Transfer Talk Topic

[paulw66]

16 minutes ago, Morgs said:

Guaranteed to get more than 25 games for us - at least. Chilwell is unfortunately very fragile. 

Not quite a guarantee with no European football. 25 starts will be over 50% 

[Ham]

29 minutes ago, Sleeping Dave said:

100%. I don’t think people appreciate what a season Maatsen has had at Burnley. Quite a lot more impressive than let’s say Colwill at Brighton. If we don’t reward players coming back from a loan like that there’s no point is it? 

He needs to start the season as LB2. 

Important to note that was in the championship.  He needs a loan in the PL in my opinion. 

[Miguelito07]

6 minutes ago, Ham said:

Important to note that was in the championship.  He needs a loan in the PL in my opinion. 

to be fair to SD - Reece had no PL loan after his stint with Wigan and went into the Chelsea team

Edited July 12, 2023 by Miguelito07

[Ham]

1 minute ago, Miguelito07 said:

to be fair to SD - Reece had no PL loan after his stint with Wigan

No but he wasn't behind the likes of Chilwell, Cucurella and Hall at the time.  Had there been solid top quality competition for RB/RWB he might have been loaned out again. 

 

[Miguelito07]

1 minute ago, Ham said:

No but he wasn't behind the likes of Chilwell, Cucurella and Hall at the time.  Had there been solid top quality competition for RB/RWB he might have been loaned out again. 

 

fair point

[Bert19]

28 minutes ago, paulw66 said:

Which compounds the absurd money spent on the Hair. 

The club knew we had him in the ranks and still thought it was a good idea.

I think it was a Tuchel "here and now" signing tbh. Hence the inflated fee.  He spoke about us needing defenders quickly after losing Alonso, Rudi and Christensen.  Shame 2/3 he wanted were duds, but I think the owners were backing the manager as he like Cucurella's ability to play LCB/LB/LWB. 

[Ham]

4 minutes ago, Bert19 said:

I think it was a Tuchel "here and now" signing tbh. Hence the inflated fee.  He spoke about us needing defenders quickly after losing Alonso, Rudi and Christensen.  Shame 2/3 he wanted were duds, but I think the owners were backing the manager as he like Cucurella's ability to play LCB/LB/LWB. 

Apart from the transfer fee, I don't recall any real negativity towards his signing at the time. 

A fair amount of revisionism going on as usual on this particular thread. 

 

[Bert19]

6 minutes ago, Ham said:

Apart from the transfer fee, I don't recall any real negativity towards his signing at the time. 

A fair amount of revisionism going on as usual on this particular thread. 

 

I was more meaning the context of the signing and the urgency required.  If I remember correctly, he looked pretty solid the first couple of games.  

I think we all knew it was an inflated price (same with Koulibaly tbf), but it was obvious that was the way things were going to be last summer. 

 

Personally, if we can get £30m for him now though, with Maatsen and Hall waiting in the wings - then i'd go for it. 

[Mark Kelly]

7 minutes ago, Ham said:

Apart from the transfer fee, I don't recall any real negativity towards his signing at the time. 

A fair amount of revisionism going on as usual on this particular thread. 

 

Everyone was mindful of how he played against us where he ragdolled Lukaku which in hindsight may not have been quite as difficult as we'd envisaged 

[Lump Of Celery]

1 minute ago, Ham said:

Apart from the transfer fee, I don't recall any real negativity towards his signing at the time. 

A fair amount of revisionism going on as usual on this particular thread. 

 

My memory is that quite a few people (myself included) were saying we didn't need a £60m left back because we already had £50m Chilwell, but also a lot of talk that he was statistically the best fullback in the league that season - which he was

I think somebody said it a coupe of pages back, but I find the idea that we paid £10m extra for Colwill (a player we own) not to be sold to them is absolutely bonkers. To me a lot of the ins and outs last season showed a lack of nous in negotiating fees up or down. I can see the owners have a smart plan with regards to FFP and structuring deals to suit that, but the actual negotiating on fees has been terrible. Badiashile looks like the only senior player where we got a half decent deal.

[thevelourfog]

2 hours ago, paulw66 said:

Of course he will.

Even if we sign 4 new players before the end of the window, and let's say he works with a squad of 24, that means 20 out of 24 (83%) are already here, and would have done the whole pre season.

What is less likely is most of the new signings (however many there will be) wont do the entire pre season. But that's completely normal. When does any club complete ALL of its incomings before training starts. Never.

First bit, I worded badly. Hands up.

Second bit, almost like I didn't say it was a "pipe dream" of mine in the post you quoted.

[Ham]

9 minutes ago, Bert19 said:

I was more meaning the context of the signing and the urgency required.  If I remember correctly, he looked pretty solid the first couple of games.  

I think we all knew it was an inflated price (same with Koulibaly tbf), but it was obvious that was the way things were going to be last summer. 

 

Personally, if we can get £30m for him now though, with Maatsen and Hall waiting in the wings - then i'd go for it. 

I'd be more inclined to give him this season under Poch before anything is decided. A full pre-season and a clean slate taking into account his considerable outside issues. 

Let's not forget that Pep wanted him before we did but baulked at the price only and apparently he's no mug. 

[Lump Of Celery]

I agree that Cucurella could do with testing for a 2nd season under a real coach

Also it makes absolute sense for all involved that Maatsen spends the season on loan at Burnley again playing regular PL football, if good enough

[xceleryx]

20 minutes ago, Lump Of Celery said:

My memory is that quite a few people (myself included) were saying we didn't need a £60m left back because we already had £50m Chilwell, but also a lot of talk that he was statistically the best fullback in the league that season - which he was

I think somebody said it a coupe of pages back, but I find the idea that we paid £10m extra for Colwill (a player we own) not to be sold to them is absolutely bonkers. To me a lot of the ins and outs last season showed a lack of nous in negotiating fees up or down. I can see the owners have a smart plan with regards to FFP and structuring deals to suit that, but the actual negotiating on fees has been terrible. Badiashile looks like the only senior player where we got a half decent deal.

This would've been me. 

Addressing the whole post though there's a few key points to consider here.

Chilwell was returning from a major injury, required easing back in (which he was), and remained a bit of an unknown in terms of whether he'd return to pre-injury form. The idea of spending a bigger sum on a good alternative left back wasn't necessarily a far-fetched notion, especially with Alonso wishing to leave also. It was a position of importance and had a heavy cloud of uncertainty, and as you acknowledged Cucurella had a very strong season. 

Paying the extra £10m for Colwill's move to be a dry loan opposed to a full blown sale isn't that bonkers, unless you'd prefer to have paid the £50m Cucurella asking price (which is what Brighton wanted and had quoted Man City earlier), and also lose Colwill altogether? In the end he got a good season of further development, we still retain him, and he's in a better position to be a first team candidate here. 

The transfers we made in the summer when ownership finally changed and the sanctions lifted were processed in less than an optimal environment. Again, few really complained though with the signings of Cucurella, Koulibaly or even Sterling. The general consensus was that they were all good additions to plug immediate problem areas. January we were in a better place to do deals because our transfer structure had been put in place, and it's gone on to showcase a clear plan (invest in talented young players who can hopefully kick on and propel us forward over the next few years). 

[paulw66]

1 hour ago, Bert19 said:

I think it was a Tuchel "here and now" signing tbh. Hence the inflated fee.  He spoke about us needing defenders quickly after losing Alonso, Rudi and Christensen.  Shame 2/3 he wanted were duds, but I think the owners were backing the manager as he like Cucurella's ability to play LCB/LB/LWB. 

Which, at the time seemed fair enough.

1 hour ago, Ham said:

Apart from the transfer fee, I don't recall any real negativity towards his signing at the time. 

A fair amount of revisionism going on as usual on this particular thread. 

 

True.

he has just hasn't worked out.

[Lump Of Celery]

16 minutes ago, xceleryx said:

Paying the extra £10m for Colwill's move to be a dry loan opposed to a full blown sale isn't that bonkers, unless you'd prefer to have paid the £50m Cucurella asking price (which is what Brighton wanted and had quoted Man City earlier)

So he was available to other teams for £50m and no player on loan. But we paid £63m and sent them a talented player on loan? Certainly sounds bonkers to me...usually teams pay us to take players on loan, not the other way round

19 minutes ago, xceleryx said:

January we were in a better place to do deals because our transfer structure had been put in place, and it's gone on to showcase a clear plan (invest in talented young players who can hopefully kick on and propel us forward over the next few years). 

Regarding all of your last paragraph, I wasn't complaining about the players signed (that is easywith hindsight) but specifically the fees paid. Every team got every penny of the fee they wanted, in the summer arguably they had us over a barrel, but come January again we paid the full aksing prices for Enzo, Noni, Mudryk etc. We even paid more than the release fees in some cases to pay in instalments (a trick we repeated this summer to sign Jackson) On top of those we paid £12m to sign Felix on loan for 6 months, and the deal for Lukaku's loan was just an embarrassment. Let's not even get started on the amount paid to hire Graham Potter and his staff.

This summer I'm not sure if the Saudi deals were luck or skill, and IMO they got a good fee for Havertz, all other deals so far have been at par. I'm expecting to see some improvement on last years negotiations.

[Holymoly]

3 hours ago, paulw66 said:

I am not convinced Caicedo is in the same category as Enzo.

Totally agree. Caicedo has appeared in 53 games in senior football while Fernandez was part of the team that won the World Cup and was voted the young player of the tournament. I think it is a risk to put so many eggs in such a young basket. When you look at his highlight reel he was a millisecond off a yellow or red card in so many of his challenges. Last season may have been his stand out season and there is always the risk we could be left holding the baby if he begins to believe the hype in himself and light up the proverbial cigar. I understand that Brighton will agree to £80m if it's paid in a oner but are digging their heels at our wish to pay on tick. It's a risky buy and certainly not worth more than £80m. Maybe they would take Cucurella back in part exchange?

[ROTG]

4 hours ago, xceleryx said:

Wouldn't give Gallagher to Spurs for even £100m. 

Firstly, screw them.

And secondly, he's ideal for the all action football Postecoglou likes to play. We're also in short supply ourselves of midfield depth, run, energy and pressers - even if we add Caicedo in the coming weeks. Plus, the lad actually wants to be at Chelsea and cares about the club. I'm hanging onto that desire even if he's not necessarily good enough to be a consistent starter. 

Another whipping for an academy player, One hopes he proves you wrong. "and yes i will be rubbing it in and you are more than welcome to do vice versa should he not be a regular starter"

 

[Morgs]

4 minutes ago, Holymoly said:

 Maybe they would take Cucurella back in part exchange?

That did occur to me as well.

Maybe give them Casedei or Bashir Humphries on loan for a season as well? 

Dropping 100m on Caicedo would be a proper head in the hands moment. 

[Morgs]

Anyone else keep seeing the Kane links and praying we don't do something silly? 

 

[boratsbrother]

8 hours ago, xceleryx said:

 

Wish he had a yard or two of extra pace, or at least acceleration off the mark, but otherwise he's got all the creative tools to pull strings and be a menace inside the final third. 

 

We already have trouble containing teams who run at us with pace. Wouldn't we be asking for trouble having another player as slow as Enzo?

[ROTG]

3 hours ago, Morgs said:

The four questions aside, the replacements vs the ones they replaced all look a significant upgrade in lots of ways don't they?

Chelsea is not and F1 car, although you might have thought so last season with the amount of upgrades the club tried.

If the upgrades work its a top 4 spot next season, anything else is meaningless and back to square one

[Chelsea_Matt]

3 minutes ago, ROTG said:

Chelsea is not and F1 car, although you might have thought so last season with the amount of upgrades the club tried.

If the upgrades work its a top 4 spot next season, anything else is meaningless and back to square one

My dear Mr Gizmo,

I would respectfully suggest that there may be a middle ground. Personally I’m looking for a tangible improvement in tactics, fitness, fighting spirit, physicality and leadership - the minimum we should accept. No more meek surrenders. 

Top 6 would be a huge improvement and in my view a reasonable expectation. Perhaps a domestic trophy, too.

As ever,

C_M 

[ROTG]

24 minutes ago, Morgs said:

That did occur to me as well.

Maybe give them Casedei or Bashir Humphries on loan for a season as well? 

Dropping 100m on Caicedo would be a proper head in the hands moment. 

There are other club out there apart from Brighton,  will be back in the championship within 5 seasons. they are not more than another Southampton, Leicester to name a couple, who sell to survive and eventually the production line stops.

 

[ROTG]

Just now, Chelsea_Matt said:

My dear Mr Gizmo,

I would respectfully suggest that there may be a middle ground. Personally I’m looking for a tangible improvement in tactics, fitness, fighting spirit, physicality and leadership - the minimum we should accept. No more meek surrenders. 

Top 6 would be a huge improvement and in my view a reasonable expectation. Perhaps a domestic trophy, too.

As ever,

C_M 

Mr Door,

you may well be right about the middle ground, however it will put more pressure on moving on the high earners / stars due to lack of income.

One would assume the ground redevelopment is past the 2030 project team Chelsea date?

 

Regards Mischievous  

ROTG