Man City would be better off spending the £150 million that Messi will cost over three years on Haaland’s transfer fee. If it’s about product on the field.
That's fair, but I find it hard to believe it wouldn't be more about money it can make them via both messi in MCFC and then in NYCFC, the kit sales, the attendance booms, etc. But agreed Haaland longterm would be the better on field decision, can we get them to send him to us in 10 years? lolMan City would be better off spending the £150 million that Messi will cost over three years on Haaland’s transfer fee. If it’s about product on the field.
Given a choice between Haaland and Messi, I would also go Haaland, but I think its a false choice.
Messi will be 34 when the next Premier League season begins. That's not worth a huge investment.
However, he is still performing at a very high level. He has 19 goals and 8 assists in 24 league games, and 4 goals and 2 assists in 5 Champions League games. There's not a team in the world he couldn't go to and improve. The question is how long that remains the case.
Also, with Messi there is an additional benefit to some clubs, but not all. The hype factor. His arrival anywhere will be huge and drive tremendous press and fan interest. Some clubs need that a lot more than others. Man City needs it very little. You have to wonder if another Club wanting to step up to a higher level of world recognition will step up and pay him more.