Is a striker enough to make us an 80+ league goal team?

[Skills]

80 league goals should always be the minimum goal for a manchester united team. It's a total we haven't hit since Fergie retired - it's a total, he himself seldom failed to hit.

Would signing a striker be enough to make us score 80+ league goals, in your opinion? If not, where else do we need the goals coming from?

 

[ifightdragons]

Good question! 80 goals, yes. 90+ goals, though, that's another thing.

I think yes, it could be enough in some seasons here and there.

But on a consistent basis, achieving it many seasons in a row, I don't think just a world class striker is enough.

We need better players - all the way from the goalkeeper at the back to the other outfield players - to consistently have possession enough to create enough chances to achieve such numbers every season.

 

[bosnian_red]

League goals only:

• Striker - 15-25
• Rashford - 15-20
• Bruno - 10
• Antony - 5-10
• Sancho/Garnacho - 10 combined
• Deep midfielders - 5-10 combined
• Defenders - 5 combined

So that's a range of 65 - 90 goals I'd guess from our group with a good striker next season. Average of 77.5. I wouldn't say any of these are aggressive estimates either.

Another (math) way to look at things - we had 71.9 league xG last season. Arsenal had 76.5. Arsenal scored 88 (15% overperformance), United scored 58 (19% underperformance). Add a competent striker to pump us up 5-10 xG more than what Ronaldo/Weghorst/Martial combined for (11.69 xG) while accepting Rashford loses a bit as he's not the sole focus (he was at 18.76, drop him down by 4 or so for a net increase of 7-8 xG) brings us basically right to 80xG for next season.

Even if it's not spread out quite the same, I'm pretty confident in us getting around 80xG next season as long as we sign a striker who is capable of doing 15+ xG (which literally Martial was halfway there by playing 1/3 of the minutes of Rashford and Bruno, and being pretty mediocre). Then it's on putting away your chances more often which I'd say is more just vibes.

 

[Eric_the_Red99]

Potentially, as long as Rashford is in form and everyone else pulls their weight, and we cut out the sloppiness that plagued us in a lot of matches last season (replacing DDG will help with ball retention).

I don’t think that we can expect the striker’s goals alone to get us up to 80+ a season. But having someone up front who the opposition are scared of, which means they have to build their defensive strategy around containing them - that should mean more space for our other attacking players. With Martial and Weghorst we’ve been far too easy to defend against.

 

[UpWithRivers]

We need to aim for 90+ and no a strikers not enough. It doesnt work like that i.e. Need 30 extra goals and get a 30 goal striker. Man City added Haaland and got less goals. Go figure that out. We need a team thats capable of a system of play that creates and scores goals freely no matter what the standard of opposition and the style of play of the opposition and have multiple goalscoring players and creators. At the moment we have Bruno creating and Rashford scoring to a high level. We need more both from current players and from new ones

 

[Damien]

80 league goals should always be the minimum goal for a manchester united team. It's a total we haven't hit since Fergie retired - it's a total, he himself seldom failed to hit.

Maybe towards the end of his reign but overall in a 38 league game season more often than not we didn't hit 80.

Hit 80 (8): 98/99, 99/00, 01/02, 06/07, 07/08, 09/10, 11/12, 12/13
Didn’t Hit 80 (10): 95/96, 96/97, 97/98, 00/01, 02/03, 03/04, 04/05, 05/06, 08/09, 10/11

Bold = won title

Having a quality striker should give us another 20 goals minimum. Problem is finding one that is attainable.

 

[Raoul]

80 league goals should always be the minimum goal for a manchester united team. It's a total we haven't hit since Fergie retired - it's a total, he himself seldom failed to hit.

Would signing a striker be enough to make us score 80+ league goals, in your opinion? If not, where else do we need the goals coming from?

80 goals should be a minimum for what precisely ? It won't be enough to win the league, especially in the new uncharted world of Haaland knocking in 40-50 goals a year for City over the next 5 or so years, which will change the dynamics by which other teams have to adapt if they want to win the league.

 

[Andycoleno9]

80 goals should be a minimum for what precisely ? It won't be enough to win the league, especially in the new uncharted world of Haaland knocking in 40-50 goals a year for City over the next 5 or so years, which will change the dynamics by which other teams have to adapt if they want to win the league.

I am not worried about Haaland. Next summer he is off to Madrid.



I hope....

 

[bosnian_red]

Hell just normal regression and Martial being fit for a normal amount of time (miracle, but more mean it doesn't have to be a great striker), less fixture congestion compared to last season's crazy schedule would have us at 80 goals TBF.

 

[Murder on Zidane's Floor]

Issue is, sounds silly but, there is only one ball. Sometimes adding a 25 goal a season striker doesn't necessarily track that you will be +25 goals the next season.

To quote moneyball, you want to buy wins. We have more chance of winning games the more goals we score but it's not an exact science.

The right type of striker will win us close games and give more space/opportunities to other forwards/players.

 

[KeanoMagicHat]

Bruno needs to score more again. He’s playing a more conservative role than under Solskjaer but still he missed some sitters last season and you’d hope he’d score a few long-rangers a season. Even if he doesn’t get close to 20 league goals again, 8 wasn’t enough last season for a player of his attacking instincts.

 

[Skills]

Maybe towards the end of his reign but overall in a 38 league game season more often than not we didn't hit 80.

Hit 80 (8): 98/99, 99/00, 01/02, 06/07, 07/08, 09/10, 11/12, 12/13
Didn’t Hit 80 (10): 95/96, 96/97, 97/98, 00/01, 02/03, 03/04, 04/05, 05/06, 08/09, 10/11

Bold = won title

Having a quality striker should give us another 20 goals minimum. Problem is finding one that is attainable.

I stand corrected, but I'd also point out the standard changed during the course of Ferguson's tenure. In a lot of those sub 80 goal seasons we still ended up as the top scorers in the league, while that would never be the case now.

Season	Top Scoring Team	Goals Scored	Final League Position
1995/1996	Manchester United	73	1
1996/1997	Manchester United	76	1
1997/1998	Manchester United	68	2
1998/1999	Manchester United	80	1
1999/2000	Manchester United	97	1
2000/2001	Manchester United	80	1
2001/2002	Manchester United	87	3
2002/2003	Manchester United	74	1
2003/2004	Arsenal	73	1
2004/2005	Chelsea	72	1
2005/2006	Chelsea	72	1
2006/2007	Manchester United	83	1
2007/2008	Manchester United	80	1
2008/2009	Liverpool	77	2
2009/2010	Chelsea	103	1
2010/2011	Manchester United	78	1
2011/2012	Manchester City	93	1
2012/2013	Manchester United	86	1
2013/2014	Manchester City	102	1
2014/2015	Manchester City	83	2
2015/2016	Manchester City	71	4
2016/2017	Tottenham Hotspur	86	2
2017/2018	Manchester City	106	1
2018/2019	Manchester City	95	1
2019/2020	Manchester City	102	2
2020/2021	Manchester City	83	1

 

[kouroux]

Short answer is no. He would help for sure but it wouldn't be enough

 

[jm99]

Well we scored 58 and had an xG of 71.9. So it would certainly help in that respect but more than that a striker creates more chances by their movement, it would be an entirely different prospect having someone who can find space as opposed to weghorst, who's only chance of finding space is if the opposition decided he wasn't worth marking. I still feel we'd be a midfielder short, because we lost the midfield battle too frequently, particularly in games without casemiro

 

[MUFC OK]

Having a quality striker should give us another 20 goals minimum. Problem is finding one that is attainable.

Kane won’t be allowed to move - he needs to put in a request and make it clear to Levy he isn’t signing a new deal.

Not keen on Hojlund at 60m - huge risk. I’d rather go for Ramos in that price bracket.

 

[united_99]

We need 3 players in the squad who can regularly score 10+ league goals (with 1-2 of them to ideally score 15+).
If you just have 1 player who scores a lot while all the others are hardly a goal threat, then our play will be predictable and even our goal scorer will be easily marked out by most sides.

 

[BorisManUtd]

We only scored 70 or more in one season since Fergie's retirement and that was in 20/21 season (73). 9-0 win over Southampton certainly help to achieve that.

 

[united_99]

I stand corrected, but I'd also point out the standard changed during the course of Ferguson's tenure. In a lot of those sub 80 goal seasons we still ended up as the top scorers in the league, while that would never be the case now.

Season	Top Scoring Team	Goals Scored	Final League Position
1995/1996	Newcastle United	66	2
1996/1997	Manchester United	76	1
1997/1998	Manchester United	68	2
1998/1999	Manchester United	80	1
1999/2000	Manchester United	97	1
2000/2001	Manchester United	80	1
2001/2002	Manchester United	87	3
2002/2003	Manchester United	74	1
2003/2004	Arsenal	73	1
2004/2005	Chelsea	72	1
2005/2006	Chelsea	72	1
2006/2007	Manchester United	83	1
2007/2008	Manchester United	80	1
2008/2009	Liverpool	77	2
2009/2010	Chelsea	103	1
2010/2011	Manchester United	78	1
2011/2012	Manchester City	93	1
2012/2013	Manchester United	86	1
2013/2014	Manchester City	102	1
2014/2015	Manchester City	83	2
2015/2016	Manchester City	71	4
2016/2017	Tottenham Hotspur	86	2
2017/2018	Manchester City	106	1
2018/2019	Manchester City	95	1
2019/2020	Manchester City	102	2
2020/2021	Manchester City	83	1

We scored the most goals in 1995/96 = 73.
Please update, I am not having seeing Oil-Castle there as top scoring team

 

[Rhyme Animal]

Depends on the striker…

Kane - yes
Watkins - doubtful
Hojlund - no

 

[gaffs]

People say a striker would take away from Rashfords tally.

If we had a competent striker who was an actually goal threat, i see that creating more opportunities for others.

I believe we would have had somewhere between another 10 to 15 points with a quality striker in the team last season. We had so may tight games where a top striker would have made the difference.

 

[Abraxas]

Maybe but I'm not sure it's the distinction that really matters. I don't think it's a magic number that beats City. We have to find more points not just more goals. I don't believe it's as simple as throwing a striker in. The creation has to improve, control has to improve. Performance in certain matches has to improve.

You can theoretically score 80 and not improve much if you get the balance wrong and concede, or you fill your boots in some matches and bottle others. If a striker comes in and puts away the likes of Luton convincingly in a way we didn't always manage last season, it's good for the heart rate but its not automatically improving our outcomes. So I wouldn't be too attached to scoring 80, it's more about an overall process to improvement ETH will want and then the goals are coming.

 

[Todd]

Doubtful. That's 22 more than we scored this season. In theory, adding a player like Kane or Osimhen could push us over that level but you'd also expect Rashford's goals to drop off a bit, as he was doing a bit of scoring playing as a #9 at times.

At any rate, I'm starting to have my doubts that we're going to get an elite striker this summer, which was the most important thing we've had to do this summer. We'll wind up with a young striker who will be lucky to get 5-10 goals in the league and we'll have all the same problems we did this season.

 

[KikiDaKats]

Nope. To increase our goals, the whole team has to improve in things we are really poor at.
If one takes the chance from Bruno(in my opinion most of them are half chances) away from this team, we are not creating enough to service a striker.
Considering a 1/3 of the goals Rashford scored this season can be classed as solo goals. It’s not the type of service you’d say is a striker’s dream.

 

[wolvored]

We need the forwards to score 60+ and the rest to score 30+. Big ask, but if you want to win the title it needs to be done.

 

[Beachryan]

The xG analysis is the most important to me. With a bloody average striker we'd have 15 more goals. A decent one would presumably bump that up.

Combine that with a modicrum of composure from Bruno and we'd get above 75. Also expect less from Marcus but more from Antony next season.

 

[jm99]

We need the forwards to score 60+ and the rest to score 30+. Big ask, but if you want to win the title it needs to be done.

I think that's a bit too much, Liverpool got 99 points with 85 goals scored, I imagine you could win the title with 80

 

[Withnail]

A striker, a modern goalie comfortable playing out from the back and a CM and then maybe

 

[JagUTD]

A striker like Kane would score 20+ goals a season for 3 or 4 seasons at United. No doubt about it at all. He'd probably get double figure assists as well.

Where I think someone like Kane would make the biggest difference is in the games we drop stupid points, like Southampton at home last season and others. Where one goal is the difference between 1 and 3 points rather than adding the 5th goal in a demolition.

We saw this with the last genuinely world class striker we had in the league, van Persie. How often did he make the difference in games we could easily have dropped points. Off the top of my head there's the free kick against City and the hattrick from 2 down to beat Southampton.

That's what Kane would add to us. Enough to take us above 80 goals? Don't know. Enough to make up 14 points? Possibly.

 

[Bwuk]

If we had Kane then yes. His link up play would create chances galore.

 

[jm99]

A striker like Kane would score 20+ goals a season for 3 or 4 seasons at United. No doubt about it at all. He'd probably get double figure assists as well.

Where I think someone like Kane would make the biggest difference is in the games we drop stupid points, like Southampton at home last season and others. Where one goal is the difference between 1 and 3 points rather than adding the 5th goal in a demolition.

We saw this with the last genuinely world class striker we had in the league, van Persie. How often did he make the difference in games we could easily have dropped points. Off the top of my head there's the free kick against City and the hattrick from 2 down to beat Southampton.

That's what Kane would add to us. Enough to take us above 80 goals? Don't know. Enough to make up 14 points? Possibly.

I think he would. Martial, Ronaldo and weghorst got 7 league goals between them, kane got 30. He'd also give us creativity that we basically rely on Bruno for, so games where he's off form we don't create anything, he's a threat in the air which we don't have basically, he's good on free kicks, he's a threat from range, which we don't have much of, he patches up basically every weakness we have,he's not quick but he's so intelligent and rashford would really benefit from not being relied upon as the only source of goals. He'd fit into our team so well we should spend whatever it takes to get him

 

[lex talionis]

If we had Kane then yes. His link up play would create chances galore.

Tottenham being a fairly poor squad outside of Kane still managed 70 goals in the PL in 22/23. Stick him into United's squad and we're suddenly between 70-80 goals side. Where that lands us in the final PL is hard to say but it should make top three a fairly easy target to reach.

To get to where we want to be we need a 9 and 8 for sure, and a backup 6. And probably a replacement for Maguire as our fourth choice CB. Others would have us replace De Gea, who apparently can barely lace his boots now, but a 9, 8 and a backup 6 are required to go to PL title challenger. But a 9 is not negotiable and there aren't any better 9s out there than Harry Edward Kane, who turns 30 in a month.

 

[Demon Barber]

Martial, Ronaldo and weghorst got 7 league goals between them, kane got 30.

That is such a depressing stat.

Clearly a top striker would improve our goals scored, and yes, I see no reason why we could not hit 80. This season we created enough good chances to score more than that, ended up with 58 goals, and still managed to finish third.

If we only have £100m to spend then in my opinion it should go on Kane. Spend that money on, say, Rice, and we would not necessarily increase our number of goals - okay, we might not ship 7, 6 and 4 in games, but this thread is about goals scored.

 

[Lentwood]

80 league goals should always be the minimum goal for a manchester united team. It's a total we haven't hit since Fergie retired - it's a total, he himself seldom failed to hit.

Would signing a striker be enough to make us score 80+ league goals, in your opinion? If not, where else do we need the goals coming from?

It would certainly make a huge difference. Even having a CF occupying/moving defenders, making the right runs/movements and showing for the 'wall-passes' would massively help the wide-forwards and the AMs.

 

[cyberman]

Yes, otherwise they wouldn’t be worth the big money.

 

[TheRedDevil'sAdvocate]

How many times did Kane make Spurs push over 80 league goals during his time with them?

 

[Siorac]

A striker like Kane would score 20+ goals a season for 3 or 4 seasons at United. No doubt about it at all. He'd probably get double figure assists as well.

He probably wouldn't, considering he only did it once during his career.

 

[sunama]

I think he would. Martial, Ronaldo and weghorst got 7 league goals between them, kane got 30.

That's unbelievable, but it probably is right.
Our striker options are wretchedly bad and we need to buy 2 strikers - but we'll get one and that is what will hold us back this coming season.
Every season is a write-off and I can already see the reasons to write-off this coming season.

The last time we started a season full of hope to win the league was under Jose, in his 2nd season (we'd won 2 trophies the season before).
We then finished 2nd and the next step forward would be to win the league, but Woodward ensured that we would not compete for the title in Jose's 3rd season.

 

[Strelok]

Issue is, sounds silly but, there is only one ball. Sometimes adding a 25 goal a season striker doesn't necessarily track that you will be +25 goals the next season.

To quote moneyball, you want to buy wins. We have more chance of winning games the more goals we score but it's not an exact science.

The right type of striker will win us close games and give more space/opportunities to other forwards/players.

Buy Kane and both him and Rashford will score +30 goals next season. What a complete footballer Kane is he'll elevate the forwards around him to another level I reckon. Then we have Bruno. And next season ETH will surely make our general play much better.

 

[Moston Red]

I am not worried about Haaland. Next summer he is off to Madrid.



I hope....

I always thought the same about Aguero and he hung around like a bad smell.

 

[bosnian_red]

Issue is, sounds silly but, there is only one ball. Sometimes adding a 25 goal a season striker doesn't necessarily track that you will be +25 goals the next season.

To quote moneyball, you want to buy wins. We have more chance of winning games the more goals we score but it's not an exact science.

The right type of striker will win us close games and give more space/opportunities to other forwards/players.

Thing is that statistically we weren't that far off 80 xG (71-72ish). We finished like shit, 19% below xG. Arsenal had 30 goals more than us from just 5 xG more. Just regression would get us there. Also Martial is mediocre and all that, but he still got over 7xG in 900ish minutes. He played a third of the minutes of Rashford. Ronaldo and Weghorst combined for like 4 xG in around 1300 minutes. Just Martial or a striker at his level being fit would have gotten us close to 80xG. Sometimes it really is that simple that you replace the striker and you will score a lot more goals.