The obsession with dropping Mason Greenwood to the bench

bsCallout

Full Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2017
Messages
1,519
Ole should forget about 3 forwards and go with two up front.
It's suprising he doesn't considering he knows the role so well.

We have three forwards, four now actually. Not wingers. Both Bruno and Pogba like to pull out wide to create too.
 

lsd

The Oracle
Joined
Jun 5, 2016
Messages
5,512
I have never seen one post saying we should drop Greenwood so have no idea what obsession the OP is on about .

What I have seen are people stating facts that you cannot overplay a 19yo at this level and expect him to deliver week in week out
 

MadDogg

Full Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2002
Messages
11,586
Location
Manchester Utd never lose, just run out of time
Now I honestly don't have a clue what point you are attempting to make. You should reread the OP and your last post.
The OP (and seemingly you) are basically making it black and white. Either he's first choice and starting every game, or he's always on the bench and not playing enough to develop.

The reality is that all four would start regularly, with Greenwood probably starting a little less than the other three at the beginning but still getting plenty of gametime. As I said, I'd expect him to play in the vast majority of games, probably starting half of them and coming off the bench in half. Is that not 'regular enough football to develop' for you, or does he have to start every match?
 

UNITED ACADEMY

Full Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2018
Messages
7,033
1. Obviously a sarcastic post
2. How does it have to do with getting the best out of all 3 when one of them will have to be on the bench playing fewer minutes?

Regardless of what you think will happen, the fact is Sacho would initially replace one of the three, and that said individual will be a rotation option until further notice. The most likely candidate is Greenwood given his position (which is the OPs point). If you don't disagree then we are square.
I’m not sure how your post is sarcastic, you are making a clear point about the rotation which trigger my argument.

You have read my post like multiple times and yet you still asked that no 2 question. There is no point playing Martial, Rashford & Greenwood blindly together as front three if they can’t perform because it lacks of balance to support them.

Those three are goalscorer and Sancho is a quality creative player which brings the balance to the front 3 as what Ole wanted in his formation/system/tactic. How can you get the best out of goal scorer if the team lacks of creator to create chance for them?

The OP point is moaning about the danger of Greenwood’s development which clearly what you have missed. Even with Sancho, Greenwood development will not be stalled, he will get lot of game times and if he’s good enough then he can even replace Martial’s spot. If anything I’m more concerned if he’s being forced to play to the death in the team that doesn’t have balance result in unable to score or underperform.
 

Fortitude

TV/Monitor Expert
Scout
Joined
Jul 10, 2004
Messages
14,037
Location
Inside right
How is that the only thing Ole has done right? And how is this Post liked.

Ole has done a lot more than just doing week with greenwood, why not bash him in this thread too though I suppose
I liked the post, and I'll bold the bits I thoroughly agree with:

No it's not an obsession. He needs to be managed properly and it's probably the only thing Ole has done right at the club.

I am pleased he is not with England now. He needs rest , played far too many games last season.

Buying Cavani is a masterstroke of a decision in as far as developing Greenwood is concerned.
Agree with the Cavani bit somewhat, too.

To be clear, unless you're dealing with a genuine man child, such as Rooney, Milner or the like, minutes for teenagers should be tightly managed or properly tailored and not simply based on how good they are - there are many a stellar teenager throughout the history of the game, but how many of them go on to have a long lasting career diminishes considerably - breaking out at 18 and playing nonstop... how many truly elite players are then spent by their very early 30's? Pushing them out there and relying on them at too young an age tends to have consequences further down the line. Even when they're 'ready' top managers try their damnedest not to rely on teenagers. Our predicament doesn't afford Ole that privilege because he needs every ounce of form he can get to literally keep him in his job.

With Sancho here, Greenwood, Rashford, Bruno and even Martial would have had someone to rotate with as and when necessary. Greenwood would have 1st dibs on that #9 spot, too, which would have accelerated his development.

Greenwood is the subject matter here, but he's not the only one whose minutes should be carefully handled, imo.

Thrusting him into the team just because he's a special talent will be a worry if it means he's played and played because there's no trust in the understudies.

Anyway, this Ole back and forth you guys embroil yourselves in is like white noise by now. That wasn't why I liked the post.
 

NoPace

Full Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2014
Messages
6,041
Well Ole is using him very wide and deep and he's not a playmaker or very good defensively, so ideally you'd want a Di Maria or maybe a left-footed #10 like James Rodriguez or even a right-footed wide passer like Soler maybe. A Beckham type would be ideal but those don't really exist much anymore apart from Alexander-Arnold and obviously we're not signing him and moving him from RB.

But yeah, when you consider how bad we've looked at moving the ball forward and breaking teams down, it's easy to watch a left-footed nimble creator like Pereira on West Brom who can make plays in a crowded midfield and think we'd look better with him out there than Greenwood.

Conversely, if we can actually get the ball forward and use Greenwood as a wide forward like Mbappe at PSG or Cristiano/Bale or Richarlison at Everton or Son at Spurs then sure he can be first choice even at his young age, as his shooting (and ability to get shots off) is just that good. Even with Rashford having a similar role on the other side. Weirdly, Martial looks best coming deep which should open up space for them higher up the pitch and more central in a classic false 9 way, but I think Wan-Bissaka and Matic and the CBs and Pogba being in suspended animation and Ole being a regular Champo quality coach are keeping that from being an effective work.
 

Fortitude

TV/Monitor Expert
Scout
Joined
Jul 10, 2004
Messages
14,037
Location
Inside right
Greenwood plays multiple positions, as does Sancho. It's not a straight competition between them. All four of Martial, Rashford, Sancho and Greenwood would be competing. If (as has been the case since lockdown) Rashford is the one playing the worst then he would regularly be on the bench with either Sancho or Greenwood playing on the left. If it's Martial in poor form then either Greenwood or Rashford would play up front. Overall I would have expected Greenwood to be on the bench a bit more than the others this season but ultimately it's up to him to outperform the others to win a spot. That's good management.

Of course now we've also got Cavani and the two young right wingers so that changes things and we'll see how they all go.
Yep!
 

Stretender

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jun 23, 2020
Messages
582
How is that the only thing Ole has done right? And how is this Post liked.

Ole has done a lot more than just doing week with greenwood, why not bash him in this thread too though I suppose
May be you should write something positive
I liked the post, and I'll bold the bits I thoroughly agree with:



Agree with the Cavani bit somewhat, too.

To be clear, unless you're dealing with a genuine man child, such as Rooney, Milner or the like, minutes for teenagers should be tightly managed or properly tailored and not simply based on how good they are - there are many a stellar teenager throughout the history of the game, but how many of them go on to have a long lasting career diminishes considerably - breaking out at 18 and playing nonstop... how many truly elite players are then spent by their very early 30's? Pushing them out there and relying on them at too young an age tends to have consequences further down the line. Even when they're 'ready' top managers try their damnedest not to rely on teenagers. Our predicament doesn't afford Ole that privilege because he needs every ounce of form he can get to literally keep him in his job.

With Sancho here, Greenwood, Rashford, Bruno and even Martial would have had someone to rotate with as and when necessary. Greenwood would have 1st dibs on that #9 spot, too, which would have accelerated his development.

Greenwood is the subject matter here, but he's not the only one whose minutes should be carefully handled, imo.

Thrusting him into the team just because he's a special talent will be a worry if it means he's played and played because there's no trust in the understudies.

Anyway, this Ole back and forth you guys embroil yourselves in is like white noise by now. That wasn't why I liked the post.
Thanks guys. It tells now in most of the posts how desperate we have become.

There are some people who think Greenwood is the finished article. Very sad.

That pressure is not necessary on any 18 year old kid let alone an 18 year old kid playing for a heavily scrutinised Manchester United Football Club.

Get real people.
 

Borussia Teeth

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Oct 18, 2019
Messages
53
Rooney, Owen, Ronaldo (R9), Fowler, Fabregas, Torres. All of them were playing very regular from very young ages. All were way past their best in their mid to late 20s.
I'm happy with Greenwood being first choice but he needs to be rotated at his age.
 

Zlatan 7

We've got bush!
Joined
May 26, 2016
Messages
6,323
I liked the post, and I'll bold the bits I thoroughly agree with:



Agree with the Cavani bit somewhat, too.

To be clear, unless you're dealing with a genuine man child, such as Rooney, Milner or the like, minutes for teenagers should be tightly managed or properly tailored and not simply based on how good they are - there are many a stellar teenager throughout the history of the game, but how many of them go on to have a long lasting career diminishes considerably - breaking out at 18 and playing nonstop... how many truly elite players are then spent by their very early 30's? Pushing them out there and relying on them at too young an age tends to have consequences further down the line. Even when they're 'ready' top managers try their damnedest not to rely on teenagers. Our predicament doesn't afford Ole that privilege because he needs every ounce of form he can get to literally keep him in his job.

With Sancho here, Greenwood, Rashford, Bruno and even Martial would have had someone to rotate with as and when necessary. Greenwood would have 1st dibs on that #9 spot, too, which would have accelerated his development.

Greenwood is the subject matter here, but he's not the only one whose minutes should be carefully handled, imo.

Thrusting him into the team just because he's a special talent will be a worry if it means he's played and played because there's no trust in the understudies.

Anyway, this Ole back and forth you guys embroil yourselves in is like white noise by now. That wasn't why I liked the post.
Fully agree with your post.
 

MackRobinson

Full Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2017
Messages
2,586
Location
Terminal D
Supports
Football
I’m not sure how your post is sarcastic, you are making a clear point about the rotation which trigger my argument.

You have read my post like multiple times and yet you still asked that no 2 question. There is no point playing Martial, Rashford & Greenwood blindly together as front three if they can’t perform because it lacks of balance to support them.

Those three are goalscorer and Sancho is a quality creative player which brings the balance to the front 3 as what Ole wanted in his formation/system/tactic. How can you get the best out of goal scorer if the team lacks of creator to create chance for them?

The OP point is moaning about the danger of Greenwood’s development which clearly what you have missed. Even with Sancho, Greenwood development will not be stalled, he will get lot of game times and if he’s good enough then he can even replace Martial’s spot. If anything I’m more concerned if he’s being forced to play to the death in the team that doesn’t have balance result in unable to score or underperform.
I used sarcasm to make a point, yes.

The bolded doesn't invalidate the fact that Greenwood most likely wouldn't start. If this is true, then he is a rotation option, which was the point. If you want to predict Sancho's arrival will magically help Greenwood, that's fine, but really just a random guess I'm not really interested in debating.
 

MackRobinson

Full Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2017
Messages
2,586
Location
Terminal D
Supports
Football
The OP (and seemingly you) are basically making it black and white. Either he's first choice and starting every game, or he's always on the bench and not playing enough to develop.

The reality is that all four would start regularly, with Greenwood probably starting a little less than the other three at the beginning but still getting plenty of gametime. As I said, I'd expect him to play in the vast majority of games, probably starting half of them and coming off the bench in half. Is that not 'regular enough football to develop' for you, or does he have to start every match?
I'm actually making it about simple math. Hypothetically, if you spread starts/minutes/etc evenly between 4 players as opposed to 3, each player, on average, sees a 25% reduction in playing time. Even more plainly, who's minutes are most at risk with the inclusion of Sancho?
 

Zlatattack

Full Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2017
Messages
5,522
I want Greenwood to have competition. I want him to have to be even better than he is. I want all of our players to have top class competition.
 

reelworld

Full Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2001
Messages
7,773
Location
Mexico City, Mexico
I used sarcasm to make a point, yes.

The bolded doesn't invalidate the fact that Greenwood most likely wouldn't start. If this is true, then he is a rotation option, which was the point. If you want to predict Sancho's arrival will magically help Greenwood, that's fine, but really just a random guess I'm not really interested in debating.
People who said Sancho would help Grenwood, Martial and Rashford seems to think that being taken in and out of the lineup doesn't have a negative effect. You also needs to consider players rythm, form and confidence.
It's not as easy as changing players in the line up every week and hoping it would work
 

mancan92

Full Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2011
Messages
8,475
Location
Loughborough university
The bolded is a bit of contradiction as to see how they perform someone has to be on the bench while the others play. You're just validating the OPs point.
How? I said it will depend on form. Martial has been off form lately so it wouldn't be greenwood out it would be him. Then the next game it might be different.
 

mancan92

Full Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2011
Messages
8,475
Location
Loughborough university
This thread is a counter balance to the Martial one:

https://www.redcafe.net/threads/the-constant-media-calls-for-us-to-replace-martial.456655/

United's current front 3 - Martial, Rashford, Greenwood - are ALL wide forwards who all play best 30 yards from goal with the ball at their feet and defenders facing them up.

The idea of buying a proper centreforward like Kane as variety as the fourth option was criticised because it would mean dropping Martial. But the idea of buying another wide forward like Sancho for more of the same is fine even though it would mean dropping Greenwood.
Martial is a striker Greenwood isn't a right winger.
 

UNITED ACADEMY

Full Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2018
Messages
7,033
I used sarcasm to make a point, yes.

The bolded doesn't invalidate the fact that Greenwood most likely wouldn't start. If this is true, then he is a rotation option, which was the point. If you want to predict Sancho's arrival will magically help Greenwood, that's fine, but really just a random guess I'm not really interested in debating.
You are totally wrong and have missed the point completely. The point of the OP is that he’s worried about Greenwood‘s development. Sancho’s arrival won’t disturb Greenwood’s development because Ole needs creative winger to get the best out of his goalscorer. Greenwood will get lot of regular time and is good enough to take either Martial or Rashford spot.
 

reelworld

Full Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2001
Messages
7,773
Location
Mexico City, Mexico
You are totally wrong and have missed the point completely. The point of the OP is that he’s worried about Greenwood‘s development. Sancho’s arrival won’t disturb Greenwood’s development because Ole needs creative winger to get the best out of his goalscorer. Greenwood will get lot of regular time and is good enough to take either Martial or Rashford spot.
Well, that's the debatable isn't it?

Because, right now I don't think he is. Physically, he still way behind both of them. There's also no evidence that Greenwood would be comfortable enough on the left.
Right now Rashford and Martial are more proven and consistent in their respective roles. Greenwood meaningful game time right now is as a right side forward, and he's pretty good at it last season. Buying a 108 million right winger would mean that Greenwood would be the one likely to get less minutes.

As I said before, rhythm and form is fundamental in players development. You can't just chopped and changes the line up just to accommodate players minutes.
 

UNITED ACADEMY

Full Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2018
Messages
7,033
Well, that's the debatable isn't it?

Because, right now I don't think he is. Physically, he still way behind both of them. There's also no evidence that Greenwood would be comfortable enough on the left.
Right now Rashford and Martial are more proven and consistent in their respective roles. Greenwood meaningful game time right now is as a right side forward, and he's pretty good at it last season. Buying a 108 million right winger would mean that Greenwood would be the one likely to get less minutes.

As I said before, rhythm and form is fundamental in players development. You can't just chopped and changes the line up just to accommodate players minutes.
Are you telling me that Greenwood is currently has not much important assets that are better than those two?

The point is that in order to develop players, you play his strength not trying to force him to do something he’s not natural with. More minutes doesn’t always mean player will develop better if they can’t perform.

By adding Sancho in XI it will improve Greenwood performance as goalscorer. When the player can start performing in consistent basis, no chance Greenwood will be dropped by the manager. And Sancho can play on the left.
 

fps

Full Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2018
Messages
4,429
I have never seen one post saying we should drop Greenwood so have no idea what obsession the OP is on about .

What I have seen are people stating facts that you cannot overplay a 19yo at this level and expect him to deliver week in week out
I’ve also only seen this. The classic internet reaction to something no-one’s said. I’m excited to think one of the two new wingers may be ready to rotate with him, though I can’t help feeling it’s wishful thinking.
 

amolbhatia50k

Sneaky bum time
Joined
Nov 8, 2002
Messages
77,455
Location
india
@mancan92 @amolbhatia50k

Don't get me wrong those are decent and valid reasons. I simply think the end goal was signing Sancho, and thus many justifications were given for replacing Greenwood in the lineup:

i) Greenwood is too young and needs to not burnout.
ii) We need a specialist RW, Greenwood is a striker not a RW.
iii) Our depth in the forward positions is bad/ the forward players are young and inconsistent, and need competition for places.
iv) Sancho is an English generational talent, we shouldn't miss him if we can afford it.
etc.

As you can see in this very thread varying reasons have been given. If Sancho didn't exist and Greenwood had the same breakout last season, I'm skeptical that there would be a pressing need to sign a specialist RW to take his place. Depth I can understand, but then the depth options presented during the window were pretty much scorned for not being Sancho, so I'm skeptical on that front as well.

For fans of Utd especially, I see no other logical reason why we'd try to push out an academy player who broke through with flying colours scoring 17 goals, except muppet season. And to be clear I too would have liked to sign Sancho, but simply because of reason (iv) which I feel is a more honest reason than the others.
It's odd that we summarised the view for you but instead of disagreeing you appear to be questioning the honesty of it.

If not Sancho I still think we need another quality RW (if Dembele can show tranmendous development maybe him but it's early) . It wouldn't push Greenwood out because top clubs, if we genuinely want to be one, need a number of quality players and he's still just a kid. There's no doubting his potential but this team is crying for that one RW who would be the perfect foil for the "they're really strikers" forward line we currently have. Rashford, Greenwood and Martial are all players who like to be central and impact the scoreline. Martial is now a CF. Radford is essentially a second striker in how he best operates. Greenwood as wonderful as he is, is single minded as all strikers should be. He's such a natural he does most things well, but you can compare him stylistically to a Hazard, Sancho etc i.e proper wide players who create plenty from out wide.

Now obviously if we can't find anyone on the market who fulfills this need, or believe the two 18 year olds will, then we compensate with quality in other areas and go with that, respectively. But I'm not going to pretend that just because we can't get Sancho, the need doesn't exist.

All the above subject to change of course depending on how everyone progresses this season but as of this summer the above view is held by me and I'm sure many others.
 

MadDogg

Full Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2002
Messages
11,586
Location
Manchester Utd never lose, just run out of time
I'm actually making it about simple math. Hypothetically, if you spread starts/minutes/etc evenly between 4 players as opposed to 3, each player, on average, sees a 25% reduction in playing time. Even more plainly, who's minutes are most at risk with the inclusion of Sancho?
Err, that's a good thing.

Do you really want a repeat of last season where we run them into the ground because we can't rotate? Where we fall away massively if one gets an injury because our cover is so much worse? Where we have to rush them back from injury early because of that? Bearing in mind it would be even worse than last season since we're in the CL and can't afford to play a weak team, and worse than normal seasons as it's all been condensed into a shorter timeframe (and none of our players got a proper rest over the preseason).

Having four players rotating amongst three positions is better both for the players and for the team, especially when they are all young. Having Sancho would also allow Greenwood to play as a striker more often, which is a good thing if the long term plan is for him to play that position. Greenwood got the equivalent of 30 full matches last season despite barely starting until after lockdown. I'd expect him to get similar or a bit more spread out over the course of the season, and if he ends up deserving it he could get a bit more. That's about what he 'should' be getting. If he wants more he has to show he's ready for it and outperform the others.
 

tenpoless

Full Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2014
Messages
6,010
Location
*Teleports behind you*
It's been obvious for ages that you're not a United fan.

Judging by your previous posts, I'm guessing Arsenal. I don't know why you're bothering to pretend, though. This forum is full of oppos. Nobody will think any less of you for it.
:lol: I found this funny for some reason... like the CIA spying on somebody.

On topic, it's not an obsession, it's how you take care of young players.
 

MackRobinson

Full Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2017
Messages
2,586
Location
Terminal D
Supports
Football
How? I said it will depend on form. Martial has been off form lately so it wouldn't be greenwood out it would be him. Then the next game it might be different.
He would get less game time and less leeway for drops in form.
 

noodlehair

"It's like..."
Joined
Apr 1, 2004
Messages
13,385
Location
Flagg
There's a danger to playing someone his age every game in that you can burn him out mentally or make him believe he's already made it and doesn't need to work as hard. Ferguson used to leave Ronaldo and Rooney out from time to time at his age just to give them a break and (presumably) keep them hungry.

Although obviously that's different to signing a RW for £100m to play instead of them, which is what a lot of people did want us to do. Not sure that counts as an obsession but I do reckon signing Sancho would have done more harm to Greenwood than good. I'm not convinced Sancho would have been good enough to justify playing ahead of Sancho/Rashford anyway. In fact I've seen very little to suggest that, but he would have due to the price tag.

Cavani is a weird one because I don't see how he can play instead of anyone other than Martial. He gives us something different but he isn't going to allow us to rotate or rest people really.
 

MackRobinson

Full Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2017
Messages
2,586
Location
Terminal D
Supports
Football
You are totally wrong and have missed the point completely. The point of the OP is that he’s worried about Greenwood‘s development. Sancho’s arrival won’t disturb Greenwood’s development because Ole needs creative winger to get the best out of his goalscorer. Greenwood will get lot of regular time and is good enough to take either Martial or Rashford spot.
Unfortunately, just b/c you say so, it doesn't make it so.

Were PSG fans gagging for Mbappe to be dropped to the bench so he can 'learn' and instead sign a first team RW? Greenwoods future *might* be at CF but he won't be playing there anytime soon because we already have Martial there. Dropping him to the bench does nothing for him. He needs to play regular football to develop, and the place he can offer the most value is on the right side of our attack. Just like Mbappe did for PSG.
What the OP arguing is obvious and not controversial in the slightest. Adding Sancho drops Greenwood to the bench and is a risk to his development. You keep repeating that Sancho playing in Greenwood's current position is good for the team, which nobody is arguing. Then you throw in a blanket statement saying he will get regular time, even though there is no guarantee of that. This is simple stuff really.
 

MackRobinson

Full Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2017
Messages
2,586
Location
Terminal D
Supports
Football
Err, that's a good thing.

Do you really want a repeat of last season where we run them into the ground because we can't rotate? Where we fall away massively if one gets an injury because our cover is so much worse? Where we have to rush them back from injury early because of that? Bearing in mind it would be even worse than last season since we're in the CL and can't afford to play a weak team, and worse than normal seasons as it's all been condensed into a shorter timeframe (and none of our players got a proper rest over the preseason).

Having four players rotating amongst three positions is better both for the players and for the team, especially when they are all young. Having Sancho would also allow Greenwood to play as a striker more often, which is a good thing if the long term plan is for him to play that position. Greenwood got the equivalent of 30 full matches last season despite barely starting until after lockdown. I'd expect him to get similar or a bit more spread out over the course of the season, and if he ends up deserving it he could get a bit more. That's about what he 'should' be getting. If he wants more he has to show he's ready for it and outperform the others.
We can all speculate the long-term effects but the fact remains that Sacho, a 108 million right-winger, would, at least initially, replace Greenwood as the starter and be in direct competition w/ him for that spot. This is something that doesn't really need to be debated, but the problem is some are so enamored with Sancho that they would rather talk around the impact to Greenwood.
 

Fortitude

TV/Monitor Expert
Scout
Joined
Jul 10, 2004
Messages
14,037
Location
Inside right
We can all speculate the long-term effects but the fact remains that Sacho, a 108 million right-winger, would, at least initially, replace Greenwood as the starter and be in direct competition w/ him for that spot. This is something that doesn't really need to be debated, but the problem is some are so enamored with Sancho that they would rather talk around the impact to Greenwood.
Sancho is a dual-sided winger; there's no certainty in saying Greenwood automatically gets benched when Rashford has been so below par.

Why are you adamant that it's only Greenwood who would be compromised?
 

MackRobinson

Full Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2017
Messages
2,586
Location
Terminal D
Supports
Football
Sancho is a dual-sided winger; there's no certainty in saying Greenwood automatically gets benched when Rashford has been so below par.
Greenwood has played a grand total of 1 match from the left.

Why are you adamant that it's only Greenwood who would be compromised?
Is Greenwood not most likely to be compromised? It's fairly obvious.
 

Fortitude

TV/Monitor Expert
Scout
Joined
Jul 10, 2004
Messages
14,037
Location
Inside right
Greenwood has played a grand total of 1 match from the left.


Is Greenwood not most likely to be compromised? It's fairly obvious.
No, Sancho playing from the left, not Greenwood.

You're posting like Rashford's position in the side is a lock.

Out of interest, roundabout how many games (starts) do you think Greenwood should play in a season?
 

UNITED ACADEMY

Full Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2018
Messages
7,033
Unfortunately, just b/c you say so, it doesn't make it so.



What the OP arguing is obvious and not controversial in the slightest. Adding Sancho drops Greenwood to the bench and is a risk to his development. You keep repeating that Sancho playing in Greenwood's current position is good for the team, which nobody is arguing. Then you throw in a blanket statement saying he will get regular time, even though there is no guarantee of that. This is simple stuff really.
It’s easy to just highlight one short sentence but ignoring the whole post to suit your argument. What about you read the whole post you will realise the reason why he’s making this thread in the first place is because the poster is worrying about Greenwood’s development if he doesn’t get regular game time. The point was always about Greenwood’s development, notice how the response on page 1 were talking about Greenwood needs to be well managed properly.

The fact is that there are 50 games or plus in a season and Greenwood will get good & fair amount of regular game times. Martial & Rashford current level aren’t world class level like Salah, Mane or Lewandowski, there is no guarantee that Martial & Rashford are untouchable.
 

Highfather_24

Full Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2014
Messages
622
What funny to me is a lot of the people opposed to a RW because he will take Greenwood's place, are also advocating for buying a CF like Haaland or Kane, who along with Martial, block Greenwood's opportunies to play in his favoured position. The signing of a CF relegates Greenwood to RW, a position that is not natural for him.
 

MackRobinson

Full Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2017
Messages
2,586
Location
Terminal D
Supports
Football
No, Sancho playing from the left, not Greenwood.

You're posting like Rashford's position in the side is a lock.

Out of interest, roundabout how many games (starts) do you think Greenwood should play in a season?
Has everyone not be clamoring for a RW? Is that not Sancho's primary position? If you honestly think Rashford is more at risk than Greenwood then I'm not sure what to tell you.

I think he should get as many starts/appearances as his body can handle. I'm not a football manager nor a physio, so I won't throw out a random, uninformed number but I do know I wouldn't buy a £100m+ player in the same position he starts in if my goal is to maximize his talent and see him develop.
 

MackRobinson

Full Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2017
Messages
2,586
Location
Terminal D
Supports
Football
It’s easy to just highlight one short sentence but ignoring the whole post to suit your argument. What about you read the whole post you will realise the reason why he’s making this thread in the first place is because the poster is worrying about Greenwood’s development if he doesn’t get regular game time. The point was always about Greenwood’s development, notice how the response on page 1 were talking about Greenwood needs to be well managed properly.

The fact is that there are 50 games or plus in a season and Greenwood will get good & fair amount of regular game times. Martial & Rashford current level aren’t world class level like Salah, Mane or Lewandowski, there is no guarantee that Martial & Rashford are untouchable.
I bolded one sentence, but I posted the entire thing and addressed his point. In the post you quote but perhaps didn't read:

What the OP arguing is obvious and not controversial in the slightest. Adding Sancho drops Greenwood to the bench and is a risk to his development. You keep repeating that Sancho playing in Greenwood's current position is good for the team, which nobody is arguing. Then you throw in a blanket statement saying he will get regular time, even though there is no guarantee of that. This is simple stuff really.
So yes, I did mention his development. Also these strawman arguments about whether Rashford and Martial are untouchable are a bit absurd as I haven't seen anyone claim that. At least initially, Greenwood's starting spot at RW is most in danger if Sancho were signed, and due to this, it's a risk to his development (risk != guaranteed detriment).
 

Giggsy13

Full Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2016
Messages
605
Location
Toronto
Nobody:

OP: why does everyone want Mason on the bench!?

United supporters are the masters of creating issues where there is none. Mason will be getting plenty of game time now with Martial suspended and out of form. Mason is arguably in our strongest 11 even with our signings.
 

Amadaeus

Pochettino's mother (MMM BBC)
Joined
May 8, 2013
Messages
7,590
Location
Amongst footballing managerial 'Gods'
A lot of fans are catching up with my thinking it seems. The potential of buying Sancho started this obsession. The fact is Mason is more than good enough to start for United and we only need to support him with a player that can give him competition for us sport. Not sure if Pellistri or Diallo are the right players, but we will have to see.
 

Fortitude

TV/Monitor Expert
Scout
Joined
Jul 10, 2004
Messages
14,037
Location
Inside right
Has everyone not be clamoring for a RW? Is that not Sancho's primary position? If you honestly think Rashford is more at risk than Greenwood then I'm not sure what to tell you.
So you don't think form and necessity play a huge factor in who would and would not start? As things stand, there is no real cover for Rashford so he gets to play when well below par without threat to his position - playing as he has been, time on the bench would be far from improbable with a player like Sancho here. Greenwood's position in the team simply being yoinked from him without deliberation or consideration of what others are offering the team when you have an actual talent pool to select from isn't realistic.

Rashford playing to his pre-injury standard, of course, Greenwood would be the one to make way, but that hasn't been the case for quite some time now.

I'm also unsure why you believe Martial remains unaffected unless he became more consistent than he has been. Directly or indirectly, Sancho would have thrown the gauntlet down to both of these players.

Even if Sancho was thrust into the team at RW, he would have no business playing non-stop - I believe in such a congested season as we're about to embark upon, rotation will be more important than ever and it doesn't matter which of the 3 starters you pick here; all of them will need downtime and proper handling if we're to have them firing at the tail-end of the season. Sancho would have facillitated that:

Martial's excess minutes would go to Greenwood.
Rashford's excess minutes would benefit Greenwood as Sancho then goes to the LW spot.

No single player from the pack should be getting worked into the ground - I don't see how Greenwood does not get enough gametime in any scenario, even as Sancho's understudy. He's guaranteed solid playing time in two positions from three.

Greenwood's minutes need to be handled correctly even as a starter, right now, with nobody currently at the club who is a better option than him at RW, which is what I find strange in what's being said by yourself and others.

Removing all of the talk about Martial and Rashford from my post and reducing it solely to the RW spot with just Greenwood and Sancho, the amount of games we've got coming thick and fast with so little recovery time, the two of them, in tandem, would be optimal to handle all of those games: a 40/20 split solely on RW starts, before even factoring them subbing in for the other (Sancho fades around 75ish minutes and has his own stamina to work on, which is normal given his age), that's a stacked season. How would that be detrimental?

The likelihood, however, is that Greenwood would've got more minutes as an out-and-out striker here with Sancho coming in than he will now with how things have panned out.
I think he should get as many starts/appearances as his body can handle. I'm not a football manager nor a physio, so I won't throw out a random, uninformed number but I do know I wouldn't buy a £100m+ player in the same position he starts in if my goal is to maximize his talent and see him develop.
And in our squad where Ole doesn't play stand-ins because they're terrible, and we've got two kids who barely have any experience of the adult game coming to England and the PL, do you think we're aiding Greenwood or about to put him through the ringer as Ole scrambles to save his job after a calamitous start to the season?

Greenwood is being put in like a seasoned pro and the potential backfire for that should be seen as more problematic and indicative of the state we're in than him getting solid minutes across two positions as a very important component in a 4-man rotation.
 

UNITED ACADEMY

Full Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2018
Messages
7,033
I bolded one sentence, but I posted the entire thing and addressed his point. In the post you quote but perhaps didn't read:



So yes, I did mention his development. Also these strawman arguments about whether Rashford and Martial are untouchable are a bit absurd as I haven't seen anyone claim that. At least initially, Greenwood's starting spot at RW is most in danger if Sancho were signed, and due to this, it's a risk to his development (risk != guaranteed detriment).
You said nothing about his development until I corrected you. Read this post of your below which triggered to why I told you have missed the point completely. All you were focusing was just Greenwood being rotation option.

I used sarcasm to make a point, yes.

The bolded doesn't invalidate the fact that Greenwood most likely wouldn't start. If this is true, then he is a rotation option, which was the point. If you want to predict Sancho's arrival will magically help Greenwood, that's fine, but really just a random guess I'm not really interested in debating.
What’s next, are you going start making another excuse again by saying it was a sarcastic post? Because that’s what you have been doing, after all it’s all started from these two:

Imagine buying a £108 winger just for the sake of rotation.
The reasons are moot. He would still be taking Greenwood's place in the starting XI.
Player won’t be well developed by just throwing him in matches for the sake of getting lot of minutes, most important is player needs to be well managed. If they can’t perform then it doesn’t do anything good for player’s development. Ole’s idea of getting top quality creative winger is to improve his team to create chances, more creative player means goalscorer will perform better and more consistent and Greenwood is goal scorer.

Sancho can play on the left means it doesn’t endanger Greenwood’s position on the right.
 

Highfather_24

Full Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2014
Messages
622
I think he should get as many starts/appearances as his body can handle. I'm not a football manager nor a physio, so I won't throw out a random, uninformed number but I do know I wouldn't buy a £100m+ player in the same position he starts in if my goal is to maximize his talent and see him develop.
Buying a RW frees up Greenwood to play in his natural/favourite position(CF).