08 Aug 2025 09:15:09
Garnacho agrees terms with Chelsea according to Romano. If they want him then it's £45m-£50m or bog off. They will no doubt lowball us but we should stand firm, if they want him they pay, if not he can have fun in the reserves. U just know he's going to antagonise us even more now and god knows what he'll do when he's gone. Such a wee prat.

1.) 08 Aug 2025
08 Aug 2025 10:27:09
Like Brentford did to us and you moaned about that. ??.

2.) 08 Aug 2025
08 Aug 2025 11:15:19
I get that fans are annoyed at the prices we buy and sell players for. However, I'm glad that those decisions aren't in the hands of those fans. There really is no place in any profession for pettiness or spite.

What do we really stand to benefit from playing silly games? It's highly unlikely to get us significantly more money. The most likely outcome is we get stuck paying a player we don't want and who doesn't want to be here for another year. A player whose attitude has been found lacking even when he was happy and wanted to be here, I can't imagine that attitude will improve much if he's made to spend a year in the reserves. Let alone the potential damage he could do while mixing with the young and impressionable kids in our academy and under 23's.

Then next summer after a horror year how much do you think he will be worth?

We might think he is worth 50m or 60m, but the reality is he is only worth what someone is prepared to pay for him. If that is 30m then he's worth 30m.

There really is no point being silly about it. When we sell players, with only a few exceptions, we are selling down not up. These are players who for whatever reason are not wanted or valued by Manchester United, a club still considered a top side by most in football.

Why would anyone pay a big fee and big wages for a player that Manchester United don't feel is good enough?

We aren't selling Garnacho because of a lack of talent, we are selling him because his attitude and behaviour is problematic and he isn't willing to do what the manager wants him to do on the pitch.

If Chelsea (a rival) wants to take that problem into their dressing room and give us a chunk of money to do so then great.

Not only does that remove a problem player from our dressing room.

It brings money into the club, money needed to strengthen the squad.

It also adds a player into a rivals dressing room who is know to cause problems. A player known to leak team news, a player known to be late, a player known to cause controversy with social media posts, a player known to have caused tension with teammates, and a player who is known to have not followed the managers instructions.

Yes based only on talent he is a player who strengthens Chelsea, but overall he is a player who weakens them. I don't see him lasting more than 2 years there.

Take whatever we can get and reinvest it on a player like Baleba.

3.) 08 Aug 2025
08 Aug 2025 11:43:55
The key difference here is that Brentford would probably have been happy for Mbeumo to stay. We are attempting to push Garnacho out of the door (deservedly so, but still) . Chelsea know we are desperate to sell before the end of the window and that the player won’t go anywhere else. We either sell to them at a price they’re prepared to pay or get stuck with a player who the manager doesn’t want, and whose value will be significantly lower come the next transfer window.

4.) 08 Aug 2025
08 Aug 2025 12:53:45
The fact that there seems to be no queue to acquire Garnacho would suggest that he is not highly thought of in the football world in general. £35m would represent pure profit plus a reduction in the wage bill by £2.5m a year. He could come good, he has certain attributes. Chelsea, which has a much better record at selling players on, could be gambling on future profit as much as Garnacho providing ab immediate boost to their already excellent squad.

5.) 08 Aug 2025
08 Aug 2025 13:15:55
I am not even convinced his talent or potential is worth more than 30 million, especially when RA criticised and chastised him so much, which in the scheme of things was rather stupid, he gone backwards that’s for sure, I am not sure he gets any better and I certainly don’t think he strengthens Chelsea by any means! They tend to try these players if not good enough move them on….

6.) 08 Aug 2025
08 Aug 2025 13:19:29
I would expect us to sell Garncacho for a similar figure to what they got for Maduake and paid for Gittens.

Both players have had reasonable seasons over the past couple of years, young with potential but not set the work alight just yet.
So, somewhere in the £40/ 45m bracket with some add ons feels about right.

At that price point for Chelsea it is relatively low risk. he does not perform over the next couple of years they will sell on.

If we get more well done.

7.) 08 Aug 2025
08 Aug 2025 13:20:33
Chelsea will be quite happy to sign him for £30m spread over 5 years for PSR then sell him next year for the same amount to allow them to spend big again as all the money hits 1 year accounts so would allow potentially £150m spend based on current rules. Seems to be how they're operating at the moment.

8.) 08 Aug 2025
08 Aug 2025 15:26:44
Chelsea sold made for £50m + and paid the same for gittens. Garnacho is around that level so his fee should be similar. We can’t just sell him for nothing. That’s my point. Also consider the fact that if the roles were reversed they’d want us to pay a decent fee. Anyways hopefully a deal can be done and one we r happy with.

9.) 08 Aug 2025
08 Aug 2025 15:51:37
For me I agree Garnacho isn’t worth £50/ 60/ 70M however, the fees that have been paid for players has set a precedent. Arsenal brought the Chelsea lad for around £50m I believe so we should be saying £50M. I don’t think we need to cave in easily and just accept a low offer. Garnacho wants to move, it’s in his interest to move with a World Cup year so I think we are in a better position to get a better fee.

10.) 08 Aug 2025
08 Aug 2025 16:26:26
They're has been a lot of clubs showing interest but he only wants to go to Chelsea so batted the others away.
Only 1 player under 21 had better stats than him last season. He is a good player but doesn't see eye to eye with the manager so he needs to go. i'm guessing somewhere around 35 to 45 including add ons we will get a small % of any future fees he generates for rest of his career as he has come through our academy.

11.) 08 Aug 2025
08 Aug 2025 17:16:48
To be fair, that is a very good point. I think if we hold firm on our price, Garnacho would put in a transfer request to force through a move. Not the best look for the club, but given the way that he’s behaved and the fact that he’s refusing to even entertain a move to anybody but a top four rival, I think most would agree that we’re right to stand our ground.

12.) 08 Aug 2025
08 Aug 2025 18:58:23
Hold out for the right price. He should be told he can't go below certain price. We must not let other clubs bully us. Chelsea killed us with Mount price, who was in his last year of contract and also wanted to go.

13.) 08 Aug 2025
08 Aug 2025 23:46:11
I think many are going to be surprised with what we sell for on all 4 players, I expect us to generate £100m to £110m, Ratcliffe did a good PR Jon on our finanical position compared to the reality. They will either pay what we want or those players will stay.

14.) 09 Aug 2025
09 Aug 2025 07:31:59
No way they stay and every other club knows that, RA put paid to that with the treatment and that’s down to his naivety and the club, let’s hope they learnt from that, but whatever concrete offers come in for them they are gone, 35m probably buys Garnacho, bit less buys Antony, or even a loan for him any offer buys Sancho, none of these are great players and none of them had much interest in, which says it all, I don’t by that Garnacho only wants Chelsea yes might be preferred but not exclusive, but no one else made an attempt with offers have they, so just press talk.
We backed ourselves into awful corner.
I could see a Mainoo offer come in though and him gone any luck an Ugarte offer but can’t see that….

15.) 09 Aug 2025
09 Aug 2025 10:38:40
No, we havent. Its not like Garnacho holds all the cards. If he stays, he might lose a year, he won't play at WC and he will be able to get lower contract, since he wasnt playing for a year. Chelsea want to sell Jackson and still ask silly money. Be realistic.

16.) 09 Aug 2025
09 Aug 2025 11:33:38
We get what we can. The old team almost wrecked the club and here we are trying to demand the exact same amount as we massively overpaid for a completely different player. Not terribly scientific. I’ve a lot of faith in this new team/ approach and have no doubt they will do the best they can and what’s best for the club. Not some bonkers eye for an eye especially as we actually poked ourselves in the eye with Mount.

17.) 09 Aug 2025
09 Aug 2025 19:19:13
It is not eye for an eye, it is what Garnachos price is, what players of similar level went for. The Mount part is just to show that a club can stay strong in their valuation of the player and not sell low, even in a "bad" position.

18.) 09 Aug 2025
09 Aug 2025 22:14:58
The manager wants Garnacho gone, he needs to be gone to show that the manager has the power now not the players and that if you don't play ball you are gone. Staying tough on Garnacho will hopefully keep others in line in the future.

United can't hold out for a bigger fee here because everyone knows this.

Mount was very different, he was a player that always gave his all, you never heard him of causing waves or giving less than 100%, his managers loved him, he just priced himself out of Chelsea and being homegrown solved a problem for Chelsea.

19.) 10 Aug 2025
10 Aug 2025 07:48:47
And what excuse you have for Jackson? They want him gone, but still want 75m.

Garnacho will be gone from the 1st team, but it doesn't have to be a low sell. As i already said, it is not just up to him or what he wants.