2 assists and 2 shinned goals from both feet?
Jack Grealish | Man City
- Thread starter RDCR07
- Start date
2 assists and 2 shinned goals from both feet?
Tbf, we've not seen how Sancho will translate his figures into the PL. Ive watched a good amount of him at Dortmund and I'm skeptical that he'll get anywhere near those figures.
Also context is required, I calculated it a whole back and both Sancho and Grealish scored about the same % of their team's goals in the last 2 seasons in the league, it's just Sancho played in a team that scored way more goals. Personally I think Grealish will put up better figures than Sancho this season.
That sounds fair
He's obviously a good player, but one that's been elevated well above his actual level of ability.
I feel Rice will be another that'll massively disappoint and underwhelm, on whoever drops 70m to 80m on him. I really hope that it's not us. For what it's worth, I think Grealish has far more ability than Rice.
Cool well whatever your calculations say, Sancho scored notably more and assisted notably more for the last few seasons (pretty much since his senior breakthrough). Your way of calculating it would probably make Ollie Watkins up there with the very best of Europe and doesn't really make sense.
I am not even saying Sancho is a better player, just that he has proven a lot more so far which is clear and obvious. I reckon they are of a similar level and Sancho is probably slightly more dangerous whilst Grealish is slightly better at retaining possession (although even where the differences are it is not that far apart). Grealish may do better because he is playing under the best manager on the planet but I think it was a far worse signing especially with the context that I think Sterling is a better player than him and will have his play time limited.
A truer statement never spoke.
The fact that the press loved him and as such he got the Wayne Rooney treatment from fans at the Euros without the Wayne Rooney performances has moved his reputation to ridiculous levels in comparison to what he actually does in most matches.
BBC have Grealish as player of the match as well. It doesn’t surprise me; he played well.
Yes he was fine, like most times I have ever watched him play. Good on the ball, a bit self-indulgent but quite good. He clearly didn't "star" today.
The media agenda with him is so forced. It’s like a coordinated campaign to manufacture him into some superstar, and it seems to go beyond the usual overhyping of English players.
1 - Doesn't matter as of yet he's done nothing in the PL, Grealish for example has 17 assists and 16 goals in the league in 99 appearances for a weak team. One of those seasons as a kid in a relegation fodder team.
2 - Grealish played nearly double the amount of minutes and was competing with Sterling (who was on form). Sancho was benched for Sako and Foden. Also Sterling is a better player than Jack or Sancho or Rashford or Foden but they offer very different things tactically. Also Pep said 3 players want to leave and its pretty much Bernardo who he stated, and Sterling and Laporte according to rumors
3 - He was highly rated but that still doesn't mean he'll make the step up and as of yet we've seen nothing of him in a United shirt to confirm nor deny it.
4 - We don't need a left back nor a striker... they would be nice but not required. You'll find we won 2 trophies last season with Zinchenko and Cancelo at LB and with only Jesus and Torres who can play as a striker. We also banged in 10 goals in our last 2 games without one and 15 in our last 3 home games. Also pretty sure we were top scorers again last season despite a poor start and scored over 120 goals in all comps.
And like I said he was over priced, but his marketability is more a reason for the signing than anything else. Whether we need him or not doesn't matter and we might, he's walked into the first team of one of the strongest squads in Europe so far... Replacing a crocked Aguero with Grealish has strengthened, not weakened the squad, we made 60+ million in player sales and he was our first signing so clearly our priority over a striker otherwise we'd have went for Kane first. I'll trust Pep on what we need/don't need over the internet.
Also I should add I believe he is overhyped and overrated.. when everyone wanted him to play in the Euro's I told them they were mental and Sterling was a far better footballer.
Bernardo was the MOM today, completely controlled the game. Grealish was anonymous in the first half, but very dangerous in the second. Seems like he is settling at City, had a far more disciplined performance today.
The point is, is that Dortmund score far more (80 goals in the Bundesliga in 34 games in 19/20 vs 45 for Villa in 19/20 in 38 games). So it stands to reason that Sancho will have higher goals and assists. The teams they played for and the type of goals they score matters a lot in context. If you watch back his goals from last season, the space he got for half of them is crazy.
Anyway it's your opinion, fair enough. Mine is that Grealish is the better player and by some margin too. That's from watching a lot of Dortmund and Villa over the last two season. We'll see as the season progresses. Don't get my wrong I hope Sancho proves me wrong, but there's some very noticeable weaknesses in his game.
Dortmund scored more goals because they had better attackers in the likes of Sancho? That’s a strange argument to be fair.
Last edited:
1. Impossible to tell unless Grealish goes to Dortmund and plays there for 3 years as a 21 year old.
2. Grealish has never done anything to back a claim that he is a better player than Sancho "by some margin" other than get extremely hyped by the British press around a football tournament.
Well yes that's obviously one thing it means but I don't really need to spell out all the things it means do I? It means they play in a less defensive league, they get more space, he has better players assisting him, better players finishing chances etc. All things you need to analyse when comparing two players playing for different teams in different leagues.
Have you actually watched Villa regularly over the last two seasons? I feel like I've had this discussion already with people who simply look at stats and go, that's it, that's all that matters without having watched either play regularly. It's incredibly boring.
Yes quite often.
I rate Grealish as a good player, I am also of the belief that if you are the sort that rates him as one of the best players in the league that you are falling for football hipsters and the English press who vastly overrate him. Just to let you know.
How often? I watched pretty much every game he played at Villa in the league in the last 2 seasons. He was head and shoulders above every one else on the pitch. Last season they were averaging 5th position until he got injured, then they dropped to 13th. In their first season he was playing some great balls but their attack was Davies and Samatta, and Trezeguet..
In fact him coming back from injury was the main reason they got promoted in the first place from the Championship. He's easily been one of the best players in the league over the last 2 years, the fact you refer to the press rather than his actual games means you clearly haven't watched him much. Quote me at the end of the season and I'll guarantee he's had a better season than Sancho, and most likely by a good margin too.
But you aren’t analysing Sancho stats, you’re dismissing them.
Jadon is the first player to reach over 15 goals and 15 assists since records began. I don’t care how offensive the league is, to do that at 21 is scandalous while the best players in Bundesliga history couldn’t match it.
If he hits 10 goals and 10 assists in the PL I'll be surprised. Go and look at the Bundesliga goals he scored. Half of them were a joke.
The best players make it look easy. Look at Chelsea today with 3 v 2 counter and they don’t get a shot away.
If it’s that easy then where are the line of older, better, world class proven players who have more than 15 and 15?
Never looks like losing the ball. Always a threat. Top player.
You say you are skeptical Sancho will produce same numbers but Grealish doesn’t produce
Stop embarrassing yourself and Mr. Grealish has no weakness? I laughed at Grealish is better than Sancho by a far margin. Sancho is putting numbers on the board since his senior breakthrough that most teenagers never did. Always trying to hype Grealish unnecessarily
This and the Lukaku thread are hilarious. Fans so desparate for them to fail that they've made their mind up that they're a flop already.
Just 1 goal and 1 assist in first 3 games so he must be a waste of money.
Christ, imagine if someone in the United forum started labelling Sancho a flop in the same circumstances, he'd be hounded out the forum.
Just 1 goal and 1 assist in first 3 games so he must be a waste of money.
Christ, imagine if someone in the United forum started labelling Sancho a flop in the same circumstances, he'd be hounded out the forum.
I would say on the whole I have probably seen Grealish play about 30 times (maybe more including when he was first coming through but I cannot remember).
He was the best player in a midtable team (maybe besides the keeper) so yes it had a big effect when he was playing and when he wasn't.
You clearly don't think it matters how often you score goals, create goals, dribble past players and you think the Bundisliga is such a poor league that achievements there don't matter. We have opinions that are so drastically different that it is hard to even have a conversation.
They are similar levels of player and Grealish is playing for a far more fluid team under a better manager. I reckon he probably might have a better season.
You realise these players had careers before August 2021 and people may have formed opinions then?
A midtable team that was 5th for half the season until he got injured. I doubt they finish above 10th this season.
My point is Grealish looked better to me playing in a far weaker team in terms of all round play. Now that he's playing in a better team with better players, he'll score more and assist more. Sancho's also playing at a comparable level team but I sincerely doubt he'll come close to the same level of output.
Now that's my opinion based on the eye test. He's a better dribbler for me (Sancho lacks acceleration to beat a man from a standing start), has a similar final ball (though I'd rate Grealish's as more versatile), loses the ball less and can finish in a similar fashion. You can disagree if you want but that's my opinion. They're not super dissimilar but crucially for me Grealish can beat a man regularly, at the top level that distinguishes players. I watched them both a lot and Grealish was the one I wanted, but I'm hoping Sancho proves me wrong.
Midtable teams are often in a higher position for a portion of the season. If you believe that Aston Villa would have finished 5th if Grealish was fit all season then I disagree, if I don't then your argument which is basically that Grealish is so incredible that he can inspire the 13th placed team to 5th is obviously wrong. The season prior backs my opinion up btw where they finished 17th with the player who can apparently inspire teams to almost getting Champions League football single handily.
I think Sancho is better at beating a man when it isn't running away from the box to win a foul, I think this is far more important.
You hoping Sancho proves you wrong is a bit of a fools game because the circumstances are not equal. I think if City had signed Sancho and we had signed Grealish then not much would be different. Grealish will probably look a little better this season due to playing in a more fluid team with a far better manager. Hard for a fair test really.
This was hard to quote.
1 - I never said he hasn't proven more nor said he's proven less. I said for the money paid one is PL proven and closer to first choice in his national team thats it, he's also something like 5 years older. That comes with a premium.
Who's talking about Lewandowski? We're talking about Sancho, you are trying to compare numbers between a winger in one of the best teams in a weaker league vs a winger in a weak team in the strongest league. What has Sancho proven? He's proven he's a very,very good footballer, so has Grealish.
2 - Again why would I feel bad. Sterling is a better player, that doesn't mean Jack is bad and not a good fit at City. Your whole argument is based on hyperbole. In fact he's arguably tactically a better fit and its rumored Sterling wants to leave... Not being as good as Sterling is not a stick to beat him with, I don't know any winger not called Messi who's come close to Raheems output in the last 3 or 4 years in one of the top 3 leagues. Its hardly a slight. Sterling has a poor season last season and still scored 14 goals with 12 assists.
3 - Who said anything about Haaland? also no one said Sancho nor Haaland was crap.. Again making stuff up. Don't be getting your knickers in a twist cause I spoke about his price tag. fecking hell... talk about shifting goal posts. I also didn't say he was overpriced, I said £73m was considered a cut price. But no Haaland is not proven in the PL either, would you back Haaland or Harry Kane to hit the ground running at United? Personally I'd back Kane. Doesn't mean either is bad, I don't know where you are pulling that from. There is no guarantee a player can come in from one league where they do well and blow the PL away. For every KDB there is a Kagawa.
4 - But we didn't choose anyone bar Grealish. Me personally I'd have liked a striker (my eyes lit up with the Ronaldo rumors as I still see him top 10 in the world, top 3 or 4 strikers) but it wasn't a priority and I'm more than happy with Zinchenko who I think is one of the best LB's in the league now he's grown into the position. We might score more with a top striker but we might not. It would change how we play. Simply put last season only getting Tucheled twice denied us 4 trophies and in both games a striker would have made no difference, Chelsea played us like a fiddle both times one of which Kun was on the pitch. My point is for the club and Pep, Grealish was our priority not a striker and they kind of know what they're doing.
You say I'm doing mental gymnastics when you've implied I consider Sancho overpriced (I don't, I just don't consider £73m cheap either), Haaland and Lewandowski crap and made up piles more I never said. You are the one doing mental gymnastics. What I've actually said is Sancho was considered cheap at £73m (in other words cheap compared to last year) and I've said Grealish was over priced but its understandable with the hype and marketing opportunities around him right now.
Also marketability is not about shirt sales its about players who people track and follow, who will get casuals interested in watching the club and game, and Jack Grealish hype right now is much bigger than his ability.
See the nonsense on the Caf during the euros as example. People calling him "the best player in the league", that kinda hype costs money.
He's a very good footballer who for some reason the British media are trying to make into the next Beckham (I won't say why the cynic in me thinks the media champion him over Sterling for political reasons). Look at the headlines today, he was probably the 5th best attacker on the pitch but you'd swear he single handedly ran Arsenal ragged, truth is despite putting in a 7 outta 10. Torres, Jesus, Gundogan and Bernardo were all more effective (every attacker who's not him). Right now weird and all as it is to say Grealish is probably bigger news and draws more eyeballs than KDB to English fans because he's a media darling.
Do I think Jack Grealish is worth more as a footballer than Jadon Sancho? Nope. Do I think Jack Grealish is more popular, a media darling and a way to get more eyes on City than Sancho? Absolutely. And that is essentially what we paid the extra money for.
Last edited:
I watched him in the game today and I wasn’t exactly sure how he improves City. He’s not a goal scorer, he kind of pretends to drive through the lines and passes it off...great player but 100million ?
1. We were talking about levels as a player. When I pointed out Sancho's accomplishments you said "it does not matter as he has done nothing in the PL". Neither has Lewandowski. It is obviously a bit of hyperbole to prove a point. I agree, both at good players at a similar level.
2. You would be a bit annoyed at the signing if you agree that you already have a better player in that position? If Grealish was a backup no problem but when you break the all time transfer record it looks poor surely?
3. So much uncertainty about making the step up from being one of the best players in the Bundisliga insinuates that there is a good chance Haaland might be rubbish in the Prem.
4. I would say Zinchenko is okay but considering there are not many spots to improve in your team I think that is clearly one of them (you could make the argument that you would be fine signing no one). Also Aguero is a bad example these days in my opinion despite me thinking he has been hugely underrated throughout his career. I honestly think this signing is a mix of Pep buying into the unjustified media hype a bit and just fancying coaching him cause he is his sort of player. I think these are bad reasons to sign someone, not that it will hurt you much it is just profligate.
As per the bit at the bottom, again we agree and I don't really know why we are arguing.
He created great openings and also a clear-cut goal so I think it's obvious how he can improve City even though there were spells in the game in which he wasn't too involved, especially in the first.
yeh he was alright, he’s just not a worth 100million
I didn't mean it was worderd poorly, I mean £73m is a risk for someone who hasn't done it in said league. Thats no a slight, you obviously can't do it if you don't have the chance.
Sterling wants out and just because Raheem is a better player doesn't make him a better fit tactically, like Saka vs Sancho on the right for England (which was hyperbole on my part). Sterling is a class player but is being marginalized more and more at City as his game moves on because Pep sees someone like Grealish as a better fit, he's started all 3 games while Raheem has been a sub. Square peg in round hole with our newer more defensive style. We now kill teams with endless possession and don't attack with the pace like we used to. It is a different City to the one with Sterling and Sane and what came after, we are a little slower and more patient and it maybe doesn't suit Raheem, but most importantly he's likely running his contract down cause he wants to leave. Its strongly hinted at the 3 who want out are Bernardo (who Pep stated), Raheem and Laporte. It might not be true but thats the rumor and it makes sense given Sterling despite being such a good player is getting pushed more and more outta the team.
I'm not at all insinuating he'll be rubbish I'm insinuating he might be a 15 goal a season striker or a 30 goal a season striker. We don't know but we do know what Harry Kane will be. Good players for whatever reason don't always adapt to new leagues.
Honestly with Zinchenko I think only Robertson and Shaw are better right now in the PL. Before last season only Robertson, I think people still see Zinchenko as the young cm playing LB he was 3 or 4 years ago. In Europe who could we really bring in to replace him. No way Davies leaves Bayern, we're not getting Shaw nor Robertson and anyone else would be pretty much an even exchange imho. Madrid and Barca are using past it full backs or Mendy who's all hype imho. PSG's aren't amazing. Juve have Sandro and Danilo.. I genuinely see no huge upgrade on him. Spinazolla if he wasn't always injured but aside from that...
I don't think we're arguing as much as having a healthy internet debate that looks like arguing (though my wife says I'd argue with myself if left in front of a mirror for 10 minutes)
Interesting opinion, everytime I see Zinchenko as a LB he strikes me as a square peg in a round hole - not great offensively or defensively, just "there". I'd say Robertson + Shaw are comfortably better as are Chillwell, Lucas Digne, TIerney, and Reguillon.
Don't care what anybody says feck Grealish and his calves.
So the same doesn't apply for Sancho playing in a far more attacking team and Grealish being surrounded by strikers that managed 1 goal between them in 19/20. The stats were fine to compare then, but not now. Right.
There's far less of a gap this season between City and United than there is between Villa and Dortmund. If we can't compare their figures after this season then I don't know what to tell you.
I don't know how you can say Sancho is better at beating a man either. It's one thing he really struggles with from a standing start. I swear it feels like I'm having a conversation with someone who has a mythical idea of a player rather than having actually watched him consistenly. I'll end this conversation, but bookmark this and revisit at say game week 15 and you'll see the actual verdict on Sancho.
I wouldn't change any of them for him, his role as a lb is very different which is probably why he's so good there. I'd start him ahead of Cancelo every day of the week. I haven't that stats to back this up but I would wager Sterlings ton of goals most of them come with Zinchenko at lb as opposed to Mendy or Cancelo.
He doesn't create overlaps or assists, his job is to recycle the ball, be in the right position to receive the ball and cover the counter. Its no coincidence Grealish came to life 2nd half when Zinchenko came on for Walker after Cancelo was stepping all over his feet and not giving him the ball 1st half. He has this great knack of always being in the right place, doesn't get caught out too often like Cancelo (mainly because he doesn't push too far and is more defensively aware), he's like the anti-Mendy, not blessed with the physique and speed of a fb but really intelligent in making space for the winger and CM (usually Sterling and Gundogan) whilst being solid defensively. Hugely underrated imho because he was less than £2m in a squad that cost £1bn.
Stuff like his record of having the longest winning run in PL history can't be coincidence. We've taken 152 points from a possible 189 with him on the pitch. Thats a win rate of just under 80%. Probably the highest in the leagues history. He's one of those players like Jesus who we're a better team when they play despite their rating as individuals.
https://www.espn.com/soccer/english...enko-unbeaten-in-23grealish-loses-20-straight ironic this is in the Grealish thread given he makes and unexpected appearance but its one example of how much he flies under the radar.
Not to be arrogant but if any of Reguillon, Digne or Tierney were better they'd be at City. For me, he's easily one of the best left backs, again like Ederson he's not gonna fit in everywhere but for Pep he's exactly what he needs and requires in a fullback (usually one of this two fullbacks).
Last edited:
Most are acknowledging that Grealish is good, but very overrated. Maybe he'll go on to smash it at City, but until then, he's a good player who has been given a God-like status far too prematurely. What he done at Villa was very good, but some off the OTT "generational talent" stuff is beyond ridiculous. Of course, some of the criticism is totally OTT too. I expect him to be a good player at City, but whether he'll be a great one is still very debatable.
Lukaku though? I mean, I was one of the ones arguing for us to sign him when people were labelling him all sorts. But feck me, he was a poor piece of business. Honestly, no one gave a shite when we sold him and I was personally glad to see the back of him. He's nowhere near as good as the media are now portraying him. It's all rosey now, but I have no doubt he'll revert to his usual languid self, once the new club adrenaline wears off. People haven't rated the guy for years, even when he played for us ffs, so why should they now?