I concur girlbob.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Ross Barkley
- Thread starter allblackcitizen
- Start date
I concur girlbob.
flb
Well-Known Member
You talk a lot of sense fella, would city take the gamble though?Barkley's best performance of his career to date came as a deeper midfielder against QPR; his skillset is maximised in there.
As a 10, he runs up blind alleys, and lacks the Silva-esque intricacy to make a real difference. If he stays there all of his career he will be nothing more than decent, but if he takes a step back permanently he can be one of the best in Europe in his position.
Pogba is more of a Zidane, a flair player; if we are looking for a long-term like-for like replacement for Yaya, then Barkley is the best suited for the job. His passing is similarly crisp, and when he opens his legs up in possession and drives into space the two are identical. There is a very special player in there, but it will require a career-defining position change like Pirlo did for him to fulfil his potential.
A couple of seasons working alongside Toure would bring him on leaps and bounds.
jaiguruKun
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 3 Mar 2011
- Messages
- 5,561
I concur girlbob.
Why? 21, homegrown and bags of potential. He's a better player than Rodwell and less injury prone before people make that comparison.
Why? 21, homegrown and bags of potential. He's a better player than Rodwell and less injury prone before people make that comparison.
He's only ever looked good in fits and starts. Even Everton fans would be happy to get a few quid for him. They would fleece us and we'd end up paying twice what he is worth. I don't rate him.
He's only ever looked good in fits and starts. Even Everton fans would be happy to get a few quid for him. They would fleece us and we'd end up paying twice what he is worth. I don't rate him.
Weren't we quoted the City standard of 50mil? I mostly agree with you. He has lots of potential but unlike Sterling he wouldn't get a chance to develop as he's not good enough to replace anyone in the starting 11.
jaiguruKun
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 3 Mar 2011
- Messages
- 5,561
He's only ever looked good in fits and starts. Even Everton fans would be happy to get a few quid for him. They would fleece us and we'd end up paying twice what he is worth. I don't rate him.
There aren't many that age who play consistently well all the time.People seem to have deeply held reservations about every single HG player we're linked with.
There aren't many that age who play consistently well all the time.People seem to have deeply held reservations about every single HG player we're linked with.
Probably because most of them are shite. I'd would have been happy with Delph for the money, and I think Sterling is worth it too. Wilshere? no thanks, perennial sick note. Barkley just hasn't done enough for me, he would be another Scott Sinclair.
HelloCity
Well-Known Member
Probably because most of them are shite. I'd would have been happy with Delph for the money, and I think Sterling is worth it too. Wilshere? no thanks, perennial sick note. Barkley just hasn't done enough for me, he would be another Scott Sinclair.
Sorry mate, but that's bollocks. Ok, he might not end up being world class but he's miles and miles more talented than Scott Sinclair.
For what it's worth, he also got miles more ability and potential than James Milner as well.
For me, Sterling and Barkley are the best two young English players.
Sorry mate, but that's bollocks. Ok, he might not end up being world class but he's miles and miles more talented than Scott Sinclair.
For what it's worth, he also got miles more ability and potential than James Milner as well.
For me, Sterling and Barkley are the best two young English players.
No need to be sorry fella, it's all about opinions and I just don't rate Barkley one bit.
Jack Wills
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 26 May 2012
- Messages
- 1,095
Sorry mate, but that's bollocks. Ok, he might not end up being world class but he's miles and miles more talented than Scott Sinclair.
For what it's worth, he also got miles more ability and potential than James Milner as well.
For me, Sterling and Barkley are the best two young English players.
He's right though, most English players are shit compared to the best foreign players, that's why England are shit. How many English players are good enough to replace someone in our starting XI? I can only think of Terry in for Mangala and possibly Rooney as a second striker if we play 442, and then Sterling instead of Navas or Nasri.
Extend it to British players there are Bale (obviously!) and Ramsey (possibly, but is he better than an on form Yaya, I don't think he is) - so given availability (ie Terry, Rooney and Bale all pretty much unattainable), we're not left with much are we!
Better to get Sterling then if we must have a certain number of HGs, use the best of our EDS and save the cash for proper quality foreign stars like Pogba.