test

Welcome to Talk Chelsea

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

nachikethas

22. Christian Pulisic

Started by nachikethas,

1,229 posts in this topic
12 minutes ago, BlueLyon said:

That video is perfect example of what will never win you games. He stalls on the ball, beats a man and then loses it.

I'll never understand why they didn't pay 30 more for Sancho instead of Pulisic and get a much better player in return plus fixing our worries about homegrown, such a joke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Nicco said:

I'll never understand why they didn't pay 30 more for Sancho instead of Pulisic and get a much better player in return plus fixing our worries about homegrown, such a joke.

What makes you think Dortmund will just sell Sancho after half a season?

Also, paying 90 million for an 18-year-old who's enjoying only his first season at senior level hardly sounds like wise business...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Jason said:

What makes you think Dortmund will just sell Sancho after half a season?

Also, paying 90 million for an 18-year-old who's enjoying only his first season at senior level hardly sounds like wise business...

Well PSG paid 150mil for a 18 years old and now it looks like shrewd business. I'm probably biased but Sancho is destinated to be one of the best which is why I think he is worth it at the cost of 100 mil. Also looking at the rumours he will probably go to United for around this mark which if he turns out to fulfill his potential it will be very good business for them. Also let's not pretend like the club targeted Pulisic only for his on field performances, half of it comes from exploiting the American market which frankly could've gone to Sancho who is the face of England in the next 10 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Nicco said:

Well PSG paid 150mil for a 18 years old and now it looks like shrewd business. I'm probably biased but Sancho is destinated to be one of the best which is why I think he is worth it at the cost of 100 mil. Also looking at the rumours he will probably go to United for around this mark which if he turns out to fulfill his potential it will be very good business for them. Also let's not pretend like the club targeted Pulisic only for his on field performances, half of it comes from exploiting the American market which frankly could've gone to Sancho who is the face of England in the next 10 years.

But Mbappe at least already had a proper season before going to PSG. Led Monaco to the title and quarter finals of the Champions League. Sancho can't boast that, can he?

If things go according to plan with CHO, then we will have a player who is also the face of England for the next 10 years, no? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Jason said:

But Mbappe at least already had a proper season before going to PSG. Led Monaco to the title and quarter finals of the Champions League. Sancho can't boast that, can he?

If things go according to plan with CHO, then we will have a player who is also the face of England for the next 10 years, no? 

Assuming he stays which I fear he won't but even if Sancho was here they could've played together since they wouldn't block each others progress. Also the comparations with Mbappe are there even if they played like shit against Totenham and they might choke the league title in Bundesliga at the end. I just hope if CHO does leave it will be to Dortmund with a buy back clause only way to fix this mess we got ourselves in. 

I'm not confident in Pulisic at all even though I remember him single handily destroying City and Liverpool in pre season, all will depend if we get a top striker or not because he clearly won't be scoring much for now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Nicco said:

Assuming he stays which I fear he won't but even if Sancho was here they could've played together since they wouldn't block each others progress. Also the comparations with Mbappe are there even if they played like shit against Totenham and they might choke the league title in Bundesliga at the end. I just hope if CHO does leave it will be to Dortmund with a buy back clause only way to fix this mess we got ourselves in. 

If we get the transfer ban, then I can't see us selling Hazard AND CHO in the same window. Also, we're talking too much about ifs and buts here. What if we don't sell Hazard and/or CHO? What if Hazard stays? What if CHO stays?

Vesper likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jason said:

If we get the transfer ban, then I can't see us selling Hazard AND CHO in the same window. Also, we're talking too much about ifs and buts here. What if we don't sell Hazard and/or CHO? What if Hazard stays? What if CHO stays?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Jason said:

What makes you think Dortmund will just sell Sancho after half a season?

Also, paying 90 million for an 18-year-old who's enjoying only his first season at senior level hardly sounds like wise business...

Wise business?

I dont think paying 90m for Sancho would be any less wiser compared to paying 60m for Pulisic who is warming bench at bvb.

In 6 months, Sancho shown more than Pulisic did in his entire career. 

Neither is great player and both would be giant risk, but I can understand splashing big money on Sancho who is english and had superb 6 months. On the other hand what did Pulisic do to make our board chunk 60m, apart from being american with big potential to bring huge fanbase. Obviously Pulisic isnt bad player and is actualy decent talent, but he is extremely raw talent, we suck at developing those, so it already makes little sense. And he is never worth 60m either. 

Its same old story. Pulisic is decent talent but we still forked out huge money. But we will never add 20m more and go for the best talent which makes no sense.

Similar story was with Sterling/Stones for who we didnt want to pay 50m, but we did pay 40m on Drinks. Laughable board and I have no doubt Pulisic was bought with idea of getting onto american market, not for being superb player. 

Because for 60m, even today you either get great player or massive talent and Pulisic is neither.

I will support him once he becomes Chelsea player, but honestly I dont have big hopes on him. I dont remember when we had a talented player away on loan that I was this unexcited about coming here.

DYC. and Vesper like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BlueLyon said:

Wise business?

I dont think paying 90m for Sancho would be any less wiser compared to paying 60m for Pulisic who is warming bench at bvb.

In 6 months, Sancho shown more than Pulisic did in his entire career. 

Neither is great player and both would be giant risk, but I can understand splashing big money on Sancho who is english and had superb 6 months. On the other hand what did Pulisic do to make our board chunk 60m, apart from being american with big potential to bring huge fanbase. Obviously Pulisic isnt bad player and is actualy decent talent, but he is extremely raw talent, we suck at developing those, so it already makes little sense. And he is never worth 60m either. 

Its same old story. Pulisic is decent talent but we still forked out huge money. But we will never add 20m more and go for the best talent which makes no sense.

Similar story was with Sterling/Stones for who we didnt want to pay 50m, but we did pay 40m on Drinks. Laughable board and I have no doubt Pulisic was bought with idea of getting onto american market, not for being superb player. 

Because for 60m, even today you either get great player or massive talent and Pulisic is neither.

I will support him once he becomes Chelsea player, but honestly I dont have big hopes on him. I dont remember when we had a talented player away on loan that I was this unexcited about coming here.

Pulisic is a marketing gambit

been saying this since day one

11Drogba likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People seem to forget that Pulisic was one of the hottest prospects in the game just shy of a year ago.

If we had signed him last summer everyone would have gone crazy saying he is the next Hazard and such. No, just because Sancho hit the ground running somehow people think Pulisic has lost all talent.

He is our player now, like it or not. We have to give him a chance to impress like everyone else gets. He hasn't even put on a blue shirt yet!!!

Somehow I think the poor current form of the team is to blame for the negativity on a player that we haven't even seen playing in our team!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's crazy the judgements people seem to be coming to based on one video...Maybe you all are implying the video is a microcosm of his play as a whole, but it really seems it is one video and now he is an ineffective player that stalls on the ball. Hazard does stuff like that often. Is he ineffective?

Let's just not take one video out of context.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scored a neat goal vs Chile and became the youngest player in USMNT history to score 10 goals.

But he then went off with a quad injury and there's this...

 

 

Bosnian Blue likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 24/03/2019 at 2:43 PM, Nicco said:

I'll never understand why they didn't pay 30 more for Sancho instead of Pulisic and get a much better player in return plus fixing our worries about homegrown, such a joke.

It's easy to understand though, he costs less and is American = profit. Also he isn't satisfied with his lack of game time, much easier to lure away than an on fire and very expensive Sancho who extended his contract 3 months prior. We would have had no chance at Sancho.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

from what little i have seen of him i feel as if he is a player similar to Pedro if i have to choose and i also see a similar numbers atleast at club level. As for NT he is going to be (Our) "Messi"ah till the next one come around..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2019. 03. 24. at 1:43 PM, Nicco said:

I'll never understand why they didn't pay 30 more for Sancho instead of Pulisic and get a much better player in return plus fixing our worries about homegrown, such a joke.

Because it's real life, not Fifa. 30 more? So do you think the first club who is willing to pay 90 million pounds gets him? No matter if it's Juventus, City, Real or Blackburn Rovers? It's not a grocery store, we are talking about human beings with decisions.

You have to agree with the player too. Sancho is like the most wanted player in Europe right now, not our category. We were never even rumoured to sign him just like De Ligt or De Jong.

BlueSunshine likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.