Luka Modric

[KonohasOrangeFlash 2,607]

I'm not using Real Madrid as an ideal situation. Real Madrid along with Barcelona, Chelsea,City, and to some extent Liverpool are the cause of this problem. I was just pointing out how even teams that spend enormously rarely spend like you people seem to want Chelsea to spend this summer. Eden Hazard is one of the most expensive transfers in history and people are acting as if Chelsea haven't done anything yet. We've already spent more this transfer period than all but 4 teams in the Premier League spent in all of 2011-2012. You don't have to buy the biggest name at every position to compete and long-term this strategy is disastrous and it creates a never-ending cycle of overspending. The inability to put a proper plan in place, the inability to find or even look for any value in the transfer market is why Chelsea have spent over a billion Euros and still have major holes in the team. I'm just so sick of the "hey, he looks good, let's go spend 25M pounds on him" stuff that dominates here. There's no feeling for football as a game, for footballers as people, for building a sustainable system, for looking for value, it's just a bunch of people treating Chelsea like a videogame for building their dream team.

Well we have no control over the youth system or implementing youth into the first team. We don't control the scouting networks nor how much we pay for players. It is only human nature to want the best and be greedy. The thing is, if we are spending big, how is it like a videogame? It is happening in real life thus it becomes our reality. Buying Hulk and Cabaye etc is hardly a dream team is it? It's just the players needed to strengthen our team to make it one of the best in Europe. Buying Messi, Iniesta, Ronaldo, Neymar etc is building a dream team

[kalouda 23]

I don't see a reason to buy him. We have De Bruyne, Mata, Hazard, Mikel, Lampard and Ramires. They are all just fine. Modric is good player, but very expensive. He didn't came last summer, and from that time we buy Mata, Hazard and De Bruyne.

There is always McEachran and Lucas Piazon

[Kisho 33]

I think we NEED modric or a player like modric.McEachran, De bruyne, Lucas Piazon still need atleast another 2-3 years to develop and lampard is 34 and needs to be used sparingly.

[ZOS 580]

How do i post pictures that is on my hard drive locally?

[kalouda 23]

I think we NEED modric or a player like modric.McEachran, De bruyne, Lucas Piazon still need atleast another 2-3 years to develop and lampard is 34 and needs to be used sparingly.

De Bruyne is able to play, and I think that Josh can play too !

Willshere in Arsenal could in Josh's ages, why Josh can't ?

I'm saying again - we don't need Modric so much. My advice - don't buy him.

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

I think we NEED modric or a player like modric.McEachran, De bruyne, Lucas Piazon still need atleast another 2-3 years to develop and lampard is 34 and needs to be used sparingly.

Sparingly? Lampard played 49 matches last season and was one of our better players and we suddenly have to cut his playing time in half simply because he's 34? Scholes was playing 33-38 games a season in his last 4 years before retiring (and coming back).Giggs has averaged almost 39 games a season in the last 5 seasons and he's 5 years older than Lampard. The idea that we have to bench a good player simply because of his age, is ridiculous. It's probably best that he doesn't play 49 games again, but he could easily play 40 and still be very effective. Lampard is probably the greatest player in Chelsea history and is still a very good player and this board is filled with people who want to see him gone.

[KonohasOrangeFlash 2,607]

Sparingly? Lampard played 49 matches last season and was one of our better players and we suddenly have to cut his playing time in half simply because he's 34? Scholes was playing 33-38 games a season in his last 4 years before retiring (and coming back).Giggs has averaged almost 39 games a season in the last 5 seasons and he's 5 years older than Lampard. The idea that we have to bench a good player simply because of his age, is ridiculous. It's probably best that he doesn't play 49 games again, but he could easily play 40 and still be very effective. Lampard is probably the greatest player in Chelsea history and is still a very good player and this board is filled with people who want to see him gone.

You do realise not every old player will be like Giggs, right? Comparing every future ageing Chelsea player to Giggs is just silly. What he has done does not happen very often. Much like Drogba is one of a kind, so is Ryan Giggs.

[Justin_3d 1,140]

Modric will go to chelsea if abramovich gets his wallet out.

Modric to madrid rumours have been media inspired, and even more so from modric him self, as several friends of his have stated something about la liga or something.

Real Madrid have showed no interest yet, when we get someone it will be a sure swoop deal, as with callejon and sahin, and varane. No controversy.

The rumors continue:

Tottenham could land Sahin in return as Real Madrid prepare £30m swoop for Modric

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2165361/Tottenham-land-Nuri-Sahin-Luka-Modric-deal-Real-Madrid.html#ixzz1z0QAFGDl

What you think of that?

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

You do realise not every old player will be like Giggs, right? Comparing every future ageing Chelsea player to Giggs is just silly. What he has done does not happen very often. Much like Drogba is one of a kind, so is Ryan Giggs.

That's absolute nonsense. I compared Lampard to Giggs and Scholes by showing how top players can remain very productive well into their mid to late 30's. Lampard is an elite level player, maybe the best midfielder in Premier League history, there's no reason to believe that he's suddenly going to be useless . Lampard was very good last year playing 49 games, so what is your basis for thinking that he's suddenly not good enough to play regularly? Your logic is basically "well, he's 34 so he's going to be bad, so let's go out and spend 25 million on somebody new". This exactly the same "let's just go out and buy players because it's fun" crap. It's not only ridiculous in football terms, it's treating the best player in Chelsea history who is still a good player like garbage because you want a shiny new toy.

[Zinedine Iniesco 172]

The rumors continue:

Tottenham could land Sahin in return as Real Madrid prepare £30m swoop for Modric

Read more: http://www.dailymail...l#ixzz1z0QAFGDl

What you think of that?

Im not going to read it because its not necessary, i just don't think that nuri sahin is at such a status at real madrid right now. He was bought because he was considered a world class player in many regards, and we will give him his chance. What many fail to realise is that even if modric rumors are true, that doesnt mean bad for sahin as he plays different position and has different competition. I still dont really take the modric possibility TOO seriously, but if it happens i dont see sahin leaving, atleast not like that.

[KonohasOrangeFlash 2,607]

That's absolute nonsense. I compared Lampard to Giggs and Scholes by showing how top players can remain very productive well into their mid to late 30's. Lampard is an elite level player, maybe the best midfielder in Premier League history, there's no reason to believe that he's suddenly going to be useless . Lampard was very good last year playing 49 games, so what is your basis for thinking that he's suddenly not good enough to play regularly? Your logic is basically "well, he's 34 so he's going to be bad, so let's go out and spend 25 million on somebody new". This exactly the same "let's just go out and buy players because it's fun" crap. It's not only ridiculous in football terms, it's treating the best player in Chelsea history who is still a good player like garbage because you want a shiny new toy.

I never said anything about not playing regularly. I simply said he will not play on untill he is Giggs' age and very few will. You're being very assumptive aren't you Lampard can still play around 35-40 games.

[Justin_3d 1,140]

That's absolute nonsense. I compared Lampard to Giggs and Scholes by showing how top players can remain very productive well into their mid to late 30's. Lampard is an elite level player, maybe the best midfielder in Premier League history, there's no reason to believe that he's suddenly going to be useless . Lampard was very good last year playing 49 games, so what is your basis for thinking that he's suddenly not good enough to play regularly? Your logic is basically "well, he's 34 so he's going to be bad, so let's go out and spend 25 million on somebody new". This exactly the same "let's just go out and buy players because it's fun" crap. It's not only ridiculous in football terms, it's treating the best player in Chelsea history who is still a good player like garbage because you want a shiny new toy.

BTW the 49 games, you surely not counting the AVB games?

Cause he was useless when he play in his normal role!

It was when RDM put in the double pivot role as a deep lying playmaker when he shined.

Because Lampard no longer had the stamina to play the Lampard of old.

Similar to Giggs at United.

But then that's the problem for United. They settle with just Giggs cause he could played that role, that they did not spend money on some younger player like Sneijder.