Jump to content

Vidahost - UK Web Hosting


Vidahost - UK Web Hosting

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Justin

Chelsea in for Falcao?


Recommended Posts

There's not a single transfer that doesn't include a measure of risk in terms of that players form and fitness. What I think we saw with Falcao last season was a striker on his way back from a serious injury but who still had those same instincts.

So this transfer is about potential upside. If he's prepared to lower his demands you're talking about potentially getting a world class striker on the cheap when they are at a premium in the current market. We have a number one, we have a capable number two so maybe we can take that risk.

It's not as easy to dismiss as some are suggesting.

 

It's very easy to dismiss, we have two prolific strikers on wages that match their output, plus some of the most reputable young strikers in the country.

 

What reason could we possibly have to bring in an overpaid, past it flop when we've only just managed to get rid of the last one?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course there is always risk but not all players are outside of the club's wage structure and haven't fully recovered from what can be a career ending injury.

The cons massively outweigh the potential pros on this on.

If the club want a high profile striker of the skill set a fully fit and firing Falcao has then that's what they should buy not drop a small fortune on a player who looks like his best days are already behind him.

The reason people are contemplating this is because he's apparently happy to cut his demands. That puts him firmly within our wage structure.

As for his injury, yes it was bad but sportsmen can come back from them after a proper recovery period and his game was never based on pace like Torres's was.

There are downsides but as a backup striker there are also massive upsides.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's very easy to dismiss, we have two prolific strikers on wages that match their output, plus some of the most reputable young strikers in the country.

What reason could we possibly have to bring in an overpaid, past it flop when we've only just managed to get rid of the last one?

I'm sure it's very easy for you to dismiss. Maybe read my longer post above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason people are contemplating this is because he's apparently happy to cut his demands. That puts him firmly within our wage structure.

As for his injury, yes it was bad but sportsmen can come back from them after a proper recovery period and his game was never based on pace like Torres's was.

There are downsides but as a backup striker there are also massive upsides.

He's supposedly on roughly £280k a week.

Realistically how much of a wage but is he going to take? 50%?

That 140k a week matches JT's wages and he was the best in his position in the league last year.

£140k is more than the majority of the first XI earn I would venture so why would we offer that sort of money to a back up striker in the premise that he might be one of a minority who recaptures their form 2 years after a serious injury?

He's 29, it'd be short term and our current strikers are both miles ahead of him productivity wise.

Just put the money towards securing younger, better and more in form talent that have a more realistic chance of improving the squad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure it's very easy for you to dismiss. Maybe read my longer post above.

 

First point: Maybe if he were a young striker i'd give it some thought, but considering he'll be 30 next season theres no time to wait around for him to maybe get back to his physical prime.

 

Second point: Di Maria, Rooney and Mata are 3 of the best support players in the league, you could say they didn't help him enough or you could say he didn't provide them enough of an option, either way he's scored 4 goals in 26 league games with 3 of the most prolific playmakers in world football behind him.

 

Third point: It's been a year and he's probably worse than when he arrived.

 

Fourth point: He has 3 years left on his 265,000 quid a week deal. This is a guy that could have gone to about any club in the world and chose Monaco for money, do you think he's going to be taking a massive paycut? He earns nearly 100,000 quid a more than Diego Costa does a week, he earns more than 3x what Loic Remy does and nearly 3x more than Drogba did. Our highest earner currently is Hazard on around 200,000 a week. Do you think he's going to be willing to more than halve what he earns currently with 3 years left on his deal, or do you think he is worth similar wages to Eden Hazard?

 

Fifth point: I don't understand it, you acknowledge that Costa and Remy have been excellent but believe we need someone on massive wages to play 3rd fiddle to them? Then go onto mention their injury problems when, even with the extremely inconvenient timing of Costa and Remy being injured at the same time late this season, has made Drogba starting necessary in a mere handful of games. Could Bamford or someone else not on 12 million pounds a year not fill that role?

 

I have to say your lengthy post did nothing to sway me, if anything in making me look into respective wages it further convinced me what an awful all around deal this would be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's 29, it'd be short term and our current strikers are both miles ahead of him productivity wise.

Just put the money towards securing younger, better and more in form talent that have a more realistic chance of improving the squad.

 

No-one is expecting him to be a long-term option, but rather short-term cover for Costa whilst we develop some of the younger talent.

 

Who is this other 'can't-miss' talent out there that we should be going for?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First point: Maybe if he were a young striker i'd give it some thought, but considering he'll be 30 next season theres no time to wait around for him to maybe get back to his physical prime.

 

 

We wouldn't necessarily be waiting because he's already well into his recovery, has the Copa America and would be coming into a team who have an established number one and two already. That's what we're talking about here - a back-up.

 

 

 

Second point: Di Maria, Rooney and Mata are 3 of the best support players in the league, you could say they didn't help him enough or you could say he didn't provide them enough of an option, either way he's scored 4 goals in 26 league games with 3 of the most prolific playmakers in world football behind him.

 

 

Di Maria was a great support player - he wasn't last year. If we're going to talk about Falcao's form last year, then let's talk about Rooney, Mata and Di Maria's too. As it is I don't think Di Maria is a bad player and have said before I'd consider a move for him if the price was right because I think he suffered from being in a bad team, utilising bad tactics. The same goes for Falcao.

 

 

 

Third point: It's been a year and he's probably worse than when he arrived.

 

The same could be said for '3 of the best support players in the league'. The issue is whether that's a systemic issue or an individual one.

 

 

 

Fourth point: He has 3 years left on his 265,000 quid a week deal. This is a guy that could have gone to about any club in the world and chose Monaco for money, do you think he's going to be taking a massive paycut? He earns nearly 100,000 quid a more than Diego Costa does a week, he earns more than 3x what Loic Remy does and nearly 3x more than Drogba did. Our highest earner currently is Hazard on around 200,000 a week. Do you think he's going to be willing to more than halve what he earns currently with 3 years left on his deal, or do you think he is worth similar wages to Eden Hazard?

 

 

If he isn't then the deal is a non-starter, something I've said a few times now. But this whole discussion was reignited by rumours that he'd be willing to take a 'massive paycut'. 

 

Just to reiterate in case it slipped under that radar though, I'm not advocating paying him £265,000 per week. 

 

 

Fifth point: I don't understand it, you acknowledge that Costa and Remy have been excellent but believe we need someone on massive wages to play 3rd fiddle to them? 

 

 

No. Not massive wages. 

 

 Then go onto mention their injury problems when, even with the extremely inconvenient timing of Costa and Remy being injured at the same time late this season, has made Drogba starting necessary in a mere handful of games. Could Bamford or someone else not on 12 million pounds a year not fill that role?

 

 

I believe that Bamford needs minutes on the pitch to aid his development, something I don't think he'll get here. Even if it were the case that I thought we could go with someone younger, it would probably be Solanke instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No-one is expecting him to be a long-term option, but rather short-term cover for Costa whilst we develop some of the younger talent.

Who is this other 'can't-miss' talent out there that we should be going for?

I'm not well versed on players outside of England but you've got players like Griezmann who are banging in goals for fun, he's younger and can play out wide and up front so offers cover in two areas that need strengthening. That's the profile of player we should go for, someone who's going to offer good competition, isn't one dimensional in their game.

Given our current standing I just see no reason to flutter away millions on wages for a player who has had a bad season and looks a shadow of his former self on the hopes he's going to turn it all around.

It's not like we can even argue we'd bring him in for his experience on the big stage as he's apparently allergic to Champions League football having avoided it like the plague in his moves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not well versed on players outside of England but you've got players like Griezmann who are banging in goals for fun, he's younger and can play out wide and up front so offers cover in two areas that need strengthening. That's the profile of player we should go for, someone who's going to offer good competition, isn't one dimensional in their game.

Given our current standing I just see no reason to flutter away millions on wages for a player who has had a bad season and looks a shadow of his former self on the hopes he's going to turn it all around.

It's not like we can even argue we'd bring him in for his experience on the big stage as he's apparently allergic to Champions League football having avoided it like the plague in his moves.

 

Griezmann is an interesting one because he could potentially strengthen us on the right whilst providing cover up top. Maybe he does kill two birds with one stone but he's also an expensive gamble. Factor in wages and transfer fee and you're looking at around £15 million per season over 5 years. That's almost certainly more money than Falcao would cost over one year without looking at the long-term costs.

 

It's also important to look at both transfers in the larger context of our summer transfer dealings. We have other areas to strengthen such as central defence and that may be an issue.

 

One more thing. If we took Falcao on loan for one season at even £200,000 then it would be covered by the sale of Cech and the removal of his wages, even if you brought in a new keeper on £50,000 per week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All this talk about his wages....what about the transfer fee?

He's halfway through a 5 year deal...he'll cost a bomb...because Monaco paid a bomb, and rightly so they'll want to recoup a fair chunk of what they paid for him - 60m Euros.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We would be utter mugs to bring this flop in.

280k a week and like FC said even a 50% wage cut would see him earn the same as JT and more than 90% of our squad.

You would think we'd have learned our lesson with Sheva and Torres....let's hope we have.

Go leech off of another club Falcao.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We would be utter mugs to bring this flop in.

280k a week and like FC said even a 50% wage cut would see him earn the same as JT and more than 90% of our squad.

You would think we'd have learned our lesson with Sheva and Torres....let's hope we have.

Go leech off of another club Falcao.

 

Two players we bought for a combined £80 million on long-term contracts?

 

I thought we were talking about taking a player on-loan for a year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two players we bought for a combined £80 million on long-term contracts?

I thought we were talking about taking a player on-loan for a year.

A 29 year old back from a serious injury who couldn't cut it last season.

He's nearing £300k a week.

Why on earth would you pay someone more money than half your squad who is clearly past it?

It reeks of desperation.

He's finished.

And yes we can compare them as we would be brining in a striker who used to be world class who is now average and would cost a fortune in wages, I thought that was pretty obvious....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A 29 year old back from a serious injury who couldn't cut it last season.

He's nearing £300k a week.

Why on earth would you pay someone more money than half your squad who is clearly past it?

It reeks of desperation.

He's finished.

 

These injuries take 18-24 months to recover fully from, but he was never a pace merchant like Torres. As a finisher in the box he was one of the best of his generation which is why I don't think it's as easy as saying 'he's finished'.

 

It's also nothing like the Torres or Sheva deals which had limited upside. This would be a deal where we'd have limited exposure to any negative effects whilst having massive potential benefits.

 

Like I've said, I'm on the fence but anyone writing this off completely is ignoring a lot of factors as well as the realities of modern football.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These injuries take 18-24 months to recover fully from, but he was never a pace merchant like Torres. As a finisher in the box he was one of the best of his generation which is why I don't think it's as easy as saying 'he's finished'.

It's also nothing like the Torres or Sheva deals which had limited upside. This would be a deal where we'd have limited exposure to any negative effects whilst having massive potential benefits.

Like I've said, I'm on the fence but anyone writing this off completely is ignoring a lot of factors as well as the realities of modern football.

Ignoring what exactly?

Did you even see him this season for United? He clearly isn't suited to our league and couldn't score goals in a team filled with guys like Di Maria, Mata, Rooney, RVP etc.

He's 29 not 21 so in all likelihood he isn't going to improve at this stage of his career and it's blatantly obvious his injury has taken a few yards of pace off him.

We already have Remy who scores goals (more than Falcao with a fraction of the game time) and Costa who is a more complete forward than Falcao while also being 3/4 years younger.

The days of us blowing huge wages on crocks living on past glories should be over and I think it is.

Thankfully I believe this is just the gutter press trying to fill columns rather than us seriously looking at him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd consider him on loan for no fee, on less than 100k a week wages.

 

I wouldnt even go this far. Reality is, if costa is fit, costa will play. Why pay even close to £100k a week for someone who is likely to only play in COC games or early FA cup rounds, or who is going to make substitute appearances to see out the final 10 minutes of a game? 

 

He's garbage. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldnt even go this far. Reality is, if costa is fit, costa will play. Why pay even close to £100k a week for someone who is likely to only play in COC games or early FA cup rounds, or who is going to make substitute appearances to see out the final 10 minutes of a game?

He's garbage.

Spot on.

He'd just be another shirt seller who's worse than Torres, some folk never learn though I guess...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ignoring what exactly?

Did you even see him this season for United? He clearly isn't suited to our league and couldn't score goals in a team filled with guys like Di Maria, Mata, Rooney, RVP etc.

 

Yes I did see him. I also saw players like Di Maria, Mata, Rooney and RVP underperform along with a number of other United players. In fact I saw in person this team fail to do anything against us at the Bridge. They're a bad team. I don't think that's the only measure by which to asses Falcao and I've said that already.

 

He's 29 not 21 so in all likelihood he isn't going to improve at this stage of his career and it's blatantly obvious his injury has taken a few yards of pace off him.

 

 

It's also blatantly obvious that pace wasn't all his game was based on and that it's possible for players to fully recover from ACL injuries...something else I've already addressed.

 

We already have Remy who scores goals (more than Falcao with a fraction of the game time) and Costa who is a more complete forward than Falcao while also being 3/4 years younger.

 

Again, already addressed this but I'm not expecting him to replace Costa but be a back-up.

 

Let's get this straight - we're talking about a replacement for Didier Drogba.

 

The days of us blowing huge wages on crocks living on past glories should be over and I think it is.

 

 

Again.... :laugh2:

 

Not talking about massive wages.

 

Spot on.

He'd just be another shirt seller who's worse than Torres, some folk never learn though I guess...

 

Shirt seller suggests that he'd be a commercial positive for us. Again, in the world of modern football that is always going to be a factor that needs to be assessed.

 

I wouldnt even go this far. Reality is, if costa is fit, costa will play. Why pay even close to £100k a week for someone who is likely to only play in COC games or early FA cup rounds, or who is going to make substitute appearances to see out the final 10 minutes of a game? 

 

He's garbage. 

 

Isn't this what we did with Drogba this season?

 

If Costa is fit then great. If Remy is fit then even better. But why not go into the season with two established strikers and take a punt on a third striker who could potentially regain the form of old?

 

If he's on fair wages, on a short-term deal with no fee and no obligation to buy then what exactly is the downside? It's not even like we can throw the 'dressing room poison' tag on him like you could with someone like Balotelli because by all accounts he's a gentleman.

 

Modern football is about looking at transfers who provide maximum upside with limited exposure to liability isn't it? What potential transfer out there does that more?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spot on.

He'd just be another shirt seller who's worse than Torres, some folk never learn though I guess...

 

I'm not even sure he's that mate. I'll probably get slaughtered here, but I do also question the level at which Falcao has performed at. Great stats, yes, but so often you see players absolutely caning La Liga. Messi and Ronaldo's stats are freakish, would that be replicated elsewhere in world football? For the record - I am not doubting their quality, they are stellar, I just question the overall quality of the rest of La Liga and I feel that amazing scoring stats in that league can often be misconstrued. 

 

I guess what I am trying to say is that I feel the wheels came off the Falcao bandwagon when he chose to move to Monaco. That move was fuelled by greed. Had he chosen England, or, say, Germany, back when he had the chance, and then gone on to tear up whatever league it was he ended up in then yes, I'd concede that Falcao is a phenomenon. But I look at it and see that he has done well for Porto, and Atletico, and then kind of trailed off into obscurity. His time at United has been an unmitigated f**king disaster, and we are in no position to be taking players who are past their peak on eye watering wages, based on a name.

 

We dont need another eto'o, or anyone in that mould at all. We supposedly have some of the most exciting young talent in England with Bamford and Solanke, so if it is going to be a case of filling up a squad place for a former-great to play in sh*t cup games and "less important" ties (or banker home wins), then what's the point?

 

This is a new, progressive, standard setting chelsea. We  are not some retirement village for greedy c**ts to come and rob a living. He had a chance to come here, he wanted exorbitant wages, and now he's on the phone literally in tears to his agent (as the story goes) because he's being forced to play reserve games for united.

 

Sorry pal, ship has sailed. you had your chance, and you and cavani can rot in mediocrity for the rest of your playing days.

 

do NOT want.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not even sure he's that mate. I'll probably get slaughtered here, but I do also question the level at which Falcao has performed at. Great stats, yes, but so often you see players absolutely caning La Liga. Messi and Ronaldo's stats are freakish, would that be replicated elsewhere in world football? For the record - I am not doubting their quality, they are stellar, I just question the overall quality of the rest of La Liga and I feel that amazing scoring stats in that league can often be misconstrued. 

 

I guess what I am trying to say is that I feel the wheels came off the Falcao bandwagon when he chose to move to Monaco. That move was fuelled by greed. Had he chosen England, or, say, Germany, back when he had the chance, and then gone on to tear up whatever league it was he ended up in then yes, I'd concede that Falcao is a phenomenon. But I look at it and see that he has done well for Porto, and Atletico, and then kind of trailed off into obscurity. His time at United has been an unmitigated f**king disaster, and we are in no position to be taking players who are past their peak on eye watering wages, based on a name.

 

We dont need another eto'o, or anyone in that mould at all. We supposedly have some of the most exciting young talent in England with Bamford and Solanke, so if it is going to be a case of filling up a squad place for a former-great to play in sh*t cup games and "less important" ties (or banker home wins), then what's the point?

 

This is a new, progressive, standard setting chelsea. We  are not some retirement village for greedy c**ts to come and rob a living. He had a chance to come here, he wanted exorbitant wages, and now he's on the phone literally in tears to his agent (as the story goes) because he's being forced to play reserve games for united.

 

Sorry pal, ship has sailed. you had your chance, and you and cavani can rot in mediocrity for the rest of your playing days.

 

do NOT want.  

 

See I know this post will be popular with some because it's vitriolic and criticises supposed greed whilst espouses our own young players....but part of me thinks if when considering footballers to play for your club you shouldn include other things, like how they'd actually potentially perform here, what the benefits could be to the side etc.

 

Firstly, we're talking about a replacement for Drogba, someone who knows they aren't guaranteed minutes and need to prove themselves. That's a tough ask. I mean yay....a player who asked for a lot of money and is now regretting it. That'll show him, victory is our's. But maybe, just maybe we can benefit from that desperation and desire to prove people wrong. Maybe there's a 'f**k you' factor here. Again he's still a baddie for not coming to us but going to another team for money, but maybe we can get past that and win a trophy with him?

 

Again, modern football is about finding value where you can and whilst the obvious thing to do is to buy one of the next Messi's that happens to be lying around (is Dybala this week's one?) there's always the slight chance that they won't be the greatest footballer who ever lived. The are other ways to find value and that can come in the form of a 29 year old coming back from an injury. It's not a sexy transfer but they don't always have to be.

 

Like I've said, this is a transfer that only makes a bit of sense if certain things happen, but I don't get the mindset of any football supporter who has read even one article about FFP or modern football finances who discounts this move out of hand. Where's the fun in that?

 

Worst case scenario, we say goodbye to him in a year. Best case, we once again show how great Mourinho is compared to someone like Van Gaal and maybe win a few more trophies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd take him on loan for a season with no loan fee if Monaco paid all his wages, maybe.

 

You're very charitable. Even with the trimmed hair I don't see any use for him, especially if the hoped-for squad place for Bamford is going to happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×