1 hour ago, the special one said:

Would be perfectly content with us signing Calvert-Lewin personally.

Might as well stick with Abraham. 

Calvert-Lewin doesn't elevate the quality of our team at all.

3 hours ago, Gol15 said:

Just like I thought, this week is the final attempt to sign Haaland. Hope Marina can do it, would be absolutely massive...

 

Key words being "I think". Meaning they can keep coming up with this BS until he joins Real.

1 hour ago, evissy said:

Tottenham would never in a million years sell Harry Kane to us. This is basic English club football 101 stuff. They don't need that money that much.

This, Levy would bankrupt the club before selling us a used handkerchief.

3 hours ago, abramovich said:

It's going to be f**king Lukaku in the end, I can feel it and to add insult to injury, we'll have to massively overpay for that donkey. FFS.

I get why you are worried as he would be a  awful signing. However he has a huge ego and is a giant fish in a small pond at Inter, he will not want to jump back in to the ocean with us imo.

11 minutes ago, axman2526 said:

I get why you are worried as he would be a  awful signing. However he has a huge ego and is a giant fish in a small pond at Inter, he will not want to jump back in to the ocean with us imo.

I hope he's smart enough to realize he should stay in Italy, where he looks like a world beater. 

1 hour ago, evissy said:

Tottenham would never in a million years sell Harry Kane to us. This is basic English club football 101 stuff. They don't need that money that much.

I think there is a chance now assuming Kane is going to continue missing training that we could get him if City stick to their guns and just go for Grealish.

If we get Kane though it would probably take over £120m because it is us.........

Harry Kane is 28 and scores regularly except in August

Ings is 29,  played 32 League matches and scored 22 in 2019-2020 season and for me probably cost £40m as they will look to cash in.

Neither player is young, agree Ings does miss a few matches each year though not more than a month in each of the last two years.

Kane has largely been free of serious injury though does have the odd spell where he struggles to score in or around month of August.

After 2-3 years neither player will have a high resale value and the bigger hit will be on Kane.

15 minutes ago, Strider6003 said:

I think there is a chance now assuming Kane is going to continue missing training that we could get him if City stick to their guns and just go for Grealish.

If we get Kane though it would probably take over £120m because it is us.........

Harry Kane is 28 and scores regularly except in August

Ings is 29,  played 32 League matches and scored 22 in 2019-2020 season and for me probably cost £40m as they will look to cash in.

Neither player is young, agree Ings does miss a few matches each year though not more than a month in each of the last two years.

Kane has largely been free of serious injury though does have the odd spell where he struggles to score in or around month of August.

After 2-3 years neither player will have a high resale value and the bigger hit will be on Kane.

Would not surprise me at all if Ings is the backup panic buy

I wouldn’t be shocked if all we brought was Kounde this summer,to go with our new goalie.

1 hour ago, abramovich said:

I hope he's smart enough to realize he should stay in Italy, where he looks like a world beater. 

true...but what if we offer him significantly higher wages than what he is on currently..

i hope he stays in Italy like you btw..

1 hour ago, Strider6003 said:

I think there is a chance now assuming Kane is going to continue missing training that we could get him if City stick to their guns and just go for Grealish.

If we get Kane though it would probably take over £120m because it is us.........

Harry Kane is 28 and scores regularly except in August

Ings is 29,  played 32 League matches and scored 22 in 2019-2020 season and for me probably cost £40m as they will look to cash in.

Neither player is young, agree Ings does miss a few matches each year though not more than a month in each of the last two years.

Kane has largely been free of serious injury though does have the odd spell where he struggles to score in or around month of August.

After 2-3 years neither player will have a high resale value and the bigger hit will be on Kane.

will ingsy cost that much? 

1 hour ago, axman2526 said:

Would not surprise me at all if Ings is the backup panic buy

As we should be bringing in a striker who has at least 15 goals per season in him, I looked up what he did at Liverpool. In about 3 years he scored 3 goals in 14 appearances, although he missed a lot of playing time due to knee injuries. He did much better at Southampton, 41 goals in 91 appearances. Question is, how will he adapt to Chelsea and our style. Should we sign a 29-year old with such checkered record at a high-aiming club, for an amount with probably the add-on fee for an English player? Will he do better than Abraham (I'm not even going to ask about being better than Batshuayi)? To be honest, I hope we'll give it a pass.

I think Ings is a quality striker. A poor man's Harry Kane, but still a very talented player. 

We could do a lot worse.

Haaland seems unlikely at this point. Maybe we will be back in for him next summer at the lower price, but we will have a lot of competition then.

If we were looking for cheaper options Patson Daka would have been a good option. He will do very well with Leicester in the Premier League I think.

Ings may not seem like a glamour signing but he is a proven goalscorer. Several years ago I wouldn't have minded seeing us sign Charlie Austin for similar reasons.

If we could get Ings at a decent price it might allow us to spend bigger on a central midfielder too.

1 hour ago, Bluesince66 said:

I wouldn’t be shocked if all we brought was Kounde this summer,to go with our new goalie.

I spuld not be shocked if all we get is the new backup keeper.

Kounde deal is growing less and less likely. Zouma has turned them down, they have turned down Emerson, Kenedy and Baka. They want his release clause of 80mill met, having accepted 55mill from Spurs. Marina ain't gonna play that game.

1 hour ago, Valerie said:

As we should be bringing in a striker who has at least 15 goals per season in him, I looked up what he did at Liverpool. In about 3 years he scored 3 goals in 14 appearances, although he missed a lot of playing time due to knee injuries. He did much better at Southampton, 41 goals in 91 appearances. Question is, how will he adapt to Chelsea and our style. Should we sign a 29-year old with such checkered record at a high-aiming club, for an amount with probably the add-on fee for an English player? Will he do better than Abraham (I'm not even going to ask about being better than Batshuayi)? To be honest, I hope we'll give it a pass.

I agree with you Val. If we cannot buy a forward who offers us more than Tammy no point in buying one. 

41 minutes ago, forbzy said:

Haaland seems unlikely at this point. Maybe we will be back in for him next summer at the lower price, but we will have a lot of competition then.

If we were looking for cheaper options Patson Daka would have been a good option. He will do very well with Leicester in the Premier League I think.

Ings may not seem like a glamour signing but he is a proven goalscorer. Several years ago I wouldn't have minded seeing us sign Charlie Austin for similar reasons.

If we could get Ings at a decent price it might allow us to spend bigger on a central midfielder too.

Agree with you, Daka will be a gem we try to get for 100mill in the future imo.

4 hours ago, axman2526 said:

Key words being "I think". Meaning they can keep coming up with this BS until he joins Real.

Haaland as our transfer target will expire after this week so if we don't sign him by saturday/sunday we will never sign him. So if they keep reporting stuff it won't matter anymore.

3 hours ago, Valerie said:

As we should be bringing in a striker who has at least 15 goals per season in him, I looked up what he did at Liverpool. In about 3 years he scored 3 goals in 14 appearances, although he missed a lot of playing time due to knee injuries. He did much better at Southampton, 41 goals in 91 appearances. Question is, how will he adapt to Chelsea and our style. Should we sign a 29-year old with such checkered record at a high-aiming club, for an amount with probably the add-on fee for an English player? Will he do better than Abraham (I'm not even going to ask about being better than Batshuayi)? To be honest, I hope we'll give it a pass.

This is the point as Val says. Its not just the scoring stats of the players but the types of teams and style of football.  If for example you look at Lewandowski. Despite his ages he has scored regularly, granted in a weaker league, but in a team where every other team parks the bus against. Is someone like Ings good enough to unlock a heavy man marking defence. I like Ings but I am not sure if he has enough to lead the line where our opposition generally have 30% possession and defend deep

3 hours ago, acidicleo said:

will ingsy cost that much? 

The price is never cheap of for us is it, I just think with COV-ID knock on and leaving it late we will pay the penalty if we go that route.

2 hours ago, axman2526 said:

I spuld not be shocked if all we get is the new backup keeper.

Kounde deal is growing less and less likely. Zouma has turned them down, they have turned down Emerson, Kenedy and Baka. They want his release clause of 80mill met, having accepted 55mill from Spurs. Marina ain't gonna play that game.

I agree with you Val. If we cannot buy a forward who offers us more than Tammy no point in buying one. 

Agree with you, Daka will be a gem we try to get for 100mill in the future imo.

Daka also looks like the kind of striker that would have fit in well with Tuchel's system. Oh well

4 hours ago, acidicleo said:

will ingsy cost that much? 

If you are Southampton with the league starting in under 2wks you will demand £50m.

He might be the difference in keeping them up.

13 hours ago, acidicleo said:

will ingsy cost that much? 

To be honest I wouldn't want anyone called ingsy to lead our line. Even if he was poor mans Harry Kane 😂

 

All this lukaku interest likely means we’ve given up on Haaland. Surely 150m on a 21 year old is better value than 110m or whatever on a 28 year old?

16 hours ago, Adamrb said:

All this lukaku interest likely means we’ve given up on Haaland. Surely 150m on a 21 year old is better value than 110m or whatever on a 28 year old?

It is but apparently it's more difficult with Haaland's agent. Still 100m on Lukaku is better than 100m on Kane.

1 hour ago, Gol15 said:

It is but apparently it's more difficult with Haaland's agent. Still 100m on Lukaku is better than 100m on Kane.

No doubt Lukakus agent will want a few too. It wont be the 40mill quoted  for Rino and 20mill for Haaland though. You have to add that 60mill to whatever Dortmund would want.

We should sign Bamford, 1 year left on his contract and scored 17 for Leeds. Great attitude and has bite in his play. Reckon we can get him for £50m max.

20 minutes ago, sonic90 said:

We should sign Bamford, 1 year left on his contract and scored 17 for Leeds. Great attitude and has bite in his play. Reckon we can get him for £50m max.

Misses even more than Werner !

13 minutes ago, BordeauxBlue said:

Misses even more than Werner !

Play them both and we might be able to score once a game?