General wrote:

He hit the post with a wicked shot today though. Thing with Pogba is when you pay that amount of money for a player you need goals and assists to show for it and Pogba has never been the most prolific.

Don't know about this, the fact he does pointless stepovers, ribonas and scores 4-5 screamers a season are about the only reason he's rated as highly as he is. Good attacking midfielder to have in your side, but not anywhere near the main man in an elite side for me

For that much money you've got to be the top 2-3 best players in the league which he's definitely not.

For that kind of money he'd need to be the catalyst for United to win the league.
Can't see it happening.

Early days and all but so far it looks like the league winners will have to better City.
At the moment I don't think any team out of us, United, Chelsea, Liverpool or Spurs look close.

The next month or so may shake things up though.

Long may he continue to hit posts.

Bold Tone wrote:

Long may he continue to hit posts.

:drool: at the thought of selling the ox for 90m.

Pogba's fee is as high as it is because he's 23 and has shown high potential in several different aspects of the game. Good thing Mourinho is the last person to develop someone like him into anything worth remotely his price tag

I don't think Pogba will ever be at the same level as Bale, ronaldo etc. Which is what people expect when you pay a WR fee for him.

jones wrote:

Pogba's fee is as high as it is because he's 23 and has shown high potential in several different aspects of the game. Good thing Mourinho is the last person to develop someone like him into anything worth remotely his price tag

But you don't pay world record fees for 'potential'.

That's the nature of the market. You have players like Sterling and Martial going for enormous fees when they are yet to fully develop.

That plus Pogba was a statement signing.

A we are back, and look at what we can still do in the market signing.

Man U were fleeced of course. He isn't worth that much. But that is the price they chose to pay to make their statement.

Cannon, people need to be realistic and consider three very important elements.

1. Inflation is very high in football, so comparing fees paid 3 and 7 years ago respectively is not very informative if you don't adjust accordingly
2. United were desperate to land a superstar and be relevant. Who were they competing with for that transfer fee? Nobody was interested.
3. I think Adidas must have intimated that they can get better synergies by having Pogba at United rather than Juve. He's in every window of any Adidas store I've gone past. United fans will devour Pogba shirts, bringing a return on that 750m pound deal.

Pogba will come good sooner or later. Lets enjoy it while it lasts.

United and Pogba will become so much better when they finally decide to axe Rooney.

General wrote:

That's the nature of the market. You have players like Sterling and Martial going for enormous fees when they are yet to fully develop.

Enormous fees, yes. But not the world record fee. Sterling went for stupid money but, even then, his transfer fee was about a fraction of the world record fee at the time. So I don't buy the 'well, that's the market' argument. Every other world record fee has been for players that are proven and widely regarded as one of the best in the world.

I'm not saying he's a bad player nor do I think he's going to even be average. He's a greater player with a lot of potential but that 100m on Pogba seems to be about making a statement rather than finding a role for him and utilising him in a role that works for him and the team. Maybe once Rooney fucks off, they'll learn to use him better.

Qwiss! wrote:

Statement signings signings don't work unless they are smart signings though.  Being back at the start of August isn't much use if you are still treading water by the end of September.

Statement signings don't have to "work" nor do they always come good. They are hardly ever smart signings too.

Pogba has served / is serving his purpose already. The most expensive player (which translates to best in some people's minds) in the world plays for Manchester United (which translates to biggest/best in people's minds). That's basically it.

Whether he lives up to the price tag is another issue entirely 

Claudius wrote:

Cannon, people need to be realistic and consider three very important elements.

1. Inflation is very high in football, so comparing fees paid 3 and 7 years ago respectively is not very informative if you don't adjust accordingly
2. United were desperate to land a superstar and be relevant. Who were they competing with for that transfer fee? Nobody was interested.
   3. I think Adidas must have intimated that they can get better synergies by having Pogba at United rather than Juve. He's in every window of any Adidas store I've gone past. United fans will devour Pogba shirts, bringing a return on that 750m pound deal.

I read a stat few days back that their commercial revenue for the first time exceeded their footballing revenue. Which can mean that their core product is now their supporters/audience and NOT football

Claudius you have a good point. Also in the long term all this criticism will not matter, Manchester United are truly a global brand now. They will continue to have enough money and influence for the foreseeable future. They may not win PL/CL anytime soon, but barring an apocalypse they are here to stay.

With regards to Pogba, I agree he is statement signing and if they continue down this path their 'first Galactico', 

HOWEVER with regards to 'PL' and its audience, no matter how BIG manchester united are the product is always the PL. The relatively egalitarian nature of PL ensures success on the field remains important. Which is where they are failing. So in a way the apocalypse is happening as despite their best efforts (spending) they are unable to turn the tide. Like Qwiss said Adidas don't matter if they continue to spend at the rate they have been. 

Offcourse  they have already realised this and hence the new UEFA co-efficients (offcourse the Italians want a pie too). They can cheat their way out of it, but fuck me if I don't make fun of their WR signing and overpaid nonces.

Qwiss! wrote:

Statement signings signings don't work unless they are smart signings though.  Being back at the start of August isn't much use if you are still treading water by the end of September.

flobaba wrote:

Qwiss! wrote:

Statement signings signings don't work unless they are smart signings though.  Being back at the start of August isn't much use if you are still treading water by the end of September.

Statement signings don't have to "work" nor do they always come good. They are hardly ever smart signings too.

Pogba has served / is serving his purpose already. The most expensive player (which translates to best in some people's minds) in the world plays for Manchester United (which translates to biggest/best in people's minds). That's basically it.

Whether he lives up to the price tag is another issue entirely 

If statement signings don't work, it often turns ugly by the fans and media though. It can entirely backfire especially as a lot of attention will be placed in close scrutiny with his performance.

Managers often pay the price when statement signings don't turn out well.

Sterling went for £50m, this is a significant proportion of the money Bale went for. I wouldn't call that a fraction at all and I don't really rate Sterling. For me his transfer was bad business compared to Pogba's as it was purely based on potential and had little commercial value. Clearly United haven't paid the record fee based on Pogba's talent alone and they've factored in the commercial gains from their partnership with adidas. If based on the former, then most would agree they've paid way over the odds. They will re-coup the fee and the economics make sense for them. If you want to put value on it, then talent is in the region of £60-65million under current market conditions and commercial value is about £30-35million. So the total sum sounds about right.