Raheem Sterling to...? | joins Arsenal on loan

Status
Not open for further replies.
Insanity said:
Ashworth during his time with the English set-up wanted to groom Gary Neville to be the England manager, so don't be surprised if it turns out that this batshit idea is his.
Click to expand...

Tbh Man Utd and Chelsea both paying each other money to swap two shite, overpaid players, thus not solving the problem for either and being a complete waste of everyone's time, seems like exactly the sort of thing that both clubs would do.

If you discount Man Utd and Chelsea it'd be the dumbest thing to happen in ages. If you don't then it''d just be the dumbest thing to happen since the last dumb thing Man Utd or Chelsea did.
 
ZupZup said:
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.
Click to expand...
Exactly this.
 
LawCharltonBest said:
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
Click to expand...

So Chelsea pay £25m for Sancho and pay half of Sterling's 325 a week wages whilst he's at United? Yeah, no. That's a disastrous deal for Chelsea. The only reason we should even be entertaining this is to get out of Sterling's contract completely.
 
Now who are the muppets? This has to be one of the silliest ideas for a long, long time
 
I think Sterling would do well here and maybe the Chelsea set up and coach would have more patience with Sancho. Problem is maybe Sterling would he functional for a year or two tops and we really need that transitional forward to tidy us over until Garnacho/Hoijlund/Zirkee/Amad settle but if Sancho somehow turns it up we will look like mugs.
 
AneRu said:
I think Sterling would do well here and maybe the Chelsea set up and coach would have more patience with Sancho. Problem is maybe Sterling would he functional for a year or two tops and we really need that transitional forward to tidy us over until Garnacho/Hoijlund/Zirkee/Amad settle but if Sancho somehow turns it up we will look like mugs.
Click to expand...
I'm surprised more people aren't talking about our wing options. We literally can't afford to sign anyone, and it'd be suicidal to rely on Amad/Antony this season. I expect Sterling will mostly play on the right.
 
It's disturbing how many on here actually think this would be a good idea
 
He’s better than all our wingers! He’d probably be our best attacker after Bruno. Not sure whether it’s cos he played for Pool and City that people don’t like him but he’s a class player, who like everyone there, has had a mediocre time at Chelsea. As a loan until we can see if Amad and Garnacho can be consistently good, it makes a LOT of sense. We’d get a known quantity who’s technically sound at everything - dribbling, control, passing, shooting etc. we don’t have many players who are on that level.

Wages, sure. That’s a problem. Not one we can’t solve though if he’s willing to take a cut to get game time.
 
WeePat said:
So Chelsea pay £25m for Sancho and pay half of Sterling's 325 a week wages whilst he's at United? Yeah, no. That's a disastrous deal for Chelsea. The only reason we should even be entertaining this is to get out of Sterling's contract completely.
Click to expand...
Can you honestly say Chelsea have any decent leverage though? United seem comfortable enough offloading Sancho to Juve on a loan.
 
The holy trinity 68 said:
You do realise its Raheem Sterling right? He is extremely wasteful and rarely makes the right decision.
Click to expand...
I’ve seen him enough over the years to know he’d be a better option than, Antony, Rashford, Sancho and Amad (right now). I’ve no issues swapping him with a player who has no interest in playing for us.
 
AneRu said:
I think Sterling would do well here and maybe the Chelsea set up and coach would have more patience with Sancho. Problem is maybe Sterling would he functional for a year or two tops and we really need that transitional forward to tidy us over until Garnacho/Hoijlund/Zirkee/Amad settle but if Sancho somehow turns it up we will look like mugs.
Click to expand...
Why do you think he would do well? What does he do well as a footballer? He's totally useless.
 
The holy trinity 68 said:
You do realise its Raheem Sterling right? He is extremely wasteful and rarely makes the right decision.
Click to expand...
This isn’t true though. He can be wasteful in front of goal, absolutely, but he gets in waaaaaay better positions than our other wide men. His low cross and passing are consistently good as you’d expect for a player of a certain quality level. Something we can’t say about many of our attackers
 
Depends on the cost for me. Our forward options are so weak that any player that might score goals is a bonus at this stage of the window.
 
Sanchos Contract ends in 2 years, we need to shift him now or risk getting nothing or very little for him.

Due to his age, we will probably only offer Sterling a 3 year deal id think. And ideally on wages lower than what Sancho is on.

Then it becomes a question of, who would you rather have for the next 3 years between the two?
 
Adamsk7 said:
This isn’t true though. He can be wasteful in front of goal, absolutely, but he gets in waaaaaay better positions than our other wide men. His low cross and passing are consistently good as you’d expect for a player of a certain quality level. Something we can’t say about many of our attackers
Click to expand...
Can't disagree really. He would be our best wide player if he'd joined.
 
Rams said:
I’d have Sterling over Sancho even at their ages, Sterling has his faults but he always causes the opposition problems.
Click to expand...

And yet he wasn't deemed good enough for Liverpool, City or Chelsea and THAT was during his peak years. He's nearly 30 now
 
What is baffling to me is the whining in this thread when the new team have already signed…

The best young CB in Europe
A young CB with a leader profile who has already won leagues in three countries
A quality attacking FB for a pittance
A former wonder kid coming off the back of quality season
A quality defensive midfielder with energy and tenacity that will make a massive difference to the way we play.

All of that while managing to get decent transfer fees for two of the most limited players in the squad.

A phenomenal summer and a mini revolution in terms of the quality in our squad.

One tentative link to an England international (with no idea what the deal even involves)

“This fecking guy doesn’t know what he is even doing11!!!1”

The only madness is this thread.
 
3 years of Sterling: 43m gbp in wages

2 or 3 years left of Sancho wages (we got a 1 year extension option): 39m gbp for 3 years - 26m gbp for 2 years.

Now what will getting Sancho off our books mean in terms of what we can spend?

(73m/5) * 2 years left = 29,2m in more spending + which transferfee we can get for him. Is this how it works? Or what will it effectively mean we can spend "more"?

I can sort of understand why we want to do something, it's just that Sterling is not hungry, he's aging, on big wages, can be a diva and I hate him as a player.

So many cons to this deal instead of just offering him to Juve or whoever for a cutprice 30m. Juve probably knows this and try to hardball us.
 
Rojofiam said:
This part is admittedly true. If we do a deal for Sterling, it will have to be on our own terms. Us keeping Sancho seems more plausible than Chelsea keeping Sterling. And then there's also interest in Sancho from Juventus.
Click to expand...
I'm actually hoiping that United have leaked the Sterling news as a ploy to get Juventus to sign Sancho
 
RedStarUnited said:
Sanchos Contract ends in 2 years, we need to shift him now or risk getting nothing or very little for him.

Due to his age, we will probably only offer Sterling a 3 year deal id think. And ideally on wages lower than what Sancho is on.

Then it becomes a question of, who would you rather have for the next 3 years between the two?
Click to expand...
I’d rather have nobody than sancho.
Just sell sancho please.
I can’t believe this is actually going to be a thing.
Will piss off both sets of fans simultaneously!
 
WeePat said:
So Chelsea pay £25m for Sancho and pay half of Sterling's 325 a week wages whilst he's at United? Yeah, no. That's a disastrous deal for Chelsea. The only reason we should even be entertaining this is to get out of Sterling's contract completely.
Click to expand...
if the option is sancho or sterling you should stick
 
Sterlings 30 by December
lost his pace and his decision making is poor.

We already have Anthony stinking the place out we dont need another right winger doing the same.

No way we should swap a 24 year old for a 29 year old. especially a poor one. madness :nono:
 
This is insanity. Is there a single United fan out there who, a week ago, was keen on him?

Surely this is some crazy strategy play to mess with Chelsea?
 
WeePat said:
So Chelsea pay £25m for Sancho and pay half of Sterling's 325 a week wages whilst he's at United? Yeah, no. That's a disastrous deal for Chelsea. The only reason we should even be entertaining this is to get out of Sterling's contract completely.
Click to expand...
Then keep him. You'll make a lot of people very happy.
 
these kind of swaps have happened forever on the continent. it’s very exotic.
 
Beachryan said:
This is insanity. Is there a single United fan out there who, a week ago, was keen on him?

Surely this is some crazy strategy play to mess with Chelsea?
Click to expand...
No but then I witnessed our wide players taking it in turns to cock up attack after attack over the weekend.
 
Giggsy13 said:
Can you honestly say Chelsea have any decent leverage though? United seem comfortable enough offloading Sancho to Juve on a loan.
Click to expand...

Not a huge lot, other than United's potential willingness to actually have Sterling at their club.

We'd be better off just settling Sterling's contract issue with him and then releasing him instead of somehow being roped into paying a substantial fee for Sancho and then pay half of Sterling's wages on top of that, whilst presumably also giving Sancho a decent contract.

If we can get 1:1 swap deal going, then it's OK by me. Anything more than that, it's pointless for us.
 
I don't know what the proposal is, but if we could sell Sancho for £40 million, buy Sterling for £15 million, and put him on less money than Sancho was on, then this has to be a good idea surely.

Sancho will be a nightmare to move, so if the opportunity is presenting itself to rid ourselves of him permanently then we need to take it, and tbf Sterling isn't that bad compared to our back up wingers.
 
WeePat said:
So Chelsea pay £25m for Sancho and pay half of Sterling's 325 a week wages whilst he's at United? Yeah, no. That's a disastrous deal for Chelsea. The only reason we should even be entertaining this is to get out of Sterling's contract completely.
Click to expand...

To be fair, you are the ones who have given him absolutely zero value with the very public demotion and exclusion from the squad.

He isn’t worth any transfer fee now on the contract he is on and knowing that he is worthless to Chelsea.

That’s part and parcel of the game Chelsea are playing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.