• Manchester United Message Board

  • Steve Steve May 14, 2012 21:08 Flag

    Scholes, Giggs, transfers etc

    SAF has confirmed that Paul Scholes has signed on for one more year. He has also said it is likely to be both his and Ryan Giggs last season in the game.

    Sir Alex on transfers: "Yes we want to add to the squad that's in process at the moment. We have set our stall on certain players and we want to make sure the evolution continues at United."

    After confirming Scholes was staying, he also said this when talking about transfers -
    "We're not like others who can spend fortunes on proven goods. We invest in players who will be with the club for a long time. We're good at that and are going to continue with that."

    Talking of transfers, you can pretty much be certain Eden Hazard is going to City. When interviewed he confirmed he was going to Manchester, he just wouldn't say which club. I don't think there is any of us who believe that may be us!

    Pogbas agent has spoken again. He's said they are close to agreeing to join Juventus but United refuse to give up and we'll see soon. To me, that was a blatant final ploy at trying to get United to offer more money. I'm long past caring whether he stays or goes, just wish he'd get on with it and make his decision.

    And in other rumoured news, Ravel Morrison is set to be released by West Ham (if thats even possible) this summer. Once again, what a waste of talent he is.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Steve, how much longer do you think City will be able to spend like drunken sailors? Of course unlike your side (or mine or anyone other than maybe Chelsea) they do have the cash, but at what point do they have to balance the books to stay onside of the FFP rules?

      Seems to me that most of their squad is actually fairly young so they don't have to spend on replacements, so may not spend as much as many think they might. Seems to me that last summer our spending like your own was on younger players in the hopes they will bring return not immediately but over the length of their contracts, and with FFP when you look at net revenues the playing field is a lot flatter than many think. While your debt takes away much of your spending power, you still rake in the most in terms of revenue to match City.

      The question mark is do you have at the club now, or can you attract on a relative budget the right players to replace many core players who are likely to start moving on in the coming seasons. Time will tell.

      • 3 Replies to dsteer_lfc_68
      • With the Glazers at the helm, it will be very tough for us to attract top talent. And it doesn't help that the culture of the top administration at United is to acquire players on the cheap, casuing us to miss out on the best and be left with mediocre signings. I just wish that a propietor or consortium with loads and loads of mullah to burn will come buy us and force the current board and management out of the club, and appoint a youthful, dynamic new board and manager to take over, then dispose of the deawood and OAP's and hit the high end market for fresh new blood, 'cuase with the current top brass, that's not gonna happen.

      • dsteer you raise an interesting question which most of the press in their wisdom continue to ignore. If uefa are serious about the FFP they have to start reigning in clubs like city and ensure that their expenditure is more in line with their revenue. Some sections of the press have mentioned that because of FFP city will probably need to sell several big name players - mainly those on the fringes or out on loan - in order to be seen to be making a genuine attempt to reduce the size of their debt. The other factor is the size of their squad and the need to keep within the rules on homegrown players. Most of the players city have been linked with are over 21 which means they have to be included in the squad. They have tended to get round this by sending players like Adebayor out on loan but that involves paying part of their wages and that is money that would be better spent on the players in their squad.

      • dsteer, no we dont have the players at the club to replace the old players, except maybe Rio, and I seriouslt doubt that we can get two players to replace Scholes and Giggs on the cheap, so unless the youngsters can suddenly become 500% better in the summer, or city get too cocky and muck it up for themselves, we will be fighting for 2nd or 3rd for a few years, and then who knows, we could go the way liverpool went, not winning the title for decades or worse, the way the last Utd top era went.

    • Even investing in players can cost a bit - utd spent in the region of £35 million on de Gea and Jones. Really sorry to hear the rumours about Morrison. The guy has bags of talent but is the living proof that if a player isn`t prepared to put in the effort it doesn`t matter how much talent they have.

    • So Fergie has admitted now that the glazers wont give money to help us to keep challenging, also admitting that we most likely wont be challenging again for a few years, 'We're not like others who can spend fortunes on proven goods. We invest in players who will be with the club for a long time'; so young players in who might or might not make it.