Superblue

The Mount and Havertz deals for me are critical of the long term way in which this club operates. Last summer we let players leave fairly cheap and easily seemingly without much negotiation (Lukaku loan, Werner, Gilmour, Alonso) whilst also getting our pants pulled down on a number of transfer negotiations such as Cucurella and Fofana (I'm personally a big fan of Fofana and I think he'll prove to be a very good player over the long term here but it doesn't change that we got drastically bid up by Leicester to bring him in). This summer it's imperative that we don't show ourselves as a soft touch in the transfer market. We've driven hard bargains with Mount and Havertz so far to sell on terms acceptable for us, not Arsenal and United. We've so far pushed a harder line with Inter on Lukaku. In the example of this Mount deal, if we just rolled over because United have briefed to the media it's their "last" offer, then we're going to struggle in the future. We'll show to buying clubs that we can be easily manipulated and bullied and we'll show to players that want to leave that we'll cave into the pressures. At present this offer is much closer to United's initial bid than it is Chelsea's initial valuation. I get there is risk attached due to his situation a year away from his contract being up, but the Mount deal could have much longer term ramifications for us if we get it wrong and are seen as being pushed around. The other acid test on the horizon will be if we are indeed interested in Caicedo, our negotiations with Brighton to buy him.

Pretty sure the Ukraine coach mentioned Mudryk is carrying an injury and would likely be rested the first couple of games as a result.

It remains to be seen just what sort of relationships may be developed over the long term but I would assume the multi club setup that looks to be created will operate in similar manners to the Red Bull group given that Boehly/Clearlake took a keen liking to that setup this time last year. The easy thing to look at is farming players out on loan to these clubs but if done correctly, it should be far more than that. It's already been discussed in media pieces that the multi club model will operate with data sharing. This could be a massive positive for a club like Strasbourg, or Rio Ave in Portugal who have also been discussed. Being able to access data, whether it's scouting, medical, coaching, etc that is likely to be amongst the best funded in world football should help in the long term to find these clubs an edge and establish themselves further. Ultimately you want these clubs to kick on and becoming bigger and more competitive as this will allow themselves to attract better calibre of players, particularly younger players who need a platform at a competitive league to develop before what should be considered their 'big' move. Ultimately if it's anything like Red Bull, in this situation we should be first in queue for any of their best players at a reasonable, competitive price. Given French clubs are usually a good proving ground for young, African talent, and likewise Portuguese clubs with South American talent, the first two clubs we look like adding to this structure should in theory be solid additions which can hoover up a lot of young talent across two continents that are almost impossible for English clubs to buy directly from due to work permit regulations.

Disappointed in the likes of Mount and Havertz who seem to be bailing on the club at the first sign of struggle. It's pretty clear that there is a longer term plot at the club to build a younger squad to grow and develop together, and in both circumstances they could have fallen into the bracket of still young and long term, but two of the more experienced players within the group that could have assumed more leadership and direction on the squad. The press briefings from both player's camps that they will not be signing new contracts whilst the club are in the middle of transfer negotiations is very poor in my opinion but unfortunately the way things are nowadays. I'm just glad the club is sticking to its guns with both players to get a valuation deemed acceptable and not take a feeling of being short changed. If we can get anything like £60m upwards for each then I think both will overall represent good deals for the club. On one hand I'd have had no problem keeping either within the squad next season, but on the other hand I don't believe either is a "game changer". They are completely different circumstances to the likes of Salah and De Bruyne who never got the opportunities here before both left. Mount and Havertz have had 4 and 3 years respectively in the Chelsea first team and whilst both have produced moments, neither has been able to find a consistency to their game and as a result, a regular and healthy output of an end product. If either goes on to be a bigger success somewhere else then so be it because I'm unsure if that would happen here. Ultimately both are part of a wider problem at the club in recent years of inconsistency which has prevented us getting anywhere near a title challenge lasting past Xmas.

Ironically when people are moaning about fair value, the Saudis are potentially picking up Ziyech, Mendy and Koulibaly for less than what some English clubs look likely to end up paying us for Gallagher, Mount and Havertz each.

I struggle to see how any of these deals with the Saudis are not deemed fair value. If we were selling Koulibaly or Ziyech for £50m each fair enough. The audacity of Neville to get back on his horse of hypocrisy when he's been begging his club to be sold to the Middle East riches is laughable.

I think they manage assets to the value of something around this figure, which I assume their share of Chelsea would be included within. I assume the circa $16bn is total personal wealth of those mentioned.

Perhaps, but there is no way that Chelsea don't split that agreement into two separate transactions. We can bank the Gallagher money as full profit for FFP, whilst spreading any fee for Caicedo over his contract length. Unless they allow the part exchange to be treated as two separate transactions for accounting purposes for FFP, if we just swapped Gallagher to bring the Caicedo fee down, the FFP benefits from that deal will be spread out over the next 5 years or so, instead of immediately.

Not sure whether overrated is correct, but he's certainly overvalued in my opinion by being at a fellow Premier League club. All the figures being placed on the likes of Caicedo and Rice this summer though, I think should solidify the belief that we actually picked Enzo up at the right time and I think if we were sitting here this summer having not signed him in January, his price wouldn't be too dissimilar at a £80-100m bracket. Paying a bit of a premium to get him in January I think looking now in hindsight was the correct move. Ultimately we need a partner for him, but I think there are more options available for his partner, than there would be if we had to find his alternative which is why I'm fairly calm about it all currently.

A little patience needed. I think over the coming weeks we'll see a bit of a domino effect at the club with regards to incomings and outgoings but it's still very early days so far and the club should always look to drive a hard bargain in negotiations first anyway. I think the outgoings are significantly more important to get done regardless. Considering the squad will be freshened up a little bit with returning loanees, if we only sold players this summer and didn't buy anyone, I still think with a smaller and more settled group, we'd perform a lot better next season anyway. One thing to note regarding the outgoings is if the 30th June is a "cut off" period for the seasons FFP, some of the players we're looking to move on will likely be done after this date, so any potential FFP losses on deals can be absorbed in next year's books instead. For example, release Auba now and his full transfer value will fall into last season's FFP. Release Auba in July and the transfer fee will be split in half over last season and this one. The likes of Koulibaly, Lukaku, Kepa, Cucurella could all fall into a similar position, where pushing their amortisation into another season before trying to move them on may help with being able to sell them for a loss.

Agree, I think he's serviceable for a top 4 side (he already has previously under Sarri), he's just not a level if wanting to challenge for the league. Ultimately if the right keeper profile isn't out there for the right price (and personally I think the keeper market is one of the weakest positions in world football currently), I'd rather hold fire and be sure in 12 months time or see where we might be with slonina than just replace Kepa with another version of him on a longer contract.

Regarding these Saudi links, they've shown so far that they're willing to throw massive wages at players but I've not seen any suggestions yet that they're willing to throw big transfer fees out there for players under contract (like China did a few years back for example). If they are, they could well end up being the answer to our prayers with regards to Koulibaly, Auba and Lukaku.

In fairness to the new regime, the young signings that have been made all look like they have huge potential and have been picked up at the right times. If we were looking at Casadei after this tournament, Santos after the tournament he won with Brazil recently, or even the new kid we've bought now he's been called up to Ecuador's senior squad, they'd all be significantly more expensive to the deals we made at the time for them. I know it's very much still potential to be realised, but it does bode well that the scouting within that age bracket seems to have improved, and we're maybe looking at areas like South America directly rather than waiting for those players to secure moves to Europe first and develop a little. The signings made in January I also think are largely promising too and in the right environment which hopefully we'll have this coming season under Poch and a streamlined squad, we can see improvements.

It's been reported by numerous people that there's been a contract on the table for him for months now and it's not been taken away, so I wouldn't fall for the idea of offering him a deal on any terms, he'd sign it. I mentioned earlier, as per reports, we've tried offering him a contract that is much more heavily incentivised for playing games which to be honest is exactly what I would do in the shoes of the Chelsea board. Certainly over the last 2 seasons, he hasn't justified anywhere near being paid £300k a week and despite being out for months and having surgery to 'fix' a regular problem, he still got injured again before the season was out. I agree with you regarding the last paragraph - when he's on the pitch he absolutely leads by example and there is no question that he is a good egg with no ego. But I don't envisage him being someone who will actively take on a leadership role off the pitch. He assumes one on the pitch, but given his personality, I can't see him being much of a talker. With the likes of Thiago Silva and Azpi as examples, I could see them even if they were injured, trying to offer their leadership to the group still. Kante doesn't give me that vibe because he's such a shy and reserved personality, I think his overall influence is a leader by example on the pitch and when he's injured most of the time, there's just no positives then to offer.

Ironically, if Reece was able to stay fit and Gusto becomes the player he is expected to be, I'd love to see what Reece could do with a run in midfield. I know it was almost like a kid 3 or 4 years older in the playground when he was playing in the Championship in general, but he looked exceptional when playing there at Wigan. I would tend to agree though, I'd rather see a defensive minded midfielder who will make us more solid. The key's ultimately are freeing up Enzo a little, and providing sufficient support for the full backs to play high, almost like they are still wing backs. In order for that to happen, we need someone who is disciplined and holds great defensive and positional awareness.

Assuming though Poch was to play a 4-2-3-1 like he did at Spurs (in my head I keep assuming this will be the plan because unless we stick with a back 5, this seems the most obvious back 4 formation due to Nkunku joining, Enzo as one for the pivot and a number of wide options) - would he be able to play deeper in a midfield 2 or would it just be that advanced role?

I would assume then he'd be on the list of targets should Mount and Havertz both leave, as it would leave a requirement for an alternative to Nkunku in that attacking midfield role?

Absolutely love Kante, what a phenomenal servant he's been to this club. His performances in our Champions League win are comparable to that of Drogba in 2012. He just dominated and the rest of the team followed behind him. But you can't get away from his injury proneness now, and at 32 and on about £300k per week, sometimes that difficult decision has to be made. It's another experienced player that will be leaving but Kante has such a shy and reserved personality, I think his influence and experience is almost solely displayed out on the pitch rather than around the club and if he can't stay fit to be on the pitch, there's little purpose. I don't think it's the same as maybe an Azpi or Thiago Silva who I think would likely be much more influential not just on the pitch but around the training ground and the club in general. As I understand, the club offered him a couple of years with a contract that was heavily incentivised on him playing but if he did stay fit he'd be earning a significant amount. I think that was the right approach by the club to someone that has barely been able to stay fit over the past 4 years. With what he's been offered it's an absolute no brainer for him and good luck to him if he accepts it.

I personally would rather we searched the market for an alternative to Caicedo. He's a good player, potentially very good, but Brighton will want £80m+ or leverage on a Colwill deal. He's simply not worth either of them. If he was playing for a mid table side in one of the other top leagues, he'd be half the value. I understand the thought process behind buying players with Premier League experience but that still guarantees nothing and you pay inflated prices to boot. All the players we bought last season with Prem experience were amongst our poorest performers last season. I struggle to look at Caicedo and not think that an alternative to him can be found for a fraction of the price if we actually do a bit of scouting outside of the South Coast of this country.

I think the deal breaker is based more on wages than the price, as we seemed to be willing to negotiate with Sporting to sort that out. It appears PSG came in initially with a higher wage offer and when ours was improved, they've upped theirs again.

Yeah looking at reports coming out, it seems to suggest that we've improved our offer only for PSG to come back in again and just bump there's up further. If that is the case, then I think it's better to take a stand, especially when these 'super' agents like Mendes are involved otherwise they'll think they can milk us on every deal. One thing I would note however is we seemingly pulled out of the Enzo deal, only to go back to it and sign him. It's a different situation with this as there is another club pursuing and bidding for him currently but we'll see how things develop over the next coming days. Currently we've no idea whether this news has been leaked by Chelsea or Ugarte's agent or someone else.

On one side it might be frustrating, but on the other side the club needs to learn from mistakes over the past 12 months, both in transfer fees and wages being paid out. Until we see what squad we have come the start of the season, it's difficult to truly assess things so let's see what alternatives we look at. In all honesty though, I said this a few days ago, I haven't really watched much of him but from seeing highlight videos, etc he did look rather limited on the ball and the increased intensity of the Premier League would find that out if it's the case. I still think it's of more vital importance currently that we sort out a number of these outgoings. We move...

I think having Poch confirmed now makes a big difference. He might not be that very top tier like a Pep or Klopp, but he is very well regarded as a high quality coach and from what has been widely reported, is an incredibly strong people person. I would imagine the combination of him and Chelsea as a club in general would be a pretty strong pull still. We've had an awful season but a lot of people aren't idiots and can see a bigger picture. There's a lot of quality and a lot of potential with our squad and hopefully in a far more settled environment next season we'll be pushing upwards again. In the case of Caicedo, he isn't going to come cheap which immediately limits the number of clubs that will be looking at him. Add a couple of other midfielders who will likely make similar moves such as MacAllister, Rice, etc and we might find that competition to sign him isn't quite as big as one might initially think.

He does look very good, although in set age competitions you do sometimes have to be careful in assessing the standard. I do think he should be primed for a loan move to a Premier League side next season.