Is he really that big of an upgrade to what City already has? 100m is insane in current market for any player, that is 27m more than Sancho who is in my opinion achieved more and is 5 years younger
Grealish To City? | City bid £100M
- Thread starter Inigo Montoya
- Start date
- Status
Oh no.
He's been hyped since he was about 18. There's been transfer rumours to bigger clubs since as long as I can remember with more recent talk about him being a Le Tissier staying at one club despite his talent to go up a level.
I was gutted we never got him last year. But for £100m this year? I'd rather give Hannibal a chance. Both very similar in play as well.
I don't think he's worth £100 million. A few times I've thought of starting a thread about the current most overrated English player. I haven't done it but, if I did, right now I'd be making the case for Grealish.
I think he'll make the move to City and no doubt he'll do well. But that price is incredible.
I think he'll make the move to City and no doubt he'll do well. But that price is incredible.
Another plastic artifact to clog up and pollute our environment for millennia to come
Not quite as bad as Pogba saying he'd never play for PSG, but why do footballers (even young ones) do this?
I know City are plastic, but this won't really endear him to his new fans.
You imagine the pressure he’d be under by rival fans/press if he came here with that price tag? We’ve already seen it with Pogba.
At City he’ll get away with loads of indifferent performances because no one cares really. Fake club.
At City he’ll get away with loads of indifferent performances because no one cares really. Fake club.
I know these always look good, but I did enjoy that. You can tell the boys got a little something. If it goes through I could argue about £100M but if it was £70M I think everybody would be saying it’s a great deal so somewhere in between is probably about right.
In his defence it was 9 years ago so he was only 16. Barely a footballer back then. There’s a few from Sancho too that you’ll have quickly forgotten so I think kids should be kids. I don’t think many fans would take these things personally!
Seems like just the other day Levy refused to pay £25m for him.
Didn't Sancho have just 1 year left on his contract? Compared to Grealish's 4. 73m for a 1 year contract is insane. He'd have gone for 200m with a full contract.
Two years left on Sancho's contract.
We spent £80m on Maguire, when you look at it like that he's probably worth more. He's class anyway and proven in the PL.
100M seems dead cheap. Villa should ideally demand Coutinho kind of money.
City's system and manager will make sure that he will do well. So I am not sure about the overhype thing, if he will improve on what he already can.
100M is nothing when it comes to City.
I am surprised City did not start at 50 - 60 million mark as it would give them lot of room for negotiations. It is not like every club wants to buy him. Pep must have seen something in him that we did not see. To me 50- 75 would be his price
Moron, I am! I did leave out a key word…”not”.
Two years. He is 5 years younger and has G/A stats which puts him in league with top players in the world. I guess 73m for Sancho should mean Grealish should cost 50-60m.
Hmm... https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/58032330
Having watched them flop in the Champions League final I think it's a coaching problem more than a players problem.
How much money does Pep Guardiola need to spend until the Manchester City owners take a step back and say... We won the Premier League without you, we won the FA Cup without you, every transfer window we give you big money signings and you don't deliver anything more than we had already won.
Yes they play some beautiful football as would a lot of teams with the quality of that squad at their disposal, Jurgen Klopp went into Liverpool and identified a central defender problem - he spent big to fix it, goalkeeper problem - he spent big to fix it... they won the Premier League and they won the Champions League. Where as Pep seems to keep spending big money on players who for example like the attacking players he signs are not really an improvement on the ones he already has because they already have top quality in those areas.
With Barca and Real in financial trouble, the Champions League could be a little bit easier this year but I don't see City winning it, they waited so long to get to the Final and then Guardiola's starting line up even surprised his own fans which to me is a mentality problem, no disrespect to all he's achieved in the game but Mourinho also achieved a lot in the game and yet his "specialness" dried up.
I would bet that if City do win the Champions League with Guardiola at the helm, he will walk away after that because his body language and enthusiasm doesn't seem what it was a few years back, he'll want a new project, with lots of money to spend of course and PSG regardless of what Pochettino acheives there will be ruthless by sacking him and bringing Pep in.
Having watched them flop in the Champions League final I think it's a coaching problem more than a players problem.
How much money does Pep Guardiola need to spend until the Manchester City owners take a step back and say... We won the Premier League without you, we won the FA Cup without you, every transfer window we give you big money signings and you don't deliver anything more than we had already won.
Yes they play some beautiful football as would a lot of teams with the quality of that squad at their disposal, Jurgen Klopp went into Liverpool and identified a central defender problem - he spent big to fix it, goalkeeper problem - he spent big to fix it... they won the Premier League and they won the Champions League. Where as Pep seems to keep spending big money on players who for example like the attacking players he signs are not really an improvement on the ones he already has because they already have top quality in those areas.
With Barca and Real in financial trouble, the Champions League could be a little bit easier this year but I don't see City winning it, they waited so long to get to the Final and then Guardiola's starting line up even surprised his own fans which to me is a mentality problem, no disrespect to all he's achieved in the game but Mourinho also achieved a lot in the game and yet his "specialness" dried up.
I would bet that if City do win the Champions League with Guardiola at the helm, he will walk away after that because his body language and enthusiasm doesn't seem what it was a few years back, he'll want a new project, with lots of money to spend of course and PSG regardless of what Pochettino acheives there will be ruthless by sacking him and bringing Pep in.
That was pre Covid price and we were desperate.
City are PL winner and CL finalist. They dont even need Grealish in my opinion.
I know people here are baulking at 100m, but for Villa that is really cheap, especially if it's the reported player exchange too. I'd be very disappointed if we sold for that much.
There's a player involved in the deal ?
Who is that player? Mahrez?
Some youth player nobody has ever heard of, Morgan Rogers who is apparently valued at 10m
City did not lose the finals because their coach was not good enough.
Some academy player they rate at 10m.
Most probably.Some youth player nobody has ever heard of, Morgan Rogers who is apparently valued at 10m
Which is why Villa should hold on for way more money than 100M
You guys need to remember that money is not an issue for City. The price is irrelevant
The feck? Sounds like some random minor league player in an American sports trade dealSome youth player nobody has ever heard of, Morgan Rogers who is apparently valued at 10m
I doubt it. If Villa ask for 160M, the deal will probably not go through. They have the money, but of late they don't spend crazy on one player.
They did. Playing weird shit in big matches is Peps guilty pleasure.
Aren't Villa pretty minted? £100m surely isn't that much for them for their star player.
It sounds pretty insulting, but a whole bunch of stuff is being reported so it's hard to tell what's true and what's not. Still 100m, player included or not seems low for Villa. He's only 10 months into a 5 year/150k/week contract and has since become a full England international and played at a major tournament.
Pep botched the CL final.
That dribbling is just outrageous.
Who would people compare him with in terms of style? Almost like an Iniesta/Ribery hybrid - and no, that doesn't mean he's as good, but in terms of the way he moves that's who comes to mind.
When the likes of Coutinho and Dembele go for well over £100m then Grealish is worth it now. Villa want to keep him and will give him a massive contract, why would they discount his price? It's going to take big money to sign him.
They do need him in my opinion, I thought they were well below their usual standards last season even though they won the league. They just miss the guile and X factor they had with David Silva and Aguero, with Grealish bringing qualities both had. Sterling was well below standard for City last season, as were Bernardo Silva and Mahrez for some of the season.
I always point to Rui Costa, but Iniesta is a good shout too if he played CM full time.
I'd rather City spink £100M+ on Grealish instead of Kane. Grealish will improve them no doubt but is he not more of the same, whereas Kane would be a much needed new dimension for them.
They may have a rich owner but it's still One Hundred Millions ! They should take it and keep improving the whole squad to cement their place in the top half of the table.
- Status