We can't guarantee game time on Erling Haaland in favor of Anthony Martial?
No wonder we're shit.
Erling Haaland
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
- Status
We can't guarantee game time on Erling Haaland in favor of Anthony Martial?
No wonder we're shit.
In a parallel world we signed Haaland two years ago and he spent the Europa League final on the bench with Amad and VDB.
He wasnt that bad back then , and we also had Lukaku
Big deal. Utd don't sign all the best players in the world. Utd should focus more on a world class set up off the pitch and stop crying about losing out on players. I don't think he would sign for Utd anyway.
He was never that good beyond his first year and last year.
The rest is pretty average if we want to be kind to him.
6 years deal.
If he replicates his Bundesliga form in the Premier League and remains injury-free, he could easily help teams like United and Chelsea win two PL titles plus several cups in that 6-year window, in addition to whatever these clubs would have won anyway without an elite striker in the squad currently.
After 6 years, let him leave for free without even bothering to negotiate another contract with Raiola et al.
Earling Braut Haaland playing for United or Chelsea in his absolute physical prime between 21 to 27 years of age is a lot of money (~£120m plus wages) but isn't it worth it?
If he replicates his Bundesliga form in the Premier League and remains injury-free, he could easily help teams like United and Chelsea win two PL titles plus several cups in that 6-year window, in addition to whatever these clubs would have won anyway without an elite striker in the squad currently.
After 6 years, let him leave for free without even bothering to negotiate another contract with Raiola et al.
Earling Braut Haaland playing for United or Chelsea in his absolute physical prime between 21 to 27 years of age is a lot of money (~£120m plus wages) but isn't it worth it?
Last edited:
It absolutely is, I just think he would want to go to RM / Barca or possibly City way before that, but that is an endless discussion in here i see
Wr arent in it for profit. W are in it to catch City.
Would you sell Bruno tomorrow for 70m? And City etc would be in for him as well and we have no control over where he goes?
We aren't in it for profit, but we are in it for that 3 season of Erling Halaand.
The profit is just to point out that it wasn't even a losing deal.
if we have to choose between 3 seasons of Bruno or No bruno at all?
Unfortunately, if Haaland took note of the total pigs ear Utd made of the CL group and then blowing the EL final to the mighty Villarreal, I don’t see there’s a cat in hell’s chance of him coming to Utd.
Yeah that's probably true, but it's also a matter of who's available. There isn't and wasn't a lot of top strikers around, especially at a price point that's affordable to Dortmund. They were desperately looking for a good one after a few signings ultimately didn't work out like Alcacer, Batshuayi or Philipp etc.
So signing a potential top player for 20m Euros when there are very few alternatives in terms of talent or price range makes a lot of sense even if it comes with the tradeoff of having to include a buyout clause.
United were also in the market for a striker and in the end signed Ighalo, on a fairly expensive loan deal I believe. Of course it's difficult for a club like United to justify a buyout clause for a young player but from a rational perspective it's not that different to loaning a player for a few seasons. The difference between United and Dortmund is that in theory United can afford a top striker in terms of wages and transfer fee when one is available, and on top of that Martial was performing quite well at the time so a backup was all they needed it seemed.
I doubt he'll move this summer
and the reason is it suits Raiola
if it's true he has a release clause there will be a hose of clubs willing to meet it all competing on agents fee and wages
he could be getting half a million a week or more
and the reason is it suits Raiola
if it's true he has a release clause there will be a hose of clubs willing to meet it all competing on agents fee and wages
he could be getting half a million a week or more
I still don't understand.
Cavani, signed for free, 2 seasons, 15 to 20 goals each season, £10m salary per season . He will leave for free at the end (2022) because he is too old,
vs
Haaland, signed for £17m, 2 seasons, 40+ goals each season, an annual salary of £5.36m (€6m) for the first two years of his contract, £63m release clause that can be activated from 2022. (There is always a chance you can convince him to renew his contract)
I know which one i will pick.
May be for Arsenal. But united absolutely cannot devalue its brand by agreeing a cheap release clause. That is handing over your balls to player's agent. A feeder club level dealing united should never entertain.
Players come and go. But once you set precedence of dealing like a feeder club it is difficult to undone.
I just don't understand the mindset of the big club fans i guess. I just looked at it from football and business perspective, and can't see what's wrong with the BVB deal. It is a very good deal. Players are running down their contract nowadays (even include messi, and barcelona needs to convince him to stay), and the days the club can hold the players against their will are numbered. Players and agents learnt their lesson from Messi, Kane, Pogba and to a certain extent Zaha. I actually feel sorry for Harry Kane. He should have got a better agent. Big clubs with big resource will always have bigger draw to players. Nothing has changed. Just big money transfer is a lot more risky. Mbappe will walk next summer and PSG paid 176M for 4 years of service.
I think you are right about the devaluation thingy. This would be a bit like when Arsenal started selling their best players to City. The deals may have made financial sense in isolation but at that moment Arsenal became a smaller club in the eyes of fans, players, sponsors etc..
Clubs are big because of their fan base. Big club has global fans and they want to see good players play for their club, their loyalty and longitivity. It is a pride for club fans that big players want to play for their club and try to win trophies. Loyal big players attract more big players to play for the club. That attracks more fan base and club retains its brand value and market value. The moment fans see the players joining their club only as a stepping stone to leave later, the trust between the club and fans start eroding. Also it becomes very difficult to attract other big established players to play for the club. You need to understand that global fan base has various level of loyalty. There are thousands of fans across the world following united because, well it is a big brand united. We start acting like feeder club and in few years fans attrition will start.
About your point of financial sense.. that is exactly how a feeder club operates. Tactical financial goal of feeder clubs vs strategic financial goal of big clubs.
How many big established players Dortmund can attract to play for them? Which big player wants to sign for them knowing likes of Haaland, Sancho are going to leave. Only highly prospective young players will sign for Dortmund as a stepping stone. Can't imagine United become like Dortmund one day. No thanks.
Last edited:
Do you really believe he will?
I do not know. If he want to renew he would have done so already, just like Neymar. May be he is trying to get an even bigger salary from PSG because PSG needs to save face?
I would like to address the "loyalty" in football. It doesn't exist. Not from the player, and not from the club either. If player doesn't perform, he is deadwood, suck the club dry. Vice versa, the club hold the player for ransom, it is a prison. It is all about money, the sporting project, and also the city.
Last edited:
players sign and players leave, all sort of shenanigans happen, that is part and parcel of football. But player joining as a stepping stone only to leave later with a cheaper than valuation release clause it a different proposition. Not for united.
It absolutely is, I just think he would want to go to RM / Barca or possibly City way before that, but that is an endless discussion in here i see
Ignoring the fact that they cannot afford him.. why would he go to either of those two? They are on the decline. I don’t see either of them being strong for the next 5 years at least, big rebuilds and not enough funds.
As a player who has seemingly no real allegiance to any team, with an agent that only cares about money, I can’t see why the two of them would prefer either of those teams.
Haaland will go to whoever gives Riola the most money. This is evident as Dortmund said he isn’t for sale and Riola was basically like IDGAF.
They can afford him next summer, and at least Real Madrid does still have the biggest pull in football.
Haaland will definately not let Raiola alone decide where he is going. Both him and his father are very strong willed individuals, and thats evident when he went to Dortmund. He could easily have gone to a much bigger club that would pay them all more, but they wanted to focus on the right developmental move.
Barca have
Dest.......garcia......lenglet.......?
.............de Jong....Moriba........
....trincao..........pedri........dembele
All 25 or under... wouldn't write them off yet... that looks like the basis for a pretty awesome team
You know the more i think about it, the more I can see a deal happening where it's pre agreed for next summer. Like a Pulisic. Loaned back.
Shit untested shit ?
Good untested
Average Good inconsistent
Gonna need more than that
The more you think about it? That's a bit strange considering it makes no sense at all if you think about it even a little bit.
If you're willing to pay that sort of daft money, and it seriously is daft, surely you'd want the player asap.
Especially if you can just pay something like half, or 2/3, next summer anyway.
Well if we really want him and they refuse to let him go this season whatsoever, why not agree something now for next year, when you then also avoid having to battle europes other top clubs
Im not necessarily saying do that kind of deal at 150m. Just a general theory. Sign him, loan him back, avoid the scramble next summer
Could easily say to BVB we'll give you the 75m now or whatever, keep him for a year. Its not that outrageous
Then why not agree something with him for next year and then pay the release clause in 2022?
He won't move this summer after BVB qualified for CL next season.
much harder deal then, have all of europe lining up to sign him. Strike now while the iron is hot
i dont think he will. But they wont reject 150m. No chance
Wont he blast your wage structure wide open? Not only Dortmund that needs negotiating with
As soon as other clubs get a whiff that Dortmund are negotiating a deal for next summer every other club will get involved. There's no way Chelsea could do such a thing so covertly and it's not in Riaola's interest to keep such a thing quiet either
It is not just the club, it is the player too. He has his own say. Both bvb and the player need to agree with the move.
Thats true, but as we speak now it seems barca and madrid may not have the funds.... only really us, you and city, plus psg. I just think next summer his wages will be enormous. Everyone will want to top each other to tempt him
Why would it be different? Either Haaland commits to Chelsea, or not. And why would Haaland commit to such a deal so early if the move is a year later anyway and he could see what his options are then?
It's just not going to happen, you can forget about it right now.
I still think Haaland will stay at Dortmond this year and replace Lewandowski at Bayern next summer.
- Status