Davkaus Posted November 8 Posted November 8 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Stevo985 said: I know people like to pretend Grealish wasn’t actually that good, but he was. He was worth £100m I think it may also just be a case of people not keeping their expectations of what a £100m player is in line with the insane football inflation and the English player tax. £100m is such a vast amount of cash, it sounds like it should get you a candidate for the Balon d'Or, when it actually gets you Declan Rice. Edited November 8 by Davkaus 3
tinker Posted November 8 VT Supporter Posted November 8 31 minutes ago, Stevo985 said: He was worth 100m on the pitch. I know people like to pretend Grealish wasn’t actually that good, but he was. He was worth £100m City have just ruined him He was our best player by a country mile, he was unplayable. Before city brought him the whole country new Jack's name, even stormzy had his name on a shirt for England, he was standing on the edge of greatness. I have watched villa for 45 years and he's been, on his day, the best player I have seen in a Villa shirt. City have ruined him as a player. Bad rep as a person but from my experience, he's done some great work behind the scenes and never once made it public knowledge, he's hated by one half the city and that drives an agenda against him. 1
Keyblade Posted November 8 Posted November 8 He would do a lot to help out our slow, laborious current style. 1
Popular Post TreeVillan Posted November 8 Popular Post Posted November 8 2 hours ago, Keyblade said: He would do a lot to help out our slow, laborious current style. So we can be slow and laborious but with free kicks? 1 6
foreveryoung Posted November 8 Posted November 8 3 hours ago, Stevo985 said: He was worth 100m on the pitch. I know people like to pretend Grealish wasn’t actually that good, but he was. He was worth £100m City have just ruined him He's a fantastic player and still is. It's just a big part of that transfer fee was our release clause and him being a brilliant marketing tool for the Saudis.
VillaChris Posted November 8 Posted November 8 His career is at a crossroads now. Felt he's mentally checked out at Man. City since they won the treble. Did very little last season with Foden completely outshining him, lost his England squad place and this season he can't stay fit which is probably one reason to avoid him now as he comes up to 30 next year. Also felt like someone who'd burn out in his early 30s due to his lifestyle and having a lax attitude to recovery on occasions after games. If he wasn't on such a long contract at Man. City he'd have probably been sold. Could see him going when they get a new manager in. Also interested what sort of role he has under Tuchel.
Keyblade Posted November 9 Posted November 9 35 minutes ago, TreeVillan said: So we can be slow and laborious but with free kicks? Not such a bad idea considering we're one of the best teams when it comes to scoring from set pieces. Even so, his very presence was opening up space for guys like Trezeguet and El Ghazi, I can only imagine how Rogers et al would benefit from him. 1
Avfc96 Posted November 9 Posted November 9 (edited) Has always thrived on a being a big fish in a small pond, but struggled being a small fish in a big pond. Do I begrudge his move to City? Absolutely not, treble winner and will retire with a trophy cabinet that most pro's could only dream of. However, he hasn't become the player he should have become. Destined for the MLS I think (Nice lifestyle, slower paced league and a fair lot of money). Edited November 9 by Avfc96 1
oishiiniku_uk Posted November 9 Posted November 9 Most of his stats per 90 have remained the same at City with 1 notable exception: Successful take-ons have dropped to well under 50% after being consistently over 60% at Villa. I'm not sure if the injuries have made him reluctant to beat his opponent, or it's been coached out of him (maybe a bit of both). It was always his greatest strength, along with through-balls (which there are less opportunities to play when Man City are usually camped outside their opponent's box and Pep's fullbacks don't over/underlap much). Wrong player for that system. He would have suited other play styles much better. 1
Wainy316 Posted November 11 Posted November 11 That spot on our left hand side is basically crying out for him right now... 1
Don_Simon Posted November 12 Posted November 12 On 08/11/2024 at 23:40, foreveryoung said: He's a fantastic player and still is. It's just a big part of that transfer fee was our release clause and him being a brilliant marketing tool for the Saudis. I think you meant Bolivians. 1
Villan_of_oz Posted Thursday at 02:33 VT Supporter Posted Thursday at 02:33 1 league goal in nearly a year.... I miss the real Jack, City bought him, then broke him, now they're stuck with him. I wouldn't begrudge a move for him, but Jack in his current state would need to be discounted quite a lot. Loan move is probably his only hope or a new manager...
ThunderPower_14 Posted Thursday at 15:04 Posted Thursday at 15:04 He's just not helped by City's style at all. They're all robots and he (at least when her was playing for us) was a maverick. I think he'd thrive under Unai playing on the left. He's excellent at the sort of things that makes a player effective in Unai's style.
Keyblade Posted Thursday at 15:52 Posted Thursday at 15:52 46 minutes ago, ThunderPower_14 said: He's just not helped by City's style at all. They're all robots and he (at least when her was playing for us) was a maverick. I think he'd thrive under Unai playing on the left. He's excellent at the sort of things that makes a player effective in Unai's style. As good as Rogers was yesterday, Grealish would have just been...better. And if Rogers played in the 10 he'd have more space than usual (something he's been struggling with) to cause damage. I honestly think like a loan in January or something (+ a RB of course) will get us over the line this season to 5th.
Genie Posted Thursday at 18:08 Posted Thursday at 18:08 £100m and over £300k per week for a player they didn’t need and subsequently broke must make it the worst transfer in history. 4
DCJonah Posted Thursday at 18:46 Posted Thursday at 18:46 2 hours ago, Keyblade said: As good as Rogers was yesterday, Grealish would have just been...better. And if Rogers played in the 10 he'd have more space than usual (something he's been struggling with) to cause damage. I honestly think like a loan in January or something (+ a RB of course) will get us over the line this season to 5th. I'm not sure he would have. When was the last time Grealish was that good in the prem?
TomC Posted Thursday at 18:50 Posted Thursday at 18:50 3 hours ago, ThunderPower_14 said: He's just not helped by City's style at all. They're all robots and he (at least when her was playing for us) was a maverick. I think he'd thrive under Unai playing on the left. He's excellent at the sort of things that makes a player effective in Unai's style. Would a maverick really thrive under Unai? He may not be as regimented as Guardiola, but he's pretty detail-oriented...
foreveryoung Posted Thursday at 18:53 Posted Thursday at 18:53 He'd be lovely on that left hand side for us cutting in.
Recommended Posts