Rasmus Højlund | Signed for United

Status
Not open for further replies.
zaafi said:
Belotti was not even decent and never showed the natural instincts or hold-up play that Højlund has.
Belotti was also two years older when he had his freak season where he scored 26 goals. Look away from that season, and he has never gone one season where he scored over 10 open-play goals, and he played full seasons as well (2900-3300 minutes).

At Højlund's age, Cavani was playing for Palermo and scored 5 goals in his first proper season. The two following seasons before his transfer to Napoli, he scored 14 and 13 goals respectively (full seasons). Napoli bought him when he was 23.

Lewandowski played for Lech Poznan at 20 years of age, and only scored 8 goals in his first season for Dortmund at 21.

There seems to be this idea that, after Haaland, you don't become a great striker unless you score a ridiculous amount of goals at a young age. Goals don't really matter that much at that age because they don't tell the whole story.
The important thing is showcasing the natural ability and why you potentially can score a lot of goals and Højlund certainly has done that. His movement and instincts are already brilliant and will only improve.

I wouldn't say he's ready to lead the line for us, but if we don't get him now, the alternative could be that he has a brilliant season this year and Atalanta adds another €60m to his price tag like Napoli did with Osimhen while we're stuck with some aging striker like we usually are.
Click to expand...
If my memory serves me right Belotti looked even better than this lad in his highlights back then. The thing is I simply didn't see anything special in both.

And no, I'm not of the opinion a striker should be judged on goals only. If I think so I would have rated Belotti very high back then. Problem is I hardly even see the potential in this lad. He's just quite average at everything. And in his highlights I don't see anything suggesting he's good in the air. Which is very important for us since we seriously need someone good at that atm.

Agree he might come good but that's quite a big if imo. +60m is simply too much to gamble with especially given our limited budget. I'm not against buying him but if +60m I'd rather use that money on Kane. We can agree to disagree then I think.
 
Strelok said:
If my memory serves me right Belotti looked even better than this lad in his highlights back then. The thing is I simply didn't see anything special in both.

And no, I'm not of the opinion a striker should be judged on goals only. If I think so I would have rated Belotti very high back then. Problem is I hardly even see the potential in this lad. He's just quite average in everything. And in his highlights I don't see anything suggesting he's good in the air. Which is very important for us since we seriously need someone good at that atm.

Agree he might come good but that's quite a big if imo. +60m is simply to much to gamble with especially given our limited budget. I'm not against buying him but if +60m I'd rather use that money on Kane. We can agree to disagree then I think.
Click to expand...
Kane is off the table. If Levy sells it won’t be to us but rather to Bayern. There is no point in discussing him as an option for this year.
 
I'm not convinced that Kane is off. He is a born winner and will see the benefits of waiting out this season and leaving for a free next season. I agree that Levy will not sell to a Premier League side, but next year he won't have a say in the matter.

I think that the focus for this year is in securing a Goalkeeper (either as a Starter or as a Back Up to Dean Henderson), a young CB and keep fluffing up Kane so that next season, his head is not turned by City or another club. He knows he will get game time at Utd, he knows that ETH wants him and he knows that he will win trophies at OT. Start the wooing process now so that he is a banker for next season.
 
zaafi said:
Belotti was not even decent and never showed the natural instincts or hold-up play that Højlund has.
Belotti was also two years older when he had his freak season where he scored 26 goals. Look away from that season, and he has never gone one season where he scored over 10 open-play goals, and he played full seasons as well (2900-3300 minutes).

At Højlund's age, Cavani was playing for Palermo and scored 5 goals in his first proper season. The two following seasons before his transfer to Napoli, he scored 14 and 13 goals respectively (full seasons). Napoli bought him when he was 23.

Lewandowski played for Lech Poznan at 20 years of age, and only scored 8 goals in his first season for Dortmund at 21.

There seems to be this idea that, after Haaland, you don't become a great striker unless you score a ridiculous amount of goals at a young age. Goals don't really matter that much at that age because they don't tell the whole story.
The important thing is showcasing the natural ability and why you potentially can score a lot of goals and Højlund certainly has done that. His movement and instincts are already brilliant and will only improve.

I wouldn't say he's ready to lead the line for us, but if we don't get him now, the alternative could be that he has a brilliant season this year and Atalanta adds another €60m to his price tag like Napoli did with Osimhen while we're stuck with some aging striker like we usually are.
Click to expand...

This. Amazing how some people think because he hasn't scored 50 goals in one season at 20 years old he's obviously crap and over-rated.
When Kane was 20 in 2013, he spent the 2012-13 season at Norwich (0 goals in 5 games) and Leicester (2 goals in 15 games). 2013 - 14 he was back at Spurs where he scored 4 goals in 19 games. How rubbish is Kane?? Clearly he's never going to amount to anything in his career.
When RVN was 20, in 1996, he spent the 95 - 96 season at Den Bosch and scored 2 in 21, and 96 - 97 12 in 31. Outstanding eh?
Shearer was 20 in 1990. 89 - 90 5 in 35 for Southampton, 90 - 91 14 in 48.

The list goes on and on and on. There are far and away more strikers who become brilliant goal scorers once they hit 22 or so than there are Haalands of the world who score for fun at such a young age. It's honestly mental putting him down for not banging a ton of goals in at 20 years of age.
 
zaafi said:
Belotti was not even decent and never showed the natural instincts or hold-up play that Højlund has.
Belotti was also two years older when he had his freak season where he scored 26 goals. Look away from that season, and he has never gone one season where he scored over 10 open-play goals, and he played full seasons as well (2900-3300 minutes).

At Højlund's age, Cavani was playing for Palermo and scored 5 goals in his first proper season. The two following seasons before his transfer to Napoli, he scored 14 and 13 goals respectively (full seasons). Napoli bought him when he was 23.

Lewandowski played for Lech Poznan at 20 years of age, and only scored 8 goals in his first season for Dortmund at 21.

There seems to be this idea that, after Haaland, you don't become a great striker unless you score a ridiculous amount of goals at a young age. Goals don't really matter that much at that age because they don't tell the whole story.
The important thing is showcasing the natural ability and why you potentially can score a lot of goals and Højlund certainly has done that. His movement and instincts are already brilliant and will only improve.

I wouldn't say he's ready to lead the line for us, but if we don't get him now, the alternative could be that he has a brilliant season this year and Atalanta adds another €60m to his price tag like Napoli did with Osimhen while we're stuck with some aging striker like we usually are.
Click to expand...
This is a great and sensible post. I’m not necessarily sold on Hojlund myself, but feck me, this thread makes me glad nobody here is a professional scout :lol:
 
zaafi said:
This is really not how you determine if a striker will become great or not.

It's hard to score against teams who dominate your team. In fact, you could use this method of yours and say the same for Osimhen, but asking the question how he hasn't scored against better teams when Napoli dominates almost all of the teams.

Højlund will have both Bruno and Mount creating for him in a team that normally dominates most teams in Premier League. This is a huge difference to playing for Atalanta in a weak team. You could argue that PL is a few levels above Serie A, but he has the physicality and abilities to adapt to the league.
Click to expand...
We are trying to draw comparisons between things that really are not very similar at all. I don't think RH has either the physicality or the abilities to adapt. Weghorst looked better and was totally found out.

The facts, though, are that Hojland is a young player who scored 37 goals in his entire career across all competitions, and 2 of those leagues he was in were about the level of EF League One or EF League Two. If this kid was over here playing for Fleetwood Town and scored 9 goals, Fleetwood would snap your hand off to sell him, and you'd be crazy to sign him as a starter. We need a starting striker and we need him right away. RH is not that player.
 
Last edited:
zaafi said:
Belotti was not even decent and never showed the natural instincts or hold-up play that Højlund has.
Belotti was also two years older when he had his freak season where he scored 26 goals. Look away from that season, and he has never gone one season where he scored over 10 open-play goals, and he played full seasons as well (2900-3300 minutes).

At Højlund's age, Cavani was playing for Palermo and scored 5 goals in his first proper season. The two following seasons before his transfer to Napoli, he scored 14 and 13 goals respectively (full seasons). Napoli bought him when he was 23.

Lewandowski played for Lech Poznan at 20 years of age, and only scored 8 goals in his first season for Dortmund at 21.

There seems to be this idea that, after Haaland, you don't become a great striker unless you score a ridiculous amount of goals at a young age. Goals don't really matter that much at that age because they don't tell the whole story.
The important thing is showcasing the natural ability and why you potentially can score a lot of goals and Højlund certainly has done that. His movement and instincts are already brilliant and will only improve.

I wouldn't say he's ready to lead the line for us, but if we don't get him now, the alternative could be that he has a brilliant season this year and Atalanta adds another €60m to his price tag like Napoli did with Osimhen while we're stuck with some aging striker like we usually are.
Click to expand...
Excellent post
 
Strelok said:
If my memory serves me right Belotti looked even better than this lad in his highlights back then. The thing is I simply didn't see anything special in both.

And no, I'm not of the opinion a striker should be judged on goals only. If I think so I would have rated Belotti very high back then. Problem is I hardly even see the potential in this lad. He's just quite average at everything. And in his highlights I don't see anything suggesting he's good in the air. Which is very important for us since we seriously need someone good at that atm.

Agree he might come good but that's quite a big if imo. +60m is simply too much to gamble with especially given our limited budget. I'm not against buying him but if +60m I'd rather use that money on Kane. We can agree to disagree then I think.
Click to expand...
I agree with you. This should be along the lines of the Diallo deal and he should be given a few seasons to get up to speed - which is absolutely not what we need, and it's not worth a 60m punt.
 
Wing Attack Plan R said:
Hojland's goals, translated to the Prem. 7 of 9 goals were against bottom half clubs. Even Lukaku is a safer bet.

Crystal Palace = Monza (11th place)
Everton = Spezia Calcio (17th)
Brentford = Bologna (9th)
Bournemouth = Salternitana (15th)
Arsenal = Lazio (2nd)
Nottingham = Lecce (16th)
Leicester = Hellas Verona (18th)
Monza (again)
Click to expand...

he's a baby though, especially for a striker
 
dazjoe said:
This. Amazing how some people think because he hasn't scored 50 goals in one season at 20 years old he's obviously crap and over-rated.
When Kane was 20 in 2013, he spent the 2012-13 season at Norwich (0 goals in 5 games) and Leicester (2 goals in 15 games). 2013 - 14 he was back at Spurs where he scored 4 goals in 19 games. How rubbish is Kane?? Clearly he's never going to amount to anything in his career.
When RVN was 20, in 1996, he spent the 95 - 96 season at Den Bosch and scored 2 in 21, and 96 - 97 12 in 31. Outstanding eh?
Shearer was 20 in 1990. 89 - 90 5 in 35 for Southampton, 90 - 91 14 in 48.

The list goes on and on and on. There are far and away more strikers who become brilliant goal scorers once they hit 22 or so than there are Haalands of the world who score for fun at such a young age. It's honestly mental putting him down for not banging a ton of goals in at 20 years of age.
Click to expand...
By your logic we will be signing RH and loaning him out for two seasons, when what we need is a starter. I don't think anyone is against bringing in young strikers to develop, it's the idea that we are spending 1/3 of our budget on a player who isn't ready to play for us that has everyone up in arms.
 
Last edited:
zaafi said:
This is really not how you determine if a striker will become great or not.

It's hard to score against teams who dominate your team. In fact, you could use this method of yours and say the same for Osimhen, but asking the question how he hasn't scored against better teams when Napoli dominates almost all of the teams.

Højlund will have both Bruno and Mount creating for him in a team that normally dominates most teams in Premier League. This is a huge difference to playing for Atalanta in a weak team. You could argue that PL is a few levels above Serie A, but he has the physicality and abilities to adapt to the league.
Click to expand...
If you can watch RH and watch Osimhen and decide that RH is the player we should sign out of those two, I don't know what to tell you.
 
Last edited:
Wing Attack Plan R said:
So where does he go for the 2 or 3 years he will need to be playing first team football to develop into an elite striker? You are advocating we sign him and loan him out?
Click to expand...

obviously not

we will develop him and slowly integrate him, he's at the perfect age for that

that's why we're interested in players like Taremi as well
 
Wing Attack Plan R said:
By your logic we will be signing EH and loaning him out for two seasons, when what we need is a starter. I don't think anyone is against bringing in young strikers to develop, it's the idea that we are spending 1/3 of our budget on a player who isn't ready to play for us that has everyone up in arms.
Click to expand...
Not really, players can explode into goals.
RVN went from 16 in 40 games, to 41 in 46 the following season. Kane went from 4 in 19 to 31 in 51. Aguero went from 7 in 42, to 27 in 50. Henry, 4 in 38 to 26 in 48.

Obviously not saying he would definitely do the same, but also nothing to say he won't. The fact that he hasn't isn't really here nor there, none of the aforementioned players had either, until they did, and all at about the same age (21, 22).
 
dazjoe said:
Not really, players can explode into goals.
RVN went from 16 in 40 games, to 41 in 46 the following season. Kane went from 4 in 19 to 31 in 51. Aguero went from 7 in 42, to 27 in 50. Henry, 4 in 38 to 26 in 48.

Obviously not saying he would definitely do the same, but also nothing to say he won't. The fact that he hasn't isn't really here nor there, none of the aforementioned players had either, until they did, and all at about the same age (21, 22).
Click to expand...

Not to mention his productivity went up towards end of the season anyway
 
Wing Attack Plan R said:
If you can watch EH and watch Osimhen and decide that EH is the player we should sign out of those two, I don't know what to tell you.
Click to expand...

If that was the point you managed to get out of my post, then I don't know what to tell you either.

You used a bizarre method to get your point across regarding how Højlund would translate to the Premier League.
If that's the method you're going to use to determine a striker's ability to adapt to a new league, I suggest you look up what teams Osimhen has scored against.

Not once did I say Højlund is better than Osimhen or that I prefer him.
 
dazjoe said:
Not really, players can explode into goals.
RVN went from 16 in 40 games, to 41 in 46 the following season. Kane went from 4 in 19 to 31 in 51. Aguero went from 7 in 42, to 27 in 50. Henry, 4 in 38 to 26 in 48.

Obviously not saying he would definitely do the same, but also nothing to say he won't. The fact that he hasn't isn't really here nor there, none of the aforementioned players had either, until they did, and all at about the same age (21, 22).
Click to expand...
I can accept all that, but when you watch RH, what makes you think he is capable of that? I literally don't see anything that suggests he's that player.
 
Last edited:
zaafi said:
If that was the point you managed to get out of my post, then I don't know what to tell you either.

You used a bizarre method to get your point across regarding how Højlund would translate to the Premier League.
If that's the method you're going to use to determine a striker's ability to adapt to a new league, I suggest you look up what teams Osimhen has scored against.

Not once did I say Højlund is better than Osimhen or that I prefer him.
Click to expand...
Not really. I don't follow Serie A and so wanted to show the equivalent placements of the PL teams. So when we see RH has scored against Team X it doesn't mean as much as maybe seeing he scored against the Italian version of Nottingham Forest. If that example does not work for you, oh well.

You brought up Osimhen as somehow being an equal example to RH. My point was if you watch both of those players, it's obvious which one we should sign. You don't have to convince someone Osimhen is a better prospect because he shows it when you watch him, despite him not scoring against whichever club. Watching RH is not impressive, he looks miles off from Osimhen.
 
Last edited:
Wing Attack Plan R said:
Not really. I don't follow Serie A and so wanted to show the equivalent placements of the PL teams. So when we see EH has scored against Team X it doesn't mean as much as maybe seeing he scored against the Italian version of Nottingham Forest. If that example does not work for you, oh well.

You brought up Osimhen as somehow being an equal example to EH. My point was if you watch both of those players, it's obvious which one we should sign. You don't have to convince someone Osimhen is a better prospect because he shows it when you watch him, despite him not scoring against whichever club. Watching EH is not impressive, he looks miles off from Osimhen.
Click to expand...

Who the feck is EH???
 
MadMike said:
That (bolded part) is fair. I don't have problem with people coming to the conclusion that he's the higher potential. But we don't know if or when he'll realise his full potential. If we had gone out and signed Kane, I think he would be a great understudy. But we're basically strikerless at the moment and if we have to sign one player, I'd rather someone a bit more well-rounded and ready for the present. Even if they have lower ceiling than Hojlund. We need a striker that will be ready to consistently lead the line next month, not next year or in 2 years time.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I really like the look of this lad and think he could be fantastic but we need a ready made striker for right now. Ideal situation would have been an older, more experienced striker and Højlund together but that is unrealistic unfortunately.
 
For me the only striker I expect is sure to put in the goals next year is Kane. But this is not happening (+ too expensive in cost and salary compared to his age).

Osimhen for the amount and salary he will expect I see this as maybe the biggest gamble of all as I am not at all sure he will be perfect for PL.

Højlund is for me still not clinical enough in his finishing and he does not not seam very strong with his head. But I believe he will keep scoring more goals each year (If this happens he will be way above 100 mill in 2-3 years).

We are not getting a top striker below 100mill and any striker on the edge of a break through will cost 40-60 mill depending on the league they currently play in.

Therefore from the names I have seen so far I think Højlund is the best bet with the smallest risk (but not for an amount above 60 mill).
 
Wing Attack Plan R said:
Not really. I don't follow Serie A and so wanted to show the equivalent placements of the PL teams. So when we see EH has scored against Team X it doesn't mean as much as maybe seeing he scored against the Italian version of Nottingham Forest. If that example does not work for you, oh well.

You brought up Osimhen as somehow being an equal example to EH. My point was if you watch both of those players, it's obvious which one we should sign. You don't have to convince someone Osimhen is a better prospect because he shows it when you watch him, despite him not scoring against whichever club. Watching EH is not impressive, he looks miles off from Osimhen.
Click to expand...

So you don't follow Serie A, but somehow Osimhen shows that he's a better player? Not that I disagree with it, he obviously has more experience and is 5 years older, but even Osimhen doesn't contribute to overall play as much as Højlund.
Osimhen, on the other hand, is a menace in the box, particularly on crosses and set-pieces.

Again, you don't follow Serie A but watching Højlund is not impressive and looks miles off from Osimhen? Nothing of what you say make sense.

As others have pointed out, who is EH?
 
zaafi said:
So you don't follow Serie A, but somehow Osimhen shows that he's a better player? Not that I disagree with it, he obviously has more experience and is 5 years older, but even Osimhen doesn't contribute to overall play as much as Højlund.
Osimhen, on the other hand, is a menace in the box, particularly on crosses and set-pieces.

Again, you don't follow Serie A but watching Højlund is not impressive and looks miles off from Osimhen? Nothing of what you say make sense.

As others have pointed out, who is EH?
Click to expand...
I don't follow Serie A, but I have looked at quite a few highlight videos of Osimhen. I've looked at the highlight reels that are out there of RH and Osimhen is one for now, RH for the future (maybe not our future). I was not aware of RH before the noises about us signing him, so I tried to get familiar with his play. I'd love for him to be the next Kane / Lewa / Aguero. To me he still seems radically untested, and he doesn't seem to play in a way that suggests he should be playing against tougher opponents.
 
Last edited:
zaafi said:
Belotti was not even decent and never showed the natural instincts or hold-up play that Højlund has.
Belotti was also two years older when he had his freak season where he scored 26 goals. Look away from that season, and he has never gone one season where he scored over 10 open-play goals, and he played full seasons as well (2900-3300 minutes).

At Højlund's age, Cavani was playing for Palermo and scored 5 goals in his first proper season. The two following seasons before his transfer to Napoli, he scored 14 and 13 goals respectively (full seasons). Napoli bought him when he was 23.

Lewandowski played for Lech Poznan at 20 years of age, and only scored 8 goals in his first season for Dortmund at 21.

There seems to be this idea that, after Haaland, you don't become a great striker unless you score a ridiculous amount of goals at a young age. Goals don't really matter that much at that age because they don't tell the whole story.
The important thing is showcasing the natural ability and why you potentially can score a lot of goals and Højlund certainly has done that. His movement and instincts are already brilliant and will only improve.

I wouldn't say he's ready to lead the line for us, but if we don't get him now, the alternative could be that he has a brilliant season this year and Atalanta adds another €60m to his price tag like Napoli did with Osimhen while we're stuck with some aging striker like we usually are.
Click to expand...
Those players you mentioned had two or more seasons as full time strikers with decent record, before moving to bigger teams.

Lewa spent 82 games in two seasons, scoring 41 goals, before moving to Dortmund.
Cavani had 73 games fin two seasons, scoring 30 goals, before moving to Napoli.

While Rasmus only had Atlanta as the most appearance in his entire pro-career (and mostly as subs), and hasn't shown any consistency yet. Context.

This might be fine if he has shown Greenwood talent. I don't see how he can instill fear to opponent, but perhaps EtH sees it.
 
Last edited:
I love that story about him, always worth reminding anyone who hasn’t heard it yet

He had a poor first half against Napoli and his manager wanted to bring him off. Rasmus didn’t say a word but he walked up to the striker due to replace him, who was sitting down in the dressing room, Rasmus stood on the bench he was sat on, bent over and aimed a fart directly into his ear. The manager knew then that Rasmus wouldn’t take no for an answer and kept him on

Went on to score the winner
 
Wing Attack Plan R said:
I agree with you. This should be along the lines of the Diallo deal and he should be given a few seasons to get up to speed - which is absolutely not what we need, and it's not worth a 60m punt.
Click to expand...
Yeah I'm not against this signing but I think Atalanta is getting a bit too greedy here. If one day he'd develop to a top proven striker great we'll pay the +100m for him. If.

At the moment it's not a fair price and imo we should stop overpaying for players we're not sure about their quality or their adaptation to the PL if we have learned anything from our previous transfers. 60m is no small money especially considering our limited budget and our absolute need for a proven top #9.

Kane has at least 3 good seasons left in him. Then we don't even know if we could get anything out of Hojlund or it'd be another flop. The difference between the two options is 40m. It's a no brainer for me tbh.
 
LawCharltonBest said:
I love that story about him, always worth reminding anyone who hasn’t heard it yet

He had a poor first half against Napoli and his manager wanted to bring him off. Rasmus didn’t say a word but he walked up to the striker due to replace him, who was sitting down in the dressing room, Rasmus stood on the bench he was sat on, bent over and aimed a fart directly into his ear. The manager knew then that Rasmus wouldn’t take no for an answer and kept him on

Went on to score the winner
Click to expand...
:lol: I can't stop laughing at this.
 
Surely Atalanta must understand he isn't proven yet and could become the player we all hope, so a decent price and future clauses can be put In place as it benefits both parties,they are just being greedy to want top money for someone who isn't worth it atm.We should sign him though as I'd rather have him than no one competing upfront with rashford and the injury prone martial.
 
Last edited:
zaafi said:
Belotti was not even decent and never showed the natural instincts or hold-up play that Højlund has.
Belotti was also two years older when he had his freak season where he scored 26 goals. Look away from that season, and he has never gone one season where he scored over 10 open-play goals, and he played full seasons as well (2900-3300 minutes).

At Højlund's age, Cavani was playing for Palermo and scored 5 goals in his first proper season. The two following seasons before his transfer to Napoli, he scored 14 and 13 goals respectively (full seasons). Napoli bought him when he was 23.

Lewandowski played for Lech Poznan at 20 years of age, and only scored 8 goals in his first season for Dortmund at 21.

There seems to be this idea that, after Haaland, you don't become a great striker unless you score a ridiculous amount of goals at a young age. Goals don't really matter that much at that age because they don't tell the whole story.
The important thing is showcasing the natural ability and why you potentially can score a lot of goals and Højlund certainly has done that. His movement and instincts are already brilliant and will only improve.

I wouldn't say he's ready to lead the line for us, but if we don't get him now, the alternative could be that he has a brilliant season this year and Atalanta adds another €60m to his price tag like Napoli did with Osimhen while we're stuck with some aging striker like we usually are.
Click to expand...

To be fair it's not just Haaland though and it's not just about goals. Most generational type talents start to shine quite young. Rooney, Mbappe, Messi, Neymar... were all quite far ahead of Hojlund at age 20. Lewa is actually the exception of a Ballon D'or level player who wasn't already considered a star at age 20. The chances of Hojlund reaching Lewa levels are really minuscule statistically. For every Lewa there's hundreds of Martials, or hot prospects who never reach the level people expected of them.

Obviously I don't mind Hojlund not becoming Haaland or Lewa so long as he becomes a very good player. But the chances of him becoming a great player are rather slim.
 
Strelok said:
Yeah I'm not against this signing but I think Atalanta is getting a bit too greedy here. If one day he'd develop to a top proven striker great we'll pay the +100m for him. If.

At the moment it's not a fair price and imo we should stop overpaying for players we're not sure about their quality or their adaptation to the PL if we have learned anything from our previous transfers. 60m is no small money especially considering our limited budget and our absolute need for a proven top #9.

Kane has at least 3 good seasons left in him. Then we don't even know if we could get anything out of Hojlund or it'd be another flop. The difference between the two options is 40m. It's a no brainer for me tbh.
Click to expand...
It does seem weird that in today's market all you can get for 60m is a 20 year old striker with 9 goals in Serie A. I'd love to see the catalog they are shopping from. Like, if we paid 65m, how much better would the player be? Or 70m? For a prospect it seems crazy to be paying starter prices. If we had dirty funds like City, sure, sign him up, figure out the math later, the more the merrier.

What's our track record with Italian signings? Darmian is the only recent one I can think of. We can't be looking solely in Italy for a #9 (I hope). What about Bundesliga? What can you get for 60m there? Nkunko scored 16 and has a €60 million release clause. Muani scored 15 and allegedly has a £80m price tag (contract to 2027, no release clause).
 
massey said:
Surely Atalanta must understand he isn't proven yet and could become the player we all hope, so a decent price and future clauses can be put In place as it benefits both parties,they are just being greedy to want top money for someone who isn't worth it Atm,we should sign him though as I'd rather have him than no one competing upfront with rashford and the injury prone martial.
Click to expand...
This is why I'm surprised. He averaged a goal roughly every 204 minutes which to me doesn't strike very impressive, in a lesser league + in his only season of proper top level football.

Personally I'd rather we go for Vlahovic or someone similar. Nothing against Hojlund, I just don't think its fair to punt on him to lead our line.
 
Wing Attack Plan R said:
It does seem weird that in today's market all you can get for 60m is a 20 year old striker with 9 goals in Serie A. I'd love to see the catalog they are shopping from. Like, if we paid 65m, how much better would the player be? Or 70m? For a prospect it seems crazy to be paying starter prices. If we had dirty funds like City, sure, sign him up, figure out the math later, the more the merrier.

What's our track record with Italian signings? Darmian is the only recent one I can think of. We can't be looking solely in Italy for a #9 (I hope). What about Bundesliga? What can you get for 60m there? Nkunko scored 16 and has a €60 million release clause. Muani scored 15 and allegedly has a £80m price tag (contract to 2027, no release clause).
Click to expand...
Yeah the striker market is a bit crazy atm. Because proven top strikers are simply fecking rare. So imo that crazy part should be applied to the proven top ones only.

A poster above used the example of Kane, Lewan were average in their 20. I didn't watch them back then so no idea. But even if that's true yes it only proves that average ones might turn world class one day. But it definitely doesn't mean all the average ones will turn world class one day. In fact most of them stay average that's why the market for the proven ones is so dire in the first place.

We should pay premium for the proven ones if we could. But imo we definitely should not overpay for the ones who are not proven yet. If the price is fair, great. If not we should stay away imo. The risks involved are just too high and we don't have much money anyway.
 
Strelok said:
Yeah the striker market is a bit crazy atm. Because proven top strikers are simply fecking rare. So imo that crazy part should be applied to the proven top ones only.

A poster above used the example of Kane, Lewan were average in their 20. I didn't watch them back then so no idea. But even if that's true yes it only proves that average ones might turn world class one day. But it definitely doesn't mean all the average ones will turn world class one day. In fact most of them stay average that's why the market for the proven ones is so dire in the first place.

We should pay premium for the proven ones if we could. But imo we definitely should not overpay for the ones who are not proven yet. If the price is fair, great. If not we should stay away imo. The risks involved are just too high and we don't have much money anyway.
Click to expand...
That's why clauses surely come into play in this kind of deal like we will offer you 35-40 million now and sure if he bangs in 25+ plus goals in a season you get an extra 5 or we win the title/cups etc if he doesn't do this then we got sold a player that was just promising and they got a good deal regardless.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.