Chelsea Transfers

[Mário César 1,280]

so... no new left back, right?

[Magic Lamps 11,692]

38 minutes ago, Pizy said:

Really strange how it looks like none of the big boys in the PL will be making a significant, season altering signing this month. Didn’t expect City or Liverpool to do anything. I thought for sure we’d do a small loan deal for a fullback. I’m absolutely stunned that United, Arse, and Spuds haven’t done anything to boost their top 4 chances. 

Can imagine Conte is really regretting signing up to manage under Levy and the Spuds’ incompetent leadership.

Tottenham were in contention to sign Adama traore but he stalled until Barca got in. They also reportedly made an offer for Luis Diaz but he said no thx on the spot.

Great thing is both would have improved Tottenham and given them more tactical options so it is awesome they got neither.

6 minutes ago, Mário César said:

so... no new left back, right?

well we signed dylan williams and got Kenedy back - close enough for the board....

 

[NikkiCFC 8,333]

2 hours ago, ZAPHOD2319 said:

It is a proven policy. Willian three year deal that Lampard wanted would have been horrible. Renewing Silva every year that he shows he can still play has been great.

Silva believes in his abilities. He can go year by year, no problem. Willian and Azpi don't so that's why they demand unacceptable things. Although I don't think even one year contract extension for Azpi is good idea. 

[NikkiCFC 8,333]

2 minutes ago, Magic Lamps said:

Tottenham were in contention to sign Adama traore but he stalled until Barca got in. They also reportedly made an offer for Luis Diaz but he said no thx on the spot.

Great thing is both would have improved Tottenham and given them more tactical options so it is awesome they got neither.

Just like in Chelsea. Conte can't get his first targets. People gonna blame him again when he gets some shit players instead. But I think they will finish 4th which will be massive result. 

 

[OhForAGreavsie 6,077]

10 hours ago, LAM09 said:

Or having the smart idea of inserting a recall clause. Spending most of the window trying to "buy" back a player that we sent out on loan is beyond stupid.

All transfer deals, be they permanent or temporary, are a subject of three-way negotiations. Each party will have their own hierarchy of wishes and red lines. It is obvious that Chelsea would ALWAYS like to include a recall clause but we will also want to prefer a loan destination where the intention is that the player will start over any where the player will be a squad player. If the side offering starts insists that they can't offer the player starts if there is a possibility of his being recalled then Chelsea have a decision to make. If Chelsea choose a club willing to accept the recall clause but which is only offering a squad place then the player has a decision to make. Why leave one club where you won't play for another one where you won't play either?

My claim is that it isn't as easy as it might seem to drop whatever clauses you want into these deals.

Edited January 27, 2022 by OhForAGreavsie

[OhForAGreavsie 6,077]

8 hours ago, Tomo said:

Unpopular opinion but I'd have him here.

I'm very surprised that Barca want him back. Up to them.

[Tomo 21,751]

29 minutes ago, NikkiCFC said:

Just like in Chelsea. Conte can't get his first targets. People gonna blame him again when he gets some shit players instead. But I think they will finish 4th which will be massive result. 

 

No one would have blamed Conte for not retaining the league (although I do think he had a lot more say in those transfers than people want to admit).

It's finishing 5th while getting slapped by the likes of Bournemouth, Watford, Newcastle and approaching an away game to City like we were San Marino that swayed opinion on him.

[MoroccanBlue 5,383]

16 minutes ago, Tomo said:

(although I do think he had a lot more say in those transfers than people want to admit).

We were only linked to about a billion Serie A players during that time too....

The notion Conte was forced fed players he didn't want is truly, truly hilarious. 

[Tomo 21,751]

1 hour ago, MoroccanBlue said:

We were only linked to about a billion Serie A players during that time too....

The notion Conte was forced fed players he didn't want is truly, truly hilarious. 

The target men links were even more hilarious.

A club with no recent history of going after target men (not even under Jose) is suddenly linked with all of them under the sun under a manager with a strong history of using them and apparently it was the former forcing it on the latter.

[LAM09 7,061]

1 hour ago, OhForAGreavsie said:

All transfer deals, be they permanent or temporary, are a subject of three-way negotiations. Each party will have their own hierarchy of wishes and red lines. It is obvious that Chelsea would ALWAYS like to include a recall clause but we will also want to prefer a loan destination where the intention is that the player will start over any where the player will be a squad player. If the side offering starts insists that they can't offer the player starts if there is a possibility of his being recalled then Chelsea have a decision to make. If Chelsea choose a club willing to accept the recall clause but which is only offering a squad place then the player has a decision to make. Why leave one club where you won't play for another one where you won't play either?

My claim is that it isn't as easy as it might seem to drop whatever clauses you want into these deals.

You have a fair point, but that's nothing more than a presumption (unless I've missed something key). My train of thought is, I presume the lack of a clause to be almost exclusive to fee originally agreed & would be a more probable reason as to why there wasn't one in this case. 

Recalled Kenedy & Gallagher/Gilmour had clauses depending on a games played quota. The lack of any concrete information, from what I've read, results in theories based on presumptions.

Edited January 27, 2022 by LAM09

[OhForAGreavsie 6,077]

6 hours ago, LAM09 said:

You have a fair point, but that's nothing more than a presumption (unless I've missed something key). My train of thought is, I presume the lack of a clause to be almost exclusive to fee originally agreed & would be a more probable reason as to why there wasn't one in this case. 

Recalled Kenedy & Gallagher/Gilmour had clauses depending on a games played quota. The lack of any concrete information, from what I've read, results in theories based on presumptions.

The scenarios I painted were meant as examples of the kind of consideration which will impact loan deals. I've never seen an actual loan agreement but to me, and I'm guessing to all of us here, it is intuitively obvious that these examples are sound. As are the ones you've given. There will be others too. This is what I referred to as the hierarchy of wishes and red lines. All parties throw their wish list on the table and who gets what in the final deal is determined by the negotiation. Unless they're making prime Eden Hazard available for loan, the lending club will have to compromise to get the deal done.

Edited January 28, 2022 by OhForAGreavsie

[OneMoSalah 8,886]

6 hours ago, Vesper said:

They are two different types of players, and can deffo coexist in the same XI.

Only thing I can think of is that the board is obsessed with Declan Rice.

I wouldn’t say so. The whole Declan Rice coming here links is ultimately a huge part of what started the tensions between the board and Frank on the transfer front. I think in that January and then the summer.

I think that under Frank the club had huge reservations about buying him for the huge price tag they’d set, considering he was an academy player here originally.

Unless Tuchel pushes for it and Rice himself plays about to get the move for a cheaper fee, I still think its extremely difficult. 

[Superblue 6,372]

3 minutes ago, OneMoSalah said:

I wouldn’t say so. The whole Declan Rice coming here links is ultimately a huge part of what started the tensions between the board and Frank on the transfer front. I think in that January and then the summer.

I think that under Frank the club had huge reservations about buying him for the huge price tag they’d set, considering he was an academy player here originally.

Unless Tuchel pushes for it and Rice himself plays about to get the move for a cheaper fee, I still think its extremely difficult. 

There has been talk that Tuchel is a big fan of his too.

I think the price being mentioned is pretty insane but I must admit that the Declan Rice we see now is a vastly superior version to the one that Lampard wanted the club to buy 18 months ago. I would have no problem with the club buying him because I think if they pass over him he will end up at one of the other big sides in the Premier League.

One thing to note is come the summer he'll only have 2 years left on his contract and so far he's apparently turned down West Ham approaches to even negotiate a new deal. West Ham will have a decision to make because the longer his contract runs down, so does his transfer value. He seems to be content at West Ham currently who are punching above their weight and he's only 23. He can actually afford to wait and run his contract down if he chose to and move at the end of it.

[Strike 7,492]

8 hours ago, Vesper said:

Have said it for ages

only 4 DMF's I would want are

    
Joshua Kimmich   (obviously impossible)
Nicolò Barella (a hybrid, and the main one similar to Kante, will be crazy expensive and hard to pull, but not impossible like Kimmich)
Declan Rice (£100m+ is madness)
Aurélien Tchouaméni    (the easiest by far to have purchased)

If we pull any of them and keep Jorgi Kova Kante - those midfield options are ridiculous

[Strike 7,492]

 

 Sarr it is

[Blues Forever 1,232]

 

[Blues Forever 1,232]

 

[Blues Forever 1,232]

Edited January 28, 2022 by Blues Forever

[MoroccanBlue 5,383]

Ousmane Dembele has averaged 20 missed games a season since he's been with Barcelona. Of which 90% of his injuries are a cause of muscular imbalances vs contact with another player. 

If we genuinely sell either Pulisic or Ziyech in favor of a player that spends half a season in the hospital bed, I will not only lose faith in our board, but Tuchel. 

 

[Pizy 18,941]

12 minutes ago, MoroccanBlue said:

Ousmane Dembele has averaged 20 missed games a season since he's been with Barcelona. Of which 90% of his injuries are a cause of muscular imbalances vs contact with another player. 

If we genuinely sell either Pulisic or Ziyech in favor of a player that spends half a season in the hospital bed, I will not only lose faith in our board, but Tuchel. 

 

I mean, Pulisic and Dembele are basically mirrors of one another. Same body type, same playing stale, both made of glass and miss loads of games every season.

Replacing Pulisic with Dembele would be like cloning him. Though I think Dembele has a higher ceiling.