To your first question: That's not what I meant. There's a difference between not rating someone highly and not acknowledging them being an upgrade. I think Vardy is kinda **** but he's still better than our options. It's fair to think Lukaku is not "£60m" good, that's obviously completely subjective, but at the same time it rings a bit hollow when no-one can name a realistic alternative. Hope that makes sense. Only 5 of Lukaku's goals this season have been headers. Giroud has ironically scored 6 headed goals. Lukaku isn't just another target man in the style of Giroud, which I feel like many people write him off. Lukaku has started games out wide before, he's quick, mobile, can get it behind a defense, his link-up has improved immensely and he's an absolute bully in the box. What is exactly is "Giroud like" about this? I think it's unfair to put the downsides Giroud brings to the table on Lukaku just because they're both above 6"3. Lukaku's dribbling ability, acceleration and pace is miles ahead of Giroud. I only have to pop in to the Welbeck thread to see several people argue that Welbeck's pace and movement make your attack look better. Lukaku is like 3x the player Welbeck is, but brings a lot of the same qualities along with the ability to score goals.