Kaos
Full Member
Probably. Slow day and I'm manically refreshing these threads hoping for some form of dopamine-like breakthrough in our transfer business.This was a lot funnier in your head.
Probably. Slow day and I'm manically refreshing these threads hoping for some form of dopamine-like breakthrough in our transfer business.This was a lot funnier in your head.
It's the dumbest argument on all sides of the spectrum when you consider that multiple players both inside and outside the Premier League over the years have had terrible seasons of scoring little to no goals only for them to come good the next season
I'm just glad I only have to read your opinion on an internet forum and not have you as our manager or part of our recruitment and backroom staff, though you seem to think you know what we need more than them.
Face of the rebuild? Go one step and say he will be the face of the club and will be given 10% of the club's shares too.
Also which rivals will be pissing themselves? The Liverpool team that trusted CF who scored 10 and 11 league goals for them? Who also played key role in their CL and league campaigns.
Or Arsenal who signed CF who scored 8 and 9 league goals in last 2 seasons and then ended up scoring 11 league goals.
Or Newcastle who signed CF who scored 8, 14, 8, 6, 5 league goals before they signed him, signed CF for big fee who scored 6 league goals last season when they signed them and scored 6, 17, 9 league goals in la liga and 0 in Bundesliga.
It's not like our rival teams have signed CFs who scored shit loads of goals. There are only few CFs who scores lot of goals, few of them are not available to sign for us for various reasons and few of them are not good enough for various reasons like play style, age.
Someone already said he can score 17. We’re getting there
What?What point are you making? Half of the players you listed would score twice as many goals against Serie A's crap defending. Chris Smalling is one of the league's best defenders and he was embarrassing in the Premier League.
If my opinion that a 20 year old with 20 appearances and 9 goals is not the best way to goal scoring problems is simple minded then I’ll happily remain simple mindedWait..you surely don't mean to tell me that the market fluctuates? That players prices rise and fall depending on supply and demand!? That inflation and other economic factors play a part in this!?
I can assure you nobody is crying, I know you obviously are because KaNe aNd OsImHeN, but what's actually going on is you're just getting pushback on your opinion because it's a very simple minded one and you're the one crying about that
I didn’t say this eitherThat's not what that person said, they offered an hypothetical and a caveat. They didn't tell you that it would happen based on his past.
I didn’t say this either
Its harder to score in the Premier League than it is in Serie A. That's not a myth.Premier League proven is a complete myth i'm sorry to say
Its harder to score in the Premier League than it is in Serie A. That's not a myth.
Then, as I said before, it's a good thing ETH and our recruitment team are not.If my opinion that a 20 year old with 20 appearances and 9 goals is not the best way to goal scoring problems is simple minded then I’ll happily remain simple minded
I think my logic is fairly explainable in that sometimes you have to overpay. All clubs overpay in some scenarios and get better deals in others. Context matters. There is a time to play hardball and I'm not sure it's when you have no strikers that are regularly available and you're telling the manager that his only play is to get a mediocre loan player or make do with what he's got. That is not what I'd call a plan worth the name, it looks more like self sabotage.
It's not great but sometimes you have to go above and beyond. The problem with Antony was he doesn't look especially good. As ever, if the assessment is correct the fee is largely rendered an insignificant detail. Of course 70 million euros is a lot for where Hojlund is at but I still think it's the preferable plan to what you're suggesting as ultimately it strengthens us in a key position according to the managers vision whereas you're simply telling him to get on with it and get any old rubbish in.
What would be a plan is to have alternative options that are actually wanted by the recruitment team and the manager. Then look at negotiating them and playing Atalanta against that. But eventually a judgment call has to be made as to whether you're really getting any better value than simply getting the prime target and it also has the potential to waste a shit load of time that would be valuable to bed a striker into our setup.
The style of football in the Premier League is going to be built for more goals, but the quality is the difference here. Serie A mid table and lower end quality isnt the same.What is the base of that statement? Keeping in mind that statistically last season the PL registered more goals per game.
It is when you have weghorst upfront for sureIts harder to score in the Premier League than it is in Serie A. That's not a myth.
Ah yes, save money, get in a random striker on loan like Weghorst so you can whine two games into the season and all the way till it ends.
Or we could get in a highly rated young striker who has quickly adapted to every league he's moved to, is on a progressive trajectory, doing well for his country and is a United fan?
But nah, let's save €60m and pray a striker talent (ironically) show up in the next years.
What do you expect? A striker to appear out of nowhere and be Kane level? Where do you think these strikers come from?
The style of football in the Premier League is going to be built for more goals, but the quality is the difference here. Serie A mid table and lower end quality isnt the same.
My question would be whether Hojlund actually strengthens us and what he’s actually strengthening.
If we stick him up top rather than Rashford is he likely to score more goals then Rashford?
We'd rather have Rashford on the left, hence why we're looking to sign a striker. Or do you think we'll play Rashford up top this season with Højlund as back-up for that position? I don't. Some games sure, when that suits the opposition, but part of why people are exited about Højlund is the lack of a player of his profile in our squad. Would it be better if he was a couple of years older and further along in his development? Yes, but then we probably wouldn't be able to afford him this summer.My question would be whether Hojlund actually strengthens us and what he’s actually strengthening.
If we stick him up top rather than Rashford is he likely to score more goals then Rashford? Personally I’d say no from what I’ve seen of him and his stats.
If that’s the case, he’s essentially going to be backup. €70m is a lot for a player that just provides strength in depth. City can afford to do that and we could probably do if we had new owners. But we don’t as per this moment and the way it’s currently looking it doesn’t look guaranteed that we will anytime soon, so you play the cards you currently have.
There’s a price point at which Hojlund makes sense, but overpaying to give the manager what he wants is exactly the logic that led to us paying €100m for Antony. A few extra week’s training with the team pre-season isn’t going to make him a significantly better player, or good value for the prices currently being quoted.
He might not score more than Rashford would in a central position but I'm not sure that's the point because unless we clone Rashford he can only play in one position. The majority of his goals were scored from the left. When you move Rashford you're really just rearranging deck chairs in terms of our goalscoring composition, it's not going to necessarily add more goals to the team because then we have to turn to Sancho or Garnacho out wide who are not close to the same level of threat. Hojlund is by far a more noted goalscorer than those lads and he's also an out and out striker that offers something to our options.My question would be whether Hojlund actually strengthens us and what he’s actually strengthening.
If we stick him up top rather than Rashford is he likely to score more goals then Rashford? Personally I’d say no from what I’ve seen of him and his stats.
If that’s the case, he’s essentially going to be backup. €70m is a lot for a player that just provides strength in depth. City can afford to do that and we could probably do if we had new owners. But we don’t as per this moment and the way it’s currently looking it doesn’t look guaranteed that we will anytime soon, so you play the cards you currently have.
There’s a price point at which Hojlund makes sense, but overpaying to give the manager what he wants is exactly the logic that led to us paying €100m for Antony. A few extra week’s training with the team pre-season isn’t going to make him a significantly better player, or good value for the prices currently being quoted.
@Niall any chance we can start IQ testing for posting privileges?What point are you making? Half of the players you listed would score twice as many goals against Serie A's crap defending. Chris Smalling is one of the league's best defenders and he was embarrassing in the Premier League.
He's 20. He will be depth/competition to start with. Rashford will rotate up top, martial will rotate as well. The idea is that he develops and turns into a world class CF, as he has all the necessary traits to turn into an all round top striker.My question would be whether Hojlund actually strengthens us and what he’s actually strengthening.
If we stick him up top rather than Rashford is he likely to score more goals then Rashford? Personally I’d say no from what I’ve seen of him and his stats.
If that’s the case, he’s essentially going to be backup. €70m is a lot for a player that just provides strength in depth. City can afford to do that and we could probably do if we had new owners. But we don’t as per this moment and the way it’s currently looking it doesn’t look guaranteed that we will anytime soon, so you play the cards you currently have.
There’s a price point at which Hojlund makes sense, but overpaying to give the manager what he wants is exactly the logic that led to us paying €100m for Antony. A few extra week’s training with the team pre-season isn’t going to make him a significantly better player, or good value for the prices currently being quoted.
Serie A's minnows are terrible and would struggle to stay in England's League One. So, yes, even Jesus would look amazing in that league.Some of the takes on here are insane. Are you seriously arguing that jesus would score twice as many goals playing for Atalanta than for Arsenal?
Okay, calling him one of the league's "best defenders" was too much. What I meant was, he's reached his level in the league, which is mediocre at best.What?
Wow. How doesn't attackers score 30+ goals on the regular in that league then?Serie A's minnows are terrible and would struggle to stay in England's League One. So, yes, even Jesus would look amazing in that league.
We'd rather have Rashford on the left, hence why we're looking to sign a striker. Or do you think we'll play Rashford up top this season with Højlund as back-up for that position? I don't. Some games sure, when that suits the opposition, but part of why people are exited about Højlund is the lack of a player of his profile in our squad. Would it be better if he was a couple of years older and further along in his development? Yes, but then we probably wouldn't be able to afford him this summer.
I've said it before, as has several other people, but a player like him should help the team as a whole. Our other attackers, like Sancho and Antony, should see their numbers rise when they have a player of Højlund's profile to play off of. His numbers if we get him might not be the most impressive in his first season, but him along with the other signings we have done should se our general play improve a fair bit. And our numbers as a team.
Its not a myth. Strikers in Serie A face poorer quality defenders. Hojlund said himself that Smalling was the toughest defender hes played in the league. Scammaca's recent struggles is a good case example too.Or it's easier for players to score goals in the PL due to higher overall quality or style? Because the point that you are trying to make is closer to a myth than the factual statement that teams have found scoring goals easier in the PL if we use the most recent season as an example.
We've made a few informal offers to Atalanta according to Alfredo Pedullà. An opening formal offer here means that we've come to an offer that Atalanta may entertain, which is a sign progress in the negotiations.What‘s the point agreeing terms with him long ago and not make an offer then? We better hurry before PSG offers oil money, whipping out his United love
He was never an embarrassing defender in the premier league. Had his limitations, especially on the ball but he was definitely one of better players in his position.Okay, calling him one of the league's "best defenders" was too much. What I meant was, he's reached his level in the league, which is mediocre at best.
Its not a myth. Strikers in Serie A face poorer quality defenders. Hojlund said himself that Smalling was the toughest defender hes played in the league. Scammaca's recent struggles is a good case example too.
Its not a myth that Premier League is a higher quality than Serie A. It's harder to score goals in that league than it is in Serie A.
Assuming we’re playing three up front, Hojlund is coming in at the expense of somebody.
Garnacho - Rashford - Underwhelming RW
is preferable to
Rashford - Hojlund - Underwhelming RW
at least to me. He’s not improving that front line enough to justify >€50m in my opinion.
50 million isn't that much these days, at least not for a striker with good potential. And again, we got to think about the team as a whole, not just the front line. For one Rashford is worse as a striker than a wide attacker cutting in. Should we limit him and his contributions? We've got no one making the types of runs Højlund makes - runs that Bruno should benefit from, as well as Sancho and Antony. Runs that stretch the defense, giving room to players that will benefit hugely from that as well as a bigger presence in the box than we have had in ages should give our team more than playing Rashford there, especially given what we loose from not playing him in his favoured position.Assuming we’re playing three up front, Hojlund is coming in at the expense of somebody.
Garnacho - Rashford - Underwhelming RW
is preferable to
Rashford - Hojlund - Underwhelming RW
at least to me. He’s not improving that front line enough to justify >€50m in my opinion.
Serie A's minnows are terrible and would struggle to stay in England's League One. So, yes, even Jesus would look amazing in that league.
Hyperbole at best, disrespectful at worst. Just total nonsense. Any Serie A side would batter League One outfits.Serie A's minnows are terrible and would struggle to stay in England's League One. So, yes, even Jesus would look amazing in that league.
Its not a myth. Strikers in Serie A face poorer quality defenders. Hojlund said himself that Smalling was the toughest defender hes played in the league. Scammaca's recent struggles is a good case example too.
Its not a myth that Premier League is a higher quality than Serie A. It's harder to score goals in that league than it is in Serie A.
He'd look okay in a Sean Dyche or Tuny Pulis team. So, yes, in that context he wouldn't be embarrassing. I stand corrected.He was never an embarrassing defender in the premier league. Had his limitations, especially on the ball but he was definitely one of better players in his position.