Would you trade the potential of Rashford for Harry Kane ?

Would you trade the potential of Rashford for Harry Kane ?

  • Total voters
    594
  • Poll closed .
Stacks said:
Indeed. 4 others in fact, over 20 seasons, who have managed to break the 20 goal barrier in 3 consecutive premier league seasons.
Click to expand...

You're correct in that few players have achieved that special scoring feat. But none of them would have reached those numbers leading the team we have now.

And there's the sticking point for me. I'd rather have a Hazard type, Eriksson or similar than putting a more prolific big man up top. And I think a lot of people including myself see Rashford as the type of forward that might offer us the difference in style compared to Eto'o versus Drogba for instance.

But agreed Kane has proven himself a top player. Rashford is still a gamble to reach that height though I think he will.

Rhyme Animal said:
Quite. And the other names in that club...?

Shearer, Henry, RvN.

I'm really, really surprised by this poll.

Before the Chelsea game, he hadn't scored a PL goal since September.
Click to expand...

Why? Ibrahimovic was set to hit 20+ PL goals and 30 overall for us yet many a poster were unhappy with his play and delighted with his season ending injury.

There's another thread that is trying its hardest to minimize Ruud's record for us, playing up a half-fit Saha's influence in what became a golden period for us.

There's two trains of thought here with the Rashford choice:

Sentimentality towards one of our youth players.

Belief that the precocious talent and play style of Rashford might lend better to reaching that special period of football we had. Nostalgia and naivety or realistic goal? I don't know.
 
manutd619 said:
Im baffled by how many voted Rashford

Sure he looks like huge potential, but so have many many other players - Kane is proven PL quality and the only thing that puts me off slightly is the injuries he is picking up
Click to expand...
Well that was the question wasn't it, how much potential they have :lol:
Not what they're doing at the moment
 
It depends on if Rashford's now and in the long term can nuture him to reach his full potential. Personally, I'm not sold on the idea that José is the man to nuture young players properly, at least not to the level we've seen from Pochettino. So, in that regard I'm more inclined to lean towards Kane but there is no doubt in my mind that Rashford can be a super talent.
 
You just wouldn't trade a homegrown talent with huge potential for anyone but generational talents (i.e. messi/ronaldo).

Anyone voting Kane is missing one of the key pleasures in supporting a club. This isnt football manager
 
Smores said:
You just wouldn't trade a homegrown talent with huge potential for anyone but generational talents (i.e. messi/ronaldo).

Anyone voting Kane is missing one of the key pleasures in supporting a club. This isnt football manager
Click to expand...

Or maybe some of us don't rate Rashford that highly and are not convinced that he would be good enough to lead the line for us even in future and if the chance arises to replace him with another English striker who has proven himself to be regular 20 goal striker in the league than it would certainly be tempting.
 
There are some seriously miserable bastards on here.

It's a hypothetical question. If you could have 1 or the other who would it be. It's not hard just pick which you'd have.

If you think there's no point why on earth did you click on the thread?

Personally Rashford being local with bags of potential makes me lean his way.
 
Invictus said:
It might be trash according to you (and others - including @Sassy Colin), but it's a reasonable hypothetical question, and people have a right to opinion as long as it's done in an orderly fashion - that's the purpose of an online discussion site. We can't just stifle opinions that don't align with our own in dictatorial fashion - that goes against the essence of any sort of (largely democratic) public forum.
Click to expand...

It's not an opinion though? It's just a one or the other answer on a ridiculous question that generates zero discussion of interest.

Oh well. As you are.
 
TheReligion said:
It's not an opinion though? It's just a one or the other answer on a ridiculous question that generates zero discussion of interest.

Oh well. As you are.
Click to expand...
Have you ever thought the inability to generate discussion may be your own personality at fault? What is interesting to one person might not be interesting to another person, as you've said you think this thread generates zero discussion of interest. The people that have posted, including myself, may disagree with you, if you're not interested in the thread, why are you still here?
 
Last edited:
KN5 said:
Have you ever thought the inability to generate discussion may be your own personality at fault? What is interesting to one person might not be interesting to another person, as you've said you think this thread generates zero discussion of interest. The people that have posted, including myself, may disagree with you, if you're not interested in the thread, why are you still still?
Click to expand...

I'm not still I'm very active and mobile actually.
 
I don't know the potential Rashford, so yes I would swap an unknown quantity for one I know.
 
fellaini's barber said:
We aren't talking about average imports are we, we are talking about Harry Kane. People didn't want us to get Ibra or or any striker so Rashford can play, was the same with Danny Welbeck, we had people moaning about RVP because of him. The players you mentioned were all very good players who earned their place in the team by being the best in their positions.Over here it seems we just want young players to be played for the heck of it to appear different or something. I don't see how signing an established striker right now is a bad thing for the club as everybody will get playing time given the large number games we'll have. But as far as some people are concerned buying a striker would limit Rashfords playing time so they don't even want to hear about it
Click to expand...

The start of my post was "this topic isn't a good example". I agree signing Kane would be great and we definitrly need an established striker for next season. Mine was more of a general point really. I've seen a lot of peoples hopeful united starting line up for next season in various topics and it includes no english players, let alone youth players.

Its just a sad state of affairs really. I don't want youth for the sake of it, but i'd rather a youth player than a squad player be bought from another league.
 
The other problem is that you have to take into account the potential Kane, it's not as if we were talking about an old player.
 
KN5 said:
I guess you missed that time your point isn't valid based off one game.
Click to expand...

Considering this list doesn't include assists and he's had a few lengthy spells out where he missed games against the top 6; personally, I think he's an impressive striker.

2014/2015
1 goal against Arsenal
2 goals against Chelsea
2 goals against Arsenal
1 goal against Liverpool

2015/2016
1 goal against City
1 goal against Arsenal
2 goals against Leicester
1 goal against City
1 goal against Arsenal
1 goal against Liverpool

2016/2017
1 goal against Arsenal
1 goal against Monaco
1 goal against Chelsea
 
Runner said:
Considering this list doesn't include assists and he's had a few lengthy spells out where he missed games against the top 6; personally, I think he's an impressive striker.

2014/2015
1 goal against Arsenal
2 goals against Chelsea
2 goals against Arsenal
1 goal against Liverpool

2015/2016
1 goal against City
1 goal against Arsenal
2 goals against Leicester
1 goal against City
1 goal against Arsenal
1 goal against Liverpool

2016/2017
1 goal against Arsenal
1 goal against Monaco
1 goal against Chelsea
Click to expand...
So, just want to get this in writing, you think he is good against top teams or better than Rashford against the top teams?
 
KN5 said:
So, just want to get this in writing, you think he is good against top teams or better than Rashford against the top teams?
Click to expand...

How else would you get it on an internet forum? I think he's good fullstop. I'm not even comparing him to Rashford who's still very young. I think Kane's the best striker in the league and we'd be challenging for the title and not top 4 if he played for us. He's scored against most of the top 6 sides (i think we're the only team he hasn't scored against).
 
Erm... OP left out the e)boue option. I think that says a lot about him, no respect for caf tradition... ban!
 
I dont see the hype over rashford..didnt wellbeck develop same way ?
 
Runner said:
How else would you get it on an internet forum? I think he's good fullstop. I'm not even comparing him to Rashford who's still very young. I think Kane's the best striker in the league and we'd be challenging for the title and not top 4 if he played for us. He's scored against most of the top 6 sides (i think we're the only team he hasn't scored against).
Click to expand...
The point of this post is to gauge opinion on which one we'd rather have so it's hard not to compare the two. Also they're both English, play the same position for 2 of the top teams in the league, of course we should compare them.

I agree he's a fantastic goal scorer and the best in the league. But I'm sure I've challenged people with enough reasons to justify why I'd keep him over going for Kane.
 
Sterling Archer said:
You're correct in that few players have achieved that special scoring feat. But none of them would have reached those numbers leading the team we have now.

And there's the sticking point for me. I'd rather have a Hazard type, Eriksson or similar than putting a more prolific big man up top. And I think a lot of people including myself see Rashford as the type of forward that might offer us the difference in style compared to Eto'o versus Drogba for instance.

But agreed Kane has proven himself a top player. Rashford is still a gamble to reach that height though I think he will.



Why? Ibrahimovic was set to hit 20+ PL goals and 30 overall for us yet many a poster were unhappy with his play and delighted with his season ending injury.

There's another thread that is trying its hardest to minimize Ruud's record for us, playing up a half-fit Saha's influence in what became a golden period for us.

There's two trains of thought here with the Rashford choice:

Sentimentality towards one of our youth players.

Belief that the precocious talent and play style of Rashford might lend better to reaching that special period of football we had. Nostalgia and naivety or realistic goal? I don't know.
Click to expand...
Really? we create some of the most amount of chances in the league and need a finisher. Shearer did it for Blackburn, with the mighty Stuart Ripley, Tim Sheerwod and Mike Newell supporting him. At Newcastle he bagged 62 EPL goals in 3 seasons which is the same avg. Neither of these sides have particularly outstanding or creative players and 35 year old Zlatan got 16, of course prime Henry, RVN and Shearer would do it easy.
 
P-Nut0712 said:
There are some seriously miserable bastards on here.

It's a hypothetical question. If you could have 1 or the other who would it be. It's not hard just pick which you'd have.

If you think there's no point why on earth did you click on the thread?

Personally Rashford being local with bags of potential makes me lean his way.
Click to expand...


Well said !

I thought I was asking a perfectley normal question, the sort of debate most football fans would have.

I was just interested to gauge huge potential up against virtually the real deal.

As you say it's nothing too complicated but my god don't some really struggle with the simplicity of it ! Funny to watch !
 
Smores said:
You just wouldn't trade a homegrown talent with huge potential for anyone but generational talents (i.e. messi/ronaldo).

Anyone voting Kane is missing one of the key pleasures in supporting a club. This isnt football manager
Click to expand...
There is this thing on the CAF where people are fine with the club moving away from it's ethos if it will guarantee success. I guess one thing people don't realize is that in it's 139 years of existence, our club has won the league just 20 times, so for the majority of time we have survived without being the best team in the country. And this applies to almost every club in the world. It is not success and trophies that make a club, it is it's ethos, tradition and culture.

Now for me the major ethos of Man Utd ( as I understand them) are it is a British club based in Manchester that is built upon the romance of playing young, exciting players and giving them the platform to shine and entertain the crowds that come to watch them. Our club is based on playing attacking, entertaining football and never giving up in the face of adversity.

Now just recently there was a thread in the Football forums I think about Northern clubs setting up training grounds in London and many of the posters were fine with Utd players staying in London and training there. So there goes the Manchester from Manchester United.

You go in the Michael Keane thread and there are loads who don't want him back and the argument is that the fact he's an academy product shouldn't be in his favor and we should buy players solely based on ability. Well I feel the fact he is an academy product should absolutely count in his favor and we should always take that into consideration when comparing him with any other prospective defender we might buy. Of course if the other option is vastly better then no doubt sign him but even if he's 20% better than Keane I'd still say sign Keane because he is one of our own and he understands what this club is about, he'll make up for that 20% through love and passion for this club like countless others before him.

Then there is another trend here that don't prefer to sign British players just because they are British. Well again we are a British club and to quote Sir Alex " Man Utd must always have a British core" , otherwise what's our identity?

Now to this thread, again if the option is to choose between an academy lad with potential against an established PL player, and you can only choose one, the answer is obvious, the academy lad. A football club is not just 11 guys wearing a team's Jersey and running around, it's about the romance and culture of that club. Anyone who understands that will always choose a Rashford over Kane, a Kane over a Suarez, Martial over a Griezmann and so on.

This culture has served our club well for all these years, I have no doubt it will in the future as well.
 
I voted yes. You should always replace a player with someone better if possible, that's how your team gets better. Kane is better than Rashford. Potential is not guaranteed.

From a purely objective angle, of course.

In reality, I'd be furious if we sold Rashford.
 
The vote would have looked a lot different just two weeks ago. Then again i don't rate Kane as highly as others do.
 
Hell yeah. I personally think prime Rashford will never score as many goals/be as natural a finisher as Kane. That's just a prediction, though, and only time will tell if that's correct.

I would liked to see the results to this 4 weeks ago.
 
There's just too many of these inane threads discussing complicated scenarios. Innovation just for the sake of innovation kind of.
 
Based purely on talent it'd be mad to say no to that. Kane is a great player who will probably go on to become one of the leagues most prolific strikers, possibly even challenging Shearer's record. Will Rashford be that good? Honestly I don't think so.

However Rashford is ours and I love the lad, so if it wasn't just a hypothetical question and we could do a straight swap, I don't think I could do it, it'd feel wrong.
 
I have no interest in seeing Harry Kane at United.

Lukaku please. Rashford, Lukaku and maybe Chicharito next season to make up for the loss of Ibra.

Griezmann and Martial on the wings with Mata or Mkhi behind and we should be serious title contenders. Maybe even CL if we get it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.