Mancienne back at Wolves on a season-long loan.

Does that mean we have a new CB coming in?

MANCIENNE BACK TO WOLVES

Posted on: Thu 26 Aug 2010

Michael Mancienne has today rejoined Wolverhampton Wanderers on a season-long loan.

The 22-year-old defender spent 2009/10 with the Molineux club, making 33 appearances as Mick McCarthy's side achieved Barclays Premier League safety, finishing 15th.

The England Under 21 man also played 10 times for Wolves during 2008/09, when his form in the Championship earned him a call-up to the full England squad.

Later that season Mancienne, who can also play in holding midfield, made his Chelsea debut and went on to make six appearances in our colours under Guus Hiddink.

Prior to Wolves, he also played 61 times on loan at QPR between 2006 and 2008.

I don't think Macienne was in Ancelotti's plans for this season in the first place, so would be very surprised if we bought another centre back.

Mancienne back at Wolves on a season-long loan.

Does that mean we have a new CB coming in?

i think it's more likely that he's just not up to scratch.

And we haven't just sold him why? Clearly he's not got much of a chance at Chels, so wouldnt it make more sense to get a good fee for him and move on? I guess the club must still believe he just might mature into Chelsea quality, but this seems an odd one.

Sorry, double

Edited August 26, 201015 yr by Tim

We may as well call his Chelsea career quits. If he can't challenge for a spot when our oldest defender leaves us, he probably won't be in contention for a spot anytime soon.

I'm dissapointed. I think it would have been worth keeping him available to play RB, CB or DM...and qualify as a homegrown player. Just means another spot we can't use to sign a foreign player.

I'd imagine this'll be the last we see of Michael Mancienne in Chelsea blue.

In all likelihood if CA had come directly after Jose, Manceinne would be a good squad player now, but circumstances have betrayed the youngster with managers coming and going. I think it would be better all round if we sold him and let him move on and hopefully up, the same applies to Cork and Bertrand too.

And we haven't just sold him why? Clearly he's not got much of a chance at Chels, so wouldnt it make more sense to get a good fee for him and move on? I guess the club must still believe he just might mature into Chelsea quality, but this seems an odd one.

I heard rumours from some wolves fans that they didn't/couldn't meet our valuation of £5m, so we said they could have him on loan for less, and they did.

Yeah, sadly I think that is the end of MM at Chelsea. I hope Wolves can come up with the money, because they clearly like the lad there and want to keep him if they keep loaning him. And I'm sure Mancienne probably thinks of that club as home by now.

Good luck to him this year.

I guess I feel a bit more attachment because he is a youth player from before Roman's money into the youth system really kicked in, and it's sad this because he was the one we pinned our hopes on for a few seasons.

Particularly when he got the England call up a couple of seasons back I thought he could have been the real deal. But it would seem he will drift off into the midtable wilderness. I hope to be wrong.

How does this impact the homegrown player rule? At present I think we only have Frank, Ashley, JT, Studge and Turnbull who qualify? Does that not mean we are still 3 players short?

I remember that Mikel, and all under 21s cant count towards the homegorwn quota

big disappointment for me as was most likely the next player after JT to come thru from the academy............................and I thought was good enuf to get a squad place?, can play right back, centre, back and midfield

carlo maybe can't see what he can do for us

up in ws6 (look it up) the wolves fans really pleased cos they all rate him

our loss (in my view)

Big fan of Mancienne's but ya I've been saying for a while that he's not quite Chelsea calibre, whether he can get there or not, I don't know. Maybe after another year, but it seems he's destined for another team on permanent loan where he can continue to play first team football.

I used to be a fan of him, but since he was either decent or bad in the games I saw him play I lost interest in him. He might be a good player for a smaller team, but he's not even close to Chelsea standard.

Too bad, I really hoped he would turn out great.

Just goes to show that talents don't often turn out well. Look at Kakuta. Really impressive now, but he might turn out as a mediocre player if we're unlucky.

And we haven't just sold him why? Clearly he's not got much of a chance at Chels, so wouldnt it make more sense to get a good fee for him and move on? I guess the club must still believe he just might mature into Chelsea quality, but this seems an odd one.

I recall reading that Wolves didn't want to match Chelsea's evaluation of 5 million pounds so he just went on loan.

In all likelihood if CA had come directly after Jose, Manceinne would be a good squad player now, but circumstances have betrayed the youngster with managers coming and going. I think it would be better all round if we sold him and let him move on and hopefully up, the same applies to Cork and Bertrand too.

I really don't understand what you have against Bertrand. Every time I've seen him, he's impressed me.

Edited August 27, 201015 yr by Planet Drogba

Just goes to show that talents don't often turn out well. Look at Kakuta.

How often do we hear so-and-so sign 14 year old starlet, and never here from that player again. You're right young talent often does not turn out

I really don't understand what you have against Bertrand. Every time I've seen him, he's impressed me.

Personally I don't have anything against Ryan I think he is a great prospect (look back at all the old threads on the subject) and should be way ahead of van Aanhult and possibly Zirkhov in the pecking order, but sadly the current management do not seem to agree and have yet again shipped him out.

What I was saying is that a group of young players (MM, JC and RB plus a few others) have missed out on account of the too many changes in management in recent years.

The difference between Mancienne and Kakuta is that Kakuta is already a world-beater in his age group. A bad injury or a Quaresma-esque attitude aside, I can't see Kakuta turning out anything other than spectacular.

Edited August 27, 201015 yr by PloKoon13

I don't see the great rush to write these youngsters off. Many players at the traditional big clubs (Real Madrid, Ac Milan, Juventus, etc) don't get bought in till their around 25 often older. So why do these guys need to be first teamers by the time their 21?

Why not give em till their 23 and decide then?

It's not like they'd be on ridiculous wages

I don't see the great rush to write these youngsters off. Many players at the traditional big clubs (Real Madrid, Ac Milan, Juventus, etc) don't get bought in till their around 25 often older. So why do these guys need to be first teamers by the time their 21?

Why not give em till their 23 and decide then?

It's not like they'd be on ridiculous wages

Its something ive never understood, why do we instantly write a player off if he gets to 21 and hasnt played at least 50 games and made himself 1st choice in his position? Some players will always be a squad player at a club like ours, but that doesnt mean we should get rid of them. Squad players now are as important as 1st choice superstars, one of the reasons we won the double last season was the strength of our squad.

I agree. I mean, if u look at man utd. They like to keep their youth products (o'shae, Wes brown, etc) around as they are usually loyal, on reasonable wages and free up more cash for their big impact signings. Hell, some of their youngsters (Fletcher) actually get good.

Now I know ultimately we wanna be a more successful club than them, but we have to accept long term we'll be doing it on a smaller budget than them (assuming roman wants us to be self sustaining).