Tbh Schteff I'm not sure how well Sturridge plays on his own, it seems imperative in Chelseas system. I agree that Sturridge had a more notable end to last season than Anelka, but wasn't he in a 442 at Bolton?
This. Or, we could really take the proverbial, and ask the Express to ramp up their journalistic rivalry with the Mail by linking us to Essien every day until the Transfer Window closes...
They seem to be playing their "wingers" quite close to the lone striker as their fullbacks can push up and add width. Sturridge may well be used as one of these wider forwards(false no. 7s? ) but they do seem to have a lot of players for the front 3 positions, so far it's Drogba, Torres, Anelka, Kalpou, Malouda, Sturridge and Lukkaku. I'd be very happy to have any of them at Spurs
so far it's Drogba, Torres, Anelka, Kalpou, Malouda, Sturridge and Lukkaku. I'd be very happy to have any of them at Spurs ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- So would I, especially 'Kalpou'...is he Calpol's brother?
His wages are a joke, only City, Chelsea and possibly Utd could pay them at the moment. He's going to have to accept a massive paycut if he wants to play regular football again.
While he's at City, they have to pay whatever they agreed. If they sell, Ade himself will have to decide whether a pay cut is acceptable to him. This is a fresh problem for all players at City, if they move on, its most likely nobody bar a handful of clubs will maintain that kind of pay. If none of them want such a player its crunch time, play elsewhere for less (more realistic money) or stay and run your contract down...then move and play for less! There's no law I'm aware of that says once a player is on obscene money, it has to stay that way.
Freundian......very good! I'm in the don't know camp on Kalou tbh, is he really a top4 striker? Good player yes, in patches though. Having said that, him being at a club with Drog at his peak, thats a tough one, so with the result being no extended run in the side, or play wide, maybe we haven't seen the best from him. Not so good for his country though, considering they play poor African opposition most of the time, you'd think he'd do better than 13 in 36. Drogba in comparison has 50 in 75!
I thought I'd put that in before anyone else did The beeb tells me Kalou scored 10 league goals in 31(15 as sub) which is pretty good as he's usually one of the slighlty wider forwards. You can't always count on him for goals and he does seem to be more effective as a sub but I think he'd get into most of the top 4s matchday 18.
Kalou's a good player at the start and end of seasons, but he goes missing during the middle of them, for some reason. I noticed this a while ago and a Chelsea season ticket holder that I know seems to think that it's common knowledge amongst their match-going supporters. Perhaps there's one way for us to sign Adebayor on a permanent deal, rather than a loan. If we were to agree a deal with him for what would probably be our top whack (£80k?) and then City could use our transfer fee to pay him a 'loyalty bonus' equivalent to whatever he would have earned. Not ideal for them, but it'd get him off their wage bill and probably help with any FFP problems that they may have in the future. The only other alternatives that they have is to keep him, paying his massive wage for nothing or to loan him out again and pay most of it anyway.
Unless Ade is completely stupid, PNP. He must know that once his current contract expires, nobody is ever going to offer him that kind of money again. So, I suppose, he's not ever going to readily walk away from what Citeh were stupid enough to agree to pay him. You can't blame him, really. I bet he thought it was his Birthday, Christmas, New year, and everthing, rolled into one when those dickheads showed up waving their huge cheques in front of his face.
He's still got nearly three years left on his contract though, NSIS. Let's assume that he's on around £160k pw. If City pay him for the next three years, then it'll cost them nearly £25m. If we pay the £14m that they supposedly want for him, agree to pay him £80k pw and City pay the difference as some sort of bonus, then they'd only make about £1.5m on the deal. If I've worked this out correctly, then that'd still be an overall saving of £26.5m, when compared to keeping him, though. We'd get the striker that we want, Adebayor wouldn't lose any money and could try to get his desired move to Real, so that he could make even more and City would save loads of money too, thought they might not care. It's a win-win-win. Or something.
I see what you mean. I think he's still only 27, right? If City can't even get £14mm for a striker of his age & capability, it must speak volumes for a pain he must be. What I was getting at is, City can't force him to sign for anybody else, if he doesn't want to - no matter what the transfer fee. It's pretty clear that most clubs don't want him because they can't match his wages, and/or because of his well publicised personality "issues". Which means - assuming that, that sort of money matters to even Citeh, we look to be the only buyers in town - which, hopefully means, we can dictate a large part of the terms. I just hope Harry & Levy know what they're taking on. Come to think of it, that would explain the loan preference - sort of take him for a test drive before, agreeing any purchase.
Unless someone else is quietly watching this situation waiting for a last minute bargain, we do seem to be his only option of playing football this year, and Citys only option of reducing their weekly wage bill by 60k.
