Ross Barkley

[Chelsea? 892]

2 minutes ago, Polo7 said:

What??? We arent loaning Costa. We are selling to A.Madrid who are then loaning to Everton as they cant add him to their squad.

Atletico can't loan him apparently. So the loan has to be from us

[Jype 6,398]

52 minutes ago, Chelsea? said:

Atletico can't loan him apparently. So the loan has to be from us

Atletico managed to loan Vitolo to Las Palmas just fine, so why couldn't they do the same with Costa?

[BlueLyon 9,359]

Im completely lost why would we need Barkley?

If we are signing Ox and Drinkwater, plus Cahill and few youth players, we have more than enough english players. 

Why the hell will we spend 30m on average player when we can eventualy get RLC, Baker and Palmer back. 

This club would now spend 100m+ on Ox, Drinkwater and Barkley, but neither improves our squad apart from depth. 

Fucking idiotic. Meanwhile even Pool is buying Keita and Lemar, while also buying english player in Solanke, except they paid just few millions on him. 

[lucio 5,370]

4 minutes ago, BlueLyon said:

Im completely lost why would we need Barkley?

If we are signing Ox and Drinkwater, plus Cahill and few youth players, we have more than enough english players. 

Why the hell will we spend 30m on average player when we can eventualy get RLC, Baker and Palmer back. 

This club would now spend 100m+ on Ox, Drinkwater and Barkley, but neither improves our squad apart from depth. 

Fucking idiotic. Meanwhile even Pool is buying Keita and Lemar, while also buying english player in Solanke, except they paid just few millions on him. 

arguably we could use someone of his ilk, who can attract 2-3 defenders and dribble, this is more evident when hazard is out

[bluesman2610 1,217]

1 hour ago, BlueLyon said:

Im completely lost why would we need Barkley?

If we are signing Ox and Drinkwater, plus Cahill and few youth players, we have more than enough english players. 

Why the hell will we spend 30m on average player when we can eventualy get RLC, Baker and Palmer back. 

This club would now spend 100m+ on Ox, Drinkwater and Barkley, but neither improves our squad apart from depth. 

Fucking idiotic. Meanwhile even Pool is buying Keita and Lemar, while also buying english player in Solanke, except they paid just few millions on him. 

Pool also has more English players in their team so they can afford to buy foreign players out team however is made up of foreign players with little to no englishmen. We went from being bale to send the most or second most english players away with national side to having one player in the team, that is kind of disgraceful. Now I'm not saying to have average English players in the team just so we contribute but Ox and Barkley I feel have a future in 3 Lions set up if they hit their potential both currently need a change of scenery

[AK-3001 286]

5 hours ago, bluesman2610 said:

Pool also has more English players in their team so they can afford to buy foreign players out team however is made up of foreign players with little to no englishmen. We went from being bale to send the most or second most english players away with national side to having one player in the team, that is kind of disgraceful. Now I'm not saying to have average English players in the team just so we contribute but Ox and Barkley I feel have a future in 3 Lions set up if they hit their potential both currently need a change of scenery

Homegrowns don't need to be Englishmen. 

 

At this moment, our HG players are Fabregas, Moses and Cahill. If we sign Ox and Drinkwater, that takes the number to 5. Which is very healthy.

 

In the PL, a club has to have not more than 17 Non HomeGrown players. Club needs to have at least 4 HG players and the rest 4 can be covered by U-21 players if the club doesn't have more than 4 HG players. Our U21 this season are Kenedy, Musonda and Christensen at the moment.

 

All in all, we have a very healthy squad balance in that sense. 

 

 

It doesn't matter if we don't have a player from England or have only one. That tells us more about the National Team than our squad to be honest.

[bluesman2610 1,217]

1 hour ago, AK-3001 said:

Homegrowns don't need to be Englishmen. 

 

At this moment, our HG players are Fabregas, Moses and Cahill. If we sign Ox and Drinkwater, that takes the number to 5. Which is very healthy.

 

In the PL, a club has to have not more than 17 Non HomeGrown players. Club needs to have at least 4 HG players and the rest 4 can be covered by U-21 players if the club doesn't have more than 4 HG players. Our U21 this season are Kenedy, Musonda and Christensen at the moment.

 

All in all, we have a very healthy squad balance in that sense. 

 

 

It doesn't matter if we don't have a player from England or have only one. That tells us more about the National Team than our squad to be honest.

I'm well aware of what constitutes homegrown vs Englishmen - my point in there was a time when Chelsea had at least 4 players in the England first 11 and that was something to be proud of because when they did well it reflected well on Chelsea . Sorry that i'd like one of the top clubs in England to have a few more Englishmen in the team contributing to the national team. I get that Chelsea is a diverse team always has been especially after Mourinho but in terms of improving that National side of the club we support if Gary Cahill is our only representation that is embarrassing and if you can't see that oh well. But thank you for the discussion

[OhForAGreavsie 5,773]

11 hours ago, Blusan Alamb said:

We could use the Diego Costa loan deal to get Barkley.

Leaving aside Diego's situation, that would have to start with us actually wanting Barkley. Ronald Koeman's comment, quoted above, gives me hope that in fact we don't. Unless we've decided, for tactical reasons, to place our bid on deadline day. 

[Strike 6,958]

1 hour ago, bluesman2610 said:

I'm well aware of what constitutes homegrown vs Englishmen - my point in there was a time when Chelsea had at least 4 players in the England first 11 and that was something to be proud of because when they did well it reflected well on Chelsea . Sorry that i'd like one of the top clubs in England to have a few more Englishmen in the team contributing to the national team. I get that Chelsea is a diverse team always has been especially after Mourinho but in terms of improving that National side of the club we support if Gary Cahill is our only representation that is embarrassing and if you can't see that oh well. But thank you for the discussion

Even before Mourinho, Chelsea were a continental team. I am okay with a spine without English players. Times have changed and signing good English players is tough now. Look at our pursuits of Shaw, Stones who were young prospects, not even established players. 

[Reddish-Blue 2,212]

12 hours ago, bluesman2610 said:

Pool also has more English players in their team so they can afford to buy foreign players out team however is made up of foreign players with little to no englishmen. We went from being bale to send the most or second most english players away with national side to having one player in the team, that is kind of disgraceful. Now I'm not saying to have average English players in the team just so we contribute but Ox and Barkley I feel have a future in 3 Lions set up if they hit their potential both currently need a change of scenery

Barkley doesn't fit our system.

He's not a winger and He's not defensively good enough to play in a midfield-2 alongside Kante. 

If we're going to sign homegrown players, at least sign someone who is useful. 

[Reddish-Blue 2,212]

13 hours ago, Jype said:

Atletico managed to loan Vitolo to Las Palmas just fine, so why couldn't they do the same with Costa?

Maybe the rules are different for domestic and international loans? 

[manpe 10,855]

26 minutes ago, Reddish-Blue said:

Barkley doesn't fit our system.

He's not a winger and He's not defensively good enough to play in a midfield-2 alongside Kante. 

If we're going to sign homegrown players, at least sign someone who is useful. 

We could have said the same thing about Fabregas tbh. Without having seen him play in a midfield 2 or in the front three, we wouldn't believe he could be of any use. If we did get him, I think he would play in a number of positions - CAM in 3-5-2, CM or RAM in 3-4-3. But I agree, he wouldn't be tailor-made for any position in our system, he would need to be moulded and eased in slowly. Would be easier to fit him in if our system had a dedicated nr.10, but it doesn't. I don't think we need him, we will (hopefully) have Ox covering a number of positions and Drinkwater as a natural tried and tested in a midfield 2. Wish we were linked to a LWB instead, but there is nothing.

[Blusan Alamb 295]

 

[Chelsea Legend 11 4,062]

Barkley doesn't fit our system.
He's not a winger and He's not defensively good enough to play in a midfield-2 alongside Kante. 
If we're going to sign homegrown players, at least sign someone who is useful. 

Sounds like the same rhetoric they used to describe Moses, Alonso and Luiz last year.

Conte knows how to improve players and get the most out of them. You think the same can be said about Moyes, Martinez and Koeman?

There is a very good chance he would flourish under Conte since much of what we do in games is rehearsed over and over again. He'll be required to use less of his instincts and more of his skill on the ball. I'd rather him than Drinkwater any day of the week.

[Reddish-Blue 2,212]

1 minute ago, Chelsea Legend 11 said:

 

Sounds like the same rhetoric they used to describe Moses, Alonso and Luiz last year.

Conte knows how to improve players and get the most out of them. You think the same can be said about Moyes, Martinez and Koeman?

There is a very good chance he would flourish under Conte since much of what we do in games is rehearsed over and over again. He'll be required to use less of his instincts and more of his skill on the ball. I'd rather him than Drinkwater any day of the week.

 

We'll see who the club picks.  A proven premier league midfielder or a 23-year old who still doesn't have a defined position?

[Jype 6,398]

15 minutes ago, Reddish-Blue said:

We'll see who the club picks.  A proven premier league midfielder or a 23-year old who still doesn't have a defined position?

From what I've understood the club are interested in signing both, not just one. Drinkwater is obviously the club's priority and he's close to signing but for now I wouldn't rule out Barkley joining too. 

Ross Barkley would be a luxury player to add depth and tactical variety. Unlike for Drinkwater I can't really see a clear role for Barkley in the squad but I have a feeling he would prove a useful player in the long run, especially coming off the bench when the team needs goals.

The only problem is his current injury, which might take him a few more months to recover from.

[Chelsea Legend 11 4,062]

We'll see who the club picks.  A proven premier league midfielder or a 23-year old who still doesn't have a defined position?

 

That is precisely what I want in a squad player.

[Cosmin 2,484]

Drinkwater is clearly going to be a bench warmer. I really can't see him imposing himself as a regular starter. I think even he knows that.

Barkley, on the other hand, has the potential to do something fantastic and to be a very solid addition on the long term. I would like to have him here.