Giroud to Milan for 4 million Euros is done apparently.
Chelsea 2021/22 - World and European Champions
- Thread starter duffer
- 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.
- Status
I still think City are always favourites because game on game they are relentless. The way of playing and consistency of play means they just sweep lesser sides away with their possession and attacking play. That's what wins titles, not necessarily squad comparisons or specific results against big sides, it's mowing through the rest.
Even if Chelsea make shrewd acquisitions that would be the way I see it. Tuchel still has to build that. Some games have been a bit of a grind. I wouldn't be surprised to see Chelsea in the mix but I think I would have to stick with what we've seen, there's little reason to think City will be less consistent. There's some reason to think Tuchel will improve Chelsea's tally but it has to be by a fair amount and City to drop off a little too.
Even if Chelsea make shrewd acquisitions that would be the way I see it. Tuchel still has to build that. Some games have been a bit of a grind. I wouldn't be surprised to see Chelsea in the mix but I think I would have to stick with what we've seen, there's little reason to think City will be less consistent. There's some reason to think Tuchel will improve Chelsea's tally but it has to be by a fair amount and City to drop off a little too.
That's a good move for both.
Thomas Tuchel need to challenge city. It's not like city will go away any time sooner and we can wrestle title with weak city. They will be here and have to question their credentials by challenging them.
Thomas Tuchel will get the upgrade he needed this window. Have to put the pressure on city from the start. That's the only way you can challenge them.
Tuchel have no excuse like bed in players like Lampard. He has the experience and have no pressure because he won CL with the same group of players.
Tuchel himself accepted the challenge he wants next title and no point in resting on past glory. Club want to win next title and he wants the same too. Want to improve the group by bringing in two or three players.
Honestly I liked his approach. There is no point in hiding behind we are not ready yet theme.
The 4M quoted is not a transfer fee, he went on a free. It is his contract for two years.
Chelsea with the bottomless spending bag again.
I will never not dislike financial doping clubs like City, Chelsea and PSG.
I will never not dislike financial doping clubs like City, Chelsea and PSG.
Why would we extend his contract in April only to release him on a free now? Seems odd thing to do.
Man United total spend is above Chelsea in the past ten years. The Net spend is almost double.
https://www.planetfootball.com/quic...-net-spent-per-trophy-over-the-last-10-years/
The extension was a clause that he could not go to another EPL team, but would be able to join any other league on a free. There is a good explanation and sources in the transfer tweet thread here.
Livramento must be protected at all costs. He's a genuine gem. I don't think it's that outrageous to be concerned about his pathway when he's only 4 years younger than Hakimi.
The good thing if you are a Chelsea fan and the worrying thing if you aren't is their xG (mostly because of Werner) is phenomenal in most games. As a United fan, my worry if we get a striker is will they still suffer from a lack of service and will we create enough for them to really improve us whereas with Chelsea it looks to simply be a finishing issue. They were a bit robotic in some games but the template is there, they know they can beat anyone and look to be adding players who can create/score if the Hakimi transfer is real. Liverpool were the same in fairness, they had a terrible season in front of goal.
@duffer
Any credible info on who your highest paid player is, and what they're being paid?
Seems to be the only obvious stumbling block to signing Haaland.
Any credible info on who your highest paid player is, and what they're being paid?
Seems to be the only obvious stumbling block to signing Haaland.
The numbers I have seen is Kante at 290,000 pounds per week and Werner at 270,000. It drops off a lot after those two.
Tbh, Chelsea is very tight lip about player salaries. I really don’t know of a concrete source?
And what is Haaland - allegedly - after? 500K? Is there any player in that side who could realistically demand anything close to parity? And of course there's always the option of high bonus clauses and a huge sign on bonus, to lower the base wage.
I guess it's not that far fetched, in terms of wages. Definitely think it's realistic in terms of financial might.
I guess it's not that far fetched, in terms of wages. Definitely think it's realistic in terms of financial might.
Chelsea reportedly offered Hazard 400k to stay so I suppose paying something in that ballpark to Haaland isn’t out of the realms of possibility. I just don't believe it will happen.
Tommy T. has a certain ring to it, don't you think?
Don't Chelsea normally just loan their kids out to get minutes? Having two years on loan getting minutes every week seems like a better idea than getting 10-15 trying to displace James.
Their attack is still rubbish. Their tight defence was suited to the cups but in the league you need more.
He should go on loan next season. He's outgrown youth football. There were rumours about Milan being interested in him. I was already not sure about Livramento's chances because of James but I could in some ways see a scenario similar to what we had this season with James and Azpilicueta. There is a way to accommodate them both if we're still playing a back 3 when that time comes. Hakimi kills that idea dead though.
I'm not saying don't buy Hakimi because of Livramento. I personally wouldn't, but whatever. If we buy him I'm going to enjoy watching him. I'm just saying being concerned about Livramento who would now have two outstanding players in his path is completely understandable.
Stop crying. United has tons of cash but the Glazers don’t wanna spend.
We need the squad and have to upgrade the squad as much as we can. We failed twice in decade to build on from winning titles. Hopefully board learnt the lesson this time around.
Mourinho title winning season and conte title winning season both time we opted for grade b signings. We failed to bring one astute signing to upgrade starting 11 from those seasons. It was clearly evident the following seasons we were no where near challenging the team who went onto win the title.
If hakimi is manager s choice so be it.
Completely irrelevant.
Your 'club' and the other bunch of plastics across the city have destroyed football and it will never hold the same value as it ever did because of the sheer scale of financial cheating since 2003/2008. You have literally no argument against that. Football would be better for the other thousands of clubs in the pyramid if City and Chelsea ceased to exist. Sickening plastic fans of those two 'clubs' trying to justify it make absolutely no difference. End of conversation.
This is why I come here. It's always amusing when a fan of the supposed most supported club in the World is talking about plastic fans.So I guess basically if Chelsea and City ceased to exist then United might probably be relevant in elite football circles again?
It's a good thing I'm not advocating for filling the squad with Bakayokos and Zappacostas then. I'm not saying don't upgrade the squad. By all means, buy Haaland or Rice or Sancho or whoever else has captured the imagination of the board and the fanbase. But let's also keep in mind and protect the development of the standout players in the academy.
Crustanoid: "You plastic scum have ruined football with your vile massive spending!!" *goes back to checking updates on United spending 100m on Sancho..*
@Crustanoid judging by your last 2 pages of most recent posts, I think you need to destress. Have a nice relaxing bath and go wash those legs of yours.
Ofcourse have to keep in mind youngsters need to give pathways to first team but need to have the environment to bring youngsters.
That will only happen if we are winning matches before 60 minutes comfortably to bring in youngsters. Yes they will get occasional league Cup run but that's never be comparable to premier league experience.
We also need to challenge against some great squads too like city united Liverpool. They were relentless in their title wins. Without squad quality we won't be near them. If Tuchel wants him I hope board will bring him in.
I have already said I have no problems with buying players to challenge City. But if we have a potential star player coming through in a particular position, buying a young ready-made star player in that very position is doing the opposite of providing a pathway.
Yes, according Understat, Chelsea had 42.74 expected points in the last 19 matches, the highest in the EPL in this period.
We try and have two players for every position anyway though. And those 'potential star players' often quickly slip away. CHO and RLC spring to mind.
There is really no need to have an argument. Man Utd are bigger spenders. This wailing and teeth gnashing because your club does not win anything is much like a girl who flies into a rage because a more popular girl moved in next door. It is strange and sad. I’m not sure how you can enjoy the sport with this mind set?
Hakimi would arguably be our best RWB. Livramento out on loan for 2 yrs would be fine.
The ironic thing is not long back he admitted he only "supports" United due to the trophy haul and his definition of "proper clubs" are ones who have loads of trophies, which actually makes him the biggest plastic of the lot
Actually it is good for football and EPL to have external investment to clubs like Man City, Chelsea, Everton, Leicester to challenge Man Utd. Man Utd spent as much as Man City and double of Chelsea for the past 10 years anyway. I can't wait for the Saudi's Newcastle take over.
We make our own money. We spend our own money. Mind your own business
It doesn't matter. It is external investment to build up the clubs. Otherwise no one can challenge the existing dominance of traditional powerhouses. Without it there is no chance Leicester or Leeds where they are today.
The richer owner/investor spend their own money too.
Of course it matters. Of course it's relevant.
Investment is one thing, living massively beyond your means is another.
It is their money and the increase values in the clubs since take over (Man City, Chelsea, Leicester, Leeds untied) justify it. How does the investors live beyond their means? do they borrow money from the bank to buy the club and get the club to pay for their ownership?
On that basis shouldn't the money you "earn" be getting used to clear your debt before it's used to strengthen your first team?
- Status