Raheem Sterling | Signs for Man City for £49,000,000

Status
Not open for further replies.
Rowem said:
I would be interested to see those stats.

Obviously if they prove me wrong then all stats are worthless anyway!
Click to expand...

In 2014/15, on the most basic metrics, he wasn't much better than Januzaj had been in 2013/14. E.G.:

janster.jpg


janster1.jpg


I'm not saying Januzaj is on the same level of Sterling. He clearly isn't yet, and might never be. But i'm not sure Sterling is so far ahead that you can justify a £50'000'000m fee (when a lot of people would likely see £20'000'000 as the upper limit for Januzaj).
 
Kinda chuffed with that! Now hopefully we can go splash the cash on a striker. I would like Benteke (seriously).
 
Revan said:
We aren't paying him 120k/week. Most reports say that it is way below 100k/week. For that matter, I would be extremely surprised if you're paying Sterling 200k/week. Media have the tendency to exagerate these things.

Like what we did on Shaw, I think that you overpayed like 15m for Sterling. But like in our case, money isn't a problem so if Sterling reaches his potential then it will be a good transfer.
Click to expand...

I've not found a single report saying Shaw is on less than £100k. Express go highest at £160k, Daily Mail say £120k, Telegraph £100k. Couldn't find any that said less. I agree with what you're saying in general though.
 
Rowem said:
I would be interested to see those stats.

Obviously if they prove me wrong then all stats are worthless anyway!
Click to expand...
BobbyManc said:
That's to be expected. Navas basically never dribbles and Nasri and Silva are incredibly skilled at retaining the ball and have a completely different dribbling style to Sterling. Sterling is much more direct and tries to beat his opponent, it's only natural his successful dribbling rate is less than the other three. In fact, the very reason his was not as good is precisely the reason we need someone like him in the team.

Click to expand...

That's also a worthless stat..It doesn't say successful take ons. His best attribute is his pace and the only aspect of his ability that warrants such a huge price tag. He's got nothing special in any other area of his game yet and as I stated before I could be proved wrong within a few seasons if he fulfills expected potential. Right now he is not worth £50m. I seen more ability in Walcott at a younger age.
 
BobbyManc said:
Because he's significantly more talented.
Click to expand...

Why? Shaw does look like he will be a brilliant FB, so why does it mean that he is less talented for his position? An today you have more quality wingers, then you have full backs.

I really think that people in England are just overrating Sterling (again, not in a way that he is bad, but more in a way that he isn't that good), but we will see.
 
We're never going to improve on the international stage if we keep overpaying for young English players. Where's the motivation to do well? For me, the jury is still out on Sterling's ability. As other posters have said, he doesn't strike me as a player who will be world class. In any case, after paying all that money I hope for the sake of the City fans that he delivers for them.
 
The United Irishman said:
That's also a worthless stat..It doesn't say successful take ons. His best attribute is his pace and the only aspect of his ability that warrants such a huge price tag. He's got nothing special in any other area of his game yet and as I stated before I could be proved wrong within a few seasons if he fulfills expected potential. Right now he is not worth £50m. I seen more ability in Walcott at a younger age.
Click to expand...

If you think Sterling's only valuable asset is his pace you certainly haven't watched him regularly. It's not even worth debating if that's your genuine opinion of him. Call him overrated if you want, perfectly valid opinion, but saying he only has pace is just incredibly inaccurate.
 
Very good deal for City. He is not just future potential, he is already delivering at a high level. If he stays free of injuries, then he can give them many years of service. Main thing at City would be that he won't have to carry the team on his back, there will be other good players to help him out.
 
septic said:
Agreed, but it's a little rich for us to be laughing at the fee when we're just as much culprits ourselves.
Click to expand...

I disagree with that, the world would be a dull place if we were to think like that all the time. I can laugh at Man City overpaying for Sterling and this despite the fact that Utd does it too.
 
I think he's a great English talent and am not suprised of the fee. But in the grand scheme of world talented youngsters, he's not unmatched.
 
BobbyManc said:
That's to be expected. Navas basically never dribbles and Nasri and Silva are incredibly skilled at retaining the ball and have a completely different dribbling style to Sterling. Sterling is much more direct and tries to beat his opponent, it's only natural his successful dribbling rate is less than the other three. In fact, the very reason his was not as good is precisely the reason we need someone like him in the team.

Click to expand...

However, when Liverpool really needed him he became invisible.
 
£49 million.

Oh dear, oh dear oh dear.
 
BobbyManc said:
If you think Sterling's only valuable asset is his pace you certainly haven't watched him regularly. It's not even worth debating if that's your genuine opinion of him. Call him overrated if you want, perfectly valid opinion, but saying he only has pace is just incredibly inaccurate.
Click to expand...
Yes I have watched him regularly and yes that is his most valuable asset in terms of ability, take away his pace and there isn't much more special to talk about his all round game. I'm not saying he's shit by any stretch but I'm not surprised that City fans will struggle to justify this ridiculous price tag.
 
Jesus Christ. £49 million?

I think he will be a great player for City but £49 million is ridiculous.

Going rate for top English talent it seems.
 
Theafonis said:
I'd think someone like Lacazette would be a better option?
Click to expand...

Lacazette is my dream signing ever since I signed him on FM2014 :lol: I'd like Benteke here, but I'd love Lacazette here. The former is a lot more likely, though :)
 
Tommy said:
Kinda chuffed with that! Now hopefully we can go splash the cash on a striker. I would like Benteke (seriously).
Click to expand...

Cracking deal for your lot. I think you could easily get a 2 or 3 top players with that money.
 
JTW95 said:
Cracking deal for your lot. I think you could easily get a 2 or 3 top players with that money.
Click to expand...
Well....they could. Doesn't usually work that way in practice though for most clubs.

Except Juventus, of course.
 
The United Irishman said:
That's also a worthless stat..It doesn't say successful take ons. His best attribute is his pace and the only aspect of his ability that warrants such a huge price tag. He's got nothing special in any other area of his game yet and as I stated before I could be proved wrong within a few seasons if he fulfills expected potential. Right now he is not worth £50m. I seen more ability in Walcott at a younger age.
Click to expand...

We'll just to have to disagree, I don't even think Sterling is even that quick. Quick feet yes, very comfortable taking players on in tight situations.
 
JTW95 said:
Jesus Christ. £49 million?

I think he will be a great player for City but £49 million is ridiculous.

Going rate for top English talent it seems.
Click to expand...

You do?

I think he will be out the door before he is 24, not because of lack of ability, just because him and his agent seem to be a pair of massive twats.
 
JTW95 said:
Cracking deal for your lot. I think you could easily get a 2 or 3 top players with that money.
Click to expand...
Don't forget QPR get 20%.

Of course we only paid 600k for him so as far as profits go .......

Glad that little hyped-up little shit has gone. Well over-rated.
 
Ducklegs said:
You do?

I think he will be out the door before he is 24.
Click to expand...

I hope your right. It will be interesting to see how his City career pans out.

I think when he is on form he is better then all the wingers City have right now (except Silva on the occasions he plays there) and he is a lot younger an he will improve. I am not sure he will ever get to Hazards level but I think he will do well there.
 
Rafateria said:
Don't forget QPR get 20%.

Of course we only paid 600k for him so as far as profits go .......

Glad that little hyped-up little shit has gone. Well over-rated.
Click to expand...

Didn't know that. I bet its made their day :lol:
 
He's an excellent player and he'll only get better. It's a lot of money for him but they can afford it. It's not a good thing for us anyway, lets put it that way.
 
Nearly David Luiz money. City can afford it though and Liverpool don't lose any face in selling the player, especially after he acted the twit by calling in sick to work. I bet Rodgers was secretly pleased with that, he won't get any Scouse fans questioning the sale.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.