Nathan Aké

[CHOULO19 24,332]

Maybe it's wishful thinking, but I want to believe that this is an indicator that Christensen is set to be given a proper chance here next season.

[BlueLyon 9,359]

10 hours ago, Strike said:

If true, this is another promising youngster not given a chance at the club. The buy-back clause does nothing to appease me. I would rather see him given a chance to play LCB ahead of Cahill. I think he is good enough for the LCB position. He has the technique, calmness and the athleticism for the position and is left footed. He proved himself in the Premier League at Watford and then Bournemouth before sitting on the Chelsea bench for the second half of this season. He stepped up in the FA Cup Semi-final when he was picked. 

Should the club really go out and splash 60million on Virgil van Dijk when there is Nathan and Christensen waiting to break in? 

I tried ti quote you in another thread but then couldnt find the post, anyway its basicaly same topic so I will just quote you here...

I dont think we are as bad with youth as some imply. Yes we messed up with KdB big time and maybe Bertrand, but thats about it. 

I dont get this; player should get chance. They do get chance. But its not like they will play 10, 20 games in season. 

We apparently had so many great youngsters we didnt give them chance. I dont buy it. They are simply not good enough. Doing it in youth levels is entirely different than senior level. They are average on senior level, thats why they dont and didnt play more for us. Its the sad truth.

We loaned several players out, to foreign leagues, to championship, to PL. Several didnt even get to play regular football. And we are to blame for loanining them out instead of giving them a chance? If they were good, they would play, they would play well and return here. And continue playing. But most didnt play on loan or played very average, thats why they got sold and we hear almost nothing about them. 

Lahm was loaned to stuttgart and played well. He returned to bayerna, got a game and played well. He didnt get 30 games to catch form. RLC is getting playtime and he is absolutely average most of time. How can someone keep giving him playtime? Mceachran, Boga, Solanke, Lukaku...they were loaned, but never made any serious waves. We cant just give them playtime. And when they sit on bench, they start complaining like they are the biggest stars in football. We are not ideal club for youngsters indeed, but if there was world class talent here, they would play. Again, only one of such calibre was KdB, in this case the board made big mistake. 

With Ake, its different, he was good but we are simply stuffed in this department. Christensen will get that role. Then there is Zouma. We all know Ake might be realy good one day and if that clause is real, we can easily get him back. 

The best example is Courtois clearly. He was loaned, he took his chance and he is now playing here because he is top player. Christensen has potential to be similar. 

[ja1 1,166]

1 hour ago, BlueLyon said:

I tried ti quote you in another thread but then couldnt find the post, anyway its basicaly same topic so I will just quote you here...

I dont think we are as bad with youth as some imply. Yes we messed up with KdB big time and maybe Bertrand, but thats about it. 

I dont get this; player should get chance. They do get chance. But its not like they will play 10, 20 games in season. 

We apparently had so many great youngsters we didnt give them chance. I dont buy it. They are simply not good enough. Doing it in youth levels is entirely different than senior level. They are average on senior level, thats why they dont and didnt play more for us. Its the sad truth.

We loaned several players out, to foreign leagues, to championship, to PL. Several didnt even get to play regular football. And we are to blame for loanining them out instead of giving them a chance? If they were good, they would play, they would play well and return here. And continue playing. But most didnt play on loan or played very average, thats why they got sold and we hear almost nothing about them. 

Lahm was loaned to stuttgart and played well. He returned to bayerna, got a game and played well. He didnt get 30 games to catch form. RLC is getting playtime and he is absolutely average most of time. How can someone keep giving him playtime? Mceachran, Boga, Solanke, Lukaku...they were loaned, but never made any serious waves. We cant just give them playtime. And when they sit on bench, they start complaining like they are the biggest stars in football. We are not ideal club for youngsters indeed, but if there was world class talent here, they would play. Again, only one of such calibre was KdB, in this case the board made big mistake. 

With Ake, its different, he was good but we are simply stuffed in this department. Christensen will get that role. Then there is Zouma. We all know Ake might be realy good one day and if that clause is real, we can easily get him back. 

The best example is Courtois clearly. He was loaned, he took his chance and he is now playing here because he is top player. Christensen has potential to be similar. 

Lukaku's loans were very good, much better than Boga's, Solanke's and McEachran's..

[Iggy Doonican 4,186]

1 hour ago, BlueLyon said:

Mceachran, Boga, Solanke, Lukaku...they were loaned, but never made any serious waves

Lukaku done really well for W.B.A and Everton. A lot of people myself included believe McEachran would have been given a longer run in the team if Ancelotti hadn't been sacked.

[BlueLyon 9,359]

43 minutes ago, Iggy Doonican said:

Lukaku done really well for W.B.A and Everton. A lot of people myself included believe McEachran would have been given a longer run in the team if Ancelotti hadn't been sacked.

 

53 minutes ago, ja1 said:

Lukaku's loans were very good, much better than Boga's, Solanke's and McEachran's..

I explained it here;

1 hour ago, BlueLyon said:

IMceachran, Boga, Solanke, Lukaku...they were loaned, but never made any serious waves. We cant just give them playtime. And when they sit on bench, they start complaining like they are the biggest stars in football.

Lukaku was not even close being good enough to leading our line. He came of good season, but he was extremely raw player. He should wait and take his chances when given, but instead decided to leave. I agree there is favorism of proven, experienced players in our team, but at one point, he would get the game time if he stayed.

Should we decide to play him every game since that first everton season on loan? Not buy Costa, because we had Lukaku? Everyone knows he wasnt good enough to be starter. He would still need to prove it here, at Chelsea. United bought Ibra last summer and Rashford is still playing and playing well. Lukaku decided to leave on loan when we had Etoo and Torres, he then decided to leave permamently when we bought Costa. He could easily play games if he proven he is good on the pitch. Costa was injured and banned in quite a few games in first season. But Lukaku thought straight he has to play every game. So be it. But he wasnt good enough to start for Chelsea every week. Even now when it seems we are buying him back, Im not convinced. He will need to play well here before I make any judgement that he is good enough to lead our attack.

As for Mceachran, he was promising under Ancelotti, but completely lost it on loans. If Carlo stayed, maybe it would be different, but its a big if. We cant say Chelsea made any mistake with Josh, he just didnt perform on loans.

[Iggy Doonican 4,186]

14 minutes ago, BlueLyon said:

And when they sit on bench, they start complaining like they are the biggest stars in football.

Don't think that's true at all who exactly ?. Lukaku might well have felt aggrieved being kept out of the side by Eto and especially Torres. No footballers enjoy sitting on the bench apart from Winston Bogarde.

[BlueLyon 9,359]

4 minutes ago, Iggy Doonican said:

Don't think that's true at all who exactly ?. Lukaku might well have felt aggrieved being kept out of the side by Eto and especially Torres. No footballers enjoy sitting on the bench apart from Winston Bogarde.

Lukaku wasnt better than Etoo at that moment. He wasnt. And he decided to leave the year we bought Costa.

Generaly there are many who didnt want to stay little longer here. Sturridge then, now Solanke. Mata too but he isnt exactly youngster.

Im only saying they must earn starting place. You dont just play them week in week out so they can get their feet running and hit form. Its one or two games, if coach is happy they will play. Unless we want to be like Borussia and sacrifice the results.

Rashford is staying put at United. He knew his chances will be limited and he didnt push for move. Neither did Martial. And Martial had much better season last year than Lukaku at Chelsea.

Martial could get realy pissed and move out when they signed Ibra. And Im sure Luaku would be throwing tantrums if he was in Martial's position. But he stayed.

Either our youngsters dont have the character or the talent.

Back then Lukaku had almost no link up ability, which is crucial for top team. I understand he was kept out by Etoo and then by Costa. But he wanted to play week in week out, how is that Chelsea fault for not giving him play time? He wasnt good enough, simple as that.

[Iggy Doonican 4,186]

10 minutes ago, BlueLyon said:

Lukaku wasnt better than Etoo at that moment. He wasnt. And he decided to leave the year we bought Costa.

Generaly there are many who didnt want to stay little longer here. Sturridge then, now Solanke. Mata too but he isnt exactly youngster.

Im only saying they must earn starting place. You dont just play them week in week out so they can get their feet running and hit form. Its one or two games, if coach is happy they will play. Unless we want to be like Borussia and sacrifice the results.

Rashford is staying put at United. He knew his chances will be limited and he didnt push for move. Neither did Martial. And Martial had much better season last year than Lukaku at Chelsea.

Martial could get realy pissed and move out when they signed Ibra. And Im sure Luaku would be throwing tantrums if he was in Martial's position. But he stayed.

Either our youngsters dont have the character or the talent.

Back then Lukaku had almost no link up ability, which is crucial for top team. I understand he was kept out by Etoo and then by Costa. But he wanted to play week in week out, how is that Chelsea fault for not giving him play time? He wasnt good enough, simple as that.

Whether you think Eto was better than Lukaku is one thing but a raw kid instead of Torres leave it out. Mourinho just doesn't trust youngsters any other manager and Lukaku would have started more. Mata? he never asked for a move think you're rewriting history a bit mate.

[BlueLyon 9,359]

52 minutes ago, Iggy Doonican said:

Whether you think Eto was better than Lukaku is one thing but a raw kid instead of Torres leave it out. Mourinho just doesn't trust youngsters any other manager and Lukaku would have started more. Mata? he never asked for a move think you're rewriting history a bit mate.

Lukaku simply wasnt good enough. Or had poor mentality, didnt convince Mou on training. Conte isnt playing Bats either for example. Dont you think its weird that Conte insisted on playing Costa despite being out of form? And only gave chance to Bats once our title was more or less secured? I certainly trust Conte, despite all talent Bats had, he was not mentaly on the level to lead our line. The boy has alot to learn, but he must take every chance he gets. I hope we keep him as our second choice this year tbh. Lukaku was pretty much the same, but he decided to leave.

Rashford is playing well and enough at United under Mourinho. Meanwhile Shaw and Martial are not, basicaly because of their attitude, despite they have talent. Mourinho clearly gave chance to players that are actualy level headed, like Varane at Real, Rashford at United. He might not be the best man for youth, he is pragmatic first, but those who truly show it, they play. 

Under Mou, I see Lukaku as immature boy, trying too hard, instead of keeping head down and learn. At one point he had enough and decided to leave, which was best for his career. But who knows, if he is as good as some say here, if he stayed, he might as well be a starter at Chelsea past season.

I absolutely agree about Torres tho, he should left or got benched long time before it actualy happened. 

About Mata; 

http://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/715399/Jose-Mourinho-Juan-Mata-Manchester-United-Chelsea-transfer-news-gossip

"He was the one wanting to leave", Im not making it up.

 

[Iggy Doonican 4,186]

15 minutes ago, BlueLyon said:

Lukaku simply wasnt good enough. Or had poor mentality, didnt convince Mou on training. Conte isnt playing Bats either for example. Dont you think its weird that Conte insisted on playing Costa despite being out of form? And only gave chance to Bats once our title was more or less secured? I certainly trust Conte, despite all talent Bats had, he was not mentaly on the level to lead our line. The boy has alot to learn, but he must take every chance he gets. I hope we keep him as our second choice this year tbh. Lukaku was pretty much the same, but he decided to leave.

Rashford is playing well and enough at United under Mourinho. Meanwhile Shaw and Martial are not, basicaly because of their attitude, despite they have talent. Mourinho clearly gave chance to players that are actualy level headed, like Varane at Real, Rashford at United. He might not be the best man for youth, he is pragmatic first, but those who truly show it, they play. 

Under Mou, I see Lukaku as immature boy, trying too hard, instead of keeping head down and learn. At one point he had enough and decided to leave, which was best for his career. But who knows, if he is as good as some say here, if he stayed, he might as well be a starter at Chelsea past season.

I absolutely agree about Torres tho, he should left or got benched long time before it actualy happened. 

About Mata; 

http://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/715399/Jose-Mourinho-Juan-Mata-Manchester-United-Chelsea-transfer-news-gossip

"He was the one wanting to leave", Im not making it up.

 

The words Daily Express and gossip are from gospel truth son. Don't follow the comings and goings of Man United so I can't comment on that. The Bats one is an odd one granted, personally I think given time he could come good. But it's all getting a bit predictable Bats will go on loan have a great season elsewhere and sit on the bench for us the following season.

[BlueLyon 9,359]

2 minutes ago, Iggy Doonican said:

The words Daily Express and gossip are from gospel truth son. Don't follow the comings and goings of Man United so I can't comment on that. The Bats one is an odd one granted, personally I think given time he could come good. But it's all getting a bit predictable Bats will go on loan have a great season elsewhere and sit on the bench for us the following season.

I know Mou can talk bs, but I would believe him on that one.

It makes sense why we sold him so quickly. 

[Strike 6,957]

14 hours ago, BlueLyon said:

I tried ti quote you in another thread but then couldnt find the post, anyway its basicaly same topic so I will just quote you here...

I dont think we are as bad with youth as some imply. Yes we messed up with KdB big time and maybe Bertrand, but thats about it. 

I dont get this; player should get chance. They do get chance. But its not like they will play 10, 20 games in season. 

We apparently had so many great youngsters we didnt give them chance. I dont buy it. They are simply not good enough. Doing it in youth levels is entirely different than senior level. They are average on senior level, thats why they dont and didnt play more for us. Its the sad truth.

We loaned several players out, to foreign leagues, to championship, to PL. Several didnt even get to play regular football. And we are to blame for loanining them out instead of giving them a chance? If they were good, they would play, they would play well and return here. And continue playing. But most didnt play on loan or played very average, thats why they got sold and we hear almost nothing about them. 

Lahm was loaned to stuttgart and played well. He returned to bayerna, got a game and played well. He didnt get 30 games to catch form. RLC is getting playtime and he is absolutely average most of time. How can someone keep giving him playtime? Mceachran, Boga, Solanke, Lukaku...they were loaned, but never made any serious waves. We cant just give them playtime. And when they sit on bench, they start complaining like they are the biggest stars in football. We are not ideal club for youngsters indeed, but if there was world class talent here, they would play. Again, only one of such calibre was KdB, in this case the board made big mistake. 

With Ake, its different, he was good but we are simply stuffed in this department. Christensen will get that role. Then there is Zouma. We all know Ake might be realy good one day and if that clause is real, we can easily get him back. 

The best example is Courtois clearly. He was loaned, he took his chance and he is now playing here because he is top player. Christensen has potential to be similar. 

I agree with RLC and Zouma getting chances and Courtois and Eden's quality was evident when they were 20 itself. 

But consider KdB, Bertrand, Lukaku, Sturridge, Not all world class but certainly top talents the club didn't handle well. The club should have a plan or a policy to integrate youngsters, like this season, I hope Christensen is given a chance to establish himself and Virgil or whoever is not bought for 60 million. 

[mccg 1,528]

CHERRIES CONFIDENT ON AKE

Bournemouth are increasingly confident that they are close to agreeing a deal to sign Chelsea defender Nathan Ake, according to Sky sources.

Sky Sports News HQ understands Southampton and Leicester are also interested in signing the 22-year-old centre-back.

Ake, valued in the region of £20m, spent the first of last season on loan at Bournemouth before being recalled in January. 

Grrr And double Grrr

[mccg 1,528]

Only a guide but ffs , i'll be suprised if Ake dosn't go!

Nathan Ake Loan deals do count

Bournemouth 1/10

Watford 20/1

West Ham 20/1

Everton 20/1

To Stay at Chelsea (Does not include returning on loan following a permanent deal elsewhere) 6/1

Nemanja Matic Loan deals do count

[Special Juan 27,092]

He's simply not going to get game time here. We are supposedly close to signing VvD, even if not him, it will be someone else. We have Cahill, Luiz, possibly AC coming back from Germany and even the left side is covered with the possible arrival of Sandro and Alonso as back up.

20M is good money for a player that probably wouldn't kick a ball but for League Cup games.

[Magic Lamps 11,441]

But he is so versatile. He can play LB, LWB, DM and CB. 20m would represent a very good return on investment given we paid like 6m for him. Probably too much to turn down if all he would do here is to make up the numbers. 

[Fernando 6,374]

12 minutes ago, Magic Lamps said:

But he is so versatile. He can play LB, LWB, DM and CB. 20m would represent a very good return on investment given we paid like 6m for him. Probably too much to turn down if all he would do here is to make up the numbers. 

Sometimes selling them can do good to them. They will feel settled. 

This is what Real Madrid does, but the best thing is that they put in a buy back clause. 

They did it for Carvajal, and Morata recently. It's about time we do the same and if the players improve in two season we just buy them back. 

[xPetrCechx 13,546]

Buyback