Transfer Talk Topic

[Blue Orca]

3 minutes ago, Lump Of Celery said:

Is that our new sponsor?

Still better than 3 😁 

[chara]

This name stuff is doing my head in..oh for the days when it was Reel Madrid..Bournmuff...

and name confusion was...Alan or Ron ?..Bobby or Jacky ?..... Hoddle or Waddle ?...Kevan was Derrick not Keegan...

And I await the mysteries and brow furrowing of todays game..... sigh.

[RDCW]

6 hours ago, Chelsea_Matt said:

Bear in mind it was just a joke. 

I did, hence the mild tone of my rebuke old chap.

[Gurj SS]

2 hours ago, paulw66 said:

So we should have sold Rudiger to accommodate Tomori or Guehi? 

Not at all, I don't think Tomori or Guehi left because they'd be playing second fiddle to Rudiger, but watching the manager play Christensen ahead of someone like Tomori just so he signs a contract was painful to watch as a fan, we have 4 spots for centreback; and there's no reason why a player like Tomori couldn't have been given a place, yet we went with players like Christensen who got stage fright and a Zouma who never recovered from his ACL injury, over a homegrown player who would play well and get better each game they played in.

I totally get the luxury of hindsight, but good management and good planning is what's required to make an academy work; not just taking talent and making it better, otherwise you're just a feeder club.

If we were starting this season with Silva, Tomori, Guehi and Colwill, (also Fofana) I'd say we're in a better position than we are now with Silva, Badiashile (3rd Hamstring injury within 2 seasons), Disasi (unplanned), Chalobah (never seems to have more than 1 good game in a row). Colwill (still question marks). Sarr? So bad his loan club didn't activate his buyout and we go buy someone to cover/replace Fofana instead of using him. Cucurella? No comment needed. Fofana is out. We're weaker than we could have been if we'd handled things with more forwards planning when dealing with our academy players stepping up.

At the moment we're in a very similar situation, we have Enzo, Gallagher, Santos, Casadei, Ugochukwu; many on here want Caicedo but if we get him in while he may boost the central midfield he will block Santos, Casadei and Ugochukwu from growing as players; even if the younger lads leave on loan they'll just get lost to the system because no matter what they do they'll never get ahead of a midfield pairing on long term contracts worth £200m. If we keep the midfield as it is, throw in Chalobah as cover and we are on the way to produce our own midfield before they're worth £100m, with one realistic positon up for grabs there's something to play for, take that out by bringing in Caicedo then we might as well go with Enzo, Caicedo, Gallagher, and some older player who doesn't mind being just a backup and playing about 10 games a year, because reality is a pairing worth £200m will play as mant games as possible. Take one out (Caicedo) and all sorts of combinations can be used without needing to worry about the squad being overcrowded.

[Chelsea_Matt]

1 hour ago, Blue Orca said:

Still better than 3 😁 

Forgive me Blue Orca for I have sinned…my sim-only deal is with 3. 😬🙈

[Original 21]

Well I guess this is happening…

 

Edited August 2, 2023 by Original 21

[Holymoly]

3 hours ago, asvaberg said:

But very easy for us Scandinavians 😁

Btw: I have noticed that English speaking people always pronounce ManC striker surname 'Håland' completely wrong.

You don't use the letter 'å' in English and you omit his name to a single 'a' and pronounce the name  'Haland', but it should be pronounced [ˈhòːlɑn] (think of how you pronounce the 'o' in words like 'off' and 'story')

I always remember back in the day that Bjorn Borg was never pronounced by English speakers the way it should have been. It must be so irritating for people when they have their name routinely mispronounced. My wife spells her name phonetically as people never pronounce it correctly. Back in the day I even dumped a girlfriend when she read my name Mikey and insisted in calling me Mickey. Shallow? Moi?

[Holymoly]

8 minutes ago, Original 21 said:

Well I guess this is happening…

 

Vlahovic seems another one with a penchant for a good hamstring injury.

[Original 21]

47 minutes ago, Holymoly said:

Vlahovic seems another one with a penchant for a good hamstring injury.

I read that it’s a groin tear similar to the one that Mount needed surgery for. I think it’s why PSG backed out of pursuing him. I just hope we do our due diligence on him. He could be a decent buy, but not if he’s going to be crocked for a chunk of the season. 

[martin1905]

We need to stand firm on OUR valuation of Vlahovic and NOT theirs. It seems they are far more desperate for this deal than we are and if it wasn't for them wanting Lukaku we probably wouldn't be interested. That's not to say we shouldn't be, if the deal is right, for us, this could make a lot of sense as we do still need another striker, regardless of the early promise Jackson has shown.

We hold all the cards on this, it would make a nice change if we dictated terms, for once.

 

 

[xceleryx]

7 hours ago, Gurj SS said:

Not at all, I don't think Tomori or Guehi left because they'd be playing second fiddle to Rudiger, but watching the manager play Christensen ahead of someone like Tomori just so he signs a contract was painful to watch as a fan, we have 4 spots for centreback; and there's no reason why a player like Tomori couldn't have been given a place, yet we went with players like Christensen who got stage fright and a Zouma who never recovered from his ACL injury, over a homegrown player who would play well and get better each game they played in.

I totally get the luxury of hindsight, but good management and good planning is what's required to make an academy work; not just taking talent and making it better, otherwise you're just a feeder club.

I'm sorry, but no. Christensen was better than Tomori then, and remains better than him now. When Tomori was here was had Rudiger, Christensen, Thiago Silva and Zouma all in contention. There is no realm in which Tomori was going to play ahead of any of these regularly.  Guehi's situation is no different, he had all those same players ahead of them once he returned from loan and was never going to get the sort of constant first team football he desired with that level of competition. One could also throw Azpilicueta into the mix here as we were also playing 3ATB during some of these periods, only further increasing the competition for places. 

The common trend, specifically about those loudest about Tomori, generally have one thing in common. They've barely watched him since leaving outside of a few Champions League outings. The reality however is that there's been increased grumbles within the AC Milan faithful about Tomori and his performances - too slow in possession, poor positionally, vulnerable in the air, a liability, and hasn't really improved since his first season there and as such his performance level has dropped. It's actually gotten to a point where selling him back to an English club is becoming a more favourable option by many. That purple period where his praises were being sung has well and truly passed. We'd be no better with him here and he'd likely be in the same situation that Chalobah now finds himself in.

People really need to let the idea of Tomori being worthwhile here go. We were well within our rights to sell him, regardless of the purchases we've gone ahead and made later on in the same position, Tomori wouldn't have been a solution. 

[xceleryx]

4 hours ago, Original 21 said:

I read that it’s a groin tear similar to the one that Mount needed surgery for. I think it’s why PSG backed out of pursuing him. I just hope we do our due diligence on him. He could be a decent buy, but not if he’s going to be crocked for a chunk of the season. 

Pubalgia to be exact. 

But yeah, he had surgery on it last summer but continued to experience pain throughout last season which hampered his performances quite a bit. Not a career ending by any means, but it can be problematic. That being said, it can also take quite a while to resolve even with surgery. I don't know how he is right now after a good break but there's also the possibility the worst is behind him. Will only really know the full extent once he's back playing regularly again over a season. 

[xceleryx]

3 hours ago, martin1905 said:

We need to stand firm on OUR valuation of Vlahovic and NOT theirs. It seems they are far more desperate for this deal than we are and if it wasn't for them wanting Lukaku we probably wouldn't be interested. That's not to say we shouldn't be, if the deal is right, for us, this could make a lot of sense as we do still need another striker, regardless of the early promise Jackson has shown.

We hold all the cards on this, it would make a nice change if we dictated terms, for once.

Disagree with us holding all the cards. The reality is, no one wants Lukaku other than Juve and the Saudi's. We all know Lukaku's desire is to stay in Italy, so if Juve walk away we're virtually stuck. We can't force Lukaku to take up any potential Saudi offer, which would mean returning here in whatever capacity is decided upon. Given the huge turn around in attitudes and moral within the squad, adding a disruptive influence isn't great - even if Lukaku has no involved with the first team. 

Even in a world where Lukaku does accept a Saudi offer we're still needing to sign another striker anyway, which I dare say is going to cost us more than the €40m or so Juventus are seeking as part of any Vlahovic deal. 

It's absolutely in our best interest to get this deal done, even if it costs. We'll be shedding a disruptive figure, a striker in his 30's, on massive wages, and is virtually unsellable. While gaining a striker 7 years younger, on more manageable wages, and irrespective if Vlahovic pans out or not he'll be a much easier sell should it come to that. Far more upside for us than there is for Juve.

[ROTG]

19 minutes ago, xceleryx said:

The reality however is that there's been increased grumbles within the AC Milan faithful about Tomori and his performances - too slow in possession, poor positionally, vulnerable in the air, a liability,

Well done summed up Tomori and Christensen to a tee.

Christensen only look reasonable in a back 5, back 4 and he was awful.

Let's be honest if Christensen had stayed, he would gone this summer because of Poch and his preference of a back 4.

[ROTG]

8 minutes ago, xceleryx said:

Disagree with us holding all the cards. The reality is, no one wants Lukaku other than Juve and the Saudi's. We all know Lukaku's desire is to stay in Italy, so if Juve walk away we're virtually stuck. We can't force Lukaku to take up any potential Saudi offer, which would mean returning here in whatever capacity is decided upon. Given the huge turn around in attitudes and moral within the squad, adding a disruptive influence isn't great - even if Lukaku has no involved with the first team. 

Even in a world where Lukaku does accept a Saudi offer we're still needing to sign another striker anyway, which I dare say is going to cost us more than the €40m or so Juventus are seeking as part of any Vlahovic deal. 

It's absolutely in our best interest to get this deal done, even if it costs. We'll be shedding a disruptive figure, a striker in his 30's, on massive wages, and is virtually unsellable. While gaining a striker 7 years younger, on more manageable wages, and irrespective if Vlahovic pans out or not he'll be a much easier sell should it come to that. Far more upside for us than there is for Juve.

If we can spend similar amounts of money on players to loan out, IMO signing him it's a no brainer and needs to be done early before Mr Kane potential departure and Daniel looks for one of his deadline day bargains.

[Chelsea_Matt]

6 hours ago, Original 21 said:

I read that it’s a groin tear similar to the one that Mount needed surgery for. I think it’s why PSG backed out of pursuing him. I just hope we do our due diligence on him. He could be a decent buy, but not if he’s going to be crocked for a chunk of the season. 

I’d still take him over the disruptive, arrogant, entitled salad-dodger tbh

Edited August 3, 2023 by Chelsea_Matt

[Holymoly]

7 hours ago, Original 21 said:

I read that it’s a groin tear similar to the one that Mount needed surgery for. I think it’s why PSG backed out of pursuing him. I just hope we do our due diligence on him. He could be a decent buy, but not if he’s going to be crocked for a chunk of the season. 

Didn't realise he's currently injured. In the past it's been hamstrings with him. He looks built for the Prem though.

[Thiago97]

I have mentioned Tyler Adams at Leeds before as he is a player I quite like.  I didn't realise he only has a £25m release fee following relegation. Surely he could be a back up option to splurging £100m on Caicedo.

I don't see that gap in the ability of these two players. Adams is a fantastic athlete with great pace and stamina, whilst being technically good. Caicedo probably offers more with the ball when compared to Adams and would also have the better physical size of the two, but these two players are nowhere near £75m apart in terms of their ability and impact they could have on our team.

[thevelourfog]

Brighton briefing a club they can't name made a bid they can't release details of other than that it's bigger than ours is very, very funny.

[Mark Kelly]

1 minute ago, thevelourfog said:

Brighton briefing a club they can't name made a bid they can't release details of other than that it's bigger than ours is very, very funny.

I think we should let the imaginary club have him .

[Holymoly]

23 minutes ago, thevelourfog said:

Brighton briefing a club they can't name made a bid they can't release details of other than that it's bigger than ours is very, very funny.

What would have been more believable is if they had received a lower offer which they had accepted....

In other news I hear thaat Mbappe is "open" to moving to Chelsea for a year on the condition that he can go to Madrid on a free next year. Hmmm, how about this Kylian, you agree to play for us for free THEN we can talk about what YOU want?

[Chelsea_Matt]

45 minutes ago, Thiago97 said:

I have mentioned Tyler Adams at Leeds before as he is a player I quite like.  I didn't realise he only has a £25m release fee following relegation. Surely he could be a back up option to splurging £100m on Caicedo.

I don't see that gap in the ability of these two players. Adams is a fantastic athlete with great pace and stamina, whilst being technically good. Caicedo probably offers more with the ball when compared to Adams and would also have the better physical size of the two, but these two players are nowhere near £75m apart in terms of their ability and impact they could have on our team.

I think we should get him. Why not just for a change go for the less high-profile option? He’s a very good player, Adams.

[ROTG]

9 minutes ago, Chelsea_Matt said:

I think we should get him. Why not just for a change go for the less high-profile option? He’s a very good player, Adams.

Agree

Also keeps the owners happy with another fellow countryman on the books

[chrisb]

56 minutes ago, thevelourfog said:

Brighton briefing a club they can't name made a bid they can't release details of other than that it's bigger than ours is very, very funny.

 

52 minutes ago, Mark Kelly said:

I think we should let the imaginary club have him .

Allegedly it’s an “un-named” Saudi club so expect the imaginary offer to be much bigger than ours!

[Box of Tricks]

45 minutes ago, Thiago97 said:

I have mentioned Tyler Adams at Leeds before as he is a player I quite like.  I didn't realise he only has a £25m release fee following relegation. Surely he could be a back up option to splurging £100m on Caicedo.

I don't see that gap in the ability of these two players. Adams is a fantastic athlete with great pace and stamina, whilst being technically good. Caicedo probably offers more with the ball when compared to Adams and would also have the better physical size of the two, but these two players are nowhere near £75m apart in terms of their ability and impact they could have on our team.

 

2 minutes ago, Chelsea_Matt said:

I think we should get him. Why not just for a change go for the less high-profile option? He’s a very good player, Adams.

 

In a minority but I don't want us to sign Caicedo. I keep on seeing people (on Twitter) calling him the natural successor to Kante, etc, but I think that's the absolute last thing we need. He's always struck me as a foul merchant too - the way he uses his physicality will get him in trouble in a team that gets the unfair rub of the green with referees. I'm not even convinced he'd be a great 6 either, which is what we need - I don't think throwing an 'all action' player in there is the way to go.

I'd honestly rather have Tyler Adams out of the two of them (and then keep Big Les around).