Ian Maatsen | Aston Villa player

Selling Maatsen/Hall and keeping both Chilwell and Cucu is about as Chelsea as it can get.
 
Hmm is this another loophole around the recently mentioned ATP rules?

Maybe i’m being suspicious as Villa and Chelsea were the clubs ‘backing’ Man City over the so called unfair rules… but what stops Chelsea and Villa having an agreement to buy each others academy players in exchange for increased budgets?
 
spe88 said:
Hmm is this another loophole around the recently mentioned ATP rules?

Maybe i’m being suspicious as Villa and Chelsea were the clubs ‘backing’ Man City over the so called unfair rules… but what stops Chelsea and Villa having an agreement to buy each others academy players in exchange for increased budgets?
Click to expand...

The only way this will work is if they continue to do this every year with continuously higher inflated values. 40m for Maatsen is reasonable given Hall was sold for 30m. Maatsen is a more refined product of the two.
 
Villa building a strong technical team, they know what they're doing. They'll finish ahead of us again if we can't pull some surprises out of the bag by the end of the window.
 
Maluco said:
I think that’s a good objective. There was something special about the cup final and having kids involved in youth levels scoring the goals. There was more emotion involved on the day and I think it gave ten Hag a lot of sympathy that he wouldn’t normally have had.

Chelsea are so prolific developing Premier League level players, it’s a pity there aren’t 4-5 in on the pitch regularly on a match day.
Click to expand...
James and Colwill have basically been given not for sale stances from day dot while we according to The Athletic we diverted the potential signing of Lima (the RB Wolves hijacked) to Strasborg because we see Josh Acheampong as superior to him.

We also have extended Tyrick George's contract while seem to be going all out to make sure that Rio kid stays (outrageous that a 15 year olds future has become so public but I guess that was inevitable in the social media era eventually).

Rightly or wrongly the policy under this ownership seems to be the elite prospects are untouchable but the ones that have a certain ceiling are available at a certain price.
 
Dancfc said:
James and Colwill have basically been given not for sale stances from day dot while we according to The Athletic we diverted the potential signing of Lima (the RB Wolves hijacked) to Strasborg because we see Josh Acheampong as superior to him.

We also have extended Tyrick George's contract while seem to be going all out to make sure that Rio kid stays (outrageous that a 15 year olds future has become so public but I guess that was inevitable in the social media era eventually).

Rightly or wrongly the policy under this ownership seems to be the elite prospects are untouchable but the ones that have a certain ceiling are available at a certain price.
Click to expand...

I get that it’s profitable but players like Mount and Gallagher absolutely should stay at Chelsea. The short term gain (only to be spent on a Murdyk or Lukaku) just doesn’t work as a business model for me.

There is a stat about transfers in general and how the success rate is so low (44%, so less than a coin toss). Why throw the dice when you have a sure thing that can contribute significantly at the highest level and loves the club and connects with the fans?

Just not worth it for me. I think it detracts from the great work the youth academy does and it hurts the heart of the club itself.
 
Maluco said:
I get that it’s profitable but players like Mount and Gallagher absolutely should stay at Chelsea. The short term gain (only to be sounded on a Murdyk or Lukaku) just doesn’t work as a business model for me.

There is a stat about transfers in general and how the success rate is so low. Why throw the dice when you have a sure thing that can contribute significantly at the highest level and loves the club and connects with the fans?

Just not worth it for me.
Click to expand...

We're not doing it for you.
 
Maluco said:
I get that it’s profitable but players like Mount and Gallagher absolutely should stay at Chelsea. The short term gain (only to be spent on a Murdyk or Lukaku) just doesn’t work as a business model for me.

There is a stat about transfers in general and how the success rate is so low (44%, so less than a coin toss). Why throw the dice when you have a sure thing that can contribute significantly at the highest level and loves the club and connects with the fans?

Just not worth it for me. I think it detracts from the great work the youth academy does and it hurts the heart of the club itself.
Click to expand...
I agree one of Mount or Gallagher should be kept (for me keeping both long term would have hurt us and them as they're just too similar to co exist in the same team). Infact I even said as early as his Charlton loan Gallagher will be the perfect 12th player to pad out a title winning squad (which I'm hoping is the ultimate aim).

I don't totally agree with the heart of the club comment though, ofcourse there's academy players that grew up a die hard supporter, come into the team as effectively one of us ala James and that's great but there's also players from Cobham who didn't support us as a boy (and joined us because of how well we develop them as youngsters) and just never get there go the fullest extent while playing while signings from the outside do, ala Thiago Silva, pretty much the entire old guard (even the one academy player in that group didn't support us as a boy).
 
Dancfc said:
I agree one of Mount or Gallagher should be kept (for me keeping both long term would have hurt us and them as they're just too similar to co exist in the same team). Infact I even said as early as his Charlton loan Gallagher will be the perfect 12th player to pad out a title winning squad (which I'm hoping is the ultimate aim).

I don't totally agree with the heart of the club comment though, ofcourse there's academy players that grew up a die hard supporter, come into the team as effectively one of us ala James and that's great but there's also players from Cobham who didn't support us as a boy (and joined us because of how well we develop them as youngsters) and just never get there go the fullest extent while playing while signings from the outside do, ala Thiago Silva, pretty much the entire old guard (even the one academy player in that group didn't support us as a boy).
Click to expand...

It’s about how Chelsea shaped them as players though. Garnacho was bought but he still feels shaped by the club and one of our own.

I just think if Chelsea has a squad that had Tomori, Maatsen, Mount/Gallagher and maybe one of the RBs, it would feel so much more…Chelsea and provide a real identity.

Gusto does look cracking though to be fair, so it was a gamble that was definitely gotten right.
 
I like Chelsea by the way, so the critiques come from a place of frustration, rather than “having a go”

I am a Mourinho fan (as unpopular as that is here) and his Chelsea team were always by go to FM option with mates in those days.

We weren’t supposed to like them, but there were too many likeable players and it felt like you knew who Chelsea were back then.

I think Maatsen has the ability to be with the elite names mentioned, so it’s a little sad to see him end up on the discarded pile.
 
Maluco said:
It’s about how Chelsea shaped them as players though. Garnacho was bought but he still feels shaped by the club and one of our own.

I just think if Chelsea has a squad that had Tomori, Maatsen, Mount/Gallagher and maybe one of the RBs, it would feel so much more…Chelsea and provide a real identity.

Gusto does look cracking though to be fair, so it was a gamble that was definitely gotten right.
Click to expand...

You have to remember, despite all the outgoings, we still gave Colwill, Gallagher, and Gilchrist significant game time this season. Broja got a couple of games here and there, Maatsen too, James when he was fit was playing, so that's still 6 academy players, despite all the outgoings.

It could be even better, of course it could and I largely agree with your criticism of how Chelsea have handled certain players, but even in this heavily criticised situation, we probably still fielded more academy players this season than maybe 90% of the league. It's worth remembering this context.
 
Monchi has been really active for Aston Villa. He is working on so many deals for Villa early in the window.
 
WeePat said:
You have to remember, despite all the outgoings, we still gave Colwill, Gallagher, and Gilchrist significant game time this season. Broja got a couple of games here and there, Maatsen too, James when he was fit was playing, so that's still 6 academy players, despite all the outgoings.

It could be even better, of course it could and I largely agree with your criticism of how Chelsea have handled certain players, but even in this heavily criticised situation, we probably still fielded more academy players this season than maybe 90% of the league. It's worth remembering this context.
Click to expand...

While true, that’s Gallagher, Broja and Maasten probably on the out of those 6, one that can’t stay fit (although we hope the surgery helps with this) and one (Gilchrist), could well be on the periphery depending on signings.

I just feel it could have been so much more.
 
Maluco said:
I like Chelsea by the way, so the critiques come from a place of frustration, rather than “having a go”

I am a Mourinho fan (as unpopular as that is here) and his Chelsea team were always by go to FM option with mates in those days.

We weren’t supposed to like them, but there were too many likeable players and it felt like you knew who Chelsea were back then.

I think Maatsen has the ability to be with the elite names mentioned, so it’s a little sad to see him end up on the discarded pile.
Click to expand...
Tbh I may be in the minority but I've never felt that big a rivalry between the clubs, infact you done us a great service in the late 90s/early 00s stopping Arsenal being so dominant.

I don't mean it at a bad thing for me it's pretty natural given we don't have close proximity and bar half a decade (and 99) have never fought for the big two at the same time and even then it didn't feel that intense because for whatever reason Fergie and Jose/Carlo decided against fully going head to head with the mind games the way Fergie and Wenger/Keegan did.
 
Dancfc said:
Tbh I may be in the minority but I've never felt that big a rivalry between the clubs, infact you done us a great service in the late 90s/early 00s stopping Arsenal being so dominant.

I don't mean it at a bad thing for me it's pretty natural given we don't have close proximity and bar half a decade (and 99) have never fought for the big two at the same time and even then it didn't feel that intense because for whatever reason Fergie and Jose/Carlo decided against fully going head to head with the mind games the way Fergie and Wenger/Keegan did.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I saw it as a rivalry to win and a team to overcome, rather than a dislike for the team itself. I think Mourinho and that team changed the landscape of the PL and it was a really exciting time.

I really loved Drogba as a player, and liked players like Malouda, Makelele, Essien, Robben, Carvalho etc…. Lots of players in that era that were easy to begrudgingly admire.
 
Maluco said:
Yeah, I saw it as a rivalry to win and a team to overcome, rather than a dislike for the team itself. I think Mourinho and that team changed the landscape of the PL and it was a really exciting time.

I really loved Drogba as a player, and liked players like Malouda, Makelele, Essien, Robben, Carvalho etc…. Lots of players in that era that were easy to begrudgingly admire.
Click to expand...
Chelsea 2004-2006 under Mourinho was a really good team.
 
Bale Bale Bale said:
Which of your other two LBs are likely to leave?
Click to expand...

Digne had Saudi interest last summer and is on a ridiculous wage. However he was really good and given he's played for likes of Roma and Barca I don't think we should just be selling all our CL experienced players so would keep him until January if that's financially possible.

Would move on Moreno. Was excellent when he first came in but he had a serious hamstring injury and looks a case since that he's lost half a yard of acceleration which is a problem for the style of LB he is. Some rumours Real Betis want him back so might see him go there for low fee. He is also over 30.
 
Ali Dia said:
I didn’t realise he was working there now. Their signings have been quality it has to be said.
Click to expand...
Looking from outside Monchi + Emery in Villa is similar to the Edu + Arteta setup in Arsenal. They work as a team and complement each other. Let's see how Villa reinforce the team for the Champion League this coming season. Newcastle last season didn't cope very well with the extra games.
 
VorZakone said:
Chelsea 2004-2006 under Mourinho was a really good team.
Click to expand...

They really were, they looked unbeatable at one point and made some really smart buys that weren’t obvious ones.

I felt like there was a real identity to that team and his approach at the time galvanized them. I think Chelsea could have a great identity and feel to them with so many youth players coming through. Maatsen is a loss for sure.
 
Maluco said:
They really were, they looked unbeatable at one point and made some really smart buys that weren’t obvious ones.

I felt like there was a real identity to that team and his approach at the time galvanized them. I think Chelsea could have a great identity and feel to them with so many youth players coming through. Maatsen is a loss for sure.
Click to expand...

They took all our targets and outbid us thanks to Kenyon.
 
Chelsea conveniently buying a Villa homegrown player now. Feels like two clubs helping each other out of a PSR jam.

Villa rapidly becoming a bit dickheady as a club. They’re one of the ones siding with City.
 
Solius said:
Chelsea conveniently buying a Villa homegrown player now. Feels like two clubs helping each other out of a PSR jam.

Villa rapidly becoming a bit dickheady as a club. They’re one of the ones siding with City.
Click to expand...
Yup, pretty much. They were also heavily linked with signing Gallagher and sending Duran to Chelsea for an inflated price. Aston Villa are also doing the same with Everton sending academy players to each other for inflated prices.
 
Kellyman seems like a good-but-nothing-special academy talent and they’re buying him for 19m.

BvB was offering 25m for Maatsen and Chelsea sold him to Villa for 37.

All very convenient from a PSR perspective but in the end Chelsea seems to have lost the better player at a position of real need just to add another left footed attacking midfielder who probably won’t make it with them.
 
Powderfinger said:
Kellyman seems like a good-but-nothing-special academy talent and they’re buying him for 19m.

BvB was offering 25m for Maatsen and they sold him to Villa for 37.

All very convenient from a PSR perspective but in the end Chelsea seems to have lost the better player at a position of real need just to add another left footed attacking midfielder who probably won’t make it with them.
Click to expand...
To be fair, this was more to do with Dortmund penny pinching. They had a buy clause of 35m when they loaned him which they didn't want to trigger. Chelsea had no reals plans to use him anyways so I don't think they feel too much about losing him.
 
Surprised at how few people are taking Villa seriously. They are working hard towards becoming a PL force and they have the wealth and know-how to achieve it. Appointing Monchi as sporting director was a huge statement of intent.
 
Powderfinger said:
All very convenient from a PSR perspective but in the end Chelsea seems to have lost the better player at a position of real need just to add another left footed attacking midfielder who probably won’t make it with them.
Click to expand...
LB is not remotely "a position of real need" at Chelsea.

We have Spain's first choice LB in cracking form plus Chilwell and Colwill as backup.

Centre forward and goalie are our "positions of real need".
 
Blood Mage said:
Surprised at how few people are taking Villa seriously. They are working hard towards becoming a PL force and they have the wealth and know-how to achieve it. Appointment Monchi as sporting director was a huge statement of intent.
Click to expand...

They have a big wage bill and tiny turnover(relative to their rivals) and are already having to make creative moves to dodge PSR. They aren't operating at a sustainable rate.
 
duffer said:
It feels like that because it is that.

Be interesting to see if they change the rules.
Click to expand...

Looks like Everton and Villa also swapping a homegrown player each. Both conveniently valued at £9m.
 
duffer said:
It feels like that because it is that.

Be interesting to see if they change the rules.
Click to expand...

Do you think Chelsea will ever tire of trying to find loopholes and just act like a normal club?
 
Damn that's a really good signing for that money. He was a catalyst for Dortmunds better form in the second half of the season and really hoped they could keep him. Obviously they couldn't afford the fee given the other holes they need to fill in the squad.

One thing though is that he was best utilized in the same way Arteta was using Zinchenko in that inside full back role where the full back will come into midfield and create that 'box midfield' that's becoming a trend now. He is really good on the ball and helped them keep progress the ball from there.

Would be interesting if Villa utilize them as a simple wide attacking full back instead.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.