Transfer Talk Topic

[Max Fowler]

10 hours ago, xceleryx said:

Which "bigger" clubs need a striker? 

• Real Madrid - Likely to sign Mbappe.
• Barcelona - Have Lewa and likely can't afford Oshimen.
• Bayern - Signed Kane in the summer.
• PSG - Signed Kolo Muani and Gonçalo Ramos
• No Serie A side can afford him, extension at Napoli the only likelihood. 
• Man City - Have Haaland.
• Liverpool - Have Nunez.
• Man Utd - Just signed Hojlund.
• Arsenal - Have Jesus, maybe a possibility but not sure if they can spend £100m+ in back to back windows. 
• Tottenham - Have Richarlison, likely can't afford Oshimen even after selling Kane. 
• Newcastle - Pretty unlikely. 

We stand a pretty good chance overall IMO if we chose to pursue him. 

Having the option of playing two upfront is certainly a plus, but it's also very different from actually playing a full-time two man system like the some of the aforementioned currently play in. Nkunku would've likely been that option for us before he got injured.

Also the comments about protecting Jackson are just your standard run of the mill comments. We're not going to throw him under the bus after just signing him, that helps no one. It doesn't mean we're not looking at other options we could possibly add to the group to create competition.

 

You don't seriously think Mbappe blocks Oshimen at Madrid? They play in different positions mate. But point taken, not sure exactly where he would go but given our current wage structure and relegation threatened status, I am doubting our ability to compete against the big boys. And I should have mentioned Saudi too instead of "bigger club".

Doesn't sound like we even want an expensive forward anyway given Fabrizio's comments. 
Woe betide we actually spend money on a forward!

[Box of Tricks]

Our best bet will probably be getting an unsettled, wantaway striker on loan in January. There's bound to be a top one somewhere by that stage of the season.

[xceleryx]

9 hours ago, Max Fowler said:

You don't seriously think Mbappe blocks Oshimen at Madrid? They play in different positions mate. But point taken, not sure exactly where he would go but given our current wage structure and relegation threatened status, I am doubting our ability to compete against the big boys. And I should have mentioned Saudi too instead of "bigger club".

Doesn't sound like we even want an expensive forward anyway given Fabrizio's comments. 
Woe betide we actually spend money on a forward!

Where do you think Mbappe is going to play at Madrid when they have Vini on the left and Rodrygo on the right already? They aren't going to dispense of either of those two, so the logical space for Mbappe to fit is upfront. Whether he plays as an actual striker is another thing, they could well opt for a fluid front three or whatever but the point still remains. 

Maybe we didn't want an expensive forward in this window, give the other spending we had to do first. Maybe we actually have our eye on Oshimen, and are willing to wait until next summer where he'll likely be more obtainable. Could be several reasons why we didn't want an expensive forward really, but doesn't necessarily mean we'll not target one later either. 

TBF we've spent plenty of big fees on strikers, including most recently Lukaku. How's that worked out for us? lol

But yeah, we'll see what happens on that front in the summer. I think we'll look for someone a little more cost effective in the January window to help cover Jackson being at the ACON, but doesn't necessarily block revisiting in the summer. 

[ROTG]

59 minutes ago, xceleryx said:

Maybe we actually have our eye on Oshimen, and are willing to wait until next summer where he'll likely be more obtainable.

I doubt the club could afford his wages.  I would assume he's on £100k at Napoli?

Edited September 21, 2023 by ROTG

[xceleryx]

1 hour ago, ROTG said:

I doubt the club could afford his wages.  I would assume he's on £100k at Napoli?

How long did it take for you to come up with this one? 😅

[Max Fowler]

What do people think about the fact that the board are clearly trying to cash in on Gallagher but at the same time he's also been made Chelsea captain? Seems to point to a serious misalignment between Poch and the board, as Poch clearly really likes Connor, whereas whenever the owners look at him they just see dollar signs.

It makes us look very silly and surely Gallagher, Maatsen and Trevor are not exactly contributing to a harmonious dressing room right now, when briefings were going out all summer about how much they were all for sale.

Of course they are good lads and will try their best, but it's about creating a stable dressing room environment and winning culture where everyone is onside and fighting for the badge. I am certain this briefing culture is not helping. 

Another podcast on this topic by Matt Law 

 

Edited September 21, 2023 by Max Fowler

[Dwmh]

4 hours ago, Max Fowler said:

What do people think about the fact that the board are clearly trying to cash in on Gallagher but at the same time he's also been made Chelsea captain? Seems to point to a serious misalignment between Poch and the board, as Poch clearly really likes Connor, whereas whenever the owners look at him they just see dollar signs.

It makes us look very silly and surely Gallagher, Maatsen and Trevor are not exactly contributing to a harmonious dressing room right now, when briefings were going out all summer about how much they were all for sale.

Isn't that normal at any club - one or two players were looking for a move in the summer and three or four players were rumoured to be looking and the press won't let that go.
Still it might explain why Gallagher continues to do his best in a blue shirt if he is playing for a move rather than sitting on a contract.

4 hours ago, Max Fowler said:

I am certain this briefing culture is not helping. 

Briefing culture??  hacks have always made stuff up and attributed it to "insiders".  Pretended that there are people close to RA who are willing to tell club secrets for a drink with a hack.
That isn't a briefing culture that is a media lack of culture.

[Max Fowler]

15 minutes ago, Dwmh said:

Isn't that normal at any club - one or two players were looking for a move in the summer and three or four players were rumoured to be looking and the press won't let that go.
Still it might explain why Gallagher continues to do his best in a blue shirt if he is playing for a move rather than sitting on a contract.

It doesn't seem normal that we've made someone captain who we were trying to sell all summer. Instead of Thiago Silva etc.

Seems like more chaos. 

[Ham]

12 minutes ago, Max Fowler said:

It doesn't seem normal that we've made someone captain who we were trying to sell all summer. Instead of Thiago Silva etc.

Seems like more chaos. 

Only chaos if you have evidence that Chelsea tried to sell him. 

Plenty of press reports of offers being made and Chelsea "pricing him out of a move". 

 

[Dwmh]

38 minutes ago, Ham said:

Only chaos if you have evidence that Chelsea tried to sell him. 

Plenty of press reports of offers being made and Chelsea "pricing him out of a move". 

 

A player everyone wants, including us.

Starting with his debut for us last season Gallagher has appeared 51 times out or 59 club games, starting in all 6 this season.  He has played another 5 games for England and 2 U21.  Only been unavailable once (suspended obvs) never injured.  23 with 182 club and NT appearances already, about 70% at PL level.

Easy to see the attraction.

 

Edited September 21, 2023 by Dwmh

[kev61]

On 20/09/2023 at 08:19, Mark Kelly said:

Barca is his "dream" destination apparently.

Not sure he'd be trying quite as hard in our shirt to be honest . 

He looked very good for us.I think he tried as hard as anyone.

I said he would have been a decent replacement for Nkunku.

I really can't see why people can't see that - baffling really.

I wonder what a rorschach assessment would think.

 

[kev61]

7 hours ago, Dwmh said:

A player everyone wants, including us.

Starting with his debut for us last season Gallagher has appeared 51 times out or 59 club games, starting in all 6 this season.  He has played another 5 games for England and 2 U21.  Only been unavailable once (suspended obvs) never injured.  23 with 182 club and NT appearances already, about 70% at PL level.

Easy to see the attraction.

 

It's good to see Ham and Droy are having a cuddle...bless🙂

[kev61]

7 hours ago, Dwmh said:

Easy to see the attraction.

 

Yes a player that gives his all.limited in so many ways but is a top asset.

[thevelourfog]

12 hours ago, Dwmh said:

Briefing culture??  hacks have always made stuff up and attributed it to "insiders".  Pretended that there are people close to RA who are willing to tell club secrets for a drink with a hack.

You've commented a few times that you haven't paid as close attention to Chelsea over the last year or so as previous (hopefully you're okay and that's been out of very sensible choice!), it is really clear to see we are not dealing with a press stonewalling RA approach any more. This lot very, very proactively and openly talk to the press, and very often.

[Ham]

5 minutes ago, thevelourfog said:

You've commented a few times that you haven't paid as close attention to Chelsea over the last year or so as previous (hopefully you're okay and that's been out of very sensible choice!), it is really clear to see we are not dealing with a press stonewalling RA approach any more. This lot very, very proactively and openly talk to the press, and very often.

In their capacity as key figures in the world of venture capital.  They are invited to talk on their wider portfolio but Chelsea and the LA Dodgers will always interest the audience more.

Roman treated Chelsea as a hobby. A rich man's plaything. He was notoriously reclusive. 

Personally I'd like a happy medium.

[thevelourfog]

6 minutes ago, Ham said:

In their capacity as key figures in the world of venture capital.  They are invited to talk on their wider portfolio but Chelsea and the LA Dodgers will always interest the audience more.

Roman treated Chelsea as a hobby. A rich man's plaything. He was notoriously reclusive. 

Personally I'd like a happy medium.

Yes, but not just in this way. How many clubs we've dealt with since they came in have complained about how openly we've courted their players and used the press? Did you not see the months of briefing after Tuchel was fired?

Whatever view you have of them briefing and talking to the press, good or bad, they do it. And not just by happy accident when talking about something else.

I was very happy with the silence tbh*, don't especially need or want to hear about packaging companies that are bigger than us in the Clearlake portfolio. 

*And expect almost everyone we dealt with, players and clubs, was, too. A big incentive to work with Chelsea, having confidence they won't rat you out to a journalist first time it seems helpful.

Edited September 22, 2023 by thevelourfog

[Morgs]

I honestly think Poch is already at odds with the board. You saw it in the summer when asked in pressers about signing players, that he responded "i don't know, you guys would know better than me" and when asked about Ugochukwu signing "I don't know him, the club say he is a good player" (paraphasing)

The Gallagher and Chalobah things are obviously where he is disagreeing with the board of getting rid of them. 

He'll be gone by Easter. 

[Mark Kelly]

14 minutes ago, Morgs said:

I honestly think Poch is already at odds with the board. You saw it in the summer when asked in pressers about signing players, that he responded "i don't know, you guys would know better than me" and when asked about Ugochukwu signing "I don't know him, the club say he is a good player" (paraphasing)

The Gallagher and Chalobah things are obviously where he is disagreeing with the board of getting rid of them. 

He'll be gone by Easter. 

The longer he goes without tangible improvement across the board the worse it looks for him.

I'm disappointed with him so far , I expected more steel , I expected us to play to our strengths and for the opposition to worry about us but the whole set up and mindset appears to be negative despite how he keeps talking about keeping things positive and I just cannot let the insanity of playing Colwill , Chilwell and Enzo in positions that actively weaken us go, it's mental. 

[xceleryx]

2 minutes ago, Mark Kelly said:

The longer he goes without tangible improvement across the board the worse it looks for him.

I'm disappointed with him so far , I expected more steel , I expected us to play to our strengths and for the opposition to worry about us but the whole set up and mindset appears to be negative despite how he keeps talking about keeping things positive and I just cannot let the insanity of playing Colwill , Chilwell and Enzo in positions that actively weaken us go, it's mental. 

And as often stressed some of this has been difficult, if not impossible to do, because a few important pieces are missing that would've played big roles in both how we setup and played. Without those players, or more specifically the qualities they possess, it's not always possible to play as initially desired and tweaks need to be made to adapt with what's on hand instead.

I'd understand this angle more if we were fielding our strongest teams and had a full selection of players. Again, not that I think every decision made so can be justified. 

[Thiago97]

25 minutes ago, Morgs said:

I honestly think Poch is already at odds with the board. You saw it in the summer when asked in pressers about signing players, that he responded "i don't know, you guys would know better than me" and when asked about Ugochukwu signing "I don't know him, the club say he is a good player" (paraphasing)

The Gallagher and Chalobah things are obviously where he is disagreeing with the board of getting rid of them. 

He'll be gone by Easter. 

I mean you could be right, but it's not really how I see the situation here. For starters, I would imagine the players we signed were targeted in some way before Poch was appointed. Poch is not here to sign players, he is here to coach them with an input into what players he may or may not require. His comments on Ugochukwu are exactly what I would expect really. Surely no-one thinks Les is a player that Poch has requested ?

I admit there does appear very different views on Gallagher - At the same time, many of the players who will be competing with Gallagher have not yet been available. So whilst it seems clear that Poch values Gallagher in his plans, we don't really know if this is a long term view, or just based on not having full quota of options available to compete with him.

1 minute ago, Mark Kelly said:

The longer he goes without tangible improvement across the board the worse it looks for him.

I'm disappointed with him so far , I expected more steel , I expected us to play to our strengths and for the opposition to worry about us but the whole set up and mindset appears to be negative despite how he keeps talking about keeping things positive and I just cannot let the insanity of playing Colwill , Chilwell and Enzo in positions that actively weaken us go, it's mental. 

A load of differing opinions on this, but I am still of the view its too early to draw many of these conclusions. I can't help but thinking we are expected more and quicker, purely based on the impact of Postacoglu is having at Spurs. Each and every situation is different and take different amount of time before improvements are made. Players like Haaland come here hit the ground running, players like Pires look ban average for 6 months, before they get to grips with the situation and show their ability. We seen something similar with Conte, it was all pretty average up until after that Arsenal game, change of formation / tactics and we turned into a different team.

On the whole Colwill, Chilwell and Enzo front. Again, I just think its too early to understand is this a long term view for the season, or is Poch just trying some options. We just cannot really gauge this after 5 games. Enzo has only really had one ineffective game playing further forward, off the back of international week playing at altitude. I believe the Colwill/Chilwell set up is something he is trying and is interlinked to each other, its fair to question how well this is working right now, but I don't believe this is being done because he needs to give Colwill games, or because he wants to fit Silva in. I think it is something tactical he is experimenting with, Poch probably feels he does not have conclusive proof it is not working or working after just a handful of games.

[Dwmh]

3 hours ago, thevelourfog said:

You've commented a few times that you haven't paid as close attention to Chelsea over the last year or so as previous (hopefully you're okay and that's been out of very sensible choice!), it is really clear to see we are not dealing with a press stonewalling RA approach any more. This lot very, very proactively and openly talk to the press, and very often.

Sure there is more openess (or an attempt to claim it).  But if the club is officially brieging as to whether it is tryiing to get rid of players things really have turned for the worse since I was watching closely.  Clearlake are financial investors, Gallagher and Chalobah are significant financial assets.  You don't brief about the specific assets you want to sell.  (I spent 5 years talking directly to Investor relations people and FDs, that is not how it works).

3 hours ago, Ham said:

Roman treated Chelsea as a hobby. A rich man's plaything. He was notoriously reclusive. 

 

Hobby is pretty much the feeling i get with the Clearlake guys - a diversion from real work.  And bragging about it.

3 hours ago, thevelourfog said:

I was very happy with the silence tbh*, don't especially need or want to hear about packaging companies that are bigger than us in the Clearlake portfolio. 

*And expect almost everyone we dealt with, players and clubs, was, too. A big incentive to work with Chelsea, having confidence they won't rat you out to a journalist first time it seems helpful.

Well quite.  But Liverpool type media content is one thing, explaining personnel policy about individuals is out right crazy (if it came from official channels).
More likely it came from traditional channels - the players' agents (unless people have seen direct quotes).

 

2 hours ago, Thiago97 said:

I admit there does appear very different views on Gallagher - At the same time, many of the players who will be competing with Gallagher have not yet been available. So whilst it seems clear that Poch values Gallagher in his plans, we don't really know if this is a long term view, or just based on not having full quota of options available to compete with him.

Gallagher is a lot like Droy - he was always brought back when we let a few in, and as soon as we had a better game he was dropped for "a player better on the ball".  Up and down days that my nick is meant to highlight.
Gallagher was used a lot at AM when it was thought we cold sit and maybe he'd nick the ball off a defender (basically our sole tactic against RM and others at that time - both the obvious future double 6s being used at AM).

 

{Various]
The real issue is when do Clearlake stop making changes because their carefully worked out plans aren't coming right.  And when to they learn to give just time a go.  ie not kick out the manager and spend half a billion every window.

I'm concerned that won't happen till they run out of money (they have probably already run out of time).

 

[Thiago97]

24 minutes ago, Dwmh said:

Gallagher is a lot like Droy - he was always brought back when we let a few in, and as soon as we had a better game he was dropped for "a player better on the ball".  Up and down days that my nick is meant to highlight.
Gallagher was used a lot at AM when it was thought we cold sit and maybe he'd nick the ball off a defender (basically our sole tactic against RM and others at that time - both the obvious future double 6s being used at AM).

 

{Various]
The real issue is when do Clearlake stop making changes because their carefully worked out plans aren't coming right.  And when to they learn to give just time a go.  ie not kick out the manager and spend half a billion every window.

I'm concerned that won't happen till they run out of money (they have probably already run out of time).

 

It is a very valid concern. Only time will really provide the answer on this.

If I look at things logically (to my eye), they spent crazy in the last two windows to try and turn around a terrible season  in January, then to finance a 2-3 season squad rebuild in one summer.

I would then expect we start to see far less activity across the next 4-5 windows.  The scenario should change to 1-3 additions to compliment the squad and address key positions. This is what I expect and somewhat explains the narrative of the last 12 months.

If we continue to buy/sell 7-8 players in/out every window, then it really will just be a madness and we will forever be stuck in a cycle of transition, and like achieve nothing.

All too early to say either way right now.

[Ham]

3 minutes ago, Thiago97 said:

It is a very valid concern. Only time will really provide the answer on this.

If I look at things logically (to my eye), they spent crazy in the last two windows to try and turn around a terrible season  in January, then to finance a 2-3 season squad rebuild in one summer.

I would then expect we start to see far less activity across the next 4-5 windows.  The scenario should change to 1-3 additions to compliment the squad and address key positions. This is what I expect and somewhat explains the narrative of the last 12 months.

If we continue to buy/sell 7-8 players in/out every window, then it really will just be a madness and we will forever be stuck in a cycle of transition, and like achieve nothing.

All too early to say either way right now.

Absolutely.  

Also, I keep saying it but it's only madness and chaos until we start scoring goals. 

Football is unlike any other business.  The landscape changes dramatically when we win some games, which I'm convinced we will, very soon.  

 

[Max Fowler]

Read the other day that Brentford only want 50-60 for Toney
If so we should snap their hand off - can't believe they don't want 80+

60 is not even a risk in this market

 

 

[Dwmh]

3 hours ago, Max Fowler said:

Read the other day that Brentford only want 50-60 for Toney
If so we should snap their hand off - can't believe they don't want 80+

60 is not even a risk in this market

Plus Toney would make a lot more money betting on Chelsea losing than he made at Brentford