Selling Garner for decent money and having a buy back clause in his contract would be a sensible move in my opinion. He doesn't look like a banker to make it at United, so no issue with selling him while his stock is high rather than hanging onto him until his value is depleted.
Transfer Tweets - Manchester United - 2022/23 | Follow the OP rules and check the quality of your sources before posting. STAY ON TOPIC!
- Thread starter mazhar13
- Start date
- Status
Agreed.
Plus some people seem to think selling unwanted players is easy, as if we can stick McFred on gumtree.
We reportedly turned down an offer for McTominay this summer
Definitely. Is the kind of thing we should have been doing for years with the likes of Tuanzebe and others.
If we don't see a pathway to the first team in the next year then it's pointless keeping him.
And it's why we find us in a situation of mcfred, we need to get rid of both no matter what whether it's out on loan, on free or at cut price fee in fred case
Haven't seen that reported. Should have snapped their hands off if true.
I'm not sure that works when our entire midfield are performing poorly in matches. Even on the assumption the rest are great in training (seems unlikely) it still isn't converting to matchday.
If we only bring in Rabiot then reducing our options isn't wise.
We have about 3-4 natural central midfielders in the entire squad going into a long and testing season and the club is considering selling a decent young prospect who could help us there? Even if we have 2 more incoming mids lined up it is still a questionable decision. Fred, Scott and Donny has looked decent at best at their time in the first team.
Until replacements are in place, that's a non-starter.
If theres any common sense we insert a buy back or first refusal clause on this and any other academy product sales.
Great message from the club. Shows that you can go out on loan, perform great and it still doesn't matter, you won't get any chance in the team, even when the starters have been absolutely atrocious. The idea that the club would need to raise funds after £50m net spend when they hadn't even bothered spending a penny last January is ludicrous.
Gumtree? Dont be silly, the darkweb is where its at, they would be worth more as a collection of usable organs than footballers surely?
Not sure any of them have any heart worth selling though
no problem with selling Garner if hes not part of ETH plans, but lets see what price we get, compared to what CIty and Lpool get for their young castoffs, especially when considering the decent amount of experience Garner has had on loan.
Hopefully it will be enough to cover next years 25million divident payment.
Hopefully it will be enough to cover next years 25million divident payment.
If he does go then Forest would pay wouldn't they?
This is what people don’t understand about most of our senior players
After the start of the season, nobody will touch McFred with a ten foot barge pole. Unfortunately Garner is one of the few that has not been tainted.
Selling Garner without giving him a chance is absolutely ridiculous. It sends the wrong message to our young players.
again this is where the rather pathetic planning comes into it. no doubt forest would have loved to have kept him and bought him, couldve hade discussions when doing the hendo loan (they couldnt loan garner as well as hendo took that spot) instead forest go off and buy literally 16 other players including lots of midfielders, and now we turn around and make garner available. thats what pisses me off. just very poor planning, everything is week to week, with results / social media seem to be dictating things.
Especially when the so-called "regulars" in front of them are playing like absolute shit, unworthy of earning a single penny.
But it's the message we need to be sending.
Stop holding on to these kids until they are mid 20s before letting them go on loan or for free... Sell NOW whilst his stock is high.
He's 21, if he was good enough he'd be a starter already.
For far too long we have held on to people for it to then bite us on the arse, let him go now and exploit the fact he's worth a bob or two.
McT's contract is until 2025, Fred's until 2024 with option for another year I think. We would want big money even though they do not warrant it.
I’m sorry but this is utter tosh.
Why wouldn’t we give Garner a chance before casting him to the side?
Genuinely can't believe the mass majority on here seem ok with this. It's ridiclous. It would be one thing if our current midfield were performing, but they've all been abysmal and Garner hasn't even been given a chance to play. We could at least throw him in to see if he can perform before discarding him for no reason. Like £20m is going to change anything. The extent some on here go to defend the Glazers and our overall management truly baffles me.
Doubt they thought MrFred would be this bad, this is even bad by their standards.
Didn't say I was happy about it, just can understand why he is one of the viable options for sale sadly. The best thing they could do is put a buy back option in any contract. He will be getting games, without the intense pressure. I would not want to be throwing the lad into this mess. A lot of this is down to serious mismanagement with contracts from previous board members and owners that didn't realise that those contracts were a mistake.
good point“Reportedly”. Think we would have accepted the bid if there was. He’s apparently on 60k/w so most PL clubs could afford him. Seriously doubt there’ll be any takers though.
Didn’t EtH say something along the lines of “if you’re good enough, you’re old enough.”. The youngsters have shown more than McT has so far, so I’m calling bullshit on EtH. Apparently he came with a reputation of being tough and ruthless.
Trouble with new managers is they come into a club and at the start have to listen to the opinions of people at the club. A club who didn't want to listen to the previous caretaker manager who said we needed major surgery. They have now been given a massive shock and are having to do something about it.
Garner is an excellent choice for "sell him but put in a buy-back clause".
As was said McT is not on massive money, so maybe we need to take a hit on the transfer fee.
Wrong message? As in if you’re not good enough we’ll sell you? City, Chelsea, Liverpool etc etc etc do the same thing repeatedly, so what message should our younger players be getting?
If his fee is used to buy someone better, then it’s good.
McTominay has 122 league appearances for us as a youth graduate. Does that send the right message?
That's the thing though, he's not had games to judge if he is good enough... Harsh basing it off a few weeks training.
What message does it send that the likes of Shaw, Maguire, Mctominay, Fred and Rashford start literally every game - despite consistently being bang average (and that's kind).
Last edited:
It isn't a great message, but who are you going to sell these players to on their contracts? Bad management of squad in the past is now coming home to roost for the unsuspecting ETH.
Isn’t the same scenario at all though. Players who come through the ranks aren’t bought for multi millions and on huge contracts. It’s all good and well comparing them, but it’s just not the same. Managers are more obligated to work with high profile players, plus at United a lot of our players don’t deserve their wages and are going to be hard to move on.
The list of players whom the CAF have told me are the next big thing in the past decade could have fetched enough fee to buy Mbappe+Neymar
But has Garner been given a real chance in the first team?
We are short on midfielders and selling one that wasn’t given a run in the first team. £15 to 20 million is poor business.
We’ve given plenty of opportunities to our academy guys but at the moment, they’re really not making us look good. Rashford looks totally disinterested, Lingard was disruptive, Henderson is disruptive, Pogba didn’t give a feck, McTominay looks very limited and the less said about Greenwood, the better. These are the players who should technically be playing their bollocks off for us and not going behind our back being disruptive.
We don’t produce gold every year. Forget the early 90s breakthrough of half a dozen players from our academy. That’s a one off. That’s like winning the Euromillions jackpot. A lot of these boys disappear off the face of the earth after they leave their teenage years behind.
Its a huge risk to give Garner a new multi year contract based on him doing well in the Championship. His stock is reasonably high. He looks comfortable in the Championship and he was a key part of a team that got promoted, so there’s an uncertainty whether he’s good enough at Premier League level… The key part is there’s a huge difference between being a promoted PL team who could easily go back down and an established elite tier PL team. If we play him a small handful of times, you might get away with it in terms of harming his worth. If he looks out of depth after a full season with us, then the value goes down and if hes tied up in a nice juicy contract, then we’ve shot ourselves in the foot. We’re basically hoping he gets better because the teams that are more of his level cannot afford those wages, and the fashionable thing now is to run down your contract so he could leave for free and we’d have missed out on £20m that could have gone to buying someone.
We have to get better at this area. Look at Liverpool and how they handled Brewster.
We don’t produce gold every year. Forget the early 90s breakthrough of half a dozen players from our academy. That’s a one off. That’s like winning the Euromillions jackpot. A lot of these boys disappear off the face of the earth after they leave their teenage years behind.
Its a huge risk to give Garner a new multi year contract based on him doing well in the Championship. His stock is reasonably high. He looks comfortable in the Championship and he was a key part of a team that got promoted, so there’s an uncertainty whether he’s good enough at Premier League level… The key part is there’s a huge difference between being a promoted PL team who could easily go back down and an established elite tier PL team. If we play him a small handful of times, you might get away with it in terms of harming his worth. If he looks out of depth after a full season with us, then the value goes down and if hes tied up in a nice juicy contract, then we’ve shot ourselves in the foot. We’re basically hoping he gets better because the teams that are more of his level cannot afford those wages, and the fashionable thing now is to run down your contract so he could leave for free and we’d have missed out on £20m that could have gone to buying someone.
We have to get better at this area. Look at Liverpool and how they handled Brewster.
- Status