Who fits our team better? Who has higher ceiling? Who do you want here?
Griezmann vs Lukaku: If we could get one, who would you splash the cash on?
- Thread starter Edgar Allan Pillow
- Start date
Why is this even a question?
Griezmann. Has performed at the highest of levels.
Lukaku, as we all know, struggles against the big teams. Might be a great goalscorer, but we need players who transition from midfield to attack. Goals will come.
Lukaku, as we all know, struggles against the big teams. Might be a great goalscorer, but we need players who transition from midfield to attack. Goals will come.
Erm..
This is a tough one.
This is a tough one.
Jesus EAP 
This is as pointless as asking would you rather shag Susan Boyle or Jennifer Aniston
Griezmann probably. Than Martial and Rashford would get the chance upfront.
TBf you could make an argument about Lukaku being ready for the league.
Would that be the same argument you made about Zlatan not being ready for the premier league?
The way to a man's heart is through his stomach. Susan Boyle looks like a decent cook.
Mascherano
Griezmann
Lukaku easily, Griezmann does it in an easy league and there's no guarentee he can replicate the same form here, while Lukaku is doing it in an average team, it's obvious who the choice should be.
Haha imagine choosing Lukaku.
Haha imagine choosing Lukaku.
EAP ... Jesus what is wrong with you.
Next one Messi or Andy Carroll
Next one Messi or Andy Carroll
Griezmann is obviously the better player.
That said, with Zlatan injured we arguably need an out and out striker more than anything else. If we thought Lukaku fit the team we were trying to build then it wouldn't be unreasonable to target the lesser player in the position we need to strengthen more.
If it was either/or only, which it isn't.
That said, with Zlatan injured we arguably need an out and out striker more than anything else. If we thought Lukaku fit the team we were trying to build then it wouldn't be unreasonable to target the lesser player in the position we need to strengthen more.
If it was either/or only, which it isn't.
Last edited:
Griezman.
Exactly this. I'm not a fan of Lukaku, but for a Mourinho team built around Pogba with Mkhitaryan, Mata and Lingard available in the side and Ibrahimovic facing a long-term injury (unnatural #9 Martial and inexperienced Rashford his only understudies), we can't really be bringing in Griezmann over Lukaku.
I missed Rooney out on purpose.
Lukaku vs Griezmann?
If all else is not enough all you needed to see of Lukaku vs Griezmann you saw at the last EURO 16. When De Bruyne and Hazard were loosing their mind with average Lukaku who found international level a little out of his league, Griezmann was showing class time and again. So really there is only one winner if we would be able to chose between those two.
If all else is not enough all you needed to see of Lukaku vs Griezmann you saw at the last EURO 16. When De Bruyne and Hazard were loosing their mind with average Lukaku who found international level a little out of his league, Griezmann was showing class time and again. So really there is only one winner if we would be able to chose between those two.
Aguero, Silva, Mata, Pedro, Costa, Sanchez.... seem to be doing fine in PL after coming from La Liga.
As good as griezmann is, and obviously he's on a different level to Lukaku... I think I would prefer Lukaku (lets say him at 50m vs Griezmann at 100m). Griezmann just doesn't really fit our team and honestly, have my doubts over how great he would be in the prem. We don't play with 2 up top, and our group of midfielders necessitate a midfield 3 to get the best out of both Pogba and Herrera. Griezmann doesn't fit a front 3 and you basically can't get the best out of both Pogba, and Griezmann. It's one with the other being stifled and playing out of position. Lukaku is perfect as a lone striker, especially in the prem. Get quality wide players either side of him (hell, hope Martial and Miki get consistent next season and we are set on that front).
Basically, Lukaku slots right in and makes us more balanced and is an obvious fit. Griezmann we have to shuffle people around and probably won't get the best out of him with the current group of players. It's not all about "who is a better player". Griezmann is world class but just doesn't really fit in, unless we are doing big changes.
Basically, Lukaku slots right in and makes us more balanced and is an obvious fit. Griezmann we have to shuffle people around and probably won't get the best out of him with the current group of players. It's not all about "who is a better player". Griezmann is world class but just doesn't really fit in, unless we are doing big changes.
Griezmann isn't a playmaker or someone who will do that transition though. He basically plays like a striker, and is at his best playing with a strike partner. So we would need 2 up top basically. Then keep in mind we have Pogba in midfield who needs to be part of a 3 to show his best. So yeah. It's not the easiest of comparisons really.
To be fair, looks aside, both very talented women. I like the story of Susan Boyle.
Edit: Jennifer Aniston
Nobody here considers Lukaku a legitimate or desirable option.
Griezmann by 15 country miles.
This.
Gonna go ahead and choose Greizmann
Why are you 100% sure he would be a success here? First of all, he isn't that great now either, nowhere near close to Griezmann and nowhere near proven as Griezman in many competitions, and you have no idea if he'll turn to shit once he plays for the team that 90% of the teams in the league park the bus against. Then there's the big expectations thing, that happened with so many players that come here from smaller clubs where the expectations are usually too big for these players to live up with. And finally, there's hardly anything impressive about Lukaku's game except number of goals he scores, and many players turned into shit finishers once they arrived here.
Rashford flanked by Griezmann/Martial/Mkhi with Pogba behind in a midfield 3.
Or
Griezmann flanked by Martial/Mkhi/Lingard with Pogba behind in a midfield 3.
Different players. One behind or next to the other would be great though
Lukaku's overall game has improved loads the past couple of years at Everton. It's not like Ibra of course, but he's improved with his hold up and link up play so he's not "just the goals" anymore. Besides, the amount of goals he scores is obviously a big plus. 25 in 35 in all comps this season. 25 last season in all comps. And he's only 23 years old so is bound to get better, and he's shown how good he is in the premier league. You say he isn't great now, but he is easily the leading scorer in the premier league, while playing for Everton. It's not like they're a great attacking side, but he carries a lot of it and can rack up the goals against most of the league, which is exactly what we need. And besides, he's got the whole physique to play the lone striker. We can rule out Ibra making a return I think, and that leaves us with Rashford who I doubt will ever get that physique to be able to handle it as a lone striker, and Martial who we aren't sure is more a winger or a striker, but since we have nobody out wide he'll be there anyway. Neither are really proven to be able to get the goals for us consistently. That means we need a striker.
Griezmann has shown his best form while playing off a leading striker. So if we buy Griezmann for 100m, then we still basically need to buy someone else that he can play off of, someone who is more of a target man since Mourinho likes those types of strikers anyways. And that means we would be hindering Pogba as well, since automatically he would play a deeper role in a 4-2-3-1 or something like that. It's just not the best option IMO, as good as Griezmann is. It's not as simple as saying, oh, Griezmann plays in attack, lets throw him up top in a 4-3-3 and he'll guarantee goals. He would likely be a huge flop if that was the plan.
Why not both?
Griezmann isn't a winger nor is he the main striker. So why spend 100m on a player to play him out of position or force us to play our other 100m man out of position. It's not like he's a messi or hazard type individual player that he could make it work whatever the system or position, and he could do something out of nothing. He's very much a player who needs to fit the system as he relies a lot on his movement off the ball to finish off chances and quick link up play with the strike partner. Not at all someone who you throw up top or on the wing and expect to do something.
Basically look back to yesterdays game. Put him in for any of the front 3, and he probably would've been as ineffective as all of them, as he's small, he's not an individual type who could go past everyone on his own, he's not going to compete in the air or physically with the defenders for long balls, and he doesn't have Rashford type pace to chase down through balls all day. Put Lukaku up top yesterday and he would be able to compete physically and relieve a lot of pressure with his hold up play and be a big threat on the break because he is also really quick and knows how to play the lone striker role effectively (just how he did when everton played City both times this season). Not to say that all he would be is a target man for those games, as obviously he racks up the goals against lesser sides too, but it's the option that Mourinho likes to have.
The OP would like to know which you would take in an either/or situation.
Yeah. Stand by them.
Which is which in this instance?