The only place to be

There are people (I had to change this word from a slightly less polite one) who think earning thousands of pounds a week inoculates one against mental issues. It's encouraging to see players being more open about it and hopefully that will lead to clubs and associations being able to treat and prevent it in future. Cabaye has gone up in my estimation.

Not worth hanging on for a definite answer. He's a professional and it would be disrespectful to Real to make open remarks about next season. It would appear everything is agreed in principle, and that would seem to hinge on us being in the CL (because his heart might be in Chelsea, but he'll be fucked if he's going to spend a season playing in the Europa League....). He's a great coach, but we're asking him to do something he's not really done before so this is by no-means a golden ticket to trophies and stability. We're actually a good team only a few players away from a push for the title, and I doubt Jose is the only one who could take us all the way, but it just feels right with him - thinking about him back at Chelsea makes me smile. But there will be question marks up until the first week of the season.

Indeed - it would be massively unfair to bring this kid back only to sit him on the bench. How exactly does he get a fair shot at the number one spot anyway? Do they take it in turns? Does he have to impress against Wolves in the League Cup? Do we give them a half each? When the change happens, it needs to be swift and decisive for the good of the team and for both keepers.

yes.

If that's still the case in a few years then fine. Personally I don't think of them as blinkers, but more an evocation of my hope for the future - but then again I don't think we sold our soul. Maybe if I did think we were soulless then I'd be more pessimistic. Alas I don't have that cynical view of our young players or our academy.

At least one of those sources says 'in principle', which may well include a provision for us being in the CL.

Denied by Chelsea. Denied by Abramovich's spokesman. Denied by the FBI. Well that was a fun hour - in future Twitter, stick to killing off celebrities.

So wouldn't an academy developing our own players (which is what everyone connected to the clubs) be the definition of bringing back the good old days?

Berezosky is dead, but there's no evidence he was killed.

The fees we got from those kids are in the millions, possibly eight figures, over the last decade. But I do agree that we should've seen more from the academy (although an England captain and one of the top five players in our history ain't too shabby) and I think that we will. If Chalobah reaches half his potential then that's probably saved us £10 million in the market, whilst there are a number of other youngsters who could make it. If it's simply a financial decision then the market isn't any better to be honest because not every signing is going to be a winner and you'll lose money on some of your deals. Also, wasn't John Hollins brought through our 'academy' such that it was in those days?

I think loans have their place. For the likes of Bamford, Kane and Saville, they give them a chance to show something that they probably haven't shown in the youth team. Without loans, these kids wouldn't have a sniff of making it here so it gives them a way to make themselves stand out and make the coaches re-assess them. For people like Kakuta, it's a chance to prove people wrong when people have written them off. For the majority of talented youngsters like Chalobah, Lukaku and even Kalas and Courtois it's essentially a way of getting them used to first-team football. They learn what it's like getting ready for matches on a weekly basis and they learn something about their bodies in January when they're playing their third game in a week, which they wouldn't have learnt in the academy. So they definitely have their place, but people can sometimes place too much stock in them. And I'll say what I said earlier when people use this comparison - Chalobah is better than Cleverley could ever hope to be. How much does it cost when you factor in the sales of players like Stoch, Mancienne, Sinclair, Cork etc.? It's somewhat short-sighted (no offence) to think that we could survive in a post-FFP world without an academy. Right now we have a lot of very talented kids who have the potential to be first-teamers and we need more of that in the future.

David Cameron just said in a speech 'Our job is to educate and train up our youth, not to rely on immigration to fill the skills gap'. That is essentially the attitude Mourinho would need to bring to the job this time around. He already has many toys to play with, but over the next 3-5 years we really need to be developing players not just to fill squad spaces but first-team places. I think people should view this whole thing with caution. If he does come back to this club, I think many of us are hoping he's a slightly changed man not in his tactical view of football or even his man-management skills but in how he builds and develops a squad, and a club. Many of the problems we face now started around the time he was in charge and a few years after - under-investment in youth, too much power given to certain players, too much money spent on players in wages and transfer fees. Now not all of that was his fault (if any) and there were certainly a large number of great things that he instilled in the club too, but we're heading in a certain direction and we can't throw away all the good things that are happening at this club. Essentially we need concessions on both sides. If they're capable of that then we could have something very special indeed.

The board that was in charge a decade ago isn't exactly the same one we have today, but if you think that you click your fingers, invest some money and out pops the next Messi from the academy then I'm sorry but that's not how it works. It takes time (decades!) for these things to bear fruit and right now we're seeing that. The Youth Cups, the Next Gen success, the Chalobahs, Feruzs, McEachrans etc. are just now starting to come through and now is the measure of how well we handle youth.

Nice post and agree with all of that, especially the Phil Jones bit. Turning him into a utility player a la John O'Shea really has robbed him of the chance to take any position by the balls and make it his own. Gael needs to do something amazing to have a shot at a career here, otherwise he's just another in a long line of players who look amazing at youth level but fail to translate that to the professional game. The same goes for Josh in many respects. He needs a bit of nastiness about him, and hopefully he'll respond to his first sustained period of struggle and criticism in the right way. Chalobah....I think I've made it clear what I think of him. Technically great, physically blessed but most importantly he has the right attitude to football and to life. The same could be said for Lukaku and a couple of others (and if we're talking about attitude, then it could go either way for Islam Feruz. The swagger either makes him a great or it becomes a chip on his shoulder that weighs him down). He's a leader, and that's what you need as either a centre-back or a defensive midfielder. In fact I think the Josh example does highlight why Chalobah does stand a good chance of succeeding. With Josh there was always a nagging question about his size but the problem is that his character and personality actually makes him seem smaller than he is. He doesn't play with his chest out, but actually hunches over like he's trying to disappear inside himself sometimes and that's not something you can really fix in the gym because it's something inside him. He needs to be a bit of a cunt. At the moment he needs his Boro teammates to play at the top of their game, for their movement to be spot on and then he can start to work his magic. When it comes together, there are few players better at picking a pass. With Chalobah it's different - he actually makes his teammates better. He's the one who can put them into better positions, covers their mistakes and enables them to flourish which is impressive at any age, but at 18 is just spectacular. I don't know if Josh can be a squad player at any club because what he does is so unique that you probably need to build a team around him. It's not like you can just slot him into an old system and expect him to do a job like you could with a Cleverley or Ramires.

The notion of a player being 100% ready to perform is absurd. What is he right now? 60%? 70%? You're either ready, or you're not - either way you're going to suffer bumps along the way but it's how you respond to that adversity that will decide your fate. Secondly, the idea that any Chelsea fan would call for a young player's head after a couple of bad performances is quite frankly absurd. Any football supporter would support young players coming through. As for Bertrand, he's 23, has over 200 first-team appearances and 2 England caps - that's a pretty large sample size for people to make judgments about. It's also a mightily unfair comparison because I think they're just different levels of player. Berts is a solid pro who will probably get into double digits for England caps, but he was never as highly-regarded as Chalobah. In fact I don't think he's given many below-average performances, he's just been average throughout his career almost. There's no shame in that.

I'm really not. I'm saying that what he needs to do this time is different from what he needed to do in 2004.

You haven't got the first fucking clue. One incident which you have no fucking idea about and then you ignore everything else about a man. You say you're from New York City? Is that a burger restaurant in Bootle?

We are in 2013 and Chelsea live in a completely different world now,

Really? Matic and Borini? I'm all for giving youth a chance, but they have to be of a certain standard. It wasn't a fucking either/or choice. Liverpool didn't come to us and say we want a striker and we don't care which for fucks sake. We made our bed with the Torres deal and we had to give him a chance because we committed £100 million to him. Let's not forget Sturridge's contract was coming to an end and it was unlikely he'd re-sign, so doubling our money almost wasn't the worst thing in the world. We also replaced him with Ba and Moses. Maybe he should have, but the Torres deal fucked us. But that's one deal - get over it. We've moved on and Danny has joined the 'humongous' club of his dreams. And even if he'd stayed I don't know if he'd be happy with the possibility of playing second fiddle to Lukaku or Falcao - could you say for certain he'd have signed a new contract? I don't think it will. I think Lukaku is better than Sturridge for a start and he has a better attitude. When you call the board 'terrible' you focus on one or two players and ignore the dozen or so others we've signed in the last two years. At least try and be fair.

Terry I could perhaps understand....but Lamps? What the fuck are you on about?

The job is to win trophies, but it's the way we need to do it that's changed. He needs to develop young players and use them and if he can't do that then he's the wrong guy for us.

A terrible board who are buying players like Hazard, Oscar, Mata, Azpi, De Bruyne, Lukaku, Courtois, Piazon, Wallace...... It could just be that Kakuta doesn't have the mental aspect to succeed at the top level?

They work on the technical, physical and tactical aspects of a player - all of which are secondary to their character. You may think I'm arguing for the sake of it, but don't bother responding if you aren't going to read my posts. AVB said he would use him, so by the time they looked to secure him a loan the teams had already settled on their starting line-ups to a large extent. If he had gone in the summer then he might have had a better chance. But what Josh shows is that the Championship isn't the cakewalk some people are suggesting it might be. He hasn't looked that impressive, but he's on a different development schedule to Chalobah so he has time. Have you actually watched Nathaniel play? He needs a greater test than the Championship can provide. No-one is suggesting rushing him. What they're suggesting is that it would be beneficial for the player and for the club for him to be part of the first-team squad next season. We need a midfielder - he's a midfielder. I'm not saying he's certain to be the answer, but I do think he deserves a fair shake.

And ultimately it comes down to the individual. People are either born with what it takes to mentally handle their talents or they're not, which is why we place such an emphasis on the intangibles because they can't be taught. There isn't an academy, coach, potion, spell or serum that can give a kid what Michael Jordan had. It's that will to win, that desire and I think Lukaku and Chalobah both have a bit of that in them. Sadly, and I'm not writing him off because it's too soon, but it's also what I think someone like Josh McEachran is lacking. You can call it arrogance, you can call it swagger or you can call it being a bit of a cunt but that is more important than experience in my view.

Josh had little chance of walking into any team in January because teams are settled by that point and including Josh in the team would take time. He's not an impact player by any measure, and AVB's insistence on keeping him around and not using him (like he did with Lukaku and Bertrand as well) robbed him of a year. But you won't say what he has to learn...is it a secret? If we've reached a European final with these kids then they can't be that bad, although I doubt that's the point you're making. Experience is secondary to hunger and talent in my opinion. Lukaku got bits and pieces under the understanding that he was very much third choice. In fact he got game time on the right-wing and when games were virtually over, rather than the minutes he's getting at West Brom. Again, AVB fucked him over and made him feel like he had little chance of getting a fair shot. Both of them have the types of personalities that can handle pressure in my opinion, and they both have the talent to succeed.