Won't hurt it thats for sure.
Romelu Lukaku | United confirm deal subject to medical and personal terms
- Thread starter FC Ronaldo
- Start date
- Status
Won't hurt it thats for sure.
yes
Indeed, my mistake.
£90m apparently :/
Did someone just laugh at the concept or RvN being better than Lukaku? The laugh's on you buddy.
I'm ok with signing Lukaku (if it actually happens) he's not my most favourite player around and he's maybe not the most technically gifted striker you'll see but neither was RVN or Cole but they knew where the net was and so does he, whether he can be as prolific as when he was at Everton where perhaps he had more space, unlike at United where some teams will be more defensive and less open, who knows but I guess if he signs we'll find out and I don't really give a feck about the price, football lost the plot along time ago and as they say "It ain't my money"
To be fair it factored in their ages as well and the room for growth, but I agree that it is extremely unlikely Lukaku is going to develop into something more effective for us than Ruud was.
People talking about how prices have changed (which is true) but Arsenal get Lacazette (sp?) for £40mil, thats the right amount of money, not £90mil on fecking Lukaku.
I hope to god we have 3 or 4 other players in the pipeline.
I hope to god we have 3 or 4 other players in the pipeline.
Youth video- 2009 - 2013
Cole, fee £7m, turnover £61m, 11.4%
Lukaku, fee £75m(?), turnover £570 (predicted), 13.1%
So, a bit higher, but about the same region. Assuming its £75M that is, seen other figures floating around.
Because people like you keep their viewing figures high enough to justify the existence of SSN
Lacazette might as well be the new Henry but he could also be the new Guivarch. He never stepped out of France before. I don't think Lukaku is WC but he's EPL proven, he's the typical Mou's target man and he does score goals.
Not to take anything away from the gist of your point, which is right, but you are comparing the price with add ons for United to the one without add ons (and rounded down) for Arsenal.
Its £75m vs £46.5m without add ons.
Or £90m vs £52.6m with.
Still a huge difference as you said. But hopefully that will be vindicated by their performances.
First, terribly wrong prices for both players. Lacazette is 46m pound while Lukaku is 75m pound till something else is confirmed. If you want to add the bonus then Lacazette deal will reach 52m pound.
If Lacazette is worth 46m then Lukaku sure worth at least +70m. At least Lukaku isn't scoring half of his goals through penalties.
Lacazette comes from a much smaller league, from a club who needs the money. Apprently only Arsenal were after him. Both Chealsea and Utd were after Lukaku. Totally different situation.
Right? This is such bullshit.
Nothing to do with the times, more with us being mugs as usual. 'YES WE'VE GOT MONEY, COME AND TAKE IT ALL ^___^'
We need to have £15 million in add-on clauses for Rooney's sale on top of the £10 million initial fee.
2017, bitches.
Hah, as if we can even hope for 10m for Rooney. He'll leave on a free transfer. Either that or it will be a loan with us still paying half his wages.
Howard Nurse is probably parked in front of a hospital in Antwerp waiting for Adolphine to give birth.
And there is a huge difference in quality between Lacazette and Lukakau imo.
I want to give his beard a rub.
This is the kind of 1996 mentality that we need to stop having.
I think United with all our new signings could have looked a very different team this year whoever was up front. One could argue there are a lot more goals in our current squad anyway. I'm happy with the pl proven goal machine. Hopefully he can bring the best out of our other forward players and turn some of those draws into wins. as it stands now you can see why Chelsea would much prefer lukaku as they were hoping to just tweak a winning formula and Morata is more of a gamble in that sense. We are still very much in the middle of a rebuild here. Exciting times!
You got the spelling right
If we are paying £90mil for Lukaku, i'd rather we spent £200mil on Ronaldo or Kane, or another world class striker (it doesn't matter if they are available when we are talking about £200mil).
I mean would that really be any more 'stupid' than spending almost half that on freaking Lukaku?.
I mean would that really be any more 'stupid' than spending almost half that on freaking Lukaku?.
This bullshit increasing of price by certain journos is why arguements about values and what an "£Xm player" should be like is so ridiculously futile.
The agreed transfer fee of £75 was blatantly leaked. Any outlet trying tell us it's more now are probably being fed info by someone with an agenda, such as Chelsea trying to make it look like more or Madrid press because of the Morata talks falling apart.
But £75m will become £90m because one bloke claims it from nowhere and a few people decide to run with it. That will then be talked about in terms of Euro, because the number is higher and the press don't care that we're talking about 2 English clubs.
Then the Euro figure just gets a £ sign instead of a € sign and suddenly a £75m transfer fee is £101m and idiots on here are moaning about spending £101m on Lukaku.
The agreed transfer fee of £75 was blatantly leaked. Any outlet trying tell us it's more now are probably being fed info by someone with an agenda, such as Chelsea trying to make it look like more or Madrid press because of the Morata talks falling apart.
But £75m will become £90m because one bloke claims it from nowhere and a few people decide to run with it. That will then be talked about in terms of Euro, because the number is higher and the press don't care that we're talking about 2 English clubs.
Then the Euro figure just gets a £ sign instead of a € sign and suddenly a £75m transfer fee is £101m and idiots on here are moaning about spending £101m on Lukaku.
Absolute pap. He has been in PL scoring goals for 5 years and still playing against the same opponents. Why he should stop scoring because he joined United is beyond me.
Who would pay real money for him after his last couple of years? Got nothing to do with our mentality, I'm afraid.
Yes it would be stupid. Since when is Kane world class? 200m for a 32 year old Ronaldo? Ok then...
The fact that he is going to be the main striker does not change the fact that when we dont have the ball, he will be expected to defend like every other player on the pitch and not just stand around twiddling his thumbs
You mean we give them £25m to take him, right?
If we can afford to spunk ridiculous money on Martial i fail to see why so many have issues with doing so for a more proven player.
Its basically just people who don't like Lukaku taking an opportunity to moan about fees. When we sign Fabinho next week they'll be saying its not their money so who cares.
If Lukaku also qualifies as a home grown player, then you can figure a bit of an increased price for that also.
Hold the door, is that common sense making an appearance?!
Since when is Lukaku worldclass?. I'm not even that keen on Kane but i'd rather Kane than Lukaku.
Seriously if City or Liverpool were paying £90mil for Lukaku, people on here would be pissing themselves, and don't try to deny it.
His last couple of years is the only reason why we can't demand £50-60 million for our club record goalscorer. Fair's fair I'd say.
That could conceivably be where the 90m number came from actually, rather than add ons a euro conversation gone awry. £75m is a little over €85m, round that up...
Who knows.
The other factor with Rooney is that it takes a large wage off our books, and given we obviously have no use for him anymore and he is near the end of his career, yeah our ability to get much for him is pretty limited.
- Status