Malone_Post
Full Member
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2022
- Messages
- 1,153
If we had owners with any kind of ambition we would have got this lad in January & would potentially be in a title race. Instead we got Weghorst & are in a battle for top 4.
If we had owners with any kind of ambition we would have got this lad in January & would potentially be in a title race. Instead we got Weghorst & are in a battle for top 4.
Odd to be dissing him this way, I reckon ETH would love FirminoHype job, another Bobby Firmino.
Odd to be dissing him this way, I reckon ETH would love Firmino
Great little player, pity the ref didn’t spot Tawkovsky attempt to throttle him just out side the box last night.
He was never meant or expected to outscore Salah and Mané, ~15G10A is a regular Benzema season until CR left Madrid.Wouldn't love his returns.
Please no. He’s not a centre forward and he’s not a wide player. Surely we can find another to play the role properly across Europe if the only two caftard choices are not possible? This chap is a 10/SS and unless we are binning Bruno it wouldn’t make any sense.Chelsea have been hit and miss but his class stands out whenever they play. Got a touch like gold.
If Osimhen isnt doable then I'd be more than happy with him as the backup. He's not as good as Kane but is significantly younger and can give us 5+ strong years.
And the games you have played Weghorst at 10? It’s clear as day that ETH wanted him, better suited to your style than Weghorst and competition for Bruno is a good thing, when Bruno is bad.. he is bad..Please no. He’s not a centre forward and he’s not a wide player. Surely we can find another to play the role properly across Europe if the only two caftard choices are not possible? This chap is a 10/SS and unless we are binning Bruno it wouldn’t make any sense.
That’s a stop gap situation. You don’t build a squad and make big signings on the basis of that. I absolutely don’t mind adding him to the squad if we didn’t have a lot of existing problems. An alternative for Bruno? Sure thing. But that’s not a priority ahead of CF, RB, CMs and GK. We’d need a cheap signing for the AM /SS rotational player.And the games you have played Weghorst at 10? It’s clear as day that ETH wanted him, better suited to your style than Weghorst and competition for Bruno is a good thing, when Bruno is bad.. he is bad..
It likely came down to the cost of the deal, which is pretty fecking terrible but so was Weghorst. You paid 3mil for a championship level player.
Yes you’re right, it should have been a yellow at the very least.I guess the ref saw it and played advantage but surely should have at least been a yellow?
And the games you have played Weghorst at 10? It’s clear as day that ETH wanted him, better suited to your style than Weghorst and competition for Bruno is a good thing, when Bruno is bad.. he is bad..
It likely came down to the cost of the deal, which is pretty fecking terrible but so was Weghorst. You paid 3mil for a championship level player.
You won’t see the difference between paying £3m and £16m I’m sure because you’ve spent over half a billion this season alone.
The Felix deal (along with him signing a new contract at Madrid and getting zero option to buy) is arguably one of the worst loan deals in the history of football.
Its no wonder Boehly was the only person interested in the deal.
We needed goals and on that basis it made sense as Pulisic got injured just before the window.
Getting a buy option at €100m same as none. He's not worth close to Atletico valuation.
A lot of our transfers have been questionable. They're aimed at medium term, not instant success.
Remains to be seem how Clearlakes strategy for the club plays out.
If that was the purpose of the loan, I’m not sure it can be called a successful loan when he’s scored 2 goals and 0 assists in 9 appearances so far. For £16m. It was a ridiculous loan deal which only Chelsea were willing to do because they were in a desperate situation.We needed goals and on that basis it made sense as Pulisic got injured just before the window.
If that was the purpose of the loan, I’m not sure it can be called a successful loan when he’s scored 2 goals and 0 assists in 9 appearances so far. For £16m. It was a ridiculous loan deal which only Chelsea were willing to do because they were in a desperate situation.
I actually like him and think he’s a brilliant talent. However, I can’t help but notice he seems to be involved in heck of a lot which normally leads to nothing. He’s always so close but yet so far. I do think he is a quality player though.Tbf he's hit the post about 5 times too. The Pogba 2019 special.
If that was the purpose of the loan, I’m not sure it can be called a successful loan when he’s scored 2 goals and 0 assists in 9 appearances so far. For £16m. It was a ridiculous loan deal which only Chelsea were willing to do because they were in a desperate situation.
I do wonder what will happen with him at the end of the season. He’s a player a lot of clubs would want. I’m just not sure Felix, Nkunku and Havertz can fit in the same team. Especially the first two. They all want to operate in the same spaces. I would be surprised if Chelsea spent big to keep Felix. It would be better spent on an out and out striker.I wouldn't call it successful, I can see why the owners did it though.
Felix shouldn't have left Benfica so soon and especially not for Atletico. I doubt anyone will pay even 50m for him. I expect we'll send him back. He'll be stuck at Atletico largely on the bench till 2027..?
I guess if Simeone does leave, possibly the new manager will totally change their style to something that suits his game.
Chelsea have spent a fortune introducing a lot of players over a short period of time, but you know as well I that it’ll take a while for them to settle and once they click they’ll more than likely be formidable.He’s scored 4 goals in 30 appearances for Portugal, so it isn’t just at Atletico that he has struggled.
He has good ability on the ball, but he flatters to deceive and doesn’t have a defined position. But if Chelsea are prepared to spend £80m on Murdyk (who has done nothing) and £100m on Enzo (who’s done a bit more), then I’m sure they’ll throw £100m on Felix too.
Chelsea have spent a fortune introducing a lot of players over a short period of time, but you know as well I that it’ll take a while for them to settle and once they click they’ll more than likely be formidable.
If you want to identify weak signings then obviously beside Lukaku I’d say Gallagher’s been the biggest flop.
Yeah but he’s spent most of his time on loan, including a season at Palace which seems to have had an effect on his overall quality.You mean the Gallagher who has been in Chelsea’s academy since he was 8 years old?
One of your first choice signings would be a second striker?Said for ages but he'd be one of my first choice signings, I think he's class and I'm glad he's getting some recognition now. He needs to be away from Atletico and in a good team that fights for trophies, so he can showcase his talents on the biggest stage.
I think it's unlikely that we'll get him, think he'll sign for Chelsea and they'll sort their shit out eventually, at which point he'll probably get lots of plaudits.
Yeah but he’s spent most of his time on loan, including a season at Palace which seems to have had an effect on his overall quality.
Okay my apologiesBut you called a player who came through the academy a weak signing.
One of your first choice signings would be a second striker?
Depressing thought. No we need a number 9 with a strikers instinct who can provide some aerial threat and hold the ball up bringing others in. Not a psuedo striker who huffs and puffs more than he does anything useful.Yes. We need better footballers, and he absolutely is just that. We don't even need an out and out goalscorer in my opinion, JF would get enough through the middle AND be a great foil to our inverted wingers, who will score lots of goals. Look at the positions WW takes up, he's a foil for others but unfortunately he's quite average and misses big chances.
I’d rather have a fully fit Martial there.