Man Utd Thread:

[gallsman]

I disagree. Getting 50m for Luiz was great business. That does not mean that moves for failures such as Salah or Cuadrado should be regarded as anything else.

[NAG1]

What if you bought a player for £50M, it didn't work out and you sold him after a year for £45M? Is that worse than buying a player for £40M and selling him for £20M the following year? You guys seem to think it is.

In terms of judging the manager's and player's success on the pitch? Absolutely. They are, respectively, 50m and 45m pound players and are judged as such.. Not 5m and 20m.

In terms of assessing how well the club is being run financially and knowing when to cut its losses? No.

Besides Seanie, you always argue that United have money to burn (which they do), so you shouldn't give a shite about gross or net spend anyway.

Agreed, but United is a unique case in many ways. I want United to buy expensive players. I want them to use their financial strength to get back to the top ASAP. Gross or net spend - honestly it doesn't matter - it just needs to be high for a few years to rebuild. Some transfers work, some don't. When you can afford a few failures then go for it.

In general though you have to take into account money coming in. For example - Mourinho (who I can't stand) can get away with a lot of bad decisions in my book for stealing £50m off PSG for sideshow Bob.

Exactly, it is all relative. The new TV money floating about has caused the market to rise because no club is a position at this point where they are desperate to sell, just look at WBA.

The European market is always difficult and the English clubs will always have to pay above and beyond to get the top talent to leave their own leagues I think at this point this is accepted and they just get on with it.

[magpie seanie]

I disagree. Getting 50m for Luiz was great business. That does not mean that moves for failures such as Salah or Cuadrado should be regarded as anything else.

How can they be failures? They didn't get on the pitch!!!! Chelsea seem to own a lot of players they never intend to use. Maybe all part of the masterplan......

[STREET FIGHTER]

I disagree. Getting 50m for Luiz was great business. That does not mean that moves for failures such as Salah or Cuadrado should be regarded as anything else.

Agree with the sentiment above...

I still have no idea how that was managed and does not in anyway affect how terrible the following signings were- Veron, Crespo, Shevchenko, Torres, Mutu, SWP etc...

[NAG1]

I disagree. Getting 50m for Luiz was great business. That does not mean that moves for failures such as Salah or Cuadrado should be regarded as anything else.

Agree with the sentiment above...

I still have no idea how that was managed and does not in anyway affect how terrible the following signings were- Veron, Crespo, Shevchenko, Torres, Mutu, SWP etc...

I think every club could point to the signings that didnt work, the thing with Chelsea and probably any of the top 5 teams is that it really doesnt matter in terms of finance to them if one does fail.

[STREET FIGHTER]

I disagree. Getting 50m for Luiz was great business. That does not mean that moves for failures such as Salah or Cuadrado should be regarded as anything else.

Agree with the sentiment above...

I still have no idea how that was managed and does not in anyway affect how terrible the following signings were- Veron, Crespo, Shevchenko, Torres, Mutu, SWP etc...

I think every club could point to the signings that didnt work, the thing with Chelsea and probably any of the top 5 teams is that it really doesnt matter in terms of finance to them if one does fail.

Didn't mean to single Chelsea out.....it was just in relation to the Luiz reference.....

All clubs are guilty as some stage!

I just think that the manager should be responsible for the actual money he spends rather than depending on a net figure which masks the real truth.....

[rodney trotter]

Utd now have only 3 strikers. 2 of them 19. 

You'll win nothing with kids!

LVG is pure ket..................... A spoofer of the highest order, I look at the business Pellegrini has done compared to LVG and the united boss has been found wanting.

I do not think LVG will be at United come seasons end, he cannot get along with the players and he seems to be building for a future he will have no part of, the man is vastly overrated at this stage of his career.

Stew - that's a ridiculous comparison. Pellegrini has an established squad, one of the best in Europe, that only needed a couple of addition plus getting their heads out of their holes.

Van Gaal is rebuilding a club left in shite by Ferguson (and to some extent Moyes).

Moyes?

Red headed dude. Scottish but has good Spanish. bit googly eyed, but not too bad

Oh aye him.....how did he leave the club in shite?

He inherited most of the squad from Fergie and signed 2 players who were UTD's best players last year....

Those who appointed Moyes made the same mistake as Liverpool when they appointed Graeme Souness. No quick fix and during this rebuilding process Van Gaal might have been better off keeping faith with the squad he had than relying on Ed Woodward in the transfer market.

Fellaini and Mata were probaly Uniteds best outfield players last season. Both players signed by Moyes.

Van Gaal talks some shite. Januzaj has a big part to play this season  - and then sends him on loan for the season

Certainly an odd decision.....thought Januzaj was going to play a big role this season......

Surely was. Nick Powell named in the 25 man Champions League Squad. who hasn't played for United since 2012. And Varela... who hasnt an apperance.


GOALKEEPERS - David de Gea, Sergio Romero, Sam Johnstone

DEFENDERS - Phil Jones, Marcos Rojo, Chris Smalling, Luke Shaw, Guillermo Varela, Paddy McNair, Matteo Darmian

MIDFIELDERS - Michael Carrick, Daley Blind, Ashley Young, Ander Herrera, Nick Powell, Antonio Valencia, Marouane Fellaini, Morgan Schneiderlin, Bastian Schweinsteiger, Jesse Lingard, Andreas Pereira

FORWARDS - Memphis Depay, Juan Mata, Anthony Martial, Wayne Rooney, James Wilson

[Maroon Manc]

As someone pointed out earlier,the only people who should be worried about net spend is the clubs Accountants.
If a manager,in this case LVG,spends 250 million pounds on players then he has to be judged on the players he bought and what they cost to buy and not his overall net spend. You spend 60 mill on a player and he flops, you can't get away with it because he only cost say 30mill net because you sold someone else. He is still a 60million pound player end of.

I'm pretty sure those arguing against net spend being relevant mean so in terms of success on the pitch.
Obviously it's important to how the club is being run financially but it should never be used as an excuse to how  a team perform on the pitch.
That's all down to the manager and the talent he brings in and if that talent is worth 250 mill then you expect results.The net cost of buying those players is irrelevant imo.

All very simplistic way of looking at it.

Rodgers, Pellegrini & Mourinho have all spent more than LVG since they took over so based on this logic they should all finish ahead of United in the league.

LVG took over a team where it's best players were all past their best. Rio, Vidic & Evra who were all in the starting 11 when we won the league in 2012/13 were finished by the time LVG took over and needed replacing. RVP our best player that season was passed his best and Rooney too is well past his best. he inherited a squad with too many players who were not good enough so naturally a lot of players have been bought and sold hence why net spend is taken into account. He's bought one player who it didn't work out for so he made a big decision and got rid for a good fee instead of keeping him to save face.

Finishing 4th for United would be about right based on the logic of not taking into account net spend as Rodgers, Pellegrini and Mourinho have all spent more.

in what world would spending £250 million and only finishing 4th be deemed alright?

According to your flawed logic.

So tell me who should finish 1st, 2nd, 3rd & 4th based on money spent?

[STREET FIGHTER]

As someone pointed out earlier,the only people who should be worried about net spend is the clubs Accountants.
If a manager,in this case LVG,spends 250 million pounds on players then he has to be judged on the players he bought and what they cost to buy and not his overall net spend. You spend 60 mill on a player and he flops, you can't get away with it because he only cost say 30mill net because you sold someone else. He is still a 60million pound player end of.

I'm pretty sure those arguing against net spend being relevant mean so in terms of success on the pitch.
Obviously it's important to how the club is being run financially but it should never be used as an excuse to how  a team perform on the pitch.
That's all down to the manager and the talent he brings in and if that talent is worth 250 mill then you expect results.The net cost of buying those players is irrelevant imo.

All very simplistic way of looking at it.

Rodgers, Pellegrini & Mourinho have all spent more than LVG since they took over so based on this logic they should all finish ahead of United in the league.

LVG took over a team where it's best players were all past their best. Rio, Vidic & Evra who were all in the starting 11 when we won the league in 2012/13 were finished by the time LVG took over and needed replacing. RVP our best player that season was passed his best and Rooney too is well past his best. he inherited a squad with too many players who were not good enough so naturally a lot of players have been bought and sold hence why net spend is taken into account. He's bought one player who it didn't work out for so he made a big decision and got rid for a good fee instead of keeping him to save face.

Finishing 4th for United would be about right based on the logic of not taking into account net spend as Rodgers, Pellegrini and Mourinho have all spent more.

in what world would spending £250 million and only finishing 4th be deemed alright?

According to your flawed logic.

So tell me who should finish 1st, 2nd, 3rd & 4th based on money spent?

lol flawed logic......

I am not debating who finishes anywhere...your away off on a tangent.....that's your topic.....

I'm simply saying that a Manager should be held accountable for the actual cost of a player and not depend on the net spend to deflect the heat should any signing of massive cost fail....

That's were me point starts and finishes.....

[STREET FIGHTER]

Utd now have only 3 strikers. 2 of them 19. 

You'll win nothing with kids!

LVG is pure ket..................... A spoofer of the highest order, I look at the business Pellegrini has done compared to LVG and the united boss has been found wanting.

I do not think LVG will be at United come seasons end, he cannot get along with the players and he seems to be building for a future he will have no part of, the man is vastly overrated at this stage of his career.

Stew - that's a ridiculous comparison. Pellegrini has an established squad, one of the best in Europe, that only needed a couple of addition plus getting their heads out of their holes.

Van Gaal is rebuilding a club left in shite by Ferguson (and to some extent Moyes).

Moyes?

Red headed dude. Scottish but has good Spanish. bit googly eyed, but not too bad

Oh aye him.....how did he leave the club in shite?

He inherited most of the squad from Fergie and signed 2 players who were UTD's best players last year....

Those who appointed Moyes made the same mistake as Liverpool when they appointed Graeme Souness. No quick fix and during this rebuilding process Van Gaal might have been better off keeping faith with the squad he had than relying on Ed Woodward in the transfer market.

Fellaini and Mata were probaly Uniteds best outfield players last season. Both players signed by Moyes.

Van Gaal talks some shite. Januzaj has a big part to play this season  - and then sends him on loan for the season

Certainly an odd decision.....thought Januzaj was going to play a big role this season......

Surely was. Nick Powell named in the 25 man Champions League Squad. who hasn't played for United since 2012. And Varela... who hasnt an apperance.


GOALKEEPERS - David de Gea, Sergio Romero, Sam Johnstone

DEFENDERS - Phil Jones, Marcos Rojo, Chris Smalling, Luke Shaw, Guillermo Varela, Paddy McNair, Matteo Darmian

MIDFIELDERS - Michael Carrick, Daley Blind, Ashley Young, Ander Herrera, Nick Powell, Antonio Valencia, Marouane Fellaini, Morgan Schneiderlin, Bastian Schweinsteiger, Jesse Lingard, Andreas Pereira

FORWARDS - Memphis Depay, Juan Mata, Anthony Martial, Wayne Rooney, James Wilson

Who bought these players?

Who should Moyes have chosen instead?

Genuine question...

[Maroon Manc]

As someone pointed out earlier,the only people who should be worried about net spend is the clubs Accountants.
If a manager,in this case LVG,spends 250 million pounds on players then he has to be judged on the players he bought and what they cost to buy and not his overall net spend. You spend 60 mill on a player and he flops, you can't get away with it because he only cost say 30mill net because you sold someone else. He is still a 60million pound player end of.

I'm pretty sure those arguing against net spend being relevant mean so in terms of success on the pitch.
Obviously it's important to how the club is being run financially but it should never be used as an excuse to how  a team perform on the pitch.
That's all down to the manager and the talent he brings in and if that talent is worth 250 mill then you expect results.The net cost of buying those players is irrelevant imo.

All very simplistic way of looking at it.

Rodgers, Pellegrini & Mourinho have all spent more than LVG since they took over so based on this logic they should all finish ahead of United in the league.

LVG took over a team where it's best players were all past their best. Rio, Vidic & Evra who were all in the starting 11 when we won the league in 2012/13 were finished by the time LVG took over and needed replacing. RVP our best player that season was passed his best and Rooney too is well past his best. he inherited a squad with too many players who were not good enough so naturally a lot of players have been bought and sold hence why net spend is taken into account. He's bought one player who it didn't work out for so he made a big decision and got rid for a good fee instead of keeping him to save face.

Finishing 4th for United would be about right based on the logic of not taking into account net spend as Rodgers, Pellegrini and Mourinho have all spent more.

in what world would spending £250 million and only finishing 4th be deemed alright?

According to your flawed logic.

So tell me who should finish 1st, 2nd, 3rd & 4th based on money spent?

lol flawed logic......

I am not debating who finishes anywhere...your away off on a tangent.....that's your topic.....

I'm simply saying that a Manager should be held accountable for the actual cost of a player and not depend on the net spend to deflect the heat should any signing of massive cost fail....

That's were me point starts and finishes.....

arf, you're clearly on a windup here as you're clearly not that thick.

[shawshank]

so the net spend is not important in the criteria for a good manager. In my business the only line thet matters is net spend and profit.

[AZOffaly]

OK Shawshank, but that's obviously not a football club.

If your net spend is £0, and you make £100m profit in 4 years, but the club wins nothing, and ends up finishing 4th or 5th every year, is that a good performance?

[Maroon Manc]

so the net spend is not important in the criteria for a good manager. In my business the only line thet matters is net spend and profit.

Most of them are on a windup about net spend.

[STREET FIGHTER]

As someone pointed out earlier,the only people who should be worried about net spend is the clubs Accountants.
If a manager,in this case LVG,spends 250 million pounds on players then he has to be judged on the players he bought and what they cost to buy and not his overall net spend. You spend 60 mill on a player and he flops, you can't get away with it because he only cost say 30mill net because you sold someone else. He is still a 60million pound player end of.

I'm pretty sure those arguing against net spend being relevant mean so in terms of success on the pitch.
Obviously it's important to how the club is being run financially but it should never be used as an excuse to how  a team perform on the pitch.
That's all down to the manager and the talent he brings in and if that talent is worth 250 mill then you expect results.The net cost of buying those players is irrelevant imo.

All very simplistic way of looking at it.

Rodgers, Pellegrini & Mourinho have all spent more than LVG since they took over so based on this logic they should all finish ahead of United in the league.

LVG took over a team where it's best players were all past their best. Rio, Vidic & Evra who were all in the starting 11 when we won the league in 2012/13 were finished by the time LVG took over and needed replacing. RVP our best player that season was passed his best and Rooney too is well past his best. he inherited a squad with too many players who were not good enough so naturally a lot of players have been bought and sold hence why net spend is taken into account. He's bought one player who it didn't work out for so he made a big decision and got rid for a good fee instead of keeping him to save face.

Finishing 4th for United would be about right based on the logic of not taking into account net spend as Rodgers, Pellegrini and Mourinho have all spent more.

in what world would spending £250 million and only finishing 4th be deemed alright?

According to your flawed logic.

So tell me who should finish 1st, 2nd, 3rd & 4th based on money spent?

lol flawed logic......

I am not debating who finishes anywhere...your away off on a tangent.....that's your topic.....

I'm simply saying that a Manager should be held accountable for the actual cost of a player and not depend on the net spend to deflect the heat should any signing of massive cost fail....

That's were me point starts and finishes.....

arf, you're clearly on a windup here as you're clearly not that thick.

lol I will try this one more time........

Won't result to any personal insults in relation to being thick etc. but hopefully it will be simple enough for you to understand from the following steps

1.  Torres was signed by Chelsea for circa £50million and was a complete flop.....

2.  Luiz was sold by Chelsea for £50million.....

3.  Nett spend is £0 million....

By selling Luiz for £50 million should this excuse the manager for signing a complete donkey?
(Rhetorical question as the answer is hopefully obvious enough)