Romelu Lukaku back to Chelsea - and gone again!

[ashwin]

2 hours ago, ForeverCarefree said:

Jack Grealish a man who at 26 has never played a game in Europe. Has just 13 caps for his country and has played in a team that the entire philosophy is basically give him the ball and let him win free kicks is about to sign for Manchester City for £100m.

Jack Grealish has proved nothing in top flight football. His goals and assists for Villa are comparable to Willian at Chelsea. 

This man is about to become the most expensive player in England. 

Yet we have people downcast at the prospect of signing one of Europe's most prolific strikers in his prime. 

True! 😂

[Scott Harris]

I'm shocked that we are willing to spend £100m+ for him now but wouldn't pay £75m for him before he joined United.

[Gol15]

12 hours ago, ducavis said:

Watch Vlahovic move to Spurs as a replacement for Kane & rip up the league.

We could easily get him for half the price of Lukaku and he's 21 y/o, left-footed and tall. In the recent friendly match he scored 7 goals in 1 half:

 

[hephzibah]

1 hour ago, thebluekid said:

Do you remember the quarter of a billion pounds we spent last summer? Was it done overnight? No it wasn’t. I understand that it’s ‘frustrating’ for the fans; we’re talking about huge sums of money. The clubs that sell need to replace talent, so on and so forth.

Talking of what we spent last season. I feel we would not have being wasting money on another striker this summer again if we had trusted Werner. We need to address this issue so that we will not spend money on another striker this summer, and be spending money on another striker next summer again.

I think we spent £56m to get Werner last season, and we are talking of how  difficult it is to get money to sign players these days, and in fact how difficult it is for a player to even agree to come to your team with all the many top clubs that we have in world football today, many top clubs want to buy top players, so the competition is so tough, it means therefore that if a team has a  top player, he must keep him jealously  and not allow another team to get him, if not, that team will be behind in the competition.

Top players are scarce, and i feel we should have appreciated the Werner we had more to make him perform better. I feel we risk not getting a striker in this transfer window, and for me, it will not be a problem, we already have a good player in Werner, let's allow him. He was doing well for Leipzig before he came to us, he was doing well for the German national team before he came to us, a player that can be the striker of the German national team, I feel he should be able to lead Chelsea. Let's not destroy the guy's career. 

Trying to spend a lot of money on another striker, for me, is just wastage. From a talent point of view, Werner is talented, so what are we looking for? If it is just for him to be more hardworking to be able to score more goals, then the club should work on that. Why should the club want to spend another money after spending £56m last season to get a striker?

How much did we spend to buy Diego Costa? And he did well for us. We should not diminish Werner in any way, we spent a lot to buy him and we should allow him to do well with us.

Werner's first goal against Southampton at Stamford bridge in the beginning of last season made me know that the guy is a good striker, and I feel he can do well for us if we give him good passes and allow him to score his goals.

I think everything was going well for him, then there was an international break, he went for that international break, then the first match after the break, which is not usually an ideal match because the team has not been together for some time, the team was not expected to perform so well in that match, at times because of the stress of traveling from their different countries, and coupled with that, I think we had an early kick-off in that match, Werner mistakenly missed a sitter in that match, anybody could miss a sitter, and since then all the fans have been against him, so many people have not forgiven him because of that.

However I feel he's to blame for that, he shouldn't have been listening to what people were saying, he should have focused on his football and just keep doing well.

[hephzibah]

23 hours ago, forbzy said:

There are still stories most days about Kounde. It seems as though Sevilla want 68m for him and we keep trying to lowball, or include players that they don't want. The latest reported today was a cash + Kenedy deal which was flatly rejected. The only player they had some interest in so far was apparently Zouma and he didn't want to move to Sevilla. Most likely we will have to meet their asking price (or close to it) or move on to a new target

It is the stories that we hear everyday that are even the most annoying. For me, I would have even preferred that Chelsea did all the deals under the radar without letting the media know about it, and then just a day or two before the deal is done, let the media know.

[Malcolm9]

17 minutes ago, hephzibah said:

Talking of what we spent last season. I feel we would not have being wasting money on another striker this summer again if we had trusted Werner. We need to address this issue so that we will not spend money on another striker this summer, and be spending money on another striker next summer again.

I think we spent £56m to get Werner last season, and we are talking of how  difficult it is to get money to sign players these days, and in fact how difficult it is for a player to even agree to come to your team with all the many top clubs that we have in world football today, many top clubs want to buy top players, so the competition is so tough, it means therefore that if a team has a  top player, he must keep him jealously  and not allow another team to get him, if not, that team will be behind in the competition.

Top players are scarce, and i feel we should have appreciated the Werner we had more to make him perform better. I feel we risk not getting a striker in this transfer window, and for me, it will not be a problem, we already have a good player in Werner, let's allow him. He was doing well for Leipzig before he came to us, he was doing well for the German national team before he came to us, a player that can be the striker of the German national team, I feel he should be able to lead Chelsea. Let's not destroy the guy's career. 

Trying to spend a lot of money on another striker, for me, is just wastage. From a talent point of view, Werner is talented, so what are we looking for? If it is just for him to be more hardworking to be able to score more goals, then the club should work on that. Why should the club want to spend another money after spending £56m last season to get a striker?

How much did we spend to buy Diego Costa? And he did well for us. We should not diminish Werner in any way, we spent a lot to buy him and we should allow him to do well with us.

Werner's first goal against Southampton at Stamford bridge in the beginning of last season made me know that the guy is a good striker, and I feel he can do well for us if we give him good passes and allow him to score his goals.

I think everything was going well for him, then there was an international break, he went for that international break, then the first match after the break, which is not usually an ideal match because the team has not been together for some time, the team was not expected to perform so well in that match, at times because of the stress of traveling from their different countries, and coupled with that, I think we had an early kick-off in that match, Werner mistakenly missed a sitter in that match, anybody could miss a sitter, and since then all the fans have been against him, so many people have not forgiven him because of that.

However I feel he's to blame for that, he shouldn't have been listening to what people were saying, he should have focused on his football and just keep doing well.

Werner will be even better with Lukaku up top, they'll play off each other very well and the expectation won't be so heavy on both of them.

[hephzibah]

9 minutes ago, Malcolm9 said:

Werner will be even better with Lukaku up top, they'll play off each other very well and the expectation won't be so heavy on both of them.

I hope so. I hope by next summer, we won't be looking for another striker again.

Edited August 4, 2021 by hephzibah

[ForeverCarefree]

1 hour ago, Scott Harris said:

I'm shocked that we are willing to spend £100m+ for him now but wouldn't pay £75m for him before he joined United.

His fee when he joined United was in excess of £100m apparently. Riaola's agent fees were apparently the stumbling block when we wanted to resign him from Everton. 

United were happy to pay the £20m agent fees plus a hefty signing on fee and we were blindsided by their willingness to meet those demands. 

[ForeverCarefree]

1 hour ago, The Don Antonio said:

2 wrongs don't make a right. Most people who are against Lukaku dont have short memories and remember how he fared at Man u. Even an aged Ibrahimovic was better than him. To be fair he improved in italy and has scored lots of goals in Italy but in that same time as Lukaku in italy Ciro Immobile has scored 19 more goals, does that mean that we should buy Immobile.

Immobile's goal scoring record in italy is phenomenal, would love to see how he'd fair at Chelsea but I believe he signed a new contract not too long back. 

Regarding Lukaku at United, he'd bulked up too much and he slimmed down a bit since joining Inter. But even then his record at United wasn't that bad, 42 goals in 96 appearances in all competitions. That's miles better then anything we've had at Chelsea since Costa left. 

So I'll ask the question. If Haaland and Kane are out of the picture, if not Lukaku, then who? 

[The Don Antonio]

4 minutes ago, ForeverCarefree said:

Immobile's goal scoring record in italy is phenomenal, would love to see how he'd fair at Chelsea but I believe he signed a new contract not too long back. 

Regarding Lukaku at United, he'd bulked up too much and he slimmed down a bit since joining Inter. But even then his record at United wasn't that bad, 42 goals in 96 appearances in all competitions. That's miles better then anything we've had at Chelsea since Costa left. 

So I'll ask the question. If Haaland and Kane are out of the picture, if not Lukaku, then who? 

I dont think this summer is a buyers market. I say we wait till next summer when Haaland Mbappe Ronaldo Kane and many players will be on a free or on the last year of their contract. We Have Havertz Werner and Ziyech who will definitely improve in their second season and we have Tammy and Batshuayi as back up

[forbzy]

Suggestion in the media that it might be players plus cash deal. Inter are interested in Zappacosta and Alonso apparently. Can we throw in Bakayoko too or will that increase the cash required?

[Frankie8Lampard]

1 hour ago, Scott Harris said:

I'm shocked that we are willing to spend £100m+ for him now but wouldn't pay £75m for him before he joined United.

Clubs transfer policy probably changed between then and now. Since the transfer ban the club have been willing to spend more compared to previous years.

[axman2526]

1 hour ago, forbzy said:

Suggestion in the media that it might be players plus cash deal. Inter are interested in Zappacosta and Alonso apparently. Can we throw in Bakayoko too or will that increase the cash required?

Ah if only that was true and we could get shot of them that way.

[SydneyChelsea]

4 hours ago, Gol15 said:

We could easily get him for half the price of Lukaku and he's 21 y/o, left-footed and tall. In the recent friendly match he scored 7 goals in 1 half:

 

Watched a good bit of him this season. He's way too slow and cumbersome for the Premier League right now. He is good enough to perform against weak Serie A defenses, but that's about it.

As an option, there'd be little point in signing him over keeping Tammy Abraham. I think he might be a top striker in 3-4 years but he would not be a solution that we need at the moment, sadly.

Edited August 4, 2021 by SydneyChelsea

[Gol15]

47 minutes ago, SydneyChelsea said:

Watched a good bit of him this season. He's way too slow and cumbersome for the Premier League right now. He is good enough to perform against weak Serie A defenses, but that's about it.

As an option, there'd be little point in signing him over keeping Tammy Abraham. I think he might be a top striker in 3-4 years but he would not be a solution that we need at the moment, sadly.

Tuchel doesn't rate Tammy, that's why we're trying to sign a new striker. Vlahovic is far from a finished product but he has the talent.

[CFCCAN]

I'll circle back to one of my earlier posts in the year when I mentioned our so called scouts scattered across the globe.  What I can't fathom out, and maybe I'm naive, is why we are we intending to spend £100 mill on Lukaku or more on Haaland, or even Kane (doubtful but you never know); so the scouts are telling us that with all the countries in the world that play football, there is not a CF out there on the entire planet except these three? None in any clubs South America, none in the clubs playing in the MLS, none anywhere in any club on the European continent; none on the African Continent that we could pick up for half of Lukaku's fee...so what are the scouts actually getting paid to do then?  Just seek out kids? 

I assume the Lukaku deal will eventually be done because we have to compete with City and Utd, I'll leave Liverpool out of the race this year unless they start signing a few attacking players.  TT's problem will be who to leave out.  

[seanlu13913]

Looks like 120 + 8ish million add ons. I’m not sure how I feel about this. 

[axman2526]

1 hour ago, seanlu13913 said:

Looks like 120 + 8ish million add ons. I’m not sure how I feel about this. 

I would feel more happy about it if we knocked 25mill off the price and gave them Zappacosta and Alonso or Emerson instead.

[SydneyChelsea]

3 hours ago, CFCCAN said:

I'll circle back to one of my earlier posts in the year when I mentioned our so called scouts scattered across the globe.  What I can't fathom out, and maybe I'm naive, is why we are we intending to spend £100 mill on Lukaku or more on Haaland, or even Kane (doubtful but you never know); so the scouts are telling us that with all the countries in the world that play football, there is not a CF out there on the entire planet except these three? None in any clubs South America, none in the clubs playing in the MLS, none anywhere in any club on the European continent; none on the African Continent that we could pick up for half of Lukaku's fee...so what are the scouts actually getting paid to do then?  Just seek out kids? 

I assume the Lukaku deal will eventually be done because we have to compete with City and Utd, I'll leave Liverpool out of the race this year unless they start signing a few attacking players.  TT's problem will be who to leave out.  

I responded to your post back then actually - the answer is agents, specifically the shift in talent acquisition power from football scouts to agents, which has accelerated in the last 15 years.

Do you ever look at clubs like Porto, Sporting, Ajax etc and think "why do the same clubs always seem to sign the top young talents"? The uncomfortable truth lies not in their scout ability, but in their relationships with player agents. Agents send smaller clubs shortlists of their players, are constantly 'selling' their clients to scouts, and provide video footage, dossiers and performance data etc. 

Agents want to sign a player while their value is low and arrange for a quality intermediary club to build their profile, before angling for a big-money move once their reputation is sufficiently enhanced. Why? Because that pathway maximises their bargaining power. If agents simply sent unknown talents to big clubs, they would not be able to wrangle a premium on wages and consequently their own earnings are reduced.

Agents have a marriage of convenience with stepping-stone clubs like Porto et al that is very profitable. And big clubs, so long as they can continue to service the inflated player costs, benefit by having a more 'finished' product available to them. Complicating this further are things like foreign player limits, and in England specifically, the work permit rules which effectively exclude English clubs from signing and developing non-English, promising first-team players.

Scouts therefore are relegated to the youth system, to finding prospects under the age of 16 and capturing them for club academies. This is obviously something that Chelsea are great at and it allowed us to circumvent the mainstream cabal above. Our scouts have no doubt identified the next Lukaku, Kane etc. but unless they are under 16 and wish to come to our academy, it is pointless trying to sign them.

Edited August 5, 2021 by SydneyChelsea

[Bob stark]

3 hours ago, CFCCAN said:

I'll circle back to one of my earlier posts in the year when I mentioned our so called scouts scattered across the globe.  What I can't fathom out, and maybe I'm naive, is why we are we intending to spend £100 mill on Lukaku or more on Haaland, or even Kane (doubtful but you never know); so the scouts are telling us that with all the countries in the world that play football, there is not a CF out there on the entire planet except these three? None in any clubs South America, none in the clubs playing in the MLS, none anywhere in any club on the European continent; none on the African Continent that we could pick up for half of Lukaku's fee...so what are the scouts actually getting paid to do then?  Just seek out kids? 

I assume the Lukaku deal will eventually be done because we have to compete with City and Utd, I'll leave Liverpool out of the race this year unless they start signing a few attacking players.  TT's problem will be who to leave out.  

For me this is an insult on Kane, Haaland and Lukaku. 

[Bob stark]

41 minutes ago, SydneyChelsea said:

I responded to your post back then actually - the answer is agents, specifically the shift in talent acquisition power from football scouts to agents, which has accelerated in the last 15 years.

Do you ever look at clubs like Porto, Sporting, Ajax etc and think "why do the same clubs always seem to sign the top young talents"? The uncomfortable truth lies not in their scout ability, but in their relationships with player agents. Agents send smaller clubs shortlists of their players, are constantly 'selling' their clients to scouts, and provide video footage, dossiers and performance data etc. 

Agents want to sign a player while their value is low and arrange for a quality intermediary club to build their profile, before angling for a big-money move once their reputation is sufficiently enhanced. Why? Because that pathway maximises their bargaining power. If agents simply sent unknown talents to big clubs, they would not be able to wrangle a premium on wages and consequently their own earnings are reduced.

Agents have a marriage of convenience with stepping-stone clubs like Porto et al that is very profitable. And big clubs, so long as they can continue to service the inflated player costs, benefit by having a more 'finished' product available to them. Complicating this further are things like foreign player limits, and in England specifically, the work permit rules which effectively exclude English clubs from signing and developing non-English, promising first-team players.

Scouts therefore are relegated to the youth system, to finding prospects under the age of 16 and capturing them for club academies. This is obviously something that Chelsea are great at and it allowed us to circumvent the mainstream cabal above. Our scouts have no doubt identified the next Lukaku, Kane etc. but unless they are under 16 and wish to come to our academy, it is pointless trying to sign them.

What you said is right but we are talking about player in calibre or Haaland, Lukaku and Kane. 

If you think having tremendous scout can get you player at this quality then good luck. 

[axman2526]

So this one is looking more and more likely, various reports are stating as much.

Lukakus opinion seems to have changed drastically on the matter, and it sounds like, from reading between the lines, is not based primarily on wages, but on speaking to TT and even Conte.

It is well known that Romelu has an amazing relationship with Antonio, a deep respect. Conte, while not having one with the Chelsea board, still holds the club in high regard, and Rom is said to have seen bits in TT he loves about Antonio.

That changed his mind, and various reports say he has asked the Inter board to agree to sell him and make a deal with us that suits both clubs.

Like with Kounde we are trying to send players Inters way, and also like with Kounde, that appears to not be working. However I expect this one to happen first now RL has given it the green light.

[ashwin]

10 hours ago, Scott Harris said:

I'm shocked that we are willing to spend £100m+ for him now but wouldn't pay £75m for him before he joined United.

It's been what, 4 years since then?

Players can improve and develop in unexpected ways. Clubs wouldn't have been willing to pay 20m, let alone 100m for Grealish 2 years back (same age that Lukaku joined United).

I would understand if this was last year but it's bizarre to be shocked that we are doing something different to 4 years back. Transfer policies, ambitions also change.

[ashwin]

10 hours ago, Gol15 said:

We could easily get him for half the price of Lukaku and he's 21 y/o, left-footed and tall. In the recent friendly match he scored 7 goals in 1 half:

 

Some world class defending here 😂

[STATS]

17 hours ago, Argo said:

The jury is still very much out on him in big games.

For all Werner"s faults, his goal against Real Madrid is bigger than any Rom has ever scored.

If he doesn't significantly improve his record in them (and with our early fixtures we are quickly going to get a good idea on whether he will or not) then Tuchel is in a very unenviable position.

This big game record stems from what over 3 years back. He has now developed his game under one of the best coaches on the planet and is a top all round striker. His 'big game' record does not concern me at all. I mean one could look at it this way and say when he has been at WBA/Everton he scored goals against majority of big teams. Hattrick against United, goals against Liverpool, Arsenal. At United his 'big game' record was not good but I still recall him assisting and scoring against us when they beat us 2-1. He was the best player on the pitch.

Now if you are looking at more recently, his big game record in Italy has been good. Their closest title challengers Milan, he put in one of his best performances last season when they beat them 3-0, which all but confirmed the title was heading to Inter. Scored goals against Lazio, Roma also and provided assists in big games too.

I have no doubt he will be a success here. I mean when you look at all the attributes Haaland has, Lukaku has also. One part of Haaland's game that needs developing for his frame, similar to Tammy is his aerial ability. Does not score enough headers. Lukaku is more accomplished in the air. He is up there with one of the best pure no.9 out there and is a reliable player for goals and staying fit.