De Gea contract talk | Signs new deal

[Adisa]

His head is no longer here. Even if he stays, buy a new keeper.

 

[Jazz]

Pogba hasn't been our player of the season for 6 consecutive seasons. He has barely turned up at all. De Gea has been the model professional- no Twitter campaign no interviews to the Spanish press.

It's still hypocrisy. I'm not buying this excuse. Dave has been sneaky which is personally worse in my eyes.
He doesn't say anything because he's not exactly a confrontational kind of guy - he just let's his dodgy agent Mendes do all his dirty work.

Would have gone to Madrid if not for the fax. Was also running his contract down to go to them as well.

Actions speak louder than words.

 

[Bowlcut11]

He's been our best player over the last five years and, bar the fax fiasco and now, he's been a model professional.

If he keeps this up though, he's going to leave a sour taste in everyone's mouth. Stop with the games, be honest with the club and let's put an end to this fiasco one way or another. Between this and Pogba, I'm getting sick of the contract circus we have become.

 

[Keefy18]

This is Rooney all over again basically.

A player living off of former glories (performances) and demanding pay rises for currently under performing.

He was arguably our worst player last season, at least in the bottom 3 anyway.

 

[Kostov]

Scumbag

You are an embarrassment.

 

[Rockets Redglare]

This is Rooney all over again basically.

A player living off of former glories (performances) and demanding pay rises for currently under performing.

He was arguably our worst player last season, at least in the bottom 3 anyway.

He had a poor season for him but to brand him our worst player is absolutely ridiculous.

 

[cyberman]

You are an embarrassment.

If he holds the club to ransom like this then he is simply a scumbag.
Cant wait to see the meltdown if Raiola and Pogba were to try this.
Second time in 4 years he has run the contract down like this.
Imagine wanting United to pay his signing bonus for another club.
He then doesn't lose his loyalty bonus on top of that since we would be paying to sell him

Good old Saint Dave.

 

[Keefy18]

He had a poor season for him but to brand him our worst player is absolutely ridiculous.

All down to opinions, I personally wouldn't have far from our worst at all.

Maybe Lingard was worse than him for carrying out his personal duties / role within the side. I'm struggling to think of many worse.

I mean we are coming off the back of our worst defensive performances since the early 70s, most supporters have Lindelof or Shaw as our best players, although that isn't saying a lot.

He's gone from most cleans sheets to fewest and I've seen stats from this xG stuff where De Gea is ranked as the league worst performing keeper. I'm not fully up to speed with how those stats are calculated but I recall reading it with only a game or 2 left of the season.

 

[Kostov]

If he holds the club to ransom like this then he is simply a scumbag.
Cant wait to see the meltdown if Raiola and Pogba were to try this.
Second time in 4 years he has run the contract down like this.
Imagine wanting United to pay his signing bonus for another club.
He then doesn't lose his loyalty bonus on top of that since we would be paying to sell him

Good old Saint Dave.

No he isn’t a scumbag he is just exploiting an option obviously given to him by some incompetent twat, who is ruining the club in all levels. Second time in 4 years this club is a total fecking mess and players who are actually good enough want to leave. Pogba and raiola are the last ones you should mention. Regularly they are mouthing off in the press and it’s nothing like De Gea.

De Gea has been a wonderful servant to this club and stuck around one way or another. We failed to build a proper team around him and of course he holds most of the cards once again. Calling one such servant a scumbag in a period where we pay hundreds of thousands of pounds to absolute dross is laughable. If you were in his place you would want the best deal possible.

 

[ArjenIsM3]

You are an embarrassment.

Why? DDG wants to leave, we'll allow him to for the right money yet he prefers to run his contract down and leave us with nothing? It's a scummy move to demand money from us while he's the one that wants to leave. It's not like we've not paid him handsomely either. We've always been good to him yet he refuses to do the same for us after he's played his worst season yet. It's embarrassing if true.

 

[Adisa]

Thia is not the first but the secobd time he's threatening to run down his contract. Get rid.

 

[Zlatan 7]

Thia is not the first but the secobd time he's threatening to run down his contract. Get rid.

Exactly and people in here are acting as if he’s been some loyal servant all these years, he’s stayed because a move fell through, not because he wanted to. And if these reports are true (admittedly they could be shit) he doesn’t come across as some united loving servant at all

 

[cyril C]

Let me guess, he deserves to hold us to ransom because we're so bad right?
Paying him to move is a scumbag move but well done. United means feck all right? Imagine every player pulled this shit.

I agree. If every player acts like this we are done. If DDG doesn't want to move because his golden handshake is not big enough, I say we bench him for the whole season, see off his Euro chance.

 

[Kostov]

Why? DDG wants to leave, we'll allow him to for the right money yet he prefers to run his contract down and leave us with nothing? It's a scummy move to demand money from us while he's the one that wants to leave. It's not like we've not paid him handsomely either. We've always been good to him yet he refuses to do the same for us after he's played his worst season yet. It's embarrassing if true.

Why scummy move? Does that last contract year don’t count? Does he have to think about the welfare of Woodward’s transfer dealings instead of his future after spending the last 6 years in a total fecking shambles while being one of the best if not the best GK in the world?

 

[Keefy18]

No he isn’t a scumbag he is just exploiting an option obviously given to him by some incompetent twat, who is ruining the club in all levels. Second time in 4 years this club is a total fecking mess and players who are actually good enough want to leave. Pogba and raiola are the last ones you should mention. Regularly they are mouthing off in the press and it’s nothing like De Gea.

De Gea has been a wonderful servant to this club and stuck around one way or another. We failed to build a proper team around him and of course he holds most of the cards once again. Calling one such servant a scumbag in a period where we pay hundreds of thousands of pounds to absolute dross is laughable. If you were in his place you would want the best deal possible.

Players running down contracts is becoming more and more common place across Europe.

It isn't just happening at United with "incompetent twats" as you put it at our club. Is Levy an incompetent twat for "allowing" Eriksen to do the same at Spurs?
What about Laurence at Chelsea and with Hazard?
Maybe Venkatesham for losing Ramsey at Arsenal?

De Gea has been offered a deal nearly 2 years ago and has chosen to run it down, similar to the others mentioned here. It's his right to of course, but...its a risk game. Your form must continue then to match the demands you make.

Did De Gea's form continue? Nope! His abilities dropped off a clip the last season and the club is now out of CL also with many blaming his poor form as part of it.

He'll continue to be a good keeper but if he's demanding the likes of 400k or whatever he can feck off to some other club and see if they are willing to pay it off the back of that season, they won't pay it and nor should we.

 

[RoadTrip]

Players running down contracts is becoming more and more common place across Europe.

It isn't just happening at United with "incompetent twats" as you put it at our club. Is Levy an incompetent twat for "allowing" Eriksen to do the same at Spurs?
What about Laurence at Chelsea and with Hazard?
Maybe Venkatesham for losing Ramsey at Arsenal?

De Gea has been offered a deal nearly 2 years ago and has chosen to run it down, similar to the others mentioned here. It's his right to of course, but...its a risk game. Your form must continue then to match the demands you make.

Did De Gea's form continue? Nope! His abilities dropped off a clip the last season and the club is now out of CL also with many blaming his poor form as part of it.

He'll continue to be a good keeper but if he's demanding the likes of 400k or whatever he can feck off to some other club and see if they are willing to pay it off the back of that season, they won't pay it and nor should we.

I mean the Hazard example is kind of pointless now.

 

[Keefy18]

I mean the Hazard example is kind of pointless now.

No it isn't. He had 12 months left on his deal, its exactly the same as De Gea.

The club is left in a position of cashing in on the player or letting them go for free.

 

[Marcelinho87]

Bench him.

His mentality has come into question for me recently and it is now I am questioning, outside of his shot stopping, where does he excel?

His distribution is poor, his one on ones are generally poor, his saves from PK are poor.

He has been an excellent mostly since signing for us but this would be twice where his head is easily turned and I reckon we would be better served long term by letting him go.

 

[Johan07]

No it isn't. He had 12 months left on his deal, its exactly the same as De Gea.

The club is left in a position of cashing in on the player or letting them go for free.

The Hazard deal is really interesting from many perspectives. I never thought Real would cough up 100m plus for a 28 year old player with one year left on his contract. Its bordering to idiotic from a financial perspective.
If this means that we suddenly are living in a reality where clubs can get full transfer value for a player that just has one year left of his contract or if the Hazard deal is an anomaly given that he is really one of a kind at the market this year, the Chelsea transfer ban and the fact that Madrid are close to desperate; I dont know.
What happens with Eriksen and De Gea; both of similar age and one year left of their contracts will be really interesting to see. I never thought a club would go over 50m for a player of that age with one year left on his contract. But we might just be looking at another crazy development of the transfer market (to everyone that has argued that the bubble will burst sooner or later).

 

[RoadTrip]

No it isn't. He had 12 months left on his deal, its exactly the same as De Gea.

The club is left in a position of cashing in on the player or letting them go for free.

Well it is. Cashing in on a player or letting them go for free is always the option at any given time in a contract. You either sell them or continue to play them and run it down to nil and they go for nothing. The reason people don’t like players running down contracts to one year is because A) there is a risk that they don’t get a suitable offer and end up going for free or B) the club has significantly reduced negotiating power because the player is going to be available for free in a year.

Ergo, the Hazard example is totally irrelevant because if we took a significant sum of money for DDG, no one would be complaining.

 

[Johan07]

Well it is. Cashing in on a player or letting them go for free is always the option at any given time. The reason people don’t like players running down contracts is because A) there is a risk that they don’t get a suitable offer and end up going for free or B) the club has significantly reduced negotiating power because the player is going to be available for free in a year.

Ergo, the Hazard example is totally irrelevant because if we took a significant sum of money for DDG, no one would be complaining.

But thats just the thing with the Hazard deal. The fact that he had just one year left on his contract seemed to have done nada to Chelseas "negotiating power". Why should it for us an De Gea?

 

[RoadTrip]

But thats just the thing with the Hazard deal. The fact that he had just one year left on his contract seemed to have done nada to Chelseas "negotiating power". Why should it for us an De Gea?

I mean it’s not as binary as that. There’s loads of factors which go into it; how many teams would compete for that player if he goes on a free, how urgent the need is, how much the player is wanted, how old the player is etc.

I think it is safe to say that on average a player with one year left on their deal will cost less than the same player with multiple years remaining.

But yes, it is not guaranteed to screw us over.

 

[Keefy18]

Well it is. Cashing in on a player or letting them go for free is always the option at any given time in a contract. You either sell them or continue to play them and run it down to nil and they go for nothing. The reason people don’t like players running down contracts to one year is because A) there is a risk that they don’t get a suitable offer and end up going for free or B) the club has significantly reduced negotiating power because the player is going to be available for free in a year.

Ergo, the Hazard example is totally irrelevant because if we took a significant sum of money for DDG, no one would be complaining.

Well that's just the point, clubs want a return on investment. Allowing a player to run the deal down and leave for free is extremely bad business, especially if you've a talent on your hands and is quite marketable to boot.

You make it sound like selling a player is that easy, it isn't. A player can also refuse to leave to an extent. Look at how ADM carried on when being forced out the door at Real, he dragged it out right to the end pretty much and reluctantly joined us, under performed and then jumped as soon as he could.

Players hold far, far too much power these days and clubs are toys to both the owners and players. They by an large don't give 2 fecks about the clubs history and reputations anymore, its just pure greed and self gratification.

As Johan says below in his reply to me though the Hazard deal is bizarre. Why the feck Real stumped up that kind of cash for a player with a year left is just madness.

 

[finneh]

But thats just the thing with the Hazard deal. The fact that he had just one year left on his contract seemed to have done nada to Chelseas "negotiating power". Why should it for us an De Gea?

Hazard would have cost £150m if he wasn't in his last year, which I'd say is similar to most transfers (losing a third of their value with a year left).

Eriksen and De Gea would probably cost £100m with 2-3 years left and will probably be sold for £60-65m with 1 year.

 

[Johan07]

I mean it’s not as binary as that. There’s loads of factors which go into it; how many teams would compete for that player if he goes on a free, how urgent the need is, how much the player is wanted, how old the player is etc.

I think it is safe to say that on average a player with one year left on their deal will cost less than the same player with multiple years remaining.

But yes, it is not guaranteed to screw us over.

Yeah, I agree. And it might very well be that the Hazard deal is an anomaly, because of the special circumstances involved as I touched upon above. What Levy squeezes out for Eriksen will be really interesting.

 

[RoadTrip]

Well that's just the point, clubs want a return on investment. Allowing a player to run the deal down and leave for free is extremely bad business, especially if you've a talent on your hands and is quite marketable to boot.

You make it sound like selling a player is that easy, it isn't. A player can also refuse to leave to an extent. Look at how ADM carried on when being forced out the door at Real, he dragged it out right to the end pretty much and reluctantly joined us, under performed and then jumped as soon as he could.

Players hold far, far too much power these days and clubs are toys to both the owners and players. They by an large don't give 2 fecks about the clubs history and reputations anymore, its just pure greed and self gratification.

As Johan says below in his reply to me though the Hazard deal is bizarre. Why the feck Real stumped up that kind of cash for a player with a year left is just madness.

I don’t really understand what we are debating then. I simply said the Hazard deal is a bad example to explain why the DDG situation is bad because the Hazard deal is unexpected and against trend. Which I think is also what you think. So not really sure what we debating!

 

[RoadTrip]

Yeah, I agree. And it might very well be that the Hazard deal is an anomaly, because of the special circumstances involved as I touched upon above. What Levy squeezes out for Eriksen will be really interesting.

Hazard deal is definitely rare. Perfect storm for Chelsea. Hazard really wanted to go. Real desperately need reinforcement. Chelsea’s negotiation power is actually strengthened by the fact that they can’t buy players so keeping Hazard for a year and letting him go for free is actually worth more to them than a team who could buy a replacement. He’s 28, which for an outfield player isn’t young and one lost year is quite a chunk of his peak playing time left. Etc etc.

With DDG, situation is different. He’s still young for goalkeeping age. He’s got a clear preference of where he wants to go which might deter competition on a free.

 

[Johan07]

Hazard would have cost £150m if he wasn't in his last year, which I'd say is similar to most transfers (losing a third of their value with a year left).

Eriksen and De Gea would probably cost £100m with 2-3 years left and will probably be sold for £60-65m with 1 year.

Maybe. I dont really know if I agree. That might be true for someone whose transfer value is 30-40m. But if you have a transfer value of 100m plus the selling club is actually more or less paying that amount to have the player playing for one more season. It would be 10 times the actual salary that Hazard is on for that season.
I dont think it makes sense and it should be natural for a player with that high transfer value to lose much more transfer value than a mid-level player.
My point was that this is a ltb unchartered territory now, and it will be interesting to see how the similar transfers turn out this summer.
And the Hazard-deal has been reported to be worth 130m in total btw.

 

[C'est Moi Cantona]

It's fine, he could have been a complete arse and would down his contract after the infamous fax machine deal collapsed, then we'd have got nothing, and not had him for the last four years.

Not really getting the £20 million golden handshake thing, but if we can walk away with a clear £30 million after it all then it's not so bad, personally I think he's just lost his edge, whether that's natural decline, or him been jaded with us, I'm not sure, but it's probably not healthy for him to stay much longer either way.

I just hope we don't give Romero the number one spot though.

 

[ArjenIsM3]

Why scummy move? Does that last contract year don’t count? Does he have to think about the welfare of Woodward’s transfer dealings instead of his future after spending the last 6 years in a total fecking shambles while being one of the best if not the best GK in the world?

It's scummy because he's the one that wants to go but still expects us to pay him to do so. So he wants us to pay him a golden handshake and his new club to pay him a nice sign on fee. That's ridiculous. If he actually cares one bit about Man United he wouldn't do something like this. He's holding us ransom. It's a disgusting and greedy move.

 

[Kostov]

It's scummy because he's the one that wants to go but still expects us to pay him to do so. So he wants us to pay him a golden handshake and his new club to pay him a nice sign on fee. That's ridiculous. If he actually cares one bit about Man United he wouldn't do something like this. He's holding us ransom. It's a disgusting and greedy move.

He’s playing the best possible scenario for him. If we were not run by incompetent twats this would not be an issue.

You see figures of 65m pounds thrown around and you expect PSG to pay that and offer DDG the wage he wants? Why would De Gea accept less money simply because Woodward is asking for 65m pounds for GK with a year left on his contract? That’s assuming all mentioned is true.

 

[Member 101269]

He’s playing the best possible scenario for him. If we were not run by incompetent twats this would not be an issue.

You see figures of 65m pounds thrown around and you expect PSG to pay that and offer DDG the wage he wants? Why would De Gea accept less money simply because Woodward is asking for 65m pounds for GK with a year left on his contract? That’s assuming all mentioned is true.

How many years have discussions been going on? When exactly did the powers have control over this?

 

[ArjenIsM3]

He’s playing the best possible scenario for him. If we were not run by incompetent twats this would not be an issue.

You see figures of 65m pounds thrown around and you expect PSG to pay that and offer DDG the wage he wants? Why would De Gea accept less money simply because Woodward is asking for 65m pounds for GK with a year left on his contract? That’s assuming all mentioned is true.

Exactly. He's being greedy and is showing us no love whatsoever. Has nothing to do with how we're being run since we've offered him a new and improved contract ages ago. He simply refused to sign it.

I don't think we'll ask for that much since we never get big fees for our players and we accepted a much lower offer from Real in a similar situation a few years back. Haven't seen any credible sources mention it either. Still, it wouldn't even be a strange asking price considering the fees other top GK's have gone for recently.

 

[LInkash]

I don't think PSG would even want him. Their main goal is to win the Champions League and De Gea has shown to be found wanting on the biggest stage, whether that is in the CL or with Spain.

 

[duffer]

But thats just the thing with the Hazard deal. The fact that he had just one year left on his contract seemed to have done nada to Chelseas "negotiating power". Why should it for us an De Gea?

Chelsea were in a decent position because everyone knew Real Madrid had promised Zidane that they would get him Hazard.

 

[Adam-Utd]

I don't think PSG would even want him. Their main goal is to win the Champions League and De Gea has shown to be found wanting on the biggest stage, whether that is in the CL or with Spain.

Don’t be daft of course they will. A world class keeper for a snip of what he’d usually cost.

 

[Kostov]

Exactly. He's being greedy and is showing us no love whatsoever. Has nothing to do with how we're being run since we've offered him a new and improved contract ages ago. He simply refused to sign it.

I don't think we'll ask for that much since we never get big fees for our players and we accepted a much lower offer from Real in a similar situation a few years back. Haven't seen any credible sources mention it either. Still, it wouldn't even be a strange asking price considering the fees other top GK's have gone for recently.

Well you’ve read the things you wanted to from all of this speculation. Maybe he’s not greedy and it’s not only about the money? Maybe he’s fed up being in a scrap for top 4 and wants better after spending his last 4 years in this circus? Maybe we actually are asking for a ridiculous fee and that’s affecting his wage proposal?

It’s everything about how we are being run mate. We are run by incompetent twat who instead of offering a steady footballing project overpays in wages and it backfires. He’s worth a lot to us also and I can see the club asking a big fee.

 

[Devil81]

I don't think PSG would even want him. Their main goal is to win the Champions League and De Gea has shown to be found wanting on the biggest stage, whether that is in the CL or with Spain.

Lol!!

What a ridiculous post, of course they are going to want one of the best goalkeepers in the world for a knockdown fee.

 

[LInkash]

Don’t be daft of course they will. A world class keeper for a snip of what he’d usually cost.

He's a good league keeper but PSG could probably win their league without anyone in goal. Even when he was at his best, his reputation wasn't that high on the continent.

Perception of him as a world class player has taken a real downturn, Spanish fans don't want him as their number one and he has been dropped by Spain for Kepa.

 

[Maticmaker]

The question surely, is David De Gea's current form just a blip, or is he beginning to fall off that 'plateau of consistency' we have seen in his performances over recent seasons?

If its the former, offer him more to stay; if its the latter offer him less, let him seek employment elsewhere...its a big call for the manager and the club, but again that's what they get the big bucks for!