• Current Donation Goals

Harvz

Transfer Talk Topic

Recommended Posts

jones   
20 minutes ago, Mark Kelly said:

Well , we run the real risk of losing Hazard and Courtois , Pedro , Willian and Fabregas are coming towards the time where historically we don't award players with any longer than a year contracts , we've got a ground to pay for ( I'm still having nightmares about the stand that killed our side ) , today Kante is being linked with PSG  ,we are apparently going to bin yet another manager after hamstringing him as a reward for winning the league and we're being linked with Andy sodding Carol who would be sent off twice a match for us if he could actually keep fit for longer than a week at a time and nobody at board level has anything other than rudimentary understanding of what it is to run  a football club.

This is not as big an issue as you make it out to be.

While it is instrumental to tie down Courtois and Hazard to new contracts, a failure to do so would leave us with a massive transfer kitty, one that could be reinvested in younger, world-class talent. It would be a challenge to replace them both short-term, but it is still a rather comfortable worst-case scenario. 

Fabregas (2019), Pedro (2019+1) and Willian (2020) will be 32 when their contracts run out, and in the case of Pedro we have an optional one year contract extension. I consider it relatively uncomplicated to prolong their Chelsea careers should their performances and importance to the team suggest it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jones said:

Fabregas (2019), Pedro (2019+1) and Willian (2020) will be 32 when their contracts run out, and in the case of Pedro we have an optional one year contract extension. I consider it relatively uncomplicated to prolong their Chelsea careers should their performances and importance to the team suggest it.

I suspect the risk on those players is not that their contracts will expire, but that we will try to push them out before they do.  As with Matic (29), Costa (arguably, 29), Remy (30), Ivanvovic (32), Mikel (29), Ramires (28).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jones   
Just now, Droy was my hero said:

I suspect the risk on those players is not that their contracts will expire, but that we will try to push them out before they do.  As with Matic (29), Costa (arguably, 29), Remy (30), Ivanvovic (32), Mikel (29), Ramires (28).

Should that happen, it would most certainly mean that we had better players in the squad. Which would not make it much of a problem, as the case was with Remy, Ivanovic, Mikel and Ramires. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jones said:

Should that happen, it would most certainly mean that we had better players in the squad. Which would not make it much of a problem, as the case was with Remy, Ivanovic, Mikel and Ramires. 

Mikel was the starting DM of choice when he went. 
Ivanovic was the starting RB of choice at the start of last season.  Anyone who thinks Moses was an upgrade on Ivanovic needs their head examined.  
Morata turns out to be very sub-Costa.
Remy was replaced, if at all, by Bats - was that an upgrade, or does that even matter.
Ramires was replaced by who, exactly?
Oscar replaced by who?  Barkley a year later?

I agree we do have a good core of young players.  But other than JT (who we kept a lot lot longer) our track record of replacing good players aged 29+ has been poor.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jones   
12 minutes ago, Droy was my hero said:

Mikel was the starting DM of choice when he went. 
Ivanovic was the starting RB of choice at the start of last season.  Anyone who thinks Moses was an upgrade on Ivanovic needs their head examined.  
Morata turns out to be very sub-Costa.
Remy was replaced, if at all, by Bats - was that an upgrade, or does that even matter.
Ramires was replaced by who, exactly?
Oscar replaced by who?  Barkley a year later?

I agree we do have a good core of young players.  But other than JT (who we kept a lot lot longer) our track record of replacing good players aged 29+ has been poor.    

This is false. Mikel had not played for six months when his contract was terminated. Ivanovic had lost his place to Moses when his contract was terminated. Ramires did not need to be replaced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ham   
38 minutes ago, Droy was my hero said:

I suspect the risk on those players is not that their contracts will expire, but that we will try to push them out before they do.  As with........ Costa

 

Hilarious. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, jones said:

This is false. Mikel had not played for six months when his contract was terminated. Ivanovic had lost his place to Moses when his contract was terminated. Ramires did not need to be replaced.

Precisely - Mikel's playing career at Chelsea stopped in the summer, not in January.
Ivanovic played about 30 mins after Moses came in (and an absolutely brilliant 30 mins it was too).
Are you arguing Moses was in his place on merit?  Come on we all want a laugh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

West Ham apparently want £35m for Carroll . Bargain.

You can get Sanchez for that or 1/3rd of Mahrez by all accounts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we are genuinely interested in Carroll then a loan swap with Bats would surely benefit all involved at no cost.

Also Lucas Moura has played 72 minutes of football this season despite (I think) being fit. We should look into a loan with option to buy.

That would be two useable signings for the cost of Lucas wages. Both available for CL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they want £35 million for Carroll, then that's over. Thankfully. 

In terms of Chelsea's finances, here is a great Twitter thread with a full analysis and breakdown of Chelsea's finances over the last few years. We've brought in £225 million from player sales in recent years, more than any other top side. 

(The thread is longer than two tweets...)

Bottom line, we have money to spend and we don't spend it. 

 

Edited by James Prescott

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now