Dr_Pangloss Posted September 2, 2017 Share Posted September 2, 2017 (edited) 2 hours ago, villaglint said: Obviously that's not great but he essentially forced a move in order to join a club which gave him a better shot at first team football. Nice to see a player actually wanting to play. You see so many ruin their careers just for the $ now. Pings did the same a few years back and it's worked out OK for him. Yes, he has gone to a club with a legacy of developing talented young players, he will look at the likes of Pulisic and think he will not be too far off first team football. City have no recent legacy of developing players at all, the prospects for him at City would have been 4 years of being farmed out on loan. The England national team will benefit greatly from top prospects at 'top' clubs in England forcing moves abroad. Edited September 2, 2017 by Dr_Pangloss 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted September 2, 2017 Share Posted September 2, 2017 Yes, while it's hard to approve of going on strike (unless it's to join us, obviously!) it's good that he's leaving City. They'll never bring a youth product through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xela Posted September 2, 2017 Share Posted September 2, 2017 On 9/1/2017 at 08:42, Dante_Lockhart said: Arsenal reject a 10m bid for Gibbs and say 50m+ is too much for Lemar in July. Sell Gibbs for 7m and offer 92m for Lemar in August. Quality work. Classic Wenger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa89 Posted September 4, 2017 Share Posted September 4, 2017 On 9/2/2017 at 12:06, HanoiVillan said: Yes, while it's hard to approve of going on strike (unless it's to join us, obviously!) it's good that he's leaving City. They'll never bring a youth product through. They did with Ihenancho. They got £25m for him so that's nothing to be sniffed at. For big clubs it's not about getting players into their own teams, it's about making money from snapping up young talent and then loaning them out until they are sellable assets. The Chelsea model if you will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted September 4, 2017 Share Posted September 4, 2017 16 minutes ago, villa89 said: They did with Ihenancho. They got £25m for him so that's nothing to be sniffed at. For big clubs it's not about getting players into their own teams, it's about making money from snapping up young talent and then loaning them out until they are sellable assets. The Chelsea model if you will. Honestly, I think that's a very 'Premier League' way of looking at it. Madrid and Barcelona manage to bring youth products through. Iheanacho is really an example of what I'm talking about. He got a few sub appearances and cup games, mostly looked excellent, and then got sold because there was a 0% chance they'd ever play him regularly in the first team. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted September 4, 2017 Share Posted September 4, 2017 you could probably make a decent argument of it being part of chelsea's business model, sign players they know they wont ever play, in some cases players who they know wont get work permits, send them out of various loans with the clubs covering at least part of the wages, sell them at a profit this summer they sold Ake, cuadrado, traore, atsu, chalobah all sold for £60m (bought for around £25m, cuadrado was £20m of that) and then just the 16 loans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts