3 minutes ago, TheChelseaBlues said:

I got railed on for suggesting this same thing about Alonso/RicRod earlier. It seems Alonso has gone from not being good enough when this saga started to now being mentioned in the same breath as Sandro and Alaba. 

For me Alonso did an ok job last season, but his pace will always be a weakness that the best teams can exploit. Sandro would be a big upgrade.

43 minutes ago, TheChelseaBlues said:

I got railed on for suggesting this same thing about Alonso/RicRod earlier. It seems Alonso has gone from not being good enough when this saga started to now being mentioned in the same breath as Sandro and Alaba. 

No, Sandro is an upgrade while RicRod is a downgrade. Alonso was great for us. That's all there is to it.

3 hours ago, Deino said:

No, Sandro is an upgrade while RicRod is a downgrade. Alonso was great for us. That's all there is to it.

No what? Alonso has been great so far which is why I think we'd be alright with him as first choice as long as we have a complimentary backup

 RicRod would also be an upgrade at backup LWB over who we have there now. Nobody has suggested dropping Alonso unless we could have gotten Sandro.

2 hours ago, TheChelseaBlues said:

No what? Alonso has been great so far which is why I think we'd be alright with him as first choice as long as we have a complimentary backup

 RicRod would also be an upgrade at backup LWB over who we have there now. Nobody has suggested dropping Alonso unless we could have gotten Sandro.

By no I mean Alonso is not not good enough and not as good as Sandro/Alaba. Everything with what you said I agree with. 

RicRod as backup isn't something I agree with tho. Aside from everything that's been said about him, he'll need to play regularly to gel with the team. If he's the backup then that'd mean less playing time which could lead to lack of team chemisty leading to him not performing at his best. As the wingback position is crucial to us thus far, it could lead to very damaging results.

If Alonso was backup, we have less to worry about as he knows the ins and outs of the system and we're pretty much accustomed to people targeting him. If RicRod is backup, teams who targeted Alonso will be much happier with RicRod as he's slower and not as tall so you'd probably see overloads or people with pace constantly targeting that side.

I'd rather sell Matic for £5m less to Inter than the full £40m to Juventus, their whole behaviour in the Sandro debacle has annoyed me.
Why keep increasing the price? If he's not available, just tell us so we can move on.
Unless we're doing some kind of Matic-Sandro deal with Juve, I stand by my point.

Edited July 17, 20179 yr by TomCFC85

37 minutes ago, TomCFC85 said:

I'd rather sell Matic for £5m less to Inter than the full £40m to Juventus, their whole behaviour in the Sandro debacle has annoyed me.
Why keep increasing the price? If he's not available, just tell us so we can move on.
Unless we're doing some kind of Matic-Sandro deal with Juve, I stand by my point.

They did. Their director's statement was clear, if I remember correctly where he said that Juve dont want to sell sandro unless the player wants to leave.

If RM were after Hazard, the club would do exactly all of this and more to keep him at Chelsea. 

We wanted one of Juve's best players and they did everything possible to keep him, absolutely nothing wrong with any of it.

Alonso did a great job, but we still no doubt need a very good backup, or someone to replace Alonso like Sandro

1 hour ago, TomCFC85 said:

I'd rather sell Matic for £5m less to Inter than the full £40m to Juventus, their whole behaviour in the Sandro debacle has annoyed me.
Why keep increasing the price? If he's not available, just tell us so we can move on.
Unless we're doing some kind of Matic-Sandro deal with Juve, I stand by my point.

Don't get me wrong, I'd like it for him to come here but Juve has a revolving door in regards to their transfer policy. They'll never sell unless the player wants out

5 hours ago, TomCFC85 said:

I'd rather sell Matic for £5m less to Inter than the full £40m to Juventus, their whole behaviour in the Sandro debacle has annoyed me.
Why keep increasing the price? If he's not available, just tell us so we can move on.
Unless we're doing some kind of Matic-Sandro deal with Juve, I stand by my point.

that is actually a speculation from UK newspapers, I doubt it is true. Juve never put Sandro on the market and refused the offer at 60m. The position has always been that he was not on the market and any talks would be linked to the player asking for a transfer which he has not so far (it seems). They now have also offered him revised terms because after the surprising transfers of Bonucci and Alves it would really be a mess if we sold Sandro too.

Having said that if the price is 40m £ I also hope you sell him to Inter 

I'd rather sell him to Juve for less and grease the wheels on a Sandro transfer next season assuming they'd be prepared to sell him then

5 minutes ago, TheChelseaBlues said:

I'd rather sell him to Juve for less and grease the wheels on a Sandro transfer next season assuming they'd be prepared to sell him then

A clause into Sandro's contract stating that Chelsea gets first refusal

15 hours ago, Deino said:

A clause into Sandro's contract stating that Chelsea gets first refusal

Why would they do that for us?

Its like us putting Real Madrid get first refusal on Hazards contract. Nonsense tbh.

1 hour ago, dansubrosa said:

Why would they do that for us?

Its like us putting Real Madrid get first refusal on Hazards contract. Nonsense tbh.

It's also an unfunny joke but you can be all serious if you want

It was a dream signing, he is on his way to sign a new contract with Juventus. 

That's gutting. For a week or so I thought we had him wrapped up. Never mind

His silence said it all for me...another chancer using Chelsea as a means to add more money to their trough...get your nose in Sandro and pork away...

On 7/14/2017 at 10:12, Deino said:

They're trying to find 3 other fullbacks besides Kyle Walker and Walker should cost them 50m. No way they'd spend around 200m for 4 fullbacks

Looks like they are about to spend 90+ on two of the four now... You so sure about that?

1 minute ago, MissouriBlue said:

Looks like they are about to spend 90+ on two of the four now... You so sure about that?

I was wrong. I assumed they had better sense than throwing money at people.

They should've invested all that money on a proper scouting team

24 minutes ago, Deino said:

I was wrong. I assumed they had better sense than throwing money at people.

They should've invested all that money on a proper scouting team

£90m on two fullbacks who both have question marks about them, and this is the model we should apparently be following.

7 minutes ago, Argo said:

£90m on two fullbacks who both have question marks about them, and this is the model we should apparently be following.

What would you want?

Options of walker and danilo for rwb/rb or just Moses who is not even a true wing back?

i know what I would like.

anyways, time to go even further down the list of desired targets.

6 minutes ago, didierforever said:

What would you want?

Options of walker and danilo for rwb/rb or just Moses who is not even a true wing back?

i know what I would like.

anyways, time to go even further down the list of desired targets.

Personally i would prefer an attack minded left wing back as i think we are more than covered on the right, furthermore if we have a LWB of that mould we could probably get away with playing Azpi at wing back which in turn will open up a space for Rudiger and Christensen.

We are being beaten to another target and that's an issue we have faced for too long now.

 

if reports are true, man city offered him more money and he took it. I don't think he was a game changer for us, disappointing to lose him to city, but it says alot about what kind of person he is, if he prefers to play less games on more money at city. I don't think the difference between what we offered, would have been massively lower than city's offer. 

On to the next one. 

Yeah, his loss. Could have been a regular starter for the champions. Clearly money was more important than game time

1 hour ago, Argo said:

Personally i would prefer an attack minded left wing back as i think we are more than covered on the right, furthermore if we have a LWB of that mould we could probably get away with playing Azpi at wing back which in turn will open up a space for Rudiger and Christensen.

With Sandro out of the picture, realistically do you see any of this happening?

Also currently we have 5 CBs with Azpi and Rudiger, one RWB and one LWB. 7 players for 5 positions. Just not good enough or deep enough.

Whats worse is the fact that we can offer the same amount of money as well as a first team position and yet not get the desired player.