Manchester United Rumours

26 Nov 2025 20:21:39
Mokio from Ajax.

Sounds like something is happening there. 17 year old, left footed DM, CM, LB. £25M region.

Liverpool and Newcastle reported to have stepped back.

Looks like good business and a solid rumour to me.

I’m sure Ronnie will be happy wherever he is.

26 Nov 2025 20:43:26
£25m for a 17 year old from a mid level Dutch team who isn't going to solve any of our current issues? It could be good long term business but could equally well be a bust.

27 Nov 2025 16:44:05
Probably no better than what we already have trying to break through in to the first team.
We need players that are prem league proven and are ready to go.
Especially in the centre of midfield.
We couldn't even cope with a mid table Everton team who were down to 10 men.

27 Nov 2025 20:31:13
You mean the 10 men Everton team that had 2 shots, one of which was on target and which got a deflection to beat the goalkeeper?

27 Nov 2025 23:41:59
What deflection?

Did the ball go in the net?

What was the final score?

The only true stat that counts. The rest is just subjective.

23 Nov 2025 14:40:06
Talks of Utd going for Joao Gomes in the January window, £44m is the fee mentioned. Good addition? Anybody seen him play more than I have? If so, how good is he?

23 Nov 2025 15:01:08
Very good player (Ed001 agrees too) . He is a good all rounded midfielder with a lot of energy and stamina. I don't want him instead for say Anderson but if we intent to buy three cms and Gomez is one of them i would be happy.

23 Nov 2025 15:30:18
He's very good. As with what Heaven said, if he's one of 2 or 3 CM additions in the next couple of windows I'd be thrilled.

23 Nov 2025 21:56:03
He'd be a great signing, can play both the 6 or 8, mobile, energetic, physically commanding, and strong defensively/winning the ball back.

We need at least two midfield signings by the start of next season. João Gomes makes a lot of sense, especially if we then went on to sign Anderson who'd pair really well with him.

24 Nov 2025 10:21:05
He should give us what we expect from Ugarte and help close our games.

24 Nov 2025 23:43:02
Agree but I don't think he is great player. Better than we have but nowhere near elite level. I suppose that's where we are but it's depressing when you recall the calibre of top top midfielders we used to have.

11 Nov 2025 08:01:37
Being reported forest would demand upwards of 100mil for anderson. Steer well clear!

11 Nov 2025 11:51:41
Depending on where Forest are come January, Dyche may want to freshen up the team. Now getting rid of their best player would be ridiculous I appreciate that but I'd be tempted to offer Ugarte plus cash for Anderson and maybe Mainoo til the end of the season on Loan as a tempter. If anything, it will get the wheels in motion for Summer.

To get the calibre of player we need in CM, we will be looking at £80M upwards and yes it's a huge amount of money, but for a 23 year old, if we can get 10 years from them that's £10M a year.

11 Nov 2025 12:54:54
Why would Forest take Ugarte for no particular reason lol.

Hes not very good and his wages are substantial, certainly for forests wage structure.

Maybe we could offer them Mount on loan in exchange for gibbs white as well and do a double swoop.

11 Nov 2025 13:33:55
He's on par with their top 4 earners, in fact Douglas Luiz is on more than him. There is a reason, he's a CM, as is Anderson so not leaving them short in that position. You may think he's not very good but others in Football may rate him, including Bielsa who seems to pick him for Uruguay most games.

He knows a bit about Football and he may just suit Forest's and Dyche's style compared to United's. Other than that, yeah it's a sound argument you put forward.

11 Nov 2025 13:50:50
So after watching Ugarte in the premier league you think he should be a top 5 earner at nottingham forest, a club that reached the european places last year.

Douglas luiz is on more than him because he is a better player as he showed for a good couple of years at Aston Villa.

We need to stop this arrogant view of our playing squad and elevated opinion of some of these players ability.

11 Nov 2025 14:51:19
Why would Anderson come to United and be expected to stay 10 years that’s just dreaming!
Everyone wanted Baleba on the back of one good season, look at this season.
Everyone raved about Ugarte look how that turned out.

11 Nov 2025 15:06:50
You said his wages are substantial, certainly for forests wage structure. I pointed out he's on par with 4 of their players and 1 is on more. It doesn't matter whether I think that's where he should be or not.

Elliot Anderson is a better player than Douglas Luiz and showed last season in the Premier League helping Forest get to European places, Luiz failed to make an impact at Juventus, involved in no goals, wasn't a regular and was inconsistent when he did play, why isn't Anderson on more than Luiz?

I am unsure on why suggesting we use a player who is currently not reaching the levels the team needs due to how we are playing as part of a deal to get a player in as well as offering money also is an arrogant view? Perhaps, Forest's style is better for Ugarte which is why it would work for all parties? Suggesting Forest give us Anderson plus cash then you'd have point.

11 Nov 2025 16:52:45
IF he stays for 10 years Je Suit unite. IF. But he’s 23, why is it unrealistic to think he could stay for 10 years?

12 Nov 2025 05:57:26
Because it’s 2025 and no player stays for 10 years and we are nowhere near the pull we once were and if he were to become a fantastic player, which he not yet Madrid, Bayern, PSG Barcelona will come calling to think we can hold a player for 10 years is delusional. Just look at the facts, poorly owned club realistically few years away from winning anything and still no guarantee of that, no striker at the club at all, jury out big time on the manager, SJR debacle of owning minority share, muting of new ground so be even less money to spend like happened at emirates at Spurs even happening at Madrid and Barca, so only defence you have of him staying 10 years is AGE….

12 Nov 2025 14:14:45
What utter nonsense.

13 Nov 2025 09:49:56
If they want 100m, pay it.
He was absolute class against us.
Get it done.
Secure the title, or top 4.
Keep the process moving.

The way he is playing, 100m in Jan is 130 in the summer.

13 Nov 2025 14:39:56
I would rather spend £100m on the right player than £50m on another Ugarte who is nowhere near good enough and needs to be replaced after two seasons.

Is Elliot Anderson the right player? I don’t know, but if the people in charge of signings are confident that he is then so be it.

13 Nov 2025 16:00:41
Agreed redseven. So many people scoffed at paying that type of money for Rice and I don't think most regard that as poor spending by Arsenal now.

14 Nov 2025 00:52:26
Je suis is the latest Maze incarnation clearly, don’t feed the troll. Nonsense already.

16 Nov 2025 13:17:51
Anderson looked class for England, looks a complete CM to me and can pass, comfortable in close with players around him. It’s the United tax on the price. Question is why have we not been picking up players like that before they get to £100m. Still, if the scouts like him, buy. You know I would sell Bruno to fund it, we missed that trick in summer. Still suspect that will be one of the big deals in summer. Thing is we need a CM on 1st Jan.

Ugarte takes a lot of stick, my humble opinion is that he isn’t suited to how we play. He looks like he is comfortable up close, one of a central 3. However, there is space all around him here and Bruno doesn’t play like that. When opposition run at him with space he doesn’t look comfortable. I think he is a really good player that was not bought for how United play.

17 Nov 2025 14:27:35
Yeah RedMan let’s take another 20 goals a season out the team! We already have a striker that don’t score, Cunha not exactly prolific so Mbeumo best double his output….
Jeez your hatred for Bruno is embarrassing is it same Bruno who scored another hat trick for Portugal…oh sorry let’s ignore that.

17 Nov 2025 17:52:05
Team, not team Bruno. We need to move forward and that isn’t going to be with a 31 year old, no matter how blinded you are. You would let him play until he has no value.
I don’t hate anyone, let alone Bruno, but we are dragging our feet as we have done for years.

18 Nov 2025 16:19:43
The argument of taking out a player automatically loses you a certain amount of goals is so simplistic. Van Nistelrooy left in 2006, his last season we scored 72 goals in the league. The following season we scored 83.

20 Nov 2025 19:44:10
This may sound like hyperbole, and it might be due to the fact he is a midfielder playing for Forest.

But I genuinely feel that Anderson has a Roy Keane feel about him.

He doesn't quite have the temper, but a combative all round box to box midfielder who is surprisingly good at getting forward and scoring key goals. Said to be a leader in the changing room and certainly is out on the pitch with his performances.

There are definitely shades of Keane in Anderson.

09 Oct 2025 09:24:30
Anyone seen the post by Turki alalshikh? Seems to be saying United are close to selling to a new investor. Whether that's full sale or just extra funding who knows. Might also just be bs for publicity. What do we think?

09 Oct 2025 13:49:50
Believe there was a clause in the Ratcliffe deal that after a certain period allowed the Glazers to sell and Ratcliffe would be forced to sell his holding for the price per share the Glazers agreed.

Anything that gets the Glazers out and debt paid off in full will mean popping Champagne corks

The next question is whether the prospective buyer has enough money or is it just the Glazers want to raise more money by selling more shares but not concede control. Not completely sure on the company structure but think if Ratcliffe were to buy more shares that took him over 30% he may be required to offer to all shareholders the same price per share in a full takeover. Hence why he sits at below 30%. Unless there is a clause saying they can’t, then as long as they retain overall 51% the Glazers may sell shares above that level to someone else and pocket the next load of cash. The club won’t benefit until they and the debt are gone completely. A happy day.

09 Oct 2025 15:25:30
The freeze period ended around mid August RedMan. The 1958 were planning a protest before the Arsenal game but cancelled due to some positive feedback from fans regarding signings and the new training centre. I found it interesting the SJR would put so much money into a project when potentially he could be forced sell his shares. Apparently he gets the opportunity to match any offer the Glazers recieve. I posted that it felt like something was in the pipeline. It’s interesting an individual like Turki Alalshikh would post something like this but no idea if it has any substance. I also, perhaps reading too much into it, found the wording of ‘investors’ rather than buyers/ owners interesting and maybe deliberate?

There has also been no movement from the 1958 recently who have been so vocal and active in their protests to the Glazers. You do wonder if they have been briefed that something is happening?!

OR this could all be nonsense and we are getting excited about the Glazers being gone for nothing 😂.

10 Oct 2025 08:46:58
Probably linked to investment in the stadium.

10 Oct 2025 11:12:21
Someone buying up all the seat licences?

10 Oct 2025 14:15:39
turki says a lot of stuff. would not spend too much on what he says. He likes the attention.

10 Oct 2025 15:50:24
If only this were true….

10 Oct 2025 21:09:52
redseven are you for real? The Glazers are awful, but wanting to be a pawn in a sportswashing operation isn't something I'd like to see happen.

11 Oct 2025 11:16:09
I'll be very happy to see the back of the Glasers. They have offered nothing to our club but have taken plenty from us.

That said I am cautious over who it is who eventually buys them out. I'm overall pleased with how INEOS have managed things since they bought into the club. I wouldn't want any new ownership to rock the boat with that. Ideally a change in ownership would either see a total buyout by INEOS, or they at least own the controlling stake in the club so as to not complicate the running of the club.

We have to remember that anyone prepared to pay the eye watering costs of buying us will be doing so with their own agenda, and that may or may not be in our best interests.

Be that sports washing or merely for financial gain. The last thing we need is a power struggle with billionaires squaring off against eachother across the board room.

Personally, what would be my ideal situation is for INEOS to increase their stake to around 70% or more, then maybe a minority stakeholder comes in with around 30% stake. Meaning we are shot of the Glasers, but there isn't going to be a power struggle, or change in how the club is currently being run. INEOS owning a significant majority over anyone else makes things far more secure.

I have a feeling that Sir Jim might set things up and in place for some kind of partial fan ownership held in trust for after he dies. Meaning his legacy will be rebuilding the club and then giving it back to the fans. INEOS is suspect will still own a majority and controlling stake, but the rest being fan owned.

11 Oct 2025 12:44:51
Nothing could be worse than the Glazers and the debt they have saddled the club with.

If somebody agrees a deal with the Glazers, Ratcliffe will have the opportunity to match it. I’m still not completely sold on INEOS, though, so whether he does or he doesn’t, I’ll be glad to see the back of the yanks.

11 Oct 2025 14:30:01
You mention sportswashing but conveniently forget to mention the awful history of the glazer family in American politics DonRed?

Extremely large contributors to the Bush presidental campaign, which eventually led to an illegal war that killed millions?

Its only fair to mention both, two cheeks of the same arse as far as I care, but you must be fair. Again, I absolutely do not agree with sport washing nor would I endorse for any of these c**** to own the club, who are undoubtedly involved in atrocities across planet. No to both!

11 Oct 2025 15:36:56
One is some prats I don't like. The other is a government funded operation to detract from horrific acts. You are equating direct involvement with indirect. That is whataboutism. I'm also not sure about your analysis of this. The Glazers give money to anyone that'll suit them. They funded a lot to both the Trump and Harris campaigns last time. You are stretching very much imo to put those two on the same footing.

11 Oct 2025 16:14:38
"Some prats I don’t like" is doing a lot of heavy lifting there and i’m not saying the UAE investors and the Glazers are identical, one’s a state trying to polish its image. But let’s not act like the Glazers are some neutral ‘just business’ owners either. Their money’s been tied up in nasty sh1t

If the point is moral high ground, there isn’t one. It’s picking between a sportswashing operation and parasites who’ve bled the club dry while funding war-mongers. Different flavours of the same 💩 sandwich. I just don’t want either anywhere near United. ”.

11 Oct 2025 16:18:45
And no, that’s not whataboutism, that’s just called having a memory. You don’t get to downplay one set of rotten politics just because it’s wrapped in a different flag.

If we’re talking morals, the Glazers have happily bankrolled people who create the mess, while the other lot are using football to cover theirs. One’s direct, one’s indirect, both are still rotten to the core.

One stinks less loud, that’s all. Still stinks.

12 Oct 2025 14:53:04
Saying that I shouldn't take sportswashing seriously because of some other indirect involvement via funding a politician before they took an action is pretty much the archetypical example of whataboutism.

12 Oct 2025 17:38:34
That’s not what I said at all. I never told you not to take sportswashing seriously, I said don’t act like the Glazers are some moral alternative. And no, that’s not whataboutism, pointing out that both sides are rotten isn’t deflection, it’s context.

12 Oct 2025 21:54:03
Scholes, Unless you are talking about something other than funding a political campaign you are equating two very different things. It is common - expected in fact - for rich people in the US to heavily donate to campaigns.

The Glazers as I said above heavily funded both Trump and Harris! It feels like you are searching for a reason to put them on equal footing with direct and actual evidence of human rights abuses by the groups funding these sports washing operations. I just don't see the equivalence you do. This, one is bad and the other is bad so why split hairs logic just isn't something I'm ever going to agree on.

20 Oct 2025 13:58:18
And let’s not be so naive to think Ineos and SJR are not in it for themselves either, like some are suggesting.

23 Oct 2025 05:07:01
Reality is, if whoever comes in will be skeletons in the cupboard but if they injecting money and United winning you same bunch will turn a blind eye…hypocrites.

24 Oct 2025 18:37:01
Notimesoon

Maybe your next persona could be shakesfistatcloud?

08 Oct 2025 22:35:14
It seems the club are in talks with Maguire for a new deal. He did better last year but he isn't good enough I'm afraid. We need to be improving on him if we're to get anywhere. Just on monetary grounds I'm perplexed by this as surely he'd have to accept well under 50% of his current contract for this to even be a discussion.

09 Oct 2025 08:57:38
Good squad player, experienced head and leader in the dressing room. What’s the problem?

09 Oct 2025 09:20:25
I imagine a wage cut will be part of it as his on field time will likely drop but a solid professional to have around.

09 Oct 2025 09:24:26
He is a squad player, not a good one. Too old, slow, ponderous and he will sit on bench with little or no return for the investment.

Time to move on and not end up with another old player taking up space.

But then it ain’t no secret what I think about slabhead.

09 Oct 2025 10:44:32
Culpable for many goals conceded. He has never been at the required level for a top CB.

As per Keefy T, he is slow and ponderous. Utd need to continue to add quality and not mediocre players to challenge for the top 4, even top 6.

I think it was down to Southgate picking him for England that has kept Maguire at Utd for so long.

09 Oct 2025 11:02:37
Eric79 I listed the problems! I don't get the idea of having someone in the dressing room that is unlikely to play. That either blocks a young kid coming through or it means we don't get in a replacement. And paying someone at least 100k/ week to have the privilege of having them sit beside the players that are on the pitch definitely doesn't make sense to me.

09 Oct 2025 11:15:13
Get rid, he is beyond crap and has been one of the constants over the last few years as we have slowly descended into the abyss we currently find ourselves trying to pull ourselves out from.