12 minutes ago, WhiteWall said:

Does anyone have Jackson's agent's phone number

It's long distance though. +221 77 838 00 81

7 hours ago, Remodez said:

I know it's Thiago Silva but a better player there is able to make that pass. If it was the other way around and Cole was on the ball he finds Jackson with that pass.

I don't really begrudge Jackson for shooting though, most strikers will back themselves and shoot too but there's no need to pretend it's an impossible pass to make.

Agree with much of your post here Remodez, but I thought you didn't agree with forwards shooting in situations where a pass to a team mate in a better goalscoring position is on, UNLESS, they have scored already?

As you raised previously as a criticism against Madueke shooting in exactly the same circumstances.

9 hours ago, just said:

Agree with much of your post here Remodez, but I thought you didn't agree with forwards shooting in situations where a pass to a team mate in a better goalscoring position is on, UNLESS, they have scored already?

As you raised previously as a criticism against Madueke shooting in exactly the same circumstances.

I think what I said was it's more understandable if they shoot again having already scored as they are still riding the confidence high.

I would much rather Jackson passed but at the end of the day he is a striker and strikers are naturally selfish to a degree as they have to back themselves in front of goal. Madueke's primarily job in his position is to create, goals are a bonus.

After a poor few months Jacksons stock is low. Would make sense to give him a season long lone elsewhere to see how he does. If he has a good goalscoring season we might make a decent profit next summer.

Oh my days.

Arsenal could possibly go from Gyokeres and Rodrygo to Jackson and Madueke!

2 hours ago, Gordon Bennett said:

After a poor few months Jacksons stock is low. Would make sense to give him a season long lone elsewhere to see how he does. If he has a good goalscoring season we might make a decent profit next summer.

That would be silly. He is not on ridiculous wages. Keep him in the squad if we don't sell him. He still will have buyers regardless.

Please sell him. Come on Milan, I believe in you

2 hours ago, dansubrosa said:

Oh my days.

Arsenal could possibly go from Gyokeres and Rodrygo to Jackson and Madueke!

With premier league interest we should just hit ignore on any inbound calls from Italy.

6 hours ago, STATS said:

That would be silly. He is not on ridiculous wages. Keep him in the squad if we don't sell him. He still will have buyers regardless.

I reckon he will be gone before the window closes. This window is the one we are going to get the maximum fee if he isn’t deemed a starter. His value will drop drastically next season if he 2nd-3rd choice CF.

6 hours ago, dansubrosa said:

10 hours ago, STATS said:

That would be silly. He is not on ridiculous wages. Keep him in the squad if we don't sell him. He still will have buyers regardless.

The big worry is his attitude, weve seen how he reacts to being subbed off, or dropped. I dread to think how he acts when he drops down the order to 3rd choice striker.

Many people try to justify selling Madueke n Jackson. There is nothing to talk about. We need to sell our attacker and the only one who we can sell for real money is Madueke, Palmer n Jackson. That is it. That is the reason.

Any price is too high for AC Milan. Italian clubs have no money when it comes to our players, despite all the money we've given them over the years.

1 minute ago, Bob stark said:

Many people try to justify selling Madueke n Jackson. There is nothing to talk about. We need to sell our attacker and the only one who we can sell for real money is Madueke, Palmer n Jackson. That is it. That is the reason.

At this very moment footballing wise we are okay I think without Jackson. Pedro seems legit and Delap looks okay. Both still bedding in naturally. If we lose Nico we have as good of a chance to finish the same way the coming season. Jackson is 2nd, 3rd choice right now and useful if we keep him.

I understand your point on the selling value and you might be right but there also is a scenario where you need the money for the sale and that player carries a good value AND you can lose the player without making the squad any worse. I think Madueke is that for sure and Jackson might be as well.

I am very comfortable if he stays and continues to develop.

Selling Noni and Jackson in the same window could be a hall of fame summer.

25 minutes ago, evissy said:

At this very moment footballing wise we are okay I think without Jackson. Pedro seems legit and Delap looks okay. Both still bedding in naturally. If we lose Nico we have as good of a chance to finish the same way the coming season. Jackson is 2nd, 3rd choice right now and useful if we keep him.

I understand your point on the selling value and you might be right but there also is a scenario where you need the money for the sale and that player carries a good value AND you can lose the player without making the squad any worse. I think Madueke is that for sure and Jackson might be as well.

I am very comfortable if he stays and continues to develop.

The attitude both on and off the pitch by both of these players is detrimental to building a harmonious dressing room of good camaraderie amongst young, impressionable players. Plus its a level of maintenance that the manager doesn't need and undermines his authority.

In my 53 years of supporting Chelsea i genuinely struggle to recall many times when Chelsea players have had to apologise to the fan base due to their attitude or persona. Madueke has already had to do this twice in one season.

The entitled, spoilt displays of petulance, whether subtle or overt, have also not been missed by the press and if we move both players on and replace in those positions, as @timetowaste says, this could be a stellar window for us, especially if the market dictates that we make money on them both.

15 minutes ago, WhiteWall said:

The attitude both on and off the pitch by both of these players is detrimental to building a harmonious dressing room of good camaraderie amongst young, impressionable players. Plus its a level of maintenance that the manager doesn't need and undermines his authority.

In my 53 years of supporting Chelsea i genuinely struggle to recall many times when Chelsea players have had to apologise to the fan base due to their attitude or persona. Madueke has already had to do this twice in one season.

The entitled, spoilt displays of petulance, whether subtle or overt, have also not been missed by the press and if we move both players on and replace in those positions, as @timetowaste says, this could be a stellar window for us, especially if the market dictates that we make money on them both.

Neither player is a leader by their character at all. So in that sense they are not to be missed. They can have a negative influence on some young players if they act in a bad way.

5 minutes ago, evissy said:

At this very moment footballing wise we are okay I think without Jackson. Pedro seems legit and Delap looks okay. Both still bedding in naturally. If we lose Nico we have as good of a chance to finish the same way the coming season. Jackson is 2nd, 3rd choice right now and useful if we keep him.

I understand your point on the selling value and you might be right but there also is a scenario where you need the money for the sale and that player carries a good value AND you can lose the player without making the squad any worse. I think Madueke is that for sure and Jackson might be as well.

I am very comfortable if he stays and continues to develop.

It doesn't matter what you think footballing wise. Which player is better, which player suit our squad. Those are irrelevant.

If we want to continue this player trading strategy we have to continue to sell and those three are the only three player that we can sell to generate money.

19 minutes ago, Bob stark said:

It doesn't matter what you think footballing wise. Which player is better, which player suit our squad. Those are irrelevant.

If we want to continue this player trading strategy we have to continue to sell and those three are the only three player that we can sell to generate money.

Renato Veiga is one as well, Petrovic is one, Tosin Adarabioyo is one (hopefully not for sale), Chalobah (hopefully not for sale), Josh (hope not), Santos maybe (hope not).

55 minutes ago, Bob stark said:

It doesn't matter what you think footballing wise. Which player is better, which player suit our squad. Those are irrelevant.

If we want to continue this player trading strategy we have to continue to sell and those three are the only three player that we can sell to generate money.

Unsurprisingly, another post where I dont agree with you. Sorry Bob - nothing personal, but you are increasingly talking nonsense.

Out of our current squad, we would likely generate a profit on all of the following.... a fair few more than the 3 you speculate:

• Palmer

• Madueke

• Jackson

• George

• Delap

• Petrovic

• Penders

• Collwill

• Trev

• Veiga

• Tosin

• Gusto

• James

• Aflie

• Josh

• Santos

• Paez

• Estavao

• Broja

• Guiu

1 hour ago, Bob stark said:

It doesn't matter what you think footballing wise. Which player is better, which player suit our squad. Those are irrelevant.

If we want to continue this player trading strategy we have to continue to sell and those three are the only three player that we can sell to generate money.

Define making money.

These owners have developed a strategy whereby any actual financial trading loss is kicked down the road and spread over time. Therefore they can make profits on players (actual), i.e. Madueke, as well as profit on their investment at a book level, where the depreciation of the book value, amortised, will outstrip the depreciation of the actual asset in many cases (Sterling excepted!) and therefore they can still sell players for less than we bought and deem it profit.

The trick, i suspect, which a number of us will question, will be to temper the fire sale enthusiasm to ensure that there is a pipeline of income without having to sell off our developing untouchables. IN other words if they sell off all the family silverware in this window, how are they going to feed that amortised debt in year four. They need to continue to stay in the black at each accounting period and by each scale of measurement, but not to do too well that hey can't draw on this later.

6 minutes ago, WhiteWall said:

Define making money.

These owners have developed a strategy whereby any actual financial trading loss is kicked down the road and spread over time. Therefore they can make profits on players (actual), i.e. Madueke, as well as profit on their investment at a book level, where the depreciation of the book value, amortised, will outstrip the depreciation of the actual asset in many cases (Sterling excepted!) and therefore they can still sell players for less than we bought and deem it profit.

The trick, i suspect, which a number of us will question, will be to temper the fire sale enthusiasm to ensure that there is a pipeline of income without having to sell off our developing untouchables. IN other words if they sell off all the family silverware in this window, how are they going to feed that amortised debt in year four. They need to continue to stay in the black at each accounting period and by each scale of measurement, but not to do too well that hey can't draw on this later.

This is exactly why the governing bodies shouldn't make these rules that are filled with holes. We are basically financing lawyers with this nonsense. Like in competitive sports big clubs will use all and any measure to gain competitive edge on the financial side as well. Why shoudn't they? Setup a system such is in Europe and this is what you get.

Edited July 11, 20251 yr by evissy

43 minutes ago, WhiteWall said:

Define making money.

These owners have developed a strategy whereby any actual financial trading loss is kicked down the road and spread over time. Therefore they can make profits on players (actual), i.e. Madueke, as well as profit on their investment at a book level, where the depreciation of the book value, amortised, will outstrip the depreciation of the actual asset in many cases (Sterling excepted!) and therefore they can still sell players for less than we bought and deem it profit.

The trick, i suspect, which a number of us will question, will be to temper the fire sale enthusiasm to ensure that there is a pipeline of income without having to sell off our developing untouchables. IN other words if they sell off all the family silverware in this window, how are they going to feed that amortised debt in year four. They need to continue to stay in the black at each accounting period and by each scale of measurement, but not to do too well that hey can't draw on this later.

I am talking about real money. Those three are the only attacker where we can sell and generate real money and also book profit.

We still have a number of player that we can sell Jackson, Santos, Chalobah, Tosin, Gusto.

In the future, depending on what happen to estevao, Quenda, paez. We can sell one of them or neto.

We shouldn’t sell Jackson. He’s very frustrating and he has a lot to learn but he’s proved that he can score 15 goals a season. That is hard to replicate.

Make him fight for his position and see how he respond.

17 minutes ago, JM7 said:

We shouldn’t sell Jackson. He’s very frustrating and he has a lot to learn but he’s proved that he can score 15 goals a season. That is hard to replicate.

Make him fight for his position and see how he respond.

Think the majority will disagree - myself included.

He's at best third choice now. He hasn't progressed and the goals have dried up, so if we can get a decent fee for him, cash in whilst we can.