Smacky The Frog

He does (this was what I was referring to with "physical attributes"), but this usually ends with him running into traffic and losing the ball, or just generally taking the worst possible option in front of him. For a guy with the ability to glide past players with ease, a return of 8 goals and 2 assists in 2 seasons is telling, isn't it? He should be running that midfield, but he either goes missing for entire games or is visible for the worst reasons.These issues could be ironed out in time, sure, and perhaps Everton's style doesn't suit him, but he's so, so far away from being ready to consistently play for a top team. If we bought him, he'd probably end up rotting on the bench, or worse, taking away the few minutes that RLC, a player with similar physical attributes, would get. I wasn't trying to suggest he doesn't have potential - all I was saying is that potential is all he has right now. He's actually shown very, very little on the pitch for a player Everton are undoubtedly going to ask over 20 mil for. I've completely ripped into the guy, but I actually like him and want him to do well. Just don't think he's ready for the next level.

Is Luke Shaw really worth 30 mil etc. Basically the market is completely distorted when it comes to young English talent and it's proabably going to get worse with the league gettting richer and richer. His "real" value is probably 15 mil, but we'd be paying for his potential and, I guess, his Englishness. Personally, I would be uncomfortable going over 40 mil for Sterling and it seems like the club feels the same way. City on the other hand appear to be desperate to land him, so I don't think we'll get him unless Jose really, really wants him (in which case I'll support it regardless of the price, which is bound to be outrageous). It'll be a risk, as it always is with potential, but if it works out, we'll probably be laughing at the sum 3 years from now when Alex Oxlade Chamberlain signs with City for 70 mil with a tally of 4 goals and 3 assists.

I don't get the hype about Barkley at all. People talk about Sterling and Kane being overrated English talent, but no one in our league approaches the level of Barkley in terms of being overrated. The guy has 3 assists in his entire career. That's shockingly poor. He had zero assists in the 2013/14 season, supposedly his breakout year where he scored a mammoth 6 goals. Barkley is pure potential at this point and outside of his physical attributes and the occasional (once a season) moment of magic, I'm not sure what he's done to suggest he's going to be a top player. He's probably more raw than a lot of our youth players who can't even get into the squad atm. Why buy Everton's project for an obscene sum when we can develop plenty of our own for free?

I haven't watched a lot of him, so could you tell me what this would be? Just from looking at his stats - a crude method to judge players, but it's all I have (because Youtube clips are even less reliable) - do we really need another attacking midfielder who doesn't score a lot? This from WhoScored: Roberto Firmino had 7 goals from 95 shots, giving him a worse conversion rate (7.4%) than any other player with 5+ goals in the Bundesliga last season. Wouldn't he just end up being another expensive (29m) squad option? His best position appears to be no. 10 and we already have Oscar there, and if/when Oscar goes into his midseason rut, we'll have Willian and Hazard who are more than adequate in that position. He's probably a good signing for Liverpool because of the paucity of their options in the market, but surely we can do better. The last thing we need is to take another expensive risk on an unproven player. We have enough of those now.

I don't think there are many, if any, players who can consistently score from as far out as Lampard could. Oscar is our best option, but we don't really see him shoot all that much. Think he's the cleanest striker of the ball that we have. With all the underwhelming players we've been linked to and Mourinho's talk of strengthening the squad, I imagine internal improvement from the players we already have is going to be key next season, and Oscar is the one that needs to step up the most. We're a much, much better team when he's playing well.

Let's just score 6 past them again and everything will be fine.

Not going to click on the link, but I'm going to take that headline as a compliment. "Least passionate twitter fans" is just code for "fewest knobheads". I'll take it.

I'm one of those who was fine with Cech joining Arsenal (although it's getting harder and harder to stomach the closer it gets to being a reality), but him strengthening them is in no way, shape or form good for us unless we get a player in return. The notion that a more competitive league will make us better in Europe is highly questionable. Just look at the four semi-finalists this year. Two of them have no competition whatsoever domestically (Munich & Juventus) and the other two only have each other. Juventus did not reach the Champions League final because of Roma. They got there because of what they did. The only way we'll get better in Europe is by getting better ourselves, not by strengthening our rivals. And I don't really think we're in a privileged enough position to worry about what's "good for the league". We aren't exactly Bayern Munich in the Bundesliga, and even they don't help their rivals despite the vast chasm between them (in fact, they do the opposite). This was our first league title in 5 years for heaven's sake. All that said, if we lose the title next season to Arsenal and Wenger thanks to our 2nd choice goalkeeper, then perhaps we'll need to have a look at ourselves first. By Jose himself. He's said it repeatedly in press conferences that he does not want Cech to go, but also that it's not his choice to make. I can see no useful reason for him to lie about this.

It's been made clear that it's not Jose's decision to make.

Sanchez, easily. He mirrors Willian's primary strength (selfless defensive work) while being significantly better at pretty much everything else.

No chance this happens unless Chamberlain himself pushes for it. I don't think even Jose believes there's a chance. He's just trying to complicate the Cech deal as much as possible for Arsenal and good on him, and us as a club, for doing that. Fine, the club will probably respect Cech's wishes and he might end up there anyway, but we don't have to make it easy for them.

This would make absolutely no sense whatsoever. Please tell me you read this at Metro or Express or Goal.com so I can completely ignore it.

Here's a hypothetical question for those of you who aren't completely opposed to this signing, and maybe even for those of you who are (although I think I know what your answer will be) - Let's just go into dreamland for a second and say Falcao scores 15 goals by overtaking Remy to 2nd choice through sheer weight of performances, and shows major signs of returning to his best, even challenging Costa for his spot along the way. Would you then pay the rumoured 35m fee for a 30 year old with injury issues and buy him permanently? As someone who is pro-Falcao relative to the mood of the thread (by which I mean I'm in the "eh, this wouldn't kill us" camp), this is the scenario that has me most conflicted about bringing him over. Because if the answer to that question is "yes", we'd then genuinely be looking at a potential Torres situation, and that scares me. It would also almost definitely mean the end of Remy and perhaps even Bamford's Chelsea careers. So what is the best-case scenario here? Are you (the pro-Falcao crew) hoping he just has an okay but not great season where he's much better than Drogba but nowhere near good enough to be paid what Monaco are asking for, or are you hoping that he rediscovers his form and confidence and bangs them in, and we end up paying 35m for him with all the risks that that will bring? Because I think Monaco and Mendes will ensure there'll be a clause in there that won't let us have him for a 15-goal season loan and then not buy him. If the short-term risk we're advocating actually pays off, we might end up having a massive long-term problem on our hands. I'm confused now. PS - Let's all ruefully laugh at this post a year from now when Falcao is at CSKA Moscow after ending our season with a total of 2 goals, one of them deflected off his hand.

It is. Or atleast that's how it's being reported last I checked.

Also, re: "Sterling has had one good season" - This isn't true though. The bollocks some people (mostly bitter Liverpool fans, online and in the media) are now peddling that he was sh*t all of this season is just that - bollocks. He carried a woefully out of sync Liverpool side through the first half of the season whilst playing out of position. All this while Gerrard and Mignolet were over the top parodies of themselves, Strurridge was sturridging on the injury table, and current Liverpool darling Coutinho was nowhere to be seen. Their good mid-season run was based on moving him up top, a position he'd never played in before. He's been shifted around to practically every available position outside of GK or CB since and has had to deal with the wrath of the fans and the media for his temerity to want to play for a better team. How well do you think even someone like Hazard would've done in a situation like that? How good do you think he'd have been playing as a striker and wing-back in his 2nd full season in the Premier League? Of course, Hazard is miles better, but my point is that Sterling was put in an almost impossible position to succeed, and guess what, eventually he didn't. Maybe that's part of why he wants to leave. His game has serious flaws (atrocious finisher), but those can be worked on. And maybe, just like with Suarez, he'll look better with better players around him. As far as whether he's a "Mourinho player", contrary to the general perception, he (usually) works extremely hard without the ball. I'd be okay with us paying 40 million to have him here. It would be a risk, but I think it's a risk worth taking, especially if the other option is Douglas Costa at 27 million.

Shaw, a young left back, had one good season at a midtable club and went for 30 million. Sterling, a young attacking midfielder, has had one and a half good seasons for the team that came in 2nd and 6th. That's how he's worth more than 30 million. 50 million is preposterous, yes, but you're worth whatever teams are willing to pay for you, and when it comes to young English internationals, teams in the PL are willing to pay a stupid amount of money. I'm not saying it's right or healthy or reflective of their current "true" value, but in the cases of teenagers (or thereabouts) like Shaw & Sterling, you're paying the English tax and the potential tax. That's a lot of tax. I figure he'll end up going to City for around 43-45 million, unless we make a bid to drive the price up even further.

To be fair, he already did that with Drogba, albeit for more sentimental reasons.

Next season, I would keep Remy and send Bamford on loan to a team in the Premier League. If the Falcao deal happens as expected, we cannot go into a season with two unproven PL strikers as our 2nd and 3rd choice options, especially with Costa's dodgy hamstrings and dodgier temperament. The one after, if Falcao works out and Bamford succeeds in the PL, I'd go with Bamford over Remy. I personally feel that we have to give Bamford a decent shot at making the team or else I'll start to become a little disillusioned with our loan policy. Bamford's done everything right so far. He's responded to every challenge that's been thrown at him and if he does well again next season, he has to be in our first team squad the year after. I also think this decision will be made for us because Remy is still young enough and good enough to start for most PL clubs and I think he'd want to leave in order to play more and remain in the picture for his national team. He's been an excellent professional for us so far, but from all the interviews I've seen of him, it's clear that he wants more than to be a back-up option.

The vitriol towards this deal seems a little excessive. If the reports are accurate - season long loan with option to buy - this is a low risk, high reward move. If Falcao sucks, it isn't going to break our season because he'd just take up Drogba's role, but if he gets anywhere near his best, it could make us much, much better. Maybe there isn't any conspiracy behind this, and Jose actually believes he can get the best out of Falcao. Maybe all our primary targets (the Lacazettes and the Griezmanns) are unavailable. It's a calculated risk and it doesn't erase a lot of the excellent business (compared to our rivals) we've done since Jose's come back. I would much rather us take a punt on a loan for Falcao than spend 30m on Benteke or Higuain. Costa, Remy and Falcao is a perfectly adequate strikeforce, and the signing of Falcao should not define our transfer window because our primary needs for reinforcement are further down the pitch. My only fear about this deal is either Remy leaving, or Jose sidelining him even further to prove that he was right about Falcao. Hopefully that doesn't happen. I also hope that if Falcao succeeds, it doesn't lead us to doing something stupid like selling Bamford for 8m. But neither of those scenarios has happened yet, so I'm just going to go with a wait and see (and hope for the best) approach.

Good news as far as I'm concerned. It's just way too early to give up on him.

I'd rather us be hated with the impotent rage of a 1000 frustrated men than be completely ignored like Man City (they scored more goals than Liverpool last year, beat them to the title and somehow ended up being a footnote to the season) or patronized like Arsenal or laughed at like Liverpool. Of course there are reasons beyond jealousy as to why we are hated and those factors may take the hatred to an almost pathological level as observed in the case of the Arsenal and Liverpool fanbases, but success breeds contempt and there's not a thing you can do to change it. Just ask Manchester United. We are never going to be loved regardless of the way we play or who our manager or captain is. Honestly, I like our role as the "villains" of football and Jose Mourinho as the charismatic, overconfident supervillain who, unlike in the movies, actually wins at the end. We may attract the most trolls, but Jose is the master of them all.

Okay, let's put all notions of sentimentality aside for a second and look at it from a purely logical stance - The people here who don't want us to sell him to a rival and keep him in the reserves - would you then be okay with him going to Arsenal on a free when he's out of contract in 2016? Because we can't force him to move to PSG or wherever, can we? Cech has all the leverage here. If we wants to go to Arsenal, he's going to go to Arsenal, if not this season, then the next. So, ignoring what it does to our relationship with him and the possible ramifications of having an unhappy senior player in our squad next season, my question is this - is delaying this move for one year and losing 10m in the process worth it? If so, are you'll just hoping Arsenal (or United) won't need him or they'll stop being our rivals in a years time? My earlier point was, our best chance of keeping him away from Arsenal, not just for a year but for good, is by appealing to HIS sentimentality. If we let him think it's his choice, he may consider how we feel about Arsenal and do us a favour. If we strong-arm him and force him to stay (we cannot force him to move to a particular club. for example, Sunderland and Liverpool agreed on a deal for Borini, but he rejected the move), we'll go from having a little leverage to having none whatsoever. If you think letting Cech go to Arsenal for 10m is going to feel sh*tty, how sh*tty do you think it'll feel when he goes to them on a free? On a tangential note, since when are we afraid of Arsenal ffs? Or is this just the hatred for that club and the thought of one of our greats playing for them taking over? Because I'd get that. This is not remotely true though, is it? Who else does it apply to other than Mata? We did not sell Lampard to City. We didn't re-sign him because we didn't need him and were under the impression that he was going to the MLS.

Jose has already made it clear he doesn't want Cech to go anywhere, especially not to another Premier League team, but also that it's not up to him to make this choice. Cech has handled himself with dignity and class upon losing his place in the 1st team without doing much wrong, and perhaps this is Roman's way of reciprocating that and all he's done for us in the last decade. You could argue that there's no place for sentimentality in football, but would you rather this turn ugly and mar our relationship with one of our legends? And then what? He leaves on a free to Arsenal next year? Because he wouldn't owe us anything if we force him to stay against his wishes. Our hope right now should be that Cech understands how the fans feel about Arsenal and decides he doesn't want to go to them, not us strong-arming him into making a decision. The aim of the club should be to find as many alternative options for him as we can, but if he wants to stay in London and play in the Champions League, there's nothing we can do. As for the people moaning about the price, he has only one year left on his contract. 10m for a 33 year-old back-up GK who wants to leave and is on the last year of his contract isn't exactly a pittance, no matter how much he means to us. We have very little leverage here. I would hate this as much as the rest of you'll with how obnoxious Arsenal and their fans can be, but if Petr Cech helps an Arsenal side managed by Arsene Wenger overtake us to the title, we have serious issues of our own.

I'm not a "play the youths!!!" guy, but when the alternative is Douglas Costa for 20m, seriously, just play the youths.

This was the one I was most excited about / hopeful for. I guess we'll just have to make do with Messi.