Romelu Lukaku

[Korea 734]

Nice...

Loan move to Swansea would see him score more goals and hopefully prepare him in 2014 for a role on Chelsea.

[Leif 6,006]

yes yes yes Swansea please. they play the closest sort of football to what Roman wants us to play I believe, so Lukaku would benefit from trying out their system.

[Kezza 1,965]

Stoked with the Swansea move if it happens

[Leif 6,006]

Stoked with the Swansea move if it happens

So if he were to go on loan to Stoke, would you be... Swansead?

[Mufassir08 2,400]

Dont think he will be played over michu anytime soon.

[RedWhite&BLUE 37]

Makes sense for both sides. He plays in a top system which plays similarly (passing, movement) to our own. Also, he likely gets to be the first choice striker which will get him on top of his game ahead of the World Cup.

That's what being first choice is about, I reckon. WC starting spot.

[Reddish-Blue 2,224]

Dont think he will be played over michu anytime soon.

He wouldn't be playing over Michu...

The whole point of Swansea bringing in Lukaku is so that Michu can play in his favoured 'second striker' role just behind Lukaku.

And Lukaku is a big upgrade at CF...compared to Swansea's current strikers: Luke Moore and some Itay Shechter

[OneMoSalah 8,615]

Swansea mainly have Luke Moore and Itay Shechter as their two 2 STs though they are not hugely favored by Laudrup. That is why Michu plays upfront most of the time for them.

Shechters on loan I think. So Lukaku going there would be great tbh.

[The only place to be 11,313]

So who does that leave us with up front next season? Torres, Ba and Schurrle or are we actually going to go for Falcao?

We could play the guy who has scored 13 goals in his first proper season in the league, who supports the club and shows the right attitude, but we've got to think about our priorities.

Who will sell most t-shirts in China?

[bushman 2,043]

It´s very simple.

If Chelsea do not buy any striker, Lukaku should be coming home.

If the club buys let´s say Andre, Falcao even Hulk was mentioned recently, then Lukaku should be loaned out.

[Stats 6,981]

I would like him to be with Chelsea next season but knowing us, we probably will loan him out again. Anyway, if rumours of Swansea are true I would be happy as they are in Europe next season and I believe he can create a good partnership with Michu. That being said, if we are to loan him out I believe he can aim higher and aim for Champions League footy next season. I believe he is only going to get better and better. Say Real Sociedad qualify or even one of the leading Bundesliag clubs, I believe he can join. Just thinking if Lew leaves this summer, would they take a gamble on Lukaku. Just a thought.

[Korea 734]

Yes, he can come to Chelsea and be 3rd or 4th string CF. THATS a good idea!

Or he could play with a team that can play to his strengths and gain first team exp..

[mediator 2,026]

Lukaku should stay in england to become homegrew player next year, so swansean and the europa league is a fucking great loan

[themightyblue 443]

Also from his perspective, he'll need to play week in week out considering it's world cup year, and thus rather than being in and out of the side here a loan is probably better for him. Lets hope they make the bid so all parties concerned are happy!

[Kojo 4,676]

I don't think another loan is good, if that's the case then send him to west brom for a 2nd season, because sending him to another team is sort of like, start your loan again and try to do all this again.

He feels he's already proven us wrong, and theirs no doubt he's wanting to play for us next season.

[Blue Armour 4,165]

I don't think another loan is good, if that's the case then send him to west brom for a 2nd season, because sending him to another team is sort of like, start your loan again and try to do all this again.

He feels he's already proven us wrong, and theirs no doubt he's wanting to play for us next season.

It would definitely be a better option than Swansea IMO...I think Steve Clarke has a good understanding of Lukaku and his abilities, and could aid in his progression.

[Peace. 4,352]

I don't understand what are the fuss all about.

I mean, it seems that everybody wants our loanees called-back to player here next season... Sometimes, I got the feeling that it's just for the sake of having youth. Yeah, I know, having our youth playing in the first team is a nice story... But is this really the best option for these youngsters ? And ultimately, is this the best solution for Chelsea Football Club ? Moreover, people are criticizing the board for this... I have criticized thet board in many ways, but, for once, I think they are doing the good thing. They got it right regarding Courtois, for two years in a row. This season, they got it right for Lukaku, de Bruyne and Chalobah. So why not have faith in their judgment, concerning these very cases ?

Undergoing a transition isn't as simple as throwing youngsters into the team — especially when you have to remain competitive, as us. Next year, our offensive department should be this one : Mata, Hazard, Oscar, Moses, Ba, ladyboy (at the light of what I said and his wages, don't think we'll be able to get rid of him) and maybe Marin. Now throw into the mixt Lukaku and de Bryune... Basically, nobody sees a problem with this ? Or am I the only one ? Whatever their potential, Hazard and Oscar are still inconsistent — just as Moses. That's normal, they are still young ; Messi and Ronaldo were also inconsistent at this age. Mata has also shown over the past two years that he was inconsistent, like it or not (even though, exhaustion has his part in it). The ladyboy is the ladyboy — we can't count upon him. And Ba cannot play every games.

That's why I don't think it would be a good solution, for us, to have Lukaku and de Bryune in the team next season, and thus having this forward department : Ba, ladyboy, Lukaku, Mata, Hazard, Oscar, de Bryune, Moses. That's too young. And as I have aforementioned, it'll cost us a lack of consistency... And I am prety sure it'll penalize us in the league — let alone the Champions League. And the lack of consistency is not only con. Indeed, we might have serious concerns over their gullibility.

So yeah, that's my opinion, having such an attacking department next season isn't the right thing to do, for Chelsea's sake. That's why, for our own sake (regardng next season, of course), it's better to have them on loan. To mine, when you're in transition, it means that you have young players along side old players and "mid-aged" players. That's how Ferguson does, that's how Barça does.. to mention a few.

Wanting to implant a long-term vision into the club is a good thing. Though, we must not rush up and skip mid-way steps. We need to build a young team on a long-term perspective — but we also need to stay competitive and to fight for the biggest trophies. Therefore, we need to find a balance between inexperienced players and "less" inexperienced players. Thus, I am agree with the board, on this case.

[The only place to be 11,313]

In terms of goals, Lukaku is having a better first (proper) season in the Premier League than Didier Drogba did. Now if all we want to look at is birth certificates and then set an arbitrary age for when a player is ready, or for the best average age of a squad then that's fine.

But the most important question is this - is he ready? Will he make our squad better?