I might have remained as one of if it wasn’t bumped as a stick to bash Onana every time he has a poor game (and if he had poor games a little less frequently!)
Last edited:
David De Gea Appreciation Thread
- Thread starter Mr.Ridiculous__
- 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.
I might have remained as one of if it wasn’t bumped as a stick to bash Onana every time he has a poor game (and if he had poor games a little less frequently!)
I do take fish oil tablets (regularly rotating them with hemp seed oil), but my memory isn't actually that good for individual games. Even games that have just happened people will often say things happened in them that I don't really remember. Obviously a few do stand out for some reason, but I'm almost tempted to say my memory for individual games is actually bad.
It's longer scale trends that I do tend to remember well, so even though I won't normally be able to say which particular games De Gea was really bad in (unless it's something like a semi that cost us badly) I know that it was during 'this' period where he was bad and making a lot of mistakes. Also in this particular case it's because I'm regularly refreshing it. Each season people would be talking like he'd only just started to go downhill and make mistakes, and I'd then go through and point out where it actually started happening, and it's basically been happening once or twice a year since. Similar with Matic, where part of the reason why I still remember his ups and (much more common) downs is because I'm regularly posting about it.
Aye, this is how I remember it as well.
Though it's perhaps telling in terms of the general state of team that even within that 5 season drop-off period, he was still voted POTY by his teamates once. That's partially because his form rallied somewhat in 21/22, but also because we really did have so many problems elsewhere.
I think the argument that we should have kept him because we had bigger problems would have had merit if he still had years left on his contract, not least because I generally think goalkeeper is less impactful than (say) CF.
But with his contract coming to an end, it was the obvious time to make the change rather than hand him a brand new contract on massive wages. Not least because it should have offered a chance to let him leave gracefully in the way players like Varane and Mata did around the same time. Instead the club not being ruthless enough in deciding his time was done led to a weird contract-offer-and-withdrawal situation that was unfortunate.
Never mind whether we were right to let him leave or not, I still think it's the manner that was completely wrong. If what was reported is true, and the club pulled out of an agreed contract extension on reduced wages only to come back with an even lower offer at Ten Hag’s request, then that shows a real lack of class and respect towards a vice-captain and the longest-serving player.
Football is still a humane game, and De Gea had a lot of close relationships in this squad. I doubt that situation went down well with the rest of the dressing room, especially when the manager’s personal pick came in and looked like he was on a mission to get us out of the CL. ETH should have been made to take responsibility and gone after that disastrous CL campaign, but we were a rudderless ship at the time, and he ended up staying a year too long.
It will take time to move on the duds he signed, but we need to start the process now. If we go out to Lyon on Thursday, Onana should start thinking about finding a new club.
Football is still a humane game, and De Gea had a lot of close relationships in this squad. I doubt that situation went down well with the rest of the dressing room, especially when the manager’s personal pick came in and looked like he was on a mission to get us out of the CL. ETH should have been made to take responsibility and gone after that disastrous CL campaign, but we were a rudderless ship at the time, and he ended up staying a year too long.
It will take time to move on the duds he signed, but we need to start the process now. If we go out to Lyon on Thursday, Onana should start thinking about finding a new club.
On the flip side, the club offered De Gea a contract and he sat on it for months without agreeing to it. How long are the club supposed to wait until moving on? The reason he didn't sign it was most likely because he thought he could get more either from us or from another team, so he played his cards and it ended up blowing up in his face as the club changed their plans (which it was well within it's right to until that contract was signed).
Unless we guaranteed him that the offer would remain on the table until the end of the season, the club did nothing wrong. If we did give that guarantee then it was a shite move, but I would hope we weren't that stupid.
He had to go because he was declining and was no longer a good GK. His replacement was poor but that doesn't mean that De Gea should have stayed. It's not that hard to understand.
We've had an atrocious recruitment strategy for years. We "replaced" Ronaldo with Weghorst, Hojlund and Zirkzee. We need to improve our recruitment strategy if we want to be a better football club.
Disagree with your logic. De Gea had to go. Just because we replaced him with someone just as incompetent doesn't mean we should have persisted with De Gea and extended his contract. We should have just signed someone better than Onana. That is all.
He definitely was in a sense that he needed to be sold long before he was actually sold. He was on huge wages and was the best paid goalkeeper in the world even though he was no longer the same GK that he once was. Don't get me wrong, he was a good lad but his time was up and we needed to find a replacement for him. Unfortunately, we ended up with Onana.
It's actually really impressive how much is wrong in that post. Even down to the Henderson comment, it's pretty comical how everyone forgets the difference in our defence and results with his run in the team and the collapse when we reintegrated De Gea. De Gea himself, and all aspects of our game, were comfortably worse with him in the team, which was why Henderson was due to start the following season as number 1.
Now a proper club would have used that summer to sell Henderson for the £25/30m that was being banded about to one of the promoted sides while his stock was high and buy a proper goalkeeper from Lille for half the price but unfortunately we weren't operating as a proper club.
It's a shame that this thread gets bumped every time Onana has a bad game because it turns into a tit versus tat thread, whereas in reality De Gea during that 2015-2018 period was outstanding and should be remembered fondly. The last five years of his career less so, but that's another case of United's unbelievably poor decision making.
Dave did not "have to go". We made a choice to upgrade on Dave, the appointed successor being a disaster, but it was a choice, not a necessity. If there were a clearly superior keeper out there at the time at a reasonable fee, yes of course we should have let Dave go and bring in that reasonably affordable upgrade. However, all clearly superior keepers were either not interested in leaving their club for United or would have cost us a fortune. We were reckless in going in all in on Onana, who had one brilliant game to his name, in what was an otherwise decent but unremarkable career, for a ridiculous transfer fee. Dave made several calamitous mistakes that season but only "had to go" if we found a clearly superior keeper at a price that would have allowed us to address more serious needs within the budget we had at the time.
He did have to go. De Gea was a poor goalkeeper. Very much a bottom half Premier League goalkeeper. It had been four or five years since he was a genuine top class goalkeeper. Why would you not want to improve on that? He was earning an obscene amount of money and the reduction on his wages that he was reportedly willing to take, still equated to that of a World Class level. We made the right decision.
"We were reckless in going all in on Onana"? Sure, if that's how you want to word it. However, choosing to move on from De Gea and choosing to move on from De Gea to Onana, are two very different points that some are repeatedly unable to separate.
Nonsense from the beginning to the end. We made the wrong decision, in [point of fact, as evidenced by the poor play of the keeper we replaced Dave with, a keeper who single-handedly threw us out of the CL last season and was disastrous in his last EL outing last week, as he has been for us during most of his time at Old Trafford, with the exception of a decent but hardly world class run for 2-3 months earlier this season.
The obvious reply to that is that although Onana turned out to be clearly inferior to De Gea we obviously should have brought in a superior keeper. Great idea! That would be a great reply if you could name that supposedly superior keeper we could have brought in. Diogo Costa comes to mind, but Costa would have cost us close to double what Onana cost us. On a pure club supporter level I'm on board with bringing in one of the best keepers in the world to replace De Gea, but United have been guilty of reckless spending for the better part of a decade on a long list of players almost all of whom proved not be worth what we paid them -- and it was the reckless spending in the past that has tied out hands now. I actually do think Costa would have been an exception to that rule (the rule of high priced flops at OT) , but it's very much an open question whether we actually had the 80m to spend on a keeper after all the reckless spending leading up to the decision to shovel 47m into the furnace for Onana. You'd think the additional 33m would have been available at the time, but after we spent 80m on Antony and 60m on Mount, it's not clear to me at all that we had 80m at the time for a proven top glove keeper such as Costa and instead went in for Onana, which of course proved to our critics once again how poorly United are managed -- replacing De Gea with Onana.
But if not Costa, then who? I actually like Vicario, whom I believe Spurs got to 17m, so maybe that would have been our answer. But Vicario has his critics and in any event it's not evident that Vicario would have been a clear upgrade on De Gea, who by universal acclaim has been outstanding for Fiorentina. Not just decent for Fiorentina...outstanding.
But we're a poorly managed club and Exhibit A for the prosecution is getting rid of De Gea for Onana.
We made the right decision to move on from De Gea. We made the wrong decision in signing Onana.
It really is that simple.
It's so blindingly obvious as well, I don't understand what people don't get about it, watching de Gea's last 2 seasons was infuriating.
Even someone piped up with the 2-2 Milan game, the one where he needs to make a double save because his first save is palmed weakly into a dangerous area ... Where had I seen that before?
De Gea was shite from 2018-2023. Facts.
Onana being more shite doesn’t even come into it.
Onana being more shite doesn’t even come into it.
So basically, it's ok for De Gea to be singlehandedly responsible for us going out of the Europa League, and badly at fault in us losing the FA Cup final in 22/23, and we should have retained him afterwards. But Onana being at fault for us going out of the Champions League last season and at fault last week in the Europa is too far? The revisionism from you people is fecking astounding.
I don’t get how people don’t understand this. DDG is a legend for this club. But it was time to move on. Rooney was a legend but it was time for him to leave when he did…it’s just a shame we replaced him the next season with the likes of Mkhitaryan and Lukaku.
Nobody in their right mind decides to "let their goalkeeper go" without having a replacement. ETH wanted Onana, that's why he vetoed the new contract for De Gea. Our goal was to replace De Gea with Onana, not just to let De Gea go and have no goalkeeper! The "decision" is the "replacement", not the "letting go".
Of course, it is also meaningless to say "De Gea had to go, but any other goalkeeper we were going to get would actually be worse"! I hope you can understand this.
So, the theoretical question is: if we let De Gea go, could we get someone who is actually better? Who that might be? Can we get him now? Who is that? And are you sure that he will actually perform better than De Gea for us?
But even if we frame the question like this, it is completely theoretical, it is quite possible that the new goalkeeper will again be worse! Here we are discussing what happened in practice, not what could happen in a perfect Universe.
(On the other hand, many people are simply incapable of accepting that some of their past decisions are wrong. All of us, in our past, we made some decision that proved to be right, some decisions that proved to be wrong because we miscalculated. Some of us learn from the mistakes, and improve our decision-making, others keep repeading the same mistakes because they cannot accept they made a mistake. It's human nature. )
Let me rephrase this.
The decision was to replace De Gea with Onana. It was the wrong decision.
Some people equate "the decision to let De Gea go" with "the decision to replace De Gea with someone better".
Obviously, all of us would want that. Of course we want to replace De Gea with someone better! To replace Amorim with someone better. To replace Bruno with someone better. To replace Yoro with someone better. To replace anyone and everyone with someone better! We all agree with this because it is a fantasy. Yes, of course, if we replace someone with someone better, it is the right decision.
In practice, we let De Gea go because we wanted Onana. It was the wrong decision.
The decision was to replace De Gea with Onana. It was the wrong decision.
Some people equate "the decision to let De Gea go" with "the decision to replace De Gea with someone better".
Obviously, all of us would want that. Of course we want to replace De Gea with someone better! To replace Amorim with someone better. To replace Bruno with someone better. To replace Yoro with someone better. To replace anyone and everyone with someone better! We all agree with this because it is a fantasy. Yes, of course, if we replace someone with someone better, it is the right decision.
In practice, we let De Gea go because we wanted Onana. It was the wrong decision.
"Sacking Moyes was the wrong decision, his replacements were shit" - same logic
"Really shouldn't have gotten out of the burning apartment, they fell down the stairs and broke their neck!"
Really boggles the mind how many people cannot seem to grasp the simple concept that one decision (let de Gea go) can be the right one, while a second, subsequent decision (hire Onana) can be wrong.
Weren't you one of those who claimed that Onana would make such a huge difference to our build up play and how DDG was holding us back? Yeah, nice to see your insight again.
It's not really an apt comparision. The manager obviously have a lot of influence of which players we want to sell and buy, how we play and so on. Anf it's also a bad comparision as the successors to Moyes did a better job than what he did. If Onana was better (even if he wasn't maybe the desired class) than De Gea no one would complain about it. The issue obviously being that he has been even worse.
Most in here probably would argue that the majority of players we have today will not carry United to a league title or such. Does that mean it would be a good idea to just let all of them go, becuase it's not the wrong move to let players (below the desired quality) go?
De Gea does hold back any side attempting to play high-line progressive football, ie the majority of good sides anywhere in the world, which is exactly why nobody wanted him for 18 months and he's had to go and play for Fiorentina to get a game again. And I've said multiple times Onana wouldn't have been my choice, or even the goalkeeper from that city I'd have signed but carry on.Weren't you one of those who claimed that Onana would make such a huge difference to our build up play and how DDG was holding us back? Yeah, nice to see your insight again.
We don't know if the bolded is true. DdG could have been asking for top much money, could have wanted some time off etc. It's silly to assume that nobody would have wanted him when he was still a decent keeper.
Letting go of De Gea was the right decission. The way it has been handled none of us actually knows. The one we really should have kept was Romero.
He is now being heavily linked to the Juventus main GK role next season and one year more.
This is like when people insisted no-one wanted Ronaldo.
When obviously these players are expecting huge money.
Tonnes of mid tier teams in all the top leagues would have been happy to take either if the price was right.
You can have three goalkeepers in the same season and release the worst one. You can't have three managers in the same season and sack the worst one.
Is it really that hard to see the difference?
Letting De Gea was in fact the wrong decision, as we now know with the benefit of hindsight. Letting De Gea go would have been the right decision if we had brought in a clearly superior keeper, but unless we were willing to spend 80m on Diogo Costa -- who was there to be had if we had been willing and/or able to spend that kind of cash -- there was no other clearly superior keeper who was willing to come to United that summer. We can talk all day about Allison, Maignan, Courtois and Donnarumma and even Martinez (Villa) as clearly superior keepers, but they were never coming to United.
That said, we could have and probably should have gone with Dean Henderson, who has been brilliant for Palace after we got rid of him as well after (or maybe it was before) we got rid of De Gea, but the pitchforks were out for him as well. But with Henderson not an option for United, instead we got rid of De Gea without really thinking through what the squad needed at the time -- a proven striker -- and instead failed to bring in a clearly superior keeper. We got neither the striker we needed nor did we get the clearly superior keeper we needed.
No one can plausibly argue that United have been well run over the last decade.
It's an odd comparison IMO given De Gea was already taking a huge cut in wages with the contract at United supposedly being around £100-150k, a rate which an awful lot of clubs could afford for a free agent on a one year deal. Even more so when you consider he ended up taking what, £40k a week at Fiorentina? Ronaldo obviously wouldn't entertain such a cut to begin with, hence him playing in a desert nowadays.
Do you want it to happen?
The rumours were all at £200-250k in wages for his new contract. That was still very firmly within the world's ten highest goalkeeper wages, for a player which had very clearly not been a top ten goalkeeper in recent years, and something only few clubs would be able and willing to pay even if he had been.
Our current GK is average at best, as so many players in our squad, while De Gea is doing pretty well and seems lively again as a person, enjoying his football... so why not, an opportunity for both parties and a couple years a la Sczescny?
De Gea back at Old Trafford!
Should be a nice send off for him.
Is it common for footballers to have their family not with them for years and years? Must be so weird.
Anyhow, I hope he gets loads of love when he's back at Old Trafford and that the club actually try to do something to show him the respect he wasn't shown (though that is probably not going to happen as it might cost too much for Ratcliffe DOGE team).
Anyhow, I hope he gets loads of love when he's back at Old Trafford and that the club actually try to do something to show him the respect he wasn't shown (though that is probably not going to happen as it might cost too much for Ratcliffe DOGE team).
What an unbelievable reaction save he pulled off tonight against Betis to keep Fiorentina in the tie