sterling

Here is the place to talk about all things city and football!

Re: sterling

Postby Wonderwall » Mon Jun 29, 2015 8:33 am

This was my original quote from a while ago, I still stand by this stance. Stop all the HG nonsense and improve our squad, we will have a reduced umber but we will have quality in all areas. If Sterling is not for sale for £40m then walk away.

Wonderwall wrote:You can only select a squad of 17 for each game, only 11 can be selected to start. If we spend that money on upgrading our current first 17 to better than what we had, we would be OK if we didnt get decimated by injuries. IMO from what I have seen from our academy, we have the resources to fill in the odd time when required without it hindering us. Use the kids in the League cup to reduce the number of games and go with a mix in the FA Cup. Prioritise the league then the Champions league and go with a full squad of 19 and let the home grown quota fill over time organically. I dont want to line Liverpools pockets with stupid money, let them fuck up and let sterling rot with them.
User avatar
Wonderwall
Colin Bell's Football Brain
 
Posts: 28906
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2005 2:58 pm
Location: Sale
Supporter of: Gods own team

Re: sterling

Postby Foreverinbluedreams » Mon Jun 29, 2015 8:54 am

Wonderwall wrote:This was my original quote from a while ago, I still stand by this stance. Stop all the HG nonsense and improve our squad, we will have a reduced umber but we will have quality in all areas. If Sterling is not for sale for £40m then walk away.

Wonderwall wrote:You can only select a squad of 17 for each game, only 11 can be selected to start. If we spend that money on upgrading our current first 17 to better than what we had, we would be OK if we didnt get decimated by injuries. IMO from what I have seen from our academy, we have the resources to fill in the odd time when required without it hindering us. Use the kids in the League cup to reduce the number of games and go with a mix in the FA Cup. Prioritise the league then the Champions league and go with a full squad of 19 and let the home grown quota fill over time organically. I dont want to line Liverpools pockets with stupid money, let them fuck up and let sterling rot with them.


Why give our rivals that advantage over us WW? You're advocating going into the season with a squad of 19 senior players whilst our rivals have squads of 23-25 senior players, that just doesn't make sense to me.
Foreverinbluedreams
Denis Law's Backheel
 
Posts: 9224
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 8:34 pm
Supporter of: Euthanasia

Re: sterling

Postby Ted Hughes » Mon Jun 29, 2015 9:46 am

Pretty Boy Lee wrote:Ted I'm not quoting you, because as usual you write 56 fucking paragraphs to say one thing.


You have said this twice now, but both of your replies to me, are more long winded than my original post which you replied to, so straight away we are off to a completely unecessary attitude and incorrect assumption here.

Pretty Boy Lee wrote: Fine lets play it your way, sterling, keep the money or homegrown squad players?
NO

Pretty Boy Lee wrote:Wrong again, who says we can't blow it on a superstar?
NOT ME


Pretty Boy Lee wrote:Why do you insist on knowing everything? Your 3 scenarios are not, and never will be our only options. Not that I expet you'll ever admit to being wrong in anything. Tell me again how what you wrote is so vastly different to my interpretation?
Ted Hughes wrote:
Don't start bullshitting about signing fucking world class players for that price, because for one, we can't unless they are available & two, we are trying to.

And guess what; if/when we sign them, we have a bunch of homegrown gaps in the squad & we have the choice of leaving holes in the squad, buying cheap players, or paying the money for people like Sterling.

That's the choice. The rest, is fucking shite, muddying the debate.


Pretty Boy Lee wrote:T Homegrown squad players to me means cheap or kids as the decent homegrown cost money. If you meant old journeymen then I apologize


Fabien Delph, Clyne, Ings, Charlie Austin, Grealish, etc etc etc etc etc.


Pretty Boy Lee wrote:And sterling is self explanatory so I didn't get that wrong.


Ted Hughes wrote:
And guess what; if/when we sign them, we have a bunch of homegrown gaps in the squad & we have the choice of leaving holes in the squad, buying cheap players, or paying the money for people like Sterling.

Ross Barklay, John Stones, Walcott, Wilshire, Oxlade Chamberlain etc etc etc etc etc.

Pretty Boy Lee wrote:Now here to why you're wrong anyway. Is there anyone abroad that we could get for 50m? Maybe not everyone comes under this price anymore, but I'd estimate oh about 99% of footballers could be attained for this sum.


Indeed, DeBruyne hopefully will sign in the near future & as I posted regarding signing such players:

Ted Hughes wrote:
Don't start bullshitting about signing fucking world class players for that price, because for one, we can't unless they are available & two, we are trying to.

And guess what; if/when we sign them, we have a bunch of homegrown gaps in the squad

Pretty Boy Lee wrote: you sterling, homegrown squad or keep the money option is simply a stupid opinion, repeated, shouted and sworn about to try and bully through a misguided post.


Apart from it's not actually my opinion, & I'm pretty sure you are the only fuckwit on this site who doesn't understand English well enough to realise it.

Congratulations, you have just outdone Rag Hater & Mancio, in making me waste more effort explaining a simple post than I have ever had to do previously.
Last edited by Ted Hughes on Mon Jun 29, 2015 10:00 am, edited 1 time in total.
The pissartist formerly known as Ted

VIVA EL CITY !!!

Some take the bible for what it's worth.. when they say that the rags shall inherit the Earth...
Well I heard that the Sheikh... bought Carlos Tevez this week...& you fuckers aint gettin' nothin..
Ted Hughes
Donated to the site
Donated to the site
Colin Bell's Football Brain
 
Posts: 28488
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 4:28 pm
Supporter of: Bill Turnbull
My favourite player is: Bill Turnbull

Re: sterling

Postby Ted Hughes » Mon Jun 29, 2015 9:58 am

Foreverinbluedreams wrote:
Wonderwall wrote:This was my original quote from a while ago, I still stand by this stance. Stop all the HG nonsense and improve our squad, we will have a reduced umber but we will have quality in all areas. If Sterling is not for sale for £40m then walk away.

Wonderwall wrote:You can only select a squad of 17 for each game, only 11 can be selected to start. If we spend that money on upgrading our current first 17 to better than what we had, we would be OK if we didnt get decimated by injuries. IMO from what I have seen from our academy, we have the resources to fill in the odd time when required without it hindering us. Use the kids in the League cup to reduce the number of games and go with a mix in the FA Cup. Prioritise the league then the Champions league and go with a full squad of 19 and let the home grown quota fill over time organically. I dont want to line Liverpools pockets with stupid money, let them fuck up and let sterling rot with them.


Why give our rivals that advantage over us WW? You're advocating going into the season with a squad of 19 senior players whilst our rivals have squads of 23-25 senior players, that just doesn't make sense to me.


Ahh, people debating the issue sensibly.

Thank fuck.

I think it's pretty clear that managers want a full squad, whatever opinions may be on here

I was advocating last season, that we got the kids involved as soon as possible, not mainly to get in the team then, but to see if anty took to Premier League football. Then if any did, they could have saved us money on homegrown players this season. But we didn't even give them five minutes.

So now, even if we go out & spend 70 mil on Pogba, & 50 mil on De Bruyne, we are left with 17 players plus Hart & Clichy, Denayer, Lopes & a bunch of totally untried kids. Bad planning from last season imo.

We have space for two more & I'm pretty sure we will try to fill both places. So it's just a matter of whether we go for someone LIKE Sterling, or Ross Barkley, or both, or we go for Delphs & Clynes.

I'm happy with Sterling personally, but I wish we'd tried our kids in that position first.
The pissartist formerly known as Ted

VIVA EL CITY !!!

Some take the bible for what it's worth.. when they say that the rags shall inherit the Earth...
Well I heard that the Sheikh... bought Carlos Tevez this week...& you fuckers aint gettin' nothin..
Ted Hughes
Donated to the site
Donated to the site
Colin Bell's Football Brain
 
Posts: 28488
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 4:28 pm
Supporter of: Bill Turnbull
My favourite player is: Bill Turnbull

Re: sterling

Postby Wonderwall » Mon Jun 29, 2015 9:58 am

Foreverinbluedreams wrote:
Wonderwall wrote:This was my original quote from a while ago, I still stand by this stance. Stop all the HG nonsense and improve our squad, we will have a reduced umber but we will have quality in all areas. If Sterling is not for sale for £40m then walk away.

Wonderwall wrote:You can only select a squad of 17 for each game, only 11 can be selected to start. If we spend that money on upgrading our current first 17 to better than what we had, we would be OK if we didnt get decimated by injuries. IMO from what I have seen from our academy, we have the resources to fill in the odd time when required without it hindering us. Use the kids in the League cup to reduce the number of games and go with a mix in the FA Cup. Prioritise the league then the Champions league and go with a full squad of 19 and let the home grown quota fill over time organically. I dont want to line Liverpools pockets with stupid money, let them fuck up and let sterling rot with them.


Why give our rivals that advantage over us WW? You're advocating going into the season with a squad of 19 senior players whilst our rivals have squads of 23-25 senior players, that just doesn't make sense to me.


I am making a case for quality instead of quantity.

Chelsea used a total of 26 players in the 2014/15 campaign.
That figure was rapidly increased toward the end of the season when we saw Ruben Loftus-Cheek, Izzy Brown and Andreas Christensen given their Premier League debuts. Before that, Nathan Ake and Dominic Solanke had also featured in the cup games—Solanke making his Champions League debut despite barely being 17 years old. Outside of them, Andre Schurrle and Mohamed Salah were also present for Jose Mourinho's side. As for Schurrle and Salah, both left the club in January. Schurrle joined Wolfsburg, while Salah was shipped out on loan to Fiorentina.

I have names 7 players above from the 26 used by chelsea last season, they were bit part players which meant Chelsea had a core of 19 players continually used to win the double
User avatar
Wonderwall
Colin Bell's Football Brain
 
Posts: 28906
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2005 2:58 pm
Location: Sale
Supporter of: Gods own team

Re: sterling

Postby Foreverinbluedreams » Mon Jun 29, 2015 10:01 am

Wonderwall wrote:
Foreverinbluedreams wrote:
Wonderwall wrote:This was my original quote from a while ago, I still stand by this stance. Stop all the HG nonsense and improve our squad, we will have a reduced umber but we will have quality in all areas. If Sterling is not for sale for £40m then walk away.

Wonderwall wrote:You can only select a squad of 17 for each game, only 11 can be selected to start. If we spend that money on upgrading our current first 17 to better than what we had, we would be OK if we didnt get decimated by injuries. IMO from what I have seen from our academy, we have the resources to fill in the odd time when required without it hindering us. Use the kids in the League cup to reduce the number of games and go with a mix in the FA Cup. Prioritise the league then the Champions league and go with a full squad of 19 and let the home grown quota fill over time organically. I dont want to line Liverpools pockets with stupid money, let them fuck up and let sterling rot with them.


Why give our rivals that advantage over us WW? You're advocating going into the season with a squad of 19 senior players whilst our rivals have squads of 23-25 senior players, that just doesn't make sense to me.


I am making a case for quality instead of quantity.

Chelsea used a total of 26 players in the 2014/15 campaign.
That figure was rapidly increased toward the end of the season when we saw Ruben Loftus-Cheek, Izzy Brown and Andreas Christensen given their Premier League debuts. Before that, Nathan Ake and Dominic Solanke had also featured in the cup games—Solanke making his Champions League debut despite barely being 17 years old. Outside of them, Andre Schurrle and Mohamed Salah were also present for Jose Mourinho's side. As for Schurrle and Salah, both left the club in January. Schurrle joined Wolfsburg, while Salah was shipped out on loan to Fiorentina.

I have names 7 players above from the 26 used by chelsea last season, they were bit part players which meant Chelsea had a core of 19 players continually used to win the double


They were EXTREMELY lucky with injuries though.
Foreverinbluedreams
Denis Law's Backheel
 
Posts: 9224
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 8:34 pm
Supporter of: Euthanasia

Re: sterling

Postby Ted Hughes » Mon Jun 29, 2015 10:11 am

Wonderwall wrote:
Foreverinbluedreams wrote:
Wonderwall wrote:This was my original quote from a while ago, I still stand by this stance. Stop all the HG nonsense and improve our squad, we will have a reduced umber but we will have quality in all areas. If Sterling is not for sale for £40m then walk away.

Wonderwall wrote:You can only select a squad of 17 for each game, only 11 can be selected to start. If we spend that money on upgrading our current first 17 to better than what we had, we would be OK if we didnt get decimated by injuries. IMO from what I have seen from our academy, we have the resources to fill in the odd time when required without it hindering us. Use the kids in the League cup to reduce the number of games and go with a mix in the FA Cup. Prioritise the league then the Champions league and go with a full squad of 19 and let the home grown quota fill over time organically. I dont want to line Liverpools pockets with stupid money, let them fuck up and let sterling rot with them.


Why give our rivals that advantage over us WW? You're advocating going into the season with a squad of 19 senior players whilst our rivals have squads of 23-25 senior players, that just doesn't make sense to me.


I am making a case for quality instead of quantity.

Chelsea used a total of 26 players in the 2014/15 campaign.
That figure was rapidly increased toward the end of the season when we saw Ruben Loftus-Cheek, Izzy Brown and Andreas Christensen given their Premier League debuts. Before that, Nathan Ake and Dominic Solanke had also featured in the cup games—Solanke making his Champions League debut despite barely being 17 years old. Outside of them, Andre Schurrle and Mohamed Salah were also present for Jose Mourinho's side. As for Schurrle and Salah, both left the club in January. Schurrle joined Wolfsburg, while Salah was shipped out on loan to Fiorentina.

I have names 7 players above from the 26 used by chelsea last season, they were bit part players which meant Chelsea had a core of 19 players continually used to win the double


They signed Cudrado to replace one of them though.
The pissartist formerly known as Ted

VIVA EL CITY !!!

Some take the bible for what it's worth.. when they say that the rags shall inherit the Earth...
Well I heard that the Sheikh... bought Carlos Tevez this week...& you fuckers aint gettin' nothin..
Ted Hughes
Donated to the site
Donated to the site
Colin Bell's Football Brain
 
Posts: 28488
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 4:28 pm
Supporter of: Bill Turnbull
My favourite player is: Bill Turnbull

Re: sterling

Postby clippo22 » Mon Jun 29, 2015 10:12 am

Wonderwall wrote:
Foreverinbluedreams wrote:
Wonderwall wrote:This was my original quote from a while ago, I still stand by this stance. Stop all the HG nonsense and improve our squad, we will have a reduced umber but we will have quality in all areas. If Sterling is not for sale for £40m then walk away.

Wonderwall wrote:You can only select a squad of 17 for each game, only 11 can be selected to start. If we spend that money on upgrading our current first 17 to better than what we had, we would be OK if we didnt get decimated by injuries. IMO from what I have seen from our academy, we have the resources to fill in the odd time when required without it hindering us. Use the kids in the League cup to reduce the number of games and go with a mix in the FA Cup. Prioritise the league then the Champions league and go with a full squad of 19 and let the home grown quota fill over time organically. I dont want to line Liverpools pockets with stupid money, let them fuck up and let sterling rot with them.


Why give our rivals that advantage over us WW? You're advocating going into the season with a squad of 19 senior players whilst our rivals have squads of 23-25 senior players, that just doesn't make sense to me.


I am making a case for quality instead of quantity.

Chelsea used a total of 26 players in the 2014/15 campaign.
That figure was rapidly increased toward the end of the season when we saw Ruben Loftus-Cheek, Izzy Brown and Andreas Christensen given their Premier League debuts. Before that, Nathan Ake and Dominic Solanke had also featured in the cup games—Solanke making his Champions League debut despite barely being 17 years old. Outside of them, Andre Schurrle and Mohamed Salah were also present for Jose Mourinho's side. As for Schurrle and Salah, both left the club in January. Schurrle joined Wolfsburg, while Salah was shipped out on loan to Fiorentina.

I have names 7 players above from the 26 used by chelsea last season, they were bit part players which meant Chelsea had a core of 19 players continually used to win the double


But did that Chelsea team not run out of steam towards the end of the season? Performances were much poorer and they were dumped out of the champs league. If it wasn't for the lack of anyone pushing them to the end would they have been champions?

Also with a smaller squad we will have the problem of automatic starters again. I think more competition for places will result in better performances. A squad of 19, say 3 are injured, 1 is willy, that leaves 4 'core squad' players fighting to get into the starting 11. Means a lot of players have automatic starting places. And I don't wanna see a half arsed yaya jogging about again!
clippo22
Darius Vassell's Composure
 
Posts: 344
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 8:53 am
Location: Lincoln
Supporter of: City!!!
My favourite player is: David Silva

Re: sterling

Postby Ted Hughes » Mon Jun 29, 2015 10:15 am

clippo22 wrote:
Wonderwall wrote:
Foreverinbluedreams wrote:
Wonderwall wrote:This was my original quote from a while ago, I still stand by this stance. Stop all the HG nonsense and improve our squad, we will have a reduced umber but we will have quality in all areas. If Sterling is not for sale for £40m then walk away.

Wonderwall wrote:You can only select a squad of 17 for each game, only 11 can be selected to start. If we spend that money on upgrading our current first 17 to better than what we had, we would be OK if we didnt get decimated by injuries. IMO from what I have seen from our academy, we have the resources to fill in the odd time when required without it hindering us. Use the kids in the League cup to reduce the number of games and go with a mix in the FA Cup. Prioritise the league then the Champions league and go with a full squad of 19 and let the home grown quota fill over time organically. I dont want to line Liverpools pockets with stupid money, let them fuck up and let sterling rot with them.


Why give our rivals that advantage over us WW? You're advocating going into the season with a squad of 19 senior players whilst our rivals have squads of 23-25 senior players, that just doesn't make sense to me.


I am making a case for quality instead of quantity.

Chelsea used a total of 26 players in the 2014/15 campaign.
That figure was rapidly increased toward the end of the season when we saw Ruben Loftus-Cheek, Izzy Brown and Andreas Christensen given their Premier League debuts. Before that, Nathan Ake and Dominic Solanke had also featured in the cup games—Solanke making his Champions League debut despite barely being 17 years old. Outside of them, Andre Schurrle and Mohamed Salah were also present for Jose Mourinho's side. As for Schurrle and Salah, both left the club in January. Schurrle joined Wolfsburg, while Salah was shipped out on loan to Fiorentina.

I have names 7 players above from the 26 used by chelsea last season, they were bit part players which meant Chelsea had a core of 19 players continually used to win the double


But did that Chelsea team not run out of steam towards the end of the season? Performances were much poorer and they were dumped out of the champs league. If it wasn't for the lack of anyone pushing them to the end would they have been champions?

Also with a smaller squad we will have the problem of automatic starters again. I think more competition for places will result in better performances. A squad of 19, say 3 are injured, 1 is willy, that leaves 4 'core squad' players fighting to get into the starting 11. Means a lot of players have automatic starting places. And I don't wanna see a half arsed yaya jogging about again!


Chelsea would sign Sterling. They can't quite manage it.
The pissartist formerly known as Ted

VIVA EL CITY !!!

Some take the bible for what it's worth.. when they say that the rags shall inherit the Earth...
Well I heard that the Sheikh... bought Carlos Tevez this week...& you fuckers aint gettin' nothin..
Ted Hughes
Donated to the site
Donated to the site
Colin Bell's Football Brain
 
Posts: 28488
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 4:28 pm
Supporter of: Bill Turnbull
My favourite player is: Bill Turnbull

Re: sterling

Postby Piccsnumberoneblue » Mon Jun 29, 2015 10:17 am

Ted Hughes wrote:
Foreverinbluedreams wrote:
Wonderwall wrote:This was my original quote from a while ago, I still stand by this stance. Stop all the HG nonsense and improve our squad, we will have a reduced umber but we will have quality in all areas. If Sterling is not for sale for £40m then walk away.

Wonderwall wrote:You can only select a squad of 17 for each game, only 11 can be selected to start. If we spend that money on upgrading our current first 17 to better than what we had, we would be OK if we didnt get decimated by injuries. IMO from what I have seen from our academy, we have the resources to fill in the odd time when required without it hindering us. Use the kids in the League cup to reduce the number of games and go with a mix in the FA Cup. Prioritise the league then the Champions league and go with a full squad of 19 and let the home grown quota fill over time organically. I dont want to line Liverpools pockets with stupid money, let them fuck up and let sterling rot with them.


Why give our rivals that advantage over us WW? You're advocating going into the season with a squad of 19 senior players whilst our rivals have squads of 23-25 senior players, that just doesn't make sense to me.


Ahh, people debating the issue sensibly.

Thank fuck.

I think it's pretty clear that managers want a full squad, whatever opinions may be on here

I was advocating last season, that we got the kids involved as soon as possible, not mainly to get in the team then, but to see if anty took to Premier League football. Then if any did, they could have saved us money on homegrown players this season. But we didn't even give them five minutes.

So now, even if we go out & spend 70 mil on Pogba, & 50 mil on De Bruyne, we are left with 17 players plus Hart & Clichy, Denayer, Lopes & a bunch of totally untried kids. Bad planning from last season imo.

We have space for two more & I'm pretty sure we will try to fill both places. So it's just a matter of whether we go for someone LIKE Sterling, or Ross Barkley, or both, or we go for Delphs & Clynes.

I'm happy with Sterling personally, but I wish we'd tried our kids in that position first.


Perhaps playing a youth team player too early would have left us with an unfair opinion of him.
Although It crosses my mind,that the top top players often break into the first team by seventeen or eighteen.
City and sniffing knickers.
Come on Blues.
Piccsnumberoneblue
Donated to the site
Donated to the site
Pablo Zabaleta's Manc Accent
 
Posts: 13353
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:09 pm
Location: Weirdosville.
Supporter of: Us

Re: sterling

Postby Ted Hughes » Mon Jun 29, 2015 10:28 am

Piccsnumberoneblue wrote:
Ted Hughes wrote:
Foreverinbluedreams wrote:
Wonderwall wrote:This was my original quote from a while ago, I still stand by this stance. Stop all the HG nonsense and improve our squad, we will have a reduced umber but we will have quality in all areas. If Sterling is not for sale for £40m then walk away.

Wonderwall wrote:You can only select a squad of 17 for each game, only 11 can be selected to start. If we spend that money on upgrading our current first 17 to better than what we had, we would be OK if we didnt get decimated by injuries. IMO from what I have seen from our academy, we have the resources to fill in the odd time when required without it hindering us. Use the kids in the League cup to reduce the number of games and go with a mix in the FA Cup. Prioritise the league then the Champions league and go with a full squad of 19 and let the home grown quota fill over time organically. I dont want to line Liverpools pockets with stupid money, let them fuck up and let sterling rot with them.


Why give our rivals that advantage over us WW? You're advocating going into the season with a squad of 19 senior players whilst our rivals have squads of 23-25 senior players, that just doesn't make sense to me.


Ahh, people debating the issue sensibly.

Thank fuck.

I think it's pretty clear that managers want a full squad, whatever opinions may be on here

I was advocating last season, that we got the kids involved as soon as possible, not mainly to get in the team then, but to see if anty took to Premier League football. Then if any did, they could have saved us money on homegrown players this season. But we didn't even give them five minutes.

So now, even if we go out & spend 70 mil on Pogba, & 50 mil on De Bruyne, we are left with 17 players plus Hart & Clichy, Denayer, Lopes & a bunch of totally untried kids. Bad planning from last season imo.

We have space for two more & I'm pretty sure we will try to fill both places. So it's just a matter of whether we go for someone LIKE Sterling, or Ross Barkley, or both, or we go for Delphs & Clynes.

I'm happy with Sterling personally, but I wish we'd tried our kids in that position first.


Perhaps playing a youth team player too early would have left us with an unfair opinion of him.
Although It crosses my mind,that the top top players often break into the first team by seventeen or eighteen.


Tbh I don't think it matters if people are left with an unfair opinion (they are already doing that in droves just after watching a few highlights of the U18s v Chelsea anyway, writing players off as well as the style of play). In my experience of following kids through the system, there are usually one or two who, when given a chance, take a liking to first team football.

Sometimes it's not the best one who gets the job first, but sometimes the 'star' just does the business & off he goes. Giggs did that at the swamp, but Beckham etc didn't all succeed; Spiceboy was tried, then went out on loan.

Ferguson always found kids to fill a few squad places. Some turned out later to be stars or regulars, others were used for a short term job then sold. But they will have saved a fortune.

Ironically, he decided (rightly imo) that Pogba wasn't ready & lost out on 70 mil!
The pissartist formerly known as Ted

VIVA EL CITY !!!

Some take the bible for what it's worth.. when they say that the rags shall inherit the Earth...
Well I heard that the Sheikh... bought Carlos Tevez this week...& you fuckers aint gettin' nothin..
Ted Hughes
Donated to the site
Donated to the site
Colin Bell's Football Brain
 
Posts: 28488
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 4:28 pm
Supporter of: Bill Turnbull
My favourite player is: Bill Turnbull

Re: sterling

Postby Wonderwall » Mon Jun 29, 2015 10:36 am

Ted Hughes wrote:
Wonderwall wrote:
Foreverinbluedreams wrote:
Wonderwall wrote:This was my original quote from a while ago, I still stand by this stance. Stop all the HG nonsense and improve our squad, we will have a reduced umber but we will have quality in all areas. If Sterling is not for sale for £40m then walk away.

Wonderwall wrote:You can only select a squad of 17 for each game, only 11 can be selected to start. If we spend that money on upgrading our current first 17 to better than what we had, we would be OK if we didnt get decimated by injuries. IMO from what I have seen from our academy, we have the resources to fill in the odd time when required without it hindering us. Use the kids in the League cup to reduce the number of games and go with a mix in the FA Cup. Prioritise the league then the Champions league and go with a full squad of 19 and let the home grown quota fill over time organically. I dont want to line Liverpools pockets with stupid money, let them fuck up and let sterling rot with them.


Why give our rivals that advantage over us WW? You're advocating going into the season with a squad of 19 senior players whilst our rivals have squads of 23-25 senior players, that just doesn't make sense to me.


I am making a case for quality instead of quantity.

Chelsea used a total of 26 players in the 2014/15 campaign.
That figure was rapidly increased toward the end of the season when we saw Ruben Loftus-Cheek, Izzy Brown and Andreas Christensen given their Premier League debuts. Before that, Nathan Ake and Dominic Solanke had also featured in the cup games—Solanke making his Champions League debut despite barely being 17 years old. Outside of them, Andre Schurrle and Mohamed Salah were also present for Jose Mourinho's side. As for Schurrle and Salah, both left the club in January. Schurrle joined Wolfsburg, while Salah was shipped out on loan to Fiorentina.

I have names 7 players above from the 26 used by chelsea last season, they were bit part players which meant Chelsea had a core of 19 players continually used to win the double


They signed Cudrado to replace one of them though.


yes they did and he is included in the stated 26 players used. Chelsea had a core of 15 players they used all season and yes, they were very lucky with injuries. However, the back 4 was solid and rarely changed, Azpilicueta and Filipe Luis were the ones who rotated at LB but it was Azpilicueta who had the most appearances.

We need quality and not space fillers
User avatar
Wonderwall
Colin Bell's Football Brain
 
Posts: 28906
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2005 2:58 pm
Location: Sale
Supporter of: Gods own team

Re: sterling

Postby Foreverinbluedreams » Mon Jun 29, 2015 10:51 am

"We need quality and not space fillers"

We need both hence Sterling.
Foreverinbluedreams
Denis Law's Backheel
 
Posts: 9224
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 8:34 pm
Supporter of: Euthanasia

Re: sterling

Postby iwasthere2012 » Mon Jun 29, 2015 10:55 am

I think the argument for this year's transfer policy has been fairly simple all along. It just depends on how much we are willing to spend.
We've all argued pretty much the same things for a few months now.
I've favoured what WW has put forward all along. It is not for everyone, I know, but I have consistently said that I think you pay too much for someone like Sterling just because he's home grown. It's a stupid rule and in my opinion is part of your problem with the English team. It's very difficult for any young talent in England not to end up with an over inflated opinion of themselves, to go along with their over inflated price tag.
I would prefer to spend big on 3-4 absolute first team improvements(no matter where they are from), ship out 4-6 of the current squad and along with Denayer, Lopes and Iheanacho, take the best of the youngsters into the squad to fill the places.
However, I also think Ted is right. Some of these should have been tried last year. We are very slow to introduce the academy players, but I think this year could be a watershed year. I really want the three lads mentioned to succeed, because I think it will pave the way for the rest.
I also think Ted is right in his assessment of the Sterling transfer situation. I'd walk away, as WW has intimated also, but I understand that it would be a compromise to add one HG of his ability at his price and pretty much go along with the rest of the scenario that WW (and myself) has outlined. It would be less of a risk to the season to take him, provided we also get at least one other of our main targets. Hopefully both (haven't given up on the tingling left ball, hoping it's not just an itch).
Image
iwasthere2012
Denis Law's Backheel
 
Posts: 9845
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2014 4:14 pm
Location: Dublin
Supporter of: Manchester City
My favourite player is: David Silva (was PabZab)

Re: sterling

Postby Foreverinbluedreams » Mon Jun 29, 2015 11:01 am

To those that believe we're after Sterling just because he's homegrown can you tell me do you believe that he wouldn't get into our side based on quality alone? Forget price, just ask yourself would he be a better option than Navas or Nasri? For me the answer is a resounding yes, that is why I believe we should sign him first and foremost, the fact that he part solves our homegrown problem is a bonus and is why we're seemingly willing to pay the premium.
Foreverinbluedreams
Denis Law's Backheel
 
Posts: 9224
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 8:34 pm
Supporter of: Euthanasia

Re: sterling

Postby Wonderwall » Mon Jun 29, 2015 11:14 am

Foreverinbluedreams wrote:To those that believe we're after Sterling just because he's homegrown can you tell me do you believe that he wouldn't get into our side based on quality alone? Forget price, just ask yourself would he be a better option than Navas or Nasri? For me the answer is a resounding yes, that is why I believe we should sign him first and foremost, the fact that he part solves our homegrown problem is a bonus and is why we're seemingly willing to pay the premium.


I think you can get better than sterling for £50m. I agree he ticks all the boxes and would compete for the first 11, but we are being robbed and its that principal that would lead me to walk away. Would you spend £50m on Barkley? Same kind of situation, I know I wouldnt.
User avatar
Wonderwall
Colin Bell's Football Brain
 
Posts: 28906
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2005 2:58 pm
Location: Sale
Supporter of: Gods own team

Re: sterling

Postby iwasthere2012 » Mon Jun 29, 2015 11:18 am

Wonderwall wrote:
Foreverinbluedreams wrote:To those that believe we're after Sterling just because he's homegrown can you tell me do you believe that he wouldn't get into our side based on quality alone? Forget price, just ask yourself would he be a better option than Navas or Nasri? For me the answer is a resounding yes, that is why I believe we should sign him first and foremost, the fact that he part solves our homegrown problem is a bonus and is why we're seemingly willing to pay the premium.


I think you can get better than sterling for £50m. I agree he ticks all the boxes and would compete for the first 11, but we are being robbed and its that principal that would lead me to walk away. Would you spend £50m on Barkley? Same kind of situation, I know I wouldnt.


I think we would be in for him, but perhaps not at that price. Yes I do think he will improve the team. Like WW says, he ticks all the boxes and that is why we are persisting.
Image
iwasthere2012
Denis Law's Backheel
 
Posts: 9845
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2014 4:14 pm
Location: Dublin
Supporter of: Manchester City
My favourite player is: David Silva (was PabZab)

Re: sterling

Postby Foreverinbluedreams » Mon Jun 29, 2015 11:20 am

Wonderwall wrote:
Foreverinbluedreams wrote:To those that believe we're after Sterling just because he's homegrown can you tell me do you believe that he wouldn't get into our side based on quality alone? Forget price, just ask yourself would he be a better option than Navas or Nasri? For me the answer is a resounding yes, that is why I believe we should sign him first and foremost, the fact that he part solves our homegrown problem is a bonus and is why we're seemingly willing to pay the premium.


I think you can get better than sterling for £50m. I agree he ticks all the boxes and would compete for the first 11, but we are being robbed and its that principal that would lead me to walk away. Would you spend £50m on Barkley? Same kind of situation, I know I wouldnt.


To be perfectly honest I really couldn't care less what we spend. What matters is improving the team/squad. Trophies aren't given out for the shrewdest operators in the transfer market so it's really irrelevant what monies exchange hands when it comes down to it.

As for Barkley, at this moment I don't see where he would improve us, so no I wouldn't go for him.
Foreverinbluedreams
Denis Law's Backheel
 
Posts: 9224
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 8:34 pm
Supporter of: Euthanasia

Re: sterling

Postby BoltFromTheBlue » Mon Jun 29, 2015 11:38 am

I'd much rather take Bale than Sterling if available, but like I said earlier, Sterling hasn't shown what he can do fully, he plays with a granny shagger for England, and what for Liverpool? He's never really had great service, or players around him.
Tick tock tick tock.
User avatar
BoltFromTheBlue
Richard Dunne's Own Goals
 
Posts: 962
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2008 1:42 pm
Location: East Stand.
Supporter of: MCFC
My favourite player is: Sergio Aguero

Re: sterling

Postby Hazy2 » Mon Jun 29, 2015 11:47 am

I would drop the Sterling Pursuit for Bale in a blink of an eye. No brainer World Class game changer for a player who could be a dud as well his off the field Gangsta shite !
Hazy2
Denis Law's Backheel
 
Posts: 9311
Joined: Fri Dec 24, 2010 11:34 am
Supporter of: MCFC
My favourite player is: Silva

PreviousNext

Return to The Maine Football forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: carl_feedthegoat, Google [Bot], Mase, patrickblue, PeterParker and 300 guests