10 | Jack Grealish - 2024/25

Status
Not open for further replies.
Luddite_Blue said:
Back to the hysterical, hyperbolic reactions on this thread.

It's a team game and no one player is solely responsible or to blame for wins or defeats.

Although it's still a fact that Grealish signed and the treble was won and 4 in a row clinched and you cannot guarantee that would be the case if the £100m was spent elsewhere.
Click to expand...
I can absolutely guarantee we would have, well just as absolutely as you can that it wouldn't have been. In fact I'll go further without him we may have 2 champions leagues, his inability to score one on one with courtois cost us that semi just as much as the 2 late goals. A no show in both finals ( by his own admission) and a side that was winning leagues annually tells me we'd have been just fine without him. In fact better off as we'd wouldn't have this most annoying of threads here.
 
How can people defend this guy? It’s the same people who laugh about players from other clubs and call them flops. Sterling got hate even when scoring 20 league goals alone - same with Mahrez. But this guy apparently has done so much? Grealish had such an impact that the whole football community uses him as an example about how Pep apparently „ kills „ wingers. which means Grealish wasn’t good at all. He doesn’t go outside , he doesn’t go inside. All he does is pass back. I’ve seen so many counters where he either passed the ball back / kept the ball for too long or slowed the game completely down.
The switch from Sané to Grealish is one of the biggest downgrades I’ve ever seen.
Honestly I feel like a hater so I told myself not to post in his thread anymore.. but wow he has so many lawyers I think it must be his own fake accounts at this point.
 
Last edited:
B\connellblue said:
I can absolutely guarantee we would have, well just as absolutely as you can that it wouldn't have been. In fact I'll go further without him we may have 2 champions leagues, his inability to score one on one with courtois cost us that semi just as much as the 2 late goals. A no show in both finals ( by his own admission) and a side that was winning leagues annually tells me we'd have been just fine without him. In fact better off as we'd wouldn't have this most annoying of threads here.
Click to expand...

We had plenty of opportunities to beat Real Madrid but you pin it on his failure to score?! Brilliant. We also defended appallingly thanks in large part to a makeshift defence that saw us field 4 different RBs across the two games. Like you say, you can't say Grealish won us the league or treble and you can't say we would have won them without him. For £100m he's not been good enough. He was a key part of how we played when we won the treble and I'm not sure who else would have offered the same control and guile he did, but now we've changed how we play you'd expect him to be able to produce more in terms of goals and assists. Others have delivered much more and been less criticised.

Hopefully he can prove he's good enough to do so if he does stay. Otherwise he'll be out the door and we'll have lost a lot of money on him which has been covered by the success.

We've been poor this season and that's the time a player like Jack has needed to step up. He had the summer off, he got a pre-season he had the kick up the arse from England. But instead he's had little niggles and failed to push on which is disappointing and exactly why Pep has called him out. Now he's in a position where we've got more players back fit and he's only got himself to blame if he can't get back in.
 
Luddite_Blue said:
The question posed was comparing players who actually cost £100m as that is the metric constantly used to beat Grealish with and I think it's very likely there are pressures associated with being a £100m player. Bale, Hazard, Kane, and Bellingham didn't cost £100m and I've never heard criticism of Grealish portrayed as those who cost over £80m.

It's hugely ironic with the fanboy slur that you are quoting being "more successful(individually)" all of sudden; I'm interested in what Manchester City win rather than individual awards, trinkets and baubles.

Grealish has won 3 Premier Leagues, 1 Champions League, 1 FA Cup, 1 UEFA Super Cup and 1 FIFA Club World Cup more than Declan Rice.

Griezmann won 1 Copa del Rey 2020–21 and was a Supercopa de España runner-up: 2021 at Barcelona!!!


A club buys a player with the club's money for the benefit of the club:

Mbappe signed for PSG for £166m and scored a lot goals, PSG didn't win the CL, didn't win the French League every year. And Mbappe left for a free at the end of his contract.

Grealish signed for City for £100m, won a lot of free kicks, City won the treble and secured 4 league titles in a row. And if Grealish is sold within the next 12 months, there will be a transfer fee.
Who was the better value signing? And which club will be happier with their investment?
Click to expand...
Several times you've mentioned what he's won here, but you go on about it as though he was crucial to all we have won with him in the squad, he wasn't. He played a bit part in most of it except the treble season where we saw him play well for half a season or so.

You previously said him being involved in us winning the treble and 4 in a row saying the treble and 4 in a row were worth 100m each to justify his fee with a silly - "cheap at half the price" comment.

And your most straw clutching silly comment is - "Grealish signed for City for £100m, won a lot of free kicks, City won the treble and secured 4 league titles in a row". Lol. Since when has any club signed any player to win a lot of free fuckin' kicks?
What else has he done, how many goals and assists in 3 n' half seasons?

"And if Grealish is sold within the next 12 months, there will be a transfer fee"..... I certainly hope so but how much of a fee? His fee is falling weekly because he hardly does anything when he plays and clubs know we have enough left wingers to allow us to sell him so they'll low ball us. A couple of weeks back I said I think we'll do well to get 30m for him but I now think we'll accept closer to 20m.

And your last "better value signing" question didn't need asking but I'll answer it anyway. Grealish is our worst value signing I can think of. There's a reason why he's sat on the bench and not starting games. Pep has given up on him because he's a Jack of no trades and a master of none. And the stark truth is he's not good enough to be here next season and that's down to Jack himself.

And before you or any other berk dub me as a hater, I'm not. I go to games to encourage the team. When Grealish plays well he gets his song sung and I join in because I want him to hear it and inspire him to play well. But his as song doesn't get sung much these days, sadly.
 
I think hierarchy was looking at it in a way that we missed out on Messi for number 10 shirt who we set aside some serious money even on salaries and signing fee alone (but I am sure we would have been OK to give Barca a fee too if it was possible) but never got to spend on him. that money was burning our pocket in some sense.
Had we got Messi even for only 2-3 years we never go for Grealish I am sure. we wanted some star figure for number 10 shirt, I wish we looked around bit better.

Now Grealish at that time was certainly having great season at Villa but it was just a strange move at this price for sure.

he basically spent 3 years at Championship in his crucial early 20s. its not something that deffo hinders you but also not as good as if you spend that at a top side under top manager learning the trade.he had likes of Steve Bruce, Lambert, Smith as manager most of his time at Villa, not really the modern type managers.
then Villa promoted and finished 17th, survived relegation. then next season which may be his best individual season under manager Dean Smith and Villa finishing 11th. upcoming summer we bought him for 100m. not even something special what Villa did. like punch above their weight like Forest now or get into EL and have a nice run in it.

bit like go to Palace now and say how much is Eze? 125m? ok, we pay it.

yikes, not sure about that. Eze is decent player. Grealish was decent too. no issue on that. but the best in that price range? fuck no.

I wonder what release clause in his contract would have made us not pursue him. 125m? 150m?
 
Luddite_Blue said:





Which results are they? And it's the Grealish 2024/25 thread so it's perfectly valid to look at City's results in 2024/25.

You seem to have some real issue with Grealish; any other player and you'd be reporting your own posts.
Click to expand...

Childish . All right which games he didnt play this season that we did well in , you have nothing
 
Kamaro011 said:
Can't wait for this cancers of Bluemoon forum thread will be finally ended when Grealish move on.

This thread is nothing more than breeding ground for brain dead haters gets their kicks spewing their hate.
Click to expand...
Looking forward to less of the pumped up playground shite from the other side too. Win win!
 
Kamaro011 said:
Can't wait for this cancers of Bluemoon forum thread will be finally ended when Grealish move on.

This thread is nothing more than breeding ground for brain dead haters gets their kicks spewing their hate.
Click to expand...
So what you're saying is anyone who criticises Grealish is a hater and gets kicks from spewing hate?
 
Sir Joe Aguero said:
The team won the treble, Grealish having a handful of good performances. That’s assuming the players we already had or could have got with 100mil wouldn’t have performed at a similar level. It’s like saying Di Matteo is a world class manager because he won Chelsea a CL. There’s a lot of luck involved.

He’s not been good enough. No amount of ‘shackling’ should lead to a full year of no goals in the league.

I hope he gets a move elsewhere and regains his form. Don’t dislike the guy but he’s not at our level.
Click to expand...
The team which included Grealish won the treble. There's no ultimate guarantee you can give that if Grealish hadn't signed that the treble and/or 4 in a row would have been won.
 
B\connellblue said:
I can absolutely guarantee we would have, well just as absolutely as you can that it wouldn't have been. In fact I'll go further without him we may have 2 champions leagues, his inability to score one on one with courtois cost us that semi just as much as the 2 late goals. A no show in both finals ( by his own admission) and a side that was winning leagues annually tells me we'd have been just fine without him. In fact better off as we'd wouldn't have this most annoying of threads here.
Click to expand...

With Grealish signed and in the side the treble was won and 4 in a row was secured and that is a factual statement. And that isn't me saying Grealish won it all on his own as certain posters seem to want to twist. If instead player X was signed for the £100m then there is absolutely no guarantee that you can give that the treble and/or 4 in a row would be secured. Now there is an extremely small possibility that 3 CLs would had been won in those 3 seasons. But that does beg the question, why wasn't the CL won beforehand?

So if we now go back to August 2021 and whether I'd sign Grealish for £100m then the answer is every day of the week because that means the treble and 4 in a row are secured. If you'd choose not to use the benefit of hindsight and sign someone else for the £100m then to quote Jim Bowen, "Let's have a look at what we could have won"

1737564618462.png

3 Premier Leagues, 1 Champions League, 1 FA Cup, 1 UEFA Super Cup and 1 FIFA Club World Cup
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top