Jump to content

Players to sell (evergreen "deadwood" thread)


mad_mac
 Share

Recommended Posts

Leeds Live have reported that Bate has started following lots of Leeds players this week.

Just checked and he now follows a lot of players not just the likes of Bamford, Phillips etc but also people like Beradi, Kllichz, Llorente etc.

 

Have a feeling he will be announced this week. Worrying times that Bate, Livramento, Peart-Harris and Simeu don't see their futures here. 

Simeu, Peart-Harris don't feel like the biggest lose. But Guehi, Tomori, Bate and Livramento feel like big losses and worrying that players don't see their futures here.

I question why we are trying to sign people like Traore and Coman 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


9 minutes ago, Fruity66 said:

Leeds Live have reported that Bate has started following lots of Leeds players this week.

Just checked and he now follows a lot of players not just the likes of Bamford, Phillips etc but also people like Beradi, Kllichz, Llorente etc.

 

Have a feeling he will be announced this week. Worrying times that Bate, Livramento, Peart-Harris and Simeu don't see their futures here. 

Simeu, Peart-Harris don't feel like the biggest lose. But Guehi, Tomori, Bate and Livramento feel like big losses and worrying that players don't see their futures here.

I question why we are trying to sign people like Traore and Coman 

How do you know we're trying to sign Traore and Coman?

There are about 25 youngsters in the development squad, and in every age group under that are new batches of kids training for a career in football. At best, only a handful are good enough to go on to the first squad. The rest will be released or sold, outright or after a loan. This is how our acadamy works, and probably every academy of top level clubs. Those kids know that, their priority is to make a living playing football, and if that's not at Chelsea, then elsewhere. Nothing worrying about that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Fruity66 said:

Leeds Live have reported that Bate has started following lots of Leeds players this week.

Just checked and he now follows a lot of players not just the likes of Bamford, Phillips etc but also people like Beradi, Kllichz, Llorente etc.

 

Have a feeling he will be announced this week. Worrying times that Bate, Livramento, Peart-Harris and Simeu don't see their futures here. 

Simeu, Peart-Harris don't feel like the biggest lose. But Guehi, Tomori, Bate and Livramento feel like big losses and worrying that players don't see their futures here.

I question why we are trying to sign people like Traore and Coman 

If leeds pay us a good fee with Guehi like clauses in the deal sounds good to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There has been a large patch of deadwood that's just been floating around aimlessly, running into things, causing issues and blockages regularly for several, several years. Hopefully Chelsea take care of that one day. 

Edited by chiefBlueCFC
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

3 hours ago, Fruity66 said:

Leeds Live have reported that Bate has started following lots of Leeds players this week.

Just checked and he now follows a lot of players not just the likes of Bamford, Phillips etc but also people like Beradi, Kllichz, Llorente etc.

 

Have a feeling he will be announced this week. Worrying times that Bate, Livramento, Peart-Harris and Simeu don't see their futures here. 

Simeu, Peart-Harris don't feel like the biggest lose. But Guehi, Tomori, Bate and Livramento feel like big losses and worrying that players don't see their futures here.

I question why we are trying to sign people like Traore and Coman 

Hardly the sort of mentality you need to come through at a club like chelsea. We praise Mount and James for having that self belief that they would make it here, but these lads, wont even commit to short contract extensions, and a season or 2 on loan to cut their teeth in the professional game. 

This 'pathway' is a 2 way street. I can understand Guehi, and Tomori having some complaints, but kids from the acedemy with no experience in professional football. Have some patience. 

Anyway, hopefully selling now while they are still under contract, we can get some decent fees, and some decent clauses. Plenty of talent on the cobham conveyor belt, we will lose a few, but im sure we will keep a few aswell. Might be the new way of making money after the fifa loan restrictions come into place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, big blue said:

 

 

Hardly the sort of mentality you need to come through at a club like chelsea. We praise Mount and James for having that self belief that they would make it here, but these lads, wont even commit to short contract extensions, and a season or 2 on loan to cut their teeth in the professional game. 

This 'pathway' is a 2 way street. I can understand Guehi, and Tomori having some complaints, but kids from the acedemy with no experience in professional football. Have some patience. 

Anyway, hopefully selling now while they are still under contract, we can get some decent fees, and some decent clauses. Plenty of talent on the cobham conveyor belt, we will lose a few, but im sure we will keep a few aswell. Might be the new way of making money after the fifa loan restrictions come into place.

Excellent point especially seeing as how nobody has been brought in this summer. If you really wanted to make it as a young player at Chelsea wouldn't this be the optimal time to show your worth? 

I'm usually loath to see young players leave or be sold (Tomori kills me) but if you've seen Mount and James, to a lesser extent Gilmour and CHO, get first team appearances and still be part of a Champions League winning team why on earth would call it quits if you have confidence in yourself? The stigma of being a Chelsea youth player is being broken in front of your eyes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Hearing Ugbo is being sold now aswell. He was supposed to have had a good loan spell last year. We had a lot of deadwood to get rid of this summer. It seems like the only exits are our best talents from the academy.

Listen maybe none of them would of been good enough..but Im also worried about the direction we are taking. Do we really know if Lampard didnt come in, that Mount and James would of been given any sort of chance in our first team because I honestly dont.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Oli said:

Hearing Ugbo is being sold now aswell. He was supposed to have had a good loan spell last year. We had a lot of deadwood to get rid of this summer. It seems like the only exits are our best talents from the academy.

Yes because our deadwood are a pile of overpaid sh*te while our academy prospects are fantastic young players. I know who I’d rather pay for…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Oli said:

Listen maybe none of them would of been good enough..but Im also worried about the direction we are taking. Do we really know if Lampard didnt come in, that Mount and James would of been given any sort of chance in our first team because I honestly dont.

There is no question that were it not for the transfer ban and Lampard's arrivals, we would be here debating whether Mount and James would be featuring in pre-season or departing on loan to the Championship, not celebrating a Champions League win.

It is some irony but history shows that whenever a club produces a 'golden generation', the worst-hit players are the often the next generation of youth players below them. The bar often raises impossibly high.

How many top players did Man United produce during the Class of 92's peak?

How many did Barcelona produce during the peak of Messi and co?

Do Man U or Barcelona fans cry themselves to sleep having sold Luke Chadwick and Cristian Tello during their golden years?

There are some counter-examples: Athletic Bilbao, Ajax, Arsenal and Dortmund, but the common thread is that they all ended up being selling clubs rather than winning trophies with their 'golden generation'.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by SydneyChelsea
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, SydneyChelsea said:

There is no question that were it not for the transfer ban and Lampard's arrivals, we would be here debating whether Mount and James would be featuring in pre-season or departing on loan to the Championship, not celebrating a Champions League win.

It is some irony but history shows that whenever a club produces a 'golden generation', the worst-hit players are the often the next generation of youth players below them. The bar often raises impossibly high.

How many top players did Man United produce during the Class of 92's peak?

How many did Barcelona produce during the peak of Messi and co?

Do Man U or Barcelona fans cry themselves to sleep having sold Luke Chadwick and Cristian Tello during their golden years?

There are some counter-examples: Athletic Bilbao, Ajax, Arsenal and Dortmund, but the common thread is that they all ended up being selling clubs rather than winning trophies with their 'golden generation'.

I can only disagree with your first point. The rest has me confused. 

 

We are still on the same wave of players I think. These guys were still in the same age groups coming up for the most part. The class of 92 didn't all break in to the first team in 92, it was spread out. So the guys 17 or 18 and under are a 2nd generation. I don't think that's where the disappointment comes from though. I don't know the clubs transfer plans but it would seem they're focused on bringing in players that can help today instead of tomorrow. I know you can't integrate all of the academy players, I just don't think they're maximizing an incredibly accomplished and talented group of players. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TheChelseaBlues said:

I can only disagree with your first point. The rest has me confused. 

 

We are still on the same wave of players I think. These guys were still in the same age groups coming up for the most part. The class of 92 didn't all break in to the first team in 92, it was spread out. So the guys 17 or 18 and under are a 2nd generation. I don't think that's where the disappointment comes from though. I don't know the clubs transfer plans but it would seem they're focused on bringing in players that can help today instead of tomorrow. I know you can't integrate all of the academy players, I just don't think they're maximizing an incredibly accomplished and talented group of players. 

Having spent years in the academy, the club probably has a better idea than us supportersof which player has the required level of talent and commitment to make it into the first team. And those supporters claim they would happily accept bad results if this is the result of blooding our own youngsters into the first team. Except of course when that is exactly what happens.

The club can make a wrong assessment of course. You just don't know how a player develops. Sometimes players are well served by playing elsewhere for a few years. But just think: how many times have we bought back an academy player? Not often. On the other hand, how many times has a prospect left the club, never to be heard of again? Most of the time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


 

3 hours ago, TheChelseaBlues said:

We are still on the same wave of players I think. These guys were still in the same age groups coming up for the most part. The class of 92 didn't all break in to the first team in 92, it was spread out. So the guys 17 or 18 and under are a 2nd generation. I don't think that's where the disappointment comes from though. I don't know the clubs transfer plans but it would seem they're focused on bringing in players that can help today instead of tomorrow. I know you can't integrate all of the academy players, I just don't think they're maximizing an incredibly accomplished and talented group of players. 

Probably splitting hairs here but  Giggs debuted in 1991 and Beckham, Neville and Butt the season after; Scholes was 1993-94. That is not that different to the Chelsea situation with Christensen, RLC & Hudson-Odoi, Abraham & Mount and finally Reece James & Billy Gilmour.

The recent success of the above is an immediate obstacle to the generation below them. Would Guehi dislodge Christensen, Gallagher dislodge Mount, Bate dislodge Gilmour or Livramento dislodge James right now? They'd be rotation options at best for a few years to come because they are simply too close in age to established players, meaning that they simply would not get the game time to fulfil their potential. I don't blame them for leaving, and I also don't blame the club for not losing any sleep about letting them go. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://weaintgotnohistory.sbnation.com/chelsea-fc-transfer-rumours-news/2021/7/20/22585022/leeds-united-chelsea-agree-fee-for-lewis-bate-transfer-report

We have agreed a deal for Bate to join Leeds. A sell on clause but no buy back is a shame.

MPH is going to Brentford and Livramento to Brighton, probably for similar deals and clauses. All turned down new deal here and wanted to leave.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What have the club made so far from selling players we won't be using. Something like £40m, right? 

I hope they can get rid of the likes of Zappacosta, Batshuayi, Emerson, Bakayoko, Drinkwater etc. No reason we can't make another £60-80m on those players too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, enigma said:

What have the club made so far from selling players we won't be using. Something like £40m, right? 

I hope they can get rid of the likes of Zappacosta, Batshuayi, Emerson, Bakayoko, Drinkwater etc. No reason we can't make another £60-80m on those players too. 

Yes there is, so far no one wants them on anything but loans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, SydneyChelsea said:

 

Probably splitting hairs here but  Giggs debuted in 1991 and Beckham, Neville and Butt the season after; Scholes was 1993-94. That is not that different to the Chelsea situation with Christensen, RLC & Hudson-Odoi, Abraham & Mount and finally Reece James & Billy Gilmour.

The recent success of the above is an immediate obstacle to the generation below them. Would Guehi dislodge Christensen, Gallagher dislodge Mount, Bate dislodge Gilmour or Livramento dislodge James right now? They'd be rotation options at best for a few years to come because they are simply too close in age to established players, meaning that they simply would not get the game time to fulfil their potential. I don't blame them for leaving, and I also don't blame the club for not losing any sleep about letting them go. 

That's a good point. I wouldn't use their debut as when they made it though, several debuted and didn't get real playing time until a season or two after. They also pushed out older players not younger. I suppose that also speaks to how well those teams were put together that they could fit all of those young players in without creating a jam up at any one position unlike what is happening here now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


12 hours ago, SydneyChelsea said:

 

Probably splitting hairs here but  Giggs debuted in 1991 and Beckham, Neville and Butt the season after; Scholes was 1993-94. That is not that different to the Chelsea situation with Christensen, RLC & Hudson-Odoi, Abraham & Mount and finally Reece James & Billy Gilmour.

The recent success of the above is an immediate obstacle to the generation below them. Would Guehi dislodge Christensen, Gallagher dislodge Mount, Bate dislodge Gilmour or Livramento dislodge James right now? They'd be rotation options at best for a few years to come because they are simply too close in age to established players, meaning that they simply would not get the game time to fulfil their potential. I don't blame them for leaving, and I also don't blame the club for not losing any sleep about letting them go. 

We've bought players back after selling them or moved on from young players too soon. I don't think any of those are going to be stars any time soon though I'd prefer them over players we have on the books right now though. Gilmour is on loan right now so he wouldn't need to be displaced by anyone this season, it would be Drink and Bakayoko for example. That sounds fine with me. Christensen has an expiring contract and I think a little insurance wouldn't be a bad thing. We have 2 fullbacks who aren't past their prime, I wouldn't be sad to see Livramento asked to backup them up either. 

 

Its a 2 way street so even if the club wanted to keep these guys they may not feel the same way about staying. As far as academy players go you're right, there haven't been any misses yet. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The latest development with young players want to go just to show the thing we all know already - football has no patience, clubs , fans ,and players.  Sure, we should have done better in the last decade to promoting youth instead of buying the likes of Drinkwater. However, it's a 2 way street, none of those who have gone or will go would have made the first 11, probably not even the bench. Guehi could have waited another year, Silva won't be around forever, and next year could be Guehi break through year. He chose to go to play a team that's mid table at best instead of competing with the best, no hate but hardly a fault of the club. For those 18-19 year olds, no way they are ready this year or even next , they refused to sign extension and what's the club to do apart from sell? We aren't going to weaken the team buy selling starting players for the sake of couple of youth players. One priority is to give Christensen a new contract, dont want lose him for nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, icecoolguy22 said:

The latest development with young players want to go just to show the thing we all know already - football has no patience, clubs , fans ,and players.  Sure, we should have done better in the last decade to promoting youth instead of buying the likes of Drinkwater. However, it's a 2 way street, none of those who have gone or will go would have made the first 11, probably not even the bench. Guehi could have waited another year, Silva won't be around forever, and next year could be Guehi break through year. He chose to go to play a team that's mid table at best instead of competing with the best, no hate but hardly a fault of the club. For those 18-19 year olds, no way they are ready this year or even next , they refused to sign extension and what's the club to do apart from sell? We aren't going to weaken the team buy selling starting players for the sake of couple of youth players. One priority is to give Christensen a new contract, dont want lose him for nothing.

Chelsea also has an impatient, trigger-happy owner. Abramovich has shown he does not tolerate below-par results, he's not going to allow a manager 3 years of mid-table performances to bed in academy graduates. Managers know this very well and will not want to start with 4 of 5 unproven teenagers. Lampard's first year coincided with our transfer ban, that's the only time academy players - most of whom had had a good season on loan the previous year - were used regularly (but even then Pulisic had come in, having been bought and loaned back earlier). And now only Mount and to a lesser degree James are regular starters. That shows how hard it is and how much time it takes to be a regular in a high level club like Chelsea. Youngsters leaving us now are impatient to the extent that they want to play. A professional football career last about 15 years, they're not going to be fringe players or go from one loan after another for a quarter of that time. They know how it works at Chelsea: the club will always try and get the best players at every position. If there's a player better than you and suited to the system being used, you're not playing. Better go elsewhere, to a mid-rable club and play every week.

Edited by Valerie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Valerie said:

Chelsea also has an impatient, trigger-happy owner. Abramovich has shown he does not tolerate below-par results, he's not going to allow a manager 3 years of mid-table performances to bed in academy graduates. Managers know this very well and will not want to start with 4 of 5 unproven teenagers. Lampard's first year coincided with our transfer ban, that's the only time academy players - most of whom had had a good season on loan the previous year - were used regularly (but even then Pulisic had come in, having been bought and loaned back earlier). And now only Mount and to a lesser degree James are regular starters. That shows how hard it is and how much time it takes to be a regular in a high level club like Chelsea. Youngsters leaving us now are impatient to the extent that they want to play. A professional football career last about 15 years, they're not going to be fringe players or go from one loan after another for a quarter of that time. They know how it works at Chelsea: the club will always try and get the best players at every position. If there's a player better than you and suited to the system being used, you're not playing. Better go elsewhere, to a mid-rable club and play every week.

But, are they going to get regular playing time right now in the clubs they are going to or will they be used sparingly as rotation options for one game here and there?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


16 minutes ago, RMH said:

But, are they going to get regular playing time right now in the clubs they are going to or will they be used sparingly as rotation options for one game here and there?

I would guess they will get more time at a mid-table club where they have a contract for at least 3 years, than at Chelsea or during a 1 season loan, where the manager isn't much interested in playing a youngster (think Ampadu at Leipzig). If you doubt they will get decent playing time at a mid-table club, then you can count of them getting even less time at Chelsea.

Edited by Valerie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think one size definitely suits all yet for a manager that needs to get results and is often playing twice a week during the season with a larger squad and their tensions about who should be playing regularly then with the promising youngsters trying to breakthrough you can see how tricky it really is. 

It certainly makes sense to get the younger players professional game time if after a certain period on the bench they are not used for more than a few games in a season. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, RMH said:

But, are they going to get regular playing time right now in the clubs they are going to or will they be used sparingly as rotation options for one game here and there?

I would say Marc G and Big Fik are for sure going to get lots if game time so long as they stay fit.

Myles PH at Brentford? Maybe, Livramento at Brighton I would expect so goven Lamptety has done, Bate at Leeds? Reckon he could we be the star pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Well, this is awkward!

awkward the office GIF

The Shed End Forum relies on revenue to pay for hosting and upgrades. While we try to keep adverts as unobtrusive as possible without pop ups, we need to run ad's to make sure we can stay online and continue to keep the forum up, as over the years costs have become very high.

Could you please allow adverts on this domain by switching it off. Some of the advert banners can actually be closed to avoid interferance of your experience on The Shed End.

Cheers now!

emma watson yes GIF

Alright already, It's off!