[Litch]

Had a few starts now, probably still finding his feet in the prem alongside returning to fitness. Stats are pretty good. After a few games have people been impressed, underwhelmed or just okay.

New player in the prem, potentially I feel he's done okay, I think he still needs to have the one big game, where he completely dominates the opposition etc etc. Looks lively at times though and in a new league that's not always the case with big name strikers.

Agree but that needs to be within the context of the team also. It's hard to assess any player at the moment, the teams constantly in a state of flux. The number of injuries has just made our season so disjointed.

 

[DanNistelrooy]

I don't think him and RVP should play in the same 11. They are both 9s and the lack of bodies further back in the field means that most of the time RVP/Falcao receive a long ball and have to battle to hold it up and bring others into play. Hopefully one of them gets dropped for Herrera.

 

[Ekeke]

The worlds turned a few times since RVP, and contractually a completely different situation. Im don't give a toss what we pay for him cause transfers turned into monopoly money a long time ago and I'm equally not writing the cheque. This is no one season wonder type of player. He's (or was) arguable the best striker in the world for many a season. The reason he's here is purely timing and circumstance. If we are patient and support him to find his best form, maybe we might just have signed a player that's worth more than 44m even at 29. These players over the last few years rarely become available. It's a gamble I'm prepared to take cause the potential outcome is worth it.

Not possible. For that kind of money you need to be at the top (as a striker) for a long period, he'll be 29 before the season is over and in 2 years would be Van Persie's age and have the same issue of being past his physical best.

If he was 25 its another story but he's not. He has a short time at the top left - havent we learned from deals like Berbatov and Shevchenko that its hard for a striker in their very late 20s to go to a big club and succeed and deliver on their pricetags, because they have to literally hit the ground running and have brilliant seasons right from the beginning? Whereas 25-26 year olds can have a year or 18 months to settle in before they need to deliver. And despite this we're taking a player who will obviously not hit the ground running and will take a lot of time to reach his best, if hes even capable of it because of his injury.

 

[Litch]

Not possible. For that kind of money you need to be at the top (as a striker) for a long period, he'll be 29 before the season is over and in 2 years would be Van Persie's age and have the same issue of being past his physical best.

If he was 25 its another story but he's not. He has a short time at the top left - havent we learned from deals like Berbatov and Shevchenko that its hard for a striker in their very late 20s to go to a big club and succeed and deliver on their pricetags, because they have to literally hit the ground running and have brilliant seasons right from the beginning? Whereas 25-26 year olds can have a year or 18 months to settle in before they need to deliver. And despite this we're taking a player who will obviously not hit the ground running and will take a lot of time to reach his best, if hes even capable of it because of his injury.

Money has nothing to do with it. It guarantees nothing in transfers as it's not a science. You will have seen both signs of the coin as a utd fan. Age equally has no baring on it either. 'Settling down' has so many variables it's untrue...age, language, culture, family, the league, the team, the manager, your fitness and health, other commitments and international games....it's endless.

I'm not sure why anyone would not just wait and see if it's successful or not. What is there to lose?

 

[Ekeke]

Money has nothing to do with it. It guarantees nothing in transfers as it's not a science. You will have seen both signs of the coin as a utd fan. Age equally has no baring on it either. 'Settling down' has so many variables it's untrue...age, language, culture, family, the league, the team, the manager, your fitness and health, other commitments and international games....it's endless.

I'm not sure why anyone would not just wait and see if it's successful or not. What is there to lose?

Hope. Or in this case, your mind. Why bother when its not possible?

He's obviously not going to look like a player thats worth more than £44 million like you said. Thats insanity. He can of course look like a top striker in his final years of physical peak, but you don't pay that kind of money for it.

 

[Litch]

Hope. Or in this case, your mind. Why bother when its not possible?

He's obviously not going to look like a player thats worth more than £44 million like you said. Thats insanity. He can of course look like a top striker in his final years of physical peak, but you don't pay that kind of money for it.

Does it matter what we pay and if so why? It has no baring on you or me. Do you think any footballer is worth 250k a week? Let's keep it real, the sums don't matter anymore. If he fails, it will have no impact on nothing other than us potentially not qualifying for Europe as easily however, If he is a success, we might have signed a player that for his relatively short period of time here might be worth paying your sky subscription or season ticket to watch. Like I said, what's there to lose? I'm still pitching myself everytime I see him in a utd shirt. Let's dare to dream eh.....

 

[marukomu]

I'd still like to check him out for a couple more months.
Someone posted that he was a 'handsome Tevez'. That wouldn't be such a bad thing.

 

[Nogbadthebad]

I hope we keep him, for two reasons.

He's class. His record backs that up. And he wants to play for us.

Once the balance of the team is sorted when our midfielders are fit i suspect we will see a partnership of Rooney plus one of the other two up top, and I think that will work well for Falcao.

Wilson is not ready for the premiership this season, and especially is we maintain league position and have CL football next year, having Rooney,Falcao and VP will be a great strike force.

 

[Ekeke]

Does it matter what we pay and if so why? It has no baring on you or me. Do you think any footballer is worth 250k a week? Let's keep it real, the sums don't matter anymore. If he fails, it will have no impact on nothing other than us potentially not qualifying for Europe as easily however, If he is a success, we might have signed a player that for his relatively short period of time here might be worth paying your sky subscription or season ticket to watch. Like I said, what's there to lose? I'm still pitching myself everytime I see him in a utd shirt. Let's dare to dream eh.....

Yes it matters because our football club is a business and when you pay x amount of money, you want x amount of success to show it was worth the money.

Else we might as well buy Emile Heskey for £50 million.

Money is also a precious resource to further strengthen to side and making sure we can compete with the top clubs. If we waste it on players who dont come close to delivering on what we paid, we have less money to fix that problem and those in other areas. And lets not forget that our financial situation isnt the best, even if we've been throwing the money around that cannot continue without concequences. The players need to deliver and make a lot of money on the pitch and they do that most easily by coming first or second in the league + champions league.

 

[Litch]

Yes it matters because our football club is a business and when you pay x amount of money, you want x amount of success to show it was worth the money.

Else we might as well buy Emile Heskey for £50 million.

Money is also a precious resource to further strengthen to side and making sure we can compete with the top clubs. If we waste it on players who dont come close to delivering on what we paid, we have less money to fix that problem and those in other areas. And lets not forget that our financial situation isnt the best, even if we've been throwing the money around that cannot continue without concequences. The players need to deliver and make a lot of money on the pitch and they do that most easily by coming first or second in the league + champions league.

Eh? That's the most simplistic explanation of football economics I've ever read...you make the assumptions about money like your talking about your own bank account. Do you know what our ceiling is for net spending on transfers? If not, how do you know what's too much or too little? You talk about spending money like my wife talks about shopping at tesco......

 

[Redo91]

We could and clearly should be looking at all the other forwards out there and compiling a list of players who are far, far, far better value for money than Falcao - thats if we didnt already put the go ahead on signing him when we first did the loan deal. Of course there are plenty of strikers who we could get for that money and would be better for us than Falcao can be, due to his age.

Examples? Lacazette would suit playing with the players we have in forward areas better and cost half as much. He's young has a very good scoring record and would add the much needed pace to our forward line. Then there's for example Benzema, we could entice Madrid for that money and he's in better form and less fitness concerns. Sanchez was available in the summer and for that amount of money we could clearly have got him instead, his speed and versatility would have suited us more - obviously he's not an option anymore, but he was available in the summer so who knows who is available next summer? He was good at Barcelona last season and they let him go. Likewise Di Maria at Madrid, the money made it happen and £44 million is a huge amount. Paco Alcacer at Valencia could obviously be taken and for less than that price, he's a young man who will score lots of goals for club and country and can play his teammates in too. And this is all talking about forwards, in reality we have Van Persie still doing the business and Rooney can yet have his best seasons as a striker if he actually plays there. We could instead buy a top midfielder if we aren't happy with Ander playing Rooney's midfield role, then putting Rooney up front. And so on.

The options are many and almost all of them make more sense than signing Falcao, who may yet get back to his best but even if he does it'll be for a short time and for an astronomical fee.

Personally the only deal I'd have an interest in is if A) Before the end of the season he goes on a high scoring run for 10 games or so showing he's back at his best for a short time (which I'm hopeful he'll do whether we sign him or not) and then B) At the end of the season we say "No, that figure is far too high. Take him back Monaco and call us when you're willing to talk realistic numbers for a 29 year old" and they get back to us with a figure in the ballpark region of what we paid for RVP. If that call doesn't come and he goes off to a 2nd tier team in Spain (Valencia, Sevilla, etc) or something then so be it

Why do people keep mentioning this figure? I thought it was common knowledge that the £6 million loan fee will be subtracted from this if we make the deal permanent. That makes it £38 million which ain't bad nowadays. Only a few days ago Marca reported the fee will be less again so people shouldn't be saying he will cost £44 million as if it's a matter of fact. It's actually wrong.

 

[Ekeke]

Why do people keep mentioning this figure? I thought it was common knowledge that the £6 million loan fee will be subtracted from this if we make the deal permanent. That makes it £38 million which ain't bad nowadays. Only a few days ago Marca reported the fee will be less again so people shouldn't be saying he will cost £44 million as if it's a matter of fact. It's actually wrong.

At this rate, he'll be at a reasonable figure by the end of the season. Sounds very convenient given he hasnt quite got going yet.

All the reports were of the fee being £44 million at the time and its not going to change, thats the whole point of an agreed fee on a loan deal. Its just a convenient thing to placate fans to put out stories that a player who hasn't quite done the business yet is going to cost less money than originally reported, by everyone.

Of course I hope its true, but theres a reason why everyone was using that fee when we first announced the deal. Was everybody wrong? Thats unlikely.

 

[Redo91]

At this rate, he'll be at a reasonable figure by the end of the season. Sounds very convenient given he hasnt quite got going yet.

All the reports were of the fee being £44 million at the time and its not going to change, thats the whole point of an agreed fee on a loan deal. Its just a convenient thing to placate fans to put out stories that a player who hasn't quite done the business yet is going to cost less money than originally reported, by everyone.

Of course I hope its true, but theres a reason why everyone was using that fee when we first announced the deal. Was everybody wrong? Thats unlikely.

And all those reports clearly stated that the £44 million included the £6 million loan fee which we have already paid. Unless I am misinterpreting what you've said, you, and to be fair many others, seem to be under the impression that if we want to buy him we have to pay £44 million in the summer. That's wrong. We have already paid £6 million of that figure. If we were to pay £44 million in the summer that would bring the entire fee up to £50 million, a figure which I don't think anybody has reported to be true.

 

[RORY65]

And all those reports clearly stated that the £44 million included the £6 million loan fee which we have already paid. Unless I am misinterpreting what you've said, you, and to be fair many others, seem to be under the impression that if we want to buy him we have to pay £44 million in the summer. That's wrong. We have already paid £6 million of that figure. If we were to pay £44 million in the summer that would bring the entire fee up to £50 million, a figure which I don't think anybody has reported to be true.

The reports were of a loan fee and then an option of around £43.5 million additionally to make it permanent.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...ao-will-see-title-return-to-Old-Trafford.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/29011493
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/manchester-united-striker-radamel-falcao-4855749

 

[Jaxa]

I don't think him and RVP should play in the same 11. They are both 9s and the lack of bodies further back in the field means that most of the time RVP/Falcao receive a long ball and have to battle to hold it up and bring others into play. Hopefully one of them gets dropped for Herrera.

Have to agree with you,

I would much prefer a 4-3-2-1

-----------------Dave--------------------
Rafael--Smalling-----Jones-----Shaw--
------Herrera---Carrick---Rooney--------
-----------Di Maria--Mata---------------
-----------------Falcao-------------------

It's hard because we have Blind coming back and RVP is a fantastic striker to have in the squad but they don't really complement each other
and I would love to see proper service from Mata and Angel to Falcao, all Falcao is getting right now is long balls up to him and has to always try and
hold the ball.

 

[Ekeke]

And all those reports clearly stated that the £44 million included the £6 million loan fee which we have already paid. Unless I am misinterpreting what you've said, you, and to be fair many others, seem to be under the impression that if we want to buy him we have to pay £44 million in the summer. That's wrong. We have already paid £6 million of that figure. If we were to pay £44 million in the summer that would bring the entire fee up to £50 million, a figure which I don't think anybody has reported to be true.

Whether we've paid £6 million or not shouldn't be much of a concern. It won't bother me too much if we pay £6 million over what he's worth.

What bothers me is paying a good £15-£20 million over his worth which is the case here

 

[Gopher Brown]

No decision has to be made for at least another 4 months. Shall we wait and see if he can deliver before labelling him a waste of money?

 

[sunama]

Not possible. For that kind of money you need to be at the top (as a striker) for a long period, he'll be 29 before the season is over and in 2 years would be Van Persie's age and have the same issue of being past his physical best.

I agree 100% with this.
I think Falcao is decent and can be decent again. But for £45M (or whatever the proposed cost is), I think we are getting shafted.
I'm sure E.Woodward can get the price reduced, though. It depends if any other club is willing to pay more than we are.

Okay, here's another question: for those who think that Falcao is not worth £45M, for that price tag, who would you suggest, as an alternative? Remember, we need a ready made striker who can compete to win the league and CL.

 

[Ekeke]

I agree that in this case we should be able to negotiate the price down despite us agreeing to a set fee, like we did with Tevez. Who is going to pay that fee? And with a much more reasonable lower fee (and the inevitable return to form of Falcao, eventually) I'd be on board with taking him. Its just the current deal is way off the mark.

 

[Redo91]

The reports were of a loan fee and then an option of around £43.5 million additionally to make it permanent.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...ao-will-see-title-return-to-Old-Trafford.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/29011493
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/manchester-united-striker-radamel-falcao-4855749

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...er-worth-up-to-20-million-for-one-season.html

In this article Mark Ogden says that we had agreed to buy him for £35 million at the end of the loan. He is generally considered to be as reliable as they come in terms of United. It was either him or Taylor that said the loan fee was part of the agreed permanent fee.

Whether we've paid £6 million or not shouldn't be much of a concern. It won't bother me too much if we pay £6 million over what he's worth.

What bothers me is paying a good £15-£20 million over his worth which is the case here

So you think he is only worth £25 million tops?

 

[RORY65]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...er-worth-up-to-20-million-for-one-season.html

In this article Mark Ogden says that we had agreed to buy him for £35 million at the end of the loan. He is generally considered to be as reliable as they come in terms of United. It was either him or Taylor that said the loan fee was part of the agreed permanent fee.



So you think he is only worth £25 million tops?

That was the day he signed, there were loads of prices flying round that day for him. However, I already posted a later article from the same paper which along with (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...st-play-if-he-is-to-stay-at-Old-Trafford.html) show it as a £43.5 million additional option. Ogden may not have written them but they're from his newspaper. The reality is it doesn't really matter. If he stays the way he is we shouldn't be going anywhere near those prices, especially given how high his wages are, but he could be a superb signing for us if he returns to being the incredible player he was at Atletico. Sadly seems unlikely currently.

 

[badkins]

Whats a 25 goal striker at 29 worth?

Love how people manipulate simple facts.

Taking last season aside (serius injury at Monaco, where he still scored 11 in 19 games overall) - his tally's are:
- 2012/13 - 34 goals
- 2011/12 - 36
- 2010/11 - 38
- 2009/10 - 36

Don't forget that he added 2 goals in 3 games before joining us, with 3 goals and 3 assists during his first season in England with only 7 starts.

Falcao is proven 35-40 goals a season striker when used properly - that's a fact.
For me he's been the best #9 in football for last 5 years or so, and that kind of players are very, very rare.

Given his age, 30-35m should be a fair price. If he comes good for second part of season, I wouldn't mind paying 40m for him.

 

[Ekeke]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...er-worth-up-to-20-million-for-one-season.html

In this article Mark Ogden says that we had agreed to buy him for £35 million at the end of the loan. He is generally considered to be as reliable as they come in terms of United. It was either him or Taylor that said the loan fee was part of the agreed permanent fee.



So you think he is only worth £25 million tops?

If he gets back to his goalscoring form thats the ballpark figure for a 29 year old thats going to win you the league ala Van Persie yes.

I know you can make the argument that fees have gone up since we signed Van Persie, but you can also make the argument that Van Persie was clearly the best player in the league and Falcao can't be considered anywhere near that. Van Persie didn't have long left on his contract, Falcao has made it clear he wanted to leave Monaco and theres no way he'll go back to playing there.

I'd also remove the "only" part. £25 million is a lot for a player with a few years left at his physical peak, there are only a handful of examples of players that age moving clubs for so much money and even less that have done it and proven worth it.

 

[Ekeke]

Love how people manipulate simple facts.

Taking last season aside (serius injury at Monaco, where he still scored 11 in 19 games overall) - his tally's are:
- 2012/13 - 34 goals
- 2011/12 - 36
- 2010/11 - 38
- 2009/10 - 36

Don't forget that he added 2 goals in 3 games before joining us, with 3 goals and 3 assists during his first season in England with only 7 starts.

Falcao is proven 35-40 goals a season striker when used properly - that's a fact.
For me he's been the best #9 in football for last 5 years or so, and that kind of players are very, very rare.

Given his age, 30-35m should be a fair price. If he comes good for second part of season, I wouldn't mind paying 40m for him.

What do his numbers prior to his injury have to do with anything? Do you have proof that it won't effect him? That crystal ball must be really handy.

25 goals is just a more realistic (but still extremely hopeful/positive) expectation given he has to adapt to a new league and is unlikely to be 100% what he was before. Thats a lot of goals

 

[Redo91]

If he gets back to his goalscoring form thats the ballpark figure for a 29 year old thats going to win you the league ala Van Persie yes.

I know you can make the argument that fees have gone up since we signed Van Persie, but you can also make the argument that Van Persie was clearly the best player in the league and Falcao can't be considered anywhere near that. Van Persie didn't have long left on his contract, Falcao has made it clear he wanted to leave Monaco and theres no way he'll go back to playing there.

I'd also remove the "only" part. £25 million is a lot for a player with a few years left at his physical peak, there are only a handful of examples of players that age moving clubs for so much money and even less that have done it and proven worth it.

As you say RVP only had a year left on his contract. He would have cost £35+ million easily otherwise. £25 million doesn't get a whole lot for you these days. If we got three good years out of him (which is the minimum I'd expect) then £25 million would be a snip.

 

[Ekeke]

As you say RVP only had a year left on his contract. He would have cost £35+ million easily otherwise. £25 million doesn't get a whole lot for you these days. If we got three good years out of him (which is the minimum I'd expect) then £25 million would be a snip.

Plenty of people made the point that we paid too much for RVP in the first place.

And again Falcao has circumstances of his own, A) not fully fit B) not at his best, may not physically be able to be C) he's done at Monaco. They tried to get Real Madrid and when that didnt work out, they made sure he went to United. If we dont sign him, he's not going back to Monaco he's going to the highest bidder that he's going to accept playing for (he'll obviously have to give the go-ahead). Its more complicated than having a year on his contract, but he's clearly done at Monaco and is just as available as RVP was.

 

[badkins]

What do his numbers prior to his injury have to do with anything? Do you have proof that it won't effect him? That crystal ball must be really handy.

25 goals is just a more realistic (but still extremely hopeful/positive) expectation given he has to adapt to a new league and is unlikely to be 100% what he was before. Thats a lot of goals

The difference is that I am basing on a fachts and you are not, as it's only your prediction.

I have no idea how his injury's gonna affect him, what I know is Falcao scored 6 goals since returning (3 for United and 2 for Monaco and 1 for Colombia) and looks sharper every single game in the most physical demanding league in the world.

Also remember that Falcao was always a main striker, so his previous managers were always building a side around him.
Here the situation is much different with Van Persie playing in an exact same position, so it will be hard for Falcao to show 100% of his efficiency.

 

[Ekeke]

The difference is that I am basing on a fachts and you are not, as it's only your prediction.

I have no idea how his injury's gonna affect him, what I know is Falcao scored 7 goals since returning (3 for United and 2 for Colombia & Monaco) and looks sharper every single game in the most physical demanding league in the world.

Also remember that Falcao was always a main striker, so his previous managers were always building a side around him.
Here the situation is much different with Van Persie playing in an exact same position, so it will be hard for Falcao to show 100% of his efficiency.

Its a fact of how he did before the major injury thats stopped him playing to the same level, will take a while to recover from and may impede him in the future. We arent able to sign pre-injury Falcao and even if we could there's no guarantee that he'd score the exact same amount of goals in the premier league, in a different system to what he's had at Atletico

I just presented a far more managable haul thats far more likely to be achieved, if we're very lucky

 

[SambaBoy]

Isn't he on loan for two seasons or does it run out at the end of this one?

 

[badkins]

Isn't he on loan for two seasons or does it run out at the end of this one?

One season.

 

[JUPITER]

Whether we've paid £6 million or not shouldn't be much of a concern. It won't bother me too much if we pay £6 million over what he's worth.

What bothers me is paying a good £15-£20 million over his worth which is the case here

This. On current showing Falcao should be worth no more than £25m including the original 6m.

Diego Costa is worth £30m, Sanchez £40m - it's utterly mental to be paying more for Falcao than we could've bought those two for.

 

[Redo91]

This. On current showing Falcao should be worth no more than £25m including the original 6m.

Diego Costa is worth £30m, Sanchez £40m - it's utterly mental to be paying more for Falcao than we could've bought those two for.

Costa is easily worth more than that. Only reason Chelsea got for so cheap is because of his release clause. I'd value him and Sanchez at £45-50 million.

 

[Momochiru]

Lots of people arguing that he is not worth the money and we are overpaying by £10-£15 million. Since when is a club like United worrying over £10-£15 million? We spent far more on the likes of Zaha, Obertan, Bebe, Powell, etc - some of whom might make a decent mid-table players and no more.

No matter what you might say about his performances for us so far, he is the 11th most productive player in the whole league when it comes to minutes per goal or assist - here are the stats of the first 11 most productive players in the EPL plus some other notable players:

Rank---Player-------Minutes per goal or assist---(Total minutes/Total goals or assists)
1---Frank Lampard----61-(364/6)
2---Sergio Agüero-----62-(1053/17)
3---Papiss Cissé-------64-(635/10)
4---Didier Drogba-----72-(289/4)
5---Ramires-----------85-(340/4)
6---Stevan Jovetic----88-(617/7)
7---Olivier Giroud-----92-(460/5)
8---Diego Costa-------96-(1444/15)
9---Ángel Di María----96-(868/9)
10-Alexis Sánchez----99-(1589/16)
11-Falcao-------------101-(604/6)

13-Cesc Fàbregas----105-(1687/16)
14-Harry Kane-------109-(983/9)
17-Wayne Rooney---116-(1397/12)
22-David Silva-------144-(1149/8)
24-Eden Hazard-----147-(1761/12)
26-van Persie-------159-(1594/10)
29-Juan Mata-------165-(1323/8)
33-Graziano Pellè---177-(1772/10)
39-Andy Carroll-----187-(749/4)
41-Romelu Lukaku--193-(1540/8)
51-Raheem Sterling-215-(1717/8)
55-Danny Welbeck--233-(1399/6)
60-Sturridge---------270-(270/1)
64-Benteke----------298-(895/3)

Looking at these stats I can say for certain that the only striker I would have instead of Falcao is Agüero. There are a few others with better stats like Costa, Giroud, Cissé and Drogba, but lets not forget that they are usually the focal point of their teams attacks hence they get far more chances than Falcao. Sánchez is probably the only exception and he looks very good too and I would definitely have him, but not instead of Falcao, because he is not a striker imo. Kane has lower stats, but considering his age he looks very good too.

 

[DannyDash]

Lots of people arguing that he is not worth the money and we are overpaying by £10-£15 million. Since when is a club like United worrying over £10-£15 million? We spent far more on the likes of Zaha, Obertan, Bebe, Powell, etc - some of whom might make a decent mid-table players and no more.

No matter what you might say about his performances for us so far, he is the 11th most productive player in the whole league when it comes to minutes per goal or assist - here are the stats of the first 11 most productive players in the EPL plus some other notable players:

Rank---Player-------Minutes per goal or assist---(Total minutes/Total goals or assists)
1---Frank Lampard----61-(364/6)
2---Sergio Agüero-----62-(1053/17)
3---Papiss Cissé-------64-(635/10)
4---Didier Drogba-----72-(289/4)
5---Ramires-----------85-(340/4)
6---Stevan Jovetic----88-(617/7)
7---Olivier Giroud-----92-(460/5)
8---Diego Costa-------96-(1444/15)
9---Ángel Di María----96-(868/9)
10-Alexis Sánchez----99-(1589/16)
11-Falcao-------------101-(604/6)

13-Cesc Fàbregas----105-(1687/16)
14-Harry Kane-------109-(983/9)
17-Wayne Rooney---116-(1397/12)
22-David Silva-------144-(1149/8)
24-Eden Hazard-----147-(1761/12)
26-van Persie-------159-(1594/10)
29-Juan Mata-------165-(1323/8)
33-Graziano Pellè---177-(1772/10)
39-Andy Carroll-----187-(749/4)
41-Romelu Lukaku--193-(1540/8)
51-Raheem Sterling-215-(1717/8)
55-Danny Welbeck--233-(1399/6)
60-Sturridge---------270-(270/1)
64-Benteke----------298-(895/3)

Looking at these stats I can say for certain that the only striker I would have instead of Falcao is Agüero. There are a few others with better stats like Costa, Giroud, Cissé and Drogba, but lets not forget that they are usually the focal point of their teams attacks hence they get far more chances than Falcao. Sánchez is probably the only exception and he looks very good too and I would definitely have him, but not instead of Falcao, because he is not a striker imo. Kane has lower stats, but considering his age he looks very good too.

Great points and exactly what people should look at, no-one seems to batter a eyelid at the waste of money on Zaha especially, we've got nothing in return.

Looking at that list he is 1 behind Alexis where Falcao is playing at 60% of his best. Granted he might not be the same as he was when he was the best no.9 in the world but he has never relied on pace or taking on 2-3 players to score, he's not going to be Aguero, but can many strikers score complete goals like Falcao?
Those attributes do not go away, if he stays injury free he will get 10 more premier goals for certain..

 

[JUPITER]

Looking at these stats I can say for certain that the only striker I would have instead of Falcao is Agüero. There are a few others with better stats like Costa, Giroud, Cissé and Drogba, but lets not forget that they are usually the focal point of their teams attacks hence they get far more chances than Falcao. Sánchez is probably the only exception and he looks very good too and I would definitely have him, but not instead of Falcao, because he is not a striker imo. Kane has lower stats, but considering his age he looks very good too.

So, you're saying you'd reject a swap deal of Costa for Falcao...?

 

[Momochiru]

So, you're saying you'd reject a swap deal of Costa for Falcao...?

That's not what I'm saying - I'm saying that Agüero is definitely a better player, while Costa might also be better, but things are not that clear cut.

 

[JUPITER]

That's not what I'm saying - I'm saying that Agüero is definitely a better player, while Costa might also be better, but things are not that clear cut.

No, you said that the only PL striker you'd 'have instead of Falcao is Aguero' - thus, you'd reject a swap deal for Falcao and any other PL striker - which is mental.

 

[DannyDash]

No, you said that the only PL striker you'd 'have instead of Falcao is Aguero' - thus, you'd reject a swap deal for Falcao and any other PL striker - which is mental.

Just because a player is doing better elsewhere doesn't mean you'd take him here, e.g. would you take Neuer over De gea right now? I wouldn't..

 

[Momochiru]

No, you said that the only PL striker you'd 'have instead of Falcao is Aguero' - thus, you'd reject a swap deal for Falcao and any other PL striker - which is mental.

I said the only one I would have for certain is Agüero, because he has amazing stats and also plays in a front two. Costa has been great too, but I'm not so sure he will be able to have the same impact if he has to play upfront with RVP, like Falcao.

 

[Ole240599]

Everyone wants to see an instant return from falcao but it will take time. I think that LVG is managing his return to full fitness very well. To be able to play at the intensity he does in the most physical league in the world will take time. Once he is there I believe he will be the main striker and RVP will become more of a back-up.