Could possibly see him being named in a squad if he keeps improving but he's got a few people to get ahead of like Leicester's James Madison who looks classy. Plus other Eng U21s like Phil Foden etc.
Sure but then Sterling, Lallana, Rashford, Lingard... those are the currently England players he'll have to displace - not to mention the competition from the likes of Madison, Solanke, Foden et al. (Just to note also - Foden isn't actually selected for U21, he is in U19, because unlike e.g. Mason Mount he isn't playing at all, whereas Mount took a loan move to Derby and is doing well, therefore selected for U21. Time definitely on Foden's side though.)
Please show us the posts on here that say this.
The only person of those first four that he'd have to worry about is Rashford. Lingard and Lallana are midfielders and Sterling is a winger (not to mention $4!t for England and overrated generally). Solanke isn't in much of a position to prove anything being fourth or fifth choice striker at Scallypool. Maddison is getting an opportunity at Leicester and Phil Foden is yet another winger and Mason Mount is a midfielder. Of all the younger players mentioned I think it would be fair to suggest that Ollie has more experience (in terms of first team football) than any of them.
Are you seriously telling me that Ollie Watkins at Brentford is going to be called up for England ahead of Raheem Sterling? Have a word with yourself. (As an aside - Sterling is a long way from being "$4!t", whatever the red tops might want you to think).
I didn't say he would, just drawing lines in your comparisons. If Ollie gets there he will be there as a striker (as Rashford should be), not an attacking midfielder (Lallana, Lingard, Mount) or a winger/wide attacker (Sterling, Foden). As for your aside about Sterling, I haven't read a daily newspaper in years. Sterling is a show pony who is too much bling and not enough end product. And no, 20 odd goals for Man City doesn't convince me otherwise. With the service the Man City strikeforce get, any vaguely decent forward could get 20 odd goals.
On England, he won't get picked as a striker either - he is a great footballer and an excellent prospect, but right now he is not better than Kane, Vardy, Rashford, Welbeck, Sturridge... and for better or worse, the likes of Solanke, Calvert-Lewin, and other fringe players at PL clubs, are more likely to get the call than anyone at Championship level.
So he can run around a lot whilst doing loads of step overs. God only knows where you dug the one out of giving the ball less times times than anybody else. How many chances did he create during the World Cup? How shots on target did he manage to get in? How many shots in general did he manage? One shot on target and only four in total in six games. Absolutely woeful. One cross in six games. One assist in six games. It's all very well being technically good and being able to run at hundred mile an hour for 90 minutes but you need to have mental awareness of what is going on around you to end up with far better stats when it comes to actually doing something productive with the ball. How many times did Sterling waste opportunities during the World Cup because he dallied and dithered for too long and the opportunity passed? Plenty is the answer. So yes, like I said, show pony. He looks really good but when you get to what really matters, like stuff done with the ball successfully, he ain't too clever.