Erling Haaland

[The Stockport Iniesta]

Why do people keep spelling Haaland with an R, is it some kind of in joke? Winds me up, haha :)

 

[citymad]

Why do people keep spelling Haaland with an R, is it some kind of in joke? Winds me up, haha :)

I agree, anyway about this Harry Kain ...

 

[doobyedoobye]

The Haaland deal looks expensive, complicated and high risk. Dortmund potentially are serious about 170 mil. If City think that's it's too difficult and costly then the focus on Kane is not necessarily down to Erling not wanting to come

 

[SWP's back]

Chelsea gonna dominate for the next five years if we aren’t careful.

 

[Homar]

I’d rather pay 50% more for Haaland. At least Haaland can give us 10 years. He also has a connection with the club, which is worth something. Sadly, I don’t think Pep cares about anything after the next few years. He probably won’t be here, so he wants the best player at this moment in time, which is Kane. I think in a case like this, the club needs to think longer term. I can’t stand the thought of dropping a fortune on someone that could be over the hill in 3-5 years. I’d prefer to take a risk on someone like Patson Daka and use the remaining funds to strengthen other positions.

 

[Deleted member 87819]

You don't have to die on this hill though, mate?

You are one of my favourite new posters on here, so don't need to teach you to suck eggs.

City do business a certain way and positively frown upon being played against other clubs.

It's why we always have our ducks in a row and know the landscape long before us plebs get to hear something isn't happening.

Chelsea just have a certain way of doing business which is very effective for them, just as sacking so many managers doesn't stop them winning trophies.

We tend to get the player and agent onside months beforehand.

We saw with Jorginho, however, that all the due diligence counts for nothing if the player cannot be trusted?

I get the impression City believe they can trust Kane more than Haaland in the current quiet.

I want to explain the point as succinctly as possible. We have been building a project that isn’t about winning the next PL title, but is about dominating domestically and with that becoming a force in European football and the strongest global brand possible. It is one story if we don’t get Haaland because he stays at Dortmund another year or even if he goes to Real Madrid or Barcelona. It is entirely different if he goes to a domestic rival that literally has just beaten us in a Champions League final. What this does is threaten the project, not the next title. With Tuchel, they have an extremely talented yet ruthless manager that is a perfect match to Roman’s own ruthlessness, as well as money to back any goals. Haaland already is a “face of the Champions League” and will be possibly the superstar in football in the next decade alongside Mbappe (who will probably always have the upper hand for being in a national team that is so talented it will challenge for any World Cup and Euro titles for many cycles to come). Him going to Chelsea is bound to make Chelsea the face of English football, and this goes beyond, I repeat, whether they win the next PL title or retain the next UCL. And whenever Pep decides to leave us, having a rival so well positioned will be even worse for us. That is why I can’t imagine that the people of our club would be so lazy to think “oh, he’s entertaining the possibility of going to another club” and give up on years of work. Unless we were pursuing Mbappe on the side, the news that Haaland could seriously be going to Chelsea HAS to mean we have to fight for this. Spare me the “this isn’t how we work” line: we work for the dominance and there hasn’t been in the last decade one single situation in which one specific signing could downgrade our status and the landscape in English football. That is why I don’t believe we would allow ourselves to miss on him for a domestic rival by being outspent, because of 1) the true cost of having that dominance threatened 2) would allow for a domino effect in the medium and long term. It is one thing to “settle for Kane” in a scenario in which Haaland isn’t available, it’s entirely different if he is. And were Haaland to go to Chelsea, we may well be left with signing Kane as a desperate move and attempt at some relevance, but it would be realistically as significant as signing André Silva instead. It makes me cringe with second hand embarrassment to read people keep referring to Kane as the “English captain” as if that carries any weight globally (it’s even more irrelevant than the English national team itself, with all due respect, my British friends!). Of course, if people want to tell themselves that Kane would score more league goals overall for us than Haaland would for Chelsea in his first year (which would be a similar scenario that happened in the Bundesliga and didn’t stop him from being the star there), or stuff like “Tuchel will be fired three months into next season” or insisting that he plays a “defensive style” or whatever, frankly, hilarious bullshit that Pep better than anyone knows all too well isn’t going to be the case, they can tell themselves that if it’s comforting at all, go ahead by all means. Even add in the “but Raiola” cliches, if needed. And as fans, maybe all we should care about is next year’s titles. But I can’t pretend the horizon wouldn’t look bright with Haaland at Chelsea.

This definitely wasn’t succinct, hehe.

 

[Gingers Dad]

Honestly going for Haaland makes more sense strategically. It weakens Chelsea and gives us an amazing striker for years.

Chelsea cant get Kane so if we take Haaland off the market then they're stuck with no one...

City need to be smart here. Break the bank for the kid

If Chelsea can afford Haaland why can't they get Kane?

 

[BlueMoonz1977]

Just got up for work to see 2 pieces of news:

So the rumour mill is £150m straight cash deal for Kane

And another rumour that dortmund want £170m for Haaland

Would prefer Haaland, and wouldnt want him rocking up at chelsea

 

[Saddleworth2]

I want to explain the point as succinctly as possible. We have been building a project that isn’t about winning the next PL title, but is about dominating domestically and with that becoming a force in European football and the strongest global brand possible. It is one story if we don’t get Haaland because he stays at Dortmund another year or even if he goes to Real Madrid or Barcelona. It is entirely different if he goes to a domestic rival that literally has just beaten us in a Champions League final. What this does is threaten the project, not the next title. With Tuchel, they have an extremely talented yet ruthless manager that is a perfect match to Roman’s own ruthlessness, as well as money to back any goals. Haaland already is a “face of the Champions League” and will be possibly the superstar in football in the next decade alongside Mbappe (who will probably always have the upper hand for being in a national team that is so talented it will challenge for any World Cup and Euro titles for many cycles to come). Him going to Chelsea is bound to make Chelsea the face of English football, and this goes beyond, I repeat, whether they win the next PL title or retain the next UCL. And whenever Pep decides to leave us, having a rival so well positioned will be even worse for us. That is why I can’t imagine that the people of our club would be so lazy to think “oh, he’s entertaining the possibility of going to another club” and give up on years of work. Unless we were pursuing Mbappe on the side, the news that Haaland could seriously be going to Chelsea HAS to mean we have to fight for this. Spare me the “this isn’t how we work” line: we work for the dominance and there hasn’t been in the last decade one single situation in which one specific signing could downgrade our status and the landscape in English football. That is why I don’t believe we would allow ourselves to miss on him for a domestic rival by being outspent, because of 1) the true cost of having that dominance threatened 2) would allow for a domino effect in the medium and long term. It is one thing to “settle for Kane” in a scenario in which Haaland isn’t available, it’s entirely different if he is. And were Haaland to go to Chelsea, we may well be left with signing Kane as a desperate move and attempt at some relevance, but it would be realistically as significant as signing André Silva instead. It makes me cringe with second hand embarrassment to read people keep referring to Kane as the “English captain” as if that carries any weight globally (it’s even more irrelevant than the English national team itself, with all due respect, my British friends!). Of course, if people want to tell themselves that Kane would score more league goals overall for us than Haaland would for Chelsea in his first year (which would be a similar scenario that happened in the Bundesliga and didn’t stop him from being the star there), or stuff like “Tuchel will be fired three months into next season” or insisting that he plays a “defensive style” or whatever, frankly, hilarious bullshit that Pep better than anyone knows all too well isn’t going to be the case, they can tell themselves that if it’s comforting at all, go ahead by all means. Even add in the “but Raiola” cliches, if needed. And as fans, maybe all we should care about is next year’s titles. But I can’t pretend the horizon wouldn’t look bright with Haaland at Chelsea.

This definitely wasn’t succinct, hehe.

Not succinct but pretty accurate. I am concerned already at Tuchel/Chelsea. With Haaland they are elevated to another level from both a football and global brand perspective. Some may not care about 'brand' but our future success depends on it.

 

[Puneeth]

I dont understand why people would prefer Haaland, Kane is determined to win trophies, he wants to join city. He has good 6 years at the Top and probably will see out his career at city. Modest footballer. Good team player.

whereas Haaland, look at PSG,they are as ambitious as Mancity and have the money power. They signed Mbappe and now he wants to leave and join Real Madrid. The Club is in desperate mode to keep hold of him. The owner had to come out and give a statement. I Still think Mbappe will leave for Madrid

if Haaland did join City i don't think he will be as commited as Aguero or Kane. Scenes when Kaldoon comes out and says we wont sell haaland, he wont leave , Haaland trying to run down his contract to sign for barca or madrid.
Big Risk

 

[Coatigan]

I’d rather pay 50% more for Haaland. At least Haaland can give us 10 years. He also has a connection with the club, which is worth something. Sadly, I don’t think Pep cares about anything after the next few years. He probably won’t be here, so he wants the best player at this moment in time, which is Kane. I think in a case like this, the club needs to think longer term. I can’t stand the thought of dropping a fortune on someone that could be over the hill in 3-5 years. I’d prefer to take a risk on someone like Patson Daka and use the remaining funds to strengthen other positions.

I disagree that Kane is the better player at this moment in time.

Kane has hit his ceiling, a few years ago, and the last 3 years has not managed to reach it again. Haaland has yet to hit his, and is already outscoring not just the current Kane, but a prime Kane at his best.

For all of Kane's goals, he has been outscored by our own 'useless' raheem two of the last three seasons.

 

[Deleted member 87819]

whereas Haaland, look at PSG,they are as ambitious as Mancity and have the money power. They signed Mbappe and now he wants to leave and join Real Madrid. The Club is in desperate mode to keep hold of him. The owner had to come out and give a statement. I Still think Mbappe will leave for Madrid

Mbappé may well leave PSG this summer or next on a free, and they certainly would love to keep him, but he has already served them a purpose by being there all these years. He has elevated them to a different level alongside Neymar. It’s proven to be a worthy investment even if he wasn’t able to win that UCL trophy (one other year left to conquer that, so we’ll see). The expectation that a player has to come and stay six, eight or ten years or it wasn’t worth it is unrealistic. If Messi came this summer and stayed for two years, we would love and be happy with that.

 

[applecentral]

I want to explain the point as succinctly as possible. We have been building a project that isn’t about winning the next PL title, but is about dominating domestically and with that becoming a force in European football and the strongest global brand possible. It is one story if we don’t get Haaland because he stays at Dortmund another year or even if he goes to Real Madrid or Barcelona. It is entirely different if he goes to a domestic rival that literally has just beaten us in a Champions League final. What this does is threaten the project, not the next title. With Tuchel, they have an extremely talented yet ruthless manager that is a perfect match to Roman’s own ruthlessness, as well as money to back any goals. Haaland already is a “face of the Champions League” and will be possibly the superstar in football in the next decade alongside Mbappe (who will probably always have the upper hand for being in a national team that is so talented it will challenge for any World Cup and Euro titles for many cycles to come). Him going to Chelsea is bound to make Chelsea the face of English football, and this goes beyond, I repeat, whether they win the next PL title or retain the next UCL. And whenever Pep decides to leave us, having a rival so well positioned will be even worse for us. That is why I can’t imagine that the people of our club would be so lazy to think “oh, he’s entertaining the possibility of going to another club” and give up on years of work. Unless we were pursuing Mbappe on the side, the news that Haaland could seriously be going to Chelsea HAS to mean we have to fight for this. Spare me the “this isn’t how we work” line: we work for the dominance and there hasn’t been in the last decade one single situation in which one specific signing could downgrade our status and the landscape in English football. That is why I don’t believe we would allow ourselves to miss on him for a domestic rival by being outspent, because of 1) the true cost of having that dominance threatened 2) would allow for a domino effect in the medium and long term. It is one thing to “settle for Kane” in a scenario in which Haaland isn’t available, it’s entirely different if he is. And were Haaland to go to Chelsea, we may well be left with signing Kane as a desperate move and attempt at some relevance, but it would be realistically as significant as signing André Silva instead. It makes me cringe with second hand embarrassment to read people keep referring to Kane as the “English captain” as if that carries any weight globally (it’s even more irrelevant than the English national team itself, with all due respect, my British friends!). Of course, if people want to tell themselves that Kane would score more league goals overall for us than Haaland would for Chelsea in his first year (which would be a similar scenario that happened in the Bundesliga and didn’t stop him from being the star there), or stuff like “Tuchel will be fired three months into next season” or insisting that he plays a “defensive style” or whatever, frankly, hilarious bullshit that Pep better than anyone knows all too well isn’t going to be the case, they can tell themselves that if it’s comforting at all, go ahead by all means. Even add in the “but Raiola” cliches, if needed. And as fans, maybe all we should care about is next year’s titles. But I can’t pretend the horizon wouldn’t look bright with Haaland at Chelsea.

This definitely wasn’t succinct, hehe.

There is a lot of passion in your post. Respect for that. I fully understand Haaland would be a major signing for City. My only fear is if we bust the bank for him we may have to pull out of other transfers the club have lined up.
It may be a case of putting all our eggs in one basket to coin a phrase and God forbid if he struggled in the Prem.
I would prefer Haaland to Kane all day, but Kane is a proven Striker in the toughest league in the world. He would rock up and bang in goals galore from the off. Haaland may suffer from first season syndrome, which happens to lots of foreign players.
It is a tough call. Meanwhile Nmecha is banging in goals for Germany, Torres is chomping at the bit, showing potential to become a potent Striker. Jesus has to start scoring more goals and he may well do this coming season. Of course none of those players compare to Haaland or Kane at the moment, and the marketing value of both players would be immense. What to do for the best?.
If we let Chelsea get Haaland then of course that would strengthen Chelsea too much for our liking. This is a very tough transfer window, Dortmund must be rubbing their hands in glee as 2 super heavyweights try to sign their golden boy with money no object. Dortmund will probably go and sign Daka, Nmecha or a player in that ilk and convert them into next seasons superstar. With the worlds greatest coach why can’t we do that?. Perhaps in time we will.

 

[nmc]

I think Chelsea are putting the groundwork in for next year… they seem to be the only ones really at the table now, but the fee is so high that it’s probably not going to happen but come next summer they are front and centre of the queue - all the hard work is done and it may be difficult for other clubs to get into the race. The one club I wouldn’t discount completely is Bayern - they are lurking in the background and they will be in the market for a striker soon - they effectively control the Bundesliga - so they may be playing a cool hand behind the scenes.

 

[Deleted member 87819]

There is a lot of passion in your post

There in fact is no passion in my post. I was keeping it rational. That’s why I finish by talking about what our concerns as fans should be.
As for the rest of your post, it’s your opinion, and a lot of it I feel has been addressed in my post already. Cheers

 

[urban genie]

I said it 6 months ago and still think it is possible that this can happen.

Haaland has no issue with another year at dortmund, he has said that before, plus next summer is better for a bidding war and best deal for himself and agent.

So buy Kane this summer and Haaland next.

It is a shame we cannot do a deal with dortmund now where we pay a kind of retainer a guarentee that he signs paying half now let him stay at him to dortmund for the season and pay rest upon full signing, waive the sancho deal and offer them first choice on academy players that won't break through (tbf dortmund a great place for youngsters to develop)

 

[himalayan_blues]

peps tears dont wash with me , he treated sergio badly , my question is more did we tell this kid we would get shot of sergio so he could come and be our no one striker ?

Regarding guardiolas tear sentiments towards aguero i geniunely believe those tears were real.
Its a completely different matter between being a nice man and a good professional. A nice man inside guardiola is crying but a good professional and a born winner inside pep is selling aguero.
Besides its aguero who is not happy being a second priority and has asked to leave. City were not that willing to let him go.

 

[himalayan_blues]

Whilst conversations are out of our control, the fact the player is receptive enough to hear Chelsea out, as Mino also was with Barca and Real, the writing is clear enough, Erling isn't closed off to anyone.

That's his prerogative, but it's not how City want to roll this summer because they want assurances around our next No.9, such is the priority weighted on it.

We thought we had it with Erling, appears not, if he's still happy to listen to pitches from Chelsea at this stage, however prudent on his part.

It may explain a lot on Kane.

I think they are planning or have a tentative idea and more than them dortmund are planning to keep him. Dortmund will not be selling 2 stars at the same season. I think they are preparing for next season departure.

 

[Larry Stranger]

If Chelsea can afford Haaland why can't they get Kane?

From what a lot of people are saying, Levi won't sell to Chelsea. Just like how he refused to sell Modric to them. I don't know how true that is, but Kane would be seen more of a Judas if he went to them instead of us.

 

[bobom]

It's not naive in terms of they want players who are committed to coming here.

We have shown plenty of times that we walk away if it's not the right smell for us.

I suspect City don't want to be dragging out this window for a number nine because it absolutely has to happen.

Two world class strikers on the market, it would be amateurish to find out you aren't the destination of choice, being forced to pay well over the odds by the other club, knowing backed into a corner.

But you also don't want Spurs to think Kane is the only game in town. You need the ability to walk away - doesn't ending interest in Haaland hugely increase Spurs' leverage on Kane?