There was a time when Manchester United wanted Marcus Rashford to be the club's point of reference and poster boy.
In bad times during the Covid pandemic, when the striker successfully campaigned for the government to hand out free school meals, he was seen as this lighthouse not just for United but for society in general.
Now it looks like a transfer abroad will almost certainly happen towards the end of the January window.
Rashford's brother and agent, Duane, travels around Europe recruiting clubs and seeing what solution he can present.
So it seems very clear that if there is an opportunity that is plausible for the player and for Manchester United, it will be realized before the end of the month.
It's been a pretty devastating dip from then to now, and it's not just because of the drop in goals for Rashford. Whether it's self-sabotage or not, the kind of things he's done off the pitch over the last 12 months hasn't prepared him for the cycle of excellence United are aiming for.
There was the infamous overnight trip to Belfast earlier this year, missing United training the next day due to illness.
This season, reports in The Athletic claimed that Rashford was dropped 48 hours before United's 4-0 win over Everton last month, a match in which he scored twice but a pastime that did not please new head coach Ruben Amorim.
People wouldn't complain if he went out to celebrate a huge win. Rashford has often felt that he has been unfairly portrayed by the media and by supporters. The people around him say he does the same as other footballers. He goes out, he enjoys it. But it's more about the timing than the actual action.
Fans also claim that Rashford is stuck in a repetitive cycle. How many times are United going to go through this process, equip the squad for the manager and then find themselves in a situation where they let the boss go and start again?
Getting out of the area could benefit Rashford, as could Scott McTominay, who is now a cult hero at Napoli with five goals in his first 18 games.
In McTominay's case, however, there was never a question mark surrounding his professionalism. The midfielder just didn't get the admiration or appreciation, probably from the fan base. Erik ten Hag said very loudly that he would have kept him because he was an example for the team.
So the question is whether the change in environment can bring about a change in Rashford mentally. Because even though he is not in shape, he has not lost any of his capabilities as a footballer. It is the disillusionment, and more the mental side of his game, that is at issue here.
As for United, is letting Rashford go part of actually healing the culture? Insiders have claimed that United like the Arsenal model: when things aren't working to change the culture; where you experience that shock and shock, and you rip up your contracts, and you take the financial hit, and you do what's right, and you create that culture of excellence.
But then they also say they like the Chelsea model, i.e. you sell your academy graduates for 'pure profit', and you go and buy the stars from Europe who you hope will excel. These two methods are completely contrasting.
If you go back to April, stories were coming out that United wanted an overhaul, and almost everyone was for sale, but not Kobbie Mainoo, not Alejandro Garnacho, not Rasmus Hojlund.
But now stories are emerging that there is some doubt about the future of Garnacho and Mainoo. The reason for this is that, despite Mainoo still having two and a half years left on his contract, United have little wiggle room to buy players in the January transfer window due to Profit and Sustainability (PSR) rules.
The club looks at the situation they find themselves in: they don't have much money to spend, so they have to find smart solutions to make ends meet.
It is a very clear scenario of selling to buy. What United need to do is choose the right sales channel, which should be: the marginal players or those who should not be part of the long-term planning – rather than a Mainoo, which is no longer untouchable.
United have actually been very frank in saying: we are preparing a new contract for Mainoo, we are in talks, we want to keep him, we want to build the long-term project around him.
And in the summer they signed Manuel Ugarte because they felt he was the perfect foil for Mainoo, as their strengths and weaknesses soften for the others. So it's a bizarre leap to these transfer exit stories.
It seems there is a conflict over what United are actually trying to be.
Comments