Chelsea Transfers

[Tomo 21,751]

13 minutes ago, Azul said:

For those being negative, I'm warning you.......you're going to look like a fool when the season starts😂

I really hope so, because that will mean the club has benefitted.

A lot of my skepticism is for two reasons, his rage quits at us before and United (compare that to how the guy in your profile picture embraced and beat his competition, night and day) and his big game record. He has a chance to somewhat silence me on the latter critic with our early games, fingers crossed he does.

[Azul 1,615]

9 minutes ago, Magic Lamps said:

Not really, Lukaku deal will be at least 160m if you add wages, agent fees (same agent), haaland maybe 220 but is 8 years yonger. easy to say which is the better deal.

Raiola is not Lukaku's agent anymore first of all. Chelsea don't have to pay an absurd 40m agent fees like they do for Haaland.

Lukaku's price will be 120m euro's and Haaland would've been 175m euro's as reports suggested. Add 40m agent fees onto Haaland's price and that becomes 215m euro's, not only that but Haaland has crazy wage demands that are higher than Lukakus. Which means that the Haaland deal would've neared a 100m more than the Lukaku deal. 

I get that Haaland was the better prospect and that he's younger, but to think that he'd stay for a very long time at Chelsea is gullible. However the upside to that would've been his resale value. I personally think that Chelsea were just not ready to spend such a huge amount since they're looking at other positions to sign players.

Edited August 4, 2021 by Azul

[Azul 1,615]

3 minutes ago, Tomo said:

I really hope so, because that will mean the club has benefitted.

A lot of my skepticism is for two reasons, his rage quits at us before and United (compare that to how the guy in your profile picture embraced and beat his competition, night and day) and his big game record. He has a chance to somewhat silence me on the latter critic with our early games, fingers crossed he does.

Trust me, he's not the same player he once was. This guy has become something else under Conte.

Edited August 4, 2021 by Azul

[Johnnyeye 7,501]

I will be happy if Lukaku works out for us in the end, i do have my reservations regarding this deal, but i hope i’m proven wrong.

[Jype 6,398]

3 minutes ago, Magic Lamps said:

Not really, Lukaku deal will be at least 160m if you add wages, agent fees (same agent), haaland maybe 220 but is 8 years yonger. easy to say which is the better deal.

They don't have the same agent though.

In 2017 when Lukaku moved to Man Utd he was still represented by Raiola but in 2018 he fired Mino due to some arguments, rumored to be regarding the move from Everton to Man Utd when Lukaku in fact would have preferred to join Chelsea even then. Nowadays his agent is Federico Pastorello, who also represents Malang Sarr and is said to have a good relationship with Chelsea.

Pastorello will surely get a fee out of it as well, but nothing is suggesting he would get anywhere close to Raiola money. Raiola is notorious for brokering deals where he gets a big chunk of the pie, but most agents are not like that and while there are still agent fees involved they're nowhere near the same. And in Haaland's case his dad must be paid too for some absurd reason.

Let's say the transfer fee for Haaland was 50M more and agent fees a minimum of 30M more. That is already a huge amount of money, and if it's true (latest Matt Law article) that Lukaku would earn around £250K/wk at the club, then his wages should be a lot 'cheaper' too. Lukaku at £250K would of course still be among the top earners at the club but he wouldn't break the wage structure in place. Haaland was rumored to be after at least £400K/wk which would have immediately made him the club's top earner, not only costing tens of millions more in wages but also surely affecting other players wage demands too. We've already seen at Man Utd how breaking the wage structure can have a negative effect, and how after Alexis Sanchez transfer they were forced to hand out ridiculous contracts to all key players (Rashford, Martial, DDG the main ones) when the time came to extend them.

Like I've said before many times, I'd have loved Haaland at the club but clearly it just wasn't meant to be. And to the people saying he's a longer term option you're just fooling yourselves, because the player and Raiola will surely have an exit plan ready for 2-3 years if the team doesn't deliver him all trophies. Whether it's a release clause few years down the line or just a good old transfer request and going on strike, Haaland would never stay at the club for ~10 years like his age would suggest is possible.

[Razer Sharp 4]

Man for some reason this transfer feels so underwhelming 130M is just ridiculous money for a player nearing 30 years old with a dodgy record in big games whilst also moving the in form Havertz away from the central spot. Also hope we can still make a few more signings Tchouameni would be a good one 

[Superblue 6,372]

27 minutes ago, Jype said:

Pastorello will surely get a fee out of it as well, but nothing is suggesting he would get anywhere close to Raiola money. Raiola is notorious for brokering deals where he gets a big chunk of the pie, but most agents are not like that and while there are still agent fees involved they're nowhere near the same. And in Haaland's case his dad must be paid too for some absurd reason.

Because Raiola I don't think is technically his agent, he's an advisor. Haaland's dad is his agent.

All this means is your paying two people instead of one, both from what it sounds greedy beyond compare. I've read some instances where Raiola wants £40m, the dad wants £10-20m and Haaland wants a signing fee of £10-20m. With a much lower release clause next season there's unfortunately a possibility that someone is prepared to pay those sorts of figures to sweeten the deal but if they're asking for similar numbers this summer on top of a huge transfer fee to Dortmund, no wonder the club has backed away. 

[Superblue 6,372]

1 minute ago, Razer Sharp said:

Man for some reason this transfer feels so underwhelming 130M is just ridiculous money for a player nearing 30 years old with a dodgy record in big games whilst also moving the in form Havertz away from the central spot. Also hope we can still make a few more signings Tchouameni would be a good one 

Just turned 28 a couple of months ago is hardly nearing 30 years old. 

There's likely to be little resale value, but if the club gets 3-4 top years from him and his goals are a big part of further trophies then it could well end up worth it still.

There is very little margin for error on a deal like this mind.

[Superblue 6,372]

5 hours ago, OhForAGreavsie said:

I believe that Rom is the same player he was when I wrote him off as a Chelsea prospect in 2011. I had endless discussions at the time with people claiming he was young and that his touch would improve. I said then, and believe just as strongly now, that players' innate qualities become fixed and permanent way before the age of 19. Experience and training can teach a player how to make the most of what he has but what he has, his basic talent level, isn't going anywhere at that age.

I could not disagree more with this. Technical aspects of a players game can be improved well past their formative years. Are you telling me that someone like Lampard didn't improve aspects of his basic technique in repetitive passing and shooting drills to become a better player as he got older. The levels that were there in his late 20's and early 30's were not those which he had when we signed him in his early 20's. Technical aspects of a players game can definitely be coached and improved upon I would say much easier than mental characteristics.

Now in the example of Lukaku, I can't pass comment on whether I believe this to be true because I haven't watched enough of him, and whilst he's hardly going to suddenly have the technique of Maradona, I could completely believe that aspects of his game such as his first touch have been improved, particularly if that is an area of his game that has been highlighted and worked on consistently which it sounds like Conte has done. 

Like you alluded too, all skills and abilities in football also go beyond a basic technique. As you get older, you'd expect and hope a player at the top level to improve on other aspects such as awareness of time and space, anticipation, awareness of teammates, positioning when receiving the ball, understanding of how to use your body, etc. 

I'm not expecting Lukaku's first touch and hold up play to suddenly be the main strength of his game, but I think it's incredibly naive to dismiss that something like that can't be worked on and naturally improve with age to at the very least no longer be a glaring weakness in his game.

[Blues Forever 1,232]

 

[Marvin123 527]

Not getting 3 points against all the smaller sides is our problem.... Lukaku solves this. Premier League here we come

[Jype 6,398]

13 minutes ago, Superblue_1986 said:

Just turned 28 a couple of months ago is hardly nearing 30 years old. 

Didn't you get the memo, all players turn shit overnight once they hit 30 and the decline already starts multiple years before that magic number? 🤣

From a financial perspective I totally understand going for a younger player with more re-sale value if needed, but if with the younger player the numbers don't add up the re-sale value means fuck all. For Haaland the higher transfer fee, Raiola fee and dad's fee all add up to so much more than Lukaku's transfer costs that it's very likely it doesn't even matter if he doesn't have a meaningful re-sale value. Even if the club loses full transfer value on Lukaku but Haaland in a few years would still command a hefty fee like 100-150M then adding up all costs together Lukaku might still be the 'cheaper player'. 

Also, PSG must be jumping with joy that Mbappe is still a young player with high value when it's looking like he'll run down his contract and leave on a free transfer and there's nothing they can do about it. Around the same time they bought two expensive players, one 18yo with higher re-sale value (Mbappe) and one player in his prime (Neymar) who'd have had quite little value at the end of his initial contract (after hitting the much dreaded 30yo mark). Now it's likely they lose Mbappe on a free but still have Neymar who happily extended his deal and in the end will give them a much better value for the money they paid, even though Mbappe was probably thought to be the better deal. 

 

15 minutes ago, Superblue_1986 said:

There is very little margin for error on a deal like this mind.

This is very much true. Lukaku has to hit the ground running and continue being a top performer for at least the next 3-4 years to justify the outlay. If he struggles badly, the club are fucked like before with Torres. But I have faith in Big Rom.