly valued players we already spent a lot of money on transfers. Nothing wrong with securing them here. Also allows us to keep them while we decide if we want to sell of for a profit at least. Paying the youths where the least of the worries to me.
posted on 8/12/23
Well it hasn’t worked for us has it. Maybe pay players a more realistic wage rather than one they don’t deserve. Who have we sold on for a profit?
posted on 8/12/23
comment by manutd1982 (U6633)
posted 56 minutes ago
Martial, Sancho, Antony, AWB, Depay. You could also add Diallo who’s been at the club for over 3 seasons.
Shaw is the only ‘young star’ we’ve bought who’s turned out well and that took about 5-6 years to happen.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
PAUL POGBA!
posted on 8/12/23
Who?
posted on 8/12/23
comment by manutd1982 (U6633)
posted 1 hour, 34 minutes ago
Martial, Sancho, Antony, AWB, Depay. You could also add Diallo who’s been at the club for over 3 seasons.
Shaw is the only ‘young star’ we’ve bought who’s turned out well and that took about 5-6 years to happen.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's an extremely poor list considering you've gone back 10 years to compile it, and they'd already broken through at high profile clubs.
Daz, Pogba's a Fergie era player who you signed back as a 23 or 24-year-old Juventus starter with multiple titles to his name.
Page 1 of 2