Whatever happens, if he ends up coming I will back him, strange as it may be supporting an ex city and Liverpool player, Owen was wierd enough. Just hope we a smart with this and recent dealings suggest the new regime know what they are doing, I choose to have faith.
Raheem Sterling to...? | joins Arsenal on loan
- Thread starter Devil_forever
- Start date
- Status
Its probably a no for me on Rabiot. He's not been keen on a move in previous years and it feels like he would just be looking for a payday. I'd rather sell Sancho, pass on Sterling and put the money into a CM who has more desire to play for us and has longevity.
But that's just my view - I'm sure INEOS will look at all options. They have plenty of great negotiators and strategists at their disposal. I'll trust in their decisions until they prove otherwise.
Here comes the famous dreaded chart that gonna shut up those who were saying Sterling is useless and awful. Love it
Last edited:
Don't be silly.
I don't think he'd lift the place up. He's obviously on the decline, like Ornstein and Anka were saying his minutes over his whole career are those of a 35 year old player, so he's worn out. His body language on the pitch is often negative, he moans, he will expect to play. I just think this is a pretty terrible idea.
Hopefully Juve find some money to make an obligation to buy loan feasible.
Hopefully Juve find some money to make an obligation to buy loan feasible.
Isn’t Sterling a bit shit while grossly overpaid?
We have two talented players who are on the up who will have their game time restricted by this move.
I'd rather watch Amad and Garnacho be inconsistent than watch Sterling be inconsistent. At least at the end of it Amad and Garnacho will be better players because of the experienced they've gained, and we'll reap the rewards of that further down the line. Watching Sterling be inconsistent will reap no longer term benefit, next summer we'll be asking "how do we get his wages off the books?"
I thought the new football people had more sense than to chase these short term solutions? It's not even a short term solution, the guy is past it which is why Chelsea want rid in the first place, and he will only get worse at his age.
I'd rather watch Amad and Garnacho be inconsistent than watch Sterling be inconsistent. At least at the end of it Amad and Garnacho will be better players because of the experienced they've gained, and we'll reap the rewards of that further down the line. Watching Sterling be inconsistent will reap no longer term benefit, next summer we'll be asking "how do we get his wages off the books?"
I thought the new football people had more sense than to chase these short term solutions? It's not even a short term solution, the guy is past it which is why Chelsea want rid in the first place, and he will only get worse at his age.
Pretty sure we won't be offering the same for them. Chelsea might also refuse to pay Sancho what we are paying him so it will be a tit for tat in terms of pay offs. No way we should be interested in Chilwell, he makes Shaw look like Lampard fitness wise.
If we take Sterling, does that mean Rashford would finally be dropped? If so, I'm in.
There's also a reason they forced him out the door and Chelsea are forcing him out the door.
He was once very good. Now he's not very good. The fact he was good 5 years ago is of absolutely no benefit to us now.
Caf - Chelsea is a mess, a circus. Signing million players hahaha. How come players or managers expect to flourish in that environment.
Caf - Sterling? A Chelsea reject? Look at how awful he was at Chelsea. He was useless.
Caf - Sterling? A Chelsea reject? Look at how awful he was at Chelsea. He was useless.
I don't get the negative hysteria around this, as it's potentially a really shrewd signing, especially if it involves moving Sancho along.
Don't get me wrong, if we put him on stupid wages then it's self sabotage, but I find the idea that we'll do that hard to believe.
If we get a motivated Sterling, on reasonable wages, we've got a player with an extremely high top level and who can rotate with our current forward options, which will help keep the likes of Amad and Garnacho fresh, and will provide another invaluable obstacle between Antony and the first team!
Don't get me wrong, if we put him on stupid wages then it's self sabotage, but I find the idea that we'll do that hard to believe.
If we get a motivated Sterling, on reasonable wages, we've got a player with an extremely high top level and who can rotate with our current forward options, which will help keep the likes of Amad and Garnacho fresh, and will provide another invaluable obstacle between Antony and the first team!
stunned so many are for this. probably mostly to get rid of sancho and relegate Rashford, but this is like exchanging the worts for a dose of the clap fs.
Both these players are still very young and not yet ready to be stone cold starters in the team week in week out. There's literally just one established PL quality winger that can compete with either of them (Rashford) and Antony doesn't really count for obvious reasons.
Worst case scenario is we're stuck with Sancho for 2 years.
When we inevitably sign Sterling on a 4 year contract we're doubling the length of time we're stuck with a player who isn't good enough for where we want to be.
I can't believe our solution for a problem that we have is to replace him with someone who may be slightly less of a problem. It's just bizarre.
EtH might not get another year if this one turns out to be shit....very limited thinking on your part i would say
agree with the other three points of view....experienced winger who gives us quality depth and takes a bit of pressure off of Garnacho and Amad
PLUS.....it hopefully ships out that cvnt Sancho and Antony hopefully sees he's like 4th or 5th on the depth chart and he fecks off as well
Yes. I am sure Chelsea has other interesting players we should look at
Indeed, I've tried my best but I can't forget Owen. And while I don't mind Sterling there should be a line. And that line is ex Liverpool players, it just should never happen.
I like Sterling but it seems like a marriage of convenience. We need a center striker.
Trouble with this is they both have contracts guaranteeing those payments. They are unlikely to take a pay cut, so unless Chelsea contribute to their wage that’s what we probably need to pay. Same with Sancho - he’s not taking a pay cut either as he’s under contract with us.
Here's confirmation that this is a good signing.
The mental gymnastics people are doing to rationalise this signing is insane.
If we can’t get a deal with Juve, I’d take a loan swap with no obligation to buy, and then sell Sancho next year.
Interesting. He'd be on the last year of his contract, but he's not worth that much anyways.
We don't need Sterling for that, we need Ten Hag to stop playing him over Garnacho or Amad.
I think sterling will offer more than Sancho will this season, if it ends up being a "swap" the way they both play I think we are getting a good deal.
Why do you think it's just Ashworth pushing this? Berrada and Wilcox will know Sterling well from their time at City. If we do go for him I imagine they had a big say in it.
This a deal I think previous managment would entertain. They are actively trying to sell Sancho who has a better resale value and much you ger. Why would they bring in an over the hill, overpaid, mercenary. Stinks of agent moves.
Also, history tells us he only needs to wait out the current Chelsea manager which could be few months and boom he’s back in the side.
Also, history tells us he only needs to wait out the current Chelsea manager which could be few months and boom he’s back in the side.
I can't believe our solution for having 2 talented young players who aren't good enough yet, is to reduce their game time in favour of an old past it player who also isn't good enough.
We actually gain something by starting Garnacho and Amad. The more they develop and the more experience they get the greater reward we'll get down the line. We'll basically be bringing a player in who has been forced out of his last 2 clubs for not being good enough, dropped from England squad for not being good enough, who will only get worse and worse every year that he's with us, and we won't be able to get rid of him due to his age and high wages, all so we can stall the development of our younger players.
Who said anything about replacing? There are more than enough games in the season. If anything they are supported. It's too early to burden them for every match with such pressure.
An experienced forward would actually do them good, and provide them better competition too.
He was name dropped in one of the telegraph tweets I believe.
Again, the other outcome is that we sell Sancho and have to further rely on Rashford and Antony as our wide options.
Sterling would be our second best winger. It’s a pathetic situation, but that’s the reality.
You have to judge a player under the right conditions. Chelsea have been a mess during that time.
Probably because swapping Sancho for Sterling would be a massive saving and give us a player who would contribute more on the pitch. Win Win.
Why on earth would we take sterling?? We already have mount. Do not want sterling
Garnacho is clearly ready to be a starter. He was already better than Sterling last season at just 19 years old. He's been by far our most threatening player so far this season every time he's come off the bench. Amad is more of a rotation player at this stage who still needs minutes to develop. Rashford 2 years ago produced something Sterling hasn't managed since the 2019/20 season in the best team in the world, so let's not act like this is prime Sterling the way you are trying to portray. Just because Sancho, Antony and Rashford of last season aren't good enough doesn't mean Sterling is.
I've re-worded it, I meant reduce their game time or replace them in the starting 11.
They already have competition from 2 players who aren't good enough in Rashford and Antony, currently one of which (Rashford) is already stealing game time away from Garnacho in the first 3 games. Add in another past it player who isn't good enough on a 4 year deal and high wages sounds like a great idea!
Which would be worse in the short term.
But potentially a lot better in the long term if it means not lumbering ourselves with a past-it Sterling on a significant contract, who we will in turn shortly want rid of.
The way to build a team is to replace problems with solutions. Not to replace problems with other older-but-slightly-less-well-paid problems.
Honestly I don't think they've watched him play since 2019. Have they stopped to wonder why England dropped him from the squad completely, City forced him out, and Chelsea forced him out? And the funny thing is, the version of Sterling who got pushed out by City, Chelsea and England, is better than the version we'll be getting. We'll be getting an even older and even more past it version of him, on a lovely 4 year contract probably. It's ludicrous.
- Status