Ross Barkley

[SuperBlu]

He can't guarantee a starting spot with Everton right now, so whats the point of buying him ?

 

[Manchester_lalala]

He can't guarantee a starting spot with Everton right now, so whats the point of buying him ?

If he ends up our main summer signing then we will be in trouble. We should be in for schneiderlin and pogba, one of them is hg too which is a bonus and will both instantly improve us. Barkley isn't any better than we've got at the minute.

 

[supercity88]

There's an almost endless list of better attacking and creative players than Barkley at the moment. Watching Chelsea v Southampton a player like Schneiderlin would be much more valuable to our squad. He is so good at reading the play and helping the defence. He is also able to get the ball under control and keep possession under pressure and normally passes forward to more creative players. He would be an excellent signing for us.

 

[aguero93:20]

It may please LC but i've been told this isn't happening.

Good good. We can always go back in for him in the future if he turns out to be decent.

 

[.A.]

Put Koke or Pogba in this years Everton team and the hipsters wouldn't be anywhere near as insistent that we sign them. Put Barkley in the laughably declining Serie A in the same team next to Tevez, Pirlo and Vidal and he'd look astounding.

It's a shame Pellegrini's anglophobia has transmitted onto most on here; most big money flops in the Premier League have been foreign, but the prospect of signing Lamelas, Soldados and Paulinhos, or Mangalas, Fernandos or Robinhos is more exciting than investing in and developing a young domestic talent for the modern football fan of a modern money club.

The most successful club of the Premier League era was identifiably British, and they had a big impact on Europe as well; the notion that British players aren't up to standard is simply moronic. The likes of Scholes, Lampard, Cole, Terry, Ferdinand, Gerrard, Giggs and Rooney have more top-level medals and have starred in more latter-stage European Cup games than Manchester City Football Club.

To refuse to acknowledge and adopt that winning formula is naive to the point of stupidity on the part of both those running the club, and the fans who pine for exclusively foreign transfer activity. If we one day want to be a club like Bayern or Barca, we have to forge a similar identity to those clubs; if Barkley was German Bayern would have signed him last summer, while Ferguson would have spent the Herrera money on him instead. That's what those who know how to build sustainable success do.

Barkley has had more of an impact on top-level football than Toure did at 21, and has all of the tools to both succeed and exceed him in our midfield. He can match Toure's passing, driving runs and has a good enough shot with either foot to gradually score 10+ goals from midfield, while also having an extra willingness/capability to chase down and tackle.

I find it hard to understand some logic on here; we now read that Gareth Bale isn't good enough for us. Says it all really.

The modern City fan wouldn't have wanted us to sign Colin Bell either.

 

[tolmie's hairdoo]

Put Koke or Pogba in this years Everton team and the hipsters wouldn't be anywhere near as insistent that we sign them. Put Barkley in the laughably declining Serie A in the same team next to Tevez, Pirlo and Vidal and he'd look astounding.

It's a shame Pellegrini's anglophobia has transmitted onto most on here; most big money flops in the Premier League have been foreign, but the prospect of signing Lamelas, Soldados and Paulinhos, or Mangalas, Fernandos or Robinhos is more exciting than investing in and developing a young domestic talent for the modern football fan of a modern money club.

The most successful club of the Premier League era was identifiably British, and they had a big impact on Europe as well; the notion that British players aren't up to standard is simply moronic. The likes of Scholes, Lampard, Cole, Terry, Ferdinand, Gerrard, Giggs and Rooney have more top-level medals and have starred in more latter-stage European Cup games than Manchester City Football Club.

To refuse to acknowledge and adopt that winning formula is naive to the point of stupidity on the part of both those running the club, and the fans who pine for exclusively foreign transfer activity. If we one day want to be a club like Bayern or Barca, we have to forge a similar identity to those clubs; if Barkley was German Bayern would have signed him last summer, while Ferguson would have spent the Herrera money on him instead. That's what those who know how to build sustainable success do.

Barkley has had more of an impact on top-level football than Toure did at 21, and has all of the tools to both succeed and exceed him in our midfield. He can match Toure's passing, driving runs and has a good enough shot with either foot to gradually score 10+ goals from midfield, while also having an extra willingness/capability to chase down and tackle.

I find it hard to understand some logic on here; we now read that Gareth Bale isn't good enough for us. Says it all really.

The modern City fan wouldn't have wanted us to sign Colin Bell either.

I have been enjoying your postings. Keep 'em coming.

Apparently we should go back for Barkley in a few years, should he prove himself at the top level, despite playing at a club that can't ever aspire to such a level as ours.

The glaring fault in this cunning plan being we can't complain when the price is double what it would have previously cost us to try and develop a clear talent.

 

[BigOscar]

I don't need him to prove himself at the top level, but proving himself at the level he's currently at isn't an unreasonable ask. It's all well and good saying Everton aren't very good, but he's not even been one of their better players, yet alone their best.

I've nothing against buying english players, but you have to put forward a better arguament for signing them than just because they are english. I don't see much being said about him specifically, other than how he is young, has potential and that signing english players is good for a club. That's an endorsement for signing anyone young and english, not for buying Barkley specifically?

Surely any arguament about buying Barkley should be about what he brings to the table? He is big, he is strong, he is powerful, he can shoot with great power. He's got a lovely turn on him, he can dribble the ball fairly well at times, although he doesn't seem to get his head up when he's doing it. His passing is unexceptional but usually tidy, his vision is poor. His injury record is poor, but looks to be improving. He has got lost in games a lot this season, struggling to make the impact you'd expect from a number 10 and seems to struggle to find the pockets of space he needs to be in to get the ball in good areas.

 

[better dead than red]

So we are not after Barkley for the summer? Or are we after him?

 

[HelloCity]

I don't need him to prove himself at the top level, but proving himself at the level he's currently at isn't an unreasonable ask. It's all well and good saying Everton aren't very good, but he's not even been one of their better players, yet alone their best.

I've nothing against buying english players, but you have to put forward a better arguament for signing them than just because they are english. I don't see much being said about him specifically, other than how he is young, has potential and that signing english players is good for a club. That's an endorsement for signing anyone young and english, not for buying Barkley specifically?

Surely any arguament about buying Barkley should be about what he brings to the table? He is big, he is strong, he is powerful, he can shoot with great power. He's got a lovely turn on him, he can dribble the ball fairly well at times, although he doesn't seem to get his head up when he's doing it. His passing is unexceptional but usually tidy, his vision is poor. His injury record is poor, but looks to be improving. He has got lost in games a lot this season, struggling to make the impact you'd expect from a number 10 and seems to struggle to find the pockets of space he needs to be in to get the ball in good areas.

Maybe you just don't have a good eye for potential talent?

 

[BigOscar]

I don't need him to prove himself at the top level, but proving himself at the level he's currently at isn't an unreasonable ask. It's all well and good saying Everton aren't very good, but he's not even been one of their better players, yet alone their best.

I've nothing against buying english players, but you have to put forward a better arguament for signing them than just because they are english. I don't see much being said about him specifically, other than how he is young, has potential and that signing english players is good for a club. That's an endorsement for signing anyone young and english, not for buying Barkley specifically?

Surely any arguament about buying Barkley should be about what he brings to the table? He is big, he is strong, he is powerful, he can shoot with great power. He's got a lovely turn on him, he can dribble the ball fairly well at times, although he doesn't seem to get his head up when he's doing it. His passing is unexceptional but usually tidy, his vision is poor. His injury record is poor, but looks to be improving. He has got lost in games a lot this season, struggling to make the impact you'd expect from a number 10 and seems to struggle to find the pockets of space he needs to be in to get the ball in good areas.

Maybe you just don't have a good eye for potential talent?

Or maybe you don't seem willing or capable to outline what specifically he has that we should be interested in? Other than his "potential", without being specific as to what he has shown to convince you as to what he will potentially be good at.