Jump to content

The RJW63 Official Jack Grealish Appreciation Thread


kevangrealish

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, a m ole said:

Those jeans are also much, MUCH worse than any of the Supreme/Nike stuff he was being slated for wearing, or when he wore a white T-shirt and sweatpants and got called out.

They are very different 😂

Indeed, I'm not prude or anything mate, I totally get " Streetwear " , as a matter of fact, I operate a Streetwear Store/Brand myself mate.

It's like he's turned up the level of douche to reflect his surroundings and " status ', then again, it could just be, being more true to himself" lol.

Anyway don't want to dwell and appear bitter.

I was sent the photos so thought I'd share.

Apparently the context is that this was a fashion launch, and he turned up plastered.

It being a fashion launch might lean to the fit being bearable. lol

Edited by JAMAICAN-VILLAN
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Wainy316 said:

Ironic that the new contract we all got excited about him signing last summer is what led to him leaving.

If still on the old deal we could've taken the Levy approach and batted off any offers.

True, although in fairness it's understandable that most of us fell for his "my club my city" BS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fairy In Boots said:

Your comparing a different thing there, I said on Jack’s current deal I’d have stayed. If you’re not getting your market value it’s a different conversation but we were offering £225k p/w over 5 years that’s roughly £60m. To stay at the club you supposedly love and lead it back to the upper echelons of English football (because that’s happening over the next 2-3 years) or go to a club you have no connection to for £100m? 
 

To me I’d stay both sums are obscene, you’re set for life with it especially given potential earnings outside the game. Why go there for that with no connection to them? It’s greed. I’ve been warned before so can’t say anything else but “over sweeteners” had a say in this, it’s financial greed that has done this nothing more.

Money is only a motivating factor up to a certain point. 

He hasn't gone for money. he's gone for success. Something we'll (probably) never be able to offer him.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Wainy316 said:

Ironic that the new contract we all got excited about him signing last summer is what led to him leaving.

If still on the old deal we could've taken the Levy approach and batted off any offers.

but would we reject £100m for him?

the thing about the clause is that its enabled the club to deflect any negativity (or at least most of the negativity) away from themselves but in reality i think £100m is an incredible amount of money for him that we could well have accepted anyway, without it i reckon city would have spent the summer in the rags arguing over a fee of around £80m, its definitely led to an increase valuation of him, i don't think in an open market with no clause we'd have got more for him

also think he's easier to replace than kane, spurs will do very very well to find another guaranteed 20+ goal a season striker (when fit)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, icouldtelltheworld said:

No offence meant here, but I find this behaviour from a fully grown adult to be really odd. Seems to be a fair bit of it on here and more widely on social media, its juvenile and frankly a bit weird changing people's names like this.

For what it's worth, I felt exactly the same when people were calling Lambert 'Lamberk' - it just makes us look completely unhinged to fans of other clubs 

It's a little humour, repartee for want of a better word. Only words.

I don't have to like them, i'll refrain from using any expletives to respect your sensitivity, I equally don't have to like the fact they have taken four of our captains. Again i'm not a fan of 'he who shall not be named' for supposedly being one of us and then leaving at the drop of a hat.

Football is full of petty rivalries, i'm surprised people find this a problem.

One might suggest it would be arrogant to call people juvenile, but I will try not to label you as that as you "mean no offence".

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Wainy316 said:

Ironic that the new contract we all got excited about him signing last summer is what led to him leaving.

If still on the old deal we could've taken the Levy approach and batted off any offers.

It's annoying what Grealish said in his interview after signing that contract, but with the club knowing he had a release clause, and knowing what happened with Delph in the past, why did they put so much emphasis on what he said/share it on our socials?

Especially when I think it's obvious the clause will eventually have been met.

Edited by Tom13
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Zhan_Zhuang said:

One might suggest it would be arrogant to call people juvenile, but I will try not to label you as that as you "mean no offence".

A fair point 👍 wasn't meant as a personal dig at you, just a general comment on something that I've seen a fair bit of on here and on Twitter of late 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, rodders0223 said:

Oh Jack. He's the poster boy. It's brilliant. He's a real character. He has his own personality and a sense of style. He's a maverick. It's just old bastards complaing about his hair. His socks ....and his clothes. Get with it grandad. He's snagged half of brum too what a lad. Go on son.

Jack leaves.

Your clothes are shit mate. Your hair's shit. You're a diving word removed. Pull your socks up. You cheating scumbag. 

Who'd have thought that people would be partisan when it came to...[checks notes] football?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, icouldtelltheworld said:

A fair point 👍 wasn't meant as a personal dig at you, just a general comment on something that I've seen a fair bit of on here and on Twitter of late 

I think people are angry still, it hurts. Some of us can deal with it better than others.

I suppose it is cathartic in a psychological sense to discuss these things on a message board.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know about others, but I cringed at his antics when he was a Villa player, especially as captain. I could live with the hair and the shin pads (which gave him a certain charm), but the drink driving, drunken shenanigans etc were things I was embarrassed about as a Villa fan, and never defended them. 

Thankfully we no longer have to consider defending those things any more. Great player, yes, absolute t**t, also yes. His antics in relation to the move just go to cement that.

 

Still, he can go off and build his brand and be the latest cool thing, and his antics are now the problem of Man City fans (although they won't care that much). I am looking forward to Aston Villa not being Jack Grealish FC and seeing us come back as a stronger, more rounded team. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Stevo985 said:

Money is only a motivating factor up to a certain point. 

He hasn't gone for money. he's gone for success. Something we'll (probably) never be able to offer him.

Well I know that he has no loyalty to any club, it would have been any champions league club and then the most offered, he was geared up to go to United last year. 

Look at the Kane saga, Grealish’s camp have specifically requested release clauses and then hawked him round 2-3 years running, why would you do that if you didn’t intend to cash in? he would have gone to United and there’s no guarantee of silverware there. I’ve said many times in this thread it’s about money first, always has been I know the deal’s finer details mate it’s about money. I told you all about that release clause and was called all sorts about it. 

Where they shit on us was going to city and telling them the parts of the contract to be exploited, this “win things” is a line like the video and statement is a line to manage perception over it. If they were fans of the Villa why would you do that? You wouldn’t. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Seat68 said:

It's worth saying as it's been posted a few times. Villa got the 100m,  not Grealish. 

He'll get it over the next 6 years (if he's at city for that long) 300k x 52 x 6 = 52 = 93,600,000

Plus a few sponsorships etc (love island and vodka I'm guessing) will take it over the 100 :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, icouldtelltheworld said:

A fair point 👍 wasn't meant as a personal dig at you, just a general comment on something that I've seen a fair bit of on here and on Twitter of late 

and ironically something that blues fans have been ridiculed on here for countless times with their little nicknames for our players/manager (greasy/baconface/m0ngs)

i don't like grealish/city myself, but agree that the silly nicknames are juvenile

Edited by tomav84
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Mister_a said:

He'll get it over the next 6 years (if he's at city for that long) 300k x 52 x 6 = 52 = 93,600,000

Plus a few sponsorships etc (love island and vodka I'm guessing) will take it over the 100 :D

If he stays at city for 12 years etc. The point is people are talking as if he got the 100m. He didn't. His earnings over time may take him there but that is a different thing altogether. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Seat68 said:

If he stays at city for 12 years etc. The point is people are talking as if he got the 100m. He didn't. His earnings over time may take him there but that is a different thing altogether. 

You're right, his agent probably got a nice cut though. Although, it wouldn't surprise me if JG got a significant signing on fee as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Fairy In Boots said:

lead it back to the upper echelons of English football (because that’s happening over the next 2-3 years)

That's a huge reach. We are miles behind city, Chelsea, liverpool, man utd. To claim that in 2 or 3 years we'll be in the CL and challenging for the title is a fantasy IMO. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Fairy In Boots said:

Well I know that he has no loyalty to any club, it would have been any champions league club and then the most offered, he was geared up to go to United last year. 

Look at the Kane saga, Grealish’s camp have specifically requested release clauses and then hawked him round 2-3 years running, why would you do that if you didn’t intend to cash in? he would have gone to United and there’s no guarantee of silverware there. I’ve said many times in this thread it’s about money first, always has been I know the deal’s finer details mate it’s about money. I told you all about that release clause and was called all sorts about it. 

Where they shit on us was going to city and telling them the parts of the contract to be exploited, this “win things” is a line like the video and statement is a line to manage perception over it. If they were fans of the Villa why would you do that? You wouldn’t. 

If you say so mate

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â