That would be my guess. Like I said, how firm is the price? How much can we defer? Bonuses. Etc. But you have to get on the phone to start getting those answers.

I would say that there's no way they get that for a promising kid that has really only had one good year (I think his year at Southampton was fine but not anything amazing). But I guess it just takes one team to fall in love.

(I really really like him a lot but I wouldn't do it at that price; I believe this is a good year to buy midfielders if you can afford patience).

Athletic reporting that United are interested in signing Karl Darlow on a free to be the backup goalie. Also looking at reuniting with Sam Johnstone to fill the backup role.

Radek Vitek has 2 years left on his contract (might be a club option for a 1 year extension). He doesn't want to be nor should he be a backup for the first team right now. I'm guessing United look for another loan in a league that will give him top exposure and experience and, unless Lammens form falls off and/or he absolutely wows while on loan, try to sell him next season. I don't really like selling academy players that could be first team players with more time/development, and I think he could be. But unlikely United keep two young goalies on their roster each with the potential to be first choice (assuming Vitek continues to improve).

United really needs a veteran back up for Lammens.

I'll be honest, I kind of doubt a keeper ever goes from the Academy to regular first choice keeper. It's not impossible, but it takes a series of events, such as: 1) an exceptional keeper who is 2) in the number 2 role and not on loan when the first choice keeper struggles who 3) takes over for the struggling keeper and doesn't struggle themselves. Henderson's probably come closest, no? But he wasn't able to keep the spot despite coming in a few games in place of de Gea. But unlike outfield players, they don't really have the opportunity to transition from being a sub to a starter.

So to win the presidency of the very terribly operated Real Madrid club, the incoming president promised a "150 million dollar gallactico signing". Rumor is the intended signing is Portuguese, so prepare yourself for a summer of "will he stay or go" with Bruno. Just leave our guys alone!

Aston94 said:

---

So to win the presidency of the very terribly operated Real Madrid club, the incoming president promised a "150 million dollar gallactico signing". Rumor is the intended signing is Portuguese, so prepare yourself for a summer of "will he stay or go" with Bruno. Just leave our guys alone!

---

Heh! AS reported Olise and Matheus Fernandes as targets…haven't checked Marca.

Aston94 said:

---

So to win the presidency of the very terribly operated Real Madrid club, the incoming president promised a "150 million dollar gallactico signing". Rumor is the intended signing is Portuguese, so prepare yourself for a summer of "will he stay or go" with Bruno. Just leave our guys alone!

---

I think he was referring to Haaland.

Mathguy64 said:

---

Aston94 said:

---

So to win the presidency of the very terribly operated Real Madrid club, the incoming president promised a "150 million dollar gallactico signing". Rumor is the intended signing is Portuguese, so prepare yourself for a summer of "will he stay or go" with Bruno. Just leave our guys alone!

---

I think he was referring to Haaland.

---

That was Riquelme, Perez' opponent who also said he'd bring Rodri and would go after klopp for a coach. Not delusional at all.

I think the 150M Portuguese target would have been Joao Neves or Vitinha, since the other clues were young and not in Premier League. Although another hint was "not Olise" but then in the knows said, "He wasn't serious on that part; yes Olise." Although PSG and Bayern have since said "no way" on all.

But if you really want to spend 150M on a Portuguese player…. Can I interest you in a very dependable Diogo Dalot? Hello? Hello? The line has gotten very quiet, is anyone still there?

Mathguy64 said:

---

Aston94 said:

---

So to win the presidency of the very terribly operated Real Madrid club, the incoming president promised a "150 million dollar gallactico signing". Rumor is the intended signing is Portuguese, so prepare yourself for a summer of "will he stay or go" with Bruno. Just leave our guys alone!

---

I think he was referring to Haaland.

---

Got out today the target was Portuguese (at least that's the rumor).

They bid 150M for Julian Alvarez, and Atletico rejected it.

https://www.realmadrid.com/es-ES/noticias/club/actualidad/comunicado-oficial-09-06-2026

Barca officially passing on Rashford. Not a surprise at this point, but that added salary (with the increase YoY now that we're back in CL) is going to bite. Only question is does Rashford do a Sancho and just agree to temporary loans for the next 2 seasons to milk his contract for all its worth, or does he take a wage cut to get a permanent move somewhere (likely either as a potential starter for a team like Villa or a clear backup for a team like Bayern)?

Dre_00 said:

---

Barca officially passing on Rashford. Not a surprise at this point, but that added salary (with the increase YoY now that we're back in CL) is going to bite. Only question is does Rashford do a Sancho and just agree to temporary loans for the next 2 seasons to milk his contract for all its worth, or does he take a wage cut to get a permanent move somewhere (likely either as a potential starter for a team like Villa or a clear backup for a team like Bayern)?

---

I've made my feelings known on Rashford. But why should he even entertain a pay cut? He signed a guaranteed contract. United owe him that money. I don't consider that milking a contract at all.

I think a "pay cut" would come with a longer term contract. Make less over the next two years but have a guaranteed contract for 5 years.

I'm not saying he should or shouldn't. It's all about his personal priorities which only he knows and I'm not judging how he prioritizes.

I'm not here to ridicule the guy for getting paid a much higher salary now than the market would currently pay him. No one forced United to make that offer. He's perfectly entitled to play out his current contract, but that comes with certain realities now that the United relationship has permanently fractured. His United contract and wage will likely inhibit him being seen as anything other than a short term resource by the team loaning him even if there's technically an option to buy...because that option won't be activated if the team loaning him think he wants anything close to his current wages. His current wages effectively ensures that the next two seasons will be spent on loan to two different clubs (making it 3 years in a row) with little chance of securing a permanent move unless/until he's willing to sign a new, permanent contract at significantly lower wages than he is on.

His other option is to prioritize a permanent move now where he has a better chance to establish himself at a club (even potentially an elite club like Bayern who is rumored to be interested as a rotation option to Luis Diaz) before his talents diminish (he's 29) over his wages. But he's not going to get both. No team is going to sign him to a contract that is close to the wages that United are paying him.

I hear you and agree with that. I think more than any sport I see fans (euro fans) say, "so and so needs to take a paycut. he's stealing money from the club. yada yada yada."

In American sports, people complain about players' salaries, but we generally do it in a different way. It's more like I can't believe we are paying him that much. He's stealing.

Euro fans generally believe some of these guys should just end their contract and give money back.

No, the club made the contract. There was no gun to anyone's head.

I'll be honest: if I were Rashford, I'd see out the contract. When it ends, he will be 31, right? His next contract won't be a great one in all likelihood, particularly if he's Luis Diaz's backup at Bayern or something. That said, I felt like the purchase price reflects that a club may have to give him a substantial sign on fee to make up for his reduction in wages.

Ediit: to put it another way, I think around 40M GBP would be a fair fee for him ignoring his high wages taking into account he is 29. So to me, if we are asking 26M GBP and his new team has to give him around 10M extra in sign on to make up for his wages being lowered… well, the new team is still a little ahead.

Edit2: I'm steeling myself for the possibility he might go to Arsenal. I mean, he's a definite upgrade on Troussard or Martinelli in all likelihood. And they are in "Win now" mode. But that sure would be difficult to see.

I cannot imagine a scenario where we loan him to Arsenal. Or Liverpool. Or City. Those just shouldn't be options. Any other EPL team fine. But not those.

That's like the Yankees trading a starter to the Dodgers.

I'm not sure what I'd do. I can't really grasp the level of money Rashford has now or how much he would be passing up if he started getting paid 1/2 the amount he currently does.

All I can say for sure is that, if I were an elite footballer, getting the most out of my time as a professional has a value as well that I could probably assign a rough monetary value to. And by that I mean playing at the very highest level that I can possibly attain so that I can play in the biggest tournaments and compete for the biggest trophies that my talent allows. Because that window is short and in Rashford's case, it's not far from closing. Is that monetary value $10m? $20m? No clue but it would definitely be a part of the calculus in my decision making process. Does my decision change if I have $10m in my bank account vs. $100m? Almost definitely.

Money wise we signed him to a contract and we owe him the money. He shouldn't have to agree to less because we were paying him more than his value. Thats not his fault.

Either loan/sell him and eat the difference in value if needed or pay him off and let him walk away or pay him to sit at home. Or find a way to integrate him back in the squad (ha!). Any way you cut it the club owes him the money.

If they can find a spot for him and only eat half the contract, that's half the club doesn't have to pay him. So find him a spot and eat what you have to eat.

Putting aside all the drama/storylines a loan like that would create, my guess is that United would rather eat the money than strengthen a team that they are trying to close the gap with unless that team gave them a substantial offer that they just couldn't refuse (and I doubt Arsenal or any other top 5 team in the EPL would offer that).

I mean even if Arsenal paid his wages in full for a loan, that's still "only" about 15m in savings (I think Rashford is on 300k per week now that United are back in CL?). Probably better to loan him outside of the EPL for even 1/3 of his salary and effectively pay 10m not to strengthen Arsenal.

The problem is there are only 8 other teams in the Top 5 leagues that pay the kind of wages our high earners get: Real Madrid, Barcelona, PSG, Bayern, Arsenal, Liverpool, Man City, and Chelsea. Occasionally Atletico and the top 3 in Italy might stretch for a player, but that's basically it for comparable clubs paying high wages. If we want to eliminate all the other EPL teams from sales of high earners, that's fine, but it means our high earners are difficult to impossible to sell (which is pretty much the route we have gone, to be fair).

I don't know if anyone is still holding out hope for Elliot Anderson but… we aren't beating this:

🚨 Manchester City verbal proposal to Nottingham Forest for Elliot Anderson was worth £106m + add-ons, taking it above £120m. #NFFC want British record fee guaranteed, not after bonuses. No fresh talks with #MCFC over 23yo England midfielder @TheAthleticFC https://t.co/DdanEQcqnz

— David Ornstein (@David_Ornstein) June 10, 2026

(BTW, the article says Forest want the fixed fee to exceed the 125M GBP record fee; we aren't beating City's offer or that, so irrelevant to us either way really).

I saw that. I wonder how much crap city will get for this. Or is bidding super high for players only a years long talking point if United do it?

On the bright side, let's all laugh at Newcastle. Anderson literally begged Newcastle not to put him on the transfer list because he wanted to be a Newcastle legend (born and bred in the Northeast), but they needed to sell to meet FFP rules so they did. Now he's a 23 year old with a 9 figure market value, likely starting for England, and soon will be starting on a team competing for the league title.

Not sure why; Wirtz was like 40M more than Antony, had barely better stats after his first year, plays for the second biggest fanbase in EPL, and still it's barely discussed in comparison.

Showstopper said:

---

Not sure why; Wirtz was like 40M more than Antony, had barely better stats after his first year, plays for the second biggest fanbase in EPL, and still it's barely discussed in comparison.

---

Bingo

Lewis Hall bubbling up the rumor list. Newcastle supposedly value him at 60m which is a lot for a LB but he is 21 and given our situation at LB, 60m for a 21 year old with talent isn't a bad deal at all, IMO. I'd move fast and pull the trigger if the valuation is accurate.

I don't know, when I've seen the 60M valuation, it's more of a guess from more United-connected sources on what they think it might take. I have a feeling Newcastle would be higher, at least right now and with us. United sources also thought about 55-60M would get Fernandes, and we see how that's going so far (I think it eventually comes down, but…). Whatever you think a fair asking price is, up it by about 20-30% right now. Crazy market.

Edit: Basically, take whatever the transfer record is for a full back, and that's probably the asking price until and unless people get serious.

Samuel Luckhurst (formerly of MEN, now at Sun):

Lewis Hall largely blames Eddie Howe for missing out on World Cup place and is seeking a move from Newcastle. #mufc in the market for a long-term left backhttps://t.co/Ovow3c6H5W

— Samuel Luckhurst (@samuelluckhurst) June 11, 2026

Edit: take it for what it's worth, but article was edited from saying he has fallen out with Howe and wants a move to saying "Toon [actual word used lol] deny there has been a falling out between Hall and Howe."

If we do go for Hall, hopefully this sets the upper limit (although they would probably argue that Hall is younger and therefore worth more even though Cucurella is ahead right now). On the other hand, it may mean Chelsea looking for left back now. Puts Alvarro on the RM bench probably, sad news for him.

🚨 Real Madrid reach agreement with Chelsea to sign Marc Cucurella. 27yo left-back joins #RMFC from #CFC for €60m - €55m fixed + €5m bonuses. Spain international’s deal done at rapid speed & now on to paperwork stage @TheAthleticFC after @FabrizioRomano https://t.co/Otq9CUKH6q

— David Ornstein (@David_Ornstein) June 14, 2026

Someone please explain to me what Chelsea is doing, besides being a weird private equity fund.