We got rinsed completelyLukaku is definitely not worth what we paid for him. Not even close.
g = window.googletag || {}; googletag.cmd = googletag.cmd || []; window.googletag = googletag; googletag.cmd.push(function() { var interstitialSlot = googletag.defineOutOfPageSlot('/17085479/redcafe_gam_interstitial', googletag.enums.OutOfPageFormat.INTERSTITIAL); if (interstitialSlot) { interstitialSlot.addService(googletag.pubads()); } });
We got rinsed completelyLukaku is definitely not worth what we paid for him. Not even close.
Why not?Lukaku is definitely not worth what we paid for him. Not even close.
No more than 50m. Turns out we would've been no less better off if we simply kept Zlatan and relied more on Martial and Rashford.Why not?
How much would you pay for a striker who consistently nets 20+ goals a season in the Premier league for 5 seasons running before he's in the peak of his career?
No chance Lukaku would have been worth 50 at fair value. You had less established players in less prolific roles going for same prices. In fact Luiz went for 50m to PSG a few years before that and Higuain went for what 90m eur a year before that?No more than 50m. Turns out we would've been no less better off if we simply kept Zlatan and relied more on Martial and Rashford.
How much do you think we can get for him now?No chance Lukaku would have been worth 50 at fair value. You had less established players in less prolific roles going for same prices. In fact Luiz went for 50m to PSG a few years before that and Higuain went for what 90m eur a year before that?
One of the best strikers in the league would have been comfortably above that.
As for Zlatan, his knee was pretty much gone. Would have been far too risky to just keep him and rely on Martial and Rashford.
He has hit 20 goals once. Jamie Vardy is as good as himWhy not?
How much would you pay for a striker who consistently nets 20+ goals a season in the Premier league for 5 seasons running before he's in the peak of his career?
He's better.He has hit 20 goals once. Jamie Vardy is as good as him
Vardy is one of the best strikers in the league though.He's better.
Yeah i agree, Vardy is quality.Vardy is one of the best strikers in the league though.
Juventus bought Higuain for 90 millions because he scored 36 goals in 35 matches in Serie A. This is the record in the history of Serie A, where usually strikers score much less than in other countries. I wouldn't say he was a "less established player" than Lukaku.No chance Lukaku would have been worth 50 at fair value. You had less established players in less prolific roles going for same prices. In fact Luiz went for 50m to PSG a few years before that and Higuain went for what 90m eur a year before that?
One of the best strikers in the league would have been comfortably above that.
As for Zlatan, his knee was pretty much gone. Would have been far too risky to just keep him and rely on Martial and Rashford.
His embarrassing attempt at football also resulted in Crystal palace's only goalHe's came into a bit of form, took his two goals today really well and looks like he's getting used to the physicality of the PL now, should have had a hat-trick though, way too cocky with that lazy chip attempt.
David Luiz’s embarrassing attempt at football also resulted in Crystal Palace’s only goal*His embarrassing attempt at football also resulted in Crystal Palace's only goal
thats nonsenseHis embarrassing attempt at football also resulted in Crystal Palace's only goal
Doesn't matter how good you paint him: he's not worth 85M € (don't know how much it was in pounds )Why not?
How much would you pay for a striker who consistently nets 20+ goals a season in the Premier League for 5 seasons running before he's in the peak of his career?
Yes Vardy is a better than most striker. But his speed and tenaciousness that scares any defence.Vardy is one of the best strikers in the league though.
For me he lacks presence at times (Lukaku for all his faults certainly has that) but I've always thought he's an intelligent striker who makes superb runs off the forward. You saw that yesterday when for his first he realised a slip second earlier than the defenders the cross would come back into the box and moved forward.He's a good footballer but he won't get you 20-25+ goals a season. I'd honestly take him over Lukaku at the moment.
I agree and you can actually play free flowing football with him in your team.He's a good footballer but he won't get you 20-25+ goals a season. I'd honestly take him over Lukaku at the moment.
16 league goals last year is actually really good considering he's being compared to Torres and Shevchenko in a Chelsea shirt. They were only managing 4-5 league goals a season.Doesn't matter how good you paint him: he's not worth 85M € (don't know how much it was in pounds )
You could get similar numbers in goals with a less expensive striker. He only scored 16 league goals last season, for crying out loud. That's quite underwhelming, tbh.
Indeed. He'd be perfect in a team with two goal scoring wide forwards. His hold up play and strength will improve when he finally adapts and stops being a sissy.I agree and you can actually play free flowing football with him in your team.
We've been better than Chelsea going forward this year thoughI agree and you can actually play free flowing football with him in your team.
I was also talking about Lukaku, not only Morata This is almost truth for every league (bar few exceptions): a team that wins the title needs to have a player that scores 20+ league goals and at least another two who score 30+ goals between themselves.16 league goals last year is actually really good considering he's being compared to Torres and Shevchenko in a Chelsea shirt. They were only managing 4-5 league goals a season.
Edit: It was 12 league goals, 16 for the season.
Big problem is he's followed Costa who was all action forward the Chelsea fans adored.
Just out of interest Giroud has only scored 5 goals for Chelsea in nearly a year being there.
Are you a United fan? Because there is no way United have been better than us going forward.We've been better than Chelsea going forward this year though
Your striker and right side have been non existent and are stupidly reliant on Hazard.Are you a United fan? Because there is no way United have been better than us going forward.
We have not. We have been a lot better in recent weeks, but our attacking play hasn't been good most of the season. Chelsea have been pretty decent going forward and have been getting better throughout the season even without Hazard (as demonstrated last week)We've been better than Chelsea going forward this year though
Wheres the great Chelsea games? They're more of a midfield control side than an attacking threat.We have not. We have been a lot better in recent weeks, but our attacking play hasn't been good most of the season. Chelsea have been pretty decent going forward and have been getting better throughout the season even without Hazard (as demonstrated last week)
I doubt we would look good if we took Martial out of the side
Who said anything about great, or are you trying to make out that United have been great this season going forward?Wheres the great Chelsea games? They're more of a midfield control side than an attacking threat.
They simply don't overwhelm sides and even if you think differently there wouldn't be much in it.
They've had to go direct with Giroud many times for a reason.
I mean... 3 games? We blitzed Burnley away ourselves yet somhow only won 2-0 and thats whats blinding posters. They're efficient.Who said anything about great, or are you trying to make out that United have been great this season going forward?
First game of the season. (No Hazard)
Arsenal (Very good attacking, absolutely trash at defending)
Southampton
Burnley (No Hazard)
There have been games where they haven't been great and there have been games where they have played some very nice attacking fong is though I wasn't even arguing they have been fantastic atg wise, the point was better than us because if you really think we have been great (bar the last 2/3 games when Martial has hit form) then you are mistaken. Even then we were not great
I listed 4 games btw, those were the games I have watched apart from West Ham which I also saw but tbh they were pretty rubbish.I mean... 3 games? We blitzed Burnley away ourselves yet somhow only won 2-0 and thats whats blinding posters. They're efficient.
Id put our halves v Bournemouth, Burnley, Newcastle, Spurs, Watford, Young boys and Chelsea against anything Chelsea have done this year.
Don't confuse our defensive shambles with how we're forced to attack
His movement off the ball is arguably his strong point, it's why he gets so many chances.Took his goals well yesterday but he still looks very half-arsed a lot of the time. Was at the Derby Carabao Cup game last mid-week and he just didn't move off the ball. Or would lay it off wide and then amble at a very pedestrian pace towards the goal with no desire to work to affect the game.
Nonsense. Chelsea have the second highest xG in the league and have produced ~20% more xG than United this year (23.63 vs. 19.55). In terms of actual goals it's even starker - 27 vs. 19. So yes, United have (slightly) underperformed in xG while Chelsea have overperformed, but there is still a very significant gap in terms of attacking output.We've been better than Chelsea going forward this year though
Thats a bit of a stretch for even the most blinkered of fans!! We havent even been as good as Bournemouth.We've been better than Chelsea going forward this year though
Wait, what?We've been better than Chelsea going forward this year though
Chelsea have been hit and miss going forward and seem to rely on spells / momentsWait, what?