Marcus Rashford - Linked to PSG

devilish

Juventus fan who used to support United
Joined
Sep 5, 2002
Messages
58,494
I get the negative sentiment and top 4 does look unlikely, but we can keep Rashford and still play Garnacho this season. I would rather we start playing well so our players are worth more when we sell, not dirt cheap because the team sucks.
We are sitting on a 60-70m rated player who hasn't been doing very well and who has just 2 years left in his contract. Sancho is more comfortable on the left and he's a far better player then Rashy. I'd say cash in now and we add the players that we need
 

sglowrider

Against Oral Equality
Joined
Dec 27, 2009
Messages
19,627
Location
Hell on Earth
Somewhat disheartening too. I'm wondering if this cloud that has enveloped my club is here to stay... can''t see myself bothering with it all after say, another few years of toxicity.
Its a one-way relationship -- they enjoy or bask in the glory of winning from the efforts of the manager and the players. Yet what do they give back in return? Normally it's loyalty -- through thick & thin. Instead, it is all about how it makes them feel only. Take but give nothing in return.
 

Jed I. Knight

The Mos Eisley Hillbilly
Joined
May 29, 2013
Messages
3,513
Location
Tatooine
We all know that he would never accept those terms. What he'll do is to delay and delay up until we either give him what he wants or he'll walk up for free. Its time we cash in now. We have a better player then him in Sancho. SAF would have done it and any proper run club would do it
Absolutely!

Hanging on to underperforming players out of sentiment and misguided hope is a classic telltale sign of poor management. SAF was the absolute master of knowing when a player’s time at the club had run its course.
 

Lyng

Full Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2012
Messages
2,425
Location
Denmark
Yeap. It's embarrassing. Zero sense of loyalty especially to one of our own. Worst set of 'supporters' in the League.
Rashford hasnt performed for several seasons now. Thinking its sensible to let him go to PSG is not toxic.
McTominay gets (rightfully) criticized as well, and from what I remember you have been one of them asking for an upgrade. Nothing toxic about it. If they arent good enough they arent good enough.
 

Lash

Full Member
Joined
May 3, 2012
Messages
9,095
Location
London
Supports
Millwall, Saint-Etienne
United wants 120

£60m is an extremely fair first bid for someone like Rashford. £75M would be probably the best we could get for him, £120m is a Woodward/Judge type valuation.
 

el3mel

Full Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2016
Messages
40,860
Location
Egypt
United wants 120

We never learn. That's the same bullshit we did with Pogba and it ended up with leaving on free. We could have cashed on him ages ago but no, we kept on asking for ridiculous prices and he kept underperforming on the pitch and at the end we got feck all from him.
 

youmeletsfly

Full Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2018
Messages
2,465
This will end with Rashford getting a new deal in 1 week
This.

Everyone and their dog know this club is full of idiots who'll jump at the occasion and get him a new bumper contract.

Why in the feck would PSG need Marcus fecking Rashford of all sorts? The PR machine is in full force.
 

ericPSG

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Dec 24, 2020
Messages
43
Supports
PSG
I don't believe one second that PSG will pay even £60m for Rashford. At least I hope they won't
PSG is supposed to have 80m€ left. Maybe a little more if they sell Paredes and Kehrer
And they still want 3 more players with the priority being clearly a CB. We can't expect Ramos to play 40+ games thie year

If they find this kind of money, it will be for skriniar
 

elmo

Can never have too many Eevees
Joined
Jul 14, 2008
Messages
12,030
Location
AKA: Slapanut Goat Smuggla
Anything over £60m we should be taking and running. Realistically we can probably hold out for £80m. But just take it and get Antony or Gakpo.
Anything over 30 and we should take and run.

If they watched how he played in the past 2 years, they’ll be wanting money to take him off our books.
 

elmo

Can never have too many Eevees
Joined
Jul 14, 2008
Messages
12,030
Location
AKA: Slapanut Goat Smuggla
A club that can afford any player in the world and they want Rashford? :lol:

We’ve a higher chance of winning the league this year than this transfer taking place.
 

Gee Male

Full Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2009
Messages
4,184
There is zero chance that this is true, it is obviously a contract ploy. All these reports mentioning PSG being willing to offer a big contract is clearly so that he can point to it and say - look what I can get on the market.

Rashford is a problem player - not so much because of his poor form, which I believe he can get through, but his poor attitude when things aren't going well is an issue. In fact, I can't think of an academy graduate that became a first team regular for us in the last 10 years that didn't have a bad attitude. The culture of the club is shocking.
 

fallengt

Full Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2011
Messages
4,002
Make them pay Anthony for us. But we all know this is bait for a new contract. Never going to happen.
Setting a bad example for the kids. Shame on you Rashy.
 

pocco

loco
Joined
Mar 17, 2010
Messages
19,463
Location
Keep a clean shit tomorrow, United is my final bus
If that is true then the goal is to push for £10-15m more, but make sure the deal gets done even at £60m. That's the best deal we have been presented with in a long time, in or out.

If they fecked it up asking for £120m then that would be the biggest transfer disaster by far, and that's saying something. He'll be worth a fraction in 1-2 years.
 

amolbhatia50k

Sneaky bum time - Vaccination status: dozed off
Joined
Nov 8, 2002
Messages
88,442
Location
india
£60m is an extremely fair first bid for someone like Rashford. £75M would be probably the best we could get for him, £120m is a Woodward/Judge type valuation.
I'm sorry but why on earth would they pay 60 million for someone who has been playing as badly as Rashford?
 

OldSchoolManc

Full Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2018
Messages
1,841
This story has been generated 90% from Rashford’s team.
That’s why we should get rid any which way we can. Can’t have these half hearted performances AND angling for greener pastures.
In no way does he deserve a new contract. Time to cut off the waste of wage bills.
 

Chairman Steve

Full Member
Joined
May 9, 2018
Messages
4,736
United offering a new multi year deal would be a disasterous move on our part. That would genuinely look like we’re in clown world.

A fairly experienced 24 year old forward that has no goals from a start in 15 months is a considerable fecking red flag.
 

nazanto

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Sep 10, 2013
Messages
289
Location
Cloud
Yeap. It's embarrassing. Zero sense of loyalty especially to one of our own. Worst set of 'supporters' in the League.
I don't really get this sentiment. Yes he comes through our ranks and done exceptionally well. And let's not forget he's being compensate well too and dare I say more than his colleagues in this same industry who has achieve far more than him. His job is to play football and its expected of him to perform well in that. But unfortunately his performance these last few years has been sub par. Just because he is one of our own, he supposedly got more leeway? I would argue because he's one of our own he should know better that if you're not performing on the pitch, then it's time for club to move on.

But then again probably some would love to see that because Rashford is local lad, he should be given new contract 400k per week or something because he deserved it.
 

poleglass red

Full Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2015
Messages
3,127
God forbid he scores a goal or actually plays decent in upcoming games, then we offer him a new improved contract. That's normally how it works, isn't it.
 

Lash

Full Member
Joined
May 3, 2012
Messages
9,095
Location
London
Supports
Millwall, Saint-Etienne
I'm sorry but why on earth would they pay 60 million for someone who has been playing as badly as Rashford?
There is no doubt he has talent and on his day he is unplayable and they would believe they can get the best out of him.
 

Annihilate Now!

...or later, I'm not fussy
Scout
Joined
Nov 4, 2010
Messages
45,125
Location
W.Yorks
I'm sorry but why on earth would they pay 60 million for someone who has been playing as badly as Rashford?
Because he's young, he's talented, he's got a lot of name value, and he has shown he can score goals at a high level.

Two years ago how much would you have expected Rashford to be worth? Would be near £100m I imagine... obviously the last 18 months lower that valuation significantly, but it doesn't suddenly mean he's a £20/£30m pound player as some here are claiming - We sold Dan James for £25m, and Rashford is worth significantly more then that.
 

Shark

@NotShark
Joined
Feb 1, 2012
Messages
24,894
Location
Ireland
There is no doubt he has talent and on his day he is unplayable and they would believe they can get the best out of him.
Unplayable wouldn't be the term I'd use but there's some talent still there.
 

Smores

Full Member
Joined
May 18, 2011
Messages
24,400
Because he's young, he's talented, he's got a lot of name value, and he has shown he can score goals at a high level.

Two years ago how much would you have expected Rashford to be worth? Would be near £100m I imagine... obviously the last 18 months lower that valuation significantly, but it doesn't suddenly mean he's a £20/£30m pound player as some here are claiming - We sold Dan James for £25m, and Rashford is worth significantly more then that.
On the flip side though would anyone be happy for United to spend 60 million on a player like him if the tables were turned?

There's plenty of examples of players that just disappear so prior form isn't a guarantee of anything.

He's got injury problems and he's a bit one dimensional already so it's a huge gamble for any club to bring him onboard. I think it's likely we'll phase him out and he'll leave on the cheap next year.
 

sglowrider

Against Oral Equality
Joined
Dec 27, 2009
Messages
19,627
Location
Hell on Earth
I don't really get this sentiment. Yes he comes through our ranks and done exceptionally well. And let's not forget he's being compensate well too and dare I say more than his colleagues in this same industry who has achieve far more than him. His job is to play football and its expected of him to perform well in that. But unfortunately his performance these last few years has been sub par. Just because he is one of our own, he supposedly got more leeway? I would argue because he's one of our own he should know better that if you're not performing on the pitch, then it's time for club to move on.

But then again probably some would love to see that because Rashford is local lad, he should be given new contract 400k per week or something because he deserved it.
If a club is all about just results then there is no soul history or depth. It's a plastic club then.
That's what's supposedly sets us and Liverpool apart.
 

Annihilate Now!

...or later, I'm not fussy
Scout
Joined
Nov 4, 2010
Messages
45,125
Location
W.Yorks
On the flip side though would anyone be happy for United to spend 60 million on a player like him if the tables were turned?

There's plenty of examples of players that just disappear so prior form isn't a guarantee of anything.

He's got injury problems and he's a bit one dimensional already so it's a huge gamble for any club to bring him onboard. I think it's likely we'll phase him out and he'll leave on the cheap next year.
If say, Bukayo Saka, or Phil Foden had an absolutely terrible 18 months - I'd still be prepared to spend around £60m on them. Though probably not more then that to be fair.... Point is £50m-£60m isn't a crazy amount for Rashford when you consider how much players are going for these days.
 

hobbers

Full Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2013
Messages
19,992
Yeap. It's embarrassing. Zero sense of loyalty especially to one of our own. Worst set of 'supporters' in the League.
What a warped mindset, if you think it’s the players who deserve loyalty from the fans while doing nothing to earn it.
 

Abraxas

Full Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2021
Messages
3,558
It depends what you get for him and what you can do with it. On the one hand it's a little bit sad to lose a player we've brought through, but if we lose him and can pay for the managers prime choice in Antony, it probably improves us.

But I don't get just selling him because people are annoyed at his form for whatever fee lands on Murtough's desk. That's stupid. At the moment he's one of our senior forwards with some chance he can improve his form. We don't have enough quality or depth to chuck him out the door without substantial funds coming our way or a plan. It would have to be a good fee.
 

Pintu

Full Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Messages
2,056
Location
Sweden
Because he's young, he's talented, he's got a lot of name value, and he has shown he can score goals at a high level.

Two years ago how much would you have expected Rashford to be worth? Would be near £100m I imagine... obviously the last 18 months lower that valuation significantly, but it doesn't suddenly mean he's a £20/£30m pound player as some here are claiming - We sold Dan James for £25m, and Rashford is worth significantly more then that.
How many clubs out there can spend this kind of money? How many of them are interested in him? Is he gonna be interested in a move to bottom-half clubs?
 
X