Gareth Bale to Chelsea emerges as genuine possibility

[James 5,138]

Real Madrid are prepared to sell Gareth Bale this summer in order to fund their move to sign AS Monaco sensation Kylian Mbappe, and Chelsea could be waiting in the wings to pounce, according to Marca. Marca claim that Los Blancos have decided that if Mbappe was to arrive in Madrid, one of the ‘BBC’ […]

View the full article

[Belgiannutt 3,201]

No thanks. 

[Mário César 811]

40 minutes ago, Belgiannutt said:

No thanks. 

l o l

[Mufassir08 2,400]

Injury prone, out of form, reliant on his physical attributes, damn expensive, Meh.

[whats happening 1,439]

we will never pay his wages 

[oldportblue 547]

48 minutes ago, Mufassir08 said:

Injury prone, out of form, reliant on his physical attributes, damn expensive, Meh.

he's still scored 54 goals in 100 games for Madrid in his time there so far, while being 2nd/3rd option... Not bad if you ask me.

Also, imagine lining up in the CL with Bale and Hazard in the team, that would be something special!

Don't think it'll ever happen because of his spurs past though but you never know, stranger things have happened

[xPetrCechx 13,546]

Injury prone

[King11Didier 916]

For these money I'd prefer Dembele or even Mbappe.

[Jype 6,398]

Make it the good old 'loan with an option to buy' and I'll bite. Otherwise too big of a risk. 

Zero chance of this happening, MARCA are just using the club's name for clicks.

[bluephoenix 1,125]

dont need him, little too late to go after him.

[Belgiannutt 3,201]

4 hours ago, Mário César said:

l o l

 

4 hours ago, Mufassir08 said:

Injury prone, out of form, reliant on his physical attributes, damn expensive, Meh.

Basically what Muffasir said. We'd have to pay a lot of money to get him (+ high wages). 

I highly doubt he'll ever get to his former level. Too big a risk soooo, no thanks.

[oldportblue 547]

people saying their objection is paying a lot of money, clubs are spending 70M, 80M, 90M, 200M left right and center... who cares? it's not your money! If he works we get a great player, if we pay 90M and he doesn't work out, oh well...

[Belgiannutt 3,201]

9 minutes ago, oldportblue said:

people saying their objection is paying a lot of money, clubs are spending 70M, 80M, 90M, 200M left right and center... who cares? it's not your money! If he works we get a great player, if we pay 90M and he doesn't work out, oh well...

No offense Oldportblue but i find this "it's not your money" argument to be incredibly foolish. Sure it's not my money but it's the club's money and the club's money isn't unlimited. We're working with a budget and pissing away 90M on a "broken" player isn't smart business.

That's 90M we wouldn't be able to spend in the future.

[xPetrCechx 13,546]

7 minutes ago, Belgiannutt said:

No offense Oldportblue but i find this "it's not your money" argument to be incredibly foolish. Sure it's not my money but it's the club's money and the club's money isn't unlimited. We're working with a budget and pissing away 90M on a "broken" player isn't smart business.

That's 90M we wouldn't be able to spend in the future.

Exactly.

[oldportblue 547]

47 minutes ago, Belgiannutt said:

No offense Oldportblue but i find this "it's not your money" argument to be incredibly foolish. Sure it's not my money but it's the club's money and the club's money isn't unlimited. We're working with a budget and pissing away 90M on a "broken" player isn't smart business.

That's 90M we wouldn't be able to spend in the future.

No offense taken mate, everyone has the right to their opinion.

Whose to say that if we spend 90M on bale we won't be able to make signings in the future? I don't worry about us lacking money at all, we are doing very well and we can afford to buy top players for top money. The idea that we are working with a specific strict, set budget is open to debate. As far as I've known and seen while supporting chelsea for 15 years, we tend to go for huge bids for top players on a consistent basis if we feel that the player in question can elevate the club not just on the pitch but commercially as well, and when those bids are rejected, as has often been the case, we don't necessarily use that money on other players... In some cases, the attitude of the club seemed to be "we'll try hard for world class player X, if we don't get him, oh well" (neymar bid in 2013, torres 2011 etc) and not necessarily "we have 100M to spend, if we bid and the bid for player X is rejected, we will buy 2-3 players instead", that's more how fans think. I think the board looks at signings on their individual merit and when a rare opportunity presents itself to get a truly WC player, they tend to jump on it, even if they have to pay over the odds. The board is also interested in making a big splash in terms of visibility, status etc by signing players who can actually elevate the club's overall prestige and status... from what i've seen, Roman is ready to splash major cash on WC players if they will being excitement and possible success and elevate the club and I'm all for it. That's why I say who cares about what it costs? we've made reported bids of 88M for the likes of higuain recently, why not bale (who would actually recoup a good chunk of his transfer fee via shirts, merchandising and overall added visibility to chelsea, if you are concerned with money)

I personally feel it's in the club's best interests to try to get top WC talents when they become available because they are few and far between. It sends a message to rival teams, increases the attractiveness of the club for other players to join, makes the club's brand greater etc... Even if they end up not working 100% perfect on the pitch, like torres for ex., I still feel they provide value to the club overall. I would have loved for us to do what PSG just did with neymar. Would you have said no if you knew the deal would be done if all we had to do is pay the 200M? I certainly would not. Granted bale is considerably less exciting than neymar but the reasoning still stands I think with say 90M instead of 200M.

Having said all that, we have been spending very little in net expenditure these past 3 years but it's hard to say if that is by design or also due to missing out on top money targets consistently (which has been the case recently)... IMO, we can afford to spend much, much more than what we have in these past few years, especially on world class talents.

anyways, just my 2 cents

[Belgiannutt 3,201]

On 4-8-2017 at 0:14 AM, oldportblue said:

No offense taken mate, everyone has the right to their opinion.

Whose to say that if we spend 90M on bale we won't be able to make signings in the future? I don't worry about us lacking money at all, we are doing very well and we can afford to buy top players for top money. The idea that we are working with a specific strict, set budget is open to debate. As far as I've known and seen while supporting chelsea for 15 years, we tend to go for huge bids for top players on a consistent basis if we feel that the player in question can elevate the club not just on the pitch but commercially as well, and when those bids are rejected, as has often been the case, we don't necessarily use that money on other players... In some cases, the attitude of the club seemed to be "we'll try hard for world class player X, if we don't get him, oh well" (neymar bid in 2013, torres 2011 etc) and not necessarily "we have 100M to spend, if we bid and the bid for player X is rejected, we will buy 2-3 players instead", that's more how fans think. I think the board looks at signings on their individual merit and when a rare opportunity presents itself to get a truly WC player, they tend to jump on it, even if they have to pay over the odds. The board is also interested in making a big splash in terms of visibility, status etc by signing players who can actually elevate the club's overall prestige and status... from what i've seen, Roman is ready to splash major cash on WC players if they will being excitement and possible success and elevate the club and I'm all for it. That's why I say who cares about what it costs? we've made reported bids of 88M for the likes of higuain recently, why not bale (who would actually recoup a good chunk of his transfer fee via shirts, merchandising and overall added visibility to chelsea, if you are concerned with money)

I personally feel it's in the club's best interests to try to get top WC talents when they become available because they are few and far between. It sends a message to rival teams, increases the attractiveness of the club for other players to join, makes the club's brand greater etc... Even if they end up not working 100% perfect on the pitch, like torres for ex., I still feel they provide value to the club overall. I would have loved for us to do what PSG just did with neymar. Would you have said no if you knew the deal would be done if all we had to do is pay the 200M? I certainly would not. Granted bale is considerably less exciting than neymar but the reasoning still stands I think with say 90M instead of 200M.

Having said all that, we have been spending very little in net expenditure these past 3 years but it's hard to say if that is by design or also due to missing out on top money targets consistently (which has been the case recently)... IMO, we can afford to spend much, much more than what we have in these past few years, especially on world class talents.

anyways, just my 2 cents

I do feel our board is working with a more restricted budget. Abramovich is no longer giving us a blank cheque to just do whatever we want. The reason i think this is because well why else would we be penny pinching and being such hard negotiators ?

While we have made bids for top players i'd say the fact we didn't get them and weren't willing to go the extra mile is more evidence  to my claim that the board is working with a more limited budget. 

Also when's the last time we made a high profile expensive signing ? Apart from Morata this season you'd have to go back to Torres's transfer.

Shirt sales and merchandising : large majority of the money goes to the manufacturer not the club.

I still feel a signing should be primarily looked at to provide the goods on the pitch, not off it. 

 

I'm probably not the best person to answer that considering i already had a strong dislike for Neymar before. (I don't like his taunting, diving and rolling around. Too much of a prima donna for my liking)

But no i wouldn't have wanted us to that. We'd not only have to pay his transfer fee. Due to it being a buy out clause PSG had to also pay taxes (70 million) then add in Neymar's wages which are astronomical. ( £520 000 a week  after tax)

So no i wouldn't because he's not even remotely worth that much money imo.

My biggest issue with Bale is his injury record in combination with his extremely inconsistent form over the last 2 seasons. If we were talking about the Bale that left the PL then sure but the present day one is just too big a risk, for me at least.