The Manchester United summer transfer window 2026 has left Michael Carrick with a squad that looks far more complete in one department than in the areas that decide tight matches. After Sunday’s 1-0 derby defeat by Manchester City, United sit 13th with four points from four Premier League games. City played with 10 men for more than an hour, yet United still lacked enough threat to turn pressure into goals.
Why did Manchester United spend so heavily in central midfield?
United’s first major choice looked logical. Casemiro left on a free transfer, while Manuel Ugarte’s knee injury reduced the options in the middle, so Carrick needed fresh legs. Andrey Santos arrived from Chelsea for £48m, Youri Tielemans came from Aston Villa for £35m, and Carlos Baleba followed from Brighton in a deal worth £65m up front, taking the initial midfield spend to £148m.
On paper, the profiles differ. Tielemans gives the side passing range, Santos offers defensive cover, and Baleba can carry the ball and compete physically. The issue sits in the allocation of resources. United added three central midfielders while leaving other positions short of senior cover, creating a squad where quantity in one zone cannot compensate for weakness elsewhere.
Why does Manchester United summer transfer window 2026 make Baleba such a costly call?
Baleba himself needn’t carry all the blame. He remains a young midfielder with room to improve, and a £65m initial fee does not become poor business after four league matches. Still, his signing deserves scrutiny because United already had Santos and Tielemans before they committed another huge sum to the same general area.
That money could have addressed a more obvious shortage. A club returning to the Champions League needs enough cover across the back four and enough forward depth to survive injuries, suspensions and the relentless midweek schedule. Instead, United put another £65m into midfield, then entered September without a new defender.
Why did Manchester United summer transfer window 2026 ignore the left-back problem?
This may rank as the most exposed decision of the summer. United knew before the window opened that Luke Shaw was the only established senior left-back, with Patrick Dorgu increasingly used in a more attacking role. Sky Sports identified the problem in June, while Opta later noted that United considered several options but signed nobody.
The club chased Lewis Hall, yet Newcastle resisted, and Hall eventually signed a new contract through 2031. United then explored other names but failed to complete a deal before the 1 September deadline. That left Shaw as the specialist senior option, with makeshift cover coming from versatile players rather than a natural replacement.
The derby provided an ugly demonstration. Dorgu came under pressure for his role in City’s winning goal, while United struggled to control the flank as the match wore on. The result does not prove that one left-back would have changed the score, but it does expose the risk United accepted before the season even started.
Why did United allow Rasmus Hojlund’s exit without adding another striker?
Hojlund’s permanent move to Napoli became official after the Italian club triggered the purchase conditions attached to his loan, and current transfer records list the fee at £38m. That figure matters because some reports have quoted higher numbers, yet the latest Premier League transfer lists and Sky Sports records place the deal at £38m.
The bigger concern sits in what followed. Benjamin Sesko remains United’s central striker, and his recent goals against Everton and Sabah underline his importance, but Carrick cannot reasonably rely on one recognised senior number nine through a campaign that includes the Premier League, Champions League and domestic cups.
United did not need to keep Hojlund simply for the sake of squad numbers. If the striker was no longer part of the plan, selling him made sporting sense. The error came from failing to replace that depth before the deadline. Once Sesko misses a game, the manager faces a thinner set of options, and that problem becomes sharper during a busy winter schedule.
How have the three decisions already affected United?
The early evidence points to a squad that can dominate certain phases yet lacks balance when matches turn chaotic. Against City, United had a man advantage for more than an hour but struggled to create enough clear openings, with Rashford and Kobbie Mainoo hitting the woodwork rather than finding the net. The same afternoon exposed the defensive concern, while the wider transfer record showed just how much attention went into midfield.
There is still time for the new midfield to settle, and a young squad can improve quickly, so calling any individual signing a disaster after a handful of games would be lazy. Yet recruitment should start with the shape of the squad, not simply the quality of isolated names. United spent £148m on three midfielders, left left-back short, and accepted a lighter striking rotation after Hojlund’s £38m departure.
The financial logic looks especially awkward because United had already committed heavily to Sesko and retained other attacking options, whereas defensive cover carried a much clearer availability risk. Recruitment departments can argue that opportunities shaped prices, but elite clubs still need a plan for positions that carry obvious fragility weekly.
What should Manchester United fans judge next?
The answer sits in availability and balance rather than headline fees. Can Shaw stay fit? Can Dorgu defend consistently when opponents target his flank? Can Tielemans, Santos and Baleba complement rather than crowd one another? And can Sesko stay healthy while carrying the central attacking role?
Those questions will shape Carrick’s first season far more than the reputation of any one signing. For now, the clearest criticism of the Manchester United summer transfer window 2026 is simple: United spent heavily where they already had bodies, while leaving two specialist areas dangerously light. That is a recruitment problem visible before the next injury, and Sunday’s derby made it impossible to ignore.
