🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 Nathaniel Chalobah

[English Freak 456]

No matter how many years he is on loan and how many games he has under his belt. His first Chelsea match will still be his first Chelsea match, no amount of experience and whatnot will change that. If he impresses he impresses if he falls flat on his face exactly that happens.

Exactly. I'm just hoping he doesn't fall flat on his face

[CHOULO19 24,332]

No matter how many years he is on loan and how many games he has under his belt. His first Chelsea match will still be his first Chelsea match, no amount of experience and whatnot will change that. If he impresses he impresses if he falls flat on his face exactly that happens.

But that's exactly why you train and loan players, so that they are ready when they get a chance at Chelsea. Of course every loan they get affects tremendously whether they impress or fall flat when they do.

[Guest FullEnglishBreakfast]

But that's exactly why you train and loan players, so that they are ready when they get a chance at Chelsea. Of course every loan they get affects tremendously whether they impress or fall flat when they do.

But that means nothing. You could loan a player out to Portsmouth and see them fail, but if they were kept at Chelsea you could watch them flourish and succeed. It isn't some static system that is easily converted. Loans mean nothing to me, people are excited and happy with Lukaku at West Brom, I'm not. I won't pass his judgement till he plays for Chelsea.

[CHOULO19 24,332]

But that means nothing. You could loan a player out to Portsmouth and see them fail, but if they were kept at Chelsea you could watch them flourish and succeed. It isn't some static system that is easily converted. Loans mean nothing to me, people are excited and happy with Lukaku at West Brom, I'm not. I won't pass his judgement till he plays for Chelsea.

Of course you need to find the right loan, but loans are extremely important for young players because they offer them a chance to learn and get valuable experience through actual match time. That's something they won't get here.

[Stats 7,142]

But that means nothing. You could loan a player out to Portsmouth and see them fail, but if they were kept at Chelsea you could watch them flourish and succeed. It isn't some static system that is easily converted. Loans mean nothing to me, people are excited and happy with Lukaku at West Brom, I'm not. I won't pass his judgement till he plays for Chelsea.

Loans are very important and a major part in a player's development. Sturridge's loan helped him when he came back to Chelsea. Bertrand benefited with a couple of loans. Look at the likes of Welbeck at Sunderland who is now a firm part of the United squad. Same with Cleverley, who is now a regular started at United. The Wigan loan helped him greatly. If we don't give Chalobah minuted here he will not improve, compared to being out on loan at another team. Wilshere, the list goes on.

[Guest FullEnglishBreakfast]

I've always been against loans. Either give them a chance at Chelsea here and now or tell them to leave. There are too many variables with loans at least if they are at Chelsea everything can assessed properly.

[Mufassir08 2,400]

the like's of pogba,de sciglio,badstubber,muller,rafael etc did not go out on loan.They were thrown into the deep end but they were talented(like chalobah) hence they worked hard and did not dissappoint their managers and fans.I would like to recall chalobah next year as an understudy to mikel and eventually replace him.

[English Freak 456]

I've always been against loans. Either give them a chance at Chelsea here and now or tell them to leave. There are too many variables with loans at least if they are at Chelsea everything can assessed properly.

How would you assess a player if he's better than the reserve team but not good enough to be in the first team yet? (eg McEachran)

[Guest FullEnglishBreakfast]

How would you assess a players development if he's better than the reserve team but not good enough to be in the first team yet? (eg McEachran)

How should I know? They only was to ascertain that information is to throw them into the deep end. Give em a few games and if they prevail they are worth it. There is no way of knowing they are good enough for the first team until they are given a shot at the first team.

[magic weeds 446]

the like's of pogba,de sciglio,badstubber,muller,rafael etc did not go out on loan.They were thrown into the deep end but they were talented(like chalobah) hence they worked hard and did not dissappoint their managers and fans.I would like to recall chalobah next year as an understudy to mikel and eventually replace him.

^^^This.

Pogba, from Manchester United's youth/Reserve, to Juventus first team, and France National Team (All in one season). Its just a matter of giving the kids some playing time. This is what exactly happens at Dortmund.

[Thomas Williams 166]

I think Poga and Rafael are excellent examples in favor of bringing Chalobah to the bridge, and honestly, could he look any worse in the pivot than Lampard and Ramires? (No offense to those players, I love them).

[zolayes 14,489]

The sad reality is that our academy will never produce players for our first team on a regular basis. Realistically, you have to be one of the top 300 players in the world to be a regular at Chelsea. Its incredibly difficult to know which 13-14 year is eventually going to develop into the next John Terry, and even if you do spot a player with incredible potential, you have to compete with every other team in the world to sign them. Barcelona, is one of the few teams that produces top players on a regular basis. Yes, that partly has to do with training, but its also because of their immense reputation; almost every young player in Spain (and everywhere else) would give their left nut to play for them. However, even with that huge advantage, a vast majority of their youths will fail.

Lately, I think we have intelligently been targeting older players like Piazon, Lukaku, Courtois and Wallace who are further along in their development. The older a player is, the easier it is to project where they will end up.

What gets me excited about Chalobah is that he seems to be one of those rare players that exceeds expectations, and actually has a shot of making it out of the academy. He still has a lot to prove, but my money is on him making it.

I have raised this question before ..Why bother with an Academy at all . It is costing a lot of money and delivering next to nothing.

A few Youth trophies is scant return on the investment ,,, We have spent considerable money and got into trouble signing Wood Taiwo

and Kakuta and I am not even talking tongue in loftus Cheek. Stay with buying players in the age bracket 20 - 23 ,,forget the kids

[The only place to be 11,313]

I think loans have their place. For the likes of Bamford, Kane and Saville, they give them a chance to show something that they probably haven't shown in the youth team. Without loans, these kids wouldn't have a sniff of making it here so it gives them a way to make themselves stand out and make the coaches re-assess them.

For people like Kakuta, it's a chance to prove people wrong when people have written them off.

For the majority of talented youngsters like Chalobah, Lukaku and even Kalas and Courtois it's essentially a way of getting them used to first-team football. They learn what it's like getting ready for matches on a weekly basis and they learn something about their bodies in January when they're playing their third game in a week, which they wouldn't have learnt in the academy.

So they definitely have their place, but people can sometimes place too much stock in them.

And I'll say what I said earlier when people use this comparison - Chalobah is better than Cleverley could ever hope to be.

I have raised this question before ..Why bother with an Academy at all . It is costing a lot of money and delivering next to nothing.

A few Youth trophies is scant return on the investment ,,, We have spent considerable money and got into trouble signing Wood Taiwo

and Kakuta and I am not even talking tongue in loftus Cheek. Stay with buying players in the age bracket 20 - 23 ,,forget the kids

How much does it cost when you factor in the sales of players like Stoch, Mancienne, Sinclair, Cork etc.?

It's somewhat short-sighted (no offence) to think that we could survive in a post-FFP world without an academy. Right now we have a lot of very talented kids who have the potential to be first-teamers and we need more of that in the future.

[zolayes 14,489]

I think loans have their place. For the likes of Bamford, Kane and Saville, they give them a chance to show something that they probably haven't shown in the youth team. Without loans, these kids wouldn't have a sniff of making it here so it gives them a way to make themselves stand out and make the coaches re-assess them.

For people like Kakuta, it's a chance to prove people wrong when people have written them off.

For the majority of talented youngsters like Chalobah, Lukaku and even Kalas and Courtois it's essentially a way of getting them used to first-team football. They learn what it's like getting ready for matches on a weekly basis and they learn something about their bodies in January when they're playing their third game in a week, which they wouldn't have learnt in the academy.

So they definitely have their place, but people can sometimes place too much stock in them.

And I'll say what I said earlier when people use this comparison - Chalobah is better than Cleverley could ever hope to be.

How much does it cost when you factor in the sales of players like Stoch, Mancienne, Sinclair, Cork etc.?

It's somewhat short-sighted (no offence) to think that we could survive in a post-FFP world without an academy. Right now we have a lot of very talented kids who have the potential to be first-teamers and we need more of that in the future.

we got next to nothing for those you mentioned,,, and we have been saying what talented kids we have for the last fifteen years

[The only place to be 11,313]

we got next to nothing for those you mentioned,,, and we have been saying what talented kids we have for the last fifteen years

The fees we got from those kids are in the millions, possibly eight figures, over the last decade. But I do agree that we should've seen more from the academy (although an England captain and one of the top five players in our history ain't too shabby) and I think that we will. If Chalobah reaches half his potential then that's probably saved us £10 million in the market, whilst there are a number of other youngsters who could make it.

If it's simply a financial decision then the market isn't any better to be honest because not every signing is going to be a winner and you'll lose money on some of your deals.

Also, wasn't John Hollins brought through our 'academy' such that it was in those days?

[zolayes 14,489]

The fees we got from those kids are in the millions, possibly eight figures, over the last decade. But I do agree that we should've seen more from the academy (although an England captain and one of the top five players in our history ain't too shabby) and I think that we will. If Chalobah reaches half his potential then that's probably saved us £10 million in the market, whilst there are a number of other youngsters who could make it.

If it's simply a financial decision then the market isn't any better to be honest because not every signing is going to be a winner and you'll lose money on some of your deals.

Also, wasn't John Hollins brought through our 'academy' such that it was in those days?

Terry is the ONLY one in TWENTY years to come through ,,,,if you want to back to when we did develop[ young players you are back to

the 50s and 60s ..The only foreign players then were the other Brits

[The only place to be 11,313]

Terry is the ONLY one in TWENTY years to come through ,,,,if you want to back to when we did develop[ young players you are back to

the 50s and 60s ..The only foreign players then were the other Brits

So wouldn't an academy developing our own players (which is what everyone connected to the clubs) be the definition of bringing back the good old days?

[Guest FullEnglishBreakfast]

So wouldn't an academy developing our own players (which is what everyone connected to the clubs) be the definition of bringing back the good old days?

As far as I'm concerned the good old days are every day a Chelsea player lifted a new trophy...

[zolayes 14,489]

So wouldn't an academy developing our own players (which is what everyone connected to the clubs) be the definition of bringing back the good old days?

the good old days might be having the same manager for more than a season ....

[semiller1313 23]

I have raised this question before ..Why bother with an Academy at all . It is costing a lot of money and delivering next to nothing.

A few Youth trophies is scant return on the investment ,,, We have spent considerable money and got into trouble signing Wood Taiwo

and Kakuta and I am not even talking tongue in loftus Cheek. Stay with buying players in the age bracket 20 - 23 ,,forget the kids

Well, we do sell some of the players that don't make the first team to help balance the books, but yeah, financially it would probably make sense to drop it. However, from a fan perspective I would hate to see it go. For me, it's fun to learn about the new players coming in, and watching how they do. A vast majority will fail, but it feels extremely rewarding when one does make it. I guess its like playing the lottery; shit odds, but the hope of possibility winning makes it worthwhile.