Sounds like Pedro Neto was a late move out from nowhere (Jorge Mendes shock horror) and now Sterling has all of a sudden become surplus.
Chelsea 2024/25
- Thread starter duffer
- Start date
This Sterling situation is weird. I don't actually disagree with moving him on. However you'd imagine there would be a better way to go about it than deciding to move him on 2 weeks before the window shuts down.
I thought Felix likely unexpectedly coming lead to us telling Raheem he has to go. Can only be that I think. Both are on very high wages... Question is if we can find anyone to take him on 250-300k a week or whatever.
It must have been something that happened very recently, he was playing in all our pre season games and clearly meant to be part of our plans...
It must have been something that happened very recently, he was playing in all our pre season games and clearly meant to be part of our plans...
There is just no planning at Chelsea.
It's clear at United we want Ugarte, but unless someone leaves it isn't possible. Chelsea just pull the trigger and then worry about shifting people afterwards.
If Maresca is going to play Enzo at 10 then there's 2 positions for Mudryk, Palmer, Sterling, Neto, Nkunku. With Palmer being the star its basically 4 internationals left fighting over 1 position. Nkunku got the nod against City, Neto has just been signed so obviously will feature, Mudryk was a huge outlay so you'd imagine he's 3rd in line so Sterling was 4th choice at best, how was he thinking he'd play.
It's clear at United we want Ugarte, but unless someone leaves it isn't possible. Chelsea just pull the trigger and then worry about shifting people afterwards.
If Maresca is going to play Enzo at 10 then there's 2 positions for Mudryk, Palmer, Sterling, Neto, Nkunku. With Palmer being the star its basically 4 internationals left fighting over 1 position. Nkunku got the nod against City, Neto has just been signed so obviously will feature, Mudryk was a huge outlay so you'd imagine he's 3rd in line so Sterling was 4th choice at best, how was he thinking he'd play.
I think it’s simpler than that. There have been rumours of interest in Sterling from Serie A, and Chelsea would probably love to welcome such an offer and so my guess they’ve now decided Sterling might need to be nudged out of the door.
Or maybe Chelsea has heard of some Saudi interest and want to push him in that direction. I don't think Sterling would ordinarily want to go there quite yet - he has already made a ton of money, probably has some idea that he could get back in the England squad with a good season, etc. But if he is not even making squads at Chelsea then he will probably be looking to leave. I have a hard time seeing any non-Saudi club buying him but he could have loan interest as long as Chelsea pays some part of the wages. But under those conditions a bunch of clubs might be interested. Villa could be a good option.
To me, the difficult part of the situation is that its another case suggesting that Chelsea isn't really running a meritocracy among the players. Picking Mudryk over Sterling simply isn't justifiable in terms of maximizing the quality of your matchday squad. Or giving players like Badiashile and Disasi much better treatment than Chalobah. Or forcing out Gallagher when he would clearly be at least a useful squad player. Its pretty clear that the players at Chelsea get held to different standards based on how much they cost, how much profit they can garner via a sale, or if they’re a favorite of the sporting directors. There is an obvious financial logic to all of these moves but I think its probably bad for the internal culture of a squad.
Yeah that makes sense, and you could tell him that he's going to be replaced, but you don't buy the replacement until he's gone, otherwise you're going to have 10 players training away from the main squad draining millions a week out of the club. Suppose we've only got another 12 days to see if you manage to pull it off, but it's an extremely risky strategy with no upside.
You're not going to get extra fleeced for a replacement as you've got a stacked squad there already.
Chelsea might be the worst run club there's ever been in the league, which is quite an achievement when you consider us under Woodward, Leeds and others. The absolute wastage and stupid decision making is just a level of its own. Bonkers stuff. Spending £1bn to be 22/1 to win the league.
It's probably not a case of him being deemed surplus that early. The fact he was brought along for the pre-season tour is a sign that getting rid of him wasn't always in the cards, but now with the Neto signing and the club finding themselves in a position of being almost forced to sign Felix in order to push through the Gallagher sale, the circumstances with Sterling have only recently changed. This one has Jorge Mendes' grubby little hands all over it, with him being the agent of both Neto and Felix.
All in all it's no doubt very chaotic and I'm not at all convinced Sterling is actually moveable given his huge salary. I think at this point the best we can hope to get for Sterling is a loan deal.
The nuclear option would be to simply cut his contract by mutual termination and allowing him a free transfer, if he were to accept that without demanding the club pay him off. That way his large salary could then be more affordable for his next club because they wouldn't have to pay a fee to sign him. But this idea is dependent on Sterling negotiating an acceptable contract with another club first, which is not a certainty even with free agency. This would of course result in Chelsea having to account for his full remaining amortisation value as a big loss on the books for this season (£28.5M) but then again getting his massive salary out would balance it out to roughly a net zero compared to keeping him for the season (£26M a year for amortisation + salary). Basically Sterling's cost on the books would stay roughly the same for the current season, give or take a few million, but then save around £26M/y in costs for the remaining two years. If he has absolutely no future at the club, even this option is better than keeping him around stinking up the place and being unhappy.
The issue with a dozen Zirkzees is that every young player wants to feel special and appreciated and their talents nurtured, whereas Chelsea treats you like a factory and nothing special. They have this factory though with the fundamental flaw that it isn't a remotely nurturing environment.
Zirkzee is arriving here with a fellow Dutchman as manager, and is being trained by Van Nistelrooy one of the best Dutch strikers ever and probably a hero of his. He has the space to learn and get game time and the fans get to build up a rapport with him because they know that he's probably here to stay for several years.
At Chelsea, he'd be brought in by a manager who will probably be sacked in three months and all his staff, in competition with various players from around the world with no rhyme or reason of completely different styles, with the constant threat of being sold or in the reserves if he has a few bad games, the fans don't care because how could they care when they keep watching so many players come and go before they can build them up.
In fairness I think Enzo at 10 was just a vs City thing to get both Lavia and Caicedo on the pitch as double 6s. In most matches one of them drops out, Enzo moves back, and Palmer/Nkunku sits in the 10.
Seen Cucarella getting stick from the city fans yesterday and then found out it was for singing a song about Haaland when he won the Euros. Why did he sing about Haaland?
You ideally have a squad full of players that all believe that they're at the right club and are happy with their choice in terms of how it fits into their career.
I think how most clubs have traditionally managed that is by having a mix of age profiles. You have a few squad players in their late 20s or 30s that don't mind not playing much and are happy to be wise older heads (while making good money at a big club). You have a few very young players in their late teens just breaking into the team who don't expect that many minutes but are happy to be involved on a limited basis as long as you give them the pathway to a bigger role and show them what they need to do to get there. And you have a core of prime age players in their 20s who all really want to play and are giving each other competition. Its a good formula for a game in which you get a 25 man squad but realistically only are going to be giving significant time to maybe 17-18 players, with probably only 14-15 players being truly key men who have a shot at being selected for big matches if everybody is fit.
Chelsea's "problem" is that even if you take out the players they definitely want to sell, they've still got like 25 players from the age of 20-26 who all are at a point in their careers in which they absolutely need to be playing regularly to keep developing. That's great from a financial investment perspective to have players in that age bracket but from a player satisfaction and team harmony perspective its not so good.
This could have been so much better managed with common sense and a bit of foresight. I really don't understand why any club will put themselves in this sort of a situation where they shoot themselves in the foot. Even we weren't this bad during peak Woodward days
Yeah it's weird that they haven't even tried to copy the team that is winning the league every year and their model, which is Man City. United at their best were much the same too.
Charges and dodgy dealings aside, it is the ideal way to run a successful team to have 15-16 top players, many of which can play multiple positions. The non-best starting line-up players feel valued because they're still playing 40 games a year and when they come into the team they're not strangers, they know their role and with you can get a higher calibre of player willing to do that too, as opposed to accepting a fringe role. Most of these 15-16 players are at their peak years and you let a few go season by season so it doesn't get stale/you don't have an ageing squad and replace them with high-quality replacements. Fill out the edges of the squad with youth players and maybe 1-2 veterans for sentimental or other reasons.
When I think of Chelsea, it's nothing remotely like that. The best starting line-up is unclear, never mind the best 15 or 16 players. The 25th player is as good as the 16th player.
United's worst season was when it got flabby like Chelsea in 21/22 and you had players like Lingard, Van de Beek and others hanging around and never playing, then leaking to the press of problems in the team in resentment. The more bloated the squad, the far greater risk of bad team spirit. What Raheem Sterling did is typical of what was happening at United. United aren't as bloated now but even there were headlines that Sancho isn't in the squad which is adding negativity whereas if he's sold, nobody cares.
Someone wrote a song about him and it went semi-viral, so Cucurella joined in. Probably not the smartest idea given the schedule but then again don't think anyone was under any illusions that Cucurella was likely to be splitting atoms anytime soon.
City fans also already didn't like him because Brighton turned down their low-ball offer for him before he moved to Chelsea.
He was drunk at the Euros celebrations and the players were singing the the songs that the Spain supporters sing about them. His has a line about Haaland.
Jorge Mendes probably owes us a massive favour down the line now
A lot of their recent business seem a bit mad but I guess you can kind of at least see some sort of idea with them but signing Felix is just mental
You can tell that Chelsea don't trust him. Only a 6 year contract. Pathetic. I hope Felix takes it personal.
Maybe they targeted players who love to sing
Mendes is too powerful. The only thing that makes sense about this deal from a Chelsea perspective is we're doing Mendes a favour.
They're rumoured to be in for a multi year transfer ban, so they need to stock pile and then sell whatever they don't need over time.
That is why I used that example. Signing Yoro and Zirkzee is great in isolation, but if you sign 25 Yoro's and Zirkzee's to populate the entire squad, then there's a problem, especially now that the number of loans to Europe have been restricted.
I'd say the fans do care. Different fans build connections with different players. It's always been that way. I wouldn't say Mudryk for example, is a beloved player, because how could he be, but he does he have general support from the fans, and little pockets of Mudryk fans within the fanbase. Same as most players at most clubs probably. Same with Cucurella, Madueke etc. Broadly speaking we follow the club, we watch the games and we know the players.
Wouldn't that be at least as "shocking and pathetic from a professional"?
£36m is the fee reported for Felix by Ornstein. What do the resident chelsea fans make of the transfer?
Just a transfer ban?
If they fail to meet the new rules from next season, I’d expect more than a tfr ban.
This is for rule breaks from the previous regime apparently.
Is there anything more soulless than Chelsea? I'd be despairing if I was there fan. How are fans supposed to feel any sort of connection/affection with the club/squad?
How is this even possible? Felix on a 6 year deal.
Another one? Should take some points this time
This is just a huge mess waiting to boil over any year now. If anything it just highlights the need for an independent regulator to monitor clubs like this more closely.
I think some of the contracts handed out to players are nonsensical and the fact three players now effectively have near 10 year contracts is crazy. All seems to just be to avoid breaching FFP too? Which in itself just highlights the issues with FFP because it just results in clubs making even riskier decisions to try and circumvent the process.
And if the gamble doesn't pay off with these extended contracts and constant wheeling and dealing then what? Concerning times to be a Chelsea fan. They make Woodward and the Glazers look competent.
I think some of the contracts handed out to players are nonsensical and the fact three players now effectively have near 10 year contracts is crazy. All seems to just be to avoid breaching FFP too? Which in itself just highlights the issues with FFP because it just results in clubs making even riskier decisions to try and circumvent the process.
And if the gamble doesn't pay off with these extended contracts and constant wheeling and dealing then what? Concerning times to be a Chelsea fan. They make Woodward and the Glazers look competent.
There is a growing sentiment, fans who feel disconnected from the club since the ownership. But honestly, I think it's just because the team isn't winning. Lots of my Arsenal mates also 'felt disconnected' from their club until they started competing at the top again and now they're in love with their club again.
Personally speaking, I dislike the ownership group. I don't believe in what they're selling. The players are pretty easy to like and build a connection with though. Caicedo and Gusto have become two of my favourite players in the world. I adore Jackson, and probably spend too much time online defending him (
) and I have different levels of attachment to pretty much the entire squad. There are some that I'm not huge fans of (Mudryk, Disasi, Sterling) but that has always been the case. I was never keen on Malouda, despite him being a crucial player for us. I never warmed to Courtois despite winning two titles with him.If we somehow defied all odds and challenged for the title this season, I'm pretty sure all the disconnect shouts would subside pretty quickly.
Last edited:
The one I think he is referring to is the self-reported one that the PL only now have gotten around to looking into. It relates to some under the table payments to some agents that allowed Chelsea to sign certain players. That is what Clearlake self-reported to the PL, and that is what they're investigating.
I don't think Chelsea are in danger of breaching PSR rules for this season.
I think that just shows that he is disappointed about not playing and you can always claim that it’s just media cooking up things. To release an actual statement an hour before kickoff seems pathetic
Soon there will come a day when Chelsea FC don't sign anyone.
I agree with that, but I don't think leaking stuff to the press is that professional either. Not an ideal situation for any of the parties.
The 18 players named in the squad on Sunday had only player from the squad that started the opening game in 2022-23