Hence why having Grealish is important as it gives us options especially in big games where ball turnover can be very costly.
Jack Grealish / signs new 5 year contract
- Thread starter MyOnlySolskjaer
- Start date
- Status
I think its justifiable to bring him in at 55-60 mill. as a rotation option. We have all seen what happens when Bruno is playing all the minutes. If Grealish gets 30-40 minutes each game , Bruno will be so much more consistent.
He did it in the Championship. His success in the EPL was as a left-sided attacker. I don't see how bringing him as a Pogba replacement makes sense. He has nowhere near the passing range of the clear link guys you mentioned, especially when you are talking about arguably two of the best midfield passers of the past 30 years in Scholes and Xavi. Pogba is mostly used not only as the link but to sit back and hold with more defensive responsibilities to clean up for. My point is, why is Grealish the ideal link to play those roles. A lot of times our formation turned into a 4-2-3-1 essentially. If you are paying a fortune for him, atleast use him tactically in the way he's been used this year, which is as a left-sided attacker. If the option is buy Grealish as a replacement for Pogba's role or don't buy him, I wouldn't buy him. There are much more proven players at higher levels at that role if we are going to be throwing around 60m or so on a #8 midfielder.
It's not justifiable because there are other options that can be good rotational players for cheaper. It makes zero sense to spend 60m on a rotational player.
You know something
Defintely toward ends of games when the pressure is on. That's why I think he'd be important for England at tournaments to do that job.
With the same dribbling, passing, shooting and versatility?
I think you're hitting the nail on the right spot here. At least these are the things that I'm also concerned about.
We need more off the ball movement, and I'm yet to see Grealish showing enough of this. To me he's more of a player who wants the ball in a standing-still-position (or at a slow pace) to then seek runners to play it to. The pressing part is also a concern. Yes, pressing is a collective thing, but some players are better at it than others. I mean, just look at Dan James. He's probably the worst I've seen. He can run, but he don't know how to press. Pogba is terrible at it as well. At the moment I'd say Fred is the best pressing player we have. No wonder Guardiola wanted him at City, as he likes to surrounds himself with players that have these abilities. Funny you mentioned Bernardo Silva. Since joining City I've been really impressed on his off the ball movement and workrate. Thought of him as a more Mesut Özil kind of player.
Grealish for reportedly around £60m is a joke, especially when you see City signing Ferran Torres for under £30m.
Also share your concern over the playmaking in deeper areas. Pogba is a big No for this. Matic is alright at times and Fred has potential, but both of them have flaws that shines through all too often. The quickest and best solution for this is Thiago Alcântara in my view.
Grealish's case is a bit different than what you think.
Out of the top team in PL, no club will be able to afford him & pay the fees ''this year''. Average players were bought in with big money due to desperation from the club. Is there any team this year desperate to pay £80m for Grealish though?
United & City have better players for the roles & position that Grealish is playing at, they are not in desperation to be willing to pay big on Grealish. Chelsea is going to sign Havertz & already have Mount & Pulisic so they won't even interested in Grealish. Liverpool has money issue that they don't even wanna go £52m Werner. Spurs Levy will never gonna pay such a money. Arsenal is the team who is desperate for creative player right now in their XI but they have no money right now unless they sell their best players like Aubameyang, Lacazatte & Pepe.
So it depends what's your club's plan here. If the plan is to keep Grealish in Aston Villa & Grealish is happy with that then that makes sense. However, if the plan is to actually really sell him for 80m after promise to the player that he will be sold this year then your club is naive, given such a situation that lot of clubs are in money crisis due to covid19 & clubs who has the money aren't desperate to sign him.
You must be the one overrating him. 55-60m for Grealish to be rotation? Christ.
@Winzaghi I agree, with @UNITED ACADEMY on this. If the expectation is Villa will give him the move he deserves, an £80m price tag is going to scupper that. I agree he's a talent and worth a fair amount of money to you, but there is pretty much no chance you're going to come high than mid table next season and if he wants to kick his career on it won't be with you. So given that price is driven by demand, we look like the only club capable of affording him and we have Sancho as our main target which will take up the majority of our budget. There's no way you're getting anywhere close to that price from us, so if you're happy to have an unhappy player next season, I think you're going the right way about it.
A rotation AND a different type of player for different games.
But think we have to agree to disagree.
Totally agree. We already have one of those and he goes by the name of Pogba.
What football have you been watching?
Or not watching?
Can you factually back your statement up? Any special stats/skills/other-factors that make you think Grealish is ‘consistently’ better then those those 2?
In all humbleness, I think he’s a quality player and PL proven but he isn’t an upgrade on Pogba or a Rashford by a mile.
By your assessment, we should basically swap Rashford/Pogba for Grealish and pay Villa some ££ on top of it as a cherry on top? Hint:
Referring to the bolded part; In all respect, that is not true. Has any club ever agreed to lower a price just to please the buying club? It’s a business like you mentioned. We just don’t want to pay £80m because he’s not worth that much. I’ve read posters not having any issues with spending upto £60-65m which would sound more sensible. But nobody has come out and said lower the price just so we can afford him.
Now that you have managed to stay in the PL, you may be able to afford keeping him unless a club pays your asking price. But let’s honestly see if that happens this transfer window now that covid happened.
My guess is you guys were already in a tough situation pre covid and sure you managed to remain in the PL but all the lost revenues will have hurt. The deal should be done around £65-70m max with add-ons.
But on a side note - being a united fan, I truly hope we’re not the ones buying him. I read your insights about his goal scoring chances ranking right behind KdB and his ability to drive the ball forward and make key passes etc. But we already have Pogba doing that, and in a more exquisite style. We also have Rashford whose a faster and more explosive version of him on the LW too. So that really leaves him as backup. And since all we need is a backup, there are much cheaper and wiser options available. VdB for one.
In my honest opinion, he should just stay with you guys if you can afford to keep him because he’ll have the highest chance of making the England squad by playing the most minutes, which is only possible in your team.
Referring to the bolded part; your whole argument is based on casually overlooking Pogba’s individual skills. Skills that go a long way in influencing a moment in the game. Like how he conceded the penalty for us in the first game back post covid against spurs? That kinda skill?
While you also didn’t mention that Grealish can do whatever else Pogba does, better. Just that he can do it too. So do you honestly think Grealish is better? I’m confused.
Do you know why Pogba is much sought-after? Hint: his individual skills play a huge role in his demand.
But since you’re already convinced your opinion cannot be changed, I’ll leave the the debate about individual skills’ importance for another day.
Also - the second bolded portion is to highlight that you yourself mentioned who else thinks highly of Pogba (Juventus & France). You can also add Zidane & Real Madrid to that list. Even our own clubs owners who deemed spending £100m+ on him just based on a ‘few’ fan boys’ opinion? Shocker.
Then we shouldn't be looking at him. There's clearly better options or uses for our money
Like who?
You can’t think of any players in the entire world of football who might be more value for money than Grealish?
Nope. To fit the AM role. If you have a look at what we are trying to achieve, the only other player I think will be van de Beek and I would pay extra £10m for Grealish.
My reasoning below on Grealish, so go on name me players who can give us what he will?
1. Cover in CM, AM, LW, RW
2. Leadership
3. Ball retention
4. top 3 in creativity in PL this season
5. Will be happy to come on rotation option.
We don't have to look at value for money, we need the best players available. I'd like to hear names of available players, for a smaller fee, that would instantly improve our options in attack. Proven players, not the flavor of the month Fifa talent that keeps popping up here, who most haven't seen playing yet.
Good thing we have a ton of scouts at United. If you look outside the PL there are a few players better than Grealish that wouldnt demand to start. I think Grealish would be a good signing but the fee has to be correct.
Grealish isnt the best available. Unless you believe he is one of the best AMs available in Europe
Buendia is a very good player and for the rotation status he'd be perfect. That may even allow us to save and pay for a CDM e.g Partey.
Well, are those others available? I'm betting Grealish is, for the right price. He would improve our options in attack immensely.
Names!
I would like Odegaard, but there's no chance he's coming here.I do mostly agree with your last point, but I would point this out which sometimes gets ignored. If you are a club, and you are refusing to sell a player by putting an insane fee on him, fair enough. But, you better also be willing to financially pay him wages that come close to reflecting the price tag you have put on him. I have no idea what Grealish is on, but if you value him at 80m, you better start paying him close to 200k a week to reflect that valuation, otherwise, you could have serious issues with the player long-term.
In the case of Rashford in your example, we probably already pay him close to what reflects what we would be selling him for. Which is around 200k before bonuses and play-related incentives. Most players on the squad are probably paid close to what we value them at (or in some cases way higher), only one who is probably way below what we value them at is Mason Greenwood, which if he lives up to what we'd value him at now, he will be among the highest-paid players in the world, but he's an 18 year old, whereas Grealish is in the peak time for his big pay-day. Fernandes is probably underpaid when you look at him relative to other players in the squad, but his value was essentially just established on the open market.
Yep, good thing we do. When was the last time a scout recommended a player that no one knew? We could have scouts all over the world, they will watch them etc, doesn't mean they are good enough.
I am not saying sign Grealish for any fee, £50m max.
Good post.
He's not even a first team player. Rotation option at best. We should always be looking for value. We are a business after all not a sovereign wealth fund. Good planning for the future allows for better future success. Spaffing money on overpriced never-will-bes is the road to ruin.
Grealish is also of questionable professionalism. See "going out on the piss and crashing his car during lockdown".
I dont think Buendia is good enough personally. He's played RW only at Norwich, we need someone who can fill more than one position.
I will say £55m max but get your drift about finding a player that no knows about.
If there was any solid interest in a DLP/Matic replacement then of course we should prioritise the spend there,however looks very much like that will be next summer
If we are going to spend north of 60mWell, are those others available? I'm betting Grealish is, for the right price. He would improve our options in attack immensely.
Names!
Luiz Alberto
Havertz
Coutinho
Than we don't agree about his qualities. He will be a first team player, get tons of games and will be a big player for us, imo. Rashford has been awful since the restart, imagine having Grealish as an option for his position. Bruno could have been rested a lot more.
Haven't seen enough of Luiz Alberto to comment, but Havertz would be a lot more expensive than Grealish and a bigger gamble. Coutinho, we should steer well clear. I don't think we'll have to spend north of 60m to get Grealish either
This is what I am trying to get at. I know there are players in Europe that people will mention. I don't think Grealish is the only AM but I do think out of everyone available, he fits our squad better than anyone else. I would pay £10m more than any other player just because what he can bring to this team is different to the players we have. We have alot of talent, but no one in this United team can retain the ball like Grealish can.
It is all about bringing different options to the table, we have seen it in the last few games, teams will work us out, we need different quality options.
The reason I am hesitant to bring someone else in, we have not had the best luck signing unknown players from Europe for a while now, we need a player that will hit the ground running.
100% I would sacrifice Grealish for a DLP but again, there is no clear choice. I would say Rice, but we wont get him so no point me mentioning names we wont get.
Grealish is realistic and a very good age.
How much do you think it will take then just out of interest?
40-45 + add-ons. But hey, that's just as big a gamble as people in here saying we would have to pay 60+.
Disagree.
One has experience playing European football and International football and is a generational talent.
Anyway I will be happy with Grealish if the pice is correct as I said before, e.g below 50m. My post was on the premise we would be paying above 60-65m for Grealish where actually Havertz is apparently available and going to Chelsea for 80m euros so in that range.
There is no way Villa would not slap an £80m figure on his head and then sell for nearly £30-£35m less
That figure didn't came from Villa though did it? We'll see what happens.
Yes - I don’t think there are any teams out there that can afford over 50m for him.
If Villa have no intent to force him to stay then I can see a deal being around 40m mark
I'd like to see a poll about the maximum amount we should stop looking at Grealish and look elsewhere. Something like - Less than 45m, Less than 60m, Less than 80m
So didnt Leverkusen slap a £100m price tag on Havertz and now selling him for less?
they are far from having agreed a price. Leverkusen are playing hardball and want him to play in the EL.
- Status