I think Grealish is a good player but to suggest he is on the same level as Bruno or KdB is a bit much.
Grealish To City? | City bid £100M
- Thread starter Inigo Montoya
- Start date
- Status
Wouldn't grealish have been like 16/17ish?
It's utter shite. We'll see where things sit in a years time when he finally players regular (well he might do) football at an elite level, expected to perform every week, and you know actually plays in Europe.
Hope he flops massively! (Sorry Jack xx)
I actually remember that too, something about an agent trying to tap up Jack to offer him to us or something just as scummy.We were linked to him though I seem to remember. But back then he was a bit of an idiot wasn't he? No one was sure which way he was going to go. Zaha looked the brighter star potentially.
Not sure why people are jumping on my comment when I was basically just trying to clarify what another poster meantI'm bloody bored of the "Fergie would have" done anything quip as much as everyone else!
I just like pointing out sometimes that Jack is a month away from 27, he was around during SAF time!
Jack is a month away from turning 27 believe it or not.
Was 17 in 12/13, turned 18 in September of Moyes' year. I'm not sure why people always think we'd have signed him anyway. Sancho is much more of Sir Alex's type, explosive and more direct and more of a player who likes to start wide. When did we sign a Grealish type?
Hes turning 26
Agreed, he's good but that's it for me, I also never understand that being the most fouled player is some sort of trait to hoist your flag on.Plus why has everyone forgotten his dodgy shins! He might not even pass the medical.
He was 17 when SAF retired.
Slowly edging towards retirement.
Bit of a strawman post no? Bruno has probably posted better goal & assist stats over the past season and a half than Iniesta did over his whole career. Do you think he is far better than Iniesta?
Bruno plays as a no. 10/ second striker whose goal stats are blatantly inflated by an astonishing number of penalties. His assist stats are inflated by the fact that every pass he plays is an attempted “killer” pass – he gives the ball away a lot. Grealish frequently plays a lot deeper – in fact his greatest asset is getting the ball deep to take pressure off of his own team due to the fact that he is undispossessable - and he does not have the luxury of playing risky passes every time he gets the ball. I think Bruno is brilliant, but come on. I don’t have a problem with anyone preferring Bruno to Grealish or vice versa (they’re both great players) but trying to use g/a stats to prove your point is highly disingenuous.
And before anyone comes at me, l’m not suggesting Grealish is as good as Iniesta. But I am suggesting that they are stylistically similar.
The SAF thing is a weird one because United pretty much never used someone like him. Some people on here I think feel like he reminds them of Beckham (they're nothing alike, must be cause he has a 'different' haircut though Grealish's is horrific while Beckham was always a stud), but we pretty much never successfully used a player like him, and Sir Alex rarely went for them.
Sancho is 100% the guy Sir Alex would go for, more direct, more of a winger who can play either wing (just modern version of it) but he starts wide and goes inside from either wing, more explosive and gets the productivity to match it up.
Sancho is 100% the guy Sir Alex would go for, more direct, more of a winger who can play either wing (just modern version of it) but he starts wide and goes inside from either wing, more explosive and gets the productivity to match it up.
Let's have a look after this season when they're both playing for big clubs
City have Sterling, Mahrez, Silva, De Bruyne, Jesus(not the miraculous one), Foden, Gundogan across the front line and in midfield.
Is he going to bench Sterling?
I don't see where else he fits.
Just stay at Villa, lad.
Is he going to bench Sterling?
I don't see where else he fits.
Just stay at Villa, lad.
No. This perfectly illustrates how stats can never tell the complete picture.
People have been sarcastically saying what has he done as a 26 year old for this level of praise.
He will be a 100m player at City at the age of 25. Younger than Sterling believe it or not.
Pep Guardiola - one of the greatest managers is also in group A. (Just for the armchair critics and stats obsessed folk here)
Will likely be a good signing but I can't understand the signing of a creative player for that type of money when City don't struggle to create chances?
De Bruyne? Sure, he is not there yet.
But he is far better than Bruno. Bruno's base level of performance is very low (when he's having a poor game), and his productivity has been steadily falling since January.
Grealish brings far more to his team than Bruno. Bruno is often a hindrance when he's not on his game, with misplaced passes galore and constant moaning at his teammates and officials.
This post seems to ignore the obvious point that Bruno was overplayed and looked just mentally and physically knackered for much of the second half the season. But sure keep slagging off Utd players.
Nah in this case it highlights that people here watch and scrutinize every minute of our players but don't watch every minute of opposition players naturally so they look at them enviously. Bruno attempts more passes per game than either De Bruyne or Grealish, plays more passes into the final third than both, and is marginally behind both for progressive passes and passes into the box per 90 minutes (but generally all on the same level there). Any minor difference between them can easily be explained by one playing in a more patient Pep system vs a more direct counter attacking system. Literally by every measure and per 90 frequency of occurrence, they are very similar. The stats just say that people overrate others and love to criticize our own.
fecking hell.Bruno and De Bruyne are on another planet compared to Grealish. It’s posts like this why this thread is the worst on the Caf.
Great post! Now a thread title change - £100 million, maybe, he sure does have nice hair
Bruno has been the best player in the Premier League over the period since he has joined.
Nope, it perfectly illustrates that risk takers are criticised differently. Bruno gets called out a lot for losing the ball. So does KDB and Grealish. Except, Bruno is doing far better in every facet of the game than Grealish. Well, maybe not the fact that he’s English and “old school”.
I don't enjoy comparisons of Bruno to KDB to Grealish. These are 3 very talented players but of different ilk, some are more direct in contribution (Bruno) and wasteful on the ball. Others are amazingly well polished but might not hit the super high numbers (KDB) and Grealish may appear passive on stats but is quite obviously a huge contributor in chance creation, drawing fouls (this is actually a big weapon to have in your team as silly as it sounds), hold up play and so on.
You forgot Torres.
I imagine if Grealish does sign, either Silva or Maherez will move on.
Feels an odd move by City given it’s an area they’re already overly stacked in. Grealish is an absolute baller but I don’t think he improves City's team in a way that is commensurate with a £100 million outlay. Kane would’ve been the signing that elevated them to an untouchable level.
Someone like Lautaro Martinez would’ve been a more effective (and cheaper) use of money imo.
Someone like Lautaro Martinez would’ve been a more effective (and cheaper) use of money imo.
That wouldn't explain why neutrals who watch both players would overwhelmingly prefer Kevin De Bruyne. Bruno's decision making is erratic at times and he goes for the wrong option of pass rather than an easier pass. This is something that stats can't tell you. With Kevin De Bruyne, you get consistency in passing and his pass completion goes down when City are trying to break down low blocks and De Bruyne is attempting to cut through the defense.
It's widely believed that Scholes couldn't tackle. The stats show that Scholes was a better tackler than Ngolo Kante. Does that make sense?
Erm, not. thanks.
Grealish and Bruno/KDB are very different players and honestly I don't know why there is a comparison.
I thought Foden was city's future etc.
The bolded bit is because he's been the most overplayed player in Europe over the last two years and he's exhausted. You know that I'm sure. And he's still managed to do more for his team than Grealish.
Except for, you know, goals and assists. But who cares about those?
That’s not a crazy opinion. Bruno has been absolutely brilliant for us. However, he has had more than a few poor games for us (prompting some real doom-laden posts in his performance thread) and overall, his form over the last few months has been less good than in the previous, say, twelve months. He looked knackered but if he doesn’t improve after a decent rest, a degree of concern is merited.
Now, I’m not saying Grealish is better than Bruno but he is better at some things and would bring a different dynamic to our attack. If we had bought Grealish he could have played LW, left 8 in a 433 or no.10; in other words, competing with Bruno for 10 in the big games and slotting in at LW as required.
I wish we had signed Grealish and I really think he would have transformed our attacking play. But we absolutely can’t get everyone and Sancho might do the same in a different way.
Without wanting everyone to load hope onto the young lad’s shoulders, Hannibal can be similar and perhaps as good as Grealish before all that long.
Going back to Bruno, I agree there is an argument that he’s been the best player in the league since he came but we’ve been too reliant on him and his occasional poor form was a bit of a problem being as there was nobody to sub on for him or stand in for him while he rested.
This is such weird logic. There are multitudes of top class players Fergie didn't sign. Far more that he didn't sign than players he did sign.
Wasn't my logic honey bunny xx
- Status