Manchester United Considered Ollie Watkins Swap in Marcus Rashford Talks with Aston Villa
Manchester United reportedly explored a shock swap deal involving Aston Villa striker Ollie Watkins and Marcus Rashford, according to The Athletic. The potential move was discussed as Rashford’s loan spell at Villa Park came to an end—but the deal never materialised.
Rashford, now 27, spent the second half of last season on loan at Villa, after falling out of favour under United boss Ruben Amorim. His time at Villa Park included a £40 million buy option for Unai Emery’s side, but Villa have now decided not to sign him permanently.
However, reports suggest it could have gone very differently. Before Villa pulled out of the permanent Rashford move, United had made contact about swapping Rashford for Watkins—a player also reportedly offered to Arsenal earlier in the year.
Now, The Athletic claims United have made a fresh approach for Watkins, independent of Rashford’s situation, as they look to strengthen their attacking options.
Aston Villa’s financial situation is playing a major role in all of this. The club is under pressure from the Premier League’s Profit and Sustainability Rules and may be forced to make a high-value sale this summer. Watkins could be that sale—especially after the £65 million departure of Jhon Duran to Saudi Arabian side Al-Nassr in January.
Letting Watkins go would be a huge move, and not one Villa fans would welcome. The striker was one of the team’s top performers last season, with 17 Premier League goals and 14 assists to his name.
Despite his impressive stats, Watkins didn’t always find favour with Emery. In Villa’s high-profile Champions League quarter-final clashes against Paris Saint-Germain, Marcus Rashford was preferred, and Watkins was left on the bench for both legs.
Speaking to Sky Sports, Watkins admitted he was “fuming” at the decision.
“I played 20 minutes against PSG in both games, so I’m not going to lie—I was fuming I wasn’t playing,” he revealed. “I let him [Emery] know that.”
Watkins added that he respected his manager’s decision but made it clear he isn’t content being a substitute:
“Rather than let it hinder you, you have to use that anger as motivation.”
United’s interest in Watkins highlights their continued search for a consistent striker. Despite signing Rasmus Højlund and bringing in Joshua Zirkzee, neither have yet proven they can deliver at the level expected at Old Trafford.
Watkins, with his pace, pressing, and proven goal record in the Premier League, could be exactly what United need.
Whether Villa are willing to sell remains uncertain—but with financial pressures mounting and Watkins voicing frustrations, the door might just be open.
Should Aston Villa have swapped Watkins for Rashford? Let us know what you think in the comments below!
The idea of a **Marcus Rashford–Ollie Watkins swap** between Manchester United and Aston Villa is fascinating — and controversial on both sides. Let’s break it down:
—
## 🔄 The Proposed Swap: Rashford ↔ Watkins
### ✅ **Why It *Could Have* Worked:**
#### **For Man United:**
* **Watkins brings what United need most:**
* 17 goals + 14 assists last season.
* Elite pressing, work rate, movement off the ball.
* Proven in the Premier League.
* **Fits Ruben Amorim’s system better than Rashford**, who struggled for form and tactical discipline under multiple managers.
#### **For Aston Villa:**
* **Rashford’s upside remains enormous** if his motivation and confidence return.
* He showed flashes of brilliance in Europe, even **starting over Watkins in the Champions League quarterfinals** vs PSG.
* Villa could’ve signed him **below market value**, then rebuilt him into a world-beater.
—
### ❌ **Why It Didn’t Happen:**
#### 1. **Villa’s Financial Caution:**
* Villa didn’t trigger Rashford’s £40m option — even though that’s arguably cheap for a player of his ceiling.
* Likely judged his **wage demands + inconsistency** as too risky.
#### 2. **Watkins’ Fan and Board Value:**
* He’s **central to Villa’s identity and success**. Letting him go — especially to a rival — could spark backlash.
* Despite friction with Emery, Watkins remains the club’s most reliable attacking outlet.
#### 3. **Rashford’s Uncertain Status:**
* He **hasn’t been the same** since his 30-goal 2022/23 campaign.
* Off-field concerns and lack of clarity around his motivation played a role.
* Not many clubs are ready to **build around him** like United once did.
—
## 📊 Stats Comparison: 2023/24 (Premier League)
| Player | Goals | Assists | Games Played | Key Traits |
| ————— | —– | ——- | ———— | ———————————- |
| Ollie Watkins | 17 | 14 | 37 | Pressing, movement, team play |
| Marcus Rashford | 7 | 3 | 33 | Pace, dribbling, explosive moments |
—
## 🧠 Verdict:
* From a **football logic standpoint**, **United would’ve benefited more** from Watkins than Villa would from Rashford.
* But from a **brand and emotional standpoint**, selling Rashford (a homegrown star) for a rival’s #9 might have caused a storm at Old Trafford **if he rediscovered his form elsewhere**.
* Villa, meanwhile, made the safer choice. With Rashford’s form uncertain and wage demands high, **they backed the consistent producer** in Watkins.
—
### 🔮 Now?
* United have **made a fresh approach for Watkins** — with no Rashford involved.
* Given Villa’s **PSR pressures** and Watkins’ frustration at being benched in big games, **a transfer is not off the table**.
* But it will likely cost United **£70–80m**, and competition from other top-six clubs remains possible.
Would you approve Watkins to United if it meant letting Rashford go permanently — no swap, just a clean break?
