Erling Haaland

Status
Not open for further replies.
Semper aggressus said:
I flat out refuse to believe that we are less of a draw for the world’s best than Chelsea, Bayern or those rag shitheads. Apart from corrupt officials, what do any of those have to offer a new player that we don’t?
Click to expand...
Chelsea; Living in London therefore better media exposure and more 'glamorous' surroundings, more money from personal sponsorships as not associated with "dirty oil money", more likely to win personal awards such as Ballon D'Or as not associated with "dirty oil money", recent Champions League winners, favourites with many on here to win the league again, very good manager with ability to help player grow.

Bayern; guaranteed a league winners medal every season, 95% games are against poor opposition so easy to pad stats, same non "dirty oil money" advantages as Chelsea.

United; huge, huge wages, willing to pay crazy money to players and agents to get one over iklle City, complete backing of the UK press corps and PGMOL, non "dirty oil money" advantages again.

Basically if a player's main objective is to be the best they can be and really challenge themselves they come to us or Chelsea. We have the disadvantage of non London, non Champions League winners, hated by the press and next season may be Pep's last so there's an air of uncertainty. Chelsea definitely aren't in need of another high paid striker now though which is good.
If they're more interested in making money and become an Instagram footballer like Pogba they go to United or Bayern, with Bayern having the advantage of winning things but United having the advantage of controlling the press like no other club. That's without taking into account Real Madrid and a very, very slim possibility of Liverpool getting involved.
Having said all that looking at the places he could go Chelsea already have a striker on big money, would they need two with the way they play? United already have about 15 strikers, Real Madrid may not have the budget of they also go for Mbappe next season and Liverpool's owners are more interested in making money so the only way they'll shell out is if they think they can make more money from sponsorship, global exposure, etc than the cost of the transfer.
Looking at it realistically Bayern or City would seem to be the most likely destinations for him next year as Bayern will need to replace Lewandowski and we need a striker. Bayern's M.O. seems to be about getting players from their rivals on the cheap so I don't know how likely they'd be to pay all the agents fees that are guaranteed to be involved with this transfer.
I don't know if we'd get involved for the same reasons either so it will be interesting to see what happens with him. It certainly seems like he would have had a lot more options of teams to move to the summer just gone than he will have the summer coming.
 
Bluemanc100 said:
Nobody is paying the lad that much in today's climate... Not a chance
Click to expand...
Even if that's true - and let's face it, every time this is reported the wages go up - then it may be possible.

Over 5 years that's £317m. That's £63m a year over five years and the potential to sell him. Huge - but I bet United would consider it.

Many thought we should have just paid £150m for Kane + 350k a week wages. That would be £240m over five years - so £48m a year on one player, and little chance of selling him later on.

They think he's a £150m+ player, so if there's the best part of £100m that won't need to be paid in a transfer, then they want every penny of it. From what I've read a lot of agents will suggest splitting the benefit of a buy out/free, but I doubt that would happen here.
 
bluenova said:
Even if that's true - and let's face it, every time this is reported the wages go up - then it may be possible.

Over 5 years that's £317m. That's £63m a year over five years and the potential to sell him. Huge - but I bet United would consider it.

Many thought we should have just paid £150m for Kane + 350k a week wages. That would be £240m over five years - so £48m a year on one player, and little chance of selling him later on.

They think he's a £150m+ player, so if there's the best part of £100m that won't need to be paid in a transfer, then they want every penny of it. From what I've read a lot of agents will suggest splitting the benefit of a buy out/free, but I doubt that would happen here.
Click to expand...
Looks much more appealing in that context. Plus haaland sells more shirts etc.
 
They’re losing 3-2 so far, but one goal and one assist for Haaland
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.