MOTD Pain

[jt64]

I found my life much better once I stopped watching British Bullshit Corporation programming and I suggest the OP does the same

 

[coaxingstar71]

It’s worth remembering that the sale of DCL allowed us to sign JOC, Clarke, Fleck and Duffy. Players move on for various reasons. We could have held onto Ndiaye and Berge but both had only 1 year left on their contracts and they could have left for nothing, the same as Hamer. Players like Bogle wanted to leave so should the club keep unhappy players? I don’t think so.

 

[Gavlar]

Ifs, buts and maybes. Better to enjoy motd for the quality football than worry about that fella.

We still have a team in red and white to support, who knows, we could still come good this season.

There is a loooonnngggg way to go for everyone this season.

utb

 

[AWetFlannel]

Ampadu and McAtee could’ve been players we could’ve bought if the club had any ambition/foresight. Why is it good if we develop players for other clubs? The only thing we want out of a loan is for that player to bring us success in the short term, we failed to go up with Gibbs-White but managed to net £40m for wolves, how is that successful for us? We absolutely did not get a significant fee for Calvert-Lewin, I actually remember a coach at Everton taking the piss out of how little they actually paid for him. Bogle is currently in his prime for Leeds in the prem and we signed him as a youngster but still managed to not make money on him .

Honesty if you spin things constantly to make it look like everything’s ok, then nothing will ever improve.

If we develop loanees, clubs are more likely to send their talented youngsters to us. That we manage to regularly pick out talented youngest that add to our squad is a good thing. MGW and McAtee helped us out loads in the seasons they played for us, they were undoubtedly positive signings.

We have no idea whether Man City were prepared to sell McAtee in the only season we were in a position to realistic afford him or what the fee would've been. Yes, it's a shame our owners can't compete at PL level, but that doesn't turn McAtee's loans into a negative. They were good signings both times.

We got more than a million for DCL which helped fund a much needed squad overhaul that eventually led to our meteoric rise. The money that was reinvested was far more valuable than DCL would have been that season. Selling players to reinvest is what good clubs do.

All teams run into situations with players at the end of their contracts, not just us.

There are plenty of reasons to be negative at the moment regarding United, but your OP is just thoughtless doomerism.

 

[Godbeblade]

Without trying to sound too much of a 'happy clapper' type and taking the positive approach (as much as possible)- we can all moan about what might have been but what the facts are is that we've had all these names through the door playing for us in recent times.

There's fairly large time scale for all the players mentioned (DCL sold about 10 years ago or so) but we manage to get either good quality young loans into the club and develop them as well as bringing young talent through which is a massive positive.

The biggest gripe I have is that we never seem to grow as a club after profiting off these player sales. Loans return- fair enough, most would command a massive fee from premier league clubs but young players (calvert lewin, osula, andre brooks even Ndiaye) all were sold 'just' before peak value in my opinion OR, this is the kicker, sold to fund other shite we bring in.

We've had enough decent players to build the club up but mismanagement has kept us bobbin around in the same place.

 

[Bladesman101]

If we develop loanees, clubs are more likely to send their talented youngsters to us. That we manage to regularly pick out talented youngest that add to our squad is a good thing. MGW and McAtee helped us out loads in the seasons they played for us, they were undoubtedly positive signings.

We have no idea whether Man City were prepared to sell McAtee in the only season we were in a position to realistic afford him or what the fee would've been. Yes, it's a shame our owners can't compete at PL level, but that doesn't turn McAtee's loans into a negative. They were good signings both times.

We got more than a million for DCL which helped fund a much needed squad overhaul that eventually led to our meteoric rise. The money that was reinvested was far more valuable than DCL would have been that season. Selling players to reinvest is what good clubs do.

All teams run into situations with players at the end of their contracts, not just us.

There are plenty of reasons to be negative at the moment regarding United, but your OP is just thoughtless doomerism.

McAtee loan was positive yeah because he got us promoted but ultimately the Gibbs-White loan did nothing for the club, whilst he was excellent yes it did nothing for us, how can that even be argued? I just made a comment on how watching match of the day reminded me that we have thrown away a lot of talent over the years, which we have.

 

[Snowflake]

Without trying to sound too much of a 'happy clapper' type and taking the positive approach (as much as possible)- we can all moan about what might have been but what the facts are is that we've had all these names through the door playing for us in recent times.

There's fairly large time scale for all the players mentioned (DCL sold about 10 years ago or so) but we manage to get either good quality young loans into the club and develop them as well as bringing young talent through which is a massive positive.

The biggest gripe I have is that we never seem to grow as a club after profiting off these player sales. Loans return- fair enough, most would command a massive fee from premier league clubs but young players (calvert lewin, osula, andre brooks even Ndiaye) all were sold 'just' before peak value in my opinion OR, this is the kicker, sold to fund other shite we bring in.

We've had enough decent players to build the club up but mismanagement has kept us bobbin around in the same place.

I think what we brought in when players have left(eg Calvert Lewin and David Brooks) were far from “other shite”

 

[AWetFlannel]

McAtee loan was positive yeah because he got us promoted but ultimately the Gibbs-White loan did nothing for the club, whilst he was excellent yes it did nothing for us, how can that even be argued? I just made a comment on how watching match of the day reminded me that we have thrown away a lot of talent over the years, which we have.

Finishing higher up the table is a good thing, whether you get promoted or not. I'm happy I got to watch MGW play for us, he's an exciting player that did plenty for us in his loan.

He benefitted the club financially, given we finished higher up the table than we would've done without him (plus extra money for the play off fixtures). He contributed towards an incredible run which made us look like promotion contenders and so desirable to players like McAtee and Doyle in the summer window. He scored great goals, did inventive bits of skill and played with passion, which undoubtedly made going to watch the football better for Blades fans.

It's bizarre to be negative about his loan spell and it was impossible to sign him permanently.

 

[utd4ever]

Begs the question of why do players that leave here seem to play better elsewhere ?
Is it the way we set up and play ?
Too rigid and no flexibility in the system ?
Players given strict instructions ?
Over thinking and more worried about the opposition ?
Or they just can't be arsed when here ?

You’ve got 5 right which does lead on to getting 6 right.

And it’s true.

 

[S74Blade]

No doubt we'll sell Ryan Oné cheap.
Looking at our decisions on players , most of this forum could run the club better than any of those in charge over the last 6 years.
Pure incompetence which pains the heart.

Surely One is better than Cannon so, why do we play Cannon. If he is better and is not getting a game he will be off. We should get rid of Cannon asap!!

 

[Bladesman101]

Finishing higher up the table is a good thing, whether you get promoted or not. I'm happy I got to watch MGW play for us, he's an exciting player that did plenty for us in his loan.

He benefitted the club financially, given we finished higher up the table than we would've done without him (plus extra money for the play off fixtures). He contributed towards an incredible run which made us look like promotion contenders and so desirable to players like McAtee and Doyle in the summer window. He scored great goals, did inventive bits of skill and played with passion, which undoubtedly made going to watch the football better for Blades fans.

It's bizarre to be negative about his loan spell and it was impossible to sign him permanently.

I would argue that we paid him more than we brought in. I enjoyed watching him too and it was exciting, but ultimately he was brought in to get us back to the premiership, which he did not after he missed a penalty in a playoff game, therefore it wasn’t a successful loan, as he didn’t do that he came here to do.

 

[AWetFlannel]

I would argue that we paid him more than we brought in. I enjoyed watching him too and it was exciting, but ultimately he was brought in to get us back to the premiership, which he did not after he missed a penalty in a playoff game, therefore it wasn’t a successful loan, as he didn’t do that he came here to do.

Had we not brought him in, we'd have paid just as much or more for someone else and they would have very likely been worse. It was unquestionably a successful loan, this is like saying Bruno Fernandes hasn't been a successful signing for Man U because they've not won the PL since signing him, mental.

 

[Dellas Cowboys]

McNulty scored 2 for Spartans on Saturday

 

[Bladesman101]

Had we not brought him in, we'd have paid just as much or more for someone else and they would have very likely been worse. It was unquestionably a successful loan, this is like saying Bruno Fernandes hasn't been a successful signing for Man U because they've not won the PL since signing him, mental.

Comes down to definition of successful then! I see success as completing the objective. He did well at United yes, but fell short ultimately.

 

[Brian Deane]

Comes down to definition of successful then! I see success as completing the objective. He did well at United yes, but fell short ultimately.

The Club fell short as a whole, not just one single player.
Until things change at the Top the its a case of rinse and repeat.

 

[Korean Blade]

Finishing higher up the table is a good thing, whether you get promoted or not. I'm happy I got to watch MGW play for us, he's an exciting player that did plenty for us in his loan.

He benefitted the club financially, given we finished higher up the table than we would've done without him (plus extra money for the play off fixtures). He contributed towards an incredible run which made us look like promotion contenders and so desirable to players like McAtee and Doyle in the summer window. He scored great goals, did inventive bits of skill and played with passion, which undoubtedly made going to watch the football better for Blades fans.

It's bizarre to be negative about his loan spell and it was impossible to sign him permanently.

This. And look how much Forest paid for him when they went up. Would've been a polarizing discussion on here.