The young Greenwood shines in two friendly games and suddenly he is better than Lukaku? I love the kid but let's calm down a bit. Give him time.
Lukaku - transfer speculation | Gone
- Thread starter bond19821982
- Start date
- Status
The young Greenwood shines in two friendly games and suddenly he is better than Lukaku? I love the kid but let's calm down a bit. Give him time.
Certainly Greenwood but I don't see James scoring much in the Prem. Needs a loan I think to get to the right level. Trouble is we need Rashford to get 40 this season if we sell Lukaku. I'd like to see him get closer to 20 first before selling Rom. Unless we sign a better striker. Of which there are 50 around the globe we could sign right now.
It's like all the people that said Mbappe and Kane would be a flash in the pan too.
"just wait, see if he can do it again next year" sometimes players are just good.
Honestly even I'd never want a young kid to replace our establish striker, but in this case I do. Lukaku hasn't hit the ground running, he scores goals but it's never vital goals when we need it the most to win us games.
In terms of versatility, energy and quickness, if Greenwood fits into Ole's vision of playing better, I'd pick him over Lukaku anyday. Doesn't really matter whether he is better or not. This year has to be about the right personnel for the style we trying to play.
Never said he was better, Greenwood has a future here Lukaku hasnt hence the comment. If Lukaku stays its highly unlikely he will be a starter so he will take minutes Greenwood should be getting.
Exactly. Lukaku is better at leading the line as he is experienced player and at his peak but we need better footballers to play better football. Greenwood is better footballer going by what he has shown in friendlies, academy and very few mins he got for ManUtd.
It won't be long before Greenwood starts scoring for first team.
The problem might be how we both define world class. My definition of world class is a player who is among the best in the world. That in itself is very subjective because the context has to be clear. But I think Lukaku is among the best strikers in the world generally speaking. No, he is not at Aguero, Suarez or Lewandowsky level, not at all, but he is certainly good enough to be rated as one of the top 25 strikers in the world. Is that what United needs, I say no. A club that has produced top ten rated strikers in the world for decades, can do better than Romelu. But it doesn't change the fact that Lukaku is world class in my definition despite having a poor season with United.
Oh, okay. Very fair point.
It's also similar to what Guardiola did with Aguero.
He had a world class footballer in Aguero, but he wasn't happy purely with just goals. He wanted off the ball work too and hard pressing from his striker.
Until Aguero got fit enough and had the desire to press like he wanted - he benched him for Jesus.
Lukaku with his body just can't do that effectively for 90 minutes, so he's struggled.
Yeah, Lukaku won't for sure. He is the CF who covered least distance playing for top 6 club. For now he doesn't fit how Solskjaer wants his team to play and also he isn't great goal scorer to compensate for his lack of work rate and limitations.
So that we don't waste time arguing, what is your definition of 'World Class'? Maybe our not clarifying that is the problem.
Mine, generally speaking without any established technical definition, is a player who is just about top 25 in his position. In that case, I rank Lukaku as one of the best strikers in the world. And to be clear, what is most important for me in a striker, is the ability to stick the ball at the back of the net, something Lukaku's career, since he was 18, has been brilliant at despite a poor season with United.
But do we need a better striker at United, I say yes.
Yeah, but until they actually show they are that good in real competitive games, let's chill a bit. Lukaku also showed good flashes at 18 and actually went on to bang in goals for clubs and country. Let's give him credit for that.
I do share in the optimism for Greenwood. He looks like he has real talent. But let's not praise him to high heavens and kill his potential before it blossoms.
We only need to replace him if it's our plan to replace him regardless. Going into the season with Sanchez, Mata, Rashford, Martial, Greenwood, Lingard & James to me seems more than adequate in terms of numbers (with Chong/Gomes getting minutes in the EL). We can argue the quality of those 7 options but again Lukaku would be a bench option anyway so he hardly helps in that regard.
I disagree that he's a top, top striker. I think he's a good striker if your team sets up perfectly to suit his strengths. We are not going to do that under Ole so in that context he's a poor striker.
People like the Glazers don't become billionaires whilst failing to understand basic economic principles like depreciation and the sunk cost fallacy.
The bolded is nonsense. Every player we sell is subject to the basic economic rule of supply and demand. If Barcelona, Madrid, Bayern and Inter were all after Lukaku then of course we wouldn't settle for the current offers on the table. The problem is the demand is restricted to one single club that can afford both a £63m staged fee and also his huge wages.
If we try to sell Sanchez or Madrid try to sell Bale, the same principles apply. Of the half dozen clubs that can afford both, literally none outside of China would be interested. It doesn't matter if Idiot FC bought Lukaku for £100m tomorrow, the floodgates aren't going to open with bids left, right and centre of £25m for Jones, £40m for Smalling and £20m for Darmian. Conversely if we try to sell Pogba we're likely to get bids of over £100m because several huge clubs would be interested (PSG, Juve, Madrid). Therefore we can set the price high due to the high demand.
When you say "we literally hold all the cards". Do we also "hold all the cards" with Sanchez and Jones? Holding all the cards is only desirable if you actually want the cards you're holding. If you don't then it's the role of senior management to sell on best possible terms. Best possible terms with Lukaku is around £75m if staged as a 2 year loan and obligation to buy or maybe £60-65m if it's cash up front.
Failing to agree to a deal would mean we continue to "hold the cards" for another season whilst paying a huge salary and having a disgruntled and almost certainly unfit player (he's had no pre-season of course), with a history of weight issues, who doesn't fit the managers system. Not a card I'd want to be within a country of come the end of the window.
I disagree with most the points you have made on here. Lukaku has scored goals wherever he has been and on the International stage. His goals to game ratio is up there with the best strikers.
Just cause he doesn't fit the current Utd system doesnt mean other clubs dont want him. People pay big bucks for a striker to put the ball in the net. Look at Newcastle paying £40m for someone who score 11 goals in the Bundesliga.
Now to your point about supply and demand, do you agree we were the only bidder for Wan Bisakka? Why did Palace get what they wanted?
Man City have pulled out the deal for Maguire, why is the price not dropping? You will say they don't need the money, well Utd dont need the money either.
In relation to Jones, Mings went for £26m, were there any other bidders? No.
It all comes down to how good you are at negotiating. Ed Woodward is shit.
Which young prospective player would you like to take as please I don't know much about Inter?
There's Barella, Pompetti, for midfield, and a 20 year old CB called Ryan Nolan, a future Republic of Ireland CB. Depends really on who Ole would be interested in. I'm just throwing these in there. But we were interested in Barella
Heard some reports that inter have walked away????
Hasn't Ryan Nolan either been released or transfer listed this week?
Now re-adjust those stats for the last 2 years only, and you will quickly see why no top team really wants Lukaku, and Inter don't really feel he is worth it either.
Neither do I. Take the money, get him off the payroll, and move forward.
Not exactly. They will need to sell first though, after that owner just might green light the deal at £75m. Right now it's dead in the water though, unless united change their stance
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2015
- Messages
- 17,736
- Supports
️
I’m sorry but you can’t say he isn’t a top striker he by all striking definitions is one of the best goal scorers in the game at present.
Even in a non ideal set up he is not “poor” because to someone else he has value.
Except Lukaku isn’t a sunk cost situation, he will potentially be a depreciating asset but right now he’s 26 at his peak potentially with an outstanding international and domestic goal scoring record he’s had a poor season last season but which United player hasn’t?
You call it nonsense but look at every quote from Conte! There is a definite and desperate demand for the player therefore we can supply for market value. If Inter can’t afford the going rate then we keep an asset that could be sold in future but right now we can use. Otherwise we sell him for what 50 odd million and then have to splash that amount on someone unproven in the PL? (See previous post regarding £30m plus strikers)
The options without Lukaku are not enough. You have too many young inexperienced players whereas Lukaku has 8 years of top flight football behind him and consistently has found the net for the clubs he’s played at. He’ll he’s even got a decent record at United apart from last season. 42 in 96 with 13 assists is a goal contribution every other game? And yet so many will throw this away on players without this record in weaker leagues? Having a quality goal scorer on the bench with experience is never a bad thing as long as they will play which I don’t think is an issue for Lukaku.
Conflating Lukaku to Bale and Sanchez is you presenting a straw man argument to attack. Nobody can deny there isn’t demand for these players but Inter and Conte have publicly declared they want him. Conte has previously wanted to work with Lukaku too so his situation is different. He’s not at the end of his career, hasn’t struggled with injuries and his manager hasn’t throw him under a bus saying he wants rid. So to compare those situations shows a lack of market awareness.
I’m also not saying we should sell Smalling and Jones and again wouldn’t expect that kind of money for them. I am referring specifically to Lukaku and when we have an asset in their prime years with great stats behind them and a very interested buyer.
Sanchez and Jones are not relevant to this specific situation. Jones has a new contract and Sanchez has had no public courters and also have either history of injuries or are clearly past their prime so non comparable situations.
You’re now saying a deal for a couple year loan worth £75m in total would be fine, I’ve not disagreed with that but we should set the price and it’s then Inter’s job to find the money. It happens to us all the time.
Essentially if Lukaku played for another team and we were buying we’d pay the £75m. We did. All that has changed is that he has more international experience with a poor domestic season. He’s still comfortably better than the other signings made this window for lower fees and statistically he’s a better goal scorer that most strikers both past and present. If Lukaku isn’t a complete idiot (which he isn’t) if a move doesn’t appear he’ll get himself back and playing or risk his entire career.
If we don't get Lukaku deal done before the window closes it will be an embarrassment to the club I'll tell you that for nothing.
This is the biggest misconception right now amongst the sell him for what you can get crowd. In your example actually yes we do want the cards we are holding and Ole has been pretty upfront about the fact that he would rather Romelu stay. Now, very much like LCFC with Maguire, there is a price at which we are willing to do business as we do not consider him irreplaceable but unless that price is met we won't be selling and are quite happy to keep him in the squad.
Thank you very much for the insight
wouldnt surprise me.
They obviously don't have the money so.
Thanks Rom for that night in Paris and always trying your best. However, we really should take the 50 Mio or whatever Inter is able to scrape up and send the big man to Italy.
Why?
Supply and demand obviously takes into account the value of the item to the person selling also, as they can choose not to sell. If Wan Bassaka could be the difference between Crystal Palace being relegated and them staying up, then obviously they aren't going to capitulate to a £40m bid. Likewise he's worth £50m for United hence we're paying it. No-one is prepared to pay £75m for Lukaku.
It has nothing to do with Woodward's ability to negotiate. I might want to sell my house for £500k but if there's only one interested party and their max budget is £400k then no ability to negotiate is going to change that. You reduce your price by £100k or you don't move. There are only 6 other European clubs (Bayern, City, Liverpool, Madrid, PSG or Barcelona) that can afford a £200k weekly wage and a £75m transfer fee up front. Out of those clubs there is zero chance any of them would be interested in Lukaku. Compare this to Maguire... There are two clubs who not only could afford an £80m transfer fee as evidenced by their previous purchases; but also actively want him. It's apples and oranges.
Do you feel Lukaku is going to be worth £25m to United next season (a fifth of his 5 year contracted £75m fee plus £10m in wages)? Personally I think 15m in depreciation plus £10m in wages is a ludicrous amount for what he's likely to contribute.
Ole is stating that he's comfortable with Lukaku staying because coming out and saying "we want rid", just like Zidane has done with Bale would show complete desperation and would also ostricise the player if no deal can be agreed. It was serve zero benefit and a heavy amount of drawback.
Lukaku has no great value to anyone at this stage other than Inter, simply because other clubs either a) can't afford the fee; b) can't afford his salary; or c) would consider him a huge downgrade on current options.
Really, then why do we need to negotiate prices? Why can't we just go to teams and say for example We want Maguire and Leicester say £80m, then it is up to Manutd to decide can we afford him or not. Why is it taking 2 months?
He is 26 now so entering his prime, with prices inflating by the year, why would he depreciate? also £10m in wages, Ole has already said we need to replace if we sell. So selling Lukaku at £54m of which only £10m is initial then installments. So we have to get another player in who will cost us £50m plus so in actual fact we lost out because there will be a salary paid to that player too.
I will use your scenario here. If you want to sell your house at £500k that you bought for £500k 2 years ago and I offer you £400k - and offer to pay you £100k first and the rest in instalments every year? That just means I cannot afford it.
Inter are trying to buy a player they cannot afford. If they went and sold the players they dont want, e.g Icardi, Perisic, Naingolan, they would up the bid to £75m. This means they are willing to pay the asking price but dont have the money.
Does anyone believe Lukaku has really been injured? I'm not sure if he's playing some game or if Ole has decided to keep him off the spotlight until his future is decided.
This situation is bad for the player himself because if he stays, there is no chance he will be anywhere near the first 11 in the first month or 2, all of the other attackers have had a proper pre-season, bar Sanchez, who is also a bit of an unknown right now, but Ole has hinted he will get a chance up front as we don't require a giant of a striker in our system anymore.
This situation is bad for the player himself because if he stays, there is no chance he will be anywhere near the first 11 in the first month or 2, all of the other attackers have had a proper pre-season, bar Sanchez, who is also a bit of an unknown right now, but Ole has hinted he will get a chance up front as we don't require a giant of a striker in our system anymore.
How exactly do you define Lukaku as WC though? His finishing is inferior to Cole let alone the top dogs in that line (RVN, Batigol, Inzaghi etc). His first touch is horrible. His technique is meah. He's got good physical strength but he's no beast like Vieri and lets face it, the typical Championship striker has that same strength. His pace is half decent but he's no Rashford let alone an Anelka.
The combination of his skills makes him a decent player IF used in the correct system. However he's no WC player. Also assuming that there are 10 top clubs in the world (Liverpool, Man United, Shitty, Chelsea, Juventus, Bayern, Barcelona, Real, PSG, Atletico, Spurs) most of whom have 1 main striker each, then being part of that 25 top strikers doesn't even qualify you as big club material let alone WC.
He's doing absolutely nothing on tour so far. Not even training on his own. He's just sitting on his arse while watching the team train. We are going to have a ridiculously unfit player with zero minutes of pre season if he doesn't get the move to Inter. Those Inter cnuts need to hurry up and cough up the money
The negotiations for Maguire are taking two months because they're at a standstill. United want to pay X maximum and Leicester want X+£10m minimum. It's called an impasse and has no bearing on anyone's ability to negotiate.
His value will depreciate because:
a) He's 12 months older, meaning he has one less footballing year left in the tank for the buying club
b) He has 1 less year on his contract. A player with 2 years left has more leverage than a player with 3 years left
c) He'll spend more time on the bench than on the pitch. He'll go from a striker who averages 20+ goals a season with last year being a blip, to a striker with 25 goals in 2 years
The key thing you're missing is if we replace him we'll do so with someone who fits the managers profile and will improve the team. When we were purchasing Wan Bassaka we weren't looking at how much we could sell Young for to offset the cost because that's irrelevant.
If I bought a house for £500k and since found out there was subsidence that meant the house not only was worth far less than when I bought it, but also the value would reduce every year as the cost to rectify the problem increased; and added to that only one party was interested in taking on such a project... Then I'd be stupid to demand the exact fee I bought it for up front and be stuck with a house I can't live in.
If two offers came in for firstly £100k up front with a guarantee of £400k being paid on completion of the subsidence works and secondly for £400k up front with no further payments... Then I would consider my own financial position. If I were very wealthy and had £1m in my bank sat there already, then I'd prefer the first offer. If I were struggling and needed to buy my next house immediately then I'd take the £400k.
United in this position have hundreds of millions in their bank so should take the £9m up front with the guarantee of £53m in two years (obviously after trying to negotiate it up as much as possible).
Nobody believes he is injured, its standard for a player on the brink of a move
Inter are wasting our time. Primark shopper ending up at Harrods. Made a big deal of sending someone to UK for this shit.
Explain your thinking here please. Why is it an embarrassment?
Sure, but what happens if there is no transfer? Lukaku will be totally unfit and not ready for the start of the season.
I think he'd be a great striker in a very dominant team such as Real Madrid or Manchester City. In a team where every player has to pull their weight he falls short almost every time.
- Status