Marcus Rashford - signed on loan (injured - out for season?)

[cdbearsfan]

No, not cup tied.

[ASHTONVILLA]

Interesting he says he is only here for a short time. Not” I hope to prove myself and hopefully sign permanently in the summer “

Oh well. I hope he gets his career back and track and  scores loads. Even if ifs a short term thing.

I don't think we can expect him to say otherwise, if it doesn't work out he has to go back and deal with the fans there. We have an option, and I am sure we would take it if it goes well.

[Smithy]

Unai does like a project doesn't he? Probably what brought him to try with Zaniolo, who's so similar to Asensio it's a little spooky (physical versatile leftfooted attacker who hasn't been the same since the injury).

Rashford's a different level though, both in risk and reward. Nothing in the world would make me happier than him being awesome, scoring a bunch and being all-round excellent, and making that £40m look a steal and Man Utd even more a bunch of mugs than they do now.

There is a sweetspot for Rashford's performances for us in the next four months, where he's good enough for us that we DO want to sign him for £40m, but where he's not SO good that there will be others willing the pay the same who might be a little more attractive (I'm thinking Barcelona and a few others).

Of course, if he's incredible, and goes to Barca (or similar) in the summer, it'll be annoying, but at least we'll have the memory of some brilliant performances for us.

If he's not great, then he'll go back to Man U and we'll write it off as a bad loan (it won't be our first, or last). 

Ideally we want him to be good, but not TOO good.

[Smithy]

A quick aside, Zaniolo's loan fee was about £100k a week while he was with us (£4.25m over 10 months).  So in that context, paying 70% of Rashford's wages, but NO loan fee, actually doesn't look too bad at all.

[LeeB]

Unai does like a project doesn't he? Probably what brought him to try with Zaniolo, who's so similar to Asensio it's a little spooky (physical versatile leftfooted attacker who hasn't been the same since the injury). Obviously, Zaniolo didn't work out.

Rashford's a different level though, both in risk and reward. Nothing in the world would make me happier than him being awesome, scoring a bunch and being all-round excellent, and making that £40m look a steal and Man Utd even more a bunch of mugs than they do now.

That's it, in a nutshell.

If it doesn't work we've lost what we pay in wages, no big deal, but on the other had, if it does we've picked up a world class forward for a relatively small fee and made them look like the twats they are.

And we now have two players that have won an actual FA Cup.

[ASHTONVILLA]

Unai does like a project doesn't he? Probably what brought him to try with Zaniolo, who's so similar to Asensio it's a little spooky (physical versatile leftfooted attacker who hasn't been the same since the injury).

Rashford's a different level though, both in risk and reward. Nothing in the world would make me happier than him being awesome, scoring a bunch and being all-round excellent, and making that £40m look a steal and Man Utd even more a bunch of mugs than they do now.

There is a sweetspot for Rashford's performances for us in the next four months, where he's good enough for us that we DO want to sign him for £40m, but where he's not SO good that there will be others willing the pay the same who might be a little more attractive (I'm thinking Barcelona and a few others).

Of course, if he's incredible, and goes to Barca (or similar) in the summer, it'll be annoying, but at least we'll have the memory of some brilliant performances for us.

If he's not great, then he'll go back to Man U and we'll write it off as a bad loan (it won't be our first, or last). 

Ideally we want him to be good, but not TOO good.

If he is that good that Barcelona want him surely we would trigger the £40m clause and sell him on for £100m? The best thing for us is for him to be a good as possible.

[Dave]

Interesting he says he is only here for a short time. Not” I hope to prove myself and hopefully sign permanently in the summer “

Oh well. I hope he gets his career back and track and  scores loads. Even if ifs a short term thing.

I don't blame him for that, it is only a loan.  He's got the right attitude, which is to do the best he can in the short time he's here.  Everything else will take care of itself from there.

I assume he's not cup-tied for the FA cup, given he hasn't been in Amorim's match day squads?

Correct.

And given Emery's previous form with the FA Cup, I reckon it's easy to see him and Malen chucked straight in against Spurs to give Ollie a rest.

[LeeB]

To be honest, if he's that good and he turns his career around here a) we'd surely execute the buyout and b) he'd want to stay and work with the man that's helped him do it.

[PeterWithe]

I suppose being realistic, all involved in pro football have an ego, only they can get the 'waifs and strays' back on the road to redemption where all others have failed.

DS thought he could do it with Drinkwater, there will be other examples, some successful.

[Smithy]

Unai does like a project doesn't he? Probably what brought him to try with Zaniolo, who's so similar to Asensio it's a little spooky (physical versatile leftfooted attacker who hasn't been the same since the injury).

Rashford's a different level though, both in risk and reward. Nothing in the world would make me happier than him being awesome, scoring a bunch and being all-round excellent, and making that £40m look a steal and Man Utd even more a bunch of mugs than they do now.

There is a sweetspot for Rashford's performances for us in the next four months, where he's good enough for us that we DO want to sign him for £40m, but where he's not SO good that there will be others willing the pay the same who might be a little more attractive (I'm thinking Barcelona and a few others).

Of course, if he's incredible, and goes to Barca (or similar) in the summer, it'll be annoying, but at least we'll have the memory of some brilliant performances for us.

If he's not great, then he'll go back to Man U and we'll write it off as a bad loan (it won't be our first, or last). 

Ideally we want him to be good, but not TOO good.

If he is that good that Barcelona want him surely we would trigger the £40m clause and sell him on for £100m? The best thing for us is for him to be a good as possible.

I'm happy to be proven wrong, but I don't think that's how buy-options work. Man Utd have to accept our offer of £40m IF we make one, but they can also accept other offers too, and then it would be up to the player.

All we've done is agree the fee if we want him in the summer.  It's also possible we've agreed wages with Rashford, but I would be STUNNED if he is now legally obliged to sign for us if we trigger the £40m buy clause.

[ASHTONVILLA]

Unai does like a project doesn't he? Probably what brought him to try with Zaniolo, who's so similar to Asensio it's a little spooky (physical versatile leftfooted attacker who hasn't been the same since the injury).

Rashford's a different level though, both in risk and reward. Nothing in the world would make me happier than him being awesome, scoring a bunch and being all-round excellent, and making that £40m look a steal and Man Utd even more a bunch of mugs than they do now.

There is a sweetspot for Rashford's performances for us in the next four months, where he's good enough for us that we DO want to sign him for £40m, but where he's not SO good that there will be others willing the pay the same who might be a little more attractive (I'm thinking Barcelona and a few others).

Of course, if he's incredible, and goes to Barca (or similar) in the summer, it'll be annoying, but at least we'll have the memory of some brilliant performances for us.

If he's not great, then he'll go back to Man U and we'll write it off as a bad loan (it won't be our first, or last). 

Ideally we want him to be good, but not TOO good.

If he is that good that Barcelona want him surely we would trigger the £40m clause and sell him on for £100m? The best thing for us is for him to be a good as possible.

I'm happy to be proven wrong, but I don't think that's how buy-options work. Man Utd have to accept our offer of £40m IF we make one, but they can also accept other offers too, and then it would be up to the player.

All we've done is agree the fee if we want him in the summer.  It's also possible we've agreed wages with Rashford, but I would be STUNNED if he is now legally obliged to sign for us if we trigger the £40m buy clause.

As far as I understand it, both are possible. We had a binding buyback clause with Philogene last summer, for instance. No idea what the nature of this deal is, but regardless we need him ripping it up and restoring his value.

[ChicagoLion]

Unai does like a project doesn't he? Probably what brought him to try with Zaniolo, who's so similar to Asensio it's a little spooky (physical versatile leftfooted attacker who hasn't been the same since the injury).

Rashford's a different level though, both in risk and reward. Nothing in the world would make me happier than him being awesome, scoring a bunch and being all-round excellent, and making that £40m look a steal and Man Utd even more a bunch of mugs than they do now.

There is a sweetspot for Rashford's performances for us in the next four months, where he's good enough for us that we DO want to sign him for £40m, but where he's not SO good that there will be others willing the pay the same who might be a little more attractive (I'm thinking Barcelona and a few others).

Of course, if he's incredible, and goes to Barca (or similar) in the summer, it'll be annoying, but at least we'll have the memory of some brilliant performances for us.

If he's not great, then he'll go back to Man U and we'll write it off as a bad loan (it won't be our first, or last). 

Ideally we want him to be good, but not TOO good.

The better he is the better for us, the rest is semantics.

[LeeB]

I think the important thing is to remember that pretty much the only way Man Utd get him back is if he's shit, which is funny in itself.

[Drummond]

I think this is a low-risk, high-reward situation for us. For him it's different, fail and that'll be him almost certainly done.

His goals and assists record is good, and the shit show that ManU are isn't his fault. We have a strong dressing room, proven talent and are 8th in the Premier League and Champions League. We have a brilliant manager and support network.

If it doesn't work here, it won't work anywhere.

[Smithy]

Unai does like a project doesn't he? Probably what brought him to try with Zaniolo, who's so similar to Asensio it's a little spooky (physical versatile leftfooted attacker who hasn't been the same since the injury).

Rashford's a different level though, both in risk and reward. Nothing in the world would make me happier than him being awesome, scoring a bunch and being all-round excellent, and making that £40m look a steal and Man Utd even more a bunch of mugs than they do now.

There is a sweetspot for Rashford's performances for us in the next four months, where he's good enough for us that we DO want to sign him for £40m, but where he's not SO good that there will be others willing the pay the same who might be a little more attractive (I'm thinking Barcelona and a few others).

Of course, if he's incredible, and goes to Barca (or similar) in the summer, it'll be annoying, but at least we'll have the memory of some brilliant performances for us.

If he's not great, then he'll go back to Man U and we'll write it off as a bad loan (it won't be our first, or last). 

Ideally we want him to be good, but not TOO good.

If he is that good that Barcelona want him surely we would trigger the £40m clause and sell him on for £100m? The best thing for us is for him to be a good as possible.

I'm happy to be proven wrong, but I don't think that's how buy-options work. Man Utd have to accept our offer of £40m IF we make one, but they can also accept other offers too, and then it would be up to the player.

All we've done is agree the fee if we want him in the summer.  It's also possible we've agreed wages with Rashford, but I would be STUNNED if he is now legally obliged to sign for us if we trigger the £40m buy clause.

As far as I understand it, both are possible. We had a binding buyback clause with Philogene last summer, for instance. No idea what the nature of this deal is, but regardless we need him ripping it up and restoring his value.

That wasn't "binding" on the player though, he could have chosen Ipswich last summer if he wanted to.  But Philgene chose to come back to us.

There ARE binding buy options, like Archer going to Sheff Utd and coming back if they were relegated, where fee, wages etc all agreed up front - but that's not what the Rashford deal is, as I understand it.

Like I said, I would LOVE it if he HAD to sign for us in the summer if we trigger the buy-clause, but that would be stunningly naive on the part of Man Utd, and all the agents involved.