Chelsea Transfers

[DDA 9,690]

34 minutes ago, Blue Armour said:

 

It's absolute garbage that players like Gallagher are getting so many minutes to prove themselves, instead of this guy.

If he's doesn't get enough game time he will remain raw.

And if that's the case next season, he should go out on loan.

Most of us are totally baffled by DDFofanas exclusion from our match day squads along with Chuwuemeka and now Madueke. 

Some bizarre shit is going down at this club...

90% of the decisions being made from the top to bottom are literally school boy errors....how can soo many so-called professionals get it wrong.... there must be absolute turmoil behind the scenes that isn't being reported.

[LAM09 6,744]

1 hour ago, Superblue said:

It depends on what you view as a 'loss'. 

If we're basing on the original purchase price of players then of course we are talking sizeable losses.

But if we're talking current value on the books for the club then I think there's a lot more leeway being able to let players leave and even bank 'profit' on them from the accounts perspective.

Pulisic for example will only have a book value of £10-11m this summer, so if we were able to move him on for example for £15-20m then it's profit despite it looking horrific compared to when we purchased him originally.

It's still going to make some difficult to shift. Kepa will still have a book value of around £20m and is reportedly on high wages - I certainly see him being much more difficult to move on than Mendy. And as you mentioned, Lukaku is still the anchor and will still have around £60m book value. 

I'd imagine a mix of their original transfer fee and how much we'd save in terms of wages. Commanding a fee of even £50m for Lukaku will probably be a stretch as things currently stand.

Using players as leeway for potential targets could prove to be our best bet for securing incomings over the summer.

45 minutes ago, Blue Armour said:

 

It's absolute garbage that players like Gallagher are getting so many minutes to prove themselves, instead of this guy.

If he's doesn't get enough game time he will remain raw.

And if that's the case next season, he should go out on loan.

Why did we turn down loan offers in January? 

[ulvhedin 507]

10 hours ago, DDA said:

Most of us are totally baffled by DDFofanas exclusion from our match day squads along with Chuwuemeka and now Madueke. 

Some bizarre shit is going down at this club...

90% of the decisions being made from the top to bottom are literally school boy errors....how can soo many so-called professionals get it wrong.... there must be absolute turmoil behind the scenes that isn't being reported.

Also Lewis Hall after his good display vs Liverpool was suddenly completely dropped

[Blue Armour 4,278]

14 hours ago, LAM09 said:

 

Why did we turn down loan offers in January? 

Short term thinking from the club. It was at a time that we were riddled with injuries, and Potter was in that phase of 'throw crap at the wall, see what sticks'.

A good coach would know who's ready and who's not, and stick with their decision, right or wrong. Instead the serial experimenter decided to give Fofana a few minutes., didn't think it was working, and tossed him to the U21s. 

Should have either gone on loan, or given him a fair share of minutes. I'm sure Drogba would have helped him secure a loan to Galatasaray 

Edited April 17, 2023 by Blue Armour

[TheHulk 1,855]

 

[LAM09 6,744]

5 hours ago, Blue Armour said:

Short term thinking from the club. It was at a time that we were riddled with injuries, and Potter was in that phase of 'throw crap at the wall, see what sticks'.

A good coach would know who's ready and who's not, and stick with their decision, right or wrong. Instead the serial experimenter decided to give Fofana a few minutes., didn't think it was working, and tossed him to the U21s. 

Should have either gone on loan, or given him a fair share of minutes. I'm sure Drogba would have helped him secure a loan to Galatasaray 

The moment Auba was frozen out by Potter, Fofana should have replaced him without question. Common sense is always lacking where player selection is concerned.

Santos' working permit being rejected was a blessing in disguise.

[ZAPHOD2319 4,477]

 

[Superblue 6,370]

17 minutes ago, LAM09 said:

The moment Auba was frozen out by Potter, Fofana should have replaced him without question. Common sense is always lacking where player selection is concerned.

Completely agree.

I can understand not starting him but having no striking option on the bench for so long has left us in a situation where if Plan A doesn't work, there's no Plan B. 

I think if Broja hadn't been injured during the break, he would have had quite a few opportunities in the second half of this season, even if just as a sub, he'd have still racked some minutes up. Fofana should have been on the bench as his replacement to offer something different, irrelevant of how raw he might be.

[OneMoSalah 8,776]

2 hours ago, ZAPHOD2319 said:

 

There talking about us having financial difficulties potentially in the summer and we are signing 15 years olds for 8 figures. When we are desperate for a CF and CM. This long term strategy is all well and good in theory but in 2/3 more years there will be other players undoubtedly of the same ilk. Priorities need to be made.

Edited April 17, 2023 by OneMoSalah

[ulvhedin 507]

9 hours ago, OneMoSalah said:

There talking about us having financial difficulties potentially in the summer and we are signing 15 years olds for 8 figures. When we are desperate for a CF and CM. This long term strategy is all well and good in theory but in 2/3 more years there will be other players undoubtedly of the same ilk. Priorities need to be made.

that makes me think that reports about us having ffp problems are exaggerated

[Superblue 6,370]

As players are written down over the length of their contract, I assume this deal won't impact FFP requirements until he can actually join in 2025 so is probably completely irrelevant to the current position.

[Superblue 6,370]

9 hours ago, OneMoSalah said:

There talking about us having financial difficulties potentially in the summer and we are signing 15 years olds for 8 figures. When we are desperate for a CF and CM. This long term strategy is all well and good in theory but in 2/3 more years there will be other players undoubtedly of the same ilk. Priorities need to be made.

But also on the flipside, how many of these types of players find themselves in Portugal or Holland and then are suddenly £50-100m players a couple of years later. 

We've seen that ourselves this year with Enzo. I get your point regarding the first team priorities and I completely agree with that, but getting a handle on tapping into that South American market could be huge as there is so much talent and potential there which we've never really looked to invest. The work permit issues are probably a factor but it would be another reason/benefit for a multi club model.

[ZAPHOD2319 4,477]

If Sky has this correct, it would be awesome!

 

[OneMoSalah 8,776]

6 hours ago, Superblue said:

But also on the flipside, how many of these types of players find themselves in Portugal or Holland and then are suddenly £50-100m players a couple of years later. 

We've seen that ourselves this year with Enzo. I get your point regarding the first team priorities and I completely agree with that, but getting a handle on tapping into that South American market could be huge as there is so much talent and potential there which we've never really looked to invest. The work permit issues are probably a factor but it would be another reason/benefit for a multi club model.

The streamlining of the transfer strategy has to be done right though, currently it’s clearly more long term. I mean already how many u23 players have we already signed?

There is also an argument of how many of these players are we going to sign that won’t amount to being 50-100m players? Or how many of them go to Portugal or Holland then never come to England/ never make the cut also at bigger clubs? We’ve seen lots and lots of these players over the years.

If the club wants to go down this route and become more of an Ajax or a RB Leipzig then fine but we need to prioritise next season more than say 2030.

[MoroccanBlue 5,297]

4 hours ago, ZAPHOD2319 said:

If Sky has this correct, it would be awesome!

 

Being owned by the Glazers and Saudi's. 

United fans must be looking at a rope. 

[OneMoSalah 8,776]

40 minutes ago, MoroccanBlue said:

Being owned by the Glazers and Saudi's. 

United fans must be looking at a rope. 

Would be extremely worried if United get some serious capital invested into them though. Regardless of who from. And if they start competing again and keep winning trophies, they wont be that worried. Like they weren’t hugely under Ferguson.

Edited April 18, 2023 by OneMoSalah

[MoroccanBlue 5,297]

8 minutes ago, OneMoSalah said:

Would be extremely worried if United get some serious capital invested into them though. Regardless of who from. And if they start competing again and keep winning trophies, they wont be that worried. Like they weren’t hugely under Ferguson.

I'm just curious to see which United fans walk the walk after years off criticizing City and Newcastle's owners. 

[OneMoSalah 8,776]

Just now, MoroccanBlue said:

I'm just curious to see which United fans walk the walk after years off criticizing City and Newcastle's owners. 

Lets be honest fans are fickle. I mean if Newcastles owners came here, we wouldn’t of complained had their impact translated to what has happened on the pitch for them. Same with for City's owners. Just as how we’ve always said that people were jealous of us under Roman at the beginning. At least 75-80% of them wont care if it turns the club round and gets them winning and competing.