*Transfer Window 2014/15 Season Rumours/Signings *AKA Man U fans listing every player under the Sun
- Thread starter Robert1986
- Start date
- Status
There are plenty of players that we simply won't sign because they don't want to join us. They wouldn't want to join Chelsea, City, Madrid etc because they are happy where they are or want to move to a different club. I'm sure CL football comes into it but I think that we are missing out on signings for other reasons.
Who cares if you play for one of the **** sides in the CL, you are never going to win it there so why would you not leave to go to a club that will pay you more and give you a better chance to win the CL ultimately.
Who cares if you play for one of the **** sides in the CL, you are never going to win it there so why would you not leave to go to a club that will pay you more and give you a better chance to win the CL ultimately.
Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Apr 2011
- Posts
- 5,455
Yesterday there was Roma's team presentation. Seems like Benatia didn't want to attend, but he was forced to go.
A lot of fans cheered when Benatia came on.
Personally, I think if he does stay, he won't be 100%. Rumors say he wants to go to Bayern Munchen. Bayern ONLY. No Roma, Chelsea, United, whatever.
A lot of fans cheered when Benatia came on.
Personally, I think if he does stay, he won't be 100%. Rumors say he wants to go to Bayern Munchen. Bayern ONLY. No Roma, Chelsea, United, whatever.
You have to remeber with Balotelli he was still rather young when he was playing for Maureen at Inter and Manchini at city (19-22) so the impish behaviour is to be expected a little imo. As to his 'problems' at AC, he signed for his boyhood club and on the day he did signs you have club officals racially abusing him - dont know about anyone else but that is bound to give him a bit of a "just **** off" attitude.
Said it before, but a loan deal with option to buy at the end would be fantastic and I would expect Rodgers/Peters to sort out his problems. Hope it happens but doubt it will.
I think Ibe needs to go out on loan, in an ideal world abroad, but failing that hopefully a competitve side in the championship.
Because of their recent injury he will end up at Bayern if he goes anywhere. Chelsea interest never materialised (or at least GOD denied it point blank last week)
Utd need him for longer than 6 months but dont look as though they have a chance at another badly needed player
Growth of TV revenue and commercial deals were all taken into account when that prospectus was drawn up.
As for the Glazers financial agreements outside of Utd being linked to Utd's finances; as far as I know there's nothing confirmed right now but we know for a fact that the interest rates on the PIK loans that the Glazers previous took out (which weren't secured on the club) were dependent on the debt levels at the club (which is effected by the cash balance) so it's certainly possible.
It's an interesting situation.
Manchester United can obviously offer a competitive pay check, however they can not offer any certainly over European football nor being competitive in winning domestic trophies.
Fans need to understand that Manchester United are going to be very fortunate to tempt a player away from a Champions League club, unless there is a specific issue with the player (Mata), and that they need to be picking up the 'cream of the crop' from the chasing packs, they also need to bring in better quality prospects. The club need to start paying up, they're working themselves in to a awkward situation; short on good players and with money available to spend means that this is the period in which selling clubs have all the power.
Associate
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 1,894
- Location
- Bedfordshire
I never get the whole no CL means no players view. Surely players will expect Utd to get back into the CL and challange for the trophy again within 5 years (IF they sign players), surely they can rake in big wages and have a release clause that allows them to be sold if Utd fail to qualify for CL? Must be better than playing for a team that is in a non-competitive league with little chance of ever winning the CL and earning low wages.
I doubt anyone would have known exactly by how much.
It was a surprise to everyone that Utd got the Addidas kit deal for so much for one.
Dont dispute that at all - but debt (according to the Guardian today) is below £300m , PIK repayments are £20m a season after being renegotiated a year or so ago, and as previously mentioned prize money + sponsorship for this season is more than £200m.
I just cant see (without Glazers themselves pocketing a huge amount) Utd struggling for a couple of big buys if they werent being stingy/ haggling too much
This cap is irrelevant for most of the big clubs because there are parts of their income which they can subsidise from without the cap coming into effect.
Absolutely no difference between Utd now and City a few years ago when they didnt have CL football, and yet they managed to get Aguerro et al (apart from seemingly negotiating skills in getting the deals done)
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 11,701
- Location
- Cheshire
I don't really think that's true. City were willing to pay well over the odds for both fees and wages back then, United wont be. They paid £38m for Aguero, which was huge at the time.
Maybe there is more than just money to some of these footballers. 5 years is a large percentage of their career and to bank on United getting back into the CL at some point means x seasons with no European football. Having said that, for some of them playing in Europe probably means even more lucrative sponsorship deals.
Regardless of all this, we don't have to buy the very best players around in order to get back in the top four. Some shrewd buys will very much do the job, but I think everyone can see Fletcher/Cleverley etc aren't going to be of much use.
We could also attract players from leagues with typically lower salaries by doubling what they are being paid - that will be tempting if there are no other offers, at least.
We've just done a really bad job of spending money the last few years.
We could also attract players from leagues with typically lower salaries by doubling what they are being paid - that will be tempting if there are no other offers, at least.
We've just done a really bad job of spending money the last few years.
Of course they'd have known the value of the new tv deals or at the very least a rough idea. Negotiations for the next round haven't even begun yet and the PL are already briefing journos the figures they're expected to get.
And the Adidas deal wasn't a surprise, Utd were briefing the press for well over a year that they were expecting that sort of figure.
And there's no more PIKs Frank, they were paid off ages ago. I was just using them as an example of how Utds financial state has knock on effects to the Glazers private borrowings.
Edit: there's reports out today that the Glazers aren't considering selling for at least 5 years and the next tv deal is probably why. Tony Evans, the football editor at the Times claims to have been told by people at the PL that they expect the deal to be 3 times the size of the current deal.
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Mar 2006
- Posts
- 58,045
- Location
- Surrey
It feels like our scouts have done nothing for 2/3 years. All these players like Vidal, Benatia, Di Maria etc didn't start at top clubs. Why aren't we trying to find these players before they end up in the £40-£50m pound range and are being targeted by the biggest clubs on the planet? Other clubs seem to manage this fine.
No one knew Utd would get £75m a season for the addidas deal
Even six months ago majority of articles were saying even £60m would be unlikely.
Same thing with the TV deals, while everyone was expecting an increase (and of course the different regions were negotiated at considerably different times ) even this was an un-presedented amount.
Frank, Utd would have been in negotiations for well over a year, they'd have known full well the sort of figure they were likely to get.
And the same for the TV deal, it was being reported in the press well before negotiations ended that the deal would be roughly what it was, I even mentioned it on here.
And the same for the TV deal, it was being reported in the press well before negotiations ended that the deal would be roughly what it was, I even mentioned it on here.
The very concept is incredible...
100% leveraged deals are illegal in the NFL, for example, where the maximum allowed leverage is 15%.
To buy such a large asset in this way, essentially for free, should not be possible in my humble opinion.
Thats because it is absolutely mad that you are allowed to do what they did.
- Status