Frank Lampard

[The Skipper 20,609]

People do realise that most of those that want Lampard to stay don't want exactly want or expect him to start or play in every game right? If Lampard is going to sign, I would still want us to sign a midfielder in the Modric ilk, especially if we are continuing with the pivot. Lampard needs to stay around to help the club transition into the next level, he'd be an excellent squad player.

[Special Juan 28,141]

People do realise that most of those that want Lampard to stay don't want exactly want or expect him to start or play in every game right? If Lampard is going to sign, I would still want us to sign a midfielder in the Modric ilk, especially if we are continuing with the pivot. Lampard needs to stay around to help the club transition into the next level, he'd be an excellent squad player.

Exactly. I wouldn't expect him to start every game, but we must remember he is still a goal threat whether starting (In the right position) or from the bench. Frank needs to be in and around this club he's a role model and I am sure he would give brilliant guidance to the young lads.

The big picture is, sign him up, he won us the Everton game and scores crucial goals. What's not to get?

[The only place to be 11,313]

Exactly. I wouldn't expect him to start every game, but we must remember he is still a goal threat whether starting (In the right position) or from the bench. Frank needs to be in and around this club he's a role model and I am sure he would give brilliant guidance to the young lads.

The big picture is, sign him up, he won us the Everton game and scores crucial goals. What's not to get?

How much should the club commit to a bench player per year? £5 million? That's in addition to the £20 million (plus wages) we're going probably end up spending on his replacement.

People do realise that most of those that want Lampard to stay don't want exactly want or expect him to start or play in every game right? If Lampard is going to sign, I would still want us to sign a midfielder in the Modric ilk, especially if we are continuing with the pivot. Lampard needs to stay around to help the club transition into the next level, he'd be an excellent squad player.

Why does the club need him around if we're transitioning to the 'next level'? If we're going to stick with the 4231 (which Mourinho played last night) then is Lampard and effective playmaker? I don't think he is. I don't think he's the type of passer we need in that position - yes he can spray the ball around but I don't think that's what you want in that position.

If we're talking about transition, then why don't we look at the players we already have like De Bruyne, Chalobah, Ake, Piazon and maybe even Oscar? When you start a new job, do you want the old guy sticking around?

I think he's a good role model, but we seem to have players with the right attitude coming through like Mata and Lukaku. Yes the Everton game was great but that was almost 20 games ago - the game after that was a 1-0 defeat to QPR which Frank started in. Has there been a game since where he's given a great performance? Stoke away maybe but they were woeful in midfield.

I'd love him to stick around for years but the question of what best serves the club needs to be asked. And the same will go for JT next year.

[Special Juan 28,141]

How much should the club commit to a bench player per year? £5 million? That's in addition to the £20 million (plus wages) we're going probably end up spending on his replacement.

Christ, I don't hold the purse strings for CFC, nor do I have any idea what should be committed too in terms of price. You are talking as if we are discussing Florent Malouda here, this is Frank Lampard and putting his legend status aside the bloke still offers massive amounts on the field.

We have made enough purchases of late that can be molded into his replacement ala Oscar and Kevin De Bruyne. But that doesn't mean he should be discarded as of now, the discarding should come to dead wood like Benayoun and washed up people like Mr Torres.

[The Skipper 20,609]

Why does the club need him around if we're transitioning to the 'next level'? If we're going to stick with the 4231 (which Mourinho played last night) then is Lampard and effective playmaker? I don't think he is. I don't think he's the type of passer we need in that position - yes he can spray the ball around but I don't think that's what you want in that position. If we're talking about transition, then why don't we look at the players we already have like De Bruyne, Chalobah, Ake, Piazon and maybe even Oscar? When you start a new job, do you want the old guy sticking around? I think he's a good role model, but we seem to have players with the right attitude coming through like Mata and Lukaku. Yes the Everton game was great but that was almost 20 games ago - the game after that was a 1-0 defeat to QPR which Frank started in. Has there been a game since where he's given a great performance? Stoke away maybe but they were woeful in midfield. I'd love him to stick around for years but the question of what best serves the club needs to be asked. And the same will go for JT next year.

Because in a transition, you don't throw away your core from the get go. The best way to allow a transition to become successful is to slowly integrate new blood into the team - you don't just get rid of the core of the club like that. Lampard has proved this season in games like against the Everton game you mentioned where he did single handily win us the game that he can still add value to the squad.

Chalobah, Ake, Piazon shouldn't even be mentioned as both you and I know that they are nowhere near ready to be thrown into the team. They aren't even ready to be effective squad players IMO - and that's where Lampard and his experience comes in the game. My point is that there is no harm in signing Lampard on for another year as he is easily good enough to be great squad player for us - essentially playing the role that Giggs does for Manchester United. That's why most people want Lampard to stay on;

I would honestly rather us hang on to Lampard who is decent in the pivot than go out there and buy a second rate player to replace his likely role in the squad next season, simply because Lampard is still a very decent player, has bags of experience, still grabs vital goals and most important of all is a fantastic role model to the younger ones coming through.

I honestly don't think we have enough experience in the squad without the likes of JT, Lampard, Terry and Cole. I want these four to stay for just a few more season to make the transition of a new CFC smoother. That is my main gripe with Lampard leaving.

At least having the four of Lampard, JT, Terry and Cole until next season is essential IMO.

At this very moment, these four are the soul of our club.

[xPetrCechx 13,570]

THEY MUST TO STAY FOR JOSE!

[The only place to be 11,313]

Christ, I don't hold the purse strings for CFC, nor do I have any idea what should be committed too in terms of price. You are talking as if we are discussing Florent Malouda here, this is Frank Lampard and putting his legend status aside the bloke still offers massive amounts on the field.

We have made enough purchases of late that can be molded into his replacement ala Oscar and Kevin De Bruyne. But that doesn't mean he should be discarded as of now, the discarding should come to dead wood like Benayoun and washed up people like Mr Torres.

You'll not get an argument from me regarding Benayoun, Torres and Malouda but surely if you're going to suggest keeping someone around you have to look at the implications of that. You say he offers massive amounts on the field - does he do that consistently enough? I'm not sure. Yes he was great against Everton, but our midfield was god-awful for the first 30 minutes and we were lucky to still be in it. The next game was QPR at home - was he great in that?

Everyone wants Frank to stay - but is it best for the club going forward? I'm still not sure.

[Special Juan 28,141]

You'll not get an argument from me regarding Benayoun, Torres and Malouda but surely if you're going to suggest keeping someone around you have to look at the implications of that. You say he offers massive amounts on the field - does he do that consistently enough? I'm not sure. Yes he was great against Everton, but our midfield was god-awful for the first 30 minutes and we were lucky to still be in it. The next game was QPR at home - was he great in that?

Everyone wants Frank to stay - but is it best for the club going forward? I'm still not sure.

Getting rid of wage huggers and people who offer nothing like the three we have spoken about goes along way towards making Lampard an offer of an extended contract. These players are eating away at our constantly huge wage bill, yet I know for a fact Frank offers more than those mentioned and can still be a threat from the bench if new faces are brought in.

You are singling out certain performances from Frank without looking at the big picture. Granted he's had poor games, Christ haven't most of them this season.....But as a package his pros far out way his cons and we should at least look at the example of United by giving players who can still do it what they deserve.

[The only place to be 11,313]

Because in a transition, you don't throw away your core from the get go. The best way to allow a transition to become successful is to slowly integrate new blood into the team - you don't just get rid of the core of the club like that. Lampard has proved this season in games like against the Everton game you mentioned where he did single handily win us the game that he can still add value to the squad.

That game was almost 20 fixtures ago - since then has he been someone you can look to build around? Is he actually part of the core of our team now? Most fans recognise that the midfield is our biggest weakness, yet he's part of that isn't he? Isn't it our core which is weak? Isn't that what we need to replace because we have all the shiny accouterments surrounding the core but not the core itself.

Chalobah, Ake, Piazon shouldn't even be mentioned as both you and I know that they are nowhere near ready to be thrown into the team. They aren't even ready to be effective squad players IMO - and that's where Lampard and his experience comes in the game. My point is that there is no harm in signing Lampard on for another year as he is easily good enough to be great squad player for us - essentially playing the role that Giggs does for Manchester United. That's why most people want Lampard to stay on;

Don't tell me what I do and don't know, especially if you're going to be wrong about it. I think Chalobah is ready, I've long said it. People keep wanting to take things slowly....because that's worked so fucking well with all the other youngsters we've had come through. Ake might still need more time but he stepped up against Boro - why not give him another shot?

And Piazon is getting starts for a team who would probably give us a run for our money on current form. I've never thought he was as good as the hype suggested, but he's put in a couple of good shifts and surprised me. Why not give him a shot?

As for Lampard's experience - where was that against QPR? Before that game people were saying that he needed to be kept around to tell the young players and the foreign players what certain games meant to this club and it's fans.

Google fucking Maps would've done a better job of telling these players what this fixture meant to the club because it was the most pathetic performance I've seen in years.

I would honestly rather us hang on to Lampard who is decent in the pivot than go out there and buy a second rate player to replace his likely role in the squad next season, simply because Lampard is still a very decent player, has bags of experience, still grabs vital goals and most important of all is a fantastic role model to the younger ones coming through.

'Decent in the pivot'. That's the new standard for our midfield is it? Decent.

That's what earns you £80k-£100k p/w at Chelsea Football Club in 2013?

I won't disagree that he's a good role model, but so is Mata. So is Lukaku. So is Cech. So is Cole. You're at Chelsea - if you can't work out on your own that you need to work harder than the rest then fuck off.

I do sometimes wonder how much people believe this stuff to be true, and how much is down to Football Manager. We need to keep Lampard around so we can right-click on his name and make him mentor John Swift.

Isn't the flipside of this that we have a person who costs £5 million p/a in the same position as 3-4 youngsters who also play that position for the same amount? That's one more high-priced 35 year old player in front of them.

I honestly don't think we have enough experience in the squad without the likes of JT, Lampard, Terry and Cole. I want these four to stay for just a few more season to make the transition of a new CFC smoother. That is my main gripe with Lampard leaving.

Because god knows you can't win anything with kids (and even if Lamps left we'd still have plenty of experience in Cole, Cech, Mikel, JT, Ivanovic, Cahill, Ba and even Torres).

At least having the four of Lampard, JT, Terry and Cole until next season is essential IMO.

At this very moment, these four are the soul of our club.

No.

No they're not. The supporters are.

These are very good players without doubt but when they're dead and buried the club will still be here. It was here before any of them arrived too.

At some point you have to move on from them and now is a good time to start doing that.

[The only place to be 11,313]

Getting rid of wage huggers and people who offer nothing like the three we have spoken about goes along way towards making Lampard an offer of an extended contract. These players are eating away at our constantly huge wage bill, yet I know for a fact Frank offers more than those mentioned and can still be a threat from the bench if new faces are brought in.

You are singling out certain performances from Frank without looking at the big picture. Granted he's had poor games, Christ haven't most of them this season.....But as a package his pros far out way his cons and we should at least look at the example of United by giving players who can still do it what they deserve.

You say I'm singling out certain examples, but you're doing the exact same thing when talking about United. They've been happy to let players (legends even) leave when they felt they needed to move on. Scholes and Giggs are the exception, not the rule.

Who was the famous quote (which I'm paraphrasing) 'you'll never win anything with kids' said about? They let some big players go in the summer before that quote was uttered because they looked at what they had and put their faith in it. We're afraid to do that despite us having as fine a crop of young talent that I can remember including one young lad who I truly believe can be Chelsea and England captain.

But he's not won any Champions Leagues yet so he can fuck off can't he.

[JDY 1,290]

I honestly don't think we have enough experience in the squad without the likes of JT, Lampard, Terry and Cole. I want these four to stay for just a few more season to make the transition of a new CFC smoother. That is my main gripe with Lampard leaving.

At least having the four of Lampard, JT, Terry and Cole until next season is essential IMO.

At this very moment, these four are the soul of our club.

You mean like last season when we had a manager in place who had a clear vision for the club, only for the likes of Lampard and Cole to be so disrespectful to the point where the club had no choice but to sack him? You never hear of owners sacking players midseason but if he could've Lampard and Cole would've been out last season, not AVB.

I agree that having experience is good, but what good is this experience if they are only disrupting the club and preventing them from moving forward? Please do not point to Manchester United as the example for giving older players new contracts. There is only one man in charge at United, and that's Fergie. No one dares challenge him, and if they do, they are out. What happened when Beckham got too big for his boots? Sold. What happened to Roy Keane when he started to question Fergie? Out. Keeping the players that will benefit the club going forward is one thing, keeping players that think they can manipulate situations because they have influence at a club is another.

The difference with us is that through the flurry of manager changes, only the old guard have remained, thus giving them a sense of power at the club. This is the main problem with Chelsea at the moment. Last season we brought in a manager who would've been good for us long term, only for that to be ruined by a few senior players who showed a complete lack of respect and thought they could call the shots.

Some of you may not like AVB, but at the end of the day he was only here to deliver what you are all after in our next manager.

[Hutcho 8,443]

People do realise that most of those that want Lampard to stay don't want exactly want or expect him to start or play in every game right? If Lampard is going to sign, I would still want us to sign a midfielder in the Modric ilk, especially if we are continuing with the pivot. Lampard needs to stay around to help the club transition into the next level, he'd be an excellent squad player.

This, i don't get why some people are so against lampard having a squad player role. If lampard doesn't wan't that then he can decide to turn down an offer. But some people really want him gone for some reason. Lampard still has a big role, and there is few i would rather see us put on with 15 mins left and we are in need of a goal.

I don't think anyone wants our best pivot next season to be lampard mikel or whatever, and we all know we need strengthening in there. I hope we get KDB in there. There are much bigger priorities to get rid of people. And one of our greatest players ever is not one of them...

queue response of, "him being a club legend shouldn't matter".

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

You say I'm singling out certain examples, but you're doing the exact same thing when talking about United. They've been happy to let players (legends even) leave when they felt they needed to move on. Scholes and Giggs are the exception, not the rule.

Who was the famous quote (which I'm paraphrasing) 'you'll never win anything with kids' said about? They let some big players go in the summer before that quote was uttered because they looked at what they had and put their faith in it. We're afraid to do that despite us having as fine a crop of young talent that I can remember including one young lad who I truly believe can be Chelsea and England captain.

But he's not won any Champions Leagues yet so he can fuck off can't he.

You can't win with kids anymore. That quote was from 1995 and in that time, you could win with youth. Most teams brought up their own players. Transfers were tiny and cheap. The league was still largely British. You can't compete with top class players by bringing through kids as regular starters anymore. Other clubs are buying top players every year. There is a massive gap between potential and actual performance.

@JDY I have no idea how you can read what happened last season like that. It was up to AVB to take control of the team and he couldn't handle basic communication. Not just with Lampard or Cole but with Alex and Anelka and others. He couldn't get his message across and he didn't seem to even try. He was at fault for that. Lampard was benched under RDM earlier this year and we heard nothing. Why? RDM communicated with Lampard and unlike under AVB, we actually played well. AVB played a style that didn't suite the club and we played some awful football. Saying that the situation was ruined because of senior players is simply ridiculous.

[The only place to be 11,313]

You can't win with kids anymore. That quote was from 1995 and in that time, you could win with youth.

Actually, you couldn't. That quote is a misnomer because that team wasn't just kids. They had players like Schmiechel, Bruce, Pallister, Irwin, Cantona, Keane and even Kiggs and Sharpe who were all experienced players much like Cech, Terry, Cole, Mikel, Mata, Ivanovic, Cahill and even Luiz would be for us.

Most teams brought up their own players. Transfers were tiny and cheap. The league was still largely British. You can't compete with top class players by bringing through kids as regular starters anymore. Other clubs are buying top players every year. There is a massive gap between potential and actual performance.

Again, we need to strike the right balance. I'm not saying we shouldn't be looking in the transfer market, but that we should also be looking at our academy. All those players we want to spend millions of pounds on did come through academies though and we've spent a lot of time and money on identifying and recruiting as many as we can before they join someone else's setup.

[robsblubot 3,595]

You say I'm singling out certain examples, but you're doing the exact same thing when talking about United. They've been happy to let players (legends even) leave when they felt they needed to move on. Scholes and Giggs are the exception, not the rule.

Who was the famous quote (which I'm paraphrasing) 'you'll never win anything with kids' said about? They let some big players go in the summer before that quote was uttered because they looked at what they had and put their faith in it. We're afraid to do that despite us having as fine a crop of young talent that I can remember including one young lad who I truly believe can be Chelsea and England captain.

But he's not won any Champions Leagues yet so he can fuck off can't he.

Just out of curiosity, who would that be? (I'm not up-to-date with the youngster atm)