Again....has zero relevance on the point being discussed which is whether the owners have been any good or not.


OK....even if we take your word that fergie was bullshitting. He was winning trophies. Why do you think that all these millions have suddenly become available now and not when fergie was in charge? Give actual reasons as to why you think this, Give actual players you believe he was denied buying due to the owners saying no.

And also, at what point and how many more millions is it going to take for you to accept that the owners have actually supported each manager they have had financially?

Maybe if you read my earlier posts I have discussed this . In a nutshell our debt is down, around 300 million and we have around 60 + sponsorship deals which give us a huge amount of money plus TV deals.

Just because we are back spending money doesn't mean that weren't financial constraints in the past.

Re read it again without being so defensive. No one was having a go at you. I was asking you why it bothers you.

Personally I don't really care because it affects my world, my bank balance and my general wellbeing not one iota. I was merely asking why it gets under your skin.

It's just football.

Can you discuss anything without rounding on other posters because they disagree with you or is this your default reply?

Good news, Man U supporter Rachel Riley is to present Friday Night Football on Sky

http://i1244.photobucket.com/albums/...psm8sztjtz.jpg

As I have stated earlier i'm not going to criticise them now because they are spending big money but I don't have to necessarily accept that there weren't financial constraints earlier on during their ownership. I do however think that because the debt is more manageable now and because of the commercial juggernaut we have become there is a ridiculous amount of money available.

As I have also stated they don't appear to have interfered in the management side of things and in that sense are a better owner than some of the motley crew owners out there.

I'm not going to change my opinions to curry favour with others or blindly agree with others to earn brownie points.

I know many on here don't agree with me on this but at least you know my opinions are genuine whether you think they are outrageous or not.

Genuinely outrageous would be my take on it, in addition to some spiky replies.

Yet again you arent actually answering......Ill ask again,

Why do you think that all these millions have suddenly become available now and not when fergie was in charge? Give actual reasons as to why you think this, Give actual players you believe he was denied buying due to the owners saying no.

I've just noticed that and I have answered it, but tbf I have mentioned it in another post earlier.

Where?

Rounding on posters ? That's absolutely unbelievable considering the OTT responses that one of the posters gets on here on a daily basis.

OTT responses being an understatement considering the word I could use for it.

Post 6231 first paragraph.

Sorry but thats not really an answer to the questions posed. Ive asked why you think so many more millions are now being made available, youre answer is the club is a commercial juggernaut when throughout the owners time here it has been so and they have only made it more so. I think batdude posted something a while ago stating that pogba is actually only our third most expensive signing in relation to income. The money has clearly always been there.

You havent stated any players you are adamant the club missed out on when earlier you were saying about all these players we were linked with. Linked with doesnt mean interested in but youve yet to answer this.

You also havent answered my third point....at what point and how many more millions is it going to take for you to accept that the owners have actually supported each manager they have had financially?

Silva is a player who we were linked with heavily but ended up at City for example. It's not like our midfield wasn't crying out for it at the time either. As for missing out on them, maybe we weren't interested for whatever reason. Maybe City or others outmuscled us?

It's not a case of saying how much money it will take for me to accept they have supported the manager. They have certainly supported the managers since Fergie retired but I don't agree that there was no financial restraints at any point during Fergie's time here.

Or maybe it was just paper talk and the club actually had no interest in him? Again, the midfield was only "crying out" for something that you believe they needed, not ferguson as he was winning trophies with the midfield he created. We have been heavily linked with garay and snejider for a few years. The money is clearly there now as you have agreed yourself so in your view why havent we bought either? Maybe its because its paper talk and we arent actually interested in buying them?

You are singularly failing to answer why you think he should be building a team for his successors.

Because you have a desire for galactico signings it doesnt mean fergie felt he needed them or that the club refused to buy them for him.

Sorry but no idea what or who you mean.

I'll just leave this here because that's the second time you've have a pop at me now and I'm not interested in a big fight with people who just throw their toys out of the pram when challenged.

Oh come on Percy, why did Scholes come out of retirement if our midfield didn't have weaknesses?

I don't think he should be building a team for his successors but I don't think he left a great squad either despite winning the league at a canter.

So it's fine for you to make digs but I'm having a pop when I answer back?

Best to put you on ignore because I'm on a hiding to nothing with you.

Then considering he was winning trophies why on earth did you earlier complain that he left behind in your view a poor squad.

It was a squad he was winning with and clearly happy with. If your criticism of him is that he left a poor squad for the next man you cant then say it wasnt his job to build a squad for his successor. Its one or the other, you cant have both.

You either accept fergie and the glazers built the team that fergie wanted to do his job and therefor didnt need to spend millions every year to accomplish it or you are asking the club to have forced players and buys on the manager when he was already winning with the team he built.

The two are incompatible and not logical.

As for scholes i think it was openly reported that he asked to come back out of retirement as he felt he left too early. Not because the club went on their knees to beg him to come back.

I made a comment in the thread which was a general observation, and you quoted me saying "read my earlier posts" which was pretty rude, I thought.

But as you wish. Please, do bluster on.

Fergie got the most out a bad bunch of players, and won the league in his last season by miles some how. The fact that those same players failed under Moyes, and promptly got shifted out by LVG, says it all.

This discussion has happened over and over since Fergie left. I'll throw this one at you Percy. From the last squad Fergie built, and those that have since left, would you have any of them back? Would they make our starting 11? If not then we've had to replace them, and in doing so spend more money than ever, as the price of average players today far surpasses what they were even 4 or 5 years ago. Also we know the business plan of the owners for the club means we have to be constantly in the Champions League, so to get back to that place they've had to spend big. The won't want to see some of the commercial deals fail or see a loss in revenue due to the side doing badly.

I don't give them that much credit, in fact I still don't trust them, but as we are the cash cow that keeps them afloat, they won't dare do half the dirty tactics they've pulled in Tampa. If anything the actions of those that protested, at the start and those that formed FC, have shown them the passion of us fans, and probably added to them not wanting to alter the way the club has been run. That's the only plus I'll give them, as how they've treated the fans in Tampa is disgusting and I'm sure that had they been able to, they'd have done the same with the United fans.

Tribec - I'm off to bed but I'll. pick your reply up in the morning.

Do you think if Fergie had stayed another season that we'd have win or been 2nd/3rd with that squad? Was it the players or the new manager(s)?

Which sort of goes against the idea that the club were under financial constraints, doesn't it?

Ferguson was unable to spend big, despite him saying otherwise, but the club has had no problems doing that from the moment he left.

No no no

The incoming managers needed to replace as they needed different players to do the job how they do it. It doesn't mean the owners refused to buy anyone for Ferguson. It really really isn't this hard to understand. The owners have supported each manager with what they felt they needed to do their job. Because fergie didnt need to spend millions upon millions to do his job doesn't mean the money wasnt there if he required it.

It seriously isn't hard to comprehend that different managers and people need different tools to do their job.

As for Tampa I couldn't give a stuff, I only care about how United is being run and only an idiot can truly criticise them on that.

Looks like outgoings are starting to gain moment, with Paddy McNair and Donald Love going to Sunder, and Schweini attracting interest from other Premier League clubs apparently.