Rasmus Hojlund (Out) | take performance chat to his performance thread

[Cassidy]

Yeah we do need another striker. I think we should supplement Rasmus with another true #9. (Zirkzee is better as a deeper false 9 or 10)
Given the INEOS MO, I think it will be more likely a Delap or a Sesko type player, rather than those I mentioned.
I kinda hope the scouts or Wilcox have an ace up their sleeve we haven’t heard of as with Solskjaer or Hernandez, but that’s probably just me being an old football romantic.
I don’t see us selling Hojlund - a lot will ride on the future of Rashford/Sancho/Antony etc

This is the exact scenario where I am advocating for selling Hojlund, if there is a good prospect we can develop which will not be a significant outlay, who we feel can contribute as a second striker off the bench next season, we should do that deal and sell Hojlund.

I tend to disagree on who we'll target for the starting position, I think given the wages we will be clearing and players we will be shifting I think we will want to sign a player who has demonstrated ability to lead the line and score goals at a good level.

As for Sesko I think his release clause is likely to be quite significant this summer and we'll pass

 

[Raoul]

And what about his transfer cost, player costs are a combination of fee and wages. He is costing 17m a year over his 5 year contract, that is not cheap

That has nothing to do with the player though. Players can't control their transfer fees and to some degree the even their wages. If we're looking at PSR, Rashford and Mainoo would seem better choices to sell. Hojlund should of course go as well, but more so out of need for a reliable striker than any wage concerns.

 

[Cassidy]

That has nothing to do with the player though. Players can't control their transfer fees and to some degree the even their wages. If we're looking at PSR, Rashford and Mainoo would seem better choices to sell. Hojlund should of course go as well, but more so out of need for a reliable striker than any wage concerns.

But he was called low-cost so I am not understanding the argument here, players don't control what they cost yes, but that doesn't make them cheap/low-cost which is what I questioned.
Hojlund is not a low cost player, whilst Mainoo who is actually a low cost player has shown far more potential in a United shirt than Hojlund has

 

[Raoul]

But he was called cheap so I am not understanding the argument here, players don't control what they cost yes, but that doesn't make them cheap which is what I questioned.

Which is why the cheap bit was connected to his wages. We're not paying much for Hojlund compared to what we would a more established striker. Let's not forget he did bag 16 goals last year, so its not as if he's been completely useless for 1.75 years.

 

[Cassidy]

Which is why the cheap bit was connected to his wages. We're not paying much for Hojlund compared to what we would a more established striker. Let's not forget he did bag 16 goals last year, so its not as if he's been completely useless for 1.75 years.

So basically we can call him cheap when we only look at a portion of what he actually costs, ok

We're not paying much for Hojlund compared to what we would a more established striker.

This is a myth, he costs us 17m a year

 

[Plant0x84]

a good prospect we can develop which will not be a significant outlay, who we feel can contribute as a second striker off the bench next season

This is literally what Rasmus was supposed to be. We were initially told he would sign for €30m and would be understudy to Kane. Obviously that went well.

 

[Cassidy]

This is literally what Rasmus was supposed to be. We were initially told he would sign for €30m and would be understudy to Kane. Obviously that went well.

yes indeed, sometimes you need to understand sunk costs and move the feck on fella

 

[Raoul]

So basically we can call him cheap when we only look at a portion of what he actually costs, ok

Yes, because the transfer fee was done nearly 2 years ago. His weekly wages are therefore the only consideration here, neither of which the player has any influence over in the present. If United structured the deal to pay Atalanta a certain sum annually, then that's on the club not the player.

 

[golden_blunder]

Maybe so but I'd still argue that he hasnt shown many skills compared to other top strikers at a similar age. Watch a highlight video of Isak at Sociedad, Lewandowski when he was in Poland, Kane during his breakout year at Spurs, or even Sesko now and it will immediately jump out how much more these players had in their lockers at age 21.

Yeah but you’re raising comparisons to Lewa and Kane, 2 of the top strikers in world football for the last 10 years. I’m not sure about the others but Kane has loans at orient, millwall, Norwich and Leicester before he really settled into the squad at Tottenham.

Comparing to those 2 is probably unfair anyway considering we know how they turned out.

 

[Cassidy]

Yes, because the transfer fee was done nearly 2 years ago. His weekly wages are therefore the only consideration here, neither of which the player has any influence over in the present. If United structured the deal to pay Atalanta a certain sum annually, then that's on the club not the player.

But we all know this isn't how transfer work and they are accounted for over the course of the initial contract

Sir Jim Ratcliffe has explained that Manchester United are spending money to pay installments for players the club already own.

And at least two of them are players Manchester United are now actively trying to sell.

He explained via The Overlap: “We’re paying for, Antony, we’re buying Antony this summer.

“We’re buying Sancho this summer. We’re buying Hojlund and we’re buying Casemiro. We’re buying Onana.”

Hojlund isn't low cost or cheap, can we stop pretending please

 

[Raoul]

But we all know this isnt how transfer work and they are accounted for over the course of the initial contract

But that's not relevant to this debate because we would never recoup the money we paid for him, so selling or keeping him would both result in a loss, as per your logic.

 

[Cassidy]

But that's not relevant to this debate because we would never recoup the money we paid for him, so selling or keeping him would both result in a loss, as per your logic.

Ok you are just moving the goal posts now, because I simply said he was not low-cost or cheap and he isn't (because you have to account for the transfer fee and not just wages because that's the overall cost of the player)

Take a note of what our minority owner recently said

Sir Jim Ratcliffe has explained that Manchester United are spending money to pay installments for players the club already own.

And at least two of them are players Manchester United are now actively trying to sell.

He explained via The Overlap: “We’re paying for, Antony, we’re buying Antony this summer.

“We’re buying Sancho this summer. We’re buying Hojlund and we’re buying Casemiro. We’re buying Onana.”

But if you want to go on about recouping costs, if we sold him for 40m this summer we could recoup a little more than what we have to fork out for the remaining of his transfer fee and we would be saving around 14m in wages. So actually I don't think your logic stands

 

[Gandalf]

yes indeed, sometimes you need to understand sunk costs and move the feck on fella

True but as has been explained, the best case scenario selling Rasmus this summer is that we get a fee that covers his remaining book value leaving us at net zero and still needing to raise additional funds to finance a move for a replacement for the second striker position. Should we even be in a position to sign two strikers we are gambling hugely that we can get a backup who is going to be better than what we already have when even upgrading the starter is fraught with risk.

That is best case, the reality is that we are probably looking at a loss on book value for a sale this summer which just eats into what little room we do have inside PSR to get deals done. Understanding sunk costs is one thing but it still needs to be balanced by an understanding of the overall financial picture. Selling Rasmus for the likely fee we could get this summer not only won't raise any money to replace him but could actually inhibit our ability to complete other deals.

 

[Raoul]

Ok you are just moving the goal posts now, because I simply said he was not low-cost or cheap and he isn't.

Take a note of what our minority owner recently said



But if you want to go on about recouping costs, if we sold him for 40m this summer we could recoup a little more than what we have to fork out for the remaining of his transfer fee and we would be saying around 14m in wages. So actually I don't think your logic stands

In terms of our wage bill Hojlund's 85k is small potatoes, lets put it that way. I'm sure Berrada isn't wasting any time moaning about choices Arnold made two summers ago, as he can only look at buying and selling for the future, and lowereing the existing wage bill, which contains 3 players making over 300k/week. When framed within this context, Hojlund's numbers aren't anywhere close to being the primary problem for the club.

 

[Cassidy]

In terms of our wage bill Hojlund's 85k is small potatoes, lets put it that way. I'm sure Berrada isn't wasting any time moaning about choices Arnold made two summers ago, as he can only look at buying and selling for the future, and lowereing the existing wage bill, which contains 3 players making over 300k/week. When framed within this context, Hojlund's numbers aren't anywhere close to being the primary problem for the club.

Again if we pretend only the wage bill relates to the cost of a player on our accounts then fine you are right, but that is not reality and Hojlund is not cheap, cheaper than Kane yes, cheap hell no

Also nowhere have I suggested that Hojlund is the primary problem at the club so you can stop moving the goal posts

 

[next_number_seven]

In terms of our wage bill Hojlund's 85k is small potatoes, lets put it that way. I'm sure Berrada isn't wasting any time moaning about choices Arnold made two summers ago, as he can only look at buying and selling for the future, and lowereing the existing wage bill, which contains 3 players making over 300k/week. When framed within this context, Hojlund's numbers aren't anywhere close to being the primary problem for the club.

There's the opportunity cost of not selling him.

 

[Utterly De Ligt'd]

A large portion of our fanbase want to sell him or want to see him fail just because he was a fan of the United Stand and gave Mark Goldbridge an interview when he got signed. Whatever your thoughts of the United Stand or Mark Goldbridge, wanting to see our player fail for that reason is shameful.

 

[dubplate warrior]

A large portion of our fanbase want to sell him or want to see him fail just because he was a fan of the United Stand and gave Mark Goldbridge an interview when he got signed. Whatever your thoughts of the United Stand or Mark Goldbridge, wanting to see our player fail for that reason is shameful.

You think that's the reason people want him gone !?

 

[Cassidy]

True but as has been explained, the best case scenario selling Rasmus this summer is that we get a fee that covers his remaining book value leaving us at net zero and still needing to raise additional funds to finance a move for a replacement for the second striker position. Should we even be in a position to sign two strikers we are gambling hugely that we can get a backup who is going to be better than what we already have when even upgrading the starter is fraught with risk.

That is best case, the reality is that we are probably looking at a loss on book value for a sale this summer which just eats into what little room we do have inside PSR to get deals done. Understanding sunk costs is one thing but it still needs to be balanced by an understanding of the overall financial picture. Selling Rasmus for the likely fee we could get this summer not only won't raise any money to replace him but could actually inhibit our ability to complete other deals.

Actually if we sold him for his book value, we then have wage savings so it really just depends at what level and who is available, you also have to account for the fact that if we end up moving on Rashford Antony and Sancho and are sensible with the wages with players coming in we are going to have a lot more PSR wiggle room than people think.

Again, though, I'm not saying he is a priority to move on, but as I keep saying, if the opportunity presents itself, e.g, we get a good offer of around 40m (which is above his book value of around 38.2m) and we find someone who is not a significant outlay with the correct profile as a development striker then we should do it. Its a big if, but I don't see this argument against it if such an opportunity presents itself and so we should certainly be looking for it.

On the risk of the number 2 not working out, we are at significant risk at the moment of Hojlund not working out even as a number 2 at a significantly higher cost than a number 2 striker should cost, which adds significant risk to us as a squad and in terms of squad building going forward. His cost actually is the big issue here, even though there are some pretending he is cheap

 

[Raoul]

A large portion of our fanbase want to sell him or want to see him fail just because he was a fan of the United Stand and gave Mark Goldbridge an interview when he got signed. Whatever your thoughts of the United Stand or Mark Goldbridge, wanting to see our player fail for that reason is shameful.

A majority simply want him replaced by a reliable goal scorer, a vast majority of which probably don't even know Goldbridge exists, never mind that Hojlund once did an interview with him.

 

[Cassidy]

A large portion of our fanbase want to sell him or want to see him fail just because he was a fan of the United Stand and gave Mark Goldbridge an interview when he got signed. Whatever your thoughts of the United Stand or Mark Goldbridge, wanting to see our player fail for that reason is shameful.

Come one man, I really dislike when there are opposing views on this forum and crap like this is said.
Honestly I would be really happy if Hojlund turned out to be a top striker, at the end of the day though many of us are just worried he won't even be a good backup striker next season and we may end up being an injury away from having to play him

 

[lex talionis]

What’s the deal with the thread title “(OUT)”?

 

[Devil_forever]

All of you referencing the £50m fee, did you not read the bit where Napoli define that fee as "frightening"? Ergo they're not spending anywhere near that amount on him:

but Manchester's request is frightening: it starts at 60 million euros, but we are at the first exploratory contacts. If there are openings, Napoli will try to understand the feasibility of the operation".

 

[Utterly De Ligt'd]

You think that's the reason people want him gone !?

A majority simply want him replaced by a reliable goal scorer, a vast majority of which probably don't even know Goldbridge exists, never mind that Hojlund once did an interview with him.

It's quite evident if you use social media to keep up with United. And people will come back to me with, social media, twitter, etc isn't real life, but it is, it's season ticket holders, local fans, groups like the 58, overseas fans, etc. It's a microcosm of our fanbase, and there is a large contingent that hold that interview against him to this day.

And why should he be replaced? Why can't he just be supplemented? If we are being honest and decent fans we can accept he is a young player in a new country playing in an extremely dysfunctional club, filling an important role completely by himself with immense pressure on him and he should probably be at least given another season to see how he does with some stability and support. But people seem more inclined to get rid of him and try to move forward with one single striker, which is ridiculous. And Zirkzee isn't a striker, never was, so he can't be counted. What's the logic in replacing Hojlund with Gyorkeres and still having no striker on the bench? Wouldn't Gyorkeres starting and Hojlund coming off the bench or starting cup games be an ideal situation? And then if he still hasn't improved by next summer then we replace him.

 

[Posh Red]

What’s the deal with the thread title “(OUT)”?

Because the thread is based on a transfer link for him out of the club?

 

[Raoul]

It's quite evident if you use social media to keep up with United. And people will come back to me with, social media, twitter, etc isn't real life, but it is, it's season ticket holders, local fans, groups like the 58, overseas fans, etc. It's a microcosm of our fanbase, and there is a large contingent that hold that interview against him to this day.

And why should he be replaced? Why can't he just be supplemented? If we are being honest and decent fans we can accept he is a young player in a new country playing in an extremely dysfunctional club, filling an important role completely by himself with immense pressure on him and he should probably be at least given another season to see how he does with some stability and support. But people seem more inclined to get rid of him and try to move forward with one single striker, which is ridiculous. And Zirkzee isn't a striker, never was, so he can't be counted. What's the logic in replacing Hojlund with Gyorkeres and still having no striker on the bench? Wouldn't Gyorkeres starting and Hojlund coming off the bench or starting cup games be an ideal situation? And then if he still hasn't improved by next summer then we replace him.

I follow many United accounts, but don't follow Goldbridge. Nor do I know why he's relevant. He seems to have a lot of followers but that's a drop in the bucket compared to United's global fan base, which numbers in the hundreds of millions. So you might excuse people who don't live in the Goldbridge fishbowl who don't buy into this as a relevant issue.

 

[Roboc7]

If someone offers 50m for him he’ll be sold in a heartbeat but I can’t see that happening. I can see teams in Serie A wanting him but on loan and with an option to buy for 25-30m.

 

[Redstain]

A large portion of our fanbase want to sell him or want to see him fail just because he was a fan of the United Stand and gave Mark Goldbridge an interview when he got signed. Whatever your thoughts of the United Stand or Mark Goldbridge, wanting to see our player fail for that reason is shameful.

 

[golden_blunder]

Again if we pretend only the wage bill relates to the cost of a player on our accounts then fine you are right, but that is not reality and Hojlund is not cheap, cheaper than Kane yes, cheap hell no

Also nowhere have I suggested that Hojlund is the primary problem at the club so you can stop moving the goal posts

Said our strikers to the ground man

 

[golden_blunder]

A large portion of our fanbase want to sell him or want to see him fail just because he was a fan of the United Stand and gave Mark Goldbridge an interview when he got signed. Whatever your thoughts of the United Stand or Mark Goldbridge, wanting to see our player fail for that reason is shameful.

Bizarre post

 

[Utterly De Ligt'd]

I follow many United account, but don't follow Goldbridge. Nor do I know why he's relevant. He seems to have a lot of followers but that's a drop in the bucket compared to United's global fan base, which numbers in the hundreds of millions. So you might excuse people who don't live in the Goldbridge fishbowl who don't buy into this as a relevant issue.

I never said he was relevant, I didn't actually say anything about Mark one way or another, but there is a lot of hatred of that guy online, like vitriolic hatred, and a lot of it is driven by his "competitors", but a lot comes from the green and gold crowd and fan groups like the 58.

United might have a global fanbase in the 100s of millions, but how many of those are just passive fans that buy a shirt occasionally and watch a game when they have time and what percent of that fanbase are people like us, that probably never miss a game and spend hours a day online engaging about United? I think that number is probably not that big, but it's easy to mistakenly think it's big when you are part of it. So when a significant portion of those people have such strong feelings towards Goldbridge, then that interview can be held against him.

Look, I hope I am wrong, but I have seen enough evidence to suggest I am not.

Our society has become one where people make their mind up on something and it will never change it, so you get situations like this where if you don't like the United Stand, and Hojlund legitimizes them in some way, it's a challenge to your beliefs and you won't back down. Similar to how a portion of our fanbase will never be happy with Ugarte, because signing him meant we didn't sign Joao Neves, who was the player they wanted. So, if they admit Ugarte is good it meant they were wrong when they said we should have signed Neves instead. It's truly a said state we are in, but every other topic has become this way in our society, how can football be any different?

Bizarre post

I appreciate you thinking that if you don't use social media for this purpose, but why would I invent this out of whole cloth? What would I have to gain by fabricating something like this? This board is amazing, it has a lot of intelligent, nuanced opinions on players and I believe most people on here are genuine, but outside this board that's not the case. This is what drew me to this board, intelligent fans, but you guys have to do a lot of weeding out to only have intelligent fans.

 

[manutddjw]

I do think there is something there with Hojlund. His finishing is quite good and I think since we've been playing better as a team he's shown a bit more of his qualities. Even the game against Sociedad despite 2 bad misses, he was starting to get himself in better positions which has continued on. I do think he will be a pretty good striker for us.

The issue we had was buying a 20 year old with limited top flight experience and expecting him to lead the line for us on a consistent basis. Most young players are inconsistent and expecting Hojlund and Garnacho to lead the attack for us was asking for trouble. In a perfect world there would have been 2 senior players ahead of them and allow them to grow naturally. A similar situation just happened with Arsenal recently. Ethan Nwaneri is a talented player and has done well, but asking him to be the focal point of attack was a bridge too far for him and he's been used as a sub recently.

 

[VP89]

I appreciate you thinking that if you don't use social media for this purpose, but why would I invent this out of whole cloth? What would I have to gain by fabricating something like this? This board is amazing, it has a lot of intelligent, nuanced opinions on players and I believe most people on here are genuine, but outside this board that's not the case. This is what drew me to this board, intelligent fans, but you guys have to do a lot of weeding out to only have intelligent fans.

You implied people wanted him sold becuase he was affiliated with Goldbridge? Isn't that just making things up here?

 

[Utterly De Ligt'd]

You implied people wanted him sold becuase he was affiliated with Goldbridge? Isn't that just making things up here?

If I have literally seen people saying that exact thing then how is it made up? I never said anything about people on this site, that is not the case, but twitter, instagram, yeah, I have seen people actually state that as a reason to get rid.

 

[quadrant]

This is a myth, he costs us 17m a year

Where is this number from?

 

[Shabby as she goes]

Wages gonna be like 5x as high.

Fair enough, but if you want good strikers that is unavoidable. If we get Rashford, Sancho and Hojlund off the books, then striker-wise, we’ll create the space

I don’t think we sign any of those 3 tbh

But would you be happy if we would?

Jonathan David is not a 'significantly better striker' than Rasmus Hojlund. He isn't even an out-and-out CF I'd argue, and doesn't fit the profile of a striker in an Amorim system.

He's beginning to get vastly over-rated on this forum, probably because he's an impending free agent and gets double figures consistently albeit in a top 4/5 team in a weak league and heavily supplemented by penalties.

Nothing is certain, I know that, especially not at Manchester United.
I started my message intending to state why David is a much more reliable goal scorer than Hojlund. But indeed in the league 1, this year is 14G+3A in 24, where 6 of his goals were penalties.

Still, this is what he did in CL this year:
Played 10
Goals 7 (2 penalties)
Assists 1
That’s not bad at all

Hojlund scored 10 in the PL last year. I think, now that he scored last weekend, the remainder of the season will tell us if he’s somewhat able to refind his form. If he does, he may be an as good as backup as David.
If he doesn’t, I think replacing Hojlund with David is a positive development.
Main priority though, would be to get that number 1 striker on board

 

[Maurice Setters Training]

Looking at what Amorim did at Sporting, he quickly gutted the team and sold pretty much everyone who was sellable, including players bought the previous season, to fund players for his system.

So, I could see Hojlund Zirkzee and Mainoo being sold.

 

[Reapersoul20]

Looking at what Amorim did at Sporting, he quickly gutted the team and sold pretty much everyone who was sellable, including players bought the previous season, to fund players for his system.

So I can't see Hojlund being sold.

 

[Todd]

Or time, when all of your attackers are barely in their 20's.

Even so, how many 20 year old strikers wind up being Kane or Haaland or Lewandowski?

We've gotta either spend small on speculation, or spend big on the sure thing. In recent years it seems we've spent big on speculation.

 

[Raoul]

Even so, how many 20 year old strikers wind up being Kane or Haaland or Lewandowski?

We've gotta either spend small on speculation, or spend big on the sure thing. In recent years it seems we've spent big on speculation.

That's where quality scouting and coaching comes in. There was a time when Lew was little more than an up an comer when some were suggesting he should be bought by United.