Boehly is going to ruin Chelsea (hopefully)

[ForeverRed1]

Have you actually got any evidence of that?

Well you have scattergunned transfers. You have gone in and bought multiple new players, some at ridiculous prices, with no room to gel your team. You can have a team of very good, expensive signings but it doesn’t make you a team. See us during our galatico spells with the likes of pogba. Didn’t work.

you have given these players massive contracts on big sums of money.. what if they don’t work? What if they don’t gel? What if they have the wrong attitude. I’m only saying that because as a United fan we have been there. We ended up with a squad of individuals. Horrible horrible time for the club and it feels you could go the same way here.

you have a manager there who has a eye for a player. Certain types of players. It’s not about chucking money at a team and hoping it sticks. Do you need to spend 300mil + on players to create a good team. Nope. Your owner would have been better with a 2/3 year process. Added to the squad gradually. Let Potter bed in a squad and his type of players, He’s literally gone and totally reshaped your entire squad in one go. It might work and he will be a genius or it could genuinely be a disaster and screw you long term. You could be stuck with these players, sat on massive contracts for 8 years. Yikes. Most of this is very very unproven and a huge risk.

 

[AdamColeBebe]

Have you actually got any evidence of that?

You've spent what, £600m, you can't score a goal and you're 10th. What more evidence do you need?

 

[redshaw]

Chelsea are a bug that just won’t die.

In a rational world, they should have done a Leeds and gotten bankrupt and fallen down the ladder.

In came the first major sugar daddy owner and instead of going bankrupt, they become a force in world football.

It'll probably stay like that now as the west London location and name will draw people in like the Americans that bought them.

 

[Dancfc]

Well you have scattergunned transfers. You have gone in and bought multiple new players, some at ridiculous prices, with no room to gel your team. You can have a team of very good, expensive signings but it doesn’t make you a team. See us during our galatico spells with the likes of pogba. Didn’t work.

you have given these players massive contracts on big sums of money.. what if they don’t work? What if they don’t gel? What if they have the wrong attitude. I’m only saying that because as a United fan we have been there. We ended up with a squad of individuals. Horrible horrible time for the club and it feels you could go the same way here.

you have a manager there who has a eye for a player. Certain types of players. It’s not about chucking money at a team and hoping it sticks. Do you need to spend 300mil + on players to create a good team. Nope. Your owner would have been better with a 2/3 year process. Added to the squad gradually. Let Potter bed in a squad and his type of players, He’s literally gone and totally reshaped your entire squad in one go. It might work and he will be a genius or it could genuinely be a disaster and screw you long term. You could be stuck with these players, sat on massive contracts for 8 years. Yikes. Most of this is very very unproven and a huge risk.

For us to be "stuck with them" they'll have to be Bakayoko/Drinkwater level of bad. Whether the signings (bar Enzo who in my opinion is a sure bet bar a catastrophic injury) work is debatable, but they'll always be a market for a player like Mudryk even if he doesn't hit the absolute hype or a proactive defender like Badiashille. Not only that both of those players are on wages that aren't exactly unshiftable.

Kouli is the one player I'm worried may sit on his contract granted.

Also the resident Brighton fan here (can't tag for some reason) made some really good posts explaining how the January window were typical Potter type signings.

You've spent what, £600m, you can't score a goal and you're 10th. What more evidence do you need?

I'll refer you to the final paragraph of the post above.

 

[do.ob]

For us to be "stuck with them" they'll have to be Bakayoko/Drinkwater level of bad. Whether the signings (bar Enzo who in my opinion is a sure bet bar a catastrophic injury) work is debatable, but they'll always be a market for a player like Mudryk even if he doesn't hit the absolute hype or a proactive defender like Badiashille. Not only that both of those players are on wages that aren't exactly unshiftable.

Kouli is the one player I'm worried may sit on his contract granted.

Also the resident Brighton fan here (can't tag for some reason) made some really good posts explaining how the January window were typical Potter type signings.


I'll refer you to the final paragraph of the post above.

If I remember correctly Mudryk was in talks to join Leverkusen for somewhere around €15m to €20m just last summer. What makes you think he'll always have a market?

 

[Dancfc]

If I remember correctly Mudryk was in talks to join Leverkusen for somewhere around €15m to €20m just last summer. What makes you think he'll always have a market?

For the same reason we managed to sell Lukaku 1.0 for a pretty penny despite him never proving himself in a Chelsea shirt.

 

[do.ob]

For the same reason we managed to sell Lukaku 1.0 for a pretty penny despite him never proving himself in a Chelsea shirt.

When he was sold the first time Lukaku was a year younger than Mudryk is now, he had been widely talked about from the moment he took his first steps in professional football and he had completed two relatively successful seasons on loan before he was sold - for half of what Chelsea just paid for Mudryk.

I don't really see it.

 

[AdamColeBebe]

Messed up on the quotes. Please delete this Mod overlords!

 

[mitchmouse]

If Chelsea get knocked out in midweek, I think Potter might go. I expect them to beat Dortmund, however

 

[Rnd898]

If Chelsea get knocked out in midweek, I think Potter might go. I expect them to beat Dortmund, however

Still league matches against Spurs and Leeds to go before the second leg against Dortmund.

 

[noodlehair]

Has a team ever gotten so spectacularly worse so quickly despite spending so much money?

I mean we gave the spectacularly worse part of it a good go with Moyes but we barely spent anything until we sacked him. In comparative terms anyway.
.

 

[gorky_utd]

Potter in.

 

[SinNombre]

For the same reason we managed to sell Lukaku 1.0 for a pretty penny despite him never proving himself in a Chelsea shirt.

Lukaku is a pretty terrible analogy.

Rom was a teenage phenom, there were threads on here and every other board since he was 16. He also wasn’t on a crazy 8.5 year deal that you had to pay.

 

[Dancfc]

Lukaku is a pretty terrible analogy.

Rom was a teenage phenom, there were threads on here and every other board since he was 16. He also wasn’t on a crazy 8.5 year deal that you had to pay.

He was a "phenom" because the media compared him to Drogba despite being nothing like him which the football population latched onto.

I could tell within 10 minutes of his Chelsea debut a decent top flight level goalscorer would be his absolute ceiling, there's many things a footballer can improve on but natural talent isn't one of them.

 

[Mb194dc]

Has a team ever gotten so spectacularly worse so quickly despite spending so much money?

I mean we gave the spectacularly worse part of it a good go with Moyes but we barely spent anything until we sacked him. In comparative terms anyway.
.

Not so much more money but Forest signed 30 players this season including 21 in the summer...

Then won 1 game in 11 to start the season... So Chelsea a bit similar, but more expensive version.

Integrating so many new players pretty difficult. Our biggest problem is no goal scorers. We've "won the xG" in the last two games at least...

I kind of agree Potter isn't the only problem, Boehly and the owners are a bit crazy. They want a return on their investment not trophies necessarily. It's a massive change from Abramovich.

 

[Dancfc]

Not so much more money but Forest signed 30 players this season including 21 in the summer...

Then won 1 game in 11 to start the season... So Chelsea a bit similar, but more expensive version.

Integrating so many new players pretty difficult. Our biggest problem is no goal scorers. We've "won the xG" in the last two games at least...

I kind of agree Potter isn't the only problem, Boehly and the owners are a bit crazy. They want a return on their investment not trophies necessarily. It's a massive change from Abramovich.

I can look at winning XG for Dortmund, Liverpool and even this seasons Fulham to an extent as a positive but not yesterday.

 

[FootballHQ]

If Chelsea get knocked out in midweek, I think Potter might go. I expect them to beat Dortmund, however

Knocked out of what, were eliminated from both domestic cups by Man. City already.

Potter will be gone if they lose to Spurs (14 points off 4th) and then just draw 1-1 v Dortmund. Then next manage has 10 free hit games plus a pre season to mould they're 150 players into some sort of coherent unit to hit the ground running in August.

 

[mitchmouse]

Knocked out of what, were eliminated from both domestic cups by Man. City already.

Potter will be gone if they lose to Spurs (14 points off 4th) and then just draw 1-1 v Dortmund. Then next manage has 10 free hit games plus a pre season to mould they're 150 players into some sort of coherent unit to hit the ground running in August.

I forget the CL wasn't this week. I meant knocked out by Dortmund. thought that was clear from the las sentence...

 

[mitchmouse]

Still league matches against Spurs and Leeds to go before the second leg against Dortmund.

yeh, forgot that wasn't this week. Still think the Dortmund game is more likely to be crunch time. If they were to win the Cl (if...), Chelsea bosses would see him as a sort of second coming of Klopp

 

[SirReginald]

yeh, forgot that wasn't this week. Still think the Dortmund game is more likely to be crunch time. If they were to win the Cl (if...), Chelsea bosses would see him as a sort of second coming of Klopp

Can’t see us scoring enough to win many of our remaining matches this season, unless something drastically changes.

 

[Shinjch]

It was clear as day that signing so many players to play off the striker without signing the actual striker was never going to work. Nkunku won't be fixing it either.

 

[Dancfc]

It was clear as day that signing so many players to play off the striker without signing the actual striker was never going to work. Nkunku won't be fixing it either.

We won the UCL without a striker, then signed one in back to back years and got worse.

 

[Shinjch]

We won the UCL without a striker, then signed one in back to back years and got worse.

Yea, you haven't been able to get the recruitment right in that position for a while - since Costa possibly.

Just seems so strange to me to be throwing so much money at other attackers when there is no plan for who the focal point of the attack will be that these players will be playing off.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

It was clear as day that signing so many players to play off the striker without signing the actual striker was never going to work. Nkunku won't be fixing it either.

Probably a cunning plan to make Potter feel at home. After all those strikerless years at Brighton he wouldn’t know what to do with a striker anyway.

 

[Dancfc]

Yea, you haven't been able to get the recruitment right in that position for a while - since Costa possibly.

Just seems so strange to me to be throwing so much money at other attackers when there is no plan for who the focal point of the attack will be that these players will be playing off.

But that's the point, we dont nesseserily need a "focal point".

The last three league winners and two of the last four UCL winners won without a striker. All three teams have in question have since added number 9s and in City's case have at best got no better and us and Liverpool's case got worse.

Arsenal's recent drop in results have also coincided with them playing a natural 9 with Jesus out and that's with said 9 scoring at a decent rate.

 

[Shinjch]

But that's the point, we dont nesseserily need a "focal point".

The last three league winners and two of the last four UCL winners won without a striker. All three teams have in question have since added number 9s and in City's case have at best got no better and us and Liverpool's case got worse.

Arsenal's recent drop in results have also coincided with them playing a natural 9 with Jesus out and that's with said 9 scoring at a decent rate.

So is the plan for Havertz/Sterling to be your most forward player? Are you happy with that?

 

[Semper Fudge]

I forget the CL wasn't this week. I meant knocked out by Dortmund. thought that was clear from the las sentence...

It was.

 

[Rnd898]

It was clear as day that signing so many players to play off the striker without signing the actual striker was never going to work. Nkunku won't be fixing it either.

Last summer the market for top strikers was pretty much non-existent so the options were to either wait it out and pounce when someone good comes on the market or throw £60M at the problem immediately and end up with an Ivan Toney or someone along those lines. Rightly or wrongly we went for a stop-gap in Aubameyang in hopes he'll be decent enough in the short term before a long term solution can be found. That's worked out horribly and it's clear he's not got the legs to play Potter's football which is why he's basically been frozen out of the team.

As for the signings made in the January window, it's possible Vlahovic could have been available following Juve's point deductions and all their financial messes but there were also big concerns in other areas of the pitch that needed sorting out sooner or later anyway. Again, rightly or wrongly the club decided to sort out the DM playmaker position (Enzo) and wingers (Mudryk, Madueke) first as long term replacements for Jorginho, Pulisic and Ziyech. The Felix loan was a bit of a wild card and finding a good role for him could well pave the way for Nkunku to come in and play the same position/role next season but if Felix plays 'too well' and we want to make his move permanent it could turn into a bit of a problem because him and Nkunku play basically the same roles and both will want to be starters. There's an off chance a solution could be found playing Felix/Nkunku together as an interchanging striking duo with one of them always staying up front and the other one dropping deeper to take part in the build up play, but either way we probably still need an actual striker too.

The club certainly seem to recognize it's a problem and the signs are it will be sorted out eventually. Personally I think it's better to fix the other areas first and then bring in a proper goalscorer to a team that already has the foundations in order and is capable of creating consistent chances so it's much easier for a striker to come in as one of the last pieces in the puzzle rather than just throwing in a top striker to a team that are struggling in midfield and wide areas and hope they can still come in and produce the goods despite limited creativity and goalscoring chances.

There's obviously two lines of thinking here. The first one being what I wrote in the last paragraph about sorting the rest of the house first before bringing in a striker, and the other one would be thinking it's better to identify and bring in the focal point first and then build the rest of the team around him to get the best out of the striker. The success rate of either 'plan' depends entirely on how well the rest of the squad building is done. A top striker won't solve anything by himself if there remains problems elsewhere, and likewise having the rest of the team in order won't solve anything if there's no top goalscorer to put the ball in the back of the net.

 

[Dancfc]

So is the plan for Havertz/Sterling to be your most forward player? Are you happy with that?

Not ideal but I'd rather that than Auba or Lukaku it was either/or. My wish would be to source a fluid type of forward (maybe Felix?) and have the wingers/wide forwards (like Sterling) getting in behind and stretching defenders with their pace.

I don't watch enough football abroad to name drop a specific player right now (that's what our well paid recruitment team are for) but if I had to name a player from our past who I think would be perfect for that role to give an idea, Eidur Gudjohnsen.

 

[Vapor trail]

Amazing how tempered the Chelsea threads have become after trending throughout the winter market. Boehly might be astute in business / investment but being prolific with things like venture capital has no bearing on the requirements to lead a successful team.

Potter I think doesn't deserve all the blame. I have never seen a club make so many acquisitions in a short period being able to integrate all the players simultaneously. It's perhaps feasibly possible in a weaker league but not a chance in the competitiveness of the premier league.

Chelsea for me are at a crossroads because their decision to stick or twist is what will effect the clubs long term direction. It's more notable to stick with Potter and give him a 36 month period to work with. The upside is he's an English manager and in his rodeo for the first time with a club that has in recent history competed on all fronts. He guarantees longevity in this regard. Because he has no real credibility the owners can impose whatever ethos they will on the manager which clearly is a youth development strategy which already as a project rules out many managers who are being mentioned on here as a replacement.

If the owners are thinking long term they have to rule out the short term reactionary measures no matter how low they finish in the table (relegation is obviously cause for change).

 

[Tom Cato]

Just say no, would have saved you the time.

Im curious, what do you imagine the teams results and performance is based on?

 

[Dancfc]

Im curious, what do you imagine the teams results and performance is based on?

Well the players he's had "forced on him" have a) gone straight into the team and b) bar Mudryk probably been our best players (low bar I know but still).

There's many things that I put this form down but that narrative doesn't enter the thought process. Not only is their jack all evidence for it a Brighton fan on here literally went into detail explaining why they were typical Potter lite signings (which if my memory serves me correct included looking at singing Mudryk and Enzo for Brighton).

 

[justsomebloke]

For us to be "stuck with them" they'll have to be Bakayoko/Drinkwater level of bad. Whether the signings (bar Enzo who in my opinion is a sure bet bar a catastrophic injury) work is debatable, but they'll always be a market for a player like Mudryk even if he doesn't hit the absolute hype or a proactive defender like Badiashille. Not only that both of those players are on wages that aren't exactly unshiftable.

Kouli is the one player I'm worried may sit on his contract granted.

I think that's rather too sanguine. Players can indeed be sold or loaned out, but in the mean time Potter has a 33-man squad, which is a very big problem in itself. In addition to the 6-8 players who play less than they think they should which you'd have in a normal squad, there's another ten or so who won't be playing at all, and all of them with a reasonable claim to do so. That's not a happy and functional squad. And if you try to lessen the problem by spreading playing time around, it will hurt the performance and delay the development of a coherent team. The only way a team ends up in that position is by thoroughly botching its personnel management.

 

[SadlerMUFC]

Chelsea defintely needs a clear out of players. Way too many top players in one team. It's one thing to have 2 players for each position, but they have 3 legit starters for every spot (other than a #9). No wonder they can't win. Players are uncertain about their future, and whether it's on purpose or not, they just don't seem to be trying as hard as they normally would. I also have no idea how they aren't breaking FFP rules. I'm sure that will come out eventually just like it has with City. They need a clear out, and they need a clear plan. Buying anyone and everyone isn't the solution. They need a proper DOF to work closely with Potter, if Potter even lasts.

 

[Rnd898]

Chelsea defintely needs a clear out of players. Way too many top players in one team. It's one thing to have 2 players for each position, but they have 3 legit starters for every spot (other than a #9). No wonder they can't win. Players are uncertain about their future, and whether it's on purpose or not, they just don't seem to be trying as hard as they normally would. I also have no idea how they aren't breaking FFP rules. I'm sure that will come out eventually just like it has with City. They need a clear out, and they need a clear plan. Buying anyone and everyone isn't the solution. They need a proper DOF to work closely with Potter, if Potter even lasts.

We already have that though? The club's Sporting Director title is currently shared by two people in Paul Winstanley and Laurence Stewart. Winstanley was at Brighton for 8 years (2014-2022) and was hired by the club a couple months after Potter's arrival in November last year.

The Caf narrative seems to be that Potter had no input into the January signings and the board just forced a bunch of random players on him but Winstanley was present every step of the way when the club made those signings and he's someone Potter already worked closely with at Brighton for three years so chances are they drew up the transfer plans together.

You're right that a clear-out is definitely needed and a clear-out is also expected. The plan is not to go into next season with a squad as big as the one we currently have. Aubameyang, Pulisic, Ziyech, Azpilicueta are the most obvious ones on the chopping block but also out of Havertz, Mount, Gallagher, Kovacic, Kante, Zakaria, RLC, Koulibaly, Chalobah I wouldn't expect too many to still be at the club come next season. Some of the 9 players on the latter list will absolutely stay but I wouldn't be surprised to see at least 4-5 of them leaving. The decisions on which ones will leave and which ones end up staying will get clearer as we get to the end of the season and the summer window opens, and will depend on a multitude of factors like their suitability to the playing style, the player's contract situation and of course transfer interest from other clubs. Some of the players on the list would need replacing if they left but for many of them a long term replacement has already been brought in.

Aside from moving some players on for good it's also possible we'll trim down the squad by looking at some loan destinations for some of the younger lads (Hall, Chukwuemeka, D. Fofana) if the feeling is they'd benefit from regular first team football elsewhere. All in all, with permanent transfers and loans out counted together I would be surprised if we didn't cut down the squad size by at least ten players, which would even open up some room for a couple of new additions to come in.

Basically:

- Out of Koulibaly, Chalobah one should leave to make room for Colwill. Ideally and hopefully Koulibaly but if/when selling him proves difficult, I could see Chalobah being sold instead. Keeping Colwill is a must either way.

- Out of the six midfielders Zakaria, RLC, Gallagher, Kante, Kovacic, Mount I would think three will stay and three will go. Lots of moving parts here with only Gallagher currently contracted to the club beyond 2024 and Kante/Zakaria even expriring this year. Right now I would perhaps say Mount, Gallagher and Zakaria to go and the rest to stay, but a lot can change between now and the end of the season depending on how each of them perform and what happens with the contracts. Probably need to keep at least one of the HG lads to fill the quotas, for me it would be RLC as he looks the most comfortable playing in a two man midfield.

- Havertz should leave if we can find a buyer but I doubt we will.

- Auba, Pulisic, Ziyech and Azpi all should go. Everyone bar Auba has already been replaced in the January window, and the feeling is another striker will come in to replace Auba as well.

- At least one or two out of Hall, Chukwuemeka, D. Fofana should go on loan. Maybe loan out Broja as well if his ACL rehabilitation could benefit from regular game time and his comeback schedule allows for a summer move?

 

[eire-red]

But that's the point, we dont nesseserily need a "focal point".

The last three league winners and two of the last four UCL winners won without a striker. All three teams have in question have since added number 9s and in City's case have at best got no better and us and Liverpool's case got worse.

Arsenal's recent drop in results have also coincided with them playing a natural 9 with Jesus out and that's with said 9 scoring at a decent rate.

Do you actually watch Chelsea play right now and not wish you had paid 90m for a striker (if there was one available) instead of Mudryk?

I don't think the false 9 is such a conscious thing, rather I think top number 9's are so rare these days that most teams have had to come up with ways to play and get the best out of their wingers from a scoring point of view.

If you had a 21yr old Benzema or Lewandowski right now, they'd probably be the most sought after players in the world as most teams play just the one striker and you have to be truly special to be one of those who can do that role at a top club.

I can't see how someone like Felix would work in Chelsea right now without prolific wingers either side of him. Sterling looks a shadow of himself, Mudryk an unknown and unlikely to hit 20+ only next season, and I don't even know who you've signed for RW? Nobody that can score consistently at least?

Anyway, I guess easy for me to judge as I don't watch every Chelsea game unlike you and many other Chelsea fans on here, but I find it bonkers that you wouldn't see signing someone like Osimhen as an absolute priority in the summer.

 

[Peelhead]

That's interesting what you and the other Chelsea fans have been writing. I'm a MU fan so my knowledge of your team is pretty low but it seems there's been an ongoing issue that's quite ingrained for some time.

It's tempting to say some 'wisecrack' and put it on Boehly and say 'should have hired Basile Boli' but David Squires the Guardian cartoonist has been showing Havertz with feet made of toasters for a while now.

The squad size and number of players on loan has been questioned for some time also.

I think any organisation displays the characteristics of the person at the very top. Boehly's background in VC might be reflecting that he has a philosophy of 'big risk, big reward' and it's leading to a disjointed transition from the 'Chelski' era to the new regime.

I'm no expert in football tactics but I do believe every team needs to have a strong 'spine' before it will be able to get results, so GK, central defence, defensive or attacking midfield and a striker of some sort.

We saw that in Liverpool and arguably ourselves.

Psychology is a big part of it possibly. If the uncertainty over the club's future the players will inevitably keep their options open and these very long contracts are counter productive imo.

When Newcastle signed Alan Pardew on a 7 year contract the consensus was that it was a mistake. It signals desperation in a way and actually shows weakness because players will be thinking if player x only joined us because of the massive contract duration, it doesn't suggest they had much confidence in winning trophies.

I didn't know much about Potter and his transfer targets but it seems the club is genuinely going to continue supporting him.

You always need a strategic goal as well and I don't feel Chelsea has one, but maybe it's because I don't support them.

Is there a strategy in play, like 'this is the style of play we want', 'these are the type of players we want' and 'this is how we will judge it as a success or failure, over this period.

It would be tough replacing Potter now imo because it would create even more chaos in a club that's already volatile and in flux.

 

[Dancfc]

Do you actually watch Chelsea play right now and not wish you had paid 90m for a striker (if there was one available) instead of Mudryk?

I don't think the false 9 is such a conscious thing, rather I think top number 9's are so rare these days that most teams have had to come up with ways to play and get the best out of their wingers from a scoring point of view.

If you had a 21yr old Benzema or Lewandowski right now, they'd probably be the most sought after players in the world as most teams play just the one striker and you have to be truly special to be one of those who can do that role at a top club.

I can't see how someone like Felix would work in Chelsea right now without prolific wingers either side of him. Sterling looks a shadow of himself, Mudryk an unknown and unlikely to hit 20+ only next season, and I don't even know who you've signed for RW? Nobody that can score consistently at least?

Anyway, I guess easy for me to judge as I don't watch every Chelsea game unlike you and many other Chelsea fans on here, but I find it bonkers that you wouldn't see signing someone like Osimhen as an absolute priority in the summer.

As i said in the above post for the system we play (or atleast are trying to play) my ideal player would be someone in the mould of Eidur Gudjohnsen. He in his prime would be perfect for the systems we've been playing since Sarri.

I don't think some poaching number 9 will make us any better, I've already seen this story with both Lukaku and Auba (who both arrived off the back of good scoring season), the chances they were suppose to come in and finish off we don't create anymore because we effectively lose one man in the build up (and in Lukaku's case does nothing off the ball which takes away our ability to press effectively).

Re Osimhen I don't think there's a snowball in hells chance he leaves this summer, as a Chelsea fan I can tell you their president makes Levy look like a decent negotiator. Their star striker after a title winning season? Neymar/Mbappe figures, at best.

 

[Zehner]

I think it will be pretty hard for him to feck up considering the amount of money he spends. He'll just buy in the expertise he needs if his spending doesn't pay off in the short term.

Plus I think the transfers were quite good if you ignore the price tags. It's of course crazy what kind of money Chelsea spends right now but they're bringing in lots of talented young players, no denying that.

 

[eire-red]

As i said in the above post for the system we play (or atleast are trying to play) my ideal player would be someone in the mould of Eidur Gudjohnsen. He in his prime would be perfect for the systems we've been playing since Sarri.

I don't think some poaching number 9 will make us any better, I've already seen this story with both Lukaku and Auba (who both arrived off the back of good scoring season), the chances they were suppose to come in and finish off we don't create anymore because we effectively lose one man in the build up (and in Lukaku's case does nothing off the ball which takes away our ability to press effectively).

Re Osimhen I don't think there's a snowball in hells chance he leaves this summer, as a Chelsea fan I can tell you their president makes Levy look like a decent negotiator. Their star striker after a title winning season? Neymar/Mbappe figures, at best.

Osimhen would be nuts money indeed, but find it hard to see Boehly balk at 150m or so on someone like him when you just bought Enzo for over 100m.

I do think will he very good, but let's face it, he's a holding midfielders there's not enough evidence he's a game changer, let alone a match-winner like a top striker would be.

Scary thing for Chelsea is, I see over half a billion spent and just a bang average, bloated squad that lacks any sort of thought or real style. Just think of the players Gudjohnsen played with in his time at Chelsea. I don't see how you can make it work with anything short of a genuine top level CF, because I don't see near enough quality around the squad to make up for what a Gudjohnsen would lack.