On paper, letting De Gea leave was the right decision.
On paper, signing Onana when we did was probably the right decision.
In practice, if we had kept De Gea we probably would have been better off.
It was debatable whether we should have signed Onana or a keeper the club had been scouting like Costa.
I doubt this because he would have been on nearly triple Onana wages.
I honestly don't even know whether or not we offered him a new contract at reduced wages?
We did. His original wages were so high that "reduced wages" in this case would've still made him the highest paid goalkeeper in the world.I honestly don't even know whether or not we offered him a new contract at reduced wages?
New contract would have bumped him down to 7th or 8th best-paid keeper at the time with the offer that was reported. Still way, way too much given the form he had been in for years, but less egregious.Oh yes we apparently did to be honest but it was still a lot of money given he was by far the highest paid keeper around
And still alot more than OnanaNew contract would have bumped him down to 7th or 8th best-paid keeper at the time with the offer that was reported. Still way, way too much given the form he had been in for years, but less egregious.
The reported 200k/wk would not have made him the highest-paid keeper. Even at 250k/wk he would not have been.We did. His original wages were so high that "reduced wages" in this case would've still made him the highest paid goalkeeper in the world.
How much Onana earns on top of that 50m fee he cost to get from Inter?And still alot more than Onana
Probably for another thread, but nothing being done with the GK options in the summer of 2023 was right on paper. We just ended the season 3rd having scored 58 goals, 30 less goals than Arsenal on second and 36 less goals that City. Liverpool on 5th scored 75 goals. 4 other teams bellow scored more goals in the PL than us.On paper, letting De Gea leave was the right decision.
On paper, signing Onana when we did was probably the right decision.
In practice, if we had kept De Gea we probably would have been better off.
Good post. I remember a certain poster leading with this narative, that replacing de gea with ball playing Gk will make up for those lack of goals. He/she’s posting on every threads possible with this opinion. Now things go shite, his narative change, pushing another agenda; where surprise surprise… anything other than addressing our awful attack as priority.Probably for another thread, but nothing being done with the GK options in the summer of 2023 was right on paper. We just ended the season 3rd having scored 58 goals, 30 less goals than Arsenal on second and 36 less goals that City. Liverpool on 5th scored 75 goals. 4 other teams bellow scored more goals in the PL than us.
On the other end, we conceded 43 goals, only City and Newcastle conceded less at 33 goals.
On paper everything pointed out to the lack of quality upfront and in midfield. ETH being delusional, just like many on here, figured out that our priority should be spending 50m on a GK.
My mistake. Still, way too much for what we were getting in return.The reported 200k/wk would not have made him the highest-paid keeper. Even at 250k/wk he would not have been.
We should have kept DeGea but brought in another keeper to challenge him for his place. We should not have spent anywhere near £50 Million on anything other than a sure thing.
And of course getting rid of him how we did meant when we were buying we were in a position of weakness... As usual. The whole thing was handled badly. And somehow we managed to make a problem into a bigger problem.
Actually, on paper, signing Onana was a mistake. He takes too many risks at Inter and made many mistakes there. Inter fans warned us on what we are getting.On paper, letting De Gea leave was the right decision.
On paper, signing Onana when we did was probably the right decision.
In practice, if we had kept De Gea we probably would have been better off.
This.De Gea had to go. We just replaced him with an idiot.
Great keeper, but he is a level or two below VDS and Schmeichel.
Is the correct answerDe Gea had to go. We just replaced him with an idiot.
That process should've taken place a couple of years before we got rid if that's what we were going to do. De Gea's decline didn't happen overnight, he was really poor for at least two seasons before he left.Should have kept De Gea on lower wages. Signed a young up and coming keeper who could play out from the back, sweeper keep, had great distribution etc but you know also knew how to stop shots, then slowly he’d replace De Gea.
Disagree. He would have been fine for two or three more transition seasons and the 50 mill we spent on Onana could have gone elsewhere in the side. Ddg was no longer a keeper of the absolute highest level but he was still absolutely fine for a side like us that was very much in transition. That money would have been more useful elsewhere.De Gea had to go. We just replaced him with an idiot.
That process should've taken place a couple of years before we got rid if that's what we were going to do. De Gea's decline didn't happen overnight, he was really poor for at least two seasons before he left.
He also sat a year out of playing any football because he didn't get an offer he liked, so the jury's out on whether he would've accepted a lesser offer anyway.
Was it a decline or just bad spell of form? He never looked like a bad keeper just one going through a bad patch. Keepers usually peak late 20s to early 30s, but it’s possible De Gea’s explosive shot stopping style meant he he’d peak and decline earlier than most keepers, I don’t know.
I don't know where this narrative has come from that he'd only had a couple of bad seasons. His last two seasons were actually a little better than the few that came before them. He'd been declining ever since the 2018 World Cup. 17/18 was probably his best ever season, but his terrible World Cup that year seemed to destroy him mentally or something and he was never remotely the same after that. So his decline had been going for 5 years before he left which is more than just a bad patch.Was it a decline or just bad spell of form? He never looked like a bad keeper just one going through a bad patch. Keepers usually peak late 20s to early 30s, but it’s possible De Gea’s explosive shot stopping style meant he he’d peak and decline earlier than most keepers, I don’t know.
The idea obviously being that had De Gea stayed he'd have signed a contract making a lot less than his previous contract. He'd still make more than Onana's current wage, mind.If we had kept De Gea he would have been pushed out the same way Rashford is being pushed out because of the wages he was earning.
What finals DDG cost us?I see a lot of comments slagging Onana, rightly so, and praising Dave, I remember Dave costing us in finals and semi finals. So was probably right time to let him go. Who we go for next I have no clue.
Can you please back that 8 goals in 12 games claim with something?I don't know where this narrative has come from that he'd only had a couple of bad seasons. His last two seasons were actually a little better than the few that came before them. He'd been declining ever since the 2018 World Cup. 17/18 was probably his best ever season, but his terrible World Cup that year seemed to destroy him mentally or something and he was never remotely the same after that. So his decline had been going for 5 years before he left which is more than just a bad patch.
18/19 he was ok for most of the season, where it wasn't a huge issue but he was obviously nowhere near his previous level. He was then atrocious for the last couple of months of that season, comfortably the worst form of his career where he was directly at fault for something like 8 goals in 12 games (and a few others he could have done better for).
19/20 he was shaky all season, including being at fault for three of the goals that got us knocked out of the League Cup and Europa League semi's.
20/21 he was so poor all season that even Ole (who was loyal to a fault to him) ended up dropping him for Henderson for the final few months of the season.
21/22 he was actually back to something like his best for the first half of the season, but he rapidly dropped off and was poor again in the second half.
22/23 was ok for most of the season, but once again he finished the season poorly (which was becoming a real trend).
Nowhere nobody ever mentioned increase in wages, contrary every report was towards a wage reduction and a short extension.Let's not rewrite history. It was time for De Gea to go. Remember, he was also on absolutely insane wages that would have likely increased on renewal or bare minimum stayed the same.
The mistake was not letting De Gea go, it was recruiting a useless replacement based on hype, something we've been great at over the years.
Onana is worse than ddg at any point in his career with us.DDG’s time at United was up it was time for him to go. The problem is we replaced him who’s as bad as DDG was towards the end of his career
