I'd take Drogba on a two year deal.
Didier Drogba
- Thread starter Feed Me
- Start date
- Status
Yep would be a great option for the squad. Cant see us spending the money on his wages though
No surprises really. I don't think we should sign him. We would be paying ridiculous wages considering he wouldn't be a guaranteed starter.
Based on Saturday, I think a lot of people are forgetting that he hasn't consistently been at his best since 2009/2010. Yes, he gets big goals, but Rooney often does as well. No need for him.
Based on Saturday, I think a lot of people are forgetting that he hasn't consistently been at his best since 2009/2010. Yes, he gets big goals, but Rooney often does as well. No need for him.
But then again I'd take Torres as well.....my inner muppet needs satisfying dammit!
Gave them eight years of good service. Think my favourite Drogba goal has to be against Everton:
Gave them eight years of good service. Think my favourite Drogba goal has to be against Everton:
Some hit. I remember one, I think against Liverpool quite similar although closer in. He took it down and hit a volley into the corner on the spin.
Edit: that's the one.
I would bet he will end up in Barca.
As I said last week, get him in. There is not going to be a better striker on the market the year, surely Drogba/free has to be the definition of "value"?
Would love it if we went in for him, but his age and that he is more likely to want to go somewhere abroad for a fresh challenge.
Not with his wage demands.
But he wants games ... As he said in his quote, he does not want to sit on the bench which he would have to if we signed him.
An amazing career in the PL. What an impact and those who love football beyond just there clubs will miss him. He was the key reason I'd want to watch any Chavski game. A genuine PL legend along with Giggs, Cantona, Henry, Shearer and the like.
Thanks for the thrills (and spills!) big DD. You will be missed but not forgotten.
Remember we're losing Berbatov/Owen from the wage bill. Fantastic player, no transfer fee. Certainly think he's much, much too good to bugger off to China.
Thread merge required?
I know you're being hypothetical but there are too many reasons this would never happen:
a) his wage
b) his age
c) he wants to play games, lots of games
d) and this is the biggest of all......
He's just cemented himself as a Chelsea club legend, they will sign his name forever, why on Earth would he ruin that to join us as a bit part player for 2 years?
I wouldn't want us paying someone over 150k a week, which he would get in China, for them to be sitting on the bench more often than not, regardless of how good he is. I wouldn't mind us getting him, but only if it wasn't on a ridiculous wage
It is true, I am being hypothetical although I would genuinely love for this transfer to happen.
It won't I grant you, I think the main factor would be his Chelsea history as you say, it's very unlikely that he would want to ruin that by signing for us.
Personally I don't see much problem with his age, he's good for 2 years yet - so give him a one year contract with an "option", as for him wanting to play games; I'd expect that he would get 40 odd games if he did sign for us, as we'd be more able to rest players like Rooney who have been essential to the team over the last season.
Shame, IMO.
Let's not forget, Welbeck kind of outperformed him in the League last year, and he hasn't really had his "big game" chance yet, which is pretty much the only thing Drogba has thrived under recently.
With interests on Kagawa and Hazard, it's very clear we are moving towards using a single forward player more often(Rooney), Welbeck being your first option for when we do go to 2, and Hernandez as super sub. Do you really want to be paying 80-100k even if he came cheap for someone who's fourth choice and would leave us with 2 strikers who are very limited in what else they can do for us? Wanting him to join us is nothing but sentimental imo.
Unless, of course, we fail for Kagawa and Hazard and have no other choice but stick to a 2 man forward, then he could work.
With interests on Kagawa and Hazard, it's very clear we are moving towards using a single forward player more often(Rooney), Welbeck being your first option for when we do go to 2, and Hernandez as super sub. Do you really want to be paying 80-100k even if he came cheap for someone who's fourth choice and would leave us with 2 strikers who are very limited in what else they can do for us? Wanting him to join us is nothing but sentimental imo.
Unless, of course, we fail for Kagawa and Hazard and have no other choice but stick to a 2 man forward, then he could work.
Crazy decision to let him go IMHO - but obviously delighted he's going as he's such a dangerous player. I realise Roman will probably spunk another billion on strikers to replace him but I honestly think they'll be weaker without him regardless.
I'd have him for a season.
Gave them eight years of good service. Think my favourite Drogba goal has to be against Everton:
Which fuzzy square is Drogba?
Just seen this
. What are you on about? Why the hell does Messi have to be a touchline-hugging winger to play on the left. What a random thing to make up. When Iniesta plays on the left is he a touchline-hugging winger? Is Fabregas? Is Sanchez on the right? No idea where you have this idea from, it is completely mental. Barcelona’s wingers tend to drift inside hugely, so Messi would do the same. I said he would be more natural on the left than Iniesta or Fabregas, which I don’t think is controversial at all. He is a better dribbler, quicker and more incisive.
As for negating his strengths, Messi is best when running at players, that’s why he drops deep so much even though he plays as a forward. If he started from a deeper position then it would be easier for him to get on the ball and run at the defence, which to me seems beneficial. As I have said, their wingers play with huge amounts of freedom, Sanchez often ends up playing as a striker when Messi drops deep for example, so Messi on the left would still be free to drift over the pitch and would in no way be as constrained as you are making out. The difference is that at the moment he has a free role whilst playing as a striker, whereas IMO he should have a similar free role playing from the left wing, as I think it would benefit the rest of the team to play with a proper striker as the false number 9 system can leave them looking disorganised.
If you are assuming he would be a touchline hugging winger on the left because he is left footed, then that is not at all true. People place way too much emphasis on this, wingers can cut inside even though they are playing on their ‘stronger’ side. Not every winger plays like Valencia, or Bale last season. Look at Ronaldo when he was at United, was he a touch line hugging winger? No course not, but he played on the right when he was right footed. What about Juan Mata, David Silva, Nani, Alexis Sanchez, Ozil or Bale this season. All of those players have started wide but drifted inside, despite playing on their stronger side, so there is no reason Messi wouldn’t do the same.
Of those players who have apparently been preferred to Iniesta on the left, three of them play primarily on the right wing and the other, Tello, started a whole three games in La Liga. So I think you’re talking bollocks. Iniesta and Fabregas played on the left plenty for Barca this year, more than any of the other players you mentioned. In the 3-1 against Madrid for example Fabregas and Iniesta were rotating playing the left wing throughout the game. Likewise in both games of the Copa del Rey. Tello started in the last Classico when they left Fabregas on the bench, but that was only one of three games he started in the whole season. So no, they were not preferred to Iniesta. In the middle was primarily Busquets with Thiago and Xavi, Fabregas and Iniesta were usually more advanced. Obviously there were exceptions, especially considering the experimentation Pep carried out throughout the season, but that was a very common line up, with Iniesta or Fabregas on the left wing.This is all well and good but why would he start from the LEFT? What's the point? He was hugely effective on the right, he was hugely effective through the middle, moving him left seems like a completely random idea, can't see a single benefit to it as he'd be a lot less effective
It makes a lot more sense to put either Sánchez or Pedro on the left 'cause that might not be their ideal position but it's still a lot better than wasting Messi there for no reason at all. And of course there's Villa coming back, too. I mean I can see the point in giving him a free role on the right; he did that before and it makes sense because, as your one correct observation notes, he's primarily a left-footer so in Barcelona's system that flank suits him more. Imho though Guardiola was absolutely spot on in moving him to the centre: the Messi-Xavi-Iniesta triangle is what makes Barcelona so dangerous. Not to mention that Messi is much better than any 'proper striker' in the world.
Iniesta starting on the left still makes more sense than playing Messi there, precisely because he can fill that roving playmaker role to great effect (Özil, btw? He started out wide only when Di María was injured and even then not always). He doesn't score enough though, in any position; but that's just all the more reason not to take Messi away from the position where he's the most prolific.
So, quite simply, your suggestion that Messi should be moved left of all places makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. He could fill the position adequately, I'm sure, as he's the greatest genius this sport has seen in the last 30 years or more but it obviously suits him less than any other role in the front line.
Seriously?
Not 40 starts - don't think it's outrageous to suggest he's get close to 40 odd matches if you put starts & sub appearances together.
If we imagine a relatively standard season assuming we only get to quarter finals in the Cups - 38 PL, 10 CL, 4 FAC, 3 LC - that's 55 games, think its fair to say you'd expect all of your strikers to take part in 35+ each and given Fergies preference of 'experience' in the bigger games that's why I'd expect Drogba to get to 35-40 games.
As I say, it won't happen. Drogba will go abroad.
Could not find a thread mentioning Drobga's signing with a Chinese club, but here's yet another "It's not about the money" shocker.
http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/s...drogba:-move-to-china-not-about-money?cc=5901
http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/s...drogba:-move-to-china-not-about-money?cc=5901
Only shocker is that he has any reason to validate why he went there.
If I was a 33 year old footballer and a team in a reportedly awesome city would offer me 200,000 pounds a week to play there, why the feck would you say no?
If I was a 33 year old footballer and a team in a reportedly awesome city would offer me 200,000 pounds a week to play there, why the feck would you say no?
Understandable though I don't think I'd want to live in China for a big paycheck. It's not like he wouldn't get half that or more in Europe, US, Middle East. But fairplay to Drogba, though it would be nice if an athlete would just admit money as a primary factor.
Then create one instead of bumping an irrelevant thread in the wrong forum.
- Status