Im not sure if this is a good source or not but here goes:

http://www.goal.com/en/Articolo.aspx?ContenutoId=671479

Shevchenko had a glorious seven years at Milan from 1999 to 2006, scoring 127 goals in just 208 games, before leaving to join Chelsea following the last World Cup in Germany.

His time at Stamford Bridge has been nothing short of disastrous, and he is desperate to return to San Siro this summer.

Milan are also keen to arrange a deal to sign Shevchenko, however, according to the striker’s agent, they are not prepared to pay a fee for him.

"[Milan vice-president] Adriano Galliani has always been very clear when stating that the deal can only be done if Chelsea allow Milan to have the player as a free loan,” said Fabio Parisi.

"If Chelsea owner Roman Abramovich will give his okay then I think the deal could be done."

Shevchenko has made just 11 Premiership appearances all season, scoring four goals, and it is almost certain that he will be shown the door at Chelsea at the end of the campaign.

This i would be very much against, i would like to see him back at Milan but as an official Milan player, would Chelsea still be paying his wages if this was too happen? If so that would be crazy to let him go on the free with the amount of money we got for him.

Or could Shevchenko actually be apart of next seasons plans when Drogba leaves?

Your thoughts?

It would be foolish to sell our most-expensive signing ever as a 'free loan'. That would confirm a loss of 30 million for Chelsea.

And Kenyon thinks that the Blues can break evens in a couple of years!

They don't have to pay.

Just give us Kaka and Pato in return.

Problem solved.

Italian clubs have interesting tendency to sell us players at high prices(Mutu,Crespo,Sheva) and then pick them up on a free.

Kaka or Pato would do the trick Gem!

I don't really understand these "on loan" deals. What do we gain from them, really? We pay their salaries and watch them perform to another team. What's the catch here? And from an older geezer like Sheva. We are not going to just send him on an trip to Milan to gain experience. We need 10mill at least if they want him back.

By the way I just quickly read somewhere that Berlusconi is leaving his post at Milan so without him I'm not sure if Milan want's Sheva back. Silvio is Sheva's kid godfather as I understand...

But the point is we want money for Sheva if he goes back to Milan!

milan not as daft as they look

get sheva on a free and we pay his wages

milan the only ones that benifit

and chelsea are probably stupid enough to let this happen

If they don't want to pay for him then don't let them have him. Make him stay an use him as we see fit.

If they don't want to pay for him then don't let them have him. Make him stay an use him as we see fit.

Yup those early round Carling Cup matches do come round thick and fast

I don't really understand these "on loan" deals. What do we gain from them, really? We pay their salaries and watch them perform to another team. What's the catch here? And from an older geezer like Sheva. We are not going to just send him on an trip to Milan to gain experience. We need 10mill at least if they want him back.

From a pure economic view, it makes sense for both clubs and the player.

The rumours is that the Crespo and Veron loans involved a 50/50 split for the players wages. Now if the same was to happen for Sheva:

From Sheva's point of view, there's no club in the world who would be prepared to pay him 120k per week in wages right now. So, if he moves on loan to Milan and we split the wages 50/50, then still Sheva gets his big bucks for another 2 years until his contract runs out.

From Milan's point of view, they get a quality player for no fee, and can afford to pay him 60k per week in wages without blowing their wage budget or wage structure.

From Chelsea's point of view, we get rid of a player who is surplus to requirements, and cut our wage bill by 60k per week, moving us (hopefully) closer to ecomonic self-sufficiency.

However, it doesn't do our reputation any favours, as the likes of Milan now EXPECT this type of an arragement rather than paying us what a player is worth.

And the really smart economic move would have been to NOT PAY 30 mil + 120k per week wages in the first place.

However, this is the gamble you take when you spend that much money on a player. If he had perfomed as well as Drogba, we wouldn't miss the 30 mil at all, and we wouldn't be in this situation. No one regrets paying 24 mil for Drogba, 17 mil for Maka or 19 mil for Carvalho.

On a somewhat related note. I read on another forum that Milan is bleeding money and may have to declare bankruptcy. Has anyone else heard of this?

I don't really understand these "on loan" deals. What do we gain from them, really? We pay their salaries and watch them perform to another team. What's the catch here? And from an older geezer like Sheva. We are not going to just send him on an trip to Milan to gain experience. We need 10mill at least if they want him back.

From a pure economic view, it makes sense for both clubs and the player.

The rumours is that the Crespo and Veron loans involved a 50/50 split for the players wages. Now if the same was to happen for Sheva:

From Sheva's point of view, there's no club in the world who would be prepared to pay him 120k per week in wages right now. So, if he moves on loan to Milan and we split the wages 50/50, then still Sheva gets his big bucks for another 2 years until his contract runs out.

From Milan's point of view, they get a quality player for no fee, and can afford to pay him 60k per week in wages without blowing their wage budget or wage structure.

From Chelsea's point of view, we get rid of a player who is surplus to requirements, and cut our wage bill by 60k per week, moving us (hopefully) closer to ecomonic self-sufficiency.

However, it doesn't do our reputation any favours, as the likes of Milan now EXPECT this type of an arragement rather than paying us what a player is worth.

And the really smart economic move would have been to NOT PAY 30 mil + 120k per week wages in the first place.

However, this is the gamble you take when you spend that much money on a player. If he had perfomed as well as Drogba, we wouldn't miss the 30 mil at all, and we wouldn't be in this situation. No one regrets paying 24 mil for Drogba, 17 mil for Maka or 19 mil for Carvalho.

Thank you for that answer. So it is basically realizing that we made a huge, huge mistake and now would like to cut the cost since it is the best option from all the sh*tty options available..Makes sense.

On a somewhat related note. I read on another forum that Milan is bleeding money and may have to declare bankruptcy. Has anyone else heard of this?

I read somewhere a few days ago that Berlusconi is leaving his post as the president of Milan so there could be a money problem involved.

You can bet that Milan has money problems (have for some time) and that's precisely why Berlusconi is out the door - the classic distancing/let the law (the italian law!??!) tie me to any of this sh*t. It'll be great watching those f**kers implode.

Yup loads of rumours going around the net that milan are around £25 million in debt. Maybe that's why they want Sheva on the free but a deal could be unlikely between the two it's just do chelsea want to offload a striker they paid 30 million for free?

Milan are struggling to even sign Ronaldinho at the moment, Barcelona have put a £31.5 Million price tag on him, only Man City have reportadly matched the offer...

Ronaldinho at Man City? that would be something to see.. but his heart is set on Milan.

Give Sheva for free then buy Kaka for 50+ millons? how f** stupid are we.. I enjoyed the role Sheva played as a 'defensive striker' in the past 2 games, a goal line clearance and few decent runs upfield, job well done!

I agree with icecoolguy hes turning out to be a great timewaster. Just throw sheva in there in the last 5 minutes and he is great at running out the clock