Speculation The hysterical and annoying, but traditional, totally unfounded summer 2022 rumours thread

[Miles Away]

Berge is a good player. I’d have a bit of that.

 

[big_mac4824]

50 Million+ for Barnes is a good deal imo I am not too concerned if we do not sign anyone I think our squad if fully fit is more than capable to do well this season. Do not get me wrong BR having the ability to strengthen would be great but if we can not do that so be it.

 

[Micky]

No signings and good luck with injuries and I reckon we should be 8th and above.

 

[popillius]

	PL	2020/21			PL	2021/22
	G	A	Total	Avg / 90mins	G	A	Total	Avg / 90mins
Barnes	9​	4​	13​	0.60	6​	10​	16​	0.68
Grealish	6​	12​	18​	0.74	3​	3​	6​	0.28
Sterling	10​	8​	18​	0.64	13​	6​	19​	0.80
	All comps	2020/21			All comps	2021/22
	G	A	Total	Avg / 90mins	G	A	Total	Avg / 90mins
Barnes	13​	4​	17​	0.59	11​	14​	25​	0.71
Grealish	7​	12​	19​	0.75	6​	4​	10​	0.33
Sterling	14​	12​	26​	0.63	17​	9​	26​	0.76

Barnes had fewer G+A that Sterling in both of the last two seasons, and fewer than Grealish in 2020/21.

I like Barnes. He's young(ish), English, on his day he's a real threat, and would attract a high transfer value if he were to be sold. But to believe he's worth more than Sterling or Grealish is crazy imho.

Apologies, I must've looked at incorrect stats but this is from the Premier League website for last season (league games):

More assists (10 vs 3) and more goals (6 vs 3) than Grealish

More assists (10 vs 3) and one fewer goal (6 vs 7) than Richarlison

More assists (10 vs 5) and fewer goals (6 vs 13) than Sterling.

So, let's take Grealish out if you want because of his lack of minutes at Manchester City. I think the best comparison is Richalrlison and he went for £60m. They're about the same age (Ricarlison about a year older), Barnes created 7 more league goals than him and scored only one fewer.

Sterling created half the league goals Barnes did but scored more than twice as many. He also has a history of success in the league. However, Sterling is 3 years older than Barnes. He went for £75m.

I'm not suggesting Barnes is better than or even as good (yet) as Grealish or Sterling (I think he's as good if not better than Ricarlison however) but I am suggesting that neither of them are £25m or £50m better than Barnes.

The minimum we should be looking for is matching the Richarlison price of £60m but even then, I'd argue that he could be worth far more than that to us in terms of league position, Cup runs etc...

 

[Blue Maniac]

Richarlison

Yes

Richalrlison

No

Ricarlison

No

Ricarlison

No

Richarlison

Wheeeey

 

[popillius]

Yes

No

No

No

Wheeeey

**** sake. I can't even edit the bastard.

What a ****knuckle.

 

[Lako42]

Yes

No

No

No

Wheeeey

Excellent

 

[popillius]

Excellent

No it ****ing isn't. Bastard.

 

[Robin127]

It is.

 

[popillius]

It is.

I hate you all. ****s, the lot of you.

 

[fitz]

I hate you all. ****s, the lot of you.

It's a nightmare when normally you could have put "that cheating ****" to save trying to spell his name. Wouldn't have helped in the post at all this time.

 

[Robin127]

Could have called him "Firework Boy" and we'd have known who you meant, the same way my wife always says "The Cheese Lady" when talking about Liz Truss.

 

[Fox Fan]

 

[homer]

In other news, bears shit in the woods, apparently

 

[pork pie fox]

I’m beginning to think I could start being a football transfer gossip type person. No sources needed, just put some idle gossip out there, based on stuff that is massively obvious and hey presto, job done.

 

[camberwell fox]

Manchester City are weighing up various options to buy some players and sell some players. They do insist though, that any such incoming and outgoing transfers will NOT meet FFP play rules but they will get away with it.

 

[Brown Nose]

Are we being too nice to the unwanted players?

BR seems to include all of them through the main preseason plans irrespective of whether they are likely to feature or not. This is the right thing to do if you're a nice chap. However, it doesn't nudge them towards the exit does it?

At some clubs, and at ours under managers like Puel or Pearson, those who weren't part of the managers plans were simply excluded from the main group and didn't travel to training camps or play in the games. As a result, the players knew that they had to get out and so were more proactive about it.

A player made to train separately and told to find a new club will be on to their agent sharpish. A player treated very nicely might not.

It seems to me that we've gone out of our way to get about thirty players game time in preseason when we should have focused on twenty and left the rest out.

 

[homer]

Are we being too nice to the unwanted players?

BR seems to include all of them through the main preseason plans irrespective of whether they are likely to feature or not. This is the right thing to do if you're a nice chap. However, it doesn't nudge them towards the exit does it?

At some clubs, and at ours under managers like Puel or Pearson, those who weren't part of the managers plans were simply excluded from the main group and didn't travel to training camps or play in the games. As a result, the players knew that they had to get out and so were more proactive about it.

A player made to train separately and told to find a new club will be on to their agent sharpish. A player treated very nicely might not.

It seems to me that we've gone out of our way to get about thirty players game time in preseason when we should have focused on twenty and left the rest out.

If we are genuinely open to offers for anyone, apart from 8/9 key players, then he has no idea who the **** he’s going to have to rely on to play

So he’s got to have all of them fit and ready to go, just in case


What a right royal ****ing shambles this is

 

[Lako42]

Are we being too nice to the unwanted players?

BR seems to include all of them through the main preseason plans irrespective of whether they are likely to feature or not. This is the right thing to do if you're a nice chap. However, it doesn't nudge them towards the exit does it?

At some clubs, and at ours under managers like Puel or Pearson, those who weren't part of the managers plans were simply excluded from the main group and didn't travel to training camps or play in the games. As a result, the players knew that they had to get out and so were more proactive about it.

A player made to train separately and told to find a new club will be on to their agent sharpish. A player treated very nicely might not.

It seems to me that we've gone out of our way to get about thirty players game time in preseason when we should have focused on twenty and left the rest out.

Quite simply Rodgers can't do this because it would then impede on his plans to injure all of the players at some point.

He needs 3 men for each position.

 

[Biffa Bacon]

Are we being too nice to the unwanted players?

BR seems to include all of them through the main preseason plans irrespective of whether they are likely to feature or not. This is the right thing to do if you're a nice chap. However, it doesn't nudge them towards the exit does it?

At some clubs, and at ours under managers like Puel or Pearson, those who weren't part of the managers plans were simply excluded from the main group and didn't travel to training camps or play in the games. As a result, the players knew that they had to get out and so were more proactive about it.

A player made to train separately and told to find a new club will be on to their agent sharpish. A player treated very nicely might not.

It seems to me that we've gone out of our way to get about thirty players game time in preseason when we should have focused on twenty and left the rest out.

Danny Simpson basically confirmed this in the interview where he said he should never have left and should have accepted being a backup player because they are treated so well at Leicester.