Somebody needs to tell Manchester United chief executive Ed Woodward that transactions speak loud...

Somebody needs to tell Manchester United chief executive Ed Woodward that transactions speak louder than words.The investment banker turned soccer chairman last week made the rousing, and very deliberate, claim that Man Utd can still compete with Europe’s elite in the transfer market, even suggesting they could break the transfer world record this summer.“It’s within our capabilities,” Woodward asserted while on tour with United in Los Angeles. “Are we afraid of doing that? No. The reality is that we’re not afraid of spending significant amounts of money in the transfer market.”<div class="the-score-article-ad-unit"></div>But by trying to sell Manchester United as a big club, Woodward’s words almost had the opposite effect, like a scrawny kid with low self-esteem pleading that they should be taken seriously in an arm wrestle.Of course, the capture of Ander Herrera and Luke Shaw for close to a combined £60-million shouldn’t be underplayed. Both will be fine players for Manchester United, with clear roles to fill in the lineup, but Louis Van Gaal will be well aware that much more is needed before the start of the new season.Woodward’s insistence came just days after Real Madrid had confirmed the signing of James Rodriguez, the Colombian rumored to have been a transfer target for United.Did Man Utd really stand any chance of luring Rodriguez—the shining star of the World Cup—to Old Trafford with Real Madrid in the reckoning? No, they did not. The same goes for Toni Kroos, who was only ever going to choose one destination when the Bernabeu became a viable option.Despite what Woodward says, United can’t compete with the Clasico giants, or Bayern Munich, in the transfer market. But that’s okay, because that’s something Man Utd have had to deal with long before the ill-fated David Moyes era. It’s something that (for once) can’t be pinned on Woodward.United were somewhat powerless in their efforts to prevent their best player in a generation—Cristiano Ronaldo—leaving for Real Madrid. And this was at a time when the Old Trafford club was at the peak of their powers, having won two league titles and reached two Champions League finals in as many seasons.The Clasico rivals—Real and Barcelona—have the pick of the Premier League’s, and Europe’s, best talent every season. Last year they plucked Gareth Bale from Spurs, and this year they took Luis Suarez.And when it comes to rivaling Spain’s dominant duo in the transfer market, English soccer simply can’t compete. Yet Woodward should harbor scant concern over this.How many genuinely world-class players have United signed over the past decade? Perhaps Dimitar Berbatov and Robin Van Persie come closest to such a definition, but it’s not in Man Utd’s persona as a club to challenge Real and Barca for the very best, top-tier talent.That may need to change. Life after Sir Alex Ferguson has left Man Utd just the same as every other big-spending, manager-firing elite club. The man who once made them different is no longer there, and United must adjust accordingly.For starters, the Glazers’ grip no longer seems so tight on the Man Utd transfer purse strings. The club’s controlling family should never be allowed to forget the summer they sold Ronaldo for a world-record £80-million, then signed Antonio Valencia, Michael Owen and Gabriel Obertan to replace him.With the retirement of Ferguson, the Glazers have lost their buffer between the boardroom and the fans. The frailty of United’s squad has been brutally exposed and at a club whose brand is based on being the best, that will not do.Over £120-million has been spent on four players in the past year (Marouane Fellaini, Juan Mata, Herrera and Shaw) trying to make up for lost time in the transfer marker, but United should be wary of spending money for the sake of it. There’s no better way to undermine your big-club credentials.Context should perhaps be applied to Woodward’s comments. He probably meant that United operate without a budget. That if the right player becomes available, they will pay the required fee to get him. Even if it came out wrongly, that was likely the essence of Woodward’s words.But it did reveal a certain unfamiliar insecurity about Manchester United at the moment. Are the Red Devils still a big club? When the chief executive has to publically clarify that they are maybe it’s time to consider that question.

How Manchester United betrays itself by claiming to be a big club

“I asked for a table and they bought me a lampshade,” bemoaned a frustrated Rafael Benitez toward...

“I asked for a table and they bought me a lampshade,” bemoaned a frustrated Rafael Benitez toward the end of his three-year tenure at Valencia, just weeks before he became Liverpool manager. It’s a statement that perhaps Brendan Rodgers can relate to this summer.The £75 million sale of Luis Suarez to Barcelona means Liverpool are indeed in the market for tables ahead of the new season. The Anfield club has lost their best player and now Rodgers must find a way to fill the Suarez-shaped hole that has been left in his team.Where would Liverpool have finished without the Uruguayan last season? It’s a purely hypothetical question, but not an entirely unreasonable one. Without his 31 goals from 33 games it’s safe to presume a second place finish might have been beyond them. So how exactly will Liverpool compensate for the loss of Suarez?<div class="the-score-article-ad-unit"></div>Last year’s Premier League runners-up look set to spend close to £100 million, with the signings of Adam Lallana and Rickie Lambert from Southampton, Lazar Markovic from Benfica and Emre Can from Bayer Leverkusen already completed.Loic Remy is also reportedly close to joining the Anfield club from Queens Park Rangers, bringing Rodgers’ recruitment drive up to a tally of five players. But is he signing the right players?Rodgers’ plan was always to use the transfer market this summer to give his squad the depth it desperately lacked toward the end of last season. But Rodgers never accounted for the loss of Suarez.The Liverpool boss must reassess what he’s looking for in the transfer market. Of the four players he has signed this summer how many will actually make the starting line-up? Markovic perhaps, but even his inclusion would require a formational shift from Rodgers.In terms of improving their starting 11, Liverpool have done very little with the £65 million they've already spent, instead choosing to pragmatically plug gaps in their squad with astute, if not bombastic, signings.It’s an approach that draws an uncanny comparison to how another Premier League club dealt with a high profile, big-money departure last year.Gareth Bale’s sale to Real Madrid last summer set a precedent for how not to cope with the loss of a star player. Rather than use the world-record £85 million fee they received for the Welsh winger to find a direct replacement, Spurs decided to spread the cash evenly across the squad.Roberto Soldado was bought for £26 million from Valencia, with £30 million splurged on Erik Lamela from Roma, £12 million on Christian Eriksen from Ajax and £10 million on Etienne Capoue from Toulouse.On the face of it, Spurs had reinvested the Bale money wisely. They needed a striker, and in Soldado they had signed (at the time) Spain’s number one frontman. Eriksen was regarded as one of the most exciting young playmakers in Europe, with Lamela a shimmering star of Serie A.But nobody came close to replacing what had been lost in Bale. Spurs failed to recognize just how important Bale was to their team. He wasn’t just their best player, but the embodiment of the club’s identity under Andre Villas-Boas.With Bale, Spurs were on an upward arc but when he left for Real Madrid he took his X-factor with him (using it to win La Decima in his first season in Spain).Great teams are defined by the great players that break the order. Look at Lionel Messi at Barcelona, Arjen Robben at Bayern Munich, or Suarez at Liverpool. Bale was Spurs’ difference maker and without him they were no different from the rest.Liverpool have to be careful not to follow a similar course. The Reds have waited a generation for another shot at the league title. They can’t afford to do a Spurs. Not this season.Just like at White Hart Lane, Liverpool identify and sign transfer targets by committee. “We have a head of analysis, a head of recruitment, a first-team manager and myself,” club CEO Ian Ayre explained about the inner workings of the Anfield transfer board. “All of those people are all inputting into a process that delivers what a director of football would deliver.”So how has the committee performed since Rodgers’ appointment two years ago? Well, it has done a good job of identifying high-level targets, the problem is that other teams have beat them to the signing part of the process.Henrikh Mkhitaryan was made a transfer target while at Shakhtar Donetsk, but the Armenian joined Borussia Dortmund instead, where he has since impressed. The same happened with Willian and Mohamed Salah, with both players ending up at Chelsea rather than Anfield. While a move for Diego Costa, who has also signed for Chelsea following a hugely successful year at Atletico Madrid, also fell through.Increases in commercial and television revenue, as well as the income from participation in this season’s Champions League, means Liverpool have a new-found financial flex, but thus far Rodgers has refused to exert such strength in the transfer market.Speculation linking them with truly world-class talents like Marco Reus and Arturo Vidal has remained just that; speculation. Liverpool might be in the Champions League but their signings this summer have been distinctly Europa League.In what has turned into a pivotal summer for Liverpool, Rodgers needs to make sure that he gets more tables than lampshades.

Will Liverpool repeat Tottenham's transfer market mistakes from a year ago?

Crowd numbers work well as a measure of significance. Big games usually attract big crowds, as is...

Crowd numbers work well as a measure of significance. Big games usually attract big crowds, as is the nature of sport and fandom. The same goes for Real Madrid signings.The Spanish club has a tradition of unveiling each new player at the Santiago Bernabeu, opening the stadium up to fans pining for a glimpse of their new ‘Galactico.’ The bigger the player, the bigger the crowd.An estimated 30,000 Madridistas turned up to greet Gareth Bale upon his capture. Likewise, an astonishing 80,000 welcomed Cristiano Ronaldo to the club four years previously. This time, just 8,000 were present for the parading of Toni Kroos on Thursday.<div class="the-score-article-ad-unit"></div>The ‘Galactico’ tag is hung around the neck of every new arrival (perhaps with the exception of Julien Faubert). Some find a way to swim under such weight, while others sink. In the context of soccer, signing for Real Madrid comes with an unparalleled pressure.Not even playing for Bayern Munich will have prepared Kroos for what he will now experience at Real Madrid. Just 8,000 may have attended his introduction but soon that same stadium will be packed to capacity with fans demanding only the best from their Galacticos.But Kroos isn’t so much the next Galactico, as the glue to hold them together.Florentino Perez once spoke of his ‘Zidanes y Pavones’ philosophy, the idea being that for every superstar signed a youth product would be promoted from the club’s academy.Such an approach was designed to maintain the balance within the Real squad, but soon enough Perez ditched the Pavones. Over two separate Perez tenures, Real became fixated with the Galacticos policy, turning the club into a toxic wasteland of egos and divas.Even Jose Mourinho, the supposed great equalizer of footballing egos, ultimately failed to galvanize the star-studded Real Madrid squad in his efforts to clinch La Decima.He exited the club having split the dressing room, making enemies out of Real stalwarts like Iker Casillas, Sergio Ramos and Xabi Alonso, leaving his replacement Carlo Ancelotti with an unholy mess to clean up.Of course, Ancelotti didn’t just clean up, he decorated the place with the club's tenth European Cup. But he did so with Mourinho’s team. Now he will look to impose his own style, starting with the signing of Kroos.If Kroos truly can be considered a Galactico—whatever that means—he is the thinking man’s Galactico. Real Madrid already have an embarrassment of midfield riches, but Kroos brings something different. Something they need.At Bayern Munich, Kroos was used in a number of different positions across the midfield. By trade he is an attacking midfielder, but Pep Guardiola recognized his capacity as a deeper-lying pass-master, in the mould of someone like Andrea Pirlo.The German World Cup winner’s versatility appeals to Ancelotti. Kroos will fit in around Real’s attacking weapons, whether it is in the number 10 role, the Pirlo role or on the flanks. If Bale, Ronaldo et all are the ones with the gun to your head, Kroos is the one who loaded the bullet.There is risk attached to Kroos’ arrival though. His signing, along with the likely capture of Colombian World Cup star James Rodriguez, means there will also be a sacrifice at Real before the transfer window shuts.If European soccer had a Most Improved Award, Angel Di Maria would have been a leading candidate last season. Once a flaky, brilliant-one-moment-futile-the-next winger, the Argentine’s improvement as a dynamic and irrepressible central midfielder was a key factor in Real Madrid’s Champions League triumph.Yet with Kroos and Rodriguez in the lineup, presumably anchored by Alonso, where would Di Maria fit in? The answer could be found in the speculation linking him with a move away from Real. He wouldn’t fit, nor would Sami Khedira, who seems set for a Premier League switch.Ancelotti led Real Madrid to their tenth European Cup by embracing his squad’s counter-attacking identity, but this summer could signify a shift in approach. Kroos is the man to control a game, rather than counter it.Kroos is the embodiment of how the playmaker role has changed over the past decade. He is the archetype of the modern attacking midfielder, combining energy and drive with guile in a way few others can. Perhaps the last player to incorporate such qualities with such effortless ease was Zinedine Zidane.The Zidane comparison is fitting, given that Real Madrid’s last great midfielder came in the form of the French legend. That’s not to say exceptional players haven’t passed through the Bernabeu since Zizou’s retirement in 2006, but Zidane was the last player to make the Real midfield his own.It’s a billing that might even weigh heavier than the ‘Galactico’ tag, but Kroos could be the club’s best midfielder since Zidane. The fact that only 8,000 fans turned up for Kroos’ unveiling could soon be a source of shame for Real Madrid fans.

How Toni Kroos could be Real Madrid's next Zinedine Zidane

The spark has been lost. International soccer is no longer the charming, compelling spectacle it ...

The spark has been lost. International soccer is no longer the charming, compelling spectacle it once was. The same teams qualify for the major tournaments and the same teams win them (namely, Spain). But fear not. A plan is afoot.According to a report by The Guardian, UEFA is set to propose a radical overhaul of the international soccer calendar, which would see European national teams participate in a new competition called the Nations League.Existing dates allocated for friendly fixtures would be used to launch the new league, forming the central pillar of an initiative to improve international soccer. The idea has already been presented to the UEFA executive committee and could be implemented from 2018.<div class="the-score-article-ad-unit"></div>The concept of adding a competitive edge to exhibition fixtures is a noble one. It’s hard to muster up any sense of national pride when faced with an irrelevant and monotonous international friendly.Yet a degree of scepticism should be applied to the proposal. The underlying motives are questionable.Given their success in the rebranding and repackaging of the Champions League UEFA now views international soccer as the focus of its next marketing renovation.The intense politicking between associations and confederations underpins the power struggle between UEFA and FIFA. They are the two most powerful bodies in world soccer and the Nations League would give UEFA more authority in an arena otherwise controlled by FIFA.At club level the concept of a pan-European league has been explored before but the Nations League applies the proposition to international soccer for the first time. UEFA seems to have identified the final frontier of European soccer not to have had every last penny wrung out.Brazil has demonstrated how lucrative the international game can be. The self-styled ‘Brasil World Tour’ has translated the innate allure and romance of the Selecao into hard cash (Brazil command an appearance fee of $3 million per game). The Nations League plan suggests UEFA has been casting envious glances and hopes to market the European game in the same way.If the Champions League financial distribution model is to be taken as precedent those who compete at the top-end of the Nations League would receive higher royalties than those at foot of the pyramid.Last season’s Champions League winners, Bayern Munich, were awarded €30.5 million in prize money and bonuses, supplemented by their share of the competition’s TV money, €21.8 million, making their triumph worth over €52 million. By comparison Celtic, who exited just three rounds before the Germans, received around €25 million.UEFA has already started the process of centralizing media rights for World Cups and European Championships, with broadcasters negotiating contracts directly with the European governing body rather than the national associations. Just as it does from the Champions League and Europa League, UEFA would stand to claim its own share of the riches.The proposed model would protect the elite, with UEFA’s 54 member nations split into nine divisions depending on their seeding. For instance, Spain, Germany, the Netherlands, Italy, England and Portugal would form the top flight.Naturally, the most prestigious nations draw the most interest, and highest fees, from broadcasters. It is therefore in UEFA’s interest to group those countries together, giving them the most attractive and lucrative product to sell. The status quo would effectively be sheltered by a new constitution, in the form of the new TV agreements struck with broadcasters.But is the Nations League proposal in the best interests of those below the line? It doesn’t appear so.Mobility is the essence of soccer. Without the means to meet ambition the sport loses its charm. How can a side improve themselves without the challenge of playing superior opposition? The glamour friendly might appear a futile and frankly tedious exercise to the neutral but it provides lesser teams with the opportunity to measure up against the best.While the purpose might have been obscured in recent years international friendly games do have one. Their role as preparation for major tournaments, with associations tailoring their build-up to World Cups and European Championships, is invaluable.The new league set-up wouldn’t interfere with the current qualification schedule, but would increase the number of international matchdays. Countries would be obligated to partake in both qualification campaigns and the newly formed Nations League.Such a reorganization of the international schedule risks a backlash from Europe’s biggest and most powerful clubs.Managers already complain about the number of international dates. The club versus country row is founded on the premise of a player returning to his club with an injury picked up on international duty. Are Europe’s elite clubs likely to back a proposal that introduces even more opportunities for that to happen?The G14 body was disbanded in 2008, replaced by the less concentrated European Club Association, but UEFA mustn’t underestimate the impact a concerted protest by Europe’s leagues and clubs could have.National associations maintain control within the jurisdiction of their respective leagues and competitions but their grip on the European game is slipping. Not just slipping, being clawed away from them.The Nations League might well make international soccer more attractive but its execution could come at a cost. That cost is the one UEFA is charging.

UEFA treads fine line with domestic clubs in Nations League proposal

https://rich-content.thescore.com/authors/graham-ruthven/content_cards

Graham Ruthven

Manchester United

EPL Soccer

Tottenham Hotspur

Luis Suárez