So there we go, they are linking us with Aguero. For whatever reason.

It will never happen. Right? RIGHT?

No matter how unrealistic this seems to be, even if there is a tiny bit of truth in it, this could, after Ronaldo, become the second biggest transfer in history. In terms of player quality.  

Edited February 5, 20179 yr by PythonLu

how old is he now? didnt he turn us down before when he left athletico?

3 minutes ago, luckywerthers said:

how old is he now? didnt he turn us down before when he left athletico?

28...

Regarding the other point, I believe we were pretty much still stuck with Torres back at that time in 2011...

no.

screw that douche.

He's a massive dickhead but if it was an opening for it you would have to think about it. Still quite the goalscorer ovbiously with 18 goals already this season and if we could somehow pair Costa and Aguero together up top i assume defenders would sh*t their pants just at the sight of it.

Nope.

I think his best days are behind him with the injuries catching up, every season he has issues and that tends to amount to bad news long term.

I also don't think City would sell such a player to anyone in England let alone a direct rival for the title. They don't have to and wont be so stupid to do so.
 

File under highly...highly unrealistic.

I'd take him.  Proven and still a few years left.

Don't know how realistic it is though?  We've signed players from other big clubs before.  Player power.

Would he want to? 

1 minute ago, Van Butsen said:

I'd take him.  Proven and still a few years left.

Don't know how realistic it is though?  We've signed players from other big clubs before.  Player power.

Would he want to? 

I am fairly sure he would want to. In fact I am certain he'd have chosen Chelsea in the first place back in 2011. The question is rather - will City let him leave?

I hope he goes to China instead of Diego, and would take Sanchez over Aguero any day of the week - but if Diego leaves or we can't sign Sanchez we could do worse.

Edited February 6, 20179 yr by the special one

If we're going to lose Costa next season, then I'd prefer to go for Lukaku.

20 minutes ago, IliyaKrostin said:

If we're going to lose Costa next season, then I'd prefer to go for Lukaku.

Agreed I'd have no qualms with Lukaku, but I think Sanchez is the only player who I think could comfortably replace Hazard and Diego without Conte having to make radical tactical changes. If both Hazard and Diego leave the ideal situation for me would be to have Sanchez on the left flank and Lewandowski at #9 (but given the unlikelihood of this happening would be happy with Lukaku, Aguero, Morata, Mandzukic)

Edited February 6, 20179 yr by the special one

Mandzukic would be a huge downgrade on what we have at the minute. Never seen the fuss with him

No chance we are getting the Kun, City is not Arsenal when comes to selling.

I still have doubts about Lukaku, more on the mental side. He looks like the type of player contend to be the big fish in a small pond, and being loved by everyone. He could have left in the last 2 summers, instead he resigned. He's just likely to sign another extension as move on to a bigger team next summer. Unless he wants to challenged and go up to the next level, why bother with a record fee with him?

 

Most goals in the last 5 PL seasons:
Sergio Agüero (90)
Romelu Lukaku (76)
Olivier Giroud (65)
Harry Kane (63)
Christian Benteke (60)

Most goals in the last 5 PL seasons:
Sergio Agüero (90)
Romelu Lukaku (76)
Olivier Giroud (65)
Harry Kane (63)
Christian Benteke (60)

76 goals for Lukaku is amazing! Seems we all underrate him.

He was pretty much selling himself to Chelsea before leaving Atlético.

 

"London would be a really amazing city to live in as well, myself and my wife could be really happy there. Carlos Tevez is doing really well at Manchester City but, for me, it is about joining a club who are ready to challenge for honours. City are not ready yet."

 

Makes you wonder how it didn't work out. Personally, I would take him in a shot. Yes, he may have been a bit of a (insert whatever insult here) but so was Fábregas at Arsenal. Everything is forgotten when they're in royal blue. Completely understand why people would not want to sign him though.

Totally forgot to add Benayoun and Benítez to that list of people we didn't like then grew to love...

 

 

 

Edited February 7, 20179 yr by BellettiBullet

19 hours ago, Van Butsen said:

Most goals in the last 5 PL seasons:
Sergio Agüero (90)
Romelu Lukaku (76)
Olivier Giroud (65)
Harry Kane (63)
Christian Benteke (60)

A lot can change with a player in 5 years, it's too big a sample size when making an argument for/against the merits of signing a player. 

11 hours ago, wallosh said:

76 goals for Lukaku is amazing! Seems we all underrate him.

I don't think we do at all.

Lukaku is a striker who will score tons against teams like Hull, Stoke and Watford but against Chelsea, City, United, Liverpool and so on he is pretty much posted missing.

He's not a big game player or someone who can change a game against your rivals like Costa or Drogba could. He'd be excellent as a number 2 or 1 against the middle to bottom sides but a club like Chelsea need a striker who you can rely on against the best teams (especially with CL coming up) You simply cant rely on Lukaku in big games which is his downfall.

Edited February 8, 20179 yr by Chelsbear

32 minutes ago, ForeverCarefree said:

A lot can change with a player in 5 years, it's too big a sample size when making an argument for/against the merits of signing a player. 

It's just a sample size, you can make it smaller or bigger if you like.

Smaller - have they really proved themselves?
Bigger - other quality players have come and gone.  Did he have a dry spell?

5 years - To me implies a reasonable level of consistency, experience and performance

Though how many strikers really have more than 5 big seasons in their life?  I wouldn't have thought many

6 minutes ago, Van Butsen said:

It's just a sample size, you can make it smaller or bigger if you like.

Smaller - have they really proved themselves?
Bigger - other quality players have come and gone.  Did he have a dry spell?

5 years - To me implies a reasonable level of consistency, experience and performance

Though how many strikers really have more than 5 big seasons in their life?  I wouldn't have thought many

It's difficult, like you say how many strikers have a period in their career where they're scoring 20 goals a season for more than 5 years? 

So can Aguero still do or has he peaked and likely to decline now? He's goal record is still very good this season and I reckon he's got another couple of really good years left in him. 

Regarding signing him though, I would avoid because you're probably looking at £50m+ for someone who is going to offer you their best for only a short period. 

While he's been prone to injury and being a c**t, if he were available I think we have to consider it, he's been the best striker in the league since he arrived, with the exception of Suarez' incredible season. If we could get him for around 50-60 million I think we should go for it, regardless of whether Diego stays or leaves. A 3-5-2 with Aguero and Costa up front and hazard behind them would make most defences sh*t their pants, and would make us a really viable threat in the Champions League too. 

49 minutes ago, Van Butsen said:

It's just a sample size, you can make it smaller or bigger if you like.

Smaller - have they really proved themselves?
Bigger - other quality players have come and gone.  Did he have a dry spell?

5 years - To me implies a reasonable level of consistency, experience and performance

Though how many strikers really have more than 5 big seasons in their life?  I wouldn't have thought many

The question with Aguero is not about whether he is proven or not. He was the best striker in the league for a while and no one will dispute that. The question is whether he is declining or likely to decline and therefore will it make sense to buy him.

Stats aggregated over 5 years tells us something that we already know. It doesn't tell us anything about how his levels have changed into this year. 

Don't forget that he is injury prone and the likelihood of injuries only increases with age. In my opinion, this is the first time in his City career that he is finding it hard to be effective.

2 hours ago, Chelsbear said:

I don't think we do at all.

Lukaku is a striker who will score tons against teams like Hull, Stoke and Watford but against Chelsea, City, United, Liverpool and so on he is pretty much posted missing.

He's not a big game player or someone who can change a game against your rivals like Costa or Drogba could. He'd be excellent as a number 2 or 1 against the middle to bottom sides but a club like Chelsea need a striker who you can rely on against the best teams (especially with CL coming up) You simply cant rely on Lukaku in big games which is his downfall.

He battered us in the FA cup last season and single handed won them the game.

5 minutes ago, Zeta said:

He battered us in the FA cup last season and single handed won them the game.

How many times has he done that against the top sides Zeta? How many times has he done it for Belgium in important games?

I'm not disputing his goal tally because it's a fantastic record but I have watched Lukaku for 4 years now and more often than not he goes missing in the big games. He would be downgrade on Costa when we are facing top sides in the CL and domestically and that's where the problem lies for me.
 

In Costa we have a big match winner just like Drogba who will come up with moments of magic to win those games. I'd take Lukaku but he would only come if he was the number 1 starter or we changed our formation to play 2 strikers up top and IMO currently with our set up we need better if we are to aspire to win titles and the CL again.

 

Edited February 8, 20179 yr by Chelsbear