Ross Barkley

[Cheadle_hulmeBlue]

Nope but the price Everton will ask for the player if any club decides to test the water would be more than what we have paid for Aguero or even what we had paid for Yaya.

So?

Honestly, it never ceases to amaze me how people get wound up about transfer fees. Who cares what the club pay - a player is either good enough to play for us or not. If he's good enough, then what he costs is irrelevant.

Fernandinho cost nearly 10 million more than Silva, Nasri, and Toure. He's not a better player but it's what he cost. You can't control the market place, and the stupidest thing you could do is try taking the Wenger/Ferguson route of going looking for value.

You're right, buying Barkley will be expensive, but the club obviously fancy him as someone who's good enough, which is ultimately good enough for me.

Equallly the most stupidest thing for any club to do is splash out £40m on a player who has a history of injury trouble who hasn't had any experience in the Champions League and given time the CFA will be producing their very own who will fit in with the seniors playing style!. According to Evertontians they have the next Ross Barkley lined up in their Academy.

I am willing to take flak here but I doubt Barkley will live up to his perceived potential at any club is willing to take a gamble.

lots of players have had injury problems though aguero included. The main injury barkley had was a leg break, hardly a recurring thing. its the potential thats there, it doesn't matter if he's not had champions league experience, he could potentially become a top player, if we are basing it on that then yaya wasn't great when he was 21. If we buy him now then we could have one of englands best players for the next ten years, making cost irrelevant.

its gonna be years before we produce anyone. Not being funny but we bought, rekik, lopes, pozo all from other clubs, whats the difference with barkely

 

[bluechampion7891]

Barkley and Pogba are pretty similar players. Both posses pace, power, two-footedness, a pile-driver of a shot, passing ability, technical ability et al. I think Pogba is a better player at the moment just because he has had more exposure to first team football. I do believe barkley will become the better player however. Barkley just seems to me to have more moments of magic and for me just seems to always have something different up his sleeve. I also think he's more skillful and technical than Pogba.

I'd love both but I see them as more of a replacement for Toure rather than somebody to play alongside him. Both will cost similar amounts, and for me it would be wiser to spend it on Barkley as he has the most potential of any young player in the premier league right now, never mind just English players. I don't think we'd buy either until Yaya goes which could be at the end of this season or in 1/2/3 even 4 years time.

Btw, I love the look of Besic at Everton as well. He did well at the WC and really impressed me against QPR. His attitude and workrate is phenomenal and he isn't just all tackle, the lad has ability too. Would be an improvement on Fernando imo. Everton paid peanuts for him as well. Shame we didn't register any interest.

wow...there are so many things wrong I dont know where to begin

First of all, Pogba or Barkley are not Toure's replacement, at least not directly. They do bring a similar physicality and ball skills but what they lack is the ability to control a game, the range of passing that Yaya possesses, the ability to be always available to receive a pass and play it. These latter qualities define Yaya's role in the team, not the occasional box to box stuff that we see (and that most pundits like to point out that Yaya hasnt had a good game when they dont see that stuff).

So Besic, yeah so he did play well against Messi, but international football is hardly a gauge of someone's true ability. Fernando has CL experience and we've seen how good he was against bayern and Roma, champions league caliber opposition, not QPR, which are relegation candidates

Did you see Barkley last night vs QPR? He played in a deeper role and controlled and dictated the game for everton, at the age of 21. Yaya couldn't ping a 30 yard pass when he was 21 and he didn't do it when he'd first joined city. He also couldn't control a game at 21. It was a late addition to Yaya's game and im sure in time Barkley will master the art of a long ranged pass. Barkley is a very intelligent player who shares many qualities with Toure so for you to dismiss him is very naive.

About Besic, I call them how i see them and what i've seen from Besic is very impressive. He seems more technically and mentally adept to the premier league than Fernando and I also admire his attitude which is similar to that of Milner. Yes, Fernando has champions league experience, but so does fucking Cleverley. I'm not bashing Fernando, I think hes been a welcomed addition to the squad, its just I think Besic has a bit more about him.

I stand by everything I said. You are a fool if you think Barkley or Pogba can't replace Toure.

Nope they can't, not at the moment. Stick Barkley in place of Yaya at this moment, do you think we will get better? Yep, he did OK to good versus QPR, I was actually quite intrigued at Barkley playing in a deeper role, but doing it day in day out versus oppositon that is much better than QPR is another thing.

FWIW, I dont dismiss Barkley at all. this is what I wrote before (in this thread):

no, he cannot replace Yaya and he cannot play as a midfielder in 2 at the moment.

However, I see no reason why, after a year or two of tactical development, he coudnt start alongside fernando or someone like Koke, the former being very good defensively and the latter giving an element of yaya's control. He has the makings of a very special box to box player, if we sign him as a number 10 or as Yaya's direct replacement i'll question our recruitment team.

We already have the best #10 in Silva, and we have a plethora of academy talent (Pozo, Lopes, even Iheanacho is more a #10 forward than a striker) who I'd like to see as the future. Barkley will have to improve his goal output a lot or play precise killer balls or show that he can run the game in the final third to be worth the #10 position, and IMO at the moment I don't see it.

Similarly, he lacks the passing ability and control that Yaya provides, and gives possession away too easily to be the midfield dictator.

But his engine, strength, power, pace, dribbling, long shots and ability with both feet means he can be an elite box to box midfielder with time. I see him as more fernandinho's heir than as Yaya's or Silva's. I wouldn't mind if we got him for something like 30M + milner, with his role being in rotation with fernandinho with him eventually taking his position, as long as we get either Koke or Pogba to be the controller in midfield.

I rate both Pogba and Barkley, very much. I may have come off a bit harsh, but I don't expect either of them to directly replace Yaya. Barkley definitely not at the moment, Pogba should get into the first team with a slight change in style

 

[.A.]

By Barkley's age, Toure had scored 6 league goals in Belgium and the Ukraine in over 100 games; Barkley currently has 7 in 56 appearances in the Premier League, yet some football masterminds on here seem sure that he will never reach or surpass Toure's level.

£60m is excessive and I'm sure a deal could be reached for a little more than half of that, but if we did sign him at £40m and get 10 years of service from him that's £4m a season. For a club willing to spend £34m on Sakho's back up in the French national team, it's a price worth paying.

Pretty useless comparison when you consider that players don't develop or mature at the same age.

Yaya Toure arrived at the age of 27, generally played behind lone striker in his first season like Barkley did last, and scored 6 goals in a team containing the likes of Silva and Tevez. Barkley's goalscoring output was exactly the same last year, despite making 7 fewer starts.

Beyond the goals, Barkley is more dynamic than Toure; factoring out the occaissional rampaging run, Toure looks on the verge of collapse 90% of the time. Barkley has a Rooney-esque enthusiasm for the game where he wants the ball and is willing to track and tackle for it. Furthermore, you get the impression Barkley would actually relish the chance to play for us, unlike everybody's favourite mercenary.

The Pogba/Barkley comparison is misinformed; if you'd put Barkley in Serie A for the team that has monopolised the league for 3 years, he'd at least match Pogba's productivity. Pogba's agent is Mino Raiola, a man who whored Ibrahimovic around Europe and did the same to Balotelli; after a year here he would be brokering deals to Real Madrid or Bayern for his latest asset. There is no value in that for us, neither from a financial or continuity aspect, as Raiola is an expert at engineering controversy to get his client the moves they desire.

It's interesting that you point out that players develop at different ages yet seem so sure that Barkley will not maximise his obvious potential based on what you've seen of him up to 21.....

And development isn't defined by age, it's defined by experience and opportunity; Zabaleta is a prime example of a player who's improved outrageously in his time with us, and why is that? It's playing with and against top players for a sustained period. Had he spent the past 6 years at Stoke or Villa, would he be the player he is now? No. The biggest issue young British players have is they aren't always afforded that opportunity to grow amongst the elite because clubs are too willing to import an established foreign player who has already been granted that crucial experience elsewhere. Would West Ham fans have foresaw the career Lampard had when he left them? He's a product of years playing at the top level, while John Terry accredits his spell as Desailly's disciple as vital to his success.

Taking into account Barkley's obvious raw ability and attitude, I'm sure he'd prosper in the elite environment we'd provide, and into one of the world's best in his role as well.

If he was German, Bayern would buy him. If he was Italian, Juventus would buy him. If Ferguson was still at United, he'd buy him; if we want to be the biggest British club and build a dynasty then we should pride ourselves on accommodating the best British talent. It's a formula that obviously works.

 

[Instant_Offense]

So?

Honestly, it never ceases to amaze me how people get wound up about transfer fees. Who cares what the club pay - a player is either good enough to play for us or not. If he's good enough, then what he costs is irrelevant.

Fernandinho cost nearly 10 million more than Silva, Nasri, and Toure. He's not a better player but it's what he cost. You can't control the market place, and the stupidest thing you could do is try taking the Wenger/Ferguson route of going looking for value.

You're right, buying Barkley will be expensive, but the club obviously fancy him as someone who's good enough, which is ultimately good enough for me.

Equallly the most stupidest thing for any club to do is splash out £40m on a player who has a history of injury trouble who hasn't had any experience in the Champions League and given time the CFA will be producing their very own who will fit in with the seniors playing style!. According to Evertontians they have the next Ross Barkley lined up in their Academy.

I am willing to take flak here but I doubt Barkley will live up to his perceived potential at any club is willing to take a gamble.

lots of players have had injury problems though aguero included. The main injury barkley had was a leg break, hardly a recurring thing. its the potential thats there, it doesn't matter if he's not had champions league experience, he could potentially become a top player, if we are basing it on that then yaya wasn't great when he was 21. If we buy him now then we could have one of englands best players for the next ten years, making cost irrelevant.

its gonna be years before we produce anyone. Not being funny but we bought, rekik, lopes, pozo all from other clubs, whats the difference with barkely

About 35 million. Not a legitimate comparison.

And I have reservations about paying more than Sanchez or Fabregas cost for someone who doesn't immediately improve our starting 11.

 

[Latics Fan SJK]

IMO Barkley is not worth £40m. At the moment he's not even close to that.

Obviously for England's sake I'd love to see him prove that worth in time, but £40m is a hell of a lot of money for an unproven player.

 

[CityFan94]

Excellent post by .A. - summed it up perfectly.

I said on this thread a few weeks ago I saw Barkley as a centre midfielder rather than a number 10.

He played in centre midfield on Monday night against QPR and he was outstanding.

I still think Barkley will be here next summer and will flourish. He has all the raw talent to become a top player and he'll learn and improve so much playing with world class players here at City.

 

[Thaksinssoldier]

Excellent post by .A. - summed it up perfectly.

I said on this thread a few weeks ago I saw Barkley as a centre midfielder rather than a number 10.

He played in centre midfield on Monday night against QPR and he was outstanding.

I still think Barkley will be here next summer and will flourish. He has all the raw talent to become a top player and he'll learn and improve so much playing with world class players here at City.

I think you are the second person posting to think he was outstanding in that role. Aside from the goal, I thought he was bang average and works better further forward.

 

[flb]

By Barkley's age, Toure had scored 6 league goals in Belgium and the Ukraine in over 100 games; Barkley currently has 7 in 56 appearances in the Premier League, yet some football masterminds on here seem sure that he will never reach or surpass Toure's level.

£60m is excessive and I'm sure a deal could be reached for a little more than half of that, but if we did sign him at £40m and get 10 years of service from him that's £4m a season. For a club willing to spend £34m on Sakho's back up in the French national team, it's a price worth paying.

Pretty useless comparison when you consider that players don't develop or mature at the same age.

Yaya Toure arrived at the age of 27, generally played behind lone striker in his first season like Barkley did last, and scored 6 goals in a team containing the likes of Silva and Tevez. Barkley's goalscoring output was exactly the same last year, despite making 7 fewer starts.

Beyond the goals, Barkley is more dynamic than Toure; factoring out the occaissional rampaging run, Toure looks on the verge of collapse 90% of the time. Barkley has a Rooney-esque enthusiasm for the game where he wants the ball and is willing to track and tackle for it. Furthermore, you get the impression Barkley would actually relish the chance to play for us, unlike everybody's favourite mercenary.

The Pogba/Barkley comparison is misinformed; if you'd put Barkley in Serie A for the team that has monopolised the league for 3 years, he'd at least match Pogba's productivity. Pogba's agent is Mino Raiola, a man who whored Ibrahimovic around Europe and did the same to Balotelli; after a year here he would be brokering deals to Real Madrid or Bayern for his latest asset. There is no value in that for us, neither from a financial or continuity aspect, as Raiola is an expert at engineering controversy to get his client the moves they desire.

It's interesting that you point out that players develop at different ages yet seem so sure that Barkley will not maximise his obvious potential based on what you've seen of him up to 21.....

And development isn't defined by age, it's defined by experience and opportunity; Zabaleta is a prime example of a player who's improved outrageously in his time with us, and why is that? It's playing with and against top players for a sustained period. Had he spent the past 6 years at Stoke or Villa, would he be the player he is now? No. The biggest issue young British players have is they aren't always afforded that opportunity to grow amongst the elite because clubs are too willing to import an established foreign player who has already been granted that crucial experience elsewhere. Would West Ham fans have foresaw the career Lampard had when he left them? He's a product of years playing at the top level, while John Terry accredits his spell as Desailly's disciple as vital to his success.

Taking into account Barkley's obvious raw ability and attitude, I'm sure he'd prosper in the elite environment we'd provide, and into one of the world's best in his role as well.

If he was German, Bayern would buy him. If he was Italian, Juventus would buy him. If Ferguson was still at United, he'd buy him; if we want to be the biggest British club and build a dynasty then we should pride ourselves on accommodating the best British talent. It's a formula that obviously works.

I like the cut of your jib.

 

[flb]

.A. is absolutely right about Ferguson aswell, In his time he mopped up all of the top English talent and you can bet yourself he will strongly advising the powers that be at United to get him before we do-that doesn't mean we buy him at any cost but its about time as .A. rightly said that we show our power in the PL.

 

[aguero93:20]

Excellent post by .A. - summed it up perfectly.

I said on this thread a few weeks ago I saw Barkley as a centre midfielder rather than a number 10.

He played in centre midfield on Monday night against QPR and he was outstanding.

I still think Barkley will be here next summer and will flourish. He has all the raw talent to become a top player and he'll learn and improve so much playing with world class players here at City.

I think you are the second person posting to think he was outstanding in that role. Aside from the goal, I thought he was bang average and works better further forward.

Agreed, he didn't take to the role at all as you would expect of a player who has a future in the role, he looked like a no. 10 trying to drop deep. I'd give him 10 or more games playing there before judging him though.