Jack Grealish / signs new 5 year contract

Status
Not open for further replies.

theklr

Full Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2019
Messages
2,659
For me, to pay that kind of money for him is only justifiable as a replacement for Pogba, as that would be buying him for a starting role. Bringing him in for a premium price as a rotation option would feel like a poor use of resources.
I think its justifiable to bring him in at 55-60 mill. as a rotation option. We have all seen what happens when Bruno is playing all the minutes. If Grealish gets 30-40 minutes each game , Bruno will be so much more consistent.
 

DannyDee

Full Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2016
Messages
499
Location
Toronto, Ontario
I have described how Grealish operated in the equivalent role for Villa. He did so for an extended period of time and thrived doing so. His versatility is well established at this point as is the fact that this is one of the roles he excels in. As much has basically been said by both Grealish and Smith as well.

He likes taking the ball in with the play in front of him, and is similar to Pogba in that they aren't as comfortable in typical no.10 areas, higher up the pitch with their backs to goal, as someone like Fernandes. Bruno's energy and willingness to operate in advanced areas would allow Grealish to get on the ball, carry it forward and release teammates. And ofcourse Matic would maintain a holding position and give him the license to support the play and join in from a deeper area. Again, this would mirror the kind of support he had with McGinn and Hourihane really quite closely. The kind of freedom afforded to Pogba, Xavi, Scholes or any other player operating in the 'link' role between a sitting and an advanced midfielder is suitable for Grealish.

For me, to pay that kind of money for him is only justifiable as a replacement for Pogba, as that would be buying him for a starting role. Bringing him in for a premium price as a rotation option would feel like a poor use of resources.
He did it in the Championship. His success in the EPL was as a left-sided attacker. I don't see how bringing him as a Pogba replacement makes sense. He has nowhere near the passing range of the clear link guys you mentioned, especially when you are talking about arguably two of the best midfield passers of the past 30 years in Scholes and Xavi. Pogba is mostly used not only as the link but to sit back and hold with more defensive responsibilities to clean up for. My point is, why is Grealish the ideal link to play those roles. A lot of times our formation turned into a 4-2-3-1 essentially. If you are paying a fortune for him, atleast use him tactically in the way he's been used this year, which is as a left-sided attacker. If the option is buy Grealish as a replacement for Pogba's role or don't buy him, I wouldn't buy him. There are much more proven players at higher levels at that role if we are going to be throwing around 60m or so on a #8 midfielder.
 

jamesjimmybyrondean

Full Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2019
Messages
7,052
I think its justifiable to bring him in at 55-60 mill. as a rotation option. We have all seen what happens when Bruno is playing all the minutes. If Grealish gets 30-40 minutes each game , Bruno will be so much more consistent.
It's not justifiable because there are other options that can be good rotational players for cheaper. It makes zero sense to spend 60m on a rotational player.
 

tob

Full Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2013
Messages
1,086
He'd essentially be Bruno and Rashford's backup right? Don't see the point in spending big on him. Also, how is he off the ball? Can he press like Bernardo Silva ? Sounds like a good player to have but I'm not sure we have a need for him.
Think we need more players who can press though. The more non pressing players you sign the further you move away from any possibility of being able to do it. But if we can make it work regardless obviously none of us care. I think we can do with a player like him. I'm just worried we don't have enough quality in deeper areas of midfield especially in terms of playmaking etc

Having said that for the right fee we would have Grealish as an option instead of James, Lingard and Periera for the AM/LW spot.
I think you're hitting the nail on the right spot here. At least these are the things that I'm also concerned about.

We need more off the ball movement, and I'm yet to see Grealish showing enough of this. To me he's more of a player who wants the ball in a standing-still-position (or at a slow pace) to then seek runners to play it to. The pressing part is also a concern. Yes, pressing is a collective thing, but some players are better at it than others. I mean, just look at Dan James. He's probably the worst I've seen. He can run, but he don't know how to press. Pogba is terrible at it as well. At the moment I'd say Fred is the best pressing player we have. No wonder Guardiola wanted him at City, as he likes to surrounds himself with players that have these abilities. Funny you mentioned Bernardo Silva. Since joining City I've been really impressed on his off the ball movement and workrate. Thought of him as a more Mesut Özil kind of player.

Grealish for reportedly around £60m is a joke, especially when you see City signing Ferran Torres for under £30m.

Also share your concern over the playmaking in deeper areas. Pogba is a big No for this. Matic is alright at times and Fred has potential, but both of them have flaws that shines through all too often. The quickest and best solution for this is Thiago Alcântara in my view.
 

UNITED ACADEMY

New Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2018
Messages
13,127
Supports
Erik ten Hag
Thanks for the reasoned reply. I agree with almost all of it. I'd like to clarify the Spurs situation though, it's not like he was looking to move per se. We were on the brink of administration and we were trying to get £25m for him to help stave that off, and he had to grudgingly go along with it (I say grudgingly but he would have likely went on to bigger and better things), but Levy bring Levy messed that up of course, thank God.

As for the £80m price tag, I don't know I think you can make a good case for it. There is there English premium for starters of course. There are comparable players in Maddison and Mount and if someone were to buy them, I'd imagine they'd go for £70-80m as well. More so for Maddison. I also think he's better than both.

But beyond that he is almost a one of a kind player in that there aren't too many players let alone English ones who can carry the ball like he does and draws defenders then releases the ball at the perfect moment. It's an invaluable skill especially for teams who play with pace on the front foot. Second in the league in chances created behind the imperious De Bruyne as well, in a relegation threatened team. The £50m that people are throwing around doesn't even scratch the surface. Joelinton cost £45m ffs. Pepe cost Arsenal 70 something odd million. How can they turn around and offer £50m for Grealish with a straight face?
Grealish's case is a bit different than what you think.

Out of the top team in PL, no club will be able to afford him & pay the fees ''this year''. Average players were bought in with big money due to desperation from the club. Is there any team this year desperate to pay £80m for Grealish though?

United & City have better players for the roles & position that Grealish is playing at, they are not in desperation to be willing to pay big on Grealish. Chelsea is going to sign Havertz & already have Mount & Pulisic so they won't even interested in Grealish. Liverpool has money issue that they don't even wanna go £52m Werner. Spurs Levy will never gonna pay such a money. Arsenal is the team who is desperate for creative player right now in their XI but they have no money right now unless they sell their best players like Aubameyang, Lacazatte & Pepe.

So it depends what's your club's plan here. If the plan is to keep Grealish in Aston Villa & Grealish is happy with that then that makes sense. However, if the plan is to actually really sell him for 80m after promise to the player that he will be sold this year then your club is naive, given such a situation that lot of clubs are in money crisis due to covid19 & clubs who has the money aren't desperate to sign him.
 

Lash

Full Member
Joined
May 3, 2012
Messages
11,888
Location
Buckinghamshire
Supports
Millwall, Saint-Etienne
@Winzaghi I agree, with @UNITED ACADEMY on this. If the expectation is Villa will give him the move he deserves, an £80m price tag is going to scupper that. I agree he's a talent and worth a fair amount of money to you, but there is pretty much no chance you're going to come high than mid table next season and if he wants to kick his career on it won't be with you. So given that price is driven by demand, we look like the only club capable of affording him and we have Sancho as our main target which will take up the majority of our budget. There's no way you're getting anywhere close to that price from us, so if you're happy to have an unhappy player next season, I think you're going the right way about it.
 

Red Company

Full Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2019
Messages
1,072
Location
Toronto
Supports
The Peaky Blinders
To be honest, I think he's a little slow. When I say slow I mean slow response and slow reaction.
I don't think he would be able to hang or keep up with the pace with this Man United squad.
I'm about to get roasted for this, but that's just my observation on him.
Totally agree. We already have one of those and he goes by the name of Pogba.
Manchester United can improve on Pogba and Rashford if they want to win the league. I wouldn't say we are stronger in those positions. Grealish is consistently better than those 2.
What football have you been watching? :lol:

Or not watching?:wenger:

Can you factually back your statement up? Any special stats/skills/other-factors that make you think Grealish is ‘consistently’ better then those those 2?

In all humbleness, I think he’s a quality player and PL proven but he isn’t an upgrade on Pogba or a Rashford by a mile.

By your assessment, we should basically swap Rashford/Pogba for Grealish and pay Villa some ££ on top of it as a cherry on top? Hint::nono:
I agree, but if there's any player in the world less likely to kick up a fuss if a transfer hasn't materialized, then it's Jack Grealish at Villa.

It already happened 2 years ago, where he was off to Spurs due to the club's financial issues. He even said he thought it was done and dusted. Mind you the jump was from the Championship to a top 4 team, so even bigger than now. It didn't happen, he put his head down and produced a masterful season to help the team achieve promotion. I imagine the people banking on him kicking up a fuss to try to force a move will be disappointed.

If United don't feel he's worth whatever Villa say he is that's fine, it's business. But I find the arrogance of some fans suggesting the selling club better lower their price so the player can move to be off putting. If for example Real came and offered £40m for Rashford, could you imagine Madrid fans saying United shouldn't hold the lad hostage and just lower their asking price etc. A player is worth whatever the club thinks he is.
Referring to the bolded part; In all respect, that is not true. Has any club ever agreed to lower a price just to please the buying club? It’s a business like you mentioned. We just don’t want to pay £80m because he’s not worth that much. I’ve read posters not having any issues with spending upto £60-65m which would sound more sensible. But nobody has come out and said lower the price just so we can afford him.

Now that you have managed to stay in the PL, you may be able to afford keeping him unless a club pays your asking price. But let’s honestly see if that happens this transfer window now that covid happened.

My guess is you guys were already in a tough situation pre covid and sure you managed to remain in the PL but all the lost revenues will have hurt. The deal should be done around £65-70m max with add-ons.

But on a side note - being a united fan, I truly hope we’re not the ones buying him. I read your insights about his goal scoring chances ranking right behind KdB and his ability to drive the ball forward and make key passes etc. But we already have Pogba doing that, and in a more exquisite style. We also have Rashford whose a faster and more explosive version of him on the LW too. So that really leaves him as backup. And since all we need is a backup, there are much cheaper and wiser options available. VdB for one.

In my honest opinion, he should just stay with you guys if you can afford to keep him because he’ll have the highest chance of making the England squad by playing the most minutes, which is only possible in your team.

Am 100 per cent sure Grealish can do whatever Pogba does on the pitch. Take out his individual skills, I don't see anything that Pogba does in this team that makes me say wow we can't do without him. He is a liability, we all know it, opposition know it and Fergie knew it( playing the young Brazilian defender in midfield over him). In my honest opinion, we will get more from Grealish than Pogba. Apart from a few Pogba fan boys , I don't know any football fan who rates him that highly. Its all about his name now. No substance. I don't care what he did for France or Juventus, I just feel he has been a failure here at least for the money paid. Again I don't want anyone getting their knickers in a twist here. THIS IS MY OPINION. IT IS NOT A FACT. IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, FAIR ENOUGH BUT I WON'T CHANGE IT.
Referring to the bolded part; your whole argument is based on casually overlooking Pogba’s individual skills. Skills that go a long way in influencing a moment in the game. Like how he conceded the penalty for us in the first game back post covid against spurs? That kinda skill?
While you also didn’t mention that Grealish can do whatever else Pogba does, better. Just that he can do it too. So do you honestly think Grealish is better? I’m confused.

Do you know why Pogba is much sought-after? Hint: his individual skills play a huge role in his demand.

But since you’re already convinced your opinion cannot be changed, I’ll leave the the debate about individual skills’ importance for another day.

Also - the second bolded portion is to highlight that you yourself mentioned who else thinks highly of Pogba (Juventus & France). You can also add Zidane & Real Madrid to that list. Even our own clubs owners who deemed spending £100m+ on him just based on a ‘few’ fan boys’ opinion? Shocker.
 

Ibrahimorich

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Aug 27, 2018
Messages
654
That's not how it works though. Sporting needed to sell due to financial issues.

Villa have billionaire owners, they are in no hurry to sell their best player.
Then we shouldn't be looking at him. There's clearly better options or uses for our money
 

romufc

Full Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2019
Messages
12,555
You can’t think of any players in the entire world of football who might be more value for money than Grealish?
Nope. To fit the AM role. If you have a look at what we are trying to achieve, the only other player I think will be van de Beek and I would pay extra £10m for Grealish.

My reasoning below on Grealish, so go on name me players who can give us what he will?

1. Cover in CM, AM, LW, RW
2. Leadership
3. Ball retention
4. top 3 in creativity in PL this season
5. Will be happy to come on rotation option.
 

onemanarmy

Full Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2013
Messages
4,687
Location
Belgium
You can’t think of any players in the entire world of football who might be more value for money than Grealish?
We don't have to look at value for money, we need the best players available. I'd like to hear names of available players, for a smaller fee, that would instantly improve our options in attack. Proven players, not the flavor of the month Fifa talent that keeps popping up here, who most haven't seen playing yet.
 

Cassidy

No longer at risk of being mistaken for a Scouser
Joined
Oct 2, 2013
Messages
31,029
Nope. To fit the AM role. If you have a look at what we are trying to achieve, the only other player I think will be van de Beek and I would pay extra £10m for Grealish.

My reasoning below on Grealish, so go on name me players who can give us what he will?

1. Cover in CM, AM, LW, RW
2. Leadership
3. Ball retention
4. top 3 in creativity in PL this season
5. Will be happy to come on rotation option.
Good thing we have a ton of scouts at United. If you look outside the PL there are a few players better than Grealish that wouldnt demand to start. I think Grealish would be a good signing but the fee has to be correct.
 

Cassidy

No longer at risk of being mistaken for a Scouser
Joined
Oct 2, 2013
Messages
31,029
We don't have to look at value for money, we need the best players available. I'd like to hear names of available players, for a smaller fee, that would instantly improve our options in attack. Proven players, not the flavor of the month Fifa talent that keeps popping up here, who most haven't seen playing yet.
Grealish isnt the best available. Unless you believe he is one of the best AMs available in Europe
 

E-mal

Full Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2017
Messages
3,022
Nope. To fit the AM role. If you have a look at what we are trying to achieve, the only other player I think will be van de Beek and I would pay extra £10m for Grealish.

My reasoning below on Grealish, so go on name me players who can give us what he will?

1. Cover in CM, AM, LW, RW
2. Leadership
3. Ball retention
4. top 3 in creativity in PL this season
5. Will be happy to come on rotation option.
Buendia is a very good player and for the rotation status he'd be perfect. That may even allow us to save and pay for a CDM e.g Partey.
 

onemanarmy

Full Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2013
Messages
4,687
Location
Belgium
Grealish isnt the best available. Unless you believe he is one of the best AMs available in Europe
Well, are those others available? I'm betting Grealish is, for the right price. He would improve our options in attack immensely.

Good thing we have a ton of scouts at United. If you look outside the PL there are a few players better than Grealish that wouldnt demand to start. I think Grealish would be a good signing but the fee has to be correct.
Names! :) I would like Odegaard, but there's no chance he's coming here.
 

DannyDee

Full Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2016
Messages
499
Location
Toronto, Ontario
If United don't feel he's worth whatever Villa say he is that's fine, it's business. But I find the arrogance of some fans suggesting the selling club better lower their price so the player can move to be off putting. If for example Real came and offered £40m for Rashford, could you imagine Madrid fans saying United shouldn't hold the lad hostage and just lower their asking price etc. A player is worth whatever the club thinks he is.
I do mostly agree with your last point, but I would point this out which sometimes gets ignored. If you are a club, and you are refusing to sell a player by putting an insane fee on him, fair enough. But, you better also be willing to financially pay him wages that come close to reflecting the price tag you have put on him. I have no idea what Grealish is on, but if you value him at 80m, you better start paying him close to 200k a week to reflect that valuation, otherwise, you could have serious issues with the player long-term.

In the case of Rashford in your example, we probably already pay him close to what reflects what we would be selling him for. Which is around 200k before bonuses and play-related incentives. Most players on the squad are probably paid close to what we value them at (or in some cases way higher), only one who is probably way below what we value them at is Mason Greenwood, which if he lives up to what we'd value him at now, he will be among the highest-paid players in the world, but he's an 18 year old, whereas Grealish is in the peak time for his big pay-day. Fernandes is probably underpaid when you look at him relative to other players in the squad, but his value was essentially just established on the open market.
 

romufc

Full Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2019
Messages
12,555
Good thing we have a ton of scouts at United. If you look outside the PL there are a few players better than Grealish that wouldnt demand to start. I think Grealish would be a good signing but the fee has to be correct.
Yep, good thing we do. When was the last time a scout recommended a player that no one knew? We could have scouts all over the world, they will watch them etc, doesn't mean they are good enough.

I am not saying sign Grealish for any fee, £50m max.
 

Fortitude

TV/Monitor Expert
Scout
Joined
Jul 10, 2004
Messages
22,409
Location
Inside right
I do mostly agree with your last point, but I would point this out which sometimes gets ignored. If you are a club, and you are refusing to sell a player by putting an insane fee on him, fair enough. But, you better also be willing to financially pay him wages that come close to reflecting the price tag you have put on him. I have no idea what Grealish is on, but if you value him at 80m, you better start paying him close to 200k a week to reflect that valuation, otherwise, you could have serious issues with the player long-term.

In the case of Rashford in your example, we probably already pay him close to what reflects what we would be selling him for. Which is around 200k before bonuses and play-related incentives. Most players on the squad are probably paid close to what we value them at (or in some cases way higher), only one who is probably way below what we value them at is Mason Greenwood, which if he lives up to what we'd value him at now, he will be among the highest-paid players in the world, but he's an 18 year old, whereas Grealish is in the peak time for his big pay-day. Fernandes is probably underpaid when you look at him relative to other players in the squad, but his value was essentially just established on the open market.
Good post.
 

Ibrahimorich

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Aug 27, 2018
Messages
654
We don't have to look at value for money, we need the best players available. I'd like to hear names of available players, for a smaller fee, that would instantly improve our options in attack. Proven players, not the flavor of the month Fifa talent that keeps popping up here, who most haven't seen playing yet.
He's not even a first team player. Rotation option at best. We should always be looking for value. We are a business after all not a sovereign wealth fund. Good planning for the future allows for better future success. Spaffing money on overpriced never-will-bes is the road to ruin.
Grealish is also of questionable professionalism. See "going out on the piss and crashing his car during lockdown".
 

romufc

Full Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2019
Messages
12,555
Buendia is a very good player and for the rotation status he'd be perfect. That may even allow us to save and pay for a CDM e.g Partey.
I dont think Buendia is good enough personally. He's played RW only at Norwich, we need someone who can fill more than one position.
 

croadyman

Full Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2018
Messages
34,330
Yep, good thing we do. When was the last time a scout recommended a player that no one knew? We could have scouts all over the world, they will watch them etc, doesn't mean they are good enough.

I am not saying sign Grealish for any fee, £50m max.
I will say £55m max but get your drift about finding a player that no knows about.

If there was any solid interest in a DLP/Matic replacement then of course we should prioritise the spend there,however looks very much like that will be next summer
 

Cassidy

No longer at risk of being mistaken for a Scouser
Joined
Oct 2, 2013
Messages
31,029
Well, are those others available? I'm betting Grealish is, for the right price. He would improve our options in attack immensely.



Names! :)
If we are going to spend north of 60m

Luiz Alberto
Havertz
Coutinho
 

onemanarmy

Full Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2013
Messages
4,687
Location
Belgium
He's not even a first team player. Rotation option at best. We should always be looking for value. We are a business after all not a sovereign wealth fund. Good planning for the future allows for better future success. Spaffing money on overpriced never-will-bes is the road to ruin.
Grealish is also of questionable professionalism. See "going out on the piss and crashing his car during lockdown".
Than we don't agree about his qualities. He will be a first team player, get tons of games and will be a big player for us, imo. Rashford has been awful since the restart, imagine having Grealish as an option for his position. Bruno could have been rested a lot more.

If we are going to spend north of 60m

Luiz Alberto
Havertz
Coutinho
Haven't seen enough of Luiz Alberto to comment, but Havertz would be a lot more expensive than Grealish and a bigger gamble. Coutinho, we should steer well clear. I don't think we'll have to spend north of 60m to get Grealish either
 

romufc

Full Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2019
Messages
12,555
We don't have to look at value for money, we need the best players available. I'd like to hear names of available players, for a smaller fee, that would instantly improve our options in attack. Proven players, not the flavor of the month Fifa talent that keeps popping up here, who most haven't seen playing yet.
This is what I am trying to get at. I know there are players in Europe that people will mention. I don't think Grealish is the only AM but I do think out of everyone available, he fits our squad better than anyone else. I would pay £10m more than any other player just because what he can bring to this team is different to the players we have. We have alot of talent, but no one in this United team can retain the ball like Grealish can.

It is all about bringing different options to the table, we have seen it in the last few games, teams will work us out, we need different quality options.

I will say £55m max but get your drift about finding a player that no knows about.

If there was any solid interest in a DLP/Matic replacement then of course we should prioritise the spend there,however looks very much like that will be next summer
The reason I am hesitant to bring someone else in, we have not had the best luck signing unknown players from Europe for a while now, we need a player that will hit the ground running.

100% I would sacrifice Grealish for a DLP but again, there is no clear choice. I would say Rice, but we wont get him so no point me mentioning names we wont get.

Grealish is realistic and a very good age.
 

croadyman

Full Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2018
Messages
34,330
Than we don't agree about his qualities. He will be a first team player, get tons of games and will be a big player for us, imo. Rashford has been awful since the restart, imagine having Grealish as an option for his position. Bruno could have been rested a lot more.



Haven't seen enough of Luiz Alberto to comment, but Havertz would be a lot more expensive than Grealish and a bigger gamble. Coutinho, we should steer well clear. I don't think we'll have to spend north of 60m to get Grealish either
How much do you think it will take then just out of interest?
 

Cassidy

No longer at risk of being mistaken for a Scouser
Joined
Oct 2, 2013
Messages
31,029
Than we don't agree about his qualities. He will be a first team player, get tons of games and will be a big player for us, imo. Rashford has been awful since the restart, imagine having Grealish as an option for his position. Bruno could have been rested a lot more.



Haven't seen enough of Luiz Alberto to comment, but Havertz would be a lot more expensive than Grealish and a bigger gamble. Coutinho, we should steer well clear. I don't think we'll have to spend north of 60m to get Grealish either
Disagree.
One has experience playing European football and International football and is a generational talent.

Anyway I will be happy with Grealish if the pice is correct as I said before, e.g below 50m. My post was on the premise we would be paying above 60-65m for Grealish where actually Havertz is apparently available and going to Chelsea for 80m euros so in that range.
 

-Supreme-

Full Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2018
Messages
2,438
40-45 + add-ons. But hey, that's just as big a gamble as people in here saying we would have to pay 60+.
Yes - I don’t think there are any teams out there that can afford over 50m for him.

If Villa have no intent to force him to stay then I can see a deal being around 40m mark
 

jamesjimmybyrondean

Full Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2019
Messages
7,052
I'd like to see a poll about the maximum amount we should stop looking at Grealish and look elsewhere. Something like - Less than 45m, Less than 60m, Less than 80m
 
Status
Not open for further replies.