Ross Barkley

[Shukes]

Unless we sell him and win the prem then I'll dance on my Barkley top gladly haha.

[duncanmckenzieismagic]

It worked out quite well for us when we sold Rooney and reinvested the dosh

[MikeO]

Peter Shilton-

 

"...we haven't seen the best of Barkley yet, he is still a young lad, he has always reminded me a bit of Gazza, in terms of ability."

 

Can see the comparison but I wish people would stop wittering on about it, it's hardly an original thought.

[Newty82]

It worked out quite well for us when we sold Rooney and reinvested the dosh

Yeah. Can't really argue with that. We went from 17th to 4th? Then sunk to 11th but after that we went 6th, 5th, 5th...I guess it helped cement us as a top end team after over a decade of mostly bottom end finishes.

 

As we know though, breaking to the next level will cost a hell of a lot more than 60 million. The games changed a lot in the last decade.

[Newty82]

Peter Shilton-

 

"...we haven't seen the best of Barkley yet, he is still a young lad, he has always reminded me a bit of Gazza, in terms of ability."

 

Can see the comparison but I wish people would stop wittering on about it, it's hardly an original thought.

Yeah, luckily he has a totally different personality!

[Paddock]

Every player has a price.

 

It's right that if you sell a 'star' player for a nice large amount, prices for replacements will inflate as other teams know you have the extra money and know that you've sold a star asset so need to appease the fans.

 

If we sell him, it becomes a gamble on what we do next. And that's up to BK and RM. Do you buy one 'star' replacement? Or a few players and increase the size of the squad? Or do you buy a few potentials, buy back Finch Farm (as an example of reclaiming previously sold off assets), pay down debt and shape the club better off the field?

 

There's people in place to make these decisions. Personally, last year when we were talking about Baines and Fellaini going to Utd, I was in favour of using the money to buy back Finch Farm, pay down debt and strengthen the club. That's changed a bit now as new TV money has given us all extra financial strength.

 

Not sure that Southampton are an example in point just yet. They haven't sold one player for mega money and bought a load of others. They've sold a few players for good money and bought replacements for a bit less. If they break into the top 6 this season, then fine. But I'm not too excited after 11 games.

 

Spurs and shite are examples. They both sold ONE player for big money and bought several others into the squad. It hasn't gone brilliantly for either of them. I think there is a point when you can bring in too many new players.

 

Our strength in point is that the club's hierarchy insist that we no longer have to sell. So if anyone wants one of our 'star' players, they'll have to pay more than the 'going' rate.

 

Like every debate on here, it's all hypothetical so not worrying about it too much yet.

Southampton lost not only one of their stars but 3 and their manager yet seems tio have replaced them at no detrimental affect to the team and are currently doing better.

 

Ok they never had a Barkley but they lost ALL their star players but replaced well.

 

It can and does get done all the time.

 

Just cos the shite and Spurs blew theirs doesnt automatically mean we will plus and the most important bit of it all.. Them losing Suarez and Bale would be nowhere near as catastrophic to us if we lost Barkley now.

Myes he has potential but he's not in the same league as those players yet so selling him in January for 60 million it would be hard not to make the squad stronger replacing him with 3 good players.

[Newty82]

Southampton lost not only one of their stars but 3 and their manager yet seems tio have replaced them at no detrimental affect to the team and are currently doing better.

 

Ok they never had a Barkley but they lost ALL their star players but replaced well.

 

It can and does get done all the time.

 

Just cos the shite and Spurs blew theirs doesnt automatically mean we will plus and the most important bit of it all.. Them losing Suarez and Bale would be nowhere near as catastrophic to us if we lost Barkley now.

Myes he has potential but he's not in the same league as those players yet so selling him in January for 60 million it would be hard not to make the squad stronger replacing him with 3 good players.

But that's the thing. You're basing Southamptons case on 11 games. What does that mean? Nothing. Come back at the end of the season with a final finishing place and then we'll say they have or haven't benefited. Right now, it doesn't matter much. Although Koeman deserves a clap for how he has handled things so far.

 

I'm not saying we would or wouldn't benefit. I'm not daft enough to put all my eggs in one basket based on a rumour and with so many uncertainties. Bit it's ok to look at all possibilities isn't it? The Pro's and Cons. That's all I'm doing.

 

You say it goes on all the time...so who else has sold a 'star' player for a top end fee (maybe that can be relative to the size of the club?) and gone from strength to strength? I guess Newcastle make a habit of buying cheap and selling at profit. Apart from Mike Ashley bank balance, all seems pretty static just now.

 

I've no doubt we'll sell if we get a big enough offer. I reckon it will have to be a biggie. I don't think we'd collapse on the back of one player sale. But it's how that money is used that would make a difference.

[Paddock]

The point I'm making with Southampton is they lost our equivelamt of Baines, Stones and Barkley along with Martinez yet they've replaced them with adequate players and not blurted a hundred million on replacing them.

 

Granted we're only 11 games in but even if they equal last seasons acheivements they've managed to lose four yes four vital cogs in their wheel.

 

Wecan easily absorb Barkleys loss this season without replacing him as he's not played the start and done fuck all for the rest. It's not like he's carried us through on his own this season.

 

The big question is what will he ever be worth 60 million while he's playing for us. 60 million is a stupid amount for him he's worth nowhere near that as we stand here right now but he could possibly be one day. He also could burn out, get constant bad injuries or run his contract out one day.

 

I personally think on balance turning down 60 million now (and I know it's only hearsay but if it was real) is far too much of a gamble to take on the hope he'll one day get us more because I don't think he ever will eclipse that pricetag whilst he's in an Everton shirt.

[MC11]

I really don't see the Gazza comparison. Yes they are/were both good at carrying the ball from their own half into the next.... But for me Gazza had much more ability dribbling the ball... Also Gazza could see the final pass.

 

Barkley still has time to grow but I don't think he's a carbon copy of Gazza.

[Shukes]

Your missing the point.

Barkley is reminiscent of Gazes, he moves forward with the ball at pace, he can set up goals and score goals.

Do you ever remember Gazza? The lad could have been a world great with the right coaching, he really was the good and anyone that ever saw him Knows this.

 

Barkley us on that bracket but with a head on his shoulders.

 

Let him havent more season and then make a decision. Then let's see if he is worth selling.

[Guest blueboy122]

You seriously want to get your tongue from up his arse because it's embarrassing. Haf says this Haf says that people picking on Haf.

We'll have a whip round and buy you a pair of Haf y fronts for christmas.

Seriously cringeworthy.

You sound like a Haf shineboy.

Ha you fucking bellend

 

As if I need to tongue anyone's arse on a Internet forum. Do me a favour.

 

Say it how I see it.

 

You are embarrassing yourself again pad

 

Haf shine boy

[MC11]

Not sure if the above response was to me but if so....

 

Yes I do remember him. That's why im saying he was a better player than Barkley.... He could dribble a lot better he could see the final pass. Barkley doesn't see the killer pass (yet). That why he hasn't got many (if any) assists.

[Shukes]

Not sure if the above response was to me but if so....

 

Yes I do remember him. That's why im saying he was a better player than Barkley.... He could dribble a lot better he could see the final pass. Barkley doesn't see the killer pass (yet). That why he hasn't got many (if any) assists.

Yes it was to you MC, but meant no disrespect.

 

You are right Gazza was a much better player but I think Ross has the potential to be as good of not better.

 

He os two footed, runs with the ball easily, can score goals and has that final ball. He just needs time to find his feet.

 

If not be in your vault haha.

 

Just glad we have a player that we can debate like this.

Edited November 16, 2014 by Shukes

[Hafnia]

I really don't see the Gazza comparison. Yes they are/were both good at carrying the ball from their own half into the next.... But for me Gazza had much more ability dribbling the ball... Also Gazza could see the final pass.

 

Barkley still has time to grow but I don't think he's a carbon copy of Gazza.

The difference between Barkley and Gazza is that at the same age Gazza made more mistakes. I watched Gazza play for Newcastle, they had Beardsley playing in the same team. I think Beardsley blasted a penalty over the bar at gwladys st end. I remember the place being abuzz about this kid from Newcastle, he was great and awful all in one game. Not because of skill, just immaturity.

 

Barkley is a one off, it's nuts to think he isn't. He's 6ft plus, built like a tank, has pace and tremendous balance and technical ability.

 

What's sad is that transfers used to be a case of what can you add to the squad by letting a player go who had given his best, at least that was the case barring lineker, now it's like every fan thinks it's football manager and who can we sell next to enjoy a good transfer window.

Edited November 16, 2014 by Hafnia

[MC11]

The difference between Barkley and Gazza is that at the same age Gazza made more mistakes. I watched Gazza play for Newcastle, they had Beardsley playing in the same team. I think Beardsley blasted a penalty over the bar at gwladys st end. I remember the place being abuzz about this kid from Newcastle, he was great and awful all in one game. Not because of skill, just immaturity.

Barkley is a one off, it's nuts to think he isn't. He's 6ft plus, built like a tank, has pace and tremendous balance and technical ability.

What's sad is that transfers used to be a case of what can you add to the squad by letting a player go who had given his best, at least that was the case barring lineker, now it's like every fan thinks it's football manager and who can we sell next to enjoy a good transfer window.

Barkley is my joint favourite player so it's not as though I'm being unbiased to him. If I'm honest... Even though he's been out injured his progression still seems to be pretty slow to me.

 

I'm obviously judging Gazza from 90 onwards. Gazza used to take the piss out of people with the ball... It was so easy for him to beat his player twice.... Because he could. He'd often go back and take him on again. That's where I don't see the comparison.. Barkley is far more direct and isn't as gifted with the ball at his feet. It we're going on ability... Barkley could reach that level.

 

His final ball is also not even close to Gazza's. Let's be honest they're pretty different players.

[Hafnia]

Barkley is my joint favourite player so it's not as though I'm being unbiased to him. If I'm honest... Even though he's been out injured his progression still seems to be pretty slow to me.

 

I'm obviously judging Gazza from 90 onwards. Gazza used to take the piss out of people with the ball... It was so easy for him to beat his player twice.... Because he could. He'd often go back and take him on again. That's where I don't see the comparison.. Barkley is far more direct and isn't as gifted with the ball at his feet. It we're going on ability... Barkley could reach that level.

 

His final ball is also not even close to Gazza's. Let's be honest they're pretty different players.

I just think the problem is people get caught up with the romance of gazza like they did with George best. At their best they were unbelievable, but that wasn't all the time, it's what they could do in a heart beat - incredible skill, pace, inspiration.

 

Barkley has that, it's there. Just allow him the time to get his minimum level up, he's top quality, he's got pure feet.

[MC11]

Trying to put a Gazza video up

Edited November 16, 2014 by MC11

[MC11]

How the hell do you add a YouTube video on mobile site?

 

I want to add this: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UXuXu-jDN1E

[Hafnia]

I e just watched it. The cryff turn had me out my seat at the time. I was 14, unreal skill.

 

No one is going to dispute gazzas genius, Barkley has the tools to be better.

[MikeO]

How the hell do you add a YouTube video on mobile site?

 

I want to add this: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UXuXu-jDN1E

 

Said many times before but youtube can make anyone look good. Gascoigne was a luxury player who won nothing outside of Scotland ('81 FA Cup aside when he played fifteen minutes and should have been sent off before being carried off).

 

No doubt he had a huge amount of talent but he largely wasted it due to his self destructive personality, Barkley is a very different character; in ten years time you'll be able to stick up an equivalent vid and Ross won't be crawling gutters looking for more beer and slapping his wife.

[MC11]

Said many times before but youtube can make anyone look good. Gascoigne was a luxury player who won nothing outside of Scotland ('81 FA Cup aside when he played fifteen minutes and should have been sent off before being carried off).

 

No doubt he had a huge amount of talent but he largely wasted it due to his self destructive personality, Barkley is a very different character; in ten years time you'll be able to stick up an equivalent vid and Ross won't be crawling gutters looking for more beer and slapping his wife.

That's not just any youtube video though is it Mike... He's running through whole teams and putting the ball in the back of the net consistently.

 

I just think it's far too early to say Barkley will be as good as Gazza. I can see the potential there and I can see that Barkley has the tools to run at defenders like Gascoigne but it's what happens when he reaches the 18 yard box. The difference between the two is Gazza could go past them all and (on his own) and put it in the back of the net. Barkley seems to hit a wall.

[MikeO]

That's not just any youtube video though is it Mike... He's running through whole teams and putting the ball in the back of the net consistently.

 

 

For three minutes yes he is. Very impressive.

 

But you can't take three minutes as representative of a twenty year career; I can remember his first appearance on Football Focus as a promising youngster at Newcastle (they went fishing with him in a little boat and said what a grounded and normal kid he was) so I saw his entire career. Over-rated and often a liability, fell well short of his potential.

[Paddock]

Ha you fucking bellend

 

As if I need to tongue anyone's arse on a Internet forum. Do me a favour.

 

Say it how I see it.

 

You are embarrassing yourself again pad

 

Haf shine boy

Touched a raw nerve there have I son?

 

Seriously, take yourself to one side and have a little word with yourself. You're like a fucking spaniel around him. You've even started repeating what he says about Mcgeady now. "There's a player in there somewhere" where have I heard that before ???

 

 

At least you're faithful.

 

Edited November 17, 2014 by Paddock

[Paddock]

Anyway, back to theGazza Barkley debateI can see both sides to this. I agree with MC that they are different players I also think Gascoine was far more technically gifted, the lad was a special, special talent but he did not fulfil his potential and if Barkley stays grounded he could become better than Gazza but atm it's all ifs and buts.

 

Barkley is much more of a direct player than Gascoine though, he likes to play down the middle and run at decences direct and his size and power allow him to do that where as Gascoine was much more intricate and deftly skillfull.

 

I think we can all agree the Barkley wont go the same route though.

 

I'm torn over Barkley. His promise is massive. The lad just looks so natural with a ball at his feet, bothfeet. He's strong, quick, direct and doesn't get pushed off the ball but his final ball is shite, he holds onto it too long at times and can be greedy but those are all things that can be worked on and improved. He also infuriates me the way he loses posession a lot in dangerous positions and pits us on the back foot when he's being a smart arse with it but again that can be tutored.

 

Either way as I've said for 60 million I think we would be mad to turn that type of money for him down .

[Hafnia]

Lets see how I can put this in a way of not being seen as dragging Lukaku into the thread, as its a very relevant point - the same way that Peter Crouch is relevant.

 

By all accounts Barkley was physically a few years ahead of his peers - the same way that Crouch and Lukaku were. Crouch can't jump as he never had to and Lukaku never had to try too hard to be athletically "advatanged" over his opponents - just get the ball in front of him and its a goal.

 

Barkley from what I gather was able to have the ball as long as he wanted, his skill and strength was so ridiculous that by all accounts he could dribble back to his own half and run the length of the pitch and score... I believe therefore his urgency on the ball has never had to be there - it was too easy to not lose the ball, - you can see this now, he takes too much time when he needs to be urgent.

 

Top and bottom is that these boys are not playing against small kids or lads who aren't gonna make it, the margins are tighter.

 

I think 24 is the right age to assess Barkley.

[Matt]

Barkley just needs to be a bit quicker in his head when it comes to the final pass. Too many times he has broken attacks down by hesitating or trying to do so much. All very well and good having the touch to control if you don't know how and when to release.

 

He will be something special, no doubt. But we thought Rodwell would be too after his first season. He needs time to develop, I think Haf is right that another 3-4 years before he can be judged. For now, he is a talent with massive potential but 1 or 2 serious issues to work on so lets be patient with him and enjoy his rise to stardom.

[Newty82]

Lets see how I can put this in a way of not being seen as dragging Lukaku into the thread, as its a very relevant point - the same way that Peter Crouch is relevant.

 

By all accounts Barkley was physically a few years ahead of his peers - the same way that Crouch and Lukaku were. Crouch can't jump as he never had to and Lukaku never had to try too hard to be athletically "advatanged" over his opponents - just get the ball in front of him and its a goal.

 

Barkley from what I gather was able to have the ball as long as he wanted, his skill and strength was so ridiculous that by all accounts he could dribble back to his own half and run the length of the pitch and score... I believe therefore his urgency on the ball has never had to be there - it was too easy to not lose the ball, - you can see this now, he takes too much time when he needs to be urgent.

 

Top and bottom is that these boys are not playing against small kids or lads who aren't gonna make it, the margins are tighter.

 

I think 24 is the right age to assess Barkley.

Good points. So let's be consistent here and judge that other young athletic player that we have (not gonna say his name!!!) at 24 or so too. Seems only fair.

[EFC-Paul]

His promise is massive. The lad just looks so natural with a ball at his feet, bothfeet. He's strong, quick, direct and doesn't get pushed off the ball but his final ball is shite, he holds onto it too long at times and can be greedy but those are all things that can be worked on and improved. He also infuriates me the way he loses posession a lot in dangerous positions and pits us on the back foot when he's being a smart arse with it but again that can be tutored.

Either way as I've said for 60 million I think we would be mad to turn that type of money for him down .

As with all the players you mentioned previously he has all the attributes and qualities to be at a similar level the main thing that holds him back is experience and his decision making which both go hand in hand.

 

Non of those you use as comparisons had developed into the players they currently are they where all around 22 when things really started to change and two full years of development and experience is massive in terms of where he could be in terms of being more rounded a player.

 

Fully agree it's daft money and very tempting for the reasons you've stated but as Matt and I think someone else pointed out earlier if his brain eventually keeps up with his feet we'll have some player.

 

I don't really agree on the Gazza comparisons also two totally different players as with the ones we can potentially compare him to now for me he's more of a Zidane type.

[Paddock]

As with all the players you mentioned previously he has all the attributes and qualities to be at a similar level the main thing that holds him back is experience and his decision making which both go hand in hand.

 

Non of those you use as comparisons had developed into the players they currently are they where all around 22 when things really started to change and two full years of development and experience is massive in terms of where he could be in terms of being more rounded a player.

 

Fully agree it's daft money and very tempting for the reasons you've stated but as Matt and I think someone else pointed out earlier if his brain eventually keeps up with his feet we'll have some player.

 

I don't really agree on the Gazza comparisons also two totally different players as with the ones we can potentially compare him to now for me he's more of a Zidane type.

You're mis-understanding what I'm saying Paul. I don't expect him to be as good as that now, why would he be?

 

What I mean is he probably wont (in my opinion) ever reach that level and unless he does he's never going to be worth much more than 60 million anyway so why take a chance on him develpoing into one because if he doesn't we probably wont get offered that type of miney for him ever again.

 

The crux of it would be (if we were offered 60 million) do we take the money or refuse sit on our hands and hope that he becomes that £100 million pounds player in the future.

 

Either way he wont stay here forever.

[Newty82]

Why won't he stay here 'forever'? If you don't think he's going to reach the next level then where else is he going to go? I'm guessing you mean 'down the way'?