Man Utd could have blown us out of the water.

[Marvin]

When Roman Abramovic came along, Man Utd had dominated the transfer market for years and here was a new entrant who was throwing the owners money around and buying every top player. United chose deleiberately not to compete with them.

Under Gill they formulated the FFP regime, and the 2nd prong of that strategy was for Man Utd to start elevating transfer costs and wages so that City on a lower revenus base could not succeed. They failed, but it could have worked.

On a second point, it's predictable but nevertheless irritating that their financial excess goes unreported. OK the transfer fees and wages are reported, but there's no accompany condemnation of the likes that City experienced.

 

[Fat Chance]

Paying DDG 400K a week is good business sense. For them to get a player of his calibre as replacement would cost them just as mtransfer fees. If it was the Warrington rat that they were offering daft money too then you could agree that they were distorting the market.

Saved em for the last four seasons....how much did his norman wisdom impression v seville ('18) cost utd ...

 

[chaddblue]

They’re only paying that kind of money cos they’re panicking and desperate

If they were negotiating from a strong winning position the likes of de gea wouldn’t be flirting with other clubs and holding the rags to ransom. He’d be snapping their hands off for a new contract on a much lower salary

In short, top players are only there for the money

 

[Project1]

Saved em for the last four seasons....how much did his norman wisdom impression v seville ('18) cost utd ...

It was getting them into the top 4 that was the most annoying. adidas deal only 50M a year if outside of top 4.

 

[Marvin]

They’re only paying that kind of money cos they’re panicking and desperate

If they were negotiating from a strong winning position the likes of de gea wouldn’t be flirting with other clubs and holding the rags to ransom. He’d be snapping their hands off for a new contract on a much lower salary

In short, top players are only there for the money

Well the top players may only be considering them because of the money, but I think they deliberately drove their costs higher as a strategy to drive City out because they knew City couldm't go there because of FFP.

Somewhat ironic that the Premier League has now scrapped their wages cap, with the strong suspicion being that it was to keep Utd afloat. It moght not have hit them this season but it was becoming a looming problem for them.

Panic or deliberate strategy, there must be a limit to this. One more season outside of the CL and they'll have nowhere to go with this.

 

[RACHACE]

Paying DDG 400K a week is good business sense. For them to get a player of his calibre as replacement would cost them just as much in transfer fees. If it was the Warrington rat that they were offering daft money too then you could agree that they were distorting the market.

Not having that its good business. He was piss poor last season and another season like that will see his perceived value drop through the roof. Putting him on 400k a week just keeps a declining player their books for a very long time.

He is still perceived as one of their better players despite his form last season and that just tells you how bad things really are over there.

I doubt very much that had ederson had the season De gea had and then came knocking for a bumper contract that he'd have got it.

 

[Gorton_Tubster]

There's something drastically wrong at utd. They're off the opinion that they are as big as bayern, RM, Barca et all. What they don't realise is that it ALL relied on SAF.

Whilst those other clubs are big no matter who manages them utd were "big" only during the reign of SAF and the globalisation of the Premier league.

I honestly think they are heading for the biggest collapse of a football club ever.

 

[Paulpowersleftfoot]

There's something drastically wrong at utd. They're off the opinion that they are as big as bayern, RM, Barca et all. What they don't realise is that it ALL relied on SAF.

Whilst those other clubs are big no matter who manages them utd were "big" only during the reign of SAF and the globalisation of the Premier league.

I honestly think they are heading for the biggest collapse of a football club ever.

SAF?
Pisscan if you don’t mind

 

[supercity88]

We're competing for leagues and cups because City dominated the domestic transfer market for the last decaade. I was suggesting that Utd's wage differential to City is extraoridnary. Their top players are on £400k pw basic. No one comes close. had they been successful on the pitch, which they easily could have been with investment like that, we'd have been struggling to make the impact we have.

All hypothetical. They decided going the Real Madrid way of huge money and wages would secure their place as a competitive team. But it has been poor investment. Panic buying. They then combine it with the "United way" of promoting young players who just are not good enough. They have followed Liverpool's model of harping for times gone by whilst investing poorly which creates a disastrous hybrid of instability. And their managerial choices have all gone the same way too.

The Barca model is such a good one to follow because the club remains consistent even when managers change. Academy there to bring one or two in and make money, team style.remains broadly consistent, manager changes every few years but is based on a set approach.

 

[denislawsbackheel]

Given their wealth and where they were when the pisscan retired they must be the worst managed club in any of the top divisions in the world.