Erling Haaland

[MrDaveyHavoc]

Could be of course. But if it's a career decision you look back 10 years and forward 10 years. Pep is the outstanding choice.

I dont think footballers can look that far forward. He would only be guaranteed 2 years with Pep, but on the other hand Chelsea change managers like I change socks.

 

[Tevez City]

If Chelsea get this lad they will be right up there (if they arent already)...they beat us convincingly twice int he last couple of months of the season (League and CL final) and looked very good and very comfortable both times.

For me Kane and Grealish (if that is who we end up with ) dont improve us enough.....

Actually they beat us 3 times in the last couple months.

 

[ancoats]

the more i think about haaland the better the option it becomes ? the whole of the summer off and ready for the early season push city need. kane will not be sold until the last minute. if spurs really have to sell because the player want out it will be deadline day ? so get haaland and forget kane unless we can budget for both. maybe once we have haaland spurs may cave in for a offer that city are happy to pay

 

[ancoats]

Actually they beat us 3 times in the last couple months.

if city let haaland go to chelsea or any other big club then we must be fools
the lad is manchester city mad would run through brick walls for the shirt

 

[Damanino]

Txiki has to be very clever here. We need to flex our muscles and go for plan A Haaland. Swallow the pride of dealing with Raiola, swallow any agent fee, if Raiola asks too much Txiki needs to negotiate it down if he cannot get someone who can.

Chelsea bought Werner for 50m who was kind of like Budesliga top scorer (maybe just behind Lewa) but after one season with winning the CL they already try to improve on Werner with Haaland.

 

[Dobsy]

The way I'm reading things Kane would have been a classic City signing: no competition and wants to come. They've clearly spoken off the record.

Haaland on the other hand would entail a high profile bidding war with Chelsea, a mouthy agent, and adding a big ego to the group. City's track record in that kind of situation is much less clear.

 

[andyhinch]

I dont think footballers can look that far forward. He would only be guaranteed 2 years with Pep, but on the other hand Chelsea change managers like I change socks.

You change your socks about once a year ?

 

[Keeper!]

if city let haaland go to chelsea or any other big club then we must be fools
the lad is manchester city mad would run through brick walls for the shirt

he is a professional footballer not some fan boy.

He is a paid hand.

 

[Keeper!]

You change your socks about once a year ?

feel sorry for the person sat next to him at a game

 

[Coatigan]

The way I'm reading things Kane would have been a classic City signing: no competition and wants to come. They've clearly spoken off the record.

Haaland on the other hand would entail a high profile bidding war with Chelsea, a mouthy agent, and adding a big ego to the group. City's track record in that kind of situation is much less clear.

There is a fair bit in that, I just don't think it is that black and white.

The club have gone for players before there was competition for. Silva from R.Madrid, Sergio from chelsea, kdb from a few, laporte from Barcelona, Sane from bayern, sanchez a couple times, supposedly mbappe if you believe claims, jorgino, hazard, both spanish clubs were after Torres, juve after gundo, etc etc. They do like to box players off early and trust them, but they also aren't shy either.

I'm not convinced there is no competition for Kane. The media repeatedly try push utd into the frame, which is predictable I guess, but it also does make sense on its own. They are more likely to pay over the odds for him than we are, they too need a striker, and we take it for granted it is just hete he would want to move to.

I don't think the competition for Haaland, this season at least, would be much bigger. Spanish clubs probably not in it, bayern not this year, italian gisnts no chance. So down to really us and chelsea. That isn't something to discourage the club imo, if it were Haaland they wanted.

 

[Dobsy]

There is a fair bit in that, I just don't think it is that black and white.

The club have gone for players before there was competition for. Silva from R.Madrid, Sergio from chelsea, kdb from a few, laporte from Barcelona, Sane from bayern, sanchez a couple times, supposedly mbappe if you believe claims, jorgino, hazard, both spanish clubs were after Torres, juve after gundo, etc etc. They do like to box players off early and trust them, but they also aren't shy either.

I'm not convinced there is no competition for Kane. The media repeatedly try push utd into the frame, which is predictable I guess, but it also does make sense on its own. They are more likely to pay over the odds for him than we are, they too need a striker, and we take it for granted it is just hete he would want to move to.

I don't think the competition for Haaland, this season at least, would be much bigger. Spanish clubs probably not in it, bayern not this year, italian gisnts no chance. So down to really us and chelsea. That isn't something to discourage the club imo, if it were Haaland they wanted.

I hope you're right. To my eyes it'll be worth it to pay him right at the top of our pay structure.

If he's as interested in breaking records as he suggests then playing in a Pep team should be a big pull. He's more likely to rack up the numbers under Pep than anywhere else.

 

[Coatigan]

I hope you're right. To my eyes it'll be worth it to pay him right at the top of our pay structure.

If he's as interested in breaking records as he suggests then playing in a Pep team should be a big pull. He's more likely to rack up the numbers under Pep than anywhere else.

Agree.

I've always said, to me, Kane and Haaland are equally available/unavailable, and more or less the same price. People will exaggerate one or the other's price based on what player they'd want or rather believe would come, but in reality, there or thereabouts. No way Kane goes for any less than 120m, up front. I doubt Dortmund would refuse over 120m. I doubt Haaland would get or even demand the wages thrown about when the narrative was 'look how much money city will pay' and I doubt Kane would be any less than 300k, but again if there is a difference it is bridgable.

So I don't see either as one and only tarket or priority between them, as seems to be accepted by the media.

 

[The Black Shed]

The fact of the matter is Football is a Business.

And in this business, players' main asset is their bodies as a result of which they have a very limited time to make as much money as they can before their bodies give out.

Look at Yaya Toure, why do you think he was taking all those moves to those sketchy lower-tier clubs in Greece and Ukraine, he probably didn't save his money and invest it properly and had to take those moves.

In Haaland's case, he is looking to assure his and his families future, Look at his father Alf, Lost his career over one bad tackle, Look at Eriksen recently, probably will never play a minute of professional football again. Ryan Mason when he got that nasty hit from Cahill.

I was thinking about the move as purely a footballing decision, but yeah it depends what you're doing with all that money, how you invest it, how you're advised to do that and how philanthropic you are with it. Personally, me and my family would be set for life on three months wages! As would most on here.

 

[I'm Blue]

This is “the statement”

 

[LangleyBlue1970]

if city let haaland go to chelsea or any other big club then we must be fools
the lad is manchester city mad would run through brick walls for the shirt

Let? What if he simply fancies London and not Manchester? And he would run through a brick wall why? Because his dad played for us?
He will go to the highest payer.

 

[ancoats]

Let? What if he simply fancies London and not Manchester? And he would run through a brick wall why? Because his dad played for us?
He will go to the highest payer.

from what i heard he was brought up watching city. in the last 10 year hes even comes to the games when he can.
so like you and me if manchester city was in for me it would not take much for me to sign

haaland is one of the best strikers in the world and city would be mad not to have a go at signing him

 

[ancoats]

he is a professional footballer not some fan boy.

He is a paid hand.

your right
but if you have a dream club you would like to sign for and they are after a new striker
plus you are one of the best in world football and city can buy you then its a dream made in heaven

 

[LangleyBlue1970]

from what i heard he was brought up watching city. in the last 10 year hes even comes to the games when he can.
so like you and me if manchester city was in for me it would not take much for me to sign

haaland is one of the best strikers in the world and city would be mad not to have a go at signing him

Have a go, yes, but not expect, which is how it sounded when you said if we let Chelsea sign him. The brutal truth is that we may not have a choice if Chelsea offer more money. Plus he will win trophies with them too.

Just broke their opening offer has been turned down, so looks like the ball is rolling.

 

[BLUEMATT23]

What's Danny Ings doing these days?

 

[PJM1891]

Reports from Germany that Dortmund have turned down an offer from Chelsea.