Agree, no attackers have scored so far, picking on Pullisic and making him the problem is hypocritical at minimum. Be hilarious if we cut Pullisic loose, then expect Gordon to come in and score 10 goals a year 

24 minutes ago, Jangz said:

Our system doesn’t just suit him.. I don’t think all players thrive in a fluid system.. pulisic had his best moment under Lamps when he played 70% of the time on LW .. under TT he has played less than 30% there ( real stats) . No wonder he has gotten worse with his numbers.

That is almost certainly a factor. Although he has also struggled with consistency in between bouts of injuries. He did have a decent first season under Lampard, especially the second half of the season. But he seems to have lost his way in this system, and I just don't see him getting consistent starts unless there are a lot of injuries. A move would do him good. If he signs a new deal and gets a good loan, he may yet resurrect his Chelsea career if he returns with some newfound form.

We already lost Werner and looks like CHO might go out on loan. Loaning him would be the most ridiculous thing to do. Seems ludicrous but wouldn't surprise me to then go spunk £50m plus on Gordon.  We shouldn't be loaning him to anyone, let along United. If no team can buy him, then he stays it should be end off. It feels like teams are purposely trying to bump us because we are throwing money at clubs for fun.

6 hours ago, Mod said:

Not on here they’re not Tim lad!

There was always die hard American fans even before I joined the old CSR forum, before this forum shifted on from that. That board went back before Roman.

 @Scott and @Phillip even came to a piss-up! Proper Chels those two 

10 hours ago, Zeta said:

If we get rid of Ziyech and loan out CHO, I'd rotate him with Mount and Sterling. Havertz I can see dropping out of the starting 11 soon, cos he just does nothing.

Wow, I disagree there. Admittedly Havertz must learn to hit the target soon or risk becoming the next Timo Werner, but his footballing ability is without question. His passing, especially key passes around the box, ball control, speed and acceleration dribbling ability and strength over defenders, makes him a MUST for me. I would pick him over everyone including Mount but except Sterling !!

Lets tell United, that with ANY of our players, Pulisic, Ziyech or CHO, you either buy them or f**k off !! We should not be doing them favours and I would prefer any of our players to be sold or loaned abroad and NOT to UK competitors unless it was Celtic or Rangers.

Sell or let him stay, no loans

If we don't believe players are good enough for us, then it shouldn't matter who we sell them to. 

If United want to buy any of our deadwood then I don't see why we shouldn't go ahead with it, but agree with others that they should be sales and not loans. 

Many of us wanted to offload most of last season's forwards, and we might be very close to binning 5 of them in one window, which would be huge progress.

Lukaku/Werner - done

CHO - looking like a loan

Pulisic/Ziyech - sell

Havertz - keep

 

 

8 hours ago, The Don Antonio said:

You are right because l didn't even know who boehly was until Putin decided to f**k our club but the point I was trying to make was that Boehly will try to raise the profile of Chelsea in America just the way Peter Kenyon did.

We will definitely lose some fans if pulisic leaves  especially with the American media finding a way to blame Chelsea for not playing him more even though Odoi and Ziyech are in the same predicament. 

It's maybe a bit more precise to say that the British government decided to go against Roman cause when all said and done Putin didn't care about our club before nor during the war but the reaction of the rest of the world pushed Roman out and that reaction wasn't really necessary but what's done is done...

Anyway I firmly believe that Pulisic was unlucky with his injuries, that impacted his playtime much and for that you can't blame Chelsea I mean it was known that he could be injury prone, but we gave him a chance anyway and as it turned out he is injury prone so...

2 hours ago, Gol15 said:

It's maybe a bit more precise to say that the British government decided to go against Roman cause when all said and done Putin didn't care about our club before nor during the war but the reaction of the rest of the world pushed Roman out and that reaction wasn't really necessary but what's done is done...

Anyway I firmly believe that Pulisic was unlucky with his injuries, that impacted his playtime much and for that you can't blame Chelsea I mean it was known that he could be injury prone, but we gave him a chance anyway and as it turned out he is injury prone so...

I agree he is injury prone but we also have to admit that Thomas Tuchels Formation and tactics dont suit his skill set. Pulisic and Ziyech dont fit in a 3421 but i can imagine them both flourishing in Man utd under Ten Haag in a 433 formation since they would both be stuck out wide and not in the half spaces. The same way Salah will be terrible in this chelsea team because he relies on the early ball but we love to slow the game down and play a possesion based game

2 minutes ago, The Don Antonio said:

I agree he is injury prone but we also have to admit that Thomas Tuchels Formation and tactics dont suit his skill set. Pulisic and Ziyech dont fit in a 3421 but i can imagine them both flourishing in Man utd under Ten Haag in a 433 formation since they would both be stuck out wide and not in the half spaces. The same way Salah will be terrible in this chelsea team because he relies on the early ball but we love to slow the game down and play a possesion based game

I agree, both Pulisic and Ziyech were at their best in the 4-3-3. I mean we don't really have an attacker that thrives in our current system, nobody is having a blast so a part of it is Tuchel's setup even if other things can work.

Speaking of the hypothetical, I could see him having a great season at Newcastle, playing fast counter attack football. He will do well in Italy as it's a weakened league, but likely  a cheap dodgy loan deal. Man United is the last place he needs to be, players have no idea how to implement manager's ideas, no confidence in each other, and public scrutiny and expectation are still overwhelming. All agree he had a sh1t season, but we already lost 2 attackers, be mad to send him away with no real reinforcement in sight.

They can have him on loan if they pay 25m for the season. Otherwise f off. 

Insane they even thought to ask. 

10 hours ago, USATim said:

Remember,  Pulisic has always been the whipping boy. Guys like Ziyech, Werner and Havertz have sh*t the bed just as much with more playing time. This year, Mount has been arguably the worst starter after two games. Starling will not have the offensive success he enjoyed at MC because Tuchel's offense is pure crap - and we will wait and see how quickly Chelsea fans start turning on him, if they do at all. So far after two games, no goals from any attacking players. Both Havertz and Starling missed sitters that Chelsea fans would have cut off Pulisic's balls for if it had been him. 

You're chatting bollocks

At least if Pulisic does go, we can finally be rid of a few posters on here.

https://twitter.com/SteveFc10/status/1477683395014668292?s=20&t=R1ibO5ZNk5rM7VPwFqTTxA

Sales pitch already done.

Edited August 18, 20223 yr by DarkMata

5 minutes ago, Zeta said:

At least if Pulisic does go, we can finally be rid of a few posters on here.

2 hours ago, Gol15 said:

I agree, both Pulisic and Ziyech were at their best in the 4-3-3. I mean we don't really have an attacker that thrives in our current system, nobody is having a blast so a part of it is Tuchel's setup even if other things can work.

Pulisic has played in a 4-3-3 most his career.  Both at Dortmund and Under Frank and has looked absolutely dreadful for 95% of his time on the pitch his entire career under multiple managers and 2 different leagues.

Surely at this point you just have to accept the player isn't talented enough for the highest level instead of talking about systems and the coaches set up.

Motherf**ker will you just give it a rest. You only need to state an opinion once. We get it. You don't need to reiterate it 12 times a day on every thread in the forum.

32 minutes ago, HazardousChoice said:

Pulisic has played in a 4-3-3 most his career.  Both at Dortmund and Under Frank and has looked absolutely dreadful for 95% of his time on the pitch his entire career under multiple managers and 2 different leagues.

Surely at this point you just have to accept the player isn't talented enough for the highest level instead of talking about systems and the coaches set up.

Look we know you like to run your mouth and exaggerate things for attention but saying he's looked dreadful for 95% of his career games is just simply not true. The fact Juventus and Utd are both interested show the talent is clearly there, otherwise he'd have no suitors and be linked to Championship clubs.

Sure he hasn't lived up to the hype, but he's still a steady player with a lot of talent he just doesn't show often enough. 

20 minutes ago, RIP Mourinho said:

Look we know you like to run your mouth and exaggerate things for attention but saying he's looked dreadful for 95% of his career games is just simply not true. The fact Juventus and Utd are both interested show the talent is clearly there, otherwise he'd have no suitors and be linked to Championship clubs.

Sure he hasn't lived up to the hype, but he's still a steady player with a lot of talent he just doesn't show often enough. 

Lmao what? I simply state the facts.  Pulisics career stats don't lie. He's a guy that has played 244 games at top attacking clubs that create more chances than most and he has 44 goals and 25 assists in his career.   That's really poor.

United are literally bottom of the league, in a complete shambles, have had the worst transfer record in Europe over the last decade and already have a younger more talented player that kept Pulisic rooted to the bench.

Juventus aren't interested.  We were rumoured to have offered Pulisic to them when we wanted De Ligt and Allegri had no interest in him.

If he had suitors why haven't we recieved a single offer for him despite it being clear Tuchel doesn't want him?

Even the United links were about a loan. A desperate club that are apparently scrambling to throw £100m+ on Felix and £50m on about a dozen other players yet they're not willing to stump up a transfer fee for Pulisic?

Doesn't that tell you anything? If we could get a single actual bid for him he wouldn't be here now.

Edited August 18, 20223 yr by HazardousChoice

.

Edited August 18, 20223 yr by HazardousChoice
Double post.

If a player is no longer good enough for Chelsea, just let him go and wish him luck. 

No need to trash a player. As far as I can tell, he has been respectful of Chelsea and the supporters.

 

 

8 hours ago, Sexyfootball said:

If we don't believe players are good enough for us, then it shouldn't matter who we sell them to. 

If United want to buy any of our deadwood then I don't see why we shouldn't go ahead with it, but agree with others that they should be sales and not loans. 

Many of us wanted to offload most of last season's forwards, and we might be very close to binning 5 of them in one window, which would be huge progress.

Lukaku/Werner - done

CHO - looking like a loan

Pulisic/Ziyech - sell

Havertz - keep

 

 

The only reason Havertz is a keep is because of the champions league final goal, other than that he has been no better and the rest of those. 

 

13 minutes ago, andy said:

The only reason Havertz is a keep is because of the champions league final goal, other than that he has been no better and the rest of those. 

I think it is a bit more than that. You can definitely see technical ability in there, plus good link play, some goal scoring (8 goals in 11 starts in Feb/March/April for example) but agree he could do with a really good and consistent season.

Of course, if we end up signing Aubameyang, Havertz may not even get in the team 🙂