Yeah it'll be related to his channel. He won't get any inside transfer scoops at united and if so, he wouldn't be allowed to leak or tease them like this
Raheem Sterling to...? | joins Arsenal on loan
- Thread starter Devil_forever
- Start date
- Status
“I see all the young players, especially in that squad, talk about Raheem, it’s like Uncle Raheem. Cole Palmer, the likes of Reece James, it’s Uncle Raheem.
“And he’s looked after a lot of these boys, they come to him, so when you kick that guy in the changing room, all of them are going to limp at some point and they aren’t going to take it well and you create a problem in your own dressing room.
“There’s nobody delivering that message with any clarity, and from what I’m hearing he (Sterling) has got no understanding of where his situation lies.
“He hasn’t had anyone in the hierarchy come to him and say: ‘Listen, you’re surplus to requirements, we want to get rid of you’.
“And what I’m hearing is that the last conversation that was had was like ‘everything is fine”.
“I’m hearing they’re getting told (updates) by email and stuff like that. This is wild.”
Taking other factors out of the equation this would be our business this window. Improvements?
Mazraoui > AWB
De Ligt > Varane
Zirkzee > Martial
Sterling > Sancho
Ugarte > Mctominay
Yoro
Mazraoui > AWB
De Ligt > Varane
Zirkzee > Martial
Sterling > Sancho
Ugarte > Mctominay
Yoro
Looks good to me.
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2015
- Messages
- 18,963
- Supports
️
22-23 year olds calling a 29 year old ‘uncle’ is hilarious. They’re all in their twenties
Thanks. Really appreciate it. So it seems, Rio does speak to Sterling or his camp directly. In that scenario, he might be well clued up.
Let's do it!
300,000 a week.
That is a lot of money. That's £15,000,000 + a year plus what Gillette pay + New Balance + Clarks + Pepsi + Barclay's .
The boy's done good.
Stay clear of this mess before we find ourselves subsidising their mistake. We've been ripped off by chelsea enough times, no more.
The strange thing is, this is less weird than Darwin Nunez to Arsenal and that’s happening
I remember similar things happening when we signed Mount. The first few pages of that thread were filled with people saying how shit he was before the links intensified, and then the copium kicked in.
Sterling would be our 3rd or 4th best winger on last season's form. There wouldn't be any appetite for this deal if Rashford didn't look out of sorts himself, but ironically that's what makes this deal so risky.
It's not unreasonable to think we could have Antony, Rashford and Sterling all sat here on big money at the end of the season with no obvious route to get rid of any of them. Not to mention Casemiro who will probably belong in a similar category.
What would be the point? You seem to think every decision the club and ETH makes is unimpeachable so we clearly won’t get anywhere.
Your question in itself tried to narrow the pool as much as possible to make Sterling seem like a sensible option.
Amad and Garnacho should be fighting for the RW position. Sterling coming over affects Rashford the most and we sure don’t care about his pathway. And who cares about pathways in a consistently goal shy team.
Sterling is a limited, past it winger who is almost 30. There is minimal upside to this deal in the short term and in the long term it’s just terrible. We’ve all watched Sterling enough to know what he is now which is why the vibe with this is so negative.
i don’t find it that weird tbh. Arteta definitely has that Guardiola thing where he’ll sign a player nobody rates just so that everyone thinks he’s a genius if it works.
Yes. upgrades overall
Upgrades. All our issues aren't going to be fixed overnight and getting better players in and getting rid of the likes of Sancho gives us a strong starting point to build upon.
I'd start ahead of Rashford on current form too.
Add Mount to that list, Murtough and Woodward have a lot to answer for. We've managed to shift only two big earners off our wage bill and that was because their contracts ran out. These players are literally unsellable. Rashord and Mount both have 4 years on their mega deals. Insane.
Those statements are not necessarily mutually exclusive.
We still have a long way to go but I think most if not all of that can't be argued.
Id faaaar rather we went for Nunez than bloody Sterling
Any deal that we do with likely be an advantage to us. Sancho isn't cut out EPL, he is likely a new toy for Chelsea who will find ways to get rid in a year or 2. So what Sancho is younger? He is likely walking away on a free transfer in 2 years time, nobody wants to buy him unless it is ridiculous low transfer fee. Sterling on the other hand is EPL proven. As long as United do our maths correctly when it comes to wages and bonus with overall saving of this swap deal, I am more than willing to take Sterling. Do you think Sancho without starting in the last 2 games will be happy with ETH? It is just a matter of time before he say something and cast away to do his own training somewhere else. Sterling is likely thinking he can replace Rashford or Amad as long as he proves to ETH that he is a better player. Overall, this deal makes sense as long as financially it helps us out. All of us knows that Sancho is most likely leaving of free. Let's do it.
Sterling is pretty much finished.
Not a fan of this swap deal if there's any legs to it.
Rather try to shift Sancho out without any swap deals involving Sterling.
Not a fan of this swap deal if there's any legs to it.
Rather try to shift Sancho out without any swap deals involving Sterling.
The transfer of Sterling should not be seen as the new recruitment of an attacking player but as a way to get rid of Sancho. The latter is an insoluble problem for us because no club wants to pay his exorbitant salary. Replacing Sancho who we pay a fortune not to play + ruining the atmosphere within the group with a Sterling who we could pay a little less each month and who would be better than Rashford, it's a good deal.
Skeptics, what do you do with Sancho? I'm curious to see how you can find a better option than Sterling's.
It's terrible to replace Sancho with Sterling, let's be clear. But it's less terrible than keeping Sancho to pay him shit, or lending him out while covering his salary until the end of his contract.
The ideal would be to sign Sterling for two seasons. We would gain a little on Sancho's current contract.
Skeptics, what do you do with Sancho? I'm curious to see how you can find a better option than Sterling's.
It's terrible to replace Sancho with Sterling, let's be clear. But it's less terrible than keeping Sancho to pay him shit, or lending him out while covering his salary until the end of his contract.
The ideal would be to sign Sterling for two seasons. We would gain a little on Sancho's current contract.
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2015
- Messages
- 18,963
- Supports
- ️
Patently untrue. He would be our best.
How do we know what we'll be getting with Sterling. He could turn out to be anything. And with his age we'll be stuck with him.
How do we know? We know exactly what we’d be getting with him and that’s the whole point. We haven’t brought in a single player who is proven in our league this summer. Getting in Sterling gives some guarantees from his wing play. He’s also effective in the false 9. His form at Chelsea is overblown, he was fine. Still make a lot of things happen but Chelsea are a mess
Ex Liverpool, Ex City, Ex Chelsea player….
Being of interest to United ?
Games gone.
Being of interest to United ?
Games gone.
In 26 matches vs United, Sterling has 0 goals and 2 assists.
How much will he cost? How much are his wages?
Take a 50% pay cut and then we should consider. Otherwise, I rather not have him in our team. Trade or no trade
This whole thing has to be to benefit PSR.
That being said depending on the length of a deal and wages for Sterling having him on a shorter deal and less wages is more benefical than having Sancho being on stupid wages and contributing absolutley nothing. Sterling may at least contribute something productive on the pitch.
That being said depending on the length of a deal and wages for Sterling having him on a shorter deal and less wages is more benefical than having Sancho being on stupid wages and contributing absolutley nothing. Sterling may at least contribute something productive on the pitch.
That's why he'll come and play for us for a tenner a week. It's the best chance he's got at ever scoring a goal at Old Trafford before he retires.
Is there any indication that Sterling will except a significant cut in pay or Chelsea will pick up a sizable portion of hi salary? I Believe Sterling is on more money than Sancho.
Garnacho is a comfortably better option now. Amad is unproven at this level but I'd rather give him the chance and even this broken version of Rashford is much of a muchness with Sterling's current level of ability.
He might out perform one of the latter two on any given day but how many times do we have to sign these 30 year olds on big money before we learn our lesson? It's an accident waiting to happen.
He is but they aren’t far apart. Depends on how much he wants to get away from current situation I guess. Could see him taking £200k which would be fine for a player of his profile
Not the lionesses, obvs.
We know what we'll be getting with him like we knew what we'll be getting with Sanchez right?
I think I agree with you….
- Status