Man Utd should sign Zlatan since Europe won't matter that much anyway. Competing for the league or aiming for top 2-3 will be important for next season and Zlatan will be incredible in the PL I think.
Zlatan Ibrahimovic
- Thread starter Jacob
- Start date
- Status
I agree with you: the idea is not to win the Champions league but be part of the EPL title race.
Last year, MUFC recruited 2 offensive players: Martial and Depay.
Given our appalling attack (in terms of goals scored and chances), let's recruit 2 another offensive players: an experienced Ibra and a young talented player able to play on the right
How many 35 year olds have scored 20 goals in the PL? Genuine question I don't have a clue!
He wouldn't need to score 20 goals. He could have an overall positive contribution. He's more of a playmaker these days than a striker who leads the line.
United should have bought him before he went to Paris
I agree with you: the idea is not to win the Champions league but be part of the EPL title race.
Last year, MUFC recruited 2 offensive players: Martial and Depay.
Given our appalling attack (in terms of goals scored and chances), let's recruit 2 another offensive players: an experienced Ibra and a young talented player able to play on the right
This.
He wouldn't need to score 20 goals. He could have an overall positive contribution. He's more of a playmaker these days than a striker who leads the line.
United should have bought him before he went to Paris
But if he's not the one to score 20 goals etc who would be?
Several sources of goals ? A combo of Rashford/Martial/Zlatan/Depay/another player ? could score many goals.
Im not convinced. Zlatan aside have they scored more than 10 leagues goals individually ? I get the train of thought but next season I'd much rather start the season with a number 9 who can largely be expected to hit the 20 mark! It means so much. It can mask a lot in the team.
We've won many PL titles without our top scorer scoring that many.
92/93: Hughes, 15
93/94: Cantona, 18
95/96: Cantona, 14
96/97: Solskjær, 18
98/99: Yorke, 18
99/00: Yorke, 20
00/01: Sheringham, 15
02/03: Van Nistelrooy, 25
06/07: Ronaldo, 17
07/08: Ronaldo, 31
08/09: Ronaldo, 18
10/11: Berbatov, 20
12/13: Van Persie, 26
@Lurpak99 Interesting post
You have very high standards, it seems. Nearly any striker would be happy to have his record.
Well, he carried PSG to the quarter finals. I didn't see anyone else stepping up against City in the 2nd leg. di Maríá was atrocious and Cavani is a sporadic finisher in European games. His record is decent overall but he misses important chances when they matter.
Yeah, 20+ goals is hard to come by. Good post.
ok but 4 of the last seasons show we had that in 3 of those? Any 18 is close enough for me!!
PS lets change is to what 35 year old scored 17+
PS lets change is to what 34 year old scored 45+ goals in a single season in Europe !!
Sheringham scored 15 goals in 00/01 season as a 34-35 year old, and I think that's the highest for a player of that age in the PL. Shearer got 10 in his last season (05/06) which ended when he was 35.
35 though....new to the PL. I hear you all but he has to start for me otherwise he's not a nice guy to have around. It's just not something I think fits at all with where we are. Him and Maureen together...Feck me it could be nice or it could most likely be an absolute shambles....
I agree with you, Zlatan is potentially poison to the team.
With this in mind, where we are, would you condone a move for him over others first say Kane, Dybala, hell even Lewandowski......feck the spellings....He'd be at the bottom for me. Not because he isnt great. He is........but there's just something which says Not here, not now...for me personally...free or not!
Because of this kind of argument, Cantona & Ginola didn't play the Euro in 1996
or Romario the WC98Because of this kind of argument, Cantona & Ginola didn't play the Euro in 1996
They weren't 35..presumably perhaps he's looking for one last paycheck and why Man United now and not when he was younger? IS this our first shot at him? Everything points towards a NO. Who else at his age would you suggest we go for? If no one....why?
Because of this kind of argument, Cantona & Ginola didn't play the Euro in 1996
France did fine without those two remember, and Brazil made it to the final.
PS People are saying Ronaldo is a no.......he's far better for me..might be his replacement at PSG....why the feck are we suggesting PSG cast off's are better at 35 than our own prodigal son who is younger and was always better??
I don't like to repeat myself but I understand your concerns.
Because at his age of 35, he might want to take a chance at winning the EPL? And what is wrong with that? It works to our benefit if he is hungry to win a title with us even if he's doing it for his own selfish reasons. How many players in Zlatan's age group (33-35) have previously had seasons like the one he's having right now? Zlatan is an anomaly, a freak of nature who has gotten better when most players decline. He has been a great player for a long time but his career peak has arguably come in the last few years.
Considering our circumstances, there isn't a better option available than Zlatan this summer if we're looking to sign a striker. He would make an immediate impact and is a short term signing (free transfer although with high wages), allowing our young forwards (Martial, Rashford) to grow and ready to take over the mantle in two years. We're not getting Harry Kane this summer and we're not getting Robert Lewandowski or Auba. Zlatan is better than Lukaku. That makes Zlatan our best available option this summer for striker. And if we're getting Mourinho, then even better because they get along extremely well, reducing risk of off field issues.
Zlatan is too old and too expensive. We already have a talisman who is over the hill and gets huge wages. Besides, Zlatan will need some time to get used to the EPL. By the time he has done it, he will be even older than now. If people believe that a strike force of Rooney and Zlatan can stop Pep's City winning the title or even Klopp's Liverpool ovetaking us in the league, they are being very naive. The way forward is to sign forwards who are yet to enter their prime years. Building a team around Zlatan, and he can't shine otherwise, would be suicidal.
I completely agree with this. However I think a lot of the people who advocate signing Ibrahimovic are assuming United will sell Rooney. In that case you can make an argument for him as an experienced goal scorer who won't hinder the long term development of our young forwards.
Do you mean they haven't won these competitions?
France lost the semifinal at Euro 96 on penalties and then went on to win both World Cup 98 and Euro 2000, and Brazil wouldn't have won the World Cup with a Romario who wasn't anywhere near the player he was four years earlier in '98.
Sign him up already. He'd relish the chance to come here and do well IMO. And so would Woody and his marketing team
I take it you didn't see him last Wednesday against City, it's understandable though he was pretty much invisible.
Unfortunately, I can't see Rooney leaving in the summer. That's not a realistic scenario, IMO. If he moves, then signing an experienced star striker is a definite option.
Romario was still brilliant up to the World Cup in '98 and he was magical together with Ronaldo inbetween the two world cups. The won the copa in summer '97 and the confed cup in winter 97/98 together, scoring a crazy number of goals. It was a big feck up to leave him at home.
IIRC, Romario injured himself 2-3 weeks before the tournament. Was a big blow for Brazil indeed, he was still a top top player at the time.
But do you think Brazil would've won the World Cup with him in the squad?
Fairly certain Zagallo confirmed a few years later that he was left out because of his selfishness. How much of it is true is probably difficult to say. Maybe it wasn't certain that he'd be fit to play and wouldn't have accepted a squad role. Either way, Romario was still a sensational player in the year before the World Cup in '98 and Ronaldo had nothing but praise for him and even complained during the World Cup how much he missed playing with him.
As Balu says, he was brilliant, they would have had a bigger chance with him, surely. He was not only top top class but had a good understanding with Ronaldo.
Didn't know that. Well, huge mistake then, IMO.
No idea. I think Brazil would have won the World Cup if Ronaldo was 100% fit for the final, with or without Romario. Ronaldo was clearly the best player in the tournament and the whole mysterious hospital story in the night before the final with Ronaldo then clearly not fit at all disrupted the team. Maybe with Romario available they would have left Ronaldo out of the starting XI in the final and trusted him to finish the job? It's all speculation though. I just disagree strongly with your comment that Romario wasn't anywhere near the player he was 4 years before. He was in brilliant form up to the World Cup.
Whatever the reasons, a shame to voluntarily ignore Maradona in 1978, Romario/Redondo in 1998...
Yes, I heard something like that: personal or collective considerations
Yes, I heard something like that: personal or collective considerations
- Status