Transfer Talk Topic

[johnnybozo]

Felix is great. Much better than pigeon boy and Mudryk. Doesn't solve the core problem of no striker, but a front 3 rotation of Felix, Nkunku and Palmer is pretty scary.

Like this signing much better than unproven Brazilian children and randos like Omodogman or whatever he's called. 

[Sleeping Dave]

This is no way to run a football club. We are buying Felix only because we want to sell Gallagher. Buying Felix was never the plan. Selling Sterling was probably never the plan either. Now when we realise we have to buy Felix we need to get rid of a winger. Sterling is the highest paid winger at the club so it’s him we are trying to flip. 

I’m at breaking point. I’ve been following this once great club for 30 years and at no point have I’ve been this disillusioned by what’s going on at the club. There is no club culture or identity to this mess. No leadership. No men. No strategy. No plan. Just a bunch boys who will amble about. What the fuck is Felix supposed to add to this squad? Why did we buy Neto a few weeks ago for €60m? 

€239m spent this summer alone on players. €464m last summer. €630m in their first season. In the five windows we’ve sold players for €500m. Read that again. It’s beyond a joke. We are well and truly the laughing stock of European football. I hate these new owners with every fibre in my body. 

CLEARLAKE OUT! Go back to your poxy franchise sports and play PE there instead. You will never get English football and English fan culture. 

[Bison]

4 hours ago, xceleryx said:

Right.

Then have it split into immediate first team and future investment. 

Whether it's for the first team or 'future investments' the money has been spent and needs to be accounted for.

@Mark Kelly blaming PSR for having to buy a player from Atletico that we seemingly didn't want two weeks ago in order to facilitate a sale is insanity. It is the club's doing. We are only in this predicament due to the unprecedented levels of spending seen over the last two years. 

[Thiago97]

8 hours ago, Mark Kelly said:

Don't hate the player , hate the game .

This wanky accounting is the brainchild of those bereft of braincells at the Premier League. All we're  trying to do is stay on the right side of it and trying to make it work for the long term aims of the club.

I don't like it any more than anyone else but it is what it is. 

To some extent yes. However, we have to stop hiding behind this, because no other club is in this same situation because of their decision making like we are. It's a convenient excuse that fits perfectly for the owners to sit behind.

Villa and Newcastle are two clubs who have had key issues with PSR, both clubs have seen their potential growth as football clubs impacted by this. They are impacted by different reasons as to why we are.

The owners have CHOSEN to go down this route and be impacted by PSR in this manner. Why ? Because they think they are the smartest men in the room, they think they are smart by exploiting loopholes, they think they are smart by implementing a strategy bespoke to Chelsea, and by employing fellow smartest people for the job to carry out this strategy.

At no point did they ever think to sit back and ponder why has no-one else has done something similar? Their answer is because no other club execs are as smart as they are to have thought of this. 

We as the fans have to hope it works in some way, cos we don't really have much choice in it. The plethora of South American kids and european teenagers have to be as good as the geniuses that have found them and brought them here.

It's ever decreasing circles until they rip this nonsense up or move on. Last thing we need to be doing is waving flimsy excuses around to  justify their actions.

[Mark Kelly]

10 minutes ago, Thiago97 said:

To some extent yes. However, we have to stop hiding behind this, because no other club is in this same situation because of their decision making like we are. It's a convenient excuse that fits perfectly for the owners to sit behind.

Villa and Newcastle are two clubs who have had key issues with PSR, both clubs have seen their potential growth as football clubs impacted by this. They are impacted by different reasons as to why we are.

The owners have CHOSEN to go down this route and be impacted by PSR in this manner. Why ? Because they think they are the smartest men in the room, they think they are smart by exploiting loopholes, they think they are smart by implementing a strategy bespoke to Chelsea, and by employing fellow smartest people for the job to carry out this strategy.

At no point did they ever think to sit back and ponder why has no-one else has done something similar? Their answer is because no other club execs are as smart as they are to have thought of this. 

We as the fans have to hope it works in some way, cos we don't really have much choice in it. The plethora of South American kids and european teenagers have to be as good as the geniuses that have found them and brought them here.

It's ever decreasing circles until they rip this nonsense up or move on. Last thing we need to be doing is waving flimsy excuses around to  justify their actions.

Aston Villa and Newcastle are in exactly the same position , Emery was complaining earlier this week and Newcastle who are one of the most cash rich in the league have also complained about the situation of having to sell to buy .

[Mark Kelly]

33 minutes ago, Bison said:

Whether it's for the first team or 'future investments' the money has been spent and needs to be accounted for.

@Mark Kelly blaming PSR for having to buy a player from Atletico that we seemingly didn't want two weeks ago in order to facilitate a sale is insanity. It is the club's doing. We are only in this predicament due to the unprecedented levels of spending seen over the last two years. 

No.

We're only in this predicament because someone pulled a figure out of their arse that all clubs had to adhere to so the government wouldn't stick their beak in. 

We have as much money as Clearlake want to invest , they're trying to game a system that stops them doing so. 

[Chelsea_Matt]

1 hour ago, Sleeping Dave said:

This is no way to run a football club. We are buying Felix only because we want to sell Gallagher. Buying Felix was never the plan. Selling Sterling was probably never the plan either. Now when we realise we have to buy Felix we need to get rid of a winger. Sterling is the highest paid winger at the club so it’s him we are trying to flip. 

I’m at breaking point. I’ve been following this once great club for 30 years and at no point have I’ve been this disillusioned by what’s going on at the club. There is no club culture or identity to this mess. No leadership. No men. No strategy. No plan. Just a bunch boys who will amble about. What the fuck is Felix supposed to add to this squad? Why did we buy Neto a few weeks ago for €60m? 

€239m spent this summer alone on players. €464m last summer. €630m in their first season. In the five windows we’ve sold players for €500m. Read that again. It’s beyond a joke. We are well and truly the laughing stock of European football. I hate these new owners with every fibre in my body. 

CLEARLAKE OUT! Go back to your poxy franchise sports and play PE there instead. You will never get English football and English fan culture. 

Brilliantly put, my siesta-loving friend. 🎯🎯🎯

[Thiago97]

54 minutes ago, Mark Kelly said:

Aston Villa and Newcastle are in exactly the same position , Emery was complaining earlier this week and Newcastle who are one of the most cash rich in the league have also complained about the situation of having to sell to buy .

Of course they are impacted by it. Villa for overspending to get out of the Championship, then having to keep spending to compete and stay up when back in the PL. Newcastle understandably want to flex their wealth and can't to the degree they want, all three clubs somewhat hamstrung by old stadiums that limits capacity.

Villa and Newcastle have took part in some possible insider trading type deals on players to try and leverage PSR. They have not gone out and signed a ridiculous amount players in/out on stupid illogical contract lengths and just pushed all the finance and assets further into the future, in expectation that it will just fall right into place at some point in the near future.

PSR is not the reason for their behaviour. It may have contributed to their behaviour, them thinking they are the smartest men in the room and not grasping football is the reason for their behaviour.

[Bones]

Paradoxically the previous ownership despite public opinion has built an incredibly good academy and had top scounting process. We bought no name Curtois, Salah, De Bruyne etc etc etc

This owerneship is just effing it up

[Ham]

6 hours ago, xceleryx said:

Right.

Then have it split into immediate first team and future investment. 

I did post on this very subject before this window. 

I calculated that the billion was actually £399m if you only took into account players that the first team squad could call on last season.  

[Bison]

3 minutes ago, Ham said:

I did post on this very subject before this window. 

I calculated that the billion was actually £399m if you only took into account players that the first team squad could call on last season.  

[Max Fowler]

1 hour ago, Mark Kelly said:

Aston Villa and Newcastle are in exactly the same position , Emery was complaining earlier this week and Newcastle who are one of the most cash rich in the league have also complained about the situation of having to sell to buy .

It's just not comparable to our situation, Mark. If we really "had to sell to buy" we would be trying to sell Reece James too. Or are you telling me we would have had to sell him if the Gallagher deal fell through?

The reason we are selling Gallagher is the owners have decided that he doesn't fit the way we want to play, isn't good enough overall, and there is too much incentive to sell him. Yes, the game is structured to incentivise selling academy boys, but we made a clear choice with Connor. Again, a choice many of us maybe wouldn't have completely disagreed with, if we'd spent the money in a sensible way (on a proper GK? a proper CB? a proper ST? - someone with at least some of the fighting attributes we will lose in Connor leaving?).

Edited August 20 by Max Fowler

[Ham]

3 minutes ago, Bison said:

Not that difficult to fathom at all. 

This was in response to a Gary Neville rant last season about Chelsea having a billion pound squad available. 

We had 12 players out injured at the time, 3 of those for an entire season, and he was also counting players who'd been bought for the future and loaned back to their clubs for another season. 

The "billion pounds bottle jobs" was actually the £399m bottle jobs.  

 

[Mark Kelly]

12 minutes ago, Max Fowler said:

It's just not comparable to our situation, Mark. If we really "had to sell to buy" we would be trying to sell Reece James too. Or are you telling me we would have had to sell him if the Gallagher deal fell through?

The reason we are selling Gallagher is the owners have decided that he doesn't fit the way we want to play, isn't good enough overall, and there is too much incentive to sell him. Yes, the game is structured to incentivise selling academy boys, but we made a clear choice with Connor. Again, a choice many of us maybe wouldn't have completely disagreed with, if we'd spent the money in a sensible way (on a proper GK? a proper CB? a proper ST? - someone with at least some of the fighting attributes we will lose in Connor leaving?).

The reason we are selling Gallagher is because he's only got a year left on his contract and they don't want to lose the potential income.

[Max Fowler]

17 minutes ago, Mark Kelly said:

The reason we are selling Gallagher is because he's only got a year left on his contract and they don't want to lose the potential income.

The argument doesn't add up Mark. We're also forcing Chalobah to leave who has a contract until 2028. If Gallagher signed a 2-year contract extension he would be in the same situation. They would still force him to leave.

In a way - we're partly agreeing, Chelsea are being incentivised to sell Connor because of the current system. 

However, you seem to be completely ignoring most people's concerns, which is how have spent the money freed up by Gallagher leaving. It's a bit rich to say we were forced to sell Gallagher in order to fund a Premier League-relegated player who only really thrived in the Championship, a highly injury-prone winger and another forward we already tried and completely failed with (along with our existing signings and a plethora of new young players).

The same concerns are there with Chalobah, where we have bought defender after defender - none of whom are clearly better than him some of whom are clearly worse.

If they valued Gallagher as highly as they valued Reece James, they would have tied him down to a long contract already. Ironically, Connor currently offers far more value than James, whose career is practically over due to injuries.

 

Edited August 20 by Max Fowler

[Bison]

16 minutes ago, Ham said:

Not that difficult to fathom at all. 

This was in response to a Gary Neville rant last season about Chelsea having a billion pound squad available. 

We had 12 players out injured at the time, 3 of those for an entire season, and he was also counting players who'd been bought for the future and loaned back to their clubs for another season. 

The "billion pounds bottle jobs" was actually the £399m bottle jobs.  

You're moving the conversation away from what was actually being discussed.

Chelsea are now in a position where they have to buy  unwanted players in order to facilitate sales (Kellyman-Maatsen and now Felix-Gallagher). We are in this position because the club has spent a ludicrous amount of money in a short amount of time.

Quote

[August 9th] At the time of writing, Chelsea have spent no less than €1.32 billion on signing players since Boehly & Co. took over the club in mid 2022. In that time the club have signed a remarkable 40 players.

What Gary Neville's comment in a one off game have to do with this I don't know.

[Ham]

38 minutes ago, Bison said:

You're moving the conversation away from what was actually being discussed.

Chelsea are now in a position where they have to buy  unwanted players in order to facilitate sales (Kellyman-Maatsen and now Felix-Gallagher). We are in this position because the club has spent a ludicrous amount of money in a short amount of time.

What Gary Neville's comment in a one off game have to do with this I don't know.

That's the main issue on here at the moment. The very small minority who see some positivity in all of this aren't able to ever move the conversation away from the constant negativity. 

It's depressing. The same criticisms every single day from multiple posters. 

My point was that the billion pound tag was being used lazily by our opponents as the value of players available last season to exaggerate the level of our failure. 

We didn't have a billion pound squad, sales weren't being taken into account and neither were players bought for the future and players who couldn't even walk. 

I know that we've spent over a billion but that doesn't equate to a billion pound squad. 

That was all.  

[RDCW]

25 minutes ago, Bison said:

You're moving the conversation away from what was actually being discussed.

Chelsea are now in a position where they have to buy  unwanted players in order to facilitate sales (Kellyman-Maatsen and now Felix-Gallagher). We are in this position because the club has spent a ludicrous amount of money in a short amount of time.

What Gary Neville's comment in a one off game have to do with this I don't know.

I'm not disputing that the Clearlake strategy is both opaque and, I fear, risky, but I can't accept that they have bought "unwanted" players. They are, as a collective, not THAT dumb. There is no doubt that they are attempting to game the system and, in the process, running roughshod over the cultural identity of the club and the traditional behaviours of the game in England, but it remains to be seen how effective the squad will be. 

The variety of opinions on this forum alone show that there is a conversation to be had about both the methods and the individuals involved, but more importantly, that opinions are not facts.

My view is that they are putting together a great, mostly young, squad of players with some glaring omissions (most notably a world class keeper and a lethal finisher). I am prepared to forgive a temporarily less than fully competent defence in the hope and expectation that they will grow into an effective unit before too long. I am frustrated by Enzo's failure, so far, to deliver on his early promise, but pleased by the development of Caicedo and delighted by the emergence of a fit Lavia.

We all have our pet hates, red lines and players we forgive : I think Mudryk will never make it here, Enzo should certainly never be near the captaincy and perhaps not, on current form, the team, and Sanchez is capable of costing us Champions League football. Conversely I really like Jackson and think he will eventually be a good Premier League striker. I also think Felix could be great for us. He wants to be here apparently and is undoubtedly a major talent; if we can find a role for him he will be a terrific complement to the players we have. Sterling is difficult: at times he looks outstanding, but at others he is frustratingly non-productive.

These are opinions, not facts.........although of course all undeniably true 😉

[Max Fowler]

7 minutes ago, RDCW said:

My view is that they are putting together a great, mostly young, squad of players with some glaring omissions (most notably a world class keeper and a lethal finisher). I am prepared to forgive a temporarily less than fully competent defence in the hope and expectation that they will grow into an effective unit before too long. I am frustrated by Enzo's failure, so far, to deliver on his early promise, but pleased by the development of Caicedo and delighted by the emergence of a fit Lavia.

Genuine question, do you think this squad can just "grow into an effective unit" without experienced players who are the right characters to help guide them? I think there's next to no chance of them reaching their potential without that. If we want our young and talented squad to reach its potential, we need real leaders to help show them what winning is all about.

There is a reason why no other club in history has tried this experiment to let the kids learn to be leaders by themselves - IMHO they will never be able to do that on their own. Don't we have, officially, the youngest squad in Europe right now? 

[Max Fowler]

17 minutes ago, Ham said:

That's the main issue on here at the moment. The very small minority who see some positivity in all of this aren't able to ever move the conversation away from the constant negativity. 

It's depressing. The same criticisms every single day from multiple posters. 

There are positives to take Ham though, and they are mentioned by some who are largely critical about what's going on.

Surely you must understand that it's also frustrating for those who are more negative than not when it feels like we are being gaslit on the broader situation, given excuses that don't add up or dealt plan old whatabboutery.

I accept that we can all try to be more respectful of each others views and try not to shove the same lines down each others throat again and again, but aren't different opinions and strong feelings the very point of a forum?

[RDCW]

12 minutes ago, Max Fowler said:

Genuine question, do you think this squad can just "grow into an effective unit" without experienced players who are the right characters to help guide them? I think there's next to no chance of them reaching their potential without that. If we want our young and talented squad to reach its potential, we need real leaders to help show them what winning is all about.

There is a reason why no other club in history has tried this experiment to let the kids learn to be leaders by themselves - IMHO they will never be able to do that on their own. Don't we have, officially, the youngest squad in Europe right now? 

Yes I do think the squad can grow, not only into an effective unit, but an excellent one. Leadership is a strange, imponderable thing : I was astonished when Butch Wilkins was made Chelsea captain at 18, Will Carling captain of the England rugby team at 21, John Terry at 21 etc, but they ended up being inspired choices. Leaders will emerge from any group and whether men will follow is dependent on their character, not their age. 

Having said that, I concede that the absence of experience, particularly in defence, will mean the process may take a season longer that if we had the influence of someone like Thiago Silva, but we need to remember that we were pretty leaky even with him in the side.

My view is that wisdom and organisation can be inculcated into the young by the coaches, whereas leadership is an innate characteristic.

Edited August 20 by RDCW

[martin1905]

@RDCWand @Ham both spot on.

It's funny, those of us that are a bit more optimistic only really talk about the sporting side of things. We are, and I think everyone on the same page as me would agree, optimistic because we feel that the squad being assembled is very good. With the potential to really challenge for the major honours.

I'm pretty sure there have been very few posts from any of us about the board and how the club is being run. It doesn't mean to say we agree with everything but the way I look at it is, it is what it is.

I don't agree with everything they do. They've done lots of things i wouldn't have done and have made me very angry but what can we do about it. Just constantly moan will get us nowhere and I don't believe those that are negative are looking at the playing side of things fairly. It says it all with the amount of criticism we received during pre season. The manager and squad have been written off before a ball has been kicked. So many on here have dismissed us having any chance of doing anything. Based on pre season. 

It's very easy to sit there and make predictions that this squad will fail and never be successful. The truth is no one knows but whenever someone is positive about our chances it just gets shot down. Those that see it all negative are right, those  that arr a bit more optimistic are quite simply wrong. That's fine but it's not fact. 

 

[Blue Kratos]

2 hours ago, Ham said:

I did post on this very subject before this window. 

I calculated that the billion was actually £399m if you only took into account players that the first team squad could call on last season.  

Yeah but the billion poands tag looks more sexy on paper.

[blueboy1905]

9 hours ago, Original 21 said:

So we’re effectively funding the Gallagher move to Atletico by taking Felix off their hands. But we’re getting the full Gallagher profit on our year on year accounts but the Felix fee is amortised over several years? Very smart. 

If there was a competition for football accounting we’d be the Champions of Europe. 

The trouble is at what cost? A souless club operating like a clearing house for players not dissimilar to upmarket human trafficking. Eventually the cupboard will be empty with nothing else to sell. 

[Rob B]

2 hours ago, Ham said:

I did post on this very subject before this window. 

I calculated that the billion was actually £399m if you only took into account players that the first team squad could call on last season.  

No idea where you are getting £399m from mate.  

Enzo, Caicedo, Lavia, Muydrk, Fofana, Sterling, Palmer, Cucerella amount to more than £0.5b and that is before Badiashille, Jackson, Madueke, Disasi, Gusto, Nkunku, Chukwuemeka etc.

We have definitely spent a billion pounds on transfer fees for the first team squad.