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

Status
Not open for further replies.
iammemphis said:
How is a player not good enough for City or Chelsea a consideration for us? Sancho is better than him by miles, its down to us the reason why Sancho is under performing so badly, similar to Rashford who would blatantly turn his form around at a club like Arsenal. I can only imagine how bad Sterling would be here.
Click to expand...

As has been said he was good for City, and has been judged at a time at Chelsea when all their player have been pretty much rubbish.

As for Sancho he has been a disaster for us, so to say he is miles better than Sterling is clearly wrong, even Dortmund who he is supposed to have been so good for aren't trying a similar deal to what Juve are offering (and have never looked that bothered about buying him back).

The guy has been a disaster, and sooner he is someone else's problem the better, even if it comes with us taking Sterling.
 
baskinginthesun said:
I think people like having a moan for the sake of having a moan.

Are you really saying that Amad and Garnacho should be playing every single game. You're asking for burnout in that case. Plus, we've seen their decision making is a bit wonky at times due to inexperience.

They need to be rotated and preserved. Sterling isn't everybody's cup of tea but, if we only need him for a couple of seasons to rotate our youth in and out then it's probably a good "purchase." He may miss the odd sitter here and there (he'll fit right in, in that case) but, he's won a lot of trophies which could be valuable for our young group of players who can learn a thing or two about going the distance.
Click to expand...
You're deliberately pretending that Amad and Garnacho are our only wide players when you know it's not true. Rashford, Garncho, Amad, Antony is 4 wingers for 2 positions, it's absolutely standard in terms of numbers. And the likes of Mount can also cover there.

Sancho is a non-entity that doesn't actually need replacing. He barely played a game for us last season and we sent him to Germany without a replacement.

We already have Rashford stealing Garnacho's minutes in the first 3 games of the season. We don't need another old past it player further reducing his minutes.

Now, if you're telling me we could replace Sancho with someone who is actually good enough, or has huge potential, then fair enough, we'd actually benefit from that. I don't see the need for us to go from 4 players who aren't good enough to 5 players who aren't good enough.

What exactly has Sterling shown Chelsea's squad about going the distance in the last 2 seasons? This is not 2019 Sterling, and we are not Manchester City. He'll be even worse for us than he's been for Chelsea given we'll get an even older and slower version of him.
 
Plant0x84 said:
I would sooner have a team of 11 Rashfords than a single Sterling at this point. We do not need another LW.
Click to expand...
No idea what you are watching. Rashford has been dreadful for far too long. We need two left sided forwards. That's in the event we view Garnacho as right sided. If not, one left sided and one right sided would suffice.
 
Dazzmondo said:
Yes, he absolutely did. Even discounting the eye test which makes no sense in the first place (and anyone who watched both consistently would clearly tell you that Garnacho was better), there are many stats where Garnacho outperformed Sterling.

Garnacho had higher expected goals and expected assists than Sterling. Garnacho significantly outperformed Sterling in progressive carries and carrying distance and in fact he's in the 96th percentile of all wingers for this. Garnacho had more touches in the attacking penalty area than Sterling and ranks in the 98th percentile of all players here (Sterling also performs well here being in the 93rd percentile). Garnacho took significantly more shots than Sterling. Garnacho had more shot creating actions than Sterling. Garnacho had more key passes than Sterling. Garnacho produced far less offside passes than Sterling (which were particularly bad for Sterling being in the 25th percentile here). Garnacho drew more fouls than Sterling, ranking in the 94th percentile among all players. Garnacho has more tackles in the attacking 3rd (the part of the pitch you'd ideally want your attackers to win the ball). Garnacho has more passes blocked and interceptions than Sterling. Garnacho has more clearances than Sterling.

There are a couple other areas where Sterling outperformed Garnacho, the most obvious being the actual goals and assists (though in the league Sterling still only ended up with 1 more goal than Garnacho and they had the same number of assists). As mentioned at the start though, it should be clear to anyone that genuinely watched both regularly last season that Garnacho had the better performances, even at the age of just 19.
Click to expand...
Sterling is a better player currently. Garnacho has the potential.
 
sullydnl said:
And I would also think Sterling is unlikely to accept a massive paycut on his ludicrous £325k a week contract.

So either this doesn't happen, or someone has done something very stupid.
Click to expand...
If INEOS could get De ligt to cut his wages to join. I'm close to certain they can convince Sterling to do the same. Chelsea will just have to probably pay out his contract to get Sterling off their books.
 
Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber said:
No one will buy Rashford currently. We can just hope he revives some what this season and we bin him next. That is why we can't look to our scouting for wing replacements. We are literally stuck with Rashford and a none committed Sancho. Unless we can sneak a deal for a guy like Sterling. Who isnt long term but can benefit us till we bin Rashford and possibly Antony to recruit upgrade/s next summer
Click to expand...
Or we could sign a player and give Rashford serious competition.
No one is taking Rashford because he doesn’t want to leave. If he did he would have suitors.
 
C'est Moi Cantona said:
As has been said he was good for City, and has been judged at a time at Chelsea when all their player have been pretty much rubbish.

As for Sancho he has been a disaster for us, so to say he is miles better than Sterling is clearly wrong, even Dortmund who he is supposed to have been so good for aren't trying a similar deal to what Juve are offering (and have never looked that bothered about buying him back).

The guy has been a disaster, and sooner he is someone else's problem the better, even if it comes with us taking Sterling.
Click to expand...
Tbh, even his final 2 seasons for City, while not as bad as his Chelsea stint, the signs were there that he was falling off. 18, 17 and 20 goals the previous 3 seasons to just 10 and 13 goals.
 
No matter how I think about this deal, it makes zero sense to replace Sancho with a washed up 30 years old player (who is also a problem and toxic). It's a stupid deal and it's very irritating.
 
Giggsyking said:
No matter how I think about this deal, it makes zero sense to replace Sancho with a washed up 30 years old player (who is also a problem and toxic). It's a stupid deal and it's very irritating.
Click to expand...

Extremely. If we want someone to for Chiesa. Swap with Juve. Ideally I don't want him either. But much rather Chiesa than Sterling
 
Stat wise he was not better that Rashford last year...and Rashford was bloody awful last season.

G/A in Prem last season.
Sterling 8G 4A
Rashford 7G 3A
Garnacho 7G 4A

Yeah lets get him in asap and make him one of the top earners, that will just piss Rashford off and for what? an extra 1G pwoah! I'm salivating.
 
Cassidy said:
Maybe it was true 2 years ago. Not now. Im taking Garnacho over past it Sterling. Its like people didn’t watch him at Chelsea
Click to expand...
After reading pages of this discussion now, I am certain that none of these people that want him watched him at Chelsea
 
So both Chelsea AND Sterling have burnt their bridges with each other.
Which means that United get a cheap deal including wages here.
Sterling has a lot to prove and has the passion to do so.
This could actually work?
 
RuudTom83 said:
Stat wise he was not better that Rashford last year...and Rashford was bloody awful last season.

G/A in Prem last season.
Sterling 8G 4A
Rashford 7G 3A
Garnacho 7G 4A

Yeah lets get him in asap and make him one of the top earners, that will just piss Rashford off and for what? an extra 1G pwoah! I'm salivating.
Click to expand...
Ok. You said that he wasn't better stat wise than Rashford last season. Then you go on to state that actually he was.

Also, he wouldn't be coming here as one of our highest earners.

Anything else?
 
Don't want him at all because I think the has regressed massively as a player but even still I'm sure he is miles better than Rashford who we start every week so if we do get him I won't complain too much
 
Semper Fudge said:
Hmm, knowing Troy Deeney thinks this is making me doubt my positive feelings around this.
Click to expand...

It's sad, but who from Sancho, Antony, Rashford, Garnacho, and Amad is undoubtedly better than him? I have a lot of faith in the latter two, but they're not 100% ready and it's a long season.

I think we need a winger. I would love a host of wingers before Sterling, but for the right deal, and emphasis on the right deal, it would be a decent move for us to make. A net positive if ever so slightly so.

At present our attack is set up to leave us short this season.
 
Remember the geese said:
Ok. You said that he wasn't better stat wise than Rashford last season. Then you go on to state that actually he was.

Also, he wouldn't be coming here as one of our highest earners.

Anything else?
Click to expand...

So Sterling is going to take 175k a week to play here? I certainly wouldn’t want to be paying him anymore than 150k a week and even that’s steep for me.

Chelsea don’t want him, they would have to pay off his wages and pay us as well imo.
 
pcaming said:
It's sad, but who from Sancho, Antony, Rashford, Garnacho, and Amad is undoubtedly better than him? I have a lot of faith in the latter two, but they're not 100% ready and it's a long season.

I think we need a winger. I would love a host of wingers before Sterling, but for the right deal, and emphasis on the right deal, it would be a decent move for us to make. A net positive if ever so slightly so.

At present our attack is set up to leave us short this season.
Click to expand...
And Sterling won’t help this cause. We need a clinical winger, someone who can score goals since we won’t get that from our ST.
 
This is the worse piece of business this team can make this summer. Instantly destroys everything they've done right so far.
 
Dazzmondo said:
After reading pages of this discussion now, I am certain that none of these people that want him watched him at Chelsea
Click to expand...
Meh, I don't want him for childish reasons, but he still outscored Garnacho despite being "terrible" in a completely dysfunctional Chelsea side. I think most people just remember that Leicester game and his horrific free kick.

Sterling has premier league pedigree and sorry to say I actually agree with Deeney on this one.
 
Wing Attack Plan R said:
How about we sell Sancho for whatever we can get, and then buy a player we might need?
Click to expand...
Sell Sancho to who? We have been struggling to do just that for the whole summer. Chelsea are only interested because they want to get rid of Raheem.
 
iammemphis said:
How is a player not good enough for City or Chelsea a consideration for us? Sancho is better than him by miles, its down to us the reason why Sancho is under performing so badly, similar to Rashford who would blatantly turn his form around at a club like Arsenal. I can only imagine how bad Sterling would be here.
Click to expand...
I don’t like Sterling because of his prior allegiances but he has a much more proven track record than Sancho.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.