Did PVA play for wigan today?
Question - does anyone know whether Bruma's loan is 1 year with the option of a 2nd, or 2 years? Got to say I think it may be better bringing him back next summer because this loan is doing him the world of good, and he would be a good back-up/rotation player by next year, then maybe another year and he could be first-team. Although if it is 2 years, then as long as we don't let him go after that I'll be happy because he's only going to improve with this loan, and in my eyes he has a big role in Chelsea's future; fits our new style, and on top of that he is a very good defender. Just a shame that Töre wasn't a loan deal :'( Was a big mistake letting him go.
The 1st isnt on the same level as Torres as a player, and they dont need the other two.
umm we were both talking about the rest of the season (as i mention the jan and summer windows to come). Nani didnt live up to his billing for 3 years. thats the crux of the argument here. but then he hugely came good. by your thinking we would have written him off as a bad buy
I'm not sure about that, and he's certainly on good form and would've probably done well. But if you want others, for an extra 5 they could've taken Agüero, for instance.
And considering they're playing Malouda (!!!) on the wings I think Gervinho would've been a good acquisition. Cabaye would add some creativity, if only for depth, at a minimal price. I would've defo taken him over Meireles.
Aguero wasnt available in January, and Osvaldo is in better form, but isnt a better player overall, They were looking for a top of the line leading forward. gervinho is exactly like malouda and thus the kind of player they are trying to move away from.
He wasn't forced into Fergies plans, so no, not really. In that case the manager took the risk, and in the end it paid out. Here the owner decided to buy Torres because, well, he wanted Torres.
It's all good and well on paper but it's all speculation - old habits die hard, and I can see Roman giving AvB the boot if he doesn't perform and I can certainly see Torres still failing come next season. I'm all for managerial stability regardless of the club and I'll be gladly be proven wrong if AvB is still in charge even if he fails, but Torres will still be a bad buy unless he pulls off some miraculous recovery in the next 6 months.
We're talking about the summer, Mike, not January.
you've just changed the argument completely, being in anyones plans wasnt the point.
You are writing torres off too early, and by that same argument you would write of a player like nani, when in fact he came spectacularly good. You are obsessed about the first 6 months, when he has been signed for the next 5 years. short term thinking
umm we were both talking about the rest of the season (as i mention the jan and summer windows to come). Nani didnt live up to his billing for 3 years. thats the crux of the argument here. but then he hugely came good. by your thinking we would have written him off as a bad buy
for the third time. Chelsea needed to spend in january, not just the summer. as you must be aware they had other targets lined up for summer, they needed the january window for FFPR. the summer was for the likes of modric.
Well, considering we're arguing the fact that Torres was a vanity buy by Roman that didn't quite work out, I don't see how I've changed the argument =/
Read somewhere that Carlo wanted Torres in the summer but Chelsea couldn't sign him. So I dont think Torres was Roman's signing like Sheva. It was Carlo's choice.
again, how can you say it hasnt worked after less than a season? that is just nonsense
Maybe not a season but it's been almost a year.
Anyways, we're not getting anywhere here. We'll see at the end of the season, maybe the next, but he's going to have to do a lot of magic to live up to his hype and pricetag.
Good thing managers dont work on hype and price tag.
Yes thats kind of the point, lets actually give him some real time, rather than calling him a dud after less than a season
It's a mannerism, but when you break a transfer record you expect it to pay out, don't you?
but i wouldnt be judging after less than a season with a player and club in transistion. I would be less concerned with the money and more concerned with the pitch. He has been bought for the next 5 years while the club also goes under changes, to judge him in under a season is foolhardy. The club itself isnt going to peak this season.
Well, it's not like they're doing all too well on the pitch, either. But you may be right about the money - maybe I'm putting a lot of emphasis in the money because we don't have much (or any) money to spend and seeing an outrageous amount of money spent in a player that hasn't performed thus far makes it stand out.