First time for everything eh... The only thing I was trying to understand from the start was whether it was possible or not for such a thing to happen and it is possible. I am not looking to speculate on whether such a thing might happen
The Chelsea Thread
- Thread starter Ramires
- Start date
- Replies 35K
- Views 3M
First time for everything eh... The only thing I was trying to understand from the start was whether it was possible or not for such a thing to happen and it is possible. I am not looking to speculate on whether such a thing might happen
You are calling me thick when you yourself more than doubled Mata's wages in your calculations ... *slowly claps*
Fair enough
I'm not a Chelsea fan, but I'll admit I was wrong there (but I did say it was an estimation). And that's nothing to do with how thick I am, just how misinformed I am. Even so, his transfer fee would still most likely cover most of the transfer fee of the new signing, so my point still stands. So what's your response, or will you admit you're wrong?
I never said you are thick ... I just find it incredible that you can accuse me of being thick when you yourself use some totally random numbers in your hypothetical Maths. Even if Mata's transfer covers the new signings, what about wages?
Cavani or Falcao would likely demand 200k p/w which would translate into millions of dollars of expenses over the length of their contract
Anyways we can just agree to disagree and move on. All these debates are brining out a pathetic side in me which I hate ... Let's move on
Apparently we are in talks to sign Guarin and Zouma this window ... If we are looking at Zouma, I assume Terry leaves in the summer? Rather surprising if that happens as he has played well regularly this season unlike Lampard or Cole
Apparently we are in talks to sign Guarin and Zouma this window ... If we are looking at Zouma, I assume Terry leaves in the summer? Rather surprising if that happens as he has played well regularly this season unlike Lampard or Cole
I apologize at the outburst, but it just seemed that you were being stubborn and not accepting other people's views. The numbers weren't really random, if you think about it, a player of Mata's calibre is likely to be on something around ?200k per week at top clubs, so that's where the figure came form. Mata's wage, it seems, is an anomaly though. Cavani and Falcao would probably demand large wages, but according to multiple sources, Torres is on ?175k; Eto'o on ?135k/?70k (depending on the source) and Ba on ?80k, so it's not as if you don't have high earners already up front. If you sold Torres/hadn't signed Eto'o, then that would mostly cover the wages, and the Mata fee would cover the transfer fee. And I'm certain Cavani/Falcao would be doing better than Torres, Eto'o and Ba have done, in the league, put together - at least in terms of goals, something which you've severely lacked from your strikers!
Nick Chelsea
Member
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2012
- Messages
- 2,038
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
I'm giving you my balls on a plate if ANY of those names makes it to the first team and establish himself in the team. The only guy that has a little chance of doing it is Chalobah. What world do you live in? What system? This is Chelsea mate, we BUY, we DON'T promote youngsters. This has been the case for years. Love it or hate it -- that's the truth. Deal with it.
Don't be sick of me pal, not my fault we have that policy in the club. I want long-term, I want youngsters to be given a chance, I want the stability United have. Don't blame me. In all fairness, however, we must not complain too much. This policy has brought trophies and as long as they keep coming, I'm fine with that.
I don't believe that "long-term" **** Jose loves mentioning, and how he "thinks for the future". Come on, been there, heard that. Sick of it now. We won't be like United, at least for the near future, so please, don't act like we are.
P.S. Pogba and Martinez are hardly big names. Lol.
This is the voice of reason. Fair play for recognizing it, and not romanticising Mourinho and Chelsea's view on youth. And anyway, most of those players probably wouldn't get near the Arsenal team, never mind Chelsea.
This ... Although to be fair, Chalobah is way too talented and I think he will be given ample opportunities to prove himself as Mourinho rates him very highly
I posted that before I saw your post, so ignore it.Mate you have your view and I have mine. Let's just end this and agree to disagree
I'm not talking about getting near first team right now, but in 2/3/4 years. We're trying to change our appraoch if you haven't noticed. Mourinho has spoken about how he'll judge the squad this season and will only make one or two clinical signings. Ruben Loftus Cheek is one of europe's elite talent, there were rumours of Barca sniffing around him. He handled Yaya Toure pretty well in that lame post/pre-season friendly. Out of all these talents, one or two will definitely make it. Charly Musonda is very highly rated in our academy. Mourinho's hatred of young players has only been hyped by the media, I'd like ya'll to dig on this matter. He was the one who gave Cech the opportunity over Cucidini, Varane replaced Pepe (although because he was injured) but Mourinho kept selecting Varane over Pepe after that. Mourinho also knows the right way to motivate youngsters (Like he asked Kalas this season, alas he succumbed to injury and we never hit the ground running to give him a shot). Chalobah will be in consideration for next year, at least that's what Jose said in pre-season this year.
And to @Nick, I'm talking about unrecognised talents at this stage. Jackson Martinez and Pogba are proven talents. You may think it's still the same Chelsea where we just buy and then sell like dumbasses (That Matic sale to SLB). But we have a different DoF, a different mentality going forward. I'd like you guys to have a talk with the people who keep a check on academy, you might as well learn a couple of things.
And I wasn't talking about right now either. No doubt one/two of the youngsters will get near the first team, but I don't believe for one second Mourinho won't sign a player because of that. He had De Bruyne - why did he sign Willian? He had Lukaku - why did he sign Eto'o? He had Chalobah - why did he sign Van Ginkel? I know Chalobah perhaps isn't ready, but the examples do support my point - that Mourinho won't 'do a Wenger' and not sign a player because he has talented youth who will be ready for the first team in a few years.
Maybe the club's approach is changing, and so is Mourinho's, but I'm still very skeptical about it all. And regarding Mourinho giving opportunities to young players, both Cech and Varane were due to injuries, and even if they weren't, that still doesn't really show his willingness to give youth a chance - they're two players, in what, ten years of management?
Nick Chelsea
Member
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2012
- Messages
- 2,038
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
I hope so. Let's see.
De Bruyne isn't playing because he can not press and run like Willian. When De Bruyne was signed, it was well known that he is not good at defending. Willian runs and runs and runs, tackles, wins ball all around the pitch and that is including his offensive contribution. I was one of the criticizers of this purchase, especially considering how good Moses was looking during pre-season. But I'm finally starting to like him, plus he also makes our attacking band's name cool. "Wizard of Os" (Willian + Hazard+ Oscar).
Mourinho has been quite open about wanting a striker who can play in tight spaces, basically who posses the attributes of a second striker (Like Eto'o was at Inter). Eto'o link up is good, Lukaku is sort of Target man, his technique isn't all too solid. 3 strikers are much needed, we know it better because we know what happened last year when we only had 2. (Sturridge and Torres). Mourinho tried to offload Demba Ba but he couldn't, Fernando Torres can not be dumped because of his wages.
Chelesea's striking problem lies in the fact that they build attacks patiently which results in opposition crowding the box, a poacher becomes fairly anonymous. Target Man can bully defenders.
Romelu Lukaku himself requested Loan considering that he needed more playing time to develop and for WC as well, after that recent spat in media, Lukaku has cleared up everything and has said good things about the manager as well as the club. Van Ginkel is far more ready product, also Chalobah wasn't in contention for first team in this year. Our current midfield is Essien (Not good enough to be a starter), Lampard (Good but only with proper rest and where he was the freedom to make forward runs), Ramires (Less technical, more utility player) and Mikel. Van Ginkel was much needed reinforcement, too bad he tore his ACL, we've struggled in midfield, Chelsea's midfield duo of Lampard and Ramires is the most "Dribbled past" pivot among top clubs.
I've had similar and longer discussion about Mourinho and young players on WAGNH, don't want to start it again.
Perhaps a lot of these points are valid, I don't know for sure, but it does sound like you're clutching at straws and trying too hard to justify the signings. How do you justify Sch?rrle's signing then? And even though Lukaku's technique isn't the best, Eto'o's seems to have significantly decreased from his days at Inter. Also, just because Lukaku wanted to leave for more playing time doesn't make it any less Mourinho's decision. If Mourinho had guaranteed him playing time at Chelsea, or said no to his request, then he may have changed his mind. Like I said, I understand Chalobah wasn't ready, but that supports my point - like I said, Mourinho won't hesitate to sign just because he has a promising youth player in the ranks and he doesn't want to stop his progress into the first team by buying a player who will be a long-term competitor.
Okay so its all about number of goals scored? So as long as Utd have a healthy goal difference at the end of the season they can finish outside the top 4? If City finish 2nd to Arsenal its okay as long as their goals scored and goal difference is far better? Good sides are built from the back and we have the 2nd best defense in the league, get that sorted 1st and your halfway there.
On the "attacking midfielder" thing you added far too many players, Lampard and Bertrand are not attacking midfielders in the slightest. Marin and Moses won't make the cut and will be sold at the end of the season and Atsu and Piazon are very young lads with potential.
Massively overestimated Mata's wage, try 90k a week and go from there mate.
Try we HAVEN'T but have the potential to do so. You go back to Jose's 1st time in charge with us, how many of that youth team are playing at a similar/higher level than Chelsea, i'll tell you 0. You go back to 3-5 years ago and do the same, how many have excelled elsewhere? My personal opinion is there is 1 player we prematurely let go of and that was Nemanja Matic. Mancienne, Stoch, Tore, Sinclair, Rajkovic, Di Santo, Mellis, Sahar, Nouble, Tejera? Would any of them get in our squad right now or in the past? Our academy is getting better each year, the standard of the average player now is twice as good as it was 4-5 years ago that's a fact.
But that along with the lack of stability at the club in manager terms has not helped them to break through. Jose has some sort of job confidence now so he may risk playing a few young lads along the way, for instance tonight Lewis Baker sung his initiation song which is sung when a player is deemed a 1st team player. He was in the squad earlier in the season against Swindon but didn't get on as we had to make 2 emergency subs through injuries.
No, it's not all about goals scored, but if none of your strikers can score more than a Norwich striker, a[n Everton] full-back and a Stoke playmaker, then that no doubt reduces your chances of winning/challenging for the league. I'm not saying that's necessarily the target, I don't know, but I'm just saying that with a good, new striker, you could be unstoppable. As you've said, you've got a fantastic defensive base to build on, with a decent midfield (maybe missing a deep-lying centre-midfielder), so a top class striker would complement that nicely. Good sides may be built from the back, but top sides are very strong in both defence and attack.
Lampard has played attacking-midfield in the past, so he is competent there. Maybe he isn't as effective as he was before, but I'm naming players who can do a job in that position in a crisis (which is what depth is all about). Bertrand can play as a defensive-winger (replacing an attacking-midfielder if needed), and although the other two won't get near Hazard/Oscar/Willian, they are worth keeping. The thing is, if you look at other top clubs, none of them have two very good players in each position, spending to get that much depth is a waste. Depth is always good, but too much depth either results in a waste of money, or a lack of playing time for some top players - sometimes, the best squads don't have all the best players, but some great players and some willing, competent and cheap backups.