He’s better than anything on our bench.
David Brooks
- Thread starter Zoo
- Start date
-
Nik (@Rood) and Imran (@Annihilate Now!) discuss United's fantastic win away against Athletic Club in the semi-final of the Europa League.
They also pick out the positives of United's 4-3 loss away at Brentford, and Nik reviews a day out at Old Trafford watching Manchester United Women qualify for the Champions League.
That's the point we didnt even go after him for 25-30 million which makes it madness if we end up going for brooks at 40 million instead.
So it’s not a snub then...
That is how we ended with this much deadwood at a first place. By buying "he is better than what we have". In this case it is even worse. We are buying better than we have on the bench. For the price of first team player. Ridiculous stuff.
Rotation player or not, when you buy a player you buy a player who has quality to play in first 11. And then he fights with another quality player for minutes. Madrid, Barca, Chelsea now, City, Bayern, Psg, Juve.....they all have at east 4 quality wingers and they rotate them. And our plan to compete are Brooks and James?
This would be extremely underwhelming.
Think people are being harsh on Brooks here. He looked exceptional in a not great team before he got injured. However, there has to be some type of discount built in given his injuries to make it worth our while. €40mn is a very high price to pay for a guy who's come off the back of a season long injury.
Agreed. Just another Schneiderlin that many on here were getting giddy about. Look where he is now. Couldn't even hold down an Everton spot.
Some fans (i hope that we as a club did) just can't learn.
What was our main problem this year? Lack of depth. So lets use argument; he is good enough for bench. By that we can sign Brooks for rw, Ighalo or King for st and lets say Rice for dmc.
And we start away game in PL with midfield Rice-McT-Fred and attack Brooks-King (Ighalo)-James. I would not bet on us.
Would make a great signing at around the £25m Mark. Any higher and I'd say we should look elsewhere.
We need depth across the pitch desperately. Young players with great fundamentals such as Brooks are perfect for that role, given the price is right.
Ideally of course he'd come alongside a top CB & RW within the next few weeks, but hey we know how slowly United hierarchy seems to work these days - this seems highly unlikely.
I don't quite get the outrage here from some.
We need depth across the pitch desperately. Young players with great fundamentals such as Brooks are perfect for that role, given the price is right.
Ideally of course he'd come alongside a top CB & RW within the next few weeks, but hey we know how slowly United hierarchy seems to work these days - this seems highly unlikely.
I don't quite get the outrage here from some.
Imagine next year that In Cl knockout phase Greenwood and Rashford are injured. And we play with Brooks and James on the wings (i remind you that James is bought and seen around here exactly like Brooks; good backup option). Would you be happy? Confident?
Brooks is better than James, and would be bought in place of Grealish at AM not in place of Sancho at RW.
been beating the same drum on here since 2013 my man. All these mega transfer car crashes that could have been avoided and all that amazing talent we missed out on in the meantime. Posters are obsessed with our status as a big club and where we sit on the food chain. Oh we should only buy prime developed players while the shrewd clubs develop them at 0 risk and major reward selling them on. We should always be looking for players with upside. Something to prove. Major improvement, Could gain in value, leadership qualities etc
Last edited:
He started out great at Bournemouth but has he recovered from the injuries?
It doesn't take a brain scientist to see we really haven't gotten much value for our expenditures the last few seasons. We really lack people with a keen eye for talent. It drives me nuts to see the kind of squad RB leizpig, Seville, Bayern and even lyon have assembled for very reasonable sums. 89M for Pogba with accompanying salary was simply nuts and I said it at the time. Not that he doesn't have talent but because he's not mobile enough across the pitch to make enough of a difference in top european games. Sir Alex, Klopp and Guardiola are all able to build very decent midfield's with reasonable amounts. The Main reason City makes no effort to bring back Sancho is because they know Ferran Torres is almost as good for a fraction of the price...and salary and I think Ole recognizes that and hence the hesitancy in completing the deal. Sancho is not as good as people here think...mainly because he lacks stamina and disappears for lengthy periods of the game. Eventually we need to move on Pogba and get a more mobile midfielder...assuming we can get a good fee.
£40 million for this cnut? 
Bournemouth are having a laugh.
Bournemouth are having a laugh.There is not thing wrong with the concept written here. The point being the fee being quoted, the reality of the situation.
Many of us have been talking the need for future replacement/rotation option for Matic, why ain't we going back for Longstaff now? He was one of our main targets last summer, no? So looking like our recruitment ain't 100% sure themselves. Our punt purchase last summer ain't getting much trust to back up the starting XI toward the end of the season.
This fee for Brooks sounds like it has PL experience tax on it aka Longstaff. Different to Championship punt Dan James.
The strange part is that Brooks played more in 18/19 season yet we showed no interest, even if we're talking about him filling #10 or right attacker position. Now after being out for most of the season, we're looking at him after the Sancho negotiation being stalled. Uncanny like last summer re Bruno saga. Fun fact: Brooks had 9 appearances this season, just like Longstaff 's infamous 9 appearances.
Looking at and learn from successful teams is good and all, but it's getting silly going around in vicious dead end at this club. Where is our DOF? All the talk about learning from other clubs are all in vain since there is huge fundamental difference between other clubs' operations and ours. We tried to do it the United without SAF, whom made us great. Other clubs don't depend such an one man system, but they have system they trust in. Right now, nobody can fully trust our system. Your post also implied you may trust Ole but hardly trust the ultimate boss. That's the point.
Last edited:
Who?
Good post.
Less happy than I'd be with Sancho & Brooks, but far happier than I'd be with the likes of Lingard & Mata doing their thing.
As far as I see it - if Sancho is a no go this year for whatever reason, someone like Brooks (Sarr, Buendia, Chiesa etc etc) is essential, if admittedly not perfect.
We need a RW this summer. Next year cannot be yet another year of Lingard / Mata & Pereira representing our 'Depth'.
James also showed lots of promise at the beginning of this season and for me shouldn't be written off just yet. Use him at LW as backup to Rashford where he excels and I think he can play a role for us going forward.
The constant comparison's with James is bizarre, what is it about them? they are both Welsh and play on the wing? 
It just reinforces my instinct that alot of people don't even watch players they comment on.
James has improved technically but is still essentially a speed merchant at this stage. Brook has a bit of everything, good vision and awareness, nice link up play and dribbling ability to get out of tight situations. If he had not got injured Bournemouth would have not been relegated and people wouldnt be so against him, but what can i say, lots on here haven't even watched him or have the memory of a goldfish and only point of reference is a relegated player so can't be good....
Obviously his injury is a concern but I think people need watch and refresh their memory with his time at Sheffield United and first season at Bournemouth to see how good he can be. The obsession with 40m is also ridiculous, I think if it happens it will be 20m with add ons rising to 30 and James going the other way on loan
It just reinforces my instinct that alot of people don't even watch players they comment on.James has improved technically but is still essentially a speed merchant at this stage. Brook has a bit of everything, good vision and awareness, nice link up play and dribbling ability to get out of tight situations. If he had not got injured Bournemouth would have not been relegated and people wouldnt be so against him, but what can i say, lots on here haven't even watched him or have the memory of a goldfish and only point of reference is a relegated player so can't be good....
Obviously his injury is a concern but I think people need watch and refresh their memory with his time at Sheffield United and first season at Bournemouth to see how good he can be. The obsession with 40m is also ridiculous, I think if it happens it will be 20m with add ons rising to 30 and James going the other way on loan
The constant comparison's with James is bizarre, what is it about them? they are both Welsh and play on the wing?
James has improved technically but is still essentially a speed merchant at this stage. Brook has a bit of everything, good vision and awareness, nice link up play and dribbling ability to get out of tight situations. If he had not got injured Bournemouth would have not been relegated and people wouldnt be so against him, but what can i say, lots on here haven't even watched him or have the memory of a goldfish and only point of reference is a relegated player so can't be good....
Obviously his injury is a concern but I think people need watch and refresh their memory with his time at Sheffield United and first season at Bournemouth to see how good he can be. The obsession with 40m is also ridiculous, I think if it happens it will be 20m with add ons rising to 30 and James going the other way on loan
Great points, like I said previously, 40 would be too steep, but 20-25 would be a great deal for us.
I agree.
My point is that they don't have to be nailed on, every week starters who are necessarily better than the first choice in that position or positions at the time they are brought in. Apart from buying reserve keepers, if any club brings in any player they obviously think said player has the chance at some point in the future to be a first team player and make a significant contribution, even if they're not a first choice.
Overall, my opinion is that when a club is playing 50 plus games a season you need players who can come in when needed and do a decent job either off the bench or for 20 plus games. If that player becomes a regular starter then it's a bonus.
Whether this lad specifically is good enough is a different question, but in my view we can do worse than buying young, PL ready players who will look at a move like this as a chance to step up, even if it means they aren't necessarily a first choice.
Last edited:
I don’t understand the logic of “25-30 would be good but 40 is too steep.” How about we don’t just buy him at all, spend zero money and let the Glazers keep it all?
And there is your major problem. Anybody who watches United will see a front three of Martial, Rashford and Greenwood with Bruno behind. They will be the starters. If Sancho comes in, likely Greenwood drops to the bench. Therefore any player coming in to one of those positions, either thinks they can push their way in when given the chance, or accepts they may have to have a limited impact and accept that. Top players (even young players) will only move to a club they think they will play at.
Case in point - Sancho a few years ago who could have gone to other top PL clubs. Haaland in January. Jude Bellingham this summer. All moved to Dortmund despite having the chance to move to bigger clubs (the latter two potentially to United) so they would play and not be sat on the bench. Leipzig also seem to be able to do this, identifying young players and giving them a lot of game time.
On the one hand you say that the club should not be "buying average players happy to sit and collect a big wage" then suggest we look at "high profile" Bosmans or loans? Why are high profile players going to join a club to pad out the squad? Unless they're looking for a payday of course. In my opinion exactly what we don't want is a load of players with their best days behind them hanging about because the money is good. I'd much rather see young players (from the academy or otherwise) get a chance.
As I set out above, in my view the club needs players to challenge hard for a first team place but you're not going to get already top players to do that. The club needs to identify players who have the potential to improve but accept that they need to work hard and not expect to start week on week.
The bottom line here is that you don't think the player in question is good enough to challenge for a place and that's fair enough, so why dress it up as anything else? If this was a player you rated, even if he wasn't established I suspect you'd be quite happy.
Your basic point seems to be that the club should identify better players via scouting around Europe, which is something we all no doubt agree with but its not only obvious but much more difficult win practice, especially when we can't guarantee those players a regular starting spot.
Last edited:
Are we selling James or just adding Brooks to squad?
The constant comparison's with James is bizarre, what is it about them? they are both Welsh and play on the wing?
James has improved technically but is still essentially a speed merchant at this stage. Brook has a bit of everything, good vision and awareness, nice link up play and dribbling ability to get out of tight situations. If he had not got injured Bournemouth would have not been relegated and people wouldnt be so against him, but what can i say, lots on here haven't even watched him or have the memory of a goldfish and only point of reference is a relegated player so can't be good....
Obviously his injury is a concern but I think people need watch and refresh their memory with his time at Sheffield United and first season at Bournemouth to see how good he can be. The obsession with 40m is also ridiculous, I think if it happens it will be 20m with add ons rising to 30 and James going the other way on loan
Good post mate, people don't watch football I'm convinced they just see the non exotic name of "David Brooks" who plays for Bournemouth and smash a million green smiley faces in coupled with "WTF 40 MILLIONS??!?!?!"
If it was up to me i'd sell James, i reckon we could make a profit on him from some bottom half PL team.
James at 23 should be wanting to start every week too and he will get less and less minutes at United due to his limitations.
I think brooks would be an excellent signing and if James could go on loan that would help him immensely too.
People seem to forget what a pressure cooker manchester united is. James started so well but when his confidence took a hit he struggled to recover.
Couple that with fact he's currently competing with rashford and greenwood its been tough for him.
Think twelve months on loan could do him world of good
People seem to forget what a pressure cooker manchester united is. James started so well but when his confidence took a hit he struggled to recover.
Couple that with fact he's currently competing with rashford and greenwood its been tough for him.
Think twelve months on loan could do him world of good
At a good price Brooks is absolutely obviously the type of player we need to bolster our squad. Yes we need 2 top quality starters also, but can we try not lose our shit every time we're linked with players who are still important to our squad management. Did people not watch our last 10 games? We have absolutely nothing on the bench.
We've been starving for a transfer
But I think this would be a great addition as a squad player.
Anything is better than the sight of JLingz, Pereira, James and Mata on the bench when we're in desperate need of some inspiration from a sub!
If it was for me I'd sell James, Lingard and Mata then add Chiesa, Brooks and Boga. It would add quality on the flanks and midfield while it would allow Greenwood to play upfront as cover/competition for Martial
I know we would all prefer Sancho and that's completely justified but Brooks in the season before last was one of the best youth prospects in the league. He is when fit and in form an absolutely quality player. Fast, good technique and has the close control to avoid situations like James where he cannot get out of tight spaces nor take on defenders one on one.
I'd fully be behind signing both he and Sancho as James could go on a much needed loan and it provides feasible rotation for Rashford who has been overplayed even through his injury.
I'd fully be behind signing both he and Sancho as James could go on a much needed loan and it provides feasible rotation for Rashford who has been overplayed even through his injury.
cnut? Why?£40 million for this cnut?
If Brooks has recovered fully from his injury he is a younger, probably overall better player than Grealish. He would be a great addition to attacking midfield, he can play anywhere across the field, and is left footed which would also be very useful to balance options. He would play in many games for United, he is not 'just' a squad player, he is far better than that.
You can't really compare us to Leipzig. They can guarantee first team football to players who would be at the same stage of their development as Tahith Chong and James Garner.
Bayern have had far more pulling power than us in recent season and they've been focusing a lot on loan moves that were not hugely successful - James Rodriguez, Coutinho, Peresic. Then Renato Sanchez was a big flop for them, a player Jose was desperate to buy so we dodged a bullet there.
We've been very successful in the transfer window since Ole arrived. We've paid premium prices but we ended up with the right personalities. City have a DOF and their recruitment has looked well dodgy, 200 million in the past 2 summer windows on Cancelo, Rodri and Mahrez yet none of them are a bona fide starter.
All this loan Daniel James out stuff, he's not good enough. I'd sign Brooks and unload Daniel James, what good is a loan at 23 when you're clearly not good enough.
A lot of us in the South of England don’t use that term in the same context as the rest of the world. I have nothing against the lad, I just want us to get rid of our deadwood, not buy new deadwood.
I'm in the SE too mate, and we use that term quite freely in Essex. Just thought you had something on the kid
Too confirm that he's not good enough obviously...
We could cut our losses and sell him though I'd like to see him abroad, Germany, to see how he does
I don't know what David Brooks is