Kirkhamblue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 19 Apr 2015
- Messages
- 499
Rather have Gibson than the ex Rag Evans.
Nothing bout playing for united. He’s just shit and old. Ben Gibson is much younger than him and even if Evans is better than Gibson, it’s only marginal.Posts like this are so petty.
People need to get over the fact that Evans used to play for United. Not only is he a better player than Gibson, he would more than likely be cheaper as well.
Nothing bout playing for united. He’s just shit and old. Ben Gibson is much younger than him and even if Evans is better than Gibson, it’s only marginal.
What benefits would that be? Evans will be 31 two years from now. At that point we’d be trying to get rid of him like Mangala now and would get paid nothing. Gibson is younger and has better potential than Evans.Both are not good enough to be our first choice CB.
However, there are many more benefits to signing Evans than there are to signing Gibson.
City have previously briefed Gibson is not a serious target.
He'd be a good signing. He's reliable, left footed, good on the ball, can play in a 3, speaks English, is home grown, is a good leader by all accounts, wouldn't take time to settle and knows the league inside out.Posts like this are so petty.
People need to get over the fact that Evans used to play for United. Not only is he a better player than Gibson, he would more than likely be cheaper as well.
Nothing bout playing for united. He’s just shit and old. Ben Gibson is much younger than him and even if Evans is better than Gibson, it’s only marginal.