Erling Haaland

I don’t know. Do they acquire players who are 3rd party owned by seedy agents? If so I’d say they’re technically a big club but acting like a small, needy, desperate one.

Originally Posted by rustling jimmies

Who gives a £#%&!, if he came to United and produced the goods for 2 years then I would be happy with that. The days of a player staying at one club are fading fast.

This

We need talent and fresh faces. We are not in a position to be so fussy anymore. We need a good season or two with good football and decent results to stop the rot.

Originally Posted by utd99

Big clubs think and act like big clubs, they don’t hand their fortunes over to scam artists. That’s what small, desperate selling clubs do.

Have you actually thought about how bad that deal was? Think Pogba, only ten times worse.

My main beef with the deal was giving Agent Fatty control over any future sale. Reality is though, we probably have to accept we’re going to have to shell out a bit more than some other clubs right now because of the state of our squad.

Originally Posted by NedKelly

My main beef with the deal was giving Agent Fatty control over any future sale. Reality is though, we probably have to accept we’re going to have to shell out a bit more than some other clubs right now because of the state of our squad.

The kid’s good, I get it. We need good players, I get it; but I really can’t believe people are willing to ignore everything else that would have made this deal terrible for us. It reeks a bit of desperation, and desperate clubs made bad decisions and act small.

Doing this deal would have meant:
No chance of a re-up. Zero
Raiola controlling every aspect of his future transfer. Probably within 2 years.
Our side being shaped around a player who has no future here, no matter how well he does.
Development of players who are our future, like Greenwood (who I think could be every bit as good as Haaland) being hampered.
Allowing Raiola to sink his claws even further into this club - have we learned nothing? We should be eradicating his influence, not giving him more ffs.
Promoting instability rather than the stability we need so badly.

Imagine. We bring the kid in, 18m, and agree to Raiola and Haaland Sr’s terms - a buy out of 65m (Dortmund confirmed) and big % of his next sale price. Now we have a top young talent and he starts playing well, 25 goals first season, 40 goals second season. Raiola holds a private auction, all the top clubs express interest, we can do £#%&! all. Next thing he rolls up with a cheque from City of 65m, minus his cut, so we get 40m for one of our best young players who then rocks up at the Etihad a week later, and there’s literally £#%&! all we can do about it.

I used City, but it could be anyone; Liverpool even. The footballing world think we’re two-bob now, what’s the story going to be when THAT happens? Every top club would know that this was their future scenario, so why, if this kid’s so good, were none of them in for him? For 18m??

And people seriously wanted to do this deal. Think. Would Fergie have done that deal?

Originally Posted by utd99

The kid’s good, I get it. We need good players, I get it; but I really can’t believe people are willing to ignore everything else that would have made this deal terrible for us. It reeks a bit of desperation, and desperate clubs made bad decisions and act small.

Doing this deal would have meant:
No chance of a re-up. Zero
Raiola controlling every aspect of his future transfer. Probably within 2 years.
Our side being shaped around a player who has no future here, no matter how well he does.
Development of players who are our future, like Greenwood (who I think could be every bit as good as Haaland) being hampered.
Allowing Raiola to sink his claws even further into this club - have we learned nothing? We should be eradicating his influence, not giving him more ffs.
Promoting instability rather than the stability we need so badly.

Imagine. We bring the kid in, 18m, and agree to Raiola and Haaland Sr’s terms - a buy out of 65m (Dortmund confirmed) and big % of his next sale price. Now we have a top young talent and he starts playing well, 25 goals first season, 40 goals second season. Raiola holds a private auction, all the top clubs express interest, we can do f*** all. Next thing he rolls up with a cheque from City of 65m, minus his cut, so we get 40m for one of our best young players who then rocks up at the Etihad a week later, and there’s literally f*** all we can do about it.

I used City, but it could be anyone; Liverpool even. The footballing world think we’re two-bob now, what’s the story going to be when THAT happens? Every top club would know that this was their future scenario, so why, if this kid’s so good, were none of them in for him? For 18m??

And people seriously wanted to do this deal. Think. Would Fergie have done that deal?

I was completely fine with us passing up on that deal. Even said it in the post you quoted, it’s disgraceful and certainly not how we should let agents do business with us. However, I’m still worried that the club is not as rich as it makes out and we are going to pass up on some legitimately good/great players all for the sake of a few million. I hope I’m wrong but Utd have turned me into a pessimist in recent years.

Originally Posted by NedKelly

I was completely fine with us passing up on that deal. Even said it in the post you quoted, it’s disgraceful and certainly not how we should let agents do business with us. However, I’m still worried that the club is not as rich as it makes out and we are going to pass up on some legitimately good/great players all for the sake of a few million. I hope I’m wrong but Utd have turned me into a pessimist in recent years.

Wasn’t directed at you mate. You just happened to be the last post on a thread that has me baffled tbh.

Why would a top club want to sign him in two years and hand over their fortunes to scam artists?

Wouldn’t that make them a small, desperate selling club?

Originally Posted by utd99

Wasn’t directed at you mate. You just happened to be the last post on a thread that has me baffled tbh.

Fair do’s. As pessimistic as I am I’d always put Utd first and it is odd that some would have us bent over a barrel by Raiola, despite knowing how much of a grade a c*** he is.

Originally Posted by AK14

Why would a top club want to sign him in two years and hand over their fortunes to scam artists?

Wouldn’t that make them a small, desperate selling club?

You get the feeling that he was seeing us on the same level as Dortmund; aka a place to develop further before the “big move”. Can’t be having that.

Who knows what the deal is in two years? Maybe at that point there isn’t a ludicrous buy out & percentage involved. If the kids true market value is closer to 100/120m and the buyers are getting him for 65m, Raiola and Haaland Sr get a big commission from the buyer too for full rights. Maybe FIFA have stepped in at the point and deemed this practice a violation of their 3rd party ownership rules -which it is- and no future contracts can be structured that way.

Either way, it’s not the point. Unless there’s something in the above scenario that’s untrue, then that’s what we’re looking at if we agree to do that deal. If the response is just going to be “but he’s so good” then I have nowhere else to go with it.

Originally Posted by utd99

The kid’s good, I get it. We need good players, I get it; but I really can’t believe people are willing to ignore everything else that would have made this deal terrible for us. It reeks a bit of desperation, and desperate clubs made bad decisions and act small.

Doing this deal would have meant:
No chance of a re-up. Zero
Raiola controlling every aspect of his future transfer. Probably within 2 years.
Our side being shaped around a player who has no future here, no matter how well he does.
Development of players who are our future, like Greenwood (who I think could be every bit as good as Haaland) being hampered.
Allowing Raiola to sink his claws even further into this club - have we learned nothing? We should be eradicating his influence, not giving him more ffs.
Promoting instability rather than the stability we need so badly.

Imagine. We bring the kid in, 18m, and agree to Raiola and Haaland Sr’s terms - a buy out of 65m (Dortmund confirmed) and big % of his next sale price. Now we have a top young talent and he starts playing well, 25 goals first season, 40 goals second season. Raiola holds a private auction, all the top clubs express interest, we can do £#%&! all. Next thing he rolls up with a cheque from City of 65m, minus his cut, so we get 40m for one of our best young players who then rocks up at the Etihad a week later, and there’s literally £#%&! all we can do about it.

I used City, but it could be anyone; Liverpool even. The footballing world think we’re two-bob now, what’s the story going to be when THAT happens? Every top club would know that this was their future scenario, so why, if this kid’s so good, were none of them in for him? For 18m??

And people seriously wanted to do this deal. Think. Would Fergie have done that deal?

Spot on.

Imagine being cornered at a house party with a sniffed up utd99.

Originally Posted by Neo

Imagine being cornered at a house party with a sniffed up utd99.

That’s usually when I move on to net spend.

Originally Posted by utd99

The kid’s good, I get it. We need good players, I get it; but I really can’t believe people are willing to ignore everything else that would have made this deal terrible for us. It reeks a bit of desperation, and desperate clubs made bad decisions and act small.

Doing this deal would have meant:
No chance of a re-up. Zero
Raiola controlling every aspect of his future transfer. Probably within 2 years.
Our side being shaped around a player who has no future here, no matter how well he does.
Development of players who are our future, like Greenwood (who I think could be every bit as good as Haaland) being hampered.
Allowing Raiola to sink his claws even further into this club - have we learned nothing? We should be eradicating his influence, not giving him more ffs.
Promoting instability rather than the stability we need so badly.

Imagine. We bring the kid in, 18m, and agree to Raiola and Haaland Sr’s terms - a buy out of 65m (Dortmund confirmed) and big % of his next sale price. Now we have a top young talent and he starts playing well, 25 goals first season, 40 goals second season. Raiola holds a private auction, all the top clubs express interest, we can do f*** all. Next thing he rolls up with a cheque from City of 65m, minus his cut, so we get 40m for one of our best young players who then rocks up at the Etihad a week later, and there’s literally f*** all we can do about it.

I used City, but it could be anyone; Liverpool even. The footballing world think we’re two-bob now, what’s the story going to be when THAT happens? Every top club would know that this was their future scenario, so why, if this kid’s so good, were none of them in for him? For 18m??

And people seriously wanted to do this deal. Think. Would Fergie have done that deal?

Good stuff

On the bold point. Short of UEFA regulation ever growing a spine and doing their job, this contractual prenup will become the entry level condition for most significant deals now. It takes the club out of the equation completely. The decision on the direction of each player is now entirely in the hands of their agent. Clubs will not be haggling with each other over price before agent/player negotiation starts. A club's communication with the selling club will amount to nothing more than the arbitrary fee transferred once the winning proposal is accepted by the agent/player.

There have been a lot of opportunities for agent regulation to be installed and sensible laws enforced to create balance. At every turn proposed restrictions have been rejected. I don't think it's too much of a reach to suggest the ridiculously wealthy super agents may just be very good friends with influential decision makers there.

Originally Posted by Curtis

Good stuff

On the bold point. Short of UEFA regulation ever growing a spine and doing their job, this contractual prenup will become the entry level condition for most significant deals now. It takes the club out of the equation completely. The decision on the direction of each player is now entirely in the hands of their agent. Clubs will not be haggling with each other over price before agent/player negotiation starts. A club's communication with the selling club will amount to nothing more than the arbitrary fee transferred once the winning proposal is accepted by the agent/player.

There have been a lot of opportunities for agent regulation to be installed and sensible laws enforced to create balance. At every turn proposed restrictions have been rejected. I don't think it's too much of a reach to suggest the ridiculously wealthy super agents may just be very good friends with influential decision makers there.

Of course, it’s the way of the world. Tricky to regulate as well, because technically the agent isn’t violating the rules, and buy outs are common in places like Spain, which is why Barcelona got caught out by PSG and Neymar.

Raiola’s model is on borrowed time though, it has to be. Just because he’s found a clever way around the rules, it’s just too much money leaving the game to be allowed to stand. That’s probably why he’s brazenly making hay while the sun shines. We don’t have to help him do it though.

Originally Posted by The Stella Fella

Like Pogba........

Only flaw in your argument.. Pogba has never produced the goods.

We knew Rashford was £#%&!ed and still didn't go all in for this.

18 mio for a hattrick against liverpool would have been a small price to pay.

Originally Posted by ScarFace

We knew Rashford was £#%&!ed and still didn't go all in for this.

We wanted to make a stand against Riola though.

Originally Posted by windy waffles

We wanted to make a stand against Riola though.

Honestly don't care if we do a deal where Norwegian supermodels feed him Weetabix every morning if it means we get a Thor like striker to lead the line.