Maguire | he stays!

[Enigma_87]

Impact on this year's accounts from accepting WHU's offer:

+30m transfer fee
+10m wage savings
-26m asset writedown
-7m one-time payoff

= 7m net savings on the books

Impact on next year's accounts would be an additional 10m savings (due to not having to pay his wages).

Overall, a net positive, but doesn't free up enough funds for a replacement. If we're not expecting him to play more than a handful of games for us, accepting the offer is the best option.

The figure is quoted anywhere between 7 and 15m. If it is 2 year payout then it's basically 0 on our books.
Having said that, next year we won't receive anywhere near 30m in terms of transfer fee, so we will net negative if we don't sell him by the end of the window, which is obviously worse.

 

[Zehner]

As I said the issue I'm having is the balls to ask for severance package to leave and play for a new club. Yes personally it's what's best for him, but it's also greedy and narcissist thing to do to exploit the situation.

If Maguire is innocent in the situation most likely we wouldn't have dithered with West Ham for two weeks as he would have flatly denied the option to go there. Negotiating with the club to pay him to leave shows that he's interested in the said above.

The way I see it, in a negotiation every party has its bargaining position and ideally, you end up meeting somewhere in the middle with both parties benefitting. Maguire's leverage is that he is willing to see out his contract. Yours is that you don't plan with him and he has interest in playing. So every compromise means that there will be a severance package because if not Maguire is the only one making any concessions. You can't expect him to just renounce money for the wellbeing of a club that wants to get rid of him. The only thing you can do is negotiate - and negotiating is optional, you can't blame anybody for not be willing to negotiate or only doing it reluctantly.

As said, nobody would criticize a football club if it refuses to sell its best player to another club (well, actually some fans in here do when the interested club is named Manchester United and I'm willing to bet many of them are ones criticizing Maguire in here).

 

[Devil You Know]

"to be clear there was never an agreement in place between Harry and West Ham."

They did not agree a contract, so whether there were talks or not, they categorically did not go anywhere. End of story. Dont understand why you're in denial about it.

Jacob Steinberg said personal terms were agreed:


Whereas nameless "sources close to Maguire stress that personal terms were never agreed and the player did not speak to West Ham manager David Moyes about a move."

So either terms were agreed, or discussions never happened.

None of us know the full truth. But Jacob Steinberg is more likely to be correct as he actually put his name to the news and seems to have links to the situation. But whatever the case, there is nothing to suggest that

It wasn't just the money, he obviously sees West Ham as beneath him. They never agreed a deal and sounds like whatever talks there were on a contract didnt go anywhere.

I'm sure he's deluded enough to think he shouldn't be going backwards in his career. Would probably only accept a transfer that paid him more which in his case could only ever come from Saudi.

Because all we've heard is that talks either went well past that point, or never even got close to it.

 

[lex talionis]

If it's about money, what do you think the fee should be that Manchester United should accept?

That's hard for me to answer as I keep seeing posts that there are negative FFP consequences ito United f we accept too low of a transfer fee, such as 20m. I have no idea why this would be the case.

But apart from that, I would say 30m feels about right. No contract buyout or ongoing wage subsidy. We give West Ham or whoever Harry and they give us 30m and we're done.

 

[acnumber9]

Within your rights but it's still petty

I don’t think it’s petty to think somebody being greedy because he’s only receiving £7m instead of £15m is a bit of a dick.

Each to their own. I think he’s a greedy, tone deaf, police assaulting wanker, who isn’t worth half of what he’s paid and should be thanking his lucky stars he gets what he already gets.

 

[acnumber9]

Only that your anger stems from a misdirected sense of justice. He's not rinsing the club. It's hypocritical to criticize players for fulfilling their contracts when you don't want them around any longer but at the same time expect players who want to leave to respect theirs. So you're entitled to your opinion but if that's your opinion, you're wrong, plain and simple.

He’s entitled to no more than the difference in salary. People are reacting to him wanting more on top of that. Maybe you’ve failed to understand that rather than it being misdirected. That’s a you problem.

 

[DavelinaJolie]

But Jacob Steinberg is more likely to be correct as he actually put his name to the news and seems to have links to the situation.

Okay, who were Jacob's sources?

 

[TheGame]

I don’t think it’s petty to think somebody being greedy because he’s only receiving £7m instead of £15m is a bit of a dick.

Each to their own. I think he’s a greedy, tone deaf, police assaulting wanker, who isn’t worth half of what he’s paid and should be thanking his lucky stars he gets what he already gets.

You’ve got feck all evidence he’s requesting £15m other than the Scum newspaper. If you want to start believing stories and calling him a wanker for it at least back them up with reliable sources.

 

[RedDevil@84]

Jacob Steinberg said personal terms were agreed:

Who is he?

 

[adexkola]

You’ve got feck all evidence he’s requesting £15m other than the Scum newspaper. If you want to start believing stories and calling him a wanker for it at least back them up with reliable sources.

Irrational hatred > waiting for facts

 

[acnumber9]

You’ve got feck all evidence he’s requesting £15m other than the Scum newspaper. If you want to start believing stories at least back them up with reliable sources.

That’s true, but the facts we have are that it has fallen apart for some reason and it’s linked to his demands. There’s no more reliable source than the fact the fat headed twat is still at our club.

 

[TheGame]

That’s true, but the facts we have are that it has fallen apart for some reason and it’s linked to his demands. There’s no more reliable source than the fact the fat headed twat is still at our club.

If ETH wanted him gone, he would have told him privately that he’s not part of the plans like Fred. The fact he is coming out and saying he can fight for his place indicates to me that he hasn’t said that so Maguire May be inclined to stay. Obviously he’s speaking in public but you can always say it in different terms and people know what you mean.

 

[IamBurnsey]

He has to realise that he isn't liked much, does he think things are going to suddenly turnaround for him this season or something, like he is going to waste a part of career by staying here, I guess money speaks!

 

[acnumber9]

If ETH wanted him gone, he would have told him privately that he’s not part of the plans like Fred. The fact he is coming out and saying he can fight for his place indicates to me that he hasn’t said that so Maguire May be inclined to stay. Obviously he’s speaking in public but you can always say it in different terms and people know what you mean.

Can you back that up with a source? I mean we stripped the captaincy from him, will give the armband to just about anybody before we would give it to him, play Lindelof and sometimes Shaw ahead of him and accepted a transfer offer for him. I don’t think Ten Hag can be any more subtle about this. Either Maguire is being greedy or he’s stupider than he looks. Which would be almost impossible.

 

[TheGame]

Can you back that up with a source? I mean we stripped the captaincy from him, will give the armband to just about anybody before we would give it to him, play Lindelof and sometimes Shaw ahead of him and accepted a transfer offer for him. I don’t think Ten Hag can be any more subtle about this. Either Maguire is being greedy or he’s stupider than he looks. Which would be almost impossible.

No which is why I said ‘indicates to me’. I agree it would be best if he left for him and the club but we will have to see how it goes and if he stays, how he is used.

 

[the_cliff]

If ETH wanted him gone, he would have told him privately that he’s not part of the plans like Fred. The fact he is coming out and saying he can fight for his place indicates to me that he hasn’t said that so Maguire May be inclined to stay. Obviously he’s speaking in public but you can always say it in different terms and people know what you mean.

It's about time you understand that what's been said in interviews and pressers is not what's being said behind closed doors. I think it's fairly obvious that he's no longer captain and Luke Shaw is preferred at CB over him that he's not exactly fancied by the manager. Feck me it's not rocket science.

You remember when he said De Gea was a legend of the club and wanted him to stay ? Or when he said DVB/Fred had a lot of good qualities and can be of use to United ?...

 

[Irwin99]

Guess he's staying as a back up centre back.

United could be ruthless and actually relegate him to the reserves for the rest of the window but i doubt that will happen. Arsenal did it with Ozil (iirc) and Real Madrid did it to David Beckham, who to his immense credit, fought his way back into the first team. We also did it to Bastian.

 

[TheGame]

It's about time you understand that what's been said in interviews and pressers is not what's being said behind closed doors. I think it's fairly obvious that he's no longer captain and Luke Shaw is preferred at CB over him that he's not exactly fancied by the manager. Feck me it's not rocket science.

You remember when he said De Gea was a legend of the club and wanted him to stay ? Or when he said DVB/Fred had a lot of good qualities and can be of use to United ?...

I’m fully aware there are two different conversations in public and private. If that is the case then it’s strange Maguire is choosing to stay. He will inevitably lose his England place with no action ahead of the Euros.

 

[Redlyn]

How could he rinse the club when the only leverage he has is seeing out the contract both parties signed? And where is the difference to a club that refuses to sell a player/asks for an unreasonably high sum when the contract isn't expiring anytime soon?

A player can refuse to be sold, its their right, eg Mbappe, if PSG wants to bench him the whole season (crazy decision but) that would be their choice and a price he is prepared to pay.
Also a club can refuse to sell or slap a huge price tag on a player, again their right. However there are risks to keeping an unhappy player on a long contract - we had to let Ronaldo go in 2009 not because we wanted to but there is only so long you can keep a player whose head is gone. If you are fair to the player you would let him go eventually for reasonable price.

He is not rinsing the club by staying and honouring his contract, that is his right. But he would have been better off coming and saying he wants to stay to fight for his place. Fans wont like it since they want him gone for ages but it would be a different reaction. However, thats not why he is staying. He is staying because he has put a ridiculously unfair price on the table. This where the rinsing comes in.
He is allowed to do that, but whether its the club or player there are consequences to being unreasonable (greedy) and not meeting the other party half way.

 

[the_cliff]

I’m fully aware there are two different conversations in public and private. If that is the case then it’s strange Maguire is choosing to stay. He will inevitably lose his England place with no action ahead of the Euros.

Now if a player decides to stay despite you not wanting him what do you do as a manager ? You have to reintegrate him in the team... I know people would love for him to be dropped to the reserves and never play a minute but the fact of the matter is if Varane and Lindelof are out we're going to need him. It is what it is.

Want to blame someone for Maguire staying you can blame Woodward for giving him a joke of a contract...

 

[TheGame]

Now if a player decides to stay despite you not wanting him what do you do as a manager ? You have to reintegrate him in the team... I know people would love for him to be dropped to the reserves and never play a minute but the fact of the matter is if Varane and Lindelof are out we're going to need him. It is what it is.

Want to blame someone for Maguire staying you can blame Woodward for giving him a joke of a contract...

We don’t have a choice other than to use Maguire as a squad player and play when needed. There is no luxury to drop him to the reserves. The lack of CB depth is clearly an issue including the lack of young talent at the club in that position.

 

[ThierryHenry14]

Impact on this year's accounts from accepting WHU's offer:

+30m transfer fee
+10m wage savings
-26m asset writedown
-7m one-time payoff

= 7m net savings on the books

Impact on next year's accounts would be an additional 10m savings (due to not having to pay his wages).

Overall, a net positive, but doesn't free up enough funds for a replacement. If we're not expecting him to play more than a handful of games for us, accepting the offer is the best option.

So how does the book look like now he stays

season 2023/2024, 2024/2025
- 26m asset write down
- 20m wage
= - 46m
Is this correct?

So it is 7m revenue vs 46m expense over 2 years, correct?

 

[the_cliff]

We don’t have a choice other than to use Maguire as a squad player and play when needed. There is no luxury to drop him to the reserves. The lack of CB depth is clearly an issue including the lack of young talent at the club in that position.

Exactly, in an ideal world we sell him and use the money on Pavard/Todibo but if it doesn't happen it would be stupid to drop him to the reserves as like you said there will definitely come a time in the season when he'll have to be used.

Hopefully though, our defenders are fit all season and he doesn't play a minute, then Southgate won't call him up...

 

[MackRobinson]

I don’t think it’s petty to think somebody being greedy because he’s only receiving £7m instead of £15m is a bit of a dick.

Each to their own. I think he’s a greedy, tone deaf, police assaulting wanker, who isn’t worth half of what he’s paid and should be thanking his lucky stars he gets what he already gets.

Why does it matter to you? Are you paying him? Did you sign the contract? I just don't understand the vitriol toward a player negotiating for a payout on money owed to him.

Sure, it sucks he won't move on, but I don't see anything he's done wrong. It's the club's fault for offering that contract, not the player's for refusing to lowball himself.

 

[FerociousCorgis]

i mean based on how it seems with his usage towards the end of last season and moving forward, im inclined to believe that EtH doesnt really want Harry. He also isnt stupid enough to burn all the bridges on the chance he remains with the club after the window. Would love to be a fly on the wall with the various convos

 

[Big Ben Foster]

So how does the book look like now he stays

season 2023/2024, 2024/2025
-26m asset write down
- 20m wage
= - 46m
Is this correct?

So it is 7m revenue vs 46m expense over 2 years, correct?

Fair point, in my figures I failed to account for the amortization that would occur if he stayed, so in reality the net benefit from selling him would be even larger.

Stay:
-23m this season (-13m amort, -10m wage)
-23m next season
Total: -46m

Leave, assuming one-time payoff of 7m:
-3m this season (-26m writedown, -7m payoff, +30m transfer fee)
0m next season
Total: -3m

Net benefit of 20m this season and 23m next season.

Leave, with worst-case scenario of recurring 15m payoff:
-11m this season (-26m writedown, -15m payoff, +30m transfer fee)
-15m next season
Total: -26m

Net benefit of 12m this season and 8m next season.

Selling him and paying him off is a no-brainer.

Disclaimer: I am dumb, somebody please check my numbers

 

[Zehner]

He’s entitled to no more than the difference in salary. People are reacting to him wanting more on top of that. Maybe you’ve failed to understand that rather than it being misdirected. That’s a you problem.

A player can refuse to be sold, its their right, eg Mbappe, if PSG wants to bench him the whole season (crazy decision but) that would be their choice and a price he is prepared to pay.
Also a club can refuse to sell or slap a huge price tag on a player, again their right. However there are risks to keeping an unhappy player on a long contract - we had to let Ronaldo go in 2009 not because we wanted to but there is only so long you can keep a player whose head is gone. If you are fair to the player you would let him go eventually for reasonable price.

He is not rinsing the club by staying and honouring his contract, that is his right. But he would have been better off coming and saying he wants to stay to fight for his place. Fans wont like it since they want him gone for ages but it would be a different reaction. However, thats not why he is staying. He is staying because he has put a ridiculously unfair price on the table. This where the rinsing comes in.
He is allowed to do that, but whether its the club or player there are consequences to being unreasonable (greedy) and not meeting the other party half way.

As said, it is completely up to him as he's not obliged to give even inch of hid bargaining position away. Actually any offer is more than you can expect. If he demands more than the salary difference than it is because his exit is worth more to you than further employing him would cost. You have maneuvered yourself into this situation yourself, he's not to blame as long as he's giving the best he can. Not his fault if you wrongly considered him good enough for your objectives.

It is within his rights to demand whatever he wants as long as he's honouring his contract. As said, seek the error with yourself not woth others.

 

[AlexUTD]

It's about time you understand that what's been said in interviews and pressers is not what's being said behind closed doors. I think it's fairly obvious that he's no longer captain and Luke Shaw is preferred at CB over him that he's not exactly fancied by the manager. Feck me it's not rocket science.

You remember when he said De Gea was a legend of the club and wanted him to stay ? Or when he said DVB/Fred had a lot of good qualities and can be of use to United ?...

I think Ten Hag underestimated Maguire`s lack of self awareness.

 

[Redlyn]

As said, it is completely up to him as he's not obliged to give even inch of hid bargaining position away. Actually any offer is more than you can expect. If he demands more than the salary difference than it is because his exit is worth more to you than further employing him would cost. You have maneuvered yourself into this situation yourself, he's not to blame as long as he's giving the best he can. Not his fault if you wrongly considered him good enough for your objectives.

It is within his rights to demand whatever he wants as long as he's honouring his contract. As said, seek the error with yourself not woth others.

Everybody has rights. His right to demand what he wants. My right to boo him every time he steps on the pitch. Clubs right to hopefully rarely play him. So let's all just excercise our rights.

 

[CM]

Impact on this year's accounts from accepting WHU's offer:

+30m transfer fee
+10m wage savings
-26m asset writedown
-7m one-time payoff

= 7m net savings on the books

Impact on next year's accounts would be an additional 10m savings (due to not having to pay his wages).

Overall, a net positive, but doesn't free up enough funds for a replacement. If we're not expecting him to play more than a handful of games for us, accepting the offer is the best option.

Are wages definitely built into accounts in that way? If so, it's a bit of a mystery as to why Maguire is still here. The reasoning about not being able to afford a replacement doesn't really wash.

 

[TheGame]

Exactly, in an ideal world we sell him and use the money on Pavard/Todibo but if it doesn't happen it would be stupid to drop him to the reserves as like you said there will definitely come a time in the season when he'll have to be used.

Hopefully though, our defenders are fit all season and he doesn't play a minute, then Southgate won't call him up...

I think he will have an issue playing for England if he’s not playing regularly even with the Southgate bias. You will have Guehi, Colwill, Tomori and Dunk all playing regularly. Then again I wouldn’t put anything past Southgate.

 

[Big Ben Foster]

Are wages definitely built into accounts in that way? If so, it's a bit of a mystery as to why Maguire is still here. The reasoning about not being able to afford a replacement doesn't really wash.

See my revised post above - my original calcs were wrong

But yes, for FFP/FSR purposes, it's all player spending. Fee amortization, bonuses, wages, etc.

 

[Bondi77]

Maguire was a useful cog in Ole's machine for his first two full seasons that saw back to back top 3 finishes. That's clearly not inept for either manager or player.

Ole was then sacked after 5 PL losses into his third season. Everything that's happened to Maguire since then has been under Rangnick (an actual inept manager) and EtH.

You are not allowed to talk sense on this topic as you are heavily outnumbered

 

[CM]

See my revised post above - my original calcs were wrong

But yes, for FFP/FSR purposes, it's all player spending. Fee amortization, bonuses, wages, etc.

Interesting, I wasn't aware of that.

So in theory, Maguire's £26m book value and (worst case scenario, assuming Custis isn't a complete lying fat cnut) £15m pay off would still be recorded as a net profit of £9m as we'd be fecking off his £20m wages over two seasons and receiving a transfer fee of £30m from West Ham? It doesn't seem right, we'd surely be mental not to pay him off now?

 

[Redlyn]

Why does it matter to you? Are you paying him? Did you sign the contract? I just don't understand the vitriol toward a player negotiating for a payout on money owed to him.

Sure, it sucks he won't move on, but I don't see anything he's done wrong. It's the club's fault for offering that contract, not the player's for being tonedeaf and a greedy git.

Fixed it for you.
Not really owed per se since he hasn't yet earned it. That's why is negotiated. By the way why don't these contracts just have clear separation clauses to avoid much ado.

 

[glazed]

Oh well might as well keep him then. Let him warm the bench.

 

[Zehner]

Everybody has rights. His right to demand what he wants. My right to boo him every time he steps on the pitch. Clubs right to hopefully rarely play him. So let's all just excercise our rights.

Of course it is your right. It just makes you a hypocrite

 

[Cassidy]

It's about time you understand that what's been said in interviews and pressers is not what's being said behind closed doors. I think it's fairly obvious that he's no longer captain and Luke Shaw is preferred at CB over him that he's not exactly fancied by the manager. Feck me it's not rocket science.

You remember when he said De Gea was a legend of the club and wanted him to stay ? Or when he said DVB/Fred had a lot of good qualities and can be of use to United ?...

His contract will be terminated and he’ll get his 15m

 

[Big Ben Foster]

Interesting, I wasn't aware of that.

So in theory, Maguire's £26m book value and (worst case scenario, assuming Custis isn't a complete lying fat cnut) £15m pay off would still be recorded as a net profit of £9m as we'd be fecking off his £20m wages over two seasons and receiving a transfer fee of £30m from West Ham? It doesn't seem right, we'd surely be mental not to pay him off now?

Exactly. You have to remember his book value is going away regardless. Either we write it down all at once by selling him, or it amortizes away (13m this year, 13m next).

 

[TheGame]

Nice thread title change