General Premier League Thread 2023-24 Mod Note in op 27/6/23 And 21/05/24

Mitch Connor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122192888#Comment_122192888

Yup.

But worse than that, would it be ratcliffe overruling the football people he hired.

It should matter one jot who ratcliffe likes, the decision should be in the hands of blanc, berrada, ashworth (at some point) and Wilcox.

johnnyryan89

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122192929#Comment_122192929

If Southgate gets the job it's likely because of his close relationship with Ashworth.

Fitz*

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122192929#Comment_122192929

What if Ashworth is the one that is pushing for Southgate?

Also, I don't think that it is unrealistic that Man Utd are sounding out potential new managers before sacking ETH. It's the general thing to do. You don't sack a manager and then go looking for a replacement afterwards with a blank canvas. You have your ducks in a row before acting. So it is very possible that they approached McKenna, De Zerbi etc last week and then the FA Cup win has altered their thinking. If I was a Man Utd fan, I'd be worried that the new regime is already acting on sentiment and that 1 win can alter such a drastic decision. It's another short term measure and doesn't bode well for the future.

billyhead

The longer it goes on there is no public backing the more likelihood he will be sacked imo

Fitz*

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122193305#Comment_122193305

Jim could have easily cleared it up the other day, so he is only adding fuel to the fire.

https://twitter.com/BradJCox_/status/1794411919979479322

Osmosis Jones

A 5 year deal from the club who sack managers for fun

https://twitter.com/FabrizioRomano/status/1795425560484798708

Flaneur OBrien

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122193610#Comment_122193610

Who wouldn't take a job that’ll will pay you a few years worth, for maybe one season?

Osmosis Jones

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122193838#Comment_122193838

Oh for sure, getting sacked by Chelsea must be the most lucrative job in the business right now

Patrick Mahomes

The Glazers must be sitting back now smiling waiting for their next set of dividends to be paid out knowing that Jim Ratcliffe the football man is making this mess now.

Regards,

P.

Fitz*

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122193959#Comment_122193959

Chelsea will still have to pay Potter, Poch & Maresca next season (unless they have been paid off already). Probably Lampard aswell.

Mitch Connor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122194541#Comment_122194541

No dividends are being paid for the next few years, so nope.

eagle eye

Looks Like Everton are going to sign Kalvin Phillips. Will they ever learn from their mistakes. The amount of players they have brought over the years who couldn't get starts at their previous clubs is unreal and nearly all of them have failed to perform with Everton.

Go and scout younger players or spend money on a starter from another club.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122194902#Comment_122194902

On loan. Can see dyche liking him

TitianGerm

https://twitter.com/SkySportsNews/status/1795711787150504126?t=YRAQ_2aERYTAnaUpBRQYEQ&s=19

Looks like Radcliffe is trying to cut costs at United. It'll be a shame that so many low paid workers are made redundant when you'd the likes of Martial earning enough a year for doing nothing to probably pay for 150-200 of these people's salaries.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122196527#Comment_122196527

No low paid workers are working from home. I worked their as a casual for a few years. Pull a few pints and then go up and watch the match. Seems like they are clearing out the middle management.

El Gato De Negocios

Not sure what the issue is tbh. Ineos are removing the remote working option and some staff have indicated that won't work for them so rather than have them hang around to get their bonus in September, they are being given an opportunity to get their bonus early plus a redundancy package on top of that.

That sounds very fair to me and beyond what most firms would offer when looking to trim the fat but like everything related to United, some folk will try and paint it in a negative light.🤷‍♂️

jacool

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122196527#Comment_122196527

Martial included in that list as "non-playing staff" perhaps.

Mitch Connor

I don't like the black and white framing of all this tbh.

United overpay players - yes. United need to get rid of under performing players, yep.

Do I think INEOS are being entirely fair to staff? No, I don't. I don't like much of what they have done. Cancelling the full club party at the end of year and not paying for 1000 staff to overnight in a London hotel? I get that. The reality is the club is (apparently) struggling with FFP up to June 30th - and whether you save money on player wages or on a staff party, money is money.

United have over 1000 staff. Way more than any other PL club. It stands to reason they don't need all of those people, it stands to reason the head count could be lower.

People point to how badly United have been ran from a football perspective, why should we consider that the non-football side has been ran any better by the same people? Why should we not consider there is bloat and overpayment of non-playing staff too?

Again, I don't like everything INEOS is doing, I don't like the ending of all work from home and, effective, sacking of anyone who doesn't agree to it. While I don't see an issue with not paying for an overnight in London last weekend and big party, I do think asking the staff to pay £20 for the bus down the Cup final is INCREDIBLY cheap and mean.

But simply saying United shouldn't look to reduce the non-playing staff costs because the playing staff costs are insane is, imo, incorrect. (And United absolutely do need a far better wage structure for the playing staff, 100%)

TitianGerm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122196576#Comment_122196576

It says all 1000 staff are being offered the redundancy package and WFH is being stopped as well. Nothing indicates that it is just WFH staff who will be affected.

Cancelling WFH is seriously anti employee as well given the rising costs of accommodation near cities and increasing travel costs.

artanevilla

I thought Radcliffe was only looking at the football side of the business?

theoneeyedman

Billionaire does cvntish Billionaire stuff shocker......

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122196913#Comment_122196913

I know all the hospitality managers still. None of them have been offered redundancy.

TitianGerm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122197412#Comment_122197412

Are they employees or United or a catering company who are contracted in to Old Trafford to provide the service?

This isn't a dig at United either by the way. If Liverpool did the same I'd be pissed off that those people on lower earnings are sacrificed to cut costs when a small reduction in playing staff wages would easily cover the payroll costs.

jacool

Jim is basing all decisions on the acrostic principle:

Intend Neutralising Excess Offsite Staff         

and         

I Need Erik Out Soon

El Gato De Negocios

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122197575#Comment_122197575

Out of contract players like Martial and Varane are leaving.

Players are taking a 25% reduction in salary due to missing out on CL.

Costs are being cut everywhere.

How would you propose the reduction of playing staff wages other than the CL clause?

Mitch Connor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122196913#Comment_122196913

Everyone is being offered the resignation = early bonus thing

People who are WFH and being told they need to come into the office are being told agree tocome into the office by Wednesday or resign/accept the early bonus offer.

I am not sayign i agree with the move. IMO if you can perform your function away from the office that should be allowed.

NITRO95

I don't get the outrage about any company reducing staff numbers when it's a known fact that they are over staffed. They are going to get some form of redundancy payment and will likely find a new job if they want one given their experience working for one of the largest businesses in the world.

From a Utd perspective its very obvious that money is being pissed away in all areas of the club, except maintenance of the stadium. I also agree with Mitch that asking the staff to pay a £20 subsidy for a coach to London last week was extremely cheap. INEOS are going to do things their way because that's how they've been successful. People don't have to like it but that's not going to change.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122197575#Comment_122197575

Direct. City uses an outside company for their staff. They did say they dropped the free drinks at the end of season staff party to two. It used to be coaches to Wembley and a drinks and meal reception alright. As far as I'm aware we are the only club that does this. City doesn't even have an end of season staff party or offer free tickets to finals. You need to be there for 8 years to qualify for the final tickets on the hospitality side anyway.

Fitz*

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122197666#Comment_122197666

Are Man City paying those outside company staff, or are they paid via an external company also? Only reason I ask is because Man City seem to have a lower number of direct staff than other clubs, with hundreds of others being contracted to CFG, so that their wages do not show up on club accounts. I suspect that's an accounting trick to skirt around PSR rather than a moral reason.

Man Utd have to cost-cut. Grand, it happens in most organizations so this is no different. Personally, I would be pissed off with my end-of season party being cancelled, being forced to work in the office full-time or quit and other things like pay for your own transport to a work event. It only dampens moral. Especially if said staff have already moved away from the city as their own cost-saving measure.

TitianGerm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122197600#Comment_122197600

Martial was just an example. Rashford and Mount are on huge wages and contributed very little last season.

I'd start with lower base salaries for playing staff and heavily incentivised. Win bonuses being the main ones with clean sheets, goals, assists, saves etc also included. That way you reward performances on the pitch.

Mitch Connor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122197794#Comment_122197794

And you would just impose those contracts on the players regardless of their current terms?

TitianGerm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122197800#Comment_122197800

All new players coming into the club, all youth players signing professional contracts and all first team players at renewal time.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122197780#Comment_122197780

They have their own company setup called F3 so yeah it's some dodgy **** they are doing since they also use agencies.

https://www.fthree.co.uk/sectors/hospitality/

Necro

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122197853#Comment_122197853

Man City being dodgy financially… well I never! 😂

El Gato De Negocios

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122197826#Comment_122197826

I would hope / expect that is precisely the plan that INEOS have. For far too long United have been doling out huge contracts to players that don't deserve it or offering renewal terms to wasters just to "protect their value".

That's why we are in the current fix we are in. A load of past their best / not up to standard players earning the type of salary they wouldn't have a hope of achieving elsewhere. It's going to take 3 or 4 years to properly wash it out but hopefully we are at the start of that.

jacool

Imagine testing the nerve of players by saying "We will offer you X to play" as you say you want to come to play for us, even if another club are willing to pay X++. If you were signing players who say, e.g. "I want to play for Man Utd* " , surely you wouldn't have to throw stupid money at them. *other big clubs are available

Too many badge kissers at all the big clubs, who realistically, are just in it for the money.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122197882#Comment_122197882

They also built their new 24k music venue beside their stadium. Probably using it for more "revenue" generated. No concerts at the Etihad this year. Although got off to a terrible start

https://www.cooplive.com/pQDzS5/the-arena/the-arena

jacool

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122198103#Comment_122198103

Isn't that 24k capacity too big for their fanbase? Couldn't resist!

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122198114#Comment_122198114

Liverpool are happy as they are giving them a go with Tay Tay and Pink. I remember Old Trafford did it one year with the Stones and someone else, however it was such a disaster they said never again. The cricket club knows how to do it.

golfball37

Surely the workers have genuine health and safety concerns about coming onsite? They’ll need waterproof clothing for a start !

AdamD

Amazing how people defend this kind of stuff. United have replaced a Glazer with a British tax-exile Glazer.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122198516#Comment_122198516

Yeah I'm not a fan. However he is similar to Edwards. Most billionaires are assholes anyway. We have our own in JP

citytillidie

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122198156#Comment_122198156

I think Liverpool like Croke park have limited number of dates for music concerts because of residents but 3 nights of Taylor Swift and 2 nights of Pink will make or break them I say for future concerts. They did not have any last summer because they were completing the construction of the newest stand but the Pink concerts in 2019 went off fine

Flaneur OBrien

You don't get to be a billionaire by thinking of other people and being nice.

Deise Vu

Billionaires doing billionaire things works in the general employment market because there are huge numbers of potential employees willing to put up with **** to get stuff on their cv or to earn relatively big bucks.

Not wanting to start WW3 but are Utd fans that deluded that they think talented in demand footballers will accept bonus related, earn if you play / win contracts just because they always wanted to play for Utd? Seriously? They will turn down a guaranteed income elsewhere in the hope that the Utd shitshow will be able to compete with City? Do you really think their Mr 20% will recommend that?

Brace yourselves lads for the “morale is shot”, “atmosphere of fear” headlines coming soon. Billionaires thinking they know how to run things is a disaster for a football club. Take a look at Chelsea and don’t quote me City. They appointed the right people (eventually!) and stood back.

Id be going mad if this was to United. Wonder what they are thinking

https://twitter.com/FabrizioRomano/status/1795835051734708635?t=qSfY_ENmlFx7c0PW_Ql0uA&s=19

Mitch Connor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122198734#Comment_122198734

Erm, yes. Because even implementing that and reducing wages would still see us paying WAY more than most clubs, more than any other not insane club.

United could substantially reduce wages, and the base pay would still be higher than other clubs.

Martial was on 250k a week. WHY? No one was EVER offering him a salary competing with that. not even close.

Brandon Williams was on 60k per week. as a just broke into the team, maybe, young rotational fullback, on his first contract. That would make him a top earner at half the pl and most of europe!

No one else was in for Antony. He was on 20k a week at Ajax, and we offer 200k? WHY? Bruno came in on 80k at first, why was that model not followed? A substantial wage increase for him, but not an elite level wage in general. Room for movement.

I do think we would need to offer over the top for 'elite' players, in lieu of bonus' but the probably at United is EVERYONE is paid more than they should be, and that is most damaging when it is squad players and not star players, as it becomes very difficult to move squad players on when they are on big wages.

Unless your argument is united need to accept they have to pay 30+% more than anyone else just to get any players to sign, which I don't agree with.

In fact, I would say the united wage structure as it is, is completely out of step with everyone else. Whether that is Liverpool or Spurs or Villa or Palace. United simply pay way too much, and we didn't use getting rid of DDG and Sanchez to reset it, we set the bar at 340k with Casemiro and Varane.

Deise Vu

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122198770#Comment_122198770

I honestly don’t know how this relates to my post. I’m talking about future recruitment not the dross that is currently stealing a living at OT. How do you get the next Jude Bellingham to sign for 100k a week plus bonuses when he will be busting his ass only to see Rashford or Casemiro on 350K strolling around? No way will they, or their agent, contemplate that situation. Why would they?

Mitch Connor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122198855#Comment_122198855

You don't.

But you do solve your issues quite a bit by not giving kids 60k contracts after 1 appearance. Or average squad players 150k a week. Or Phil Jo es a new 150k contract that he makes like 10 appearances in.

And then when you get rid of high earners not earning their contracts you look to reset the scales rather than replace with another older player on north of 300k.

doc_17

In ways, UTD remind me of RTÉ. Martial is like Rte’s Brendan O’Connor. He’s on €250k a year and you have to ask, would he have turned down €125k? Who was in for Martial? An awful footballer to have at your club. Poisons the place.
But if people expect billionaires to come in and that having no implications for the lower paid, then I have magic beans to see you! As someone better than me said, most billionaires are a result of failures of social policy.