Maguire | he stays!

Adnan said:
There's a big difference between the head of development and the head scout. The head of development is basically the DoF and Murtough was the DoF at youth level and he put in place the recruitment structure at youth level where he appointed David Harrison as the head of youth scouting to oversee the recruitment at youth level. Harrison was at Man City previously and his role as the head of scouting at youth level is very different to the role of the person who is the head of performance, which is another title which describes a football director, DoF, head of football etc.

And when he was promoted to the first team he was operating within a structure put in place by Ed Woodward who had Bout & Lawlor directing the recruitment with the manager also operating with his own people when it came to recruitment. So my argument always was that you had to allow him to restructure the recruitment structure at first team level and appoint his own people or you'll be judging him on the work of a manager and head scouts put in place by someone else. But most on here don't have a clue about how a recruitment structure functions and hilariously think that a DoF just goes about signing players on his own whim.

Little clubs like Hoffenheim and RB Leipzig operate differently to United but have the advantage of being financially doped up by billionaire owners who have put vast amounts of money into the aforementioned clubs to make them relevant. It's much easier to be a DoF under the RedBull ownership compared to United due to how wealthy the RedBull ownership is compared to the Glazers and the lower expectations that come with a club like RB Leipzig who have struggled to top Dortmund consistently, nevermind Bayern. It's not difficult to be a DoF at the RedBull clubs because the ownership has provided the conditions for the football people to thrive. And how they've done that is by owning 6 other clubs not named Leipzig and Salzburg which gives their scouts a greater scope to stock-pile talent in almost every continent in the world.


Paul Mitchell was a head scout who was given the role of DoF at Monaco and he did a below par job. He almost got fired in his first season and in his second season Monaco finished 6th and didn't even come close to making the champion's league.

I will support any DoF who is given the gig at United. But the DoF role isn't as straight forward as most of you guys think. A club can appoint me to oversee recruitment and I would bring in the young exciting players but would fans show the patience required for those young players to develop like what happens at the Red Bull clubs or Brighton who have a strategy that doesn't necessarily involve winning trophies but rather their aim is to develop and sell players for a profit whilst developing a proactive attacking play style? I don't think you would and in the current EPL where nation states and wealth funds are breaking FFP rules with impunity, it's sensible to re-evaluate your expectations under a ownership that doesn't want to win but wants to instead extract dividends and make a profit on their asset.
Click to expand...

Yes Adnan! Great post! We could do with your Boca LB wonderkid right about now.
 
Tyrion said:
Jesus I just saw the quote from Henderson



:lol: :lol: :lol: Cocky b@stard
Click to expand...
I do think people take that the wrong way. If he thought ETH would have seen him then wanted to keep him as the #1 it's obvious Henderson would have wanted to stay. He would have much preferred to be #1 at Utd than at Forest. The fact that he was desperate to leave says that he thought ETH would probably want to keep him as the #2 (which would likely have been true since he was clearly better than our other back-ups), and he simply couldn't accept yet another year sitting on the bench twiddling his thumbs. Basically the exact opposite of Maguire who is getting abused for being happy to sit on the bench collecting his wage.
 
MadDogg said:
I do think people take that the wrong way. If he thought ETH would have seen him then wanted to keep him as the #1 it's obvious Henderson would have wanted to stay. He would have much preferred to be #1 at Utd than at Forest. The fact that he was desperate to leave says that he thought ETH would probably want to keep him as the #2 (which would likely have been true since he was clearly better than our other back-ups), and he simply couldn't accept yet another year sitting on the bench twiddling his thumbs. Basically the exact opposite of Maguire who is getting abused for being happy to sit on the bench collecting his wage.
Click to expand...

I guess if that's how he meant it than I can understand. He is often called arrogant though and that quote doesn't help
 
Tyrion said:
I guess if that's how he meant it than I can understand. He is often called arrogant though and that quote doesn't help
Click to expand...
Honestly, quite a lot of things that he gets called arrogant for (not all) seems to me just him wanting to play and being upset when it doesn't happen. I definitely do think he does have some arrogance about him, but I don't think he's anywhere near as bad as what people make out.
 
MadDogg said:
Honestly, quite a lot of things that he gets called arrogant for (not all) seems to me just him wanting to play and being upset when it doesn't happen. I definitely do think he does have some arrogance about him, but I don't think he's anywhere near as bad as what people make out.
Click to expand...

Only to have look at that group photo of the lads out for a meal in preseason where he had the audacity to not smile and posters were extrapolating what his character was. He does have RBF, can't be helped!
 
I guess the loan does partly simplify the issue of wages at least for the current year... Otherwise wonder if there's an upfront loan fee (but those rarely exceed 5-6m, right ?) and an option (obligation ?) considered.
 
How does loan deal make any sense for United?

And still who willncover his wages?

he can ride the bench better than that.
 
Only if we can bring in a replacement should he be allowed to leave on loan. We already lost out on Pavard because this greedy bastard and his agent wanted more than the £6 million offered to settle the shortfall on his contract.
 
Loan would be a piss-take, we need to sell him. If he goes out on loan his value will only tank once he starts having his "performances"
 
Dream scenario...

Maguire goes to West Ham...

Bayern want McTominay so we use negotiations to get Pavard rather than Gravenberch....

Then use the money from the recent sales to get Amrabat from Fiorentina.

McTominay and Maguire for Amrabat and Pavard would be a great upgrade for the squad.
 
As the transfer window comes to an end…the Maguire and McTom stories will be stretched very thin right up to the the final hour countdown.

I’m sure United will be thrilled to loan Maguire out with West Ham covering 25-50% of his wages! yawn!
 
Adnan said:
I'll stick the tweet you've linked below.


Click to expand...


I'm sure seeing them perform better than United in the opening stages does this no harm. Surely the middle ground is a fixed fee with an obligation to buy after a few matches. If this gets going again and the sticking point is the payoff it's in the club's or the player's best interest to leak what the stumbling block is. If they're paying 30m for him, we can subsidise his wages for the next two years in a lump sum. Certainly better than having a player who doesn't fit the tactical style of play sat on the bench on 190K whilst simultaneously preventing us from getting in a defender who fits.
 
Adnan said:
Romano mentioned the below via a live stream.

Click to expand...

Whatever kind of deal it is, I’m happy with it as long as it means he’s gone and we can bring someone else in.

I’ll even accept them borrowing him for a tenner.
 
Obligation to buy doesn’t mean anything if player refuse to move which Maguire has already done. Next year he will have one year left and will seriously force our hand for a payoff to move on. At this point, anything else than a sale is bad deal for us. Pay him and let him rot in reserve to send out a signal will be better in long term
 
Bastian said:
I'm sure seeing them perform better than United in the opening stages does this no harm. Surely the middle ground is a fixed fee with an obligation to buy after a few matches. If this gets going again and the sticking point is the payoff it's in the club's or the player's best interest to leak what the stumbling block is. If they're paying 30m for him, we can subsidise his wages for the next two years in a lump sum. Certainly better than having a player who doesn't fit the tactical style of play sat on the bench on 190K whilst simultaneously preventing us from getting in a defender who fits.
Click to expand...
Romano is saying that United won't accept a straight loan. So i'd assume they'd accept a loan with a obligation to buy.

But the stumbling block is his wages and the Glazers won't give him the £12m pay off he reportedly wants. So it'll be interesting to see how things develop because it seems like Todibo has been lined up if he departs.
 
I would imagine WHU would cover wages to the same levels they planned to offer previously... So 60-70% give or take ? United covering the rest, probably, but it would be much less controversial within the frame of a loan : it's expected.

Let's be coldly calculating : He'll have better value next summer playing than riding the bench. He'll want to move next year at the latest anyway, in all likelihood.

The only part that is a problem is how to replace him and depending on the loan conditions financially that can maybe be worked out on MU's side.

They're the only takers we have, so if we want him gone...
 
Haha slabheaded prick. He can get fecked

I’m too good to play for West Ham and too good for a pay cut.

oh but actually I’ve just realised I’m 6th choice, the manager hates me and I’m going to lose my England place. So can I have a loan where I get to play and get my full wages paid. Meanwhile you can’t sign a replacement because I’m still on your books.
 
TsuWave said:
Loan would be a piss-take, we need to sell him. If he goes out on loan his value will only tank once he starts having his "performances"
Click to expand...

He was good at Leicester and in his first season here. The problems started when we tried to be more open and he got exposed and his confidence dropped. If he played for a more defensive team like he does for England, I can imagine him doing pretty well.
 
Adnan said:
Romano is saying that United won't accept a straight loan. So i'd assume they'd accept a loan with a obligation to buy.

But the stumbling block is his wages and the Glazers won't give him the £12m pay off he reportedly wants. So it'll be interesting to see how things develop because it seems like Todibo has been lined up if he departs.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's what I assume to be the case too. If reports are to be believed, they'd rather save 6m on one of the biggest transfer mistakes in during their incompetent era than pay him the 12m without the manager using him and getting no one else. Which may bring all sorts of problems with it. Varane's fitness cannot be relied upon, nor Lindelof's, and we're really well positioned to get one of those young centre backs to be mentored by Varane. If it's sensible, they're not interested.
 
pratyush_utd said:
Obligation to buy doesn’t mean anything if player refuse to move which Maguire has already done. Next year he will have one year left and will seriously force our hand for a payoff to move on. At this point, anything else than a sale is bad deal for us. Pay him and let him rot in reserve to send out a signal will be better in long term
Click to expand...

I'd imagine those involve the player signing a pre-contract agreement before the deal is concluded. The buying and selling club negotiate the potential fee, then the buying club and player agree to a potential contract and sign the agreement, then the overall deal is signed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.