Jump to content
Join Talk Chelsea and join in with the discussions! Click Here

Erling Haaland


NikkiCFC
 Share
Followers 0

Recommended Posts

49 minutes ago, Jason said:

It's bloody obvious that the club want to sign Haaland but I asked this before, what is the club's backup plan if we don't get Haaland?

Do they want Haaland because they feel we need a top striker and Haaland is that OR do they only want Haaland because he's the shiny toy right now?

I would hope: 

DCL, Kane (even more impossible than Håland), Kun, Ings. 

Those are the only options imo. Maybe Martinez but I am not sold on him at all. 

Personally, I would be hyped if we did get Håland as I think he really is the type of player who could take us to the next level like VVD at the Dippers. Look at the first 18 with him in it: 

Mendy

AC Silva Rudi

James Kova Kante Chilwell

Mount Harvetz 

Håland 

Subs: Kepa, Dave, Alonso, Jorgi, Puli, CHO, Werner

After that, all you really need to do is maybe get a LCB and a No.6 who is bigger and more athletic (although I could see Mount move there to allow Puli/Werner more time.) A new GK2 may also be required but that is peanuts. 

The big loser would be Ziyech as I could really see him struggling to make the bench. If not him then Puli, but I reckon he will be safe. Zouma's days also looked numbered as well, although he will still pick up decent money so he is not a major worry. 

Edited by King Kante
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 417
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

He does not offer much else when he does not score goals and he is clearly very dependent on his teammates giving him good passes. He is currently nowhere near Mbappe level because even when Mbappe do

LOL If that's the kind of money they want, no one is gonna pay for it, especially when clubs are still counting the cost of the pandemic. 

This season yes, last season two German sides made it while the runaway champions were dumped out by a diluted Atletico and the 2nd place team were dumped out by the 10th place French side. Not to men

2 hours ago, King Kante said:

I would hope: 

DCL, Kane (even more impossible than Håland), Kun, Ings

Those are the only options imo. Maybe Martinez but I am not sold on him at all. 

Personally, I would be hyped if we did get Håland as I think he really is the type of player who could take us to the next level like VVD at the Dippers. Look at the first 18 with him in it: 

Mendy

AC Silva Rudi

James Kova Kante Chilwell

Mount Harvetz 

Håland 

Subs: Kepa, Dave, Alonso, Jorgi, Puli, CHO, Werner

After that, all you really need to do is maybe get a LCB and a No.6 who is bigger and more athletic (although I could see Mount move there to allow Puli/Werner more time.) A new GK2 may also be required but that is peanuts. 

The big loser would be Ziyech as I could really see him struggling to make the bench. If not him then Puli, but I reckon he will be safe. Zouma's days also looked numbered as well, although he will still pick up decent money so he is not a major worry. 

Ing’s isn’t good enough to be a top clubs starting CF.

I don’t buy the City links to him either. Not one bit. Seens a lot like the British media putting 1 and 1 together and getting 3 because Aguero is older with question marks about his future and Ing’s is coming up to having 1 year left on his deal after a season where he scored career high goals.

City would of tried to sign him in the summer just gone if they wanted him because it would be fair to assume Gabriel Jesus has hardly convinced regularly in Aguero’s absence although for me, he is proper a better all round player than Ings.

Plus City arent short of 30-35m or whatever it would take to sign Ings who would of had 2 years left on his deal and cost Southampton around 20m initially. 

Would buy the links to Spur’s more as a back up to Kane/to play in tandem with Kane because he suits their sort of recruitment model under Levy more as we have seen with the likes of Rodon, Hojbjerg, Doherty, Sissoko, Alderwereild, Ben Davies, Dele Alli, guys who had some experience playing in English leagues. 

If we don’t get a top CF and buy Ings I would be bitterly disappointed to be very honest. I could see him as a rotation player or a back up. He maybe offers more than Abraham perhaps but he doesnt strike me as the sort of guy to elevate the team any higher than it already is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

World class Strikers are very few right now. Other than Haaland there are only Lewandowski, Kane, Benzema, and Lukaku that it. Still not sold on DCL and Martinez is more like Second Striker.

Edited by Blues Forever
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, King Kante said:

I would hope: 

DCL, Kane (even more impossible than Håland), Kun, Ings. 

Those are the only options imo. Maybe Martinez but I am not sold on him at all. 

Calvert-Lewin still has 4 years left on his contract. He won't come cheap at all, even if Everton are interested in selling him.

Kane is impossible.

Aguero may be possible but he would just be a short term solution.

Ings...nah. He's not a game changing striker that we want to lead the line. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The answer might be we don't get a striker and Tuchel plays with the attacking players we have. Silva is not got that many years left and we need one more quality CB. A bigger problem is reducing the players we have. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel like we need a striker for sure. However, if I we can not get Haaland this summer then we should get an experienced vet like Immobile for cheap.

Then look at what happens in WC 2022, because the World Cup always seems to produce talented up-and-coming players.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Azul said:

I feel like we need a striker for sure. However, if I we can not get Haaland this summer then we should get an experienced vet like Immobile for cheap.

Then look at what happens in WC 2022, because the World Cup always seems to produce talented up-and-coming players.

Worth remembering that the one time Immobile stepped out of Serie A/Italy, he was loaned out after just 1 season and was then subsequently sold.

Immobile also has 4 more years on his current contract. So, he won't come cheap either.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't even think I'd take Aguero. Feels like he's been out for two seasons. 

Anyone been watching Andre Silva? Looks like he's having a great season at Frankfurt. 22 goals and 7 assists in 26 games . Involved in 1.2 goals every game. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Atomiswave said:

He is either city or united bound, especially with FFP binned.

Nah, Dortmund by all accounts want the fee upfront. Utd work on a debt model, so buy all their players with it and spread the money out over the duration of the contracts. Barca and Real also use this method. That is why all three have massive bank debts. 

Utd also have the problem that the Glazer's are currently pumping over $100m into the Tampa Bay Buccaneers at the moment to circumnavigate the NFL cap rules. They are doing this by signing a lot of expensive players with 'signing on fees' with contracts with voidable years rather than giving them a fixed salary for each year. 

This works as follows: 

Tom Brady - $50m signing on fee with something like $9m incentives. They gave him a 5 year contract with 3 voidable years as the geezer is 44 in the Summer (thus meaning they cancel his contract in 2, which is when he wants to retire.)

That consequently makes his cap hit for next year as approximately $11.8m rather than $29.5m (approx.) as this then allows them to sign more high quality players to the team as the NFL have very strict salary rules. They are doing this as their team is in a 'win now' phase where the owners have to pony up right away as they only have 2-3 years before they have to rip the side apart and rebuild (owing to age of players and the salaries.)

This is great news for the Bucs as their team is now an absolute powerhouse. However, it is costing the Glazer's serious coin. Here is the signing on fees they have laid out in the last few weeks (all approx.): 

Brady - $50m 

Suh - $5m

David - $20m 

Gronkowski - $6m 

Barrett - $38m 

Succop - $4m 

Godwin - $15.5m 

That is around $140.5m they have shelled out on signing and they still have other players they have to sign/restructure to get under the cap and have a full squad. So, essentially Utd cannot finance it as all the Glazer's money is going into the Bucs and they cannot buy Håland with debt. 

Barca situation is also bleak. Laporte got £100m+ loan but that need to finance existing debt, Messi's new contract for the first year (his re-signing was a pledge) and they have to buy other players, whilst the ones they have got won't attract much owing to contracts (similar to us with the dregs.) 

Real also have similar issues with their stadium build/debt payments/existing costs etc. 

That consequently only leaves City, Chelsea and PSG as options who can finance it this year. By all accounts Håland won't go to PSG due to the quality of the league (although this could be BS) which then just leave us and City who can do it this year. 

If he stays at Dortmund this year, then 8 clubs could probably buy him as the buyout is low and they can finance it with debt. They are: Munich, Utd, Juve, Barca and Real, along with the 3 that can afford him this year. 

Edited by King Kante
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Jason said:

Worth remembering that the one time Immobile stepped out of Serie A/Italy, he was loaned out after just 1 season and was then subsequently sold.

Immobile also has 4 more years on his current contract. So, he won't come cheap either.

Immobile has grown as a player and if you use the eye test and watch him play for Lazio, then you can see that he is one of the most lethal finishers in the world. (Scored a very good goal as I was typing this).

Having 4 years on your contract does not necessarily mean that the player will be expensive. He's still 31 years old, which means that it would be silly for him to be overpriced. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Azul said:

Having 4 years on your contract does not necessarily mean that the player will be expensive. He's still 31 years old, which means that it would be silly for him to be overpriced. 

But he is one of Lazio's main assets, if not the main one. They have no need to sell and I don't think Immobile is necessarily interested in leaving either.

Moreover as you pointed out, he's already 31 years old and we know the club's stance when it comes to players over 30 years old. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Jason said:

But he is one of Lazio's main assets, if not the main one. They have no need to sell and I don't think Immobile is necessarily interested in leaving either.

Moreover as you pointed out, he's already 31 years old and we know the club's stance when it comes to players over 30 years old. 

True, if he's not available then get someone who's of a similar profile, if Haaland doesn't come of course.

My point is that if we don't get Haaland we shouldn't rush it and sign a long term striker, when in my opinion no one else is really available. 

People shouldn't underestimate the impact the World Cup has on club football. Many stars have put themselves on the map in a WC tournament, then got signed by big clubs afterwards. Think of Ozil, Ramires, Mascherano, Khedira, Tevez, Cavani, Sanchez etc. There might be a new guy on the block, who's touted to be the next world class striker next summer. We should be patient and keep that in mind to be honest.

Edited by Azul
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Magic Lamps said:

Love that. Every country should make a stand here. WC in Qatar began with corruption, continues with bloodshed.

What's going on in Qatar is horrible. It's literally modern slavery. However I don't believe that these football organizations speak up because of their moral compass. 

They're not consistent when it comes to the World Cup in Russia, or the Uyghur concentration camps in China. Why? It's all business for them that's why.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Azul said:

My point is that if we don't get Haaland we shouldn't rush it and sign a long term striker, when in my opinion no one else is really available. 

I think we want Haaland because it is one in the lifetime chance. Otherwise, if we cannot get him, I would not be surprised if we sell Tammy or Giroud leave without new guy coming in. One of them stays plus Kai and Timo can play there.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Azul said:

True, if he's not available then get someone who's of a similar profile, if Haaland doesn't come of course.

My point is that if we don't get Haaland we shouldn't rush it and sign a long term striker, when in my opinion no one else is really available. 

People shouldn't underestimate the impact the World Cup has on club football. Many stars have put themselves on the map in a WC tournament, then got signed by big clubs afterwards. Think of Ozil, Ramires, Mascherano, Khedira, Tevez, Cavani, Sanchez etc. There might be a new guy on the block, who's touted to be the next world class striker next summer. We should be patient and keep that in mind to be honest.

I think if we don't get Haaland, we might just stick with what we have and then just pray the current crop of attacking players will come good next season. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...