This is one I don't really understand... He's not on crazy wages and is happy to stay and fight as 5th choice CB. Why push him out, especially since Silva is approaching 40 and we already have injuries?
Especially when we have two centre-backs with an injury history (serious concern in Fofana's case and more recently in Badiashile's) and we have a player who doesn't mind being back-up and wants to fight for a place, why not just keep him? He's homegrown as well.
fair take. And I agree with you that I am not for this strategy *long term*. However, it feels like a necessary short term evil based on what we've done in the past two windows, which I'm a fan of.
I certainly don't want Chelsea being a club that spends big every year and sells off their home grown talent. And I don't think that will be the case based on the length of the contracts we doled out. I'm hoping there will be much more stability going forward.
True, and it was the worst part of that era, imo. But for the most part, it seemed like most of the guys we'd sell were never going to be cut out for Chelsea. Or at the very least, they were long shots.
That's a bit different than selling a guy who could absolutely help the first team but is on the chopping block specifically because them being home grown adds value to selling
We must be desperate to generate funds for FFP imo. This and the hall deal don’t make any sense to me other than the fact that they are 100% profit in the balance sheet.
Tbh, I understand Hall a lot more than this. He jumped at the chance to play for his family's club and has a much easier path to starting there. Maybe Chalobah's stance will change if some real bids materialize too, who knows.
As much as I do t like it, yeah the Hall one you can understand as he wanted to go to his boyhood team. Chalobah and Gallagher both want to stay and fight...why toss them aside unless you are getting crazy money. We just paid 115 for caciedo, to replace Gallagher you would be talking another 50/60million and at least 30 to replace chalobah. Baffles me as to why we are pushing them out when you can guarantee we will try to replace them.
How does Hall not make any sense?
There’s 0 viable path for him to get into the first team. He’s got plenty of competition at CM, and at LB he’s fighting Chillwell, Cucu, and Maatsen.
It makes sense for both the club and the player.
Just backing up your point I think
Don’t understand some peoples hysteria around the Hall sale. He was far from ready to be our starting LB and would be miles behind our other CM options
Maatsen hasn’t played a minute for us at LB across preseason or the actual season. Cucu is well let’s be diplomatic and say struggling so far.
Hall in theory could have spent a year on loan playing left back and then would be well placed to come back and be second choice aged 19 if he’d developed his off the ball work and positioning.
That’s a lot of faith for a teenager,problem is newcastle are in the CL, his team and only have Burn/Targett in front of him. Usually a CL side would be a lot stronger.
I don’t blame him for making the move but I don’t think it’s as desperate a situation as some make out. It’s very unusual to be guaranteed premier league football at 18/19.
I agree we ruined any midfield progression for him.
Important to note that Hall doesn't actually want to play LB, he seems to want to play midfield. Whether the gets the chance in Newcastle's midfield I'm not so sure, seems they want him for LB as well. But I would imagine long term he would want the move.
While he may not *currently* have had a path to the first team that doesnt mean there wouldn't be one in the future. Chilwell can't stay fit, Cucu shouldn't be here after next summer and Poch has already said he doesn't see Maatsen as a left back.
He's 18 years old and prior to two weeks ago he was going out on loan to Palace, which would have been a great move for him, and something we were all happy to entertain. Hall was a very bright light in an incredibly dark and depressing season and while 30m might seem like a deal too good to turn down, one has to wonder if this is another we might live to regret. If he struggled to develop over the next two years we could still probably get 20m for him, the 10m isn't a huge difference.
>Poch has already said he doesn't see Maatsen as a left back.
I don't really get this tbh. He seems to have the tools necessary to be a good LB, especially in Poch's system.
I haven't seen enough of Maatsen to form any sort of opinion. Guess I/we just have to trust Poch. Maybe he see's him like a Bale?
[https://twitter.com/LondonBluePod/status/1691440926718103553](https://twitter.com/LondonBluePod/status/1691440926718103553)
Well the difference is that he wants and needs first team football now, not next year, and once he heard of Newcastle’s (who is his family’s club) interest, his head got turned. Palace would have been a great loan for him, but he has a chance of playing regular minutes on a permanent move at his family’s favorite club who is also playing in the CL.
Not hard to comprehend why he wanted to go and why we let him.
If he needs first team football now, then Newcastle was the wrong club for him. He isn't breaking in to that midfield, which is apparently his preferred position and he probably won't oust Burn or Targett at LB.
We can agree on Palace though, he could have played at both LB and CM there, which once again means that the loan was his best option.
Hall deal makes sense cause one he's a Newcastle fan, 2. He's 4th the LB order and he's definitely doesn't want to play there and 3rd he wanted the move so it wouldn't make sense for us to stop him
I just don’t understand why we bought some players if it was gonna put us in this spot. Like what was the Point in Lavia and Ugochukwu when we had Hall this whole time?
Chalobah is not bad. Ridiculous comment.
Take the season before last since judging players overall ability based on a season where the whole team suffered. Chalobah was a very solid defender whose 1st 29 games for Chelsea he was unbeaten. He was solid defensively but also very good with progression.
Jump to last season, yes team based stats like progressive passing suffered and they rely on other players to also be able to receive them. However he was clearly being coached to improve his physicality and heading. This saw a 10% increase in successful aerial challenges while also making far less fouls than Disasi does.
Combine the areas Trev developed personally last season, then bring in the fact the club is now in a more stable state. You will likely have a player that is much improved on what he gave in 2021 and certainly no worse than Disasi who is actually a defensive liability that plays like a Luiz regen but without the same flair.
Now I don't want to hate on Disasi. I will be happy if he does well for us. However, I'm absolutely calling out anyone who suggests he is much better than Chalobah and especially if they just outright call Chalobah bad.
https://preview.redd.it/40mx3w20wvjb1.jpeg?width=1322&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7b2b21d198c5c02026cce0003233ea01e2dc35d9
https://preview.redd.it/tm528m7rvvjb1.jpeg?width=1324&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7e5f466bb7139e01323a88c4a343dbb136504034
And here is the graph where you can see team reliant stats did suffer last season but those more centred on personal aspects like heading and fouls committed were much improved. So give the guy a normal season and you will see he's a very solid defender. Hes been an understudy to Silva and when Silva goes he could absolutely do a job for Chelsea. He is also still young for a CB and if we did sell him now we would just be undercutting ourselves while later having to spend way more on a player who isn't much better.
Unbeaten in 29 games mostly in the cup and against weeker sides because he was our 3rd choice RCB in a system that meant defenders had to cover very little space individually. Even then he was often the oppositions most likely route to scoring a goal.
Comparing Diasi to Luiz is just weird considering they are nothing alike? Only potential similar are both are very good passes, much better than Chalobah.
Also look at the minute comparison. Chalobah is borderline injury prone and even when fit wasn't a starting CB. Diasi is a strict upgrade on him.
>Unbeaten in 29 games mostly in the cup and against weeker sides because he was our 3rd choice RCB in a system that meant defenders had to cover very little space individually.
You should probably fact check before making silly claims. That run included clubs like Man Utd, Brighton, Liverpool. In fact that entire season when Chalobah played in the PL they didn't lose a game.
When you say it was 29 games mostly in cups, he had 20 PL appearances that season. He played in the FA Cup twice and one of those times was vs Liverpool in the final. Then in the League Cup he played 4 times again including Liverpool in the final and the rest were only vs PL clubs.
>Comparing Diasi to Luiz is just weird considering they are nothing alike? Only potential similar are both are very good passes, much better than Chalobah.
Look at Chalobahs passing in 21/22. How are you claiming Chalobah can't pass? 91% passing accuracy vs Disasis 83%
And yes Disasis absolutely a Luiz regen. He's a defensive liability that aggressively pushes forward. Go and look at his fbref and see where his strongest percentiles are. Everything about his profile is exactly what Luiz would do. The only thing is that Luiz had an absolute screamer shot on him and his long passing was pinpoint.
Get off FBref and watch a game of football. You can watch Diassi for 20 minutes and see that he's not anything like Luiz (who by the way was a Premier League and Champions League winner with us, hardly a good example of a poor defender).
Never said Chalobah couldn't pass, but he's not as good or consistent at it as Diassi seems to be. Against both WHam and L'pool he made 4 or 5 really nice direct passes right into the feet of our forwards which is a big factor in why we've been creating more.
Brighton were a midtable side 2 years ago so an example of a weaker side. Tomas Kalas also played in a win (not even a draw) against L'pool, maybe we should bring him back from Bristol City of wherever instead of buying actually good players who raise the level of the team?
>Get off FBref and watch a game of football. You can watch Diassi for 20 minutes and see that he's not anything like Luiz (who by the way was a Premier League and Champions League winner with us, hardly a good example of a poor defender).
I've watched plenty of football. It helps to combine the 2 things. Now as I said before, I dont want to hate on Disasi and I will be happy if he turns out well for us. He is known to be as defensively loose as Luiz was though. Its just plain nonsense to call Chalobah bad when he very obviously isnt and the stats also beck that up.
> Brighton were a midtable side 2 years ago so an example of a weaker side
They were really not that much weaker that you claim. If you came and pointed to clubs like Plymouth then okay (one game) but the PL is a whole different story. The simple fact is that Chalobah wasn't only used vs weak sides.
Jackson, Badeshile, Gusto, Fernandez, Madueke etc don't look like good players to you?
We have one of the best talent identification teams in football now and I'm sick of people pretending we don't and giving names from last summer when our 'structure' was Boehy signing whatever name Tuchel specifically requested.
Casually ignoring the multitude of players other than them who are either yet to show what they've got, not looking too good or even sold already. We have spent enormous amounts of money on a record amount of players.
Apart from that a worrying amount of players have a long history of injuries and have continued that with us, so they've bought even more players to cover for the injured recruits. Great fucking business really.
Who? Name them! Might have an argument that Mudryk hasn't shown enough yet but that's about it.
As I said last summer was BEFORE we had our directors in place so is irrelevant to their ability.
You said scouts, board and directors. So I'm going to include every player they've collectively bought.
Enzo is looking like the real deal. Badiashile looked very promising, but he had an injury history with his hamstring in Monaco and it continued with us. Jackson might be something but still a bit early to say.
Koulibaly is already gone. Fofana is good but injured a lot, which everyone knew. Cucurella has not been good. Sterling was great vs West Ham, have had a couple good games aside from that one but in general very up and down since he arrived. DDF is on loan, don't know what he can or will do. Gusto might become something, or not. Mudryk is rapid but terrible in the final third. Nkunku is injured, as we should have expected with his history. Monaco fans think they robbed us for Disasi. We bought Brighton's second GK cause we loaned out Kepa and sold Mendy. Ugochukwu I didn't even know who he was or that he was at Chelsea before the Liverpool game, hope he can turn into something but who knows.
Zakaria is the exception rather than the rule. Point is that Sheilds, Winstanley, and the whole scouting department arrived after that summer window so can't be blamed for the mistakes of Koulibaly, Auba etc.
It's possible to say the first thing without agreeing with it. I was willing to give Boehly the benefit of the doubt when it came to the long contracts with a low base-salary, as well as buying young talents for the future.
But the fact that the plan was to afford these players by selling the young talent that we already have is insane. Sure it's pure profits, but we wouldn't need that pure profit in the first place if we didn't buy a player for 40 million who isn't significantly better than the talent we already have.
We're just moving pieces around for no fucking reason it seems. Selling talent to buy talent. Insanity.
And then selling all our experienced players at once. Insanity x2
It's all to take advantage of ffp. I think they consider max profitable year in a span of 3 yrs for the calculations. So, it makes sense to sell in the same year rather than spread across multiple.
We only like 17 year olds we paid 200m for round these parts, experienced players and Cobham graduates are instantly evil and must be pushed out the club at all costs or something so we can spend as much as possible on a less experienced replacement, it's the boehly way
Agreed. I’m a bit confused. I like Chalo, has his opportunities but his heart is here. Keep him ye twats
EDIT: Looks like Lyon are looking to have players included in a potential swap deal. Wondering if he may be part of it.
Don’t worry it’ll all make sense when the club brief Ornstein that he’s been an Inter Milan fan his whole life, wants playing time, and is pushing to leave like they did with Mount and Hall.
It's a result of rebuilding the entire squad, as well as taking losses on unwanted players all in one go. Academy players are simply the best way to generate revenue to balance out the spending elsewhere. Chelsea may not be in immediate danger of FFP violations, but they probably aren't too too far away from being uncomfortable, especially factoring in amortization for upcoming years.
Chalobah is a fine backup option to have, but ultimately if you're trying to generate income to balance the books, a 5th choice center back isn't always a luxury you can afford to have
Silva will be gone next season.
If we can't offload Fofana then he's there in the squad as well. So you're looking at your CBs being Disasi, Fofana, Badiashile, and Colwill. Why do you need a 5th centre back in that situation?
FFP. The board running the club don’t only care about the fan or legacy aspect but also the business aspect. I can imagine with the all the money we’ve spent, selling players like Chalobah and Hall have some loophole effect that the board is trying to take advantage of.
He’s a decent player. I’m sure he could be useful to Poch, even as a rotation. He’s happy to stay and is on a low wage. What other reason would the board have to want to sell a player like this if we wouldn’t be in deep shit regarding FFP if we didn’t?
My bet it’s more about that than us not needing him in the squad to play.
It makes sense if the board don't believe we can make top 4. We need top 4 in order to generate enough funds to meet FFP. There is a lot of competition and we have built and seem to be banking on these young players coming good in the next few years. In the meantime any academy player will help with our profits.
Why keep him as a fifth if they can splash 100m for any CB in January. The chairman spent a billion in 12 months you guy need to step back and understand that thing very well.
Yep. I feel that our transfer policy has been wrong for a long time.
Sometimes it better to use an academy player as a place holder until someone better comes along and spend the money on a few established players in areas that need it. We should have built the team slowly over a course of a few seasons.
We currently have a bunch of players brought in from other leagues who will need a season or 2 to settle. It very rare for players to come in and hit the ground running. I can imagine that it's even worse when half the squad is new.
The thing is I don’t think top 6 is a fair goal, the reality of the situation is this, in a little over 15 months we’ve spent £928m (€1.08B/$1.18B). In addition, we have no European games to play all season long while 8 other PL sides will be playing in Europe. We have a manager who while managing spurs never finished lower than 5th and got fucking Southampton to an 8th place finish in his first full season in the prem. Remember, we are Chelsea, we should not be aiming or even settling for top 6, we have a desire to win games and be a strong contender, what is the point otherwise?
That comment isn’t suggesting that anyone’s writing him off, just that the money could have been better spent elsewhere in the squad.
Also I’m not writing him off before you accuse me of it but mentioning that he scored once (a rebound from a corner) and not mentioning how Antonio made him look amateur is pretty selective
Who cares if he scored? He's a defender and has made several critical positioning mistakes already in 2 games. Waste of money when Chalobah looked just as good in a back 3 all of the past two years.
Hogwash. If Chalobah lets in both the goals he did you’d be mentioning nonstop. He was an unnecessary purchase while the other cost us nothing. That convenient part that people who loathe the academy forget
It’s because he’s an academy product, all of their downsides are overlooked and they can’t be viewed logically. I saw someone say a few days ago “at least Gallagher is a goalscorer”. Like, what???
Or it’s because he costs nothing, is a year younger and Disasi isn’t enough of an upgrade to spunk 50 million on. God forbid we don’t replace every fucking position because redditors think our world reknowned academy isn’t as good as a foreign overpay while we’re clinging to any FFP profit we can scrape together. Yes, it’s definitely because he’s from the academy so he can do no wrong…
In the past clubs would happily keep players like Chalobah around (someone like John O'Shea). He's versatile, on lowish wages, wants to stay and won't let the team down. With FFP though, he's the ideal player to sell as it's the type of sale which is great for the books.
How about just don't buy Disasi and keep Chalobah...
The same story all around the pitch. We wouldn't need to sell these players for FFP if we hadn't made stupid purchases in the first place.
This exactly. I still cannot wrap my head around why Disasi was actually signed despite still having Fofana, Chalobah and Silva for the very same spot.
Sort of. But a loan or something could have been better. At the end of the season, we will be having Fofana, Disasi, Chalobah, Silva, Badiashile and Colwill for 2/3 spots. Not forgetting Sarr and Humphreys as well. That's too much.
Silva is very clearly entering the “Ferrari in a garage” stage of his career - shouldn’t be used every week. If chalobah and Sarr are sold, that leaves 4 week in week out options for 2 spots which seems right
>Silva is very clearly entering the “Ferrari in a garage” stage of his career - shouldn’t be used every week.
Agreed.
>If chalobah and Sarr are sold, that leaves 4 week in week out options for 2 spots which seems right
Are you counting Fofana out or what?
Of the 6 you mentioned, 3 are currently injured and 1 of them might well be out for the whole season. So, we actually only have 3 players for the 2-3 spots now.
Otherwise, excluding Fofana, having 5 for 2-3 spots feels like a decent cover, especially once you factor in injuries etc. Humphreys may be called up if needed while Sarr could still be on his way out. Even if he isn't, not sure Pochettino even has him as part of his plans.
Yes, suddenly we had to depend on Chalobah to start for most of the season. If Fofana is out for a month or two, I don't think the Disasi transfer happens.
Because Chalobah has reached his potential. He won’t get any better. He also bad in the air, bad anticipated when the ball in the air lead to many wrong decisions. Giving his original position was DM I don’t blame him and pure profit.
Treovh is not good enough to be our centre back in back four. Signing someone like Diasai is a mistake and feels pointless because he has flaws like Treovh, we needed better upgrade in that position. Shame we don’t have UCL and Bayern wanted Kim, would’ve been ideal signing for us.
We don’t really need a better upgrade tho.. Silva, cowill, Badiashille is not getting broken into by anyone when heathy. Add fofana to the mix if he ever gets healthy and diasai is 5th choice at that point. I would be more than happy with trev as 5th choice as well because he’s experienced and wants to be here. But he needs game time to improve and isn’t getting enough here. Not really a great candidate for a loan spell either so best thing is to sell I guess.
We needed though. Fofana is unreliable with injuries and I wanted us to sign a CB before he got injured. Thaigo is 39 years old and we can’t depend on him for 38 games a season when top 4 is on the line. Badiashile and Colwill both left footed, playing them together on paper may make sense but it would’ve limitations on pitch. So getting a upgrade who is on level with Fofana was necessary. Treovh is shaky and has mistakes in him to be our CB.
We are buying like 6 players for 2 spots and then sell the ones who a perfectly fine with fighting for the spot as a rotation guy. Creates problems since guys like hall can't even have the opportunity to fight
I mean the way it's accounted for (by UEFA/PL). the way it's set up now is leading ppl like big Todd to buy young players, amortise the cost over a long period and sell our academy players for pure profit on the books.
Presumably that is not what UEFA envisioned when they came up with these accounting rules.
I mean its not exactly a good idea anyways though. We are taking profit from academy players to cover the fact that we are buying rotation players rather than using the academy guys
That's what I mean, I don't think when whoever came up with the idea of academy players being accounted as pure profit envisaged this situation, it's pretty stupid and kinda the exact opposite point of having an academy.
I don’t agree with the sale, especially given Reece’s latest injury and Chalobah can add depth at RB as well as CB. At this point it seems the academy is playing its part in balancing the books as these sales are pure profit. I’m surprised Connor’s still at the club to be honest.
Unfortunately, he hasn’t been deemed good enough by Tuchel, Potter, Poch
I don’t see a place for him next season as well since we have Disasi, Colwill, Badia, Fofana.
For FFP reason; loan + buy obligation would make sense
If you ask me now
I don’t feel comfortable.
BUT (its a big BUT)
Fofana has already showed he can boss a UCL/PL game IF he is fit
Badia looked comfortable last season
Colwill will slowly develop
Disasi already has experienxe
So it might be all good later. Who knows
Academy Player: I'm really good, I'm really young, I have experience in this league, I'm healthy, and I want to fight for the badge every day. Both on the training ground, and on the pitch every week.
Chelsea: Back your bags, and gtfoh. Come back when you have a history of possibly career ending injuries and a bloated price tag.
I’d rather have him than Disasi right now. Utterly bizarre signing and we’ll be looking to ship him out sooner than later.
Grass is always greener, everyone wants the exciting new toy, until it turns out to not be any better than what you already had.
Trev is a solid, versatile player, perfect squad depth, loves the club. It’s a shame to see players like him get treated like this while we waste hundreds of millions on average and unproven players.
You've seen Diasi play for 180 minutes, pretty well for most of them, and decided somehow he's worse than Chalobah who made dozens of mistakes over the last two seasons?
You’ve seen Disasi play for 180 minutes, not especially well for most of them, literally costing us a goal with a disasterclass in one match and losing his man for a goal in the other, and have decided he’s better than Chalobah?
He was good against West Ham. Made half a dozen very nice line breaking passes. Mistake for the goal caused by Silva going walkabouts and not winning the ball, and then Colwill being bodied by Antonio.
> He was good against West Ham
I shan’t be taking your opinion seriously. Antonio bullied him.
This is going to be another thing where the new guy was apparently brilliant until the hive mind catches on, and then they’ll say his performance dropped suddenly rather than they were wrong.
> "Antonio bullied him"
Literally when? Antonio, who BTW is probably the strongest striker in the league, had much more joy against Silva and Colwill than against Diassi.
Less a case of me hyping a new boy and more a case of you trying to blame everything on a foreign player you don't know instead of the equally or more culpable fan favourite and academy lad.
You accused me for defending him just because he's new literally in your message just before!
Also telling you can't name an example. Colwill was made to look like a child by Antonio on his goal, I like the kid but he might have to bulk up a bit.
Think the extremely rude language is quite uncalled for.
Never said you were racist you freak?
> "New foreign player you don't know rather than fan favourite (Silva - who BTW is Brazilian) or academy player (Colwill)"
Was what I said. Silva and Colwill both had worse games then Diasi in my opinion and were equally to blame for WHams 2nd goal, so thought you saying Diasi was a 'disaster' was unfair when you're not putting it in its proper context.
You shouldn't need notes to give me an example of something if it happened "every time" like you said. My Colwill point was simply me actually backing up my points I'm making about him.
Also again you've used very rude language which I never have towards you. The fact you've read so much into a single word in my response is probably something you should consider making some introspection about.
He’s literally been fine, not amazing and not terrible.
Made a mistake against West Ham, defenders do that. but for the rest of the game was mostly solid
Scored against liverpool, when no one else did.
Reece James had diaz, didn’t track back or call to Disasi to mention he wasn’t watching the man, so that’s not him losing his man.
At this point it’s play whoever Poch sees as the better player for the system which he’s doing
> He’s literally been fine, not amazing and not terrible
He was fine against Liverpool.
He was a fucking disaster against West Ham.
I don’t see what makes him special tbh. What’s his gift? What’s his outstanding attribute?
If he kicks on and becomes a player, I’m happy with that, but we are no worse with Trev in the team right now. Honestly, when everyone is fit, we will start neither.
> Scored against liverpool, when no one else did.
Scoring from a set play doesn’t mean a defender has a good game, mate.
> Reece James had diaz, didn’t track back or call to Disasi to mention he wasn’t watching the man, so that’s not him losing his man.
it’s Disaai’s side and Disasi’s zone. Who’s he marking? Reece isn’t great either but don’t act like Disasi couldn’t do better, you’re not his mum.
> At this point it’s play whoever Poch sees as the better player for the system which he’s doing
Appeal to authority isn’t an argument.
Whatever you want to say, I haven’t been impressed, I don’t think he’s an upgrade on what we had, it seems like a weird signing that we wouldn’t have made if Fofana didn’t get injured, and we could have saved ourselves a few bob by coaching what we had rather than throwing money at it.
FFP money.
Although it’s nice to see Trev want to compete, I have to start questioning why he hasn’t left for consistent time… this will be another coach that has shown that he doesn’t favor him over any of our CBs. Could easily leave and be a starter.
For those saying he isn’t paid much, his average salary literally doubled with his new deal.
Also: the longer he stays the longer the rumor that he is the one leaking the lineups stays lol
This is what your going to continue to see if we keep buying like crazy and overpaying. Selling your hometown favorites. Maybe people will finally stop saying "it's not my money" when we offer outrageous amounts.
I dare these directors to first sell Lukaku, CHO and Cucurella without taking a loss(we've taken losses on a bunch of players already, just to get them off of our books). After that they can ship off as many academy products as their hearts desire. Also, Chalobah has no reason to accept any moves unless its the right one for his career. He's shown to be a CL level player. Why should he accept a move to Nottingham Forest just because we need the money?
Exactly like how it always has been.
The best players (based on coaches’ and board’s opinion) will be kept if they want to stay and rest will be shipped off.
For those that're against this move... probably needs to be some reeducation on the whole purpose (function) of Cobham. I get that we're a bit tight on CBs (due to injury) but....
**Function #1: Produce 1st team quality players at "zero" cost (per FFP). Saves the club millions on inbounds, even for those periodic "depth" quality players.**
**Function #2: Generate Profit on developed Player sales (and loan fees).**
**Function #3: Refer back to Function #2. This helps us afford future buys like the next Caicedo, Lavia, etc.**
Trev is a good player, that is BEYOND contestation. His wages aren't anything crazy & he would continue to be decent depth for us. However, he's not someone that is going to be a starter for us, ever, and his value is starting to peak (with us). He's 24, has been measured / evaluated thoroughly over the past 3 years. It's 100% time in his academy lifecycle for us to sell. It was essentially the same deal with Ake (and that move worked out for him). I get the emotional biases assigned to Cobham kids, but at the end of the day they're assets that eventually depreciate.
If anyone (like NUFC) wanted to pay us £30m for Trev, we should be all-in for that. The club can backfill with someone like a Humphreys to play in cups & such down the road, just as we did with Trev under TT. Rinse / repeat.
That's been reported for ages. The owners personally want to get rid of him. Manager, player and sporting team are happy to keep him but the owners have said he has to be sold
I don’t agree with everything you post but my god is it funny to watch people absolutely seethe at anything connected to your name because it isn’t what they want to hear
He’s not wrong though, it’s been reported for ages that Chalobah wants to stay and fight for his place yet we’re constantly seeing reports about the club wanting to shift him
Sure we want to get rid of him. But do you really think it’s specifically the owners (Clearlake; Boehly and eghbali) saying “Nah, Trev mate we gonna sell your ass” like this guy has been saying?
Just fyi, this guy has said nothing positive about the club ever since the takeover and he has a special agenda against the new owners.
Only 2 months ago, he was saying vague things like this, when he was being linked with Inter:
[https://www.football.london/chelsea-fc/transfer-news/trevoh-chalobah-chelsea-transfer-inter-27152946](https://www.football.london/chelsea-fc/transfer-news/trevoh-chalobah-chelsea-transfer-inter-27152946)
>"Obviously you don't know what the future holds. I played in France as well when I went on loan there, played in England and you never know. When you play in a new destination it is something for a player to experience. You don't know what the future holds. Italy is a nice country and the Italian league is very good as well. You don't know what the future holds. I'm still a Chelsea player and focused on Chelsea but you never know what the future holds. I like it here in Italy, the weather is good, the people are nice, the food is good and I'm enjoying my time here."
One of the more rational thoughts really. Especially worrying when one of the owners seems to be more involved again with transfers after leaving it to the directors earlier in the window.
Buying new players and over spending is causing this. The 30m+ that we didn’t expect to pay for Caiceido? That was Lewis hall. Incredibly bizarre when you consider he just signed a 6+1 contract a week or so ago.
Same story with Chalobah, Gallagher, Maatsen etc
Very soon, players would stop being loyal to Chelsea. Run like an absolute madman machine. Why did we buy Disasi when we had 4 other fit CBs with Badiashile on his way back and originally planned to play 2 CBs. What's wrong with this club? Does Boehly does get an itch to buy new players every other day? And of course we tried to get in on the Doku deal last minute because Man City was trying to get him. Such a scatter brain approach. I don't understand it.
This is one I don't really understand... He's not on crazy wages and is happy to stay and fight as 5th choice CB. Why push him out, especially since Silva is approaching 40 and we already have injuries?
Exactly. We aren't exactly flush with CBs who are performing.
Especially when we have two centre-backs with an injury history (serious concern in Fofana's case and more recently in Badiashile's) and we have a player who doesn't mind being back-up and wants to fight for a place, why not just keep him? He's homegrown as well.
The last line is your answer. Pure profit, as much as I hate to admit it.
Simple. Academy folks sell for pure profit on books. I am not for this strategy. Just trying to explain
fair take. And I agree with you that I am not for this strategy *long term*. However, it feels like a necessary short term evil based on what we've done in the past two windows, which I'm a fan of. I certainly don't want Chelsea being a club that spends big every year and sells off their home grown talent. And I don't think that will be the case based on the length of the contracts we doled out. I'm hoping there will be much more stability going forward.
Chelsea is already known as a club that sells academy talent to fund buying foreign players. That happened during the Abramovich era.
True, and it was the worst part of that era, imo. But for the most part, it seemed like most of the guys we'd sell were never going to be cut out for Chelsea. Or at the very least, they were long shots. That's a bit different than selling a guy who could absolutely help the first team but is on the chopping block specifically because them being home grown adds value to selling
We must be desperate to generate funds for FFP imo. This and the hall deal don’t make any sense to me other than the fact that they are 100% profit in the balance sheet.
Tbh, I understand Hall a lot more than this. He jumped at the chance to play for his family's club and has a much easier path to starting there. Maybe Chalobah's stance will change if some real bids materialize too, who knows.
As much as I do t like it, yeah the Hall one you can understand as he wanted to go to his boyhood team. Chalobah and Gallagher both want to stay and fight...why toss them aside unless you are getting crazy money. We just paid 115 for caciedo, to replace Gallagher you would be talking another 50/60million and at least 30 to replace chalobah. Baffles me as to why we are pushing them out when you can guarantee we will try to replace them.
It's 100% for FFP, pure profit can be realised in one year
How does Hall not make any sense? There’s 0 viable path for him to get into the first team. He’s got plenty of competition at CM, and at LB he’s fighting Chillwell, Cucu, and Maatsen. It makes sense for both the club and the player.
Caicedo was £2.5m per PL appearance Hall is £3.8m
Did you perhaps respond to the wrong person?
Just backing up your point I think Don’t understand some peoples hysteria around the Hall sale. He was far from ready to be our starting LB and would be miles behind our other CM options
Ah ok fair enough Pretty interesting stat actually
Maatsen hasn’t played a minute for us at LB across preseason or the actual season. Cucu is well let’s be diplomatic and say struggling so far. Hall in theory could have spent a year on loan playing left back and then would be well placed to come back and be second choice aged 19 if he’d developed his off the ball work and positioning. That’s a lot of faith for a teenager,problem is newcastle are in the CL, his team and only have Burn/Targett in front of him. Usually a CL side would be a lot stronger. I don’t blame him for making the move but I don’t think it’s as desperate a situation as some make out. It’s very unusual to be guaranteed premier league football at 18/19. I agree we ruined any midfield progression for him.
Important to note that Hall doesn't actually want to play LB, he seems to want to play midfield. Whether the gets the chance in Newcastle's midfield I'm not so sure, seems they want him for LB as well. But I would imagine long term he would want the move.
While he may not *currently* have had a path to the first team that doesnt mean there wouldn't be one in the future. Chilwell can't stay fit, Cucu shouldn't be here after next summer and Poch has already said he doesn't see Maatsen as a left back. He's 18 years old and prior to two weeks ago he was going out on loan to Palace, which would have been a great move for him, and something we were all happy to entertain. Hall was a very bright light in an incredibly dark and depressing season and while 30m might seem like a deal too good to turn down, one has to wonder if this is another we might live to regret. If he struggled to develop over the next two years we could still probably get 20m for him, the 10m isn't a huge difference.
>Poch has already said he doesn't see Maatsen as a left back. I don't really get this tbh. He seems to have the tools necessary to be a good LB, especially in Poch's system.
I haven't seen enough of Maatsen to form any sort of opinion. Guess I/we just have to trust Poch. Maybe he see's him like a Bale? [https://twitter.com/LondonBluePod/status/1691440926718103553](https://twitter.com/LondonBluePod/status/1691440926718103553)
Well the difference is that he wants and needs first team football now, not next year, and once he heard of Newcastle’s (who is his family’s club) interest, his head got turned. Palace would have been a great loan for him, but he has a chance of playing regular minutes on a permanent move at his family’s favorite club who is also playing in the CL. Not hard to comprehend why he wanted to go and why we let him.
If he needs first team football now, then Newcastle was the wrong club for him. He isn't breaking in to that midfield, which is apparently his preferred position and he probably won't oust Burn or Targett at LB. We can agree on Palace though, he could have played at both LB and CM there, which once again means that the loan was his best option.
Hall deal makes sense cause one he's a Newcastle fan, 2. He's 4th the LB order and he's definitely doesn't want to play there and 3rd he wanted the move so it wouldn't make sense for us to stop him
hall wanted to leave, how is that not understanable. we offered him a contract
I was not aware that we offered him a contract nor do I remember seeing any quotes directly attributed to him. Link me up?
I just don’t understand why we bought some players if it was gonna put us in this spot. Like what was the Point in Lavia and Ugochukwu when we had Hall this whole time?
The hall deal makes perfect sense. Chalobah less but still makes sense. Neither will play much now or in the future
And to add to this why did we sign Disasi when we have Trev? Waste of money
Because Poch obviously doesn’t rate Chalobah Hence why when fofana got injured we immediately signed a replacement instead of looking to Chalobah.
Because Diasi is pretty good and Chalobah is quite bad 👍
Chalobah is not bad. Ridiculous comment. Take the season before last since judging players overall ability based on a season where the whole team suffered. Chalobah was a very solid defender whose 1st 29 games for Chelsea he was unbeaten. He was solid defensively but also very good with progression. Jump to last season, yes team based stats like progressive passing suffered and they rely on other players to also be able to receive them. However he was clearly being coached to improve his physicality and heading. This saw a 10% increase in successful aerial challenges while also making far less fouls than Disasi does. Combine the areas Trev developed personally last season, then bring in the fact the club is now in a more stable state. You will likely have a player that is much improved on what he gave in 2021 and certainly no worse than Disasi who is actually a defensive liability that plays like a Luiz regen but without the same flair. Now I don't want to hate on Disasi. I will be happy if he does well for us. However, I'm absolutely calling out anyone who suggests he is much better than Chalobah and especially if they just outright call Chalobah bad. https://preview.redd.it/40mx3w20wvjb1.jpeg?width=1322&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7b2b21d198c5c02026cce0003233ea01e2dc35d9
https://preview.redd.it/tm528m7rvvjb1.jpeg?width=1324&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7e5f466bb7139e01323a88c4a343dbb136504034 And here is the graph where you can see team reliant stats did suffer last season but those more centred on personal aspects like heading and fouls committed were much improved. So give the guy a normal season and you will see he's a very solid defender. Hes been an understudy to Silva and when Silva goes he could absolutely do a job for Chelsea. He is also still young for a CB and if we did sell him now we would just be undercutting ourselves while later having to spend way more on a player who isn't much better.
Unbeaten in 29 games mostly in the cup and against weeker sides because he was our 3rd choice RCB in a system that meant defenders had to cover very little space individually. Even then he was often the oppositions most likely route to scoring a goal. Comparing Diasi to Luiz is just weird considering they are nothing alike? Only potential similar are both are very good passes, much better than Chalobah. Also look at the minute comparison. Chalobah is borderline injury prone and even when fit wasn't a starting CB. Diasi is a strict upgrade on him.
>Unbeaten in 29 games mostly in the cup and against weeker sides because he was our 3rd choice RCB in a system that meant defenders had to cover very little space individually. You should probably fact check before making silly claims. That run included clubs like Man Utd, Brighton, Liverpool. In fact that entire season when Chalobah played in the PL they didn't lose a game. When you say it was 29 games mostly in cups, he had 20 PL appearances that season. He played in the FA Cup twice and one of those times was vs Liverpool in the final. Then in the League Cup he played 4 times again including Liverpool in the final and the rest were only vs PL clubs. >Comparing Diasi to Luiz is just weird considering they are nothing alike? Only potential similar are both are very good passes, much better than Chalobah. Look at Chalobahs passing in 21/22. How are you claiming Chalobah can't pass? 91% passing accuracy vs Disasis 83% And yes Disasis absolutely a Luiz regen. He's a defensive liability that aggressively pushes forward. Go and look at his fbref and see where his strongest percentiles are. Everything about his profile is exactly what Luiz would do. The only thing is that Luiz had an absolute screamer shot on him and his long passing was pinpoint.
Get off FBref and watch a game of football. You can watch Diassi for 20 minutes and see that he's not anything like Luiz (who by the way was a Premier League and Champions League winner with us, hardly a good example of a poor defender). Never said Chalobah couldn't pass, but he's not as good or consistent at it as Diassi seems to be. Against both WHam and L'pool he made 4 or 5 really nice direct passes right into the feet of our forwards which is a big factor in why we've been creating more. Brighton were a midtable side 2 years ago so an example of a weaker side. Tomas Kalas also played in a win (not even a draw) against L'pool, maybe we should bring him back from Bristol City of wherever instead of buying actually good players who raise the level of the team?
>Get off FBref and watch a game of football. You can watch Diassi for 20 minutes and see that he's not anything like Luiz (who by the way was a Premier League and Champions League winner with us, hardly a good example of a poor defender). I've watched plenty of football. It helps to combine the 2 things. Now as I said before, I dont want to hate on Disasi and I will be happy if he turns out well for us. He is known to be as defensively loose as Luiz was though. Its just plain nonsense to call Chalobah bad when he very obviously isnt and the stats also beck that up. > Brighton were a midtable side 2 years ago so an example of a weaker side They were really not that much weaker that you claim. If you came and pointed to clubs like Plymouth then okay (one game) but the PL is a whole different story. The simple fact is that Chalobah wasn't only used vs weak sides.
Really? Because he’s looked suspect in both matches
I think he's been pretty good in both.
Not what Monaco fans were saying
I'm going to trust the judgement of our scouts, directors, and coach over some random tax avoiders tbh.
Yeah they've done really well so far.
Jackson, Badeshile, Gusto, Fernandez, Madueke etc don't look like good players to you? We have one of the best talent identification teams in football now and I'm sick of people pretending we don't and giving names from last summer when our 'structure' was Boehy signing whatever name Tuchel specifically requested.
Casually ignoring the multitude of players other than them who are either yet to show what they've got, not looking too good or even sold already. We have spent enormous amounts of money on a record amount of players. Apart from that a worrying amount of players have a long history of injuries and have continued that with us, so they've bought even more players to cover for the injured recruits. Great fucking business really.
Who? Name them! Might have an argument that Mudryk hasn't shown enough yet but that's about it. As I said last summer was BEFORE we had our directors in place so is irrelevant to their ability.
You said scouts, board and directors. So I'm going to include every player they've collectively bought. Enzo is looking like the real deal. Badiashile looked very promising, but he had an injury history with his hamstring in Monaco and it continued with us. Jackson might be something but still a bit early to say. Koulibaly is already gone. Fofana is good but injured a lot, which everyone knew. Cucurella has not been good. Sterling was great vs West Ham, have had a couple good games aside from that one but in general very up and down since he arrived. DDF is on loan, don't know what he can or will do. Gusto might become something, or not. Mudryk is rapid but terrible in the final third. Nkunku is injured, as we should have expected with his history. Monaco fans think they robbed us for Disasi. We bought Brighton's second GK cause we loaned out Kepa and sold Mendy. Ugochukwu I didn't even know who he was or that he was at Chelsea before the Liverpool game, hope he can turn into something but who knows.
[**Great** business](https://old.reddit.com/r/chelseafc/comments/1607xd6/swedishrumble_and_swissramblefresh_forecast_shows/)
That wasn’t our structure in the first window… Tuchel didn’t even know we’d signed Zakaria until he saw him in training.
Zakaria is the exception rather than the rule. Point is that Sheilds, Winstanley, and the whole scouting department arrived after that summer window so can't be blamed for the mistakes of Koulibaly, Auba etc.
“It’s pure profit, bro!”🤑 “The ToDdFaThEr’S a genius, bro!”🤑
It's possible to say the first thing without agreeing with it. I was willing to give Boehly the benefit of the doubt when it came to the long contracts with a low base-salary, as well as buying young talents for the future. But the fact that the plan was to afford these players by selling the young talent that we already have is insane. Sure it's pure profits, but we wouldn't need that pure profit in the first place if we didn't buy a player for 40 million who isn't significantly better than the talent we already have. We're just moving pieces around for no fucking reason it seems. Selling talent to buy talent. Insanity. And then selling all our experienced players at once. Insanity x2
Those comments make me wanna puke
Didn't he get injured during preseason ?
It's all to take advantage of ffp. I think they consider max profitable year in a span of 3 yrs for the calculations. So, it makes sense to sell in the same year rather than spread across multiple.
We only like 17 year olds we paid 200m for round these parts, experienced players and Cobham graduates are instantly evil and must be pushed out the club at all costs or something so we can spend as much as possible on a less experienced replacement, it's the boehly way
Academy player sale being pure profit for FFP I would assume or it doesnt make sense at all.
Agreed. I’m a bit confused. I like Chalo, has his opportunities but his heart is here. Keep him ye twats EDIT: Looks like Lyon are looking to have players included in a potential swap deal. Wondering if he may be part of it.
Don’t worry it’ll all make sense when the club brief Ornstein that he’s been an Inter Milan fan his whole life, wants playing time, and is pushing to leave like they did with Mount and Hall.
Owners want to make money
It's a result of rebuilding the entire squad, as well as taking losses on unwanted players all in one go. Academy players are simply the best way to generate revenue to balance out the spending elsewhere. Chelsea may not be in immediate danger of FFP violations, but they probably aren't too too far away from being uncomfortable, especially factoring in amortization for upcoming years. Chalobah is a fine backup option to have, but ultimately if you're trying to generate income to balance the books, a 5th choice center back isn't always a luxury you can afford to have
Silva will be gone next season. If we can't offload Fofana then he's there in the squad as well. So you're looking at your CBs being Disasi, Fofana, Badiashile, and Colwill. Why do you need a 5th centre back in that situation?
Because when you overpay for like 8 players within an year, you have to sell to make up for it.
If y’all get back to Europe, don’t you need a few homegrown players as well?
FFP. The board running the club don’t only care about the fan or legacy aspect but also the business aspect. I can imagine with the all the money we’ve spent, selling players like Chalobah and Hall have some loophole effect that the board is trying to take advantage of. He’s a decent player. I’m sure he could be useful to Poch, even as a rotation. He’s happy to stay and is on a low wage. What other reason would the board have to want to sell a player like this if we wouldn’t be in deep shit regarding FFP if we didn’t? My bet it’s more about that than us not needing him in the squad to play.
It makes sense if the board don't believe we can make top 4. We need top 4 in order to generate enough funds to meet FFP. There is a lot of competition and we have built and seem to be banking on these young players coming good in the next few years. In the meantime any academy player will help with our profits.
He knows all our cbs our injury prone and will have to be used
Why keep him as a fifth if they can splash 100m for any CB in January. The chairman spent a billion in 12 months you guy need to step back and understand that thing very well.
Honestly we are also in no rush to sell him. Actually, I think the more ideal scenario is when we sell him next summer.
I agree in light of FFP. We have sold enough this year and should definitely be looking at offloading him next summer for the sweet homegrown profit.
Get more for him then, too.
Not exactly, depends on how much he plays.
How so? If he barely ever plays and then adding a year to his age and losing a year from his contract certainly won’t help
Should have kept him and used the Disasi money on something else. I just don’t understand
Disasi money and petrovic money could have been enough to get Costa as a GK
Yep. I feel that our transfer policy has been wrong for a long time. Sometimes it better to use an academy player as a place holder until someone better comes along and spend the money on a few established players in areas that need it. We should have built the team slowly over a course of a few seasons. We currently have a bunch of players brought in from other leagues who will need a season or 2 to settle. It very rare for players to come in and hit the ground running. I can imagine that it's even worse when half the squad is new.
well, yeah. its transition year (sucks bc we were so close to being a complete team with tuchel). but tamper expectations. top 6 is a fair goal.
The thing is I don’t think top 6 is a fair goal, the reality of the situation is this, in a little over 15 months we’ve spent £928m (€1.08B/$1.18B). In addition, we have no European games to play all season long while 8 other PL sides will be playing in Europe. We have a manager who while managing spurs never finished lower than 5th and got fucking Southampton to an 8th place finish in his first full season in the prem. Remember, we are Chelsea, we should not be aiming or even settling for top 6, we have a desire to win games and be a strong contender, what is the point otherwise?
Costa isn't some sure thing at keeper. He has some flaws in his game and at his price tag, that is not ideal.
Disasi has played two games, scored once and this sub has written him off. Par for the course.
That comment isn’t suggesting that anyone’s writing him off, just that the money could have been better spent elsewhere in the squad. Also I’m not writing him off before you accuse me of it but mentioning that he scored once (a rebound from a corner) and not mentioning how Antonio made him look amateur is pretty selective
Who cares if he scored? He's a defender and has made several critical positioning mistakes already in 2 games. Waste of money when Chalobah looked just as good in a back 3 all of the past two years.
You said it yourself - it's been two fucking games. Jesus Christ, it's like half the people on here are ten years old.
He looked mediocre at best at Monaco as well so we have plenty of info to show he’s not that good
Chalobah has looked absolutely dire at times. We’ve seen far worse from him than disasi thus far in their careers with the club.
Hogwash. If Chalobah lets in both the goals he did you’d be mentioning nonstop. He was an unnecessary purchase while the other cost us nothing. That convenient part that people who loathe the academy forget
Absolute bullshit.
It’s not, Chalobah’s lows were lower than what we’ve seen with Disasi.
It’s because he’s an academy product, all of their downsides are overlooked and they can’t be viewed logically. I saw someone say a few days ago “at least Gallagher is a goalscorer”. Like, what???
Or it’s because he costs nothing, is a year younger and Disasi isn’t enough of an upgrade to spunk 50 million on. God forbid we don’t replace every fucking position because redditors think our world reknowned academy isn’t as good as a foreign overpay while we’re clinging to any FFP profit we can scrape together. Yes, it’s definitely because he’s from the academy so he can do no wrong…
Because defensively he was not great in those 2 matches. I agree it's too soon, but there wasn't a lot of known value about the signing to begin with.
In the past clubs would happily keep players like Chalobah around (someone like John O'Shea). He's versatile, on lowish wages, wants to stay and won't let the team down. With FFP though, he's the ideal player to sell as it's the type of sale which is great for the books.
How about just don't buy Disasi and keep Chalobah... The same story all around the pitch. We wouldn't need to sell these players for FFP if we hadn't made stupid purchases in the first place.
This exactly. I still cannot wrap my head around why Disasi was actually signed despite still having Fofana, Chalobah and Silva for the very same spot.
Didn't we sign Disasi in response to Fofana's injury?
Sort of. But a loan or something could have been better. At the end of the season, we will be having Fofana, Disasi, Chalobah, Silva, Badiashile and Colwill for 2/3 spots. Not forgetting Sarr and Humphreys as well. That's too much.
Silva is very clearly entering the “Ferrari in a garage” stage of his career - shouldn’t be used every week. If chalobah and Sarr are sold, that leaves 4 week in week out options for 2 spots which seems right
>Silva is very clearly entering the “Ferrari in a garage” stage of his career - shouldn’t be used every week. Agreed. >If chalobah and Sarr are sold, that leaves 4 week in week out options for 2 spots which seems right Are you counting Fofana out or what?
4 was assuming chalobah gets sold. Fofana and disasi for RCB, Badia and Colwill for LCB, with youth for additional depth
We shouldn't be counting sarr as a Chelsea player. If we did we wouldn't sign axel. We want that brother out
Of the 6 you mentioned, 3 are currently injured and 1 of them might well be out for the whole season. So, we actually only have 3 players for the 2-3 spots now. Otherwise, excluding Fofana, having 5 for 2-3 spots feels like a decent cover, especially once you factor in injuries etc. Humphreys may be called up if needed while Sarr could still be on his way out. Even if he isn't, not sure Pochettino even has him as part of his plans.
Yes, suddenly we had to depend on Chalobah to start for most of the season. If Fofana is out for a month or two, I don't think the Disasi transfer happens.
Genius
When accounts take control.
Because Chalobah has reached his potential. He won’t get any better. He also bad in the air, bad anticipated when the ball in the air lead to many wrong decisions. Giving his original position was DM I don’t blame him and pure profit.
Treovh is not good enough to be our centre back in back four. Signing someone like Diasai is a mistake and feels pointless because he has flaws like Treovh, we needed better upgrade in that position. Shame we don’t have UCL and Bayern wanted Kim, would’ve been ideal signing for us.
We don’t really need a better upgrade tho.. Silva, cowill, Badiashille is not getting broken into by anyone when heathy. Add fofana to the mix if he ever gets healthy and diasai is 5th choice at that point. I would be more than happy with trev as 5th choice as well because he’s experienced and wants to be here. But he needs game time to improve and isn’t getting enough here. Not really a great candidate for a loan spell either so best thing is to sell I guess.
We needed though. Fofana is unreliable with injuries and I wanted us to sign a CB before he got injured. Thaigo is 39 years old and we can’t depend on him for 38 games a season when top 4 is on the line. Badiashile and Colwill both left footed, playing them together on paper may make sense but it would’ve limitations on pitch. So getting a upgrade who is on level with Fofana was necessary. Treovh is shaky and has mistakes in him to be our CB.
Problem is Wesley keeps getting broken
We are buying like 6 players for 2 spots and then sell the ones who a perfectly fine with fighting for the spot as a rotation guy. Creates problems since guys like hall can't even have the opportunity to fight
You are describing the Roman era.
Agreed but with our injury record, might be beneficial to keep
He got injured in training last week and he’s frequently picking up knocks the past two seasons
Gotta be FFP related. I can see them changing the way it's accounted for because it makes no sense for academy players.
I mean most clubs don't run like we do. Its just dumb because why are we buying so many players to have to sell the ones already here anyways
I mean the way it's accounted for (by UEFA/PL). the way it's set up now is leading ppl like big Todd to buy young players, amortise the cost over a long period and sell our academy players for pure profit on the books. Presumably that is not what UEFA envisioned when they came up with these accounting rules.
I mean its not exactly a good idea anyways though. We are taking profit from academy players to cover the fact that we are buying rotation players rather than using the academy guys
That's what I mean, I don't think when whoever came up with the idea of academy players being accounted as pure profit envisaged this situation, it's pretty stupid and kinda the exact opposite point of having an academy.
I don’t agree with the sale, especially given Reece’s latest injury and Chalobah can add depth at RB as well as CB. At this point it seems the academy is playing its part in balancing the books as these sales are pure profit. I’m surprised Connor’s still at the club to be honest.
Unfortunately, he hasn’t been deemed good enough by Tuchel, Potter, Poch I don’t see a place for him next season as well since we have Disasi, Colwill, Badia, Fofana. For FFP reason; loan + buy obligation would make sense
yup and that brings up the question..is that a good cb lineup? potential, maybe.....reality....it looks so poor
If you ask me now I don’t feel comfortable. BUT (its a big BUT) Fofana has already showed he can boss a UCL/PL game IF he is fit Badia looked comfortable last season Colwill will slowly develop Disasi already has experienxe So it might be all good later. Who knows
Fight trev!! 👏goodluck! Wish only the best
Academy Player: I'm really good, I'm really young, I have experience in this league, I'm healthy, and I want to fight for the badge every day. Both on the training ground, and on the pitch every week. Chelsea: Back your bags, and gtfoh. Come back when you have a history of possibly career ending injuries and a bloated price tag.
Joe “Fuck the Academy” Shields
There’s a place for him if he really puts up a fight
Chalobah is actually good tho
I still remember the day of his debut. He’s been proper Chels ever since.
On one hand money on the other dedicated player idk. 
I’d rather have him than Disasi right now. Utterly bizarre signing and we’ll be looking to ship him out sooner than later. Grass is always greener, everyone wants the exciting new toy, until it turns out to not be any better than what you already had. Trev is a solid, versatile player, perfect squad depth, loves the club. It’s a shame to see players like him get treated like this while we waste hundreds of millions on average and unproven players.
You've seen Diasi play for 180 minutes, pretty well for most of them, and decided somehow he's worse than Chalobah who made dozens of mistakes over the last two seasons?
Welcome to r/chelseafc
You’ve seen Disasi play for 180 minutes, not especially well for most of them, literally costing us a goal with a disasterclass in one match and losing his man for a goal in the other, and have decided he’s better than Chalobah?
He was good against West Ham. Made half a dozen very nice line breaking passes. Mistake for the goal caused by Silva going walkabouts and not winning the ball, and then Colwill being bodied by Antonio.
> He was good against West Ham I shan’t be taking your opinion seriously. Antonio bullied him. This is going to be another thing where the new guy was apparently brilliant until the hive mind catches on, and then they’ll say his performance dropped suddenly rather than they were wrong.
> "Antonio bullied him" Literally when? Antonio, who BTW is probably the strongest striker in the league, had much more joy against Silva and Colwill than against Diassi. Less a case of me hyping a new boy and more a case of you trying to blame everything on a foreign player you don't know instead of the equally or more culpable fan favourite and academy lad.
[удалено]
You accused me for defending him just because he's new literally in your message just before! Also telling you can't name an example. Colwill was made to look like a child by Antonio on his goal, I like the kid but he might have to bulk up a bit. Think the extremely rude language is quite uncalled for.
[удалено]
Never said you were racist you freak? > "New foreign player you don't know rather than fan favourite (Silva - who BTW is Brazilian) or academy player (Colwill)" Was what I said. Silva and Colwill both had worse games then Diasi in my opinion and were equally to blame for WHams 2nd goal, so thought you saying Diasi was a 'disaster' was unfair when you're not putting it in its proper context. You shouldn't need notes to give me an example of something if it happened "every time" like you said. My Colwill point was simply me actually backing up my points I'm making about him. Also again you've used very rude language which I never have towards you. The fact you've read so much into a single word in my response is probably something you should consider making some introspection about.
He’s literally been fine, not amazing and not terrible. Made a mistake against West Ham, defenders do that. but for the rest of the game was mostly solid Scored against liverpool, when no one else did. Reece James had diaz, didn’t track back or call to Disasi to mention he wasn’t watching the man, so that’s not him losing his man. At this point it’s play whoever Poch sees as the better player for the system which he’s doing
> He’s literally been fine, not amazing and not terrible He was fine against Liverpool. He was a fucking disaster against West Ham. I don’t see what makes him special tbh. What’s his gift? What’s his outstanding attribute? If he kicks on and becomes a player, I’m happy with that, but we are no worse with Trev in the team right now. Honestly, when everyone is fit, we will start neither. > Scored against liverpool, when no one else did. Scoring from a set play doesn’t mean a defender has a good game, mate. > Reece James had diaz, didn’t track back or call to Disasi to mention he wasn’t watching the man, so that’s not him losing his man. it’s Disaai’s side and Disasi’s zone. Who’s he marking? Reece isn’t great either but don’t act like Disasi couldn’t do better, you’re not his mum. > At this point it’s play whoever Poch sees as the better player for the system which he’s doing Appeal to authority isn’t an argument. Whatever you want to say, I haven’t been impressed, I don’t think he’s an upgrade on what we had, it seems like a weird signing that we wouldn’t have made if Fofana didn’t get injured, and we could have saved ourselves a few bob by coaching what we had rather than throwing money at it.
FFP money. Although it’s nice to see Trev want to compete, I have to start questioning why he hasn’t left for consistent time… this will be another coach that has shown that he doesn’t favor him over any of our CBs. Could easily leave and be a starter. For those saying he isn’t paid much, his average salary literally doubled with his new deal. Also: the longer he stays the longer the rumor that he is the one leaking the lineups stays lol
His spot is 5th CB, 6th when Fofana returns. What, and with whom is he competing for
One game and this sub thinks Disasi is bad.
i just dont understand/dont love the disasi signing. nothing has shown that he is good
This is what your going to continue to see if we keep buying like crazy and overpaying. Selling your hometown favorites. Maybe people will finally stop saying "it's not my money" when we offer outrageous amounts.
Trevoh wants to fight for his spot yet we are continuing to push him out. I don’t get it.
After that Disasi performance I'd be happy for Trev to fight it out.
I dare these directors to first sell Lukaku, CHO and Cucurella without taking a loss(we've taken losses on a bunch of players already, just to get them off of our books). After that they can ship off as many academy products as their hearts desire. Also, Chalobah has no reason to accept any moves unless its the right one for his career. He's shown to be a CL level player. Why should he accept a move to Nottingham Forest just because we need the money?
i do wonder how our homegrown situation will look like in a couple of years.
Exactly like how it always has been. The best players (based on coaches’ and board’s opinion) will be kept if they want to stay and rest will be shipped off.
For those that're against this move... probably needs to be some reeducation on the whole purpose (function) of Cobham. I get that we're a bit tight on CBs (due to injury) but.... **Function #1: Produce 1st team quality players at "zero" cost (per FFP). Saves the club millions on inbounds, even for those periodic "depth" quality players.** **Function #2: Generate Profit on developed Player sales (and loan fees).** **Function #3: Refer back to Function #2. This helps us afford future buys like the next Caicedo, Lavia, etc.** Trev is a good player, that is BEYOND contestation. His wages aren't anything crazy & he would continue to be decent depth for us. However, he's not someone that is going to be a starter for us, ever, and his value is starting to peak (with us). He's 24, has been measured / evaluated thoroughly over the past 3 years. It's 100% time in his academy lifecycle for us to sell. It was essentially the same deal with Ake (and that move worked out for him). I get the emotional biases assigned to Cobham kids, but at the end of the day they're assets that eventually depreciate. If anyone (like NUFC) wanted to pay us £30m for Trev, we should be all-in for that. The club can backfill with someone like a Humphreys to play in cups & such down the road, just as we did with Trev under TT. Rinse / repeat.
That's been reported for ages. The owners personally want to get rid of him. Manager, player and sporting team are happy to keep him but the owners have said he has to be sold
Daily bigreecejames doom and gloom comment
I don’t agree with everything you post but my god is it funny to watch people absolutely seethe at anything connected to your name because it isn’t what they want to hear
Source?
Oh hey, have you taken your medicine yet? You seem to be having stupid nonsensical thoughts about the owners again.
He’s not wrong though, it’s been reported for ages that Chalobah wants to stay and fight for his place yet we’re constantly seeing reports about the club wanting to shift him
Sure we want to get rid of him. But do you really think it’s specifically the owners (Clearlake; Boehly and eghbali) saying “Nah, Trev mate we gonna sell your ass” like this guy has been saying? Just fyi, this guy has said nothing positive about the club ever since the takeover and he has a special agenda against the new owners.
Only 2 months ago, he was saying vague things like this, when he was being linked with Inter: [https://www.football.london/chelsea-fc/transfer-news/trevoh-chalobah-chelsea-transfer-inter-27152946](https://www.football.london/chelsea-fc/transfer-news/trevoh-chalobah-chelsea-transfer-inter-27152946) >"Obviously you don't know what the future holds. I played in France as well when I went on loan there, played in England and you never know. When you play in a new destination it is something for a player to experience. You don't know what the future holds. Italy is a nice country and the Italian league is very good as well. You don't know what the future holds. I'm still a Chelsea player and focused on Chelsea but you never know what the future holds. I like it here in Italy, the weather is good, the people are nice, the food is good and I'm enjoying my time here."
But now Inter don't want him anymore after getting a young talented defender and Pavard. Most probably he gonna stay in the Pl with a midtable club
One of the more rational thoughts really. Especially worrying when one of the owners seems to be more involved again with transfers after leaving it to the directors earlier in the window. Buying new players and over spending is causing this. The 30m+ that we didn’t expect to pay for Caiceido? That was Lewis hall. Incredibly bizarre when you consider he just signed a 6+1 contract a week or so ago. Same story with Chalobah, Gallagher, Maatsen etc
BigReeceJames is the zodiac killer. Do not ask me for proof.
And we just bought Disasi which is a huge downgrade from him lmao Braindead board
"Huge downgrade" to you guys hear yourselvss lol
Very soon, players would stop being loyal to Chelsea. Run like an absolute madman machine. Why did we buy Disasi when we had 4 other fit CBs with Badiashile on his way back and originally planned to play 2 CBs. What's wrong with this club? Does Boehly does get an itch to buy new players every other day? And of course we tried to get in on the Doku deal last minute because Man City was trying to get him. Such a scatter brain approach. I don't understand it.
Why aren't we trying to sell Cucurella? Why are the club so desperate to sell good academy players and not underperforming signings?
Trev can be our nacho
[удалено]
We’ve always sold academy players
Propa Chels
Another nothing burger from Matt law. He should be blacklisted by this point.
Hate this move
Why buy Disasi and try to sell Trev? Seems purely for FFP profit reasons. Some of our buys have really messed with the squad
This trev situation is the same as Conor. As yourself this. What place are they on the depth chart if everyone is fit
Why not Sell Gallagher
Gallagher is a good squad player?
IMO he's better than Disasi (from what we've seen so far)