Chelsea 2024/25

CannonBalls said:
Chelsea selling Angelo for 7m profit. Cant do anything but laugh at this.

Not even trying to hide.
Click to expand...

Who doesn't sell to Saudi for profit? That's a relatively modest profit considering Saudi are the buyers. Angelo isn't like Washington, who has veeeryyy little pro experience. Angelo actually had a solid amount of experience in Brazil before we signed him, 3 seasons, and then he spent a full season in Ligue 1. He's also a Brazil U20 international.

I'm surprised he's agreed to go there though, but he isn't the first, and won't be the last, to jump to Saudi at the first chance before even really beginning their careers properly.
 
WeePat said:
Who doesn't sell to Saudi for profit? That's a relatively modest profit considering Saudi are the buyers. Angelo isn't like Washington, who has veeeryyy little pro experience. Angelo actually had a solid amount of experience in Brazil before we signed him, 3 seasons, and then he spent a full season in Ligue 1. He's also a Brazil U20 international.

I'm surprised he's agreed to go there though, but he isn't the first, and won't be the last, to jump to Saudi at the first chance before even really beginning their careers properly.
Click to expand...
Given Kante and Mendy going there for a combined £16m was apparently some massive conspiracy (but Liverpool rebuilding their washed up midfield thanks to money from the same league was perfectly fine) I think it's safe to say rival fans are well too far down the rabbit hole where this topic is concerned.
 
WeePat said:
Given Kante and Mendy going there for a combined £16m was apparently some massive conspiracy (but Liverpool rebuilding their washed up midfield thanks to money from the same league was perfectly fine) I think it's safe to say rival fans are well too far down the rabbit hole where this topic is concerned.
Click to expand...

Well if you had to add Kante in there (who was a free transfer) to make your point that doesn't help.
 
WeePat said:
Who doesn't sell to Saudi for profit? That's a relatively modest profit considering Saudi are the buyers. Angelo isn't like Washington, who has veeeryyy little pro experience. Angelo actually had a solid amount of experience in Brazil before we signed him, 3 seasons, and then he spent a full season in Ligue 1. He's also a Brazil U20 international.

I'm surprised he's agreed to go there though, but he isn't the first, and won't be the last, to jump to Saudi at the first chance before even really beginning their careers properly.
Click to expand...

While you can argue the merits of this particular deal, do you not believe that Chelsea are doing shady exercises of player swaps at inflated valuations? While it may be a loophole, don't you see how Chelsea are effectively gaming the system? The June 30 swaps with Villa, the Omorodion deal where the player was a 40 million euro asset while signing for Chelsea and when the deal fell through, he signed for Porto for 15 million. And you would know of more shady deals.
 
Nickelodeon said:
While you can argue the merits of this particular deal, do you not believe that Chelsea are doing shady exercises of player swaps at inflated valuations? While it may be a loophole, don't you see how Chelsea are effectively gaming the system? The June 30 swaps with Villa, the Omorodion deal where the player was a 40 million euro asset while signing for Chelsea and when the deal fell through, he signed for Porto for 15 million. And you would know of more shady deals.
Click to expand...
I mean Atleti get a full 50% of any future deal for Omorodion, so we're talking about a 10m PL tax effectively. Hardly earth-shattering.
 
Nickelodeon said:
While you can argue the merits of this particular deal, do you not believe that Chelsea are doing shady exercises of player swaps at inflated valuations? While it may be a loophole, don't you see how Chelsea are effectively gaming the system? The June 30 swaps with Villa, the Omorodion deal where the player was a 40 million euro asset while signing for Chelsea and when the deal fell through, he signed for Porto for 15 million. And you would know of more shady deals.
Click to expand...

If you go into one of the PSR threads, you'll see many posts in there from me that I fully believe Chelsea were doing exactly as you say, colluding with other clubs in the same PSR predicament to game the rules.

That doesn't people can just pick anything they see and attach shady values to it though, like you just did there with Omorodion.
 
TheMagicFoolBus said:
I mean Atleti get a full 50% of any future deal for Omorodion, so we're talking about a 10m PL tax effectively. Hardly earth-shattering.
Click to expand...

WeePat said:
If you go into one of the PSR threads, you'll see many posts in there from me that I fully believe Chelsea were doing exactly as you say, colluding with other clubs in the same PSR predicament to game the rules.

That doesn't people can just pick anything they see and attach shady values to it though, like you just did there with Omorodion.
Click to expand...

We can agree to disagree on the Omorodion transfer. But the fact that the figure was eerily close to the Gallagher fee and only marginally lesser than the Joao Felix transfer, is clear (to me) that it was deliberately overinflated. Chelsea know what they’re doing and if there’s an Everton/Forest type scenario which happens, who would the fans protest against? In an ideal world, the Chelsea supporter groups should be putting out statements that they need to be included in the thought process behind this radical decision making.
 
Nickelodeon said:
We can agree to disagree on the Omorodion transfer. But the fact that the figure was eerily close to the Gallagher fee and only marginally lesser than the Joao Felix transfer, is clear (to me) that it was deliberately overinflated. Chelsea know what they’re doing and if there’s an Everton/Forest type scenario which happens, who would the fans protest against? In an ideal world, the Chelsea supporter groups should be putting out statements that they need to be included in the thought process behind this radical decision making.
Click to expand...
You can't point to Omorodion getting sold for 15m as some sort of gotcha while ignoring the fact that it was for 50% of his economic value.

He was "overinflated" by 10m and this also doesn't include the fact that Chelsea offered a deal wherein they'd get 50% of his future image rights.

Chelsea have done far far far shadier things from a PSR perspective; the failed Omorodion deal is a blip on the radar when examined beyond "he went to Porto for 37.5% of what Chelsea offered".
 
Nickelodeon said:
We can agree to disagree on the Omorodion transfer. But the fact that the figure was eerily close to the Gallagher fee and only marginally lesser than the Joao Felix transfer, is clear (to me) that it was deliberately overinflated. Chelsea know what they’re doing and if there’s an Everton/Forest type scenario which happens, who would the fans protest against? In an ideal world, the Chelsea supporter groups should be putting out statements that they need to be included in the thought process behind this radical decision making.
Click to expand...

There's really nothing to agree to disagree about. That's not the first nor the last time a deal like that has happened. Porto are banking on Omorodion becoming world class very quickly so they can sell him for 90-100m, give Atleti their 50% and bank the rest of the profits.

Chelsea supporters trust are generally always at odds with the club, especially this ownership. I haven't seen them take a stand against some of the PSR manipulation we saw this summer. Their bag is typically things like ticket prices, stadium renovation/move, etc.
 
For all the dealing, I think the squad is only stronger than last year due to players back from injury. The transfers have all been sideways or outright downgrades...
 
WeePat said:
There's really nothing to agree to disagree about. That's not the first nor the last time a deal like that has happened. Porto are banking on Omorodion becoming world class very quickly so they can sell him for 90-100m, give Atleti their 50% and bank the rest of the profits.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Any deal with Chelsea for Omorodion would sure as hell not have included a 50% sell-on clause for Atletico. If they'd sold him to Chelsea for the proposed 40M€ then that money would more or less have been everything Atleti ever get for him. At most there would have been like a 10-20% sell-on clause for any profits made over that initial 40M€ fee but even then he would have had to be sold for 100M€+ for Atletico to see any significant amount of money from the clause, and chances are if he developed into a triple digits player we just wouldn't sell him for a long time anyway.

With Porto they sold him for a more modest fee and Atletico are now hoping Omorodion uses them as a stepping stone to a bigger club and they'll get their money's worth eventually. Just need to look at Gyökeres what a couple of great seasons for a top Portuguese club can do to a striker's value. There is of course a risk of Omorodion flopping in Porto and being moved on for another low-priced deal or even him running out his contract and then leaving on a free transfer. In that case Atletico would end up losing money compared to a higher sale this summer, but that's just a risk they were willing to take because the clause could also mean they end up with way more money than 40M€ if the player becomes a huge hit and gets sold for massive amount of money within the next few years.

Atletico could have just loaned out Omorodion for a few years and hoped he'll increase his value that way, but then they wouldn't have got anything for their immediate financial needs so they came up with a creative manouver to get some of the gains right now with a high probability of making more in the future. A permanent move also means Porto are now more invested in his development than they would have been with just a loan deal.

There was absolutely nothing shady with the valuation of the Conor Gallagher deal, if anything he went for below his market value. The only reason another deal involving an Atletico player moving the other way had to be done was Atletico having just blown their entire budget on signing Alvarez and needing to sell first in order to afford Gallagher.

Chelsea are absolutely abusing any loopholes the club executives can think of without actually breaking any rules but neither the Gallagher/Felix deal or Angelo Gabriel's move to Al Nassr were part of those shenanigans. With the Maatsen/Kellyman deal there was definitely some level of PSR inflation at those prices.
 
This is what Chelsea would look like if they hadn't bought a single player this summer but still sold/loaned out everyone that they did:

Sanchez

Gusto Fofana Colwill Cucurella

Enzo Caicedo

Madueke Palmer Nkunku

Jackson



Bettinelli

James Disasi Badiashile Chilwell

Lavia Chukwuemeka(€18m) Casedei (€15m)

Kellyman (€22.5m) Fofana (€12m) Mudryk

Not included: Washington(€16m)


Not a bad couple of teams that. Just need some experience in the wide areas to help the young 'uns. Maybe someone like the guy Arsenal signed, who is respected and called Uncle by the young players.

Maybe could have done with another CB considering Fofana's injury record and to cover James at RB if necessary. I think Palace signed a good solid English CB on loan, shame they couldn't get him.

Probably would have needed a better back-up goalie, maybe like the one Strasbourg signed.

Midfield needs some bite too, maybe like that guy Atletico signed this summer.

Strikers need some experience to help them, Napoli just signed a guy to replace Osmihen.......nah. Even in jest I can't defend Lukaku.

This post is a bit tongue in cheek but when you write it down it's crazy that they added 3 more wide players, another CM and another young striker to the pile, amongst others. Are they going to be fielding €70m+ worth of signings in their U21 team?
 
CannonBalls said:
Chelsea selling Angelo for 7m profit. Cant do anything but laugh at this.

Not even trying to hide.
Click to expand...

I dont see how its much different to Liverpool selling Fabio Carvalho and i bet you said nothing about that.
 
Dont watch many Chelsea games as I don't have the time. However keen to know what you all think of Enzo?

What's his actual role and how good is he really?
 
jakko said:
I dont see how its much different to Liverpool selling Fabio Carvalho and i bet you said nothing about that.
Click to expand...
Well Carvalho player for Liverpool in EPL. They were pretty happy to keep him. There were many team after him.
Not sure how these can be compared, one is a fringe player in title challenging team another is part of a (not sure what to call whats happening at Chelsea)
 
TheArse said:
Dont watch many Chelsea games as I don't have the time. However keen to know what you all think of Enzo?

What's his actual role and how good is he really?
Click to expand...
He's one of the best deep-lying ball progressors and playmakers in Europe. Not great physicality (apart from excellent stamina) so has struggled out of possession.

Ideally you'd play him in a double pivot alongside a destructive deep-lying defensive midfielder or potentially in a 3 man midfield as an 8 where he and the other 8 have license to get forward (again you need a destructive 6 to do this probably or potentially an inverted fullback). He's not great with his back to the opposition goal so not a great fit as a 10.
 
TheMagicFoolBus said:
He's one of the best deep-lying ball progressors and playmakers in Europe. Not great physicality (apart from excellent stamina) so has struggled out of possession.

Ideally you'd play him in a double pivot alongside a destructive deep-lying defensive midfielder or potentially in a 3 man midfield as an 8 where he and the other 8 have license to get forward (again you need a destructive 6 to do this probably or potentially an inverted fullback). He's not great with his back to the opposition goal so not a great fit as a 10.
Click to expand...

I gotta be honest, I think Enzo is a brilliant talent, but he's a brilliant talent that can only be brilliant when almost everything else is tailored to him. He needs to be carried for him to shine, is what it sounds like.

I find him immensely dislikeable, so it just annoys the hell out of me when I was see him in a Chelsea shirt, but that's a side point. I honestly, genuinely do not believe he's a good fit for this squad. Lavia + Caicedo is a way more balanced pivot with Palmer in the 10.

I have no idea where you could fit Enzo in, in the current setup, that doesn't expose his huge shortcomings. I don't think he's great in a pivot. Any midfield that is even a tiny bit athletic and pacy will blow past him. You could put him in a 3 man midfield, but we know now Maresca doesn't favour that, so he either goes in the double pivot with one of Lavia and Caicedo, or you drop Madueke, push Palmer back out wide and play Enzo in the 10, which we already know he can't do.

I think Maresca will keep playing him because he's the £100m man but imo Enzo doesn't get in our best, most balanced lineup.
 
CannonBalls said:
Well Carvalho player for Liverpool in EPL. They were pretty happy to keep him. There were many team after him.
Not sure how these can be compared, one is a fringe player in title challenging team another is part of a (not sure what to call whats happening at Chelsea)
Click to expand...

What? he played 13 times for Liverpool and scored 2 goals, 1 underwhelming loan one at Leipzig and and an average one in the Championship with Hull.
Angelo highly rated young player from Brazil with a decent loan at Strasbourg.
 
Lavia is not healthy at the moment. Something about Caicedo makes him take a bit before he warns up his league form; he hasn’t played great yet.

Enzo hasn’t played particularly bad. Chelsea, in general, hasn’t played particularly bad. We played pretty well in what we were trying to do versus City, we just choked on our chances and we had issues with Haaland. We hit points that were downright sublime against Wolves. Hughes should have been off the field and nobody mentions the Palace game.

I know nobody likes to mention “grades” and “metrics”, but Enzo HAS graded out very well, and not just by passing backwards. His progressive carries and ability to get the ball forward have been good. He isn’t Lavia defensively, but we haven’t been that bad defensively. I expected us to be worse. Eze had a great moment from a ball that should have been easily cleared out, but aside from that Palace had an almost non existent xG or real threat. Their “shots on goal” cane from outside the box and might as well have been lobbed passes to Sanchez.

Attacking momentum and possession have both been in Chelsea’s favor by nearly 70%.

5 “Outstanding chances” in a game is nearly unheard of. If Dean Henderson doesn’t channel Oliver Khan, and the refereeing is slightly normal it’s a co for table 3 points ( how does a player get 5 warnings for physical fouls that do t get the ball and no red card? And how does Palmer have more Yellows than Will Hughes).

So if you’re a Chelsea fan. Don’t overreact, don’t let them get to you, and support the team. They are buying in. Fofana earned a call up back to France with his recent games, but said no for now so he could focus on getting to full fitness and following his plan properly.

The team is starting to move the ball with better and cleaner tempo. There are fewer miscommunication mistakes every time they play.
 
jakko said:
What? he played 13 times for Liverpool and scored 2 goals, 1 underwhelming loan one at Leipzig and and an average one in the Championship with Hull.
Angelo highly rated young player from Brazil with a decent loan at Strasbourg.
Click to expand...

How was Carvalho's loan (9 goals + 2 assists in 20 games) at Hull average yet Angelo's (0 goals, 4 assists in 25) decent?
 
Bluelion7 said:
Lavia is not healthy at the moment. Something about Caicedo makes him take a bit before he warns up his league form; he hasn’t played great yet.

Enzo hasn’t played particularly bad. Chelsea, in general, hasn’t played particularly bad. We played pretty well in what we were trying to do versus City, we just choked on our chances and we had issues with Haaland. We hit points that were downright sublime against Wolves. Hughes should have been off the field and nobody mentions the Palace game.

I know nobody likes to mention “grades” and “metrics”, but Enzo HAS graded out very well, and not just by passing backwards. His progressive carries and ability to get the ball forward have been good. He isn’t Lavia defensively, but we haven’t been that bad defensively. I expected us to be worse. Eze had a great moment from a ball that should have been easily cleared out, but aside from that Palace had an almost non existent xG or real threat. Their “shots on goal” cane from outside the box and might as well have been lobbed passes to Sanchez.

Attacking momentum and possession have both been in Chelsea’s favor by nearly 70%.

5 “Outstanding chances” in a game is nearly unheard of. If Dean Henderson doesn’t channel Oliver Khan, and the refereeing is slightly normal it’s a co for table 3 points ( how does a player get 5 warnings for physical fouls that do t get the ball and no red card? And how does Palmer have more Yellows than Will Hughes).

So if you’re a Chelsea fan. Don’t overreact, don’t let them get to you, and support the team. They are buying in. Fofana earned a call up back to France with his recent games, but said no for now so he could focus on getting to full fitness and following his plan properly.

The team is starting to move the ball with better and cleaner tempo. There are fewer miscommunication mistakes every time they play.
Click to expand...

As an outsider, I honestly do not see any real quality with Caicedo. When I watch him he seems to:
a) have 'ok, but limited' passing. In particular, he doesn't strike the ball with much zip to transition the ball quickly.
b) not have a great reading of the game. For instance, he appears to not be able to read where the person in possession is going to play the ball until after they have struck the ball. This means he is regularly ends up late to challenge for the ball, which causes him to have a very 'clumsy' style of tackling.
c) he seems to panic under any duress and consequently makes bad decisions. Utd's fist at SB last season was a prime example of this where he essentially played a through ball. I think I also remember him whiping out James against City before they got a pen (?) In your home game last season.

I get that he has a good engine and puts himself about, but apart from that I honestly don't see what he provides.
 
Santos J said:
How was Carvalho's loan (9 goals + 2 assists in 20 games) at Hull average yet Angelo's (0 goals, 4 assists in 25) decent?
Click to expand...

Ones a harder league than the other, maybe average was harsh but dont see a problem with what Angelo is being sold for in comparison. Same with Sepp Van Den Berg.
 
Dave Smith said:
As an outsider, I honestly do not see any real quality with Caicedo. When I watch him he seems to:
a) have 'ok, but limited' passing. In particular, he doesn't strike the ball with much zip to transition the ball quickly.
b) not have a great reading of the game. For instance, he appears to not be able to read where the person in possession is going to play the ball until after they have struck the ball. This means he is regularly ends up late to challenge for the ball, which causes him to have a very 'clumsy' style of tackling.
c) he seems to panic under any duress and consequently makes bad decisions. Utd's fist at SB last season was a prime example of this where he essentially played a through ball. I think I also remember him whiping out James against City before they got a pen (?) In your home game last season.

I get that he has a good engine and puts himself about, but apart from that I honestly don't see what he provides.
Click to expand...
While your critiques are fair for the most part, I think it's also important to point out that Caicedo more than anyone else in our team was the biggest victim of Poch's chaotic tactics. Far too often Caicedo was left alone to cover acres of space - it's hard to look good in that kind of system.

He's quietly been excellent for most of 2024 - but I do think more broadly it's becoming evident that he's not a single pivot type of player. He's far more akin to Kante where you want to allow him to press high to make the most of his engine - so in general I'd agree with @WeePat and his thinking that Caicedo + Lavia likely makes the most sense as a midfield pair. Unless we do something outlandish and play Caicedo as a high-pressing inverting right back - but that's probably only something to do in emergencies (although we did do it once Gusto went off injured this past weekend).
 
TheMagicFoolBus said:
While your critiques are fair for the most part, I think it's also important to point out that Caicedo more than anyone else in our team was the biggest victim of Poch's chaotic tactics. Far too often Caicedo was left alone to cover acres of space - it's hard to look good in that kind of system.

He's quietly been excellent for most of 2024 - but I do think more broadly it's becoming evident that he's not a single pivot type of player. He's far more akin to Kante where you want to allow him to press high to make the most of his engine - so in general I'd agree with @WeePat and his thinking that Caicedo + Lavia likely makes the most sense as a midfield pair. Unless we do something outlandish and play Caicedo as a high-pressing inverting right back - but that's probably only something to do in emergencies (although we did do it once Gusto went off injured this past weekend).
Click to expand...

Agreed. I have zero problems with Caicedo. I think he’s brilliant, and been brilliant post Christmas to now.
 
bosskeano said:
chelsea are becoming the new Man City or Red Bull with all the loopholes they've found

https://www.espn.com/soccer/story/_/id/41120574/chelsea-hotel-sale-cleared-premier-league-sources
Click to expand...
Real Madrid-buying-their-training- grounds from-the-government-for-next-to-nothing then-selling-it-back-for-huge-profit-decades-ago says “Hi!”

This is nothing new, and it will never go away, because there are reasons to shift around the ownership of capital assets, facilities, and things like land that have nothing to do with PSR. And if you made this a penalized offense you would effectively erode the ability of many teams to do necessary upgrades, remodels, and complete renovations.

Might as well make it illegal to borrow money from yourself as well while they’re at it.
 
DOTA said:
I read that. I was wondering how you felt about it.
Click to expand...

I mean, it depends on who was going to buy. Could there be better? Of course.

I don't think they could sell even if they wanted to for a few years as part of the purchase so it's not really something I've considered much. They're committed to putting in £1.7 billion over a set period and we're nowhere near that yet.
 
duffer said:
I mean, it depends on who was going to buy. Could there be better? Of course.

I don't think they could sell even if they wanted to for a few years as part of the purchase so it's not really something I've considered much.
Click to expand...
Ahh, yeah, I'd forgotten there was stipulations about that.
 
If the outcome was Clearlake buying out Boehly, Walters and Wyss for their shares to gain full ownership and control of the club, I doubt much would change from the way things are now.

Boehly's been nothing but a glorified rubber stamp for almost two years now and in that time it's been Clearlake who make all the important decisions. Walters and Wyss (both with just under 13% share like Boehly) have to my knowledge been more or less silent partners with no decision making power even now.

But if the outcome was Boehly buying out Clearlake, things could be a bit unpredictable and there's really no way to know which way things would go. But this scenario seems more far fetched because Clearlake don't seem interested in selling and I doubt Boehly could afford it anyway.
 
Rnd898 said:
If the outcome was Clearlake buying out Boehly, Walters and Wyss for their shares to gain full ownership and control of the club, I doubt much would change from the way things are now.

Boehly's been nothing but a glorified rubber stamp for almost two years now and in that time it's been Clearlake who make all the important decisions. Walters and Wyss (both with just under 13% share like Boehly) have to my knowledge been more or less silent partners with no decision making power even now.

But if the outcome was Boehly buying out Clearlake, things could be a bit unpredictable and there's really no way to know which way things would go. But this scenario seems more far fetched because Clearlake don't seem interested in selling and I doubt Boehly could afford it anyway.
Click to expand...
I'm leaning towards Clearlake purely because instinct says Boehly would take the average fans opinion into account and frankly I couldn't think of much worse.

We'd have never had Conte or Tuchel if Roman did that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.