Author Topic: Man Utd Thread:  (Read 2832256 times)

magpie seanie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11778
    • View Profile
Re: Man Utd Thread:
« Reply #42795 on: January 12, 2018, 12:13:25 PM »
If Ronaldo had had some sort of 11th hour change of heart and decided to stay the club would have had to sell other players or come up with other means of raising cash quickly. That is a fact. The cashflow situation at the time was very, very tight.

I don't know why this stuff is so hard for people to grasp.

Il Bomber Destro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3037
    • View Profile
Re: Man Utd Thread:
« Reply #42796 on: January 12, 2018, 12:15:49 PM »
If Ronaldo had had some sort of 11th hour change of heart and decided to stay the club would have had to sell other players or come up with other means of raising cash quickly. That is a fact. The cashflow situation at the time was very, very tight.

I don't know why this stuff is so hard for people to grasp.

That is conjecture, not fact.

Maroon Manc

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2156
    • View Profile
Re: Man Utd Thread:
« Reply #42797 on: January 12, 2018, 12:16:52 PM »
If Ronaldo had had some sort of 11th hour change of heart and decided to stay the club would have had to sell other players or come up with other means of raising cash quickly. That is a fact. The cashflow situation at the time was very, very tight.

I don't know why this stuff is so hard for people to grasp.

We're wasting our time.

All the evidence is there in the accounts and with Fergie's lack of spending to back up the theory.

Spending 100m back from 09 to 11 would have saved the Glazers spending 300m since Fergie left.

Geoff Tipps

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1624
    • View Profile
Re: Man Utd Thread:
« Reply #42798 on: January 12, 2018, 12:20:01 PM »
United are spending big money in a panic in the last few years to attempt to make up for the lack of investment in the 2005 to 2012 period (while the future of the club was placed in jeopardy by massive debt and interest payments). To say, as you did, that

Quote
United are one of the highest spending clubs in the world since the Glazers took control, consistently


is completely and utterly false. They have been high spenders in recent seasons and that has brought the average up over the period. You used the word "consistently" which the facts have clearly proven to not be the case.

Hope you're not embarrassed.

In 2005-2012, United won 4 titles, 1 CL and made 2 other CL finals. So why spend for spending sake?

During periods of dominance clubs have less need to spend, that's reality and you can check it out with Madrid and Barcelona. Madrid have now gone through 2 seasons of negative transfer spends after winning 3 CLs in a row. It's common and not unique for United, the facts continue to contradict the argument you are putting forward.

And when they don't continue spending the dominance ends!
Madrid have won 2 in a row but don't let facts get in your way!!

United never failed to spend, in fact they have spent a bucketload since they last won the league, they have just done it very poorly.

I can't believe I'm standing up for United but the point is that they stopped spending heavily when they were dominant.
You're right they have spent sh*tloads recently but the damage was done in the late Fergie years when the spending dropped off. Since then it's been a scatter gun approach
to transfers and they are reaping the rewards now!

Il Bomber Destro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3037
    • View Profile
Re: Man Utd Thread:
« Reply #42799 on: January 12, 2018, 12:20:21 PM »
If Ronaldo had had some sort of 11th hour change of heart and decided to stay the club would have had to sell other players or come up with other means of raising cash quickly. That is a fact. The cashflow situation at the time was very, very tight.

I don't know why this stuff is so hard for people to grasp.

We're wasting our time.

All the evidence is there in the accounts and with Fergie's lack of spending to back up the theory.

Spending 100m back from 09 to 11 would have saved the Glazers spending 300m since Fergie left.

Would it?

Spending 300m in the last few years hasn't help. You fail to be grasping that poor investment seems to be the problem rather than lack of investment.

magpie seanie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11778
    • View Profile
Re: Man Utd Thread:
« Reply #42800 on: January 12, 2018, 12:20:38 PM »
You're correct MM. United slipping from being a club in contention for winning things has meant even more exorbitant fees, attracting the "wrong" type of player (in desperation to get talent in), and having to suck up to scum like Jose and his mate the superagent. And United aren't out of that particularly disgusting woods yet either - far from it.

Bomber - if you do not understand that it is a fact please have a look at United's accounts.

Il Bomber Destro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3037
    • View Profile
Re: Man Utd Thread:
« Reply #42801 on: January 12, 2018, 12:22:36 PM »
United are spending big money in a panic in the last few years to attempt to make up for the lack of investment in the 2005 to 2012 period (while the future of the club was placed in jeopardy by massive debt and interest payments). To say, as you did, that

Quote
United are one of the highest spending clubs in the world since the Glazers took control, consistently


is completely and utterly false. They have been high spenders in recent seasons and that has brought the average up over the period. You used the word "consistently" which the facts have clearly proven to not be the case.

Hope you're not embarrassed.

In 2005-2012, United won 4 titles, 1 CL and made 2 other CL finals. So why spend for spending sake?

During periods of dominance clubs have less need to spend, that's reality and you can check it out with Madrid and Barcelona. Madrid have now gone through 2 seasons of negative transfer spends after winning 3 CLs in a row. It's common and not unique for United, the facts continue to contradict the argument you are putting forward.

And when they don't continue spending the dominance ends!
Madrid have won 2 in a row but don't let facts get in your way!!

United never failed to spend, in fact they have spent a bucketload since they last won the league, they have just done it very poorly.

I can't believe I'm standing up for United but the point is that they stopped spending heavily when they were dominant.
You're right they have spent sh*tloads recently but the damage was done in the late Fergie years when the spending dropped off. Since then it's been a scatter gun approach
to transfers and they are reaping the rewards now!
[/quote

Ferguson's trasfer business in his latter years was hardly that inspiring, he paid way over the odds for fairly limited players from within an overpriced market in the EPL. He splashed a massive fee on Van Persie who would have been available on a free the year after that was short termism. Maybe people should look elsewhere rather than the strawmen they have made in the Glazers.

NAG1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4173
    • View Profile
Re: Man Utd Thread:
« Reply #42802 on: January 12, 2018, 01:17:03 PM »
Missing the fact that RvP picked up a winners medal? And was on fire for a good part of that season.

magpie seanie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11778
    • View Profile
Re: Man Utd Thread:
« Reply #42803 on: January 12, 2018, 01:18:24 PM »
Missing the fact that RvP picked up a winners medal? And was on fire for a good part of that season.


Scored a lot of goals and United clearly wouldn't have won that league without him. There are loads of examples of bad spending but that isn't one of them.

Bord na Mona man

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1757
    • View Profile
    • Uibhfhaili.com
Re: Man Utd Thread:
« Reply #42804 on: January 12, 2018, 01:22:51 PM »
If Ronaldo had had some sort of 11th hour change of heart and decided to stay the club would have had to sell other players or come up with other means of raising cash quickly. That is a fact. The cashflow situation at the time was very, very tight.

I don't know why this stuff is so hard for people to grasp.

We're wasting our time.

All the evidence is there in the accounts and with Fergie's lack of spending to back up the theory.

Spending 100m back from 09 to 11 would have saved the Glazers spending 300m since Fergie left.
Aye, but 100m back then roughly equates to 300m in today's transfer market. A 24 year old Cristiano Ronaldo would sell for around the 300m mark nowadays.

Il Bomber Destro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3037
    • View Profile
Re: Man Utd Thread:
« Reply #42805 on: January 12, 2018, 02:05:19 PM »
Missing the fact that RvP picked up a winners medal? And was on fire for a good part of that season.

As I said it was short-termism, you got one good season out of him. I think it was a bad use of funds.

TabClear

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1183
    • View Profile
Re: Man Utd Thread:
« Reply #42806 on: January 12, 2018, 02:10:19 PM »
You're correct MM. United slipping from being a club in contention for winning things has meant even more exorbitant fees, attracting the "wrong" type of player (in desperation to get talent in), and having to suck up to scum like Jose and his mate the superagent. And United aren't out of that particularly disgusting woods yet either - far from it.

Bomber - if you do not understand that it is a fact please have a look at United's accounts.

These leeches need to be reeled in. I'm all for fair pay for services provided but agents fees and influence has got out of control with the likes of Pogba's deal. The Barkley deal to Chelsea stinks as well. Unfortunately unless all the big clubs take a united approach to this the backhanders and side deals will continue which only benefits the agent. Not the clubs, fans or even players in most cases.

Il Bomber Destro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3037
    • View Profile
Re: Man Utd Thread:
« Reply #42807 on: January 12, 2018, 02:22:16 PM »
You're correct MM. United slipping from being a club in contention for winning things has meant even more exorbitant fees, attracting the "wrong" type of player (in desperation to get talent in), and having to suck up to scum like Jose and his mate the superagent. And United aren't out of that particularly disgusting woods yet either - far from it.

Bomber - if you do not understand that it is a fact please have a look at United's accounts.

These leeches need to be reeled in. I'm all for fair pay for services provided but agents fees and influence has got out of control with the likes of Pogba's deal. The Barkley deal to Chelsea stinks as well. Unfortunately unless all the big clubs take a united approach to this the backhanders and side deals will continue which only benefits the agent. Not the clubs, fans or even players in most cases.

Didn't Ferguson have a lot of dodgy deals involving his son as an agent?

magpie seanie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11778
    • View Profile
Re: Man Utd Thread:
« Reply #42808 on: January 12, 2018, 02:31:47 PM »
You're correct MM. United slipping from being a club in contention for winning things has meant even more exorbitant fees, attracting the "wrong" type of player (in desperation to get talent in), and having to suck up to scum like Jose and his mate the superagent. And United aren't out of that particularly disgusting woods yet either - far from it.

Bomber - if you do not understand that it is a fact please have a look at United's accounts.

These leeches need to be reeled in. I'm all for fair pay for services provided but agents fees and influence has got out of control with the likes of Pogba's deal. The Barkley deal to Chelsea stinks as well. Unfortunately unless all the big clubs take a united approach to this the backhanders and side deals will continue which only benefits the agent. Not the clubs, fans or even players in most cases.

Didn't Ferguson have a lot of dodgy deals involving his son as an agent?


Go on. You tell us.

Il Bomber Destro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3037
    • View Profile
Re: Man Utd Thread:
« Reply #42809 on: January 12, 2018, 02:36:36 PM »
You're correct MM. United slipping from being a club in contention for winning things has meant even more exorbitant fees, attracting the "wrong" type of player (in desperation to get talent in), and having to suck up to scum like Jose and his mate the superagent. And United aren't out of that particularly disgusting woods yet either - far from it.

Bomber - if you do not understand that it is a fact please have a look at United's accounts.

These leeches need to be reeled in. I'm all for fair pay for services provided but agents fees and influence has got out of control with the likes of Pogba's deal. The Barkley deal to Chelsea stinks as well. Unfortunately unless all the big clubs take a united approach to this the backhanders and side deals will continue which only benefits the agent. Not the clubs, fans or even players in most cases.

Didn't Ferguson have a lot of dodgy deals involving his son as an agent?


Go on. You tell us.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2004/may/26/newsstory.sport3