Is transfer budget our problem?

[Sky1981]

Our new manager always offered warchest, and perceived chance to rebuild.

But could it be a double edged sword, in a sense that every manager that came here never try to fully utilize the players they inherit?

We've seen moyes, lvg, jose, and now ole first hand will always be clearing deadwoods.

While some of the deadwoods really offers nothing and really need to go but is it a wrong mentality to come in and state that x,y,z are not needed and up for sale.

Managers at other top clubs comes and go, they quietly work with what they have. I even think they're cunning enough pretend that they give every player a chance and only sell them when the times and conditions are ripe for them to do so.

Our methods seems to be making a shortlist of who needs to go every time a new manager is appointed, i dont think it's good for the morale. How would you feel if a new boss comes in and says you're not needed. I can only imagine they will probably not arsed to put in the effort. In an ideal world they'll knuckle down and fight for their place, but i dont think it's fair to ask a human being to be like that.

Already we've seen lukaku, matic mouthing off. Regardless of what we think about them it creates a division in our dressing room.

Thoughts?

 

[Scotty McT]

The main issue is that we've built a squad full of mediocre players. That's why managers come in and ship them off. You can't motivate the likes of Lingard and Jones into playing better. You can coach them, especially when they're young and malleable like the former, but that takes years and might not result in much anyway. Some players can be motivated into playing better such as Pogba and Martial, but the club doesn't seem to have any interest in trying to sell them anyway. Most of the squad falls into the category of talent being the issue though, not motivation.

I wouldn't call what Ole had to spend a warchest, considering we spent less than half of what Madrid spent. Another issue is our wage structure is poorly managed so you have guys on the bench who are on £130k a week despite the fact no other club would pay them those wages, which means we can't spend that money on marquee talents. For example, weren't we apparently spending more on wages when Madrid had Bale and Ronaldo? Despite our top earner being on about tree fiddy a week and those two being on excess of 600k? We just have a massively bloated squad. Paying them wages that are too high also means we have trouble flogging those players, which we see evidence for every summer like when you sell Italian internationals in 2019 for the same price we were buying players for in 1981.

 

[Cassidy]

We needed to rude the wage budget and number of players we just do not need this summer. You can't just keep adding players without getting rid of deadwood

 

[settembrini]

In Solskjaer's case he had a good few months of working with the previous manager's squad to see which players he could use and which he didn't think were up to it.

 

[Robbie Boy]

No.

 

[Bestietom]

I did think Ole would be given a bigger transfer budget for a team that needs huge rebuilding. At this rate it will take us 3 years to get a strong team to compete.
Yes we bought well in the 3 players we brought in, but were left thin in other areas where players moved out.
We need to start balancing these areas from the next window onwards, so as to have a better chance of competing.
A midfielder and a forward would be nice in January. Then continue next summer strengthening in other areas.

 

[Denis79]

The cause of our problems that it was let to slip this far until funds were made available. We stopped going for the biggest talents in SAFs last 8 years in charge, why invest when it's working, right? That SAF kept the team that competetive just shows how good a manager he really was.

This years 90M net spend this year isn't really a warchest now is it? Considering the clubs financial power and the shit we're in, it's peanuts.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

Nope

 

[Greck]

Not a problem but the previous managers when given a big budget acted like they absolutely had to spend it even if what they wanted wasn't available, LVG especially. Many of those panic buys are now deadwood. I'll give Ole credit for not panic buying when he learnt some of his targets were not available. They say he wasn't backed, I think he just refused to hit the panic button like fans wanted

Whether he stays our manager or not we won't have deadwood from his tenure

 

[Mark Pawelek]

Not buying wisely is in previous seasons was our problem. Prior to Ole transfer budget wasn't the problem; Mourinho spent a lot of money. Last summer was the 1st season I can remember when we bought no duds. Best transfer season since 2005-2006 when we got: Vidic‎, Evra, Park, van der Sar and Ben Foster.

 

[devilish]

I think it is a problem. Hence why we started the season with no midfield, no RW and no competition for Rashy

 

[Lee565]

No the main issue is Woodward is a moron who keeps jumping from one extreme to another when it comes to the philosophy of our managers.

 

[Massive Spanner]

we've spent more than enough since Fergie retired to build a top team, so no.

 

[romufc]

No one knows where the root of the problem is..

 

[buckooo1978]

we cant be sure but it could well.be a combination of all of.....

-problems of structure with no DoF
-problems of egi with Woodward unwilling to give up responsibility
-problems of scouting
-problems of spending

 

[GBBQ]

we've spent more than enough since Fergie retired to build a top team, so no.

Yeah exactly, many teams have performed better than we have with a lot less resources. Even if we're not spending enough of the money we actually generate, it still should be enough to be competing on all fronts.

 

[Eric's Seagull]

Years of not spending wisely messed up. I believe it was an issue during the last window as I think we should have got in at least 1 midfielder, a right winger and a striker.

 

[Un4givableB]

The cause of our problems that it was let to slip this far until funds were made available. We stopped going for the biggest talents in SAFs last 8 years in charge, why invest when it's working, right? That SAF kept the team that competetive just shows how good a manager he really was.

This years 90M net spend this year isn't really a warchest now is it? Considering the clubs financial power and the shit we're in, it's peanuts.

100% right.

We just stop competing at the top of the market, instead of trying for the best players we tried to buy future potential good players but not even potential superstars, that why bought the like's of Jones, smalling, Nick Powell, Kagawa, Zaha,
Ashley Young decent players most of them but hardly game-changers. Imagine the team we would have had with David Silva, Aguero or Hazard all very gettable at the time.

 

[ClaytonBlackmoorLeftPeg]

It’s definitely not the budget that’s an issue, it’s the players we have bought.

Any fan can easily name 10 big money players we have bought that have failed at the club since Fergie left... here goes:

Bailly
Darmian
Schneiderlain
Schweinsteiger
Lukuku
Sanchez
Rojo
Fred
Falcao
Di Maria
Miki
Fellaini

That’s got to be £330m plus wages we’ve wasted. Clearly we got some money back on a couple of these, yet not a single one of them we sold for more money than we bought them for, or is worth more than bought them for (if still at the club). You could argue the only player we have bought since Fergie retired that we didn’t lose money on was Zlatan!

You can then add in the likes of Matic, Shaw, Mata and Blind - who have done ok, but nothing really above average. That’s nearly another £140m.

So nearly £500m spent on players who didn’t really perform at the club.

In 6 years, you could only consider Zlatan, Romero (reserve keeper!!) Martial and Lindelof (barely), as successes. That’s the problem.

The three signed this summer have started off well, and hopefully we have turned a corner.

 

[Annihilate Now!]

Who knows

The only thing i'm pretty sure of is that wanted to sign more then just 3 players this summer.

 

[Sky1981]

I'm not talking about whether the fund is enough or not, that's another debate.

But our mentality whenever a new manager comes in, instead of utilizing and working with what he has until the time is right to sell the deadwood, our managers seems to stupidly laid out the plan on who they'll chop without realizing that they're still in the team.

 

[sunama]

Our transfer budget is not the reason why we lost to CP and failed to beat some other "lesser" teams.
The squad is expensive enough to beat these teams.
Now if/when we get thumped by the likes of MCFC and LFC, we can say that the small transfer budget is the reason.

 

[Class of 63]

Yes, I don't think the Glazers and Woodward ever give the Manager(s) enough pocket money to spend.

 

[Amerifan]

This happens in business so often it’s an adage: a new broom sweeps clean.

I don’t have a problem with a new manager working with the players he wants to work with. I do have problem with changing managers every couple years, and an even bigger problem with dumping a significant chunk of the squad without replacing many of them, and the biggest problem with a squad where the whole is less than the sum of the parts.

I hope those days are behind us and we can build a squad that works better together as a team. With today’s transfer fees we can’t buy enough quality to challenge, so this is our only route to a title.

 

[Hawks2008]

No CL money leads to owners tightening the purse strings. We've been burned in the market and they don't want to lose dividends. The narrative they brief the press is that it's all about giving youth a chance but really it's just betraying Ole and leaving him with a squad short of bodies and quality.

 

[el3mel]

The problem is we spend money without any kind of plan. We sign players then spend the entire season thinking where should we fit them, or if they're actually good enough or not. Thanks to this we're in our 7th year post SAF and the squad is still a total mess.

Of course it's not helped by the fact that Glazers decided to stop spending the previous 2 markets as well.

All this would have been solved by a competent DOF who analyzes the team and puts a certain plan for us to build the squad based on it, but nope, why should we be an organized and well run club ? Let a banker like Woodward run the team, appoint managers with different styles who aren't going to stay here beyond 2 full seasons and keep signing random players, maybe it'll work at one point or something.

We're a terribly run club and this isn't going to change any time soon.

 

[youmeletsfly]

No mate, the lack of a proper guy to select players and managers is our problem.
The guy's position is commonly known in football as DOF.

 

[RooneyLegend]

Far from it, more like not having a clear plan.

 

[Lentwood]

If you look at the money spent post-SAF, and even in the few years prior to SAF leaving, there has undoubtedly been enough to be competing for 2nd/3rd as a minimum now

The problem with asking “is our transfer budget enough” is that fans will always think “no” because enough is never enough when it comes to football fans and transfers

At some point, you have to re-evaluate and think “how come we’ve spent £800m but appear to be getting worse”?

 

[Schmeichel's Cartwheel]

We haven't spent enough in the last 2 summer windows. Last year we spend £70m, which all pretty much went down the drain. This year we spent £145m, with a much lower net spend due to the Lukaku money. We really should have spent £200m+ for the last 2 summer windows. Look at City when they were going from an average team to a great team, they were the biggest spenders by far every season for about 4 straight years. If we do indeed have the money we say we do, that is what we need to be doing. If City and Liverpool spend £150m we need to be spending £300m. We're playing catch up, quickest way to catch up is to throw serious money at it and outspend everyone, as Chelsea and City proved in 2003 & 2009 respectively.

Forget the United Way, it's a myth. We simply had two all time great long term managers, outside of those 2 periods we're just like everyone else. Liverpool fans used to talk about the Liverpool Way, they've not won a league in 30 years. We can talk about the united way all we want while further falling behind, or we can actually do something about our decline, get some decent scouts in for once, and buy legitimately great players.

 

[Cassidy]

Squad bloat and wage bloat I would guess. We have far too many players on our books. Or we did anyway

 

[Web of Bissaka]

Other than 2013/14 (new change in management bringing problems) and 2018/19 where Ed likely losing trust with Mou and Ole is still a caretaker during January, our transfer budget have always been consistent.

Transfer budget = around 200m per season

2013/14 -- 77.3m

2014/15 -- 195.35m
2015/16 -- 156m
2016/17 -- 185m
2017/18 -- 198.4m

2018/19 -- 82.7m

2019/2020
Mag 87m
James 17m
AWB 55m
----------------
= 159m
+ Bruno 55m
--------------------
= 214m


I imagine Sancho is going to cost 100m minimum, at most 150m.
Leaving 100m for other positions, but more realistically 50m.

2020/21
Budget 200m
- Sancho 150m
------------------------
= 50m

50m can only be used to get budget players, realistically just one player.
I don't think C19 really affected transfer prices that much.

Expect we'll be getting only 2 players for next season, 3 players at most if we play it right.
Extending Ighalo's loan helped a lot but only until next Jan.

 

[Bilbo]

If we make the CL it will help enormously. We need that confirmed income. I can see us spending around 120m on 2 players and trying to shift a few out

 

[Igor Drefljak]

150m...?

 

[Web of Bissaka]

Other than 2013/14 (new change in management bringing problems) and 2018/19 where Ed likely losing trust with Mou and Ole is still a caretaker during January, our transfer budget have always been consistent.

Transfer budget = around 200m per season

2013/14 -- 77.3m

2014/15 -- 195.35m
2015/16 -- 156m
2016/17 -- 185m
2017/18 -- 198.4m

2018/19 -- 82.7m

2019/2020
Mag 87m
James 17m
AWB 55m
----------------
= 159m
+ Bruno 55m
--------------------
= 214m


I imagine Sancho is going to cost 100m minimum, at most 150m.
Leaving 100m for other positions, but more realistically 50m.

2020/21
Budget 200m
- Sancho 150m
------------------------
= 50m

50m can only be used to get budget players, realistically just one player.
I don't think C19 really affected transfer prices that much.

Expect we'll be getting only 2 players for next season, 3 players at most if we play it right.
Extending Ighalo's loan helped a lot but only until next Jan.

^ But if we also include money recoup from transfers out.

Turns out we only had budget of around 150m every season.
except 13/14, 18/19 and also *new* 15/16.

^ May also be an indication that Ed already lost trust in LVG for season 15/16 (~50m) but more likely he's balancing the book since we couldn't sell more to get more money. Plus LVG's insistence on cutting the squad down to open up more door for youth.

Would also explain why we didn't get more players for 17/18, only a swap later on Jan.

Worrying for next season.
Selling current players especially Sanchez and Smalling are important.

 

[Igor Drefljak]

^ But if we also include money recoup from transfers out.

Turns out we only had maximum 150m every season.

Worrying for next season.

Is it? How many sides spend 150m+ every season

 

[Cheimoon]

I think the reason why new managers keep making lots of changes to the squad is because United hire very different managers each time. Stylistically, there is nothing that connects Moyes to LvG or LvG to Mourinho, and little between Mourinho and Ole. Add further that United have swapped managers a lot the past few years, and of course the squad is a random mix of players that each manager had managed to buy to fit their own style. So it will take Ole a little while to get a squad that he really likes (just like it happened for Klopp and Pep) - and if he is replaced before that happens and another manager with a different approach is hired (say, someone like Rose or Nagelsmann), then the whole cycle will inevitably start again.

 

[Skills]

I think the reason why new managers keep making lots of changes to the squad is because United hire very different managers each time. Stylistically, there is nothing that connects Moyes to LvG or LvG to Mourinho, and little between Mourinho and Ole. Add further that United have swapped managers a lot the past few years, and of course the squad is a random mix of players that each manager had managed to buy to fit their own style. So it will take Ole a little while to get a squad that he really likes (just like it happened for Klopp and Pep) - and if he is replaced before that happens and another manager with a different approach is hired (say, someone like Rose or Nagelsmann), then the whole cycle will inevitably start again.

That's a load of shit. The reason our managers keep making changes is because they're not held accountable for making use of the talent at hand.

Pep fecking Guardiola can make Man City play football with Otamendi as a CB, and here our fans believe Ole Solskjaer is some savant who can't cope without two exceptional ball playing CBs.

 

[Web of Bissaka]

Is it? How many sides spend 150m+ every season

Just did quick looks, you are right.

City and Barca did but depends when they feel like it, not consistent.
City won the league twice after they spent those amount of money, they spent it thrice.

Liverpool once for 18/19 but it then brought them immediate success with CL and PL in two seasons.

PSG can be considered more consistent, but they're still not close to winning CL.

I just realize, we've been spending like crazy overall consistently post-SAF, in comparison to other top teams. Inflation doesn't only affected us.

Turns out, sensible transfers and good squad building are more important.

 

[UNITED ACADEMY]

Other than 2013/14 (new change in management bringing problems) and 2018/19 where Ed likely losing trust with Mou and Ole is still a caretaker during January, our transfer budget have always been consistent.

Transfer budget = around 200m per season

2013/14 -- 77.3m

2014/15 -- 195.35m
2015/16 -- 156m
2016/17 -- 185m
2017/18 -- 198.4m

2018/19 -- 82.7m

2019/2020
Mag 87m
James 17m
AWB 55m
----------------
= 159m
+ Bruno 55m
--------------------
= 214m


I imagine Sancho is going to cost 100m minimum, at most 150m.
Leaving 100m for other positions, but more realistically 50m.

2020/21
Budget 200m
- Sancho 150m
------------------------
= 50m

50m can only be used to get budget players, realistically just one player.
I don't think C19 really affected transfer prices that much.

Expect we'll be getting only 2 players for next season, 3 players at most if we play it right.
Extending Ighalo's loan helped a lot but only until next Jan.

Agent fees & big wages can also affect our transfer budget. Bruno's money may be also from this year transfer budget.