Jump to content

Kevin de Bruyne


Madmax
 Share

Recommended Posts

To be brutally honest he will just go down the same route as di Santo, knowing our club. Limitless potential curtailed by reserve football.

He'll be loaned to Anderlecht and after the loan spell the club would take the decision. Though honestly, I'd be gutted if he was another Di Santo...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I bet the only reason we have not signed him is because we want to loan him to their arch-rivals Anderlecht.

It's kind of stupid anyway, why not just loan him back to Genk ffs?

Because Anderlecht wanted him on loan as a part of Lukaku transfer if the rumors are to be trusted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They can not afford him theire selfs, so they need to do it this way..

I hope were taking an clausule with the sell of him, no loan back to Belgium unless Genk..

Yeah.

Wouldn't be good if Anderlecht gets De Bruyne on loan...

But I do think Anderlecht is thinking about that deal.

Selling Lukaku to Chelsea, getting De Bruyne on loan from Chelsea.

There was an article today in a belgian news paper: Anderlecht manager Herman Van Holsbeeck flies to Monaco today to talk about transferring Lukaku to Chelsea. BUT at the same time, also Kevin De Bruyne's manager is in Monaco.

Anderlecht would like to sell Lukaku to Chelsea, to buy De Bruyne with the money they get for him, but Chelsea wants De Bruyne as well.

They would put him on loan to Anderlecht, but Genk does not want to sell De Bruyne to Chelsea if they'll put him on loan to Anderlecht afterwards...

IF Chelsea wants to put De Bruyne on loan, it would have to be to Genk, otherwise they won't sell him to Chelsea.

To be continued I guess...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

De Brune excites a lot, he seems so direct and has great technical ability. Anderlecht are being incredibly stupid if they think Genk will sell him to Chelsea if they think he will end up on loan back in Belgium straight away.

What would really be funny is if we weren't aware of De Bruyne at all until Anderlecht proposed a deal and then we just said 'nah we'll have him as well'. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i would prefer him to stay at Chelsea and be given chances in the first team immediately if we were to buy him , but if we do feel the need to loan out yet another youth player why not loan him to Genk then both parties are happy .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is not about us needing to loan someone but Anderlecht wanting a forward player in return for us taking Lukaku from them. I would say give them Lalkovic on loan for a year and keep De Bruyne with ourselves. This way Genk would be happy too that we are not sending their player directly to their title rivals !!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

De Bruyne ..I fail to see the sense in buying him and leaving out on loan in Belgium . We might sign him on a 4y deal then leave him there for a year so really we are getting him on a 3 y deal or put another way increasing his cost by 25% . More vitally the Belgian league is far below the level of the PL. If we buy him it needs to be now , so he can spend the pre season with us . Get to know the rest of the squad and our training and playing style.

If it proves he needs a loan period to gain more English experience then the time for that would be next January with an English club and manager

we could trust. Clubs such as Swansea , Bolton or Burnley might fit that criteria.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah.

Wouldn't be good if Anderlecht gets De Bruyne on loan...

But I do think Anderlecht is thinking about that deal.

Selling Lukaku to Chelsea, getting De Bruyne on loan from Chelsea.

There was an article today in a belgian news paper: Anderlecht manager Herman Van Holsbeeck flies to Monaco today to talk about transferring Lukaku to Chelsea. BUT at the same time, also Kevin De Bruyne's manager is in Monaco.

Anderlecht would like to sell Lukaku to Chelsea, to buy De Bruyne with the money they get for him, but Chelsea wants De Bruyne as well.

They would put him on loan to Anderlecht, but Genk does not want to sell De Bruyne to Chelsea if they'll put him on loan to Anderlecht afterwards...

IF Chelsea wants to put De Bruyne on loan, it would have to be to Genk, otherwise they won't sell him to Chelsea.

To be continued I guess...

Drogba is in Monaco as well. Cannot be a coincidence. Definitely something going on there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • 0 members are here!

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

talk chelse forums

We get it, advertisements are annoying!
Talk Chelsea relies on revenue to pay for hosting and upgrades. While we try to keep adverts as unobtrusive as possible, we need to run ad's to make sure we can stay online because over the years costs have become very high.

Could you please allow adverts on this website and help us by switching your ad blocker off.

KTBFFH
Thank You