ALL post Rooney transfer and policy funding discussion(NO player speculation allowed)

VoetbalWizard said:
this argument only holds water if he's going to barca or madrid.

otherwise its shit.

lets see where you end up.
Click to expand...

Even then it doesnt. When have we ever competed with Madrid for transfers? Its always been the case. If Madrid are in for the same player as we are it just doesnt happen
 
Twigginater said:
I can't believe I'm getting criticised for this.

Our top player has said it's down to ambition. His story holds up. If he said he wanted to leave last season, why has he started every game until a few weeks ago. When he said he wanted to meet Gill.

Our club squad at the moment is competitive. That is true. We have possibly the best in the league.

However, we need massive investment, and if Rooneys said we aren't going to get that and is willing to leave the club, why do you all suddenly assume he's wrong.
Click to expand...

Rooney should put his own house in order before criticizing Manchester United? WHO lacks a discipline that is essential for world-class players? WHO has managed only one really consistently good season in six years? WHO needs weeks at the beginning of a season before finding his form? WHO doesn't look after his body and fitness? Basically he can just sod off.

An English club will always attract less players than let's say Real Madrid or Barcelona. It's because those clubs are adored in continental Europe. But if we are willing to invest money, we'll have more than enough world-class player to choose from.

I cried when Ronaldo left, I cried when Becks left, I cried when Ruud left. But I'm not that bothered at all by Rooney's departure. He's a brilliant player but he is replacable - replacable by even much better players or players with much more potential.
 
I didn't expect Rooney to say anything difference, wouldn't look good if he admitted it was about money.

My gut feeling is that it's still all about money, but I could be wrong, I don't really know for sure. Last week Rooney's PR people where saying there had been a breakdown between Ferguson and Rooney. That didn't go down to well, not many people believed them, so Rooney now says he has never had a problem with Ferguson and it's about lack of ambition.

Rooney is right that there has been a lack of investment in the squad under the Glazers, we have relied to long on players in the twilight of their careers. I believe he's wrong about lack of ambition. Hopefully this is a wake up call and will force United to spend some of the money in the bank in the next couple of transfer windows.

Even if they do spend a lot of money I can't see them going after many players that are considered the world class or the finished article, that's never really been the United way. It will be players in their early to mid 20's who have shown enough to see their potential and that are good enough to play for United now but will be developed into much better players while at United.

What really interests me is what assurances Rooney was seeking and what Gill actually told him.
 
Canuckred64 said:
What really interests me is what assurances Rooney was seeking and what Gill actually told him.
Click to expand...

100% agree.

The way Rooney has handled himself in all this is disgraceful.

But likewise, we do deserve to know what that conversation entailed.
 
Do people seriously believe, with our current squad and the competition around us, with or without Rooney we are strong enough to win the league and/or champions league? I sadly think not....interested to hear what you guys think.
 
Yeah right.. he's shown himself to a be an utter cnut with all that rubbish on the club not showing ambition. This club has always been developing great talents into worldclass players. If his interpretation on an ambitious club is as shallow as City's snapping up of all the players with ludicrious money, with none even have any love for the club, or regards for its limited history, then i say gtfo of Old Trafford asap. However, he shouldn't forget that it is precisely our philosophy that made him the player he is today. He could have been still at Everton, winning feck all had Manchester United chose to buy established stars 6 years ago rather than naturing his youthful talents.
 
Canuckred64 said:
What really interests me is what assurances Rooney was seeking and what Gill actually told him.
Click to expand...

He lucky Gill didn't say "feck off, our management and transfer policy is nothing you should be worrying about" (points at trophy cabinet).

Rooney has been playing too much FIFA obviously. It's sad that he hasn't realised what our club is founded on. We don't have a history of spending big every year, only 1 player over 30m and that Berbatov, Rooney, Rio and Veron were all around 20m with add ons up to 28-29m. We've always brought in potential and developed it, Ole, Schmeichel, Anderson, Nani, Vidic, Evra and more recently Hernandez. Hell, Ronaldo was only 12m. Rooney is the ultimate benificiary of our commitment to youth and now he's saying we don't buy enough established stars. He's prick.
 
SittingBull said:
Yeah right.. he's shown himself to a be an utter cnut with all that rubbish on the club not showing ambition. This club has always been developing great talents into worldclass players. If his interpretation on an ambitious club is as shallow as City's snapping up of all the players with ludicrious money, with none even have any love for the club, or regards for its limited history, then i say gtfo of Old Trafford asap. However, he shouldn't forget that it is precisely our philosophy that made him the player he is today. He could have been still at Everton, winning feck all had Manchester United chose to buy established stars 6 years ago rather than naturing his youthful talents.
Click to expand...

QFT. Every word.
 
Even before the Glazers we would still not be able to compete with the cash and the wages being spent at Chelsea or City.

So basically he is leaving because Man Utd never gained an Arab or a Russian oligarch. And that just saddens me
 
Randall Flagg said:
Even before the Glazers we would still not be able to compete with the cash and the wages being spent at Chelsea or City.

So basically he is leaving because Man Utd never gained an Arab or a Russian oligarch. And that just saddens me
Click to expand...

The pre-requisite of success nowadays. Football is dead - we live in the age of the plastic club. Feasibly a billionaire could buy Accrington Stanley and turn them into a top team
 
Redfighter said:
He lucky Gill didn't say "feck off, our management and transfer policy is nothing you should be worrying about" (points at trophy cabinet).

Rooney has been playing too much FIFA obviously. It's sad that he hasn't realised what our club is founded on. We don't have a history of spending big every year, only 1 player over 30m and that Berbatov, Rooney, Rio and Veron were all around 20m with add ons up to 28-29m. We've always brought in potential and developed it, Ole, Schmeichel, Anderson, Nani, Vidic, Evra and more recently Hernandez. Hell, Ronaldo was only 12m. Rooney is the ultimate benificiary of our commitment to youth and now he's saying we don't buy enough established stars. He's prick.
Click to expand...

I agree 100% and if we continue to buy young players with potential and who are good enough to play for United now but will be developed into much better players down the road then everyone should be happy, Rooney included.

I am just curious what Rooney's expectations were. He didn't say we don't buy enough established stars or did he and if that's the case he's wrong.

But if look at the players United bought in the summer, Bebe, Smalling, and even Hernandez, their all long shots, they are not in the same category as a Schmeichel, Anderson, Nani, Vidic, or an Evra.

I don't know what assurances Rooney wanted, but I know I would like to know if we are going to buy players like Bebe and Smalling or players like Nani and Evra in the next couple of transfer windows.
 
Randall Flagg said:
Even before the Glazers we would still not be able to compete with the cash and the wages being spent at Chelsea or City.

So basically he is leaving because Man Utd never gained an Arab or a Russian oligarch. And that just saddens me
Click to expand...
Good points, money not football talks
 
FAO Fred and others

If David Gill realised that Rooney wouldn't sign without assurances of future investment, why wouldn't he have just lied to him, got him to sign the contract so at least we'd have protected his value? I mean afterall, this man in your opinion is a two faced lying b*stard isn't he?

I get the feeling that Rooney's talking out of his arse to try to cover up the fact that he's a money grabbing whore but anything to beat the Glazers with eh?
 
Devil_forever said:
If David Gill realised that Rooney wouldn't sign without assurances of future investment, why wouldn't he have just lied to him, got him to sign the contract so at least we'd have protected his value? I mean afterall, this man in your opinion is a two faced lying b*stard isn't he?

I get the feeling that Rooney's talking out of his arse to try to cover up the fact that he's a money grabbing whore but anything to beat the Glazers with eh?
Click to expand...

In fairness to Wayne, I don't think it's just one reason for him wanting away. I think the financial benefits he can get elsewhere have definately turned his head but by the same token, I think our lack of investment in high quality individuals over the last 18 months has had an effect on his decision aswell.

It's clear that the financial burden on the club is starting to wear us down, it has been apparent through our activities since losing Ronaldo. It's not just supporters that become concerned about the direction of their club, player's do too, perhaps even more so as it's a short career, and if you feel you can be more successful elsewhere whilst picking up a bigger salary, most player's would do that.

Still think he's acting like a cnut living in his agent's pocket though.
 
Devil_forever said:
If David Gill realised that Rooney wouldn't sign without assurances of future investment, why wouldn't he have just lied to him, got him to sign the contract so at least we'd have protected his value? I mean afterall, this man in your opinion is a two faced lying b*stard isn't he?

I get the feeling that Rooney's talking out of his arse to try to cover up the fact that he's a money grabbing whore but anything to beat the Glazers with eh?
Click to expand...

The problem is, money is definitely there (and yes, a lot of it, if not all of it, is for spending on players). That is as much as Gill can really say. How that money is spent is not within his remit. That's a question only Fergie can answer and he can only really answer it around next April/may when he has had a chance to see exactly what the state of play is with his current crop of players.

Rooney is just talking out of his arse. At the very least, he should be giving Fergie and United the benefit of the doubt and signing the new contract. He can still leave in the Summer if he kicks up a fuss again but at least he secures United a better deal.

But, of course, that might not secure Rooney the best deal if he's thinking of doing that buy-out thing...
 
TheMancRedDevil said:
The problem is, money is definitely there (and yes, a lot of it, if not all of it, is for spending on players). That is as much as Gill can really say. How that money is spent is not within his remit. That's a question only Fergie can answer and he can only really answer it around next April/may when he has had a chance to see exactly what the state of play is with his current crop of players.

Rooney is just talking out of his arse. At the very least, he should be giving Fergie and United the benefit of the doubt and signing the new contract. He can still leave in the Summer if he kicks up a fuss again but at least he secures United a better deal.

But, of course, that might not secure Rooney the best deal if he's thinking of doing that buy-out thing...
Click to expand...

I'm sorry but it is. The order has come down from the top to keep our wage bill below 50% of our annual turnover, that means top player's on inevitable top wages are out of SAF's reach. If that's not Gill/the owners influencing SAF's transfer remit, I don't know what is.
 
WireRed said:
I'm sorry but it is. The order has come down from the top to keep our wage bill below 50% of our annual turnover, that means top player's on inevitable top wages are out of SAF's reach. If that's not Gill/the owners influencing SAF's transfer remit, I don't know what is.
Click to expand...

And how do you know all this?
 
Stretch said:
And how do you know all this?
Click to expand...

It doesn't take a financial mastermind to figure it out. All the young uns, punts, and unknowns we've collected over the last couple of windows are a by-product of this emphasis on keeping wages below the 50% landmark.

This particular wage-turnover percentage was used as a boast in the big sell for the bond issue, and I recall Gill waxing lyrical about it a while back.

It certainly explains the lack of quality, proven player's coming through the door in recent times, I expect we'll refrain from buying established player's until Rooney aswell as some of the old guard's wages are off the books at the end of the campaign.
 
WireRed said:
It doesn't take a financial mastermind to figure it out. All the young uns, punts, and unknowns we've collected over the last couple of windows are a by-product of this emphasis on keeping wages below the 50% landmark.

This particular wage-turnover percentage was used as a boast in the big sell for the bond issue, and I recall Gill waxing lyrical about it a while back.

It certainly explains the lack of quality, proven player's coming through the door in recent times, I expect we'll refrain from buying established player's until Rooney aswell as some of the old guard's wages are off the books at the end of the campaign.
Click to expand...

It is true that the wages have to be kept below or equal to 50% but that still doesn't mean that Gill is in a position to say how that 50% is spread about.

Fergie could have flirted Giggs and Neville off in the summer and made a nice slice to work with.

If memory serves, our wage % is at 46% at the moment which would suggest that there's something in the region of £12million to play with - that would be enough to pay either one highest paid footballer in the world or a couple of very well paid players.
 
Just been an aftermatch press conference where SAF says Gill has spoken to the owners and the matter will be put to bed tomorrow when he and Gill meet at 10am.
 
TheMancRedDevil said:
It is true that the wages have to be kept below or equal to 50% but that still doesn't mean that Gill is in a position to say how that 50% is spread about.

Fergie could have flirted Giggs and Neville off in the summer and made a nice slice to work with.

If memory serves, our wage % is at 46% at the moment which would suggest that there's something in the region of £12million to play with - that would be enough to pay either one highest paid footballer in the world or a couple of very well paid players.
Click to expand...

I think it's 48% with the knowledge that our turnover may not be as high in some years, that's the crux of the issue IMO.

I'm pretty sure the 50% barrier is the reason we haven't added quality, and is why we've focused purely on youth with re-sale potential. That being another directive from the top.

Re-sale value and salaries are sadly what we focus on these days, ahead of quality and ability to add something to the squad.

That is a result of the debt and the need to pay the interest rates, how anybody can deny that it's having an impact is beyond me.
 
Wire, I don't see why curbing wages is such a big deal. We've always kept our wages in check at the club. Even before the Glazers. Also, everyone always goes on about how wonderful Arsenal's financial model is and one of the key reasons for it is a strict wage structure. It's not like we can't pay a big name signing.
 
Stretch said:
Wire, I don't see why curbing wages is such a big deal. We've always kept our wages in check at the club. Even before the Glazers. Also, everyone always goes on about how wonderful Arsenal's financial model is and one of the key reasons for it is a strict wage structure. It's not like we can't pay a big name signing.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying it's a big deal, it's good business sense. But when wages become foremost in the hierarchy's thoughts ahead of improving a squad crying out for an injection of quality, that's an unhealthy state of affairs.

I don't want us paying silly fees and outrageous salaries, far from it, I wouldn't mind seeing us supplement all these punts and unknowns with a high calibre player now and then though, I don't think that's being unreasonable but the club obviously have felt that's the case over the last 18 months hence the inexpensive young arrivals and even punts like Bebe, Diouf etc.
 
WireRed said:
I think it's 48% with the knowledge that our turnover may not be as high in some years, that's the crux of the issue IMO.
Click to expand...

OK. You're splitting hairs a bit here. I have just checked the financial reports for year end 30th June 2010 and it states 46%.

No, our turnover might not be as high in some years, fair enough. It has just increased year on year under the Glazers but I accept that one year the trend may be bucked. The evidence so far suggests otherwise at the moment.

WireRed said:
I'm pretty sure the 50% barrier is the reason we haven't added quality, and is why we've focused purely on youth with re-sale potential. That being another directive from the top.
Click to expand...

You may well be right. It is difficult to prove at the moment. Some might suggest waiting for a little longer than two months before we declare the likes of Smalling, Bebe and Hernandez as "not quality" though.

If Valencia is not what you would call "quality" then you're a hard man to please, in my view.

Personally, when Fergie talks of value, I see no problem with bringing in a few unpolished gems and subjecting them to our training methods, coaches, fitness experts etc etc etc and seeing how them come out.

There may well be something to be said for buying ten raw diamonds for a combined £30million or something rather than one player who is supposed to be the finished article.

What if just one of them becomes the "next Ronaldo"? What if TWO of them come through?

WireRed said:
Re-sale value and salaries are sadly what we focus on these days, ahead of quality and ability to add something to the squad.
Click to expand...

Hmm... I am not sure that "re-sale" value is all we are about at the moment. I cannot think of any classic examples of us taking a youngster and then selling him on (unless you want to somehow crowbar Rooney and Ronaldo into that scenario!) with that as our specific intention from the beginning.

If these players come through and add quality and ability to the squad then they will be retained but if they don't quite come up to scratch then, yes, they will be sold on. I think it's a bit wrong to suggest that that is the sole reason why they were bought though. United has a strong history of youth. For whatever reason, we don't seem to be able to bring through sufficient numbers through our own Academy system at the moment and so we are having to look further afield for our "raw prospects".

WireRed said:
That is a result of the debt and the need to pay the interest rates, how anybody can deny that it's having an impact is beyond me.
Click to expand...

No one is denying that it is having an impact. £45million out in Bond Interest payments clearly prevents that £45million from being spent elsewhere but you have to keep things in perspective.

We are attempting to compete with clubs who are not running by the same rules. It is not solely about the fact that they do not have debts to contend with, it is about the fact that they do not have the laws of arithmetic and business to contend with.

They can spend more than they earn and fall back on their sugar daddy to bail them out - we don't have that.

You also have to remember that revenues have been increased enormously over the last five years and have largely nullified the impact of the debt - it doesn't impede us as much as we are led to believe but, again, it is because the likes of City can spend hundreds of millions more than they earn that they are able to attract these players and, worse still, they are making it harder for the properly run clubs such as Manchester United to compete because we have had to increase our wages to their silly levels to stay in the race.

Wages at United have increased in the region of 60% over the last five years.

Does that suggest that we have been curtailing our wages or have been forced to go a bit crazy in order to live with the Chelsea's, City's and Real Madrid's of this world?
 
WireRed said:
I'm not saying it's a big deal, it's good business sense. But when wages become foremost in the hierarchy's thoughts ahead of improving a squad crying out for an injection of quality, that's an unhealthy state of affairs.

I don't want us paying silly fees and outrageous salaries, far from it, I wouldn't mind seeing us supplement all these punts and unknowns with a high calibre player now and then though, I don't think that's being unreasonable but the club obviously have felt that's the case over the last 18 months hence the inexpensive young arrivals and even punts like Bebe, Diouf etc.
Click to expand...

Sir Alex Ferguson would beg to differ with you.
 
Stretch said:
Sir Alex Ferguson would beg to differ with you.
Click to expand...

I'm sure SAF knows our midfield needs addressing, even more so when Giggs and Scholes call it a day in the not too distant future.

My guess is that the club are waiting for their wages to come off the books before they bring in the high calibre, high earning replacements for them and one or two other's that have lost their way over recent times, cough Carrick cough, cough.
 
WireRed said:
In fairness to Wayne, I don't think it's just one reason for him wanting away. I think the financial benefits he can get elsewhere have definately turned his head but by the same token, I think our lack of investment in high quality individuals over the last 18 months has had an effect on his decision aswell.

It's clear that the financial burden on the club is starting to wear us down, it has been apparent through our activities since losing Ronaldo. It's not just supporters that become concerned about the direction of their club, player's do too, perhaps even more so as it's a short career, and if you feel you can be more successful elsewhere whilst picking up a bigger salary, most player's would do that.

Still think he's acting like a cnut living in his agent's pocket though.
Click to expand...

Things never work out the way you think.
I remember when Brian Poole dumped his backing band the Tremeloes saying that he wanted to go solo and advance his career- Poor old Bri never had another hit while the Trems went on out of the blue to string together a bunch of number one hits
 
I don't think anyone of sound mind can disagree that our squad needs at least one established players bringing into it. By established, I mean a player who is not a "maybe make it" but a certainty.

Scholes, Giggs and VDS are leaving remember.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.