Chelsea Transfers

[Blue Armour 4,436]

The one thing that bothers me about the club sniffing around for Lukaku, is whether this is actually a Tuchel backed target.

Is this another 'board knows what's best? 

We bring on a player that wasn't really wanted, and he becomes the elephant in the dressing room. 

[whats happening 1,612]

i just dont get it. our board is ready to give 100 million euros for lukaku + his wages + agent, but are not ready to give 150-180 for haaland + his wages + agents. since two (or three) of our offers have been recejted by inter it seems like they gave up on haaland, which also means they probably think that selling our not-needed players will not be happening either.

[Blue Armour 4,436]

Hope the club doesn't try to woo Lukaku by launching some awful campaign about 'unfinished business'.

He has no unfinished business.

He took his ball and left for Everton.

[Tomo 21,751]

3 minutes ago, King Kante said:

For me it is pretty clear that the board since around 2007 have had a policy of scouting/picking the players with the manager getting one pick (maybe two at times), and particularly post 2012. An example of this would be Jorgi for Sarri, Chilwell for Lampard, Torres for Ancellotti, Robinho (failed) for Scolari, Costa for Jose (Cesc may have been a pick but not sure as Jose hasn't ever really gone for many Cesc type players.) AVB's I think was meant to be Rodriguez (or whoever that FB from Porto was that we didn't get.) 

Additionally, I see no real change in transfer strategy from pre-Conte to Conte's regin to post-Conte (bar last Summer which was kind of like 03-06 again) if you look at the age demographics of the players.

If you scan the period from 2012-18 we seemed to have a policy of primarily using funds for players u26, then adding the odd experienced player via buyout/gentleman's agreement (Luiz, Cesc, Pedro) or using a loan/emerangy buy when desperate (Giroud, Pato, Higuain.)

Personally, I really don't see the majority of the signings under Conte as being any different to what went before and after. It was more that the players brought were just bad and he was a lighting rod because of how he carried on in his second season.

I mean the season before Conte we went on a spree to buy Baba, Hector, Papy and Pedro (the buyout/gentleman's agreement buy) with loans for Falcao and Pato then after he left, we went to buy the biggest dud of all in Kepa. 

The idea that 2017 was all on Conte doesn't really wash with me as we were still making disastrous decisions either side of him. I mean, lets's be real, if we go out and buy Lukaku at 28 for £100m, when he clearly doesn't fit the managers style of play (the irony of doing this now when Conte clearly wanted him in 2017 is not lost), how is the strategy been different in anyway?

Some people point to players coming from Italy, but their are numerous examples of us buying from one location at points - Belgium 2012, Spain 2015-2016, France 2016-18 (think we brought just as many players from France as Italy during Conte's time) etc. 

If people want to complain about how Conte behaved in his second season, I don't really mind (as whilst I have sympathy for him in that the club weren't providing him with the players he wanted) he did give up and appeared to behaving in a manner to get himself sacked to get his payout.

Apart from Kepa our signing's have been largely good since 2018  (i'm convinced all our 2020 signings will come good), even Higuain served a purpose, although admittedly that would take a hit if Lukaku returns. Not only that Conte himself has largely stuck to a similar profile of signings at Inter which included trying to reunite with two of our singing's from that year. Conte has been known to be pretty sketchy in the market, United fans still joke about him being a key part of their rebuild by taking Young and Alexis (both of whom he also wanted here) off their hands.

Do i think Conte was the only guilty party for that season? No but i also don't buy him being an innocent bystander either.

[Pizy 18,850]

One positive thing we probably could count on with Lukaku is him bullying the shit out of Arsenal a couple of times each season. That’ll be funny, I guess. 😂

[DDA 9,924]

Nah just watched highlights of Lukaku and it has reminded me that indeed the fella is a complete donkey at times. 

 

[Tomo 21,751]

-

Edited August 3, 2021 by Tomo

[Tomo 21,751]

 

 

[Milan 17,955]

In this particular instance, can we revert back to 'Waiting FC', or 'Monitoring FC' or whatever was used in this forum before? Just one big no to this signing!

[Pizy 18,850]

It just feels like the opposite sort of profile our club have liked recently. We’ve tried to build around younger players who are great technically and have lots of room to improve and sustain or inflate their value. So why then would we spend over 100m on a striker who has zero resale value, is mediocre technique wise, and depends heavily on his pace and power to be effective as he quickly approaches 30?

This is why Haaland makes so much sense. He’s much younger and is the exact sort of profile we’ve loved. If Haaland agitates or decided to move in a few years he’d bring us a return of 200m. If Lukaku ends up being a poor fit he becomes a massive anchor who we’d probably have to loan out for a couple of years whilst paying some of his wages.

It’s just strange from our club. 

[NikkiCFC 8,286]

Kane to City, Lukaku to Chelsea also means United have clear path to Haaland next summer. There is also Norwegian connection.

But considering Haaland situation next summer makes you wonder why Chelsea and City dont wait for him?

Why is no one after Mbappe with just one year left on contract? Because everyone knows he wants only Real and will go there next summer.

So it could be that clubs become aware what Haaland wants and maybe he already promised himself to United or Real or Barca...

[Tomo 21,751]

The most frustrating thing will be when he gets injured or suspended and Kai has an absolute screamer at false 9 in his absence and we look like such a better all round team as a result only to shoehorn Rom back in next game.

Would be even more infuriating than when Lampard did likewise with an out of sorts Kante.

[ZAPHOD2319 4,801]

1 minute ago, NikkiCFC said:

Kane to City, Lukaku to Chelsea also means United have clear path to Haaland next summer. There is also Norwegian connection.

But considering Haaland situation next summer makes you wonder why Chelsea and City dont wait for him?

Why is no one after Mbappe with just one year left on contract? Because everyone knows he wants only Real and will go there next summer.

So it could be that clubs become aware what Haaland wants and maybe he already promised himself to United or Real or Barca...

They really do not have a clear path. That €85M is all upfront money. Man Utd do not do that. They try to spread it over 5 years if possible. That is just the release clause, then comes all the agent fees, father money, and signing bonus. The Glazers hate up front buys. The real danger is if PSG loses Mbappe. They will pay everything up front and Riola has ties to PSG. 

[Superblue 6,372]

The irony of a large bulk of the forum moaning for the past couple of weeks about how the club has no ambition and is throwing Tuchel under the bus by not buying players or addressing weaknesses. Now the club are reportedly looking to make a huge bid for someone and near enough everyone is against it.

 

[LAM09 7,043]

11 hours ago, Pizy said:

Just throwing ideas out there. I’m desperate at this point. Jesus isn’t ideal but at least he’s a decent goal scorer when actually given a run and is a much better footballer than Tammy.

 

I'm slightly surprised no one has gone after Iheanacho. People might say he just had a purple patch, but his goal scoring record was rather good before leaving City as well.