Indeed. 0% risk.Timing is all wrong and the fee is a wild guess. No chance this window.
Typical Sunday rumour.
Indeed. 0% risk.Timing is all wrong and the fee is a wild guess. No chance this window.
Given Fergie is currently out injured, I am not sure how buying him as cover for the start of the season makes much sense?I decided to read this article. The evidence put forward for the headline is a follows:
1. Man Utd might be looking for a new striker because Højlund is probably out injured unitl September.
2. Dan Ashworth helped sign Ferguson before so probably wants to sign him again.
3. Chelsea like signing Brighton players so probably want to sign Ferguson too at some point.
4. So….. Man Utd must sign him quickly for ‘over’ £50m (which is what he is probably worth after a season blighted by injury) before Chelsea get him.
That’s the logic behind the article.
The article is astonishingly badly written. No surprise given the source but very disappointing that the BBC chose to parrot something so clearly BS, even if it’s only in their gossip section.Given Fergie is currently out injured, I am not sure how buying him as cover for the start of the season makes much sense?
Agreed.Indeed. 0% risk.
Typical Sunday rumour.
Exactly. As per my post #57, what is the price that might tempt TB to cash in and let somebody else take the risk that he recovers to his full ability that we saw earlier on? After all, every player, in every team, has a price. FWIW, I don't think £50M would be enough (and equally, that £150M is simply cloud-cuckoo land).Agreed.
However IF there is any truth to the rumour, and IF the figure mentioned is anything like true, (let's face it Chelsea are known for spending silly money), then might not a deal be tempting?
19 year olds are notoriously inconsistent and, although injured for some of the time, we saw we saw very little of him last season. If that £50m, or the majority of it could be reinvested back into the team, then there may be a tendency to just take the money and run.
I'm not saying that l favour the club doing that, I'm simply adding another dimension to the debate.
I know the writer. A nice guy, he always strikes me as a bit like a minor character from Minder. He lives in Bristol and has absolutely no inside track on the Albion. Nothing to see here.I decided to read this article. The evidence put forward for the headline is a follows:
1. Man Utd might be looking for a new striker because Højlund is probably out injured unitl September.
2. Dan Ashworth helped sign Ferguson before so probably wants to sign him again.
3. Chelsea like signing Brighton players so probably want to sign Ferguson too at some point.
4. So….. Man Utd must sign him quickly for ‘over’ £50m (which is what he is probably worth after a season blighted by injury) before Chelsea get him.
That’s the logic behind the article.
Then there is also the Manure rumour . . .It's alright, they've just spunked £50m on Pedro Neto (7 year deal). They won't be buying any more players for a shit ton of money during this window.
No way. Definitely not.
It is unclear if he would be available, even on loan.