35 minutes ago, Ernie_blue said:

I think Klopp might get Liverpool into title contenders but it will be very hard to win the league from this season on, Klopp is backed though, Liverpool needed a CB and they spent 75m on a player who was needed, it doesn't matter what people feel regarding the fee. Liverpool have more money to spend and will surely be looking for a keeper, you can't win the league without a top keeper and even Leicester have one in Schmeichel, there's a hint for you Klopp  Liverpool have also got Keita coming in, to me they are looking forwards atm.

I don't think any team can look back at what Leicester did and hope it is going to happen again, that's living in an Arsenal world. Pep's got his team now and will make improvements every year.

I think it can happen again yet not soon, I recall Lineker and Co talking about it and acknowledging it had happened yet decades ago.

This may be pedantic yet I don't rate Schmeichel as a top keeper, a decent one -yes.

"We can no longer compete with Man United and Man City for the top players" - Conte
Basically:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2018/01/23/antonio-conte-chelsea-cannot-spend-money-like-manchester-united/

I think we are all aware that this is now the case, although it's maybe not the best thing for conte to be coming out with, while we are trying to get Courtois and hazard to sign long term deals. 

I think conte will be here longer than the press think, signing dzeko seems like conte is planning on staying until the end of next season at least. 

17 minutes ago, big blue said:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2018/01/23/antonio-conte-chelsea-cannot-spend-money-like-manchester-united/

I think we are all aware that this is now the case, although it's maybe not the best thing for conte to be coming out with, while we are trying to get Courtois and hazard to sign long term deals. 

I think conte will be here longer than the press think, signing dzeko seems like conte is planning on staying until the end of next season at least. 

He’s exactly right. If he leads us to 3rd above arsenal pool and spurs, he’ll have done a very fine job imo.

You are right though big blue, I doubt it’s what Roman wants to hear.

we spent 15m less than city and about 40m more than utd. if we buy dzeko and palmieri in this window, we would have spent another what, 60m+? hardly paupers now are we. just because we didn't want to pay sanchez huge wages doesn't indicate we can't compete financially otherwise you could say the same thing about bayern, psg etc who backed out for the same reason. i would like to think the reason is because we are being smarter about how we spend our money, rather than throwing money at the problem and hoping for the best. of course we will sell to buy, but that's natural for majority of clubs. 

5 minutes ago, enigma said:

we spent 15m less than city and about 40m more than utd. if we buy dzeko and palmieri in this window, we would have spent another what, 60m+? hardly paupers now are we. just because we didn't want to pay sanchez huge wages doesn't indicate we can't compete financially otherwise you could say the same thing about bayern, psg etc who backed out for the same reason. i would like to think the reason is because we are being smarter about how we spend our money, rather than throwing money at the problem and hoping for the best. of course we will sell to buy, but that's natural for majority of clubs. 

Exactly. But you never know: Roman might sell his bitcoins when it hits the 100 000 $ mark in six months and we'll be richer than PSG, City and Utd

13 minutes ago, enigma said:

we spent 15m less than city and about 40m more than utd. if we buy dzeko and palmieri in this window, we would have spent another what, 60m+? hardly paupers now are we. just because we didn't want to pay sanchez huge wages doesn't indicate we can't compete financially otherwise you could say the same thing about bayern, psg etc who backed out for the same reason. i would like to think the reason is because we are being smarter about how we spend our money, rather than throwing money at the problem and hoping for the best. of course we will sell to buy, but that's natural for majority of clubs. 

It's not about spend he is talking about it's the level of player. We clearly can't compete with those clubs when it comes to wanting the best footballers. If we want a Dyabla or Greizmann while City or United do too then we don' have a chance because we won't be paying over 300k a week like they are doing these days.

We spend quite a bit of money (much of it from sales) but sadly much of it is wasted on so so players. 

 

7 hours ago, enigma said:

we spent 15m less than city and about 40m more than utd. if we buy dzeko and palmieri in this window, we would have spent another what, 60m+? hardly paupers now are we. just because we didn't want to pay sanchez huge wages doesn't indicate we can't compete financially otherwise you could say the same thing about bayern, psg etc who backed out for the same reason. i would like to think the reason is because we are being smarter about how we spend our money, rather than throwing money at the problem and hoping for the best. of course we will sell to buy, but that's natural for majority of clubs. 

I’m not being cheeky, but have you seen the players we have spent that money on? We’re definitely not being smart by splashing large amounts on players like Bakayoko, DD & Zappacosta.

 

I get what you’re saying but spending money wiser would be getting younger players with high potential like Monaco got Tielemans for £20m for example.

 

We just seem to want to spend large amounts on bang average football players, which is the most worrying strategy we could adopt IMO.

6 hours ago, Chelsbear said:

It's not about spend he is talking about it's the level of player. We clearly can't compete with those clubs when it comes to wanting the best footballers. If we want a Dyabla or Greizmann while City or United do too then we don' have a chance because we won't be paying over 300k a week like they are doing these days.

We spend quite a bit of money (much of it from sales) but sadly much of it is wasted on so so players. 

 

I agree, and some people might see that as a good thing but it’s a double edged sword IMO. 

 

If we think that the likes of Hazard & Tibo want to stick around at the club as we slowly turn in to Arsenal and scrap for 4th every year, we’re kidding ourselves. We laugh at Arsenal fans and their delusion of wanting to keep Sánchez despite never getting close to a league title never mind the CL. 

 

Obviously its too soon to say we’re the new Arsenal when we won the league just last season and considering how we usually do the season after a title win we’re actually having a good season. However, if we refuse to pay top wages and top prices then that’s the future I imagine us having unfortunately.

4 hours ago, enigma said:

we spent 15m less than city and about 40m more than utd. if we buy dzeko and palmieri in this window, we would have spent another what, 60m+? hardly paupers now are we. just because we didn't want to pay sanchez huge wages doesn't indicate we can't compete financially otherwise you could say the same thing about bayern, psg etc who backed out for the same reason. i would like to think the reason is because we are being smarter about how we spend our money, rather than throwing money at the problem and hoping for the best. of course we will sell to buy, but that's natural for majority of clubs. 

Our net spend is tiny compared to the two manc clubs and that makes all the difference. Not only you can spend vast amounts of money on fees and wages, you don't have to sacrifice the quality of the squad. You don't think Conte would prefer Pogba to Bakayoko, Walker to Zappacosta, Van Dijk to Rudiger and Sanchez to whatever 'young attacker with potential' we're going to buy for 30-something pounds next summer?

21 minutes ago, EdinburghBlue said:

I’m not being cheeky, but have you seen the players we have spent that money on? We’re definitely not being smart by splashing large amounts on players like Bakayoko, DD & Zappacosta.

 

I get what you’re saying but spending money wiser would be getting younger players with high potential like Monaco got Tielemans for £20m for example.

 

We just seem to want to spend large amounts on bang average football players, which is the most worrying strategy we could adopt IMO.

I think this is the bit that concerns us all. It's the waste and opportunity cost associated, not necessarily being unable to buy top players that is concerning. The panic buying of Zappacosta is a supreme example. Would we really have been worse off having Sterling instead? Would that 25m have assisted us to pay for Sandro instead of Emerson?

Could we have bought Fabinho instead of Bakayoko and Drinkwater and just kept Nat and Ruben? We don't lack funds. I'd just argue we have used them poorly since Jose's first season (with the exception of Alonso and Kante)

Edited January 24, 20188 yr by Spiller86

You are talking about transfer fees but missing the point. It's not the fees we can't afford, it's the wages.

7 hours ago, enigma said:

we spent 15m less than city and about 40m more than utd. if we buy dzeko and palmieri in this window, we would have spent another what, 60m+? hardly paupers now are we. just because we didn't want to pay sanchez huge wages doesn't indicate we can't compete financially otherwise you could say the same thing about bayern, psg etc who backed out for the same reason. i would like to think the reason is because we are being smarter about how we spend our money, rather than throwing money at the problem and hoping for the best. of course we will sell to buy, but that's natural for majority of clubs. 

Conte has right when he told that we can't compete with both Man.U and Man.C, just look the last recruit of City, they spent 65M£ for Laporte who will be on the bench...... 

Do you think that we can compete with that ? 

You are talking about transfer fees but missing the point. It's not the fees we can't afford, it's the wages.

That may be a point. All this talk about money 'spent' is meaningless without taking into account the value of the players' contracts (and also the money coming in from players sold).

It would be interesting to see a less simplistic comparison of our transfer activity.

10 hours ago, big blue said:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2018/01/23/antonio-conte-chelsea-cannot-spend-money-like-manchester-united/

I think we are all aware that this is now the case, although it's maybe not the best thing for conte to be coming out with, while we are trying to get Courtois and hazard to sign long term deals. 

I think conte will be here longer than the press think, signing dzeko seems like conte is planning on staying until the end of next season at least. 

Thats a great article, sadly realistic also.

51 minutes ago, Zola said:

Thats a great article, sadly realistic also.

Not buying that argument personally. If he hadn’t stripped that squad of so many players, and then moan about not having numbers in things wouldn’t look that bad. As things stand we are on course to spend £250m without having strengthened any first-11 role. 

He could have kept on Zouma + Ake, moved Azpi to RB and either bought a top LB/CB. Instead we are about to spend £85m on our defence without any of them being starters.

In Midfield, he could have kept 2 of Van Ginkel/Chalobah/RLC, and signed a potential world class talent like Savic for £60m (now you will need £90m+). Instead we have spent £85m & signed Bakayoko, Drinkwater & Barkley. Not an upgrade IMO

Upfront we are potentially going to spend £85m+ on both Morata + Dzeko, and Arsenal are about to spend £50m on Aubameyang a clear upgrade on both players.

off my head, we are spending £650k/w on wages for 8 players when we could have bought 4 top class ones (Aubameyang,Savic, Mahrez, top CB/Sandro) for the same amount & around the same wages. We would also have had enough spare cash to sign Barkley in Jan if need be.

 

 

2 hours ago, abramovich said:

Our net spend is tiny compared to the two manc clubs and that makes all the difference. Not only you can spend vast amounts of money on fees and wages, you don't have to sacrifice the quality of the squad. You don't think Conte would prefer Pogba to Bakayoko, Walker to Zappacosta, Van Dijk to Rudiger and Sanchez to whatever 'young attacker with potential' we're going to buy for 30-something pounds next summer?

it's not always necessarily about the wages or fee though. walker wanted to go back up north, pogba maybe would have come to us, but utd was his old club and it would have been like a betrayal, van dijk for some reason wanted to play for liverpool. however, i think rudiger has been a revelation for us and don't think i'd swap him for vvd. pedro and willian have both contributed to our team immensely, so bringing in sanchez was really a luxury rather than necessity. 

3 hours ago, EdinburghBlue said:

I’m not being cheeky, but have you seen the players we have spent that money on? We’re definitely not being smart by splashing large amounts on players like Bakayoko, DD & Zappacosta.

 

I get what you’re saying but spending money wiser would be getting younger players with high potential like Monaco got Tielemans for £20m for example.

 

We just seem to want to spend large amounts on bang average football players, which is the most worrying strategy we could adopt IMO.

i feel this is the problem. people writing off players in their first season. zappacosta imo has been good, but he wasn't bought to be a first choice. i think he's good enough to push moses for the first team spot, but he was ultimately bought as back up. the same for drinkwater. bakayoko is the only player who was bought to be a first teamer, and yes although his season so far has been average, he's still being written off too quickly because he's coming in to replace matic. think about it, matic at bakayoko's age was playing for benfica. at 22 years of age bakayoko has been part of a league winning monaco side, he wouldn't have been first choice for monaco if he was trash. football fans are way too impatient these days, it's an era of instant success. i don't like it tbh, but it is what it is and we have to live with it. 

1 hour ago, enigma said:

i feel this is the problem. people writing off players in their first season. zappacosta imo has been good, but he wasn't bought to be a first choice. i think he's good enough to push moses for the first team spot, but he was ultimately bought as back up. the same for drinkwater. bakayoko is the only player who was bought to be a first teamer, and yes although his season so far has been average, he's still being written off too quickly because he's coming in to replace matic. think about it, matic at bakayoko's age was playing for benfica. at 22 years of age bakayoko has been part of a league winning monaco side, he wouldn't have been first choice for monaco if he was trash. football fans are way too impatient these days, it's an era of instant success. i don't like it tbh, but it is what it is and we have to live with it. 

Zapacosta is 25/26, he's only got a few caps for his country and most of us had never heard of him before he joined. He's a good squad player but that's about it. He's nowhere near the level of the best wing backs in Europe.

Bakayoko had 1 good season at Monaco and even then in the CL he looked a luxury player because his positional play was crazy. We spent more than £40 million on him when he was no better than the player we sold for less in Matic.

These might be the players and market we are limited to now that we can no longer compete with the very best players. People are only fooling themselves if they think we can when United are offering 350k a week for Sanchez and City have given KDB a deal around the 250/300k mark. Then you have the PSG's who are paying those wages for fun. We can't attract those players now unless money isn't important to them, that's the reality.

We are trying to be self sufficient while building a very costly stadium so naturally we are going to suffer in terms of players we can bring in and competitions we can win. Time to face up to it

4 hours ago, EdinburghBlue said:

I agree, and some people might see that as a good thing but it’s a double edged sword IMO. 

 

If we think that the likes of Hazard & Tibo want to stick around at the club as we slowly turn in to Arsenal and scrap for 4th every year, we’re kidding ourselves. We laugh at Arsenal fans and their delusion of wanting to keep Sánchez despite never getting close to a league title never mind the CL. 

 

Obviously its too soon to say we’re the new Arsenal when we won the league just last season and considering how we usually do the season after a title win we’re actually having a good season. However, if we refuse to pay top wages and top prices then that’s the future I imagine us having unfortunately.

Only we can win two titles in three years (both with numerous games to spare) and say we are turning into Arsenal 

2 hours ago, enigma said:

it's not always necessarily about the wages or fee though. walker wanted to go back up north, pogba maybe would have come to us, but utd was his old club and it would have been like a betrayal, van dijk for some reason wanted to play for liverpool. however, i think rudiger has been a revelation for us and don't think i'd swap him for vvd. pedro and willian have both contributed to our team immensely, so bringing in sanchez was really a luxury rather than necessity. 

There’s no doubt Sanchez would have been a big upgrade on Willian and Pedro.

Only we can win two titles in three years (both with numerous games to spare) and say we are turning into Arsenal :laugh2:

There were a number of factors that worked for us. Transition for big clubs, no CL, etc. I don't see us winning in the near future if we continue our prudent ways.

you could say same about city this season that spurs have regressed, we have suffered injuries and poor form, liverpool started off poorly, the teams below top 6 have got worse. city have done well to capitalise this season though, but watching them recently they're looking a lot more beatable. i wouldn't say they or utd will dominate, just like i am not willing to write us off as not being able to compete for the title any time soon. 

you could say same about city this season that spurs have regressed, we have suffered injuries and poor form, liverpool started off poorly, the teams below top 6 have got worse. city have done well to capitalise this season though, but watching them recently they're looking a lot more beatable. i wouldn't say they or utd will dominate, just like i am not willing to write us off as not being able to compete for the title any time soon. 

Difference is if they see a weakness, they will immediately replace with a world class talent. See Laporte. We cannot. It will be more like Madrid and Barca dominating and buying the best players.

2 hours ago, JoseBlues said:

3 hours ago, Argo said:

Only we can win two titles in three years (both with numerous games to spare) and say we are turning into Arsenal 

There were a number of factors that worked for us. Transition for big clubs, no CL, etc. I don't see us winning in the near future if we continue our prudent ways.

And im sure Arsenal had a "number of factors" in their favour at times the last decade but didn't win.  You can rip apart any title win using that logic (would we have had it so easy in 2005 if Fergie wasn't half way through a rebuild? For example) but the reality is the winners deserve it and pissing two league's in three years isn't a fluke.