Romelu Lukaku

Status
Not open for further replies.
ravi2 said:
.... folks like Glaston remind me of those Japanese soldiers who continued fighting World War II a full 29 years after the Japanese surrendered because they didn't know the war was over.
Click to expand...

Folks like ravi remind me of those army generals who end up fighting the next war on the basis of outmoded assumptions they picked up in the last war ... not least the idea that there will never be another war.

Still, the more switched-on observers saw General Moyes and his 7th Army put that silly notion to bed.
 
Last edited:
One season would be more like a scuffle than a war. A quickly controlled scuffle. Though no doubt signing Burnley's right back could see it escalate into a brawl.
 
soap said:
You seem to think I'm literally implying that people don't know how old he is. My point is he has lots and lots of time to develop which people aren't accounting for, because he feels like he's been around forever - its the same with Phil Jones. He broke through at such a young age that it feels like he should be much better than he is by now, when in reality there are very few strikers of his age at his level. He's done a lot more than flavour of the month Harry Kane. Why should his age be discounted anyway? Thats like saying if Reuben Loftus-Cheek was 34 no one would be talking about him either.
Click to expand...

No, they are accounting for his age. Every time he's discussed, someone points out his age, as if people are rating him without taking that into account. It's very easy not to think he has much potential to get better, regardless of his age. I've pointed out plenty of times that there is more scope for improvement between the ages of 17 and 22 than there is between 22 and say 27. Yet in the last 5 years we've seen very little improvement in Lukaku. In the last 3 Prem seasons his goal scoring rate has steadily declined. That is judging him on what's actually happened in his career so far and not on his age. There are plenty of examples of athletic players who burst on to the scene at a young age and then never really progressed much. Age is just an indication of time a player has to realize potential, it doesn't reflect potential itself. Hence if a player doesn't have a great deal of potential to improve, even over a longer period of time, like 5 years, there is unlikely to much improvement.
 
GlastonSpur said:
Folks like ravi remind me of those army generals who end up fighting the next war on the basis of outmoded assumptions they picked up in the last war ... not least the idea that there will never be another war.
Still, the more switched-on observers saw General Moyes and his 7th Army put that silly notion to bed.
Click to expand...


:lol:

Tottenham will never be as good as MUFC...on any level.
 
redmeister said:
No, they are accounting for his age. Every time he's discussed, someone points out his age, as if people are rating him without taking that into account. It's very easy not to think he has much potential to get better, regardless of his age. I've pointed out plenty of times that there is more scope for improvement between the ages of 17 and 22 than there is between 22 and say 27. Yet in the last 5 years we've seen very little improvement in Lukaku. In the last 3 Prem seasons his goal scoring rate has steadily declined. That is judging him on what's actually happened in his career so far and not on his age. There are plenty of examples of athletic players who burst on to the scene at a young age and then never really progressed much. Age is just an indication of time a player has to realize potential, it doesn't reflect potential itself. Hence if a player doesn't have a great deal of potential to improve, even over a longer period of time, like 5 years, there is unlikely to much improvement.
Click to expand...

His first season with Everton was his best season even if he didn't get as many goals, he hasn't been steadily declining. Going only on goals, he didn't score a single goal for Chelsea so it wouldn't be fair to say he hasn't improved much in 5 years. Who are these plenty examples of athletic young strikers who faded away after a bright start ? Drogba is the player he is most compared to for obvious reasons, and he most certainly developed more in his mid 20s than teens and early 20s, because his extremely unusual blend of size, power and pace were always there and he refined his decisioning making and composition in front of goal with age, as you'd expect. Out of interest, who are some strikers of around Lukaku's age or younger do you think are better? I can't think of many who I could say so for definite.
 
soap said:
His first season with Everton was his best season even if he didn't get as many goals, he hasn't been steadily declining. Going only on goals, he didn't score a single goal for Chelsea so it wouldn't be fair to say he hasn't improved much in 5 years. Who are these plenty examples of athletic young strikers who faded away after a bright start ? Drogba is the player he is most compared to for obvious reasons, and he most certainly developed more in his mid 20s than teens and early 20s, because his extremely unusual blend of size, power and pace were always there and he refined his decisioning making and composition in front of goal with age, as you'd expect. Out of interest, who are some strikers of around Lukaku's age or younger do you think are better? I can't think of many who I could say so for definite.
Click to expand...


Babel, Mpenza and Owen for 3.

Drogba is a terrible example. It just shows you haven't looked into the the comparative histories of both players. Drogba didn't even start playing football seriously until he was 15! You couldn't have chosen a worse example to compare Lukaku's progress with. Harry Kane was bad enough!

You are judging Lukaku on his age. You are ignoring all his history. He didn't play for Cheslea, that's why he didn't score! He was better at West Brom than at Everton. In terms of goals per minute his first season of International football remains his best. He scored at a quicker rate during his break through season at Anderlecht than in the following season. The guy has stagnated.

Why don't you search for Lukaku threads from last summer and the summer before that. I bet you'll find plenty of people making the same points then as you are now. Hopefully by next summer, when he's 23, it will stop as by then he wont be judged on his age.
 
redmeister said:
Babel, Mpenza and Owen for 3.

Drogba is a terrible example. It just shows you haven't looked into the the comparative histories of both players. Drogba didn't even start playing football seriously until he was 15! You couldn't have chosen a worse example to compare Lukaku's progress with. Harry Kane was bad enough!

You are judging Lukaku on his age. You are ignoring all his history. He didn't play for Cheslea, that's why he didn't score! He was better at West Brom than at Everton. In terms of goals per minute his first season of International football remains his best. He scored at a quicker rate during his break through season at Anderlecht than in the following season. The guy has stagnated.

Why don't you search for Lukaku threads from last summer and the summer before that. I bet you'll find plenty of people making the same points then as you are now. Hopefully by next summer, when he's 23, it will stop as by then he wont be judged on his age.
Click to expand...

Talk about horrible examples, comparing Owen to Lukaku! Completely different players AND Owen faded away because of persistent injuries. Babel was shite as soon as he left Eredivisie so I wouldn't hold him up as an example either. So that leaves Mpenza.

If he never played for Chelsea, why say he hasn't improved in 5 year years? If you want to argue he hasn't improved in 3 years that's one thing. He made some appearances from the bench and didn't do anything, when he got the chance to do the same for WBA he looked a different prospect. I wouldn't read much into that but you brought his time with Chelsea up. I think he was definitely better in his first year at Everton, a slightly better goal to minute ratio at WBA that doesn't change that. At WBA, for the much of the season Shane Long ran his bollocks off for 70 minutes and Lukaku came on to punish tired defences, at Everton he is much more of a key player. He stagnated last season, yes. There are plenty examples of this happening to young players, its no reason to discount the guy.

Can you tell me some strikers of Lukaku's age who are better btw?
 
soap said:
He stagnated last season, yes. There are plenty examples of this happening to young players, its no reason to discount the guy.
Click to expand...

In fairness Coleman, baines, jagielka and barkley didn't have the best of seasons either but plenty of people still want us to sign Coleman.

As you say there are not many strikers of his age who can claim to be loads better.
 
soap said:
Talk about horrible examples, comparing Owen to Lukaku! Completely different players AND Owen faded away because of persistent injuries. Babel was shite as soon as he left Eredivisie so I wouldn't hold him up as an example either. So that leaves Mpenza.

If he never played for Chelsea, why say he hasn't improved in 5 year years? If you want to argue he hasn't improved in 3 years that's one thing. He made some appearances from the bench and didn't do anything, when he got the chance to do the same for WBA he looked a different prospect. I wouldn't read much into that but you brought his time with Chelsea up. I think he was definitely better in his first year at Everton, a slightly better goal to minute ratio at WBA that doesn't change that. At WBA, for the much of the season Shane Long ran his bollocks off for 70 minutes and Lukaku came on to punish tired defences, at Everton he is much more of a key player. He stagnated last season, yes. There are plenty examples of this happening to young players, its no reason to discount the guy.

Can you tell me some strikers of Lukaku's age who are better btw?
Click to expand...

No they aren't horrible examples. We are looking at athletic players who didn't progress much, if at all from when they burst on to the scene as teenagers. At 19 Michael Owen was as good as he was 25 before his injuries started. Ryan Babel never developed into the player he was touted to be when he burst onto the scene.

Again you mention age in your question. Stop judging him purely on his age. Look at his career and how much football hes played and then see if there is great scope for potential improvement. Look at Aaron Lennon or Micah Richards. As 17/18 year olds they were seen as potential world beaters, but as it turned out, beyond their physical attributes, they just weren't that talented, hence the potential wasn't anywhere near what it was assumed it would be.

As I said, go back and look at previous Lukaku threads, Your arguments are nothing new and come up every season. We probably wont see the same arguments next season as he'll be 23 and by then people will have stopped judging him on his age. You've even done it again, by asking "can you tell me some strikers of Lukakus age who are better btw?" It's as if you've totally missed the point. You could have asked exactly the same question 5 years ago, last year or the year before that and got the answer you think vindicates your faith in him.
 
Owen's injuries did not start when he was 25, that just isnt true. He had hamstring problems years before that which affected his agility noticeably. Richards and Lennon are perhaps better examples but you can find loads of examples of hot prospects who were not physical players and ended up being average players - that's a universal reality regardless of particular attributes.. With Babel one could have made the argument that he hadn't done anything in a decent league - Lukaku has proven himself in the EPL. You could have made that argument about Lukaku when he was at Anderlecht. Which brings me on to my next point...

redmeister said:
You could have asked exactly the same question 5 years ago, last year or the year before that and got the answer you think vindicates your faith in him.
Click to expand...

So when he was 17 he was one of the best strikers of his age, now he's 22 and he's still one of the best strikers of his age (I'm guessing you agree with this seeing as you haven't told me any who are better). I'd say that indeed does vindicate my faith in him. He was not one of the best U23 strikers in the world when he was 17 and probably nkt even when he was at WBA so I'd say he's improving fine.

I'm not saying he is going to be a world class player - I don't think he will be, his touch isnt good enough. I'm just accounting for his age, not judging him on it. His physical attributes are extremely rare, he's two footed and has a piledriver of a shot. More importantly in the context of this discussion, he has plenty of time to improve his composure in front of goal and find more consistency, I don't see why that's such an objectional position.
 
I'm surprised there is so much discussion for an overpriced Cab horse with a questionable mentality and mediocre technique.
 
Memphis better be better at this tapping up malarkey than De Gea was with Thiago. Not fussy for Lukaku but he can get us Pogba if he wants!
 
Bwuk said:
Memphis better be better at this tapping up malarkey than De Gea was with Thiago. Not fussy for Lukaku but he can get us Pogba if he wants!
Click to expand...

He's also good friends with Eljero Elia and Zakaria Labyad, I hope he doesn't want to bring everyone he knows :nervous:
 
I think he can actually become a very good player, provided he keeps his head level, which at present looks a big IF. He's certainly a better prospect than a few on here make him out to be, He's.. 22 I believe? so still essentially a kid in football terms, he could potentially raise his game a level or two in the next few years, the raw potential is certainly there if he works on a few flaws in his game.
 
Last edited:
Didn't want him originally, but wouldn't be against it right now. He could step up a few levels and if he doesn't then he could be easily sold without too much of a loss. Not much quality on the market either right now. In terms of strikers it's a choice between the likes of Lacazette, Lukaku or Benteke. Would prefer Lacazette of the three, but would have Lukaku over Benteke.
 
No way should we go for Lukaku from bargain bin Everton, not worth it. He's not a prolific goalscorer and that is what we need now.
 
I'd like him tbh, think he's got a lot to offer. He's an LVG striker for sure and we've got the right system for him; he limits touches, controls defenders, pure goal scorer, decent hold up ability.

B9UFmRm.png


Pretty good return on paper in the Prem, especially if you consider the standard of teams he's been playing at. (West Brom/Everton)

Just turned 22 as well, might get stick for this but I think this would be a pretty good move.
 
Last edited:
Morpheus 7 said:
No way should we go for Lukaku from bargain bin Everton, not worth it. He's not a prolific goalscorer and that is what we need now.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure. He'll probably score 15 goals minimum and would definitely bully defenders playing for teams in the bottom half of the table. I mean last season was poor from him yet he managed 20 goals for Everton.
 
MyOnlySolskjaer said:
I'd like him tbh, think he's got a lot to offer. He's an LVG striker for sure and we've got the right system for him; he limits touches, controls defenders, pure goal scorer, decent hold up ability.

B9UFmRm.png


Pretty good return on paper in the Prem, especially if you consider the standard of teams he's been playing at. (West Brom/Everton)

Just turned 22 as well, might get stick for this but I think this would be a pretty good move.
Click to expand...
His record is good. I think he'd score 25+ (in all competitions) here without too much hassle.
30 (in 45-50 games) is about the aim.

Purely from a goal-scoring standpoint, he'd probably be okay. But you probably wouldn't back him in tight games where strikers only get two or three half-chances. And you'd have a good few games where he looks poor in his general play.
 
Speak said:
His record is good. I think he'd score 25+ (in all competitions) here without too much hassle.
30 (in 45-50 games) is about the aim.

Purely from a goal-scoring standpoint, he'd probably be okay. But you probably wouldn't back him in tight games where strikers only get two or three half-chances. And you'd have a good few games where he looks poor in his general play.
Click to expand...

Well there is still Rooney and not all goals need to come from the strikers ofcourse...

I'd like him I think he has alot of potential (and that is from following him since he was 17 years old). He is strong and he has pace, his strikers insitinct has improved, his record shows that he can score goals so with some guidance and confidence I think he could become a good striker for us.
 
Everton signed him for £28m just a year ago, they'll make us pay an absolute fortune for him.
 
Oh lord first people want Benteke then they try and scrape even lower at the bottom of the barrel and fined Lukaku, he's shite so hopefully this a a non starter.
 
bucky said:
Kane, Dybala, Morata, Vietto, Berardi

Based on last season though.
Click to expand...

Yeah last season form wise but his goalscoring record is better than there's (not talking last season) most of those names well Morata excluded have only had a one recognizable season.

Just think if you was to be stubborn about it you could really argue the case.. even though he's not for me.
 
iBoss said:
14/15
22 goals, 7 assists

13/14
22 goals, 8 assists

12/13
20 goals, 4 assists
Click to expand...
Oh here we go, roll out the stat brigade again. Jesus Christ Lukaku is really quite poor and it genuinely worries me that people would be open to the transfer
 
Status
Not open for further replies.