Chelsea Transfers

[NikkiCFC 8,337]

For sure the deal will be done. Around 2 more weeks of transfer window and we already offered 65m. So just 10m difference. We can put adds one, player on loan etc... 

[didi007 69]

18 minutes ago, NikkiCFC said:

For sure the deal will be done. Around 2 more weeks of transfer window and we already offered 65m. So just 10m difference. We can put adds one, player on loan etc... 

waste of money

[turgi 71]

Guehi, Tomori, Colwill > Kolibali, Fofana, Cucurella.

[Vesper 30,226]

Arsenal target Moussa Diaby would be “perfect” for Mikel Arteta’s side, says Christian Falk.

https://www.givemesport.com/88105639-arsenal-mykhailo-mudryk-alternative-emirates-transfer-news

However, the BILD journalist has told GiveMeSport that he is likely to cost the same amount of money as Mykhailo Mudryk, who recently joined Chelsea.

Arsenal transfer news – Moussa Diaby

According to Sky Sport, Arsenal are looking at alternatives to Mudryk and have identified Diaby as one.

The Gunners missed out on the 22-year-old, who signed for their London rivals Chelsea in an £88.5m deal last Sunday, as reported by Sky Sports.

Arteta must now consider other names if he still wants to sign a new winger this month, and Diaby appears to be one the Spaniard currently has in mind.

You suspect, though, that Bayer Leverkusen are going to do all they can to keep the Frenchman, who is one of their best players, at the club this winter.

What has Christian Falk said about Moussa Diaby and Arsenal?

Falk thinks Diaby would be ideal for Arsenal but says Leverkusen would probably ask for €100m (around £88m) for the 23-year-old.

Speaking to GMS, the BILD journalist, who also writes for CaughtOffside, said: “If they give Diaby to Arsenal, he would be a perfect player because they didn’t get the other one. But he’s really in the same range, €70m plus €30m, which Chelsea paid for Mudryk.

“Arsenal said we couldn’t pay that, so I’m not sure if they get Diaby if that’s the amount they can’t pay.”

Will Arsenal sign Moussa Diaby this month?

Diaby really does look like a good alternative to Mudryk. Last season, he scored 13 goals and provided 12 assists in 32 Bundesliga appearances, as per Transfermarkt.

As for the current campaign, the France international has registered nine goal contributions in the league so far and an average of 1.9 key passes per game, which is the highest in Leverkusen’s squad, according to WhoScored.

If Arsenal were unwilling to pay £88m for their primary target Mudryk, though, it is hard to imagine them spending that on an alternative. Shakhtar Donetsk chief executive Sergei Palkin, however, has told The Athletic that their offer was similar to Chelsea’s but differed when it came to things like bonuses.

At that price, the Gunners will probably not be signing Diaby in this transfer window. But if Leverkusen are open to accepting less and their English counterparts end up striking a deal with them, as the above shows, he could bring a lot to the Emirates.

It is perhaps one to watch, but getting the former Paris Saint-Germain man out of the BayArena this month looks like an extremely difficult task.

•  

[YorkshireBlue 3,279]

2 hours ago, MoroccanBlue said:

Speculations that since the debt has been paid, what ever the amount the player is sold above their book value is considered a profit in accounting/FFP terms, but 100% of the transfer fee will be utilized as cash on hand.

Of what we are lead to believe is true then surely yes, any money owned on a player will have been paid of by Roman when he made the club debt free, so that should mean are players are 100% paid for.

[Superblue 6,372]

I like the links to the Brentford keeper. I don't think there are many stand out keepers at present that can give you the blend of shot stopping/handling and ability to play out the back. Any that start to show any remote potential (like the Porto keeper) are quickly tagged upwards of £50m. With the disaster of Kepa's move and still a number of positions to strengthen over the next couple of windows or so, I'm reluctant to see the club really dent the budgets for a keeper.

I read earlier Raya's contract only has one year left in the summer and Brentford would be willing to sell for £15-20m. To me it seems a cost effective and fair price to take a solid Premier League proven goalkeeper who is excellent on the ball. He's certainly an upgrade in my opinion on Kepa and I think one of our two keepers might be able to be sold in the summer for a similar price to help fund the move.

[Vesper 30,226]

44 minutes ago, turgi said:

Guehi, Tomori, Colwill > Kolibali, Fofana, Cucurella.

chalk and cheese at multiple levels

I do not care how many times a few people on here try to claim CuCu is a centre  back, the little overpriced left back IS NOT a CB

also, Guehi and Tomori were sold long before we shit away cash on KK and Wesley Fofana, so the latter are not direct replacements, and barely a few words of whinge were uttered when we did sell them off

we got around £55m (counting add-ons) plus sell-on percentages and right of first refusal for Guehi (I don't think we have a sell-on clause for Tomori)

IF Guehi is sold for around £40-50m, our total pay-out for both combined, when the books are completely closed, will be close to £65-68m

that's a shit tonne better that the combined ZERO we got for AC and Rudiger

[DDA 9,941]

If Cucarella is a 65m player... Caicedo is easily 75m unfortunately.. 

 

Shot ourselves in the foot with this one.

[Stats 7,147]

10 hours ago, TheHulk said:

 

We should be all over this. Top keeper. Brilliant technically, has outstanding reflexes and commands his box wonderfully. Has single-handedly saved Brentford in several matches. He is not a massive presence in terms of height but everytime I see him for Brentford he looks top class.

[Reddish-Blue 2,510]

8 hours ago, Pizy said:

£65-75m is a hell of a lot for Caicedo. Can probably get someone with his exact profile for a whole lot less.

But I can see us pulling the trigger. Knows and has worked under Potter, we seemingly have a good relationship with Brighton, and he’s in a position of serious need. He also perfectly matches the sort of signing Boehly and Vivell have desired. Early 20’s and can be put on a long contract and “grow with the project.”

Always going to be a price premium when you’re buying in January and especially from a fellow PL club who don’t actually want to sell.

We did pay in the 60 million range (including add ons) for Cucurella who isn't anything special and the Brighton CEO basically said that Caicedo would be going for a decent margin on top of the Cucurella deal....so the 70-75 million mark actually makes sense. 

I do wonder whether the club will try to balance the books with a potential sale of Gallagher though....as there were rumors of a good transfer fee. 

[TheHulk 2,482]

 

[cosmicway 1,333]

How Mudryk ended up in Chelsea:

Mudryk came to England by ferry as the luggage carriers of Heathrow airport were on strike.

From the ferry one normally descends using the stairway but Chelsea sent a fishing boat and the confused Ukrainian disembarked from a small hatch on the side of the ship and into the boat, thinking it was Arsenal's.

After they made him sign the contract it was too late.

[ulvhedin 526]

8 hours ago, Vesper said:

chalk and cheese at multiple levels

I do not care how many times a few people on here try to claim CuCu is a centre  back, the little overpriced left back IS NOT a CB

also, Guehi and Tomori were sold long before we shit away cash on KK and Wesley Fofana, so the latter are not direct replacements, and barely a few words of whinge were uttered when we did sell them off

we got around £55m (counting add-ons) plus sell-on percentages and right of first refusal for Guehi (I don't think we have a sell-on clause for Tomori)

IF Guehi is sold for around £40-50m, our total pay-out for both combined, when the books are completely closed, will be close to £65-68m

that's a shit tonne better that the combined ZERO we got for AC and Rudiger

Also though Guehi and Tomori are capable of having very good match now and then, they are not so great on regular basis. They would be heavily exposed in Chelsea.

[TheHulk 2,482]

 

[Superblue 6,372]

27 minutes ago, TheHulk said:

 

I can't see a situation where we have headed into January looking like top 4 is pretty much out of the picture and gone on to spend what we have with a backdrop of breaking FFP. I'm sure there would be contingencies in place at the club for missing out on the top 4 as it's unlikely to happen this season. 

Personally I think there will be a clear out in the summer which will give rise to being able to go again in the market if they choose to. Jorginho will almost certainly leave in the summer and I think Pulisic and Ziyech will both be sold too with a year left on their deals. That just there is £20-25m of FFP costs per annum cleared off the books, and based on the age profile and contract lengths we have been targeting, probably gives rise to 2-3 big signings that can be done to replace those costs.

I think depending on interest in the market, one of the keepers, Auba and Koulibaly will all be moved on too and then I do think it's up in the air with regards to Havertz and Gallagher, particularly as we can probably fetch decent fees for both.

[Pizy 18,953]

What’s the punishment for breaching FFP anyways? A small fine like City were slapped with? I doubt our owners (or really any multibillionaire owner) is sweating heavily and losing sleep over FFP any longer. 

[Hamilton 2,120]

16 minutes ago, Pizy said:

What’s the punishment for breaching FFP anyways? A small fine like City were slapped with? I doubt our owners (or really any multibillionaire owner) is sweating heavily and losing sleep over FFP any longer. 

The rules change when the name Chelsea Fc pops up in a sentence..

[Superblue 6,372]

25 minutes ago, Pizy said:

What’s the punishment for breaching FFP anyways? A small fine like City were slapped with? I doubt our owners (or really any multibillionaire owner) is sweating heavily and losing sleep over FFP any longer. 

It is all due to change again over the next year or two anyway and move towards a model where certain expenses (transfer fees, wages, agents fees I believe) have to be within a certain percentage of your turnover (believe it's due to start at like 80% and move down to eventually 70%).

To me this looks like an even bigger means of keeping the established clubs at the top table and will be even more restrictive for any clubs that have a bit of ambition. 

But I'm not sure what the transition is from current to the future one. Perhaps Chelsea are aware that the changes offer a window of opportunity, I'm not too sure. 

[Pizy 18,953]

I mean, whatever the worries about FFP there are it doesn’t appear to be stopping Boehly. Maybe the plan is a massive outlay early on, get all these young signings on super long deals, and clear out the aging players on huge wages. Then the spending can slow down as the new young signings settle.

[Vegetable 830]

51 minutes ago, Pizy said:

What’s the punishment for breaching FFP anyways? A small fine like City were slapped with? I doubt our owners (or really any multibillionaire owner) is sweating heavily and losing sleep over FFP any longer. 

It depends - City and PSG get the finger waved at them, Chelsea is getting relegated