Chelsea paid almost £110m for Enzo Fernández, having only played half a season at Benfica and a WC campaign. The fee isn't that crazy when you put it into perspective, and you just have to cough up for talent these days.
Transfer Tweets - Manchester United - 2023/24
- Thread starter mazhar13
- Start date
- Status
Good job that's not the cost.£72m is a LOT of money for a young prospect
If the add ons are met to take it to that, then United have done very well.
Enzo was a stone cold sure hit. Hojlund is not.
Yeah he sure set the world on fire for them
He was actually very good for them. Their failure was not down to him whatsoever.
Yeah that wouldn't be the consensus if we'd signed him. Everyone would think the club was batshit crazy to pay such a price
Kane in Hojlund's age wasn't exactly tearing the league apart, just yet.
PSG was ready to overpay for Hojlund, and they're stacked on quite good attackers.
So they paid a mental fee for a fella who couldn't solve their issues.
He's probably class - I don't really care.
I'm trying to make a roundabout point that I don't understand the crying about Hoiljund. We are taking a stab at potential - what's the issue?
So you're making a hypothetical argument and getting annoyed by it. Ok.
This is such a weak argument. Kane wasn't worth 70+mil then and Hojlund isn't worth it now. What's your point?
He wasn't brought in to solve every single one of their problems. No player can do that given their turbulence last season.
Now Kane is worth more than 70+mil, or should we go for Kolo Muani instead ?
No matter how unhappy you can get, you'll be forced to spend at some point.
Of course Kane is worth more than that. But you were referring to Kane at 20, were you not?
Not if he performs£72m is a LOT of money for a young prospect
And what price do you put on us starting the season without a striker ?
price isn’t the main concern here
Yes, back when he wasn't scoring at all. Paying for 30 years old striker even bigger amounts than Hojlund, could be a bigger risk. On top of that, Levy would rip us off even more, after way longer negotiations. At least now you have striker before season's start.
£72million is eye watering but hey-ho it’s not my money. Let’s get this wrapped up so he can get training with the squad.
Right so In that case you are presuming Hojlund would have a Kane esque progression which is actually not very likely.
As much as I'd love it to be otherwise of course.
Don't project that shit on me. You're not giving any hints, what is actually the better option right now than Hojlund.
We've been signing experienced strikers for almost a decade, and it's not working. Season starts in 3 weeks, we have a young one for a change. Is that really such horror situation to be in ?
Oh and it doesn't mean, we'll stop searching for another option in attack btw.
I'm not projecting anything. You made a random point that Kane wasn't as good as Hojlund at 20, which frankly, has feck all to do with Hojlund being worth 70m+.
£72m, we've overpaid, again. Not really surprised at this point but he's got to put up Haaland kind of figures in the future if he's going to be deemed a hit, rather than a flop.
Do you had knowledge in 2011 that Kane will be expensive star when he was playing for Leyton ? How do you know, if Hojlund won't be worth close to 100m in 3-5 years ?
Oh wait, I'm gonna call ETH to call off the deal, then call Klopp, Arteta, Pep and Pochettino to wait with their deals and spending, just before season starts, so we can come up with something cheaper and better, that will suit your current thing.
Isn't the point that Kane would have turned out to be worth way more than 70 if we'd have bought him for that aged 20 and everyone would have wet their pants at the fee back then?
Hojlund is the man the manager wants and I'm glad the club backed his judgement.
It's £64 million plus £8 million in add ons if he turns out to be great.
The point in that case is stupidly presumptuous because Kane is a generational striker.
Yes and if we'd spotted that when he was 20 and paid even 60 million then everyone would have reacted like you're reacting now only for him to turn out to be incredible.
The point is, this lad might turn out the same. Then the fee will look like shrewd business.
£64m is still overpaying
And my point is that it's extremely far fetched. There are dozens of strikers each year that have generational potential. Punting 60m on a single one of them is basically roulette.
Hojlund has shown no more promise than Alvarez for example, who was peanuts.
Put it this way, if there was an actual market of strikers available we would probably not put down that amount for him. A huge reason for this fee is lack of alternatives more than actual faith of him realising absolute potential.
Dude... just enjoy the ride. The money is meaningless. We bought Mount and Onana and everyone cried saying that was the budget gone. We've bought a striker and it sounds like Amrabat deal will still happen.
Squad has been strengthened in 3 key positions, we're playing good football under a top modern manager. We've not had it this good in ten years
Squad has been strengthened in 3 key positions, we're playing good football under a top modern manager. We've not had it this good in ten years
Quite an ignorant statement in the grand context of how to run a club well.
I mean to you and I it is meaningless. We have no agency in this at all. Why worry about it?
By that logic, why discuss anything on this forum? We have no control over any decisions that are made.
I didn't say don't discuss it, I said don't worry about it.
Let's never sign expensive youngsters, because every deal requires faith of realising potential. We had generational strikers in Ronaldo, Zlatan and Cavani for cheap and they worked beautifully. Scoffing at this stage at Hojlund deal, and not seeing even the slight change of approach, how to run a club, could be, how you say it... ignorant ?
United actively searching for another option in attack wouldn't be a bad idea. Don't you think, or is it too ignorant concept for your forum excellency ?
We have a vested interest in seeing our club run well. Of course there is an agency interest.
No one drops 70m plus on a striker punt who has had one season in Italy, and even then didn't set the league on fire. Literally no one, barring us.
I'm accepting of us doing it under desperation, which this is. But don't harp on about Kane parallels, because it just doesn't fly. Who gives a feck if he was better than Kane at 20. Progression doesn't happen linearly, it's just a terrible flaw to hang your hat on.
This means we are confident of getting deals for McFred eh. And talk of VdB to Sociedad. Seems like Mejbri might stick around since Mainoo is out injured.
Didn't Madrid sign a 16 year old who'd only played a handful of games in Brazil for about €60m?
Not the only ones making punts for those numbers then.
Less than Hojlund and looked a huge talent at the time.
So what? He's still 16 and hasn't achieved anything, other than looking as good as he does at that age. There have been so many players that never live up to the hype. Could get injured and slow his development, could turn out he has a poor attitude in the long run and derail his own career. We just won't know for another 5/6 years.
Madrid are still gambling, and if it doesn't work out they'll make sure they get the next one that looks a huge talent.
He's already got 4 goals in 3 starts this season in the Brazilian league at the age of 16. They've already had success using this strategy with Vini and Rodrygo. They also don't pay as much of the fee up front, they put Ballon d'Or clauses in. Barcelona have done something similar with Vitor Roque. Biggest difference is these players aren't being brought in to be 1st choice immediately so the expectations are different. Basically they have the luxury of investing in these youngsters because their squad is already strong enough and doesn't have any glaring weaknesses (I guess you could suggest striker with Benzema leaving but that's only for 1 season until Mbappe arrives and Rodrygo can do a fine job there).
What do you mean so what? He was less money and a bigger talent. That justifies the transfer more.
Honestly at this point if anyone tries to argue we aren't overpaying by a chunk for Hojlund they must be on a wind up.
- Status