[Sylar]

That's exactly my point mate. His fee is for potential, since when did Manchester United the biggest club in England sign a centre forward to start for us as our main man while being unproven and having scored 6 goals in his whole career in a top 5 league. Now let's talk about Leipzig. As you said Leipzig signed a similar player with potential in Sesko, for a third of the price and to be third choice centre forward (behind Werner and Openda) but we Manchester fricking United signed a similarly experienced player to lead our line.

We did a similar thing with Amad/Pellestri with Ole, we were desperate for a starting right winger and we signed 2 kids instead.

Surely if we've been desperate for a striker for so many years you buy the one that can immediately contribute to your team and then the one that has potential afterwards.

It's just absolutely dreadful squad planning and shows nothing has changed since ETH came in. It's a howler. I remember a time not too long ago that we had 4 strikers that were all better than Hojlund is right now.

I like Hojlund btw and would have no problem with his signing if he was in addition to a starting striker but when the whole world and the whole league knew you needed a goalscoring striker and you splash it all on a guy that's scored 6 professional club goals then you deserve all of the criticism you should rightly get.

@Shark answer applies to your post as well.

Not Man Utd expected it to change as long as we got the same structure above the manager. Its been awful for ten years, and it only works with a bit of luck (you need all four signings (which we seem to be restricted to at most per window) to be a hit, as well as injury free)
I agree with your overall point. Hoijlund makes sense if you have a firing Martial starting (which happened for one season), and you can embed Hoijlund to learn from him.
It defo works if you have Cavani or Zlatan (their first years), where they will play the majority, but he can learn from.

I think most people will see your comment ' So when are we going to call out this signing for what it is ?' as a shot at the player rather than the clubs planning.

 

[TrustInJanuzaj]

Lukaku was fecking awful that was his issue.

 

[Brightonian]

The thing is as well, he's (or was) top scorer in the CL, and yet we are bottom, so would would exactly would Kane have changed? He wasn't gonna plug the massive gaping black hole that is the midfield and he wasn't going to plug this leaky as shit defense so.

Agreed. My post wasn't a 'we should have got Kane', it was a 'Hojlund is doing quite well, it's not fair to expect him to be prime Kane, if we wanted prime Kane we should have bought prime Kane.'

 

[the_cliff]

Which established striker did you have in mind?

We should have gone all out for Harry Kane. Many people disagree but if we signed no one but Kane we'd be a lot better off of this season. No way Fergie would have let him go to Bayern and I'm sure he would have got him even if it meant no Mount Onana etc.

 

[Andycoleno9]

We should have gone all out for Harry Kane. Many people disagree but if we signed no one but Kane we'd be a lot better off of this season. No way Fergie would have let him go to Bayern and I'm sure he would have got him even if it meant no Mount Onana etc.

Even with "famous" Levy tax (which is BS) he wouldn't be more than 120 mil. So there would be enough money to waste on Mount or Onana.

 

[the_cliff]

Even with "famous" Levy tax (which is BS) he wouldn't be more than 120 mil. So there would be enough money to waste on Mount or Onana.

Even for those that say they'd only sell him to us for 140-150. We would have signed him under Fergie regardless of any additional signings. If a world class striker was available we used to get him straight away. Same goes for Haaland.

Now we dilly dally and sign a kid that had scored 6 goals before joining us for 60-70 m and then say well there was no one else available.

Toney/Watkins will be available this summer but we won't sign them, they'll end up at teams that are serious meanwhile we'll be praying that Hojlund turns into the next RVP.

 

[Bobski]

Lukakus problems through his career were more mental than ability related. If he was able to get more consistency in overall game and able to do it in pressure situations like he was in others, he'd be seen much better.

Hojlund technically though to me looks much stronger anyway. Hojlunds technical issues tend to be when backing into a defender, and it's more inconsistency with that. Which isn't a surprise. He's 20, and his game builds around a skill that even the very best strikers of the past 30 years weren't able to do that until their mid 20's. Strikers like that who back into defenders to hold up the ball, especially premier league CBs, compete physically regularly and play as an all rounder... They typically do absolutely nothing in big leagues until 22 or 23. Lewandowski, Kane, Dzeko, Cavani, Ibra, etc. The list goes on. They are hard skills to master and take years to get there. Attackers who excel early tend to be based off of off the ball movement, being roamers or poachers. Lukaku when he was young and throughout his career never really learned how to back into defenders to hold it up properly. Haaland didn't do that at first. Kane didn't do that right away, and he was a couple years older anyway when he broke through properly.

It's about highlighting what type of player he is, what skills he shows, and when we should expect those to be more refined and consistent. For a player like Hojlund, that's really 22/23 when I'd expect the main step up, because historically all the best players who did similar things didn't do anything before that point either.

You are right, it is a long game with Hojlund and ideally Utd will bring in someone to take the pressure off him. Would say that recent Utd has not been a great environment for continuing development on first team players, that needs to change.

 

[Rojofiam]

We should have gone all out for Harry Kane. Many people disagree but if we signed no one but Kane we'd be a lot better off of this season. No way Fergie would have let him go to Bayern and I'm sure he would have got him even if it meant no Mount Onana etc.

Yes, but in all likelihood Kane was unattainable. Ten Hag also clearly wasn't going to tolerate another season with DDG.

 

[Rojofiam]

Even for those that say they'd only sell him to us for 140-150. We would have signed him under Fergie regardless of any additional signings. If a world class striker was available we used to get him straight away. Same goes for Haaland.

Now we dilly dally and sign a kid that had scored 6 goals before joining us for 60-70 m and then say well there was no one else available.

Toney/Watkins will be available this summer but we won't sign them, they'll end up at teams that are serious meanwhile we'll be praying that Hojlund turns into the next RVP.

Haha, I think you are underrating Hojlund just based on his stats in his previous clubs. Within a few games for United you could tell that he's an immense talent, and the fee is going to be justified.

 

[Lost bear]

Nobody wants to hear that Lewandowski had just been transferred to Lech Poznan where he'd spend 2 full seasons at Hojlunds age, and his first Dortmund season after that was a bit shit.

Or that Kane had only had championship loans before this point and was a backup for Spurs that year before breaking out the following year (and he's early relative to others...).

Yeah . Personally I feel certain that Hojlund has great potential and will click with his goals given a little time and patience, and a more considered supply chain from his team mates. That is more of an instinctive reading derived from watching him play, but it’s good to hear it supported by evidence from other top strikers.

 

[bosnian_red]

We should have gone all out for Harry Kane. Many people disagree but if we signed no one but Kane we'd be a lot better off of this season. No way Fergie would have let him go to Bayern and I'm sure he would have got him even if it meant no Mount Onana etc.

Fergie may have gone for Kane. He'd likely have had a sorted striker before hand where we wouldn't spend so much on a 30 year old. He'd also have us as a title competitor, or just a Kane away. It's a different and pointless comparison. We were and still are much more than a Kane away from being a title challenger. Spending 100m on a 30 year old is dumb, unless that will make you a title winner. So it never made sense for us in our state

 

[ti vu]

Would have been a major improvement, but still, the technical issues would limit what you could do with him. I think Utd have to make a decision about what type of striker they want long term, my preference would always be for an all rounder who can link with the team, hold the ball up, interchange with the wide forwards, basically a fit, harder working, not as mardy version of Martial. A Hojlund type as an alternative or possible partner in some games would be a decent set up.

Right now many of the big, rich clubs would look for the same one. So unless there are a dozen of them suddenly breakthrough at top level, you unlikely would be able to recruit one.

Bayern had a stop gap year with Choupo Moting only to break club record to sign 30 year old Harry Kane for a reason. Barcelona had to make do with Lewandowski in his mid 30. Chelsea, Arsenal are looking for a new CF too as report suggest. RM currently has a hole at no9 position. Newcastle signed Isak who is known injury prone. Tottenham currently plays Son as CF which is not his natural position. Hell I would say, Pep would go after the type of CF you describe since he can use that type of forward alongside with Haaland and as back up for Haaland in case of injury.

We didn't even have good enough stop gap and system to play the waiting game. Then the odd for attracting that kind of talented striker when the fierce competition for this player's signature is crazily low. There is a reason Darwin Nunez fee was that inflated, and Liverpool of all clubs bit their lips to push that transfer through.

 

[the_cliff]

Fergie may have gone for Kane. He'd likely have had a sorted striker before hand where we wouldn't spend so much on a 30 year old. He'd also have us as a title competitor, or just a Kane away. It's a different and pointless comparison. We were and still are much more than a Kane away from being a title challenger. Spending 100m on a 30 year old is dumb, unless that will make you a title winner. So it never made sense for us in our state

A world class striker makes you a title contender. If we signed no one but Kane we'd be in the title race right now (We're only 6 behind now and our attackers have scored a grand total of 4 goals between them).

 

[JagUTD]

We should have gone all out for Harry Kane. Many people disagree but if we signed no one but Kane we'd be a lot better off of this season. No way Fergie would have let him go to Bayern and I'm sure he would have got him even if it meant no Mount Onana etc.

Last seasons United plus Harry Kane would probably be top of the league right now and comfortably through the group in the Champions League.

Those 9 defeats would be closer to 2 as well.

Anyway, let's not talk about what could have been, it's to painful

 

[Amir]

Fergie would have gone for Kane, but the idea that he definitely would have been able to sign him is a little far fetched. Maybe, maybe not. Like Shearer.

 

[Sylar]

Fergie would have gone for Kane, but the idea that he definitely would have been able to sign him is a little far fetched. Maybe, maybe not. Like Shearer.

He defo would have attempted and I reckon it would have been around the time we got lukaku, much earlier.

Yeah . Personally I feel certain that Hojlund has great potential and will click with his goals given a little time and patience, and a more considered supply chain from his team mates. That is more of an instinctive reading derived from watching him play, but it’s good to hear it supported by evidence from other top strikers.

My worry is the bad service he gets, which will result in him picking up habits like not making those runs any more. Reckon if we had wingers who would try find him regularly it would benefit him and the team.

 

[bosnian_red]

A world class striker makes you a title contender. If we signed no one but Kane we'd be in the title race right now (We're only 6 behind now and our attackers have scored a grand total of 4 goals between them).

We are so far away from that, a striker doesn't make us as good as city FFS. Can't actually watch us and think that

 

[JagUTD]

We are so far away from that, a striker doesn't make us as good as city FFS. Can't actually watch us and think that

Our two biggest problems this season are the strikers and keeper.

Kane solves one of them completely and probably compensates for the other in doing so. Though if Kane was the only signing, the keeper would be much less of an issue anyway.

We're clearly not as good as City but somehow, against all the odds we are 5 points behind them and 3 of those points came from City beating us. We'd have more points if we had Harry Kane.

 

[ti vu]

Lukakus problems through his career were more mental than ability related. If he was able to get more consistency in overall game and able to do it in pressure situations like he was in others, he'd be seen much better.

Hojlund technically though to me looks much stronger anyway. Hojlunds technical issues tend to be when backing into a defender, and it's more inconsistency with that. Which isn't a surprise. He's 20, and his game builds around a skill that even the very best strikers of the past 30 years weren't able to do that until their mid 20's. Strikers like that who back into defenders to hold up the ball, especially premier league CBs, compete physically regularly and play as an all rounder... They typically do absolutely nothing in big leagues until 22 or 23. Lewandowski, Kane, Dzeko, Cavani, Ibra, etc. The list goes on. They are hard skills to master and take years to get there. Attackers who excel early tend to be based off of off the ball movement, being roamers or poachers. Lukaku when he was young and throughout his career never really learned how to back into defenders to hold it up properly. Haaland didn't do that at first. Kane didn't do that right away, and he was a couple years older anyway when he broke through properly.

It's about highlighting what type of player he is, what skills he shows, and when we should expect those to be more refined and consistent. For a player like Hojlund, that's really 22/23 when I'd expect the main step up, because historically all the best players who did similar things didn't do anything before that point either.

Agree with your perspective and most of what you said. Just being nitpicked here.

Cavani played in Serie A in early his 20. During this team Serie A was on the decline but the gap between Serie A, La Liga and PL was very close. There was a reason Milan was still a force in CL during this season, and few years later Mourinho Inter could compete and won CL. Top players in Serie A was still highly desired. Zlatan moved to Juventus when he was 23 at the time Serie A was considered the top league in Europe. I don't know how Zlatan did as a whole at Ajax, but he was very physical from the get go when he arrived in Serie A, and in this friendly game against us he looked to be already very physical too.

 

[Pronewbie]

Lukaku was fecking awful that was his issue.

And yet like another poster pointed out was doing much better at the same age range as Hoijlund has for Atalanta and us. Not saying Hoijlund won't come good but it's an interesting short term comparison.

 

[Bobski]

Right now many of the big, rich clubs would look for the same one. So unless there are a dozen of them suddenly breakthrough at top level, you unlikely would be able to recruit one.

Bayern had a stop gap year with Choupo Moting only to break club record to sign 30 year old Harry Kane for a reason. Barcelona had to make do with Lewandowski in his mid 30. Chelsea, Arsenal are looking for a new CF too as report suggest. RM currently has a hole at no9 position. Newcastle signed Isak who is known injury prone. Tottenham currently plays Son as CF which is not his natural position. Hell I would say, Pep would go after the type of CF you describe since he can use that type of forward alongside with Haaland and as back up for Haaland in case of injury.

We didn't even have good enough stop gap and system to play the waiting game. Then the odd for attracting that kind of talented striker when the fierce competition for this player's signature is crazily low. There is a reason Darwin Nunez fee was that inflated, and Liverpool of all clubs bit their lips to push that transfer through.

Are clubs going to have to start repurposing some of the wide forwards coming through into CF's. There is a real dearth of top class strikers, one of the main reasons is guys who would have been traditional strikers 15-20 years ago shifted to the wide forward role, still gives them the chance to score a lot of goals, but removes the need to take the physical battering that competing with CB's, holding the ball up, naturally created, Also a lot of widen forwards have minimal defensive responsibilities beyond initial pressing compared to previous era wingers so no surprise it is a stacked role these days in comparison to forwards.

Gabriel Jesus would have been a decent option if he wasn't so injury prone.

Just back on Hojlund, would love if he ended up as as something similar to Louis Saha, without the injuries of course, type of striker who pretty much fits in every system.

 

[UnofficialDevil]

Yep. We should have got Kane instead of Mount and Onana.

 

[Alemar]

Rasmus is our top goal scorer this season (despite missing some games due to injuries), yet there is so much criticism...

 

[bosnian_red]

Our two biggest problems this season are the strikers and keeper.

Kane solves one of them completely and probably compensates for the other in doing so. Though if Kane was the only signing, the keeper would be much less of an issue anyway.

We're clearly not as good as City but somehow, against all the odds we are 5 points behind them and 3 of those points came from City beating us. We'd have more points if we had Harry Kane.

Our biggest problem this season is a complete lack of control in games. We concede as many shots as anybody in the league. We don't control the tempo of games. We don't have any balance in our team, opposition cuts through us with ease and dictate tempo against us regularly. Of course, a better striker means we score more but overall just looking at it like "oh we are a few points away that means we'd be closer and therefore in a title challenge" is so simplistic. That's like saying put Kane on any team in the top half and they are now going to compete with City. Which is complete nonsense.

We are on pace to finish 18 points behind the winners by the end of the season is another way to look at it. Another way is that we've been ridiculously fortunate to have picked up 24 points so far this season, as our underlying stats based on performances put us in 11th in the league this season.

I'm sorry but if anybody actually watched us this season and thinks that putting any single striker in our team makes us title challengers, then they straight up don't know anything about football. It's painfully obvious watching us that we are nowhere close to that level and it's not just a CF issue. We have 0 control in games. Watch the other top teams who are actually competing for the title, and see how much better they are in their play. It's night and day.

 

[Mike Smalling]

Rasmus is our top goal scorer this season (despite missing some games due to injuries), yet there is so much criticism...

So much negative attention is driven by him not scoring in the PL yet. I imagine it would be different if his five goals had been spread across PL and CL, and also if they had led to points.

 

[bosnian_red]

Agree with your perspective and most of what you said. Just being nitpicked here.

Cavani played in Serie A in early his 20. During this team Serie A was on the decline but the gap between Serie A, La Liga and PL was very close. There was a reason Milan was still a force in CL during this season, and few years later Mourinho Inter could compete and won CL. Top players in Serie A was still highly desired. Zlatan moved to Juventus when he was 23 at the time Serie A was considered the top league in Europe. I don't know how Zlatan did as a whole at Ajax, but he was very physical from the get go when he arrived in Serie A, and in this friendly game against us he looked to be already very physical too.

Ibra had huge potential of course. But at age 20 he was doing his first season for Ajax. Hojlunds looks promising and is very physical too. But he's in his first season here. The difference between a 20 year old and 23 year old CF is huge. I'd expect a 23 year old to be showing a high level. I don't for a 20 year old.

Cavani moved to Italy at 20 years old in 2007. He didn't do much that half season, then 07/08 he didn't do much (5 goals in 35 games - this is the equivalent age as hojlunds right now), then the following 2 seasons (age 21/22 and 22/23 in 08/09 and 09/10 he scored 15 goals in 36 games in each season. He then moved to Napoli and stepped up into a top striker in his age 23/24 season.

My point is that center forwards who play with physicality just take a while to adapt. It makes sense. They are kids who come in to compete with professional defenders, which is the most physical position. If they are going in to hold the ball up on them and battle them, it'll take a few years to learn your body and learn how to duel with them and be able to push the rest of your game more. It's just very rare for a classic CF style player to come in and do anything of note before 22 or so. Hojlunds in his first half season in the Prem which is by far the toughest league for his type of player. It'll just take time.

 

[Garethw]

He’s been a massive disappointment.
It was always going to be a ridiculous decision to pin all of our hopes on such a young and inexperienced striker.

I feel for him as he is nowhere near ready to be leading the line for a club like United.

 

[Nebel]

A striker this young, needs someone to learn from. Usually a seasoned vet, that's how it's usually done, we pin all our hopes on a relatively untested youngster that he burns down the entire league.

 

[bosnian_red]

And yet like another poster pointed out was doing much better at the same age range as Hoijlund has for Atalanta and us. Not saying Hoijlund won't come good but it's an interesting short term comparison.

Lukaku is basically 2nd to Haaland for young and physical center forwards over the past 30 years.

Lukaku also broke through based on being a physical poacher, like Haaland has. Main strengths running in behind. He never knew how to hold the ball up well. They're different types of players.

 

[Red00012]

Yep. We should have got Kane instead of Mount and Onana.

We should have got Haaland instead of Mount and Onana

 

[FujiVice]

He hasnt been a massive disappointment. The fact we're a team who seems incapable of creating chances half the time, and has put so much pressure on a 20 year old kid is what is a massive disappointment. Clearly he's talented, he's fast, can finish, gets into positions, works his bollocks off. But we've totally let him down. When you have a 20 year old with the potential he has, the idea is to bed him in. Not throw him to the wolves.

 

[Alemar]

He’s been a massive disappointment.

And who was Rashford then? Rasmus is several times more efficient than Rashford this season

 

[elmo]

He’s been a massive disappointment.
It was always going to be a ridiculous decision to pin all of our hopes on such a young and inexperienced striker.

I feel for him as he is nowhere near ready to be leading the line for a club like United.

The real disappointment has been the rest of our attackers because they’ve been selfish and not creating much chances for him. He can score when he’s given chances as shown in the CL.

 

[Utd heap]

Hang on people genuinely aren't really pleased we signed this guy?

I think he's been really good?

 

[Rojofiam]

Hang on people genuinely aren't really pleased we signed this guy?

I think he's been really good?

He has been really good. Calling him a disappointment is just daft, to be honest.

 

[Andycoleno9]

He has been really good. Calling him a disappointment is just daft, to be honest.

Seriously?

 

[Rojofiam]

Seriously?

Yes.

 

[Utd heap]

Seriously?

He's had maybe 2/3 poor games? At most, in a dysfunctional side at 20 years old?

 

[Mickeza]

Fergie would have gone for Kane, but the idea that he definitely would have been able to sign him is a little far fetched. Maybe, maybe not. Like Shearer.

Ferguson would have signed Rice and Kane years ago. Not a single doubt in my mind. Signing Hojlund isn’t the issue - I think he’ll be a very good striker - the fact he’s guaranteed to start every week at his current level is absurd though. Evan Ferguson has more competition at Brighton for fecks sake.

 

[Bobski]

Ferguson would have signed Rice and Kane years ago. Not a single doubt in my mind. Signing Hojlund isn’t the issue - I think he’ll be a very good striker - the fact he’s guaranteed to start every week at his current level is absurd though. Evan Ferguson has more competition at Brighton for fecks sake.

Rice is the type of no brainer signing that Utd should have done 2/3 years ago. Even at an inflated price we would have been getting a PL proven player at a great age, strong physical profile with the likelihood of getting 10 years service out of him in a key position. Instantly solves a long standing problem and gives a solid base to build around. Should have pushed for Rice last year when FDJ fell through rather than Cas.