OhForAGreavsie

Thank you. I've never heard of him, but then I've never taken an interest in the NBA.

Yes, I do think Maurizio speaks in a considered way. All intelligent people in positions of authority do. As to whether he wants to keep Willian I think that's about options. Until the club gets him a suitable alternative I think he'd rather retain Willian, and try to coax good performances out of him. While it is the case that Maurizio has said lately that he now sees CHO as a useable option, previously the manager has looked at his squad and selected Willian ahead of others. No matter what the buzz on social media thinks about it, that must mean Maurizio has preferred Willian to other choices. He's entitled to back his own judgement and, if asked to give up one of his preferred options without acquiring a replacement, any manager is going to resist.

I see what you mean, and in the way you mean it, I agree with you. I don't think that's the sense in which Maurizio meant it however, and it's not the way I meant it either. I, and Maurizio I think, meant it in terms of Willian's peak performance level, you mean it in the sense that his peak level can improve, that he can become better than he's ever been. I say again that I 100% agree with your position on that. In terms of his existing peak however Willian is below, way below, what we've seen from him at his best. I for one would dance in the streets if we regularly saw from Willian what we saw from him against Barca. Indeed we wouldn't be having this conversation about him. We'd either be unhappy that the club did not resist an even bigger offer from Barca, or we'd be worrying about how long Willian could maintain his level and fretting about how we were going to replace him when the time came. Whether Willian will ever recapture that form can be debated, but I think it's reasonable for the manager to allude to that level of expectation when talking about his potential.

Who is KD?

Amazing. They look like twins. Are they?

Yep, it would be a matter of moving them forward from their opening negotiating position. If all of this is real, then appreciating there is bound to be some negotiating is all the more reason to avoid the prematurely frustrated posts about a 'stupid' board turning down xyz offer.

His potential is high. We've seen some tremendous displays from Willian, including a number of them last season. In the first leg vs. Barca, for example, he was out of this world. That is his potential but, I always say never buy a player on the strength of his maximum output. Instead, judge a player on what you consider his average level to be because, by definition, that's what you're going to get from him most of the time. All we then need to factor in to get a good understanding of what Maurizio said is that managers always want to look for positive public comments about their players. Positive but believable, even for players they are happy to sell but who might still be with the squad when the window shuts. I think we need to make room for more nuanced consideration of manager talk.

Sarri's comment is balanced and well judged. It appreciates that Willian is still his player, so it's positive but, by saying Willian is performing below his potential, it includes the implication that the Brazillian must do better. It is also, by the way, exactly the right thing to say if Maurizio wants to encourage Barcelona to bid for the player. It's not treating them like idiots by pretending Willian has been setting the world alight. Instead it implies that he sees more than enough upside for the player's output to make his manager want to keep the attacker. These are just the things a potential buyer would like to believe.

You're right. Of course you are, but sometimes I really have to sit on my hands and count to ten. An earlier post in the thread included the expression, 'revert back'. It's the visual equivalent of chalk on a blackboard, or fingers on glass, to me. Just have to keep reminding myself that I'm the one who's wrong if I get bothered about it.

We don't know that this is the reality of course but at least it would explain the published stories without having to rely on the board being certifiable morons. This makes your scenario seem more likely to me. It also leaves room for negotiation.

Thank you. Little by little my faith is being restored. We all lug these big heavy brains around with us, we might as well put them to use eh?

No you are not. You're assessing the 'information' available and, applying an actual thought process, you are asking, what, if anything, might really be going on here. I hope this approach catches on but I'm not hopeful.

I don't agree with your assessment of Malcolm but it's a breath of fresh air to read a post which shows signs of logic having been applied. Whatever happens has a reason for it. Almost always it's a reason we'd all agree with if only we knew the real situation.

Yes, but I wonder if you mean that in the same way I do.

Not a single established fact, and that's before we even attempt to understand what factors might influence the decision. None of us have any clue what, if anything, is going on yet so many know that the club is wrong and stupid and wicked. A strange thought process.

Neither.

Well, I'll give you that if this was true it would give her some leverage over him but I can't pretend I give it any credence. Why would Marina use that leverage to get, and retain, an actual job? A job her performance of which causes the business to lose millions? Would it not make more sense for her to engineer a backroom position that involved only enough work to satisfy any authorities that might take an interest in her remuneration package? Why indeed would she not negotiate a bigger pay packet in exchange for not wasting Roman's cash with stupid transfer decisions? Your speculation is fun but it does not seem to me to fit the facts. I would not object to the right new owner. Not that Roman is going to give a hoot what I think.

Thank you, and likewise. I'd be interested in your speculation on the following questions: - Why, if Marina is as bad as you say, if she is costing Roman millions of pounds as well as endless opportunities to bring success to his team, has he not sacked her? Why indeed has he, in effect, promoted her by expanding her responsibilities? You surely can't believe that Roman and all his advisors are so stupid that they don't know blindingly obvious truths that so many posters on this forum believe they understand completely.

Just because it was reported someone said it, does not make it so. Actual confirmation may emerge one day, but until then I can't get to the jump off point required to reach the same conclusions as many do. That jumping off point is a belief that Marina Granovskaia is terminally stupid. That cannot be the case; it is not the case. Believing otherwise is about people being unable to handle the fact that they don't know the truth and so they substitute guesswork and prejudice instead.

Not one of which constitute evidence. You just asked someone to get back to you when the final, or shall we say 'real', figures are in regarding recent Chelsea transfer activity. Fair enough but will you get back to us when you have actual facts about Willian & Barcelona?

Said it before in this thread so forgive me for the repeat but better to wait for Reece. I think he'll be ready for 2019/2020 but even if it takes until the season after that I still say wait.

There have already been many posts following this one (lot's of them by me ), and there will be many more I'm sure, but BL's comment says all there is to say on this subject

I know what you mean but it's not about the size of the name, it's about the quality of the player. I'm pretty sure you, me and everyone here agrees with that. Where the size of the name comes in is that the big names are the players we've heard of, and are therefore the ones we can identify as desirable targets. There is lots of proof season after season however, that there are good players out there currently flying under the radar as far as most football fans are concerned. They should not be off the radar of our club however. We have a big budget to spend on scouting and information gathering. If we don't have enough pull to attract the young, big name players. If we can't afford their price tags, even if we could persuade them to join, then we simply have to up our game in the under the radar market.

I think we'd all agree that this approach should not be plan A. In fact it's plan C at best. Competition is fierce for the top level player we need but if we want to compete with the best on the pitch, then we have to compete with them in our recruiting. Lots of clubs around Europe are consistently better than we are at identifying quality players at a stage when they are affordable and attainable. That's our challenge. Spending big on players who we know are below the quality required actually makes it harder for us ever to reach our ultimate aims.

That's exactly what I mean when I say it's about recognising the good from the shiny.