Transfer Talk Topic

[martin1905]

There'd have been a time, at pretty much any point over the past couple of years if Sterling had been dropped and released that statement he would have been universally hated by Chelsea fans and everyone on this forum would have been calling him a disgrace and wanting him to be sold.

Literally,  everything we do now is wrong. 

[east lower]

6 minutes ago, Mark Kelly said:

I don't think football works like a "normal" business to be honest. 

They're on a contract and they can demand to honour it if they wish but they generally don't as it's probably quite unpleasant despite the money on offer. 

Sterling could dig in his heels and take the dough like Winston Bogarde but I'd imagine he will want to play. 

None of this is particularly nice but thems the breaks. 

 

Yes, all that’s sunk. And he has a contract, therefore any loss or difference that manifests itself between his contract and any new contract he takes with AN Other club is what I’d go after and if they don’t want to do that deal -sit tight. 
 

Those are, the breaks on the other side of that coin.

 

[east lower]

2 minutes ago, martin1905 said:

Literally,  everything we do now is wrong. 

You’re not far wrong there.

[martin1905]

1 hour ago, Max Fowler said:

Yes, but the fitness you are glossing over is the key point Martin. Fofana is highly unlikely to last the season given two massive injuries in recent years, and we have no idea what kind of player he is any more. I would still keep him and Colwill but have another starting CB option to see who does best out of those two.

But we already have Disasi, Tosin and Badiashille.

No one knows how any of them, or anyone is this squad will fare, playing under the new manager.

I doubt anyone has seen enough of Tosin to really make a judgement. Interesting that Newcastle wanted him. Now they want Guehi, would they have wanted both? Badiashille, no doubt has been disastrous since his injury which is a real shame as he showed a lot of promise. Disasi was nowhere near as bad as people have made out. I remember one game where everyone was raving about him, saying he had Rudiger vibes. I've certainly not written him off.

We were appalling for large parts of last season,  especially defensively, so really hard to pass too much judgement. 

[east lower]

16 minutes ago, My Blood Is Blue said:

Yes and no. Legally if you are making less than 20 people redundant the process is slightly different and can be much more cut throat… the first round of redundancies at my previous company were under this number and they literally split the company into two rooms and those who were going, were informed there and then and had to go that day. Fortunately when it was my turn they had gone over this number and we had to go through the consultation process… I say fortunately, it wasn’t a lot of fun!

You’re right though this isn’t redundancy, but I was just trying to highlight that nasty things happen in business every day and ultimately, employers will get rid of you if needed, without too much of a second thought. Not all, but a lot will. It’s one of the reasons I don’t want to progress too much further in seniority and into the C-Suite, because believe it or not, I’m too nice and can’t be cut throat like that!

I’ve seen people managed out many times though and it’s horrible to see, that is essentially what’s happening here, but publicly.

Good companies manage these processes with empathy, bad ones with bad management do as you suggest in the last paragraph.

Boils down to, do you (not you personally, but you as the company) want to have ethics and decency and be able to look at yourself and say I’m ok, I am - Or are you an organisation who’s values and ethics come second or some way down that line.

There will come a time, when players will not want to come to the club if they keep acting this way. Same thing that people who have a choice of new jobs do now.

[My Blood Is Blue]

5 minutes ago, east lower said:

Good companies manage these processes with empathy, bad ones with bad management do as you suggest in the last paragraph.

Boils down to, do you (not you personally, but you as the company) want to have ethics and decency and be able to look at yourself and say I’m ok, I am - Or are you an organisation who’s values and ethics come second or some way down that line.

There will come a time, when players will not want to come to the club if they keep acting this way. Same thing that people who have a choice of new jobs do now.

Yep, I agree, that’s why I personally am very careful what jobs I take and where I work (although, I got that last one wrong sadly!).

If things settle down with all the ins and outs, which I think they will and we become successful on the pitch again, it will all be forgotten and players will continue to want to join and take the clubs money.

[east lower]

23 minutes ago, My Blood Is Blue said:

Yep, I agree, that’s why I personally am very careful what jobs I take and where I work (although, I got that last one wrong sadly!).

If things settle down with all the ins and outs, which I think they will and we become successful on the pitch again, it will all be forgotten and players will continue to want to join and take the clubs money.

If, being the little word but massive meaning. 

They’ve been at it 2 and a bit seasons now, and we’re no more settled than in either of those seasons and there’s an argument to say that their strategy is to spray enough bullets and by the odds of probability one or two might actually hit the target. Expensive way of trying to do it and appears quite random, which I find strange from a PE firm, who are all about evaluated risk, probabilities of future growth and certainty of revenues.

Edited August 21 by east lower

[My Blood Is Blue]

3 minutes ago, east lower said:

If, being the little word but massive meaning. 

They’ve been at it 2 and a bit seasons now, and we’re no more settled than in either of those seasons and there’s an argument to say that their strategy is to spray enough bullets and by the odds of probability one or two might actually hit the target. Expensive way of trying to do it and appears quite random, which I find strange from a PE firm, who are all about evaluated risk, probabilities of future growth and certainty of revenues.

Personally, I think they are trying for a complete rebuild but over a really (and far too short) period, which is resulting high turnover of players and staff.

Whether they pull it off remains to be seen, but it’s no doubt uncomfortable times for us fans.

[east lower]

Just now, My Blood Is Blue said:

Personally, I think they are trying for a complete rebuild but over a really (and far too short) period, which is resulting high turnover of players and staff.

Whether they pull it off remains to be seen, but it’s no doubt uncomfortable times for us fans.

Unfortunately, a typical approach of the sort of people who know how much everything costs, but will never know the true ‘value’ of anything.

Time will owt though.

[thevelourfog]

54 minutes ago, martin1905 said:

There'd have been a time, at pretty much any point over the past couple of years if Sterling had been dropped and released that statement he would have been universally hated by Chelsea fans and everyone on this forum would have been calling him a disgrace and wanting him to be sold.

Literally,  everything we do now is wrong. 

They've stripped him of his squad number on 21st August, with 10 days of the window left. He was apparently told only last week he wasn't in the coach's plans. 

Do we honestly think the coach needed to watch him for a few minutes in a friendly to make a decision on him? I'd be very worried about any coach appointed who wasn't already very familiar with the attributes of a 29 year old recent international who has been in the PL for about 13 years.

The bits of this we can see are pathetic and reflect terribly on how we are being run. It doesn't work to strip it of context and compare it a completely different hypothetical and suggest anything can be inferred from that comparison. 

[paulw66]

2 hours ago, Max Fowler said:

He was absolutely excellent at the Euros and has been a PL stalwart for Palace - that's where the clamor is coming from.

If Colwill was better than Guehi he would have started ahead of him for England, but he's not!

Was injured. And is 5 years younger.

[paulw66]

8 minutes ago, thevelourfog said:

They've stripped him of his squad number on 21st August, with 10 days of the window left. He was apparently told only last week he wasn't in the coach's plans. 

Do we honestly think the coach needed to watch him for a few minutes in a friendly to make a decision on him? I'd be very worried about any coach appointed who wasn't already very familiar with the attributes of a 29 year old recent international who has been in the PL for about 13 years.

The bits of this we can see are pathetic and reflect terribly on how we are being run. It doesn't work to strip it of context and compare it a completely different hypothetical and suggest anything can be inferred from that comparison. 

So when Felix was available at a knock down price, Sterling was told he wasn't neded. Fairly normal stuff

 

The defence of poor Sterling on here is really quite funny.

[east lower]

19 minutes ago, thevelourfog said:

They've stripped him of his squad number on 21st August, with 10 days of the window left. He was apparently told only last week he wasn't in the coach's plans. 

Do we honestly think the coach needed to watch him for a few minutes in a friendly to make a decision on him? I'd be very worried about any coach appointed who wasn't already very familiar with the attributes of a 29 year old recent international who has been in the PL for about 13 years.

The bits of this we can see are pathetic and reflect terribly on how we are being run. It doesn't work to strip it of context and compare it a completely different hypothetical and suggest anything can be inferred from that comparison. 

The quote from Maresca that went something like that he “prefers a different type of winger“ just doesn’t compute in the timing of this.

He (Maresca), being the well researched type - at his interview he had extensive files of all existing players, would have already known that Sterling wasn’t his type of winger and that was back in June. Added to that he had plenty of knowledge of him with their time at Man City.

That’s why the last 5 or days have been full of complete and utter bull from the club and I think Maresca - who is toeing the party line.

Something’s happened to change the narrative, real question should be, what that is and why’s Maresca going along with it?

Edited August 21 by east lower

[thevelourfog]

9 minutes ago, paulw66 said:

So when Felix was available at a knock down price, Sterling was told he wasn't neded. Fairly normal stuff

 

The defence of poor Sterling on here is really quite funny.

Nah. Felix has been available (and attainable) for about 2 years, not sure how Atletico could have made that clearer, and absolutely bizarre to be posting as if that was a sudden development. 

Also bizarre to frame this as "defence" of Sterling. He's a multimillionaire earning £300k a week, and can chose to do that for nothing or to earn less somewhere he'll play. My heart hardly bleeds. This isn't about him. It's about how we're conducting ourselves as an organisation. There's none so blind, though.

[Ham]

12 minutes ago, paulw66 said:

So when Felix was available at a knock down price, Sterling was told he wasn't neded. Fairly normal stuff

 

The defence of poor Sterling on here is really quite funny.

Don't forget Neto.

[paulw66]

3 minutes ago, east lower said:

The quote from Maresca that went something like that he “prefers a different type of winger“ just doesn’t compute in the timing of this.

He (Maresca), being the well researched type - at his interview he had extensive files of all existing players, would have already known that Sterling wasn’t his type of winger and that was back in June. Added to that he had plenty of knowledge of him with their time at Man City.

That’s why the last 5 or days have been full of complete and utter bull from the club and I think Maresca - who is toeing the party line.

Something’s happened to change the narrative, real question should be, what that is and why’s Maresca going along with it?

What benefit is / was it for Chelsea to string Sterling along, only to tell him to get stuffed now ?

[paulw66]

1 minute ago, Ham said:

Don't forget Neto.

I had.

[paulw66]

2 minutes ago, thevelourfog said:

Nah. Felix has been available (and attainable) for about 2 years, not sure how Atletico could have made that clearer, and absolutely bizarre to be posting as if that was a sudden development. 

Also bizarre to frame this as "defence" of Sterling. He's a multimillionaire earning £300k a week, and can chose to do that for nothing or to earn less somewhere he'll play. My heart hardly bleeds. This isn't about him. It's about how we're conducting ourselves as an organisation. There's none so blind, though.

Ok, Neto became obtainable.

[east lower]

8 minutes ago, paulw66 said:

What benefit is / was it for Chelsea to string Sterling along, only to tell him to get stuffed now ?

I’ve absolutely no idea, that’s why the last few days have been pure obfuscation by the club.

You could speculate all sorts of things, it would IMO, have been far better to tell him and Chilwell a month ago that they were not in the new coach’s plans - gives all the chance to negotiate the best possible outcomes for each party. 
 

Equally, one could speculate that’s it’s a hasty decision based on the need to free-up £300k per week for Osimhen? Done it in one hit, with the saving on Chilwell’s wages paying for The Cats with a bit left over?

But, who knows?

[Miguelito07]

i know two wrongs dont make a right, but.....

[paulw66]

35 minutes ago, east lower said:

I’ve absolutely no idea, that’s why the last few days have been pure obfuscation by the club.

You could speculate all sorts of things, it would IMO, have been far better to tell him and Chilwell a month ago that they were not in the new coach’s plans - gives all the chance to negotiate the best possible outcomes for each party. 
 

Equally, one could speculate that’s it’s a hasty decision based on the need to free-up £300k per week for Osimhen? Done it in one hit, with the saving on Chilwell’s wages paying for The Cats with a bit left over?

But, who knows?

One could speculate that having got hold of Neto and or Felix, the club decided Sterling was surplus to requirements

 

Maybe Chilwell was told weeks ago but didn't feel the need to put out a statement.  I presume he had a fair idea after the Inter game when Viega was sent on ahead of him.

[My Blood Is Blue]

20 minutes ago, Miguelito07 said:

i know two wrongs dont make a right, but.....

Isn’t Thiago Motta also doing a similar thing at Juventus at the moment as well?

[east lower]

1 minute ago, paulw66 said:

One could speculate that having got hold of Neto and or Felix, the club decided Sterling was surplus to requirements

Felix was very obviously the replacement for the Athleti forward who was coming our way then didn’t to ensure the Gallagher deal went through. 

Neto might have prompted it, possible.

None of it explains the statements made by the coach. Honesty and integrity, cornerstones of trust and team building. It’s Maresca’s first mistake. Better to say, we’ve found options that better fit the wage profiles required to comply with the new rules, then bulls**t to cover other people’s actions.

Or, if they’re unhappy and feel that Sterling shouldn’t have made the statement, say so. Just be straight.

4 minutes ago, paulw66 said:

Maybe Chilwell was told weeks ago but didn't feel the need to put out a statement.  I presume he had a fair idea after the Inter game when Viega was sent on ahead of him.

Chilwell may well have known, he was on thin ice. But that could have been as long ago as last season.

[martin1905]

1 hour ago, thevelourfog said:

They've stripped him of his squad number on 21st August, with 10 days of the window left. He was apparently told only last week he wasn't in the coach's plans. 

Was last week when we signed Neto? Maybe after that happened the coach decided he didn't need him?

1 hour ago, thevelourfog said:

Do we honestly think the coach needed to watch him for a few minutes in a friendly to make a decision on him? I'd be very worried about any coach appointed who wasn't already very familiar with the attributes of a 29 year old recent international who has been in the PL for about 13 years.

No, not at all. The fact that he didn't play him much is the point. Maybe he just doesn't rate him?

1 hour ago, thevelourfog said:

The bits of this we can see are pathetic and reflect terribly on how we are being run. It doesn't work to strip it of context and compare it a completely different hypothetical and suggest anything can be inferred from that comparison. 

What I have seen is a new manager not picking a player much during pre season. We've now signed two more players that play his position.  Sterling then doesnt make the match day squad for the first game of the season and comes out with his statement an hour before kick off.

I don't see how any of that reflects, in any way, on how we are being run.

[chiswickblue]

High wages, not signed by the current sporting directors = get rid, asap

Low wages, signed by those two = you're in

It's something that's never been done before and it will be both interesting and incredibly frustrating to see how it plays out.