Transfer Rumours The Sterling Discussions

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!

Which Club should we Sell Sterling to?

  • Manchester City??

    Votes: 27 54.0%

  • Chelsea?

    Votes: 8 16.0%

  • Arsenal

    Votes: 9 18.0%

  • Manhester United

    Votes: 8 16.0%

  • None of the above(Must go to Overseas Club.

    Votes: 12 24.0%

  • MITO is a ****!

    Votes: 4 8.0%
  • Total voters
    50
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
With space around him created by quality players Sterling is a good player we saw that last season. He is not yet good enough to make a game his own and the question is will be ever be?
I say no so selling him to a rival doesn't really hurt us as he only improves that team slightly and is certainly not some kind of world class player that elevates a rival to the next level and all of the teams mentioned could do better elsewhere.
That said I don't think we should sell any player to Utd but I'm willing to make an exception as long as the deal is cash plus Herrera.
 
What ever happened to a good old transfer request? It means the greedy ****ers miss out on some money.
You also don't see clubs putting players up for sale which is exactly what is needed here it would make a statement that we don't think he's that good and if someone wants to pay loads of money we will accept, it also means we set the price.
Negotiations are also advanced and we can get on with spending the money nice and early. The club need to sort this out and not let it drag on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Page_Moss_Kopite
My opinion is we should see this as a press driven thing.

Only city will really bid but let's just say all 4 did.

The fee would have to start at 60 Mil just to extract the silly money and see who gets closest

40mil to real

In reality however there will be no bidding war as I don't think chelsea need him bar his hg status and have 3 better players already.

Arsenal also have 3 better though ozil must be frustrating wenger

City have the gaps and they will bid... therefore with 2 years of contract we have to play hard ball.
 
Depends how much we're getting in return. For Man Utd to sign him we'd be talking world record fees which everyone with a pulse knows isn't going to happen.
 
Liverpool have rejected Manchester United's move for Raheem Sterling.
United made a shock enquiry for the England midfielder, who is determined to quit Anfield this summer as his contract saga rumbles on.
But the Reds have firmly told United that Sterling, who has two years left on his current Reds deal, is not for sale - reports the Liverpool Echo.
The 20-year-old was voted the club's Young Player of the Year on Tuesday night at the Liverpool Players' Awards, although he received a few boos from fans as he collected his award due to his current contract dispute.
United boss Louis van Gaal is understood to be prepared to ignore the bitter rivalry between the clubs to bid for Sterling.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/manchester-united-make-raheem-sterling-5732746
 
Page_Moss_Kopite said:
If you define a "super club" by winning trophies on a regular basis only 2 prem clubs fit the bill(Chelsea and City, since Fergie retired Man U don't fit that criteria), if you base it on finances we are currently 8th richest in world football?
If we're also rans so are every club not to win honours in any particular season, in Sterling's case he is a wet behind the ears kid who believes in his own hype, the 4 clubs currently above us in the prem, Barca and Real, PSG, Juve and Bayern in Europe out of those "super clubs" how many would want him?, how many could guarantee he wins the trophies he thinks his super skills and match winning performances entitle him to?

If he signed for any other club than those mentioned it would be purely finance driven, if any of the clubs mentioned hold talks with him surely he will demand in his potential new contract that he's guaranteed a starting place in every game due to his brilliance, if on the other hand he's prepared to be a bench warmer and play a minor role its also financially driven.

So taking your agenda aside, in your opinion where does young Sterling rank in terms of being a proven winner that gives his employers 110% every game compared to any of the players currently at "super clubs"?

If you read the thread you'll see that I personally want the Judas gone asap, him leaving isn't the problem for me, its him dragging the club through the dirt, giving an exclusive tv interview regarding a move without permission from the club, opening the club up to snide remarks and criticism etc, Rodgers has let himself and the club down publically kissing the ****ers arse and basically pleading with him to stay, as soon as he started bitching the club should have played hardball with him, club fine and a cooling off period in the youth team, but not us, we send him on a paid holiday holiday during the season to the Caribbean and offer him £100,000 a week wages.<laugh>
Click to expand...

8th richest club in the world, yet wont pay the wages for the targets Rodgers wants?

The new Arsenal<ok>
 
RogerisontheHunt said:
True, the owners have long made it known they admire Arsenal's model (the old one). Too bad it only half worked for Arsenal, financial stability yes, Silverware no.
Click to expand...

Hmmm.

So now with Rodgers at the helm silverware should not be a priority....to be fair it looks that way<ok>
 
PJS - BACK AND BOSSING IT said:
Hmmm.

So now with Rodgers at the helm silverware should not be a priority....to be fair it looks that way<ok>
Click to expand...
:huh:
Not sure I follow you.

You equated us to the Arsenal of 2-3 years ago and I agreed, quibbling over wages, not paying for the top draw players (wages) and prioritising revenue streams etc in order to secure financial stability. And whilst doing this it cost Arsenal their best players and going a long stretch without winning things.

Not sure what Rodgers being in charge has to do with it. Surely that is the owners strategy? Americans owners seem to have a habit of accepting being/stay in the top division as a win in football, as it guarantees not to jeopardise the money side.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back