egafd.com

Sam Slater wrote:

>You with me?

In a word NO but to be honest I didn't read the full choice of word essay sorry.

You'll be please to know the Moyes would have also chosen Rooney as Captain this season, in the belief that the time is right for him:



I still don't because I don't think he has the motivation needed but hope to be proved wrong.

Too bad you didn't read my post. It basically said this 'desperate' accusation was either nonsense or perfectly normal for every club with every decision they make.

You seem to be discussing the merits of Rooney as a captain rather than defending/explaining the 'desperate' tag.

Ferguson kept winning. Why would he rock the boat?

I agree that the Glazers haven't invested like their rivals over the last 10 years, but they're not stupid. They surely must realise that Man Utd must be successful for them to keep up their worldwide appeal.

Basically, if they want to keep skimming the cream off the top year in year out, they've got to spend money.

[quote]What is going on, and has been for several seasons, is a huge under-investment by the board... something I alluded to last season (but I was wrong... it was all Moyes' fault, of course, as someone kept insisting).[/quote]

Hold on, hold on! One bad result doesn't mean you're right. Bit eager aren't you?

[quote]Wasting huge amounts on Fellaini (a player woefully short of the minimum level required by a club like Man Utd) and Mata (a player they didn't actually need) does not constitute "investment".[/quote]

Both Moyes buys.

[quote]Much of the blame must be laid at the door of SAF... how many seasons did he go without strengthening a dodgy midfield, preferring instead to rely on Giggs and bringing Scholes out of retirement? If he had the funds but didn't spend them, he is wholly to blame. If he didn't have the funds, then his defending the Glazers to the supporters did the club as a whole a huge disservice. [/quote]

He kept winning, which means that given the right management the players were good enough. He's not going to rock the boat and start arguing with the owners when he's won 5 titles, 4 league cups, a Champions League, 2 other Champions League finals and a Club World cup in 10 years. And if he did, who's to say they'd listen to him and start spending?

[quote]Sir Alex knew he was weak in midfield, but did nothing. He knew that sooner, rather than latter, replacements were needed for his 3 most senior defenders, but he did nothing.[/quote]

Yes, because Sir Alex doesn't know his arse from his elbow when it comes to building title winning squads. Come on, Bob.

[quote]I feel sorry for David Moyes... decent guy who was sold a pup. A bit like the guy who buys a nice, low mileage second hand car only to find, after being stopped by the police, that it's a cut and shut and the odometer's been tampered with. Moyes was never going to be the world's greatest manager, but he is not at fault for what happened and is continuing to happen at Old Trafford.[/quote]

He was the one that spent nearly ?70m on two players he (in your words) didn't need or weren't good enough. And he has no excuses in buying Fellaini. He'd worked with the guy for 2 years so can't blame that on the scouts.

He dumped the whole coaching setup, against the advice of Sir Alex. He's only himself to blame. His payoff will also be more than what 95% of the population earn in a decade or more. I don't feel one bit sorry for him.

[quote]I said last year that United needed to spend at least ?100m. They've wasted ?30m of that on Luke Shaw (no doubt will be a good player over the long-term, but you spend ?30m on 20+ goals a year strikers and creative midfielders, not left backs!) and ?29m on Herrera, an "attacking" midfielder who scores at a rate of less than one goal every ten games. [/quote]

Man Utd have always paid over the odds for players. They rarely get bargains. Herrera isn't an attacking midfielder. Playing for Bilbao he was the one who got involved in building up attacks and getting it to the forwards and also chasing down the opposition when in possession. A real box-to-box midfielder. Time will tell if he turns out a good buy.

As to my thoughts on Man Utd now.......well, they have to spend big. Last season it was clear to me they needed a defensive midfielder who could carry the ball. A presence in the centre. Carrick is good positionally and can pass very well but he hasn't the pace and energy to really dominate a midfield. This season, Giggs has retired and 3 of the back four have moved on. I don't know of many teams that have 75% of their back four move all at once. That's got to have an affect and the reason van Gaal is going with 3 at the back. Having said that, I don't think the loss to Swansea was defensive errors as much as the defense having no protection from midfield. Also, Man Utd only conceded 1 goal from open play in pre season and that was a 60 yard lob over the keeper against Roma. Teams haven't been ripping them apart.

Man Utd need a right-back because Rafael is constantly injured. They need backup for Luke Shaw because Ashley Young cannot play there (wing-back he's been good, full back he's a liability). They also need at least 1 other central defender if they want to play 3 at the back.

In midfield they definitely need a someone like Vidal or Strootman, who can put tackles in as well as support the attackers. Lastly they need pace up front.......especially if they want to play wing-backs because they'll need forwards who can run into wide areas fast.

On 8 August 2013, Sterling was arrested for an alleged assault on his model
girlfriend. He was found not guilty at Liverpool Magistrates Court on
20 September.[46][47] Sterling had previously gone to trial for another
assault on a woman, but the case was abandoned after alleged witnesses
did not appear.

Yeah.......I know.

You didn't get the general point I was trying to make though, did you?

Sam Slater wrote:

> Ferguson kept winning. Why would he rock the boat?
>
> I agree that the Glazers haven't invested like their rivals
> over the last 10 years, but they're not stupid. They surely
> must realise that Man Utd must be successful for them to keep
> up their worldwide appeal.
>
> Basically, if they want to keep skimming the cream off the top
> year in year out, they've got to spend money.
>

There is no way for the Glazers to pay off the debt incurred in buying the club out of cashflow. I think they will sell on to a greater fool. They have already sold a percentage of the club on the NY Stock Exchange. One thing they have never done and will never do is put one penny of their own money into the club. Their ownership of Man Utd is and always has been predicated on the enrichment of the Glazer family.

Man U will be signing a sponsorship deal with a US counselling provider so their fans can come to terms with normality. The next few days transfer activity, or lack of it, will define how far VG will be able to take the team.

Sam Slater wrote:


Hold on, hold on! One bad result doesn't mean you're right. Bit eager aren't you?

[SNIP]


The result against Swansea has nothing to do with it... I was saying exactly the same thing last season. Even if Man Utd had won 6-0 at the weekend I'd still be saying it.

Two seasons ago they over-performed AND Man City, Chelsea etc under-performed. That they won the league that year was *in spite* of having an ageing defence and a woeful midfield. Last season, with a new manager who didn't hold the fear over the dressing room that SAF did, they performed at closer to their natural level.

The purchase of Fellaini may well have been 100% down to Moyes, albeit as a last minute act of desperation when the club failed to get anyone else in (and look back at the papers a year ago and Man Utd were being linked with a host of top names... Cesc Fabregas amongst them). Mata I think was more down to the board than Moyes... it was Man Utd saying "look we can still attract top players away from our rivals".

Nobody in this forum will change my mind that Man Utd have been in need of two or three top defenders, two or three top central midfielders and at least one top wide man for several seasons; that SAF was more than aware of the deficiencies in his squad (but knowing he was retiring, did nothing so as to ensure his status as a demi-god whilst those following him failed); that the American owners have no intention of spending the necessary money required to bring the squad to a level where they will compete against the very best in Europe as equals, and will be looking to sell the club within the next 12-24 months.

If (and it's a big if) they bring in 2 or 3 quality signings in the next few days, they may just get back into the top 4, given they won't have the distraction of European football this season to clog up their fixture list and put a strain on a very weak squad. If they don't, expect United to be vying with Spurs, Everton etc for a Europa League place for the next few years.

[quote]Two seasons ago they over-performed AND Man City, Chelsea etc under-performed.[/quote]

Sour grapes for a rival is all that is. Basically, you're saying they only won because your team let them. Sorry, there are 38 games in a season. It's not a cup game where you can get lucky. The best team over 38 games wins.

[quote]Last season, with a new manager who didn't hold the fear over the dressing room that SAF did, they performed at closer to their natural level. [/quote]

Doesn't make sense. So if Chelsea win the league this year, one could say that they only won it because Jose got more out of them. When he wasn't there they came 3rd, 4th or 5th......which is their natural level. 'Natural level' is a meaningless phrase in this context.

What you can say is this squad, under Sir Alex, won the league 4 times in that seven years you're talking about. The squad (barring Scholes) Moyes had last year. They were ageing and declining but that doesn't account for a drop off from 1st to 7th. That's falling off a cliff. Moyes takes the blame.

[quote]The purchase of Fellaini may well have been 100% down to Moyes, albeit as a last minute act of desperation when the club failed to get anyone else in (and look back at the papers a year ago and Man Utd were being linked with a host of top names... Cesc Fabregas amongst them).[/quote]

So, even when Moyes buys a dud, it's not his fault? If the club failed to get his targets why bother with Fellaini at all? He didn't improve the squad in any way. What it did do was waste nearly ?30m.

[quote]Mata I think was more down to the board than Moyes... it was Man Utd saying "look we can still attract top players away from our rivals". [/quote]

That's speculation from you. Moyes never complained and hasn't since he's been sacked. Man Utd haven't got a history of buying players over the manager's head so this is just you making something up to try and defend a Moyes buy even you said was not what they needed. He's a Moyes purchase.

[quote]Nobody in this forum will change my mind that Man Utd have been in need of two or three top defenders, two or three top central midfielders and at least one top wide man for several seasons;[/quote]

They have. But only to replace the older players. The squad still won 4 league titles in those 'several seasons'.

[quote]that SAF was more than aware of the deficiencies in his squad (but knowing he was retiring, did nothing so as to ensure his status as a demi-god whilst those following him failed)[/quote]

Silly comment. So he spends a quarter of a century building up a club to be one of the biggest in the world only to plan several seasons ahead to destroy it out of pride? And didn't he retire because his wife was ill and needing an operation himself through the summer he just decided the time was right? He'd bought van Persie 9 months before making the decision to retire. That's not a man planning to let the squad degrade before someone else takes over.

[quote]that the American owners have no intention of spending the necessary money required to bring the squad to a level where they will compete against the very best in Europe as equals, and will be looking to sell the club within the next 12-24 months.[/quote]

That wouldn't make much business sense. Man Utd's debt has gone from ?800m at it's highest to under ?300m now and as you say, just signed a sponsorship deal over around ?750m over 10 years. The made ?146m net profit last season and their revenue was ?363m in 2013. With the extra sponsorship money, and if they get back into the Champions League, Man Utd could be debt free within 3-5 years. Potentially, with no debts to service, the Glazers could cream ?100m a year from Old Trafford and still give the manager ?100-?150m a year to spend on new players. It would be stupid to sell now, just when their long-term plans to get the debt down is working. It's like selling your house in the last few years of your mortgage when you know the value is going to triple over the next five years. It's dumb. The Glazers are greedy.........but not dumb.

[quote]If (and it's a big if) they bring in 2 or 3 quality signings in the next few days, they may just get back into the top 4, given they won't have the distraction of European football this season to clog up their fixture list and put a strain on a very weak squad.[/quote]

You predicted they'd be 3rd a few days ago >

Man Utd need players, but have just had 75% of their back four move on and Giggs retiring. This is worse than what Moyes inherited and their current difficulties in no way lets Moyes off the hook like you want to believe. If they finish 7th again, Moyes was still out of his depth.