Manchester United Teamtalk/Transfer Rumours/Gossip 2019/20

Drumpot

fatherted1969 wrote: »

Players that played alongside Keane have stated in the past that he was a brilliant passer of the ball into the forward positions, that his first thought always was to get the ball forward through the lines in midfield.

It gets overlooked by many who just want to cast him as some sort of hatchet man. Best captain and one of the best CM in the premiership era

You are not suggesting people judge Keane unfairly ? ....

Sure even the season he captained United to the treble in 1999, David Ginola was voted players player of the year .... Scoring a cracking goal against the mighty Burnley was the icing on that cake.

Rock77

fatherted1969 wrote: »

Players that played alongside Keane have stated in the past that he was a brilliant passer of the ball into the forward positions, that his first thought always was to get the ball forward through the lines in midfield.

It gets overlooked by many who just want to cast him as some sort of hatchet man. Best captain and one of the best CM in the premiership era

Again nobody has cast him as only some sort of a hatchet man and yes he was the best captain in the prem, ever. However the point stands. Beckham was a more creative player, he was directly involved in more big goals in big games in the treble season and he finished 2nd in the ballon dor and really should have won it.

DM_7

Drumpot wrote: »

You are not suggesting people judge Keane unfairly ? ....

Sure even the season he captained United to the treble in 1999, David Ginola was voted players player of the year .... Scoring a cracking goal against the mighty Burnley was the icing on that cake.

At least Keane won both PFA and FWA player of the year a year later.

bangkok

Weepsie wrote: »

He thinks pogba is the best in the world, never mind the league.


Anyway, the votes for PFA and balloon d'Or are often not really accurate of who was/is best, at least in some positions.

Beckham as good as he was, and as good a pro you could have, was never one of the top 3 players on the world.

The PFA team of the year always has a player or 2 that gets there on reputation rather than merit too.

Ginola got PFA player of the year when Keane should've too.

So yeah, even pros in and around the game have their voting biases and will vote for friends, teammates or just people they like ahead of people who have just played better

I have never said pogba was the best player in the world.. ever

also, season 98/99 beckham was one of the best players in the world, no doubt about it

Trigger

Lord TSC wrote: »

Man United will play West Brom twice on Friday, at 1pm and 3pm. Two different squads to get everyone a game.

Are they going to show the games on MUTV do you know?

Lord TSC

Trigger wrote: »

Are they going to show the games on MUTV do you know?

Not seen anything about them doing so. Seems most of these friendlies aren't being televised.

Lord TSC

Telegraph: Borussia Dortmund set to demand £115m for Jadon Sancho

yabadabado

Lord TSC wrote: »

Telegraph: Borussia Dortmund set to demand £115m for Jadon Sancho

Obviously try and negotiate the best deal possible but if that's true then time to look elsewhere.

I couldn't see any team paying that .

brinty

bangkok wrote:

also, season 98/99 beckham was one of the best players in the world, no doubt about it

Beckham wasn't even one of the best players in his team in 98/99

Keane
Scholes
Stam
The big Dane
Cole/Yorke

All miles ahead of him performance what that season.

DM_7

Lord TSC wrote: »

Telegraph: Borussia Dortmund set to demand £115m for Jadon Sancho

Would that be the third most expensive transfer fee ever?

With all going on in football where clubs are going to be under extreme pressures I hope United stay well away from paying that level of money for any players for the next while.

Trigger

Lord TSC wrote: »

Telegraph: Borussia Dortmund set to demand £115m for Jadon Sancho

Yeah if United pay anywhere close to that I'd be surprised.. it's been made knowledge that he wants to leave, let them keep an unhappy player there or accept a lower offer.

bangkok

brinty wrote: »

Beckham wasn't even one of the best players in his team in 98/99

Keane
Scholes
Stam
The big Dane
Cole/Yorke

All miles ahead of him performance what that season.

Him and keane were the 2 most important outfield players that season, beckham finishing 2nd in ballon dor as well

beckham also made PFA team of the year that season, won the UEFA club footballer of the year, won the UEFA club midfielder of the year..

pjohnson

Trigger wrote: »

Yeah if United pay anywhere close to that I'd be surprised.. it's been made knowledge that he wants to leave, let them keep an unhappy player there or accept a lower offer.

Imagine the figures that'd be bandied about for his contract!


"United offer Sancho 1.25m a week deal"

Lord TSC

yabadabado wrote: »

Obviously try and negotiate the best deal possible but if that's true then time to look elsewhere.

I couldn't see any team paying that .

Felix went for €125m
Mbappe went for €180m (with add ons).

I'd argue that Sancho has shown more than either of them. At his age, with his insane level of talent, he was never going to be cheap. I can't imagine that price will shock United's transfer department.

Its going to be how much they can turn into add-ons of different levels of achievability. But, personally, I think he looks worth that high price tag.

bangkok

Lord TSC wrote: »

Telegraph: Borussia Dortmund set to demand £115m for Jadon Sancho

Demand all they want. Id say utd wont go over 100m spread over a few years with lots of add ons

0gac3yjefb5sv7

I'd take him at that price. Not like money in the bank will have us winning titles.

Hodors Appletart

MattS1 wrote: »

I'd take him at that price. Not like money in the bank will have us winning titles.

exactly this

pay the bleeding money get the player in

El Gato De Negocios

MattS1 wrote: »

I'd take him at that price. Not like money in the bank will have us winning titles.

Hodors Appletart wrote: »

exactly this

pay the bleeding money get the player in

£100m + is savage money. We are in a post covid world where revenues for all clubs are hugely down. Signing a player for that kind of money, especially in the current climate is a massive gamble. He could well turn out to be a superstar but he could just as easily end up having a disappointing career. United have tried throwing money at the footballing side of things since the GOAT retired with no major successes. Given the perilous financial situation alot of clubs are going to be in over the coming months, there will be significantly better value in the market so spending that kind of coin on one player would be stupidly reckless imo.

https://twitter.com/ManUnitedZone_/status/1270817701200572416?s=19

Bruno trolling Fred at the end

jayo26

[Deleted User] wrote: »

https://twitter.com/ManUnitedZone_/status/1270817701200572416?s=19

Bruno trolling Fred at the end

Bruno is like the new more talented Mata, he just gets on with everyone and you couldn't dislike him.

damowill

Statutory Ape wrote: »

£100m + is savage money. We are in a post covid world where revenues for all clubs are hugely down. Signing a player for that kind of money, especially in the current climate is a massive gamble. He could well turn out to be a superstar but he could just as easily end up having a disappointing career. United have tried throwing money at the footballing side of things since the GOAT retired with no major successes. Given the perilous financial situation alot of clubs are going to be in over the coming months, there will be significantly better value in the market so spending that kind of coin on one player would be stupidly reckless imo.

i agree. we could have as many as 16 games remaining this season with no fans for any home and no gate receipts. Its likely that a large chunk of next season will be behind closed doors so there is a huge amount of lost revenue. Season tickets will be down and corporate matchday sales will be down. The rumour for the last 6 months prior to Covid was Sancho would go for 80m-100m. Now in the midst of Covid, 115m is being quoted. Makes no sense.

I think United will try and do a deal for sure, but i can see us bypassing and looking elsewhere. Guys in different positions like DVB will go for 40m and Grealish, if Villa are relegated especially will go for 40-50m.

Zaha is another id expect to go for 50m. So Zaha (50m) vs Sancho (115m)?

Zaha + Grealish or DVB vs Sancho?

I dont think United will pay more than the Harry Maguire or Pogba fee they paid to land Sancho. Not in these times

Mitch Connor

I reckon Sancho comes at about 80million, with clauses on top to a headline figure of 95-100million.

If United think Sancho is 'the' guy, and can do the deal, they should do it.

akelly02

Statutory Ape wrote: »

£100m + is savage money. We are in a post covid world where revenues for all clubs are hugely down. Signing a player for that kind of money, especially in the current climate is a massive gamble. He could well turn out to be a superstar but he could just as easily end up having a disappointing career. United have tried throwing money at the footballing side of things since the GOAT retired with no major successes. Given the perilous financial situation alot of clubs are going to be in over the coming months, there will be significantly better value in the market so spending that kind of coin on one player would be stupidly reckless imo.

think he is in danger of being quite badly overrated .

good player but not worth near that money

bangkok

akelly02 wrote: »

think he is in danger of being quite badly overrated .

good player but not worth near that money

Ah he is... he is on the path now to becoming the best player in europe. He is pure quality for his age

Mitch Connor

akelly02 wrote: »

think he is in danger of being quite badly overrated .

good player but not worth near that money

For the money, as things stand, the return needs to be a player that will be spoken of as a Ballon D'or winner over the next 10 years. Maybe not the next Ronaldo or Messi, (will there be another?) but up their at the levels of the very next best.

He doesn't need to be that player this instant, at his age there has to be an element of potential in his price. It would be a gamble, as he could be a guy that doesn't reach his potential for any number of reasons.

If United think they are buying an 07 or 08 Ronaldo, then the money can be justified. the 80million we got for Ronaldo was huge at the time, but looks a poor deal when you see how he went on to improve year on year. Sancho could do the same (or not) and it will be hindsight that judges his fee.

No one really cares what a player costs, when they are a success.

60million on Martial is a far more insane deal, based on timing etc, than 100 on Sancho.

8-10

Lord TSC wrote: »

Felix went for €125m
Mbappe went for €180m (with add ons).

I'd argue that Sancho has shown more than either of them.

:eek:

Go on then, interested in this argument that Sancho has shown more than Mbappe.....?

Mbappe had won league titles with 2 different teams, French Cup and scored in the World Cup final as part of the winning team at a younger age than Sancho is now.

I'm a fan of Sancho but he's not yet at Mbappe's level for me, that just sounds like British media bias.

Mitch Connor

8-10 wrote: »

:eek:

Go on then, interested in this argument that Sancho has shown more than Mbappe.....?

Mbappe had won league titles with 2 different teams, French Cup and scored in the World Cup final as part of the winning team at a younger age than Sancho is now.

I'm a fan of Sancho but he's not yet at Mbappe's level for me, that just sounds like British media bias.

when Mbappe went for that money he had won one title with one side, and had 2 seasons in that team. 16 leauge goals over those 2 seasons. Considering the level of the French league, his stats aren't that impressive.

Thought technically his deal was completed after winning the second league title it was agreed prior, and the loan/transfer was an FFP fudge.

He moved to PSG the season before the world cup etc.

You can say Mbappe has done more now than Sancho has done now, but if you are talking transfers you have to base it on what he had done up to August 2017. you can still argue he had done more then too - as Sancho only really has 2 and a half seasons to go on vs Mbappe's 2.

y0ssar1an22

8-10 wrote: »

:eek:

Go on then, interested in this argument that Sancho has shown more than Mbappe.....?

Mbappe had won league titles with 2 different teams, French Cup and scored in the World Cup final as part of the winning team at a younger age than Sancho is now.

I'm a fan of Sancho but he's not yet at Mbappe's level for me, that just sounds like British media bias.

Most goals and assists combined
Jadon Sancho ranks third in Europe's major leagues in 2019/20

GoalsAssists
C Immobile 27 7
L Messi 19 12
J Sancho 14 15
R Lewandowski 25 3
T Werner 21 7
C Ronaldo 21 3
K De Bruyne 8 16

8-10

OK I'm convinced. Sancho > Mbappe.

Carry on

Mitch Connor

8-10 wrote: »

OK I'm convinced. Sancho > Mbappe.

Carry on

FFS. You ask for a discussion. Get a response. Get snarky.

paulbok

I wonder are Dortmund upping the price for Utd as a negotiation tatic, with both clubs apparently very interested in Bellingham, maybe they are using the fee to get Utd to drop their interest and they will drop the price for Sancho?

akelly02

bangkok wrote: »

Ah he is... he is on the path now to becoming the best player in europe. He is pure quality for his age

we will see .

Grealish would be my number one priority

pjohnson

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

Most goals and assists combined
Jadon Sancho ranks third in Europe's major leagues in 2019/20

GoalsAssists
C Immobile 27 7
L Messi 19 12
J Sancho 14 15
R Lewandowski 25 3
T Werner 21 7
C Ronaldo 21 3
K De Bruyne 8 16

I hadn't heard of Immobile recently and thought he'd retired. Some fcukin renaissance he's having!

8-10

Mitch Connor wrote: »

FFS. You ask for a discussion. Get a response. Get snarky.

I assumed it was the opinion of just one poster but it's not given the replies. Shows that I'm the one in the wrong.

Minime2.5

Torres at Valencia is an alternative to sancho and would be much cheaper

Trigger

Mod: folks, just a reminder of the previous mod note. If you have a problem with a post please report, and any more posts attacking the poster instead of the post will be met by Cards. Final warning.

DM_7 wrote: »

Mod Note: okay folks please remember to be civil and engage with the topic instead of dismissive posts.

Posts that generalise views as 'bumwaffle' or 'crazy' or simplify an argument to be ONLY based on one thing are not helpful.

People don't have to agree with others, don't have to engage with other posters in a direct way but they are expected to be civil. Commentary like the above does nothing to add to the debate and could be viewed as threadspoiling (see the charter).

y0ssar1an22

8-10 wrote: »

I assumed it was the opinion of just one poster but it's not given the replies. Shows that I'm the one in the wrong.

mbappe has a higher profile due to playing for PSG, the funds involved in his transfer, and winning the world cup.

on paper there aint much between them. you can even make the argument for sancho.

now admittedly, i havent seen much of either.

but the point is (i think) if utd need to pay ~100m for sancho, then they should. he's only 20 and may not have even reached his potential yet.

and its a position utd need to fill, 100% the most important transfer this summer.

bangkok

akelly02 wrote: »

we will see .

Grealish would be my number one priority

i think Grealish would be coming in to be a squad player if signed.

if pogba is kept, and grealish signed he would be on the bench when our best 11 is picked. we will only sign him as well if villa get relegated

y0ssar1an22

pjohnson wrote: »

I hadn't heard of Immobile recently and thought he'd retired. Some fcukin renaissance he's having!

he's been so up and down no team will gamble on him again. and he's 30 now so that boat has sailed.

Father Hernandez

Lord TSC wrote: »

Felix went for €125m
Mbappe went for €180m (with add ons).

I'd argue that Sancho has shown more than either of them. At his age, with his insane level of talent, he was never going to be cheap. I can't imagine that price will shock United's transfer department.

Its going to be how much they can turn into add-ons of different levels of achievability. But, personally, I think he looks worth that high price tag.

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

mbappe has a higher profile due to playing for PSG, the funds involved in his transfer, and winning the world cup.

on paper there aint much between them. you can even make the argument for sancho.

now admittedly, i havent seen much of either.

but the point is (i think) if utd need to pay ~100m for sancho, then they should. he's only 20 and may not have even reached his potential yet.

and its a position utd need to fill, 100% the most important transfer this summer.

That wasn't the original point in fairness.

Mbappe went for £130/£140 million to PSG off the back of his season and a half at Monaco where he looked the real deal and has proved that since.

Joao Felix went to Atletico for £115mil odd off the back of 1 good season in the Primeria Liga at Benfica.

The OP was saying has Sancho done more than each of these before their transfers to warrant a massive transfer at a reported £100million (less than both).

The answer IMO is probably yes.

Rock77

It’s a matter of opinion again,

In my opinion Mbappe is worth more and is a much better player than Sancho.

jayo26

Rock77 wrote: »

It’s a matter of opinion again,

In my opinion Mbappe is worth more and is a much better player than Sancho.

He is now but its not as obvious at the stage where they both signed deals for their new clubs and thats the point been made originally.

I dont think sancho will ever be as good as mbappe but i do believe he has done more at this point then mbappe did with Monaco.

Liam O

Dortmund looking for similar to what they got for Dembele shouldn't be a surprise. The fact that transfer happened along with them signing a player for 140m that 2 years later might be joining Newcastle threw the whole transfer system out of whack.

They seem reasonably fair at Dortmund though and have previous negotiations which went smoothly with United. If the player wants the move and the fee is in their ball park I don't think they'll stand in his way. Especially since they'll probably make up any shortfall on the Haaland transfer in 2 years

Father Hernandez

Rock77 wrote: »

It’s a matter of opinion again,

In my opinion Mbappe is worth more and is a much better player than Sancho.

No one is disputing that. You've missed the original point entirely.

I don't think anyone would disagree Mbappe is a better player, he's the most likely of all the players in the world right now to emulate Messi or Ronaldo over the past 15 years.

bangkok

hopefully Mbappe moves on from the french league either this year or next and then we will see what he is all about.

IMO Rashford isnt far off what Mbappe is and he is playing in a much harder league than Mbappe is

Not really testing yourself as a player when you are playing against the likes of Amiens, Dijon, Brest, Angers etc every week

pjohnson

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

he's been so up and down no team will gamble on him again. and he's 30 now so that boat has sailed.

Hes THIRTY! I thought he was about 35. Italians and especially can have utterly batshít careers not getting going until mid to late 20's. Quagliarella, Di Natale and Toni etc. spring to mind.

The trajectory is gas.

Rock77

Father Hernandez wrote: »

No one is disputing that. You've missed the original point entirely.

I don't think anyone would disagree Mbappe is a better player, he's the most likely of all the players in the world right now to emulate Messi or Ronaldo over the past 15 years.

Sorry I thought the actual point was would we be justified spending that amount of money on Sancho. Then it went to has he done as much as Mbappe did at his age. I think they are separate issues. It doesn’t matter what he has won, it’s the potential and ability seen in the player.

Mbappe was lighting up the French league, Sancho the German league.

However the first time I seen Mbappe I knew he had the ability to be the best player in the world at some stage.

The first time I seen Sancho I thought excellent player but not Ronaldo/Messi level.

brinty

Great to see apples being compared to plums in the Sancho and mbappe debate.

They're not like for like players so like for like comparisons are not warranted.

Sancho is a better provider whereas mbappe is a better executor. Finishers always go for better money, as they should, but they're nothing without the Sancho's who provide the chances on a platter

Strumms

Dele Ali out of the United vs Spurs game, hit with a one game ban because of some social media post which the Premier League didn’t approve of.

Liam O

Rock77 wrote: »

Sorry I thought the actual point was would we be justified spending that amount of money on Sancho. Then it went to has he done as much as Mbappe did at his age. I think they are separate issues. It doesn’t matter what he has won, it’s the potential and ability seen in the player.

Mbappe was lighting up the French league, Sancho the German league.

However the first time I seen Mbappe I knew he had the ability to be the best player in the world at some stage.

The first time I seen Sancho I thought excellent player but not Ronaldo/Messi level.

What about when Ronaldo and Messi were 18/19? Did you know they were going to be the best players ever? Bearing in mind of course that Sancho's stats eclipse both of theirs at the same age, them playing for United and Barcelona and him for a weaker Dortmund team too.