1 hour ago, RMH said:

it's a weird question because playing on different places there could be a George........Estevao lineup at some point during a game. The question should be, would you rather have George and Estevao on the bench or Garnacho, Gittens and Estevao on the bench. I don't see much difference at this time of the season, and we could have saved £100m having George and Estevao.

Not my battle - think you are over complicating. It was simply a way of asking who looks better and has a higher ceiling? George or Steve-o. I don't know why you are then turning it into this convoluted nonsense about both playing, benches etc.

to make it very clear....Steve-o, gittens, and garnacho are all much better than George. One is a full brazil international (starter).Another is selected for the world champions. Gittens looks raw - but even he has looked so much better in his short career than George.

The point about saving £100m is moot. Clubs will always have to pay to make the squad better. And there is a point when the cost for the elite isn't always commensurate with the difference in quality - but in a game where small margins matter, clubs will still pay a premium for an extra few %

5 minutes ago, nonotnowjim said:

Not my battle - think you are over complicating. It was simply a way of asking who looks better and has a higher ceiling? George or Steve-o. I don't know why you are then turning it into this convoluted nonsense about both playing, benches etc.

to make it very clear....Steve-o, gittens, and garnacho are all much better than George. One is a full brazil international (starter).Another is selected for the world champions. Gittens looks raw - but even he has looked so much better in his short career than George.

The point about saving £100m is moot. Clubs will always have to pay to make the squad better. And there is a point when the cost for the elite isn't always commensurate with the difference in quality - but in a game where small margins matter, clubs will still pay a premium for an extra few %

Thats fair enough if the £100m gives you a few extra % but in this case it doesn’t. Take Estevau out because nobody was talking about him. The discussion was £100m on bench warmers Gittens and Garnacho who haven’t upgraded our first team by 1% over George sitting on the bench for nothing.

We are building the squad wrong IMO. Spend £100m on a first team upgrade and move Neto to the bench thats how you get extra %.

Hopefully Estevau does this anyway but considering we already owned him and have the other kid from Portugal coming next season it seems even stranger to drop £100m on Gittens and Garnacho.

I’m not writing either of those 2 off by the way, just like I feel it’s too early to write off George yet some have.

I feel some get starry eyed by names and price tags. If George was at Dortmund we’d probably be dropping a fortune on him.

1 hour ago, nonotnowjim said:

Not my battle - think you are over complicating. It was simply a way of asking who looks better and has a higher ceiling? George or Steve-o. I don't know why you are then turning it into this convoluted nonsense about both playing, benches etc.

to make it very clear....Steve-o, gittens, and garnacho are all much better than George. One is a full brazil international (starter).Another is selected for the world champions. Gittens looks raw - but even he has looked so much better in his short career than George.

The point about saving £100m is moot. Clubs will always have to pay to make the squad better. And there is a point when the cost for the elite isn't always commensurate with the difference in quality - but in a game where small margins matter, clubs will still pay a premium for an extra few %

3 hours ago, nonotnowjim said:

It's not a weird question - it is simply comparing 2 young, wide attackers, as a way of making a point. Not an actual question about choosing 1 or the other to play out of position.

He could have said, something like the manager is being forced, with a gun to his head to play only 1 young attacker under the age of 20... in the most important game in the clubs history.... which should he choose to give the team the best chance of winning.

And the answer is, or should be, Estavao. Steveo has looked far more skilled, confident, ahead in his development than Angry Saka. 1 plays with a smile. The other plays with a frown. 1 is natural and clearly very gifted, with what looks like potential to be a player who can contribute regularly to Chelsea in the long term. The other looks no bad - but ultimately a MOR young player, who should be looking to have a long and strong career -but probably not with a team looking to challenge at the very top.

EDIT: Oh, and to answer the question. I would prefer Either Gittens or Garnacho on the Bench over George. Not because they cost more - but because simply they are much better.

"Absolutely useless against Kazakhstan U21s': Chelsea fans already fed up with Jamie Gittens"

Isn't it too early?

more-on Tribuna.com:

https://tribuna.com/en/blogs/absolutely-useless-against-kazakhstan-u21s-chelsea-fans-alre/?utm_source=copy

On 09/09/2025 at 13:57, evissy said:

My opinion is George is not the top level prospect we should go after/keep. My eye-test and the ranking I posted is telling the same story. That is probably why the club is not keeping hold of him like they do with James for example.

Who did Maresca bring on to replace Delap in the 14th minute against Fulham ??

1 hour ago, C3blue said:

Thats fair enough if the £100m gives you a few extra % but in this case it doesn’t. Take Estevau out because nobody was talking about him. The discussion was £100m on bench warmers Gittens and Garnacho who haven’t upgraded our first team by 1% over George sitting on the bench for nothing.

We are building the squad wrong IMO. Spend £100m on a first team upgrade and move Neto to the bench thats how you get extra %.

Hopefully Estevau does this anyway but considering we already owned him and have the other kid from Portugal coming next season it seems even stranger to drop £100m on Gittens and Garnacho.

I’m not writing either of those 2 off by the way, just like I feel it’s too early to write off George yet some have.

I feel some get starry eyed by names and price tags. If George was at Dortmund we’d probably be dropping a fortune on him.

Gittens cost us £50million , he's a year older, hasn't impressed so far .but he's "raw" and needs time .!!

Whereas George, a year younger, cost nothing, is absolutely not good enough, he's not allowed any time to adapt to the first team ( despite replacing Delap on 14 minutes v Fulham) and must be sold ! Lets face it , if the club decided to sell Gittens in January, the usual members on here would say that it is absolutely the correct decision , it's part of the plan, you haters , etc !

11 hours ago, RMH said:

That is a weird question as Estevao and George play on different sides of the pitch. No one is arguing that George would play ahead of Neto, on the left, but that he's a good bench option and we could have saved £100m spent on Garnacho and Gittens, who do not improve what Neto provides. The question is, who do you prefer as a bench option, George or Garnacho/Gittens? And, could have we spent £100m on a better left winger that would start ahead of Neto, Garnacho and Gittens?

Fee paid aside, I would rather have Garnacho who is more experienced in the league and Gittens who is more experienced in CL.

The kind of player that would have cost near £100m thats far better than all of them would have not signed for us in the first place as we would not be able to afford his wages so it’s a pointless comparison.

2 minutes ago, Remodez said:

Fee paid aside, I would rather have Garnacho who is more experienced in the league and Gittens who is more experienced in CL.

The kind of player that would have cost near £100m thats far better than all of them would have not signed for us in the first place as we would not be able to afford his wages so it’s a pointless comparison.

But what are the combined wages of Gittens and Garnacho? Quality over quantity, especially when you have Cobham to pad the squad with. Just a thought.

Edited September 10, 2025Sep 10 by C3blue

13 hours ago, nonotnowjim said:

Not my battle - think you are over complicating. It was simply a way of asking who looks better and has a higher ceiling? George or Steve-o. I don't know why you are then turning it into this convoluted nonsense about both playing, benches etc.

to make it very clear....Steve-o, gittens, and garnacho are all much better than George. One is a full brazil international (starter).Another is selected for the world champions. Gittens looks raw - but even he has looked so much better in his short career than George.

The point about saving £100m is moot. Clubs will always have to pay to make the squad better. And there is a point when the cost for the elite isn't always commensurate with the difference in quality - but in a game where small margins matter, clubs will still pay a premium for an extra few %

@C3blue has explained much better than me, apparently. Estevao, George and a proper £100m winger that starts over Neto is a far superior option than Garnacho, Gittens as bench options to Neto.

11 hours ago, Remodez said:

Fee paid aside, I would rather have Garnacho who is more experienced in the league and Gittens who is more experienced in CL.

The kind of player that would have cost near £100m thats far better than all of them would have not signed for us in the first place as we would not be able to afford his wages so it’s a pointless comparison.

The board has decided that we're not paying the kind of wages that brings world class players that will start over Neto, Garnacho or Gittens on the left, it's not like the Club can't afford them.

George would be my 5th choice of the above five, based on what we've seen of him, a good player.

A good player plus a half decent transfer value is probably how the club see him.

If a combination of several of Neto Garnacho Gittens and Estevao doesn't get us in the top four and consequently Champions league qualification the problem is elsewhere.

We are lucky to have such a selection without mentioning Palmer and Pedro.

1. Estevao

2. Neto

3. Garnacho

4. Mudryk

5. George

6. Kalou

7. Gittens

In that order.

2 hours ago, RMH said:

The board has decided that we're not paying the kind of wages that brings world class players that will start over Neto, Garnacho or Gittens on the left, it's not like the Club can't afford them.

14 hours ago, C3blue said:

But what are the combined wages of Gittens and Garnacho? Quality over quantity, especially when you have Cobham to pad the squad with. Just a thought.

There's no point lamenting what could have been when the board was never going to even consider it in the first place. Yes we can afford it but that's not how the club is being run anymore.

With that in mind, it's a no brainer I would rather have Garnacho and Gittens over George even if I do think we overpaid for both.

7 hours ago, RMH said:

@C3blue has explained much better than me, apparently. Estevao, George and a proper £100m winger that starts over Neto is a far superior option than Garnacho, Gittens as bench options to Neto.

Depends. a) on who is available b) who we could afford within the wage structure.

George isnt likely going to be good enough - so would also need someone else even with the 100m purchase.

If a £100m player is contributes 20 goals per season, then it might not be a bad calculation to spend £80m on 2 players who can realistically contribute 10 each whilst also allowing more flexibility, cover and options.

1 hour ago, nonotnowjim said:

Depends. a) on who is available b) who we could afford within the wage structure.

George isnt likely going to be good enough - so would also need someone else even with the 100m purchase.

If a £100m player is contributes 20 goals per season, then it might not be a bad calculation to spend £80m on 2 players who can realistically contribute 10 each whilst also allowing more flexibility, cover and options.

Doesn’t work that way in reality. You are not going to keep rotating your £40m buys to get that efficiency, you will stick with the best of your bad bunch. So if Garnacho is the better of the 2, he might get 7 league goals and Gittens 4 league goals.

Something no one keeps mentioning with this 2 is we had Madueke on £50k/w who was after a delayed contract improvement that would have bumped him to around £100k/w. Instead we have bought both Gittens & Garnacho & stuck both on £100k/w each.

10 minutes ago, markpitts said:

Doesn’t work that way in reality. You are not going to keep rotating your £40m buys to get that efficiency, you will stick with the best of your bad bunch. So if Garnacho is the better of the 2, he might get 7 league goals and Gittens 4 league goals.

Something no one keeps mentioning with this 2 is we had Madueke on £50k/w who was after a delayed contract improvement that would have bumped him to around £100k/w. Instead we have bought both Gittens & Garnacho & stuck both on £100k/w each.

Best of a bad bunch....

If Estevao Garnacho Gittens and Neto are a bad bunch we are doomed to failure.

I can't see a situation where we have four elite in their prime players in their place at the same time. Lol cant imagine 2 of them on the bench.

20 minutes ago, markpitts said:

Doesn’t work that way in reality. You are not going to keep rotating your £40m buys to get that efficiency, you will stick with the best of your bad bunch. So if Garnacho is the better of the 2, he might get 7 league goals and Gittens 4 league goals.

Something no one keeps mentioning with this 2 is we had Madueke on £50k/w who was after a delayed contract improvement that would have bumped him to around £100k/w. Instead we have bought both Gittens & Garnacho & stuck both on £100k/w each.

dont think thats necesarilly true. We had distinctly different teams in the A and B squads last year. A squad in the league. B squad in the conference league.

7 hours ago, nonotnowjim said:

dont think thats necesarilly true. We had distinctly different teams in the A and B squads last year. A squad in the league. B squad in the conference league.

There is little chance he would pull the same trick in the CL this year, key players won’t sit out on the biggest stage. His team selection will be based on the opposition strength, so you would expect Hato, Josh, Santos & Gittens for example to start v Qarabag for example.

On one hand I'm pleased an academy player is still getting used over our big money signings, bodes well for the others, but I don't believe George has done anything to warrant this level of trust.

Also optics look a bit silly when the club is willing to sell him and probably will try again come January.

I couldn’t care less if George’s dad was Stamford the lion and he was born on the centre spot at Stamford Bridge. If he is going to get game time from Maresca for us then we should not be expecting any improvement in our situation. I don’t particularly rate Garnacho, but why the hell do you not use a player that you pursued all summer and has at least PL experience and even some decent performances for United instead of a player who hasn’t even shown a glimpse of PL standard ability and who you even tried to palm off onto Fulham?

George isn’t good enough and Maresca is a complete and utter idiot.

Bambi on ice this kid.

wtf he came on for beggars belief

Its such an odd decision to keep selecting a player, who most of us can see (I know a few were advocating for him ahead of gittens and garnacho) is nowhere near good enough. He is even worse when played out of position.

Evil Saka should not be anywhere near the first team. Guiu must be furious with poundland pep.

3 hours ago, nonotnowjim said:

Its such an odd decision to keep selecting a player, who most of us can see (I know a few were advocating for him ahead of gittens and garnacho) is nowhere near good enough. He is even worse when played out of position.

Evil Saka should not be anywhere near the first team. Guiu must be furious with poundland pep.

I don’t think he rates Gittens, and I actually feel he thinks Tyrique is the better player. He is approaching it in a smart way by not throwing the latter on at LW, so he doesn’t get asked questions by the press. The good thing is both Gittens & Garnacho get to stare their case v Lincoln on Tuesday.

Think I mentioned it in one of the threads that I wouldn’t be surprised if Tyrique is ahead of both Gittens & Garnacho in the pecking order before the season ends.

1 hour ago, markpitts said:

I don’t think he rates Gittens, and I actually feel he thinks Tyrique is the better player. He is approaching it in a smart way by not throwing the latter on at LW, so he doesn’t get asked questions by the press. The good thing is both Gittens & Garnacho get to stare their case v Lincoln on Tuesday.

Think I mentioned it in one of the threads that I wouldn’t be surprised if Tyrique is ahead of both Gittens & Garnacho in the pecking order before the season ends.

Well - if he genuinely thinks George is better than either then a) he is even more blind than I thought or and/or b) the scouts are inept and need sacking.

I feel for him, because he is nowhere near good enough for us, selling him to Fulham for £22m would have been the best sale under the new owners but every time he plays his value must plummet.

19 minutes ago, timetowaste said:

I feel for him, because he is nowhere near good enough for us, selling him to Fulham for £22m would have been the best sale under the new owners but every time he plays his value must plummet.

Agreed - Our LW options are not great, but George is the worst of the current lot (excluding Mudryk). I include Sterling in that.