Manchester United Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 2015 Mod Note Post #2331

Trigger

homerjay2005 wrote: »

never even heard of him before. i doubt its true as surely if the club wanted him, they wouldnt have left it this late to put in a bid?

Not a hope of getting that done. He is the right back for Olympiokos. Though that is 2 right backs we have been linked to today. That's not including Danny Rose.. cause like.. Danny Rose.

Edit: thinking some more of this. Could be flown in and signed subject to Medical.

brinty

homerjay2005 wrote: »

never even heard of him before. i doubt its true as surely if the club wanted him, they wouldnt have left it this late to put in a bid?

Didier Baptiste strikes again....

eagle eye

I wonder if United will go for Pellegrini? I think he would be a great coach for them.

Just seen there today that he is second only to Mourinho is points over his first 100 games. He has 99 games in the EPL to this point but cannot pass Mourinho even with a win.

I think he would be a breath of fresh air at United. He would bring an entertaining style of football and he would have them in the Champion's league I think.

I don't think there is a better manager available out there.

bucketybuck

eagle eye wrote: »

I wonder if United will go for Pellegrini? I think he would be a great coach for them.

Just seen there today that he is second only to Mourinho is points over his first 100 games. He has 99 games in the EPL to this point but cannot pass Mourinho even with a win.

I think he would be a breath of fresh air at United. He would bring an entertaining style of football and he will have them in the Champion's league I think.

Any competent manager should have United in the champions league, but I think there is a huge PR problem with appointing Pellegrini.

Do we want to compete with City or trail along in their footsteps? Appointing Pellegrini will be labelled as taking Citys cast-offs, taking the man they deemed not good enough and saying "he's good enough for us, because we aren't as ambitious as City are".

Whether its right or not doesn't matter, that will be the perception. if we genuinely felt he was the right man for us then we could ignore that, but lets be honest he is just another name on the list so why go down that road.

secman

NIMAN wrote: »

Jose will be delighted today, he will be waiting on the call from Old Trafford now.

Having said that, if I was a Utd fan, would a punt on the likes of a Unai Emery not be worth a go. Jose will bring nothing but disrepute to the club.

Hope to God he's left waiting for the call.. the man is poison personified....
.

Coat22

bucketybuck wrote: »

Any competent manager should have United in the champions league, but I think there is a huge PR problem with appointing Pellegrini.

Do we want to compete with City or trail along in their footsteps? Appointing Pellegrini will be labelled as taking Citys cast-offs, taking the man they deemed not good enough and saying "he's good enough for us, because we aren't as ambitious as City are".

Whether its right or not doesn't matter, that will be the perception. if we genuinely felt he was the right man for us then we could ignore that, but lets be honest he is just another name on the list so why go down that road.

Not a hope of United going for Pellegrini. loads of reasons:

- As you say he would be seen as a City reject.
- Doesn't he want to go back to Spain?
- He's probably going to Chelsea (which isn't in Spain)
- He wouldn't be working in a Director of Football type structure. Would he be able to lead recruitment?
- Giggs wouldn't be able to understand him.

Maximus Alexander

bucketybuck wrote: »

Any competent manager should have United in the champions league, but I think there is a huge PR problem with appointing Pellegrini.

Do we want to compete with City or trail along in their footsteps? Appointing Pellegrini will be labelled as taking Citys cast-offs, taking the man they deemed not good enough and saying "he's good enough for us, because we aren't as ambitious as City are".

Whether its right or not doesn't matter, that will be the perception. if we genuinely felt he was the right man for us then we could ignore that, but lets be honest he is just another name on the list so why go down that road.

Why do you see that as a problem with Pellegrini but not with Mourinho?

Kerrydude1981

brinty wrote: »

Didier Baptiste strikes again....

He was never going to leave Hartchester

RobertKK

United can play badly and be 5th.

Imagine how good the rest of the season will be as we gain form.

Far too much negativity around here

StringerBell

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

Why do you see that as a problem with Pellegrini but not with Mourinho?

Local rivals is a bit different tbf

Kerrydude1981

Is the Stoke game tomorrow night on TV lads?

Maximus Alexander

StringerBell wrote: »

Local rivals is a bit different tbf

I get that for people who are from the city, not so much for international fans...

Liverpool rivalry makes sense to me because my generation growing up was fairly split down the middle with Liverpool / United fans. City were never even on our radar - they're no different to Chelsea in my eyes. Sugar daddy club who I have a problem with because they are a threat to United.

That's why I asked the question though, I'm interested to hear how other people feel about it.

wiz569

Kerrydude1981 wrote: »

Is the Stoke game tomorrow night on TV lads?

Only on foreign satellite m8

Coat22

Kerrydude1981 wrote: »

Is the Stoke game tomorrow night on TV lads?

Nope - BT are showing eh....West Ham v Villa - should be a cracker

StringerBell

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

I get that for people who are from the city, not so much for international fans...

Liverpool rivalry makes sense to me because my generation growing up was fairly split down the middle with Liverpool / United fans. City were never even on our radar - they're no different to Chelsea in my eyes. Sugar daddy club who I have a problem with because they are a threat to United.

That's why I asked the question though, I'm interested to hear how other people feel about it.

Yeah and I totally understand that if you take away the local rivalry from the equation everything else applies, but I would imagine that is why taking on a City manager, particularly one who has just left, or a Liverpool manager would be seen as being much worse then taking a former Chelsea manager.

homerjay2005

Coat22 wrote: »

Nope - BT are showing eh....West Ham v Villa - should be a cracker

United V Stoke at a cold Tuesday and Windy night in february at Old trafford doesnt sound too appealing either.

it could be another painful game.

Coat22

homerjay2005 wrote: »

United V Stoke at a cold Tuesday and Windy night in february at Old trafford doesnt sound too appealing either.

it could be another painful game.

Absolutely - wouldn't mind watching the Leicester v Liverpool or Arsenal v Southampton games though.

Julez

homerjay2005 wrote: »

United V Stoke at a cold Tuesday and Windy night in february at Old trafford doesnt sound too appealing either.

it could be another painful game.

Thats a bit harsh, Stoke have been playing some enjoyable football! :pac:

posturingpat

homerjay2005 wrote: »

United V Stoke at a cold Tuesday and Windy night in february at Old trafford doesnt sound too appealing either.

it could be another painful game.

It could bhe a really good game,unfortunately the good stuff will probable be from Stoke though

Discodog

astradave wrote: »

Why refuse to answer? Could have ruled it out.. oh Jose you tease

I posted earlier that Jose has said that he wouldn't comment whilst LvG is still manager out of respect for him.

Maximus Alexander

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

. City were never even on our radar - they're no different to Chelsea in my eyes. Sugar daddy club who I have a problem with because they are a threat to United.
.

City owned by foreign billionaire
Chelsea owned by same
United owned by same

I don't understand why you think there's difference?

bucketybuck

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

Why do you see that as a problem with Pellegrini but not with Mourinho?

Really? The circumstances are very different, Jose left Chelsea in acrimony rather than simply being, for want of a better word, upgraded. That matters when you are talking about perceptions, he isn't a Chelsea cast-off kicked to the kerb because a prettier girl came along like Pelligrini is.

But the single biggest reason is that Mourinho is almost a brand at this stage. He is still Jose "win titles everywhere he goes" Mourinho, instead of "not good enough for a big club" Mourinho. There are few managers classed as elite right now, he is one of them while Pellegrini is not, and so that transcends any perception of getting sloppy seconds.

Ancelloti is also a manager sacked from plenty of clubs but he wouldn't carry that stigma either. And I don't think Pellegrini is forever blocked from managing United, but taking him right after our local rivals dumped him for a supposed upgrade? That just won't look good.

Flint Fredstone

[Deleted User] wrote: »

City owned by foreign billionaire
Chelsea owned by same
United owned by same

I don't understand why you think there's difference?

There's a massive difference. I'm sure if you thought about it for a second you would find it.

Liam McPoyle

[Deleted User] wrote: »

City owned by foreign billionaire
Chelsea owned by same
United owned by same

I don't understand why you think there's difference?

Before the Glazers United were one of the most valuable teams in the world.

Before Roman Chelsea were something like £130m in the hole.

Before Sheikin Stevens City were relegation fodder by times and didn't have a pot to piss in.

City and Chelsea would be nothing and nowhere without non football investment.

United have made the Glazers tens, probably hundreds of millions of pounds.

Though I'm sure you know all that.

StringerBell

Deleted User wrote: »

City owned by foreign billionaire
Chelsea owned by same
United owned by same

I don't understand why you think there's difference?

I don't believe you don't see the difference tbh

Maximus Alexander

Deleted User wrote: »

City owned by foreign billionaire
Chelsea owned by same
United owned by same

I don't understand why you think there's difference?

That's got literally nothing to do with what I posted.

jimmytwotimes 2013

Balague called Pep couple of weeks ago, fair play to him

FutureGuy

jimmytwotimes 2013 wrote: »

Balague called Pep couple of weeks ago, fair play to him

Throw enough Sh!t...

Julez

Deleted User wrote: »

City owned by foreign billionaire
Chelsea owned by same
United owned by same

I don't understand why you think there's difference?

3/10 must try harder.

Business Cat

Business Cat wrote: »

Though I'm sure you know all that.

Of course I know, but they are still three clubs private owned by billionares. Just seems a funny one to make a distinction.

edgecutter

secman wrote: »

Hope to God he's left waiting for the call.. the man is poison personified....
.

And LVG is...

Rossi IRL

Pereira is not playing for the u21s tonight.


Either involved tomorrow or going on loan somewhere by the looks of it.

Liam McPoyle

Deleted User wrote: »

Of course I know, but they are still three clubs private owned by billionares. Just seems a funny one to make a distinction.

StringerBell

Rossi IRL wrote: »

Pereira is not playing for the u21s tonight.


Either involved tomorrow or going on loan somewhere by the looks of it.

I'd imagine he will be in the squad tomorrow

jayo26

[Deleted User] wrote: »

City owned by foreign billionaire
Chelsea owned by same
United owned by same

I don't understand why you think there's difference?

Get it now??

Al Capwned

Hi lads. Not been on in a while, but I've been thinking about this a lot today while bluffing a living....

I do believe that Guardiola is the best manager in the game right now. And taking the emotion out of it, even though they still think their moustaches are trendy you have to say City are going about their business very fcuking well. They're way way ahead of us right now.

Pep is going to be a massive success with City, even the most ardent of us is going to be forced to admit that I think.

Now I have said very vocally on some other forums I don't want Mourinho. And a lot of people have been very critical of his negative tactics. City confirming that Pep is replacing Pellegrini as manager has gone a way to changing my mind now. We need an immediate boost to stay on their coat tails.

The only way imaginable for me for that to happen is to appoint Mourinho as our next manager. I still haven't changed my mind that it needs to happen now. If we don't make an appointment that will have an immediate positive effect, there's every chance that City, and perhaps others, could leave us a long way behind. Getting rid of van Gaal is the easy decision, getting the replacement right is arguably one of the most important our club will ever face.
I think that decision simply now has to be Mourinho. Giggs, Hughes, Bruce etc won't do this.

I know people will say Oh what about his bus, and the negative news stories, the eye gouging, the goading, the general cnutishness. I've been thinking back to Mourinho's first Chelsea with Robben, Duff et al, to his 100+ goal season with Madrid, to his breakthrough with Porto. Couple that with his apparent respect for United and I'd be willing to give him a chance to prove that he can be a decent man as well as a decent manager, and get us back to playing the type of football that i'd actually look forward to watching.

Jose in.

hufpc8w3adnk65

Al Capwned wrote: »

Hi lads. Not been on in a while, but I've been thinking about this a lot today while bluffing a living....

I do believe that Guardiola is the best manager in the game right now. And taking the emotion out of it, even though they still think their moustaches are trendy you have to say City are going about their business very fcuking well. They're way way ahead of us right now.

Pep is going to be a massive success with City, even the most ardent of us is going to be forced to admit that I think.

Now I have said very vocally on some other forums I don't want Mourinho. And a lot of people have been very critical of his negative tactics. City confirming that Pep is replacing Pellegrini as manager has gone a way to changing my mind now. We need an immediate boost to stay on their coat tails.

The only way imaginable for me for that to happen is to appoint Mourinho as our next manager. I still haven't changed my mind that it needs to happen now. If we don't make an appointment that will have an immediate positive effect, there's every chance that City, and perhaps others, could leave us a long way behind. Getting rid of van Gaal is the easy decision, getting the replacement right is arguably one of the most important our club will ever face.
I think that decision simply now has to be Mourinho. Giggs, Hughes, Bruce etc won't do this.

I know people will say Oh what about his bus, and the negative news stories, the eye gouging, the goading, the general cnutishness. I've been thinking back to Mourinho's first Chelsea with Robben, Duff et al, to his 100+ goal season with Madrid, to his breakthrough with Porto. Couple that with his apparent respect for United and I'd be willing to give him a chance to prove that he can be a decent man as well as a decent manager, and get us back to playing the type of football that i'd actually look forward to watching.

Jose in.

Brilliant post couldn't agree more Al

Liam McPoyle

Al Capwned wrote: »

Hi lads. Not been on in a while, but I've been thinking about this a lot today while bluffing a living....

I do believe that Guardiola is the best manager in the game right now. And taking the emotion out of it, even though they still think their moustaches are trendy you have to say City are going about their business very fcuking well. They're way way ahead of us right now.

Pep is going to be a massive success with City, even the most ardent of us is going to be forced to admit that I think.

Now I have said very vocally on some other forums I don't want Mourinho. And a lot of people have been very critical of his negative tactics. City confirming that Pep is replacing Pellegrini as manager has gone a way to changing my mind now. We need an immediate boost to stay on their coat tails.

The only way imaginable for me for that to happen is to appoint Mourinho as our next manager. I still haven't changed my mind that it needs to happen now. If we don't make an appointment that will have an immediate positive effect, there's every chance that City, and perhaps others, could leave us a long way behind. Getting rid of van Gaal is the easy decision, getting the replacement right is arguably one of the most important our club will ever face.
I think that decision simply now has to be Mourinho. Giggs, Hughes, Bruce etc won't do this.

I know people will say Oh what about his bus, and the negative news stories, the eye gouging, the goading, the general cnutishness. I've been thinking back to Mourinho's first Chelsea with Robben, Duff et al, to his 100+ goal season with Madrid, to his breakthrough with Porto. Couple that with his apparent respect for United and I'd be willing to give him a chance to prove that he can be a decent man as well as a decent manager, and get us back to playing the type of football that i'd actually look forward to watching.

Jose in.

A lot of truth there for sure though I'd disagree that Pep is the best manager in the game right now.

He has achieved a lot in a very short space of time, absolutely no doubt about it, and he will very likely bring City another couple of league titles at the least, however I'm still not convinced by him.

He has never built a team, he has tweaked teams but he has never built one from scratch, or even rebuilt one that had decent foundations to it.

For him to be regarded as a true great he would have to take on a team like Spurs, teams that are somewhat limited in terms of their appeal factor and make them league champions.

It's easy to attract players to a club that is glamorous and that can outspend their domestic rivals.

Look at United even. 10 to 15 years ago they would have been the dream team for the majority of footballers that wanted to play in the PL, thats not the case anymore.

Unlimited funds at the likes of Chelsea or City, or a proven manager at the likes of Arsenal are all a bigger draw than we currently are.

Until he takes on a team from outside of the regular top 4 in a given league and brings them to the top of the mountain he will always remain a good, not great coach.

jaykay74

Deleted User wrote:

Of course I know, but they are still three clubs private owned by billionares. Just seems a funny one to make a distinction.

Funny not to unless you are a retard, you think?

Rayne Wooney

Pep may be overrated and leaving out the drama I think Mourinho is a better manager but Pellegrini could easily win a double this season, that would be two titles and two cups in three seasons. Pep with presumably a war chest along with world class players following him will clean up on the domestic front for the next 3 or 4 seasons, even if he fails in Europe again. The structure is there for City to continue being successful.

The only way to compete with Pep's City is to get Mourinho, it should have been done in December when it was clear Van Gaal was going to continue to be a dud.

Trigger

https://twitter.com/Sport_Witness/status/694230912502988800?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

Pyjamarama

Business Cat wrote: »

A lot of truth there for sure though I'd disagree that Pep is the best manager in the game right now.

He has achieved a lot in a very short space of time, absolutely no doubt about it, and he will very likely bring City another couple of league titles at the least, however I'm still not convinced by him.

He has never built a team, he has tweaked teams but he has never built one from scratch, or even rebuilt one that had decent foundations to it.

For him to be regarded as a true great he would have to take on a team like Spurs, teams that are somewhat limited in terms of their appeal factor and make them league champions.

It's easy to attract players to a club that is glamorous and that can outspend their domestic rivals.

Look at United even. 10 to 15 years ago they would have been the dream team for the majority of footballers that wanted to play in the PL, thats not the case anymore.

Unlimited funds at the likes of Chelsea or City, or a proven manager at the likes of Arsenal are all a bigger draw than we currently are.

Until he takes on a team from outside of the regular top 4 in a given league and brings them to the top of the mountain he will always remain a good, not great coach.

You don't think United could match the funds the others offer? Monster bids for Bale and signing the likes of ADM say otherwise. =

Rossi IRL

astradave wrote: »

https://twitter.com/Sport_Witness/status/694230912502988800?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

Another right back makes no sense.

Trigger

Rossi IRL wrote: »

Another right back makes no sense.

We only have one senior RB tbf. Squad depth makes the most sense, though i would rather give Varela a chance.

https://twitter.com/NorwayStats/status/694216624547700738?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

He would also count as homegrown

https://twitter.com/NorwayStats/status/694218408062238720?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

RobertKK

Omar in a previous life a few years back was a Man City player.

Liam McPoyle

Pyjamarama wrote: »

You don't think United could match the funds the others offer? Monster bids for Bale and signing the likes of ADM say otherwise. =

City or Chelsea could go out and sign 3 or 4 players the likes of Bale or ADM and it wouldn't make a dent.

United's spending comes from their offfield sponsorship deals, they also have shareholders that require dividends.

City or Chelsea have daddy's pockets to rattle when they need a new toy.

Unless FFP is actually enforced (cant see it ever happening) then they will always carry more weight in the transfer market.

Headshot

Im so ****ing happy the Pep stories to utd are done and dusted. It was getting so tiring reading the rubbish.

On the other side, it make utd look even worse that LVG is still at the club even when there's a world class manager in waiting Jose

Pyjamarama

Business Cat wrote: »

City or Chelsea could go out and sign 3 or 4 players the likes of Bale or ADM and it wouldn't make a dent.

United's spending comes from their offfield sponsorship deals, they also have shareholders that require dividends.

City or Chelsea have daddy's pockets to rattle when they need a new toy.

Unless FFP is actually enforced (cant see it ever happening) then they will always carry more weight in the transfer market.

When have they ever done that? (sign 3-4 bales) They have never come close to it and United in the last few years have spent pretty similar to both i'd imagine (tho i could well be wrong). United are still eating at the same table as both. One step below the two big spanish clubs and Bayern. That could change now that City have Pep tho.

Sand

Headshot wrote: »

Im so ****ing happy the Pep stories to utd are done and dusted. It was getting so tiring reading the rubbish.

On the other side, it make utd look even worse that LVG is still at the club even when there's a world class manager in waiting Jose

Doesn't really matter in terms of trophies who manages United for the next 3-5 years when you have Guardiola+experienced squad+oodles of money at City. Mourinho certainly doesn't lay down anything long term at a club.

Sand

Pyjamarama wrote: »

When have they ever done that? (sign 3-4 bales) They have never come close to it and United in the last few years have spent pretty similar to both i'd imagine (tho i could well be wrong). United are still eating at the same table as both. One step below the two big spanish clubs and Bayern. That could change now that City have Pep tho.

They spent 165 million GBP in the last transfer window alone.

People go on and on about United spending 250 million GBP over 4 transfer windows now but its not even enough to keep up.