Its rumoured that M City with all their wealth can sign pretty much whoever they want, so three names were put up as those that City had earmarked; Delph, Pogba and Sterling. Signing those three would be massive for city and help attack cfc for the prem title.
Well, delph has decided to stay put at Villa and Pogba (funny enough city were rumoured to meet HIS release clause) looks Barca bound according to some report's, that leaves Sterling who it appears ain't leqving for a penny less than £50M. So, it looks like city may well have to cough up the full £50M if they want to sign one of their major targets, because it looks like it's the only one they might actually get.
For a team like city to lose all three of their top targets doesnt send out the battle cry of we're coming back for the title, does it? Its more like, we would, like too but it looks like we cant.
Do City HAVE to take Sterling?
posted on 12/7/15
Did Rodgers or Gerrard leave in January Arouna?
posted on 12/7/15
comment by Arouna Jagielka oooh I wanna take ya, Heitinga Nikica come on pretty mama (U1308)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Be A Grizzly (U2206)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by Arouna Jagielka oooh I wanna take ya, Heitinga Nikica come on pretty mama (U1308)
posted 13 minutes ago
It's an shambles
What a farce, all this then Rodgers will waste the transfer cash on some expensive dross
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What, you think we are after Lukaku?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
By all accounts Rodgers is going to give Villa £32.5m for a player who is older an worse than Lukaku
Hurry up City, Villa want your dosh via Todgers and Liverpool
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Benteke is a good player, lukaku is a good player. Liverpool have the money to be able to spend at these levels, Everton sunk their life savings on Lukaku and he has been average at best. Its pretty clear whose position is better.
posted on 12/7/15
According to reports in the sc.um, both City and United apper to be after Benteke so we're safe. One of them will probably pay £40m
posted on 12/7/15
Benteke has a release clause of £32.5m.
Meet that or shop elsewhere as Villa are in control. Maybe City will buy you him and give you some cash for Sterling
posted on 12/7/15
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Arouna Jagielka oooh I wanna take ya, Heitinga... (U1308)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Be A Grizzly (U2206)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by Arouna Jagielka oooh I wanna take ya, Heitinga Nikica come on pretty mama (U1308)
posted 13 minutes ago
It's an shambles
What a farce, all this then Rodgers will waste the transfer cash on some expensive dross
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What, you think we are after Lukaku?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
By all accounts Rodgers is going to give Villa £32.5m for a player who is older an worse than Lukaku
Hurry up City, Villa want your dosh via Todgers and Liverpool
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Benteke is a better player than Lukaku.
Benteke has a better goals per game ratio. Better headers won ratio, better pass ratio etc.
I'm not quite sure have you managed to delude yourself on this matter.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I will make my own judgements here, I remember you saying Borini would be a good player/come good.
All in all Lukaku is younger, cheaper and has more to his game than the target man Benteke. Case closed
posted on 12/7/15
You can't really call Lukaka cheap as you spent £28m on him, which probably makes him twice the value of your stadium, and £28m for you is a hell of a lot more than £32.5m is for us even though we won't sign him for that.
posted on 12/7/15
How does being cheaper make you a better player? Doesn't it suggest the opposite?
posted on 12/7/15
comment by 李贝 If anyone can, Emre Can... And don't call me Schürrle (U3979)
posted 1 hour, 2 minutes ago
You can't really call Lukaka cheap as you spent £28m on him, which probably makes him twice the value of your stadium, and £28m for you is a hell of a lot more than £32.5m is for us even though we won't sign him for that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you don't think Villa will ask for what they value him at?
As with City, pay the price or don't sign the player
posted on 12/7/15
Then we probably won't sign the guy and still I'd rather be Liverpool and pay £32.5 million for Benteke than be Everton and sign Lukaku for £28m.
posted on 12/7/15
We just gave United Fellaini and they paid Chelsea for Rom