According to a study: http://www.football-observatory.com/IMG/pdf/ar2014_excerpt.pdf Maybe Rooney is on far too much after all???
Tobes will call bullshit and UIR will come with some stats to prove Raheem is just a school bully really.
Uir was arguing that Rooney is worth far more, but he isn't. He is past his best and already 28. I doubt tthat Tobes will argue too much as Barkley is right up there too and rightly so. Suarez 3rd in the world too, not surprisingly though.
If you were the manager of any other club other than Liverpool or Man Utd and had the opportunity to sign Sterling or Rooney but the budget had to be considered, there is only ever one winner IMO. That is not me being biased either. Swap Sterling for Januzai and I'd say exactly the same thing!
in short it says youd get 100mil euros for suarez, 40 odd for sterling and a small bit less for rooney. wasn't chelsea bid for the rotund one very close to this really???
Rooney is still a great player (I really rate him when he's fit) and he's better than Sterling (although not necessarily a better fit for us than Raheem) but Rooney is on the downhill slope now whilst Sterling is only showing signs of improving and has at least 10 more years to play. Time has shown that price drops significantly past a players prime and these days, you pay a lot for potential. I don't think many could argue against that.
well if costa costs 35million.... thats his market value due to release clause. thats a great deal for chelsea as they get him cheap. Can for us might or might not be that at 10mil real madrid could argue paying 70mil for a 100mil player is good business. the othere way of looking at it is you have to get retrun so for rooney theres no return if someone signs him for 40mil over 4 years (would be 32) but with sterling at 19 your expectation might be to sell on and get value back
Who knows why young English players with potential come at a premium but it's not anything new is it 16 yr old wallcott = what was it 6 or 12m? Rooney nearly 30m in his teens Rio (merkdem) ferdinand cost a bomb too Shaw rated a 25m+ Lallanallana rated @ 25m+ and he's not even young Carroll ffs 50m (facepalm) List goes on and on Its a conspiracy I tell ya!!
It's a weird list. And a useless exercise too. They're combining market value with performance stats with club achievement and demographics. Nonetheless, it would be a dream job to work for that pointless firm every morning.
The interesting page of the article is the last one "Transfer Asset Value", this has Liverpool third in England behind City and Chelsea. The difference is they have both paid a fortune for established players whereas we have bought young players who have then proven themselves and increased in value. Or we have bought them/signed them as 14/15 yr olds and brought them through such as Sterling. Utd's position reflects their old squad whose value is on the decline and the very average quality players they have had to sign under the Glaziers/Moyes.
The fact Giroud is valued at between £28m and £32m shows how bad this list actually is. Ask Arsenal fans if someone offered £28m for Giroud if they'd accept it. I'd guess 99% of them would bite your hand off!
