GledTheRed
Full Member
I bet he doesn't leave for 50 million in 2023, he will sign a new contract doubling his wages either removing or increasing the release clause.
Think he has two big money moves in him. Can't believe how low his release clause is!Raiola lining up the move to Juventus/Bayern/Madrid/PSG as we speak.
Think he has two big money moves in him. Can't believe how low his release clause is!
Well, they are obligated to. It’s not their choice. And ever since the Neymar fiasco they have been adjusted upwards a lot at Real, Barca and throughout the league.You do understand that both Barca and Real have buyout clauses for every single one of their players don't you? I've actually never heard of a english club ever had one
I bet he doesn't leave for 50 million in 2023, he will sign a new contract doubling his wages either removing or increasing the release clause.
Probably doubling both the wages and the release clause. Both parties would gain from it. He will get a big move in a few years anyway with his record.
And probably injured already.Sucks for us, but he made the right move for his career and I don't blame him one bit. He's reaping the rewards for making a smart career move. Fair play to him. If he'd come to us he'd have 0 goals in 2 games.
Indeed. I think he has an immaculate concentration.Can’t believe what I’m seeing really. His movement off the ball is something else, it’s like he’s being controlled by someone with a full overview of the pitch.
His release clause is low, but you're not really appreciating how his next transfer is intended to work and how players are now seizing power back from elite clubs. United can make a Cm offer in summer 2020 and pay the release clause, but it means feck all unless you offer Haaland and his agent the terms and the fees they want to execute it. It's basically a new form of co-ownership. Rather than Raiola, Haaland and his father owning Haaland's playing rights, they remain in control of his destiny but signing contracts where his club is contractually undervaluing him with them retaining the rest of his value through the power they holdThink he has two big money moves in him. Can't believe how low his release clause is!
Dortmund wouldn't be able to afford any offer that he would be advised to sign. They know that they are essentially leasing him for a couple of years.I bet he doesn't leave for 50 million in 2023, he will sign a new contract doubling his wages either removing or increasing the release clause.
Surely his 16 goals from the Austrian league would count towards his season total, which would be worth 12 goals in Germany and taking his total to 17, 6 behind Immobile in Italy.No way is he going to average 2 goals per game all season. If he gets 1 goal average then that is great.
Are we witnessing the new Ronaldo?
Indeed. I think he has an immaculate concentration.
To be honest, no. He isn't comparable in any way to an early Ronaldo or Messi and has nothing like the touch or skill they showed at that age. Good goal as it was, he hasn't got anything like the poise and balance those two showed. He could become a fantastic long-term goalscorer which we'll regret not buying quite easily though.
Delusions of grandeur.Are those people who claimed we were too good to meet his demands still sticking to their guns? In our current, shite state - how are we even as good as Dortmund, let alone better club, and why would it be below us to accept something Dortmund accepted? I mean - seriously, all the bullshit aside. Even if he was going to leave in 3 years, would it not have been worth it? And if we returned to old glory, in part with his help, why would he force exit?
In short - where the feck was any logic in us missing out on him?
In short - where the feck was any logic in us missing out on him?
Are those people who claimed we were too good to meet his demands still sticking to their guns? In our current, shite state - how are we even as good as Dortmund, let alone better club, and why would it be below us to accept something Dortmund accepted? I mean - seriously, all the bullshit aside. Even if he was going to leave in 3 years, would it not have been worth it? And if we returned to old glory, in part with his help, why would he force exit?
In short - where the feck was any logic in us missing out on him?
Was best move for him but ffs frustrating....he'll never play for Utd.
If we offered the same deal and he still chose Dortmund - then yes, you are right, but if the reports that we just didn't want to offer the same deal – because we thought giving him the same deal was beneath us – then we fecked up, and it's OK to say that we fecked up. We cannot know which one is true, but a bunch of posters said it was indeed beneath us to offer the same deal, which is what my comment was all about.If the player was ready to sign for us and we rejected him, then we can search for logic and reasons. When it was battle between 3-4 clubs and he picked the club that is best for him, there is nothing much we can do about it. Football world doesn't revolve around ManUtd as much as few ManUtd fans and English media wants us to believe.
I don't understand the obsession, player rejects the clubs. It happens all the time but for some reason ManUtd fans are like obsessed ex who just can't move on from failed transfers. Maybe the current league position is playing the big role.
If we offered the same deal and he still chose Dortmund - then yes, you are right, but if the reports that we just didn't want to offer the same deal – because we thought giving him the same deal was beneath us – then we fecked up, and it's OK to say that we fecked up. We cannot know which one is true, but a bunch of posters said it was indeed beneath us to offer the same deal, which is what my comment was all about.
What are you up to these days, I heard United are in a need for DOF...Of course I understand that buyout clauses have negative consequences for clubs and I also fully understand that elite clubs are willing to pay higher wages in order to compensate players for not having one. However, I'm speaking of this particular case, not the general one.
For me, your arguments ultimately come down to pride and pride is generally speaking a bad advisor when doing business. Assuming that Haaland generally preferred you over Dortmund, the choice for you was between signing him with a buyout option or not signing him at all. You guys think "we're Manchester United. Barcelona and Madrid don't grant players buyout clauses and we are also a big club, so why should we?" when you should actually be asking "why can Madrid and Barcelona sign those players without clauses and we can't?"I know it's a bitter pill to swallow but at the very moment, you don't have this third option of paying higher wages and not grant buyout clauses at all anymore. You are all like "Dortmund is a selling club, we aren't" when the whole point of being a "selling club" is that you develop players of a quality you otherwise wouldn't get your hands on. And that's exactly the problem you're having: The elite isn't willing to sign for you any longer. If a player nowadays plans his career, you aren't his ultimate destination. You may be considered as an intermediate stop but not the club he wants to spend his prime years at. Acting like a top club doesn't automatically make you one. Imagine a random small club would just copy that behaviour and in negotiations with a highly promising youngster would say "no, we won't give you a buyout clause. Sign for us without one or sign for someone else." This would just come across as silly. You can only play that card when you actually have the position of strength necessary for it and United IMO lacks this international standing.
In essence, you are still acting like you're one of the absolute top clubs when you actually aren't any longer. My point is that instead of refusing reality you should accept your current position and think of a way to regain your previous status. And for that, Haaland would've been a great signing. You argue "we develop him for 2 years and then he signs for City and Liverpool? Nah." but you'd have sorted out your striker problems for 2.5 years with a guy who's already good enough to lead the line at a top club and guarantee you 20+ goals a season and if he eventually leaves then this sends a signal into the world that improves your reputation as a good place to develop for young players. And in the meantime of those 2.5 years you'd have time to scout a successor for Haaland without pressure. And if he really leaves for one of your biggest rivals, what's the problem? If he goes there after spending 1.5 or 2.5 years at Dortmund, you'll get the same result.
So in the end, all of your issues with this deal are of symbolic nature. I don't get this kind of thinking. Imagine for once that you applied the same strategic approach Dortmund is currently applying. Take a step back, build up a young, talented squad and sign players like Hakimi, Sancho, Haaland, Brandt, Dembele, etc. and don't block their development by having (or signing) experienced players in your squad that may be just a little bit better right now but ultimately have a much lower ceiling. Over 1-2 years, you'd assemble an extremely talented squad with a great promising player in every position, pretty much like Dortmund has now. The only difference is, you have the financial prowess Dortmund lacks. That means you have much better chances of actually retaining those players. Imagine Dortmund could go into negotiations with Sancho, offer twice his salary and say that the strategy for the upcoming years is to hold this squad together, spend big on another two or three top stars and ultimately challenge for big titles. You certainly could. Of course one or two of those players would still leave but that doesn't matter, a club can compensate that. Liverpool also lost Coutinho who seemed irreplaceable for quite a while. And they lost Sterling to City. That's part of the business, everyone has to go through it.
Thing is, you want to make the second step before the first. You want to avoid the uncomfortable part and you are doing that for far too long already, essentially making matters worse.
We are simple club, We see a player wanting to leave, We try to get him. Outside of that We do nothing.I'm curious on why we showed interest only when Riola started to get involved, or Dortmund approached. Why not before?
We are simple club, We see a player wanting to leave, We try to get him. Outside of that We do nothing.