Romelu Lukaku

[robsblubot 3,595]

8 minutes ago, BluesMadLad said:

Did u rate Drogba?

Because Drogba played 254 games and scored 104 goals in the PL

Lukaku played 252 games and scored 114 goals. And he played for West brom at one point.

No doubt Drogba was awesome, am not saying that but give this lad some credit atleast he's no where near as bad as ppl make out.

Drogba was twice the player. He had the ability, esp in the air, to win games out of nothing (as he did).

I actually watched Lukaku play in a pre-season match in NYC when he was still with us. Lukaku and Luiz were both amazing in that game, but his characteristics as a player have not changed: lots of power, pace (esp for a guy of his build), and only mediocre skill on the ball... kinda heavy first touch.

So, it's sad that we've had this player, let him go, and are getting him back for over 100m. Like him or not, it's not like he completely reinvented his game. It's the very same player.

Will have to trust Tuchel knows how to use him is all.

[YorkshireBlue 3,275]

6 minutes ago, robsblubot said:

Drogba was twice the player. He had the ability, esp in the air, to win games out of nothing (as he did).

I actually watched Lukaku play in a pre-season match in NYC when he was still with us. Lukaku and Luiz were both amazing in that game, but his characteristics as a player have not changed: lots of power, pace (esp for a guy of his build), and only mediocre skill on the ball... kinda heavy first touch.

So, it's sad that we've had this player, let him go, and are getting him back for over 100m. Like him or not, it's not like he completely reinvented his game. It's the very same player.

Will have to trust Tuchel knows how to use him is all.

I wasn't saying Drogba wasn't. Drogba was a brilliant player, am pointing out the fact that lukaku has more goals in the EPL than him thats all. City just paid 100m for grealish and talk of 150m for kane. Prices will only go up my point is inter value rom at 100m not lukaku himself.

[YorkshireBlue 3,275]

5 minutes ago, Hermione said:

What an odd comment, yes I liked him and so what? He didn't came at the peak of his career, was just a good player in France, he wasn't hyped as the best in the world, his skillset was twice to those of Lukaku, had no PL experience and didn't cost anywhere near as much even if you take inflation into consideration, on top of that Abramovic was in full spending mode at the time whereas right now has a fully fleshed board who should take the best decisions instead of him.

So why exactly didn't we postpone our search for a striker until next season if all we get for 100 millions is 6-7 more goals than Abraham would score this season? 

Because the market will be the same if not more next year 100m gets u a grealish 150 gets u kane 200+ mill gets u haarland 800k a week gets u messi. So what would we be waiting for? Who would u sign next year? 

[robsblubot 3,595]

2 minutes ago, BluesMadLad said:

I wasn't saying Drogba wasn't. Drogba was a brilliant player, am pointing out the fact that lukaku has more goals in the EPL than him thats all. City just paid 100m for grealish and talk of 150m for kane. Prices will only go up my point is inter value rom at 100m not lukaku himself.

true, but Grealish carries the English add-on in his price tag.

Lukaku had a pretty bad time last time in the PL, turned it around in Italy, which still makes it a pretty big bet in my book: regardless of being "better" the PL has its own characteristics. I sure hope he at least keeps his Italian fitness.

I actually think Kane is a much better footballer and weren't for his Injury proneness, I'd say he'd be worth the additional cost.

I just feel that football has changed recently and a pure #9 does not buy you as much anymore. Sure hope to be wrong here.

[YorkshireBlue 3,275]

5 minutes ago, Hermione said:

Even if you take Haaland out, Lewandowski, Vlahovic, Adeyemi, Isak if they develop all would cost less than Lukaku right now.

IF... we have a club full of IFs 

[Hashishi 148]

4 minutes ago, Hermione said:

Lukaku himself is a if though, can't have it both ways, a few days ago he was world class and now needs time to settle in and 15 PL would be good, for 100 millions you don't buy if players (unless you're Barcelona but whatever).

I think buying Ifs isn't the worst idea. Ifs got us Hazard and Havertz. Every player we have bought at his peak, we have destroyed, all the way back to Shevchenko (apart from the odd Fabregas). All of our Ifs from last year are more established and managed to win CL in their first year.

I'm hoping Lukaku is a fabregas/Costa type signing as he is just a piece of the puzzle. My issue is that I don't think he's suited to a team that presses so he will probably be limited to teams that sit back. That just means we are buying a squad player for 100m which reeks like a Drinky/Barky signing. 

[Clockwork 1,794]

Drogba and Lukaku couldn’t be anymore different. I am sick of this comparison.

[DH1988 1,348]

The biggest difference in Drogba and Lukaku, I feel, is that in a big game with Drogba, I felt zero worries upfront.. Now it is all I worry about in big games.

 

Nothing emphasises that as much as the FA cup final vs. United.

[OhForAGreavsie 6,072]

48 minutes ago, Hashishi said:

Every player we have bought at his peak, we have destroyed, all the way back to Shevchenko (apart from the odd Fabregas). All of our Ifs from last year are more established and managed to win CL in their first year.

Sheva was, as I said after watching him at World Cup 06, absolutely finished when we bought him. The phrase I used at the time was that, "He had nothing to offer us." The same was true of Torres who I never rated at all, even when he was scoring goals for Liverpool. Irrespective of that temporary success he was a fundamentally limited player. If Eden was an if then every player we ever signed was an "if."  There are ifs everywhere but there really shouldn't be one in the argument you make about buying a 100,000,000 player. Let's hope TT was the one making that argument and let's hope that he at least has no doubts.

[Blue Armour 4,439]

3 hours ago, Clockwork said:

Drogba and Lukaku couldn’t be anymore different. I am sick of this comparison.

Same.

A lot of stems from the fact that they have a similar build and because Lukaku is a Drogba fan.

Didier's football IQ is superior to anything I've seen in Lukaku so far. And his skillset made him a perfect target man. A lot of tricks, flicks, pirouettes, and ability to cross from either wing,..you can go on and on.

Lukaku on the other, has more raw pace (not that Drogba was a slouch). A lot of his game revolves around his pace and power, and of course he is a fox in the box. Lethal with both feet.

 

[YorkshireBlue 3,275]

5 hours ago, Clockwork said:

Drogba and Lukaku couldn’t be anymore different. I am sick of this comparison.

I wasn't comparing the two just pointing out lukaku has scored more goals. Wasnt comparing there play style or aerial abilities.

[OhForAGreavsie 6,072]

12 hours ago, Warning_Hazard said:

Heres a question:

What will be required of him for people class a him/the tranfer a success?...

My version of the answer is easier to say but more complicated to assess than a straightforward count of goals and assists. Rom simply needs to make us a better side.

[OhForAGreavsie 6,072]

12 hours ago, BluesMadLad said:

2 years away, that will need time to adjust. Our top scorer last season was jorgi with 7 goals lol, so yeah ATLEAST 15 is a massive upgrade to that.

No, I don't believe that it would represent an upgrade. What counts is a player's contribution. Jorgi's goals are an irrelevance to his place in the team. He earns his spot by doing his positional job. Fail to do that and he's out, do it and he's in even with zero goals. A centre forward's positional functions include many things, goals among them.

Edited August 10, 2021 by OhForAGreavsie

[OhForAGreavsie 6,072]

9 hours ago, BluesMadLad said:

u can't blame lukaku for his price. 

Agreed of course. Let's hope there won't be any blame to be shared out.

[OhForAGreavsie 6,072]

9 hours ago, BluesMadLad said:

100m is the new norm its nothing special

Football has GOT to get a grip.

[OhForAGreavsie 6,072]

9 hours ago, BluesMadLad said:

Did u rate Drogba?

Because Drogba played 254 games and scored 104 goals in the PL

Lukaku played 252 games and scored 114 goals. And he played for West brom at one point.

No doubt Drogba was awesome, am not saying that but give this lad some credit atleast he's no where near as bad as ppl make out.

Take out The Drog's 29 goals in 32 games during 2009/10 and his record becomes 75 goals in 222 games. Just under 1 in 3. This underlines the truth about Didier which gets disguised in our memories by his habit of performing in the big games and his penchant for the spectacular. This truth is that he had notable technical shortcomings of his own. As I regularly admit, when I watched DD at Marseilles I was against signing him. In fact I did a post saying that his touch was hit and miss, his control on the run can be clumsy and he likes a dive.

What I did not see at Marseilles was Didier's character and his character was one of, if not absolutely, his major contribution to the team. There were days when, even with JT & SFL in the side, Didier was the true leader on the pitch. Cast your minds back to the number of times the lads were in a huddle and DD was the one doing that talking. His personality is how The Drog compensated for his technical issues. This personality is the only thing which stops me being certain that we would have won more had we signed a technically better player instead of DD. Even so I do believe that. I can't be certain of it but I do believe it.

Anyway, The Drog is history and Rom is the future. It's on people like me to get behind Rom and flood him with positivity in the stadium(s). Most importantly don't get on his back if he has a slow start either in terms of goal involvements or general play. We have nothing to gain, and everything to lose by turning our doubts into a self-fulfilling prophecy. 

Edited August 10, 2021 by OhForAGreavsie

[Superblue 6,372]

32 minutes ago, OhForAGreavsie said:

My version of the answer is easier to say but more complicated to assess than a straightforward count of goals and assists. Rom simply needs to make us a better side.

Even this could be subjective though for different people.

Is better side a higher league position or playing better quality, more pleasing on the eye football? Because there's every chance that his inclusion improves one but worsens the other.

For me, I've never cared less about the quality of the football so long as we win. If anything sometimes the "backs to the wall", defending for our lives and nick a goal are the most satisfying.

If Lukaku, whether it's through his goals, assists, or just his general presence in the team gets more out of the likes of Werner, Pulisic and Havertz, gives us a greater chance of winning the league and other competitions then I believe his purchase and inclusion will be merited.

[OhForAGreavsie 6,072]

3 minutes ago, Superblue_1986 said:

Even this could be subjective though for different people.

Is better side a higher league position or playing better quality, more pleasing on the eye football? Because there's every chance that his inclusion improves one but worsens the other.

For me, I've never cared less about the quality of the football so long as we win. If anything sometimes the "backs to the wall", defending for our lives and nick a goal are the most satisfying.

If Lukaku, whether it's through his goals, assists, or just his general presence in the team gets more out of the likes of Werner, Pulisic and Havertz, gives us a greater chance of winning the league and other competitions then I believe his purchase and inclusion will be merited.

Yes, you've fleshed out what I meant when I said the assessment is more complicated if becoming a 'better' team is the yardstick. My biggest, maybe only, disagreement with what you say here is the bit about not caring if the football is of 'quality' or not.

When I played winning was all that mattered but when I watch professional football I need more. I've walked out of the Bridge more times than I can count utterly frustrated after a win. Watching the ball bounce off people's shins never makes me feel good. By the way, let's not doubt that there is also quality in defending well. It's not about whether you aim to control the game by dominating possession or by conceding it. Whatever the side chooses to do what counts is whether it does it well. 

[Superblue 6,372]

10 minutes ago, OhForAGreavsie said:

Yes, you've fleshed out what I meant when I said the assessment is more complicated if becoming a 'better' team is the yardstick. My biggest, maybe only, disagreement with what you say here is the bit about not caring if the football is of 'quality' or not.

When I played winning was all that mattered but when I watch professional football I need more. I've walked out of the Bridge more times than I can count utterly frustrated after a win. Watching the ball bounce off people's shins never makes me feel good. By the way, let's not doubt that there is also quality in defending well. It's not about whether you aim to control the game by dominating possession or by conceding it. Whatever the side chooses to do what counts is whether it does it well. 

I agree to an extent with this - if it was week after week, it can become a little demoralising, especially if it feels there is no end in sight. I think with the profile of players we have we're not suddenly going to play turgid football at every given opportunity. There will be some games where the football clicks and is of the highest quality, but there will be some games where we are poor. Every team has games like this. In this instance you just have to gut it out and win those games.

Going back to Lukaku, I don't think his inclusion is going to mean our football becomes a hard watch. I don't see us suddenly banging long balls up to him at will for example. But on the same token he isn't as technically sound as a Havertz and there may not be as much fluidity between the front players. But if his presence spearheading the attack makes it more effective then he's doing his job in the team.

[Jype 6,398]

13 hours ago, Warning_Hazard said:

Heres a question:

What will be required of him for people class a him/the tranfer a success?...

I couldn't give less fucks about how many goals he scores on a personal level, but the team need to play well with Lukaku in it.

I've seen people claim he needs to score 25+ league goals every year to be considered a success, but that's a very unrealistic expectation to put on any player. Aguero did it only once in his 10 year City career, Salah has done it once in his career across all clubs and leagues, Kane has done slightly better but still less than half his seasons are 25+ in the PL etc.

Diego Costa for example reached a maximum of 20 league goals a season for us, yet he was a massive player for us and improved the team immensely to win two league titles in three years. If Lukaku scores 20 in the league but the team aren't playing well I wouldn't consider him a success even though on paper he'd have matched Costa's performance in the team. 

To be labeled a success Lukaku needs to develop good chemistry with the players around him and help them score more goals as well, either by providing the final pass or just by making movements that bind defenders to mark him and thus creating space for others to score. At Inter he had that chemistry with Lautaro Martinez so I don't see how he couldn't have it with Werner, Havertz as well.