I rate him much higher than you do. He walks into our team, for me. I’d take him over Bruno any day and being as he can play left as well, we could play them both most of the time. If there’s one team who really needs his guile and quality it’s us.
Grealish To City? | City bid £100M
- Thread starter Inigo Montoya
- Start date
- Status
The idea he’s better than Bruno is fecking hilarious though.
And I think he’s brilliant.
That’s as stupid as me claiming Sancho is better than Salah.
And I think he’s brilliant.
That’s as stupid as me claiming Sancho is better than Salah.
Are you kidding ? Overrated player where Sancho is the superior player atm is the view of many in here because Sancho has better G/A stats. Comparing a Bundesliga player in the second best team in the league vs a PL player in a midtable team is stupid. Up to this point its best to compare them on the national team where Grealish always has a good game and Sancho has not delivered yet. To bad England has the most boring manager ever who doesnt rate neither of them. Comparing chances created is also better than G/A, but still not ideal
Sancho can turn up to be the better player in the long run, but no way he is already the superior player.
He'd be on the bench for us, no chance he starts over Bruno and Rashford.
IMO, he's not worth 100m, but he might just worth that for City because I think he's exactly what City needs to reinvigorate their attack.
I hope he failed miserably there though, but I doubt it
I hope he failed miserably there though, but I doubt it
I think they need him to improve. KDB picks up injuries and then they are missing something. As brilliant as their squad is, they still miss individual game changers. Jesus, Sterling, Mahrez, Torres and Bernardo are all good, but neither is world class or particularly an undisputed starter. Foden is still young and inconsistent, him and Sterling will be the first under threat, as you dont spend 100m on a player to bench him.
Aye, I was agreeing with you mate.
I can see the argument of them being on a similar level at best, being different types of #10's, though Grealish only showed half a season of that form and without the same level of production while Bruno showed it for far longer. Grealish is a top player for sure, but IMO Bruno is in the tier below just De Bruyne (and not far below, but admittedly below) on par with any other attacking midfielder around. Grealish is more of a dribbling type of creator while his range of passes isn't as good as Bruno's (who doesn't create much through dribbling), while Bruno provides loads of goalscoring input and shot taking input which Grealish doesn't. De Bruyne kind of is a mix of them as he provides very effective dribbling but also provides a good amount of shots while keeping a very high level of passing.
A big plus for me is fitness though, as Bruno just doesn't get injured, yet that gets overlooked all the time.
Anyway, if we didn't have Rashford or Sancho, then by all means get Grealish. But we have them both now, Sancho was priority for me as he can play on the right and is 5 years younger, so he works with whatever combination we want. Grealish basically competes directly with Rashford and Bruno and ignores are biggest hole in attack which was the RW, so thats why I was all out on him. Even if you think he's ahead of Bruno or Rashford (again, which I disagree with for our team needs), it's at best a marginal difference, not a 100m difference at the expense of other positions. I like having an inside forward on one wing and a creator on the other. We have that with Sancho and Rashford now, or Sancho and Greenwood, so in my mind we're set on the wings and #10 even if Pogba goes. Rashford is our long term LW for me, and we have depth past him, so Grealish was just unnecessary for me.
Either Ole and our board agree with you or we just don’t have the cash. He’d be the third name on my team sheet after Shaw and Maguire.
I can see from this thread that plenty people don’t rate him as high as I do. Sometimes I think there’s just me and Pep left.
It's actually insane how disrespected he is. Has everyone just forgotten his production over the last 18 months? Does anyone seriously think Grealish would've came anywhere close to his numbers?
They were using Foden as a false 9 for the run in last season a decent amount if they didn't use him out wide, so if they don't sign Kane then I think they go:
Grealish Foden Mahrez
Gundogan De Bruyne
Rodri
Or Sterling gets back in the team ahead of Mahrez or as the false 9. Using Grealish next to De Bruyne in the middle won't work though IMO, Gundogan was class last year anyway so I hope they try it and unsettle the parts that worked well.Gundogan De Bruyne
Rodri
No, I agree. He's better than Bruno and Rashford.
We’ve missed out on this one! Grealish is obviously a united fan aswell going of his previous tweets. He also said old Trafford is his favourite stadium. I still think we made the right decision in choosing sancho though.
It's more a case of you don't go to improve your already best performing positions and ignore your really weak areas. We needed a partner for Maguire. We needed a creative RW (and this one is equally good on either wing luckily), and we need deeper midfielder. Literally the last positions of need were LW and #10, so we were never going to go for him.
And to think, its been a whole 3 months since Pep's last declaration about how City totally couldn't spend a huge amount of money on a player..
Literally by every metric over their career right now, Sancho is a better player. It's not just goals and assist stats. It's dribbles, chances created, impact in build up, etc. Sancho is 5 years younger and has set records with what he's done, Grealish at 25/26 has only finally had a half season run that was on par with what Sancho has done for 3 years since he was 18.
Comparing national team stuff is crazy, though even by that metric Sancho has much more appearances than Grealish does despite being 5 years younger, and the last time I checked he also had a better goal and assist rate per 90 than literally any winger Southgate brought. Unless you think Saka is now better than all of them and national team performances are all that matter? Even on that, it's not like Grealish did much apart from 1 decent sub appearance, but he had limited time and IMO he should've started anyway, but Southgate is Southgate. Personally I'd have just started Grealish as the 10 and Sancho on one wing, and then rotated the other attackers as the wide forward.
They can't afford a striker apparently. My heart bleeds
Okay. I call bs on that as well though.
No he wasn't
We played against Neymar and Mbappe who are streets ahead of Grealish. We also played against other actual world class players like Salah and Kane who have been at the top level for years now not just 1 year.
Especially as Sancho is 4 an a half years younger and will hit a higher level than Grealish ever will.
Some people in this thread are massively overrating Grealish.
No way he's better than Radford or Bruno. Someone even said he'd be 2nd best attacker in City after KdB. Wow stop.
No way he's better than Radford or Bruno. Someone even said he'd be 2nd best attacker in City after KdB. Wow stop.
Half year***No he wasn't
We played against Neymar and Mbappe who are streets ahead of Grealish. We also played against other actual world class players like Salah and Kane who have been at the top level for years now not just 1 year.
I do think Grealish is a quality player. But he didn't do much in the 2nd half of last season with the injury issues, and he never showed close to the same level as he did in the first half of last season before the injury issues.
I think he’ll do very well there & fits Guardiola’s style of play well. £100m is excessive but that’s the market these days. I’m not too fussed we’re missing out, we have Sancho & have more pressing needs to resolve (CM). He’s a very good player, but some of the hyperbole about his ability is ridiculous.
If they get Kane, I’d be more worried about how we’ll reduce the gap.
If they get Kane, I’d be more worried about how we’ll reduce the gap.
Doesnt sound like you have watched a good amount of games of neither of them. Judging by your view you will probably have a moment of sudden realization half a year from now.
I think he would be the 2nd best attacker in City after KDB, though I'm not Sterlings biggest fan admittedly (too brainless but his movement is great I'll give him that).
Hes a top player, but funnily enough United are probably the only club in world football where it wouldn't make sense at all to sign Grealish or that he wouldn't find it easy to get into the team if everyone is fit. We have Bruno, we have Rashford for #10 and LW. All fit and at their best, I wouldn't take Grealish ahead of them due to styles and effectiveness at the end of the day. What other club has a pairing like that as a 10 and LW?
Yeah know I have already said it multiple times but the blame lies with what happened in the first game after lockdown
Say it louder!
We’ve signed a generational talent & our fans are crying into their cornflakes because Citeh are signing yet another player.
We can’t have them all & Sancho looks a perfect fit for our set up. Can’t we let them play a bit before moaning about what the neighbours are up to.
I like Grealish, let’s not pretend he’s not a good player and De Bruyne is an elite excellent player.
There’s just been a stats comparison on Sky Sports News with the two of them. Last season they both scored 6 and assisted 12. Now go look at Bruno’s he’s got much better shot accuracy, higher assists, let’s not even compare goals as Bruno has double them put together, he attempts many more shots, many more passes and he won the player of the month 4 times.
I think we need to appreciate what we’ve got. I’d take De Bruyne for Pogba but not Grealish for Bruno.
There’s just been a stats comparison on Sky Sports News with the two of them. Last season they both scored 6 and assisted 12. Now go look at Bruno’s he’s got much better shot accuracy, higher assists, let’s not even compare goals as Bruno has double them put together, he attempts many more shots, many more passes and he won the player of the month 4 times.
I think we need to appreciate what we’ve got. I’d take De Bruyne for Pogba but not Grealish for Bruno.
To me Grealish right now is just a prime Willian (15/16). The Chelsea guys in here will probably be the only ones to get what I'm saying. That is nowhere near a £100m fee. City are getting totally fleeced here and I'm glad Chelsea are playing no part in this.
watched plenty of both thank you. Sancho is a phenomenal footballer who suits our needs far more, given he is equally good on both wings while Grealish is exclusively a LW or #10. I rate Sancho as a generational player because he brings it all together and has set records with his productivity at such a young age. Only covid stopped him from getting more league goals and assists than Mbappe in a big 5 league for a player before their 20th birthday, to have the most in the modern football era. More league goals or assists As a teenager than Messi, Rooney, Fowler, Owen, whatever teenage prodigy you can think of, only Mbappe has more and just 1 more at that (and in by far the weakest of the big leagues).Grealish was a good player but only last season, despite being 5 years olds, in the first half of the season looked truly like a top player and showed form that matched what Sancho has done since 18. So yeah.
Here's a statistical comparison between them based on performances over the past year.
The biggest/only notable difference in performance is Grealish wins a lot more fouls and Sancho scores more goals and has a much better shot selection (and more touches in midfield and attack, but you could make arguments about why that is).
That's just silly.
I'd say Grealish at his best is more of a prime Isco.
City signed Sancho as a 15 year old and the club pushed him, Foden and Diaz as the future of the club. Sancho was rated just as highly Foden yet now they have to watch their future at their most hated rival. If they’re saying they’d rather have Grealish at £100 million over having Sancho who would’ve cost next to nothing other than they’re lying or saying it thru bitter tears. If Sancho had signed and never went to Dortmund, they wouldn’t be looking at Grealish in the first place.
The shameful state of some of our supporters, pathetic. Sancho and Varane yet moaning about a player we don’t need.
The shameful state of some of our supporters, pathetic. Sancho and Varane yet moaning about a player we don’t need.
Yep. Grealish is undoubtedly an excellent player too, but it's purely a "can't hoard all the good players" situation. There's loads of top #10's and left wingers, and we have a problem fitting them all in anyway. Grealish would've made a bigger difference to a team like Chelsea IMO who need the individualism in attack that Grealish can bring, so I'm not too bothered by City getting him.
He'll be ball hogging, drawing fouls and it'll hurt the tempo in their passing game. Don't think he's a perfect fit in that side.
Yep. United from a few years ago would probably have gone for Grealish over Sancho and Varane, just to try and prove our financial power.
But sorting 2 dodgy positions with star players is much smarter than going huge on a position we have a young quality player in Rashy.
He will have better players around him to play quicker passing football.
At Villa he has to do more himself.
Will be intriguing how he fits in though, with Sterling there in his main position.
- Status