Transfer Tweets - Manchester United - 2024/25
- Thread starter mazhar13
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
That's what I'm assuming, yeah. Though they could've just taken up the option of the extra year in his existing contract for that. That would have given him more security and authority next year but without sending out a mixed message about thinking of replacing him then given him a (potentially) lengthier new contract instead.
I'm hoping any 'new contract' doesn't mean extending it to longer than the end of 2025/6, as the extra year on the current contract would take it to. As for me he's still on a bit of a 'trial' next season - another poor league season next year (and worse if we don't win a trophy) and it's probably time to part ways. A good season and you can justifiably chalk up that 8th place to the extreme injury list and fully back him.
Someone on a football forum should know it's not a daft question. But here you are...
It’s like the lord of the flies on here every day
We aren’t going to be going out buying a league winning team this summer as much as we all want to. Let them work and see how we get on. Anything and I mean anything is better than Woodward or the glazers having the ultimate call. Stripping away all the bad practice from that era is going to take years. Building a solid sustainable foundation is going to take years. We will make 3 or 4 of hopefully the right kind of signings and actually start listening to offers for players who we previously would have been trying to hold onto for economic reasons
We aren’t going to be going out buying a league winning team this summer as much as we all want to. Let them work and see how we get on. Anything and I mean anything is better than Woodward or the glazers having the ultimate call. Stripping away all the bad practice from that era is going to take years. Building a solid sustainable foundation is going to take years. We will make 3 or 4 of hopefully the right kind of signings and actually start listening to offers for players who we previously would have been trying to hold onto for economic reasons
Well then sell them/one so that we can get a ‘reliable’ one. A new LB may not be reliable either. Malacia was a new LB a year ago. We can’t just stack them up.
We may have to. I’d love us to upgrade Malacia, mainly because he’s not very good, but what we are very unlikely to do is just act as if he doesn’t have exist. We can’t just replace him while he’s now fully fit and still here.
Shaw is England’s first choice LB, about to play a major tournament. If he shows up in August fit, as he most likely will, what should we do with him? We’ll play him. While having a now fit Malacia somewhere, plus a new LB. And Harry Amass. If Shaw is as bad as is stated, we need to sell.
Shaw, Malacia and Amass are three LBs. A fourth would have been great last season. Just as a 7th choice CB would have been. That said, we can’t plan from that position. If we get a new LB, we need to sell one, and that will be difficult for the reasons you mentioned. How does it work with Shaw, Malacia, Kerkez and Amass, who is just two years younger than Kerkez himself?
Shaw won't be fit all of next season though? Or even the majority of it. His fitness is awful, and that won't suddenly magically change sadly.
Well yeah, obviously.
Stuttgart: Ito. Can play lcb and lb.
Shaw and Malacia will probably play very little football next season.
Like your optimism but sadly reality doesn’t care about hope and optimism. And the reality is Shaw is unreliable. Malacia suffered a horrible season ending injury and we don’t even know if he’s gonna be fully fit at all. And Amass is a kid, 16-17 I guess? He’s still growing and doesn’t have the physicality and of course experience.
You really want to go next season with these options? Because I can assure you Shaw would break down and Malacia’s fitness is uncertain too. We need a LB plain and simple.
Shaw will be guaranteed starter.
Guaranteed to keep the physios busy
Would we not be better served sending Amass out on loan also?
I think he'll be back up to Shaw next season, with Malacia going out on loan given that he's missed a full season of football.
Until he's injured after 25 minutes of the first game.
We sold Fernandez and had Regullion on loan this season. We should be able to have cover there in the event that a) Shaw gets injured or b) Malacia is no where near back to where he was. It would genuinely be mad to not have LB cover, even if that's just a LCB/LB like Lucimi or someone similar in profile. Amass hasn't even made his first team debut, to suggest we should go into the season with him as the first team cover for LB would be insane. I expect him to make his debut this season, but we should not be in a position where he's thrust into the side and expected to start regularly.
Amass, as very talented and exciting as he looks, has only really been playing at U18 level so far. He's had some U21 games in the 2nd half of last season, but I'd imagine the plan is to have him part of our pre-season and then for him to be with the U21's in the first half of the season.
After that, I'd expect a decision to be made in January as he probably shouldn't 'waste' a whole season in the U21 set up. It would be nice if he got his debut in some of the EL group games, but I wouldn't expect him to make many first team appearances for us next season and could certainly see him being loaned out at some point in 2025 - either January or for 25/26.
https://archive.ph/ Copy the link into there
How have I not knowed about this hack. Great share pal!
I deliberately didn’t mention Amass as he has just turned 17. He needs to develop at the right speed for him.
now that leaves 2 potential LB, neither of which hardly kicked a ball last season. We can’t go into a season just hoping that they’re ok.
Last edited:
£50M 
utter tripe
utter tripeIt's so crazy that we're unable to spend while City can do as they please (thanks to pretend sponsors) and then have the audacity to cry about it and try to sue the league because they want to spend even more.
This seems legit (multiple sources reported it) but reportedly improved a bit because we qualified for the EL. That's net spend, so if we manage to raise 80-100M in sales, I think we get to spend 150-175M or so in new players.
I’d like to see us briefing that regardless of our financial position.
£50M before sales sounds about right tbh.£50M
Factor in the fee we're going to get for Greenwood and possibly Sancho then we have big wages coming off the books with Varane gone and possibly Casemiro too. I imagine one of Maguire or Lindelof will go. The transfer budget starts to look a lot better.
Based on what Whitwell and Crafton's latest Athletic article stated, the £50m budget is their starting point for when they couldn't get into Europe. Now that they're in the EL, their budget should be higher, but I guess they want to start low to save some money along the way.
Maybe it's the FFP limit? result of spending nearly half a billion in the last two years
I know I'm talking to a brick wall here, but have you learned literally nothing in the past few weeks?
We. Are. Skint.
weren't there some experts here who claimed that we would be able to spend up to 400m?
Even if we did have a big budget I don't think the club would like to let that slip. That's an Ed Woodward move. Better to go into windows pretending you're on a tight budget than go in telling everyone you have a £200M war chest.weren't there some experts here who claimed that we would be able to spend up to 400m?
Every summer such articles pop up, every summer people debate the finances trying to act smart. Every summer we end up spending loads.
Hopefully this time we are smart in how we spend that money.
Hopefully this time we are smart in how we spend that money.
weren't there some experts here who claimed that we would be able to spend up to 400m?
We could but that doesn't mean they want to or should. We're apparently not very limited by PSR right now and it seems like that's the theoretical maximum they could spend.
The source is what we told players agents not what we briefed the journos, so that's why I was saying it seemed legit.
weren't there some experts here who claimed that we would be able to spend up to 400m?
If you had £400m to spend, would you prefer to have journalists reporting that to the world as you entered negotiations, or that you only had £50m?