Would you trade the potential of Rashford for Harry Kane ?

[Sterling Archer]

You seriously overrate Rashford. His dribbling is very erratic. He is no Raheem sterling with his dribbling, nor is he a Zaha, so the ideas that he has unique skillsets are far fetched. This the same Rashford who kept dribbling off the pitch for months on end. Many 18 year old attackers have had and will continue to emerge with superior dribbling skills and finishing to Rashford.

Absolutely mate! 1000% overrate Rashers. I'm a United fan. And in the sullenness throughout the club he became such a bright spot last season. A double in the EL then against Arsenal on my bday. The goal against city. The beauty versus West Ham. He gave me great memories in a quite awful year of football. So I don't deny there's a huge bias in my opinion.

I'm a sentimental guy. But Mourinho is not. And despite everyone's fears, he clearly rates Rashford very highly. Circumstances are unique with our squad but who was the last 19 year old Mourinho put so much faith in? That validates my belief that he can become very special.

His stand out attribute is his pace. The rest can be matched and bettered, even by other teenagers. The reason I love him is that he is soooo random. He can do some clumsy clowninsh shite one moment, then pull out some world class move, so it is entertaining to me to watch.

This is a point we won't agree on. Perhaps when I say dribbling I'm not talking about the close control and quickness that Sterling or Hazard have. I'm thinking just plain and simple beating a man either with pace l, skill or both. It honestly feels like he has beaten a man more than Martial this season.

I've also been really impressed with some of his crossing and free kicks. He looks gangly and awkward. But there is so much more then just pace there.

The Henry and Eto'o comparisons are comedy gold and 3 weeks ago would've had a person barred from the Caf for wumming

1. I said that my dream (see bias above) is that he can become as influential as those two. I'm not saying he plays to their level. I'm helping paint a picture of where I would like to see him go professionally.

2. What is your problem suggesting banning? Do you want to try and understand my sentiments or not? I'm not asking you to agree with me.

3. Hyperbole. Putting Kane in the same bracket as Alan Shearer. Arguably the greatest (English) striker the Premier League has seen. I'll consider this comparison when Kane wins the league. Because if we want to hang on just numbers then Vardy also beat Ruuds record. Is he even close to the same bracket?

Well then surely that makes it a good thread then? because it sparks interest, debate, differing opinions, surprising results, people explaining their choices, frivolousness and conflict

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and take this to be your attitude. I'm not here to change your mind. Just to give you pause before dismissing my opinion.

 

[Stacks]

Absolutely mate! 1000% overrate Rashers. I'm a United fan. And in the sullenness throughout the club he became such a bright spot last season. A double in the EL then against Arsenal on my bday. The goal against city. The beauty versus West Ham. He gave me great memories in a quite awful year of football. So I don't deny there's a huge bias in my opinion.

I'm a sentimental guy. But Mourinho is not. And despite everyone's fears, he clearly rates Rashford very highly. Circumstances are unique with our squad but who was the last 19 year old Mourinho put so much faith in? That validates my belief that he can become very special.



This is a point we won't agree on. Perhaps when I say dribbling I'm not talking about the close control and quickness that Sterling or Hazard have. I'm thinking just plain and simple beating a man either with pace l, skill or both. It honestly feels like he has beaten a man more than Martial this season.

I've also been really impressed with some of his crossing and free kicks. He looks gangly and awkward. But there is so much more then just pace there.
I have to agree with this, his deliveries are very good.


1. I said that my dream (see bias above) is that he can become as influential as those two. I'm not saying he plays to their level. I'm helping paint a picture of where I would like to see him go professionally.
I thought you said it as an expectation that we will be our Henry or Eto'o
2. What is your problem suggesting banning? Do you want to try and understand my sentiments or not? I'm not asking you to agree with me.
It was a joke or a friendly exaggeration
3. Hyperbole. Putting Kane in the same bracket as Alan Shearer. Arguably the greatest (English) striker the Premier League has seen. I'll consider this comparison when Kane wins the league. Because if we want to hang on just numbers then Vardy also beat Ruuds record. Is he even close to the same bracket?
At this rate, Kane will rival Shearer for premier league goals. He won't do it, but could definitely break the 200 league goal barrier. Whether he wins the league or not isn't important


I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and take this to be your attitude. I'm not here to change your mind. Just to give you pause before dismissing my opinion.

 

[DellaNe]

This is hilarious. On one hand you have possibly the best striker in the league, who is still only 23. On the other side, you have an inconsistent young player, who hasn't really done that much yet, but has potential. The only way anyone picks Rashford is because of sentimental reasons, or because of some deluded habit of overhyping players coming through one's own academy. This shouldn't even be a comparison. The question is ridiculous. If you are asked to do a comparison, it should be a sporting comparison, not an emotional one.

 

[dogwithabone]

This is hilarious. On one hand you have possibly the best striker in the league, who is still only 23. On the other side, you have an inconsistent young player, who hasn't really done that much yet, but has potential. The only way anyone picks Rashford is because of sentimental reasons, or because of some deluded habit of overhyping players coming through one's own academy. This shouldn't even be a comparison. The question is ridiculous. If you are asked to do a comparison, it should be a sporting comparison, not an emotional one.

No one is suggesting Rashford is better than Kane, he isn't. The question is whether one, Rashford, will ultimately become better than the other, Kane, which I think is a valid question.

Use your imagination. If you're Jose Mourinho and Potch says you can have Kane if we can have x millions and Rashford would you take it ? It isn't like comparing say CBJ with Shaw because it's clear that CBJ will never reach even the underwhelming level Shaw has played at this season. The Rashford/Kane scenario is much closer and less clear cut as to which will be the better player in three or four years time.

That's all it is. Not a ridiculous question just a very simple one.

 

[Sterling Archer]

@Stacks Cool. I figured you were up for the debate. Easy to mistake a little banter for something else. I appreciate the clarification

Re: Kane and Shearer
Oof Harry is off to races, isn't he? Even if he didn't leave Spurs I think he could get close to that league tally. He is an elegant forward imo. Which perhaps you don't always associate with your archetype English player. Shearer was more of that.

Now since I am hellbent on keeping Rashford, I'd love to see him and Kane together for United. But playing two up front consistently is unlikely

 

[The Brown Bull]

No

 

[antohan]

Watching a local talent come from nothing to become a top class player, firing the team to success in the process, is surely the greatest enjoyment a fan can have. I don't think we've got the right conditions for that to happen though, personally.

Lots of instability, increasing need for short term success and a CEO with a penchant for buying superstars is not a good mix for developing youth, and strikers are always the most vulnerable.

So while I love the idealism of it, I think pragmatically Kane makes much more sense. As much as people want to avoid it, football is not a game fuelled by romanticism any more. I also think Kane is a lot better than he gets given credit for and Rashford still has an awful lot to prove. He's going in the right direction but there's absolutely no guarantee he'll be a top striker.

Stop being so sensible.

I would love having both, but no way I'd ever sacrifice the romance option.

It's "Football, bloody hell", not "Logic, bloody hell". Logic prevails most of the time but there's a lot more to enjoy from the former, more rare, experience.

 

[Kag]

Where's the fun in doing that?

 

[Brwned]

Stop being so sensible.

I would love having both, but no way I'd ever sacrifice the romance option.

It's "Football, bloody hell", not "Logic, bloody hell". Logic prevails most of the time but there's a lot more to enjoy from the former, more rare, experience.

Meh. I've spent a lot of time over the past two years working with UEFA and its member associations so the romance of it all isn't there for me, at the moment. I'd love it if Rashford became what you hope he will but the way our team is set-up doesn't seem particularly well placed for that to come to fruition.

 

[GailSpaceWynand]

You seriously overrate Rashford. His dribbling is very erratic. He is no Raheem sterling with his dribbling, nor is he a Zaha, so the ideas that he has unique skillsets are far fetched. This the same Rashford who kept dribbling off the pitch for months on end. Many 18 year old attackers have had and will continue to emerge with superior dribbling skills and finishing to Rashford. His stand out attribute is his pace. The rest can be matched and bettered, even by other teenagers. The reason I love him is that he is soooo random. He can do some clumsy clowninsh shite one moment, then pull out some world class move, so it is entertaining to me to watch. The Henry and Eto'o comparisons are comedy gold and 3 weeks ago would've had a person barred from the Caf for wumming

This is hilarious. On one hand you have possibly the best striker in the league, who is still only 23. On the other side, you have an inconsistent young player, who hasn't really done that much yet, but has potential. The only way anyone picks Rashford is because of sentimental reasons, or because of some deluded habit of overhyping players coming through one's own academy. This shouldn't even be a comparison. The question is ridiculous. If you are asked to do a comparison, it should be a sporting comparison, not an emotional one.

It isn't a debate between Kane and Rashford's current ability (even though even that can be argued) but rather his potential. Rashford is making the first team for a manager of considerable repute (just like Kane for Pocch) at the age of 19 having played for the first time last season mid-way; How anyone can compare Kane's 3+ years starting almost every game for Spurs as the central forward to Rashford's random appearances (often subs) in a plethora of positions (RW/LW/CF) is beyond me.
Also, people disregarding the notion of romanticism is weird. A youth player from a major club making it to the first team as a mainstay is always an enjoyable part of watching your team.

 

[The_Order]

There's something about Kane that just screams average PL journeyman, doesn't matter how good he becomes or how many goals he scores. I think it's his face/hair, or maybe because he's boring.

I'm of the same mind, there is something about him that just leaves me unawed, unconvinced no matter how many times he scores.

Perhaps it's the feeling that in any other team he would struggle massively or like you mentioned that unassuming and slappable face.

 

[Stacks]

It isn't a debate between Kane and Rashford's current ability (even though even that can be argued) but rather his potential. Rashford is making the first team for a manager of considerable repute (just like Kane for Pocch) at the age of 19 having played for the first time last season mid-way; How anyone can compare Kane's 3+ years starting almost every game for Spurs as the central forward to Rashford's random appearances (often subs) in a plethora of positions (RW/LW/CF) is beyond me.
Also, people disregarding the notion of romanticism is weird. A youth player from a major club making it to the first team as a mainstay is always an enjoyable part of watching your team.

Indeed and I don't feel Rashford's potential is sky high as he hasn't proved all that much. Rashford is making the 1st team under Jose true, yet until 2 weeks ago, he was crap, having not scored since September, and still sitting on 1 assist in the league. He hadn't been playing due to his talent, it was his attitude. He has also laid on 17 chances which is low for an attacking player.

I take it you believe Rashford is a spectacular dribbler also, hence your Carol Smillie? Well I did say he is no Raheem Sterling with his dribbling. To reinforce this, at age 19 Sterling completed 92 dribbles at a 64% success rate, to Rashfords 36 dribbles at 45% success. He ain't a great dribbler mate and as I suggested there are kids all around who will be better at it. Obviously dribbles completed can be skewed, depending on where they take place, but both these guys played as wingers at age 19.
Again. people on here seriously overrate Rashford. He may not even reach Sterling's level, given that at 19 Sterling was already a phenomenon. Talk of world class potential is weird and seriously unwarranted. I love the guy, but if he was at another club then I wonder if there would be soo much fuss on here. I don't ever think he will reach Kane's level of scoring as that will make him basically Marcus Griezmann

 

[Rams]

Rashford is currently the most gifted English player I know of. He has more ability in his little toe then Kane, Zaha and Sterling have combined. If you can't see that then you're either an ABU or a complete and utter idiot.

 

[cyberman]

Nope, Kane seems to be a very good EPL player but nothing more, Rashford has the ability to play in a fluid front three with pace and the ability to isolate and kill defenders one on one, his value is in his potential as an inside forward that seems to be all the rage these days.
Rashford has the potential to add so much tactically to a top side, especially when he fills out his frame and he adds power to his pace and dribbling.

 

[Jev]

This is hilarious. On one hand you have possibly the best striker in the league, who is still only 23. On the other side, you have an inconsistent young player, who hasn't really done that much yet, but has potential. The only way anyone picks Rashford is because of sentimental reasons, or because of some deluded habit of overhyping players coming through one's own academy. This shouldn't even be a comparison. The question is ridiculous. If you are asked to do a comparison, it should be a sporting comparison, not an emotional one.

Must say I agree with this. If this thread was on RAWK or Bluemoon we'd be laughing at the delusion on here.

 

[Stacks]

Nope, Kane seems to be a very good EPL player but nothing more, Rashford has the ability to play in a fluid front three with pace and the ability to isolate and kill defenders one on one, his value is in his potential as an inside forward that seems to be all the rage these days.
Rashford has the potential to add so much tactically to a top side, especially when he fills out his frame and he adds power to his pace and dribbling.

And what does that make Rashford considering he has barely 10 EPL goals? A Champions League superstar?
Playing in a fluid front 3 isn't as important as you think. See Costa, Lewandowski, Ronaldo, ZLatan, RVP, Lukaku. None possess winger qualities anymore, yet play or have played for top teams, scored bucket loads of goals and won silverware.....Not everyone wants to emulate Barcelona. Many prefer a "Big Dunc" up top

 

[cyberman]

And what does that make Rashford considering he has barely 10 EPL goals? A Champions League superstar?
Playing in a fluid front 3 isn't as important as you think. See Costa, Lewandowski, Ronaldo, ZLatan, RVP, Lukaku. None possess winger qualities anymore, yet play or have played for top teams, scored bucket loads of goals and won silverware.....Not everyone wants to emulate Barcelona. Many prefer a "Big Dunc" up top

This thread is about the potential of Rashford though. Would I swap a 19 year old Rashford for Kane? Of course? Is it the best idea going forward? In my opinion no.
Bayern were at their best with a fluid front line of Robben and Ribery out wide, they've regressed in Europe at the same rate as they have regressed. We dominated most of Europe with a fluid front line, Madrid and Barca have as well. All of the best versions of those sides had fluid attacks full of pace.
If a team becomes a defensive monster like Atletico and Juve which makes every goal scored count that little bit more then fair enough. A more static and discliplined front line would then suit us more.
Ibra has scored goal after goal for us but the side still lacks that something when he played up top.

 

[Stacks]

This thread is about the potential of Rashford though. Would I swap a 19 year old Rashford for Kane? Of course? Is it the best idea going forward? In my opinion no.
Bayern were at their best with a fluid front line of Robben and Ribery out wide, they've regressed in Europe at the same rate as they have regressed. We dominated most of Europe with a fluid front line, Madrid and Barca have as well. All of the best versions of those sides had fluid attacks full of pace.
If a team becomes a defensive monster like Atletico and Juve which makes every goal scored count that little bit more then fair enough. A more static and discliplined front line would then suit us more.
Ibra has scored goal after goal for us but the side still lacks that something when he played up top.

When was this? when they had the dynamic, pacey, skillful Mandzukic upfront, or Lewa, whom I listed above. Bayern have regressed because they haven't replaced their best wingers, but I don't see what the fluid CF has to do with that.
We have never dominated Europe. in 2008-09 we had a fluid line. By 2011 we had Rooney Chica and Berbs as our forwards. None are suitable for that fluid dream you propose.
Seeing as ROnaldo's powers have decreased, I don't know how "fluid"you think their front line it. Ronaldo is more Kane now than Rashford, funnily enough and at this period is when they starting winning the CL. When Ronaldo still had his speed and skill to play "fluid", Barcelona were dominating. Again, I feel you overstate the value of a fluid line in todays football.

Maybe its because Ibra is very slow and keeps dropping deep?

 

[balaks]

If I was a Utd fan I'd be keeping Rashford because I'd always favour a talented youth player from my own club.

 

[Sparky Rhiwabon]

This is hilarious. On one hand you have possibly the best striker in the league, who is still only 23. On the other side, you have an inconsistent young player, who hasn't really done that much yet, but has potential. The only way anyone picks Rashford is because of sentimental reasons, or because of some deluded habit of overhyping players coming through one's own academy. This shouldn't even be a comparison. The question is ridiculous. If you are asked to do a comparison, it should be a sporting comparison, not an emotional one.

I'm surprised that so many went for Rashford tbh, although like you said sentiment definitely comes into it, especially with him being a homegrown player.

If Rashford played for another club and people were asked would you rather have Kane or Rashford for free, the results would be very different, in fact the thread would be roundly ridiculed.

 

[cyberman]

When was this? when they had the dynamic, pacey, skillful Mandzukic upfront, or Lewa, whom I listed above. Bayern have regressed because they haven't replaced their best wingers, but I don't see what the fluid CF has to do with that.
We have never dominated Europe. in 2008-09 we had a fluid line. By 2011 we had Rooney Chica and Berbs as our forwards. None are suitable for that fluid dream you propose.
Seeing as ROnaldo's powers have decreased, I don't know how "fluid"you think their front line it. Ronaldo is more Kane now than Rashford, funnily enough and at this period is when they starting winning the CL. When Ronaldo still had his speed and skill to play "fluid", Barcelona were dominating. Again, I feel you overstate the value of a fluid line in todays football.

Maybe its because Ibra is very slow and keeps dropping deep?

Mandzukic only worked due to the dynamism and goal threat of those around him.
It's easier to sign Kane / Lukaku /RVP / Higuain / Costa / Ibra than it is to sign the dynamic inside forwards such as Neymar / Sanchez / Hazard / Dembele / Dybala / Ronaldo / Bale / Messi even.
There's a reason for that.
We did dominate Europe. Undefeated for 2 years, setting every record in the book and came closer than any side to retaining the CL itself. All of that fell away when we stopped using Rooney as a hard working inside forward and became more static up front. We lost Ronaldo and couldn't find the player that allowed us to keep the shape that made us so successful.

 

[KristianMackle]

Big difference with Kane is that, he can't create chances on his own like Rashford can. Rushford has that explosiveness; that magic that tells you he's going to be something special. You can't teach that neither will I want to lose that.

 

[Hawks2008]

At first I was surprised at so many people turning down Kane in this scenario, but then I remembered that Rahsford is the caf's darling and the pace obsession on this forum.

 

[Stacks]

Big difference with Kane is that, he can't create chances on his own like Rashford can. Rushford has that explosiveness; that magic that tells you he's going to be something special. You can't teach that neither will I want to lose that.

At first I was surprised at so many people turning down Kane in this scenario, but then I remembered that Rahsford is the caf's darling and the pace obsession on this forum.

Yup, pace obsession it is.
And to be fair to Kane, he is more than just a guy that waits for crosses and finishes chances. He is capable of fashioning chances himself as are most strikers. He is quite nimble but like most strikers (including Rashford) he relies on his team mates to provide his goals for him.

 

[Ram1fy]

This is hilarious. On one hand you have possibly the best striker in the league, who is still only 23. On the other side, you have an inconsistent young player, who hasn't really done that much yet, but has potential. The only way anyone picks Rashford is because of sentimental reasons, or because of some deluded habit of overhyping players coming through one's own academy. This shouldn't even be a comparison. The question is ridiculous. If you are asked to do a comparison, it should be a sporting comparison, not an emotional one.

Some clubs don't have a lot of experience with academy players coming through and how it feels like when someone comes through. Thankfully, at United we experience that feeling more regularly than some of the other small "big" clubs. We have every right to make whatever comparisons we want to make and pick players for whatever reasons we want to make - sentimental, footballing or because he is my long-lost brother because this is a United forum mainly. We as United fans have seen a lot of young talent come through the academy and otherwise. So other clubs with a laughable academy output might not get that. Also, when someone doesn't make it, we know how to see someone for what or who he is - because we know how it works.

 

[Rhyme Animal]

Rashford is currently the most gifted English player I know of. He has more ability in his little toe then Kane, Zaha and Sterling have combined. If you can't see that then you're either an ABU or a complete and utter idiot.

Mate, Dele Alli?

I'm surprised that so many went for Rashford tbh, although like you said sentiment definitely comes into it, especially with him being a homegrown player.

If Rashford played for another club and people were asked would you rather have Kane or Rashford for free, the results would be very different, in fact the thread would be roundly ridiculed.

Indeed.

It's fair enough if people would prefer Rashford over Kane, but all those taking the moral high-ground I bet are the exact same types who subscribe to the 'no player is bigger than the club' ideology! Ironic.

For me it's essentially that ideology why I would choose Kane, and why I would always the player more likely to bring success and honours to my club.

I love Rashford, and obviously this is a hypothetical thought experiment (as Rashford and Kane together would be fecking immense), but it does open another debate...

If you'd pick a (currently) lesser player for aesthetic reasons, do you accept that you're putting that player above the success of the club?

 

[KristianMackle]

Yup, pace obsession it is.
And to be fair to Kane, he is more than just a guy that waits for crosses and finishes chances. He is capable of fashioning chances himself as are most strikers. He is quite nimble but like most strikers (including Rashford) he relies on his team mates to provide his goals for him.

Not really pace obsession. Rashford has bags of skill that Kane doesn't as well. It's two very different kind of forwards.

 

[shabadu84]

Sensible answer is Kane of course. You take the proven commodity every time. Rashford is pretty much still all potential, though all the signs of a great talent are there. But shit happens. Look at Martial - he's not become bad all of a sudden but the upward trajectory has certainly stalled and he suddenly doesn't look quite so destined for a Balon d'Or.

That said, Rashford is fantastic and I look forward to cheering him on for years to come.

 

[Web of Bissaka]

Why not both.

If cannot, then "No".

Kane seems to be an early bloomer, Rashford's potential is more interesting.

Both are amazing players - Kane pure class no.9 & Rashford could be even more than just a simple striker.

 

[rpg]

I guess if everyone just agree that Rashford is better Alan Shearer and Thierry Henry, people would still argue that he is better than Ronaldo and Messi combined.

 

[Litch]

This is hilarious. On one hand you have possibly the best striker in the league, who is still only 23. On the other side, you have an inconsistent young player, who hasn't really done that much yet, but has potential. The only way anyone picks Rashford is because of sentimental reasons, or because of some deluded habit of overhyping players coming through one's own academy. This shouldn't even be a comparison. The question is ridiculous. If you are asked to do a comparison, it should be a sporting comparison, not an emotional one.

Agree and if both were put up for sale, there would be a massive difference in the potential fees and suitors. Some people are more impressed in how the player gets to the goal, than actually the goal itself. Kane always hits the target, from any position, any foot or with his head. This lad is a 30 goal a season irrespective of the fact, he might not look as exciting getting there. Rashford is superb but if he's through 1 on 1, I'm not convinced he scores and that's the difference. Rashford you're hopefully, Kane you expect it....

 

[LFC-Fans]

So... people think Rashford will be better than Kane? Ok then.

 

[paulscholes18]

So... people think Rashford will be better than Kane? Ok then.

When Kane was Rashford's age he scored 2 in 15 for Leicester in the championship, for us Rashford is better suited to our style of play, of course Kane is a much better finisher then Rashford but he is also 4 years older

 

[AlwaysRed66]

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

I agree. I like Rashford & he has potential, but no one knows whether he will be a prolific scorer. Kane is, & has produced for three years straight in the Premiership, which few others are doing. Mind you, he could flop at united, as our slow build up play would be alien to him. Actually, I think Rashford would score plenty in the Spurs team, though we don't really know.

 

[starman]

For people keep on asking if you think Rashford is better then Kane and being condescending about. Yes, I think 19 year old is streets ahead of 19 year old Kane..

 

[balaks]

For people keep on asking if you think Rashford is better then Kane and being condescending about. Yes, I think 19 year old is streets ahead of 19 year old Kane..

So all you need is a time machine to go back 3 or 4 years and you are all set.

 

[Canucantona20]

I'd go with Kane as of right now.

 

[starman]

So all you need is a time machine to go back 3 or 4 years and you are all set.

No, because then we would be comparing a 15 year old to a 19 year old with first team experience..

 

[balaks]

No, because then we would be comparing a 15 year old to a 19 year old with first team experience..

No, you could kidnap the 19 year old Kane, bring him back to now and then compare the players.

 

[Frank Grimes]

Even if Rashford was to improve brilliantly it would hard to see him having the same goal threat as Kane, who is the most lethal finisher in the Premier League. Because it's a hypothetical question I'll say Kane, not even a tough choice.