2 hours ago, RMH said:

Why the need to choose when we are desperate in the midfield? They are different players that can cover different areas of the midfield, and Gilmour is the closest next thing we had to rotate Jorginho. Who else do we have in the midfield that can stay healthy? This move is just shooting ourselves in the foot, if not for the quality, for the lack of cover we have in that part of the pitch.

Tuchel never saw that in him. And I am sure Billy demanded he needs to play all the time which naturally is the best for a young player like he is. 

Btw we paid 500k + dev fees and sold him on for 9m. Good profit. This is also part of Chelsea business model. 

17 minutes ago, TheGermanOne said:

https://www.90min.com/posts/billy-gilmour-set-for-permanent-brighton-transfer

Brighton emerged as the leading suitor for Gilmour, but given they already have centre-back Levi Colwill on loan from the Blues, they had to pursue a permanent deal and sources have confirmed to 90min that an agreement has now been reached.

Gilmour is now heading for a medical and will be leaving Chelsea for a fee of around £10m.

It is believed that Chelsea have also negotiated a buy-back clause for Gilmour, with Chelsea's ownership reluctant to give up on the 21-year-old permanently.

Well, there is no confirmation yet that there is a buy back clause in place because the two clubs are not disclosing any information about it.

I expect there is a buy back clause. It's a bit controversial because we arent allowed to loan anyone to Brighton and so the question is, what's the difference between this and a loan with obligation to buy 🤔

31 minutes ago, evissy said:

Tuchel never saw that in him. And I am sure Billy demanded he needs to play all the time which naturally is the best for a young player like he is. 

Btw we paid 500k + dev fees and sold him on for 9m. Good profit. This is also part of Chelsea business model. 

Yes, good move for Gilmour, I don't think anyone is questioning that. But some of us question some of the choices Tuchel has taken based on the Club's moves this past window, which are directed by Tuchel himself. It all looks like it has been improvised, and we are left with no cover for Jorginho, who won't be able to play all the games this season, and short of players in the midfield.

39 minutes ago, evissy said:

. And I am sure Billy demanded he needs to play all the time which naturally is the best for a young player like he is. 

 

Highly doubtful.

5 hours ago, evissy said:

Under Frank when he featured he was excellent. After that he's been hit and miss. In Norwich he was closer to a disaster. 

He needs to be around talented players and in a good attacking side. I think he is going to be a good player but his lack of physicality is a problem in the Prem. I bet in Germany he'd instantly be a brilliant player. 

Tuchel chose between him and Gallagher. Conor is much more a Prem style player so it makes sense it went like this.

 

In a team as bad as Norwich, he was one of their worst players ... surely you would expect he'd be the big fish in the small pond so to speak, if he was as good as some say ?

I know stats aren't everything, but the algorithms that feed these data points hold up pretty well. You generally see the anecdotally best players come out at the top of the rankings.

Billy's international performances are held up as his shining lights, but he's not exactly crash hot there either ... 

 

Anyway, good luck to him at Brighton. We shall find out in the passing of time whether selling him was a good decision or a bad one.

46 minutes ago, Sexyfootball said:

 

In a team as bad as Norwich, he was one of their worst players ... surely you would expect he'd be the big fish in the small pond so to speak, if he was as good as some say ?

I know stats aren't everything, but the algorithms that feed these data points hold up pretty well. You generally see the anecdotally best players come out at the top of the rankings.

Billy's international performances are held up as his shining lights, but he's not exactly crash hot there either ... 

 

Anyway, good luck to him at Brighton. We shall find out in the passing of time whether selling him was a good decision or a bad one.

And you cannot blame Billy here. He is still so young. This is why managers try to protect young players from making bad decisions for their career. He simply didn't have a route to the first team for us this season. In my mind he is behind Jorginho, Kante, Kovacic, Mount, Ruben and Conor in terms of midfied spots. Hard to see any minutes.

Potter is probably perfect manager for wee Billy. Hopefully he does well there.

18 hours ago, El regreso said:

The overreaction here is funny, he’s okay player  but he will be no better than Josh McEachran.

Some of you are acting like he’s the next Pirlo FFS

For me it is an emotional reaction. In the few games he did play for us you could see the spirit with which he played, like a young lad in the park with his mates. He showed great awareness, an appreciation of space, an eye for a pass, the courage to show for the ball, and composure well beyond his years. 

Tuchel would not make the leap of faith necessary to give him a run in the team. We have allowed a pragmatist to make decisions on our future direction as a team. For me, and few others like me, our treatment of Billy is symptomatic of the death of romance in football in general, and Chelsea in particular at the present time.  

20 minutes ago, Liam said:

For me it is an emotional reaction. In the few games he did play for us you could see the spirit with which he played, like a young lad in the park with his mates. He showed great awareness, an appreciation of space, an eye for a pass, the courage to show for the ball, and composure well beyond his years. 

Tuchel would not make the leap of faith necessary to give him a run in the team. We have allowed a pragmatist to make decisions on our future direction as a team. For me, and few others like me, our treatment of Billy is symptomatic of the death of romance in football in general, and Chelsea in particular at the present time.  

Billy might also have just been sh*t in training since tuchel joined. 

If Billy was unable to impress TT how on earth do some of our expensive flops manage to impress him so much that he regularly plays them ?

14 hours ago, El regreso said:

If he was that good Neil bath would of fought for him to stay within the club and loan him out while extending his contract. He’s not that good people just overhyping him because he comes from our academy.

I can bet my mortgage he will not be anywhere near as good as Salah or KdB, both you could see the potential was there. 
His level is championship to lower premier league team.

Great kid just not the elite talent we need.

Doesn't even come from our academy per se. Bought from Rangers. He's talented but won't amount to much in the Premier league due to his size. Unfortunately to be successful in this league he will need physically strong players (team mates) covering him 

The only issue I have is the price. It just seems to be a pattern now that we sell our own players below market value and buy other teams players at over inflated sums

2 hours ago, Liam said:

For me it is an emotional reaction. In the few games he did play for us you could see the spirit with which he played, like a young lad in the park with his mates. He showed great awareness, an appreciation of space, an eye for a pass, the courage to show for the ball, and composure well beyond his years. 

Tuchel would not make the leap of faith necessary to give him a run in the team. We have allowed a pragmatist to make decisions on our future direction as a team. For me, and few others like me, our treatment of Billy is symptomatic of the death of romance in football in general, and Chelsea in particular at the present time.  

Are we going to ignore the fact there's been as much as 5 academy lads on the pitch at certain times in recent games? 

I'd wager not many if any club in the big leagues could match that, especially ones with pressure to win.

1 minute ago, Argo said:

Are we going to ignore the fact there's been as much as 5 academy lads on the pitch at certain times in recent games? 

Tuchel only did that to annoy dkw 

2 minutes ago, Sexyfootball said:

Tuchel only did that to annoy dkw 

I don't think this one will come back to bite us.

Letting go Tomori and Tammy have though.

 

11 hours ago, EdinburghBlue said:

Whoever signed off on the Norwich loan should be following him out the door - was always going to be a disaster sending him to the ultimate yo-yo club.

It may have been Flo who was a higher up in the loan brigade and conveniently moved on of his own accord. 

3 hours ago, bisright1 said:

Billy might also have just been sh*t in training since tuchel joined. 

If he was bad at defending during our training sessions you know he would have been a liability in matches against most of our opponents since we're not exactly good at attacking.

7 hours ago, TheGermanOne said:

https://www.90min.com/posts/billy-gilmour-set-for-permanent-brighton-transfer

Brighton emerged as the leading suitor for Gilmour, but given they already have centre-back Levi Colwill on loan from the Blues, they had to pursue a permanent deal and sources have confirmed to 90min that an agreement has now been reached.

Gilmour is now heading for a medical and will be leaving Chelsea for a fee of around £10m.

It is believed that Chelsea have also negotiated a buy-back clause for Gilmour, with Chelsea's ownership reluctant to give up on the 21-year-old permanently.

Well, there is no confirmation yet that there is a buy back clause in place because the two clubs are not disclosing any information about it.

If it was a straight 10 million why would you not disclose everything. Seems like the only thing you would not want to disclose is a buyback clause

4 hours ago, bisright1 said:

Billy might also have just been sh*t in training since tuchel joined. 

Time will tell 

3 hours ago, abister1 said:

Doesn't even come from our academy per se. Bought from Rangers. He's talented but won't amount to much in the Premier league due to his size. Unfortunately to be successful in this league he will need physically strong players (team mates) covering him 

Probably correct there. So same as Jorginho then?

Gilmour is the only player we had with the natural passing range and vision to consistently hit early, accurate long passes.

1 hour ago, just said:

Probably correct there. So same as Jorginho then?

Gilmour is the only player we had with the natural passing range and vision to consistently hit early, accurate long passes.

The thing is Jorginho had already become established as a player in a competitive European league. When you have that experience already its easier for people to overlook the physical flaws (except the managers who always see things differently from fans) and even he gets slaughtered weekly by fans. 

But even then, in terms of physicality you can't compare Jorgi to Billy, we don't have the players in the tean to "help" him excel and he will be seen as a luxury player. 

Let's not forget he was miles ahead of Connor in squad ranking but Connor went on loan, performed and basically made it impossible for the fans or management lo ignor him 

Maybe we sent Billy to the wrong team on loan but if you're not even getting into that Norwich team, talk less of getting in and just having okay games, how can it be expected that you will make the Chelsea first team. 

Brighton will be a good one for him I believe but just have o hope there's some kind of  buyback clause. Really disappointed at the price though. 

I hope he fits in at Brighton.

Never convinced by him at Chelsea in a 2 man midfield.

Really thought like Mount he should have gone to the Championship where we would have got a little more time on the ball instead of the sharp end of the EPL.

 

I think Gilmour has a skillset which lends itself well to a side who spend the majority of the match in control of the ball. Unfortunately those sides are also generally the better sides, so for a young and incomplete (if you will) player it makes it that much harder to get the game time required to develop, as the players he will be competing with for a space in the team are that much better. Easier to justify starting a young player when the alternative is Jack Cork rather than N'Golo Kanté.

In that situation I suppose you have two options (three if you include 'give up on the player entirely'): take a leap of faith and make sure he gets sufficient minutes to develop, knowing that he will make mistakes and might not be fluent in the fundamentals of a top side (like Arsenal did with Wilshere and Fàbregas), or loan him out to a less good team knowing that the player might not be a very good match for the way the team plays (like we did when we loaned Bamford to Burnley).

It's a real shame Swansea aren't in the Premier League any more...

Apoligies if there has already been a thread on Gilmour but i couldnt find it. Does anyone else think we made a mistake getting rid of him. Im maybe a bit biased because im Scottish and followed his development at Rangers. I think hes a baller. Would of been nice to see him and Enzo together. Obviously Pochettino wasnt here at the time but would of been great to see how Billy would have developed under him. Just my opinion🤷‍♂️

@just on a scale of Jorginho to "I-Told-You-So", how do you rate Billy Gilmour now?

5 hours ago, Roland The Bruin said:

Apoligies if there has already been a thread on Gilmour but i couldnt find it. Does anyone else think we made a mistake getting rid of him. Im maybe a bit biased because im Scottish and followed his development at Rangers. I think hes a baller. Would of been nice to see him and Enzo together. Obviously Pochettino wasnt here at the time but would of been great to see how Billy would have developed under him. Just my opinion🤷‍♂️

Gilmour is a talented footballer who had his progress stunted at Chelsea partly through our mismanagement and partly through his ill-timed injuries. I still think he is capable of being a world class player in a similar role to what Enzo Fernandez is doing now, but the difference is Fernandez has had oodles of top-flight experience in comparison. 

I would hope there is a buy-back clause but the reality is Enzo's signing has permanently shut the door on a Gilmour return. In saying that, I fully expect us to spank 80m on him in two years time when Fernandez leaves for Real Madrid.