Chelsea Transfers

[Jase 43,479]

1 minute ago, Superblue_1986 said:

I feel that Haaland will end up at PSG to replace Mbappe.

Better off just going to Bayern then. 

[Magic Lamps 11,692]

25 minutes ago, ZAPHOD2319 said:

With Raiola as an agent, he is only staying three years wherever he goes.

we will be the last ones foolish enough to pay those two clowns. If lukaku comes here he will most likely ride out that fat contract after he seizes to be useful in 2023.

This feels a lot like the torres deal minus the injury. desperate, pushing for the title , overpaying for a late deal for a pl-proven goalscorer just after his peak. absolute madness to tie so much assets to one okish player.

i would have been 100% fine with no major signings but no money wasted on duds. yet, we are gonna make 2 of the biggest signings this club has ever made for players that do not fit us and are not good enough for the money offered. the deals will cripple the clubs financially for years right after we just made it out of the aftermath of the criminal 2017 window.

[Superblue 6,372]

Just now, Jas said:

Better off just going to Bayern then. 

I just feel that PSG will go all out for him to cover losing Mbappe.

Haaland as well may look at PSG as an attractive proposition to go and score a boat load of goals for another 3 years or so before his next move.

[DDA 9,946]

2 hours ago, Tomo said:

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.

Lukaku is a different animal to the one that played at United and you know it... so I can't see how making that comparison is valid. Also, you really think Lukaku won't score goals in our current set up?? Comon... don't don't ignorant Tomo... I fully understand the frustration of paying the huge amounts of money quoted for him and would rather have Halaand every day of the week but Lukaku will not be a disaster and if he is... then I would 100% hold my hands up and be just as gutted as everyone else. 

[Blue Armour 4,448]

1 hour ago, Tomo said:

I don't know what I find more frustrating, the fact that we're trying to sign Lukaku or that people are suddenly agreeing with me (that we shouldn't sign for the sake of it) purely because we are about to do it.

"Sign someone anyone"

Ok

"No not him"

Haha, tbf...

I'd still like for us to sign someone.

Just that if it's not Haaland this season, then it should be an inexpensive nobody that we can offload, when we go in for Haaland next season 

[Tomo 21,751]

2 minutes ago, DDA said:

Lukaku is a different animal to the one that played at United and you know it... so I can't see how making that comparison is valid. Also, you really think Lukaku won't score goals in our current set up?? Comon... don't don't ignorant Tomo... I fully understand the frustration of paying the huge amounts of money quoted for him and would rather have Halaand every day of the week but Lukaku will not be a disaster and if he is... then I would 100% hold my hands up and be just as gutted as everyone else. 

My main frustration is that we are tearing apart a hugely promising system to accommodate him. If we really wanted to go down the rabbit hole of buying a player who we think will guarantee us goals then we should absolutely be going for a wide forward in the Salah/Mane/Jota/Sterling mould.

He has to score atleast 30 until he even begins to justify the compromises to our overall style that's going to be made.

[Jase 43,479]

8 minutes ago, DDA said:

Lukaku is a different animal to the one that played at United and you know it... so I can't see how making that comparison is valid. Also, you really think Lukaku won't score goals in our current set up?? Comon... don't don't ignorant Tomo... I fully understand the frustration of paying the huge amounts of money quoted for him and would rather have Halaand every day of the week but Lukaku will not be a disaster and if he is... then I would 100% hold my hands up and be just as gutted as everyone else. 

The chances missed aside, the thing with our current setup is that we're able to create lots of chances because the front 3 has got good movement and understanding between them and they are interchangeable and that's without an out-and-out #9. If we put one like Lukaku in, that whole thing is gonna change. We might still create the same amount/type of chances or we might not. 

And it's also worth noting that he's been highly successful at Inter because Conte created a system and style that were based around him. Tuchel hasn't done that with anyone here. Can Lukaku thrive if the system is not built around him? 

[Strike 7,503]

4 hours ago, Hermione said:

He is really coming isn't he? Forget Drinkwater, Bakayoko, Morata, Torres this will surpass them in terms of worst transfer I've seen at this club, nothing about this one makes one bit of sense, the club has lost it's marbles.

Think people dont remember just how monumentally bad that Torres signing was.

[Magic Lamps 11,692]

Just now, Strike said:

Think people dont remember just how monumentally bad that Torres signing was.

yeah we do, we were stuck with him for ages and had to give him new chances every few weeks.... same will happen with lukaku, the similarities are striking.

[King Kante 1,643]

7 minutes ago, Strike said:

Think people dont remember just how monumentally bad that Torres signing was.

Torres wasn't worse than Kepa. He was bad but Kepa is the all time winner in the worst signing stakes. £72m with £170k a week for seven years for a funsized GK with T-rex arms who is essentially a training cone when shots are placed in a corner has no equal. 

[ZAPHOD2319 4,820]

This was an enjoyable watch

 

 

[Strike 7,503]

1 minute ago, King Kante said:

Torres wasn't worse than Kepa. He was bad but Kepa is the all time winner in the worst signing stakes. £72m with £170k a week for seven years for a funsized GK with T-rex arms who is essentially a training cone when shots are placed in a corner has no equal. 

I think Torres was worse. It was a club record signing + the striker supposed to lead the team for years. Trying to get him to work restricted opportunities for Sturridge and Lukaku. Kepa had a decent first season and was poor in the second year under Lampard. Club acted swiftly to get Mendy in so the damage is not as much

 

[Tomo 21,751]

3 minutes ago, Magic Lamps said:

yeah we do, we were stuck with him for ages and had to give him new chances every few weeks.... same will happen with lukaku, the similarities are striking.

As much as I don't want Lukaku he will never be that bad. Our version of Torres was league 1 standard at best, he did not have one single positive attribute to fall back on.

[Special Juan 28,149]

I'm telling you now, so many of you are solely fucking focused on the financials you can't even see your own arse, never seen so many stupid fucking comments like "oh look it's 100m we are being robbed" who gives a flying piece of horse shit if he comes in and scores goals, can't be fucking worse than Werner last season.

Can't wait that if we sign him he fucking throws it back in your faces.

[oldportblue 547]

11 minutes ago, King Kante said:

Torres wasn't worse than Kepa. He was bad but Kepa is the all time winner in the worst signing stakes. £72m with £170k a week for seven years for a funsized GK with T-rex arms who is essentially a training cone when shots are placed in a corner has no equal. 

Agreed! Kepa all-time worse CFC signing by a mile... Torres was already sort of injured and we took a chance that didn't really work out.

[DDA 9,946]

32 minutes ago, Tomo said:

My main frustration is that we are tearing apart a hugely promising system to accommodate him. If we really wanted to go down the rabbit hole of buying a player who we think will guarantee us goals then we should absolutely be going for a wide forward in the Salah/Mane/Jota/Sterling mould.

He has to score atleast 30 until he even begins to justify the compromises to our overall style that's going to be made.

 

31 minutes ago, Jas said:

The chances missed aside, the thing with our current setup is that we're able to create lots of chances because the front 3 has got good movement and understanding between them and they are interchangeable and that's without an out-and-out #9. If we put one like Lukaku in, that whole thing is gonna change. We might still create the same amount/type of chances or we might not. 

And it's also worth noting that he's been highly successful at Inter because Conte created a system and style that were based around him. Tuchel hasn't done that with anyone here. Can Lukaku thrive if the system is not built around him? 

But we have built a system that needs a proper number 9. That's where we were failing last season. That was plain to see. We tried Werner, hit and miss, we tried Havertz and it was again hit and miss. Just because Havertz scored the winning goal against City in the CL final doesn't mean him playing there was a success. He missed absolute sitters, time and time again. The same with Werner. The system needs a striker and every man and his dog was saying so throughout each match day thread. What's changed all of a sudden??

                       

[acidic 0]

1 hour ago, Hermione said:

I'd take Danny Ings all days and nights.

Ings for me too

[King Kante 1,643]

Lukaku when he isnthe biggest and fastest player on the pitch: 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9NiumzzcmEI

 

[Tomo 21,751]

11 minutes ago, DDA said:

 

But we have built a system that needs a proper number 9. That's where we were failing last season. That was plain to see. We tried Werner, hit and miss, we tried Havertz and it was again hit and miss. Just because Havertz scored the winning goal against City in the CL final doesn't mean him playing there was a success. He missed absolute sitters, time and time again. The same with Werner. The system needs a striker and every man and his dog was saying so throughout each match day thread. What's changed all of a sudden??

                       

But like I said, If we really want to go down the route of signing someone we think can guarantee goals fine, I'll happily compromise at sourcing a Mane/Salah/Jota type (even if I think Werner, Mount and especially Havertz will score a lot more next season).

But like Jas said the reason we create so many chances to waste is because our players are all heavily involved in the build up, since we've moved Kai to false 9 (from the Everton game) the majority of our performances have been very good, when teams are playing shit but get undeserved results for a while because one player keeps coming up clutch eventually it catches up (ala Arsenal with Aubameyang, Spurs with Kane and us with Hazard under Mourinho) so why can't that also work in reverse?

Fox in the box strikers have a habit of making their teams worse overall even if they offer a good goal record, even great ones like RVN (United only won 1 title in 5 years with him and 3 in a row either side of him). The game has long moved on from them in consistent winning teams.

Edited August 3, 2021 by Tomo

[Jase 43,479]

11 minutes ago, DDA said:

But we have built a system that needs a proper number 9. That's where we were failing last season. That was plain to see. We tried Werner, hit and miss, we tried Havertz and it was again hit and miss. Just because Havertz scored the winning goal against City in the CL final doesn't mean him playing there was a success. He missed absolute sitters, time and time again. The same with Werner. The system needs a striker and every man and his dog was saying so throughout each match day thread. What's changed all of a sudden??             

Just because someone misses chances, doesn't mean the system is built to have a #9. 

Having a system and then putting in players to make the system work (what Tuchel has been doing) is entirely different to having a system entirely based around one player (which is what Conte did at Inter).