Transfer Talk Topic

[Chelsea_Matt]

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/23462858/chelsea-edouard-mendy-debut-howler-al-ahli-saudi-arabia/
 

It can always be worse 🤣

[Floyd25]

Let Kepa go on loan if you’ve got a top replacement lined up, nothing suggests to me that we do, could just end up with a lacklustre replacement. 

[Rob B]

31 minutes ago, RDCW said:

I disagree: the one thing he is good at is playing with the ball at his feet. I do, however, agree with you that as a general keeper he is pretty poor.

If he is on a no obligation loan for a year then that's only £9 million off the balance sheet. Why not let them have him on a free, which would give us the £18 million you describe?

This is bad business whichever way you look at it.

For a few reasons I’d assume….

Firstly RM won’t want a GK on high wages for more than they actually need ie during Courtois’ injury, so the financial commitment of signing him permanently wouldn’t work for them.  And I suspect Kepa too because he knows he would be dropped the moment Courtois returns. 

Secondly, if we let him go for free, we have to write off what’s remaining on his transfer fee which I suspect is around £20m (£10m per season based on him being roughly £70m over a 7 year contract).  

So this season, the saving on his salary offsets his book costs for this year, and then if you happened to get £15m for him next summer (don’t know if that’s realistic or not) you’d actually post a £5m profit on the books, before the additional wages saving. 

[ShedMiddle]

7 minutes ago, Rob B said:

For a few reasons I’d assume….

Firstly RM won’t want a GK on high wages for more than they actually need ie during Courtois’ injury, so the financial commitment of signing him permanently wouldn’t work for them.  And I suspect Kepa too because he knows he would be dropped the moment Courtois returns. 

Secondly, if we let him go for free, we have to write off what’s remaining on his transfer fee which I suspect is around £20m (£10m per season based on him being roughly £70m over a 7 year contract).  

So this season, the saving on his salary offsets his book costs for this year, and then if you happened to get £15m for him next summer (don’t know if that’s realistic or not) you’d actually post a £5m profit on the books, before the additional wages saving. 

Add to the fact that if he wins a few things with Madrid his value could increase especially in the eyes of the Saudi's 

[Ham]

33 minutes ago, Original 21 said:

Chelsea set to sign Moises Caicedo in record £115m deal to hijack Liverpool bid
 

Chelsea are on the brink of sealing the signing of Moises Caicedo in a British record deal worth £115 million.

The west London club are sorting out the final terms of the deal after agreeing to better Liverpool’s £111 million offer that was accepted this week.

Caicedo informed Liverpool that he only wants to join Chelsea, which has let the London club back in and after more than 24 hours of negotiations a deal is close to being fully agreed.

Telegraph Sport understands that Chelsea are expected to pay £115 million, inclusive of add-ons for Caicedo who will sign a long-term deal.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2023/08/12/chelsea-set-sign-moises-caicedo-record-115m-deal-liverpool/

 

Makes absolutely zero sense.

Even if we actually needed to better the Liverpool bid, which I don't think we do, why would we offer £115m instead of, say, £111,000,000.01?

 

[thevelourfog]

26 minutes ago, RDCW said:

Why are we offering more than the amount they agreed with Liverpool? That is just so weak.

My guess is because we can't pay as much up front as Liverpool could. 

We're getting what I believe is a brilliant player so I can live with it, but for me there is no way of getting round the basic reality that Brighton have had our pants down. Again. A bid that didn't take the piss but was still £20m-odd less than this would have got this done months ago imo.

[Sleeping Dave]

3 hours ago, Original 21 said:

So Sanchez is now our first choice keeper  😳 

Must admit I have not seen an awful lot of Sanchez, but I’d be genuinely surprised if he was  a worse goalkeeper compared to Kepa. 

3 hours ago, Thiago97 said:

Not seen any mention of the fee anywhere for this deal . 

Hopefully a loan fee. 

1 hour ago, Rob B said:

Unsurprisingly, I sit in the camp of taking the opportunity to offload Kepa when it arises, even if it is a loan.  Clearly Real Madrid are not going to agree to a buying obligation, so you take the deal on the table, or you don’t. 

He’s allegedly on over £9m a year - isn’t great with his feet, isn’t commanding on crosses and doesn’t save long shots from distance. 

As he only has 2 years left on his deal, it’s almost certain he never plays for us again.  No way will the club offer him a new deal (that he would accept) and he is still “good enough” and young enough to be snapped up next season for a knockdown price.

So I suspect it is being seen internally as £18m of wages off the balance sheet over the next 24 months, and the chance you might get £10m for him next summer.  A £28m upside on the P&L and an opportunity to improve the team (more importantly)

The scouts now need to earn their crust, because as others have said, no one we will go into the season with Sanchez and Bettinelli

Very good points. If you have a chance to get rid of Kepa you take it. If this deal goes through it would definitely lend a lot of support to the theory that the club knows they have royally fucked up with his signing and have been looking for the first opportunity to get him out, albeit only on a one year loan. 

But a one year loan cuts his remaining time here with us by 50% and as you say, if it happens he has played his last game for us. With a remaining book value of roughly £10m, I’m sure there would be a few clubs interested in taking him on. If he has a good loan at Real, perhaps we could even get a slightly higher fee. The main sticking point is what club would match his wages - £190k/week is a lot for a bang average goalkeeper. 

[chara]

OK..I try to stay out of the Kepa debate and do appreciate all the financial arguments regarding a loan/sale etc but regardless of the $$$ issues the situation is that the keeper depth and standards at this time are not at an acceptable level for any club let alone Chelsea.

As it stands there, imho, are two below or borderline average back up keepers of a keeper who is probably slightly better than #2/3....

Unless a better all round keeper comes in..and as ever who?...it's appears to me to be something of farcical situation.

If ever Chelsea needed a solid keeper it is NOW with a young untested side ,,,a young keeper in a settled side and/or defence is reasonable but at this time ..for me Kepa is the best option even taking into account the downside of his game. A far from perfect or acceptable situation.

[thevelourfog]

RE: Kepa, I wonder how Sanchez will take whoever comes into replace him. We absolutely need someone in terms of numbers, but I've no doubt Sanchez came here and signed a 7 year deal as he felt confident he'd displace Kepa. So we're now left with the choice of bringing in someone of a lower profile than Sanchez, or someone of a much, much better one ... So either lowering the overall standard of our keeper options, or rendering a signing made a week ago a very expensive mistake already.

I know some would welcome the back of Kepa if it meant handing their life savings and dear old granny over, but this is a ridiculous decision.

[Sleeping Dave]

Just now, chara said:

OK..I try to stay out of the Kepa debate and do appreciate all the financial arguments regarding a loan/sale etc but regardless of the $$$ issues the situation is that the keeper depth and standards at this time are not at an acceptable level for any club let alone Chelsea.

As it stands there, imho, are two below or borderline average back up keepers of a keeper who is probably slightly better than #2/3....

Unless a better all round keeper comes in..and as ever who?...it's appears to me to be something of farcical situation.

If ever Chelsea needed a solid keeper it is NOW with a young untested side ,,,a young keeper in a settled side and/or defence is reasonable but at this time ..for me Kepa is the best option even taking into account the downside of his game. A far from perfect or acceptable situation.

Can we go back in time and sign Cech for £7m?

[chara]

4 minutes ago, Sleeping Dave said:

Can we go back in time and sign Cech for £7m?

Or even drag him out of retirement!!!😁.I'm joking..I think!

[RDCW]

31 minutes ago, Rob B said:

For a few reasons I’d assume….

Firstly RM won’t want a GK on high wages for more than they actually need ie during Courtois’ injury, so the financial commitment of signing him permanently wouldn’t work for them.  And I suspect Kepa too because he knows he would be dropped the moment Courtois returns. 

Secondly, if we let him go for free, we have to write off what’s remaining on his transfer fee which I suspect is around £20m (£10m per season based on him being roughly £70m over a 7 year contract).  

So this season, the saving on his salary offsets his book costs for this year, and then if you happened to get £15m for him next summer (don’t know if that’s realistic or not) you’d actually post a £5m profit on the books, before the additional wages saving. 

Whatever is taken off the books for this injudicious loan would need to be offset by the cost of acquiring and paying a new reserve keeper (assuming that Sanchez is the new first choice). 

[Original 21]

Getting there…

[Thiago97]

11 minutes ago, thevelourfog said:

RE: Kepa, I wonder how Sanchez will take whoever comes into replace him. We absolutely need someone in terms of numbers, but I've no doubt Sanchez came here and signed a 7 year deal as he felt confident he'd displace Kepa. So we're now left with the choice of bringing in someone of a lower profile than Sanchez, or someone of a much, much better one ... So either lowering the overall standard of our keeper options, or rendering a signing made a week ago a very expensive mistake already.

I know some would welcome the back of Kepa if it meant handing their life savings and dear old granny over, but this is a ridiculous decision.

Schmichael linked and kinda fits the bill. I don’t think he is as good as he was, but he would be a good experienced option to go up against Sanchez.

I am convinced Sanchez will surprise people. He is not just some average keeper that is being played out imo. Though I accept he can have a bad mistake in him. 

[Sciatika]

On Caicedo, they are saying that the player will undergo a medical this evening, and the contract will be signed later tonight. Not sure how reliable that is. There is also some dispute about the final fee though the most commonly quoted is £115m. If correct, the sum will depreciate at £23m/annum for FFP purposes. As @Original21 says, the contract is till 2031 with an option of an extra year. By that time, the player will be 30-31. The plan is to present him at the Bridge tomorrow.

[Mark Kelly]

30 minutes ago, thevelourfog said:

My guess is because we can't pay as much up front as Liverpool could. 

We're getting what I believe is a brilliant player so I can live with it, but for me there is no way of getting round the basic reality that Brighton have had our pants down. Again. A bid that didn't take the piss but was still £20m-odd less than this would have got this done months ago imo.

But for months they've been adamant they wanted over £100m so £90m would have been waved away with scorn. 

[chara]

1 minute ago, Sciatika said:

On Caicedo, they are saying that the player will undergo a medical this evening, and the contract will be signed later tonight. Not sure how reliable that is. There is also some dispute about the final fee though the most commonly quoted is £115m. If correct, the sum will depreciate at £23m/annum for FFP purposes. As @Original21 says, the contract is till 2031 with an option of an extra year. By that time, the player will be 30-31. The plan is to present him at the Bridge tomorrow.

That I hope is the final page in a saga of disgraceful proportions...fueled by my buzz phrase of the hour "Media Buffoonery".

[Mark Kelly]

15 minutes ago, Thiago97 said:

Schmichael linked and kinda fits the bill. I don’t think he is as good as he was, but he would be a good experienced option to go up against Sanchez.

I am convinced Sanchez will surprise people. He is not just some average keeper that is being played out imo. Though I accept he can have a bad mistake in him. 

What Sanchez has on his side is the fact that he's 6ft6in tall and had his very best season when under that auspices of our goalkeeping coach we pinched from Brighton who he has a real connection with. 

A happy Sanchez could be a very good addition. 

[RDCW]

31 minutes ago, Thiago97 said:

Schmichael linked and kinda fits the bill. I don’t think he is as good as he was, but he would be a good experienced option to go up against Sanchez.

I am convinced Sanchez will surprise people. He is not just some average keeper that is being played out imo. Though I accept he can have a bad mistake in him. 

I'd be happy with Schmeichel.

[boratsbrother]

Imho, there's a real lack of depth in quality in some positions in football today, so I do have some sympathy for those responsible for buying players.

A lot of OK keepers but very few very high quality ones.  Mbappe, the goal machine at City, an aging Kane and Salah and an old Messi are the only top class forwards, though Zaka could soon be up there as world class. Very few high quality creative midfielders or Lampard types. Few wingers who can terrorize defenses. Game seems to be full of decent,  hard working athletic players who fit into systems but don't stand out much as individuals, thus leading to the truly crazy fees for the likes of a Caicedo. 

 

 

 

[boratsbrother]

31 minutes ago, RDCW said:

I'd be happy with Schmeichel.

Or De Gae for me. Both Schmeichel and De Gae are past their best but still a level above Sanchez.

[chara]

26 minutes ago, RDCW said:

I'd be happy with Schmeichel.

I sort of agree with you Mr Williams but with the proviso that often when a keeper gets moved on without a top replacement youngster/understudy it often indicates that the club consider him past shelf life date..an obvious exception is the Great Pat Jennings...and whilst PC had some mileage left when he moved across town the years caught up at the Arse.

As a backup keeper I would bite your hand off but wonder about #1 status...accepting that I could be wrong.

[east lower]

30 minutes ago, chara said:

I sort of agree with you Mr Williams but with the proviso that often when a keeper gets moved on without a top replacement youngster/understudy it often indicates that the club consider him past shelf life date..an obvious exception is the Great Pat Jennings...and whilst PC had some mileage left when he moved across town the years caught up at the Arse.

As a backup keeper I would bite your hand off but wonder about #1 status...accepting that I could be wrong.

The problem that’s presenting itself is that a loan isn’t going to provide funds to find and fund a high-level replacement and leaves us with inadequate replacements such as Schmeichal.

If we can sell it provides the funds to buy a replacement - no deal unless it’s a sale for me. 
 

The Wolfsburg keeper or Seville keeper would be options, but neither could be acquired without significant outlay. I’ve watched Sanchez for Brighton and have never thought he’s anything better than ordinary.

[Blue Kratos]

BTW I think Caicedo turned down the dippers because there may be a language barrier.

I don't mean to be racist but I've never understood a scouser in my life so what bloody chance does Moises have?

[thevelourfog]

1 hour ago, Mark Kelly said:

But for months they've been adamant they wanted over £100m so £90m would have been waved away with scorn. 

The current reported figure is £115m, though. Much more than any reported asking fee up until this point.