Two reasons:
I think you’re argument is pretty shortsighted from a footballing point.
I agree.
I take your point well, but I’m of the view that United cannot afford to wait 2-3 years before a manager of the caliber of Ten Hag takes over. The table will be set in May for a proper manager to is from where are now to where we must be.
It's really weird how you are just regurgitating what other people are saying on this forum. Why pretend to be a Blackburn fan?
Haha. Why would I “pretend” to be a Blackburn fan?I spend a lot more time on BRFCS than here. It would be a lot easier not to bother. Live abroad for the last 15 years and every United game is on TV so I’ve got (my own) opinion on United.
Hahaha…mind blown.
Only United can fire a manager, bring on an interim, and have the interim following the path that was set by the manager who was sacked. The season has come full circle.
If that Sun article has any truth it's literally history repeating itself.
Keep an underqualified interim coach on to placate Pogba, and then he can take home £450k a week for feck all return. Much more important to have someone who will baby Pogba than hire a top class coach. Ole proved that.
Looks like Pogba isn’t getting the kind of offers he expected he would on the open market. He’s been angling towards signing a new deal ever since the start of the season with one report after another. This is just hilarious that he’s been convinced by a manager he hasn’t even played under.
Which teams have travelled to high altitude?
It's always about what Pogba wants. What if the club decides they're not gonna extend his contract anyway?
Smack on. You would surely have heard that Pogba had have a deal in place by now if 2=3 teams were after him. The club should offer 250k a week no more. If they do cave in and make him highest player with what looks like no competition, then they really haven't changed a thing and we will be doomed.
Pretty sure this club makes its decisions based on how many social media followers players have, how big a "brand" they are, if they can help get sponsors etc. so they would absolutely extend it
That's some interesting bollox.What part is bollocks? The fact that no one wants a paycut after getting used to a certain standard of living? because that's common feckin sense for anyone that has ever earned a paycheck. Yeah what an outlandish theory that totally defies common sense. You know what's foolish? thinking sign on fees exist for every signing and when they do they are always enough to offset what the player was previously earning. Why do you think they want us to pay their wages to leave? Because the other club can rarely ever cover what we're paying and the players don't want to give up the difference in current earnings. If Pogba can't find someone to pay him in the stratosphere of what we pay he'll be compelled to revisit our offer.
Pogba and Lingard will be getting substantial sign on fees due to being out of contract. It's not like Lingards wages are insanely high either, it would be a surprise if he ends up on lower wages. Neither will have much to worry about, unless they're complete morons and spend whatever they're earning.
You just keep going...You're confusing your personal opinion with facts. It's hardly unknown that we pay our players too much money, doesn't mean that some of the better players we have are unlikely to sort out a move where they will get similar wages. Accepting differences in standard wages, bonuses etc is fairly standard when changing company. It's not like anyone really wants less money, but depending on the overall situation it's hardly a showstopper, also depends on how loaded you are. Furthermore, i specifically mentioned Pogba and Lingard in relation to sign on fees, it was hardly a claim that everyone gets it, can't be that difficult to understand the difference in claims. Lingard is a proven player, he was also excellent for West Ham during his loan spell, his reported £100k weekly wages is unlikely to be that much of a stumbling block for the clubs interested in him, but even if they don't want to fork it out we're hardly talking about a significant drop, especially considering he'll be getting a sign on fee.
Talk about confusing opinion with fact. All of this is personal opinion and conjecture about what these players are going to receive at their next clubs. I mean who told you Lingard is receiving a signing on fee on his next deal? Has his agent negotiated it? how much is it? He's going to lose for sure because he's going to a lesser poorer club. West ham only has about 2 players making six figures, it is absolutely a big deal for the lower clubs. They wouldn't be loaning players if they just had that kind of cash.
Oh brother, another one spamming emojis when he isn't confident in himself. I said our players don't want to take a paycut because no one does, eg the episode we just had with Martial's move. I've also used Lingard and Pogba as examples who will undoubtedly have to face the unappealing choice to take less if they want to leave us this summer. You can go discuss the exact economic feasibility with their accountants. The sentiment is not that deep. Take your advice and stick to what you're replying. Jeez, "Economic feasibility" for players yet to even agree these next contracts. One would need to see exactly what their next contracts land them before talking feasibility specifics.
Mint
Lingard has turned down contract offers and rejected any further talks of extensions at United, massive surprise given that Greck on the internet has concluded it's not economically feasible for Lingard to potentially earn less money somewhere else.
We don't know what Pogba has sorted out and what he hasn't sorted out, just because his next destination isn't announced it doesn't mean that it's not already decided. In terms of hot commodity and selling, why would anyone pay large transfer sums for a player that is about to leave on a free transfer. Real Madrid are hardly lining up for something as daft as that after their Hazard fiasco.
Not entirely sure why you find it so complicated to stick to what i'm actually writing. What i wrote:
Not sure why you've decided to pretend that Pogba is facing a massive drop in wages by changing clubs, or that it's going to have a massive negative effect on his personal deals that he's fecking to Real Madrid, Juventus or another top club, to the point that it's not economically feasible for him.
How you translated it:
If you think another club is going to easily match that for Pogba then I don't know what to tell you.
There's a bit of a fecking difference between "massive drop in wages and commercial income to the point it's not economically feasible" and "easily matching that".
S'right. Commercial success is our priority and we've done a pretty remarkable job exploiting every angle. I'm not saying they board doesn't want trophies and titles, they'd be insane not to, but our relative lack of success on the pitch and managerial turmoil doesn't seem to have brought about a radical restructuring of the business model. If a player can generate more than his salary in image rights, sponsorship, and advertising, it makes good sense to keep them.
Depends on the player.
It's a shame about Amad though. Atalanta wanted him back on loan when we first bought him and we said no, only for him to rot on the bench all this time.
Yeah. I thought us saying no was a sign that he’d be given minutes and allowed to develop especially considering how highly rated he is.. ultimately Dan James played more.
I am not sure why you think he'd play more for Atlanta in their system he barely played when we signed him and he is still ill suited to that system now
… Carl Anka and Seb Stafford-Bloor. Two of the absolute worst football ”journalists”. Crafton is not so bad though.
Well said, but these high wages work both ways in We can't get rid of players that we don't want because of there high wages. ( Sanchez) Also I would rather players play for the badge
