sterling

[City64]

For the doubters Sterling is a very similar player to Hazard who we missed out on .Potentially being only 20 Sterling can be better than Hazard .......... no brainer for me !

not in the same league as Hazard, nowhere near.

That is a matter of opinion .We missed out on Hazard , Sterling can be POTENTIALLY as good as Hazard the lad is only 20 ! Hazard,s stats aren't great this season which is bizarre for a player of his quality , good job he takes penalties or his stats would be total dogshit ! Stats eh ;-)

[Chinners]

Whilst I think Sterling could be a fantastic player, I have reservations that he seems a right pre madona in the vain that Sturridge was when he asked for £55k a week after playing about 4 first team games. A 20 year old rejecting a £100k plus contract seems too sinister to me with regards to his outlook

[sheblue]

I like sterling but not at 50 mill, crazy risk at those shillings.

[Mike J]

Good player and id certainly take him. But if the price tag is 50million let arsenal have him

If he goes to Arsenal no doubt it would be dressed up as a great career move by the media. If its us no doubt he will just be a money grabbing cunt.

[iwasthere2012]

Well I'll fire it back at you; which homegrown players do you think are better & cheaper ?

That's not my point. My point is for the same money you'd spend on the likes of him and Barkley you'd buy better quality abroad, I'm sure. Take your pick there.
The academy players coming in can make up the squad positions elsewhere and fulfil the homegrown quota.
It's just my opinion. If it turned out we got him this summer, I wouldn't be greatly upset.

Then we would need to fill a further 6 places with academy players, if we are to operate a full squad (& most of those players are qulified on the UEFA B list anyway so don't even need registering in the A squad) . So effectively we choose to have maybe 6 empty places, rather than have players such as Sterling or Barkley ? A smaller squad than under the ffp restrictions ?

It wouldn't be everybody's choice on here, I know, but I've stated several times I'd be quite happy if City choose to move out the 8 or so that we expect and replace with 4 absolute A-listers. No room for spending over the odds on Sterling/Barkley etc. if you are talking £50mil+. Keep the money for your Pogba's and even Reus and the likes, even Bale if that's their wish. the players you think we should go for are subjective.
Bring back Denayer , Lopes, Ambrose if he's good enough. Put some of the academy in the squad as backup to the first choices that survive the cull.
Like I said, wouldn't suit everyone, but if we still put out a team that could secure top three, I'd be happy. It would be something we would grow with year on year.

[Fidel Castro]

Wouldn't surprise me if he eventually strangles a prostitute. He's got potential but could easily turn into a Pennant/Bentley imo

[DoomMerchant]

Wouldn't surprise me if he eventually strangles a prostitute. He's got potential but could easily turn into a Pennant/Bentley imo

Does he seem like a strangler tho? I'd have had him down for a hit and run/drink driving type. In a lambo. On Coke. After washing out at Villa or West Ham. Aged 26.

IF that's the turn he takes. Which he could. Probably. Easily. Maybe. Perhaps.

cheers

[Im_Spartacus]

Well I'll fire it back at you; which homegrown players do you think are better & cheaper ?

That's not my point. My point is for the same money you'd spend on the likes of him and Barkley you'd buy better quality abroad, I'm sure. Take your pick there.
The academy players coming in can make up the squad positions elsewhere and fulfil the homegrown quota.
It's just my opinion. If it turned out we got him this summer, I wouldn't be greatly upset.

Then we would need to fill a further 6 places with academy players, if we are to operate a full squad (& most of those players are qulified on the UEFA B list anyway so don't even need registering in the A squad) . So effectively we choose to have maybe 6 empty places, rather than have players such as Sterling or Barkley ? A smaller squad than under the ffp restrictions ?

It wouldn't be everybody's choice on here, I know, but I've stated several times I'd be quite happy if City choose to move out the 8 or so that we expect and replace with 4 absolute A-listers. No room for spending over the odds on Sterling/Barkley etc. if you are talking £50mil+. Keep the money for your Pogba's and even Reus and the likes, even Bale if that's their wish. the players you think we should go for are subjective.
Bring back Denayer , Lopes, Ambrose if he's good enough. Put some of the academy in the squad as backup to the first choices that survive the cull.
Like I said, wouldn't suit everyone, but if we still put out a team that could secure top three, I'd be happy. It would be something we would grow with year on year.

I'm not sure having 18 senior players, or even 20 is feasible without considerably weakening the squad - as I reckon we'd need to spend big money on 3 versatile players to make it work.

Assuming we flog Dzeko and Jovetic and ended up buying 2 wide forwards cum midfielders such as Bale and Sterling, both of these can play up front on their own in an emergency, as can Silva. An EDS player would likely still be 5th or 6th choice but we would have considerable flexibility in formation that we don't currently have.

So that's 4 forwards out of 18 places taken care of

In midfield, assuming Milner, Nasri, Toure go, and we bring in Pogba, we would have Fernadinho, Fernando, Pogba, Silva who would form the core of the 3 in central midfield, with Navas, Bale, Sterling out wide. This argues a case for Kolarov to stay as cover for the left midfield position or bring one of the left sided kids through - i wouldn't be comfortable with a kid being 1st backup to someone like bale though. We would also be light of cover in the centre, and we don't have any kids ready to step up in the middle just yet.

That's an additional 6 players, with arguably at least 1 more senior pro needed as cover for Silva......that might turn out to be Yaya staying.

In defence we have Clichy, Kompany, Mangala, Demichelis, Denayer, Zabaleta, Sagna. I think this leaves us a bit light in all honesty as there really isn't any great depth of cover there (Kolarov already included above), and I'd also be tempted to keep Boyata (possibly at the expense of Sagna) given Kompany being made of glass and none of the EDS lot being close to ready.

That's 8 defenders.

Throw in Hart and Caballero, and the squad would work out as 20 players, with 6 association trained (Bale, Sterling, Pogba, Clichy, Denayer, Hart). We would end up with kids on the bench a fair bit during injury crises, but running the squad so thin means we'd have to have the bring the very best talent in, anything less and we would struggle badly as soon as we had a couple of injuries.

What would it cost to do this? Fuck knows, its all going to be a bit silly this summer I think, but if we are bringing money in for Dzeko, Nasri, Jovetic I think we would struggle to get more than 30/40m......could we get Bale, Pogba and Sterling (or Reus) for sensible money within the current FFP regime? I doubt it, we'd need FFP to be lifted or to sell Toure, otherwise we are going to end up with inferior players and a thinner squad, which is my big fear of this type of scenario.

[Wooders]

35 million would be ok and that's what I've seen reported - where's 50 come from?

[Im_Spartacus]

35 million would be ok and that's what I've seen reported - where's 50 come from?

If he has 2.5 years left on a 5 year deal worth 35k a week, I don't know how this buying out business works, but it suggests that the true value would probably break down like this:

Contract Value - 4.5m
Transfer Value - well it certainly isn't 30m considering if we waited 6 months, it would go to whatever today's version of tribunal is to work out what Liverpool and Fulham were owed for development

I'd be very surprised if his genuine value came to anything more than 20-25m if he were to move this summer, unless Liverpool managed to find 2 or 3 mugs who wanted to get into a bidding war. Arsenal won't get into a bidding war, although I can see how Sterling would fit into Chelsea's system so that would be the thing that likely would bump the price up if we were to get involved.

Sterling holds all the cards here with both the buying and selling clubs, and he knows it. His problem is that he's too good for Liverpool but perhaps not quite ready for a 1st team spot at a top club though, so he may end up having to stay until he can buy himself out.

[Mase]

35 million would be ok and that's what I've seen reported - where's 50 come from?

If he has 2.5 years left on a 5 year deal worth 35k a week, I don't know how this buying out business works, but it suggests that the true value would probably break down like this:

Contract Value - 4.5m
Transfer Value - well it certainly isn't 30m considering if we waited 6 months, it would go to whatever today's version of tribunal is to work out what Liverpool and Fulham were owed for development

I'd be very surprised if his genuine value came to anything more than 20-25m if he were to move this summer, unless Liverpool managed to find 2 or 3 mugs who wanted to get into a bidding war. Arsenal won't get into a bidding war, although I can see how Sterling would fit into Chelsea's system so that would be the thing that likely would bump the price up if we were to get involved.

Sterling holds all the cards here with both the buying and selling clubs, and he knows it. His problem is that he's too good for Liverpool but perhaps not quite ready for a 1st team spot at a top club though, so he may end up having to stay until he can buy himself out.

Fulham?

[Tokyo Blue]

Fulham, QPR, same thing.

[Ted Hughes]

I don't understand why we need Sterling to be world class. He's 20 years old & fast, can beat a man & scores the odd goal. He is effectively taking up a place in the squad which is currently empty, as Lampard is going. He's been possibly their outstanding player vs us. He's not a Sinclair type signing.

By all reports, City expect to have money to spend, irrespective of ffp. If he comes in & is just 'ok' we can move him on to at his peak & get a decent fee for him. If he's brilliant we have him for years or we sell him to Real Madrid for a bucket full of cash. It"s miles more than he's worth but so is every single fee we are being quoted. And we may get him for less anyway.

If it stops us from signing our biggest target then of course it's a mistake, but they wouldn't sign him under those circumstances. And our big targets are going to be chased by others, so we are not necessarily favourites.

[freshie]

I don't understand why we need Sterling to be world class. He's 20 years old & fast, can beat a man & scores the odd goal. He is effectively taking up a place in the squad which is currently empty, as Lampard is going. He's been possibly their outstanding player vs us. He's not a Sinclair type signing.

By all reports, City expect to have money to spend, irrespective of ffp. If he comes in & is just 'ok' we can move him on to at his peak & get a decent fee for him. If he's brilliant we have him for years or we sell him to Real Madrid for a bucket full of cash. It"s miles more than he's worth but so is every single fee we are being quoted. And we may get him for less anyway.

If it stops us from signing our biggest target then of course it's a mistake, but they wouldn't sign him under those circumstances. And our big targets are going to be chased by others, so we are not necessarily favourites.

If he's just 'ok' then we aren't going to recoup what we paid for him. Just because we have an incredibly rich owner doesn't mean that we should pay over the odds for players - does value for money not come into the equation? I just think that £50m is too much to spend on a largely unproven player with a questionable off the field track record. We paid £38m for Aguero who was a much better player at the time then Sterling is now - I find it hard to justify the £50m fee that is being quoted and wouldn't want us to pay more than £30m for him. Let's not forget that he has only had one good season. You say that you don't understand why he has to be world class - that's fine as long as we don't pay the sort of money that is spent on world class players. I think that we are only favourites to sign him because nobody else is going to pay the amount of money that Liverpool want for him

I do agree though that every fee we are quoted is miles more than the players are worth. I suppose it all depends on how much UEFA are going to relax the FFP regulations

[Ted Hughes]

I don't understand why we need Sterling to be world class. He's 20 years old & fast, can beat a man & scores the odd goal. He is effectively taking up a place in the squad which is currently empty, as Lampard is going. He's been possibly their outstanding player vs us. He's not a Sinclair type signing.

By all reports, City expect to have money to spend, irrespective of ffp. If he comes in & is just 'ok' we can move him on to at his peak & get a decent fee for him. If he's brilliant we have him for years or we sell him to Real Madrid for a bucket full of cash. It"s miles more than he's worth but so is every single fee we are being quoted. And we may get him for less anyway.

If it stops us from signing our biggest target then of course it's a mistake, but they wouldn't sign him under those circumstances. And our big targets are going to be chased by others, so we are not necessarily favourites.

If he's just 'ok' then we aren't going to recoup what we paid for him. Just because we have an incredibly rich owner doesn't mean that we should pay over the odds for players - does value for money not come into the equation? I just think that £50m is too much to spend on a largely unproven player with a questionable off the field track record. We paid £38m for Aguero who was a much better player at the time then Sterling is now - I find it hard to justify the £50m fee that is being quoted and wouldn't want us to pay more than £30m for him. Let's not forget that he has only had one good season. You say that you don't understand why he has to be world class - that's fine as long as we don't pay the sort of money that is spent on world class players. I think that we are only favourites to sign him because nobody else is going to pay the amount of money that Liverpool want for him

Pogba isn't world class.

We either sign nobody or pay over the odds. Sterling's record in the Premier League is way ahead of Pogba's.

[freshie]

I don't understand why we need Sterling to be world class. He's 20 years old & fast, can beat a man & scores the odd goal. He is effectively taking up a place in the squad which is currently empty, as Lampard is going. He's been possibly their outstanding player vs us. He's not a Sinclair type signing.

By all reports, City expect to have money to spend, irrespective of ffp. If he comes in & is just 'ok' we can move him on to at his peak & get a decent fee for him. If he's brilliant we have him for years or we sell him to Real Madrid for a bucket full of cash. It"s miles more than he's worth but so is every single fee we are being quoted. And we may get him for less anyway.

If it stops us from signing our biggest target then of course it's a mistake, but they wouldn't sign him under those circumstances. And our big targets are going to be chased by others, so we are not necessarily favourites.

If he's just 'ok' then we aren't going to recoup what we paid for him. Just because we have an incredibly rich owner doesn't mean that we should pay over the odds for players - does value for money not come into the equation? I just think that £50m is too much to spend on a largely unproven player with a questionable off the field track record. We paid £38m for Aguero who was a much better player at the time then Sterling is now - I find it hard to justify the £50m fee that is being quoted and wouldn't want us to pay more than £30m for him. Let's not forget that he has only had one good season. You say that you don't understand why he has to be world class - that's fine as long as we don't pay the sort of money that is spent on world class players. I think that we are only favourites to sign him because nobody else is going to pay the amount of money that Liverpool want for him

Pogba isn't world class.

We either sign nobody or pay over the odds. Sterling's record in the Premier League is way ahead of Pogba's.

Although I didn't mention Pogba, I agree he isn't world class and the £70-80m fees being quoted for him are obscene

[Ted Hughes]

I don't understand why we need Sterling to be world class. He's 20 years old & fast, can beat a man & scores the odd goal. He is effectively taking up a place in the squad which is currently empty, as Lampard is going. He's been possibly their outstanding player vs us. He's not a Sinclair type signing.

By all reports, City expect to have money to spend, irrespective of ffp. If he comes in & is just 'ok' we can move him on to at his peak & get a decent fee for him. If he's brilliant we have him for years or we sell him to Real Madrid for a bucket full of cash. It"s miles more than he's worth but so is every single fee we are being quoted. And we may get him for less anyway.

If it stops us from signing our biggest target then of course it's a mistake, but they wouldn't sign him under those circumstances. And our big targets are going to be chased by others, so we are not necessarily favourites.

If he's just 'ok' then we aren't going to recoup what we paid for him. Just because we have an incredibly rich owner doesn't mean that we should pay over the odds for players - does value for money not come into the equation? I just think that £50m is too much to spend on a largely unproven player with a questionable off the field track record. We paid £38m for Aguero who was a much better player at the time then Sterling is now - I find it hard to justify the £50m fee that is being quoted and wouldn't want us to pay more than £30m for him. Let's not forget that he has only had one good season. You say that you don't understand why he has to be world class - that's fine as long as we don't pay the sort of money that is spent on world class players. I think that we are only favourites to sign him because nobody else is going to pay the amount of money that Liverpool want for him

Pogba isn't world class.

We either sign nobody or pay over the odds. Sterling's record in the Premier League is way ahead of Pogba's.

Although I didn't mention Pogba, I agree he isn't world class and the £70-80m fees being quoted for him are obscene

The rags have destroyed the transfer market. If Luke Shaw is 30 mil, Barkley & Sterling are bargains if they go for less than 50. DiMaria 60 mil ? Pogba is more because of his age.

Rooney went for 26 mil at 18 in 2004. Them again. They have always fucked up the transfer market for everyone else. It doesn't bother me at all if we set the going rate for a promising player @ 50 mil. It means those cunts can't afford to make many more signings.

[freshie]

I don't understand why we need Sterling to be world class. He's 20 years old & fast, can beat a man & scores the odd goal. He is effectively taking up a place in the squad which is currently empty, as Lampard is going. He's been possibly their outstanding player vs us. He's not a Sinclair type signing.

By all reports, City expect to have money to spend, irrespective of ffp. If he comes in & is just 'ok' we can move him on to at his peak & get a decent fee for him. If he's brilliant we have him for years or we sell him to Real Madrid for a bucket full of cash. It"s miles more than he's worth but so is every single fee we are being quoted. And we may get him for less anyway.

If it stops us from signing our biggest target then of course it's a mistake, but they wouldn't sign him under those circumstances. And our big targets are going to be chased by others, so we are not necessarily favourites.

If he's just 'ok' then we aren't going to recoup what we paid for him. Just because we have an incredibly rich owner doesn't mean that we should pay over the odds for players - does value for money not come into the equation? I just think that £50m is too much to spend on a largely unproven player with a questionable off the field track record. We paid £38m for Aguero who was a much better player at the time then Sterling is now - I find it hard to justify the £50m fee that is being quoted and wouldn't want us to pay more than £30m for him. Let's not forget that he has only had one good season. You say that you don't understand why he has to be world class - that's fine as long as we don't pay the sort of money that is spent on world class players. I think that we are only favourites to sign him because nobody else is going to pay the amount of money that Liverpool want for him

Pogba isn't world class.

We either sign nobody or pay over the odds. Sterling's record in the Premier League is way ahead of Pogba's.

Although I didn't mention Pogba, I agree he isn't world class and the £70-80m fees being quoted for him are obscene

The rags have destroyed the transfer market. If Luke Shaw is 30 mil, Barkley & Sterling are bargains if they go for less than 50. DiMaria 60 mil ? Pogba is more because of his age.

Rooney went for 26 mil at 18 in 2004. Them again. They have always fucked up the transfer market for everyone else. It doesn't bother me at all if we set the going rate for a promising player @ 50 mil. It means those cunts can't afford to make many more signings.

Fair point regarding Luke Shaw. Ultimately the transfer market is fucked due to clubs like the rags and we just have to deal with it I suppose. Time for Sheikh Mansour to get the chequebook out again then. To sign the 4 or 5 quality players we need this might have to be our biggest transfer window yet, getting close to £200m

[Ted Hughes]

We may get quite a fair bit in if we get rid of several at the same time though.

[MilnersJaw]

The way people going on here trying justify how good he is because they want him at the club is laughable.