I'm quite sure Bamford goalwise can give us what Drogba did at his age this past season.

 

If he's given third choice I'm sure he wouldn't be miserable sitting on the bench behind Costa and Remy who are both coming off fantastic seasons respective of their role in the club.

 

Look at how much Drogba played, if Bamford would get that and if he impressed a little more, I'm certain he'd be happy with it for his first season. And even if he performs and doesn't get a chance, the only place his value is going is up, unlike Falcao's who's value is only going to drop.

 

I simply don't see any benefit in signing Falcao over giving Bamford a chance.

I can see a point where bamford will be more fed up of being loaned out. He has proved himself every time he's gone out on loan and not being given a fair shake. How many times is he going to be loaned out before jose sits up and says "you can be 2nd/3rd choice"? Every time he's been sent on loan he's done what's needed of him, yet the next season he's loaned out again and again, and again.

 

 

You have a point, but for Bamford he just isn't there yet. He needs to continue developing by getting minutes and at the moment he can't do that here. 

 

Everything I've heard suggests he doesn't want to be third choice.

 

Spot on.

If he can't get a chance now Drogba's gone then I don't see him getting one at all.

 

How many minutes would be available to him here?

if you listen to any of his interviews, you get the sense he just really wants to play for the club. that kind of ambition as a young player is invaluable. Also, there's absolutely no reason we couldn't play him out wide on the right, similar position to where he was playing at boro; he is very versatile. 

Edited June 2, 201511 yr by enigma

Spot on.

If he can't get a chance now Drogba's gone then I don't see him getting one at all.

Agreed and for a certain someone going on about minutes no seasons are the same.

Assuming Chelsbear's comment was sincere and not just wumming, Drogba got about 800 minutes in the league last season but that was in a year when Remy got about 670 and Costa got just over 2000. I'd be surprised if those two played so few minutes next season so how many minutes could Bamford realistically expect to get here?

Well when will he ever get minutes?

He's going to have to ease in some time. This is Chelsea, there will ALWAYS be a big name he has to replace

If he goes off on a PL loan and storms it, he's even less likely to be prepared to sit behind Costa the season after next trying to force his way in

You're picking at others for suggesting he gets a chance, what's your wise and obviously correct and unquestionable truth regards the situation?

Agreed and for a certain someone going on about minutes no seasons are the same.

Hard work trying to get that point across mate, I've had one last crack at it, but it will fall on deaf ears. Will ALWAYS be a "star name" up front that Bamford will be competing with. What difference is there if he is given that challenge now as opposed to next year when he could do a lukaku.

That same certain someone will no doubt be arguing the point that should that happen (I.e an excellent showing on loan resulting in him then being deemed "too good for our bench") that we should sell him if he isn't happy, all the while we are left with a 31 year old falcao with f**king glass knees.

Edited June 2, 201511 yr by CFC_RFC_TID!

Agreed and for a certain someone going on about minutes no seasons are the same.

 

So what you'd do in that instance is make an educated guess wouldn't you, maybe factor in a longer FA Cup and CL run or some such?

 

I want Bamford to succeed here because he's an absolutely lovely young man and you can tell from talking to him that he's got his head screwed on right. But I recognise that what he needs right now is minutes, same as Solanke and Abraham in the development squads so it requires one to look at what they'd realistically get. 

 

You can just say I'm arguing for the sake of it but I'm actually assessing factors and making a guess as to what he'd get here - the club will do the same.

 

Well when will he ever get minutes?

He's going to have to ease in some time. This is Chelsea, there will ALWAYS be a big name he has to replace

If he goes off on a PL loan and storms it, he's even less likely to be prepared to sit behind Costa the season after next trying to force his way in

You're picking at others for suggesting he gets a chance, what's your wise and obviously correct and unquestionable truth regards the situation?

 

Well when will he ever get minutes?

He's going to have to ease in some time. This is Chelsea, there will ALWAYS be a big name he has to replace

If he goes off on a PL loan and storms it, he's even less likely to be prepared to sit behind Costa the season after next trying to force his way in

You're picking at others for suggesting he gets a chance, what's your wise and obviously correct and unquestionable truth regards the situation?

 

If he went to a club in the PL and got 8-12 goals then he'd be putting pressure on Remy who would be entering the final 24 months of his contract.

 

You can make that dig if you want but I'm actually prepared to sit down and look at the factors and offer up a realistic scenario. I'm not trying to be argumentative and I apologise to my fellow supporters if they feel that. What I'm saying is that we have a duty to this young lad to give him the best chance at a career in football, be it here or elsewhere, and that requires MINUTES. 

So what you'd do in that instance is make an educated guess wouldn't you, maybe factor in a longer FA Cup and CL run or some such?

I want Bamford to succeed here because he's an absolutely lovely young man and you can tell from talking to him that he's got his head screwed on right. But I recognise that what he needs right now is minutes, same as Solanke and Abraham in the development squads so it requires one to look at what they'd realistically get.

You can just say I'm arguing for the sake of it but I'm actually assessing factors and making a guess as to what he'd get here - the club will do the same.

If he went to a club in the PL and got 8-12 goals then he'd be putting pressure on Remy who would be entering the final 24 months of his contract.

You can make that dig if you want but I'm actually prepared to sit down and look at the factors and offer up a realistic scenario. I'm not trying to be argumentative and I apologise to my fellow supporters if they feel that. What I'm saying is that we have a duty to this young lad to give him the best chance at a career in football, be it here or elsewhere, and that requires MINUTES.

You're going in circles with totally flawed logic.

What's the solution? You're telling me that he will go and get 8-12 goals (an assumption) then come back. Would that be good enough to justify him displacing Costa? Nope. So it would be the same situation next year

Or do we just loan him out til Costa retires?

if you listen to any of his interviews, you get the sense he just really wants to play for the club. that kind of ambition as a young player is invaluable. Also, there's absolutely no reason we couldn't play him out wide on the right, similar position to where he was playing at boro; he is very versatile. 

 

I hope you don't find this argumentative...but he didn't play very much football at all on the right. 

 

From speaking to him, what you get is a guy who knows his own mind and is very sensible which is why I don't think he'd come back here to play back-up to Costa. He knows what he needs is minutes.

 

He won't get enough here. It's as simple as that in my view. Costa will more than likely play more and so will Remy because the two of them being injured at the same time for a second season in a row is unlikely. That doesn't mean it can't happen.

 

You're going in circles with totally flawed logic.

What's the solution? You're telling me that he will go and get 8-12 goals (an assumption) then come back. Would that be good enough to justify him displacing Costa? Nope. So it would be the same situation next year

Or do we just loan him out til Costa retires?

 

It isn't just Costa - it's Remy too. You're a well-respected accountant invited to sports summits right? Well then you know the importance of Remy entering the last 24 months of his contract next summer don't you?

 

If Bamford had a good season in the top flight then he has a chance to stake a claim for back-up striker behind Costa doesn't he? At the moment, Bamford doesn't have a chance of that in my opinion.

 

Here's my opinion - Bamford can expect between 400-800 minutes next season if he comes back and that's if he's lucky. Do you concur?

Edited June 2, 201511 yr by Blue Daze

I hope you don't find this argumentative...but he didn't play very much football at all on the right. 

 

From speaking to him, what you get is a guy who knows his own mind and is very sensible which is why I don't think he'd come back here to play back-up to Costa. He knows what he needs is minutes.

 

He won't get enough here. It's as simple as that in my view. Costa will more than likely play more and so will Remy because the two of them being injured at the same time for a second season in a row is unlikely. That doesn't mean it can't happen.

 

 

It isn't just Costa - it's Remy too. You're a well-respected accountant invited to sports summits right? Well then you know the importance of Remy entering the last 24 months of his contract next summer don't you?

 

If Bamford had a good season in the top flight then he has a chance to stake a claim for back-up striker behind Costa doesn't he? At the moment, Bamford doesn't have a chance of that in my opinion.

 

Here's my opinion - Bamford can expect between 400-800 minutes next season if he comes back and that's if he's lucky. Do you concur?

 

You are basing this ALL on nonsensical assumptions and literally refuse to concede anything other than your opinion as relevant - the "blue daze universal truth" is honestly really, really tiresome. I'm not alone in that - and as a grown up I'm sure you can take that on the chin, you're hard work. 

 

Bamford scoring a few goals, Bamford getting 400 minutes, Bamford needing more minutes. 

 

Give the guy a chance and rotate him, is what my point is (along with others in here). This is an issue for Jose to resolve, and one that could quite easily see us dodge a bullet by investing significant funds (and a foreign squad place - WHICH ARE LIMITED WITHIN OUR SQUAD) on someone coming off the back of his SECOND cruciate ligament injury, and a TERRIBLE season in English football.

 

Blame Van Gaal all you like; falcao did not convert the chances when they fell to him.

 

Bamford has just had a cracking season in the Championship. He will always have stiff competition at Chelsea. Always. It is up to him to prove that he is up to scratch when given the chance by the manager. Both player and manager need to show their credentials here; jose by trusting his squad, bamford by seizing opportunity when it arrives. 

 

You are speculating about player contracts - Remy being in the last year of his deal. Who is to say Remy wont get sold this summer? Who is to say he wont get a contract extension and then we find ourselves with Bamford in the same situation a few years down the line? 

 

Bamford has played well, admittedly at a lesser level, but for me, this is the time to give him a crack at it, and to save our squad places, our FFP headroom, and to integrate players from our excellent youth academy into a team that can compete for years to come, with a homegrown backbone. 

 

I see falcao as a pointless gamble when we have been burned before. If he even QUARTERED his salary, it would be too much in my honest opinion. I would rather have Bamford on the bench than falcao. That's my stance. 

You are basing this ALL on nonsensical assumptions and literally refuse to concede anything other than your opinion as relevant - the "blue daze universal truth" is honestly really, really tiresome. I'm not alone in that - and as a grown up I'm sure you can take that on the chin, you're hard work. 

 

 

If I'm wrong then I tend to admit I'm wrong, but no reason not to start with an ad hominem attack....let's see if it get's better.

 

 

Bamford scoring a few goals, Bamford getting 400 minutes, Bamford needing more minutes. 

 

Give the guy a chance and rotate him, is what my point is (along with others in here). This is an issue for Jose to resolve, and one that could quite easily see us dodge a bullet by investing significant funds (and a foreign squad place - WHICH ARE LIMITED WITHIN OUR SQUAD) on someone coming off the back of his SECOND cruciate ligament injury, and a TERRIBLE season in English football.

 

 

We don't rotate, especially up front. I'd love it if we do but we don't, so if we're talking about faulty premises then that's your's right there. Foreign places - losing Cech, Drogba and possible one other (Mikel?) so not an issue at this point in time. Again, faulty premise.

 

You're right though that Falcao has had ACL issues and was poor last season. Absolutely correct....and a point I've agreed with and responded to a few times now.

 

 

 

Bamford has just had a cracking season in the Championship. He will always have stiff competition at Chelsea. Always. It is up to him to prove that he is up to scratch when given the chance by the manager. Both player and manager need to show their credentials here; jose by trusting his squad, bamford by seizing opportunity when it arrives. 

 

 

Agreed. The issue is that Bamford probably doesn't want to do that and the club won't want to stifle his development in all likelihood.

 

 

 

You are speculating about player contracts - Remy being in the last year of his deal. 

 

 

24 months is two years.

 

Who is to say Remy wont get sold this summer? Who is to say he wont get a contract extension and then we find ourselves with Bamford in the same situation a few years down the line? 

 

 

I doubt either is likely but anything is possible. You've moved from arguing about things which are based on faulty notions to things which are unknowable, albeit unlikely. Good points though.

 

 

Bamford has played well, admittedly at a lesser level, but for me, this is the time to give him a crack at it, and to save our squad places, our FFP headroom, and to integrate players from our excellent youth academy into a team that can compete for years to come, with a homegrown backbone. 

 

 

Ok, but answer me this because this is what I want to know - what do you want to give him a crack at exactly? You've written this great long spiel which is brilliant but all I've asked for is how many minutes of football Bamford actually plays here. Now you could ponder that Jose would go against everything he's ever done and rotate players (as you did above) and that's fine but have some respect for me. Tell me broadly speaking what you'd actually expect Bamford to get in terms of first-team minutes if he was behind Costa and Remy, and how many minutes he'd get in the under-21s. That's all I want to know.

 

 

I see falcao as a pointless gamble when we have been burned before. If he even QUARTERED his salary, it would be too much in my honest opinion. I would rather have Bamford on the bench than falcao. That's my stance. 

 

A perfectly respectable stance and one I have absolutely no issue with. But again, how many minutes would you expect Bamford to get?

 

I ask you this because I assume you think minutes are an important part of a player's development and as a Chelsea supporter who puts his time and money into his love you have a vested interest in that.

If I'm wrong then I tend to admit I'm wrong, but no reason not to start with an ad hominem attack....let's see if it get's better.

We don't rotate, especially up front. I'd love it if we do but we don't, so if we're talking about faulty premises then that's your's right there. Foreign places - losing Cech, Drogba and possible one other (Mikel?) so not an issue at this point in time. Again, faulty premise.

You're right though that Falcao has had ACL issues and was poor last season. Absolutely correct....and a point I've agreed with and responded to a few times now.

Agreed. The issue is that Bamford probably doesn't want to do that and the club won't want to stifle his development in all likelihood.

24 months is two years.

I doubt either is likely but anything is possible. You've moved from arguing about things which are based on faulty notions to things which are unknowable, albeit unlikely. Good points though.

Ok, but answer me this because this is what I want to know - what do you want to give him a crack at exactly? You've written this great long spiel which is brilliant but all I've asked for is how many minutes of football Bamford actually plays here. Now you could ponder that Jose would go against everything he's ever done and rotate players (as you did above) and that's fine but have some respect for me. Tell me broadly speaking what you'd actually expect Bamford to get in terms of first-team minutes if he was behind Costa and Remy, and how many minutes he'd get in the under-21s. That's all I want to know.

A perfectly respectable stance and one I have absolutely no issue with. But again, how many minutes would you expect Bamford to get?

I ask you this because I assume you think minutes are an important part of a player's development and as a Chelsea supporter who puts his time and money into his love you have a vested interest in that.

Case and point regards your comment on my typo on 24 months equating to two years.

You're just a c**t.

To other users how do you block someone on this thing?!

Case and point regards your comment on my typo on 24 months equating to two years.

You're just a c**t.

To other users how do you block someone on this thing?!

 

Absolutely no reason for that, and I think it's simply that you don't want to have a worthwhile debate on the topic.

 

Don't worry about blocking me, I'll block you. I come here to discuss Chelsea with Chelsea supporters. I have no time for Keyboard warrior Rangers fans. Enjoy your slow slide back to irrelevance. 

Absolutely no reason for that, and I think it's simply that you don't want to have a worthwhile debate on the topic.

Don't worry about blocking me, I'll block you. I come here to discuss Chelsea with Chelsea supporters. I have no time for Keyboard warrior Rangers fans. Enjoy your slow slide back to irrelevance.

ST Holder but never mind.

w**ker

Edited June 2, 201511 yr by CFC_RFC_TID!

Come on guys lets not fight

Come on guys lets not fight

Sorry mate but the guy is f**king intolerable. Someone else called him a c**t on another thread, he's absolutely impossible

Apologies to other users, I cannot handle the bloke, he's atrocious

ST Holder but never mind.

w**ker

 

Why resort to insults though? I made a comment that was hardly malicious and you call me names?

 

We're all Chelsea supporters, I said that to you, I said that you put your time and money into your love and you come back with something you would never, ever say to a fellow Chelsea supporters face in the real world.

 

There's absolutely no need for it. 

Why resort to insults though? I made a comment that was hardly malicious and you call me names?

We're all Chelsea supporters, I said that to you, I said that you put your time and money into your love and you come back with something you would never, ever say to a fellow Chelsea supporters face in the real world.

There's absolutely no need for it.

I'd say it to your face in a flash.

I'd say it to your face in a flash.

 

No problem. Don't see why you did it in the first place but if you genuinely believe that you would treat a fellow supporter like that in real life then go for it. PM me where and when.

Absolutely no reason for that, and I think it's simply that you don't want to have a worthwhile debate on the topic.

 

Don't worry about blocking me, I'll block you. I come here to discuss Chelsea with Chelsea supporters. I have no time for Keyboard warrior Rangers fans. Enjoy your slow slide back to irrelevance. 

 

He is a Chelsea supporter, discussing Chelsea, so that's a strange comment from you.

Why resort to insults though? I made a comment that was hardly malicious and you call me names?

We're all Chelsea supporters, I said that to you, I said that you put your time and money into your love and you come back with something you would never, ever say to a fellow Chelsea supporters face in the real world.

There's absolutely no need for it.

I do think you don't help yourself though, you hammer people with the same points over and over.

No problem. Don't see why you did it in the first place but if you genuinely believe that you would treat a fellow supporter like that in real life then go for it. PM me where and when.

It's like this you're basically goading him, you really do seem to enjoy the debate a little to much for my liking

Edited June 2, 201511 yr by Bobbywoodhogan

He is a Chelsea supporter, discussing Chelsea, so that's a strange comment from you.

 

True. I shouldn't have said that. Maybe I reacted poorly to him calling me a c**t. 

 

Apologies.

Case and point regards your comment on my typo on 24 months equating to two years.

You're just a c**t.

To other users how do you block someone on this thing?!

On the desktop version, click on your own name in the left top corner, choose Manage ignore preferences, and take it from there.

Sorry mate but the guy is f**king intolerable. Someone else called him a c**t on another thread, he's absolutely impossible

Apologies to other users, I cannot handle the bloke, he's atrocious

Only one being an atrocius cint over the last few pages here is you. Might want to take a breather there mate

At least It's not me getting involved in all these arguments nowadays!