Jump to content
IGNORED

The old Man Utd Thread

ThePixelbarks

By ThePixelbarks
in Sport

 Share

Recommended Posts

5R7

5R7

Posted
Posted

i hate to say it, but id almost love for one of them Saudis to step up and buy  the club.

 

Heck, do that and keep woodward on, in the commercial side of the club only, where he does seem to know what he doing!?

 

once the glazers are gone and the debt with them, the club would bring in enough on its own without investment to actually buy decent players each season...although, i wouldn't say no to some investment in the training ground, the key club infrastructure, fixing old trafford...

2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Marlowe

Marlowe

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, ckny said:

The current situation is entirely of Glazer/Woodward's making. Just look at the squad, the 18 players we had last night. Jones, Martial, Fred, Matic, Pereira, Mata and James all started - none are good enough to play for Manchester United.

 

This kind of hyperbole doesn't help to be honest.

 

Martial had an off day, sure, missed a couple of good chances, but I also watched him make a lot of good runs that just weren't found by the players behind him, which is why he ended up dropping deeper and deeper.  Fred has actually been decent this season (him playing like this in a 3 with Herrera and Pogba could have been something). James is young and has a lot of potential - it's the fact he's starting nearly every game due to our lack of wide options that is the issue. Pereira again should just be a squad player at this point.

 

We need a wide player, some creativity in midfield and another centre forward who can give us the option of playing more direct when up against low blocks. Defence is decent (second lowest good chances conceded in the league was a stat I read the other day) and gives us a good base to build from at least.

 

1 minute ago, 5R7 said:

i hate to say it, but id almost love for one of them Saudis to step up and buy  the club

 

No no no. I'll never watch the team again if this happens.

2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ckny

ckny

Posted
Posted
44 minutes ago, Marlowe said:

This kind of hyperbole doesn't help to be honest.

 

I disagree. Would any of the players I named get in a Liverpool, City, Barcelona, Juventus, PSG side? Of course not.

 

The recruitment has been shambolic for a long time. Who was the last player we signed that you can point to and say was an unmitigated success?

1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
feltmonkey

feltmonkey

Posted
Posted

 

People who are saying they're out, I wouldn't go that far. I'll support the club forever, through thick and thin. It's painful to see what those parasites are doing but as the song says, "love United, hate Glaziers." 

 

It's a strange situation. Woodward and the Glaziers are the common factor in this decline, but we have spent eye-watering amounts of money. There's certainly incompetence. Is there a lack of intent?  There seems to be little appetite to do what is necessary to fix things, and zero idea how to go about it.

 

One problem seems to be a perception that just spending money is enough, rather than genuinely trying to sign the right players. We miss out on the player that would be right, and end up taking a gamble on someone else, often overpaying without doing the right research. Other clubs (Man City) identify a player and go and get them. We get weird hail mary signings like Di Maria, Falcao, Sanchez, and nearly Dybala which seem to happen without the manager's input. But we do spend the money. It's just that almost every single signing ends in disaster. Our best signing since Ferguson left is arguably Fellaini. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Liamness

Liamness

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, 5R7 said:

i hate to say it, but id almost love for one of them Saudis to step up and buy  the club.

 

Great, so we can become the biggest and ugliest sportswashing campaign of them all? I don't think it's going to happen anyway - the story that leaked a while back was just to test public opinion, and the response was very negative.

 

The money isn't the issue. The lack of long term planning is. Other clubs get in front of potential problems, and try to build squads with depth and balance. We don't. That's why we're only a couple of points above clubs like Wolves, Sheffield United and Southamption, who all have a fraction of the resources we do. Despite this, it wouldn't surprise me if one of more of them are above us by the season's end - particularly Southamption who have hit a real hot streak. Compared to those clubs, we invest reactively, and create a media circus every time. The latest example is the Fernandes debacle - Lisbon's owners know what running a football club is like, they know the fans will be right up the Glazers' and Woodward's backs if we don't sign him. We're trying to sign a crucial first team player in January, with essentially no-one to play there if a deal can't be made, and few alternatives we could pursue. It's such a weak position to be in, and it's the result of years of there being no leadership or vision on the sporting side.

 

I honestly could live with us being a mid table team (maybe I'm being a bit dramatic - but we're not far off), if our position wasn't the result of expensive and haphazard recruitment and poor coaching. If we had an average group of players stretched to the maximum of their abilities, collectively more than the sum of their parts, that would be a step down from our recent past of course, but it would be much more bearable. Obviously if you are only a fan when your club is winning trophy after trophy, then you are not really a fan. But when the ownership of a club is either uninterested in sporting success, or just completely incompetent, I do think that it's much harder to find that excitement and passion in following them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
5R7

5R7

Posted
Posted

The sooner we hit the bottom, the better, because then the glazers wont want the club as it wont make money, and somebody that does might be able to step in! So, 30 years till we win the league again?

 

hell, it wouldn't be so bad if we were at least playing good football!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stevie

Stevie

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, teddymeow said:

 

This is where I'm at.

 

All this talk of supporting Ole from the board etc just seems to be lip service.

 

Yup. Our squad is paper thin and lack the quality needed to compete for anything. We didn't replace Lukaku and we didn't replace Herrera, and were not strengthening our squad even though we desperately need it. Why should fans invest in the club when the owners wont?

 

 

7 hours ago, 5R7 said:

i hate to say it, but id almost love for one of them Saudis to step up and buy  the club.

 

 

I would love owners who put money into the club instead of just taking money out of it. Take a look at City, their B team alone would comfortably qualify for top 4 while we are betting all our money on Rashford. 

 

24 minutes ago, Mr Do 71 said:

No Bruno Fernandes then. Joel Glazer has said he's not worth the money.

 

The Glazers turning a positive into a negative, again. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
5R7

5R7

Posted
Posted
37 minutes ago, Mr Do 71 said:

No Bruno Fernandes then. Joel Glazer has said he's not worth the money.

I had to double check that...WTAF!?!?! - https://www.givemesport.com/1540698-bruno-fernandes-move-to-man-utd-is-off-after-joel-glazers-intervention

 

They need to get the fuck out, they clearly have no intention of real investment!

 

He has an excellent record, wanted to come, and yes was a little pricey, but, not astronomical!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Stevie

Stevie

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted

This was written by a Liverpool fan

 

Quote

 

First though, a confession: I'm a Liverpool fan (*vinyl screech*). Now, at this point I'm not going to say that "I come in peace" or other such bollocks, nor am I here to gloat at your club's current misfortunes. I wrote this comment because for me this goes far deeper than football rivalries or petty schadenfreude. Manchester United is a proud and historic British institution, and the way that it has been shamelessly exploited, mismanaged and bled dry by the the current regime is a national disgrace that for me exemplifies a lot of what is going wrong with football and in fact this country as a whole at the moment. What's equally galling to me is that there are many people here on reddit and other forums who, either through ignorance of the facts or misplaced allegiances, still defend the Glazers for it. As a Liverpool fan I can relate better than most. Like the Glazers, our previous owners Hicks & Gillett bought our club in the mid 2000s with leverage and then unceremoniously dumped the debt onto the club. A decade ago we were an inch away from administration and ruin until John Henry and FSG saved our arses. If you think that can't happen to your club too, then you've not been properly paying attention. So, without freddy adu, here is a no-bullshit guide to the history of the Glazer ownership saga, warts and all...

 

I see a lot of people defending the Glazers on reddit lately, and usually with the same breath mocking Man Utd fans in a derisive tone for being fickle. "Look how much money they've spent", they'll say, or maybe point to patsy Woodward for orchestrating the on-field shambles. For those of us who have been around long enough to witness the slow-motion train wreck that has been the Glazer's tenure from the beginning however, it has been crystal clear for some time that the Glazers are the authors of their own (or rather the club's) misfortune. For those who are OTL or maybe think the Glazers have done nothing wrong, I'd like to regale you all with a tale of the greatest heist in football history. Like a bad crime novella, it involves intrigue, dirty business practices and, perhaps most bizarrely all, a bucket load of horse cum.

 

First things first though, dear readers, let me reassure you all that this is not a knee-jerk reaction by United fans to their team's current atrocious form, nor is it born of envy as a consequence of the brilliant resurgency of their noisy neighbours in Manchester and Merseyside (heh). In fact, these protests have been going on quietly behind the scenes ever since the Glazers first took over the reigns of the club 15 years ago...

 

Let us go back in time now to the EPL at the turn of this century. Manchester United, guided by the savant-like managerial talents of Alex Ferguson, were dominating English football like never before. A decade of almost unparalleled success on the field had elevated United to the pinnacle of British football, both in fan popularity and, more importantly for our story, financially. The club had built a solid international reputation throughout the 90s as a pioneer of the commercial aspect of the game. As an institution they were THE benchmark that all other clubs in Europe measured themselves by. They were the first footy club in Europe (maybe the world) to become publicly listed on a stock exchange, and by the early 2000s had a market capitalisation on the London Stock Exchange of around £750 million, making it by far the most valuable club in world football. They were a model club in every sense, posting annual profits of upwards of £30m which was faithfully pumped back into Ferguson's squad every summer. The post-9/11 world was in some senses a bleak and uncertain time to live in, but what seemed a sure bet to many of us was that Manchester United would continue to be the richest and therefore most successful team in England for evermore. After all, what was there to stop them?

 

Enter the Glazer family, proprietors of a Florida NFL franchise and a failing shopping mall empire. Beginning in the early 2000s, the reclusive head of the family, Malcolm Glazer, began quietly but diligently acquiring shares in Manchester United. Once he had reached 30% ownership, Glazer senior was obliged by stock exchange rules to make an offer for the remaining shares, which no doubt had been his plan all along. The United board led by CEO David Gill were at first resistant to Glazer's attempt at a hostile takeover and rebuffed his advances, making stern recommendations to the shareholders to reject the offer.

 

Of particular interest to keen observers were the positions of two of the major shareholders at the time, Irish racehorse breeders John Magnier and J. P. McManus, who together owned around 30% of the shares. In order to reach 75% ownership and force through a total buyout of the club, the Glazers would need to convince the Irish investors to sell their shares at some point. As fate would have it though, Ferguson had recently fallen out in spectacular fashion with Magnier and McManus over the stud rights of a valuable racehorse, the legendary Rock of Gibraltar, which they had gifted to him for his service to the club. The whole thing inevitably ended in court, and now the manager of Manchester United was in the awkward position of being at loggerheads with two of the club's major shareholders. Whether or not this affair was the catalyst, Magnier and McManus soon decided to go against the board's recommendation and sold their shares to the Glazers. Within weeks, the takeover was complete and the Americans were now in control of the richest and best-run club in world football.

It soon emerged, however, that the Glazers had borrowed around £750 million (the full value of the club) in order to buy it, and immediately upon completing the takeover had passed this debt burden onto the club. Manchester United had until that point been completely debt-free and possessed the financial muscle to outspend any club in England and probably the world. Now, under the new ownership, they were hamstrung by a yearly interest bill of around £70m against earnings of £250m, which could only result in stifling the club's ability to compete in the post-Abramovich transfer market. Understandably, many fans were apoplectic at these developments, and demonstrations took place at the last minute to try to stop the deal happening. Famously, the Glazers even required a police escort at their first appearance at Old Trafford, such was the public's disdain.

 

The fans' concerns quickly proved to be well founded, as despite continued success under Ferguson, expenditure on players was sporadic. Fergie famously lamented that there was "no value in the market", but wiser heads understood that the budget was being constrained by the Glazers. More worryingly for United's finances, however, was that the debt wasn't going down, but rather UP. The Glazers had borrowed via a high interest "PIK loan", which stood at almost 20% APR. All of a sudden, Manchester United, arguably the biggest club in the world, was in deep financial distress. There was even talk of selling the stadium and training ground in order to lighten the albatross of debt hanging around the club's neck. In the end, the Glazers fortuitously managed to refinance the debt by first issuing bonds at a low 5% yield and then listed the club on the NY stock exchange, selling 10% of their shares. The club was now out of immediate danger, but the bulk of the debt remained. According to the latest financial results, United spent £20m on interest payments last year and remain around £400m in the red. To date, the club has spent in excess of £1 billion on servicing this debt.

 

Today, thanks mostly to the boom in EPL television rights and the efforts of Woodward in cannily exploiting the commercial opportunities afforded by a vast global fanbase, the club is in sound financial health (for the time being at least) and the debt level is sustainable. However, they certainly rode their luck in the early years and selfishly placed the club in an extremely perilous financial position. During the first eight years of their ownership, the club continued to succeed on the pitch despite the Glazers, not because of them. Regardless of the relative lack of investment in the squad throughout this period, United overachieved thanks simply to the brilliance of Ferguson. But since the great man retired in 2013, the Glazers have been badly exposed as having no obvious talent or understanding of football matters by a never-ending chain of bad decisions. As if to add insult to injury, they draw in excess of £30m in dividends and salaries for themselves from the budget each year. The club's fortunes on the pitch are in a tailspin after the last seven years of mismanagement, and yet the Glazers continue to reward themselves for it most handsomely. And for those of you who still point to the lavish spending spree that United has embarked on in recent seasons, know this: not a PENNY of it has come from the pockets of the Glazer family - it has been entirely self-generated by the club's revenues.

 

In summary then, Manchester United fans' ire is not simply down to poor form on the pitch, but rather the way in which the Glazers bought the club in 2005 with bad debt and the gross mismanagement of it ever since. They relied on the genius of Ferguson for too long and completely bungled his succession. They have proven not only to be poor stewards of the club time after time, but have also badly crippled its finances for decades to come with unnecessary debt. In my opinion, aside from the Munich disaster, the Glazers' parasitic tenure has been the biggest misfortune to ever befall Manchester United.

 

 

12
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.

  I accept