I think this up & coming transfer period, could turn out to be one of the most important in the clubs recent history.

It's going to be made that much more difficult because as it stands now,we have no permanent manager.

There are possible transfer targets flying around everywhere,but do you think the term 'not Chelsea quality' has merit,or is it just a stick used by fans who don't no what the feck their talking about, to beat down the chances of players such as Clint Dempsey?.

In a recent family get together, we had a mass-debate (phew,that was a relief!),but as these things tend to go when large amounts of alcohol are involved,what started as a sensible & reasonable debate amongst knowledgable chaps,soon turned into a total piss-up and the rather unusual use of a kebab salad & chilly sauce combo.

So,I thought I'd ask the question to the ancient & vast knowledge, (just ancient in some cases!) that's avaliable on this site.

Do you think there is (or should be), such a thing as 'Chelsea quality'?,if no, why not?, but also, if you feel there should be such a standard,what possible future transfers targets would match up?.

I hope to get some quality (& sober) opinions,but the worse way as this is the internet,no numpty can try and force feed naan bread to the other half's beloved tropical fish!.

It's two different types of quality; one is for instant performance (straight in to the first XI), the other is those who are good enough to be rotated when it fits and still make a good enough impact so that we can compete on four fronts (Mickey Mouse-cup, FA-cup, CL and PL). Right now we have too many that are neither.

I like the new transfer policy that we seem to operate with. It looks as though we are letting the Hazards, the Muniains and the Martinez' (ie. Galacticos-project) to Citeh and PSG and hunts for the next big thing more and more. Marin, Courtois, KdB and Markovic (if he comes) are good examples of that. If we are chasing Schurrle as well for 15 million then it's awesome (especially when you see unproven players like Neymar and Lucas costs 35 million quid each). Quality to make an impact right away but even more potential left in them. We should really target Gylfi Sigurdsson as well; very underrated, could be another Lampsy (I see the same potential in KdB).

The problem with this galacticos-project that PSG and City does now is FFP. There is no way that these teams will play Champions League without "cheating" (like selling the stadium name to their owner, read: Eastlands to Etihad). We've been in "red" for almost ten years now! It's time to get some positive numbers when we sums up the year, and that won't happen if we go after the big fishes (Falcao, Cavani, Hazard, Munian etc).

This is why our next manager is even more crucial than ever to get right! Would Mourinho excel in our team with the regulations financially now? I don't think so. I don't think that RDM will do that either because he has little or no experience in building a team from scratch, and that's the reason why I think RDM won't get the job as well even though he might end up as a CL-winner. If we are to follow the logic of most of the fans do follow ("if he wins he must be signed"), then Grant could have been our manager for one more year if Terry didn't wear those crappy Umbro-shoes.

Next year I want to see a fine mix between the "oldies", some younger foreign players and some players from our academy. Integrate our youths when the time's right (when we're 2 or 3-0 and there's 20 minutes left on the clock or in cups), and create a formation and a system that fits the new and more technical players that we buy.

That's my five cents.

Edited May 11, 201214 yr by Ozztheboss

Depends on the usage, really. If somebody says that Clint Dempsey is not Chelsea quality, as in, he's not good enough to play for us in any capacity, then they're wrong. Dempsey would clearly improve our bench, no question about it. If somebody wants to bring Dempsey in as a starter, then I'm going to say we can do a lot better. The role determines the level of quality that we should look for.

Edited May 11, 201214 yr by That Boy Brandinho

How does Chelsea quality differ from City quality, Real quality or West Ham quality?

OK that last bit was a joke, but quality is quality is my point, what we want is high quality.

Give us Ya Ya Roman please!