28 May 2014 08:46:45
Looking at the posts about Shaw down the page, talk of Woodward getting the sack is nonsense. The club will not pay massively over the odds for the player, end of. The club is a business, and hey will pay what they feel is a fair price. They are bound to try and negotiate a lower price. Southampton are not actively looking to sell the player. They have quoted a price for interested parties, that's all. If moneybags Chelsea won't pay it, why would we? If Southampton decide to negotiate and sell for a lower price then I am sure Chelsea will re-new their interest. We have no divine right to sign players just because we are Manchester United.
At the end of the day, Shaw is still only 18 years old. He is a very good player already, but he is not a £30m (guestimate admittedly) player. With Luke Shaw, you are paying for potential, coupled with the fact that Southampton don't want, or need to sell.
If we get Shaw I will be delighted, but I am not holding my breath. But if we don't, I wouldn't expect Woodward to lose his job over it. We only see what we read in the papers and online. None of us know what goes on in the negotiations, so just chill out and wait to see what happens.

1.) 28 May 2014
If Ed Woodward has another disappointing summer like last summer, then he will be taken off of transfers in the future and MU will use somebody else. It's not nonsense at all. He has to be held accountable for failed transfer windows, it's his job.

2.) 28 May 2014
28 May 2014 11:01:28
Syd, are you on the board at OT? Thought not. You know no more about what goes on behind the scenes than anyone else. My original post said that Woodward would not get the sack if we don't sign Luke Shaw. If Southampton are asking an unrealistic price for Shaw, I don't think the club would, or should be held to ransom. Shaw is not the only left back in the world.
I agree that last summer was a disaster, due in no small part to Woodward. But he seems to be highly regarded by the Glazers, and if they wanted to get rid of him for being incompetent they would have done so already. The press and the fans always love to make a scapegoat of somebody, and Woodward has been that man. He needs to get the deals done this time around, but the deals have to be right for the club. He may well be in charge of transfer dealings, but I would not expect him to have total control and an open cheque book.
Ed02 has already said there is no deal for Shaw, so why would he lose his job over a potential deal that may not happen anyway?

3.) 28 May 2014
BS, Woodward is highly regarded by the Glazers but not for his transfer dealings. He is highly regarded for his marketing skills and getting the best sponsorship etc.
My guess would be IF we have a poor transfer window that someone might be brought in to handle transfers with Woodward continuing with his other duties which is extremely good at.

4.) 28 May 2014
The problem, Betty, is Southampton have been open from the start about the price they are willing to sell Shaw for. It was enough to convince Chelsea to end their interest in December, but Woodward decided to maintain an interest and pursue the deal. That means one of two things, either the club are willing to match (or close to match) Southampton's valuation, or Woodward thinks he can haggle them down.

If it is the former then the deal should be tied up quickly, if it's the latter then Woodward is just embarrassing himself and the club again. If the club isn't willing to pay close to £30m for a lb, then they shouldn't be wasting their time negotiating. Woodward needs to get over this idea that he can be some maverick negotiator, and either match valuations or move onto other targets, otherwise it will bite him and us in the backside like it did with Fellaini last summer.

5.) 28 May 2014
Scapegoat? It's his job for Christ sake. He's in charge of player recruitment, he deals with the negotiating and if that goes pear-shaped again this summer then he's the one that's responsible, just like he was largely responsible for last summer's mess. The Glazers do not decide on who we buy and for how much, that job is Ed Woodward's job. If we have another disastrous summer, then he will no longer be in charge of player recruitment and nor should he be.

6.) 28 May 2014
RedDub, exactly.

7.) 28 May 2014
Betty, in not paying over the odds and saving money, United are now losing money by not being in the CL! I don't think we are in any position to bargain at the moment. If we need a player, we need him, end of. Once we are back in the big time, we might have to clout to pick and choose who we buy and what we pay for them. Right now, we have to get back into the CL and money, for the first time with the Glazers, seems to be of no importance.

8.) 28 May 2014
I don't like Woodward but has anyone actually stopped to think that it is the players that don't want to join us? Is this is the case then what can Woodward do. nothing.
The hardest part of the deal is convincing players to join the club, if that doesn't happen then it's a no brainer.

9.) 28 May 2014
Maybe we've met the valuation, maybe it's Shaw that needs convinced? Maybe Shaw, like Robben, see's OT as "not a option"? Just sayin'!

10.) 28 May 2014
Nonsense Simmo, you do not enter into negotiations with clubs for players who have no interest in joining you. That is known before negotiations start. Once negotiations start it's up to Ed Woodward to get the deals done. We have spent a lot of time negotiating deals for Kroos and Shaw. Next we will be hearing that LvG doesn't want Shaw either. It's utter nonsense, it's because EW is penny pinching at a time when penny pinching should not be happening. We are desperate for players and we should be paying whatever it takes.

11.) 28 May 2014
Guys, my OP was in response to the idea that Woodward will be sacked if he doesn't tie up the Shaw deal. Quite frankly, the idea that Woodward's career depends on a deal for Luke Shaw is, in my opinion, nonsense. Whether or not the club should pay over the odds for the player in not the point, and is a completely different discussion.
But I will make the point that many of the people on here lately who say we should pay whatever it takes so land our targets are the same ones who slated the club (and Woodward in particular ) for paying too much for Fellaini. You can't have it both ways.
The club, like I said, is a business. Woodward is the man in the spotlight when it comes to transfer negotiation, fair enough. I am not privy to the running of the club, but I seriously doubt that Edward Woodward has carte blanche when it comes to signing players. There will be other people, board member, Glazer or whoever, as well as Woodward who decide on how much the club are willing to spend on any given player. If the collective decision is that the club won't match the asking price, the Woodward's hand are tied. Deals are not done between two club representatives on the back of a fag packet down the pub.
There is a difference between Woodward "cocking up" a deal, and failing to meet an asking price because the CLUB are not willing to pay it.
As for being a scapegoat, well maybe that is a bit of an exaggeration, but you gat my point. Woodward took the brunt of it last summer, but we don't know what went on in the negotiations last year.
I don't remember too many people shouting for David Gill's head because we missed out on Shnyderer, Lucas Moura, Eden Hazard etc etc. I know they were different times and different cirmustances. But the whole situation NOW is polarised, in many ways, because of the failings and poor decisions of the pre Woodward era in the transfer market.

12.) 28 May 2014
Thomas, MU have not agreed a fee with Southampton. MU would not enter lengthy negotiations for a player who didn't want to sign. It would be pointless wouldn't it.

13.) 28 May 2014
Syd, you are now saying that we should pay whatever it takes. You appear to have changed your mind, as usual to suit your argument. Do you remember posting the following:

4.) 28 Aug 2013
MU do not pay over the odds for players. Whatever way you look at this Fellaini isn't worth £23m. If he was worth £23m then Chelsea, Arsenal or MU would have paid it. IMO he is a £20m player. But to Everton he is worth a little more because they overpaid for him originally and he has improved under their care. There is a difference in paying an initial £23m for a player or say £18m initially with the rest in add-ons. To be fair Everton will probably allow MU to pay in installments and that would mean there's more cash to spend on other players. I would be happy with Coentrao, Fellaini & someone like Oezil.

Sydney!

14.) 28 May 2014
Betty, Luke Shaw was our main target this summer. This was the target that was happening no matter who our manager was. This is a club buy and someone we desperately want to sign. If this falls through due to EW twiddling his fingers then his job will be under serious threat. I am not saying if Shaw agrees to join Chelsea that EW will be sacked the very next day, but he will be judged come September after the window is closed and if it's unsatisfactory, he will be pulled off of player recruitment and rightly so.

15.) 28 May 2014
MU have significant funds to spend this summer and we have NEVER been out of the top four whilst under the Glazer ownership. We couldn't be more desperate right now. Comparing this to our situation 2-3 years ago is not the same. David Gill and SAF would have made 2-3 signings before the WC because we are in desperate need for reinforcements. EW still has time, but if he messes up again he will be pulled off of transfers in the future.

It's EW who decides what the CLUB are willing to pay. That is his job.

16.) 28 May 2014
Betty, you need to try and keep up mate. We had won the league then and could offer UCL football. NOW after finishing 7th with no UCL we have to pay whatever it takes to get the standard of player that we need to get us back into the UCL.

17.) 28 May 2014
Betty, the reason Woodward / Moyes and United got slated for overpaying for Fellani is because had the club moved quicker we could have secured him for the lower release clause. The fact the club and Moyes / Woodward acted so slowly is why most people where annoyed. By acting slowly, the window to buy Fellani at a cheaper price passed and we panicked and paid more.

18.) 28 May 2014
Betty
it looks like u hit a raw nerve

19.) 28 May 2014
Jred, it seems like it! If they read my OP properly they might understand the point I was trying to make. Ed Woodwards career does not depend on the his success in trying to sign Luke Shaw. Quite straight forward really :)

20.) 28 May 2014
No, but whether or not we have a successful summer will decide whether or not EW remains in charge of player acquisitions. Quite straight forward really :)

21.) 28 May 2014
Sydney, are you sure your not Ed Woodwards monkey boy. you seem to know a lot of inside information on all the failed negotiations / transfer dealings that are currently happenning/not happening at United? Maybe we should all address our questions to you from now on.

22.) 28 May 2014
Simmo, it's a little thing called "common sense" and being able to process information given to us from the editor. We know we are interested in Shaw and we know that we are yet to agree a fee with Southampton after several weeks of negotiation. This has all been confirmed not just by almost every media source available, but by the editor. We also know that after the Bayern Munich game in Munich, club officials from both MU and BM held a meeting regarding Kroos. Again this was mentioned in the media, but more importantly it was confirmed by the editor. So we have spent weeks/months trying to sign these two players and clearly a deal for Kroos couldn't be agreed and we still haven't agreed a deal with Southampton for Shaw. It is Ed Woodward's job to conclude these deals. We wouldn't be negotiating these deals unless the players were willing to join MU. Therefore if the deals fall through, then it's down to Ed Woodward. And IMO his penny pinching tactics.

23.) 28 May 2014
All the Sydney has said here is correct. Anyone who thinks the club will spend weeks trying to thrash out a deal for a player without having been told via agent or the like that the player wants the move and a rough idea of wages is living on another planet! Also all this support for Ed Woodward is rediculous! He showed his incompetence last year, and the way he's going again we will have a similar window this time! This is the guy who couldn't get any player we wanted lad year and therefore ended up going back to Fellaini who he could of got £5m cheaper 10 days earlier! He's a good businessman and good with the sponsorship side of things. But clearly player recruitment is not as easy for him! If he messed up again it should be the end of him in that role.

Also the likes of Shappy and Mick saying we shouldn't pay £30m for a young player like that, I think this season it's a case of having to pay a little over the odds. Clubs know were desperate and will automatically hike prices up. How much revenue have we lost this year alone in missing out on Europe? So spending £30m on 5 or so players isn't the end of the world if it gets us back in UVL.

24.) 28 May 2014
Stand, I am just waiting for the "Shaw is not on LvG's wishlist" headlines to appear. Another player we have failed to get due to penny pinching.

Don't get me wrong I am not all for paying over the odds for players, but I suspected this summer would be different. We badly need players.

Surely we have to weigh up the pros and cons, spend an extra few million on players or risk another season out of the UCL costing another £50m.

25.) 28 May 2014
Exactly. Fully agree. Miss out on CL this year £50m. Miss out another year or even two and it's another £50-£100m. Every year it gets harder and harder to get back in it. And if were struggling to attract the best players now imagine if we miss out again? There's no room for penny punching this time, and if we have to spend £5m more that people want for too signings then so be it as far as I'm concerned.

26.) 28 May 2014
My point exactly, shame others cannot see my point.