Transfer Talk Topic

[east lower]

1 hour ago, Max Fowler said:

 

 

Makes me wonder why?

1. He wasn’t starting too many games from recollection, but did start the last 3 or 4 - so not sure that lack of game time is overly valid as a reason

2. Replacing a departure

3. Replacing a player who’ll be unavailable for a while - hernia op for Enzo might be a reason?

Edited January 19 by east lower

[Dwmh]

1 hour ago, Mark Kelly said:

Well they did say at the time that they wouldn't be where they want to be until after four transfer windows if I recall. 

I think it was entirely one hundred percent deliberate I'm absolutely convinced. 

Well it is the fourth window right now.  Maybe they need one more.

I can only assume they expect a lot of teenagers to grow up in a hurry when decades of watching a club with a youth plan (70s, 80, last 15 years) suggests to me that some grow up at 22/3, a few at 20, but most just never do.

My guess 50% deliberate, 50% player panic + board not knowing how to say no.

1 hour ago, chara said:

Surely Droy it's the individuals not the bulk? By your argument the number of players that left should have been reduced by a figure not taking into account such factors as their form, age, inclination or injury record?

Azpi left for totally different reasons than Mount....just saying. 

No it is like surgery.  You don't replace your heart, Kidneys, Liver and spleen at the same time.

You can always find reasons for individual departures (sometimes we might actually guess right).  But the whole sale chopping and changing and especially with it leaving us with 20 O21 players including 2 crocks and 4GKs, that spells either madness or a lack of control.
 

31 minutes ago, Ham said:

And Net?  I doubt we look so good.  

 

2 minutes ago, east lower said:

Makes me wonder why?

4.  We are 5 adults short so a tall kid might help.

[east lower]

1 minute ago, Dwmh said:

4.  We are 5 adults short so a tall kid might help.

I saw a table that showed us as having the average second smallest (height) squad in the PL. 

So a tall one might help. 

My guess is cover for a long-term injury, because I don’t think there will be more than one coming in via this transfer window. That should be a forward, but unless we sell two or three I doubt that will happen.

[Rob B]

13 minutes ago, east lower said:

Makes me wonder why?

1. He wasn’t starting too many games from recollection, but did start the last 3 or 4 - so not sure that lack of game time is overly valid as a reason

2. Replacing a departure

3. Replacing a player who’ll be unavailable for a while - hernia op for Enzo might be a reason?

It does seem like bit of an odd one on the face of it.  He started less than half  (11 out of 25) for a team in the championship.  So wasn’t taking it by storm, but whilst being sufficient for his development.

So definitely didn’t scream ‘bring him back’  in the same way as Andrey Santos for example. 

My guess is either:

1)  CFC injury 

2)  Leicester signing incoming 

3)  Makeweight in a CFC deal,  but signing a striker doesn’t seem likely till the summer, and that would surely be Broja anyhow.

[boratsbrother]

2 hours ago, chara said:

Surely Droy it's the individuals not the bulk? By your argument the number of players that left should have been reduced by a figure not taking into account such factors as their form, age, inclination or injury record?

Azpi left for totally different reasons than Mount....just saying. 

Agree with you chara!

Those complaining about the the players we sold or chose to leave, who exactly would have made any significant difference to the current team?  I'd say Alonso would definitely have been better than Cucu or Colwill but that's about it! Colwill is talented but still learning and will be a good player once he gets a run in his best position.

Azpi and Kante were great players for us but both of them were clearly in decline, with Azpi in sharp decline due to age and Kante because of injuries and huge number of miles on those legs. We were right to let both go!  

Gallagher is now doing the leg work of Kante. Gusto is a very promising 20 year old. How can anyone say they are not better for us going forward?

Petrovich over Kepa all day and every day! 

Jackson is obviously very raw but gets himself into far better positions than Havertz. He has more potential than Havertz to score lots of goals for us.

Madeuka over Ziyech.

Palmer the star of the team almost from day one.

Chuck has real talent.

Caicedo and Enzo yet to come good is the only significant negative for me at this moment in time. Desasi is one I don't rate at all. 

Imo RLC should have stayed as a useful squad utility player. Don't miss Mount or any of the others.

 

 

 

 

[Original 21]

1 hour ago, east lower said:

Makes me wonder why?

1. He wasn’t starting too many games from recollection, but did start the last 3 or 4 - so not sure that lack of game time is overly valid as a reason

2. Replacing a departure

3. Replacing a player who’ll be unavailable for a while - hernia op for Enzo might be a reason?

My guess is that the injuries to Lavia and Ugochukwu are worse than feared.  Just one more injury to either Enzo or Caicedo and we’d be screwed. So I reckon it’s more a precaution. Be interesting to see if Santos sticks around after he returns in February too. 

[Floyd25]

Will be interesting to see if Poch starts giving some minutes to Casadei, or does he go out on loan elsewhere? He seems to divide people on here, but I quite like him personally, don’t want him hanging around on our bench for the rest of the season. 

[ROTG]

4 hours ago, east lower said:

Makes me wonder why?

1. He wasn’t starting too many games from recollection, but did start the last 3 or 4 - so not sure that lack of game time is overly valid as a reason

2. Replacing a departure

3. Replacing a player who’ll be unavailable for a while - hernia op for Enzo might be a reason?

Maybe he is the new Della Bona

[Ham]

1 hour ago, Floyd25 said:

Will be interesting to see if Poch starts giving some minutes to Casadei, or does he go out on loan elsewhere? He seems to divide people on here, but I quite like him personally, don’t want him hanging around on our bench for the rest of the season. 

Very safe player.  More an attacking midfielder so not automatically a replacement for either Big Les or Lavia.  

Closer to Gallagher than anything else.  

[xceleryx]

6 hours ago, Dwmh said:

I'm not going to argue over individuals it is just the bulk that matters.  
For me it is like replacing half the parts in your car and expecting it to run first time.
Or like Triggers Brrom.  Is this even CFC any more, just the shirts (but not logos) remain.

The point is I can't believe it was all deliberate.  Half of it, not all.  It got out of control, and the best explanation is that someone shouted Fire in the cinema.

You've done a great job of creating a little narrative of why the bulk of the core players were moved on from, yet a couple of minutes worth of research and some basic comprehension skills will provide a clearer underlying reason - contractual situations.

Kante and Apzilicueta were both out of contract at seasons end.

With Mount, Kovacic Havertz, Loftus-Cheek and Pulisic from the core group of names all having 18 months or less on their deals.

We were in a position where it was either hand out a bunch of expensive contract renewals that would've bogged us down for years to come (in most cases), or recoup what we could and put that back into other players. You can by all means question the method of our rebuild, but there's not really a single player from the list of departures that stands out as a mistake to let go - even if a couple would've been handy to call upon this season at times.

I certainly don't envy Arsenal paying Havertz £280k pw until 2028, Man Utd paying Mount £250k pw until 2028, Man City paying Kovacic £150k pw until 2027 when he's going to be 30 in May, etc.

[xceleryx]

4 hours ago, Rob B said:

It does seem like bit of an odd one on the face of it.  He started less than half  (11 out of 25) for a team in the championship.  So wasn’t taking it by storm, but whilst being sufficient for his development.

So definitely didn’t scream ‘bring him back’  in the same way as Andrey Santos for example. 

My guess is either:

1)  CFC injury 

2)  Leicester signing incoming 

3)  Makeweight in a CFC deal,  but signing a striker doesn’t seem likely till the summer, and that would surely be Broja anyhow.

Re point 2) - this is the most likely one. I believe Leicester are close to signing Sensi from Inter Milan.

I also think we'll use Casadei for additional depth given our own midfield shortage at present with injuries.

[xceleryx]

24 minutes ago, Ham said:

Very safe player.  More an attacking midfielder so not automatically a replacement for either Big Les or Lavia.  

Closer to Gallagher than anything else.  

Indeed. He's very good at getting into the box, making runs forward, etc. 

My biggest concern will be his athleticism, specifically his lack of pace. We're not going to get the sort of run, energy or defensive pressure/pressing ability from Casadei as we do from Gallagher when he's in that #10 type position. 

[ROTG]

1 hour ago, xceleryx said:

We were in a position where it was either hand out a bunch of expensive contract renewals that would've bogged us down for years to come (in most cases), or recoup what we could and put that back into other players. You can by all means question the method of our rebuild, but there's not really a single player from the list of departures that stands out as a mistake to let go - even if a couple would've been handy to call upon this season at times.

umm - sold quality players for potential at a greater cost of 400m 

1 hour ago, xceleryx said:

I certainly don't envy Arsenal paying Havertz £280k pw until 2028, Man Utd paying Mount £250k pw until 2028, Man City paying Kovacic £150k pw until 2027 when he's going to be 30 in May, etc.

their wages are offset from the revenue they generate by being part of successful teams.

Whereas the club is now down to advertising films at press conferences without informing the Coach, and have a group of actors /singers clowns singing from the stands to promote the film during the game to help with the much needed coffers for the piggy bank. 

Maybe Chelsea's should get the makers of kinder eggs to sponsor the club because there seems to be some kind of surmise every matchday  

[ROTG]

1 hour ago, xceleryx said:

I also think we'll use Casadei for additional depth given our own midfield shortage at present with injuries.

A player who could not hold down a regular spot in the championship "started 8 games for Leicester" is now an addition for a premiership team. 

[Dwmh]

6 hours ago, xceleryx said:

You've done a great job of creating a little narrative of why the bulk of the core players were moved on from, yet a couple of minutes worth of research and some basic comprehension skills will provide a clearer underlying reason - contractual situations.

Kante and Apzilicueta were both out of contract at seasons end.

With Mount, Kovacic Havertz, Loftus-Cheek and Pulisic from the core group of names all having 18 months or less on their deals.

We were in a position where it was either hand out a bunch of expensive contract renewals that would've bogged us down for years to come (in most cases), or recoup what we could and put that back into other players. You can by all means question the method of our rebuild, but there's not really a single player from the list of departures that stands out as a mistake to let go - even if a couple would've been handy to call upon this season at times.

I certainly don't envy Arsenal paying Havertz £280k pw until 2028, Man Utd paying Mount £250k pw until 2028, Man City paying Kovacic £150k pw until 2027 when he's going to be 30 in May, etc.

All good reasons for the board to go on a charm offensive to keep some of them.  Starting Summer 2022 and not Summer 23.

The fact is that those clubs took the players on, and so far their judgement seems to be far superior to the Creamcakes.

How can anyone defend the loss of 13 senior players.  After replacements we now have just 20 over 21s of which 4 have bareley played (2 from pre-season injuries) and 4 are GKs.

I'm pretty sure that even the board realise just how badly they screwed up.

[Mark Kelly]

13 minutes ago, Dwmh said:

 

The fact is that those clubs took the players on, and so far their judgement seems to be far superior to the Creamcakes.

Yes , congratulations to Manchester United for signing Mount , he's been a real difference maker .

Literally the only one of the lot who we got rid of I'd want back was Rudiger .

Shifting RLC and getting actual money for him is one of the best things any club has ever done anywhere.

And (no disrespect to XCX) Italy is where you go to wind down your career when the Saudis don't know who you are. 

[Dwmh]

14 minutes ago, Mark Kelly said:

Yes , congratulations to Manchester United for signing Mount , he's been a real difference maker .

Literally the only one of the lot who we got rid of I'd want back was Rudiger .

Shifting RLC and getting actual money for him is one of the best things any club has ever done anywhere.

And (no disrespect to XCX) Italy is where you go to wind down your career when the Saudis don't know who you are. 

Even RLC would be an asset this season (and my position on him has been a whole lot stronger for longer than almost anyone).  Even Kalou would help now.  (Not Matic, we are covered there).

[Mark Kelly]

1 hour ago, Dwmh said:

Even RLC would be an asset this season (and my position on him has been a whole lot stronger for longer than almost anyone).  Even Kalou would help now.  (Not Matic, we are covered there).

RLC wouldn't get in the side , we're too lean on quality to carry a lumbering oaf.

[xceleryx]

2 hours ago, Dwmh said:

All good reasons for the board to go on a charm offensive to keep some of them.  Starting Summer 2022 and not Summer 23.

The fact is that those clubs took the players on, and so far their judgement seems to be far superior to the Creamcakes.

How can anyone defend the loss of 13 senior players.  After replacements we now have just 20 over 21s of which 4 have bareley played (2 from pre-season injuries) and 4 are GKs.

I'm pretty sure that even the board realise just how badly they screwed up.

Why in gods name would the club want to go on a charm offensive to a group of players that were either on the decline, were perennially inconsistent, struggled with injuries, ran their course, and wouldn't have represented value for money on their next deals? 

Just because some of them landed at other "top clubs" doesn't mean they were the right players for us to move forward with.

Mount's barely kicked a ball and looked awful when he did. Kovacic has been a rotation player at best, starting less than 50% of Man City's available matches. Arsenal are facing the same issue we had with Havertz and are going to continue to force it because they forked out £60 odd million for the honour. Then you've got Kante going to a noddy league to wind down, with Azpi, Pulisic and Loftus-Cheek all heading to less demanding leagues with a lower overall level of quality. 

Your insistence on refusing to see the plain and obvious is remarkable, yet entirely unsurprising given your notorious history of doing so. 

And you know what, even if we did keep all these players ownership apparently made a mistake in letting go and overpaying, you'd be one of the first lamenting them for doing so.

Edited January 20 by xceleryx
spelling

[My Blood Is Blue]

8 hours ago, Dwmh said:

All good reasons for the board to go on a charm offensive to keep some of them.  Starting Summer 2022 and not Summer 23.

The fact is that those clubs took the players on, and so far their judgement seems to be far superior to the Creamcakes.

How can anyone defend the loss of 13 senior players.  After replacements we now have just 20 over 21s of which 4 have bareley played (2 from pre-season injuries) and 4 are GKs.

I'm pretty sure that even the board realise just how badly they screwed up.

Using just those that stayed in the PL for even comparisons against those we reasonably replaced them with, to try and give a fair comparison. Small sample size, admittedly, but I know which 4 i’d rather.

Mount - 8 apps 0 G/A
Kovacic - 15 apps 0 G/A
Havertz - 19 apps 4 G & 1 A
Hudson-Odoi - 11 apps 1G & 1A

Palmer - 18 apps 9 G & 4 A
Caicedo - 18 apps 0 G/A
Jackson - 19 apps 7 G & 2A
Madueke - 10 apps 2 G & 0 A

We moved on far more players than you’d ever want in 1 summer, that I agree with, but as has been said by others, contracts were up for a lot of them, many had underperformed/been suffering plenty of injuries and others were on the way down, so the owners clearly made the decision to cut now all at once and go for a pretty excessive rebuild. Is it how I expected them to do it? No. Is it how I think we should have done it? Probably not. But to try and claim all the players that have left have gone on to be bigger and better than what we’ve now got just isn’t true. 

It’s possible and likely some just wanted to jump ship, but don’t blame them, look at the turmoil that club had been through in the last few years… that’s something no other club has had to suffer and for players with a short career, you can’t blame them for wanting away from that.

I’d agree with you if your argument was that they’ve all moved for the benefit of their own careers. Kovacic has gone off to win a title, Havertz has gone off to a side that will challenge for the title, Pulisic and RLC have gone to a league much more suited to their abilities and fragility. Kante has gone to earn loads of money playing in matches he can probably walk through. Azpilicueta has gone back to his native country to see out his career there. Ziyech has gone to a league with a pace much more suited to his style. This doesn’t mean they’re all better than what we have and the owners were stupid to sell them.

[Ham]

7 minutes ago, xceleryx said:

Why in gods name would the club want to go on a charm offensive to a group of players that were either on the decline, were perennially inconsistent, struggled with injuries, ran their course, and wouldn't have represented value for money on their next deals? 

Just because some of them landed at other "top clubs" doesn't mean they were the right players for us to move forward with.

Mount's barely kicked a ball and looked awful when he did. Kovacic has been a rotation player at best, starting less than 50% of Man City's available matches. Arsenal are facing the same issue we had with Havertz and are going to continue to force it because they forked out £60 odd million for the honour. Then you've got Kante going to a noddy league to wind down, with Azpi, Pulisic and Loftus-Cheek all heading to less demanding leagues with a lower overall level of quality. 

Your insistence on refusing to see the plain and obvious is remarkable, yet entirely unsurprising given your notorious history of doing so. 

And you know what, even if we did keep all these players ownership apparently made a mistake in letting go and overpaying, you'd be one of the first lamenting them for doing so.

 

6 minutes ago, My Blood Is Blue said:

Using just those that stayed in the PL for even comparisons against those we reasonably replaced them with, to try and give a fair comparison. Small sample size, admittedly, but I know which 4 is rather.

Mount - 8 apps 0 G/A
Kovacic - 15 apps 0 G/A
Havertz - 19 apps 4 G & 1 A
Hudson-Odoi - 11 apps 1G & 1A

Palmer - 18 apps 9 G & 4 A
Caicedo - 18 apps 0 G/A
Jackson - 19 apps 7 G & 2A
Madueke - 10 apps 2 G & 0 A

We moved on far more players than you’d ever want in 1 summer, that I agree with, but as has been said by others, contracts were up for a lot of them, many had underperformed/been suffering plenty of injuries and others were on the way down, so the owners clearly made the decision to cut now all at once and go for a pretty excessive rebuild. Is it how I expected them to do it? No. Is it how I think we should have done it? Probably not. But to try and claim all the players that have left have gone on to be bigger and better than what we’ve now got just isn’t true. 

It’s possible and likely some just wanted to jump ship, but don’t blame them, look at the turmoil that club had been through in the last few years… that’s something no other club has had to suffer and for players with a short career, you can’t blame them for wanting away from that.

I’d agree with you if your argument was that they’ve all moved for the benefit of their own careers. Kovacic has gone off to win a title, Havertz has gone off to a side that will challenge for the title, Pulisic and RLC have gone to a league much more suited to their abilities and fragility. Kante has gone to earn loads of money playing in matches he can probably walk through. Azpilicueta has gone back to his native country to see out his career there. Ziyech has gone to a league with a pace much more suited to his style. This doesn’t mean they’re all better than what we have and the owners were stupid to sell them.

Absolutely bang on the money.

I would add that we collectively had an inferiority complex against all of the top clubs and that was the case for a few years. 

Who can forget that chastening 6-0 v City?

Who can forget the sight of our players being happy to watch City pass the ball around in their own half without making challenges to avoid inviting on another attack?

People have short memories on the dog's abuse our midfield used to get when they got completely overrun by the better sides.

We scraped 4th thanks to failure by others on a couple of occasions and in hindsight, a purple spell under TT masked the limitations and weak mindsets of a lot of that squad. 

[boratsbrother]

55 minutes ago, My Blood Is Blue said:

Using just those that stayed in the PL for even comparisons against those we reasonably replaced them with, to try and give a fair comparison. Small sample size, admittedly, but I know which 4 is rather.

Mount - 8 apps 0 G/A
Kovacic - 15 apps 0 G/A
Havertz - 19 apps 4 G & 1 A
Hudson-Odoi - 11 apps 1G & 1A

Palmer - 18 apps 9 G & 4 A
Caicedo - 18 apps 0 G/A
Jackson - 19 apps 7 G & 2A
Madueke - 10 apps 2 G & 0 A

 

Furthermore, all of our players have a lot of potential to mature into better players than they currently are while the ones who moved on are only going to go one way from here on in.  Then we look at the goals scored between the two sets of players and see it's 5 scored by those who left and 18 by our new boys. Already our new boys are having a far greater impact on their teams results. Only someone smoking funny fags would swap the old guard for any of the new!

 

Edited January 20 by boratsbrother

[Ham]

A player we scouted before Brighton did.... What are the odds?

 

 

[My Blood Is Blue]

16 minutes ago, Ham said:

A player we scouted before Brighton did.... What are the odds?

 

 

I look forward to watching him in his debut at The Bridge at the start of next season, as the new English record signing.

[Dwmh]

2 hours ago, xceleryx said:

Why in gods name would the club want to go on a charm offensive to a group of players that were either on the decline, were perennially inconsistent, struggled with injuries, ran their course, and wouldn't have represented value for money on their next deals? 

 

Doh because they might just lose 13 core players otherwise.
Because they might just end up with 20 over 21 players includinge 2 crocked before start of season and 4GKs?
Because of all the reason the team has been so handicapped at the start of the season.

pretty clear to me.

2 hours ago, Ham said:

I would add that we collectively had an inferiority complex against all of the top clubs and that was the case for a few years. 

Who can forget that chastening 6-0 v City?

Well obviously the reasons we were so crap last season and the players played so crap are the same reasons they want to leave.

I guess you have:

Theory xceleryx:  the players were always crap even before  2022/23 and the club were right to get rid of them even if they are replaced with kids and the squad is naked this year

and

Theory Droy:  The players were always good (74 points in 21/22) but some serious issues at Cobham made them play badly last year and they all wanted out.

Theory xceleryx is the kind of theory I used to reserve for ex girlfriends.