Have City rebuilt their midfield better than Utd have?

Regulus Arcturus Black said:
Bouaddi “looks a special talent” could have been applied to Baleba just 14 months ago @amolbhatia50k, and that whilst plying his trade in the Prem.
Click to expand...
Sadly we aren't in 14 months ago and Baleba was poor for Brighon and was signed by us despite that whereas Bouaddi was showing real class and signed by City on the back of that. Playing his trade in the prem is obviously the only thing that matters.

Regulus Arcturus Black said:
Anderson, good player, I think Tielemens is equal.
Click to expand...
Tielemans moves like a turtle. Good player but he's 29 and slow as feck which is why no big club has signed him. I'd take Anderson anyday, as would our club given he was the one we really wanted this summer.

Regulus Arcturus Black said:
So it’s Enzo v Mainoo for me, before we even start considering Santos.
Click to expand...
Enzo vs Mainoo, you mean the player we already had and didn't have to sign? In a thread comparing signings? Nice try.
 
amolbhatia50k said:
Sadly we aren't in 14 months ago and Baleba was poor for Brighon and was signed by us despite that whereas Bouaddi was showing real class and signed by City on the back of that. Playing his trade in the prem is obviously the only thing that matters.


Tielemans moves like a turtle. Good player but he's 29 and slow as feck which is why no big club has signed him. I'd take Anderson anyday, as would our club given he was the one we really wanted this summer.


Enzo vs Mainoo, you mean the player we already had and didn't have to sign? In a thread comparing signings? Nice try.
Click to expand...

The main question of the OP was “Basically have City rebuilt their midfield better than Utd have?” so of course Mainoo comes into it, he’s likely our first choice.

Bouaddi doing some stuff in France doesn’t impress me one iota like it does for many, and considering how many flops there are like this, I’m amazed so many are jealous vs Baleba. Neither feels a certain hit.
 
Regulus Arcturus Black said:
The main question of the OP was “Basically have City rebuilt their midfield better than Utd have?” so of course Mainoo comes into it, he’s likely our first choice.

Bouaddi doing some stuff in France doesn’t impress me one iota like it does for many, and considering how many flops there are like this, I’m amazed so many are jealous vs Baleba. Neither feels a certain hit.
Click to expand...
Seems like a you problem.

I agree that neither is a certain hit but then again, neither is Anderson and he was our top priority - so not all non certainties are even equal. In the end, any sane person would, on paper, take their signings over ours. Which is fine - they are state owned after all.
 
amolbhatia50k said:
Seems like a you problem.

I agree that neither is a certain hit but then again, neither is Anderson and he was our top priority - so not all non certainties are even equal. In the end, any sane person would, on paper, take their signings over ours. Which is fine - they are state owned after all.
Click to expand...

Anderson is far more certain than the two youngsters here.

I honestly can’t wrap my head around any jealousy over Bouaddi v Baleba.
Both looked good in France, one has also looked top in England, but after a shit last season, I don’t think a single person on Earth can be sure who’ll be a better player.

Having Mainoo in our rebuilt midfield is huge for the comparison going forward on which team has rebuilt best, even if City’s signings are fancier.
 
Regulus Arcturus Black said:
Anderson is far more certain than the two youngsters here.

I honestly can’t wrap my head around any jealousy over Bouaddi v Baleba.
Both looked good in France, one has also looked top in England, but after a shit last season, I don’t think a single person on Earth can be sure who’ll be a better player.

Having Mainoo in our rebuilt midfield is huge for the comparison going forward on which team has rebuilt best, even if City’s signings are fancier.
Click to expand...
In the end Baleba is coming off a shit season. If 1 year of your fledgling career was hugely disappointing, you aren't going to be that highly rated. In fact, none of our signings are as sure a bet as Anderson or Enzo.

Having said that, I wouldn't swap Mainoo for any of these six CMs.
 
amolbhatia50k said:
In the end Baleba is coming off a shit season. If 1 year of your fledgling career was hugely disappointing, you aren't going to be that highly rated. In fact, none of our signings are as sure a bet as Anderson or Enzo.

Having said that, I wouldn't swap Mainoo for any of these six CMs.
Click to expand...

And there’s the crux of it.

Mainoo none of us would swap, Bouaddi and Baleba both risks.
That leaves one midfield position to truly be jealous of if you don’t rate Tielemens too highly.
Although Tielemens and Anderson are almost identical as fast as each other, Anderson does cover much more ground I’d imagine.
 
Regulus Arcturus Black said:
And there’s the crux of it.

Mainoo none of us would swap, Bouaddi and Baleba both risks.
That leaves on midfield position to truly be jealous of if you don’t rate Tielemens too highly.
Although Tielemens and Anderson are almost identical as fast as each other, Anderson does cover much more ground I’d imagine.
Click to expand...
Except it's not. I'd take their midfield signings over ours (on paper), which is what the OP was asking.
 
Regulus Arcturus Black said:
No, he asked specifically “Basically, have City rebuilt their midfield better than Utd have”.

I’d say that question is going to solely be decided on how the two risky youngsters turn out.
Click to expand...
Only if we ignore - "if you were offered the choice of either Enzo-Anderson-Bouaddi or Tielemans-Santos-Baleba, who would you choose?"
 
amolbhatia50k said:
Only if we ignore - "if you were offered the choice of either Enzo-Anderson-Bouaddi or Tielemans-Santos-Baleba, who would you choose?"
Click to expand...

Well we don’t ignore either then right?

He’s asked two questions there.

I still think the first one is a trickier one also, as obviously on paper Enzo and Anderson are clearly better signings than Tielemens and Santos.
But I absolutely wouldn’t want Enzo, it’s a position we have already given to the most talented midfielder to come out of the academy since Scholes.
As mentioned, I think comparing the two youngsters is daft, no-one has a scooby there.

Ends up with Anderson v Santos/Tielmens for me in our situation.

If starting with a blank slate, of course City’s 3 wins.
 
Last edited:
Cutch said:
Actually think it's much closer than a lot of people think.

Think Baleba 24/25 is comparable to Anderson 25/26. A lot on here would have happily had the club spend 120m on him 12 months.

Similarly I think Andre Santos season in France was comparable to Bouaddis who in truth I hadn't heard much about until 2 standout games in the world cup.

Recent form is in the favour of the 2 City lads hence their obscene cost but Baleba and Santos are very young and have huge potential, delighted that we have both.

I'll accept Fernandes is probably better than Tielemans but I've personally never been much of a fan of Enzo. There was a time that Chelseas win record was way better without him than with, and although the gap I believe has closed I think he left with that record still being the case.
Click to expand...
I don't think the gap is that wide either. It would be interesting to come back to this at the end of the season. I think we have more potential in Baleba and Santos as to what heights they could hit. I think with Enzo and Anderson, you know what you are getting. Enzo is a solid 8 out of 10 most games. I think the jury is still out on Anderson as he hasn't impressed so far (it's early) at city. If he gets back to his forest form he will be a solid midfielder for them.

Bouaddi is a unknown as to what levels he could reach. I don't think he will kick on that much more, but what do I know.

It's obviously going to be painful to watch if M Fernandes has a great season at Spurs or if Sangere is the reason deal at Brentford. Having been linked with both players.
 
Regulus Arcturus Black said:
No, he asked specifically “Basically, have City rebuilt their midfield better than Utd have”.

I’d say that question is going to solely be decided on how the two risky youngsters turn out.
Click to expand...
I did ask this, I should have said what Regulus said as the title post. It was late when I posted it.

Edit: I changed the post title
 
dinostar77 said:
I did ask this, I should have said what Regulus said as the title post. It was late when I posted it.

Edit: I changed the post title
Click to expand...

I think it’s the better question as City have basically sold their best midfielder (Rodri) and have bought a completely new one from scratch with 3 new signings.
Our best midfielder (Mainoo) is still here, we complemented him with 3 new signings.

It’s a no brainer that if you’re starting Guehi in CM, that bringing in Enzo, Anderson is better than United’s signings, because Enzo’s a very good player.
So much of this (at this early stage) comes down to Enzo vs. Mainoo to me.
 
City won't play Enzo, Anderson and Bouaddi together as this trio lacks the creativity aside from Enzo, so it would be Cherki-Enzo-Anderson with O'Reilly, Bouaddi & Kovacic as backups, and for us, I anticipate it would end up as Bruno-Mainoo-Baleba with Mount, Tielamans and Santos as backups

Looking at the totality, Bruno is by far the best player in both groups, while an Enzo+Anderson midfield pairing on paper is better than Mainoo+Baleba, and the backups for City are certainly better simply because Mount is undependable due to his injuries

Overall, I think they did better because Enzo+Anderson could be the difference maker for them this season, cost them 250m but it could prove valuable for the now and the long term
 
At the risk of coming back in 2 seasons time and looking silly - this really isn't debatable. But this is also quite obvious given City have spent over double what United have.

I think both have done pretty well, but City have literally gone out and signed two of the best midfielders in the league based on last season in their primes.
 
At this stage, rather than thinking of conpeting with City, I would settle for United a better floor than falling to 15th or atleast consistently top 5. That way the window was quite good. I am don't think for now we have the money or attractiveness to get top players over City. The hope is that of the many young talented players we have accumulated, some of them grow to be world class over which we could build a strong team.
 
Imagine having to see Enzo in your team every week. I'd quit watching football altogether.

City's midfield is better though. As it should be considering all the monopoly money their sugar daddy printed to get them.
 
Unfair comparison, if you asked me. Both clubs have done relatively well in their respective rebuilds, but the objectives are different. City's new midfield will be judged on delivering the PL and/or the CL while ours on top-four qualification.
 
Well, if anyone try to argue that they fancy their MFs than us, I would say I fancy our club to be like their club too. Comparing a state-backed club (serious at it too) to any normal run club is pointless at this stage. Alot of us so contradictory, you want the club to be like City, have nice and moral billionaires owner, willing to spend 10s of billions of their money to make United win again. There is no such things as free meals in this world. Actually, the most expensive items alway come free.
 
TheRedDevil'sAdvocate said:
Unfair comparison, if you asked me. Both clubs have done relatively well in their respective rebuilds, but the objectives are different. City's new midfield will be judged on delivering the PL and/or the CL while ours on top-four qualification.
Click to expand...

Some serious overrating of other teams shiny new toys as always here.
Enzo has finished 12th, 6th, 4th and 10th in his time at Chelsea. Average 8th.
Despite playing for far worse sides, Tielemens also averages 8th place finishes in the PL.

Anderson was playing at Notts Forest.
The kid has done well at Lille.

I don’t see some mega midfield that City has bought here, they still seem weaker without Rodri than with.
 
You could include spurs in this conversation as if you include Gallacher (January signing). They have rebuilt their midfield: gallacher - tonali - m fernandes.

I think we have done well with our midfield rebuild. Especially seeing how much money City and Spurs have spent on their modified rebuilds
 
Regulus Arcturus Black said:
Some serious overrating of other teams shiny new toys as always here.
Enzo has finished 12th, 6th, 4th and 10th in his time at Chelsea. Average 8th.
Despite playing for far worse sides, Tielemens also averages 8th place finishes in the PL.

Anderson was playing at Notts Forest.
The kid has done well at Lille.

I don’t see some mega midfield that City has bought here, they still seem weaker without Rodri than with.
Click to expand...

Difference in expectations. If City finish second (three seasons in a row without in the low eighties (81-84 points) and get eliminated in R16 in the CL, their season and their midfield revamp will be deemed a failure. The same results in 2026 will be a success story for us. The bar is much higher for their players.
 
Very difficult to judge which team got the better midfielders this summer.
However we got our signings for only a fraction of the price that City paid. Impressive work from our end.
 
TheRedDevil'sAdvocate said:
Difference in expectations. If City finish second (three seasons in a row without in the low eighties (81-84 points) and get eliminated in R16 in the CL, their season and their midfield revamp will be deemed a failure. The same results in 2026 will be a success story for us. The bar is much higher for their players.
Click to expand...

Oh no debate there.

I just think people are generally vastly overrating both Enzo and Anderson. Enzo’s PL record with Chelsea is shite let’s be honest, and if you offered me those two, or Rodri, I’d have Rodri myself.
He’s the only true World Class midfielder amongst them.
 
City's midfield looks good but, considering the stupid amount of money spent, I'm not bowled over by it.
 
adexkola said:
They've overpaid given the quality and what they've paid. I'm also not convinced about how this midfield synchs with the rest of their team. Transfer values have no meaning nowadays.

Is it conclusive now that in 5 years that their trio would have performed better than ours? Not yet
Click to expand...

Maresca has said he sees Anderson as a 6, so presumably Enzo will be in the pivot with him and Bouaddi will come off the bench.

Unless they bench Cherki or push him to right wing to accommodate Enzo in the 10 and allow Bouaddi to start. This of course only leaves room for one of Semenyo, Foden, Doko and O'Reilly.
 
pocco said:
They have a different profile of player there. They have built to control games and dominate possession.
Click to expand...
I am unsure on this. Anderson and Fernandes are high energy players who like to try their forward passes often. They are quite direct and not known to be tempo setters.
 
Citys midfield doesn't wow me. I think they have built a weird mixture of players. They undoubtably have a good side but I think that its a "United" good side ie. its not particularly cohesive or well built. Arsenal have built a great side out of good players with a sprinkling of star players. City are hoping that if you stick enough good players on the pitch it will be enough. Which it will be for most games but I don't think they win anything of note with their current squad.
 
TheRedDevil'sAdvocate said:
Unfair comparison, if you asked me. Both clubs have done relatively well in their respective rebuilds, but the objectives are different. City's new midfield will be judged on delivering the PL and/or the CL while ours on top-four qualification.
Click to expand...

Pretty much this. From a talent perspective both midfields are talented. We have a few more unknowns I'd say in terms of can Baleba get back to his previous form etc. However, in Kobbie and Baleba we have a potential CM pairing to rival any team's if they fulfill their potential. Add in Tielemans and Santos as backups, our midfield is in good shape and for a fraction of the what City spent. We will see how things shape up but I wouldn't be super surprised if end of the season we are saying that we spent our money more wisely than City.
 
VP89 said:
I am unsure on this. Anderson and Fernandes are high energy players who like to try their forward passes often. They are quite direct and not known to be tempo setters.
Click to expand...

Both technically good though and not known for physical aspects - I think they will turn them into more of a hybrid between what they are naturally and more controlling CMs. Similar to how Enzo played for Argentina.
 
pocco said:
Both technically good though and not known for physical aspects - I think they will turn them into more of a hybrid between what they are naturally and more controlling CMs. Similar to how Enzo played for Argentina.
Click to expand...
Anderson and Fernandes are not known for physical aspects? I disagree with that !
 
I find their business really uninspiring.

Bouaddi just didn't impress me in the World Cup and Enzo is really a 10 who can't play in the pivot.

Anderson is a very good player mind.

I don't know, I feel like I'm actually very happy with our midfield. I probably would have taken Sangare over Santos but whatever, screwed Chelsea over and I do think Santos will be good.

Our problems are now further back.
 
VP89 said:
Anderson and Fernandes are not known for physical aspects? I disagree with that !
Click to expand...

Obviously they both put in the effort, but Fernandes in particular is not somebody who is a midfield powerhouse. He's more akin to Bernardo Silva. But my point is that they are both technically gifted rather than physically, and I think it is these traits they have been signed for. Like you said earlier, they are generally risk takers with their passing at previous clubs, but the ability to make these passes translates well into turning them into more controlled figures, as they are tidy under pressure and obviously great on the ball.

I don't think Enzo will completely neuter them, but I think they will still dominate most games.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.