Jump to content
Join Talk Chelsea and join in with the discussions! Click Here

Non-Chelsea Transfer Pub


Hamilton
 Share
Followers 11

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Strike said:

 

City will get him I feel - seems like the time has come for a move for Grealish.

Would Grealish really improve City? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 28.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

BREAKING NEWS: Liverpool and Dortmund have reached an agreement over the transfer of Reus. They've agreed it's never going to happen. [emoji23]

It reminds me the day when we signed Hector and Djilobodji on the same day.

David Moyes is that ugly bloke at the nightclub who gets to 2am and just tries chatting up every girl. Take a hint dude - no-one likes you.

Posted Images

The thought of Arsenal managing to sign another competent striker in Martinez would be something. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Special Juan said:

Grealish to City...buying a player to win fouls, I am so far off this fucking Grealish bandwagon it's unreal.

He doesn't just win fouls he creates so much space for other players because he gets surrounded, and if u don't surround him he will plough through teams, he's a win win player 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Special Juan said:

Grealish to City...buying a player to win fouls, I am so far off this fucking Grealish bandwagon it's unreal.

He's a good player but this 'hype' only happened because people want(ed) to use him as a stick to beat Mount with, and even then he was the 2nd choice (after Maddison fell off a cliff).

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, BluesMadLad said:

He doesn't just win fouls he creates so much space for other players because he gets surrounded, and if u don't surround him he will plough through teams, he's a win win player 

Grealish is basically an Eden Hazard. I wonder why Chelsea fans don't rate Grealish because Eden was insane for us

Edited by killer1257
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, killer1257 said:

Grealish is basically an Eden Hazard. I wonder why Chelsea fans don't rate Grealish because Eden was insane for us

Simple answer... probably because he's English and not a big foreign player

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, killer1257 said:

Grealish is basically an Eden Hazard. I wonder why Chelsea fans don't rate Grealish because Eden was insane for us

Except with less pace, worse dribbling, worse shooting and worse off-the-pitch discipline. If at all he is a bad copycat. who wants to settle for the rip-off when you used to have the original. Try another product instead.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Magic Lamps said:

Except with less pace, worse dribbling, worse shooting and worse off-the-pitch discipline. If at all he is a bad copycat. who wants to settle for the rip-off when you used to have the original. Try another product instead.

I mean, yeah he is slower than Hazard and he isn't as good as Hazard at dribbling, but who in the PL is better at Dribbling than prime Eden Hazard? There was a time where Eden Hazard was the best dribbler in Europe and Messi was second best according to stats. But that does not mean that Grealish is a bad player. I think Grealish has great potential and I think he is much, much better than for instance Mount. Is he is better than Foden long term, we will see though

Edited by killer1257
Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, killer1257 said:

I mean, yeah he is slower than Hazard and he isn't as good as Hazard at dribbling, but who in the PL is better at Dribbling than prime Eden Hazard? There was a time where Eden Hazard was the best dribbler in Europe and Messi was second best according to stats. But that does not mean that Grealish is a bad player. I think Grealish has great potential and I think he is much, much better than for instance Mount. If he is better than Foden long term, we will see though

Grealish needs ages on the ball. For me he is too much of a downgrade for a team to afford him the amount of time in the ball a luxury player like Messi or hazard warrants. Who says we still need a hazard? The team has moved on style wise, we should not revel in the past trying to emulate a style that heavily relied on individuals esp if those individuals were just an inferior copy 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Either love or hate Grealish, I'm on the bandwagon, I think he is only going to get better, but in order for that to happen he needs to leave Villa asap and stop imitating Barkley off the field. Essentially, he has proved himself there and that he is able to step up when needed. He would definitely improve City and under Pep for sure, he improves any top team. Is he world class? No, can he be? I believe so under the right coach and in the right team, copy and paste that to any talent, I suppose.

That said, I am absolutely off the Foden bandwagon, I never got on it, good player, not great. The word(s) great and world class are just thrown around so easily these days.

Edited by DH1988
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, killer1257 said:

Grealish is basically an Eden Hazard. I wonder why Chelsea fans don't rate Grealish because Eden was insane for us

What…. he is nowhere near the same level Eden was or close to possessing the same footballing intelligence or creativity that Eden had for us….. and is nowhere near as decisive in the final third. As mentioned before, he clearly has a tendency to take too many touches and thats a problem at a big club when your doubled up against or need to move the ball quickly to break teams down. Maybe its ok at Villa when your their key man and they look to you but in a top team, with de Bruyne’s, Bernardo Silva’s, Sterling’s etc, you cannot afford to do that.

For sure, Grealish is a good player and improved his goals and assists last season but he played in a mid table team where he basically got a free role off the ball, didn’t need to track back, stayed high as Villa’s outlet on counters. Plus he only got 6 goals and 10 assists in 24 starts, 4 sub appearances. When you look at it 5 of those goal involvements came in that freak 7-2 game v Liverpool. Actually, 9 of those 16 goal involvements in the PL came in the first 7 games which he all started. So in another 17 starts and 4 sub appearances after the first 7 weeks he only got 7 goal involvements.

He’s in for a big shock at City because Pep will demand regular goals, assists and more importantly lots of work rate and pressing. Said it before, I think City should of signed Sancho back and United went for Grealish in all fairness. Sancho suits City more than Grealish would for me. And Grealish suits United more because hes a counter attacking player and thats how they play in big games.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I stand by my feeling that Grealish doesn’t make much of a difference for City and that £100m is an absolutely ridiculous price to pay for him.

He’s going to be good there as almost every attacker is but I don’t think he really makes them any any scarier than they already were. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...