Erling Haaland

Status
Not open for further replies.
BrazilianBlue (Gus) said:
Being disappointed is part of being a fan, either getting hyped for a match or a transfer. I can’t imagine anything can top my disappointment from that UCL final. ITK’s share what they know, but facts aren’t facts until they are. That sometimes things don’t come to fruition doesn’t mean they were wrong. And it is perfectly possible to distinguish people who actually know what they’re talking about, know people and have reliable sources, from those lost desperate for relevance. It’s not true that the club doesn’t communicate about transfers; it has its ways of making it known when they’re not interested in someone, or out of the running, especially when there is speculation mounting and they feel something should be clarified.
Click to expand...
I agree Gus, disappointment goes with the territory, but there was far more previously.

However I it has been around 50 years of it for me, I remember being hyped when I heard we were in for Rodney Marsh, on for the title run to come to a grinding halt.
 
BrazilianBlue (Gus) said:
Lol. You underestimate our own club. I would have Lewandowski here, but nothing would be more unlike the way we do business
For someone so pessimistic, you spend a lot of time in this thread. I understand the fascination and the defensive mechanism though
Click to expand...
I dont underestimate our club , I just know that we dont drop that kind of money on one player, the kind needed to sign Haaland. If you paid attention to our strategy when comes to transfers you'd know this too.
I do spend a lot of time on this thread because I wish to be proven wrong and for us to actually sign him.
 
Nihilist said:
I dont underestimate our club , I just know that we dont drop that kind of money on one player, the kind needed to sign Haaland. If you paid attention to our strategy when comes to transfers you'd know this too.
I do spend a lot of time on this thread because I wish to be proven wrong and for us to actually sign him.
Click to expand...
I pay attention to our strategy very well. We haven’t signed someone to come and score more goals than the rest of the squad in how long? We pay more in agent fees than almost any club.
I don’t even think the fear of PSG here is justitied. Sam Lee reported that the previous summer we had offered Messi more than PSG is paying now. Look at the deal they made for Nuno Mendes. If we were interested in him, we would have secured him and paid more. His agent desperately wanted to sell him to us. PSG was far from their first choice. Look at Sergio Ramos. He tried hard to find a way to come. We didn’t want him either. Right now, we will have the advantage as a club and as a league over everyone else, and will pay accordingly to a player that would come to be the top goalscorer and beyond (including off the pitch). Understand that we signed Grealish and he arrived already receiving more than anybody but KdB and same as Sterling. We are a club aware of the market and won’t fall behind by not understanding and ever adapting. These aren’t amateurs
All of this is understood by everyone except some of our fans. A strange situation
 
ahmed.aq17 said:
I understand what u mean. But I'm pretty sure the Haaland camp will make sure their financial demands are also being met while Dortmund gets their 130 mil. That's the whole reason ppl were saying that buying Haaland even at his release clause price would cost clubs a total of around +120 mil.
So either way, the Haaland camp will give zero sh*ts abt what Dortmund get, instead they'll persuade clubs to meet their demands.
Click to expand...

Dortmund might accept a bigger fee in January but why would that suit Haaland, he either wants to join a certain club or he doesn't?

Whichever club he has his mind set on, he only needs to wait another five months to realise the move and extra cash he can ask for.

My point is City don't need to get involved in an auction if the player decides that's where he is going.

He saves the club £50m and both City and Haaland would use that saving to improve his overall package.

Haaland isn't leaving in January, all common sense dictates.

The player is now in the box seat, not Dortmund, not the buying club.
 
Last edited:
Nihilist said:
I dont underestimate our club , I just know that we dont drop that kind of money on one player, the kind needed to sign Haaland. If you paid attention to our strategy when comes to transfers you'd know this too.
I do spend a lot of time on this thread because I wish to be proven wrong and for us to actually sign him.
Click to expand...

I take it you then were also one of the relatively few that knew we weren't getting Kane last summer? That's not a dig btw, it is enforcing your claim.

Generally, would agree. But that money has essentially more than halved now. The club do pay agents fees, and high wages, and definitely pay release clauses. They certainly like to buy players of his age that fit a long term outlook. Players that want to come here.

So for me that will be what decides it, does he want to come here. I don't believe the 'he wants 1bn a week' crap or 'his agent wants the equivalent if his transfer fee/clause' cluckbait that so many are inexplicably desperate to not only believe but argue as some well known fact. Of Course there will be agent fees involved. Of Course his wages will be high. Wherever he ends up. But nothing that is beyond us, that we don't already pay, that we weren't already supposedly prepared to pay for Kane. The question is will the club feel he can be convinced to want to come here, or not. The rest is detail we will never know, and reports will pick their own numbers to run with.
 
the transfer fee will not dictate where he ends up - the wages will, which is why I don’t think we’ll get him.
 
Manchester_lalala said:
Haaland was going to cost north of £150m. Not a chance City entertaining that.
Click to expand...

Which would explain why attention shifted to Kane, who was presumed would cost less, eventhough it was obvious he wouldn't.

There were a few links with Haaland early on, then Dortmund set their stall, then they stopped, and Kane links started. Many read we were never in for him anyway, Kane was always the one. Some thought it was a play to test Dortmund's resolve before trying to push their demand down. The truth is probably in the middle, but with Dortmund sticking to it, with Chelsea too supposedly, and Kane half-suggesting doing his bit, it probably became a clearer choice. Still the difference was way too far apart.

You are right, we were never going to entertain 150m.

But the goalposts will have shifted for next summer, either way, particularly if the release clause part is indeed true.
 
bellsouth said:
the transfer fee will not dictate where he ends up - the wages will, which is why I don’t think we’ll get him.
Click to expand...

Because we don't pay big wages? Are we not among the top of the highest wage bill clubs, I forget where exactly we sit in that table as it doesn't seem to have beem thrown in our faces for a while.
 
The potential release of Raheem, plus the loss of Sergio and David Silva freed up a fair bit of wages.
 
tolmie's hairdoo said:
Dortmund might accept a bigger fee in January but why would that suit Haaland, he either wants to join a certain club or he doesn't?

Whichever club he has his mind set on, he only needs to wait another five months to realise the move and extra cash he can ask for.

My point is City don't need to get involved in an auction if the player decides that's where he is going.

He saves the club £50m and both City and Haaland would use that saving to improve his overall package.

Haaland isn't leaving in January, all common sense dictates.

The player is now in the box seat, not Dortmund, not the buying club.
Click to expand...

That is sound logic, however what is being argued here is that he wouldn't 'save' his buying club 50m by waiting till the summer, but instead wait to pocket it himself. Something I don't buy myself, cynicism for the sake of it.

It's the whole, if he costs 150m now, he'll still cost 150m next summer even with a release clause at half that, because his agent will want the difference for themselves arguement. But why would any club not prepared to pay 150m for him then go and pay 150m for him.

edit, not by the poster you replied to I should add btw.
 
Coatigan said:
Which would explain why attention shifted to Kane, who was presumed would cost less, eventhough it was obvious he wouldn't.

There were a few links with Haaland early on, then Dortmund set their stall, then they stopped, and Kane links started. Many read we were never in for him anyway, Kane was always the one. Some thought it was a play to test Dortmund's resolve before trying to push their demand down. The truth is probably in the middle, but with Dortmund sticking to it, with Chelsea too supposedly, and Kane half-suggesting doing his bit, it probably became a clearer choice. Still the difference was way too far apart.

You are right, we were never going to entertain 150m.

But the goalposts will have shifted for next summer, either way, particularly if the release clause part is indeed true.
Click to expand...

Yeah it’s the way I see it.
 
oldius said:
The potential release of Raheem, plus the loss of Sergio and David Silva freed up a fair bit of wages.
Click to expand...
The recent contract extensions probably take good care of most of that to be fair.

Pep, Dias, Stones, Ederson, Foden all new and improved deals and I would imagine Grealish is on tasty money.
 
Coatigan said:
Which would explain why attention shifted to Kane, who was presumed would cost less, eventhough it was obvious he wouldn't.

There were a few links with Haaland early on, then Dortmund set their stall, then they stopped, and Kane links started. Many read we were never in for him anyway, Kane was always the one. Some thought it was a play to test Dortmund's resolve before trying to push their demand down. The truth is probably in the middle, but with Dortmund sticking to it, with Chelsea too supposedly, and Kane half-suggesting doing his bit, it probably became a clearer choice. Still the difference was way too far apart.

You are right, we were never going to entertain 150m.

But the goalposts will have shifted for next summer, either way, particularly if the release clause part is indeed true.
Click to expand...
I was always under the impression that Dortmund, who are a well run club, wouldn't see both Sancho and Haaland in the same window, and the latter simply wasn't for sale last year short of an absurd price that no one would pay given everyone - player, selling club, agent - knows he is on the market from January.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top