Chelsea Transfers

[Tomo 21,751]

1 hour ago, DDA said:

People saying Lukaku is a wasteful transfer are forgetting how many big chances were missed last season with Havertz in the team.

Yea 100m is ridiculous but let's get it straight here... we need a goalscorer.

Lukaku last season scored less goals then Werner the year before he joined us.

Lukaku last season in the PL scored less goals than Havertz the year before he joined us.

[Pizy 18,852]

Some of this Lukaku criticism is going way overboard now. 😂

None of us want the club to spend 100m on him but some of you are acting like he’s an embarrassment to the sport. 
 

 

[Tomo 21,751]

41 minutes ago, MoroccanBlue said:

Except a lot of people are forgetting he 'improved' by playing in a league where his limitations on the ball are played down given how slow the league is in comparison to the Premier League. 

I have no doubt in my mind he will score goals, but the amount of build up he will ruin will have us pulling our hair similar to United fans. 

I'm fully against Lukaku but even I am laughing at the theory he will be worst than Torres.

Rom will have some uses, our version of Torres was the worst striker in the league.

[Blues Forever 1,232]

Just now, Jas said:

But Tuchel has also said he doesn't want to repeat what he did at previous clubs because he doesn't want to destroy the squad harmony and the good atmosphere at the club. At the risk of looking silly down the line, think Tuchel is someone who can learn from his mistakes in such cases as opposed to being a stubborn bastard like Conte or Mourinho. And if Matt Law is to be believed, Tuchel is said to be relaxed about how things are going and isn't using the CL win to kick up a fuss with the board. 

It still remain to be seen, i wouldn't blindly trust what he said.

[Marvin123 527]

Lukaku is gonna get a boat load of goals here in this formation. Imagine his pace and power running into that open space 😻

[Pizy 18,852]

I think Lukaku will 100% score between 15-20 goals in the PL alone. The question is whether we have to completely change up our formation and style to accommodate him. That’s what I worry about. 

[Jase 43,479]

I believe this was already said earlier but I'll just say it anyway. If we do get Lukaku, we're practically helping United raise funds and open the door for them to sign Haaland next year. They would enjoy more years out of him compared to us with Lukaku. And if we don't get the "improved" version of Lukaku, then we're gonna look very silly then, especially for 100 million+.

[Mário César 1,232]

Just now, Jas said:

I believe this was already said earlier but I'll just say it anyway. If we do get Lukaku, we're practically helping United raise funds and open the door for them to sign Haaland next year. They would enjoy more years out of him compared to us with Lukaku. And if we don't get the "improved" version of Lukaku, then we're gonna look very silly then, especially for 100 million+.

lol you don't know the future 

imagine that halaand flops... 

your guesses can be wrong... 

 

[MoroccanBlue 5,375]

Think we should hold off with what we have and then enter the race for Haaland next summer. The thought of him going to United or City whilst we are stuck with Lukaku is just too much. 

[chelsea_4_eva 1,180]

Ings for the win!

[Jase 43,479]

Just now, Mário César said:

lol you don't know the future 

imagine that halaand flops... 

your guesses can be wrong... 

Oh, you're changing your tune now that we're not bidding 150m+ for Haaland?

Even IF Haaland flops, it will still look less silly considering he would cost only 60-70m. Plus given his age, he would still have a good resale value if things don't work out for him in England.

[Razer Sharp 4]

5 minutes ago, Hermione said:

Fabrizio Romano: “The bid from Chelsea (for Lukaku) is €100M and Marcos Alonso, Inter turned down this proposal. They want something really crazy for Lukaku because their plan is to keep the player at the club."

Of course and we're stupid enough to give them something crazy. 

Praying we aren't stupid enough do to that...

[Mário César 1,232]

1 minute ago, Jas said:

Oh, you're changing your tune now that we're not bidding 150m+ for Haaland?

Even IF Haaland flops, it will still look less silly considering he would cost only 60-70m. Plus given his age, he would still have a good resale value if things don't work out for him in England.

hein?

Halaand would be my first choice. But if we can't get him, we need to find another solution. Wait one season can damage the club, if we don't get top4 next season.

[YorkshireBlue 3,264]

7 minutes ago, Jas said:

Oh, you're changing your tune now that we're not bidding 150m+ for Haaland?

Even IF Haaland flops, it will still look less silly considering he would cost only 60-70m. Plus given his age, he would still have a good resale value if things don't work out for him in England.

Your asumming the 60/70m price tag on the basis he would choose us over any other team in the world. And do you not think they that price will just start bidding war 

[Jase 43,479]

Just now, BluesMadLad said:

Your asumming the 60/70m price tag on the basis he would choose us over any other team in the world. And do you not think they that price will just start bidding war 

That's his release clause next year...