Sleeping Dave

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


About Sleeping Dave

Contact Methods

  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Battersea, London
  • Interests
    Chelsea. End of.

Previous Fields

  • Team
    Chelsea FC

Recent Profile Visitors

4,276 profile views
  1. Oh perhaps I just didn't understand the analogy then! We seem to agree:) Well I certainly hope you'll be less wrong then me! But please let you be wrong as the club surprises us all on deadline day with five new players lined up next to a grinning Conte.
  2. I'd say we need more than four in reality. GK: Courtois, Caballero, Eduardo DF: Azpilcueta, Christensen, Luiz, Rudiger, Cahill WB: Alonso, Moses, New RWB, New LWB CM: Kante, Bakayoko, Fabregas, New CM AM: Hazard, Willian, Pedro, New AM, Musonda Jr. S: Morata, New S, Batshuayi One could even argue that would be the bare minimum one should find acceptable. There's an argument to have 22 senior outfielders - I.e two more taking the total up to seven new players. Optimally it should perhaps be seven, bare minimum five with the most likely scenario for me right now being one or two new players. That would mean we'd end up with 16-17 senior outfielders. Last season we started out with 19 (incl Chalobah).
  3. It's a funny clip but he does seem somewhat agitated to me. Maybe I'm over -thinking the situation? In any case, seems like the man sitting next to Conte had to step in before he said too much towards the end?
  4. Hi mate. I must admit that I have a bit of a hard time following that analogy. It is not in Chelsea's power to decide where Costa has to move. They can decline offers, but thy can't accept one and force Costa to move there against his will. The club should have known there was an actual market of one club and one club only. The man himself has stated so publicly on a number of occasions consistently over time. You've said as much yourself. We're in a situation where we either make up with the man (foolishly I haven't given up completely) or sell him to Atletico for the offers that's on the table. The third option is the worst case scenario for all parties - we let him rot in Brazil and fine him his wages along the way. This would be a rather silly route to take out of spite.
  5. Yes, quite a material difference Kev.
  6. Eh? You must be joking right? Isn't that exactly the question one should be asking? I don't care if he's something that doesn't fit the way we play. What good is he for us if he can't play the role we require of him? If he's to be a starter for us, then he needs to master the role that's required. My assessment is that he's not ready. How is your reply even a little bit relevant?
  7. But wouldn't it be fair to judge him on what he can do for us as a club? Last time I checked, we've played with a lone striker for the best part of the last decade.
  8. Well sure - but we had a much bigger squad last year. This year we don't even have a squad. We have a first XI. If you think me being wrong last year automatically means I'm wrong this year I think you may be in for a surprise. 14 days to try and save our season as far as I'm concerned. We don't even have enough players to focus on both the PL and CL. What's the point in qualifying if we have no chance to perform?
  9. I'm still a little bit at loss how some seem to rate him so highly on here. Sure he was decent towards the end of last season but is he anywhere near ready to be starting for us as a lone striker? No, not at all imo. I think we may come to regret only having two strikers this season.
  10. I'm in neither of those camps. I don't believe every rumour but is still incensed we sign players later than any other PL club. I also do not believe (for a second I might add) that we will strengthen sufficiently by deadline day. You simply don't sign 4-5 quality players in a two weeks window. It ain't happening. Personally I'm quite prepared for a disastrous season by our own yardstick. Right now I can see us competing for 4-7th position in the league.
  11. I don't have a short memory, just stating the obvious. Roman hasn't paid for a player with his own money in years. The Chelsea FC operation is 100% funded with Chelsea FC generated turnover. I appreciate the joke, but we both know that is simply not true.
  12. To be fair, whatever tactic we chose could go pear shaped. What's worse is that we won't even have a chance to really change it due to lack of players.
  13. Roman isn't paying for our transfers. Chelsea FC are however.
  14. To be honest, it's not so much Conte experiencing this but rather all managers we employ. Mourinho, Ancelotti, Mourinho again and now Conte. You are right though (imo), something is definitely not right at the club.
  15. 16 days to go... Getting desperate this.