• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

The transfer thread

tommysvr said:
Not necessarily. I could be wrong, I don't really pay a huge amount of attention to other team's players but I'm not sure Alvarez and Solanke are the same forwards -- to me, Solanke is a bit of a poacher, hard-working pressing type. Alvarez more of a creative forward, getting involved in the build up and scoring goals from outside the box.
Click to expand...
For me Alvarez is younger, more versatile, better technically. Like you say he's more the creative forward type (admittedly something I'm biased towards). I think ultimately a top team will get more from an Alvarez than a Solanke imo.
 
Bishop said:
For me Alvarez is younger, more versatile, better technically. Like you say he's more the creative forward type (admittedly something I'm biased towards). I think ultimately a top team will get more from an Alvarez than a Solanke imo.
Click to expand...

If he gets a flat 18+ goals in a season I am fine for Solanke to be here, I think given the collective more goals that would be a welcome addition to what we need to progress, I also saw a link between not taking chances last season and defensive lapses in many a game (Villa and West Ham being glaring examples) So I am getting to be ok with this deal

If the guile comes from Neto or another, then it foils nicely
 
Bishop said:
For me Alvarez is younger, more versatile, better technically. Like you say he's more the creative forward type (admittedly something I'm biased towards). I think ultimately a top team will get more from an Alvarez than a Solanke imo.
Click to expand...
What are you basing that opinion on though?
His stats (Alvarez) doesn’t align to an £80m player
 
Bedfordspurs said:
What are you basing that opinion on though?
His stats (Alvarez) doesn’t align to an £80m player
Click to expand...
The eye test. I watched quite a bit of City last season (when he played very well as an AM for the start of the season), last season and for Argentina. Stats are useful but I'm not a guy ruled by the stats. I'll largely judge a player on the qualities they have.
 
Bishop said:
The eye test. I watched quite a bit of City last season (when he played very well as an AM for the start of the season), last season and for Argentina. Stats are useful but I'm not a guy ruled by the stats. I'll largely judge a player on the qualities they have.
Click to expand...

Which is understandable. But Ange is a systems manager, therefore we need someone who will suit that system. And even though he's undoubtedly a very good player, I think that's Solanke, more than Alvarez.

If we had Conte or Mourinho, it's 100% Alvarez.
 
Bishop said:
The eye test. I watched quite a bit of City last season (when he played very well as an AM for the start of the season), last season and for Argentina. Stats are useful but I'm not a guy ruled by the stats. I'll largely judge a player on the qualities they have.
Click to expand...
Did he play AM
Whenever I saw him he was playing as a striker or wide forward
I’ve never seen him play any midfield role but then I don’t watch much of city as I find them boring
He is joining a manager who is anti attacking football but that may suits Alvarez’s work rate which is really good
 
Bedfordspurs said:
Did he play AM
Whenever I saw him he was playing as a striker or wide forward
I’ve never seen him play any midfield role but then I don’t watch much of city as I find them boring
He is joining a manager who is anti attacking football but that may suits Alvarez’s work rate which is really good
Click to expand...
Yeah the start of last season when De Bruyne was out Alvarez was playing quite a bit in the AM role, this was at the time when Foden was still on the wing. Anyway it's neither here nor there, we aren't trying to buy Alvarez so it's a moot point.
 
Bishop said:
85m for Alvarez is better value imo than say 65m on Solanke. Not presuming we are paying that much but just comparing the reported fees.

The thing I'll give Athletico, they aren't afraid to be ambitious. They will buy young prospects and they also buy good strikers and they have a fantastic record at picking forwards.
Click to expand...

You are assuming it would have been 85M for a PL team, it probably wouldn't have been

The lack of noise around Alvarez for PL sides (us, Scum & Chelsea should have all been at least interested) likely means City picked a very big price and an even bigger PL tax ..
 
Raziel said:
You are assuming it would have been 85M for a PL team, it probably wouldn't have been

The lack of noise around Alvarez for PL sides (us, Scum & Chelsea should have all been at least interested) likely means City picked a very big price and an even bigger PL tax ..
Click to expand...
At the start of the summer there was actually a lot of speculation that Chelsea were indeed going for him. Whether that had any basis in reality or not we will probably never know. I do agree though that a smart City would attempt to sell Alvarez for a higher fee to direct rivals.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back