Sell Rashford and sign him? Scored his 4th goal of the tournament today and has scored probably the goal of the tournament.
Some Premier league clubs are looking at him for sure.
Some Premier league clubs are looking at him for sure.
Patrik Schick
- Thread starter tentan
- Start date
This is why tournament football is highly deceptive.
Just no.
Look at his career stats and then look up Rashford and you might begin to understand why this is the worst idea ever.
Why would you sell Rashford for this? If you want to buy Schick fine, but sell Rashford
Let's sell a player operating out wide who is younger and who scored 57 goals last season playing with an injury, in a tougher and more competitive league.
To sign a player who operates in a different position, as an actual striker, scoring 36 goals last season in a weaker league.
This is just about the dumbest thing I've heard today. I have a lot of time for Rashford, and this guy (who doesn't even play the same position) is not anywhere near as talented or accomplished. And he's older.
Who cares if the likes of West Ham or Palace or whoever are looking at him? We can't sign every rando who ever had a good run of form.
I could see him at Spurs if they sell Kane. Has some of the same ability to drop deep to help Son, and he's well suited for playing up top alone when they're outplayed against the bigger teams.
Who scored 57 goals last season playing with an injury?
Well the caf has already signed Locatelli, Dumfries and Dolberg. Might as well add Schick to the pile.
Rashford scores 21 goals last season so maybe he counted all the goals he scored in training .
what happened here?
Was meant to document the appearances appearances to goals ratio but realise I missed out the goals part
my bad. He had 57 appearances with 21 goals**
Pat had 13 in 36
why sell Rashford though?13 in 36 and 21 in 57 are virtually the same ratioWas meant to document the appearances appearances to goals ratio but realise I missed out the goals part
He had 57 appearances with 21 goals**
Pat had 13 in 36
anyway he seems like a good but for sure selling sir Rashford is not an answer to anything.
Ridiculous
Ya but we need to account for position they operate in and the quality of opposition they play.13 in 36 and 21 in 57 are virtually the same ratio
anyway he seems like a good but for sure selling sir Rashford is not an answer to anything.
I just think Marcus is a superior player and think we could do better than Pat
At least this is better than "Should have sold Rashford instead of Josh King".
Rashford scored 1.5 gpg, is news to mewhat happened here?
I was surprised Spurs didn't sign him last season to be honest instead of Vinicius. Would have been a good back up to Kane whilst also adding an option cutting in from the right (which is where I'm sure he played for Leipzig at times).
Based on a few tournament games and one brilliant goal he could be a great player. Just like that last fella from the Czezh's that was signed off the back of a similar showing. He turned out to be top class too.
He's an interesting player. I remember when he was at Sampdoria the Italian football podcasts I listen to used to rave about him, comparing him to Bergkamp in terms of his style and predicting a big future. Then Juve agreed a deal to buy him and it looked like he was ready for primetime. But he failed his medical and ended up at Roma, where he was poor. I believe he's been better in Germany without being outstanding. I guess its possible he'll come good, but it looks now like he'll never fulfil his potential.
He mostly played up front but didn't always start ahead of Poulsen back when they had Werner. Not sure how it is now.
He's at Leverkusen now, plays through the middle.
Could be a nice budget option to replace Cavani. Certainly better than Ighalo I think. 25 years old and even if he doesn't work out I doubt we'd lose that much money on a resale similar to Dan James.
If Schick doesn't end up at West Ham, I'll eat my hat.
He's done well but we shouldn't be signing anybody because of a few good games at the Euros. In fact they are closer to irrelevant than a reason to sign somebody, the real question is how he performed in each and every appearance within club football and that's why clubs have scouts. Why you would even suggest selling a key player to sign this guy boggles the mind.
He looks a big strong lad and decent on the ball but I'd question why he's not scored enough in his career so far and whether he can suddenly up that. Because I don't see anything but a number 9 in him.
He looks a big strong lad and decent on the ball but I'd question why he's not scored enough in his career so far and whether he can suddenly up that. Because I don't see anything but a number 9 in him.
We’re the biggest club in the world and we generate revenue that reflects that. We don’t have to sell to buy. Yes, we should be all over signing this guy but there’s no reason we can’t keep Rashford as a squad player. Some of the stuff you read on RedCafe…
Not one to usually jump on these tournament talents but he looks like he can do OK in the PL with his physicality.
I'd take him as a back-up to Cavani for next season but not sure he'll be that cheap since he plays for Leverkusen.
I'd take him as a back-up to Cavani for next season but not sure he'll be that cheap since he plays for Leverkusen.
Please don’t let tournament tax fool you. He is probably shite. Also why would you sell rashford who is better and offers us great physicality in attack?
I'm sure I'm guilty of it myself (wouldn't mind Dumfries as a backup RB ) but it's mental that there are people clamouring to sign this guy when there's someone else the same age who's scored 3x more goals last season in the same league (Silva), simply because this lad has looked decent in the handful of games they've actually seen. I guess that's how we ended up with swashbuckling left back Marcos Rojo.
Tournament muppetry is something else.
) but it's mental that there are people clamouring to sign this guy when there's someone else the same age who's scored 3x more goals last season in the same league (Silva), simply because this lad has looked decent in the handful of games they've actually seen. I guess that's how we ended up with swashbuckling left back Marcos Rojo.Tournament muppetry is something else.
Not that he's anywhere near good enough to be considering, Schick actually was a top talent a few years back. I remember him looking very good at Sampdoria -- Juventus were due to sign him but backed out at medical stage, and he ended up at Roma (where he tanked).
How did he do when he played for Roma against us?
Sign Milan Baros too.
Avergaing 1 in 3 roughly at club level, bar Roma where it's 1 in 9. If we want a player who averages a goal in every 3 games, we'd play Martial, we need better.
If we really want to sign him, then Ole should cut his face a little with a knife.
Why? Cause Schicks dig scars.
Why? Cause Schicks dig scars.
Where the heck are you plucking these numbers from
Literally read the following posts, was an honest mistake.Where the heck are you plucking these numbers from
To summarise: Rashford is a better player in a tougher league and also operates in a completely different position. Not to add, we should and can be aiming for better than Schick.
Think he just fecked it up and posted appearance figures. To be fair, he might have stopped to consider that maybe Rashford wasn't somehow sneakily putting up early 2010s Messi goal numbers without anyone noticing.Where the heck are you plucking these numbers from