Transfer Talk Topic

[Thiago97]

30 minutes ago, Mark Kelly said:

Wouldn't touch him with a ten foot pole , incredibly overrated . 

What's not to like? Plays as a leader and focal point for the attack, he is a calm and cool finisher, links up play very well and unselfish. He has pace and a physical presence, he can come short and link up the play, you can throw it up to him and he will fight for every ball. Defenders hate playing against him.

I think one of the questions is would he be as effective anywhere other than Brentford , as he very much suits their style. I think you would also have to question what the likely fee would be . 

I can't see that he is well overrated though. He has many of the key attributes you want from a modern day No9 playing up front as a lone striker.

[Morgs]

Santos on loan to Forest. No Chels. This is not the one. 

[Original 21]

Problem with signing Ivan Toney in January is that the season would be half over by then and we’re going to be relying in the meantime on Jackson and Broja staying fit, scoring regularly, and keeping us in contention. That’s a pretty optimistic scenario. 

[Sleeping Dave]

17 hours ago, Lump Of Celery said:

All of the best players our academy has produced were at the club from Under 10 - Reece, Trevoh, Connor, Broja, Colwill all good enough to be in this seasons squad. Then Tammy, Mount, Musiala, Declan Rice, Nketiah, Tomori, RLC all playing at top level teams

Of the ones brought in from elsewhere at an older age group I can only think of Ake and Christensen that got to play at that level, maybe Maatsen to be added to that. Then a couple like Van Aanholt and Bertrand that played at a level below the top teams

The success of our academy seems to actually be the coaching at very young levels, rather than bringing players in from outside

Yet we seem completely oblivious to that very fact. I think a lot he to do with the two new muppets in charge of the football operations feeling pressured to stake a claim. So they sell off all the food work we’ve done with the academy only to buy expensive games from abroad. I think we will look back at this time, concluding that we sold out our soul and the best batches of academy players this club has ever produced out of spite. 

I’ve already concluded that the two new guys, I’m not even bothered to learn their names properly, are two losers who have no business being at Chelsea. 

[Mark Kelly]

30 minutes ago, Sleeping Dave said:

Yet we seem completely oblivious to that very fact. I think a lot he to do with the two new muppets in charge of the football operations feeling pressured to stake a claim. So they sell off all the food work we’ve done with the academy only to buy expensive games from abroad. I think we will look back at this time, concluding that we sold out our soul and the best batches of academy players this club has ever produced out of spite. 

I’ve already concluded that the two new guys, I’m not even bothered to learn their names properly, are two losers who have no business being at Chelsea. 

I used to play in a band years ago and we were quite liked wherever we played , normally went down well , however , every now and again we would come up against a resident DJ who seemed to believe that the paying customers had actually paid to hear him play his favourite records and not a couple of local bands .

This is what those two idiots believe , no-one is coming to see Chelsea or Pochettino do their thing they're paying instead to see hiw well they've done in finding an unknown kid from the colonies.

They are not "the main character" in this despite what they think

[xceleryx]

3 hours ago, Original 21 said:

I missed this from earlier. Loan rather than sale again?

Roma were one of the sides I suggested may look at him because of their need for a striker, the problem however was that they simply cannot afford to buy him outright. I believe Lukaku will remain eligible for one more year of tax cuts within Italy, so that would reduce his cost to Roma and make him affordable from a loan perspective. 

For us it obviously just kicks the can down the road for another year, but if we're not having to foot the bill for this season that's still money saved.

Overall it beats a swift kick to the plums I suppose. 

[chiswickblue]

Lukaku on loan means we're running out of slots - if Washington goes to Strasbourg that's the lot. What happens to Ugochukwa? Anyone else we can't shift like Malang Sarr'

Not much planning going on here.

[My Blood Is Blue]

8 minutes ago, chiswickblue said:

Lukaku on loan means we're running out of slots - if Washington goes to Strasbourg that's the lot. What happens to Ugochukwa? Anyone else we can't shift like Malang Sarr'

Not much planning going on here.

I just hope they don't try and rectify it by selling the likes of Gallagher, Chalobah and Maatsen.

The players we'd have around the place that would benefit from a loan would be:

Bergstrom
Humphreys
Ugochukwu
Burstow

I would also have said Broja as well to get his fitness up, but we can't really afford to do that at this stage, without signing 2 more strikers.

Sarr, I imagine the club may try and sell/give away for free, but he is in the same boat as CHO who clearly isn't wanted, but has no other club to go to.

The club have done a lot of good things with outgoings so far though, so we shouldn't be too critical.

[chiswickblue]

6 minutes ago, My Blood Is Blue said:

I just hope they don't try and rectify it by selling the likes of Gallagher, Chalobah and Maatsen.

The players we'd have around the place that would benefit from a loan would be:

Bergstrom
Humphreys
Ugochukwu
Burstow

I would also have said Broja as well to get his fitness up, but we can't really afford to do that at this stage, without signing 2 more strikers.

Sarr, I imagine the club may try and sell/give away for free, but he is in the same boat as CHO who clearly isn't wanted, but has no other club to go to.

The club have done a lot of good things with outgoings so far though, so we shouldn't be too critical.

It's not ideal for development, but given all of the injuries I think Humphreys and Burstow will be kept around until January at least, possibly Bergström too depending on Bettinelli. 

Maybe getting rid of all the deadwood permanently in one window was too much to hope for!

[Lump Of Celery]

28 minutes ago, chiswickblue said:

Lukaku on loan means we're running out of slots - if Washington goes to Strasbourg that's the lot. What happens to Ugochukwa? Anyone else we can't shift like Malang Sarr'

Not much planning going on here.

 

16 minutes ago, My Blood Is Blue said:

I just hope they don't try and rectify it by selling the likes of Gallagher, Chalobah and Maatsen.

The players we'd have around the place that would benefit from a loan would be:

Bergstrom
Humphreys
Ugochukwu
Burstow

I would also have said Broja as well to get his fitness up, but we can't really afford to do that at this stage, without signing 2 more strikers.

Sarr, I imagine the club may try and sell/give away for free, but he is in the same boat as CHO who clearly isn't wanted, but has no other club to go to.

The club have done a lot of good things with outgoings so far though, so we shouldn't be too critical.

The loan rules only apply to players who are over 21 and not club trained. So only Kepa and Ziyech taking up slots atm I think. Does mean we will have to move on the majority of these 19 hear old players we've bought to flip after their 21st birthday. Makes the process a bit more risky as they are on long contracts

[chiswickblue]

25 minutes ago, Lump Of Celery said:

 

The loan rules only apply to players who are over 21 and not club trained. So only Kepa and Ziyech taking up slots atm I think. Does mean we will have to move on the majority of these 19 hear old players we've bought to flip after their 21st birthday. Makes the process a bit more risky as they are on long contracts

Unfortunately the text of the rules says they have to be under 21 and club-trained at the time they are loaned. So David Fofana counts,  as would Tino Anjorin if we tried to loan him to a foreign club again. Charlie Webster is the only one of the 6 players we have on loan overseas at the moment that fits the criteria for an exception.

[Original 21]

[Original 21]

The Tuchel factor…

[My Blood Is Blue]

18 minutes ago, Original 21 said:

The Tuchel factor…

Not good enough for us, but good enough for Tuchel and Bayern.

[Original 21]

Chelsea right to be furious about Romelu Lukaku's bid for loan move to Roma

First it was Thomas Tuchel he did not want to play for, then it was Chelsea, followed by Saudi Arabia, then Inter Milan and now Juventus, with Romelu Lukaku suddenly deciding Roma is the best place for him.

When Lukaku reflects on a summer saga that not only threatens to read the last rites on his own career at the top level, but has also backed Chelsea to an unenviable position, he might eventually realise “it’s not you, it’s me”.

Chelsea have been forced to negotiate a deal for Lukaku to join Roma on a season-long loan, having rejected two bids, worth £23 million and £26 million, from Inter before the Belgian effectively sabotaged that particular route out of Stamford Bridge.

Lukaku had already turned down a lucrative move to Saudi Arabia before then and has now told Chelsea that he does not want to move to Juventus, the last club who had been trying to negotiate a permanent transfer ahead of the summer window closing next week.

Juventus had made it clear that they could only afford to buy Lukaku by selling Dusan Vlahovic or sending him in part-exchange to Chelsea, but the striker has run out of patience, which is ironic given that tolerance levels towards him are at an all-time low.

So Chelsea now face the prospect of having to kick the Lukaku can down the road for another 12 months, with Roma unlikely to agree to an obligation to buy the 30-year-old and probably unable to cover his full £325,000-a-week salary.

Lukaku’s decision has wider implications too. The club had been discussing using the two outgoing international loans available to them on Lesley Ugochukwu and Deivid Washington, but, assuming the Roma deal goes ahead, they will now only have one overseas spot available.

That means Ugochukwu or Washington will either have to remain at Chelsea with little prospect of playing this season, or co-sporting directors Paul Winstanley and Laurence Stewart will have to quickly find a domestic loan for one of the pair.

Chelsea’s decision to send Andrey Santos on loan to Nottingham Forest for the season may point towards fellow midfielder Ugochukwu now staying at the club.

Let’s not indulge any public relations exercise that tries to tell us that there is respect and admiration on both sides. Lukaku has treated Chelsea and some of those who have tried to help him with contempt and the club are right to be privately furious.

Rewind 12 months and Chelsea were willing to indulge Lukaku after he told the owners, who inherited a £97.5 million nightmare, that he wanted to return to Inter Milan, who could not afford a transfer fee.

Outsiders were shocked that co-controlling owners Todd Boehly and Behdad Eghbali agreed to loan Lukaku back to the Italian club 12 months after he had become Chelsea’s record signing at the start of last summer’s window.

But he has thrown that favour back at them, not once, not twice but three times by shrinking the market for him to such an extent that Chelsea can no longer play hardball over Lukaku, who has been training with the club’s Under-21s and is thought to be at least three weeks from full match fitness.

Given the chaos around him and the fact he has not played any meaningful pre-season minutes, Lukaku is not prepared to hit the ground running under José Mourinho in Rome and there are certainly no guarantees that he will score enough goals to encourage more clubs to the table next summer.

Even thinking about what they might do with Lukaku in 12 months, when he will still have two years remaining on his Chelsea contract, will send Boehly and Eghbali into a cold sweat. Tuchel, Saudi, Inter and Juve will feel they have had a lucky escape.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2023/08/25/romelu-lukaku-transfer-loan-roma-chelsea-next-club/

 

[Chelsea_Matt]

6 minutes ago, Original 21 said:

Chelsea right to be furious about Romelu Lukaku's bid for loan move to Roma

First it was Thomas Tuchel he did not want to play for, then it was Chelsea, followed by Saudi Arabia, then Inter Milan and now Juventus, with Romelu Lukaku suddenly deciding Roma is the best place for him.

When Lukaku reflects on a summer saga that not only threatens to read the last rites on his own career at the top level, but has also backed Chelsea to an unenviable position, he might eventually realise “it’s not you, it’s me”.

Chelsea have been forced to negotiate a deal for Lukaku to join Roma on a season-long loan, having rejected two bids, worth £23 million and £26 million, from Inter before the Belgian effectively sabotaged that particular route out of Stamford Bridge.

Lukaku had already turned down a lucrative move to Saudi Arabia before then and has now told Chelsea that he does not want to move to Juventus, the last club who had been trying to negotiate a permanent transfer ahead of the summer window closing next week.

Juventus had made it clear that they could only afford to buy Lukaku by selling Dusan Vlahovic or sending him in part-exchange to Chelsea, but the striker has run out of patience, which is ironic given that tolerance levels towards him are at an all-time low.

So Chelsea now face the prospect of having to kick the Lukaku can down the road for another 12 months, with Roma unlikely to agree to an obligation to buy the 30-year-old and probably unable to cover his full £325,000-a-week salary.

Lukaku’s decision has wider implications too. The club had been discussing using the two outgoing international loans available to them on Lesley Ugochukwu and Deivid Washington, but, assuming the Roma deal goes ahead, they will now only have one overseas spot available.

That means Ugochukwu or Washington will either have to remain at Chelsea with little prospect of playing this season, or co-sporting directors Paul Winstanley and Laurence Stewart will have to quickly find a domestic loan for one of the pair.

Chelsea’s decision to send Andrey Santos on loan to Nottingham Forest for the season may point towards fellow midfielder Ugochukwu now staying at the club.

Let’s not indulge any public relations exercise that tries to tell us that there is respect and admiration on both sides. Lukaku has treated Chelsea and some of those who have tried to help him with contempt and the club are right to be privately furious.

Rewind 12 months and Chelsea were willing to indulge Lukaku after he told the owners, who inherited a £97.5 million nightmare, that he wanted to return to Inter Milan, who could not afford a transfer fee.

Outsiders were shocked that co-controlling owners Todd Boehly and Behdad Eghbali agreed to loan Lukaku back to the Italian club 12 months after he had become Chelsea’s record signing at the start of last summer’s window.

But he has thrown that favour back at them, not once, not twice but three times by shrinking the market for him to such an extent that Chelsea can no longer play hardball over Lukaku, who has been training with the club’s Under-21s and is thought to be at least three weeks from full match fitness.

Given the chaos around him and the fact he has not played any meaningful pre-season minutes, Lukaku is not prepared to hit the ground running under José Mourinho in Rome and there are certainly no guarantees that he will score enough goals to encourage more clubs to the table next summer.

Even thinking about what they might do with Lukaku in 12 months, when he will still have two years remaining on his Chelsea contract, will send Boehly and Eghbali into a cold sweat. Tuchel, Saudi, Inter and Juve will feel they have had a lucky escape.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2023/08/25/romelu-lukaku-transfer-loan-roma-chelsea-next-club/

 

What an arrogant, entitled, fat tub of shit he is.

[Lump Of Celery]

1 hour ago, chiswickblue said:

Unfortunately the text of the rules says they have to be under 21 and club-trained at the time they are loaned. So David Fofana counts,  as would Tino Anjorin if we tried to loan him to a foreign club again. Charlie Webster is the only one of the 6 players we have on loan overseas at the moment that fits the criteria for an exception.

I don't think it does, this is the exact wording from the FIFA website-

Players aged 21 and younger and club-trained players will be exempt from these limitations.

[Original 21]

32 minutes ago, Chelsea_Matt said:

What an arrogant, entitled, fat tub of shit he is.

Maybe we should have accepted the Inter bid of 26m. I assume we were hanging on for a better offer. Now we’re lumbered with him. 

[Sleeping Dave]

55 minutes ago, My Blood Is Blue said:

Not good enough for us, but good enough for Tuchel and Bayern.

This is absolutely outrageous. If Bayern buys him we have officially lost the plot. Not good enough for us, a midtable club in England, but good enough for one of the best sides in the world? 

Oh well. I suppose there is some 20-something unknown we can buy from another club on a 8-year contract. Muppetry of the highest order. 

43 minutes ago, Original 21 said:

Chelsea right to be furious about Romelu Lukaku's bid for loan move to Roma

First it was Thomas Tuchel he did not want to play for, then it was Chelsea, followed by Saudi Arabia, then Inter Milan and now Juventus, with Romelu Lukaku suddenly deciding Roma is the best place for him.

When Lukaku reflects on a summer saga that not only threatens to read the last rites on his own career at the top level, but has also backed Chelsea to an unenviable position, he might eventually realise “it’s not you, it’s me”.

Chelsea have been forced to negotiate a deal for Lukaku to join Roma on a season-long loan, having rejected two bids, worth £23 million and £26 million, from Inter before the Belgian effectively sabotaged that particular route out of Stamford Bridge.

Lukaku had already turned down a lucrative move to Saudi Arabia before then and has now told Chelsea that he does not want to move to Juventus, the last club who had been trying to negotiate a permanent transfer ahead of the summer window closing next week.

Juventus had made it clear that they could only afford to buy Lukaku by selling Dusan Vlahovic or sending him in part-exchange to Chelsea, but the striker has run out of patience, which is ironic given that tolerance levels towards him are at an all-time low.

So Chelsea now face the prospect of having to kick the Lukaku can down the road for another 12 months, with Roma unlikely to agree to an obligation to buy the 30-year-old and probably unable to cover his full £325,000-a-week salary.

Lukaku’s decision has wider implications too. The club had been discussing using the two outgoing international loans available to them on Lesley Ugochukwu and Deivid Washington, but, assuming the Roma deal goes ahead, they will now only have one overseas spot available.

That means Ugochukwu or Washington will either have to remain at Chelsea with little prospect of playing this season, or co-sporting directors Paul Winstanley and Laurence Stewart will have to quickly find a domestic loan for one of the pair.

Chelsea’s decision to send Andrey Santos on loan to Nottingham Forest for the season may point towards fellow midfielder Ugochukwu now staying at the club.

Let’s not indulge any public relations exercise that tries to tell us that there is respect and admiration on both sides. Lukaku has treated Chelsea and some of those who have tried to help him with contempt and the club are right to be privately furious.

Rewind 12 months and Chelsea were willing to indulge Lukaku after he told the owners, who inherited a £97.5 million nightmare, that he wanted to return to Inter Milan, who could not afford a transfer fee.

Outsiders were shocked that co-controlling owners Todd Boehly and Behdad Eghbali agreed to loan Lukaku back to the Italian club 12 months after he had become Chelsea’s record signing at the start of last summer’s window.

But he has thrown that favour back at them, not once, not twice but three times by shrinking the market for him to such an extent that Chelsea can no longer play hardball over Lukaku, who has been training with the club’s Under-21s and is thought to be at least three weeks from full match fitness.

Given the chaos around him and the fact he has not played any meaningful pre-season minutes, Lukaku is not prepared to hit the ground running under José Mourinho in Rome and there are certainly no guarantees that he will score enough goals to encourage more clubs to the table next summer.

Even thinking about what they might do with Lukaku in 12 months, when he will still have two years remaining on his Chelsea contract, will send Boehly and Eghbali into a cold sweat. Tuchel, Saudi, Inter and Juve will feel they have had a lucky escape.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2023/08/25/romelu-lukaku-transfer-loan-roma-chelsea-next-club/

 

At this stage we should just let him train by himself for the remaining three seasons. Sure, he’ll finish his career a wealthy man but the legacy won’t be much to brag about. Another lost ego from that golden Belgian generation who sadly bought into his own hype too much.

[thevelourfog]

4 minutes ago, Original 21 said:

Maybe we should have accepted the Inter bid of 26m. I assume we were hanging on for a better offer. Now we’re lumbered with him. 

Very likely a limit to how much we could afford to write off in amortisation/FFP terms, especially this summer. It's a big issue with FFP imo, the year's accounts don't always give the best indication of financial health.

[thevelourfog]

2 minutes ago, Sleeping Dave said:

This is absolutely outrageous. If Bayern buys him we have officially lost the plot. Not good enough for us, a midtable club in England, but good enough for one of the best sides in the world? 

I don't know when you last watched Bayern, but they are very, very far away from being one of the best sides in the world. 71 points last year, failed to win about a third of their games. They are the weakest they have been in about 15 years.

[Sleeping Dave]

4 minutes ago, thevelourfog said:

I don't know when you last watched Bayern, but they are very, very far away from being one of the best sides in the world. 71 points last year, failed to win about a third of their games. They are the weakest they have been in about 15 years.

Come on. Claiming Bayern ain’t one of the best club sides in the world is being somewhat disingenuous. 

Man C, Bayern, Real. Top three in world football. Then you have a host of clubs below them. We are probably not in that group, perhaps not even in the group below that. 
 

Edit: over the last 11 seasons they’ve won 11 Bundesliga titles, 5 German Cups, 2 Champion Leagues and 2 FIFA Club World Cups. 
 

Last five seasons: 5 Bundesliga titles, 2 German Cups, 1 Champions League and 1 FIFA Club World Cup. 

Edited August 25, 2023 by Sleeping Dave

[Chelsea_Matt]

1 minute ago, Sleeping Dave said:

Come on. Claiming Bayern ain’t one of the best club sides in the world is being somewhat disingenuous. 

Man C, Bayern, Real. Top three in world football. Then you have a host of clubs below them. We are probably not in that group, perhaps not even in the group below that. 

I think we would beat them tbh

[Sleeping Dave]

3 minutes ago, Chelsea_Matt said:

I think we would beat them tbh

Sure we would. 

[thevelourfog]

Just now, Sleeping Dave said:

Come on. Claiming Bayern ain’t one of the best club sides in the world is being somewhat disingenuous. 

Man C, Bayern, Real. Top three in world football. Then you have a host of clubs below them. We are probably not in that group, perhaps not even in the group below that. 

No. 

They're one of the biggest clubs, sure. I wouldn't disagree. You can pursue an argument that a side that managed its lowest points total since 2011 in a league it has massive spending power over is one of the "best sides in the world" if you want, but just saying I'm not being honest isn't great supporting evidence for that. They are not currently even close to the side they were just a few seasons ago.