(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Es-RIBnba8) :)

Experience can work well in certain situations but I think that ultimately skill is more important. You can learn and become experienced, but when you're a grown up, you don't get much more skillful.

Besides - if you compare Perisic with Mkhitaryan for example, is he better? Miki was Bundesliga player of the year, but has struggled. Perisic isn't the best player in Italy surely. He might not adapt in a new country, there's always that risk for example. And he is 28, so if he takes one year to adapt(like I hope it took Miki a year to adapt and next year he'll do more), then he will be 29 before he has had a good season at United. Then he might make a step up(if he isn't unhappy about being on the bench and looking to move on to somewhere else to get regular football) and play two seasons of good football. How many wingers have their best seasons after they're 31?

Even evergreen Giggs slowed down at that age..

This kind of a transfer has the upside of improving the team a little(I think you'll agree here, right?), but the downside of the club blowing a good part of 35m without getting an improvement to the team. If the club buys a young player for that money, then surely we'd get the money back(at least a decent part of it, like with Memphis).

It's also financially bad. For comparison:

Signing Perisic for 35m - assuming he'll be here until he is 31, that would be about 11m per season+wages.
Signing Mbappe for 120m - assuming he'll be here until he is 31, that would make it 9m per season+wages.

With Mbappe there is the real chance that he might be the best player of his generation and improve considerably still. Like Ronaldo or Rooney improved from the age of 18 to the age of 23-25. With Perisic there is little chance that he'll improve considerably.

We are still in transition and José is still trying to create a team of his own taste, put his own stamp on it. He is an intelligent person and therefore knows that on long term he will need to follow United's way, make us play more attractive football and start putting more trust into younger players. Hence, I think this will last only until we reach a certain level of stability.

I have serious doubts about this.

He can talk the talk, but in the first few months so could Van Gaal. He was also bullish and aimed high, but it turned out.. well, we know how.

I think this is hope talking more than expectation that he'll change :).

I also hope that he'll change. But we constantly see signs that he is doing things just like he did at his previous clubs - Tuanzebe and Fosu-Mensah don't really get that many games, even though they haven't done anything badly on the pitch so far. He hasn't kept the criticism of his players in-house, but has washed the dirty laundry in front of the whole world. He is moaning about the referees, fixture congestion and whatnot, even though the problems come from him not rotating, not the fixtures being that much worse than they generally are.

The problem with this transfer for me is that even if it works out brilliantly(which it might not), then the upside is pretty small. I wasn't a fan of the Mkhitaryan transfer either and I liked Zlatan only because I've been a fan of him since... 2002ish.

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Es-RIBnba8) :)

;-)

Experience can work well in certain situations but I think that ultimately skill is more important. You can learn and become experienced, but when you're a grown up, you don't get much more skillful.

But skillfull dosen't make you consistant in your performances experinece does, i will agree with you that Martial is more skillfull then Perisic is (but this season you could see Martial was young)

Besides - if you compare Perisic with Mkhitaryan for example, is he better? Miki was Bundesliga player of the year, but has struggled. Perisic isn't the best player in Italy surely. He might not adapt in a new country, there's always that risk for example. And he is 28, so if he takes one year to adapt(like I hope it took Miki a year to adapt and next year he'll do more), then he will be 29 before he has had a good season at United. Then he might make a step up(if he isn't unhappy about being on the bench and looking to move on to somewhere else to get regular football) and play two seasons of good football. How many wingers have their best seasons after they're 31?

Even evergreen Giggs slowed down at that age..

I wouldn't say he is better, maybe around the same player as Miki but a little more versatile then Miki and IMO Miki has had a really bad season (so I also hope he picks up his game)

This kind of a transfer has the upside of improving the team a little(I think you'll agree here, right?), but the downside of the club blowing a good part of 35m without getting an improvement to the team. If the club buys a young player for that money, then surely we'd get the money back(at least a decent part of it, like with Memphis).

It's also financially bad. For comparison:

Signing Perisic for 35m - assuming he'll be here until he is 31, that would be about 11m per season+wages.
Signing Mbappe for 120m - assuming he'll be here until he is 31, that would make it 9m per season+wages.

With Mbappe there is the real chance that he might be the best player of his generation and improve considerably still. Like Ronaldo or Rooney improved from the age of 18 to the age of 23-25. With Perisic there is little chance that he'll improve considerably.

Yeah I would agree that it improves the squad and the attack "a lot"

I just don't understand that we allways are concerned about the money we use on players, we shouldn't care, united is a filthy rich club and we have owners that milk the club every year for millions upon millions so I personally don't care if we pay 50 mil for Perisic (even though I would agree its to much for Perisic) but if that is what united will pay for him it's fine with me :-)

I would love Mbappe in United and I still hope we sign him, and who says we don't sign him and Perisic??

SuperNuuK wrote:

Even if he is better defensively than Martial or just overall slightly better than him, then this is something that I don't particularly like. If such a deal goes through, then it confirms the short-term nature of Jose. He isn't thinking 10 years ahead when he buys someone. If he looked at his job as someone who needs to take care of the club for until he grows old, then he wouldn't do such a deal.

This I totally disagree with

IMO you can't allways think 10 years ahead with every transfers, im sure Martial is gonna be a huge star for united in the future but he is still young (21), (and to be honest he wasn't good this season 4 goals and 6 assist in the PL) you need to have a nice blend of young and experience.
And another thing is, I think Mourinho will use him on the right side.

last year he bought Eric Bailey and Poul Pogba 22 and 23 at that time, then he brought in Zlatan and Miki for experince as well.

For Martial the season wasn't that bad. The 4 goals and 6 assists came in 1558 minutes, which is 0,58 goals+assists per 90 minutes.

Perisic for comparison - 11 goals and 8 assists in 2757 minutes, which is 0,62 goals+assists per 90 minutes.

The difference is quite small. Perisic played in what is probably an easier league. If he comes to England, will he be able to score/assist as many goals?


If you think he will play Perisic on the right, then it's replacing Mata or Miki. While Mata is someone I think that just isn't good enough for United(but good enough on the bench - the role he played this season basically), then replacing Miki seems absurd to me. Why did we buy him for such a big amount of money at all if we don't trust him to be a first team player? Or if Perisic is going to be a backup for him, then it makes even less sense. 35m for a bench player? That's just pointless.

I just don't understand that we allways are concerned about the money we use on players, we shouldn't care, united is a filthy rich club and we have owners that milk the club every year for millions upon millions so I personally don't care if we pay 50 mil for Perisic (even though I would agree its to much for Perisic) but if that is what united will pay for him it's fine with me :-)

A few things here.

1. Any extra money we spend on transfers will in some ways go to strengthen our rivals. Whether it's some other English club or someone we play in Europe doesn't really matter. Either way it's not a good idea IMO.
2. The resources aren't limitless. If we pay too much for one player, then we might get priced out for some other player. For example if we spend 35/40 mil on Perisic, then do we have money to go all in on Mbappe(should we want him)? I doubt it.
3. The players we buy are the players we're going to watch the next few seasons. If things don't go horribly wrong for them(which is even worse).

If we overpay for someone like Pogba or Bale or Ronaldo or Messi(yes, even at his current age pay 100m!), then I don't mind it one bit. I also don't mind it if Zlatan gets 300k or 400k per week as long as he plays well, makes special touches on the pitch, remains funny in interviews and mentors the young strikers at the club.

But I do mind if we spend huge amounts of money on some above average player who will just do things slightly better than the player we have at the club now in his position. And maybe not improve the team at all. I'd rather see us spend 5mil each on 7 under 18 players who can do something special but who are really really raw right now.

I would love Mbappe in United and I still hope we sign him, and who says we don't sign him and Perisic??

We can't have 30 players in the squad. We play 4-3-3 usually with Herrera-Pogba-another in midfield.

Who are the 6 players who you'd want to have in attack? 3 starters and 3 subs.

Currently we have:
Zlatan, Rooney, Martial, Rashford, Miki, Mata, Lingard and you'd add Mbappe and Perisic.

Even if we assume that Rooney and Zlatan won't be here you're still left with only one slot for a new signing. Lingard signed a new deal a few months ago so selling him isn't an option.

We can buy one player to replace Zlatan basically and that's it. Assuming Rooney is out of the picture basically. If he remains, then any new signing also means that one player will have to leave.

(http://www.espnfc.com/story/3136474/riyad-mah...leave)

I'd prefer him to Perisic. Probably wouldn't cost more. Younger. Sort of an upgrade to Mata, because he has a great left foot as well and just is quicker and a better dribbler.

chuksi wrote:

(http://www.espnfc.com/story/3136474/riyad-mah...leave)

I'd prefer him to Perisic. Probably wouldn't cost more. Younger. Sort of an upgrade to Mata, because he has a great left foot as well and just is quicker and a better dribbler.

Yep.

All of what you mentioned and already accustomed to playing in EPL, so I guess he would hit the ground running at Man Utd.

A few things here.

1. Any extra money we spend on transfers will in some ways go to strengthen our rivals. Whether it's some other English club or someone we play in Europe doesn't really matter. Either way it's not a good idea IMO.

thats just the reallity English clubs need to deal with after there huge TV sponsorship deal, Clubs know english clubs have a lot of money, even the smaller clubs in PL pay overprice for players, and yes it will strengthen other clubs

2. The resources aren't limitless. If we pay too much for one player, then we might get priced out for some other player. For example if we spend 35/40 mil on Perisic, then do we have money to go all in on Mbappe(should we want him)? I doubt it.

I would be more worried if we went all in for Mbappe at a price tag around 110 mil £ for a 18 year old player who has produced 1 good season in a "weak" league like the french. yes Martial came from the french league and had good first season, but now he is struggling.

And if we get Perisic for 30-35 mil £ I don't think we have over payed for him.

3. The players we buy are the players we're going to watch the next few seasons. If things don't go horribly wrong for them(which is even worse).

If we overpay for someone like Pogba or Bale or Ronaldo or Messi(yes, even at his current age pay 100m!), then I don't mind it one bit. I also don't mind it if Zlatan gets 300k or 400k per week as long as he plays well, makes special touches on the pitch, remains funny in interviews and mentors the young strikers at the club.

So you wouldn't mind overpaying by 40-50 mil £ for Mbappe? I just can't see the logic in this?

We can't have 30 players in the squad. We play 4-3-3 usually with Herrera-Pogba-another in midfield.

Who are the 6 players who you'd want to have in attack? 3 starters and 3 subs.

Currently we have:
Zlatan, Rooney, Martial, Rashford, Miki, Mata, Lingard and you'd add Mbappe and Perisic.

Even if we assume that Rooney and Zlatan won't be here you're still left with only one slot for a new signing. Lingard signed a new deal a few months ago so selling him isn't an option.

We can buy one player to replace Zlatan basically and that's it. Assuming Rooney is out of the picture basically. If he remains, then any new signing also means that one player will have to leave.

I don't know who will start and who will be subs, and I can't say who will stay and leave, but I think Zlatan and Rooney is gone, Lingard IMO should be nothing more then a squad player and Mata (as much as I like him) don't fit in to Mourinho's style of play so I think he should be sold.

overall we need to make an overhaul on the Attack IMO (we scored 20 goals less then the rest of top 6 and about 30 goals less then top 3)

@typo :-)

thats just the reallity English clubs need to deal with after there huge TV sponsorship deal, Clubs know english clubs have a lot of money, even the smaller clubs in PL pay overprice for players, and yes it will strengthen other clubs

The clubs will want a surplus, but there's paying too much and then there is paying way too much.

I would be more worried if we went all in for Mbappe at a price tag around 110 mil £ for a 18 year old player who has produced 1 good season in a "weak" league like the french. yes Martial came from the french league and had good first season, but now he is struggling.

And if we get Perisic for 30-35 mil £ I don't think we have over payed for him.

Yet that 'struggling' means he contributes about as much end product as Perisic. So I'm slightly confused why you'd want someone who is 'struggling' in a weaker league to come in (probably for Martial).

So you wouldn't mind overpaying by 40-50 mil £ for Mbappe? I just can't see the logic in this?

(http://statsbomb.com/2017/05/valuing-kylian-mba...)
These are guys who regularly do this kind of analysis(they also advise real clubs) and they say 100m is quite a reasonable valuation of him.

Overpaying a bit there is not as bad as with and older player who should already be doing great.

Also Mbappe already is better than Perisic. And he is 10 years younger.

Mbappe in France got 15 goals and 8 assists in 1501 minutes.
Perisic in Italy got 11 goals and 8 assists in 2757 minutes.

And to say that 'Mbappe played in a weak league and had such stats because of that' seems weird, because he got 1 goal in 2 games vs Juve, 3 goals in 2 games against Dortmund and 2 in two against City.

It's not 40-50m that I think we would overpay but 20m would be fine, because United is an English club. 20m on top of 100m is 20%. While if Perisic is worth 20m and we pay even 35m, then that's paying about 75% extra.

On top of that, Mbappe has a marketing value which is much higher than Perisic, so we could have a big chunk of money back already in the first season, through selling shirts and through other sponsorship deals.

Of course, they are different players on different positions, but just saying that it would be more logical to pay £100mil on Mbappe than £40mil on Perisic.

Agreed on the marketing value. I think the 'shirt sales earn back the transfer fee of Zidane etc' is a load of BS, but he'd earn the club some money via that for sure. The bigger deal is the sign it gives about United to anyone who does business with us and who wants to be our sponsor - we're the real deal. We're the big team who gets the best players. We have ambition. We want to be number one. Some Asian tyre company will want to be associated with the club that has the best players, not just good players. That's why United earned 260m from commercial deals in 2016 and Chelsea just a small 120m.


I'm quite frustrated that there have been no rumours about us being interested in Mbappe whatsoever. It seems like the perfect fit - he wants to play regularly first and foremost. We have a striker-sized hole in the team. We're also one of the very few clubs that is rich enough to be able to afford him. When I read a headline that Arsenal was interested in him I literally laughed. They're never going to spend 110m on one player.

I'm quite frustrated that there have been no rumours about us being interested in Mbappe whatsoever. It seems like the perfect fit - he wants to play regularly first and foremost. We have a striker-sized hole in the team. We're also one of the very few clubs that is rich enough to be able to afford him.

Maybe people in Man Utd know that Mbappe will go to Real Madrid and therefore they don't want to fight in a battle that would be lost in the beginning. It would be bad for our name if we go and try to buy him when he is probably going to end up in Madrid anyway.

Dunno, that's just the first thing I can think of.

However, there were some rumours that both United and City are interested in Mbappe, but I don't remember whether a concrete bid was mentioned.

Yeah, I think there was like one or two stories about him and United, but you'd guess that this is something that sells and there would be more smoke.

As for him going to Real - I don't know. I think he said a few weeks ago that he'd want to be sure that he'll get regular games. At Real this perhaps isn't certain. They have so many forwards - Benzema is still top class, Ronaldo sometimes plays through the middle, Bale, Isco and James also competing for a place.. Getting games might not be certain. At United the competition right now is quite a bit softer - just Rooney, because Rashford is great out wide as well and it isn't a problem to shift him around. Even though not so great for Rashford, but I think that he might soon be the type of a wide player that can stay high up the pitch like Ronaldo - just to gamble because no WB will dare leave him into space there.

That's exactly why it seems like a great move for him - he can get exactly what he wants. To play at the highest level and play all games basically.

I eead a romour this mornign that United has rejected an offer from Real Mddrid for De Gea for about 55 million £.

Do we want to sell him? And do we have trust in Romero then? Or are there coming a new one in? And who?

I like Leno from Leverkusen, I hope they will go for him. Or maybe Donnarumma. Milan say they will sell him if he not signs a new contract.

Afaik Donnarumma has that idiot agent Pogba also uses...

I wouldn't be sad to see Schmeicel II in the goal. :-)

We have good relations to Donnarummas agent then.

Schmeichel II in the goal... Not bad, and probably the only keeper from BPL that is realistic at the level we want.

Bendtsen wrote:

I eead a romour this mornign that United has rejected an offer from Real Mddrid for De Gea for about 55 million £.

Do we want to sell him? And do we have trust in Romero then? Or are there coming a new one in? And who?

I like Leno from Leverkusen, I hope they will go for him. Or maybe Donnarumma. Milan say they will sell him if he not signs a new contract.

I think it's logical that we refused £55mil, looking at the prices nowadays.

De Gea is maybe the best keeper in the world, or at least in the top 3, so Real would have to pay more if they want him (even if he wants to move, which I think he does but I'm not 100% sure).

They value some of their bench players higher than £55mil and then want to take one of the best world's keepers for less. No way, (says) José :)

Since Mourinho arrived, I am glad to see that we refuse to sell our players for bargain prices as we did before. We became harder negotiators and I am convinced it has something to do with José. Maybe Woodward is also gaining some experience in that field, but I'm sure that Mourinho has his stamp on our improvement as negotiators.

De Gea or not, I hope that in the next years we will become less keeper dependable. This year already, the opponents had lesser number of shots on our goal and lesser number of chances, thanks to Mourinho's tactics.

However, if David leaves, I would like us to buy Oblak, as he seems the best solution out there. Neuer doesn't seem available and Buffon is too old, so Oblak would be my choice.

Donnarumma is great, especially for his age. If we buy him we might have a keeper for the next 10+ years, but I am only concerned about his capacity to play with his feet. Of course, that can be improved, but I'm not sure to what extent. I think this is the reason he won't go to City, as Guardiola likes his keepers to be excellent with the ball at their feet.

Schmeichel would be the most romantic option because of his surname, but I don't know whether he is among the top keepers in the world.

Leno seems great as well, but I didn't watch him enough, so I don't want to say more about him.

The question is entirely about what De Gea wants IMO. If he wants to leave, he'll leave. If he doesn't, he'll stay. If he wants to leave, then he'll leave and that will be that.

I think this summer nothing will happen. I hope Real get a decent goalie though, because that would cement De Gea as our keeper.

If we are to sell him, then we must get the best goalie to replace him. It's a big difference if we have someone good or someone great. I mean - Ben Foster is a very good goalie, but at United he got stick for not being great. We don't need that uncertainty at the back. I don't know the consistency of other keepers well enough to evaluate. But for example Leno doesn't strike me as a very strong goalie when just looking at stats. His team were 12th in Bundesliga and conceded about 1,7 goals per game. This means he probably had a lot to do and there many keepers can look very good. I remember some Sunderland keeper having a good season and getting a transfer to Liverpool :). He isn't bad, but not at the level for a top club either. I think that for a smaller club where the expectations are lower the goalie can get away with letting in some soft goals. But at a top club if you do that, you might be on the bench.

As for trusting Romero - no no no. He is just not good enough. He is lucky that he concedes so few for us, but he makes mistakes too often IMO.

The question is entirely about what De Gea wants IMO. If he wants to leave, he'll leave. If he doesn't, he'll stay. If he wants to leave, then he'll leave and that will be that.

Well, yes, but anyway Real Madrid would need to make an offer which would be deemed as acceptable by Manchester United.

It is not enough for a player to express a wish to leave, if he is under a contract for the next 3-4 years.

If we are to sell him, then we must get the best goalie to replace him. It's a big difference if we have someone good or someone great.

I agree, we must try to get the best possible replacement, not just an excellent keeper.

With Atletico Madrid losing their appeal over the ban for signing new players, it becomes a bit more difficult to bring Oblak, as they would be reluctant to sell, because they wouldn't be able to buy a replacement. Only if he has a release clause and if he doesn't care about leaving his club in a bad situation (I don't know who is their reserve keeper, though) we might be able to bring him.

Same goes for Griezmann now, so we will see what happens there...

As for trusting Romero - no no no. He is just not good enough. He is lucky that he concedes so few for us, but he makes mistakes too often IMO.

Agreed here as well. Romero might be the best reserve keeper in the world, but I wouldn't trust him to be our 1st team keeper for the whole season, as he does make mistakes. He can make some great saves, he is usually very confident, but every now and then he does make an awkward error, so I am not completely calm when he is between the sticks. If he wants to continue as a 2nd keeper then great, but if he wants to be a starter week in - week out, then he should move on.

Well, yes, but anyway Real Madrid would need to make an offer which would be deemed as acceptable by Manchester United.

It is not enough for a player to express a wish to leave, if he is under a contract for the next 3-4 years.

If De Gea wants to leave, then he'll leave. Whether it's this summer or next summer or the one after that. The price United want will only decide when he leaves, not if he leaves. That was my point.

I think the important question is if he leaves. If he doesn't want to leave, then no money will change that. And if he wants to leave, then it's just a question of when.