Erling Haaland

ThierryHenry14

Full Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2015
Messages
1,086
Supports
Arsenal
Our only hope is.......If we have a great year and win a few things he will feel he can achieve success with us, plus the possibility of playing with Sancho again (If we sign him) and working with Ole, his old manager. Oh.....and the big wages we can offer.
When Ronaldinho chose Barcelona over Man Utd back then, They had not won anything since the 98/99 season, and in the 2001 and 2002 seasons, Barca had finished fourth. In 2003, Barca finished sixth! It is the same when CR7 joined Real Madrid. I don't quite understand the argument of "win a few things" to attract top talent.
 

RoyH1

Full Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2014
Messages
3,433
Location
DKNY
When Ronaldinho chose Barcelona over Man Utd back then, They had not won anything since the 98/99 season, and in the 2001 and 2002 seasons, Barca had finished fourth. In 2003, Barca finished sixth! It is the same when CR7 joined Real Madrid. I don't quite understand the argument of "win a few things" to attract top talent.
CR7 joined Real Madrid a season after they had won the league. It's not as if they'd gone through a 5 year drought.
 

theklr

Full Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2019
Messages
1,849
because if he joined us and performed to his abilities, those offers would likely come back around, especially Madrid. You cant act in "what if's" during your career.

Plus, roughly 300 grand a week for arguments sake, has some persuasion
Yeah, well I dont think Roman would agree to a similar buyout clause, so another way of looking at it is if he stays there for 3-4 years and for some reason doesnt do particularly well, or that the club in question spend their money otherwise..

Like, I bet you Pogba regrets coming to United...
 
Last edited:

roseguy64

Full Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2010
Messages
8,490
Location
Jamaica
Hazard chose Chelsea over us because they won the CL. Whats to say Haaland wont do the same. If his camp are smart they will look at the projects on offer. Chelsea is a good project with a good squad coming together. If you had half a brain cell as a representative of haaland you tell them to steer clear of Madrid and Barcelona for a few years, theres a rebuild job with massive debt at both those clubs.

So it wouldn't be a bad call to go to Chelsea for 2-3 seasons then off to Madrid/Barcelona when they have got their house in order.
Of course Chelsea is a good option. But next year he'll have much more leverage as it comes to determining who he signs for and his wages plus the fees. He could well choose Chelsea next summer as they might provide him the best option then. But now? He's just limiting himself. Plus things can look different for whichever club he could sign for instead of Chelsea and they'll beat whatever Chelsea offers now. So he doesn't have 2-3 seasons and instead only wait for 1.
 

Sky1981

Fending off the urge
Joined
Apr 12, 2006
Messages
26,433
Location
Under the bright neon lights of sincity
Because we're disrespecting the mighty Chelsea FC. Of course he would choose them over any other club like Man Utd or Barca.

He'll rush to them this summer instead of waiting for the best offer next one.
So many player choose Chelsea or some other club instead of us.

Shearer
Ronaldinho
Essien?
Mikel
Halaand chooses dortmund
Sneijder

We're not the dog's bollock these days.
 

ReallyUSA

Full Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2015
Messages
2,404
So many player choose Chelsea or some other club instead of us.

Shearer
Ronaldinho
Essien?
Mikel
Halaand chooses dortmund
Sneijder

We're not the dog's bollock these days.
Haaland was a board issue. They didn't want to concede to the demands.
 

RedRonaldo

Full Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2003
Messages
12,696
When Ronaldinho chose Barcelona over Man Utd back then, They had not won anything since the 98/99 season, and in the 2001 and 2002 seasons, Barca had finished fourth. In 2003, Barca finished sixth! It is the same when CR7 joined Real Madrid. I don't quite understand the argument of "win a few things" to attract top talent.
That’s actually a good point. But to be fair Barcelona always have that connection with top Brazilian player at that time (Romario, L.Ronaldo) so it’s natural Ronaldinho would choose Barca over us to follow their footsteps.

Whereas before Ronaldo is joining Real, they have gone through periods of their Galacticos era, so there is always big attraction for best players moving there.

For our case though, forgot when was the last time we could attract high profile big name worldclass player for joining us during their peak? Maybe only Pogba in recent year, who seems doesn’t want to stay beyond his current contract with us. Then there was Di Maria, who immediately escaped within a year of joining us. One could argue Sanchez too, but it was the worst move in his career on hindsight. Not a very encouraging record.
 
Last edited:

Varun

Moderator
Staff
Joined
Mar 16, 2011
Messages
45,704
Location
Mumbai
Barca and Real are in a league of their own when it comes to attractiveness to players. Doesn't even have a lot to do with what they win season over season. Players have left much stronger teams to join them regularly.
 

Bebestation

Full Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2019
Messages
4,540
If Haaland doesn't want to come here then so be it.

He is a great young player but if he makes it clear he doesn't want to be at United twice - then he can find the club he wants to be at.

We will instead look to balance and get the best out of players like Greenwood alongside players like Sancho and Rashford.
 

sglowrider

Against Oral Equality
Joined
Dec 27, 2009
Messages
14,324
Location
Hell on Earth
If Haaland doesn't want to come here then so be it.

He is a great young player but if he makes it clear he doesn't want to be at United twice - then he can find the club he wants to be at.

We will instead look to balance and get the best out of players like Greenwood alongside players like Sancho and Rashford.
Our Alan Shearer of 2020s.
 

Bebestation

Full Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2019
Messages
4,540
Our Alan Shearer of 2020s.
He also seems a bit Zlatan to me like in the way that I dont see him going to a club and wanting to be there for a while.

He has talked about how he wants to play in different leagues etc.

I can see how he starts his first move from a German club to join a PL club, then go to a Spanish club and then possibly move to a French or Italian team.


If he moves to Chelsea, I dont necessarily see him being there for a decade; maybe 3 years imo.

Maybe im wrong but lets see.
 

ThierryHenry14

Full Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2015
Messages
1,086
Supports
Arsenal
Look at the scenario Dortmund find themselves in this summer.
Players are running down their contracts to either walk for free or sell at discount in last year contract. See Depay, Mbappe, Hazard, Pogba, Wijnaldum, Donnarumma...etc. This is the trend.

BVB got the goals from Haaland while he is there, and can make a 200% profit when he leaves next summer. What not to like? it sounds like a much better investment than PSG on Mbappe.
 
Last edited:

Sky1981

Fending off the urge
Joined
Apr 12, 2006
Messages
26,433
Location
Under the bright neon lights of sincity
Look at the scenario Dortmund find themselves in this summer.
They have 2-3 years of good services and lots of goals under halaand
They have and will easilly guaranteed 50m Transfer fee next year, 150M possibly if they let go this year.

All that, vs Nothing

That deal is a very good deal, considering Dortmund bought him for 30M, That's 20M guaranteed profit and 3 years of goals galore.

Only thing hurt is ego
 

RkkMan

Full Member
Joined
May 16, 2019
Messages
1,218
They have 2-3 years of good services and lots of goals under halaand
They have and will easilly guaranteed 50m Transfer fee next year, 150M possibly if they let go this year.

All that, vs Nothing

That deal is a very good deal, considering Dortmund bought him for 30M, That's 20M guaranteed profit and 3 years of goals galore.

Only thing hurt is ego
If Utd agreed to a clause that would only guarantee a profit of a measley £50m for a talent like Haaland each and every Utd fan on this forum would hurl spectacular levels of abuse to Woodward for agreeing to such terms in the first place
Very easy to think the grass is greener on the other side due to hindsight but extremely different circumstance when you're the one in an actual pickle
 

stefan92

Full Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2021
Messages
368
Supports
Hannover 96
They have 2-3 years of good services and lots of goals under halaand
They have and will easilly guaranteed 50m Transfer fee next year, 150M possibly if they let go this year.

All that, vs Nothing

That deal is a very good deal, considering Dortmund bought him for 30M, That's 20M guaranteed profit and 3 years of goals galore.

Only thing hurt is ego
Even that could be mitigated if dealt with the issue carefully. Haaland is known as someone who would like to play in multiple leagues (bit like Ibrahimovic in that regard), so what would be the issue when he scored for a few years for United in the PL and then moved on to Real or Juventus or some club like that? As long as you wouldn't sell him to another PL club I don't see how it would have hurt United's ego to be part of such an exclusive list of clubs. Regarding titles you are nowhere near those clubs
 

Judas

Open to offers
Joined
Jun 28, 2010
Messages
23,008
Location
Where the grass is greener.
Even that could be mitigated if dealt with the issue carefully. Haaland is known as someone who would like to play in multiple leagues (bit like Ibrahimovic in that regard), so what would be the issue when he scored for a few years for United in the PL and then moved on to Real or Juventus or some club like that? As long as you wouldn't sell him to another PL club I don't see how it would have hurt United's ego to be part of such an exclusive list of clubs. Regarding titles you are nowhere near those clubs
"exclusive list of clubs" :lol: I mean he's a good player, but you make it sound like we should be falling over ourselves to have the second coming of christ grace our little slug of a club.
 

Sky1981

Fending off the urge
Joined
Apr 12, 2006
Messages
26,433
Location
Under the bright neon lights of sincity
If Utd agreed to a clause that would only guarantee a profit of a measley £50m for a talent like Haaland each and every Utd fan on this forum would hurl spectacular levels of abuse to Woodward for agreeing to such terms in the first place
Very easy to think the grass is greener on the other side due to hindsight but extremely different circumstance when you're the one in an actual pickle
So what? We bought him for 30M?

Like I said, those deals have all the pros and non of the cons (other than ego)

and if United is smart, just get him first and offer him a contract he can't refuse along the way.

Plus, retrospectively looking back, if we have Halaand we could easilly probably advance to the later stages of CL, or to the very least won the League / Fa cup or UEFA cup.
 

RkkMan

Full Member
Joined
May 16, 2019
Messages
1,218
So what? We bought him for 30M?

Like I said, those deals have all the pros and non of the cons (other than ego)

and if United is smart, just get him first and offer him a contract he can't refuse along the way.
What's your definition of a contract he can't refuse? Where Raiola and Alfe Haaland are involved with their bad past/relationship with Utd we're talking £400-500K a week for a 20yr old. How much more will it cost to renew his Contract AGAIN as time goes by? Not to mention it would be a case of fully bending down to player/agent power for someone who's not guaranteed to stay for the rest of his prime years at one club. He's a top top player but the hassle and possible dominoes he'd have come with weren't worth the hassle
 

Sky1981

Fending off the urge
Joined
Apr 12, 2006
Messages
26,433
Location
Under the bright neon lights of sincity
What's your definition of a contract he can't refuse? Where Raiola and Alfe Haaland are involved with their bad past/relationship with Utd we're talking £400-500K a week for a 20yr old. How much more will it cost to renew his Contract AGAIN as time goes by? Not to mention it would be a case of fully bending down to player/agent power for someone who's not guaranteed to stay for the rest of his prime years at one club. He's a top top player but the hassle and possible dominoes he'd have come with weren't worth the hassle

Let me ask you a question : how much is Halaand's salary in Dortmund? And do you even know how much we're paying Martial?

So, tell me.

What do you expect from Halaand? Profess his undying love to United? Paid for peanuts? Sign a 10 years contract?
 

cyberman

Full Member
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
23,331
Players are running down their contracts to either walk for free or sell at discount in last year contract. See Depay, Mbappe, Hazard, Pogba, Wijnaldum, Donnarumma...etc. This is the trend.

BVB got the goals from Haaland while he is there, and can make a 200% profit when he leaves next summer. What not to like? it sounds like a much better investment than PSG on Mbappe.
But this isnt running down a contract, this is 2 years in!
Thats ok for a Dortmund but it would have set back all the progress we made if we signed him back then. Imagine being forced to sell Bruno tomorrow or lose him for a quarter ofthe price next year. We would be nowhere.
 

stefan92

Full Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2021
Messages
368
Supports
Hannover 96
"exclusive list of clubs" :lol: I mean he's a good player, but you make it sound like we should be falling over ourselves to have the second coming of christ grace our little slug of a club.
Obviously that was bit over the top, but I'm sure you get the point :lol:

I see no harm in a player wanting to play for a top club in every top league and United being the English club in that list. When it is clear from the beginning that he does not intend to stay forever he might never become a club legend, but he also should not be involved in any big drama.

But ultimately it sounded a lot like the transfer to United did not fail because of the issue of a release clause but because Haaland did not trust United to trust him as player (reportedly he had the feeling only Solskjaer wanted to sign him, and his job seemed far from safe at the time). So yes, it was a board issue but not so much in terms of the contract details it seems
 

RkkMan

Full Member
Joined
May 16, 2019
Messages
1,218
Let me ask you a question : how much is Halaand's salary in Dortmund? And do you even know how much we're paying Martial?

So, tell me.

What do you expect from Halaand? Profess his undying love to United? Paid for peanuts? Sign a 10 years contract?
Haaland's salary at BVB isn't important we all know if he was at Utd around this time with clubs showing interest any contract extension where Haaland's dad and Raiola are involved will be expensive as hell when you factor in our relationship and past with those two. His salary of he joins Chelsea is reportedly the figure I told you.
Okay we pay Martial a high salary so what? Does that mean we should do it for EVERY player? The reason he's on so much is because of the mistake that was Alexis Sanchez same reason why De Gea is on his current wages too if we never signed Alexis our wage bill wouldn't be so messed up. So yes while Haaland is world class the over stretched financials he'd come with for a player so young that would undoubtedly become higher over time plus the baggage that is Raiola was not worth it. I'm not expecting him to express undying love for Utd but a player and his dad/agent should NEVER make a club bend over to his will no matter how good he is
 

Sky1981

Fending off the urge
Joined
Apr 12, 2006
Messages
26,433
Location
Under the bright neon lights of sincity
But this isnt running down a contract, this is 2 years in!
Thats ok for a Dortmund but it would have set back all the progress we made if we signed him back then. Imagine being forced to sell Bruno tomorrow or lose him for a quarter ofthe price next year. We would be nowhere.
Except that's not the case

We are GUARANTEED profit at the very least 20M (30M purchase, 50M buyout clause)

and on your bruno analogy, the comparison is Bruno for at least 2 years and 20 M profit or no bruno ?

Like I said, the only thing hurt is the ego.
 

diarm

Full Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2014
Messages
13,139
Signing a player with a clause like that is by it's nature, signing a player who believes he is bigger than the club.

Along with the goals he'll score, you are also taking on the inevitable shitshow circus Raiola embarks on when he feels it's time to move on to bigger and better things.

Signing a player like this, no matter how good he is, hurts our image (and as such, our attractiveness to other players) in the long run.

Under Ole, we have done really well to reign back control of the perception of the club in the transfer market - getting back into bed with Raiola and signing Haaland on astronomical wages and with some small time release clause would be a massive step backwards for me.

Class player, weird bloke, scumbag agent. The goals wouldn't be worth the hassle in the long term.
 

Judas

Open to offers
Joined
Jun 28, 2010
Messages
23,008
Location
Where the grass is greener.
Obviously that was bit over the top, but I'm sure you get the point :lol:

I see no harm in a player wanting to play for a top club in every top league and United being the English club in that list. When it is clear from the beginning that he does not intend to stay forever he might never become a club legend, but he also should not be involved in any big drama.

But ultimately it sounded a lot like the transfer to United did not fail because of the issue of a release clause but because Haaland did not trust United to trust him as player (reportedly he had the feeling only Solskjaer wanted to sign him, and his job seemed far from safe at the time). So yes, it was a board issue but not so much in terms of the contract details it seems
Yeah I do get your point mate. I know wherever he ends up next he'll only be there for a little while, but that club will make a lot more money off him and get the better player. I still fully feel we were right now to bend over backwards for the deal to sign him, its not changed my desire for us to go all in for him next summer, even if it doesn't happen.
 

RkkMan

Full Member
Joined
May 16, 2019
Messages
1,218
Except that's not the case

We are GUARANTEED profit at the very least 20M (30M purchase, 50M buyout clause)

and on your bruno analogy, the comparison is Bruno for at least 2 years and 20 M profit or no bruno ?

Like I said, the only thing hurt is the ego.
If a profit of just 20m is appetizing in our eyes for a player like Haaland when other clubs made MUCH bigger profits on key players(us with Ronaldo, Chelsea with Hazard, Liverpool with Coutinho, Spurs with Bale, BVB themselves with Dembele and soon with Sancho etc) then I'm glad you're not in charge of our transfers
 

Sky1981

Fending off the urge
Joined
Apr 12, 2006
Messages
26,433
Location
Under the bright neon lights of sincity
If a profit of just 20m is appetizing in our eyes for a player like Haaland when other clubs made MUCH bigger profits on key players(us with Ronaldo, Chelsea with Hazard, Liverpool with Coutinho, Spurs with Bale, BVB themselves with Dembele and soon with Sancho etc) then I'm glad you're not in charge of our transfers
You seems to twist everything I post.

If you can't argue rationaly, best to just agree to disagree.

If you think passing the opportunity to buy Halaand @ 30 M 2 years ago with a release clause of 50M is a good choice, then so be it. It's your opinion.
 

stefan92

Full Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2021
Messages
368
Supports
Hannover 96
Signing a player with a clause like that is by it's nature, signing a player who believes he is bigger than the club.
I don't think that statement can be applied to the release clause Haaland wanted at United. As I said above, Haaland was not really sure about this situation at United, especially if Solsjaer had been fired. That quite low release clause can be seen more as an exit strategy/insurance for him that he can leave in case his time at United did not go happily (if you will, call it a lack of self-confidence on Haalands behalf or a lack of confidence in the club structure, just from the numbers that's hard to determine I think).

This reasoning works out especially when you consider that the release clause he has at Dortmund is a lot higher than the one he wanted at United (there are conflicting reports I am aware of, but the difference could be as big as 50 million € vs 100 million). The clause at Dortmund is something else, it is a way to ensure that a top player can go to an absolute elite club for a reasonable fee.

And by the way I do think that it was in United's best interest to refuse that clause, too. At least if it was unconditional - I think that kind of clause with such a low amount should only be applied for example in case of the player not being used a lot by the coach or whatever.
 

Sky1981

Fending off the urge
Joined
Apr 12, 2006
Messages
26,433
Location
Under the bright neon lights of sincity
Signing a player with a clause like that is by it's nature, signing a player who believes he is bigger than the club.

Along with the goals he'll score, you are also taking on the inevitable shitshow circus Raiola embarks on when he feels it's time to move on to bigger and better things.

Signing a player like this, no matter how good he is, hurts our image (and as such, our attractiveness to other players) in the long run.

Under Ole, we have done really well to reign back control of the perception of the club in the transfer market - getting back into bed with Raiola and signing Haaland on astronomical wages and with some small time release clause would be a massive step backwards for me.

Class player, weird bloke, scumbag agent. The goals wouldn't be worth the hassle in the long term.
Again, different kettle of fish.

Your argument is 100% correct if the initial layout is huge (e.g. Pogba), we bought him for world record, and the whole baggage that comes along isn't worth the hassle.

But in Halaand case it's different, we bought him for peanuts (30M) if he ended up causing alot of circus we can just tell him to feck off, let him run down his contract or whatever we deemed appropriate and won't be a loss. We hold all the card, at the very least he's like a very good Loan player.
 

sglowrider

Against Oral Equality
Joined
Dec 27, 2009
Messages
14,324
Location
Hell on Earth
They have 2-3 years of good services and lots of goals under halaand
They have and will easilly guaranteed 50m Transfer fee next year, 150M possibly if they let go this year.

All that, vs Nothing

That deal is a very good deal, considering Dortmund bought him for 30M, That's 20M guaranteed profit and 3 years of goals galore.

Only thing hurt is ego
We have a different business model plus it would hurt the United brand. Fans love have the longevity of players from academy to the peak of their careers all within United, if possible. Our very own.

Dortmund has to churn players through to try and compete against the likes of Bayern.
 

Judas

Open to offers
Joined
Jun 28, 2010
Messages
23,008
Location
Where the grass is greener.
I think its so disingenuous to pretend people would have been ok with Haaland walking away for relatively peanuts because we didn't pay much for him in the first place, even if he'd been great for two years. Peoples piss would be boiling all over the place.
 

Sky1981

Fending off the urge
Joined
Apr 12, 2006
Messages
26,433
Location
Under the bright neon lights of sincity
We have a different business model plus it would hurt the United brand. Fans love have the longevity of players from academy to the peak of their careers all within United, if possible. Our very own.

Dortmund has to churn players through to try and compete against the likes of Bayern.
Exactly my point. The only thing that deal wasn't right was the "ego" part

Everything else is logically beneficial. It's a win win situation, if not for our huge ego.

I'm not saying United were wrong to say no to him, but it wasn't such a bad deal many said.
 

Sky1981

Fending off the urge
Joined
Apr 12, 2006
Messages
26,433
Location
Under the bright neon lights of sincity
I think its so disingenuous to pretend people would have been ok with Haaland walking away for relatively peanuts because we didn't pay much for him in the first place, even if he'd been great for two years. Peoples piss would be boiling all over the place.
Oh yeah, people will get pissed, traitors/judas/leech/cnut/gloryhunter etc will be banded on Halaand, and lord knows what sort of vile abuses Ed / Glazer will get.

Fans will be fans.
 

stefan92

Full Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2021
Messages
368
Supports
Hannover 96
I think its so disingenuous to pretend people would have been ok with Haaland walking away for relatively peanuts because we didn't pay much for him in the first place, even if he'd been great for two years. Peoples piss would be boiling all over the place.
I am just thinking here - is there such a thing as performance-dependent release clauses? Does Haaland maybe have such a clause at Dortmund, and would that have been an acceptable solution for United (fans)? I am wondering about that because all initial reports about his release clause were about 75 million €, while earlier this year suddenly reports about 100 million turned up. Maybe both are true, but journalists did not know about some kind of automatic increase based on number of goals or something like that.

Selling a bench player who signed for 30m for 50m onwards or selling a superstar for 150m sounds quite different I believe and could be achieved with such kind of clause - but I actually never heard about something like that existing, so could this be thing? I really don't know.
 

theklr

Full Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2019
Messages
1,849
Haaland didnt want to come to us , he was afraid PL was too big a step that could stop his development , and that he wouldnt get 100% gametime.

Raiola has confirmed this not to long ago, and Alf-Inge father said the same thing not long after the transfer was completed.

The clause thing was just United’s PR spin afterwards to try and save their reputation.