Radamel Falcao

[themightyblue 443]

Almost nobody is worth 40-50M no matter what. There have been 4 players in history who have gone for 50M+. (Ronaldo, Torres, Ibrahimovic, and Kaka) Only 2 other players went between 40-50M (Figo and Zidane) 4 of those 6 players were Real Madrid buys and all 4 of those were previous Ballon D'or winners. Other teams are somehow still able to win trophies and get strikers that score goals without spending that much money on a single player. You can get players that will fit your team and not cost 50M pounds. It's amazing. Chelsea have gone after big-name strikers twice. We bought Shevchenko who was a ballon d'or winner and probably the best striker in the world in a league that's always been difficult to score in. He was almost useless for us. Then, we spent 50M on Torres who had scored 65 goals in just over 100 games in England, the starting striker for the best national team in the world. Utterly useless at Chelsea. (That's without mentioning Chris Sutton who cost a lot of money and was even worse than Torres). You're acting like this is a new situation. Like we've never seen a case where there was a striker that everyone thought was amazing who came to Chelsea and flopped. We don't need to spend 50M on players, especially a player who relies on service to score. (Which he absolutely does).

Here are the top goal-scorers in the Premier League and how much they cost

Suarez-22.8M, Van Persie-24M , Ba-Free, Michu-2M, Defoe-15.75M, Fellaini-15M-Not one costing more than 24M pounds (and Van Persie cost Arsenal about 1M pounds)

The five most expensive strikers in Premier League history

Torres, Shevchenko, Aguero, Robinho, Caroll...4 complete and utter flops out of 5.

This is why the board needs to be better than fans. They need to actually go out and find players that will fit into the (theoretical) manager's vision of the club, not just splurge on whoever the biggest name is.

@FAnta-whoscored.com has very good free access to statistics.

But why make the assumption that we want Falcao just because he's a bigger name. If we are to believe reports, Robbie and Avb have both said that they have want Falcao here. Falcao is one of if not the best striker on the planet. How do we know that Falcao isn't part of the manager vision's of the club?

The club clearly aren't just going for the biggest name's either. We've gone out and scouted players like Bony, Altidore, Huntelaar, Taison who aren't big names. The club aren't stupid, we won't buy a player just because there a big name (Before you bring up Torres, Wilkins said himself that Ancelotti had always wanted Torres). It's clear we've been working hard over these past few months to find some potential new strikers and if we end of signing Falcao its because he's been the best fit in the club's view. If anything, the club has matured on the transfer front these past few years. We could have easily just gone a 'splurged' money on players like Hulk in the summer, but we didn't and went for Victor Moses instead. If the club were using this bigger name policy then we would have just signed Maicon instead of someone like Azpi. As I said, if we sign Falcao it'll be because he's the right man, not just 'the name on everybody's lips'

[DarcyWard 13]

Falcao (26) is at his peak and is going to go downhill, We need a player that is going to move into his peak.

I would prefer Stephen El Shaarawy (20)

[BlueLyon 9,359]

Oh come on, Pastore's transfer wasn't all that bad, at least when compared to Torres. Pastore is only 23 years old and will improve. Also he still has resale value should PSG decide to get rid of him and his wages aren't too high either so I'm sure there would be a lot of clubs waiting in line to snap him up. Can't say the same for Fernando and we'd be lucky if someone were willing to take him even for free, without us having to pay the majority of his wages till 2016.

Regarding PSG paid 40mio, he is a flop. And whoever would buy Pastore now, he is not worth more than 20mio. Thats half of what Psg paid for. And no one would even pay 20mio for Pastore anyway. There are reports several italian teams are interested, but only for loan options.

[Jype 6,398]

Regarding PSG paid 40mio, he is a flop. And whoever would buy Pastore now, he is not worth more than 20mio. Thats half of what Psg paid for. And no one would even pay 20mio for Pastore anyway. There are reports several italian teams are interested, but only for loan options.

I know Pastore can be considered a flop but all I'm saying is he doesn't even come close to the nightmare we're having with Torres or some other expensive flops there have been over the years (not just with Chelsea). If PSG decide to cut their losses and sell him, they can still easily get 15-20m and probably wouldn't even have to compensate for his wages. If we sold Torres now, we'd get nothing for him and would have to pay half his wages for the remainder of his contract with Chelsea because there's no way anyone in their right mind is willing to pay him £175k a week now. I'm no mathematician but believe me when I say we're talking completely different numbers here in terms of money wasted.

Anyway, that's enough pointless discussion about Pastore and Torres in Falcao's topic or the moderators will get mad.

Falcao (26) is at his peak and is going to go downhill, We need a player that is going to move into his peak.

I would prefer Stephen El Shaarawy (20)

What the hell?

Since when is a 26-year-old too old? Go back to play Football Manager, in real life it doesn't work to have a squad full of teenagers. SES is a wonderful talent and I'm sure he would do a great job if only we were able to get him but your arguments are ridiculous.

[BlueLyon 9,359]

I know Pastore can be considered a flop but all I'm saying is he doesn't even come close to the nightmare we're having with Torres or some other expensive flops there have been over the years (not just with Chelsea). If PSG decide to cut their losses and sell him, they can still easily get 15-20m and probably wouldn't even have to compensate for his wages. If we sold Torres now, we'd get nothing for him and would have to pay half his wages for the remainder of his contract with Chelsea because there's no way anyone in their right mind is willing to pay him £175k a week now. I'm no mathematician but believe me when I say we're talking completely different numbers here in terms of money wasted.

Anyway, that's enough pointless discussion about Pastore and Torres in Falcao's topic or the moderators will get mad.

Yes, they are different flops I agree, we fucked up with Torres big time. I wish there would be some Anzi, Guanghzou or AL-whatever that would be ready to pay at least 15mio for ''Big name'' Torres.

Back on topic now.

[Rmpr 8,977]

Almost nobody is worth 40-50M no matter what. There have been 4 players in history who have gone for 50M+. (Ronaldo, Torres, Ibrahimovic, and Kaka) Only 2 other players went between 40-50M (Figo and Zidane) 4 of those 6 players were Real Madrid buys and all 4 of those were previous Ballon D'or winners. Other teams are somehow still able to win trophies and get strikers that score goals without spending that much money on a single player. You can get players that will fit your team and not cost 50M pounds. It's amazing. Chelsea have gone after big-name strikers twice. We bought Shevchenko who was a ballon d'or winner and probably the best striker in the world in a league that's always been difficult to score in. He was almost useless for us. Then, we spent 50M on Torres who had scored 65 goals in just over 100 games in England, the starting striker for the best national team in the world. Utterly useless at Chelsea. (That's without mentioning Chris Sutton who cost a lot of money and was even worse than Torres). You're acting like this is a new situation. Like we've never seen a case where there was a striker that everyone thought was amazing who came to Chelsea and flopped. We don't need to spend 50M on players, especially a player who relies on service to score. (Which he absolutely does).

Here are the top goal-scorers in the Premier League and how much they cost

Suarez-22.8M, Van Persie-24M , Ba-Free, Michu-2M, Defoe-15.75M, Fellaini-15M-Not one costing more than 24M pounds (and Van Persie cost Arsenal about 1M pounds)

The five most expensive strikers in Premier League history

Torres, Shevchenko, Aguero, Robinho, Caroll...4 complete and utter flops out of 5.

This is why the board needs to be better than fans. They need to actually go out and find players that will fit into the (theoretical) manager's vision of the club, not just splurge on whoever the biggest name is.

@FAnta-whoscored.com has very good free access to statistics.

Nobody is worth 50mi and nobody is worhty of making 10mi/year, it is not about that though. You simply forgot 4 hugely important factors: inflation, profit, increase of value and performance.

INFLATION: 4 of the 40mi+ you posted have 3 years old or less. For instance, there is a reason why all no movie before the 2000s make the top 10 of most profitable movies of all time and why in 2012, 2 movies made the list. We live in the world where money loses value little by little in each year. If you take in consideration Drogba and Essien, they would cost 40mi in January and Zidane would have cost more than the 80mi payed for CR7. Today, 40mi for a player is yesterday`s 25-30mi. Your list for most expensive players and EPL striker would change, and so would the flop list. People get caught up too much on the numbers...

PROFIT: When a Football Club goes out to buy a big name, it looks for some factors other than talent, etc. It is looking for a return, it can be inside the pitch or not. They bring new fans (specially from their nationalities) that spend big money on products and membership, sell an absurd amount of shirts, make advertisers and unconsciously relates them to their club and, lastly, improve their teams. Just like any investment, sometimes it works, some doesnt. However, it is not like the owner loses 100mi, he recovers most part with all the profit the player brought. Wgaes in the entire world works like this, if you have very profitable job for your boss you will make lots of money, if you have a non profitable job for him you dont. People have a hard timing understanding why some jobs are so highly underpaid, that is why.

INCREASE OF VALUE: How can a team win trophies without expensive players? That is impossible! What happens, is that the player wasnt worth that much when he came, but that doesnt mean they dont have a value of 40mi+. How much do you think Messi, Ribbery, Iniesta, RVP (with a decent contract), Gotze and Cavani would cost? The difference is there are Buyers (Chelsea, RM, ManCity) and Developers (Barcelona, Arsenal). Well, you might say the clubs who develop are the real deal, but that does not mean they dont have expenses or make mistakes in the process. Look how many strikers Arsenal bought in the hopes of him becoming Henry 2.0, when it happens it is highly profitable but until then, a lot of players have to suffer. It really does not matter which way you go, they both work. What you cant have is doubt (Chelsea and ManCity).

PERFORMANCE: It admires me you focusing on goals statistics when you are one of the first to criticize Falcao for not having anymore than finish. You are absolutely right saying a player needs way more than a great shot. However, you go and post the top scores, like they were good or you would like them in your team. Most of the players with a great scoring record, dont deliver the aspects a top team need.

Anyways, I think you are being overcrtitical of Falcao. He is not super adaptable but that does not mean he will become a flop or it would be the worst mistake ever to spend 47mi on him.

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

Nobody is worth 50mi and nobody is worhty of making 10mi/year, it is not about that though. You simply forgot 4 hugely important factors: inflation, profit, increase of value and performance.

INFLATION: 4 of the 40mi+ you posted have 3 years old or less. For instance, there is a reason why all no movie before the 2000s make the top 10 of most profitable movies of all time and why in 2012, 2 movies made the list. We live in the world where money loses value little by little in each year. If you take in consideration Drogba and Essien, they would cost 40mi in January and Zidane would have cost more than the 80mi payed for CR7. Today, 40mi for a player is yesterday`s 25-30mi. Your list for most expensive players and EPL striker would change, and so would the flop list. People get caught up too much on the numbers...

PROFIT: When a Football Club goes out to buy a big name, it looks for some factors other than talent, etc. It is looking for a return, it can be inside the pitch or not. They bring new fans (specially from their nationalities) that spend big money on products and membership, sell an absurd amount of shirts, make advertisers and unconsciously relates them to their club and, lastly, improve their teams. Just like any investment, sometimes it works, some doesnt. However, it is not like the owner loses 100mi, he recovers most part with all the profit the player brought. Wgaes in the entire world works like this, if you have very profitable job for your boss you will make lots of money, if you have a non profitable job for him you dont. People have a hard timing understanding why some jobs are so highly underpaid, that is why.

INCREASE OF VALUE: How can a team win trophies without expensive players? That is impossible! What happens, is that the player wasnt worth that much when he came, but that doesnt mean they dont have a value of 40mi+. How much do you think Messi, Ribbery, Iniesta, RVP (with a decent contract), Gotze and Cavani would cost? The difference is there are Buyers (Chelsea, RM, ManCity) and Developers (Barcelona, Arsenal). Well, you might say the clubs who develop are the real deal, but that does not mean they dont have expenses or make mistakes in the process. Look how many strikers Arsenal bought in the hopes of him becoming Henry 2.0, when it happens it is highly profitable but until then, a lot of players have to suffer. It really does not matter which way you go, they both work. What you cant have is doubt (Chelsea and ManCity).

PERFORMANCE: It admires me you focusing on goals statistics when you are one of the first to criticize Falcao for not having anymore than finish. You are absolutely right saying a player needs way more than a great shot. However, you go and post the top scores, like they were good or you would like them in your team. Most of the players with a great scoring record, dont deliver the aspects a top team need.

Inflation is real and player are generally costing more, but it's mostly because there are now a few more teams that have gone crazy. Zenit, City, and PSG have all joined the high spenders in the past few years You look at the spending on players now, and almost all of them are going to be poor value. A handful of teams overspend to a ridiculous level now. That doesn't mean we have to. Also, your inflation numbers are off. Inflation hasn't been 100% in the last decade. If you account for inflation, there are still only 6 players who would have cost more than 50M today (the 6 I mentioned in my first post).

(And BTW, in terms of yearly salaries, it's very different. Most players are actually worth what they are paid and top players are generally underpaid compare to how much money they bring in for the club.) And as for bringing new fans, that's what clubs like PSG and Zenit try to do by the big buys. Chelsea are already at a high level with as much exposure as possible.Buying a big name won't change anything. (And every player we buy from one country means that we don't buy another player from another country.)

You can't win trophies in England without expensive players. It's not possible but the notion of what an expensive player is has been so skewed by a few clubs, that people have lost all perspective. There are almost no transfers of 20M pounds. That's a very expensive player. (I think maybe 4 players in the Premier League went for more than that last season). 15-20M pounds still gets you very good players. Dembele, Cazorla, etc...10-15M pounds gets you starters-Steven Fletcher, Natasic, Giroud, Vertonghen, Lloris, etc...We have spent so much money that, spending 40M seems like nothing, but it's an enormous amount of money even in modern transfers. The average Premier League club spent 14M pounds in the summer. You can't win without ever spending big, but you certainly can win without ever spending more than 30-35M on anybody.

[kellzfresh 7,229]

Almost nobody is worth 40-50M no matter what. There have been 4 players in history who have gone for 50M+. (Ronaldo, Torres, Ibrahimovic, and Kaka) Only 2 other players went between 40-50M (Figo and Zidane) 4 of those 6 players were Real Madrid buys and all 4 of those were previous Ballon D'or winners. Other teams are somehow still able to win trophies and get strikers that score goals without spending that much money on a single player. You can get players that will fit your team and not cost 50M pounds. It's amazing. Chelsea have gone after big-name strikers twice. We bought Shevchenko who was a ballon d'or winner and probably the best striker in the world in a league that's always been difficult to score in. He was almost useless for us. Then, we spent 50M on Torres who had scored 65 goals in just over 100 games in England, the starting striker for the best national team in the world. Utterly useless at Chelsea. (That's without mentioning Chris Sutton who cost a lot of money and was even worse than Torres). You're acting like this is a new situation. Like we've never seen a case where there was a striker that everyone thought was amazing who came to Chelsea and flopped. We don't need to spend 50M on players, especially a player who relies on service to score. (Which he absolutely does).

Here are the top goal-scorers in the Premier League and how much they cost

Suarez-22.8M, Van Persie-24M , Ba-Free, Michu-2M, Defoe-15.75M, Fellaini-15M-Not one costing more than 24M pounds (and Van Persie cost Arsenal about 1M pounds)

The five most expensive strikers in Premier League history

Torres, Shevchenko, Aguero, Robinho, Caroll...4 complete and utter flops out of 5.

This is why the board needs to be better than fans. They need to actually go out and find players that will fit into the (theoretical) manager's vision of the club, not just splurge on whoever the biggest name is.

I still want falcao, but I have to admit, this was a very good post.

The only reason I think we shouldn't buy falcao is because some of the money can be used elsewhere in our team. Like a regista(benat, moutinho) or two strikers instead of only falcao.

[Stats 7,059]

Falcao (26) is at his peak and is going to go downhill, We need a player that is going to move into his peak.

I would prefer Stephen El Shaarawy (20)

LOL, I am sorry but that is quite a ridiculous and unfounded post. At 26 years of age he has years ahead to score goals. Did you not see Dorgba pull out stuff till up to age 33 with us. If Falcao comes to us we have a good 5-6 years to expect goals from him so where you got that from i don't know. Also, El Shaarawy has been performing brilliantly at Milan but Falcao would be the much better fit here for now due to being more of a complete fit and due to El Shaarawy young age best he stays where he is. RVP and Defoe are around the age of 30 and still scoring goals for fun and I am sure Falcao will. You need to stop being influenced by Football Manager, this is real life mate.

[BlueLyon 9,359]

I cant imagine another expensive flop to come, so maybe an alternate option is always good to take. Personaly, I would either take Cavani (if we will pay big), Jovetic or Shaarawy (if we will pay medium) or Bony if we will pay ''cheap''.

Bony at the moment would feel best option. We dont have a manager that would exactly know what striker we need and might spend big on completely useless player in januar. Once we will have permament manager (like Pep), he will know who to buy and even if that particular player will cost fortune, he will fit our system and manager will teach him well, so it wont be flop. Besides we will probably need some depth in striker area, and Bony seems to fit that bill. If he excels, he will be starter and next world class striker, if he does decent, we will still have chance to buy top striker in summer with Bony as backup. Its always good to have backup like Bony.

Also Bony seems to be quite a Chelsea fan and is excited about joining us, he wont have that pressure and probably would fit us just fine, as he has strengh, speed, dribbling and finishing. Sure he would need to addapt, but could do a Michu and start scoring for fun.

[Rmpr 8,977]

Inflation is real and player are generally costing more, but it's mostly because there are now a few more teams that have gone crazy. Zenit, City, and PSG have all joined the high spenders in the past few years You look at the spending on players now, and almost all of them are going to be poor value. A handful of teams overspend to a ridiculous level now. That doesn't mean we have to. Also, your inflation numbers are off. Inflation hasn't been 100% in the last decade. If you account for inflation, there are still only 6 players who would have cost more than 50M today (the 6 I mentioned in my first post).

(And BTW, in terms of yearly salaries, it's very different. Most players are actually worth what they are paid and top players are generally underpaid compare to how much money they bring in for the club.) And as for bringing new fans, that's what clubs like PSG and Zenit try to do by the big buys. Chelsea are already at a high level with as much exposure as possible.Buying a big name won't change anything. (And every player we buy from one country means that we don't buy another player from another country.)

You can't win trophies in England without expensive players. It's not possible but the notion of what an expensive player is has been so skewed by a few clubs, that people have lost all perspective. There are almost no transfers of 20M pounds. That's a very expensive player. (I think maybe 4 players in the Premier League went for more than that last season). 15-20M pounds still gets you very good players. Dembele, Cazorla, etc...10-15M pounds gets you starters-Steven Fletcher, Natasic, Giroud, Vertonghen, Lloris, etc...We have spent so much money that, spending 40M seems like nothing, but it's an enormous amount of money even in modern transfers. The average Premier League club spent 14M pounds in the summer. You can't win without ever spending big, but you certainly can win without ever spending more than 30-35M on anybody.

1. Inflation is solely determined by supply and demand, we are talking about player inflation, not overall. You proved my point, look at how many clubs are spending huge amounts of money, the demand has increased. Supply, on the other hand, has stayed the same or has decreased (try to find 5 excellent CBs). Counting all the factors, it has easily made a 30mi player ten years ago jump to 40mi+.

2. Chelsea has still a lot to grow, specially in the USA and Asia. Our popularity in South America is incredibely big, however we get schooled by the likes of Manure, RM and Barcelona in Asia (biggest market). Zenit, ManCity and PSG are way behind us, but we still have some work to do!

3. I completely agree. You can get great players for 20-25mi, easily. However, we usually have to overpay (just because everyone knows we have money) and we do have a tendency to buy Big Names. I never dennied we only buy super stars, I just dont think it is as bad as you think. The problem is we dont have a plan, we just go and buy whoever Roman thinks is cool.

4. The real problem is not buying expensive players, it is buying the wrong ones. I think Falcao can fit our system, but we need a manager with power. Someone who will choose one style and have power to put our shit executives in their proper place. Abramovich has my trust until the summer, if he still changes our managers like underwear, I will jump the Roman Out bandwaggon!

[Manuf 1,448]

1. Inflation is solely determined by supply and demand, we are talking about player inflation, not overall. You proved my point, look at how many clubs are spending huge amounts of money, the demand has increased. Supply, on the other hand, has stayed the same or has decreased (try to find 5 excellent CBs). Counting all the factors, it has easily made a 30mi player ten years ago jump to 40mi+.

there are plenty: Pepe, Ramos, Pique, Puyol, Terry, Luiz (I find him to be great when his mind is right), Vermaelen, Boateng, Badstuber, Vidic, Thiago Silva, Hummels, Kompany, Chiellini, Rami, Alex (shame we sold him), Subotic, Lescott

[The Skipper 20,593]

The "try finding 5 CBs" argument is a bit irrelevant since we're talking about strikers...

[communicate 2,703]

Not to prove anything though. Just to look at figures

Does open play excludes goal from corner and free kick ?

[themightyblue 443]

Key one for me is 1989 minutes compared to 1167 minutes

[nadavTKL 1,787]

24-14 (in matches)

It supposed to be a good comparison for our striker?

[Sheva. 5,373]

A comparison with Falcao is not fair to most strikers lol, compare with Man city strikers or something

Anyway i was going to post here on Thursday how he didn't feature in the EL yet again, wasn't even in the squad.

[Leif 6,006]

Torres has more goals from open play than Falcao this season.

If Torres had been taking our penalties all season, like Falcao does at Atletico, Torres would likely be ahead on goals period.

Torres offers his team more than Falcao offers his. (All Falcao offers is finishing. Really. That's it.) Despite finishing being an attribute Falcao is miles ahead with when compared to Torres this season, Torres is finding the back of the net more often.

All of this while Atletico Madrid play to every strength Falcao has and craft out almost every move exclusively for him.

And people want Roman to pay £40m for this guy in January?

Wut?

I'd understand a bit more wanting to get him in the Summer (although it would still be a strange move in my opinion considering how one-dimensional he is), and trust me - I want this season to be Torres's last; but maybe Falcao just isn't the answer at all?

Infact, reading back and taking everything into account, I've changed my mind. I don't actually think Falcao is a great finisher. I believe he's simply a good finisher who has a great technique, causing him to score some spectacular goals. And that's it. He's not as good as his stats suggest. The fact that teams play FOR him means he gets SO many chances and shots that he simply HAS to score a high amount. Every other attribute really must be questioned.

There's a reason he's never played for a very top club. Managers can see through the hype which fogs many fans' view on him.