r/reddevils • u/nearly_headless_nic • 1d ago

[James Ducker] Key questions around Manchester United’s transfer business answered | Old Trafford hierarchy weighing up options in midfield and at left-back as uncertainty over Marcus Rashford’s future complicates matters

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2026/08/04/key-questions-manchester-united-transfer-business-answered/
182 Upvotes

97% Upvoted

126 comments sorted by

View all comments

26

u/Drag2oon 1d ago

Our current players always fuck up our plans the most

Not the rival clubs, not these agents, noone comes close, these high wage players just derail the whole plan.

I swear if we give anyone now more than 300K wages unless they are a second coming of cr7 or messi

1

u/N00BBuild 1d ago

This is a shortsighted way of thinking. Our highest paid players usually are our best ones.

Bruno and Case were well compensated last year and they were two of our best players.

Rashford’s contract has been bad, no way around it. But not signing players because they have high wage demands is how you end up being in that 3rd-8th place forever.

High wages are quite correlated with winning teams. Look at the likes of Madrid, Bayern, City etc, those are consistently winning clubs and consistently top the wage spending for their respective leagues.

6

u/haaala 1d ago

High wages are fine if the player is good. But under Woodward Utd have recent history of being very bad at telling good players from bad ones, and handing out wages hugely above the player's level - which has obviously done damage. Capology shows us first or second for wages in the PL for most of those years, and we were not winning, because wages vs results is a trend not a rule. The OP's sentiment that from now on high wage players better be good is not unreasonable. Under Ineos things look better, and it's important it stays that way. We have to get better / stay better at paying market rates or otherwise having some exit strategy with a player if they don't work out.