Marcos Leonardo....Young Brazilian Striker

[bosskeano]

MARCOS LEONARDO IN MAN UTD SIGHTS

Manchester United are ready to outbid Roma for Brazilian striker Marcos Leonardo Santos Almeida, it has been revealed in Thursday’s edition of La Gazzetta Dello Sport.

One of the most promising strikers in South America at present, Marcos Leonardo has scored 49 goals for Santos at senior level already, despite only being 20 years old. Moreover, he was recently the second highest goalscorer at the FIFA Under-20 World Cup, behind only the Chelsea-owned Italy midfielder Cesare Casadei.

Santos have already been fending off interest in their top prospect. They have resisted serious interest from AS Roma this summer, after Jose Mourinho’s side went searching for a replacement for the injured Tammy Abraham.

There has been a belief brewing that Roma might get their hands on Marcos Leonardo in January instead. But now, La Gazzetta has hinted that they might miss out to Man Utd.

According to the Italian newspaper, Man Utd are ready to make their own offer for Marcos Leonardo. Their package would be worth the equivalent of an initial €20m, plus €5m in bonuses.

In other words, that means Man Utd are willing to pay £17.1m up front for the transfer, with add-ons potentially increasing their investment towards £21.4m.

 

[Mainoldo]

We was linked before. We aren’t spending any money on a 21 year old.

 

[Giggsy13]

We’ve spent a big chunk of money on a young striker already. This isn’t happening.

 

[DJ_21]

Surely if we’re getting another striker it’s gonna be an experienced one

 

[sullydnl]

We’ve spent a big chunk of money on a young striker already. This isn’t happening.

Not in any way suggesting this story is true, but how does that logic work?

We know we could do with another striker. There's no reason you can't have two young strikers. The fee reported above is relatively modest. And we know a certain other young striker we may have been planning on reinstating to the side will now be leaving.

We probably won't sign another striker but it will be less because we already signed one and more because we have other priorities and/or can't shift players already in the squad, I think. Having paid big money on Hojlund isn't really the issue.

 

[mav_9me]

Not in any way suggesting this story is true, but how does that logic work?

We know we could do with another striker. There's no reason you can't have two young strikers. The fee reported above is relatively modest. And we know a certain other young striker we may have been planning on reinstating to the side will now be leaving.

We probably won't sign another striker but it will be less because we already signed one and more because we have other priorities and/or can't shift players already in the squad.

Well there's an obvious reason. Can't have both of your strikers adapting and getting used to the league and we are waiting on their development.

 

[James35]

No chance, not a keeper.

 

[Dazzmondo]

If we had signed Kane or Osimhen I could see this happening but think us signing Hojlund made it a bit less likely unless there's no plan to sign another striker next season (which maybe there isn't who knows). We've been linked for a while, so clearly our scouts like him. I'd like us to trust our scouts but our club pretty much never does so until there's a takeover, that probably won't change.

 

[Infra-red]

The stats suggest he's a diminutive, Chicharito-style goal poacher. A fox in the box type.

It doesn't look like we have the funds for a striker, but if we signed one, I tend to think it would be more likely to be an experienced target man type, with decent aerial ability.

 

[GaryLifo]

People complain that we let City get Alvarez on the cheap and then will complain if we did this deal.

 

[sullydnl]

Well there's an obvious reason. Can't have both of your strikers adapting and getting used to the league and we are waiting on their development.

That's a reason you ideally shouldn't, not a reason you can't. Or even just practically shouldn't.

By which I mean if you need a striker, and you have a limited budget, and the striker market is scarce, and there was a young striker you had an eye on reintroducing to the squad this season but now realise you can't, signing another striker of that same age might be the best option you have and make complete sense. It's not like there are a plethora of more experienced options available at that price you'd be turning down in his favour, you're making do with what's available.

There's zero reason to think this will happen but of all the reasons it won't, the notion that signing two young CFs would be a problem in itself is very far down on the list.

City signed Haaland and Alvarez in the same transfer window, for example. PSG seem to be trying to sign Ramos and Muani. I wish we could sign Hojlund and someone like this kid, because it certainly wouldn't be overkill.

 

[glasgow 21]

People complain that we let City get Alvarez on the cheap and then will complain if we did this deal.

We want ever deal to fall through and if we get him we hope he isn't any good cause we love misery. If he was for sale for 95m there would be 850 pages of comments right now. On a positive side he does have a hint of Romario about him and if he is half as good then it would be a shrewd buy.

 

[glasgow 21]

The stats suggest he's a diminutive, Chicharito-style goal poacher. A fox in the box type.

It doesn't look like we have the funds for a striker, but if we signed one, I tend to think it would be more likely to be an experienced target man type, with decent aerial ability.

Since when last were we any good a feeding a tall striker ? I think i remember one cross to Weghorst but not sure, I may have dreamt that.

 

[Roboc7]

I’d prefer another young striker to no one, we need to build a team so if we have to start with few cheaper younger players then so be it. We don’t have the money or FFP flexibility to keep signing 50m plus players.

 

[Infra-red]

Since when last were we any good a feeding a tall striker ? I think i remember one cross to Weghorst but not sure, I may have dreamt that.

We're lousy at it, but EtH has often had a big man in his teams, at least as a tactical option.

 

[rooneyberbatov]

I’d take any young talent at this point and risk it all. We’ve missed out on so many good youngsters in recent years.

 

[Hernandez - BFA]

We always get linked to Brazilian wonderkids. Shock.

 

[MrBrightside1989]

Sign him up. If it means rashford wide and a bit of an option up top of hojlund is out of form/injured.

 

[croadyman]

Wide forward or more of a 9?

 

[glasgow 21]

We're lousy at it, but EtH has often had a big man in his teams, at least as a tactical option.

We have a big striker in Hojlund but meantime if we can't spend circa 17m on a fit Leonardo we are truly up the creek

 

[Nep77]

 

[Ahmer Baig]

I wouldnt mind taking a risk on a young talent.

 

[Paul778]

Haha.

We are currently looking for 3m down the back of the sofa to get Amrabat over the line. If this guy happens I'll buy a hat specifically so I can eat it.

 

[ColvaleGoa]

People complain that we let City get Alvarez on the cheap and then will complain if we did this deal.

This my friend is a smokescreen from the Glazers.

They know fans are boiling over. Only thing that distract Fans is shiny new Toy. We don't have money for Amravati, how can we go into a bidding war with Roma?

 

[Trex]

Well there's an obvious reason. Can't have both of your strikers adapting and getting used to the league and we are waiting on their development.

Madrid once had Benzema and Higuain. City currently Haaland and Alvarez. We need goal scorers.

 

[cj_sparky]

It would be nice to have more depth up top and this is a kind of fee that wouldn't see a significant drop off in value if it didn't work out.

But as it stands, I'll be surprised to see us do anymore business in this window and most the South Americans we are linked to amount to nothing more than links.

 

[Redstain]

Take moves like this over someone like Taremi

 

[croadyman]

Take moves like this over someone like Taremi

Can we afford to have two young prospects?

 

[Patchbeard]

Proper John Smith's it at 2:22

 

[Giggsy13]

Not in any way suggesting this story is true, but how does that logic work?

We know we could do with another striker. There's no reason you can't have two young strikers. The fee reported above is relatively modest. And we know a certain other young striker we may have been planning on reinstating to the side will now be leaving.

We probably won't sign another striker but it will be less because we already signed one and more because we have other priorities and/or can't shift players already in the squad, I think. Having paid big money on Hojlund isn't really the issue.

Not disagreeing with your logic and I would be happy to see another striker brought in, but this is not how the club thinks or operates.

 

[CallyRed]

Hasn't played in the Netherlands. Not interested.

 

[Hoof the ball]

Can we afford to have two young prospects?

Madrid got two teenage forwards at the same time (Vinicius and Rodrygo). Granted they had Benzema altrady, but they weren't afraid to take a risk.

 

[Ali Dia]

This is the kind of signing you make if you’re trying to build a squad long term especially when we are desperately lacking in the position. He and Rasmus can push each other on in the coming years. Another cheap talented wonderkid we will pass on who’s done more in the game than the likes of Amad had when we picked him up. We should have been in for players like Alvarez and Enzo when they were cheap and standing out. I don’t understand why we don’t

 

[Plant0x84]

Starting to get 2020 vibes after they fecked up the Sancho deal and spunked the rest of the budget on Amad and Facu with these links and the Klapija link.

We know how well that turned out

 

[croadyman]

This is the kind of signing you make if you’re trying to build a squad long term especially when we are desperately lacking in the position. He and Rasmus can push each other on in the coming years. Another cheap talented wonderkid we will pass on who’s done more in the game than the likes of Amad had when we picked him up. We should have been in for players like Alvarez and Enzo when they were cheap and standing out. I don’t understand why we don’t

Not against him (IF we are interested) but just feel an experienced striker like Toney could be useful in January was my point on it

 

[Strelok]

Well there's an obvious reason. Can't have both of your strikers adapting and getting used to the league and we are waiting on their development.

Why not? Have we learned anything from what happened with Greenwood?

I still remember back then some were against buying a top striker because we already had Greenwood. One big injury, or Hojlund flops badly, or he does another Greenwood and we're back to square one - play Rashford there. You'll never know what might happen in a couple years so if you can sign a top prospect, grab him with all your mind. Plus 17m is nothing these days even things don't work out big deal. And if so we will be able to sell the kid for at least half of that imo.

 

[croadyman]

Why not? Have we learned anything from what happened with Greenwood?

I still remember back then some were against buying a top striker because we already had Greenwood. One big injury, or Hojlund flops badly, or he does another Greenwood and we're back to square one - play Rashford there. You'll never know what might happen in a couple years so if you can sign a top prospect, grab him with all your mind. Plus 17m is nothing these days even things don't work out big deal. And if so we will be able to sell the kid for at least half of that imo.

Yeah no doubt it's a low risk price

 

[Bubz27]

Strong name ain't it.

 

[LARulz]

We hardly make these signings so am not counting on anything happening other than monitoring and watching him go to a rival

 

[Lay]

Thought he was off to Roma in January