30 May 2026 22:14:20
With literally thousands of players on professional football across the world, why is that Utd no longer seem able to sign diamonds like Schmeichel and Ole for relatively low amounts?
30 May 2026 23:56:38
Lammens. Heavens. Mazraoui.
31 May 2026 00:01:28
Lammens, I give you that, but Heaven was found by Arsenal, and I don't think he is yet, and Mazraoui is a decent player, not a diamond.
31 May 2026 00:19:57
A few reasons.
1. Every club in a top division has invested huge sums of money in their scouting network to identify a promising youth players from every corner of Europe (and in some cases further afield).
2. Every club has invested huge sums of money in developing their academies, and getting youth players into the system as early as possible.
3. Players are expected to be more technically proficient at a younger age today, and those outside the academy system are at a massive disadvantage.
In other words, if Schmeichel and Ole were around today, they would likely have been identified in their local youth leagues and brought to an academy in their teens. So much has been invested in youth scouting that there are far fewer diamonds in the rough to find.
31 May 2026 00:29:11
Schmeichel had a big name when he joined United from his time at Brondby. And saying Heaven was found by Arsenal is just silly. Unless you're saying that nobody at all knew of Ole or Schmeichel. I get what you're trying to say, but it's overblown.
It's 20/20 hindsight. Lammens could well turn out to be every bit the superstar. If Heaven becomes a 50M calibre CB, we'll hear those saying how great our scouts are to make sure we got him at that time.
31 May 2026 01:50:28
Devil's advocate...
Then why do we have hardly anybody coming through into the first team if the scouting and academy is so good?
In theory, we should never have to buy a first team player ever again, but here we are spending 100's millions on risks.
Not arguing either wat poking the usual bears for a giggle!. ?
31 May 2026 07:11:05
It's a problem, Keefy. We have prospects who go on to have solid careers elsewhere, but there are a few key points for me.
Every club has Academies, so everyone is looking, meaning the competition for young talent is fierce.
Secondly, it depends how you measure success. Most recently, Garner and McTominay have done very well elsewhere, whilst we brought through Rashford and Kobe.
How many is enough? It would be great if we could add 2 Academy players every year, a top one and a squad player.
Finally, at United, our expectations are very high. Many have already decided that the Fletcher twins are not good enough, but they're only 19, and Tyler in particular is a great prospect. We need to have patience and allow players to develop in a supportive environment.
31 May 2026 11:32:05
There are a number of examples where we were aware, or even handed them on a plate.
Haaland. Ole recommended we buy him for £4m.
Caicedo. We negotiated a £4m deal, but backed out.
Sterling. United showed interest, but Liverpool signed him for a low fee (~£450k rising to £2m).
Alvaro Fernandez. This one really frustrated me, as you all know. Got him for almost nothing. Showed potential at Preston. Sold by the idiot ETH for £6m to Benfica, then replaced by Malacia. Madrid paid over £50m for him.
You can go on. Frankie de Jong, Jamal Musiala, even Virgil van Dyke. We were apparently interested in them all, and many more.
It looks like, for the Woodward years, we weren't really interested in buying young upcoming players; it was more about sexy names. If you don't believe me, look up Woodward reaction to Bastion Schweinsteiger.
We have fallen so far behind others, particularly City, that it is hard to see us climbing back any time soon. I often look at when we buy someone from, say, Brighton, if we should be looking at who they are getting to replace them.
Go and get their scouts.
The Heaven deal has real potential, a potential bright light, the main one we can see.
I watch the youth, and JJ apart, they seem to flatter, lightweight, nice players, but lack that physical and mental edge. I would love to know what is briefed out to the scouts, what are the club looking for? Skillful players, but what else? Do we even look at positions needed that are expensive to fill. As an example, when was the last centre forward to burst through the youth? Was it Mark Hughes?
I suspect the years of Woodward didn't see any commercial benefit buying a prospect; shelling out £4m for Caicedo was £4m that was destined for dividends. However, old Bastion was good commercially. Like Bastion, so not a dig at him, but how the club has failed for years at scouting.
You can put some of it down to the aims of the club, top down, who wanted Disney, commercial success, after all that's what Woodward tried to sell Klopp, Disney.
31 May 2026 13:03:39
Red Man. ???
31 May 2026 14:20:56
It's become an inversion of what happened in the 80s and 90s, Red Man.
Back then, clubs often looked to bring physically dominant players to their academies. However, the Barca team of the 00s changed that. They looked for technical aptitude, and it was successful, so the rest of Europe tried to replicate.
The thinking, these days, seems to be to have the academies focus on technical skills, and if the player makes it to the first team, they can build muscle then.
You can see it with Manioo, who is looking far stronger this year. I suspect that it's also on the advice of medical departments, as trying to build muscle before a person is fully grown can lead to injuries.
31 May 2026 15:29:22
The difference in expectations at a club like United is in a different stratosphere than Brighton etc.
Caicedo was given a platform to grow at Brighton that he simply wouldn't be afforded at United. He could have 2 good games, 2 average games and 2 bad games and the general consensus would be "he's a smashing little player".
Not having that microscope over every performance is what helps players develop. McTominay is an interesting one to revisit, and you often see people talk about why we let him go. Well, we let him go because he wasn't at the standard required to play at United. He's done really well in Serie A, and you scroll the news and see he's scored again, you think maybe he could have had a longer spell with us. But that's not and was never the case.
Elanga did well at Forest and got a big-money move to Newcastle, but again he needed a couple of years plying his trade week in, week out, and he's still one of these players that only has 1 good game in 3.
As for getting bargains. Anyone who has played Championship Manager/Football Manager games has a finger on the pulse of the world of wonderkids/bargains around the world. Buying these players with the intention of playing them in the first team is simply not feasible. The football world is simply too small now.
Take Chelsea as an example of going out and buying every young player they could. It's been quite an unmitigated disaster. Spending tonnes of money on the next Brazilian embryo hoping you strike gold.
The margin for success is so small, that a club with aspirations of success can't spend 2 seasons blooding in a £1 million prodigy.
Many have tried to copy Brighton's transfer strategy, but Brighton are a club that will struggle to win anything of note because of how they operate. That is not the model Manchester United should look to adopt.
31 May 2026 16:10:26
Salford, Heaven was not 'found' by Arsenal, he was at the West Ham academy for 4 years prior to joining them.
Redman, every club could provide a list of players they could have signed, but did not, and who subsequently proved a success.
I have said previously that Alvaro Fernandez made it very clear he wanted to leave prior to his permanent transfer to Benfica. The club said, at that time, they would not stand in the way of a young overseas player, who expressly stated they wished to leave.
Furthermore, at that time it was felt Harry Amass, who was younger, was further along with his development and indeed had a higher potential ceiling. The issue with Amass has not really been about ability, but physicality. He could well be the type of player who does not reach the required physical level until he is a bit older, or indeed he may not make it at all.
Time will tell.
You also reference Haaland and indeed, OGS strongly urged us to buy him whilst at Molde, at that time the club said they did not wish to do so. They did, however, make strenuous attempts to buy him when he was leaving Salzburg.
You may remember his agent back then was the since departed Raiola. He insisted on a clause in the contract stating a fixed transfer fee, which if received by us, HAD to be accepted with part of the fee going to Raiola. In effect this would mean us losing control over the player, a totally unacceptable situation to be in. Thankfully we refused to comply.
You seem to be suggesting we should just go and buy every player in case some come good! Choices have to be made at the time, and just criticising with a degree in hindsight and using chosen examples does not seem helpful.
Thank God we did not sign Sterling.
31 May 2026 17:29:23
Why are you happy we didn't sign Sterling?
He was an excellent player at Liverpool and City. Even if he pushed for a transfer at us, like he did at Liverpool, we would have made a tidy profit.
31 May 2026 20:06:17
Never been a fan of Sterling. Had a few reasonable seasons, but he never seemed committed to his club.
When he was in dispute with Liverpool over wages, he supposedly contacted the BBC, telling them he wanted to do an interview about his contract situation.
I don't think you should be doing that. Also, he asked to be left out of preseason tour, again I don't think that's the right way of doing things.
01 Jun 2026 13:13:49
It is not about individualising the comment, but Sterling, I recall, was a United fan. We didn’t bother, despite that; I recall watching him as a youth, and he was excellent, outstanding. He was excellent for Liverpool, although his finishing wasn’t quite top notch, and from Liverpool's initial very small outlay we then received £50m plus when selling.
How many times have we done that? Garnacho, to a point, but not often.