Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

UEFA Champions League


Shocker

Recommended Posts

Watching Man U vs Juventus and keep wondering...is Paul Pogba the most overrated player in history?  He is so pathetically bad.  In the World Cup he was just a different player and really good, but for his club team he is horrible.

So Man U came back and won...chuckle at Mou rubbing it in a little, nice.

 

 

3EBFF4AF-9D0E-47C3-9931-77D135EF13E6.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I wouldn’t say overrated as he’s not particularly rated at all at the moment. Overpriced definitely. He’s failed to live up to his performances elsewhere.

There have been a few that spring to my head immediately. Chelsea have had a load, no less Schevchenko. Arshavin was signed on the basis of one good international tournament. Schweinsteiger. Veron. Craig Gordon. Balotelli.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎11‎/‎18‎/‎2018 at 8:13 AM, Trev_GFC said:

I wouldn’t say overrated as he’s not particularly rated at all at the moment. Overpriced definitely. He’s failed to live up to his performances elsewhere.

There have been a few that spring to my head immediately. Chelsea have had a load, no less Schevchenko. Arshavin was signed on the basis of one good international tournament. Schweinsteiger. Veron. Craig Gordon. Balotelli.

He was without question considered one of the top talents in Europe before signing at Man U.  He has not been good at all for them.  That's my point.  Every team has busts shoot Chelsea might have one in Morata right now, but Pogba has stunk it up at Man U.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
5 hours ago, ARSEN said:

UCL has been boring this year.  I watched few games and it seems like many players are going half speed.  Almost like watching a friendly game.

I have watched one game.  They need to show more games.  One positive to playing Liverpool is the first leg is televised.  If the second leg is not televised or if Bayern somehow makes it through and either QF match is not televised then I will be done with the competition for the season.  Not wasting my time on a product that they do not want me to see.  Cannot believe that neither Barca nor Real will have their first leg televised.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Goondal said:

I have watched one game.  They need to show more games.  One positive to playing Liverpool is the first leg is televised.  If the second leg is not televised or if Bayern somehow makes it through and either QF match is not televised then I will be done with the competition for the season.  Not wasting my time on a product that they do not want me to see.  Cannot believe that neither Barca nor Real will have their first leg televised.

Not sure if this is anything to do with new league they are trying to create to eliminate the little guys and have all superstar teams participate.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Shocker said:

Liverpool is smashing Arsenal today.  They want this trophy bad.  

Arsenal have no defense...  Liverpool created 3 chances and scored 5 goals.  They need CBs bad...  Arsenal had only 1 clean sheets in like 30 games this season. Worst D in decades.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, ARSEN said:

Not sure if this is anything to do with new league they are trying to create to eliminate the little guys and have all superstar teams participate.  

Nah, it is their way of trying to force us to pay for B/R Live.  FOX use to show matches on both FS1 and FS2 so you could watch both during knockout rounds.  I use to rush home (or to the bar) from work on those days and watch both games.  Not possible this year without paying extra, which I refuse to do for one competition that is only on during the week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
    • Get any shot you can at humane society, so much cheaper
×
×
  • Create New...