Raheem Sterling to...? | joins Arsenal on loan
- Thread starter Devil_forever
- Start date
- Status
To be fair Rashford gets in to dangerous positions a lot. It's the bit where the then runs in to traffic or stabs the ball across the penalty that is why he doesn't get the assists.
This deal (or these 'deals' if they are being considered separate) doesn't make sense.
Sterling must be prepared to take a HUGE wage reduction - the only reason I believe INEOS are even flirting with the idea is simply to get Sanchos massive wages gone. But Sterling himself is reportedly on £325k a week.
Surely he wouldnt move further up any sort of pecking order than Sancho? He must be prepared to sit on the bench - again, must have huge wage reduction.
Doesn't it seem hilarious and typical that Chelsea have made hundreds of signings over the last couple years and yet ours is the one where they are having to come up with a creative way to do the deal? Like just pay us £50m too...
If this is done you need to question INEOS on it. Seems random as hell.
Sterling must be prepared to take a HUGE wage reduction - the only reason I believe INEOS are even flirting with the idea is simply to get Sanchos massive wages gone. But Sterling himself is reportedly on £325k a week.
Surely he wouldnt move further up any sort of pecking order than Sancho? He must be prepared to sit on the bench - again, must have huge wage reduction.
Doesn't it seem hilarious and typical that Chelsea have made hundreds of signings over the last couple years and yet ours is the one where they are having to come up with a creative way to do the deal? Like just pay us £50m too...
If this is done you need to question INEOS on it. Seems random as hell.
swapping him and us getting no pure money for Sancho just seems like such a horrible deal?
Why are we even entertaining this?
It maybe a PSR appeasement move. Seems shady as hell.
If we can swap him with no fee and get Sterling on sensible wages I'd do it, better than keeping Sancho
Agreed. But then we knew what the game might be once Omar Berrarda jumped from City.
On paper an experience Premier League player who can score goals playing right across the front line sounds great.
But it's Sterling. He's got that flawp in him.
But it's Sterling. He's got that flawp in him.
I am shocked that some are convincing themselves that taking on Sterling is a good move. He's finished at a top level and I thought the Club would be putting a halt to terrible short-term moves like this one.
Last edited:
Those season tickets Ratcliffe had at Chelsea seeming more shady by the day.
It stinks of Sanchez/Mkhitaryan with a hint of PSR/FFP favours.
It stinks of Sanchez/Mkhitaryan with a hint of PSR/FFP favours.
We already have 4 wingers, we dont need Raheem fecking Sterling. Its just another Sanchez situation, and we shouldnt be helping Chelsea out.
Gettign rid of Sancho to get Sterling is just swapping one problem for another. Can this rumor just die already?
Gettign rid of Sancho to get Sterling is just swapping one problem for another. Can this rumor just die already?
This is such a Woodward-era signing. Can’t believe you’re considering it.
So according to Sky its not a swap its 2 seperate deals
It's just another dodgy Chelsea swap deal.
Villa for those randoms that I can't remember.
Atletico - Gallagher/Felix
Now United Sancho/Sterling.
We're the ones getting rinsed though, Sterling is shocking.
Wait, so United get a fee for Sancho and get Sterling's wages subsidised by Chelsea? That's the best 'suits everyone' scenario you could come up with?
It only makes sense for Chelsea if it's a straight swap, and Sancho agrees to reduced wages at Chelsea. What terms Sterling and United come to agreement about would/should be of concern to us. If we're paying United for Sancho, and still paying half of Sterling's wages at United, we might as well keep Sterling and try to flog him a different way.
Ah well, at least he won’t be overhyped when he gets here.
Probably end up doing really well now
Probably end up doing really well now
Anywhere but United. Please.
Rashford tends to get into dangerous positions via a through-ball. Sterling can also progress into dangerous positions with the ball, which is what we need and leads to your 2nd point.
That said, I don't know if Sterling's too slow these days, that could be a problem. I haven't really watched Chelsea this year other than the season opener against City..
Think it will be a good buy if we get him, having an experienced winger who can make the right decisions when needed isn’t going to be a bad thing and I have confidence in INEOS to only do the deal if it suits us.
Never in my life did I expect to see Sterling to United on the cards.
But if it means Rashford doesn’t play or gives him a kick up the backside I’ll take it.
But if it means Rashford doesn’t play or gives him a kick up the backside I’ll take it.
yep. pretty standard affair. it’s how i get around the prostitution rules in my country. the money i hand over and the blowjob i receive are two completely different deals.
Yes because Sancho is worth more than Sterling. And Sancho would have a much higher chance of being reintegrated than Sterling if a deal falls through.
So United can come down a ways on their £40m valuation, to say the £25m ballpark. And in return for some of the saved cash Chelsea can sort Sterlings wages in part.
Only reason that wouldn’t make sense is if you think Sterling and Sancho are worth the same on the market
If it were a Woodward-era signing we'd be spending £50m and keeping an unhappy player on massive wages.
Wtf !
No No No No!
No No No No!
People actually turning their nose at sterling after watching rashford in those first three games!??
And garnacho is
(A) not ready to start week in week out either, we saw that last season.
(B) better on the right
I think we’re stronger at RW with Amad, Garnacho (better on right) and Antony. If we’re relying on Rashford all season on the left I’d take Sterling tomorrow.
Could see Zirkzee being the perfect facilitator striker for him just like Kane was for England and even at times when they played with a false 9 at City. Especially if ETH is persisting with the two false 9s we need goals from wide areas and can see more chance of that with say
Sterling - Bruno - Zirkzee - Garnacho/Amad
Not to mention it also gets a £350k a week problem off our books.
And garnacho is
(A) not ready to start week in week out either, we saw that last season.
(B) better on the right
I think we’re stronger at RW with Amad, Garnacho (better on right) and Antony. If we’re relying on Rashford all season on the left I’d take Sterling tomorrow.
Could see Zirkzee being the perfect facilitator striker for him just like Kane was for England and even at times when they played with a false 9 at City. Especially if ETH is persisting with the two false 9s we need goals from wide areas and can see more chance of that with say
Sterling - Bruno - Zirkzee - Garnacho/Amad
Not to mention it also gets a £350k a week problem off our books.
Really don’t want this. I thought we’d learnt from buying signings like this. If he’s on squad level wages then fine, but he won’t be.
Terrible signing - galling after it looked like Ineos were so much better
Terrible signing - galling after it looked like Ineos were so much better
Sterling = Owen
Another mercenary
Another mercenary
You should try stand-up comedy
Boyhood United fan who turned down oil money.
He is doing a decent job of the old Michael Owen "let's see if I can make every fanbase in British football hate me" career moves.
Reports are that Avram and Joel Glazer are pushing this and are huge admirers of Raheem Sterling, calling him the English Maradona.
We don’t know anything yet or what the negotiations look like.
I have faith that Berrada and Ashworth know what they’re doing. Based on their history they don’t seem to make rash decisions.
Sanchez had a lot of excitement going for him. He was in the PFA Team of the season 6 months back coming off the back of a 30 goal season. Sterling is coming from 2 very ordinary seasons and even his move to Chelsea from City never really seemed like it would be quite successful. Plus he is at 300k a week. Why we’re involving ourselves with the same ridiculous behaviour we’re trying to get rid of is insane. This has to be a very favourable deal financially because it sure as hell wouldn’t be successful from a footballing perspective.
Of all the fecking excess players they've got, we go for one we have absolutely no use for and somehow on wages higher than Sancho? And approaching 30? If they want Sancho (who they also don't need) then we should bend them over for a player that would actually help us.
I can't really understand the criticism INEOS etc. are getting here... they are essentially trying to clear up the Sancho mess and when it boils down to it... taking Sterling may be a lesser evil in every sense, than keeping Sancho on astronomical wages to rot in the reserves. It's not like clubs are banging down our door to take Sancho. We have Juve who want to take him on loan and have us heavily subsidise his salary for the season... or Chelsea who can only do a deal if we take the likes of Sterling off their hands, for FFP reasons. The club are stuck between a rock and a hard place. If we do the deal, it will be because the terms are more favourable than what Sancho is costing us.
We'd be digging Chelsea out of a hole, I wouldn't take sterling on a free.
Never thought that such a scenario would present itself, but I think i'd prefer Sterling on the wing over Rashford all day long !!
Chelsea have about 20 to 25 excess players, so perhaps the Club can be forgiven for overlooking someone!
If we're talking about a serious move in return, I'd much rather the club push for someone like Nkunku instead.
- Status