Manchester United banter 72737

 

Use our rumours form to send us manchester united transfer rumours.



13 Jul 2016 19:36:31
Reports that phil jones has been told by jose that he has a long future at the club and will be a first choice centre back next season. Anyone happy if this was the case?

Also city apparently paying 53mil for john stones. Puts any potential pogba deal in perspective.

Agree1 Disagree2

13 Jul 2016 19:47:04
I think Jones could be a fantastic centre back just a shame he's made out of glass.

13 Jul 2016 19:59:12
Pogba is a good player so is stones.

13 Jul 2016 20:06:46
Im always amazed how quick people change there opinions on this site.

I like stones i think he is a good player . Overpriced but if everton don't want to sell it would take an offer of more than what he is worth to get him .

Now I've been shot down many times over stones being to expensive by the same people who now think its not our money who cares .

We know jose wanted stones last season but ibram pulled the plug at 40 mil.
I wonder what people would of said if chelsea paid the 50 mil and jose got stones?

13 Jul 2016 20:55:38
I agree with you jred, i think stones has all the capabilities to be a top centre back but my op was just stating that we are not the only ones potentially overpaying for players. The market is what it is and with the increased money being pumped into the premier league this is only the start.

Last season joses plan with stones was very clear. He had one centre back in john terry who has been a stalwart for chelsea for many year but was and is on the decline. Next to him was gary cahill who was average and not good enough. With zouma at the club already, jose saw the oppurtunity to blood two promising young defenders next to terry eventually developing those two into a formidable partnership.

If he were to draw the same conclusions with bailly and stones i would be happy for him to pay what it takes to get stones just as i am with pogba coming for an exorbitant fee. If you get 6 plus years of great service out of these players their transfer fees will become inconsequential.

13 Jul 2016 21:06:23
Dsg
I'm of the same opinion pal.
Others aren't and to be honest there are that many factors involved no one is right or wrong

But a lot of people only care about transfer fees wages if it suits there argument.

13 Jul 2016 22:05:58
I agree with jred. Although I didn't want Stones because I thought he was overpriced. A very good young player with great potential but not a player currently worth what you would have to pay for him.

Now my opinion on Pogba is exactly the same, he is a great talent, ajd is probably a year or two ahead of Stones in development but he isn't worth the money being asked for him.
For a world record fee regardless of inflation or current market value should mean you get arguably the best player in the world. At the very least a player who will make a very telling difference to the team every single week. Pogba can and should get to this level, but he isn't their yet. He is a decent player who occasionly does something world class, but not often enough to make a telling difference in nearly every game.

Put it this way, when Zidane left Juventus for Real Madrid for a world record fee it badly effected Juventus because Zidane was such a key player. When we lost Ronaldo to Real Madrid for a record fee, it badly effected us because Ronaldo was such a key player. The same for Spurs when Bale left, and Liverpool when Suarez left.

Players who go for world record fees should be the very heart beat of their team, the key player.

Pogba as good as he is, as great as he can be isn't even in Juve's top three best performing players last season. Bonucci, Dybala and Buffon where far more important players for Juventus last season, so if Pogba is worth 100m then what are those three worth?

I have no problem with the club breaking records, but that should be for players who are record breakers on the pitch.

13 Jul 2016 22:28:03
Shappy did zidane leaving really affect juve badly? If i remember correctly they used the money to fund buffon, thuram and nedved and went on to win a very competitive serie a title and reach the champions league final a year later and narrowly lost out on penalties.

Also after ronaldo left we still won league titles and made champions league finals.

Now i am not saying that those two weren't hugely important players but it seems a strange way to judge pogbas worth. He might be as highly regarded as bonucci and dybala, juve made him their highest paid player aged 21 and rejected huge offers for him last summer. They wouldn't have done that if they didn't consider pogba very very important to their club.

13 Jul 2016 23:33:41
Okay let me put it another way.

Is Pogba the worlds best player? Is he in the top 5? Where would he rank in comparision to the best players currently playing?

Personally I wouldn't put Pogba in the top 10 best footballers currently playing. He certainly has potential to hit those heights, but he isn't there yet.

Which if there are at least 10 better players, then there should be at least 10 more expensive players. Because if Pogba is the 11th best player in the world then the 10 ahead of him are more valuable.

That is why Pogba is overpriced regardless of arguments about inflation or "thats just the market".

Very good player, but anything over 50-55m at this stage in his career is far too much.

13 Jul 2016 23:30:13
Spot on dsg.

14 Jul 2016 02:26:01
jred - those that say Pogba is worth the money if Jose rates him, don't seem to view Stones the same way. Even though Jose obviously rates him, too.

14 Jul 2016 06:34:32
99
Of course not. Its only a valid point if it suits there argument.







 

 

 
Log In or Register to post

User
Pass
Remember me

Forgot Pass