Chelsea 2022/2023 | THIS IS LAST YEARS THREAD YOU NUMPTIES

[TheReligion]

Would be interested in seeing a list of players Chelsea have let go when they were young who are now playing well at a side in a top league. I can think of:

Ake - sold at 22, now at City
Guehi - sold at 21, doing well at Palace and in the England set up
Tomori - sold at 23, doing well in Serie A
Livramento - hot prospect sold at 18
Lamptey - sold at 19. Like Livramento, probably impacted by Reece James, but still, they're playing RLC at RWB currently..
Abraham - sold at 23, doing well in Serie (and did better than his expensive replacement)
Salah - sold at 24 after 2 years out on loan, became one of the best players in the world
De Bruyne - sold at 23, became one of the best players in the world
Lukaku (first time) - sold at 21, became high profile goalscorer and bought back for a huge fee.
Boga - sold at 21, has done well in Serie A, less high profile than some others on this list but still a decent player.


They're just such a weird club. Letting players like this go, and then spending big on players who haven't necessarily done any better. I know it's a numbers game for them and for every one they sell who goes on to do really well they probably sell two who drop down divisions, but it still has to hurt seeing their former youth players do well elsewhere. They have some decent young players on the fringes at the moment too, like CHO, Ampadu, Pulisic, Chalabah, and I wouldn't be surprised if one or two of them leave and go on to have really good careers elsewhere.

Rice too although he was pretty young when they decided he wasn’t good enough.

Yes I’ve said it a while now but there recruitment has been poor for sometime. The same goes for their signings.

The clubs money has papered over the issue under Abramovich so will be interesting to see how it goes with Boehly in the future.

 

[WeePat]

Rice too although he was pretty young when they decided he wasn’t good enough.

Yes I’ve said it a while now but there recruitment has been poor for sometime. The same goes for their signings.

The clubs money has papered over the issue under Abramovich so will be interesting to see how it goes with Boehly in the future.

He was 14 I think this is scrutinising things a little too much.

 

[Aidan Azar]

Would be interested in seeing a list of players Chelsea have let go when they were young who are now playing well at a side in a top league. I can think of:

Ake - sold at 22, now at City
Guehi - sold at 21, doing well at Palace and in the England set up
Tomori - sold at 23, doing well in Serie A
Livramento - hot prospect sold at 18
Lamptey - sold at 19. Like Livramento, probably impacted by Reece James, but still, they're playing RLC at RWB currently..
Abraham - sold at 23, doing well in Serie (and did better than his expensive replacement)
Salah - sold at 24 after 2 years out on loan, became one of the best players in the world
De Bruyne - sold at 23, became one of the best players in the world
Lukaku (first time) - sold at 21, became high profile goalscorer and bought back for a huge fee.
Boga - sold at 21, has done well in Serie A, less high profile than some others on this list but still a decent player.


They're just such a weird club. Letting players like this go, and then spending big on players who haven't necessarily done any better. I know it's a numbers game for them and for every one they sell who goes on to do really well they probably sell two who drop down divisions, but it still has to hurt seeing their former youth players do well elsewhere. They have some decent young players on the fringes at the moment too, like CHO, Ampadu, Pulisic, Chalabah, and I wouldn't be surprised if one or two of them leave and go on to have really good careers elsewhere.

Musiala.

 

[duffer]

Musiala.

We didn't let him go.

 

[Trequarista10]

The fact that we produce these players should be commended too, no? Despite all those academy players we’ve let go, and it’s a lot and they’re all talented who have proven since that they were probably worth persisting with, Chelsea started the Leicester game yesterday with 5 academy players in the starting lineup with 3 more on the bench.

So unless people expect Chelsea to keep everyone and roll with a squad entirely made up of academy players, then some players will regrettably have to be let go and those players will be good players who are likely good enough to play for Chelsea and that’s just the nature of having an academy that produce players at an extremely impressive rate.

It's commendable, for sure. Your academy is an absolute talent farm. I just don't see the logic in some of the decisions. Signing players like Ziyech, Barkley, Drinkwater, Pulisic when you have as good players coming through. And some of the players who have been kept around wouldn't be the ones I'd have chosen, Gallagher in particular doesn't look like a top 4 player to me, and it surprises me RLC is still around. Fofana is a very good CB but I'm surprised Guehi and Tomori weren't given more opportunities, which would have allowed the Fofana money to be spent on a position you really need. You were even enquiring about Maguire ffs! Salah and De Bruyne are obviously obviously the worst two sales, but I think I'm right in saying that was under Jose (who wanted our board to bin off Martial for Mandzukic, and although it hasn't gone to plan for Martial since, I would have been furious if Jose had got his way). Just curious if Chelsea will be regretting some of these sales in the coming years. It's easy in hindsight of course but I think you'd happily have Abraham back now, and I'm surprised CHO isn't given more game time. I also like Ampadu.

 

[Bluelion7]

Will never forgive Mourihno for Kevin De Bruyne. That was him almost exclusively, not a team decision. You always WANT your own players to be the answer at each position, but you don’t force that if they aren’t the best option.

We have me some mistakes in ones we have let go, and, arguably, in one’s we’ve kept. But overall the quality of our academy and player development has been really good. We’ve had 5 academy graduates start for us this season so far. If Broja had been healthy enough to start it would have been 6.

A more telling story is how well our academy has done overall. The story of players that “got away” playing at a very high level for top teams is a testament, not an admonishment. Come to Chelsea academy, you will either make it here, or you’ll end up starting for teams like AC Milan. A remarkably high percentage of our academy grads have lucrative pro careers. It’s not a bad selling point. When teams like Barca move their academy players on all over the world they are celebrated.

They will only be making this a bigger focus going forward with youth investment, as seen this window.

 

[TheMagicFoolBus]

What do you think the targets will be for Tuchel over the next season or 2?

Until we get a top class holding midfielder, we probably can't hope for a serious title challenge. So ideally comfortably within the top 4 and a cup run per season.

 

[WeePat]

It's commendable, for sure. Your academy is an absolute talent farm. I just don't see the logic in some of the decisions. Signing players like Ziyech, Barkley, Drinkwater, Pulisic when you have as good players coming through. And some of the players who have been kept around wouldn't be the ones I'd have chosen, Gallagher in particular doesn't look like a top 4 player to me, and it surprises me RLC is still around. Fofana is a very good CB but I'm surprised Guehi and Tomori weren't given more opportunities, which would have allowed the Fofana money to be spent on a position you really need. You were even enquiring about Maguire ffs! Salah and De Bruyne are obviously obviously the worst two sales, but I think I'm right in saying that was under Jose (who wanted our board to bin off Martial for Mandzukic, and although it hasn't gone to plan for Martial since, I would have been furious if Jose had got his way). Just curious if Chelsea will be regretting some of these sales in the coming years. It's easy in hindsight of course but I think you'd happily have Abraham back now, and I'm surprised CHO isn't given more game time. I also like Ampadu.

I’m just saying it’s easy to look at individual players we’ve let go and point out mistakes there but on the whole, we’re a club that regularly features up to 6 academy players in the team and we have more currently on loan we have to make decisions on next summer - Colwill, Anjorin etc - so at some point, although I have been annoyed by some individual players who have been sold, you have to just accept that they can’t all make it at Chelsea.

So if Chelsea had 5 academy players in the starting line up vs Leicester and a further 3 on the bench, what’s the expectations people have? Keep Tomori or Guehi, keep Tammy, keep Livramento or Lamptey? Keep Boga? Try and compete in this league with a squad made up entirely of academy players? As much as I would agree with you mostly if we were to discuss each individual player we’ve let go, we have a great academy, the ones we let go will invariably be good players who will succeed at other clubs. It doesn’t change the fact that they can’t all make it here.

 

[Trequarista10]

I’m just saying it’s easy to look at individual players we’ve let go and point out mistakes there but on the whole, we’re a club that regularly features up to 6 academy players in the team and we have more currently on loan we have to make decisions on next summer - Colwill, Anjorin etc - so at some point, although I have been annoyed by some individual players who have been sold, you have to just accept that they can’t all make it at Chelsea.

So if Chelsea had 5 academy players in the starting line up vs Leicester and a further 3 on the bench, what’s the expectations people have? Keep Tomori or Guehi, keep Tammy, keep Livramento or Lamptey? Keep Boga? Try and compete in this league with a squad made up entirely of academy players? As much as I would agree with you mostly if we were to discuss each individual player we’ve let go, we have a great academy, the ones we let go will invariably be good players who will succeed at other clubs. It doesn’t change the fact that they can’t all make it here.

You've let some very good young defenders go in recent seasons, and are now spending huge on Koulibaly and Fofana, whilst also still having 38 year old Silva. Its an interesting comparison to the Salah and De Bruyne sales, and I think it's worth considering how these transfers will be viewed in a few years time.

I wasn't trying to get into a conversation about what Chelsea should do, so much as make an observation on something that simply stands out as unusual. But if I were pushed to comment on what I think Chelsea should do, then I'd say with the talent you have coming through, you could have a mix of academy players and absolute top talents - instead you bring in some players for big fees who are no better. In general terms I'd say you would have been better off signing fewer players, but aiming for higher than what you have done with the level of player you've brought in in recent seasons. Although arguably the Sterling and Koulibaly signings go some way to remedying that, and these signings make more sense than many in recent seasons. Chelsea used to be in the mix to sign some of the most sought after players in world football, and a return to that strategy, with a conveyor belt of academy players mixed in, is a more worrying prospect as a rival fan than your transfer dealings of the last decade or so.

Let's also not pretend that you will always, or have always been, playing so many academy players. When your injured midfielders are back, add in Fofana and probably Aubameyang, the only two regulars will be Mount and James. You can't help but wonder if in a few years time the departures of some of your youngsters will be looked upon in the way as the Salah and De Bruyne sales. It's not even intended as a criticism really, it's more interesting/curious/a source of gentle banter. From a business perspective you do well from your academy, in contrast United often hold onto youngsters too long, stall their careers and let them go cheaply. Neither is great, but as a fan I know it would be irksome if the likes of Guehi, Tomori, Liveamento or Abraham go on to become absolute monsters and sign for a rival.

 

[Bastian]

So that gossip bit on the BBC, Gallagher and Broja + 25m for Gordon. I'm assuming both of the Chelsea boys are loans.

That deal is just absolutely mad.

I know he's started badly this season, but Gallagher was the shit last season. Is he going to be happy to stay there and be farmed out again?

 

[TheMagicFoolBus]

You've let some very good young defenders go in recent seasons, and are now spending huge on Koulibaly and Fofana, whilst also still having 38 year old Silva. Its an interesting comparison to the Salah and De Bruyne sales, and I think it's worth considering how these transfers will be viewed in a few years time.

I wasn't trying to get into a conversation about what Chelsea should do, so much as make an observation on something that simply stands out as unusual. But if I were pushed to comment on what I think Chelsea should do, then I'd say with the talent you have coming through, you could have a mix of academy players and absolute top talents - instead you bring in some players for big fees who are no better. In general terms I'd say you would have been better off signing fewer players, but aiming for higher than what you have done with the level of player you've brought in in recent seasons. Although arguably the Sterling and Koulibaly signings go some way to remedying that, and these signings make more sense than many in recent seasons. Chelsea used to be in the mix to sign some of the most sought after players in world football, and a return to that strategy, with a conveyor belt of academy players mixed in, is a more worrying prospect as a rival fan than your transfer dealings of the last decade or so.

Let's also not pretend that you will always, or have always been, playing so many academy players. When your injured midfielders are back, add in Fofana and probably Aubameyang, the only two regulars will be Mount and James. You can't help but wonder if in a few years time the departures of some of your youngsters will be looked upon in the way as the Salah and De Bruyne sales. It's not even intended as a criticism really, it's more interesting/curious/a source of gentle banter. From a business perspective you do well from your academy, in contrast United often hold onto youngsters too long, stall their careers and let them go cheaply.

It's a reasonable question to ask but we've seemingly learnt our lesson by putting buyback clauses into these deals.

Frankly I don't think anyone we've let go is even comparable to KdB - even during his last loan for us at Bremen he was genuinely excellent and the only recent departure at that level for me has been Livramento (who we can buy back next summer for a reasonable fee).

Guehi is a nice player who still obviously has upside - but Fofana is comfortably better already and is younger. We also still have Colwill who is clearly highly rated - hence why we paid a higher price for Cucurella in order for there to be no purchase clause in Colwill's loan deal.

I think you're spot on in your assessment and it's something I've always said - clubs don't usually regret paying premiums for top drawer talent; the players who become millstones are the mediocre ones who have been bought for depth. And that's where the benefits of the academy should be reaped - case in point is Chelsea in the summer of 2017. Would we have been worse off keeping Nathaniel Chalobah instead of buying dross like Danny Drinkwater? Of course not. Fortunately for us, this is more or less how the Dodgers have always been run and it seems like this is the approach Boehly et al are taking - signing 3 (and possibly 4 if the Zakharyan rumours are true) of the best teenage prospects in Europe is an extremely smart gamble worth taking.

 

[WeePat]

You've let some very good young defenders go in recent seasons, and are now spending huge on Koulibaly and Fofana, whilst also still having 38 year old Silva. Its an interesting comparison to the Salah and De Bruyne sales, and I think it's worth considering how these transfers will be viewed in a few years time.

I wasn't trying to get into a conversation about what Chelsea should do, so much as make an observation on something that simply stands out as unusual. But if I were pushed to comment on what I think Chelsea should do, then I'd say with the talent you have coming through, you could have a mix of academy players and absolute top talents - instead you bring in some players for big fees who are no better. In general terms I'd say you would have been better off signing fewer players, but aiming for higher than what you have done with the level of player you've brought in in recent seasons. Although arguably the Sterling and Koulibaly signings go some way to remedying that, and these signings make more sense than many in recent seasons. Chelsea used to be in the mix to sign some of the most sought after players in world football, and a return to that strategy, with a conveyor belt of academy players mixed in, is a more worrying prospect as a rival fan than your transfer dealings of the last decade or so.

Let's also not pretend that you will always, or have always been, playing so many academy players. When your injured midfielders are back, add in Fofana and probably Aubameyang, the only two regulars will be Mount and James. You can't help but wonder if in a few years time the departures of some of your youngsters will be looked upon in the way as the Salah and De Bruyne sales. It's not even intended as a criticism really, it's more interesting/curious/a source of gentle banter. From a business perspective you do well from your academy, in contrast United often hold onto youngsters too long, stall their careers and let them go cheaply. Neither is great, but as a fan I know it would be irksome if the likes of Guehi, Tomori, Liveamento or Abraham go on to become absolute monsters and sign for a rival.

We did let very good defenders go. I was in here vehemently arguing against letting Guehi go. But we’ve been forced into spending big on defenders because Rudiger and AC ran down their contracts and left for free. I do not think that factor was considered when Guehi was being let go. I’m sure the club felt confident both Rudiger and AC would extend, so yes the club comes out of it looking silly but I don’t think it was a straight forward case of if we had kept Guehi and Tomori we wouldn’t have been here having to spend big on defenders. There’s some context to that situation.

I don’t disagree with you generally speaking about how Chelsea have misused funds over the years. I think it’s an area Boehly and his band of data analytics gurus will hopefully work on fixing.

I didn’t take your posts as criticism, so forgive me if I’ve come across combative. Wasn’t my intention. I was just trying to add what I felt was missing context/my perspective to the points you were raising.We were regularly starting 3-4 academy players last season. This season RLC. Mount and James have started every game, while Gallagher has started 2/4 and off the bench in the other 2, granted Kante’s injury heavily influenced those starts. It’s going to be a long season. I’m pretty certain RLC, Gallagher and Chalobah will all play more than 30 games this season, some of them more than 40 games as well as Mount and James being undisputed starters. That’s a great place to be, even if, you’re right, there are regrets and annoyances around a couple of players we’ve let go.

 

[BluesJr]

Signed Gordon yet? Get that done.

 

[Powderfinger]

Guehi is a nice player who still obviously has upside - but Fofana is comfortably better already and is younger. We also still have Colwill who is clearly highly rated - hence why we paid a higher price for Cucurella in order for there to be no purchase clause in Colwill's loan deal.

I know everybody gets hyped about a new signing but this notion that Fofana is some superstar young CB and comfortably ahead of a player like Guehi is just total nonsense.

Fofana was never viewed as an elite CB prospect his entire youth and early career. He never even played for France youth teams until after he came to England. He then moved to Leicester and had a very impressive first season while generally paired with a very experienced head in Jonny Evans who organized the defense, in the context of an established side into which he simply needed to slot in. And then he broke his leg and has been understandably up and down since. Guehi was actually a much higher rated player as a youth and in his early professional career. He then had a very promising first season in the PL, doing so while taking a leadership role in a refashioned defense for a transformed side under a new manager. And he is only five months older, they are effectively at the same point in their careers.

 

[SirReginald]

Will never forgive Mourihno for Kevin De Bruyne.

As much as I love De Bruyne there is a lot of revisionism with him. He didn’t play a lot but when he did, he was shit. He couldn’t even hack it against lower league clubs in the cup. This is coming from a guy who got a De Bruyne shirt. He chose to leave because he didn’t want to fight for a place in the first 11, Mourinho may have been a small factor but it wasn’t the only one.

 

[TheMagicFoolBus]

I know everybody gets hyped about a new signing but this notion that Fofana is some superstar young CB and comfortably ahead of a player like Guehi is just total nonsense.

Fofana was never viewed as an elite CB prospect his entire youth and early career. He never even played for France youth teams until after he came to England. He then moved to Leicester and had a very impressive first season while generally paired with a very experienced head in Jonny Evans and playing for a very established side. And then he broke his leg and has been understandably up and down since. Guehi was actually much higher rated player as a youth and in his early professional career. He then had a very promising first season in the PL, doing so while taking a leadership role in a refashioned defense for a transformed side under a new manager. And he is only five months older, they are effectively at the same point in their careers.

Faulting a young CB for not making it into the French youth teams is a stretch mate. He was also excellent at St. Etienne alongside Saliba - hence why Leicester paid something like £35m for him.

Guehi's time in the Championship at an older age doesn't compare to Fofana playing in Ligue 1 and then in the PL. Whilst he was definitely very good last year Fofana was better sooner despite moving abroad to a foreign country - this is his 4th season of top flight football while Guehi is entering his second. The two simply aren't in the same bracket as prospects.

 

[WeePat]

As much as I love De Bruyne there is a lot of revisionism with him. He didn’t play a lot but when he did, he was shit. He couldn’t even hack it against lower league clubs in the cup. This is coming from a guy who got a De Bruyne shirt. He chose to leave because he didn’t want to fight for a place in the first 11, Mourinho may have been a small factor but it wasn’t the only one.

That’s straight out Mourinho’s book of talking points. KDB was good. He was fantastic in preseason and good as the season started. Mourinho just preferred Oscar and then subsequently ran a propaganda campaign against KDB to absolve himself once it became clear KDB was going to be a superstar.

 

[TheMagicFoolBus]

As much as I love De Bruyne there is a lot of revisionism with him. He didn’t play a lot but when he did, he was shit. He couldn’t even hack it against lower league clubs in the cup. This is coming from a guy who got a De Bruyne shirt. He chose to leave because he didn’t want to fight for a place in the first 11, Mourinho may have been a small factor but it wasn’t the only one.

This is incorrect. Mourinho decided to sell him based on one cup match after he'd had 5 minutes of game time in a month and was actively lying about De Bruyne's performance in training.

It was objectively a terrible decision. De Bruyne had 3.5 years left on his contract and was coming off an excellent loan in the Bundesliga where he won young player of the year. Mourinho pushed for him to be sold because he didn't want to deal with a young player and his potential growing pains. It is probably the single worst transfer decision made by any team in the past 15 years.

 

[TheReligion]

I still can’t believe Piazon spent 8 years at Chelsea and played once whilst Van Ginkle was there for 9 and played twice.

Drinkwater played 12 times in 5 years and Batshuayi has been there 6 years and counting…

I think things like this should stop happening under Boehly.

 

[TheMagicFoolBus]

I still can’t believe Piazon spent 8 years at Chelsea and played once whilst Van Ginkle was there for 9 and played twice.

Drinkwater played 12 times in 5 years and Batshuayi has been there 6 years and counting…

I think things like this should stop happening under Boehly.

Yep completely agree.

I don't mind us taking flyers on players like Piazon and Van Ginkel who were highly rated at the time but didn't work out for whatever reason - the issue was we were unwilling to cut bait and accept cut-price offers once it was clear they weren't up to standard.

Also Van Ginkel is a great what-if player - could have been truly fantastic without absolutely rotten injury luck.

 

[WeePat]

Yep completely agree.

I don't mind us taking flyers on players like Piazon and Van Ginkel who were highly rated at the time but didn't work out for whatever reason - the issue was we were unwilling to cut bait and accept cut-price offers once it was clear they weren't up to standard.

Also Van Ginkel is a great what-if player - could have been truly fantastic without absolutely rotten injury luck.

Yeah MVG was a terrible example as he’s pretty much had his career derailed by horrible injuries and Chelsea just kept extending him to allow him to rehab at the club properly before letting him leave for free to the club of his choice.

 

[TheMagicFoolBus]

Yeah MVG was a terrible example as he’s pretty much had his career derailed by horrible injuries and Chelsea just kept extending him to allow him to rehab at the club properly before letting him leave for free to the club of his choice.

Yeah distinctly recall people giving the club a lot of shit for extending him when he would have been a free agent but he had another long-term injury - when the sole purpose was to allow him access to world-class medical facilities and rehabilitation.

Sad story overall. Still pretty remarkable he's been able to show flashes of his talent given all he's gone through - he was fecking brilliant for PSV during their title campaign a few years back.

 

[Powderfinger]

Faulting a young CB for not making it into the French youth teams is a stretch mate. He was also excellent at St. Etienne alongside Saliba - hence why Leicester paid something like £35m for him.

Guehi's time in the Championship at an older age doesn't compare to Fofana playing in Ligue 1 and then in the PL. Whilst he was definitely very good last year Fofana was better sooner despite moving abroad to a foreign country - this is his 4th season of top flight football while Guehi is entering his second. The two simply aren't in the same bracket as prospects.

I'm not faulting Fofana for not making it into the national team setup. But its indicative of how he was viewed as a prospect in France during his youth and early professional career. I like Fofana a lot as a player and certainly rate him as a good CB. But Chelsea fans want to make it seem like he is some kind of obviously elite young CB who is head-and-shoulders above lots of other good young CBs and the evidence just isn't there. Guehi was fantastic last year in a much tougher situation than Fofana enjoyed at Leicester. He is effectively the same age as Fofana, is an England international, has played more minutes of first team football than Fofana, and has a much cleaner injury history. Why shouldn't he be in the same bracket as a prospect?

 

[TheMagicFoolBus]

I'm not faulting Fofana for not making it into the national team setup. But its indicative of how he was viewed as a prospect in France during his youth and early professional career. I like Fofana a lot as a player and certainly rate him as a good CB. But Chelsea fans want to make it seem like he is some kind of obviously elite young CB who is head-and-shoulders above lots of other good young CBs and the evidence just isn't there. Guehi was fantastic last year in a much tougher situation than Fofana enjoyed at Leicester. He is effectively the same age as Fofana, is an England international, has played more minutes of first team football than Fofana, and has a much cleaner injury history. Why shouldn't he be in the same bracket as a prospect?

Because Fofana put up a better season two years ago next to worse defenders? Jonny Evans and Caglar Soyuncu are comfortably worse players compared to Joachim Andersen, at least in my opinion. I strongly disagree that Palace are a worse situation for defenders compared to Leicester of late - under Vieira they tend to play a very low block and are extremely conservative when in possession, whilst Leicester leave their CBs isolated far more regularly.

And personally I'd value first team minutes in the top flight much more highly. I don't think Guehi's first team minutes in the Championship necessarily translate (e.g. Bournemouth 0-9 Liverpool).

Also the injury history is a red herring - a freak leg break is hardly indicative of a spotty injury record. If Fofana had recurrent hamstring injuries that'd be a very different proposition.

 

[Bluelion7]

As much as I love De Bruyne there is a lot of revisionism with him. He didn’t play a lot but when he did, he was shit. He couldn’t even hack it against lower league clubs in the cup. This is coming from a guy who got a De Bruyne shirt. He chose to leave because he didn’t want to fight for a place in the first 11, Mourinho may have been a small factor but it wasn’t the only one.

Not for me. See , if you can pull my posts from back then on the shed you would see I didn’t need revisionism. He was played out of position and Mourihno allowed him to be mentally beaten down after a brilliant Werder Bremen loan. He even did some of the beating himself, calling him fat and slow.

It was obvious he could be an elite creative 8 when properly supported. I wrote a whole article on it in his thread. He then proceeded to start becoming just that with Wolfsburg. The weight and vision on his long passing was always something beyond most players, and he had a good size frame, and comfortable on the ball.

Mourihno wanted him to be a high Pressing AM like a Mahrez or Silva. He was never that player, but Mourihno lacked the brain and vision to develop him into the the player he actually should be, and ended up ultimately becoming.

So, no forgiveness for Mourihno. It’s not like losing just a really good player. And it’s not like losing Salah, who genuinely underperformed at the same position he ultimately ended up playing.

We lost one of the best midfield maestros ever.

It would be like Fergie getting rid of 19 year old Ronaldo because he would only play him at a true 9, and his hold up play with back to goal was bad.

 

[Powderfinger]

Because Fofana put up a better season two years ago next to worse defenders? Jonny Evans and Caglar Soyuncu are comfortably worse players compared to Joachim Andersen, at least in my opinion. I strongly disagree that Palace are a worse situation for defenders compared to Leicester of late - under Vieira they tend to play a very low block and are extremely conservative when in possession, whilst Leicester leave their CBs isolated far more regularly.

Jonny Evans is a really good defender, or was one until injuries really caught up to him last year. And what you say about Palace under Vieira is completely wrong. They are a relatively press-heavy team for a side that doesn't dominate the ball. They were 4th in total pressures in the PL last year and were about in the middle of the pack for final third pressures, which is a high number for a team that wasn't spending a lot of time attacking (and therefore getting the opportunity to immediately press in the final third). Leicester in Fofana's good season were 15 in the PL in pressures and 14th in final third pressures. They weren't an aggressive high line defensive team at all.

And personally I'd value first team minutes in the top flight much more highly. I don't think Guehi's first team minutes in the Championship necessarily translate (e.g. Bournemouth 0-9 Liverpool).

Fofana has 3075 PL minutes to Guehi's 3583 PL minutes. Fofana played half a season in France previously (1690 career Ligue 1 minutes).

Also the injury history is a red herring - a freak leg break is hardly indicative of a spotty injury record. If Fofana had recurrent hamstring injuries that'd be a very different proposition.

Fofana already has six recorded injuries in three years per Transfermarkt, all to his legs. A couple seem like minor knocks but that's not a great injury history for a 21 year old. 19/20 was an abbreviated season in France and he missed 75 days injured in total. In 20/21 he missed 44 days. And that's all before the leg break. Guehi has had one injury and missed 10 days in his career.

 

[TheMagicFoolBus]

Jonny Evans is a really good defender, or was one until injuries really caught up to him last year. And what you say about Palace under Vieira is completely wrong. They are a relatively press-heavy team for a side that doesn't dominate the ball. They were 4th in total pressures in the PL last year and were about in the middle of the pack for final third pressures, which is a high number for a team that wasn't spending a lot of time attacking (and therefore getting the opportunity to immediately press in the final third). Leicester in Fofana's good season were 15 in the PL in pressures and 14th in final third pressures. They weren't an aggressive high line defensive team at all.

Fofana has 3075 PL minutes to Guehi's 3583 PL minutes. Fofana played half a season in France previously (1690 career Ligue 1 minutes).

Fofana already has six recorded injuries in three years per Transfermarkt, all to his legs. A couple seem like minor knocks but that's not a great injury history for a 21 year old. 19/20 was an abbreviated season in France and he missed 75 days injured in total. In 20/21 he missed 44 days. And that's all before the leg break. Guehi has had one injury and missed 10 days in his career.

Evans was a very good defender when he first signed for Leicester, but he's been extremely limited for the past two years. He's nowhere near as good as Andersen at this point.

Also not sure why Palace having Conor Gallagher last year (who is more or less a one man press) and having final third pressures is relevant to their CBs - under Vieira they have consistently left cover for their CBs. Joel Ward is 21st percentile for fullback pressures and Clyne is 6th. Castagne is 57th and Justin is 80th by way of contrast. Final third pressures is a bad way to evaluate CBs - it's far more sensible to look at fullback pressures because that gives you a sense of how isolated the CBs were and it limits the impact of variable forward and midfield workrates.

I don't think the minutes point works in your favour - it's ~1000 additional top flight minutes for the younger player who missed a year due to a freak injury? That's a pretty meaningful gap.

Maybe you're right and Fofana is a crock. But Transfermarkt is hardly canon - it doesn't include Guehi's ankle injury from last year, for instance.

Again I don't think Guehi is bad or anything. But there's just no feasible way to argue that he's established a track record that is better than Fofana's despite the latter being younger.

 

[Bluelion7]

I’m sure that having players like Piazon and Van Ginkel permanently on the loan army had something to do with financials. Not money laundering, as I’ve seen, because it wouldn’t actually be good for that. More likely related to taxes and capital expenses because players allow you to manipulate the level of losses you show, not hiding unexplained profits.

But as annoying as it was I would still take that over Phil Jones inexplicably staying on the team and playing for a similar period.

I’m hoping we see a more effective use of our strong youth model going forward. Clearlake has already talked about the importance of things like buy back clauses.

I think all Chelsea fans can admit they are excited about Fofana and at the same time still wish we had Guehi and Tomori. Heck, Lamptey would be super useful right now, as we have no actual RWB as cover for James.

This is where fees become important. Because if we had Guehi and Tomori maybe we have the flexibility to push for Rice this window? Or, set out a price big enough to make a real run at Leao? Who knows.

 

[Dancfc]

Good news, the truth is that without our transfer ban, even James and Mount probably won't get much chance with us.

We're obsessed with big money signings and almost never give younger players from our academy or bought in a chance unless they're already a name.

Eddie Newton pretty much confirmed Mount would have got in under Sarri.

 

[Bluelion7]

Even Mount and James? This notion that people, particularly “only” Chelsea people are obsessed with spending money is starting to get a bit ridiculous.

There is always an element of “the grass must be greener” but that is usually because a team is not exactly thrilled with how a particular position looks. The transfer ban was like a 6 month period. RLC and others have been getting looks in for years. RLC still isn’t at a high enough level consistently to be a full time starter, and it has been primarily muscle issues that derail him, not a bias by the various staff.

He is a good example of someone that needs to play more consistently and improve to get rid of things like the indecision that had him walk a ball right into a defender on a break where he had ten yards of space. All things considered he’s not as good as Kova. He’s just not.

Gilmour. Good enough to start at say, Southampton? Yes. Good enough to reach the levels we expect of our starters? Probably not.


It isn’t like it is just Academy players we have this issue with. There are players we pay big money for that simply do not work out well to the standard we expect. You move on and try to find someone who is, and you let them move on and find a level they actually play at.

What’s weird is that, with the exception of Phil Jones at United, ALL top teams do this.But this whole “wasting talent” thing seems to always be a Chelsea issue in discussions.

We have Marc Cucurella right now because he couldn’t even get a look in at Barcelona; a team with loads of money issues.

We aren’t perfect, and under Roman we were more apt to make the occasional “pride” signing like Lukaku. He was only signed to make a big move to save face after Halaand said no. I think we will be less prone to that sort of thing under Clearlake.

 

[Bluelion7]

There was a couple of very good articles out today detailing what I’ve been trying to coyly hint when people questioned spending. One of them specifically has to do with Chelsea, and the other affects all clubs if they wish to take advantage.

Quoting the work of football finance expert Dr Rob Wilson of Sheffield Hallam University.

1. “In Layman’s terms, the 4.25 billion dollar sale could have wiped out debt and losses … Chelsea then start at a zero base under the current terms of FFP”


And

2. This is the last year of the old FFP system, and there will be a massive grey area. To quote “This is the last roll of the dice, so this year you will probably get away with it”. All teams were given some leeway with Covid allowances on what their profits “would” have been if there wasn’t Covid.

If you have been keeping up, we are nearing the end of a three year FFP period, the final one. Then it goes to a yearly percentage of all income towards “footballing expenses”: 90, then 80, then 70.

For profits Uber the new owner, Chelsea was able to use an estimated figure of 500 million. We are at the end of the 3 year period, and have no debt other than current payrolls we have to count against that figure…. SO, essentially a 4 to 500 million spend under the wire before the next term starts and the inflation also really starts to take its toll.

Using this “benefit” to accumulate fairly high dollar elite youth talent on a large scale had also been … brilliant.

By the way, it does not seem that United, a club that could really leverage this situation, realized any of this until recently … JUST after Boehly held a special get together of PL owners. So … you’re welcome.

 

[Gasolin]

By the way, it does not seem that United, a club that could really leverage this situation, realized any of this until recently … JUST after Boehly held a special get together of PL owners. So … you’re welcome.

Could you detail what you mean? What did United not realize?

 

[Bluelion7]

Could you detail what you mean? What did United not realize?

That the change over in FFP rules allowed you to take advantage of the grey area in spending, and that you could essentially front load purchases into this window, before prices went up even more.

People are going to scoff at what you paid for Antony, but they won’t be next year, and two years from now it will seem an average sum.

You can save money by buying now. With Covid allowances and a very black ledger sheet going into the final year of the 3 year FFP periods you could have done even more, especially as it regards “players of the future”

The Glazers are cheap and you should want them gone. But I don’t think they are really leaving. So the next best thing is to show them how they can save by spending, right?

You wanted FDJ, but all along you could have bought FDJ, Casemiro, Antony AND more players. I’m not sure the United people realized they could do this and/or how it would financially benefit them to do so.

Realizing that, you now seem to have your hand in just about every pot. As long as you mix it between established players to get you top 4, and players for the future, all the better. Next season is a clean 90% slate, and FFP starts to get more restrictive as prices rise.

 

[roonster09]

By the way, it does not seem that United, a club that could really leverage this situation, realized any of this until recently … JUST after Boehly held a special get together of PL owners. So … you’re welcome

 

[Bluelion7]

Boehly held an “Event” where he invited all the PL owners to Join him for a luncheon and meetings. He specifically wanted to improve his relationship with some of the American owners. He thinks United is key to the expansion of the entire league.

He pointed out that the premiere league has more than a few billion fans worldwide, while the NFL has an estimated 300 million, yet the NFL generates drastically more revenue.

He thinks the entire league is doing it wrong, and has a vision for its future success.

Prior to the meeting with Todd you were going to go with your two defensive signings and wait to see on FDJ, then panicked and starts to settle for Rabiot. The meeting happens, and immediately after you tell Rabiot to kiss off on his wage demands and go after Casemiro instead. Then you tell FDJ’s people you will still be in for him, then you go 100m for Antony, and you aren’t stopping there.

Coincidence? Maybe. But I’ve told you for months on here that Boehly had a grasp of this window that most of the people here didnt understand. The football financial FFP experts in your country are now confirming that very thing.

And the numpties that run United start getting full use of this unique window right after meeting with Todd, and it’s coincidental? Probably not.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

Boehly held an “Event” where he invited all the PL owners to Join him for a luncheon and meetings. He specifically wanted to improve his relationship with some of the American owners. He thinks United is key to the expansion of the entire league.

He pointed out that the premiere league has more than a few billion fans worldwide, while the NFL has an estimated 300 million, yet the NFL generates drastically more revenue.

He thinks the entire league is doing it wrong, and has a vision for its future success.

Prior to the meeting with Todd you were going to go with your two defensive signings and wait to see on FDJ, then panicked and starts to settle for Rabiot. The meeting happens, and immediately after you tell Rabiot to kiss off on his wage demands and go after Casemiro instead. Then you tell FDJ’s people you will still be in for him, then you go 100m for Antony, and you aren’t stopping there.

Coincidence? Maybe. But I’ve told you for months on here that Boehly had a grasp of this window that most of the people here didnt understand. The football financial FFP experts in your country are now confirming that very thing.

And the numpties that run United start getting full use of this unique window right after meeting with Todd, and it’s coincidental? Probably not.

wtf

 

[roonster09]

Boehly held an “Event” where he invited all the PL owners to Join him for a luncheon and meetings. He specifically wanted to improve his relationship with some of the American owners. He thinks United is key to the expansion of the entire league.

He pointed out that the premiere league has more than a few billion fans worldwide, while the NFL has an estimated 300 million, yet the NFL generates drastically more revenue.

He thinks the entire league is doing it wrong, and has a vision for its future success.

Prior to the meeting with Todd you were going to go with your two defensive signings and wait to see on FDJ, then panicked and starts to settle for Rabiot. The meeting happens, and immediately after you tell Rabiot to kiss off on his wage demands and go after Casemiro instead. Then you tell FDJ’s people you will still be in for him, then you go 100m for Antony, and you aren’t stopping there.

Coincidence? Maybe. But I’ve told you for months on here that Boehly had a grasp of this window that most of the people here didnt understand. The football financial FFP experts in your country are now confirming that very thing.

And the numpties that run United start getting full use of this unique window right after meeting with Todd, and it’s coincidental? Probably not.

Dude you should start writing novels and some story books.

 

[Top]

That is one of the strangest posts I have read during my almost 20 years on this site.

 

[Mb194dc]

Nonsense aside. Private equity owners, like Clear Lake, are in it for the money. They obviously think they can vastly increase revenue. Or they wouldn't be spending money like a kid in a candy store.

FFP is an artificial construct, these guys aren't like a state owner or Abramovich though. Who definitely aren't in it to make money. There's no will to lose money indefinitely from Clear Lake.

My opinion, is that structural factors in football stop it being as commercially successful as the NFL or other US leagues. It could take decades to overcome them if it's even possible.

 

[GoonerBear]

Boehly held an “Event” where he invited all the PL owners to Join him for a luncheon and meetings. He specifically wanted to improve his relationship with some of the American owners. He thinks United is key to the expansion of the entire league.

He pointed out that the premiere league has more than a few billion fans worldwide, while the NFL has an estimated 300 million, yet the NFL generates drastically more revenue.

He thinks the entire league is doing it wrong, and has a vision for its future success.

Prior to the meeting with Todd you were going to go with your two defensive signings and wait to see on FDJ, then panicked and starts to settle for Rabiot. The meeting happens, and immediately after you tell Rabiot to kiss off on his wage demands and go after Casemiro instead. Then you tell FDJ’s people you will still be in for him, then you go 100m for Antony, and you aren’t stopping there.

Coincidence? Maybe. But I’ve told you for months on here that Boehly had a grasp of this window that most of the people here didnt understand. The football financial FFP experts in your country are now confirming that very thing.

And the numpties that run United start getting full use of this unique window right after meeting with Todd, and it’s coincidental? Probably not.

Love the leaps there mate. Im interested, do you have a link to these articles? Do we know who were in attendance? I'm trying to work out if I should have the rage with the Kroenkes again for not pushing the boat out to sign another wide player.