Imagine caring about this when it comes to Danny Ings
probably played less than 15 times for them in what 4 years? His Liverpool career barely existed.Danny Ings / signs for Villa
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) and Jamie (@Vault Dweller) are here to celebrate rare back-to-back victories for Manchester United! They analyse the late win in the Europa League vs. Rangers and then try and find things to analyse in a pretty dour game vs. Fulham. They also chat about the latest Marcus Rashford news, and look at the latest transfer news.
- Status
Imagine caring about this when it comes to Danny Ings
probably played less than 15 times for them in what 4 years? His Liverpool career barely existed.Honestly, he's a better striker than Martial. Obviously he doesn't have the technique or silky feet, but he's a better more rounded number 9. One of the things I like about him is his range of finishing. Cavani and Ings would give us a pretty reliable 35 goals between the two.
Yeh, then with Cavani heading back to SA next year it'd leave us with Ings and a more experienced Greenwood for 2022/23. As long as we're still in for Sancho, a DM and a CB I'd be happy with Ings to be honest. He's a great finisher.
To me we want another striker as Martial isn't trusted, and the long term goal is Haaland. Clearly just conjecture on my part.
Financially makes sense. When fit he's lethal.
Him and Cavani competing for number 9?
I think it may just work.
Ing's is always guaranteed a few games out due to injury which will give Cavani more game time.
Or we can blow £100 million on Kane/Haaland and not strengthen anywhere else.
Him and Cavani competing for number 9?
I think it may just work.
Ing's is always guaranteed a few games out due to injury which will give Cavani more game time.
Or we can blow £100 million on Kane/Haaland and not strengthen anywhere else.
Could mean we want to sell Martial
Would any of those be available as 'bargains'?
The reason Ings might be is because his contract is due up in a year, and he'd be 30 by the start of that season (22/23), so might fancy one last chance at a big move and a deal might be done below market value this year.
Whereas Watkins and Wilson only signed for their clubs at the start of this season - Watkins for a fee of around £30m as a championship player so would cost a lot more now. And Richarlison (who I know you might not have included in the bargain group) cost Everton £40-50m and would cost us a lot more than that unless his contract is up soon.
Unless we go big for the really top quality #9's like Haaland and Kane (who are likely to have better alternatives and unlikely to join us), then I'd be happy with cheaper ones like Cavani and Ings for now and spend that money on a world class CB / CM / RW if we can successfully attract any of those instead. Rather than pay inflated PL fees for non-world class strikers like Watkins and Wilson.
Richarlisson is 2024, Wilson is 2023, Watkins is 2023 (all just google search so might be wrong). Wilson would be similar to Ings I think in price, both will be 29 this summer and have almost identical stats - Watkins I agree would likely be too much for what we'd be getting. Might as well just try and get Memphis back here on a free for a true bargain.
This. Danny Ings doesn´t sound any upgrade.
Ings to us, Kane to city 
Tbf I think it might be shrewd if it guarantees we sign a CB, DM and Sancho. We can then maybe replace Cavani with Haaland next summer?
Tbf I think it might be shrewd if it guarantees we sign a CB, DM and Sancho. We can then maybe replace Cavani with Haaland next summer?
That’s what I assume. Get a cheap body in this summer to go with Cavani and go all out for Haaland next year.
Imagine caring about this when it comes to Danny Ings
More like 25 in 3 but even one's enough for me.
We've already had one too many Ex Liverpool players at United in my lifetime.
Can't wait for the doom and gloom on here when City sign Kane and we end up with Ings
you know what he'd probably be a good signing for City, I mean he wouldn't be a starter but he'd fill a squad position for them
Sir Matt played for them & City, imagine the modern day melt down and people getting offended if he were to take the role now
. I care not where we get players from, simply that they're the required standard.You might be in for a surprise.
A player like Martial does not seem to have the right attitude to overcome form dipping. Even when he was on form, there were doubts if he could become a pure no 9 due to lacking some necessary abilities for that.
No thanks
We need genuine starters not more shite to fill the squad with. If we can’t get a genuine top class striker then go into next season with Cavani, Martial and Greenwood.
We need genuine starters not more shite to fill the squad with. If we can’t get a genuine top class striker then go into next season with Cavani, Martial and Greenwood.
What is the point in signing him?
If you look at it logically.
I'm not his biggest fan. But, with Martial you don't need him. He's stays on as backup striker/left wing. Sign a right winger and Greenwood can cover right wing and as a central striker too.
If you bring in Ings, Martial would need to go and then you sign him for 10m, Cavani leaves in a year. Then have the need to spunk another 70 or 80 million on a striker in a year anyway.
Total waste of time and money.
Presumably the logic would be a) we think Ings might perform better than Martial given he has been scoring at a better rate than him in the PL in the last two seasons and b) buying Ings and selling Martial raises funds for other purchases this summer as you'd get more for Martial than you pay for Ings.
Dippers reject. Think we can do better.....
40m tops for Martial and about 10 for Ings. That leaves 30m and in a year you need a proper striker anyway. It makes no sense to bring in Ings for any purposes. That's not even considering that he's just not good enough.
You say that like 30m isn't a lot. It's probably the bulk of what we'd spend on a CB and a relatively large fraction of what will be our total spending this summer.
Whether we need a proper striker in another year is irrelevant as we'd need that regardless. In the meantime, why wouldn't swapping one second-choice striker for another second-choice striker (who has been scoring more goals) + 30m make sense? You'd raise 30m without weakening the squad.
Martial isn't a 9. He has feck all presence in the 12 yard box as a 9 and feck all movement. Very good player, but he belongs on the left hand side where he can maximize his natural skill set better. Greenwood isn't ready to be a central striker either, he has too many occasions where he too is not moving or making gambles on deliveries. The hope is that he learns on these nuances and adds to his game over the next couple of years, but he's not ready to be central just yet.
Ings is a 9. He's a very good one. The point in signing him would be getting an actual striker to compete with Cavani.
He might be good, but he is not good enough to play for Man Utd. Like I said earlier Southampton is his level.
It is relevant. It's long term plannning. Why spunk a year on the likes of Ings when there already players who can do the same job and can cover that position. You take the season to transition Greenwood to central striker. Make it clear to Martial it's his last chance to kick on, if he doesn't take it he's gone.
Generate funds by selling the likes of Fred, Jones, James, Dalot, Lingard and Perreira. There's the guts of 100m to spend on the squad.
Like I said, it's not. His calibre is higher than Southampton.
He's superior as a 9 to Martial and Rashford for starters - when fit you saw how he performed for a lesser team. You don't get what, 23 goals in a season all from open play and be average in the Premier League. His form this season has been admirable when Southampton actually look worse in general play.
It speaks to shit long term planning if you want wingers to cover a central striker position, rather than consider a value signing of a very good striker in the Premier League. Thank god you weren't around when SAF brought in the likes of Saha, Sheringham or Larsson to do add to his squad options.
I don't get the logic of what you're arguing at all.
In this hypothetical scenario we'd spend the money on Ings because it allows us sell Martial for more money, which frees up (by your maths) 30m extra for investment in the squad immediately. In net terms we'd have generated significant funds by swapping one second choice striker for another. Whereas the bold makes it sound like it would be costing us something.
The fact that we would have to sign a top class striker when Cavani goes isn't relevant as that will be the case either way. In both scenarios we'd ultimately end up with a top class striker + a back-up. But in this hypothetical scenario we'd also have a year of benefit from whatever investment that 30m we freed up brings.
To put it another way: what benefit do we get from not freeing up that 30m this summer and not swapping our second-choice striker for a second-choice striker who has scored more goals in the last two seasons?
How much would he cost us? If he isn't taking up too much of our transfer budget and doesn't cost us more than £15m then surely it's good business providing we keep Martial?
Cavani, Martial, Ings and Greenwood as striking options are very good imo. Then in the summer of 2022 we can hopefully try to get Haaland when his £70m release clause is active and replace him with Cavani??
With the money saved from spending big this summer, just focus on getting Sancho, a DM, a CB and hopefully a backup RB!
Cavani, Martial, Ings and Greenwood as striking options are very good imo. Then in the summer of 2022 we can hopefully try to get Haaland when his £70m release clause is active and replace him with Cavani??
With the money saved from spending big this summer, just focus on getting Sancho, a DM, a CB and hopefully a backup RB!
Even if this wasn’t at Martial’s expense, why wouldn’t an addition like Ings improve us up top?
Only 28. For some reason I thought he was 32/33. Feels like he's been around forever.
I don't see any crazy team team going for this year turning 26 lazy flop with reoccuring hamstring injuries Martial paying anything more than 20 million and his stupid wages. It is very unlikely he will get any better with his attitude and overrated talent.
Ings is also pretty injury haunted player but just had a decent season with the one before amazing, English, soon 29 but still a real no9 scoring goals and potentially more in a better team. I could see Ings who's team donesnt wanna sell, having higher value easily over not wanted overpriced inconsistent and never reached his potential potential player.
I think if we could somehow ship Martial for 20 and get Ings for 25 would be a decent business. Martial is an okay player but too expensive with his wages from the bench.
I think he can get close to Vardy performances, if he can stay fit and play for a more progressive team. Certainly good enough to have a good role in the squad..and underrated. Late Bloomer too, with his bad injury stopping his progress when at Liverpool.
All 3 of those were better than Ings. Fergie brought them in to supplement top class strikers. This team has one, a 35 year old who is not going to play every game, therefore you need a striker of higher quality for him to be the backup to, like those 3 were.
I gave you 6 players who should be sold to make money. They should all be gone this summer.
Keep convincing yourselves that this makes sense and that he's good enough. In my opinion it doesn't and if this team under Ole wants to win the league or go far in the champions league. He is not the player he should be signing to do that.
If we sign him as a side dish to Varane, Ndidi & Sancho, cool. If he’s our marquee signing then I’ll cry.
Poor man's Giroud.
People are going to moan and overreact because City are linked to Kane and we are linked to Ings, but that obviously isn't even half the full story here. In terms of what it looks like we are planning to do this summer and where our priorities lie, then this would be a very sensible transfer. A square peg for a square hole.
It's becoming increasingly likely that our masterplan is getting Sancho this summer and reuniting him with Haaland next summer, and if we can pull that off it will be a fantastic move for the future of this team
It's becoming increasingly likely that our masterplan is getting Sancho this summer and reuniting him with Haaland next summer, and if we can pull that off it will be a fantastic move for the future of this team
this is the thing. he’s a good player though. It would only take a few goals and people would warm to him like they did to Micheal Owen…
If we want to take a punt on a striker I suggest Celtics Edouard. He's got a year left too, he's been prolific for them and apparently Rodgers is sniffing around.
Would take him to rotate with Edi provided that it doesn't affect the key areas of concern in the first XI
You gave me six players we could sell to make money, some of whom definitely will not be sold this summer. Accepting that they would be though, that doesn't change the fact that generating an extra 30m would allow further investment this summer.
So what do we lose out on by swapping Martial for Ings + 30m for investment elsewhere? Because the 30m extra is an obvious benefit.
I could understand it if the argument was that we'd be signing Ings at the cost of a top quality striker, but in this case we're accepting that we'd get a top quality striker when Cavani goes either way. So even accepting your point that Ings isn't "good enough", we'd be swapping one striker who isn't good enough for another striker who isn't good enough (but scores more goals) and gaining 30m in the process. Seems reasonable to me.
Last edited:
Actually, they weren't Alan Smith wasn't some superstar name or a big player. Nor are a lot of value signings Fergie made to fit his squad, taking Antonio Valencia, Park, Owen as other examples of attritions to the squad who had varying degrees of positive impact, moreso than expected.
Besides, Ings is of higher quality. Your evaluation is based on him being no better than the calibre of a Southampton side, which is simply wrong. He's a very, very good striker capable of 20+ goals when fit. To suggest he's not of a sufficient quality is bonkers. You shot yourself in the foot by looking at goal stats.
Oh yeah there is no doubt whatsoever he is the backup target to Kane
- Status