They got top 4 and CL.
The point here is, no point spending money on players that do not add value to the squad.
Any how, when was the last time Manchester United signed no one in the summer transfer window?
Ed Woodward | Groundhog Day Edition
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
The point here is, no point spending money on players that do not add value to the squad.
Any how, when was the last time Manchester United signed no one in the summer transfer window?
Season starts in a matter of weeks, not like any new players would want to bed in and be fully prepared for start of the season
The lack of investment completely bit them in the arse, they're still suffering the consequences of that to this day. Ask any Spurs fan if they think it was the right choice not to sign anyone, the answer will be a resounding 'no'.
We need transfers and you can always improve any squad but can't be done overnight. Chelsea do their business in a very different way and always have......
Meh. Loads of shouty-shouty, not much thinking. Pretty sure they post on here listening to them rant.
That why I posted it! Sounds like many of the ranting moaners on here. Own up: Which posters are these two likely lads??
I’m actually seeing a lot of idiots on Twitter trying to incite violence and validate the previous attacks on Woodward’s house.
I’m not actually sure which part Woodward is being held responsible for here. Chelsea, by end of this week, would have spent over £200m in this market. Is Woodward being lambasted for not having £200m to spend at the moment? Is his failing an inability to get Dortmund to give us Sancho for £30m?
Honestly, transfers is the worst part of football support to me by some distance. It’s all anyone seems to care about, and it’s often detached from any fiscal reality. Just be ‘busy in the market’ - as by the time summer comes around, fans are bored of their squads and want new ones.
Of course, it is an essential part of the game, and I would also like additions, but transfer obsessing is such a tabloid part of the game that irritates me no end.
I’m not actually sure which part Woodward is being held responsible for here. Chelsea, by end of this week, would have spent over £200m in this market. Is Woodward being lambasted for not having £200m to spend at the moment? Is his failing an inability to get Dortmund to give us Sancho for £30m?
Honestly, transfers is the worst part of football support to me by some distance. It’s all anyone seems to care about, and it’s often detached from any fiscal reality. Just be ‘busy in the market’ - as by the time summer comes around, fans are bored of their squads and want new ones.
Of course, it is an essential part of the game, and I would also like additions, but transfer obsessing is such a tabloid part of the game that irritates me no end.
grow up
Sancho’s value has always been 120m. We’ve known this for months. Surely we’d have back up options right?
sorry EDgrow up
Because they spent hardly anything 2008-2013 and cleared some of their debt. They were also playing catchup after that period of minimal net spend.
Better to stop browsing redcafe for a while. You can bet it’s going to be another bunch of threads on this soon enough.
There has been no credible news on Sancho, but look at the thread.
Reckon the Glazers have shit themselves at the prospect of spending 150m or whatever when our revenue is potentially down 100m plus
not to defend Woodward but he does operate within the constraints they set
still don't know why we aren't bringing in cheap prospects from France/Belgium/Italy/Portugal
not to defend Woodward but he does operate within the constraints they set
still don't know why we aren't bringing in cheap prospects from France/Belgium/Italy/Portugal
The money they've spent post Fergie was enough to mount a serious title challenge at the very least. But we've spent that money really poorly and last summer was another example of our poor approach in the transfer window.
That would mean we are a well run club, we are not a well run club same rubbish every window. We just don't push on.
Which begs the question why the feck haven’t they switched it up yet? Aren’t they supposed to be fecking business men?!
I have to agree. I wouldn't want no investment, I just don't want bad investment.
But the question still exists, if the Glazers are such leeches, why spend the money they did post saf? Also, why not sell to the Saudis?
Constraints budgetwise, yes fair enough. What smalltalk have they been making with Dortmund for god knows how long who appears to be our only serious target? Tiago Silva played in the CL final last night and today looks like he is a Chelsea player. The excuses for these clowns is mindboggling
Who knows if they've even contacted Dortmund.
maybe Pogba staying scuppered any deal?
either way we aren't a major player in the transfer market anymore. We haven't been since early Mourinho
If Man Utd did that, they’d be accused of not showing any ambition.
Man Utd cannot win with our fans, no matter what they do.
Say Woodward gets Sancho over the line and Sancho turns to utter shite. People would complain why Woodward couldn’t get him any cheaper.
Beggers belief.
That's the million dollar question..
The blame lies entirely at the Glazer's IMO.
Joke of a post.
We spent £80M on Maguire, £55M on AWB, £90M on Pogba.
EDIT: £50M on Fernandes too!
Yet somehow we aren’t “Major Players”
Hahahahahahah
Poba staying is one less headache for them they dont have to consider replacing
Hope no one blames Solskjær next season if we don’t perform well with the squad we’ve got, he’s delivered top 4 so you’d expect him to get the backing he deserves, if we wanna be challenging then we need to be buying!! Ed Woodward is clueless and always takes forever to sign players!
yeah experience tells us we are playing a waiting game with Sancho - a game we will lose
He'd be a great signing
at the same time you look at a team like Leicester who replace Maguire with Soyuncu and can buy Kante and N'Didi for a pittance and you wonder what data analysts and scouts are doing to recruit
Sancho would be great but we will run out of steam by Christmas with our lack of depth
For this guy to "deliver" he'd have to sign 5 very good players.
feckin fat chance of that happening.
I can see us signing one top player and a couple of average ones.
feckin fat chance of that happening.
I can see us signing one top player and a couple of average ones.
How do the owners get money from United?
Those idiots are the followers on those fan channels that created unrealistic expectations with those 'reports' that we had agreed terms with Player X months ago and the club had taken the credit facility for summer transfers, something that made no sense. They've had their cocks in hand for 2 months and finally started going crazy over it
There are not many things wrong with RedCafe, especially ones largely out of its control.
But the lack of a sticky explaining to the fanbase exactly what the Glazers did when they 'bought' the club and how they now operate it is a bit perplexing. It'd be a useful resource. Surely the staff have someone they could trust to vet the general accuracy and then post the info. Eventually - and rather quickly, I'd imagine - it'd become a meme to refer posters to the sticky whenever someone posts 'I hate the Glazers but they've clearly spent a lot on us recently'.
Over the years, dozens - if not hundreds - of posters have patiently and kindly explained it to others only to be lost in the din.
There are still supporters who think the Glazers are super-rich and - while having been stingy during the SAF years - are now at least pouring money into the club to try and stop the on-pitch bleeding. This is inaccurate.
But the lack of a sticky explaining to the fanbase exactly what the Glazers did when they 'bought' the club and how they now operate it is a bit perplexing. It'd be a useful resource. Surely the staff have someone they could trust to vet the general accuracy and then post the info. Eventually - and rather quickly, I'd imagine - it'd become a meme to refer posters to the sticky whenever someone posts 'I hate the Glazers but they've clearly spent a lot on us recently'.
Over the years, dozens - if not hundreds - of posters have patiently and kindly explained it to others only to be lost in the din.
They haven't. That's the club's money. Post purchase, the Glazers have literally not put a single coin into the club. They've taken quite a bit out, though.
There are still supporters who think the Glazers are super-rich and - while having been stingy during the SAF years - are now at least pouring money into the club to try and stop the on-pitch bleeding. This is inaccurate.
Not their debt. The club's debt. It should be their debt. But it isn't thanks to Woodward.
Who owns the club?
If you're being honestly curious, this does.
If you were trying to be 'witty', then your post is exactly the type of post that would be referred to any purported "The Glazer 'ownership' explained simply" sticky.
Who owns Manchester United, quite a simple question for someone who has a lot to say? You able to answer it, yes or no?
Indeed, those are the ones.
That is unbearable.
You clearly don't understand that you trying to do what you're doing kind of proves you don't understand what you're doing.
On paper the Glazers own the "controlling stake" in terms of stock. That what you wanted, pumpkin?
I checked your post history. You've done a lot of 'But but gut the Glazers have spent on us' posts. No more responses to you, I'm afraid.
No offense.
I don’t know how these guys have viewers. They obviously have a deep love for the club and it does come across. BUT when they interview some absolutely great guests their questions can go on for hours, they’re quite incoherent and just go off on tangents. I worry that they’re both users on here.