United and these crazy contracts

UpWithRivers

Full Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2013
Messages
1,423
Ive been thinking about this recently trying to work out the reasoning behind it. As some have mentioned it had to do with the fact that its cheaper to give huge contracts then to lose players on a free. Cant see any other reason why the heck we do this. If thats the case then fine. But there has to be a plan for when those players are no longer needed. Either we have to pay off their contracts. Sell them for dirt cheap. Or allow the manager to drop them to the reserves and then get replacements. Basically if we have high wages fine but that cannot in any shape or form affect bringing in new players. Otherwise the club is dead.
The Goalkeeper situation is the latest of the crazies. For some reason we felt that we needed to give Henderson 120k a week. Sounds crazy to everyone. But fine. Thats your plan. I get it. Keep him happy. But what the fk is the long term plan? If he plays great then it doesnt matter because we literally cant sell De Gea cos of his 350 a week wages. If he plays sht we cant sell Henderson because of his 120 a week wages. We cant get rid of Romero either. So what happens now? They just rotate themselves to death for 5 years until one of their contracts runs out and they go on a free? Sell them for 5 mill? What?
 

ghaliboy

Snitches on Tom Hagen
Joined
Apr 29, 2009
Messages
10,957
Location
Sydchester
I don't really understand the OP. But as long as we have Woodward we won't be turning over the squad properly and we'll continue to try and sign big headline hunting players on ridiculous wages that their value on the pitch will rarely match.
 

Classical Mechanic

Full Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2014
Messages
29,403
Location
xG Zombie Nation
No, Makélélé went to Chelsea because he didn't fit with the galactico approach that Perez wanted and he even openly criticized his footballing abilities when he left.
Perez said

"I am surprised at the difference between the exemplary behaviour he showed over the last three years, on and off the field, and that which he has shown recently. I believe it is due to bad advice. He wanted half of what [Zinedine] Zidane is earning and that was not possible."
 

finneh

Full Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2010
Messages
6,794
This is all true and well and good but this is 2020, not 2004. Clubs like Leicester and Everton have back up and reserve players on 50 to 70k per week. Arsenal, Chelsea and City have many youth players on 50k per week and you simply can not sign or resign players on 30 to 40k per week anymore unless they are middling youth players.

Saw someone in this thread suggesting that Smalling should be on 35k per week because he is worse than Wijnaldum... Smalling was our first choice centre back at one point, so that's just a ludicrous suggestion.

The actual issue is that the players themselves just aren't very good.

But it's impossible to sign a player for your 18 man squad and pay less than 60 to 70k per week these days. You simply won't get a quality player for that little anymore.
Over the last 3 years United have paid £892m in wages compared with:

Chelsea - £749m
Liverpool - £782m
Spurs - £453m
Everton - £410m
Leicester - £382m

That disparity does not occur if we're paying market rates for our players. That shows our average squad player earns more than double those at Leicester/Everton, double what Spurs' average player earns or 20% more than Chelsea; during a period where both clubs have been of similar levels to ourselves.

Leicester therefore are not paying £70k a week to reserve players; if they were it would show in their figures. In fact I'd be surprised if anyone outside of Vardy, Maddison, Schmeichel and Ndidi are earning that much (ie key players). For example even first team players like Tielemans, Perez, Barnes and Socunku are reportedly earning in total less than half of what Lingard, Jones, Bailly and Rojo are.

Worse players earning more than twice the salary, which is our problem.
 
Last edited:

wolvored

Full Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2016
Messages
5,551
I think there is a fear within the hierarchy of letting players go and seeing them achieve success elsewhere. This results in players being awarded contracts disproportionate to their levels of ability. This is what has resulted in us providing huge contracts to the likes of Jones, Rojo, Lingard, Rooney, De Gea and now Henderson. We need to learn to be okay with letting players go when the time and money are right.
I think you are probably right there, thats the only thing that makes sense. You can imagine Jones agreeing a lowball figure contract as well provided there are a lot of seasons in it. Woody Judge and co would think they had pulled a masterstroke.
 

JPRouve

can't stop thinking about balls - NOT deflategate
Scout
Joined
Jan 31, 2014
Messages
44,595
Location
France
Perez said

"I am surprised at the difference between the exemplary behaviour he showed over the last three years, on and off the field, and that which he has shown recently. I believe it is due to bad advice. He wanted half of what [Zinedine] Zidane is earning and that was not possible."
And you forgot what he said before in that same interview:

"He wasn't a header of the ball and he rarely passed the ball more than three metres," Perez said. "Younger players will arrive who will cause Makelele to be forgotten."
The issue is that he didn't rate him.
 

Classical Mechanic

Full Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2014
Messages
29,403
Location
xG Zombie Nation
And you forgot what he said before in that same interview:



The issue is that he didn't rate him.
My point is that they have a different wage structure to us where they pay 'water carriers' like Makelele a lot less than their 'stars'. Part of that consideration is star quality. We pay silly wages to average players which is why we can't sell them. As the OP says, quadrupling Telles's wages is bonkers. He'd come here for double the wages.
 

snowkarl

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Dec 12, 2018
Messages
340
Over the last 3 years United have paid £892m in wages compared with:

Chelsea - £749m
Liverpool - £782m
Spurs - £453m
Everton - £410m
Leicester - £382m

That disparity does not occur if we're paying market rates for our players. That shows our average squad player earns more than double those at Leicester/Everton, double what Spurs' average player earns or 20% more than Chelsea; during a period where both clubs have been of similar levels to ourselves.

Leicester therefore are not paying £70k a week to reserve players; if they were it would show in their figures. In fact I'd be surprised if anyone outside of Vardy, Maddison, Schmeichel and Ndidi are earning that much (ie key players). For example even first team players like Tielemans, Perez, Barnes and Socunku are reportedly earning in total less than half of what Lingard, Jones, Bailly and Rojo are.

Worse players earning more than twice the salary, which is our problem.
But it's in large part due to what we pay our stars and starters. Lloris last year had a much better season than De Gea but literally makes 30% of DDG's salary.

Alexis Sanchez made almost twice KDB's base salary. Rashford makes twice what Dele Alli gets. Of course we also keep our old 'stars' for far too long, ie Mata on about twice what a second/third choice player should make. But also Shaw, making about 3-4x what Tierney makes and Chilwell made at Leicester.

We are using our main strength - financial power, to get starters we think we probably couldn't have gotten anyway. The issue is that whoever is making these judgements on what a great player is, does not cut it. If we'd bought the right players on the same salaries, we'd have been fine. If we'd gotten Salah and Mane ahead of Alexis and Ighalo we would be in a much better position, but imho, the issue is not the exorbitant wages paid themselves, but the poor choices made when identifying key players.
 

flappyjay

Full Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2016
Messages
3,535
But it’s hard to stop this trend unless we go for young players or average players.
I don't thinks so. Just look at what we have Reportedly given Dean Henderson, he hasn't done much for us and is on 100k a week. He is in the top 5 highest paid keepers in the league. At another big club he would be on the 60k mark. We purposely put ourselves in this position time and time again.
 

JPRouve

can't stop thinking about balls - NOT deflategate
Scout
Joined
Jan 31, 2014
Messages
44,595
Location
France
My point is that they have a different wage structure to us where they pay 'water carriers' like Makelele a lot less than their 'stars'. Part of that consideration is star quality. We pay silly wages to average players which is why we can't sell them. As the OP says, quadrupling Telles's wages is bonkers. He'd come here for double the wages.
Which equate to what I said the reason Makélélé was sold is because he didn't fit with their galactico policy. Makélélé being paid half of Zidane isn't silly wages when most players in the locker room thought that he was arguably the most important player in that midfield.

Now if your point is that at Madrid the top players and the squad players have vastly different wages then we agree but that doesn't apply to Makélélé who was a top player.
 

El Zoido

Full Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2013
Messages
8,583
Location
UK
The reason we do it is because United is a club that prides themselves on looking after their employees, and we take the same philosophy for playing staff as we do for the dinnerladies. This is not a falling out with a player ala Beckham or Stam, it’s about supporting a player who is suffering through a lot of injuries and making sure they’re still employed, rather than binning them off because they’re a crock. It’s admirable really, I’m not mad at the club for this approach, but with salaries spiralling out of control it might be something we could look to change. Because at this point it’s clearly causing us problems with moulding and developing the team.
 
Joined
Dec 21, 2014
Messages
5,910
Location
Manchester
Mata - 150k a week
Henderson - 150k a week
Lingard - 120k a week
Smalling - 120k a week
Jones - 100k a week
Rojo - 90k a week
Romero - 90k a week
Pereira - 75k a week
James - 70k a week
Dalot - 50k a week

How much is that per week on unused players?

Giving Jones a 5 year contract last year was unbelievably stupid. We are run by clowns.
 

finneh

Full Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2010
Messages
6,794
But it's in large part due to what we pay our stars and starters. Lloris last year had a much better season than De Gea but literally makes 30% of DDG's salary.

Alexis Sanchez made almost twice KDB's base salary. Rashford makes twice what Dele Alli gets. Of course we also keep our old 'stars' for far too long, ie Mata on about twice what a second/third choice player should make. But also Shaw, making about 3-4x what Tierney makes and Chilwell made at Leicester.

We are using our main strength - financial power, to get starters we think we probably couldn't have gotten anyway. The issue is that whoever is making these judgements on what a great player is, does not cut it. If we'd bought the right players on the same salaries, we'd have been fine. If we'd gotten Salah and Mane ahead of Alexis and Ighalo we would be in a much better position, but imho, the issue is not the exorbitant wages paid themselves, but the poor choices made when identifying key players.
That's not generally the case though. We pay twice what Leicester pay roughly across the board. Our top earners (Rashford, Pogba, Martial) earn around double what Vardy, Maddison and Schmeichel do. Our second set of first teamers (Shaw, Lindelof, Matic, AWB) also earn roughly double what Ndidi, Evans, Pereira and Iheanacho do (reportedly).

Obviously there are some outliers such as DDG, but I don't think our wage structure at the top is an issue. Paying top players £200-400k per week who should be outperforming their opposite numbers at Leicester is fair enough (if they don't of course that's an issue). United will always want the best talent in the world and will always pay top whack to get them (we'll also get it wrong sometimes).

However paying backup players like Lingard, Rojo, Jones and Bailly more than twice what much better players are earning at clubs lower down the league is absurd. There is no necessity to pay these players more than £40-50k per week as they aren't going to get more elsewhere. It's also strange because these players were earning a fraction of their current salary beforehand. Rojo and Bailly weren't earning £70k a week at Sporting and Villarreal, so why did we offer several times their previous salary unnecessarily?

It reminds me of the urban myth surrounding Seth Johnson where he went into negotiations looking for £x a week and ending up getting three times the amount.

Alex Telles could be a prime example. Earning £10-15k per week at Porto and targeted as a backup option to Shaw. There's no reason to offer him more than £40k but we're reported to have agreed nearly twice that (conjecture of course but in line with our strategy).
 
Last edited:

Hansinity

Full Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2013
Messages
711
Wait , what ?! Jones got a 5 year contract last year ?

I remember Thiago got 4 years from Bayern in 2017

They are even struggling to offer Alaba 5 years now ( same age as Jones, but on higher wages though )

Also, seeing Lingard on 120k/week and Mata on 150k hurts.

Imo keeping Mata all these years was a mistake. To me he never added too much to the team.
 

POF

Full Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2014
Messages
3,423
There’s no way the decisions are taken based on anything other than accounting/finance.

“Can player x contribute to the squad? Yes (at the time of asking that would be a reasonable response)

Well if we let him leave on a free we’ll need to replace him and that will cost £15m plus £50k a week over 4 years = £25.4million over 4 years.

If we offer him £100k a week then that only costs £20.8million over 4 years

Ok that saves nearly £5million that we can trouser between us, let’s do that then.”
There's nothing wrong with making financially prudent moves. But signing Rojo up to a new contract and then spending £140m on Maguire, Lindelof and Bailly while they pay Rojo handsomely to holiday in Argentina is certainly not that.

It always staggers me how United fans make these remarks about how the Glazers are only interested in saving money while they waste an absolute shit tonne of cash through horrendous mismanagement.

The club is not frugal with funds for transfers or wages. They're just useless at spending it wisely.
 

Maticmaker

Full Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2018
Messages
1,834
Is United the biggest name in British Football, the most successful club in British Football, and one of the biggest names in World football only way to get players to the club is by offering crazy money and just plan insane contracts.
United have a whole bunch of deadwood that would do okay in lower Premiership Teams but can not move them for any money due to the wages being paid. Surely United's pulling power must count for something not just the
big pay cheque, surely its got to change heard rumors that this Porto Left Back is being offered 4 times his wages to join United. Looks like Ed is not learning.
Precisely because we are in this ''bracket' it means everyone who does business with us for players wants a 'bite of the apple', they want us to pay more when buying and take less when selling, it has been this way for years and is nothing whatsoever to do with the Glazers. One of the advantages for players in coming to live in the goldfish bowl which is United (as described by Alan Shearer) is they can get top whack in salary.

Given our position in the hierarchy of football, the club either accepts that is the case or it tries to do something about it... it would seem the way Woodward negotiates he is trying the latter option with the selling club and the former option with the player and his hangers on, be that his agent, his family etc.!

This duel-strategy approach can be laid at the door of the Glazers, because Woodward is their man!
 

SirAF

Ageist
Joined
Sep 28, 2003
Messages
33,295
Mata - 150k a week
Henderson - 150k a week
Lingard - 120k a week
Smalling - 120k a week
Jones - 100k a week
Rojo - 90k a week
Romero - 90k a week
Pereira - 75k a week
James - 70k a week
Dalot - 50k a week

How much is that per week on unused players?

Giving Jones a 5 year contract last year was unbelievably stupid. We are run by clowns.
Henderson was necessary to tie down, but the others I definitely agree on. It’s madness.
 

balaks

Full Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2014
Messages
9,915
Location
Northern Ireland
Supports
Tottenham Hotspur
Mata - 150k a week
Henderson - 150k a week
Lingard - 120k a week
Smalling - 120k a week
Jones - 100k a week
Rojo - 90k a week
Romero - 90k a week
Pereira - 75k a week
James - 70k a week
Dalot - 50k a week

How much is that per week on unused players?

Giving Jones a 5 year contract last year was unbelievably stupid. We are run by clowns.
My god is that accurate? Wow your club is a mess if that is true.
 

snowkarl

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Dec 12, 2018
Messages
340
That's not generally the case though. We pay twice what Leicester pay roughly across the board. Our top earners (Rashford, Pogba, Martial) earn around double what Vardy, Maddison and Schmeichel do. Our second set of first teamers (Shaw, Lindelof, Matic, AWB) also earn roughly double what Ndidi, Evans, Pereira and Iheanacho do (reportedly).

Obviously there are some outliers such as DDG, but I don't think our wage structure at the top is an issue. Paying top players £200-400k per week who should be outperforming their opposite numbers at Leicester is fair enough (if they don't of course that's an issue). United will always want the best talent in the world and will always pay top whack to get them (we'll also get it wrong sometimes).

However paying backup players like Lingard, Rojo, Jones and Bailly more than twice what much better players are earning at clubs lower down the league is absurd. There is no necessity to pay these players more than £40-50k per week as they aren't going to get more elsewhere. It's also strange because these players were earning a fraction of their current salary beforehand. Rojo and Bailly weren't earning £70k a week at Sporting and Villarreal, so why did we offer several times their previous salary unnecessarily?

It reminds me of the urban myth surrounding Seth Johnson where he went into negotiations looking for £x a week and ending up getting three times the amount.

Alex Telles could be a prime example. Earning £10-15k per week at Porto and targeted as a backup option to Shaw. There's no reason to offer him more than £40k but we're reported to have agreed nearly twice that (conjecture of course but in line with our strategy).
Of course when you compare to Leicester that is true, but it generally is not true if you compare it to Arsenal, Chelsea, City & Liverpool. There, our squad players make similar amounts (just look at the wages of players like Mustafi, Sokratis, Rudiger, Matip, Keita, Chamberlain, Cancelo etc) yet our top earners generally are massively overpaid.

Bailly is making less than Mustafi, Jones fair enough but he was a starter at one point but still making the same as Sokratis and less than Matip, Lingard isn't even making much for someone who's been here for so long (and still making about the same as Origi/Shaqiri).

We've just made really poor buys compared to our spending. We bought players we expected would perform at an elite, 'world class' level similarly to Liverpool/City, but their performances have generally been in the Arsenal/Leicester level. That's the issue.

You're just not going to get quality back ups for less than 60k per week unless they are really young. Telles is on low wages because he signed a contract four years ago in a league whose wage budget is probably smaller than just our own. It's not comparable. If we signed Telles today, there is no chance whatsoever he's making less than 80kpw, and probably closer to 100-120. Otherwise, why would he not run down his contract and sign with PSG or Leicester and get a 10m sign on bonus and 80kpw?

The biggest disasters are however,
1) Henderson 150k per week with De Gea on 300+. About half a mil A WEEK on two goalkeepers... and Romero is also on almost 100k!!! It's absolutely insane.
2) Resigning Mata, Jones, Pereira et al. Beyond insane decision. Absolutely crazy.
 

TrueRed79

Full Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2013
Messages
1,335
We deserve this. Apathetic fan base for years, couldn't see the shit show that we were going to become. All the fans saw was big name signings and money getting wasted on big contracts. That equalled in some peoples eyes as some form of success. Big time Charlies some people might say. You reap what you sow, and now we are stuck with a bloated squad, full of bang average dross. Where are those Woodward is a God posters that were posting memes of him like he was some sort of celebrity around here?
 

finneh

Full Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2010
Messages
6,794
Of course when you compare to Leicester that is true, but it generally is not true if you compare it to Arsenal, Chelsea, City & Liverpool. There, our squad players make similar amounts (just look at the wages of players like Mustafi, Sokratis, Rudiger, Matip, Keita, Chamberlain, Cancelo etc) yet our top earners generally are massively overpaid.

Bailly is making less than Mustafi, Jones fair enough but he was a starter at one point but still making the same as Sokratis and less than Matip, Lingard isn't even making much for someone who's been here for so long (and still making about the same as Origi/Shaqiri).

We've just made really poor buys compared to our spending. We bought players we expected would perform at an elite, 'world class' level similarly to Liverpool/City, but their performances have generally been in the Arsenal/Leicester level. That's the issue.

You're just not going to get quality back ups for less than 60k per week unless they are really young. Telles is on low wages because he signed a contract four years ago in a league whose wage budget is probably smaller than just our own. It's not comparable. If we signed Telles today, there is no chance whatsoever he's making less than 80kpw, and probably closer to 100-120. Otherwise, why would he not run down his contract and sign with PSG or Leicester and get a 10m sign on bonus and 80kpw?

The biggest disasters are however,
1) Henderson 150k per week with De Gea on 300+. About half a mil A WEEK on two goalkeepers... and Romero is also on almost 100k!!! It's absolutely insane.
2) Resigning Mata, Jones, Pereira et al. Beyond insane decision. Absolutely crazy.
There's a reason that Liverpool can sell Ibe for £15m, Solanke £19m, Allen £14m, Borini £10m. Likewise Spurs can sell Trippier for £18m, Benteleb £16m, Wimmer £16m, Chadli £14m, Mason £10m.

The reason isn't because they were so much better than Jones, Lingard, Rojo, Rafael, Evans, Nani, Zaha. Lingard is better than Ibe, Zaha was better than Borini, Nani was better than Chadli and Evans was better than Wimmer.

The reason is because our players often cannot be bought by the likes Stoke, So'ton, Bournemouth, Schalke, Palace or West Brom because of their prohibitive wages. If they are within reach for those teams then the fee has to be seven figures rather than 8 to account for their wages.

In terms of Telles if Spurs were signing him he'd be on maybe £55k per week similar to the likes of Ben Davies (I was a bit low at £40k, fair enough). In the midst of a global pandemic he'd be incredibly brave to assume a £10m signing on fee and £100k a week is anything close to a reality when clubs like Leicester will be more likely having to make savings (and even PSG are likely to be under FFP scrutiny).
 

LoneStar

Full Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2017
Messages
2,093
I don't thinks so. Just look at what we have Reportedly given Dean Henderson, he hasn't done much for us and is on 100k a week. He is in the top 5 highest paid keepers in the league. At another big club he would be on the 60k mark. We purposely put ourselves in this position time and time again.
That’s a fairly simple one where I think we could easily handled it better. But it’s the situation with attracting top talent like Sancho where this would be harder.
 

limerickcitykid

There once was a kid from Toronto...
Joined
Oct 3, 2012
Messages
13,092
Location
East end / Oot and aboot
Mata - 150k a week
Henderson - 150k a week
Lingard - 120k a week
Smalling - 120k a week
Jones - 100k a week
Rojo - 90k a week
Romero - 90k a week
Pereira - 75k a week
James - 70k a week
Dalot - 50k a week

How much is that per week on unused players?

Giving Jones a 5 year contract last year was unbelievably stupid. We are run by clowns.
How much is that per week which you’ve completely made up?

My god is that accurate? Wow your club is a mess if that is true.
No it’s not even close to accurate. He’s just made up numbers which are all higher than what’s been reported. And then reported figures are notoriously overstated too so in reality they’ll actually be getting paid far less. Luke Shaw even came out a couple years ago and said he wishes he made what the media reports and he doesn’t actually get paid near that. Through my job I also know that media reported figures related to footballers or celebrities are 99% not accurate, most of the time being not even close.
 

Rozay

Master of Hindsight
Joined
Oct 22, 2012
Messages
19,084
Location
...
Everyone is an economist in hindsight. Our team has struggled, but it is not a simple equation that the players are not good. Lingard was an England regular (first XI) not long ago, Rojo is a World Cup finalist and Jones and Smalling were both internationals too (not to mention that Smalling HAS attracted 8 figure bids).

These players are not of a lower pedigree than the likes of Sissoko at all. Those players have played better in recent times, but as a result, their value has risen, while the players in our squad who have not played well have dropped in value. At a point, Lingard was easily an 8-figure player. The obvious issue is that when he was, we of course had little intention of selling him. Usually, these players get extensions/increases when their stock is high. After that, they decline, but they are typically given a good wage while they are good players (bar a couple of exceptions). Their salaries are hardly going to be re-evaluated weekly.

I’m not saying it’s all been right. But when we work with a formula of only wanting to sell players when they drop below expectation, it is logical that at that point, there will be a gap between their market value and their value when these expectations were initially placed upon them. Jones and Rojo’s contracts were odd. Mata shouldn’t have got the contract he got either in my opinion, but his wages were reduced. De Gea was a 29 year old proven world class keeper. You simply don’t offer him £150k at that stage. Personally, I would have sold him, but if you decide to keep him, he will always be well-paid. Williams’ £65k contract is one that was also curious to me, especially as we then proceeded to vigorously pursue a new left-back who will almost certainly go above him. I’m pretty sure the figure is also higher than what was reported for Greenwood too.
 

acnumber9

Full Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2006
Messages
15,636
My god is that accurate? Wow your club is a mess if that is true.
Of course they’re not accurate. Nobody knows for certain what players earn and that’s easily proven by just googling it and seeing different figures from different sources. Our club is a mess though.
 

#07

makes new threads with tweets in the OP
Joined
Oct 25, 2010
Messages
18,319

Someone at the MEN reads the CAF :lol:
 

FletchTheHero

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Nov 3, 2007
Messages
29
I strongly believe the reason why we kept on extending contracts to those deadwoods is simply, so that Woodward can "inflate" their actual value on our accounts book. This will create a false sense of security that we have a sizable bunch of high valued assets in our club.
 

Greck

Full Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2016
Messages
4,017
The worst part is every single one of these awful contracts were renewed by us. We could have just let them walk but instead chose to extend them on bloated contracts that made them untradeable. Could the club really not tell no one would buy Jones on a 6 figure wage? Worst part is most of those players weren't even in the first team when they had their contract renewed so where did the motivation to keep them come from?
 

Cheimoon

Up-and-comer
Joined
Jun 22, 2020
Messages
1,367
Location
Canada
Supports
no-one in particular
The reason is because our players often cannot be bought by the likes Stoke, So'ton, Bournemouth, Schalke, Palace or West Brom because of their prohibitive wages. If they are within reach for those teams then the fee has to be seven figures rather than 8 to account for their wages.

In terms of Telles if Spurs were signing him he'd be on maybe £55k per week similar to the likes of Ben Davies (I was a bit low at £40k, fair enough). In the midst of a global pandemic he'd be incredibly brave to assume a £10m signing on fee and £100k a week is anything close to a reality when clubs like Leicester will be more likely having to make savings (and even PSG are likely to be under FFP scrutiny).
On this point, I'm wondering: who makes these salary decisions, and what are they basing them on? As far as I can tell, United's moneymen are generally pretty good; how come they can't assess the football salary market better? As you or someone else said, it makes no sense that a club like United could sign a player like Telles only if they pay him this much. So again, how and why does it happen anyway?

I have seen comments that having a Director of Football would solve this, but is that what they do? I thought they would be there to oversee the sportive direction of the club: ensure coach and players fit the vision in terms of approach, ethos, playing style, ensure that this vision runs through the entire club from the youngest academy levels to the first team, and direct the scouting apparatus accordingly. Would this also be the person that assesses the market and determines what a club should be paying in terms of transfer fees and salaries?
 

clarkydaz

Full Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2013
Messages
10,230
Location
manchester
I strongly believe the reason why we kept on extending contracts to those deadwoods is simply, so that Woodward can "inflate" their actual value on our accounts book. This will create a false sense of security that we have a sizable bunch of high valued assets in our club.
A City fan mentioned this to me at work, that the players are assets to the club. Phil Jones, 27 year old in his prime England international? 5 year contract, mate
 

Greck

Full Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2016
Messages
4,017
A City fan mentioned this to me at work, that the players are assets to the club. Phil Jones, 27 year old in his prime England international? 5 year contract, mate
At those wages he should be recorded in the liability section of the books along with our debt
 

dannyrhinos89

OMG socks and sandals lol!
Joined
Nov 24, 2013
Messages
10,625
The fact that our 3 keepers (not even including grant) earn more than Liverpool front 3 is pathetic.

This club is severely damaged to the point of no return and literally the one and only thing that can save us is a multi billionaire takeover where he buys the deadwood out of their contracts and tells them to piss off on a free Somewhere.
 

United Hobbit

Full Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2019
Messages
1,926
Its the length of offers to deadwood as well. Why oh why did we offer Jones who is either unfit or making calamitous mistakes a big new contract when he should have been shifted. It was clear he was deadwood for any manager, yet we offer him a new contract, presumably because we wanted to see what Ole thought of him.

If only we have a dof who could make a plan of players regardless of who the manager is so we don't have this everytime we get a new manager. Obviously some players it may just be the manager/ system but we need someone to stop OBVIOUS deadwood being offered huge long contracts.

Im using Jones as an example but there are multiple other examples.

The additional problem with Jones is he doesn't stay fit. He could probably do a fair job, disregarding wages, for a lower pl/ high championship club but as he is rarely fit he's probably too much of a gamble as theyre unlikely to have strength in depth so need him available consistently.

I expect we haggle as much over fees for them as when we try and sign players. We've probably had a few offers where we should just take them but hold out for the extra money so clubs walk away.

Watch us not sign anyone else this window then announce we are delighted to announce J Lingz has signed a new 5 year contract!
 

GiddyUp

Full Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2015
Messages
4,352
Didn't Ed already say he offers these extensions and pay rises so as to keep the value of the player up incase someone where to make an offer. Anyways, Woodward couldn't spot a good footballer even if legs spread on the goal line and Maradona, Van Basten and Messi where taking pot shots at his balls from the 18 yard.
 

fps

Full Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2018
Messages
4,157
The problem is Woodward is deeply insecure and has a small time mentality. He doesn’t understand the pull of United at all and that insecurity filters right through the whole club now. He betrays his own world view, he thinks the only thing players are interested in is money, and paying more money means a better outcome.
 

sunama

Baghdad Bob
Joined
Apr 26, 2014
Messages
15,126
You can add Romero (£3.6m), Tuanzebe (£2.6m), Grant (£1.5m!!!!!)

Also Mata's annual salary is £8.5m (!!!!!!!!)

Who the feck is sanctioning this shite.
That would be Woodward and his star negotiator - Matt Judge.
Matt Judge is so bad at his job, he should've been sacked for gross misconduct.
The Phil Jones deal alone, should be worthy of the sack.
 

Nas-JR

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Mar 6, 2014
Messages
27
Does anyone actually have any idea what most of our players are getting paid or are they hyper-inflating figures to bash our management some more? How people believe that Jones is on 100k a week is beyond me... unless I get a super reliable source I would never believe that.

I think people are fueled with so much anger that they're making things up to justify their outrage
 

VeevaVee

despite the protests, wears Ugg boots
Scout
Joined
Jan 3, 2009
Messages
39,170
Location
Manchester
You can add Romero (£3.6m), Tuanzebe (£2.6m), Grant (£1.5m!!!!!)

Also Mata's annual salary is £8.5m (!!!!!!!!)

Who the feck is sanctioning this shite.
You’ve got to question football in general when what Grant offers the club can be worth anything like 1.5m pounds.

Football is such a good example of capitalism out of control. Everything should be cheaper for the fans and end up with players being paid less (although still handsomely like any top level employee). But it’s impossible to stop if there’s enough people willing to pay.