Maybe the reason we are struggling to sell players is because we don't want, or aren't desperate to sell them.
But if the press say we are.....
But if the press say we are.....
Are high wages why we struggle to sell players?
- Thread starter LuisNaniencia
- Start date
I get the impression that Woodward was in favour of squad churn (his term, not mine) when LVG was appointed but having seen it in action, decided that he didn't want a repeat.
Not because of their wage. Sanchez and Lukaku were both supposed to be top players, not squad players, the issue with them is their level which is a different debate. From a wage structure standpoint it's a far bigger issue to overpay, the dozen of players that are not supposed to start, the players that you are more likely to trade, for two reasons the money is wasted outside of the field and it makes it more difficult to shift them.
Last edited:
Not a bad jump from £70,000 a week.
I firmly disagree that the relation wage vs level/performance is irrelevant. Its quite the opposite IMO.
If our squad players are on 40-50 or even 70k is pretty irrelevant. Shifting those numbers isnt going to help our wage bill (if it even will at all).
If we want to (which I hope) get three top players in this summer and put De Gea and Martial on new contracts: Its going to help feck all if we shift out our lowest earners against other low earners, even if the new one earns a ltb less.
We already have the largest wage bill in the PL, and that is not going to help in any particular way.
We need to look at the upper half of our wage bill if we are going to get top players in this summer. and then what is most important is actually who is performing to the level they are paid to do.
So IMO wage relative performance is actually the most important thing to look at.
I didn't say that, so you disagree alone.
High wages and average to poor players. Players who are also injury prone on high wages. Why was Rojo given a new contract when hes injured more than he plays? It will be a travesty if Jones gets a 12 month add on this summer because Woody thinks he would be able to sell him. Darmian was interesting Juve and Inter until he wanted 6 million euros loan and 6 million buy at the end of the season.
150k is what the ABU-media threw around when he renewed his contract. I thought I would use that just for arguments sake since someone stated that he was on 195k.
I would guess that his basic salary is more like 100k and the rest are possible bonuses and image rights payment.
The ABU-media loves to use the total possible salary when it comes to United. Sanchez supposed to be on 600k for example. Yeah, maybe he will be, if we win the triple again and he scores 30plus goals.
These numbers that are being thrown around should not be taken at face value, which was my original point when again; someone actually believed that he was on 195k per week.
Most top clubs operate much more with wages+bonuses nowadays anyways and you dont really know your wage bill until the end of the season.
Well you said that their level was a "different debate" than what wages they are on so... Well, its not really relevant; I made my point.
The managers are at fault for actually making use of said players. If a player is benched for a season, he will leave more often than not.
This thread is about why we can't offload certain players and there is a list in the OP. Your point is about whether Sanchez and Lukaku are worth their wage in relation to their level, that's two different conversation.
It’s because of the beautiful Manchester weather.
I get what you mean that the ABU-media are taking into account what would be wages after bonus and trying to portray that as his basic wage. Never saw it that way before but I always wondered how there can be so many different stories about players wages.
I have read varied stupid amounts for Sanchez wage but according this Manchester United wages before start of season he only earns £350,000/week.
Yes, we tend to give to much time and chances to players who clearly are not up to the level required and instead of selling them after 1-2 seasons we let them run down their contract and then when we want to sell then the choice is either have peanuts for them or let them on a free.
We are way to pasive with this, we should not renew failed players and accept a loss when it doesn’t work out and move on, but instead we renew the contract with improved terms and then we have a squad full of underachieving players such as Rojo, Darmian, Bailly, Jones, Fellaini, Mata to name a few.
We are way to pasive with this, we should not renew failed players and accept a loss when it doesn’t work out and move on, but instead we renew the contract with improved terms and then we have a squad full of underachieving players such as Rojo, Darmian, Bailly, Jones, Fellaini, Mata to name a few.
We awarded Luke Shaw 200k a week because he scored a fluky goal against Leicester ffs.
Who’s gonna buy him now? Nobody.
Who’s gonna buy him now? Nobody.
We cant shift players because they are on silly contracts with silly pay and silly terms and conditions.
Apparently it is costlier to live in London than up north yet players like Kane and Alli are on peanuts compared to the players at United up north.
When I read recently that Alli was on £80,000 a week it was laughable. Daniel Levy is a reincarnation of Scrooge.
We always get ripped off when venturing into the transfer market and pay well over the odds for very average players.
Give them life changing contracts and then wonder why we cant shift them when they turn out to be tosh or always injured.
Going forward all this needs to be brought to an abrupt halt or we will never win the title again.
Apparently it is costlier to live in London than up north yet players like Kane and Alli are on peanuts compared to the players at United up north.
When I read recently that Alli was on £80,000 a week it was laughable. Daniel Levy is a reincarnation of Scrooge.
We always get ripped off when venturing into the transfer market and pay well over the odds for very average players.
Give them life changing contracts and then wonder why we cant shift them when they turn out to be tosh or always injured.
Going forward all this needs to be brought to an abrupt halt or we will never win the title again.
Last edited:
Can't we just agree to pay a portion of their wages? That's what I had to do to get rid of Sanchez in FM17 - had to pay 50% of his damned wages.
Totally agree. The likes of Jones, Rojo, Bailly, Darmian should be at most at 50k/week, with the likes of Fellaini, Shaw, Smalling, Lingard, Young, Valencia under 100k/week. For whatever reasons we give our squad players double the salary they should get.
Lukaku is not the problem. He just went wrong and should be sold IMO, but when you spend all that money in a striker who scores 25+ goals/year, you have to pay him well. On the other side, a defender who is injured most of the time, and the remaining time is somewhere between mediocre and average, shouldn't get more than 50k.
How do you know what these players actually earn, other than (probably completely inaccurate) reports in tabloid newspapers or online? Also, how do you know what the going rate is for a footballer of whatever ability?
Wages are driven by the market and circumstance. A player with options amongst top clubs, or who's contract is due to or has expired can obviously command more. Similarly, a player who's contract is expiring can probably get a decent deal at his current club since it's likely that club will need to spend a transfer fee to get a replacement. Whilst the footballing acumen of the clubs management may well be questionable, and that of course has ramifications, the clubs is generally very financially savvy.
One thing I would say is that having had sight of a contract of a player who was at a decent club in the Championship but who was by no means a star, footballers earn a lot of money, even that far down the pecking order, especially when bonuses etc come into play.
For me the reason why we can't get decent money in sales most of the time is because we're selling players we didn't pay that much for who haven't played well. Why would anyone pay decent money for any of the above (barring Lingard)? They're all players we want rid of for a reason.
Chelsea (as an example often referred to) are currently selling players with potential (the fella who Bayern are chasing being a good example) or who have already performed at the top level - Morata specifically, who has played for Real Madrid and Juve with significant success. Mata brought in big money because the year before he was their player of the year. as it stands, their squad players would likely fetch no more than ours.
Mainly yes, because basically only english clubs can pay wages this high.
There are numerous examples across the United Squad of players being on contracts too high but Valencia & Young both being on 100k a week is by far the worst case closely followed by he waged Fred & Fellaini are on
I think the reason we can't sell players is down a combination of things.
For example, the fact half of them are out of contract in six months, and that some of the ones we want to sell are really rubbish, is two reasons
For example, the fact half of them are out of contract in six months, and that some of the ones we want to sell are really rubbish, is two reasons
Who have we struggled to sell?
This place is weird... In one thread you have people wondering why we can't sell players, and in another we he people not wanting us to renew contracts so players can go for free.
Yep
And when we let Fellaini go for free he ended up being signed, by us.
It's like the caf is running the club.
Yes I do believe that high wages is the problem when we try to sell players. Not many would take a cut nowadays