He's good but he's not done anything to justify that tag, but it's getting out of hand with these transfer fees when even average players are fetching silly money. I suppose it depends on their finances and who they've sold, but they surely can't afford both Grealish and Kane. Is the Grealish signing a done deal? If it is I'm betting they're regretting that now Messi is a free agent and City would have been on of the likely teams he was interested in.
English players have overvalued price on transfer market. I don't say Grealish is not a good player but the cost for him is high crazily and it is an overpaid transfer from Manchester City.
Messi is already a free player and Manchester City won't not pay transfer fee. The issue is salary for Messi and how to convince him to join Manchester City. Pep can be a plus point for them to convince Messi. Manchester City can help Messi to win at least one Champions League before he ends his career.
He's definitely good, and has manged to shine in a Aston Villa side which I would describe as overwhelmingly average, however they did over perform last season, which is probably because of the impact that Grealish had, but I don't think hes a huge improvement over Manchester City's existing players.
Grealish is good but the appearance of Jack can put other players in the squad of Manchester City in uncertain positions. De Bruyne has a solid position, Bernado Silva too. Grealish probably takes the position of Phil Foden. It wil be bad for Phil after the last good season.
If Manchester City get Kane or actually any prolific striker, we'll be one step closer to having a one team league, similar to that of the French league. I don't want that, and that's exactly the reason financial fair play was introduced, to prevent this from happening.
Kane is the most desired player of Manchester City now because they need him to replace Kun Aguero. Gabriel has never provided enough goals for the club. Sterling is not a striker and unbelievably misses great opportunities.