Manchester United Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread - Mod Note in OP, 25/08

The Pontiac

kryogen wrote: »

If you have, Rooney and RVP in your team and you really need a top quality central midfielder but choose to sign Radamel Falcao instead, you would be an idiot, and you would be signing a luxury player, in that he isn't actually needed really in the grand scheme of things, he would of course be nice to have in your team, but it would make more sense to address the more critical problem in your team since you are already well stocked in the striking department.

Still too hard to follow?

Yes, very hard to follow.

Everyone knows the difference between defense midfielders, box-to-box midfielders, play-makers/wingers etc.

But to say a world class "luxury" player like Di Mario is not needed now is absolute nonsense. If he's available, buy him. UTD are crying out for a player like this - that's why Van Gaal is willing to pay the £50m or £60m.

I'm sure LVG is well aware of the of the defense and midfield areas that also need addressing. It takes time. Probably 24 months minimum.

bangkok

irishfeen wrote: »

Anything happen since Balague was on SSN?? ... was busy watching the inbetweeners 2 - fcuking hilarious lads...

No Mendez is still on a plane somewhere

Felexicon

Pro. F wrote: »

It is extremely simple to see how the money spent on one transfer will affect other transfers the club can make. Your argument is idiotic.

Only if you know United's transfers budget, which you don't. So your argument is equally if not more idiotic

8-10

magnumbud wrote: »

really? was great in the world cup and was the best player in the dutch league last year. maybe might end up a squad utility player but those kinda players win you leagues

He was very good last season in fairness, I just think he'd end up being a solid player, not above the level Smalling, say, is at. Not to diss Smalling or anything I think he's a good player, but not really that special. All depends on how much is being spent on him.

jive

Smithwicks Man wrote: »

I rate Di Maria very highly and i'm well aware of how good he is, although I don't consider him one of the top 5 players in the world and i'd be surprised if others did.

Answer me this, how is it that "one of the top 5 players" in the world isn't a starter for his own club and is being deemed expendable?

He's probably not a top 5 player but he definitely has been in 2014. He was the best player in Europe towards the end of last season with the exception of maybe Suarez, IMO.

Madrid would probably get rid of the best player in the world to be fair, they are mental. Florentino Perez is a bit of a headcase, he loves big powerful players like Ronaldo and Bale but will happily sell the brains of the team e.g. Ozil when he was actually in good form. Madrid being willing to sell isn't a reflection on any player, they've spit out better players for a lot less money and I'd imagine this is a somewhat reluctant sale. Robben didn't last too long (2 seasons maybe) but he'd still be in the debate for top 5 players.

Bit of a mad transfer seeing as United need to strengthen other areas much more but it's not often a player like Di Maria is available, even for that kind of money. The league will be better for it. Definitely not the wisest spending of their transfer kitty though it must be said.

Cantstandsya

Pro. F wrote: »

It is extremely simple to see how the money spent on one transfer will affect other transfers the club can make. Your argument is idiotic.

Really? Please enlighten me then. What impact will this have on the other potential transfers? Are you saying this is all the money Man U have? If that's your logic then look in the mirror for the source of the idiotic arguments.

Liam O

In fairness as bad as defense and midfield have been, United do have the majority of possession in most games they play just for whatever reason haven't been able to get the goals to counteract the other team. Last week theu were caught cold while on top against Swansea. For whatever reason goalscoring has been a huge problem at times recently even with huge possession.

Smithwicks Man

Liam O wrote: »

Yeah I'm sure the difference to how it is now will be huge

Leaving it until the end of August where they're stuck for time to find a replacement and Juventus watching United pay €75m for Di Maria could add about €10m onto the transfer.

Realistically I still think a €55m offer would be enough to get Vidal and I think he'd be worth every penny to United.

Pro. F

Felexicon wrote: »

Only if you know United's transfers budget, which you don't. So your argument is equally if not more idiotic

I thought this was so obvious that I could skip it and people would work it out for themselves, but obviously not.

Unless you think United have suddenly become able to compete on the same spending level as the sugar daddy clubs, the type of fees rumoured for Di Maria would obviously represent a significant share of the budget.

magnumbud

8-10 wrote: »

He was very good last season in fairness, I just think he'd end up being a solid player, not above the level Smalling, say, is at. Not to diss Smalling or anything I think he's a good player, but not really that special. All depends on how much is being spent on him.

he'd likely be backup to shaw and be extra cover for cm wouldnt have a problem with that

Smithwicks Man

jive wrote: »

He's probably not a top 5 player but he definitely has been in 2014. He was the best player in Europe towards the end of last season with the exception of maybe Suarez, IMO.

Madrid would probably get rid of the best player in the world to be fair, they are mental. Florentino Perez is a bit of a headcase, he loves big powerful players like Ronaldo and Bale but will happily sell the brains of the team e.g. Ozil when he was actually in good form. Madrid being willing to sell isn't a reflection on any player, they've spit out better players for a lot less money and I'd imagine this is a somewhat reluctant sale. Robben didn't last too long (2 seasons maybe) but he'd still be in the debate for top 5 players.

Bit of a mad transfer seeing as United need to strengthen other areas much more but it's not often a player like Di Maria is available, even for that kind of money. The league will be better for it. Definitely not the wisest spending of their transfer kitty though it must be said.

Good points.

I agree that the fact that Madrid are willing to sell is in no way a reflection on Di Maria's ability, but it should be reflected in the transfer price which it is not at €75m.

Pro. F

Cantstandsya wrote: »

Really? Please enlighten me then. What impact will this have on the other potential transfers? Are you saying this is all the money Man U have? If that's your logic then look in the mirror for the source of the idiotic arguments.

I can't explain it any more simply than I have.

Cantstandsya

Pro. F wrote: »

I thought this was so obvious that I could skip it and people would work it out for themselves, but obviously not.

Unless you think United have suddenly become able to compete on the same spending level as the sugar daddy clubs, the type of fees rumoured for Di Maria would obviously represent a significant share of the budget.

Saying things are "obvious" just because you happen to think it doesn't make it so.

If you knew anything about how much money Man U earn you'd know you're talking out of the wrong end.

The reason they don't normally spend is because they choose not to, not because they lack funds.

Pro. F wrote: »

I can't explain it any more simply than I have.

You haven't explained anything at all. Just empty rhetoric about it being "obvious". United earn crap loads of money, far more than any other Premier League club. Please explain how spending a fraction of that on one player impacts on other potential transfers?

8-10

magnumbud wrote: »

he'd likely be backup to shaw and be extra cover for cm wouldnt have a problem with that

Yep if that's it then I fully agree he'll be good as cover. Personally don't think he's worth more than 6/7m, his reputation and recent form should mean he goes for 12ish I reckon. Hopefully the Ed Woodward "we're loaded and want to spend big on players" tax bumps up the price to closer to £20m...!

Felexicon

Liam O wrote: »

In fairness as bad as defense and midfield have been, United do have the majority of possession in most games they play just for whatever reason haven't been able to get the goals to counteract the other team. Last week theu were caught cold while on top against Swansea. For whatever reason goalscoring has been a huge problem at times recently even with huge possession.

The problem is pace in attack. For all their good points, Rooney, RVP and Mata are not the quickest.
DiMaria would (hopefully will) give a decent injection of pace to our attacks

Smithwicks Man

Fescue wrote: »

According to Jonathan Northcroft, LVG sees Di Maria as a left sided central midfielder, a role he has played brilliantly for Madrid I think on occasion.

Maybe LVG will have listened to my suggestions and play Ancelotti's famous Christmas Tree formation

4-3-2-1 with Di Maria playing LCM and Rooney and Mata behind RVP.

It can be argued that it lacks width but having quality players play their best position would make up for that.

RobertKK

edit I don't know how to embed tweets..

@Footy_Jokes
Follow

"Herrera with a lovely turn, he plays it out to Di Maria, Di Maria threads a beautiful ball through to Tom Cleverley ANDDDD... Goal kick."

adox

Felexicon wrote: »

The problem is pace in attack. For all their good points, Rooney, RVP and Mata are not the quickest.
DiMaria would (hopefully will) give a decent injection of pace to our attacks

And run at players, take them on, get defenders facing their own goal, something Utd are severely lacking.

The Pontiac

adox wrote: »

And run at players, take them on, get defenders facing their own goal, something Utd are severely lacking.

Couldn't agree more!

Felexicon

Pro. F wrote: »

I thought this was so obvious that I could skip it and people would work it out for themselves, but obviously not.

Unless you think United have suddenly become able to compete on the same spending level as the sugar daddy clubs, the type of fees rumoured for Di Maria would obviously represent a significant share of the budget.

I'm not necessarily saying you're wrong but you can't just say that if someone isn't looking from the same viewpoint as you that they are an idiot. You need to give some form of basis to your argument, not to change the other posters mind or prove that you're right but just to show where you're coming from and how you've come to that conclusion

redbaron_99

Vinz Mesrine wrote: »

Not even in the slightest, and just in the interest of fairness I should state I have mentioned you in another thread a few minutes ago.

That was rather petty of you. I'm loving it though. It seems you're rather flustered.

Pro. F

Cantstandsya wrote: »

Saying things are "obvious" just because you happen to think it doesn't make it so.

If you knew anything about how much money Man U earn you'd know you're talking out of the wrong end.

The reason they don't normally spend is because they choose not to, not because they lack funds.

You haven't explained anything at all. Just empty rhetoric about it being "obvious". United earn crap loads of money, far more than any other Premier League club. Please explain how spending a fraction of that on one player impacts on other potential transfers?

Our earnings are higher than any other club, but so are our costs. I think you are misinformed about the type of cash reserves United have available for spending on players. Not that I follow the finances that closely these days, but I know enough to know that the fraction that these proposed fees represent would be significant.

v3ttel

Pro. F

Felexicon wrote: »

I'm not necessarily saying you're wrong but you can't just say that if someone isn't looking from the same viewpoint as you that they are an idiot. You need to give some form of basis to your argument, not to change the other posters mind or prove that you're right but just to show where you're coming from and how you've come to that conclusion

I didn't say that anybody was an idiot and you can't expect people to always have the patience to explain the blindingly obvious.

Hococop

v3ttel wrote: »

I quite drunk and unfortunately its been posted already sorry man

super_furry

Di Maria is a great player but he doesn't really address United's problems and unless they make two or three other signings in defence and midfield, he won't be enough.

bangkok

Pro. F wrote: »

Our earnings are higher than any other club, but so are our costs. I think you are misinformed about the type of cash reserves United have available for spending on players. Not that I follow the finances that closely these days, but I know enough to know that the fraction that these proposed fees represent would be significant.

So you don't follow the finances and you don't follow any of the gossip either, do you watch many games?

Cantstandsya

Pro. F wrote: »

Our earnings are higher than any other club, but so are our costs. I think you are misinformed about the type of cash reserves United have available for spending on players. Not that I follow the finances that closely these days, but I know enough to know that the fraction that these proposed fees represent would be significant.

Earnings have gone up dramatically in the last few years and the debt is significantly less than it was. Not to mention that in all the years that the team has been raking it in they haven't been spending at the same levels as the "sugar daddy" clubs as you call them. Now, I'm not suggesting that all that money has been saved up, it may well be the case that it's gone but we don't know that and regardless, going on what we do know about United's finances, I am still very certain that United can spend quite freely in the short term without any worry of either running out of money or falling foul of FFP.

Saying all that, your vitriolic labelling of the argument as "idiotic" seems born of frustration on your part. A frustration likely based on assumptions: 1) that United have a set transfer budget from which this potential transfer is taking a large chunk and, therefore, 2) buying Di Maria will prevent Man Utd buying other targets that you feel are more necessary.

The reality of course is that 1) nobody knows how much United’s transfer budget is or even if there is a set budget at all. Woodward has said that if the manager wants signings the money is there. Now, you don’t have to believe him but that’s the only evidence either way on the subject. To unilaterally declare, based on no evidence at all, that the supposed (by you alone) transfer budget is now gone is nonsense.

2) Nobody knows who Man Utd’s transfer targets are. You can say who you, in your humble opinion, think they need but that is irrelevant. The club have their own targets in mind and I think it’s more likely that they are spending in accordance with those targets rather than the targets that you might happen to imagine they need. If United don’t buy the players that you think they need then I’d imagine it’s far more likely to be because either they never wanted that player at all or the player didn't want to come to United, rather than being a result of blowing all the money on Di Maria.

Pro. F

bangkok wrote: »

So you don't follow the finances and you don't follow any of the gossip either, do you watch many games?

I never said either of those things.

2moreMinutes

I don't want DiMaria to sign. He's Argentinian and we all know how troublesome those lads can be at United.

yabadabado

great the way other team's fans are knocking this move for Di Maria.

MagicMarker

Felexicon wrote: »

The problem is pace in attack. For all their good points, Rooney, RVP and Mata are not the quickest.
DiMaria would (hopefully will) give a decent injection of pace to our attacks

Rooney is one of the fastest players at the club, to say he lacks pace is complete bs.

JerCotter7

MagicMarker wrote: »

Rooney is one of the fastest players at the club, to say he lacks pace is complete bs.

Rooney's problem seems to be that he forgot how to run around players. Watching videos of him when Ronaldo was there, he's like a different player. But he is fast still. Might just be the lack of pace around him leaving him with very little space every time he gets near the ball.

PhlegmyMoses

MagicMarker wrote: »

Rooney is one of the fastest players at the club, to say he lacks pace is complete bs.

Rooney isn't explosive over 5-10 yards. This is all that matters in football.

Still a great player, irrespective of this

Pro. F

Cantstandsya wrote: »

Earnings have gone up dramatically in the last few years and the debt is significantly less than it was. Not to mention that in all the years that the team has been raking it in they haven't been spending at the same levels as the "sugar daddy" clubs as you call them. Now, I'm not suggesting that all that money has been saved up, it may well be the case that it's gone but we don't know that and regardless, going on what we do know about United's finances, I am still very certain that United can spend quite freely in the short term without any worry of either running out of money or falling foul of FFP.

Saying all that, your vitriolic labelling of the argument as "idiotic" seems born of frustration on your part. A frustration likely based on assumptions: 1) that United have a set transfer budget from which this potential transfer is taking a large chunk and, therefore, 2) buying Di Maria will prevent Man Utd buying other targets that you feel are more necessary.

The reality of course is that 1) nobody knows how much United’s transfer budget is or even if there is a set budget at all. Woodward has said that if the manager wants signings the money is there. Now, you don’t have to believe him but that’s the only evidence either way on the subject. To unilaterally declare, based on no evidence at all, that the supposed (by you alone) transfer budget is now gone is nonsense.

2) Nobody knows who Man Utd’s transfer targets are. You can say who you, in your humble opinion, think they need but that is irrelevant. The club have their own targets in mind and I think it’s more likely that they are spending in accordance with those targets rather than the targets that you might happen to imagine they need. If United don’t buy the players that you think they need then I’d imagine it’s far more likely to be because either they never wanted that player at all or the player didn't want to come to United, rather than being a result of blowing all the money on Di Maria.

That's an awfully long post on the finances for somebody who, an hour ago, was giving out about "all the people who want to talk about money" in this thread.

Regarding the bold: We do actually know how much United have been saving. They release quarterly and yearly financial statements as a requirement of the bond market.

Pro. F

MagicMarker wrote: »

Rooney is one of the fastest players at the club, to say he lacks pace is complete bs.

He might be the fastest at running some measured sprints and he may have been recorded as the fastest moving during a game, but that stuff does not equate to football pace. He does not have the pace to take the ball and carry it past defenders in a one-on-one. Nor does he have the pace to reliably win the race for a through ball and then stay in front of the defender.

rob316

yabadabado wrote: »

great the way other team's fans are knocking this move for Di Maria.

It's the price is ott for a player ye don't badly need but he is a huge signing and one that does improve your first 11. He will add bags of direct pace something ye have lacked which has made ye very easy to play against.

Cantstandsya

Pro. F wrote: »

That's an awfully long post on the finances for somebody who, an hour ago, was giving out about "all the people who want to talk about money" in this thread.

Regarding the bold: We do actually know how much United have been saving. They release quarterly and yearly financial statements as requirement of the bond market.

And do these financial statements show that Man U have no money left? That they can't afford anyone else after Di Maria? Have you got access to their current finances? Do you know how much Man U have right now? I honestly don't know the answers - I assume you do since you find the answers to questions directly contingent on this information (how much is left for transfers) "blindingly obvious".

My post is not about money, it's about your contention that the reasons that the Di Maria transfer has a negative impact on other potential transfers are "blindingly obvious". I was pointing out that it's actually not obvious at all and is merely based on your own subjective assumptions. I'm guessing you can read and are quite aware of the point of my post so your retort strikes me as more than a little disingenuous.

Please address your own assumptions, tell me why these are not merely your own subjective opinion but rather amount to "blindingly obvious" facts.

Pro. F

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Potential formations - with Di Maria but no other signings (I believe United are trying to get another 2).

---

De Gea
Rafael--Smalling--Evans--Shaw

---

Carrick--Herrera
Januzaj

---

Mata

---

Di Maria

---

Rooney

---

De Gea
Rafael--Smalling--Evans--Shaw
----Herrera-Carrick-Di Maria

---

Mata

---

Rooney-RVP

---

De Gea
Rafael--Smalling--Evans--Shaw

---

Carrick

---

Herrera--Fletcher
Januzaj

---

Di Maria

---

Rooney

We certainly need another central midfielder, imo, and I believe we are going for one - whether we get them I dunno.

EDIT: Another option

---

De Gea
---Smalling---Evans--Rojo
Rafael

---

Shaw

---

Carrick-Herrera

---

Mata

---

Rooney-Di Maria

Interesting that all but one of the potential formations requires a back four and only one formation accommodates Di Maria, RVP, Rooney and Mata.

Pro. F

Cantstandsya wrote: »

And do these financial statements show that Man U have no money left? That they can't afford anyone else after Di Maria? Have you got access to their current finances? Do you know how much Man U have right now? I honestly don't know the answers - I assume you do since you find the answers to questions directly contingent on this information (how much is left for transfers) "blindingly obvious".

My post is not about money, it's about your contention that the reasons that the Di Maria transfer has a negative impact on other potential transfers are "blindingly obvious". I was pointing out that it's actually not obvious at all and is merely based on your own subjective assumptions. I'm guessing you can read and are quite aware of the point of my post so your retort strikes me as more than a little disingenuous.

Please address your own assumptions, tell me why these are not merely your own subjective opinion but rather amount to "blindingly obvious" facts.

What I find blindingly obvious is the fact that Manchester United (or any company) do not have an unlimited budget for transfers (or any expenditure) and that if you are going to make claims about how buying Di Maria wouldn't have any affect on the transfer budget you should at least have a vague idea about how much money the club actually has available to spend.

The fact that you admit that you don't know how much available money there is and yet you want to argue for how you think a proposed purchase can easily be afforded, shows how ridiculous your argument is.

As of September 2013 United had £94m cash in the bank. This year's end results will be out in the coming weeks. The club also have a special credit facility for emergency transfer spending that is £75m per year iirc, but using that would mean more debt. The club have already spent £37m on Mata, £27-£30m on Shaw, £29m (possibly plus significant additional taxes) on Hererra and £16m on Rojo. Almost certainly most or all of those fees (except for Hererra's) are being paid in instalments, but they will still add up to a significant expenditure this year. So yes, the proposed fees being talked about for Di Maria do represent a significant proportion of the money available to spend.

Hank Scorpio

Get a midfielder in now, if Di Mario is joining and your kingkong again, Mr Woodward

KombuchaMshroom

Di Maria is a great player, but to me it feels like putting on a johnny after you've already got her pregnant.

£180 million, Hernandez and the soul of Ed Woodward's first born male just seems too high a price!!

Gringo180

kryogen wrote: »

Jesus Christ the club will never do right in some eyes you know, "just go spend the ****ing money! Get the world class talent in!" Who cares how much he would cost we need players!!!!!!! "

Is that you Peter Ridsdale?

Headshot

Gringo180 wrote: »

Is that you Peter Ridsdale?

Gringo180 wrote: »

Is that you Peter Ridsdale?

Is that your Gringo?

goodolegill

Its ludicrous beyond belief if the reports are true

We will pay 75 million euro for Maria and not pay Juventus want they ask for Vidal
The most important area of the field is the middle 2 cm spots - we hope that herrera will occupy one.
But WE NEED a defensive midfielder - in a 3-5-2 where does Maria play?? We would have to change the system again.
He plays in the spot we have sufficient cover in with Mata and Kagawa
We should have someone like Matic who breaks up the play and gives it to our attacking players
For Swansea's 1st goal, can we imagine Di Maria covering Ki's break??

goodolegill

And for the people who have been saying "we've been crying out for a player like Di Maria"
I dont think many people at the start of the window thought a left winger was essential (wake up)
We have been crying out for a world class midfielder and defender and we have got none of them.
(bought potential over achievements again but paying the top dollar)

PhlegmyMoses

goodolegill wrote: »

Its ludicrous beyond belief if the reports are true

We will pay 75 million euro for Maria and not pay Juventus want they ask for Vidal
The most important area of the field is the middle 2 cm spots - we hope that herrera will occupy one.
But WE NEED a defensive midfielder - in a 3-5-2 where does Maria play?? We would have to change the system again.
He plays in the spot we have sufficient cover in with Mata and Kagawa
We should have someone like Matic who breaks up the play and gives it to our attacking players
For Swansea's 1st goal, can we imagine Di Maria covering Ki's break??

How do you know what we were willing to pay for Vidal? Perhaps Vidal just doesn't want to sign for United. At the end of the day, it's Manchester, there's no CL football and Juve are doing well. Maybe his family is just settled in Turin. Who knows?

My point is, if we are willing to pay 50/60m on one player, the default position is not that we are unwilling to pay it for another. If we sign Di Maria for that kind of money, the only thing we know is that we are willing to pay huge money for players, not that we weren't willing to stump up for Vidal. In this situation, yours is not the logical conclusion.

J. Marston

Fúck Vidal and his dodgy knee.

sReq | uTeK

[quote="Pro. F;91877086"]That's an awfully long post on the finances for somebody who, an hour ago, was giving out about "all the people who want to talk about money" in this thread.

Regarding the bold: We do actually know how much United have been saving. They release quarterly and yearly financial statements as a requirement of the bond market.[/quote]

What's that got to do with anything he's posted?

Utd paying insane money for a position not entirely needed is weird.