Manchester United Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 2015 - Mod Post in OP 23/07

RobertKK

Jose has a club that was run like a left wing socialist would love, money being spent like crazy but it was not the club's money, it was someone else's money.
United has always being run like a business, we had austerity of sorts when the club sorted out its high debts after it was bought by the Glazers, then it signed up big paying sponsors and now the business is generating more and more money, the socialist model of using someone else's money affected those who used that as a model with FFP, now relaxed but United has the sustainable economic model.
Jose better get use to it.

Probably crying as he wanted Pedro.

PhlegmyMoses

Not really that unhappy with Di Maria leaving, especially if we reinvest the money in a player who wants to be here and fits the system.

ShoulderChip

Lord TSC wrote: »

Lads, Jose is a troll. He says these things to wind people up. My take is if he's starting that sort of mindgame, we're obviously in his head :P

but didn't a lot of United fans say that about Chelsea? whats the difference?

FutureGuy

Bret Hart wrote: »

https://mobile.twitter.com/beINBUND/status/625388806322135041


:pac:

Yeah not really funny.

ShoulderChip

PhlegmyMoses wrote: »

Not really that unhappy with Di Maria leaving, especially if we reinvest the money in a player who wants to be here and fits the system.

not just fits the system but has Van Gaal's philosophy

glued

ShoulderChip wrote: »

but didn't a lot of United fans say that about Chelsea? whats the difference?

The difference is that Chelsea actually bought their way to the top table in football, United earned it and are now spending money that they have earned as opposed to Russian Billionaire buying Chelsea the league.

There is a huge difference in the two.

Nalz

beno619 wrote: »

Na he was Madrid's best player on his last season. Thought that was widely acknowledged ?
Il wait for Di Maria to give his reasons than except the ones you've made up in your head.

I'm making educated guesses as to why he's leaving, but regardless he didn't do the business for us and isn't happy so does it matter?

I don't think Di Maria was wide acknowledged as their best player last season... Don't get me wrong he has turned it on in the past but he's not a consistent match winner.

Finally, Suarez is on another level to Di Maria, and Neymar to a lesser extent.

Lord TSC

ShoulderChip wrote: »

but didn't a lot of United fans say that about Chelsea? whats the difference?

The source of the money.

Chelsea, like City and other sugar daddy clubs, didn't earn their money. They won the lottery and just had the cash/success dumped on their lap.

United's money is well and hard earned. If anything, we're spending money we should have been spending in years gone by and have a bit of a catch up to do. But the money is not coming because a rich bloke threw a dart and picked our club; it's because we've a long history of being a massive global brand.

Trigger

ShoulderChip wrote: »

but didn't a lot of United fans say that about Chelsea? whats the difference?

United made the money themselves whereas chelsea had a sugar daddy.

DrPhilG

And even if United did have a rich sugar daddy funding a spending spree it's laughable that Jose of all people is complaining about it!

Nalz

Jose the WUM

The only time he got up my nose was his comments after the Stamford Bridge game last season.

ShoulderChip

Lord TSC wrote: »

The source of the money.

Chelsea, like City and other sugar daddy clubs, didn't earn their money. They won the lottery and just had the cash/success dumped on their lap.

United's money is well and hard earned. If anything, we're spending money we should have been spending in years gone by and have a bit of a catch up to do. But the money is not coming because a rich bloke threw a dart and picked our club; it's because we've a long history of being a massive global brand.

so if I earn money at lets say running trains, any money I spend on buying or hiring trains is fair game, but if I start buying cabbages it is cheating because other people who are buying cabbages did so with the money they earned from selling cabbages and that is purer?

Lukker-

RobertKK wrote: »

Jose has a club that was run like a left wing socialist would love, money being spent like crazy but it was not the club's money, it was someone else's money.
United has always being run like a business, we had austerity of sorts when the club sorted out its high debts after it was bought by the Glazers, then it signed up big paying sponsors and now the business is generating more and more money, the socialist model of using someone else's money affected those who used that as a model with FFP, now relaxed but United has the sustainable economic model.
Jose better get use to it.

Probably crying as he wanted Pedro.

It was Roman's money. He owned the club so therefore his money was the clubs money. He invested it in the club. It has already began coming to fruition if you have seen any of the commercial deals Chelsea have signed.

United would have went alot further if they had someone like Roman running them. Instead of the Glazers who leveraged a buyout of the club against itself and put a massive burden on it's finances with interest payments that they have only caught up on now.

Adamcp898

MY honest impression of him leaving is he is just unhappy in Manchester. As in unhappy to the extent where he dreads and loathes the place.

And while people bang on about how he's paid enough money to tolerate his surrounds, well I'd imagine if you know someone else in a place you'd much prefer who is willing to pay you the same salary then it wouldn't seem like much of a choice but to get out whatever way you can.

A deal before yesterday was already likely to happen, but what his refusal to join the squad now does is prevent United doing any last minute haggling over the structure of the deal or getting a few million more because now they have a player who has been publicly unruly and possible stories of him wanting to stay can't be spun now to squeeze PSG.

Cypher_sounds

Agent Chico has had a word with Dave about life at the bernabu perhaps..

https://twitter.com/D_DeGea/status/625195063451222017

Fenix

Di Maria was never madrids best player while Ronaldo was there, he had a good champions league final and rightfully got MOTM.

I said it on the last day of the season, there was a turning point with him at utd, his attitude seemed to change, his performances suffered and he looked uninterested. I'm glad he's going, it's been clear for some time that he dosnt want to be there.

Lukker-

Lord TSC wrote: »

The source of the money.

Chelsea, like City and other sugar daddy clubs, didn't earn their money. They won the lottery and just had the cash/success dumped on their lap.

United's money is well and hard earned. If anything, we're spending money we should have been spending in years gone by and have a bit of a catch up to do. But the money is not coming because a rich bloke threw a dart and picked our club; it's because we've a long history of being a massive global brand.

I actually find this attitude hilarious.

We're the only club with a right to be big ..cos history.

Trigger

Lukker- wrote: »

I actually find this attitude hilarious.

We're the only club with a right to be big ..cos history.

Where did he say that?

ShoulderChip

astradave wrote: »

Where did he say that?

the inference being the money earned was based on previous success.

Nalz

Lukker- wrote: »

I actually find this attitude hilarious.

We're the only club with a right to be big ..cos history.

Erm that's not what he's saying

Trigger

ShoulderChip wrote: »

the inference being the money earned was based on previous success.

That does not imply what Lukker- is saying

RobertKK

Lukker- wrote: »

It was Roman's money. He owned the club so therefore his money was the clubs money. He invested it in the club. It has already began coming to fruition if you have seen any of the commercial deals Chelsea have signed.

United would have went alot further if they had someone like Roman running them. Instead of the Glazers who leveraged a buyout of the club against itself and put a massive burden on it's finances with interest payments that they have only caught up on now.

The Glazers have not invested their billions in buying players. Roman did.
The problem with a rich owner who spends his own money...look 20 years ago Blackburn rovers had that model. Where are they now?

ShoulderChip

RobertKK wrote: »

The Glazers have not invested their billions in buying players. Roman did.
The problem with a rich owner who spends his own money...look 20 years ago Blackburn rovers had that model. Where are they now?

ah so you are worried that chelsea will be run to the ground under a mountain of debt? thats cute but pretty sure we are okay. thanks for the concern.

Lord TSC

Lukker- wrote: »

I actually find this attitude hilarious.

We're the only club with a right to be big ..cos history.

Woah, thats not what I was saying at all.

Every club has a right to be big regardless of where their money comes from. I wasn't saying "only we deserve to be big". Someone asked whats the difference for United fans between how we're spending obscene amounts of money compared to other clubs; I never ever would argue that no other club has the right to be bought and spend the money, so please place that idea back wherever you pulled it from.

The_Kew_Tour

It was the West Brom game at home was when I knew ADM was leaving. There was a period with about 10 minutes to go where he gave the ball away. our went shooting from crazy spots in space of few minutes,and it was like as if he was doing it on purpose. I'm not making some Conspiracy, but its when I thought to myself he aint gonna be here next season.

Lukker-

RobertKK wrote: »

The Glazers have not invested their billions in buying players. Roman did.
The problem with a rich owner who spends his own money...look 20 years ago Blackburn rovers had that model. Where are they now?

There is a right way and a wrong way to do things.

I just find it gas that people get prissy about other clubs breaking the status quo via direct investment from the owners.

First and foremost Football is a business. So in my eyes there is absolutely nothing wrong with an owner investing in his business with an eye to long term sustainability. Everyone has to start somewhere.

For 12 years people were saying Chelsea were f*cked if Roman left. Less of that now. But what other teams talk about even less is the fact that they are one of most commercially successful clubs in the world. Our kit deal with Yokohama is second biggest in world football only behind United's. Then people go on about how we are spending others money..

RobertKK

ShoulderChip wrote: »

ah so you are worried that chelsea will be run to the ground under a mountain of debt? thats cute but pretty sure we are okay. thanks for the concern.

No, I think the club will be run in a sustainable way but that means its revenues will be far inferior to United and will need Romans money to compete...

ShoulderChip

RobertKK wrote: »

No, I think the club will be run in a sustainable way but that means its revenues will be far inferior to United and will need Romans money to compete...

but that wouldn't be sustainable? is your worry that a paradox will happen?
like if you ask ponnochio if he is lying?

Lukker-

Lukker- wrote: »

There is a right way and a wrong way to do things.

I just find it gas that people get prissy about other clubs breaking the status quo via direct investment from the owners.

First and foremost Football is a business. So in my eyes there is absolutely nothing wrong with an owner investing in his business with an eye to long term sustainability. Everyone has to start somewhere.

For 12 years people were saying Chelsea were f*cked if Roman left. Less of that now. But what other teams talk about even less is the fact that they are one of most commercially successful clubs in the world. Our kit deal with Yokohama is second biggest in world football only behind United's. Then people go on about how we are spending others money..

Look I don't really disagree with you, but people aren't getting prissy at Chelsea buying via direct investment from Abramovic, people are getting prissy at Jose moaning about Utd alledgedly "buying the league". I'm well aware that for the last few seasons Chelsea's net spend has been very reasonable but Jose moaning about this is absolutely laughable considering the money he's spent at a number of clubs.

RobertKK

Lukker- wrote: »

There is a right way and a wrong way to do things.

I just find it gas that people get prissy about other clubs breaking the status quo via direct investment from the owners.

First and foremost Football is a business. So in my eyes there is absolutely nothing wrong with an owner investing in his business with an eye to long term sustainability. Everyone has to start somewhere.

For 12 years people were saying Chelsea were f*cked if Roman left. Less of that now. But what other teams talk about even less is the fact that they are one of most commercially successful clubs in the world. Our kit deal with Yokohama is second biggest in world football only behind United's. Then people go on about how we are spending others money..

How much a year is the kit deal with Yokohama?

ShoulderChip

Ernesto Juicy Popgun wrote: »

Look I don't really disagree with you, but people aren't getting prissy at Chelsea buying via direct investment from Abramovic, people are getting prissy at Jose moaning about Utd alledgedly "buying the league". I'm well aware that for the last few seasons Chelsea's net spend has been very reasonable but Jose moaning about this is absolutely laughable considering the money he's spent at a number of clubs.

is it?
if you are mocked for something for years, and you see someone else exhibit the same behaviour is it laughable to point out the fact they are doing it?

Trigger

Lukker- wrote: »

There is a right way and a wrong way to do things.

I just find it gas that people get prissy about other clubs breaking the status quo via direct investment from the owners.

First and foremost Football is a business. So in my eyes there is absolutely nothing wrong with an owner investing in his business with an eye to long term sustainability. Everyone has to start somewhere.

For 12 years people were saying Chelsea were f*cked if Roman left. Less of that now. But what other teams talk about even less is the fact that they are one of most commercially successful clubs in the world. Our kit deal with Yokohama is second biggest in world football only behind United's. Then people go on about how we are spending others money..

This all stemmed from Jose's comments in the media that United where trying to buy the title, we were saying that is ironic for Jose to come out with that in the first place as when he first took over at Chelsea (first time) Roman ploughed money into the club and brought in a host of players that chelsea would not have been able to afford without Roman, hence they bought they title. we are not saying that Chelsea are NOW buying titles from Romans pockets but that it was ironic for Jose to come out with such a statement.

RobertKK

ShoulderChip wrote: »

but that wouldn't be sustainable? is your worry that a paradox will happen?
like if you ask ponnochio if he is lying?

I never said I was worried, as a owner of United I am only concerned with United, and the spending is very sustainable.

Lukker-

Ernesto Juicy Popgun wrote: »

Look I don't really disagree with you, but people aren't getting prissy at Chelsea buying via direct investment from Abramovic, people are getting prissy at Jose moaning about Utd alledgedly "buying the league". I'm well aware that for the last few seasons Chelsea's net spend has been very reasonable but Jose moaning about this is absolutely laughable considering the money he's spent at a number of clubs.

If you read the full interview you'd see that he says that. He said Chelsea tried to buy the league in 03-04. Now he said United and City are trying to do the same.

Lukker-

Lukker- wrote: »

If you read the full interview you'd see that he says that. He said Chelsea tried to buy the league in 03-04. Now he said United and City are trying to do the same.

I did read the interview. I noted he just so happened to take over Chelsea the season after 03/04.

ShoulderChip wrote: »

is it?
if you are mocked for something for years, and you see someone else exhibit the same behaviour is it laughable to point out the fact they are doing it?

Look I don't have a problem with Chelsea really so I'm not looking for some big row but I would argue it's not really the same behaviour. Utd are spending well in proportion to their income. The net spend this summer assuming AdM is gone and Pedro is in is something like 60m. It's absolutely mental to say this considering the vast amount of money that is, but that's a modest sum for a top club to be spending in a given summer these days.

Lukker-

RobertKK wrote: »

How much a year is the kit deal with Yokohama?

£40m

Lukker-

Ernesto Juicy Popgun wrote: »

I did read the interview. I noted he just so happened to take over Chelsea the season after 03/04.

He said in the beginning. I'd guess that that encompasses his first term as manager.

ShoulderChip

Ernesto Juicy Popgun wrote: »

I did read the interview. I noted he just so happened to take over Chelsea the season after 03/04.





Look I don't have a problem with Chelsea really so I'm not looking for some big row but I would argue it's not really the same behaviour. Utd are spending well in proportion to their income. The net spend this summer assuming AdM is gone and Pedro is in is something like 60m. It's absolutely mental to say this considering the vast amount of money that is, but that's a modest sum for a top club to be spending in a given summer these days.

I just have a problem with football fans claiming that how the business is run is integral to whether success on the field should be recognised.

Lord TSC

ShoulderChip wrote: »

I just have a problem with football fans claiming that how the business is run is integral to whether success on the field should be recognised.

The hell did anyone suggest it should?

homerjay2005

any worth in the theory that 1 or 2 players who we want, especially the "marquee" players, could be holding off until as late as possible in the window until Champions league football is secured?

ShoulderChip

Lord TSC wrote: »

The hell did anyone suggest it should?

the concept of "buying the league" which is often referenced or directly mentioned, its ridiculous.

RobertKK

Lukker- wrote: »

£40m

Not bad, but still it is 53.33% of what United will receive from Adidas.
our training facilities and gear is sponsored for £20 million a year.
Then our shirt sponsor is around £51 million a year. So that's over £145 million a year.
Then the other sponsors...

bucketybuck

RobertKK wrote: »

The problem with a rich owner who spends his own money...look 20 years ago Blackburn rovers had that model. Where are they now?

I'm not sure of your point here?

Are you saying Blackburn would have been better off had Jack Walker not spent his millions there? That their previous spell of success has left them worse off 20 years later?

duffman13

ShoulderChip wrote: »

the concept of "buying the league" which is often referenced or directly mentioned, its ridiculous.

It's being referenced by Mourinho in relation to everyone else. What's the problem in pointing out it's ironic coming from Mourinho? They spend huge money to get competing so saying the same about other clubs is ridiculous.

Abramovich is obviously here for the long haul but at the time a few of my Chelsea mates were worried he'd bail after a season or two can Chelsea would become a Leeds. Chelsea lived outside there means and it worked for them

RobertKK

bucketybuck wrote: »

I'm not sure of your point here?

Are you saying Blackburn would have been better off had Jack Walker not spent his millions there? That their previous spell of success has left them worse off 20 years later?

No, their model was too dependent on one man, Chelsea are addressing this problem, so I don't see them repeating the mistakes of Blackburn. But by becoming sustainable on its own revenues, Chelsea/Jose will not be able to compete with United, just like City couldn't with FFP, but I guess people with money can get rules relaxed...

ShoulderChip

ShoulderChip wrote: »

the concept of "buying the league" which is often referenced or directly mentioned, its ridiculous.

Then we're all on the same page.

It was Mourinho moaning about buying the league.

VW 1

zerks wrote: »

PSG midweek,the traditional one at OT next weekend was cancelled on the orders of LVG.

A few years ago the charity shield would have been the traditional final pee season game!

duffman13

VW 1 wrote: »

A few years ago the charity shield would have been the traditional final pee season game!

As it will be next season

ShoulderChip

Ernesto Juicy Popgun wrote: »

Then we're all on the same page.

It was Mourinho moaning about buying the league.

If only, if only it was him talking ****e and it wasn't a ridiculous construct that resonated with so many. Then I would be happy.

TheDoc

My feelings on Di Maria have gotten stronger as the end of season drew to a close and now I stand at this point

While great to have signed a world class talent, he didn't want to come to United, PSg was his first choice. You rarely have a player perform when they have made a transfer they didn't really want, so it was a double blow not only to be booted from Madrid, but to also miss out on his preferred destination.

After a bright start, he became injury prone and absolutely hapless on the pitch. Our best stuff last season happened when he wasnt even playing.

I can see and agree with the club that if he has another turgid season his price will be on the floor. Shipping out a player who doesnt want to be there after a year, taking a small hit on the fee, and then buying someone who wants to be there, would be a good move imo

Sometimes it happens, a player doesn't work out. Worst thing to do is be unrealistic and persist and "hope he comes good". In this case United are cutting their losses, and thats fine by me.

A player I was excited about, and would have liked to have gone into the new season with dedication. He doesn't want to do that, is clearly mentally fragile and a bit soft, which is fine, and wants to move.

Best of luck him, hope it works out at PSG. The reality is the performances and victories taht blew me away last year, he wasn't even playing. So it is not any actual impact onto the team imo, other then losing out on the hypothetical "what if" for next season, which just as easily could have been another poor season.