Longest Thread For Drivel (or the Romelu Lukaku thread)

[Matt]

I also think £20m is too much for potential. But this lad already has a good record, he is probably worth £20m with his current scoring rate.

If he didn't have a problem with his game, like poor touch and no good back to goal, he would never have been here in the first place. He would be starting at Chelsea and would be touted at about £40m.

For £20m you get a striker with an already impressive record, who fits in well with our team, likes the manager, seems to like the club and the city, and minimum risk, as well as 15 years ahead off him.

For the same money you could get all that with Remy or Bony, but they carry the risk of not fitting in, and only maybe 7 years ahead of them.

In terms of value, it's only Rom who fits for me. If we risk £20m we need the possibility of getting it back if we need to, we wouldn't get that for Remy or Bony going into their 30's.

I hope some of that makes sense.

United paid 28m for potential...

[Hafnia]

 

 

Fellaini was 25. Saha was 31. Bony is 25. Giroud is 28. Suarez is 27.

 

Lukaku is 20 years old. Do you see the difference?

Ok, the point I will make is this, take Suarez, Giroud, bony at 20 years old and show me them having balls bounce off them, they don't.

 

Ball control is a fundamental skill, like tackling but far more important... Does anyone think that scholes didn't try and work at his tackling? He did but just never had that knack.

 

Show me a footballer with all the physical attributes and very little technical attributes and I'll show you a league one footballer.

[Guest Nikica]

Sorry, I might have misread what you were saying. I think you meant 'if we want someone who can't play football but can finish get Hernandez'. So essentially you're using him as an example of a shite footballer but good poacher, like I said.

[Hafnia]

 

Sorry, you know I like you as a poster, but this is turning into an agenda. I can see what you're saying and you have some valid criticisms, but to turn round and advocate Hernandez as an alternative is just sheer bias against Lukaku. Hernandez has the all-round game of a pub player, he's an overrated tap in merchant and that's it. Casuals love him because they see him scoring goals on MOTD, but he has the touch of a rapist and couldn't pass a ball in a straight line if his fucking life depended on it.

 

Compared to a talentless joke like Hernandez, Lukaku is like a Spanish playmaker. Just sheer bias against the guy in my opinion.

The point being that if we are looking at someone who can just pop up and get a goal and offer very little in the ability to hold up the ball and play back to goal then why spend £20m on lukaku? Could get Hernandez for £8m... It's not a case of saying who is better, it's a case of bang for buck.

 

The bottom line is that the money quoted for lukaku is serious solid all round striker.

 

Agenda??? I had to have a chuckle, I was going to say that lukaku can learn off two of the best players ever seen in ronaldo and Gerrard.... I won't though.

 

Look how much city miss aguero, he really is the complete striker

Edited May 7, 2014 by Hafnia

[StevO]

United paid 28m for potential...

I know that Matt. What I mean is, we can't afford to pay £20m for a striker who might score 20 goals a season one day. But Lukaku us that kind of striker now. He is a 20 goal a season striker. So even if he doesn't improve for the next five years and carries on at this rate, that's still very good for £20m. We wouldn't be buying his potential, we would be buying ready made quality, who might turn out even better than he already is, which is damn good in my opinion.

[msloan78]

I know stats don't tell the full story but as a 20yr old in an (at best) average league, Suarez managed 10 goals in 27 games (1:2.7), at Groningen 10 in 29.

Only as a 22-23 yr old, playing in an Ajax side that was carving teams apart in Holland did he really up his scoring rate.

 

My point.... Lukaku is still a kid, but has averaged better than a goal ever 2 games, and will only get better. Any striker that we attempt to buy will be a gamble regardless of age, reputation etc. If we sign him permanently (which I doubt) then I'll be made up to have secured, in my opinion, one of the best young strikers around.

[Guest Nikica]

The point being that if we are looking at someone who can just pop up and get a goal and offer very little in the ability to hold up the ball and play back to goal then why spend £20m on lukaku? Could get Hernandez for £8m... It's not a case of saying who is better, it's a case of bang for buck.

 

The bottom line is that the money quoted for lukaku is serious solid all round striker.

 

Agenda??? I had to have a chuckle, I was going to say that lukaku can learn off two of the best players ever seen in ronaldo and Gerrard.... I won't though.

 

Look how much city miss aguero, he really is the complete striker

 

How exactly do I have an agenda against Gerrard and Ronaldo? I despise their all-athlete, American sports style of football, and they're both highly overrated in the way that I say they are i.e. Gerrard has never been a world-class mf, and Ronaldo is not a top ten or even fifteen player of all time. Some people claim these things about them both, and they're not true. They're the two most overhyped players I have ever seen, and their fanboys are absolutely loopy.

 

Lukaku can't learn anything from Gerrard when it comes to first touch and intelligent passing. Creative technician Gerrard certainly isn't. You shouldn't really lump him in with Ronaldo as 'best players ever seen'. Tranny yes, Gerrard no.

 

You on the other hand are making out like Lukaku is some sort of pub player. His touch and dribbling at times is far better than you're giving it credit for. I've already admitted that I agree with many of your comments regarding the player, but you give no credit when he does show technical ability.

 

Aguero is my favourite PL player (alongside Suarez) so no disagreements there. But Aguero is one of the best players in the world. Everton can't sign his level of player but Lukaku is still very good player in the making. That's like saying you don't want Jagielka because he's no Baresi.

Edited May 7, 2014 by Nikica

[Newty82]

This wee debate has got me hooked!

 

For me, we can't afford to pay £20mill for one player with 'potential'.

 

As far as potential goes...well, yes, pay £65k for potential (Coleman), pay even a few million for potential (Stones). And it may workout in your favour. Then you can spend a few quid on other potential...Vellios, Guaye etc, and if it doesn't work out then not much harm is done.

 

But see when you have a limited budget and you know for sure you need a bigger squad to cope with the increased demands coming our way. No way can you risk spending £20mill on 'potential'. That would be crazy. We can't afford that on just potential.

 

Just break away from the potential argument, and even take Lukaku out of it. Can we really afford to spend £20mill on any one player? As said above, we need a bigger better squad. Wouldn't we just be putting our eggs into one basket? What if that big buy got injured for a few months? Back to square one. We can't afford to take that risk as a club.

 

Onto Lukaku himself. Of course he has potential. Everybody has potential, even Cotto. But facts are facts...His touch is poor (and hasn't improved all season, so what time scale do you put on it?). He does have poor shooting accuracy and for a player in a passing team, his passing accuracy is terrible. He does have 14 league goals, but let's not forget that nearly a third of those came in his first few games. He got 8 goals in 9 games at the start of the season, the part where there is a natural buzz carrying you. That means that since then, he has 6 in 21. Hardly shit hot. 6 in 21?!!! C'mon!!! £20mill? We are a team that creates chances. We are a top team for creating and scoring.

 

I don't dislike Lukaku and agree he has 'potential'. But has he really shown the consistency, the energy, the drive...to spend that much on him just now? No. It's too risky. Regardless of age. Some of you are being lead by romance over reality. Some other team might spend that money. Good luck to them.

 

Said it in another thread. We are much more worthwhile looking at those 3 who play behind the front man. Those positions are worth more to the team.

 

(Quick edit...was going to mention that some may say that Rooney was potential. No he wasn't. Rooney was raw talent. Gobsmacking talent. Immense. How many Rooney moments has Lukaku had? How many times has he made you feel 'that way'?)

Edited May 7, 2014 by Newty82

[Guest Nikica]

The thing is, with proper scouting you can sign better strikers than Lukaku for buttons. However, most of those gems come from South America, so there are issues with work permits and such. I'm not even that big a fan of Lukaku but I don't think his touch is as consistently bad as people here like to say. Like I said before, it's erratic, but he's shown enough ability for me to keep the faith and believe he can polish it.

 

 

(Quick edit...was going to mention that some may say that Rooney was potential. No he wasn't. Rooney was raw talent. Gobsmacking talent. Immense. How many Rooney moments has Lukaku had? How many times has he made you feel 'that way'?)

 

 

 

You're making out like Rooney is a genius. He's amazingly overrated and has never been world-class. He's simply a very good player, nothing more. He's overrated on this site because he's an Evertonian imo. Not that I blame people for that, but he is.

 

--------------------------

 

Anyway, I just felt like Lukaku was getting a harsh time on here. Felt like defending him.

Edited May 7, 2014 by Nikica

[Matt]

Ok, the point I will make is this, take Suarez, Giroud, bony at 20 years old and show me them having balls bounce off them, they don't.

can you prove that?

I know that Matt. What I mean is, we can't afford to pay £20m for a striker who might score 20 goals a season one day. But Lukaku us that kind of striker now. He is a 20 goal a season striker. So even if he doesn't improve for the next five years and carries on at this rate, that's still very good for £20m. We wouldn't be buying his potential, we would be buying ready made quality, who might turn out even better than he already is, which is damn good in my opinion.

exactly

[Newty82]

 

You're making out like Rooney is a genius. He's amazingly overrated and has never been world-class. He's simply a very good player, nothing more. He's overrated on this site because he's an Evertonian imo. Not that I blame people for that, but he is.

Ha...I knew you'd say that. Knew it.

 

I'm making that out only if that's the way you want to read it.

 

Rooney as a teen to early 20's was brilliant. No ifs, no buts, no 'just because he's a blue' etc...He was advanced. Not sure what happened to him...bad advice, bad lifestyle, losing that 'aggressive fiery' edge.

 

It was an age to age comparison. Rather than a 'in the day' comparison.

[Newty82]

exactly

Exactly? You agree that he is a 20 goal a season striker? When has he scored 20 goals?

 

Not yet...and that's the risk we can't afford to take. It's too much money for us to play with.

 

Like I said earlier, he has scored 6 in 21 for us since his initial spurt. Too risky for our finances.

 

However...half that price...bite your hand off material! !!

[Guest Nikica]

Ha...I knew you'd say that. Knew it.

 

I'm making that out only if that's the way you want to read it.

 

Rooney as a teen to early 20's was brilliant. No ifs, no buts, no 'just because he's a blue' etc...He was advanced. Not sure what happened to him...bad advice, bad lifestyle, losing that 'aggressive fiery' edge.

 

It was an age to age comparison. Rather than a 'in the day' comparison.

 

Rooney isn't really on my hated footballer list. I find it funny that someone who's not well educated has (in conjunction with his agents) played one of the biggest football clubs in the world like a fiddle...twice. I have no reason to play down his talent.

 

He was great in his teens to early 20s certainly, but there's been hundreds of better players at that age. Was amazing at Euro 2004. Never really thought he was as good at Everton as is being suggested. In fact, I think Barkley is a bigger talent than he ever was. Doesn't have the hype behind him as much though.

 

Yeah, I get that now. Anyway, I get on with you and hafnia so don't wanna have a row.

Edited May 7, 2014 by Nikica

[Newty82]

http://www.espn.co.uk/football/sport/story/305695.html

[Hafnia]

Rooney has got to be the biggest let down for me, he was 17 and had the lot, potentially was going to be world class and England's best striker in years.

 

For me he was what you call potentially amazing. Can't say that about lukaku, potentially very good in the way that "if" by any chance he did improve technically he could be a Christian vieri. That to me is 10-12m

[Guest Nikica]

http://www.espn.co.uk/football/sport/story/305695.html

 

The headline makes it sound like they're a young homosexual couple trying to consummate their relationship.

Edited May 7, 2014 by Nikica

[Newty82]

 

Rooney isn't really on my hated footballer list. I find it funny that someone who's not well educated has (in conjunction with his agents) played one of the biggest football clubs in the world like a fiddle...twice. I have no reason to play down his talent.

 

He was great in his teens to early 20s certainly, but there's been hundreds of better players at that age. Was amazing at Euro 2004. Never really thought he was as good at Everton as is being suggested. In fact, I think Barkley is a bigger talent than he ever was. Doesn't have the hype behind him as much though.

 

Yeah, I get that now. Anyway, I get on with you and hafnia so don't wanna have a row.

I don't class it as a row my friend! Not when it's so constructive.

 

I just remember having real 'wow' moments with Rooney. I don't with lukaku.

 

Just to stress, I don't dislike Lukaku. I just see it as too risky to splash most our budget on. And as the fresh article above says, Chelsea may want £25million. Crazy.

[Guest Nikica]

Rooney has got to be the biggest let down for me, he was 17 and had the lot, potentially was going to be world class and England's best striker in years.

 

For me he was what you call potentially amazing. Can't say that about lukaku, potentially very good in the way that "if" by any chance he did improve technically he could be a Christian vieri. That to me is 10-12m

 

Yeah, that is probably fair on Lukaku. He will be a very good player but probably not a top five striker in the world. Vieri was underrated though.

[StevO]

Exactly? You agree that he is a 20 goal a season striker? When has he scored 20 goals?

Not yet...and that's the risk we can't afford to take. It's too much money for us to play with.

Like I said earlier, he has scored 6 in 21 for us since his initial spurt. Too risky for our finances.

However...half that price...bite your hand off material! !!

He scored 14 goals in 30 appearances this season (source: wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romelu_Lukaku ) missed a couple of months due to injury. Let's say a full prem season of 36 games, 3 FA cup, 3 league gup, 4 Europa league, call that 46 games. Average of 21.46666 goals a season.

Can use stats for anything me! Just ask my boss.

[Guest Nikica]

I don't class it as a row my friend! Not when it's so constructive.

 

I just remember having real 'wow' moments with Rooney. I don't with lukaku.

 

Just to stress, I don't dislike Lukaku. I just see it as too risky to splash most our budget on. And as the fresh article above says, Chelsea may want £25million. Crazy.

Wouldn't call this constructive on my part. I haven't really went into the detail I generally do and have been more about 'polemic' over the last few pages. Topic about Lukaku veers onto Hernandez, Rooney, Ronaldo and Gerrard You couldn't find four different players to Lukaku if you tried.

 

I don't think anyone dislikes Lukaku. He seems like a pretty decent lad, especially as far as footballers go.

 

I just feel that some people are overplaying how bad his touch consistently is. I think they're just frustrated because he has ruined moves in games. Sometimes he looks like a donkey but he shows flashes of excellence as well.

Edited May 7, 2014 by Nikica

[Matt]

Exactly? You agree that he is a 20 goal a season striker? When has he scored 20 goals?

Not yet...and that's the risk we can't afford to take. It's too much money for us to play with.

Like I said earlier, he has scored 6 in 21 for us since his initial spurt. Too risky for our finances.

However...half that price...bite your hand off material! !!

he's proven to be a 1 in 2 game striker. Look at the averages...

 

Oh, thanks Steve!

[Newty82]

Thinking of it from Lukakus point of view. As a young man, wanting to make a career for himself but being farmed out on loan. Having to settle into new areas, new people etc.

 

Not easy for a young man.

 

Maybe we'll see the best of him when he 'belongs'...be it at Chelsea or where ever.

 

We sometimes forget these guys are human beings.

[Guest Nikica]

Thinking of it from Lukakus point of view. As a young man, wanting to make a career for himself but being farmed out on loan. Having to settle into new areas, new people etc.

 

Not easy for a young man.

 

Maybe we'll see the best of him when he 'belongs'...be it at Chelsea or where ever.

 

We sometimes forget these guys are human beings.

 

Yeah, I say that a lot. We forget that we don't know what goes on in their personal lives. We expect them to be robots but there's far more to how they perform than their talent.

 

Btw, I was lying about Rooney. He would make my disliked footballer list but I tried to give me post more objectivity

Edited May 7, 2014 by Nikica

[Matt]

Thinking of it from Lukakus point of view. As a young man, wanting to make a career for himself but being farmed out on loan. Having to settle into new areas, new people etc.

Not easy for a young man.

Maybe we'll see the best of him when he 'belongs'...be it at Chelsea or where ever.

We sometimes forget these guys are human beings.

great post.

 

where he belongs with Martinez guiding him. Settled, one of the best managers we have seen and a great young prospect. I get tingles thinking about it (might me linked to wine and grappa)

[Mirallas]

I don't know what makes some of you think that Remy is a good idea... Cause he's not. Bony is a good idea, Remy is a big gamble with only medium-high potential. Kind of like a Jelavic case.

[Newty82]

he's proven to be a 1 in 2 game striker. Look at the averages...

 

Oh, thanks Steve!

I'm going to be a picky are. ..He ain't a proven 1 in 2 at all...His stats aren't 1 in 2. Just under!!!

 

My point though wasn't about 1 in 2, it was about 20 goals a season???

 

Also, as said earlier. For us he got 8 in his first 9 games. Since then, 6 in 21 games.

 

It's too risky for us to spend that much money on one player. We can throw all the stats n whatever round and round. Bottom line is...We can't afford this money on ANY ONE player!

[Newty82]

He scored 14 goals in 30 appearances this season (source: wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romelu_Lukaku ) missed a couple of months due to injury. Let's say a full prem season of 36 games, 3 FA cup, 3 league gup, 4 Europa league, call that 46 games. Average of 21.46666 goals a season.

Can use stats for anything me! Just ask my boss.

I know what your saying. But this is where stats play a shitter.

 

Again, 8 goals in 9 then 6 goals in 21. So yes, multiply it over a full season...more of a bad run? Who knows? Too simple that.

[Matt]

I'm going to be a picky are. ..He ain't a proven 1 in 2 at all...His stats aren't 1 in 2. Just under!!!

My point though wasn't about 1 in 2, it was about 20 goals a season???

Also, as said earlier. For us he got 8 in his first 9 games. Since then, 6 in 21 games.

It's too risky for us to spend that much money on one player. We can throw all the stats n whatever round and round. Bottom line is...We can't afford this money on ANY ONE player!

20 goals a season will be a walk in the park if a ) he stays fit and b )he gets the service to play to his strengths.

 

At WBA he played as a super sub and got 17 in 35. This season he's improved (in terms of expanding his playing time and game) and still got 14 in 30. "We can't afford is not an excuse"; if we use that excuse we will never grow, and also we are not in the same financial position as we have been. We have cash this year. We need to show arrogance and believe, and if we sign squad players to add depth, it means nothing if there no goals. Rom brings in goals and goals win games. Worth every penny of 15m (considering my previous explanations).

 

Still, unfortunately think we will miss out anyway

[Newty82]

But by playing to his strengths do we then do so to the detriment of the team strengths? We score from all over the park. We clearly don't rely on Lukaku and/or any other striker.

 

We can buzz about his 14 league goals, and ignore that 8 came in his first 9 games. We can also ignore that of the 30 league appearances he made, he DIDN'T score in 18 games. For a striker, a lone striker, in a team creating chances, that's a lot of games not to score in.

[Guest Nikica]

To be fair, while I see Matt's point, I agree that it is risky to go by stats. I have to be consistent as I always say that stats are very misleading. Even if he scores twenty goals a season, he needs to be more consistent with his touch and link-up play to be good enough to play long-term in a Martinez team.