Jump to content
Join Talk Chelsea and log in to join the CFC discussion! ×

Luke Shaw

Joker10

By Joker10,
in Transfer Archives

 Share

Recommended Posts

Barbara

Barbara 15,149

Posted
Posted

We should remember Azpilicueta's deal in moments like this.

we're talking about a defender. The signings of Courtois, Azpilicueta are the ones we should be aiming. I know they aren't that easy to find, but while I would love Shaw to be here, this £30m fee plus crazy high wages makes no sense whatsoever.

Why should we gamble so hard in a position we don't even have a problem now and we could get some other guy for a quick fix in the next few years?

This board has been brilliant with Mata's and Luiz's deals - which makes me think they could have milked de Bruyne more, but I think they allowed the kid to leave soon to a club he wanted, also he isn't proved like the other two, who are in theory in their peaks.

So not only we buy Cahills, Azpilis, Thibauts for the price we do - all of which who became very good players (Thibaut is nearly brilliant and Azpili must have the best attitude in football world) for literally a bargain, but we sell the likes of Mata and Luiz for almost £90m.

I understand @The only place to be change of mind about it. It's one thing to be willing to pay, I don't know £20m and some reasonable wages for/to an eighteen year old, but it's another completely different to pay 30 and have some astronomical wages coming with him... Yes, it would be great if he came here and 1) became what many expected him to become 2) contributed for real for the English value in the team (not only homegrown quota) 3) to have a true Blue wearing this shirt. But this is real world business, not some video game, and there's no reason why we should break the bank in a situation like this. The times of signing Torres for 50m are over... thankfully. Now we're wise and sneaky to make great deals like we did with Mata, de Bruyne and Luiz - to mention just a few players that contributed very much for us while they stayed (except Kevin) and contributed even better with their departure fee.

(btw is Luiz now the highest fee we received for a player we sold? and can you believe we got £10m more for him than we did for Mata? What's next?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Posted Images

yuvala

yuvala 2,167

Posted
Posted

We should remember Azpilicueta's deal in moments like this.

we're talking about a defender. The signings of Courtois, Azpilicueta are the ones we should be aiming. I know they aren't that easy to find, but while I would love Shaw to be here, this £30m fee plus crazy high wages makes no sense whatsoever.

Why should we gamble so hard in a position we don't even have a problem now and we could get some other guy for a quick fix in the next few years?

This board has been brilliant with Mata's and Luiz's deals - which makes me think they could have milked de Bruyne more, but I think they allowed the kid to leave soon to a club he wanted, also he isn't proved like the other two, who are in theory in their peaks.

So not only we buy Cahills, Azpilis, Thibauts for the price we do - all of which who became very good players (Thibaut is nearly brilliant and Azpili must have the best attitude in football world) for literally a bargain, but we sell the likes of Mata and Luiz for almost £90m.

I understand @The only place to be change of mind about it. It's one thing to be willing to pay, I don't know £20m and some reasonable wages for/to an eighteen year old, but it's another completely different to pay 30 and have some astronomical wages coming with him... Yes, it would be great if he came here and 1) became what many expected him to become 2) contributed for real for the English value in the team (not only homegrown quota) 3) to have a true Blue wearing this shirt. But this is business, not some video game, and there's no reason why we should break the bank in a situation like this. The times of signing Torres for 50m are over... thankfully. Now we're wise and sneaky to make great deals like we did with Mata, de Bruyne and Luiz - to mention just a few players that contributed very much for us while they stayed (except Kevin) and contributed even better with their departure fee.

(btw is Luiz now the highest fee we received for a player we sold? and can you believe we got £10m more for him than we did for Mata? What's next?)

Torres for 80? :ph34r:

.

.

.

.

.

I agree with your post, though I really cant decide whether I'd like to "take the hit" of paying that kind of money to secure his services or maybe I'd rather we bought some other option for more money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Barbara

Barbara 15,149

Posted
Posted

Torres for 80? :ph34r:

.

.

.

.

.

I agree with your post, though I really cant decide whether I'd like to "take the hit" of paying that kind of money to secure his services or maybe I'd rather we bought some other option for more money.

we aren't desperate, this isn't a position that will lead us to places we haven't been before. We won't become the next Barcelona because of Luke Shaw. I know £30m isn't even that much money when we sell bench defenders turned into midfielders for almost 50 and deadwood for almost 40, but why should we gamble?

Was he someone like Hazard, then I'd say, go for it. That's a position that if the promise becomes true it can change us. But for a LB? 18yo? Especially while there are areas we need massive reinforcement in times of FFP?

I don't know what kind of joke it's this PSG deal while they're fined by FFP (maybe I'm wrong and the whole FFP is a joke after all, but I'll keep believing it will be useful) and I know we don't have problems with FFP and we're far from having with the crazy amount of money we've made in the last five months alone, but we're not desperate yet to have a guy like him. We gambled with Atsu and Traore - that's how you gamble with youth. You have people with eyes in kids like that, bring them very young here to be considered homegrown, pay some derisive amount and see what happens.

Or you do it with foreigner older players such as Thibaut and Cesar for a sensible amount and see what happens (actually both are considered steals on our part imo, not simply sensible).

I want Shaw here just like the next person, but I want the deal to be good for us considering it's still just a gamble. If we keep making business like we've been doing, rivals will have even more reason to envy us and our Russian emperor ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
zolayes

zolayes 14,489

Posted
Posted

He was picked over Azpilicueta for Premier League team of the season by pretty much every pundit, even 'straight talkers' like Gary Neville picked him over Azpi. The guy replaced Mr Ashley-"I ain't done yet"-Cole for England and yet people are referring to him as a 'prospect' on here, lmao.

Why the sneer at Cole ,,, ????

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Viper22

Viper22 2,418

Posted
Posted

Ha! You didn't even acknowledge the existence of Ramires. Our board must do everything with their power to spare us the ignominy of watching Ramires in that pivot pretending to be a footballer.

That's because Ramires shouldn't even be defined as a footballer the way he's played this year. No decision making ability, no skill, no quality, just a big engine. He's our own Dirk Kuyt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Starman60

Starman60 1,343

Posted
Posted

No way is Shaw worth £30 million. We would be crazy to fork out that amount on an 18 year old. I dont care how good he is, the fee is seriously inflated.United are afraid they will miss the boat again if they dont buy big, so they will fork out monopoly money to try and secure signings. And Shaws wages will be £100,000 !!! He's a bloody left back, not a box to box utility player, or someone who can slot into the right back or centre back spot if needed. We have Aspi and Ivanovich who have both played more than one position this season and excelled in both. Plus, Evra has decided to stay for another season and he'll have a say in who plays left back. If United do sign him it's a lot of money to pay for a player who may not even make their bench. The reason I say that is I would much rather have a central defender on my bench than a LB who would not be able to turn a game around if we were losing.

I would love to see him at Chelsea, but £20 million tops for him, With our superb scouting network I'm sure we can find another gem or two in the mould of Aspi for a fraction of the cost

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LDN Blue

LDN Blue 7,903

Posted
Posted

I'd pay 50m for Shaw if it meant Azpilicueta is free to play RB.

I don't think I can handle another year of Ivanovic at fullback.

Very true. If Azpi is that good at LB he'll be just as/even better in his natural position (as many say for Ivanovic in fact at CB).. Which frees up the left-back role. With Cole not staying and Bertrand's future in the air.. We'll need 2 anyway. Shaw & someone else adds competition.. We could sign a player like Zhirkov who can play left-wing or left-back

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Styles

Styles 9,790

Posted
Posted

True that. I'd be happy with £20-25m and Bertrand though. Heck, what about offering them Marin or Moses to lower the fee?

You have to bear in mind the contracts Bertrand, Moses, Marin etc are on. Southampton most probably wouldn't want to pay what Chelsea do so it's not as easy as 25m + this player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jype

Jype 6,398

Posted
Posted

You have to bear in mind the contracts Bertrand, Moses, Marin etc are on. Southampton most probably wouldn't want to pay what Chelsea do so it's not as easy as 25m + this player.

None of those players are on more than £40k a week, could be even less. Southampton are paying somewhere around the £60-70k a week region to their best paid players so matching for example Bertrand's current deal would be easy for them if they wanted to. Also, with the new broadcasting deal plus the sales (Shaw, Lallana?) they're getting loads of extra money so Southampton can afford to start paying more in both transfer fees as well as wages, they already started last year with getting the likes of Dani Osvaldo for a club record fee and big wages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Styles

Styles 9,790

Posted
Posted

None of those players are on more than £40k a week, could be even less. Southampton are paying somewhere around the £60-70k a week region to their best paid players so matching for example Bertrand's current deal would be easy for them if they wanted to. Also, with the new broadcasting deal as well as the sales (Shaw, Lallana?) they're getting loads of extra money so Southampton can afford to start paying more in both transfer fees as well as wages, they already started last year with getting the likes of Dani Osvaldo for a club record fee and big wages.

All valid points. I think it'll come down to Southampton having a good academy and being able to produce their own players. I just can't see them replacing their 18 year old LB with a 25 year old player on a Chelsea salary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The only place to be

The only place to be 11,313

Posted
Posted

All valid points. I think it'll come down to Southampton having a good academy and being able to produce their own players. I just can't see them replacing their 18 year old LB with a 25 year old player on a Chelsea salary.

They have got another youngster called Matt Targett coming through as left-back. Some fans down there rate him as being another Chambers so whether they'd want a Bertrand is debatable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • 0 members are here!

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