Those sweet money making deals count for little when success dries up.

Surely you see the link? It's very short sighted to think the deals will continue without on the pitch success.

Yeah, The Manchester United empire that Fergie was responsible for can only last for so long without trophies. The sponsors won't hang around regardless.

There are plenty of attractive options to consider now.

Agree with this. Though most of the players have not been helped much by idiosyncratic management. I want to see a couple of mean, mf-ing, sons of bitches in the spine of the team. The required talent, with the necessary attitude.



I've seen MUTV described in many and various ways, but that's a new one....


Nothing you've said disqualifies him for MUTV LOL

I can see why TPTB thought Giggs could do the job, at the end of next season. We are seeing a clutch of young players coming through and, all things being equal, should be just about ready by then. I think the club aims/aimed to build the team, founded on those youngsters. Discover a Cantona-like catalyst and Bob's your Auntie, three times removed. Meanwhile Giggs will have had more than enough time, years in fact, to get in their heads and groom them; to make them his players. All this would have the added benefit of saving the club a ton of money. As an aside, you may have noted Depay's recent comments about how helpful Giggs has been to him. Of course no one has seen any evidence of that on the pitch, but still.....

The evident problem with this "Plan A", is the seemingly never ending agony of what amounts to an extended hand over from LvG.

Alternatively, this is all just a nightmare and I'll wake up soon. Soon. WAKE UP!

So because there is no evidence to the contrary that is your reasoning?

Woodward wouldn't stay in the job if he couldn't secure a transfer deal all year but got a commercial deal over the line.

Without coming across as bitter or biased or anything like that at all, just look at Liverpool, they have not won a league title in ages, and have in recent times had very little on pitch success (the Champions League win being their best, but that is over a decade ago now), yet they can still attract good sponsorship deals.

So whilst the on pitch success is a very vital cog in getting good sponsorship deals done, it seemingly is not all that matters.


The top marquee names might very well move away if we continue to drop further down the league table, and don't achieve success, but it will still be possible to get good deals from other companies, as we have a brand that people do want to or wish to be associated with.
How long that lasts for, I don't know.


You are going to complete extremes there, it is highly unlikely that he would not be able to secure at least one transfer deal in two windows (January and the summer one), or unless by "all year" you mean just a summer window.

Appreciate the info - not sure it translates to the Premier league but I guess it all depends on the calibre of the people involved.


I agree to some extent with what you are saying but still a big fat NO to ' I refer to myself in the third person' Zlatan, especially not if even a fraction of his wage demands are to be believed.

More immediately and IMO more importantly, at least one of the recent big money deals is directly linked to our success, particularly our presence in the CL. Probably several, as maximum International exposure is essential to the value of their sponsorship to them. On field success is crucial for the value of the brand, and that's all sponsors care about.

It's been a while since we won the FA cup or were even in the final. But if it will coffin-nail a new manager in the summer, I'd rather we get beat against West ham. There, I said it.

Not sure if that'd make a difference, though. FA Cup is more of a fan's cup now. Financially the club wouldn't feel anything whether you win or lose. It can be good for the players though, the new young players can benefit from winning some silverware.

At a push 4th and an FA Cup might, just might make a difference if their mind hasn't been made up yet but even that I have serious doubts over.

Trouble is, I don't think it will make any difference. I'm convinced that all the decisions have already been made, be they stay or go, but we shall see. Therefore, I want us to win the Cup. As for 4th place, I can't see that happening now, yesterday was last chance saloon for that I think.

Im not going to extremes, its just an example. Woodward has a wide remit and the idea that all he needs to do is bring in commercial revenue is an absolute figment of your imagination with no supporting evidence.

It is not all, but it is a huge part of his remit, and whilst he is still doing a very good job in bringing in the blue chip sponsors from around the globe, and expanding our brand into new markets, then his job will not be under too much of a threat I would imagine.
Getting the right manager in, is also a part of his job, but I doubt that he would be under pressure for his job if that doesn't pan out as successful as he and the owners might have hoped for.

So if he failed in his transfer targets, messed up securing a manager and watched us slide down the table his job would be fine if he kept doing sponsorship deals?

Cobblers.

Normally in the real world I would agree with you but if he kept the same level of sponsorships in regards to financial terms I do wonder if he would be kept on for that reason alone.

Personally I think he's a money man and not a footballing fan at all.

Rooney starts for the reserves tonight.

U21s: #mufc v Middlesbrough (H) - Johnstone; Riley, Williams, Jones, Borthwick-Jackson; McNair, Love; Redmond, Rothwell, Weir; Rooney.

Gill was more of a football man than Woodward, he was more charismatic and knew players better. It's Woodward's job, as it was Gill's to have good relationships with agents so he and Manchester United get offered any possible player ahead of the other teams. Woodward will then speak to the manager about the particular player and if he wants to try and get him.

The main guy in charge on the financial/sponsorhsip side of things was Richard Arnold and his team. He is Woodward's right hand man, he has now slightly further away from things directly as he is MD now. He is involved in more of the day to day running of the club.

The main competitors at the moment for the really big deals off the pitch for Man United are the Spanish giants. this is who thy are competing with for the big deals, I think Turkish airlines was a big battle with Barca to secure.

The issue with unsuccessful seasons on the pitch is not growing the fan base in Asia as much as competitors and as a result this could in the future lead to less appeal for corporate partners.

Woodward's needs to have good football relationships so that he gets United first shout on available players and possibly managers.

Rooney starts for U21s with Jones

I've unfortunately given up on Jones having any consistency with us and I can never get excited at any of his "comebacks" because he will be out again within 5 games. He needs to go imo.

I notice Borthwick-Jackson is in the side too. I'd be happy to see him back in the first team.

I wonder if Phil Jones will last 90 minutes?

Woodward signed the players Van Gaal wanted. Thats the be all and end all of the football side of things for me.

The summer before last we made two massive signings in name and stature. Falcao and Di Maria. Both in theory, world class attacking footballers.

Neither worked out for varying reason and were moved on but on their day and based on reputation they should have been massive for us.

What I cannot for the life of me understand is why they weren't replaced - not the players they were for us but the players we though we signed. Why the summer before last did Van Gaal feel the club needed a world class striker and a world class playmaker yet one year laster having moved them on decided we need neither?

Before a ball was kicked that made no sense whatsoever.

Wanted to give youth a go?! (edited to put full word in)

Me? No I dont think I was in his thoughts.

haha. Sorry, edited.

You dont go from deciding the team needs a £60m playmaker and one of the best strikers in the world to getting rid of them and replacing them with youth. Its totally contradictory.

One philosophy (I now hate that word) would have seen us replace Di Maria and Falcao like for like and the other wouldn't have signed them in the first place.

If we had the attacking threat of a Di Maria type and a Falcao type the entire squad would have a completely different look IMO. We'd probably still be playing shite football under Van Gaal but there would be an added attacking quality even accidentally.

His main job or main responsibilities are to the business side of the football club, to the shareholders and stockholders, so if he is bringing in the big deals, and is making them money, then he will be kept on, no quite no matter what happens on the pitch, but asong as we are remaining competitive, then that coupled with doing well with the deals, would be enough to keep in a job.