theboyangel Posted October 4, 2021 Share Posted October 4, 2021 1 minute ago, bobzy said: It is genuinely bizarre to think that Man City have spent £100 million on a player purely for his "marketability". I think Beckham’s transfers to Real, AC Milan, LA Galaxy and PSG were, on balance probably more about marketing revenue over his ability on the pitch (not that he was a bad player but he was worth more off the pitch than on it!) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vive_La_Villa Posted October 4, 2021 Share Posted October 4, 2021 2 minutes ago, bobzy said: It is genuinely bizarre to think that Man City have spent £100 million on a player purely for his "marketability". Of course it’s not just for that. Grealish is obviously a very good player. Probably 60m pound player in my opinion which makes him an extremely expensive player. The thing is he‘s just not as good as Aston Villa made him look. That’s all people are saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dodgyknees Posted October 4, 2021 Share Posted October 4, 2021 He’s more than good enough to play at that level but he’d be better off at Liverpool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted October 4, 2021 Share Posted October 4, 2021 5 minutes ago, avfcDJ said: He’s more than good enough to play at that level but he’d be better off at Liverpool. He wouldn't get a game though in Klopp system Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted October 4, 2021 Share Posted October 4, 2021 26 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said: Of course it’s not just for that. Grealish is obviously a very good player. Probably 60m pound player in my opinion which makes him an extremely expensive player. The thing is he‘s just not as good as Aston Villa made him look. That’s all people are saying. It isn't, though, is it? 12 hours ago, Spoony said: Doesn’t work in their system and right now looks little more than a PR signing. 1 hour ago, DJ_Villain said: and now seeing him not be this all-singing-all-dancing maverick he was before… His fanbase start to question him, turn on him, doubt him… They are blissfully unaware that he wasn’t bought for his ability… but for his marketability… 42 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said: He’s sold the shirts and got them the exposure they needed. Probably a whole new generation of city fans because of Jack. It is bonkers to suggest that Man City need more exposure or signed Grealish purely because of his marketability. It's an added bonus - part of the package - and maybe why they were willing to meet such a high release clause, but he's quite obviously a very **** good footballer. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vive_La_Villa Posted October 4, 2021 Share Posted October 4, 2021 I think he’d be most suited at Man U. Ole wouldn’t have a clue how to use him so just let him do his own thing. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vive_La_Villa Posted October 4, 2021 Share Posted October 4, 2021 1 minute ago, bobzy said: It isn't, though, is it? It is bonkers to suggest that Man City need more exposure or signed Grealish purely because of his marketability. It's an added bonus - part of the package - and maybe why they were willing to meet such a high release clause, but he's quite obviously a very **** good footballer. If he didn’t become so high profile during the World Cup (even without hardly playing ) I don’t think they would have paid the 100m for him IMO. I guess we’ll never know. He is a very good footballer. They just have an abundance of players that are as good or better. I said the same when he was at us so it’s not like I’m just being bitter. This is something I appreciate many will not agree with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJ_Villain Posted October 4, 2021 Share Posted October 4, 2021 (edited) 11 minutes ago, bobzy said: It isn't, though, is it? It is bonkers to suggest that Man City need more exposure or signed Grealish purely because of his marketability. It's an added bonus - part of the package - and maybe why they were willing to meet such a high release clause, but he's quite obviously a very **** good footballer. They needed to sign SOMEONE noteworthy… Someone who newspapers liked to talk about and who made them relevant and competitive with the “big clubs”… Spurs weren’t playing ball over Kane and Haaland would have been difficult to prise away from Dortmund… Grealish was the lowest hanging fruit with the highest marketability… Especially after he became the nations darling at the Euros… Grealish has proven that he isn’t all that when he isn’t allowed the freedom to express himself… and Guardiola won’t want him to do that… It would allow Jack far too much limelight and an ego boost and Pep wants all of that to himself… Two shite performances in a week… He NEVER scored 4s and 5s when playing for us… Long may it continue… and as far as having him back for £30m in 2 years is concerned… Nah, you’re alright… I don’t want Man Cities old toys and the Prodigal Son act doesn’t wash with me… Edited October 4, 2021 by DJ_Villain Autocorrect error 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted October 4, 2021 VT Supporter Share Posted October 4, 2021 1 hour ago, VillaJ100 said: God I don't think even man City would be happy with 100 mil on an impact sub Weird that this impact sub has started every game in the premier league for them 43 minutes ago, bobzy said: It is genuinely bizarre to think that Man City have spent £100 million on a player purely for his "marketability". It is bizarre because it's clearly not true. Just people desperate to cling to the weird opinion that he's not very good (despite probably spending the last 5 years saying how amazing he is) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vive_La_Villa Posted October 4, 2021 Share Posted October 4, 2021 7 minutes ago, Stevo985 said: Weird that this impact sub has started every game in the premier league for them It is bizarre because it's clearly not true. Just people desperate to cling to the weird opinion that he's not very good (despite probably spending the last 5 years saying how amazing he is) At the moment he has to start because he is a marquee 100m signing. The Jack Grealish fan club doesn’t seem to be understanding this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vive_La_Villa Posted October 4, 2021 Share Posted October 4, 2021 Also nobody is clinging on to an opinion he’s not very good. He’s a quality player. He just isn’t anywhere near as good as the players around him at the moment. Whether that continues only time will tell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted October 4, 2021 VT Supporter Share Posted October 4, 2021 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said: At the moment he has to start because he is a marquee 100m signing. The Jack Grealish fan club doesn’t seem to be understanding this. Because it's not true, that's why. He's starting because he's had an excellent start to the season. One bad half vs PSG and a game played out of position as a striker doesn't suddenly change that. Man City aren't exactly a team that is bothered about having expensive players on the bench is it? Their bench yesterday was probably worth about £350m Edited October 4, 2021 by Stevo985 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vive_La_Villa Posted October 4, 2021 Share Posted October 4, 2021 Just now, Stevo985 said: Because it's not true, that's why. He's starting because he's had an excellent start to the season. One bad half vs PSG and a game played out of position as a striker doesn't suddenly change that. Man City aren't exactly a team that is bothered about having expensive players on the bench is it? Their bench yesterday was probably worth about £250m They don’t sign a big player and then stick him on the bench straight away. Give it 6 months and he will spend a lot more time on the bench. I’d happily put money on that. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted October 4, 2021 VT Supporter Share Posted October 4, 2021 Just now, Vive_La_Villa said: They don’t sign a big player and then stick him on the bench straight away. Give it 6 months and he will spend a lot more time on the bench. I’d happily put money on that. Apart from all the times they have done that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StanBalaban Posted October 4, 2021 Share Posted October 4, 2021 22 minutes ago, bobzy said: It isn't, though, is it? It is bonkers to suggest that Man City need more exposure or signed Grealish purely because of his marketability. It's an added bonus - part of the package - and maybe why they were willing to meet such a high release clause, but he's quite obviously a very **** good footballer. He's an amazing footballer, but City have amazing footballers that can play in Jack's place, yet still don't have a centre forward. If they wanted marketability they could have got Messi, so I don't understand why they thought they needed him to the extent that they met our release clause. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vive_La_Villa Posted October 4, 2021 Share Posted October 4, 2021 Just now, Stevo985 said: Apart from all the times they have done that? They’ve never done that! They’ve also never spent 100m on a player either. Laughing at every one of my opinions is starting to make you look like a a bit of a Grealish groupie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwi1890 Posted October 4, 2021 Share Posted October 4, 2021 JG City 7 games 1 goal 1 assist JG Villa last season 7 games 4 goals 4 assists most chances created in Europe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted October 4, 2021 VT Supporter Share Posted October 4, 2021 Just now, Vive_La_Villa said: They’ve never done that! They’ve also never spent 100m on a player either. Laporte was signed for £60m and played 9 games in his first season. Mahrez was signed for £60m and only started 13 games in his first season Nathan Ake signed for £40m and has only played 11 times for them in the league Cancelo signed for £60m and only played 9 games in his first season Mendy signed for £52m and only played 4 games in his first season They're not £100m but most of those wouldn't be far off in today's money. In fact signings like Mahrez would probably be more. Thinking Grealish isn't playing well is fine. It's an opinion which is obviously valid. I disagree with it (except for the past 7 days) but obviously you're entitled to it. But this nonsense that he's only playing because he cost so much is exactly that, nonsense. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJ_Villain Posted October 4, 2021 Share Posted October 4, 2021 6 minutes ago, StanBalaban said: He's an amazing footballer, but City have amazing footballers that can play in Jack's place, yet still don't have a centre forward. If they wanted marketability they could have got Messi, so I don't understand why they thought they needed him to the extent that they met our release clause. It was their once-every-few-year habit of having to buy a Villa captain immediately after breaking through into the England squad routine… Its become a bit of a tradition now… 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fun Factory Posted October 4, 2021 Share Posted October 4, 2021 I just can't see how they can play Foden, KDB and Grealish all in one team at the same time regularly. Unless the plan is to sell de Bruyne some time as he is injury prone. Long term surely they will build around Foden as he is a man city player since he was a kid and is 5 years younger than Grealish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts