What's new

Mauro Icardi

yorkleyblue said:
Really?  Better than Henry, Zlatan, Batitusta, Messi, C Ronaldo, Fat Ronaldo, Ronaldinho, Lineker, Shearer, and, though it makes me want to puke to say it, Kane? (And that's just off teh top of my head)

I know you have a man-crush on Michy, but you need to temper that with a little bit of reality.
Click to expand...
Better than a lot of those, yes. Purely at finishing. Obviously lacks what most of those do in other areas. Henry himself heaped praise on his finishing having worked with him with Belgium. 

 
RIP Mourinho said:
Better than a lot of those, yes. Purely at finishing. Obviously lacks what most of those do in other areas. Henry himself heaped praise on his finishing having worked with him with Belgium. 
Click to expand...
Actually, that's just silly. Look at some of those names and think again.  Michy better than Messi, Batitusta, Henry himself, two Ronaldos and a Dinho.

Come on, mate, on what possible logic can you claim Michy is better than those?

 
Davey Baby said:
His omission from the WC squad has caused quite a bit of consternation in Argentina, particularly as Higuain was chosen over him, a player that has had numerous chances and has always bottled the big occasion.

Icardi is a good age. The fact that he's Inter's captain suggests he's matured as a personality. We would be signing trouble, much as we did with Costa. Sometimes though these players are worth the baggage, because of that competitive edge they bring, because of their personality, things we desperately lack at the moment. Icardi is a fighter, he's tough, and I think he'd build a rapport with the fans in no time.

He didn't just run off his teammate's wife however, that's not the full story. This teammate was his friend who had put him up when he first moved to Italy. He then gloated about it, posting pictures on social media of him with his wife and his teammate's kids, having the kids' names tattooed on his body and so on. Really appalling behaviour. This was a friend of his from his homeland and probably explains why he hasn't been picked for the WC, as it may not go down well with his Argentina teammates.

As a player though, you'd take him over Morata all day long.
Click to expand...
Definitely an interesting story and I’m sure there’s many sides to it.  I’m of the opinion that it doesn’t matter, as long as he comes in and scores goals.  His married life is really none of our business, and since López is most likely not going to join a PL side, it wouldn’t affect his play here if he were to come.

The bolded portion is the key point when it comes to the possibility of Chelsea buying Icardi.

 
yorkleyblue said:
Actually, that's just silly. Look at some of those names and think again.  Michy better than Messi, Batitusta, Henry himself, two Ronaldos and a Dinho.

Come on, mate, on what possible logic can you claim Michy is better than those?
Click to expand...
Michy would slot in any goal they score in the 18 yard box. Difference being they can all make chances for themselves. Big differences between poachers and these players. Michy relies on the team mates. 

 
dkw said:
Nope, but is is fun, especially with people like you writing such utter drivel. Bats better than Ronaldo`s, Batistuta, Messi, Lineker etc at finishing for f**ks sake......dont be so ridiculous
Click to expand...
yep. As good as for sure. Just can't make the chances himself like others could. 

 
Considering the fact that we've been super reluctant to pay Sarri's buyout clause, why would anyone believe we're ready to pay Icardi's buyout clause? Complete pipe dream.

 
Barrettinator said:
Considering the fact that we've been super reluctant to pay Sarri's buyout clause, why would anyone believe we're ready to pay Icardi's buyout clause? Complete pipe dream.
Click to expand...
What is left of us when we stop dreaming :comeandgetitff:

 
Barrettinator said:
Considering the fact that we've been super reluctant to pay Sarri's buyout clause, why would anyone believe we're ready to pay Icardi's buyout clause? Complete pipe dream.
Click to expand...
No correlation.
That's like saying: 
"Why would he buy a Playstation for £200 when he's not buying a single Banana for £10"
Banana ain't worth £10, a Playstation is worth the £200. 

 
TomCFC85 said:
No correlation.
That's like saying: 
"Why would he buy a Playstation for £200 when he's not buying a single Banana for £10"
Banana ain't worth £10, a Playstation is worth the £200. 
Click to expand...
I think your analogy is the one lacking correlation. The playstation and the banana aren't intended for the same end goal. A manager and a player are. 

 
Barrettinator said:
I think your analogy is the one lacking correlation. The playstation and the banana aren't intended for the same end goal. A manager and a player are. 
Click to expand...
Fine
"Why would he a buy a Playstation for £200 when he's not buying a single controller for £90" 

 
Barrettinator said:
I think your analogy is the one lacking correlation. The playstation and the banana aren't intended for the same end goal. A manager and a player are. 
Click to expand...
A manager never has a sell on taken into consideration, or merchandising etc, their fees have very little crossover. 

 
dkw said:
A manager never has a sell on taken into consideration, or merchandising etc, their fees have very little crossover. 
Click to expand...
You're right but I don't think clubs like Chelsea buy players with the intention of possibly selling them for a profit in the future. Maybe Spurs do. Or even present day Arsenal and Liverpool. And then the Evertons of the world and what not. Plus the merchandising is a misunderstood part of the business. The only substantial thing Chelsea would get from Hazard shirt sales, for example, already comes in the yearly fee we get from Nike. Only about 5-10% of each individual sale comes to Chelsea after that yearly payment. The rest of it goes to Nike.

Besides, I don't think this is the first time we've had to pay to get a manager over the last 10 years, is it? I could be wrong about that though.

 
Barrettinator said:
You're right but I don't think clubs like Chelsea buy players with the intention of possibly selling them for a profit in the future. Maybe Spurs do. Or even present day Arsenal and Liverpool. And then the Evertons of the world and what not. Plus the merchandising is a misunderstood part of the business. The only substantial thing Chelsea would get from Hazard shirt sales, for example, already comes in the yearly fee we get from Nike. Only about 5-10% of each individual sale comes to Chelsea after that yearly payment. The rest of it goes to Nike.

Besides, I don't think this is the first time we've had to pay to get a manager over the last 10 years, is it? I could be wrong about that though.
Click to expand...
That's true about us not really being concerned about sell on, but players do also Contribute more towards sponsorship, shirt deals etc. 

I'm not sure about paying for a manager to be honest, I'd be really surprised if it is the first time. 

 
RIP Mourinho said:
Exactly this. If we are interested in Icardi we're better off sticking with Michy. One of the best natural finishes i've seen and on par in terms of build up. 
Click to expand...
He isn't similar to Batshuayi. He is more similar to Harry Kane then he is to Batshuayi.

 
dkw said:
That's true about us not really being concerned about sell on, but players do also Contribute more towards sponsorship, shirt deals etc. 

I'm not sure about paying for a manager to be honest, I'd be really surprised if it is the first time. 
Click to expand...
I know we didn't pay for Jose 2.0 but I think we paid for AVB if I'm not mistaken. Either way, I'm giving Marina the benefit of doubt on this henceforth. Let's see how it plays out.

 
  • Like
Reactions: dkw
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top