I got grapes

I suppose there's only one place to start today, even if that place is Real Madrid.
There's differing versions of the Benzema to Real story. The Telegraph have this version:

The 21 year-old French international has agreed what could amount to a 41 million euro (£35.8 million) move to Real – who were forced to increase their original offer of 35 million euros (£30 million), even though it was agreed with Lyon on Tuesday evening, after a flurry of activity from United on Wednesday morning.

Once United became aware that Lyon had accepted Real’s bid they then submitted an offer of 40 million euros (£35 million). However Benzema was already too far progressed in his discussions with Real, having also spoken to United, and the Spanish club were also willing to add extra payments, depending on targets and bonuses, which meant their bid came in slightly higher than United’s. Benzema has agreed a six-year deal.

While The Times say:

United had registered a firm interest in Benzema, but were reluctant to break their transfer record to sign a 21-year-old striker largely unproven outside France.

While The Guardian has us not being that bothered:

Sir Alex Ferguson's long-standing admiration for the 21-year-old Lyon player never manifested itself in the form of a concerted attempt to bring him to Old Trafford as a replacement for Carlos Tevez. Instead, United have left Madrid unchallenged to add yet another striker to their already bloated squad.

Whatever the real story, it would have been good to sign such a quality young player, but no need to push the panic button.
The Times go so far as to say

Some well-placed sources have claimed that Ferguson may not even sign a striker this summer and will instead look to Wayne Rooney and Dimitar Berbatov to spearhead United’s attack next season.

I'm not sure our search for a striker is as desperate as some of the papers seem to think, we have two brilliant strikers and some good young emerging strikers, so, while we could probably do with something extra, and probably will, not signing anyone else would not be a disaster scenario.
Rory Smith in The Telegraph paints a ridiculously bleak picture of our squad:

Ferguson would probably admit that his side, however feted until that 2-0 humiliation at the hands of Barcelona in Rome, was far from perfect. The central midfield, certainly, is weaker than either Chelsea’s or Liverpool’s, thanks to the uncertainty over whether Owen Hargreaves will ever play again.

United’s famous strength in depth weakens a little with every year that passes on to the legs of Paul Scholes, Ryan Giggs and Gary Neville. Park Ji-Sung, Nani and Zoran Tosic are hardly wingers to terrify defenders.

Dimitar Berbatov has not settled well in his first season, often a peripheral figure, rarely employed for the key games.

Carlos Tevez may be an idol for the fans, but Ferguson clearly does not believe he has the quality required to be a regular, effective presence at the highest level.

In goal, Edwin Van der Sar is showing signs of wear and tear, and Ben Foster and Tomasz Kuszczak are yet to prove they can replace him.

Add to that the loss of Ronaldo, the team’s standard-bearer, the man who could win games when all else failed, and Ferguson has much to think about.

Grasping at straws. Van der Sar coming in for criticism after the season he had last year? He probably means he's getting to the end of his career, which he self-evidently is. And picking Gary Neville as an example of the loss caused by an aging player is odd given that we have Rafael, Wes Brown and John O'Shea who can play right back - a nice mix of youth, experience and fill in as necessary.
I think Ian Herbert in The Independent wins for the silliest comment of the day though:

Michael Owen as a short-term measure? The prospect is an intriguing one. Ferguson tried to sign the 29-year-old as a youngster and there have been rumours that he has returned with inquiries since. The £40,000 a week Owen might be prepared to accept will certainly not hurt United and there are enough attacking options at Old Trafford to make the risk of injuries to which Owen has become prone less of a problem than at most other clubs. A possibility, perhaps, but the good money now has to be on Ferguson not seeking further front line reinforcements.

"An intriguing prospect?" Not sure "intriguing" is the word I'd use. Ignoring anything else Ill stick to the silliness of the argument he makes. He starts by implying that, failing a big signing, we need a "short term measure". However, after claiming that Owen could fill this role, he goes on that if Owen was injured (and how he'd get injured I don't know - how often would he even make our bench?) we have enough attacking options for it not to be a problem. If that's the case, why do we need a short term measure? His argument is just plain daft.
The Daily Star repeat their rumour of yesterday:

That leaves Toulouse striker Andre-Pierre Gignac as a realistic option – though after one impressive season in which he scored 24 goals there are still doubts over whether he has the pedigree to be a top class forward.

The Mirror continue with the Aguero line:

The United boss is pressing ahead with his interest in Atletico Madrid playmaker Sergio 'Kun' Aguero, who is likely to cost £40m.

The Mail have news of a player we're allegedly in discussion with:

United are thought to be in discussions with Chile forward Alexis Sanchez, but the little-known young Chile star would hardly excite the Old Trafford faithful and suggestions that Udinese's asking price has risen to more than £20m is a barrier to a deal.

Yeah.
The Guardian claim that Frazier Campbell is "poised" to sign for Hull.
And finally someone comes out and actually criticises Tevez for whining on all summer. Lawrence Donegan on The Guardian blog has some good words on Tevez:

"You cannot argue with Alex Ferguson," Tevez said. "He is like the president of England. It is impossible. You always lose. But he made a mistake to leave me on the bench. That was the only final the team had lost since I had been at Manchester United."

Tevez's notion of a republican England is certainly appealing (albeit with a different president) but the suggestion he would have altered the course of the European Cup final stretches credulity tighter than a Lycra bandana round the circumference of Cristiano Ronaldo's ego. The Argentinian did, after all, come on at half-time in Rome to no noticeable effect, although I seem to remember that Barcelona were even more dominant after the interval than before. ...

There is nothing inherently evil about a professional footballer slagging off his former manager, even if that manager happens to be the most successful in the modern era of English football, but it is patently absurd to pass off such self-centred whining as the final verdict on what might have been. Tevez was a good player for United — not a great one, and certainly not one who was worth the additional £25m it would have cost to secure a permanent move to Old Trafford — but he was a squad player, not a defining member of the team.

So he didn't play from the start in Rome, or start in as many league matches as he would have liked. Big deal. Perhaps if he had scored more frequently when he did play, things might have been different.

Couldn't have put it better my self (and I know this is the second time I've broken my not talking Tevez rule, but seeing as he has continued slagging us off, I think it only fair I return the favour).