Transfer Talk Topic

[ROTG]

1 hour ago, Morgs said:

So we sign Lavia for 55m and Caicedo for another 115m and then "evolve" them out next season or the season after? 

 

Of they are poop like Cucurella then the answer is yes. 
you don’t win thing with passengers or prospects. 
chitty / Chelsea is the proof over the last decade

Edited August 17, 2023 by ROTG

[thevelourfog]

45 minutes ago, martin1905 said:

Big elephant in the room that no one seems to want to talk about.

Fair chance Pochettino just doesn't rate him as much as the random people on this forum. His lack of pre season minutes would suggest this is the case.

There's a fair chance, he's just not as good as some of you think and he's just another over hyped young player in a long, long list of over hyped young players.

The CHO debate should never be forgotten. The arguing that went on here when 99% of you all thought he was going to be a superstar and would not have it any other way really should be enough to stop this happening with other players, especially ones that have played so little.

Wasn't Billy Gilmour the next Xavi and levels above Jorginhio after a half decent debut against Liverpool?

I couldn't care less about selling Hall. In fact I think if we can get anything like £35m for an 18 year old that's barely played then we should be laughing all the way to the bank.

I personally rate Hall when I actively didn't with Hudson-Odoi (ditto Loftus-Cheek and McEachran, as examples going further back) and was much more cautious about Gilmour (whose best attribute for many was simply not being Jorginho), so don't agree on this specific example but think this is an important point.

We can't get £5m for Hudson-Odoi now, after years of paying him huge wages for no return. Selling the talented youngster is a big risk. So is not taking the money. It's not an easy job, running a football club.

[RDCW]

I was just talking to a mate of mine (an Everton fan - that's suffering for you) and  he sent me this:

 

[RDCW]

We were talking about the mad musings of John Aldridge and he shared the fact that he is known to the Goodison faithful simply as TCA - THAT **** Aldridge! Very funny.

[Sleeping Dave]

2 hours ago, xceleryx said:

And where would you play him, Dave? 

As a midfielder he's yet to demonstrate the capacities at senior level and has far better, both in term of quality and suitability ahead of him. Do you see Hall as capable in a pivot? I certainly don't, his game lends itself more towards being an #8 or more of that LCM in a midfield three  - which we don't use. 

As a fullback he's not looked comfortable in the brief time spent there, and again there's more suitable options ahead of him that were here before Hall was even a thought. 

His best football has come playing as a WB in a back three, where his strengths in ball progression are more beneficial. As I said in another post, there's a big difference between being a fullback and a wingback as we've seen with Alonso in the past and even someone like TAA at Liverpool.

I just don't get the fuss that's being made.

This is yet another case of us not being able to convince some of our best academy prospects that they have a future with us. Hall is a midfielder, someone who is tenacious and can run all day. Has a good pass in him and a tackle.

His long-term career is as a midfielder and I think we could have easily convinced him that he has a future here. One loan at Palace and then come back and compete. Ugochukwu was a very unnecessary signing. 

Next season we could have had a midfield pool of;

Enzo, Caicedo, Lavia, Santos, Hall, Casadei

Sure it would have meant disposing of Gallagher, or maybe one of the three younger ones weren’t ready and needed a loan. My point is merely this, a strategy that consists of selling our best academy prospects, whose long-term potential is to play for us, is a very bad strategy. Bad for culture, bad for finances and bad for the fans connection to the club. Just because they are pure FFP profits doesn’t mean that the long-term financial health is supported by selling them. 

Buy less players, use more academy players and spend the money on the likes of Caicedo, Enzo etc and less on Ugochukwu, Santos, Casadei, Morerira, Angelo etc. It isn’t rocket science when it comes building squads. You need that mix and money to spend on players who really increases the quality of the squad. Paying lots of money for squad fillers/risky bets is stupid. Better to keep the risky bets coming from the academy. 

[Sleeping Dave]

1 hour ago, Morgs said:

Well if we have to be ruthless and sell a bunch of players I'd be selling Cucurella, Chalobah, Lukaku, Ziyech, Sterling, Anjorin and a few others before Gallagher and Hall but if the lad wants to go, then so be it. 

Honestly, looking at it dispassionately, Hall looks at our DM and LB stocks and quite rightly sees big money buys and extremely highly rated players in front of him in the pecking order.

If at that point a Champions League side with the strong chance of a highly successful imminent future offers you the chance to come in and play as first choice in their midfield anchor role, its tempting. 

If that team happens to be the club you supported as a kid, it is tempting. 

If that team almost certainly offers to double your salary, it is tempting. 

If you think you are going to play regularly and stake a claim for an England call up which most would agree would be a tough thing to do at Chelsea, it is tempting. 

I don't blame him at all. Its the way the game is played now. If he goes he goes with my best wishes and sincere hopes he does well. Best of luck to him. 

Whether we are better off with Maatsen at LB cover and with Lavia and Caicedo as the DM mainstays is beside the point - the club must think we are, otherwise they'd be playing him there. 

Onwards and upwards. 

I don’t blame Hall - for him this is a no-brainer. I blame the club for yet again pushing out an astonishing academy prospect. 

[Mark Kelly]

8 minutes ago, RDCW said:

We were talking about the mad musings of John Aldridge and he shared the fact that he is known to the Goodison faithful simply as TCA - THAT **** Aldridge! Very funny.

And true 

[RDCW]

2 minutes ago, Sleeping Dave said:

I don’t blame Hall - for him this is a no-brainer. I blame the club for yet again pushing out an astonishing academy prospect. 

Maybe the lure of the club he supported as a boy is at play here. He seems to be well regarded by the club, so perhaps he just wants to do a Moises!

[Original 21]

2 hours ago, Rick1977 said:

I would rather Hall, Gallagher and Chalobah stay. And we try to sell sterling and Cucurella. But we can all dream 😆 

I’ve got a feeling we’re going to sell all three of Hall, Gallagher and Chalobah. I’m surprised at the Hall rumours after signing a new long term contract so I don’t know if he’s had his head turned at the thought of joining Newcastle and figuring he’s got no pathway to the first team here.  

I’d like to see Gallagher stay but realistically he’s got two years left on his contract and even if he doesn’t go this year, it’s difficult to see the club giving him a bumper new contract next year. I think Pochettino likes him, but where does he fit into his plans?  As a DM we’re now covered, and as an AM we’re likely going to have better options. 

Chalobah is way down the pecking order now at CB so if an offer comes for him I can’t see us holding on to him.

As for Sterling and Cucurella I can see them staying another year before we try and cut our losses. Of the two I think we’d take a good offer for Cucurella but I don’t know how likely that is at this stage of the window. 

 

Edited August 17, 2023 by Original 21

[Original 21]

[thevelourfog]

27 minutes ago, Original 21 said:

I’ve got a feeling we’re going to sell all three of Hall, Gallagher and Chalobah. 

I'm wondering if we actually need to keep one or two to sell for the next set of books. We'll have something like £150m a year to amortised, even without next summer's (hopefully massively reduced!) spending. Christ knows what debt we might have to serve on the cash we've been spending this year. And the lack of CL money will truly hit then. We're going to need "pure profit" next summer, probably even more than we do this one.

[xceleryx]

10 minutes ago, Sleeping Dave said:

This is yet another case of us not being able to convince some of our best academy prospects that they have a future with us. Hall is a midfielder, someone who is tenacious and can run all day. Has a good pass in him and a tackle.

His long-term career is as a midfielder and I think we could have easily convinced him that he has a future here. One loan at Palace and then come back and compete. Ugochukwu was a very unnecessary signing. 

Next season we could have had a midfield pool of;

Enzo, Caicedo, Lavia, Santos, Hall, Casadei

Sure it would have meant disposing of Gallagher, or maybe one of the three younger ones weren’t ready and needed a loan. My point is merely this, a strategy that consists of selling our best academy prospects, whose long-term potential is to play for us, is a very bad strategy. Bad for culture, bad for finances and bad for the fans connection to the club. Just because they are pure FFP profits doesn’t mean that the long-term financial health is supported by selling them. 

Buy less players, use more academy players and spend the money on the likes of Caicedo, Enzo etc and less on Ugochukwu, Santos, Casadei, Morerira, Angelo etc. It isn’t rocket science when it comes building squads. You need that mix and money to spend on players who really increases the quality of the squad. Paying lots of money for squad fillers/risky bets is stupid. Better to keep the risky bets coming from the academy. 

Sure, but this doesn't answer the question in where exactly you expect Hall to play outside of his position generally speaking being a midfielder (which I agree he is). 

We play a double pivot which means it suits a particular type of midfielder and Hall does not fit that billing, as such us signing other midfielders who are more suitable to the role doesn't necessarily impact a player who is ill-equipped himself. I dare say that's the line of thinking our managers in the time Hall has been here have also had, considering they favoured throwing him into a more manageable wing-back role then in the heart of the midfield. 

If we don't sign other talented players from elsewhere people are still going to piss and moan about our scouting, or not getting these players in earlier when they're cheaper, rather than spending vast sums of money on them later on and having to compete with other top side for their signature. We've seen it all before over the years, there's literally no winning either way. 

[Mark Kelly]

1 minute ago, thevelourfog said:

I'm wondering if we actually need to keep one or two to sell for the next set of books. We'll have something like £150m a year to amortised, even without next summer's (hopefully massively reduced!) spending. Christ knows what debt we might have to serve on the cash we've been spending this year. And the lack of CL money will truly hit then. We're going to need "pure profit" next summer, probably even more than we do this one.

I think we are going to see a lot more of this going forward and particularly more duplicitous methods to get to where we want to be 

One could imagine the scenario where we approach Gallagher for instance who has two years left on his contract IIRC and point to the fact that Poch likes him , we wanted to keep him so sold Hall instead , purely to get him to sign an extension to his contract so that we can cash in more going forward .

At some point you have to pay the piper , although I don't believe it's as big an issue as some as I think we can show a loss of £90m with no FFP recriminations  and we have reportedly cut our wage bill dramatically too .

Be nice to get a £50m injection of shirt sponsorship soon though 

[Bob Singleton]

Blimey, reading this thread you'd think no academy player is ever going to be allowed to be a success here.

Who is the club captain?
Who is currently wearing the 26 shirt?

While some may yet be sold (Chalobah? Gallagher?) there are nonetheless 8 players in the current squad who have come through the academy, and while others such as Mount, Loftus-Cheek etc have also recently been disposed of, the problem is not that we are unwilling to give academy products  a chance, but that we maybe produce so many good players via the academy that a) not all of them can play at the same time, so b) only the truly elite ones are retained.

Regarding Lewis Hall in particular; he's probably best being played on the left of a midfield 3 in a 4-3-3, with the ability to play as a wing-back in a 5-3-2/3-4-3 as a secondary role.  Under Pochettino, who prefers a 4-2-3-1, we are unlikely to play those formations, other than as one-offs due to injuries/suspensions and maybe the odd "disruptive tactic" to make the opposition think. 

If we do play a 4-3-3 I can see Enzo, Caicedo and Lavia being the preferred 3, with Gallagher as "1st reserve" and even Santos ahead of Hall. If playing with wing-backs - no matter how well Hall is perceived to have done last season - Chilwell, Cuccurella (I know many will disagree, but he is actually better than some here think) and Maatsen are ahead of Hall.

Timing is everything. Maybe if Hall were 21 and not 18, we'd be talking about selling Maatsen instead? Sadly he's coming through at a time when we have a host of young players - some barely older than him - who are more developed and experienced.

On the whole, the vast majority of our top level academy products we've let go (and neither de Bruyne nor Salah were academy products) have gone on to have decent careers but not one has "bitten us on the bum".  Hall might be the first, but for around £30m for a largely untested 18 year old, who seems to want to join the club he supported as a kid (Caicedo, anyone?), then I'm OK taking that risk. We turned down a whole load of money for Hudson-Odoi, whom we are having difficulty getting around £5m for now.

[Bob Singleton]

39 minutes ago, Mark Kelly said:

Be nice to get a £50m injection of shirt sponsorship soon though 

... don't forget another possible £25m/£30m for the sleeve! 😉

[Morgs]

Olise has signed a new contract with Palace and isnt coming to Chelsea. 

[Miguelito07]

 

[Chelsea_Matt]

12 minutes ago, Morgs said:

Olise has signed a new contract with Palace and isnt coming to Chelsea. 

Ah yes, the old “use Chelsea to get a better deal” ruse. Good. We don’t need another winger. 

[Mark Kelly]

10 minutes ago, Morgs said:

Olise has signed a new contract with Palace and isnt coming to Chelsea. 

 

10 minutes ago, Miguelito07 said:

 

Chelsea reject.

Is that how it works? 

[Thiago97]

13 minutes ago, Miguelito07 said:

 

Fair play to him. I have no issues with that and he can now be paid his going rate. I am sure there is still probably a release clause in there, but it will be at least double what it was!

[xceleryx]

And to add salt to the would Reece James has a hamstring injury and is to have further scans. 

[chrisb]

17 minutes ago, Miguelito07 said:

 

Why would he want to stay there? They lost to Oxford Utd in 1937! 

[Mark Kelly]

2 minutes ago, xceleryx said:

And to add salt to the would Reece James has a hamstring injury and is to have further scans. 

Hamstring? 

Blimey , when's the last time one of our players got a hamstring injury ? 

We may as well have a neon sign outside the medical bay saying "Club Hamstring" 

[CarefreeMuratcan]

I imagine we are still going to get him if we want him, just not for 35m

[xceleryx]

20 minutes ago, Mark Kelly said:

Hamstring? 

Blimey , when's the last time one of our players got a hamstring injury ? 

We may as well have a neon sign outside the medical bay saying "Club Hamstring" 

At this point we might as well put it down as an attribute requirement when signing players.

"Dodgy hammies?"

"Check"