2 hours ago, Sconnie Blue said:

Jorrel Hato and Patrick Dorgu the names going around. 

Actually like the look of both players, with Hato at 18 IMO having the bigger potential. Dorgu is a Chelsea fan, and seems to be very versatile as he can play anywhere on the pitch. Problem though is can’t see any of those 2 happening as they will be very expensive. Dorgu is valued at £40m and has Liverpool & United as suitors, Hato will go for a minimum of £50m.

It will be some unknown for around £15m, who won’t move needle and compete with Cucurella. We all know Maresca would rather play James & Gusto at LB. Personally I’d rather trust Ishe Samuels Smith who will paid £4m for as a 17yr old till the summer and keep the powder dry till the summer, especially after Maresca’s comment today. Whoever ends up here won’t see much game time.

3 minutes ago, ducavis said:

Actually like the look of both players, with Hato at 18 IMO having the bigger potential. Dorgu is a Chelsea fan, and seems to be very versatile as he can play anywhere on the pitch. Problem though is can’t see any of those 2 happening as they will be very expensive. Dorgu is valued at £40m and has Liverpool & United as suitors, Hato will go for a minimum of £50m.

It will be some unknown for around £15m, who won’t move needle and compete with Cucurella. We all know Maresca would rather play James & Gusto at LB. Personally I’d rather trust Ishe Samuels Smith who will paid £4m for as a 17yr old till the summer and keep the powder dry till the summer, especially after Maresca’s comment today. Whoever ends up here won’t see much game time.

Samuels-Smith and Acheampong could be our fullbacks for years. Hope we keep them vs having another Livramento/Hall scenario. 

Edited January 13, 20251 yr by Sconnie Blue

1 hour ago, JM7 said:

If we continue to “flip players”, we will never be an elite title competing team. They just don’t exist. If they’ve bought him in and don’t think he is elite then fair enough but this feels like a money making opportunity. 

Agreed we won't.

But it is the model we are following. I've accepted since this lot came in we won't ever have "our Chelsea back", this is their Chelsea now.

Some still believe we will be a top side competing for top honors again though.

5 minutes ago, Sconnie Blue said:

Samuels-Smith and Acheampong could be our fullbacks for years. Hope we keep them vs having another Livramento/Hall scenario. 

I want to know why Samuels-Smith has not been given a look in yet.

Just now, axman2526 said:

I want to know why Samuels-Smith has not been given a look in yet.

Veiga maybe. 

Even Dyer should of had game time ahead of KDH. 

2 hours ago, JM7 said:

If we continue to “flip players”, we will never be an elite title competing team. They just don’t exist. If they’ve bought him in and don’t think he is elite then fair enough but this feels like a money making opportunity. 

By the sounds of it Veiga came in as a back up full back and now he's throwing a stop because we won't play him at CB. I know it's fashionable to blame the owners for everything but I don't see it as an ownership issue.

5 hours ago, TheCeleryKing said:

Hall wanted to leave. We let him leave.

Colwill was at the absolute minimum flirting with the idea of leaving until we did everything to keep him. He also had his boyhood club after him, I find it a stretch to believe we couldn't have convinced Hall if we made similar effort.

That said i find it somewhat forgivable as we seem to have learned from this mistake with Josh when it comes to the elite prospects, the likes of Chalobah and Glichrist can be the pure profit players as and when we need them.

Edited January 13, 20251 yr by Argo

1 hour ago, Sconnie Blue said:

Veiga maybe. 

Even Dyer should of had game time ahead of KDH. 

Could have played Veiga CB apparently.

Several youth went to the conference league. I wonder why he did not.

3 hours ago, JM7 said:

If we continue to “flip players”, we will never be an elite title competing team. They just don’t exist. If they’ve bought him in and don’t think he is elite then fair enough but this feels like a money making opportunity. 

I think we are. I think it is just smart. One extra way of making revenue. If we have the capacity to identify good prospects from the pool, get them in, try and test and then if everything goes well he becomes part of the squad. If not we can make a profit. 

Under Roman we didn't have such revenue avenue if you will. 

Getting a Chelsea label can't hurt either. 

I think this is just smart.

Being reported we are now in talks with Dortmund. 

We don't want a loan, we want a package worth close to 30mill euros, probably inlucldes sell on percentage and/or buy back.

 

Now if only it proved so easy to find clubs for players we are actively trying to get rid of, like Chilwell, Disasi, KDH, Casadei etc. Don't think we were trying to ship off Veiga but are happy to make quick money on him.

I mean he backs himself to make that Portugal team in 2026 and if he wants to play at a club that will offer him playing time in his preferred position, I don't fault him. 

That being said, he's tied down and we sell on our terms. 

He’s played enough minutes that we would make a tidy profit on him. 
However, we have signed too many project players that cost far too much for us to get a profit if they move on after having limited or no minutes.

KDH, Datro Fofana, Washington, Disasi, Bada, Casedei, Carney, and Kellyman. Their values only increase if they get minutes. And that’s before we count the enormous amount of money we’ve spent on goalkeepers.

Even when some go on loan and get minutes their values sometimes go down. If we sign players under the “project” banner we shouldn’t be spending more than £15 million imo

Edited January 13, 20251 yr by 19seventyone

4 hours ago, evissy said:

I think we are. I think it is just smart. One extra way of making revenue. If we have the capacity to identify good prospects from the pool, get them in, try and test and then if everything goes well he becomes part of the squad. If not we can make a profit. 

Under Roman we didn't have such revenue avenue if you will. 

Getting a Chelsea label can't hurt either. 

I think this is just smart.

What are you talking about? Chelsea led the league in terms of transfer income received under Abramovich, and it wasn't even close with the next best being nearly €200m behind.

 

The idea of a top club operating a 'loan army' for revenue purposes (as opposed to feeder clubs like A**x and Porto) was practically invented by Michael Emenalo and Marina Granovskaia to combat incoming FFP rules in the light of decreased commerical revenue. Even complete busts like Tiemoue Bakayoko and Baba Rahman became accounting profits with loan fees.

To be fair, Emenalo and Granovskaia copped just as much criticism as Clearlake are doing now, only they actually sold players for a profit. 

 

6 hours ago, Argo said:

I find it a stretch to believe we couldn't have convinced Hall if we made similar effort.

I liked Hall but Cucurella and Chillwell and maybe Maatsen were all being touted ahead of him at that time. He saw his future elsewhere.  Now that Maatsen and Chillwell didn't work out we all know that we should have kept him, but it wasn't quite like that at the time.

Milos Kerkez would be my choice as a Veiga replacement.

2 minutes ago, TheCeleryKing said:

I liked Hall but Cucurella and Chillwell and maybe Maatsen were all being touted ahead of him at that time. He saw his future elsewhere.  Now that Maatsen and Chillwell didn't work out we all know that we should have kept him, but it wasn't quite like that at the time.

The club will be delighted to have brought in £60m plus for Hall and Maatsen. Without that money we'd be facing a transfer ban and a points deduction. 

That is the basis of our recent and current transfer strategy. 

So the media are putting across that Veiga is the "bad guy" in all this.

Came in knowing he was a utility back up, happy to be so as he was young and learning. 

With us he has become a national team first choice player, now he has ungratefully stabbed Big Enz and the club in the back and gone to make this dortmund deal.

Maybe that is true, maybe not. Hard to trust the owners PR machines. The Osimhen debacle shows the lengths their PR reaches too.

Signed for 12.5M if we manage to sell for the quoted 20M then it’s 7.5 profit for the year or in FFP terms a (roughly) 40M signing amortised over 5 years. Good business for a fringe player.

9 hours ago, JM7 said:

If we continue to “flip players”, we will never be an elite title competing team. 

But that is never the goal. I am confused that many try to argue against it when our owner pretty much said that they are looking at Brighton as their model. 

 

 

55 minutes ago, TheCeleryKing said:

Milos Kerkez would be my choice as a Veiga replacement.

He would cost over £40m and his choice of Liverpool and Utd. He wouldn’t leave Bournemouth who are on the up and with those options to come and play backup to Cucurella.

 

37 minutes ago, The Boehly Babes said:

Signed for 12.5M if we manage to sell for the quoted 20M then it’s 7.5 profit for the year or in FFP terms a (roughly) 40M signing amortised over 5 years. Good business for a fringe player.

Why do we keep calling him a “back up” or a “fringe” player and not highlighting his “versatility”. A lot of his value is tied into his potential and he is also a Swiss knife type player. He is a Rico Lewis or a Partey type player under Pep and Arteta respectively, and should be someone Maresca should be fighting to keep.

23 minutes ago, ducavis said:

 

Why do we keep calling him a “back up” or a “fringe” player and not highlighting his “versatility”. A lot of his value is tied into his potential and he is also a Swiss knife type player. He is a Rico Lewis or a Partey type player under Pep and Arteta respectively, and should be someone Maresca should be fighting to keep.

Rico Lewis & Partey are, politely, both seen as their teams weak links as well. 
Is versatility really that much of a positive in a large squad that should be built to challenge? It’s nice,don’t get me wrong, but we should have 2 players at every position and being ‘versatile’ usually translates to more a jack of all trades master of  none.

He’s not a better LB than Cucu (or Chilwell but that’s another matter) and from the reports ISS is a more promising prospect to give ‘developmental’ minutes to.

He’s not a better CB than Colwill or Fofana or even Tosin for that matter and if Guehi comes in he’s behind him as well.

As a CDM/CM hybrid he’s a lot worse than Caiceido & Lavia and we have Santos & Ugochukwo on loan who both have shown more.

Couple all that with the fact that in his limited game time he’s looked distinctly average and the chance to turn a quick profit that could bring in an actual LB/CB to benefit the team it’s a no brainer.

Am I the only one confused with this Veiga debate? 

Veiga is better than what I expected but he is still very raw. Why Maresca bother with this kind of player. If you want to develop this kind of player you need to give him minutes, the more minutes you give him the more people think you can't coach. 

4 hours ago, The Boehly Babes said:

Signed for 12.5M if we manage to sell for the quoted 20M then it’s 7.5 profit for the year or in FFP terms a (roughly) 40M signing amortised over 5 years. Good business for a fringe player.

If the transfer is completed this January then the profit will only count for this season's books 2024/25 and can only be used to offset spending from the 2024 transfer windows. However, that leaves us with a few important implications:

• One of Felix, Neto or Sancho is essentially 'free' in FFP terms this year - meaning less pressure if we need to sell them later
• The money completely offsets Romelu Lukaku's FFP loss, meaning if he hits his reported performance clauses we turn an FFP profit 😂

4 hours ago, The Boehly Babes said:

Rico Lewis & Partey are, politely, both seen as their teams weak links as well. 
Is versatility really that much of a positive in a large squad that should be built to challenge? It’s nice,don’t get me wrong, but we should have 2 players at every position and being ‘versatile’ usually translates to more a jack of all trades master of  none.

He’s not a better LB than Cucu (or Chilwell but that’s another matter) and from the reports ISS is a more promising prospect to give ‘developmental’ minutes to.

He’s not a better CB than Colwill or Fofana or even Tosin for that matter and if Guehi comes in he’s behind him as well.

As a CDM/CM hybrid he’s a lot worse than Caiceido & Lavia and we have Santos & Ugochukwo on loan who both have shown more.

Couple all that with the fact that in his limited game time he’s looked distinctly average and the chance to turn a quick profit that could bring in an actual LB/CB to benefit the team it’s a no brainer.

This. Other than the very occasional glimpse of a piece of quality he has looked pedestrian,  laboured and lacking in creativity, imho.

He sits firmly in a bracket of players nowhere near Chelsea's required standard. No big loss for me.

3 minutes ago, WhiteWall said:

 

He sits firmly in a bracket of players nowhere near Chelsea's required standard. No big loss for me.

This. I am confused with the fuss about Veiga. 

There is a chance that he will turn into a good player but to do that you need to play him.