Trevoh Chalobah

Leftback99

Oscar the Grouch.
Joined
Jan 11, 2015
Messages
15,026
Early summer transfer rumours with us nearly always turn out to be nonsense.
 

the_cliff

Full Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2013
Messages
6,156
I actually think he's a good player. My worry is him being injury prone.

If the plan is to sell one of Maguire/Lindelof and to use Chalobah as a rotational option that would leave us with:
Martinez (Injury Prone)
One of Maguire/Lindelof
New starting CB ?
Chalobah (Injury prone)

That's far too light considering Martinez and Chalobahs fitness problems. We'd need to sign another rotational CB option or keep both Maguire and Lindelof or we'll be having similar troubles at CB next season.
 

ty09cali

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jun 24, 2013
Messages
37
Good point. Makes sense. Citys way of having flexible defenders is quite smart as it allow you to have more player of decent quality.

Shaw/Malacia/Hato* - Martinez/Hato - New/Maguire/Chalobah - Dalot/Chalobah

Would essentialy feel like we had greater dept by selling/removing four (Varane, Lindeløf, Evans and AWB) and bringing in three.

Took Hato as an example. Calafiori could probably be another option. Probably a bunch of them I dont know of. Would also prefer if we could replace Malacia with an attacking fullback as that is something we probably lack. Furthermore, not comfortable with having Shaw, Malacia and Martinez as three of four option as LB/LCB aftet this season.
this makes perfect sense to me.
 

DarkRed

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jan 28, 2019
Messages
366
Location
wolf den
If we were to sign Chalobah it would be as a rotation option at CB and RB imo. I think we will buy a marquee CB to come in and partner Martinez. I think this signing (Chalobah) could see us sell Wan Bissaka.
Could it be that we would move to a 3 in the back or the system or that system when CB plays as FB by moving Martinez to the LB spot?
 

andersj

Nick Powell Expert
Joined
Aug 7, 2004
Messages
4,421
Location
Copenhagen
Could it be that we would move to a 3 in the back or the system or that system when CB plays as FB by moving Martinez to the LB spot?
I think you would prefer Martinez through the middle in a back three. At LCB you would want someone better adept at defending that channel. Someone quick and physical. A bit like Chalobah just left foted. Furthermore, the CB through the middle is also more allowed to be aggressive. Both on the ball and of the ball, stepping into midfield.

We have seen Shaw inverting into LCB sometimes, and he is quite good there.

I dont think we will ever see EtH switch to a pure 343 (ala Amorim or Potter at Brighton). But we could definitley see a 4231 with an inverted full back.
 

marktan

New Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2017
Messages
7,078
Is he actually that good? Whenever I've watched Chelsea I've been somewhat unimpressed. Strikes me as another one like Mount that Chelsea are keen to offload for FFP benefits, but talent wise is the average CB that comes out of your academy and then ends up at a lower PL team
 

Bwuk

Full Member
Joined
Feb 29, 2012
Messages
17,636
No thank you.

He's no better than likes of Lindelof.
 

didz

Full Member
Joined
May 17, 2014
Messages
2,398
Isn't he pretty poor in the air? His aerial duel success has been around the 47% mark over the last 2 seasons, which isn't much better than Lindelof and about the same as Shorty McShortison. Seems like him and Licha would be a pretty poor partnership against any team that fancied a long ball or a cross.
 

VP89

Pogba's biggest fan
Joined
Dec 6, 2015
Messages
33,038
Chaloboah for me doesn't work in a 2, so it simply doesn't make sense to buy him. Just get Todibo, and if we can cash in on Lindelof then one more too.
 

DarkRed

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jan 28, 2019
Messages
366
Location
wolf den
I think you would prefer Martinez through the middle in a back three. At LCB you would want someone better adept at defending that channel. Someone quick and physical. A bit like Chalobah just left foted. Furthermore, the CB through the middle is also more allowed to be aggressive. Both on the ball and of the ball, stepping into midfield.

We have seen Shaw inverting into LCB sometimes, and he is quite good there.

I don't think we will ever see EtH switch to a pure 343 (ala Amorim or Potter at Brighton). But we could definitely see a 4231 with an inverted full back.
In my mind the middle CB is a tall CB with a good heading.
EtH might not want to play 3 CB, but that could be something decided above him, maybe.
 

jakko

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jan 15, 2021
Messages
610
Supports
Chelsea
Debatable, and even if true it’s still bad business.
No it isn't, Chalobah has a 45% success rate at aerial duels. He's not good in the air.
I dont think he starts for most PL sides.
 

quadrant

Full Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2023
Messages
539
No it isn't, Chalobah has a 45% success rate at aerial duels. He's not good in the air.
I dont think he starts for most PL sides.
Had to look that up, that's surprisingly poor. He ranks 131 on Fbref in the league, which is worrying when the almost the entire top 30 is centre backs. Better than Lindelof though, so there's that.
 

Ekeke

Full Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2006
Messages
53,799
Location
Hope, We Lose
Another Chelsea cast off. Mata, Matic, Mount. We never learn. :rolleyes:
Giving him too much credit. At least they were highly rated at one point for things they actually did and were relatively fit when we signed them. Trevoh started 6 premier league games last season and has had 1 fairly good season a couple of years ago, now hes aged of 24 and has a poor fitness record.

Signing him would be as bad as 2 of those poor signings above combined.
 

mitchmouse

loves to hate United.
Joined
Oct 8, 2014
Messages
17,855
if this is where we are, we might as well appoint Allardyce as manager
 

golden_blunder

Site admin. Manchester United fan
Staff
Joined
Jun 1, 2000
Messages
121,764
Location
Dublin, Ireland
Agreed, we have Willy so this chap is not required.

We need at least one CB to start alongside Licha so hopefully Lindelof and Maguire are sold, that should free up some funds for one big signing in the CB area and we can have Willy as a bench option
So you move from Lindelof, Maguire, Varane, Martinez, Evans and Willy to:

new CB, Martinez and Willy

Is that wise after a season where our CBs have been consistently injure? We still don’t know if Martinez is going to last a season or whether (as I suspect) he is going to pick up increasing nibbling injuries now

I think unless we are investing in at least 2 in this area, we are going to see Maguire and either Lindelof or Evans stay
 

didz

Full Member
Joined
May 17, 2014
Messages
2,398
Giving him too much credit. At least they were highly rated at one point for things they actually did and were relatively fit when we signed them. Trevoh started 6 premier league games last season and has had 1 fairly good season a couple of years ago, now hes aged of 24 and has a poor fitness record.

Signing him would be as bad as 2 of those poor signings above combined.
Maybe that's the key? Don't sign Chelsea players who have played well for them like Mata and Mount, sign the ones that haven't, like Olise, Guehi, and... Chalobah!?
 

Giggsyking

Full Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2013
Messages
9,125
Maybe that's the key? Don't sign Chelsea players who have played well for them like Mata and Mount, sign the ones that haven't, like Olise, Guehi, and... Chalobah!?
Revers psychology, nice.
 

OmarUnited4ever

Full Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2021
Messages
3,590
So you move from Lindelof, Maguire, Varane, Martinez, Evans and Willy to:

new CB, Martinez and Willy

Is that wise after a season where our CBs have been consistently injure? We still don’t know if Martinez is going to last a season or whether (as I suspect) he is going to pick up increasing nibbling injuries now

I think unless we are investing in at least 2 in this area, we are going to see Maguire and either Lindelof or Evans stay
Oh yes I kind of misrepresented my idea, it was "one of Lindelof & Maguire" not both, and I prefer Maguire.

we had a freak season of injuries, even someone who was virtually available all the time like Maguire got injured several times this season, and also Lindelof who is rarely injured was injured too, it was really weird situation.

I also have an issue with Martinez being injured, so next season the club should rethink if he can remain fit or be moved on, he is too important to wait for to get fit, so either he is fit or he is moved on.
 

bringbackbebe

Full Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2021
Messages
1,976
It is good business
It isn’t.
That's exactly why you're selling Chalobah. The analysts at Chelsea probably ran a stat model that showed Tosin is very similar to Chalobah and a like for like replacement. If they can sell Chalobah (hopefully not to us) for 30m and get Tosin for free, it's 150m they can use for amortization in FFP.

I'm not arguing whether that's the correct move or not, but the motive seems to be primarily driven by numbers here.
 

WeePat

Full Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2015
Messages
18,337
Supports
Chelsea
That's exactly why you're selling Chalobah. The analysts at Chelsea probably ran a stat model that showed Tosin is very similar to Chalobah and a like for like replacement. If they can sell Chalobah (hopefully not to us) for 30m and get Tosin for free, it's 150m they can use for amortization in FFP.

I'm not arguing whether that's the correct move or not, but the motive seems to be primarily driven by numbers here.
It's 100% driven by FFP reasons. They've put themselves in such a stupid hole with reckless spending that they now have to make transfers for the sake making transfers to boost the books. Tosin and Chalobah are very comparable players, but one has a deeper connection to the club and the fans so I reject the notion that it is a like for like replacement, it's only like for like in one aspect. It would be like if we sold Gallagher and then picked up McTominay on a free as his replacement. It would be stupid business because you're losing a part of the soul of the club for very little, if any at all, gain on the pitch.

If they sold Disasi for 30m and brought in Tosin as his replacement for example, I'd view it as excellent business because it's a like for like in every sense, but Tosin is a smaller hit on the books and they just about break even Disasi.
 

SilentWitness

Has a Dutch member.
Staff
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
32,805
Location
London
Supports
Everton
It's 100% driven by FFP reasons. They've put themselves in such a stupid hole with reckless spending that they now have to make transfers for the sake making transfers to boost the books. Tosin and Chalobah are very comparable players, but one has a deeper connection to the club and the fans so I reject the notion that it is a like for like replacement, it's only like for like in one aspect. It would be like if we sold Gallagher and then picked up McTominay on a free as his replacement. It would be stupid business because you're losing a part of the soul of the club for very little, if any at all, gain on the pitch.

If they sold Disasi for 30m and brought in Tosin as his replacement for example, I'd view it as excellent business because it's a like for like in every sense, but Tosin is a smaller hit on the books and they just about break even Disasi.
It's a weird one because on one hand I disagree with the rules that mean that homegrown players give better profit on the PSR front because clubs should be encouraged to keep those players more so and fans have more connection with players of that ilk usually, but on the other hand Chelsea have cornered themselves with those rules because of spending so recklessly.
 

WeePat

Full Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2015
Messages
18,337
Supports
Chelsea
It's a weird one because on one hand I disagree with the rules that mean that homegrown players give better profit on the PSR front because clubs should be encouraged to keep those players more so and fans have more connection with players of that ilk usually, but on the other hand Chelsea have cornered themselves with those rules because of spending so recklessly.
You only get to place where you desperately need to sell homegrown players for pure profit when you've spent recklessly for a while. No other club in this league is in this situation. I have seen people talk about the rules incentivising selling academy players for pure profit is stupid but it's never been an issue before now - they are likely selling Gallagher, Chalobah, Maatsen and Hutchinson this summer, as well as Lewis Hall whose move is made permanent this summer, that's well over £130m in pure profit, but we'll be back here next summer with rumours hanging on Colwill's head probably and we'll have these same conversations again.
 

SilentWitness

Has a Dutch member.
Staff
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
32,805
Location
London
Supports
Everton
You only get to place where you desperately need to sell homegrown players for pure profit when you've spent recklessly for a while. No other club in this league is in this situation. I have seen people talk about the rules incentivising selling academy players for pure profit is stupid but it's never been an issue before now - they are likely selling Gallagher, Chalobah, Maatsen and Hutchinson this summer, as well as Lewis Hall whose move is made permanent this summer, that's well over £130m in pure profit, but we'll be back here next summer with rumours hanging on Colwill's head probably and we'll have these same conversations again.
Well, yes and no. Yes, that can be a situation but also there's the problem that the clubs at the lower end of the table need to sell homegrown players to be able to spend more and try to move up the league. I don't think that's right.
 

WeePat

Full Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2015
Messages
18,337
Supports
Chelsea
Well, yes and no. Yes, that can be a situation but also there's the problem that the clubs at the lower end of the table need to sell homegrown players to be able to spend more and try to move up the league. I don't think that's right.
Yeah fair enough, I hadn't considered that. I just meant selling academy players to avoid falling foul of the FFP rules. That's a self made problem and it's the club that should be criticised in this situation, not the rules. I understand though, that the rules themselves are causing different issues elsewhere.
 

SilentWitness

Has a Dutch member.
Staff
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
32,805
Location
London
Supports
Everton
Yeah fair enough, I hadn't considered that. I just meant selling academy players to avoid falling foul of the FFP rules. That's a self made problem and it's the club that should be criticised in this situation, not the rules. I understand though, that the rules themselves are causing different issues elsewhere.
That's why I don't have sympathy for Chelsea in this situation as they have the prestige, luxury and financial muscle to be more savvy in the market and spend more anyway.
 

WeePat

Full Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2015
Messages
18,337
Supports
Chelsea
That's why I don't have sympathy for Chelsea in this situation as they have the prestige, luxury and financial muscle to be more savvy in the market and spend more anyway.
Agree completely.
 

Craig Ward

Full Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2016
Messages
2,133
Could it be that we would move to a 3 in the back or the system or that system when CB plays as FB by moving Martinez to the LB spot?
Why would be play our best CB by a country mile out of position at LB? Jesus wept
 

DarkRed

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jan 28, 2019
Messages
366
Location
wolf den
Why would be play our best CB by a country mile out of position at LB? Jesus wept
If we buy Jarrad Branthwaite, who is two footed and tall, he would be better centrally, besides it's not out of position, because it's the inverting LB position.
 

jakko

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jan 15, 2021
Messages
610
Supports
Chelsea
It's 100% driven by FFP reasons. They've put themselves in such a stupid hole with reckless spending that they now have to make transfers for the sake making transfers to boost the books. Tosin and Chalobah are very comparable players, but one has a deeper connection to the club and the fans so I reject the notion that it is a like for like replacement, it's only like for like in one aspect. It would be like if we sold Gallagher and then picked up McTominay on a free as his replacement. It would be stupid business because you're losing a part of the soul of the club for very little, if any at all, gain on the pitch.

If they sold Disasi for 30m and brought in Tosin as his replacement for example, I'd view it as excellent business because it's a like for like in every sense, but Tosin is a smaller hit on the books and they just about break even Disasi.
What? we could easily keep Chalobah we dont have to sell him.
We just got £35M for lewis Hall then we have money potentially for Broja, Maatsen, Hutchinson. Thats like over £100M pure profit.
It's simple the sporting directors dont rate Chalobah or Gallagher that highly. The two elite Cobham talents Colwill and James we keep.
 

WeePat

Full Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2015
Messages
18,337
Supports
Chelsea
What? we could easily keep Chalobah we dont have to sell him.
We just got £35M for lewis Hall then we have money potentially for Broja, Maatsen, Hutchinson. Thats like over £100M pure profit.
It's simple the sporting directors dont rate Chalobah or Gallagher that highly. The two elite Cobham talents Colwill and James we keep.
Well if they can get close to £100m for Maatsen, Hall and Hutchinson and they’re still trying to sell Chalobah and especially Gallagher then that should tell you the finances are probably a lot worse than we think. The SDs not rating Chalobah and Gallagher is stupid and quite frankly irrelevant because I guarantee Maresca, if asked, would prefer to keep them and play them, especially Gallagher. They’re trying to sell them because they have to.
 

didz

Full Member
Joined
May 17, 2014
Messages
2,398
If we buy Jarrad Branthwaite, who is two footed and tall, he would be better centrally, besides it's not out of position, because it's the inverting LB position.
I'm starting to feel like we'll look very silly in a year if we buy Branthwaite. There are only so many academy graduates Chelsea can sell before it's Colwill's turn and I like him a lot more for a LCB.