Except they wouldn't offer £150m, but what about £50m?
Wayne Rooney | 2012-14 Performances
- Thread starter gooDevil
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) was joined by comedian Ali Woods to look back at the best and worst moments of a rollercoaster season with the annual United Hour Awards.
Has Ten Hag been sacked yet? We're not sure and we hope not, but it's looking more likely as the days pass.
Who should replace him and why is it taking so long to make a decision?
- Status
Even if he was our most important player and there was no good enough replacement available? I'm not too sure SAF would do that. No point having 150m in the kitty if you've worsened your team.
Yeah but we'd have the FA in our pockets for another few years with that kind of money.
50m wouldn't buy us someone who offers us what Rooney does so no we wouldn't accept it imo
Yeah, let's sell our best player for half of what we got the last time we did it. That seems like something a sensibly run football club would do...
Seriously, can we just throw all football journalists into a pit?
Seriously, can we just throw all football journalists into a pit?
It's basically asking the question, how much is Rooney worth?
He's certainly not worth the 80m Ronaldo went for. 50m? Debateable.
It's the sort of transfer we'd look back on in 3/4 years and think, that's where it went wrong.
I didnt bother to read the article but it seems like a bit of a space filler to me, slow news day so someone decides to knock out a generic "Team X will bid for Player Y" story. I doubt Rooney is especially interested in going to Paris, I doubt we are keen to sell him, it wont come to anything.
Everyone has his price. Even if you can't replace a player immediately, a fee like £150m will offer the club a long term stability and could be re-invested over
three or four years, eventually making you stronger than you'd have been had you kept the player.
three or four years, eventually making you stronger than you'd have been had you kept the player.
For example:
Sell Rooney for £50m
Buy Ronaldo for £55m
Buy Bale for £45m
Sell one of Young/Valencia/Nani (might be going anyway although of the 3, I'd hate to loose him the most) for £15m
Sell Rooney for £50m
Buy Ronaldo for £55m
Buy Bale for £45m
Sell one of Young/Valencia/Nani (might be going anyway although of the 3, I'd hate to loose him the most) for £15m
btw, £150m is clearly out of the question.
Of course there's also the small matter of the player's interest, which is usually ignored in these stories.
Why the feck would Wayne Rooney want to play for PSG?
Why the feck would Wayne Rooney want to play for PSG?
Only reasons to sell Rooney are if Fergie thinks his questionable lifestyle off the pitch is reducing his impact on the pitch. And at 27 has already had his best days.
That or there being any chance of Ronaldo coming back.
That or there being any chance of Ronaldo coming back.
300-400k a week, and a massive signing on fee?
Not to mention playing for one of Europe's hot rising clubs.
PSG don't pay that much more than us, and he already plays for one of the best clubs in the world, which happens to be just down the road from where his family live.
Move to Paris for maybe an extra thirty grand a week and play in what is rapidly become Le SPL? I can't see the appeal in the least.
Move to Paris for maybe an extra thirty grand a week and play in what is rapidly become Le SPL? I can't see the appeal in the least.
According to this thread, we reckon he's worth £38M.
https://www.redcafe.net/f6/how-much-our-players-worth-366676/
https://www.redcafe.net/f6/how-much-our-players-worth-366676/
That's not what we think we'd sell him for, if the thread was phrased that way I'm sure it'd be at least 10m more.
If Ronaldo was for sale and might move for something in the region of £55m, PSG would have to be pretty feckless to fork out £150m for Rooney.
And if they are not offering £150m, and/or Ronaldo is not coming for £55m, why would we emasculate ourselves by selling Rooney?
And if they are not offering £150m, and/or Ronaldo is not coming for £55m, why would we emasculate ourselves by selling Rooney?
To put it into perspective, is Rooney really worth more than Kaka when he moved to Madrid? (The old, world-beater Kaka).
Different times, different economies.
That's a no then
It's hard to say, actually. That's what I meant. How do we even measure it their respective value (not just in a monetary sense) in a fair way?
Don't agree that a 27 year old forward is past his peak. Maybe at 32-33 we are getting there, but that period inbetween is a great period for most strikers.
The Telegraph's report:
There are so many errors in this piece, it's actually embarrassing. The Telegraph used to be one of the best papers for sport not so many years ago, but the standard has collapsed over the last couple of years. They don't even have his age right ffs...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...-Wayne-Rooney-could-be-tested-by-PSG-bid.html
There are so many errors in this piece, it's actually embarrassing. The Telegraph used to be one of the best papers for sport not so many years ago, but the standard has collapsed over the last couple of years. They don't even have his age right ffs...
Rooney and Kaka have similar standings in their club, although you could make an argument that Kaka was more important to that Milan side than Rooney is to ours.
There's not really anything to suggest average transfer fees at the very top end of the scale have drastically changed between then and now.
I do love the way they continue to throw that weekly salary figure around as fact.
He's not anymore.
It depends if you take into account the whole package. Rooney for the next 5 years will probably cost us in the region of £60m in wages, along with your £50m transfer fee.
Could we get someone who offers us what Rooney does for £110m all in, i'd say probably. Likewise could we get a couple of players who combined would contribute more, again probably.
The only reason we should sell Rooney is if he himself wants to leave. If that's not the case then it doesn't or shouldn't matter how much PSG offer us. It's all well and good saying every player has a price and then sighting Ronaldo as example but would we have sold Ronaldo if he hadn't wanted to go despite the 80m bid?
He's not our best player, but he is our most important IMO. We've coped well when he's been out this season, but when he's on his game, we usually play our best stuff.
I wouldn't sell him for less than £70 million. Buy Falcao.
More important than RvP?
Don't forget he's been out quite a lot this season yet we haven't suffered for his loss. I don't think any of our players are the 'most' important. SAF has proved this season, as much if not more than any, that United are a team not a collection of individuals.
If you had to be pushed on it, then RvP could be considered our most important player this season, but even when he hasn't played it's not like we've struggled. We certainly haven't struggled when Rooney hasn't being playing, which maybe we did last season.
Edit: You edited your post, not playing fair...
Sell Rooney, buy Flintoff from cricket ...
Forget it.
Next rumor?
Next rumor?
United don't need the money. Analysts project that profits will rise to almost £200m in a few years with zero debt. The future couldn't be any more stable.
feck selling Rooney, buy Messi!
We're not going to sign Ronaldo and losing Ronaldo, Rooney, Tevez and (probably) Nani in the space of some 4 years wouldn't really look good. We make good money so we don't really need the 50m or whatever we would get for him. He's been around for a long time, is going to be our all time top scorer, still has a lot to offer, is easily in our top 2 most important/best players right now and wouldn't want to move to Paris so yes I can't see him leaving and I wouldn't even take 100m for him. There's no one else out there who can give us what Rooney does and it's not like we'd go and buy something that we need (a CM) from the money he gets us anyway.
As we saw in 2009, selling our best player for even a world record fee doesn't mean that we would invest that cash in some sort crack-fuelled muppet spree to replace him. It would more than likely just mean we'd greatly weaken our squad and have more money sitting in the bank.
And aside from anything else, there's simply no way we should even contemplate selling him unless we have to. While RVP has been outstanding, and covered for Rooney's absences this season, it doesn't seem even remotely logical to me to entertain losing our best player of recent years because of an brilliant (half-)season from another player. City and Chelsea will continue to spunk their owners' endless money at major signings every time the transfer window opens, so there's no way we should risk losing one of the best players in the league just because some other sugar daddy cnut has waved masses of cash at us.
Debt or no debt, we are fecking Manchester United.
And aside from anything else, there's simply no way we should even contemplate selling him unless we have to. While RVP has been outstanding, and covered for Rooney's absences this season, it doesn't seem even remotely logical to me to entertain losing our best player of recent years because of an brilliant (half-)season from another player. City and Chelsea will continue to spunk their owners' endless money at major signings every time the transfer window opens, so there's no way we should risk losing one of the best players in the league just because some other sugar daddy cnut has waved masses of cash at us.
Debt or no debt, we are fecking Manchester United.
- Status