Real Madrid apparently make £100 million bid for Ronaldo

[fredbob]

but, surely ronaldos contribution this season (27 PL goals, and the rest) cant be replaced by anyone. not to mention shirt sales etc. im not sure £100m would be worth it. £100million for 27 pl goals a season, and the rest for at least 10 years.

 

This is the big one, aside from David Beckham, Ronaldo is the most marketable player in the world, makes absolutely no sense in selling him, £100m is silly money, but for me, not silly enough.

[Rich]

Nobody has mentioned the important fact.

 

Does Ronaldo want to stay or does he want to go?

 

That's what it will all come down to.

[midds]

Must be a nice decision to make though.

 

Take the £100m and rebuild the team or keep Ronaldo and have him torture defences for the next few years.

[steve_69]

Sell him and buy Kaka, Ronaldinho and Benzema with the proceeds.

 

 

[Slugsy]

£100m could prove cheap for him given the potential to win the Champs League and more importantly the amount of money they could make from marketing him - could be bigger than Beckham as a worldwide brand if done right - make their money back no problem.

 

I'd be inclined to keep him as he can do the business on the pitch and make them loads of cash off it.

[Guest LucaAltieri]

no reason to sell. they dont need to money and they wont get a better replacement.

 

I disagree, the money is always useful.

 

No player is worth £100m, not even Ronaldo. One bad tackle and it could be curtains.

 

Spending a further £50m on the youth set up and recruitment and using the other £50m on a giant piss up would produce just as much, if not more, sucess than Ronaldo alone can potentially generate.

 

on the other hand, he could get 25+ goals a season for the next 10 years.

 

Right. So you weigh up the odds. Which is more likely? Alternatively you can avoid the gamble and get a £100m in your hand.

 

I know which route I'd go.

 

odds-wise, far more players retire through old age rather than injury. if you're taking the money based on this career ending tackle then you'll be losing the best player in the world on nothing more than a small possibility.

 

Not at all. The point I'm making isn't that you should sell based on fact he might get injured. It was simply that taking the money would allow you to spread the risk and avoid the gamble of pinning so much on one player.

 

Anything can happen in the course of a footballing career. How many quality players keep a high standard of play constantly over their career? Any number of things can go wrong. Even if he doesn't have a career ending injury he may well get a bad tackle that keeps him out a good few months. Will he be the same player when he returns? Will it cause a recurring problem like so many players get? Or again, you can avoid the gamble, take the stupid money being offered, use it to buy other quality players. Improve the squad. As mentioned, they could sign a top out and out striker with that money, they can get shot of Wes Brown, Darren Fletcher, Louis Saha and replace them with quality players. Which would benefit Man United more?

 

 

[Guest sombrero]

If a player changes hands for a £100m fee, the world has gone officially mental.

 

Makes you think dunnit, just how many top 10 Prem clubs are worth under that, even sides in Europe worth less than just one player, its madness.

 

thats so true actually and also not encouraging for the smaller clubs, even us

[STM]

What so if they sold Ronaldo for that and signed Kaka and another star for less than 100m that wouldn't be good buisness?

 

People saying Ronaldo is irreplaceable, i think it's the other way round. 100m profit is un-turn-down-able.

 

He's the best player in the world but 100m could get get you the second and third best players.

 

[STM]

Sell him and buy Kaka, Ronaldinho and Benzema with the proceeds.

 

 

 

Pretty much what i've just said.

[Guest The Libertine]

no reason to sell. they dont need to money and they wont get a better replacement.

 

I disagree, the money is always useful.

 

No player is worth £100m, not even Ronaldo. One bad tackle and it could be curtains.

 

Spending a further £50m on the youth set up and recruitment and using the other £50m on a giant piss up would produce just as much, if not more, sucess than Ronaldo alone can potentially generate.

 

on the other hand, he could get 25+ goals a season for the next 10 years.

 

Right. So you weigh up the odds. Which is more likely? Alternatively you can avoid the gamble and get a £100m in your hand.

 

I know which route I'd go.

 

odds-wise, far more players retire through old age rather than injury. if you're taking the money based on this career ending tackle then you'll be losing the best player in the world on nothing more than a small possibility.

 

Not at all. The point I'm making isn't that you should sell based on fact he might get injured. It was simply that taking the money would allow you to spread the risk and avoid the gamble of pinning so much on one player.

 

Anything can happen in the course of a footballing career. How many quality players keep a high standard of play constantly over their career? Any number of things can go wrong. Even if he doesn't have a career ending injury he may well get a back tackle that keeps him out a good few months. Will he be the same player when he returns? Will it cause a recurring problem like so many players get? Or again, you can avoid the gamble, take the stupid money being offered, use it to buy other quality players. Improve the squad. As mentioned, they could sign a top out and out striker with that money, they can get shot of Wes Brown, Darren Fletcher, Louis Saha and replace them with quality players. Which would benefit Man United more?

 

 

 

its barely even a risk or gamble for me. he's pretty much winning them every match with his goals and there's not many players i can say that about, and his injury record so far (im fairly certain) is excellent.

 

if they spend £100 million trying to replace him they might buy the new Veron or the new Shevchenko, great players who cant hack it in the PL. they've bought some bad players before and will again. they've got the best player in the world who is getting better with every game.

 

basically, its stick or twist. and i'd stick.

 

 

 

[Guest LucaAltieri]

no reason to sell. they dont need to money and they wont get a better replacement.

 

I disagree, the money is always useful.

 

No player is worth £100m, not even Ronaldo. One bad tackle and it could be curtains.

 

Spending a further £50m on the youth set up and recruitment and using the other £50m on a giant piss up would produce just as much, if not more, sucess than Ronaldo alone can potentially generate.

 

on the other hand, he could get 25+ goals a season for the next 10 years.

 

Right. So you weigh up the odds. Which is more likely? Alternatively you can avoid the gamble and get a £100m in your hand.

 

I know which route I'd go.

 

odds-wise, far more players retire through old age rather than injury. if you're taking the money based on this career ending tackle then you'll be losing the best player in the world on nothing more than a small possibility.

 

Not at all. The point I'm making isn't that you should sell based on fact he might get injured. It was simply that taking the money would allow you to spread the risk and avoid the gamble of pinning so much on one player.

 

Anything can happen in the course of a footballing career. How many quality players keep a high standard of play constantly over their career? Any number of things can go wrong. Even if he doesn't have a career ending injury he may well get a back tackle that keeps him out a good few months. Will he be the same player when he returns? Will it cause a recurring problem like so many players get? Or again, you can avoid the gamble, take the stupid money being offered, use it to buy other quality players. Improve the squad. As mentioned, they could sign a top out and out striker with that money, they can get shot of Wes Brown, Darren Fletcher, Louis Saha and replace them with quality players. Which would benefit Man United more?

 

 

 

its barely even a risk or gamble for me. he's pretty much winning them every match with his goals and there's not many players i can say that about, and his injury record so far (im fairly certain) is excellent.

 

if they spend £100 million trying to replace him they might buy the new Veron or the new Shevchenko, great players who cant hack it in the PL. they've bought some bad players before and will again. they've got the best player in the world who is getting better with every game.

 

basically, its stick or twist. and i'd stick.

 

 

 

 

How much do you think Torres would cost?

[matta]

They dont need the money tho

 

 

They need huge amount of money to deal with their debt.

[ElDiablo]

He's the best player in the world but 100m could get get you the second and third best players.

 

Is that good business though? Then what if the likes of Kaka don't cut it in the premiership which isn't impossible? He's the best player in the world, if I was Fergie I wouldn't sell under any circumstances. Unless he demanded the move...

[SUPERTOON]

They dont need the money tho

 

 

They need huge amount of money to deal with their debt.

 

They get huge amounts by filling the ground and winning trophies which they wouldnt do without Ronaldo

[Decky]

They dont need the money tho

 

 

They need huge amount of money to deal with their debt.

 

They get huge amounts by filling the ground and winning trophies which they wouldnt do without Ronaldo

 

They did it before Ronaldo

[lovejoy]

i reckon he'll want to go personally, madrid is the pinnacle for the portugese/spanish

[SUPERTOON]

They dont need the money tho

 

 

They need huge amount of money to deal with their debt.

 

They get huge amounts by filling the ground and winning trophies which they wouldnt do without Ronaldo

 

They did it before Ronaldo

 

Aye but there wasnt as much competition they wouldnt win it without him in my opinion

[Guest Sniffer]

There's always the outside chance that, even a player as good as he is, would not play to the level he does at manure.

 

Better the devil you know than the devil you don't know. Especially if they win the CL.

[Guest The Libertine]

no reason to sell. they dont need to money and they wont get a better replacement.

 

I disagree, the money is always useful.

 

No player is worth £100m, not even Ronaldo. One bad tackle and it could be curtains.

 

Spending a further £50m on the youth set up and recruitment and using the other £50m on a giant piss up would produce just as much, if not more, sucess than Ronaldo alone can potentially generate.

 

on the other hand, he could get 25+ goals a season for the next 10 years.

 

Right. So you weigh up the odds. Which is more likely? Alternatively you can avoid the gamble and get a £100m in your hand.

 

I know which route I'd go.

 

odds-wise, far more players retire through old age rather than injury. if you're taking the money based on this career ending tackle then you'll be losing the best player in the world on nothing more than a small possibility.

 

Not at all. The point I'm making isn't that you should sell based on fact he might get injured. It was simply that taking the money would allow you to spread the risk and avoid the gamble of pinning so much on one player.

 

Anything can happen in the course of a footballing career. How many quality players keep a high standard of play constantly over their career? Any number of things can go wrong. Even if he doesn't have a career ending injury he may well get a back tackle that keeps him out a good few months. Will he be the same player when he returns? Will it cause a recurring problem like so many players get? Or again, you can avoid the gamble, take the stupid money being offered, use it to buy other quality players. Improve the squad. As mentioned, they could sign a top out and out striker with that money, they can get shot of Wes Brown, Darren Fletcher, Louis Saha and replace them with quality players. Which would benefit Man United more?

 

 

 

its barely even a risk or gamble for me. he's pretty much winning them every match with his goals and there's not many players i can say that about, and his injury record so far (im fairly certain) is excellent.

 

if they spend £100 million trying to replace him they might buy the new Veron or the new Shevchenko, great players who cant hack it in the PL. they've bought some bad players before and will again. they've got the best player in the world who is getting better with every game.

 

basically, its stick or twist. and i'd stick.

 

 

 

 

How much do you think Torres would cost?

 

differing situations. not worth as much as ronaldo for me, but very pricey.

[STM]

He's the best player in the world but 100m could get get you the second and third best players.

 

Is that good business though? Then what if the likes of Kaka don't cut it in the premiership which isn't impossible? He's the best player in the world, if I was Fergie I wouldn't sell under any circumstances. Unless he demanded the move...

 

If Ronaldo wasn't in their side, i still believe they would compete for the title. Add Kaka etc they would (probably) win it. No player is a certanty to be a success in a any league but good plyers lessen the risk.

 

Although, i get your point. Every manager strives to find the best playerin the world in order to help them win the league and Man Utd have done that, so why sell?

 

What i'm saying is you could buy five potential Ronaldo's with that money, which is a breathtaking thought.

[Guest BudBud]

Stupid money for one man who could have a career ending injury with a bad tackle

[Teasy]

The debts are managable and serviceable due to the amount they bring in.  Ronaldo is a money machine himself.

 

Yes the debts are managable, but at what point do they actually reduce those debts?  Surely they want to do that at some point.

[NG32]

By selling their best player, not a fcking chance.  He brings in fasr to much money for merchandise and while man u have him playing for them they can justfiy some of the season ticket money/prices.

 

Best player in the world at the minute.

[Guest Brazilianbob]

no reason to sell. they dont need to money and they wont get a better replacement.

 

I disagree, the money is always useful.

 

No player is worth £100m, not even Ronaldo. One bad tackle and it could be curtains.

 

Spending a further £50m on the youth set up and recruitment and using the other £50m on a giant piss up would produce just as much, if not more, sucess than Ronaldo alone can potentially generate.

 

on the other hand, he could get 25+ goals a season for the next 10 years.

 

Right. So you weigh up the odds. Which is more likely? Alternatively you can avoid the gamble and get a £100m in your hand.

 

I know which route I'd go.

 

odds-wise, far more players retire through old age rather than injury. if you're taking the money based on this career ending tackle then you'll be losing the best player in the world on nothing more than a small possibility.

 

Not at all. The point I'm making isn't that you should sell based on fact he might get injured. It was simply that taking the money would allow you to spread the risk and avoid the gamble of pinning so much on one player.

 

Anything can happen in the course of a footballing career. How many quality players keep a high standard of play constantly over their career? Any number of things can go wrong. Even if he doesn't have a career ending injury he may well get a bad tackle that keeps him out a good few months. Will he be the same player when he returns? Will it cause a recurring problem like so many players get? Or again, you can avoid the gamble, take the stupid money being offered, use it to buy other quality players. Improve the squad. As mentioned, they could sign a top out and out striker with that money, they can get shot of Wes Brown, Darren Fletcher, Louis Saha and replace them with quality players. Which would benefit Man United more?

 

 

 

Ok, so sell him and buy up to three replacements, whats to say those replacements won't get bad/career threatening injuries?

 

I say keep him, truth be told, there isn't one of us wouldn't crawl over broken glass to have him as an NUFC player.  Madrid will be back with a £200m bid within two years.

[ChrisJbarnes]

united were pretty crap at the start of the season, and brilliant since then. any coincidence then that ronaldo was sent off at pompey and banned for 3 matches at the start? other than the start, theyve barely put a foot wrong.