Transfer Talk Topic

[ROTG]

7 hours ago, kev61 said:

No it's much better than that.Jose walked into a turnkey squad that Ranieri was more responsible for.

Jose just added his svengali like personality that is dead and buried now.

Are you smoking those Jamaican senior service cigarettes again?

just asking

Edited August 19, 2023 by ROTG

[Sleeping Dave]

10 hours ago, Floyd25 said:

What’s the point in signing Balogun when we have two young strikers in Jackson and Broja? Just assess the situation at the end of the season, we also have Fofana on loan, it’s just buying for buyings sake now. 

Personally I think Balogun makes a lot of sense. We are a striker short, we can’t go into the season with Jackson supported by Broja (who is entering his third senior season without having done much at all at senior level plus returning from a serious injury) and Burstow. Fofana was a strange signing, he isn’t good enough and likely will never be. Has some good things about him but he’s one of those - hope he improves enough for us to make a profit. I’m not even counting him as a serious option, neither do I do with Broja. If Jackson gets injured we are totally fucked. 

 

[Sleeping Dave]

10 hours ago, chrisb said:

He is a free agent so would cost nothing other than wages.

Maybe it would be best for us to have our memories of him as he was and not how he now is. 

We should definitely not sign Hazard. He’s been finished at the highest level for several seasons. 

[xceleryx]

1 hour ago, Rob B said:

Players in his position is one thing - he seems like a grounded lad with a head on his shoulders I’m sure he appreciates competition at a club like Chelsea (and Newcastle now tbf with Tonali, Joelinton, Guimareas etc)  although I suspect the ages of said players in our case didn’t help.

But what I can’t get my head around is the amount of money we are spending on project players.  Off the top of my head, Santos, Casadei, Ugochukwu, Angelo Gabriel, Moirera, Richards, Peaz, Slonina etc. 

Ive got no idea what the total outlay is here, but well in excess of £100m - which is absolutely fine if you aren’t then having to sell your brightest academy prospect to balance the books?! 

I don’t believe for a second Lewis Hall pushed for a move and we reluctantly sold him.  This isn’t a £100m big personality in the dressing room on massive wages.  This is an 18 year old with 6 appearances who had literally just signed a new long term deal.  Absolutely no doubt in my mind we’ve jumped on this one due to the FFP benefits.

And so my counsel to the club would be, if the finances are that precarious, stop spending money on gambles when we have a similar or likely better talent in-house. 

Here's the rub of the green though. Say we don't sign these quote unquote "project players" and then they go on to be good, or even great and cost vastly higher sums down the line. You'll have the same lot who are moaning now moan about why we're not scouting these players sooner and signing them for cheaper fees. This was a big thing many of us were vocal about and wanting to see happen, now that we're actually doing it, which may save millions in the future, it's being criticised. There's no winning,

It's the bigger transfers that impact FFP more as they generally carry larger upfront costs courtesy of fees and wages, this is why we've worked hard to structure the transfer we have made in a certain way to help alleviate some of that pressure. Hall may or may not have been sold for FFP, this could genuinely be argued either way as the intention was very much to keep him - even with Newcastles earlier interest. Like with most players, in particular one with 600 minutes to his name and no truly defined role in the side, they all have their price. 

We're going to continue to sell plenty of players moving forward, just as we have done in prior times. It won't be going away any time soon.

[Ham]

3 hours ago, kev61 said:

You find it funny? even though you tried to take the piss?

Arguing with yourself?

That's not particularly zen. 

[Mark Kelly]

1 minute ago, Ham said:

Arguing with yourself?

That's not particularly zen. 

The duality of man.

[Sleeping Dave]

23 minutes ago, xceleryx said:

Here's the rub of the green though. Say we don't sign these quote unquote "project players" and then they go on to be good, or even great and cost vastly higher sums down the line. You'll have the same lot who are moaning now moan about why we're not scouting these players sooner and signing them for cheaper fees. This was a big thing many of us were vocal about and wanting to see happen, now that we're actually doing it, which may save millions in the future, it's being criticised. There's no winning,

It's the bigger transfers that impact FFP more as they generally carry larger upfront costs courtesy of fees and wages, this is why we've worked hard to structure the transfer we have made in a certain way to help alleviate some of that pressure. Hall may or may not have been sold for FFP, this could genuinely be argued either way as the intention was very much to keep him - even with Newcastles earlier interest. Like with most players, in particular one with 600 minutes to his name and no truly defined role in the side, they all have their price. 

We're going to continue to sell plenty of players moving forward, just as we have done in prior times. It won't be going away any time soon.

If we can't present a path to our biggest academy prospects why would we be able to present a path to other clubs academy prospects? Why sell, only so you can buy? It feels like buying for the sake of buying. It's all about having a balanced approach. You sign some young players from other clubs and you place your bets on your best academy players. It doesn't have to be either or. It can be both in a balanced approach. 

At the moment there is no balance. I'm arguing that this is negative for the club long-term. This season we won't suffer for selling Hall and even Chalobah and Gallagher. But long-term we will - 100%. A similar strategy in the past has already meant we've lost almost a starting XI of talent that we could have had in our squad, saving us millions in fees that we've thrown on absolute garbage like Lukaku, Cucurella, Sterling, Koulibaly and the likes. This is not even hindsight, it'll happen again and again and again as long as we have this strategy. Sure, some of our academy players won't make it (McEachran, Hudson-Odoi) but many will. Just look at the clubs our most recent releases/sales are playing at. AC Milan, Roma, Newcastle, Brighton, Crystal Palace. And they are not fringe players at these clubs either, they are valued members of the first team and play major roles. 

 

[johnnybozo]

14 minutes ago, Sleeping Dave said:

If we can't present a path to our biggest academy prospects why would we be able to present a path to other clubs academy prospects? Why sell, only so you can buy? It feels like buying for the sake of buying. It's all about having a balanced approach. You sign some young players from other clubs and you place your bets on your best academy players. It doesn't have to be either or. It can be both in a balanced approach. 

At the moment there is no balance. I'm arguing that this is negative for the club long-term. This season we won't suffer for selling Hall and even Chalobah and Gallagher. But long-term we will - 100%. A similar strategy in the past has already meant we've lost almost a starting XI of talent that we could have had in our squad, saving us millions in fees that we've thrown on absolute garbage like Lukaku, Cucurella, Sterling, Koulibaly and the likes. This is not even hindsight, it'll happen again and again and again as long as we have this strategy. Sure, some of our academy players won't make it (McEachran, Hudson-Odoi) but many will. Just look at the clubs our most recent releases/sales are playing at. AC Milan, Roma, Newcastle, Brighton, Crystal Palace. And they are not fringe players at these clubs either, they are valued members of the first team and play major roles. 

 

We've got Reece as our captain, Gallagher, Broja and Chalobah as backups, Maatsen challenging Chilwell in cup games and Colwill is a first choice CB. Think we're doing ok for HG talent ATM.

Edited August 19, 2023 by johnnybozo

[ROTG]

2 hours ago, xceleryx said:

Here's the rub of the green though. Say we don't sign these quote unquote "project players" and then they go on to be good, or even great and cost vastly higher sums down the line. You'll have the same lot who are moaning now moan about why we're not scouting these players sooner and signing them for cheaper fees. This was a big thing many of us were vocal about and wanting to see happen, now that we're actually doing it, which may save millions in the future, it's being criticised. There's no winning,

Project players do not win, leagues, swell the trophy cabinet and there is always the possibility they do fulfill their potential. 
 

The club over the years has scouted the best players hence the continuity of swelling the wonderful trophy room. 
 

Going to be interesting what comes first, a major trophy or off loading of project players. 
 

Toodles

Edited August 19, 2023 by ROTG

[ROTG]

1 hour ago, johnnybozo said:

We've got Reece as our captain, Gallagher, Broja and Chalobah as backups, Maatsen challenging Chilwell in cup games and Colwill is a first choice CB. Think we're doing ok for HG talent ATM.

It’s not now. It’s 3 years down the line. 

[xceleryx]

11 minutes ago, Sleeping Dave said:

If we can't present a path to our biggest academy prospects why would we be able to present a path to other clubs academy prospects? Why sell, only so you can buy? It feels like buying for the sake of buying. It's all about having a balanced approach. You sign some young players from other clubs and you place your bets on your best academy players. It doesn't have to be either or. It can be both in a balanced approach. 

At the moment there is no balance. I'm arguing that this is negative for the club long-term. This season we won't suffer for selling Hall and even Chalobah and Gallagher. But long-term we will - 100%. A similar strategy in the past has already meant we've lost almost a starting XI of talent that we could have had in our squad, saving us millions in fees that we've thrown on absolute garbage like Lukaku, Cucurella, Sterling, Koulibaly and the likes. This is not even hindsight, it'll happen again and again and again as long as we have this strategy. Sure, some of our academy players won't make it (McEachran, Hudson-Odoi) but many will. Just look at the clubs our most recent releases/sales are playing at. AC Milan, Roma, Newcastle, Brighton, Crystal Palace. And they are not fringe players at these clubs either, they are valued members of the first team and play major roles. 

 

Because it's not about giving one or the other a pathway, it's about getting our hands on a good spread of talent early before they burst onto the scene and end up £80, £90 or £100 million players after one good season. By having stocks aplenty it allows an early foot in the door and doesn't have as competing with the other big boys to sign them and possibly miss out. 

It's not as if we've not giving chances to our acsemdy kids altogether, we've done it more than anyone else in recent years and still retain a number who've come through the ranks as it is - one now even being captain. So the opportunity and pathway is certainly there, but it can't just be expected either nor stop us from signing players of either higher present or future talent - or simply those that fit better. 

I agree there needs to be a balance, but right now as things than I have zero problems with how things have been undertaken.

[xceleryx]

58 minutes ago, ROTG said:

Project players do not win, leagues, swell the trophy cabinet and there is always the possibility they do fulfill their potential. 
 

The club over the years has scouted the best players hence the continuity of swelling the wonderful trophy room. 
 

Going to be interesting what comes first, a major trophy or off loading of project players. 
 

Toodles

If that's the case, how about this to satisfy your needs (although, I'm sure you'll move the goal posts as your renown for doing). We scrap the academy, we don't buy young players period, and purely invest in ready made established stars that walk into the team and can immediately deliver and raise our ceiling - therefore putting us in a position to fill the trophy cabinet further.

Problem solved. 

Doodles to you too.

[RDCW]

1 hour ago, xceleryx said:

If that's the case, how about this to satisfy your needs (although, I'm sure you'll move the goal posts as your renown for doing). We scrap the academy, we don't buy young players period, and purely invest in ready made established stars that walk into the team and can immediately deliver and raise our ceiling - therefore putting us in a position to fill the trophy cabinet further.

Problem solved. 

Doodles to you too.

Stay away from his bridge, Billy Goat Gruff 😉

[ROTG]

24 minutes ago, RDCW said:

Stay away from his bridge, Billy Goat Gruff 😉

Do you mind dear boy and stick to peacocking with Kev61. 😀
 

I believe responding to my posts is good therapy for mr xceleryx, you can clearly see all his anger being released though hitting those keys on his keyboard. 😁
 

Toodles

[Rob B]

5 hours ago, xceleryx said:

Here's the rub of the green though. Say we don't sign these quote unquote "project players" and then they go on to be good, or even great and cost vastly higher sums down the line. You'll have the same lot who are moaning now moan about why we're not scouting these players sooner and signing them for cheaper fees. This was a big thing many of us were vocal about and wanting to see happen, now that we're actually doing it, which may save millions in the future, it's being criticised. There's no winning,

It's the bigger transfers that impact FFP more as they generally carry larger upfront costs courtesy of fees and wages, this is why we've worked hard to structure the transfer we have made in a certain way to help alleviate some of that pressure.

I’m really not sure any fans are pinning for 17 -18 year olds from South America?! 

It’s Kennedy, Nathan, Wallace,  Piazon all over again.  One or two that you truly believe in is fine, but our approach just feels so scatter gun and chaotic. 

And yeah you’re right, these guys pale in comparison to Enzo, Caicedo, Lavia etc in terms of FFP,  but if you are buying a dozen of them, some of them at €20m a pop, it quickly adds up! 

And to reiterate, I’m fine with that as the owners can spend their money as they wish, but when it’s to the detriment of our own academy stars, and they are being used to balance the books, I have an issue.

[Mark Kelly]

33 minutes ago, Rob B said:

 

And to reiterate, I’m fine with that as the owners can spend their money as they wish, but when it’s to the detriment of our own academy stars, and they are being used to balance the books, I have an issue.

I think we all feel this way however, so far it's one player with all probability who's experienced a block, Hall and even he was offered a deal before deciding to play for the club he supports. 

I'd be keeping a very close eye on the development of Bashir Humphreys though. 

[Sciatika]

Rudi Galetti saying Ziyech has completed the signing, so presumably announced tomorrow or Monday. No fee but it does allow us to say his wages.

[Morgs]

Ziyech officially gone, thank God. 
 

Another nice chunk of wages off the books. 

[Chelsea_Matt]

24 minutes ago, Morgs said:

Ziyech officially gone, thank God. 
 

Another nice chunk of wages off the books. 

Nothing on the cfc site though, Morgerino… 👀 

It’s on the Gala Instagram. Thank goodness he’s gone.

Edited August 19, 2023 by Chelsea_Matt

[Sleeping Dave]

29 minutes ago, Morgs said:

Ziyech officially gone, thank God. 
 

Another nice chunk of wages off the books. 

Good riddance. One of the worst signings we’ve ever made. He doesn’t even look like a footballer, makes Anelka look like someone chewing happy pills on the daily. 

I can honestly say I wish him no well at all. Wonder how many players he managed to drag with him together with Auba and some of the other primadonnas we had here last season. Let that be a lesson, you don’sign talent first and foremost. You sign attitude and mentality. In that regard Ziyech is barely a League One player.

Feel sorry for the Gala fans. But at least he ain’t our problem anymore. Miserable sod. 

Just fatty to go now. 

[Michael Tucker]

29 minutes ago, Sleeping Dave said:

Good riddance. One of the worst signings we’ve ever made. He doesn’t even look like a footballer. 

All true. 

You have to ask who watched him before we signed him. 

[boratsbrother]

1 hour ago, Sleeping Dave said:

 

Just fatty to go now. 

Imho, getting Sterling's 350k a week off the books will be the last big problem to sort out, but that can probably wait until next summer's window. 

Glad Ziyech has finally gone. Always thought he'd be a poor signing but even I was shocked by just how bad he generally was. Worst of all, he rarely looked like he even gave a shite. Cucu is just as bad but at least he looks like he's trying.

[Floyd25]

The premier league about to block another potential sponsor, this is going to drag on for ages. When it comes to City and sponsors though, they look away, clearly nothing fishy about that at all. 

[xceleryx]

11 hours ago, ROTG said:

Do you mind dear boy and stick to peacocking with Kev61. 😀
 

I believe responding to my posts is good therapy for mr xceleryx, you can clearly see all his anger being released though hitting those keys on his keyboard. 😁
 

Toodles

Quite the contrary old gizzard lad. 

I just enjoy the antique nature of your posts, gives me a good insight into how the mind worked during the neanderthal period. 😉

[Michael Tucker]

OK, can we throw out the pointless insults (I doubt that anyone thinks either of you is being clever) and get back to the topic? Thank you.