Current Avatar:
No Avatar image uploaded
No Avatar image uploaded
Manchester United Rumours Member Posts
newnameoldideas's Profile
newnameoldideas's Posts and Other Poster's Replies To newnameoldideas's Posts
To newnameoldideas's last 5 rumours posts
To newnameoldideas's last 5 banter posts
To newnameoldideas's last 5 rumour replies
To newnameoldideas's last 5 banter replies
newnameoldideas's rumours posts with other poster's replies to newnameoldideas's rumours posts
31 May 2026 18:25:31
Clickbait merchants on YouTube suggesting that Tonali is close to being signed.
We're planning on exercising Sancho's one year extension, so we can sell him for a small fee. Don't see this as likely, at least not at his current pay rate. Would anyone buy him for £20m?
Barcelona will offer £11m only for Rashford.
1.) 31 May 2026 19:10:24
If we activate that on Sancho's contract, then we really are stupid and haven't learned a thing. We'd be stuck paying his wages for another year, which would be ludicrous, so I'm hoping it's bs.
2.) 31 May 2026 20:54:22
Any 'profit' from activating Sancho's extension and selling him would almost all go to Sancho as you cannot 'profiteer' from one year extensions.
3.) 01 Jun 2026 10:24:01
It's simply not true.
4.) 01 Jun 2026 15:57:48
If I recall rightly, our dear Ed 002 once said that the one yr contract extensions cannot be triggered with the plan of selling the player within that year.
5.) 01 Jun 2026 16:42:26
We would make a loss if we triggered the one year contract extension on the Sancho deal, so why would we do it?
Unless Carrick is getting the band back together, which feels very unlikely, Sancho will be departing the club finally. Very poor piece of business, and a player that has always flattened to deceive everywhere except at Dortmund.
06 Jan 2026 19:06:44
But Telegraph Sport revealed on Monday morning that United’s hierarchy took the decision to dismiss Amorim before Sunday’s draw with Leeds United after the manager “lost it” with Wilcox on Friday morning.
Wilcox had intended the meeting to be a chance to discuss the evolution of the team but when the subject of Amorim’s 3-4-2-1 system – to which he has been wedded – was raised the Portuguese “blew up”, according to sources.
Sources said Amorim’s behaviour had grown increasingly erratic in recent weeks and felt his public outbursts, in which he suggested he was being undermined and hinted at a power struggle with Wilcox and the board, were designed to engineer an exit.
1.) 07 Jan 2026 12:46:19
I hope I am wrong but I think after Amorim had players wanting to play for the club and the team behind him, this is meddling from the board in exactly what Amorim Was employed to do, which is coach the team. That includes setting the formation and style of play. It was coming and we were progressing.
The fallout is clearly over the board changing goalposts from Europe to being Champions League, trying to change the 3 year narrative without the extra investment. It's a rubbish show and this is a disastrous decision and we are back to square 1 yet again.
Look how many players have come out in support of Amorim and clarifying they saw him as their boss and leader. An absolutely terrible ego driven decision based on someone reacting emotionally to being doubted within and abused by Wlcox who openly admits to interfering and believing he's a bteer coach.
This is dreadfully short sighted and utterly incompetent.
2.) 07 Jan 2026 17:19:15
The DOF is perfectly entitled to question what's happening on the pitch without the coach throwing all his toys out of the pram. Rather than act as many of our players have done by going public the correct approach would have been either to arrange for discussions with the rest of the management team, and/or if there were indeed genuine tensions between Wilcox and his colleagues, to let that play out.
In tense situations tensions are quite normal as are disagreements. Mature individuals try to negotiate through them. After all, getting into the Champions League ought to have been the priority not just for the club but also Amorim since doing so would provide more funds for the rebuild. If that required a short term modification of approach a reasonable individual should at least consider being less rigid.
3.) 09 Jan 2026 14:08:03
In truth wilcock must resign. he's a rat like Radcliffe and his pathetic ego has dumped utd into chaos.
newnameoldideas's banter posts with other poster's replies to newnameoldideas's banter posts
06 Jun 2026 21:26:47
Apparently our $33m target Christos Mouzakitis (who? when?) is taking Spanish lessons amid interest from Real Madrid and Barcelona (you know, the club that hasn't any money!), interest.
Silly season is upon us.
Someone should keep a tally of where all the players who are linked to us end up going.
1.) 07 Jun 2026 11:23:07
We've been loosely linked with him a couple of times, but in all honesty it was probably more a case of using our name to flush out other interested parties or as leverage in contract negotiations.
He's a talented lad, but I think it's a bit early for a move to a top European club where the pressure and expectations will be sky high. He needs a good stepping stone club where he can develop against better opposition, while also playing regularly enough to continue to develop.
That's the thing we often overlook as fans when we are linked to a "wonder kid." They need to be allowed to make mistakes and still be first choice in the next game, so they can learn from it. At top clubs, if you make a mistake you are often dropped (or taken out of the spotlight) in the next game, but the longer between the mistake and being given the opportunity to rectify it, the harder it is to do so.
They need to be given the chance to try again while the memory of the mistake is still fresh.
If you think about the wonder kids who move to top clubs and then reach their potential, they tend to play in positions where mistakes are easier to forgive or they have less impact. Forwards, wingers, full backs etc. Rarely do we see keepers, CB's or CDM's given the opportunities at top clubs when they make mistakes as it often costs the club points. These are also positions where experience is a vital part of the role.
Leny Yoro, for example, is potentially a generational talent, yet his development has been very stop-start. He has looked great at times, but has made costly errors at others. While he keeps coming in and out of the line up, it will be harder for him to develop. It'll certainly take him longer to reach his potential, while it could ultimately limit the maximum level he gets to.
05 Jun 2026 19:55:39
Listening to Berada's interview by Andy Mitten, it's clear he gets it. None of us know what the future has in store but we can rest assured that the new management team is working hard and professionally towards the right goals, in particular footballing excellence in keeping with the traditions of the club along with fiscal responsibility. This is not an executive team that's going to shrink away from hard decisions, as painful as they may be/already have been. It's all in pursuit of the necessary investments both to win trophies, improve the facilities and the fan experience.
The management team can't magic away the debt. That's down to the owners. The best they can do is produce profits/+ve cash flow to help reduce it. It was interesting to note a report in Bloomberg that some of the Glazer family are investigating how they can reduce or sell their stakes.
Why would they have any desire to remain as shareholders if the club is not appreciating in value and/or not paying dividends? Joel and Avram have Board roles so it's a different proposition for them. They won't want the family holdings diluted to the extent that they lose control. So you would think it would be a total sell out or nothing at all. They're already down to 49% overall, 69% of the voting stock.
Meanwhile the transfer window opens in 10 days, not before the World Cup, which is going to take 6 weeks this time around. It's hard to see how too many major transfers are going to be completed before top players start coming home. I guess we're going to be mired in a lot of speculation, most of it repetitious clickbait, until then.
1.) 06 Jun 2026 00:23:31
I think you may be a little naive there, buddy. Don't drink the cool aid.
The Glazers are going to make billions more by holding until after the stadium is built, and the club has bled as dry as possible. They will not be letting go until at least then. It would take a ridiculous offer.
European league will come at some point, Utd will only grow in value, and the fans have shown they will put up with anything.
What has Barada done that has been good? We are losing primary choices for players to rivals and other clubs. He has made more money off fans at the stadium. Might bring out an extra kit next year. Mitten will get a nice interview and some exclusives for putting out a soft glow up for Barada. That is all it was.
2.) 06 Jun 2026 02:24:02
They will be dead before a new stadium is built. Unless they get investors to come in, there is no chance a spade will be dug in the ground in the next 10 years.
3.) 06 Jun 2026 07:36:32
New name
"The best they can do is produce profits/+ve cash flow to help reduce it."
The Glazers are not reducing the debt though. Profit would let them pay dividends to themselves, potentially increasing the Net Worth of the business marginally. The debt is just sitting there. Stop kidding yourself. This is only about what the Glazers want to take out. Very likely the leeches have set Ratcliffe and hence Berrada an objective to be profitable so they can keep taking dividends.
It must have been tough for them in recent times to manage the upkeep of the mansions and yachts they have bought on the back of a northern working people's football club without precious millions in dividends. They even had to sell shares to keep going.
Do you think taking millions in dividends helps us?
4.) 06 Jun 2026 13:05:49
I'm no fan of the Glazers, and haven't been since day one. I've not had a nice thing to say about them. The LBO was an abomination and should never have been allowed. Their appointment and retention of Woodward was a disaster for the club. I'm no fan of Ratcliffe either.
The only naivete here is being shown by those who think investors should not be in it to make money, and resent them when they do. United is a public company. Why would I, you, or an institutional investor buy shares without the hope that they would appreciate in value and/or pay dividends? Any other reason is a vanity, whether it's one share or the whole club.
What I'm concerned about as a fan is the quality of the executives, who, as I wrote, have limited control over the level of debt, but have the responsibility for the product on the pitch. If Berada and his team get us back to competing seriously for and winning titles, and, preferably, playing exciting football on the way, it will not concern me one jot if the owners make out like banshees. As of now it's not Berada's fault if our lack of profitability and existing debt prevents us from spending £100m+ on individual players.
5.) 07 Jun 2026 00:22:43
Spot on, newname.
As a fan, I am really only concerned with how the team performs on a football pitch.
Two caveats, though...... I find it offensive and upsetting when loyal members of staff, who have worked at the club (sometimes for many years), are sacked whilst huge dividends are paid out and under performing players still get mega salaries.
Secondly, I hate that us working class fans are being asked ever increasing amounts for tickets to matches, and being priced out of attending.
6.) 07 Jun 2026 07:42:59
Newname
"The only naivete here is being shown by those who think investors should not be in it to make money."
Tell me exactly how much the Glazers have invested in the club at any time? I can tell you, zero, not one cent. Show me any time they have invested in the club.
I don't believe City owners take out a penny, nor, I bet, will Newcastle.
I hope Ratcliffe doesn't take dividends out of respect to the fans who pay hard earned money, and a lot of it. I have no issue whatsoever if Ratcliffe makes money on his investment in terms of asset value; at least he did put money on, however it was done (via Ineos?).
7.) 07 Jun 2026 12:05:35
I think there is a very clear difference between the people running the club and the people who own the club.
While ultimately the owners get the final say in club decisions, the problem we had previously is that the ownership was solely under the Glazers who had little to no interest in the clubs success beyond how much money it could make them. As such they left the running of the club down to those people who would ensure they got a return on their "investment".
The hiring of Ed Woodward for example was just full blown cronyism, they didn't even try to hide it and said in the statement of his hiring about how much he helped to owners previously.
That was not a hiring for the club but one for the owners.
Since INEOS have come in they at the very least seems to be doing things the right way. Initially people they knew came in to judge the lay of the land and to advise on what they saw and what would need to be put in place to fix the issues. People like Blanc and Brailsford for example could have easily have been given long term roles if they wanted to have "their" people in charge of the day to day running. Likewise Sir Jim and Dave Brailsford's close previous connections to Southgate could have got him the managers position.
Yet none of that happened, they've interviewed the best candidates and hired who they thought was best placed to run the club well. Not every hiring has worked out (no one every gets every decision right), and I'm sure there will be times when they need to replace people again in the future.
Yet they've seemed to manage to get a good blend of people, Berada, Wilcox, and Vivell seem to have a good balance and grasp of what is needed. They will of course make mistakes, but they are at least trying to make the club successful on the pitch.
The way they are clearing the squad of deadwood or those who just don't fit what we want to be. They way they have made a clear idea of they types of players we should be signing and how we are scouting and profiling targets, as well as how they are working to line them up. Whole club thinking, not just about this season with this manager, but future seasons under potentially different managers, how youth players fit in with potential first team signings.
Ultimately just being run as a proper football club.
The owners are a whole different matter, ultimately whether it's the Glazers or INEOS (Sir Jim) they will have their own agendas and ideas. They will want something from the club. What is important to remember is that the owners, just like the players and the managers, are just temporary custodians, they own the club for now, but they won't own it forever. Maybe the next owners will be better, or maybe they will be worse, who knows.
Personally, though I'm just happy that the club is being run as a football club again. Ultimately I'm here to enjoy the football, which I can say I am, and I feel hopeful again that we are on a pathway that will lead to future success. How long that takes I don't know, but it feels like we are at least heading in the right direction.
30 May 2026 14:00:23
Anyone else not going to read Gianni Sychophantino's biography, Forward?
1.) 30 May 2026 15:50:11
I'd rather read Gary Neville's autobiography. I'm Bezzie Mates With David Beckham.
2.) 30 May 2026 20:09:45
I've read Neville's, and Scholes's, and Giggs's, and they are incredibly dull. Keane's are worth a read. He's very honest.
3.) 30 May 2026 21:14:24
Except when he was in court, AJH. Then he argued that it was Dunphy taking creative licence. ?
4.) 31 May 2026 00:05:12
Slots should make interesting reading.
5.) 31 May 2026 07:13:55
True, Danny, I preferred his second book, you could feel his pain and frustration in his words.
6.) 31 May 2026 11:42:42
In fairness AJH Roddy Doyle is a Booker prize winner. It's not a fair comparison. That being said, I enjoyed both books
30 May 2026 13:47:24
Well, damn. We were all coming round to thinking that Slot was as perfect a fit for Liverpool as Liverpool fans considered ETH was for us.
29 May 2026 13:25:08
It's been suggested that revenues next year could be close to £800m assuming a fairly deep Champions League run.
The club has a £400m revolving credit facility of which £250m is currently unused.
Given the improved financial results for the current year there should be absolutely no problems with PSR as it comes to an end.
Current squad cost is less than 50% of next year's likely revenues compared to a maximum Uefa limit of 70% So, with the departures of Casemiro, Hojlund and Sancho at a minimum there's gong to be plenty leeway for the club to improve the squad. I would not be surprised to see us spending £300m.
Longer term there is the new stadium. Part of the reason Real Madrid's revenues are now £1bn is the development of the Bernabeu into a multifunctional entertainment complex. This is one of the areas where the Glazers intend to cash in having reportedly been steadily increasing their real estate holdings around OT.
Whether we like it, or them (the Glazers and Ratcliffe - and I don't), one does get the feeling that the club is now being run by professionals with ambition both on and off the field. The LBO was an abomination which drained the clubs resources and negatively impacted the ability to buy the best players, followed by the appointment and too long endured Ed Woodward, an utterly incompetent chief exec, but If the current management can consistently deliver entertaining football and titles, why should I/we care if they make money in the process? It's surely better for the club that they make it rather than lose it.
It's going to be a transformational decade.
1.) 29 May 2026 13:53:52
I will never ever forgive the Glazers, not least for the years of SAF, when we should have dominated Europe but didn’t because of Glazernomics. The LBO & subsequent borrowing cost over £1Bn, and the debt still sits there. £1Bn plus! They will never ever get a pass from me, even when they are finally expunged from the club. Disgusting leeches.
2.) 29 May 2026 14:37:09
Red Man, whilst their saddling of debt onto the club is something I really detest, i don't think most people would care if they had appointed competent people to look after the operations. Ultimately plenty of money has been spent - it's that it was spent terribly. Ed Woodward created a toxic culture and made so many inept decisions.
The relative stability we have now, and the clearer approach towards transfers, etc and on due diligence towards the new stadium is far more important than who owns the club and whether they make profit or not. I really don't like them but I'm far happier we owned by them than a Russian oligarch, or a human rights abusing state owned regime.
3.) 29 May 2026 15:03:19
They are not allowed anymore in the EPL, as far as I understand - says it all, really. The test for fit ownership clearly failed, and now we have leaches attached to our club that we will likely never shift.
Those in the know around the club have apparently purchased as much property as possible around the proposed site for the new stadium and entertainment area.
A lot of people stand to make a lot of money over the next 10 years.
4.) 29 May 2026 15:22:55
But that's exactly the point, DonRed - the Glazers are responsible for appointing those incompetent people in the first place. You can't separate Woodward from the ownership because he was their choice, repeatedly backed by them despite years of failure. A competent ownership structure would never have allowed someone with zero football expertise to run the biggest football club in the country for nearly a decade.
Yes, money was spent, but the reason United had to operate like a commercial machine obsessed with sponsorships and marketing growth was because the club was loaded with debt from a leveraged buyout that never should have been allowed and served as no benefit to the club. Hundreds of millions that could've gone into infrastructure, recruitment, scouting, or the stadium instead went into servicing debt, dividends, and interest payments. The Glazers created an environment where commercial performance mattered more than football performance.
Opposition fans, the media will always say "they spent money," but net spend without structure means nothing.
The ownership failed to put proper football people in place, failed to modernise the club, failed to renovate Old Trafford, failed to invest in the training ground for years, and tolerated mediocrity because top-four finishes and commercial revenue were enough for them.
Liverpool and City built elite football structures while United drifted because the owners didn't prioritise football excellence.
And even now, the "relative stability" only arrived after fan pressure became impossible to ignore and after INEOS effectively had to come in and clean up the football side. The clearer strategy you're praising exists because the Glazers finally had to hand over control after years of mismanagement - not because they suddenly became good owners.
As for other ownership options, although I agree with your sentiment about preferring them to a Russian oligarch or human rights abusing state owned regime, that's a very low bar and the club and fans deserve so much better.
5.) 29 May 2026 16:32:06
Who truly cares who the owners are, deep down. Ultimately you just want your tea to win, come what may.
6.) 29 May 2026 16:39:03
I also will never forgive the Glazers for the lost decade and a half, and, yes, they are entirely responsible for appointing Woodward, then keeping him in place, and for getting rid of competent managers when they started to tell the truth about what a soulless disaster they were.
My only point is that, had we actually continued to win top trophies with regularity, and somehow found value in the market place, I, and I think the majority of us, wouldn't care much about their dividends, the level of debt, and the interest payments.
Fact is, after the company went public in 2012 - which corresponds with the exit of both SAF and Gill - we were in pretty good shape. If we had replaced them with a halfway decent executive team, we would not have wasted £1bn, we would have continued to at least be in the Champions League with regularity, and we would not now have the level of debt we have.
7.) 29 May 2026 16:40:39
Oh dear Jimbobred. ?♂️
8.) 29 May 2026 16:59:06
Newname, We've won 5 major trophies since Sir Alex left in 2013, and not one league title.
9.) 29 May 2026 18:28:37
They basically bought the club by saddling us with debt, using club revenues to service the debt. Clever but appalling. All the while taking large dividends and letting the staff rust and rot. Of course we care who the owners are.
They then appointed a marketing man as CEO who was inept, meaning we overpaid for players who were not good enough. Complete incompetence.
10.) 29 May 2026 19:58:45
Ports, the way I look at it is that only the Premier League and European Championship are major titles. The rest are all secondary. Certainly better than nothing, particularly if you're a club that rarely, if ever, wins anything. For example, if you support Villa, a team that realistically is unlikely to ever win the EPL, you're going to be over the moon to win the Europa League.
But if you support Man Utd, it's no more than a consolation. The same for Crystal Palace and the Conference League. It's fantastic ------ for them.
11.) 29 May 2026 22:01:22
I read somewhere that around 200 million of transfer fee installments are due to be paid out over the next 12 months.
12.) 29 May 2026 22:36:47
Ports, the point is this: clubs are being bought up by all and sundry. Some saddle them with debt; very few will be buying them with cold hard cash.
I'm not saying I agree with their ownership, I'm merely saying if it isn't them, it will be a full SJR ownership (he is no saint), or the Saudis' oil, or Qatari money, or another Hollywood actor making it into a Netflix special revolving pantomime.
It is just the way football has progressed over the last few decades, and I'm not in favour of it.
But what is the alternative? Give up your season ticket in boycott, only for it to be sold the next day (not an option for people who have held them for generations), join the in-game protests (sure, all in), don't buy the merchandise for your kids and grandkids (let them go and support the latest glory team). Any other suggestions?
13.) 30 May 2026 09:47:13
Jimbo
I only care what owners do to the club.
The Glazers are disgusting and Ratcliffe enabled them to stay. I suspect the summer aims from the owners are to buy players but also to ensure financial profitability so dividends will be paid. The Glazers have used United like a cash machine, whilst seeing the asset value rise.
Great business from them, but a disgraceful way to treat a historic football club that grew from working class Manchester people.
You said "some saddle them with debt". Which other club has been bought by a LBO?
14.) 30 May 2026 13:14:13
Liverpool 2007, Gillett and Hicks.
Burnley 2020.
Portsmouth and Hull were both LBOs.
There's a few.
I respect the Liverpool fans, they successfully chased them out.
newnameoldideas's rumour replies
13 May 2026 14:14:38
There are similarities, but this is not the same as the Ole situation other than the fact they're both ex players. In Ole's case, the club rushed into a decision in March when they had another 6-8 weeks to further assess the situation and options. A then-utterly incompetent management team, already shrouded in failure, took shelter behind his initial success. In Ole's day the psyche was totally different. The club was still living on past successes. Now this group looks a whole lot hungrier to create the future.
We'll see. There are no guarantees. The current squad is clearly behind the manager, but by the beginning of next season there will, no doubt, be at least 5 or 6 new personalities who may or may not fit in with the rest of the players, or respond to Carrick.
As Angel says, it's now up to the management team to give him the tools. I have no doubt that's what they intend to do. With Champions League revenues, I can see them spending up to £300m, but hopefully, with the new scouting teams and analytical systems they'll not just bring in the obvious high price players but a couple of diamonds in the rough. Plus, there may be a surprise departure or two.
Opinions are divided, obviously. It's going to be a big season for us. More games, more injuries, higher expectations, etc etc. We've all seen with both Liverpool and Chelsea this season that expensive new players don't necessarily bear fruit.
Carrick has earned a shot. Good luck to him.
02 May 2026 22:40:20
Difficult decision for the club. Lammens is now #1, and he's young. When does Vitek get a shot in the next 5-8 years? He's looking like a top prospect. He needs to play. The club will, quite likely, entertain good offers with a sell-on clause. It would be sad to see him go, but we need cash.
01 May 2026 14:41:34
Our future success will depend at least as much on the players we sign this summer as it will on the coach. I don't think there's anyone out there who is available, hasn't already been tried, and who has managed an EPL club to a major title. Whoever we choose then is a risk.
Iraola looks like a good option to me. He's done very well with modest resources, but that doesn't necessarily mean he'll succeed under the OT glare. It would not surprise me if it's between him and Carrick, two youngish coaches. A tough choice.
29 Apr 2026 17:24:41
We will have plenty of wage headroom, at least from an FFP point of view. Being in the Champions League, total squad cost can be up to 70% of revenues, which should comfortably exceed £700m next year. Right now, I believe squad cost is around 50% of total revenues. We'll be losing at least £100m a year in existing squad cost. Casemiro alone is £60m wages + amortization; Sancho's and Hojlund's amortization is around a further £30. That's before considering other sales.
Zirkzee? Ugarte? Onana? We'll be more limited by debt and borrowing facilities than by squad cost.
Rashford is on the books for 2 more years. That's a big nut if he returns, but it's probably manageable. I'm more confident that there'll be a solution of some sort under this management team than under the previous one. If Barcelona will only go to a loan, how about a full 2 year one? Does that ever happen? Wages paid plus a loan fee?
01 Feb 2026 18:50:06
It's well recognized at Barcelona that Rashford is not a good defensive player. They want to keep him notwithstanding. The EPL is a different place. Every player has to put in a competent defensive shift when required.
Look at Amad today. He worked really hard supporting Dalot and Mazraoui. Rashford costs us £15m a year, Zirkzee maybe £12m a year. Which would we prefer? I'd probably go with Rashford, but ideally I'd like to see both of them move on.
newnameoldideas's banter replies
06 Jun 2026 13:05:49
I'm no fan of the Glazers, and haven't been since day one. I've not had a nice thing to say about them. The LBO was an abomination and should never have been allowed. Their appointment and retention of Woodward was a disaster for the club. I'm no fan of Ratcliffe either.
The only naivete here is being shown by those who think investors should not be in it to make money, and resent them when they do. United is a public company. Why would I, you, or an institutional investor buy shares without the hope that they would appreciate in value and/or pay dividends? Any other reason is a vanity, whether it's one share or the whole club.
What I'm concerned about as a fan is the quality of the executives, who, as I wrote, have limited control over the level of debt, but have the responsibility for the product on the pitch. If Berada and his team get us back to competing seriously for and winning titles, and, preferably, playing exciting football on the way, it will not concern me one jot if the owners make out like banshees. As of now it's not Berada's fault if our lack of profitability and existing debt prevents us from spending £100m+ on individual players.
02 Jun 2026 15:18:11
Bode Glimt have a very good CB in Odin Bjortuft apparently. With a name like Odin, he could end up being a Man Utd god.
02 Jun 2026 12:29:42
If we only buy Ederson and Fernandez for mf, we should absolutely have plenty to spend elsewhere. I can see us forking out £300m gross over the summer. They have £250k on the credit line, revenues that could be as high as £800m next season (+£135m on this year's projected revenues) with a decent Champions League run, and no PSR or financial fair play issues.
I agree. Ineos inherited a deep mess. They've made some missteps on the way, but they have had the courage to fix them quickly.
They have a vision, which, unlike the period under Woodward, actually includes managing a football club to win titles rather than just sponsorship.
Interesting to see whether anyone is prepared to meet the £130m release clause to buy Rayan from Bournemouth. Liverpool, perhaps, if, as seems likely, they hire Iraola. Major upgrade on Amad.
30 May 2026 17:01:30
Isak was excellent at Newcastle. He got injured early and never got going, that was on top of losing Jota, Diaz, and Nunes, and a downturn in Salah's form. I can see things improving radically under Iraola if he has a healthy Isak and Ekitike, maybe with Diomande or Rayan as Salah's replacement.
It would not surprise me if Ratcliffe really wanted Iraola but it had simply become impossible not to give Carrick the opportunity.
29 May 2026 19:58:45
Ports, the way I look at it is that only the Premier League and European Championship are major titles. The rest are all secondary. Certainly better than nothing, particularly if you're a club that rarely, if ever, wins anything. For example, if you support Villa, a team that realistically is unlikely to ever win the EPL, you're going to be over the moon to win the Europa League.
But if you support Man Utd, it's no more than a consolation. The same for Crystal Palace and the Conference League. It's fantastic ------ for them.