Falcao for Chelsea??

[Chelsea Pensioner]

There's talk this could be a goer, seems a bit odd to me. Remy is more than decent, just wish he's get some game time. Thought Costa was fantastic last game , he worried the life out of the defenders with his football. Can't remember him ever working so hard. Fab was utterly dire, and Oscar simply invisible. Something is seriously amiss there, surely it's not just tiredness that makes Fab misdirect every pass and Oscar just go missing?
Falcao seems to have lost it, but hard to judge the way Utd have been going. His age is a problem for me, 29 I believe, when most strikers would seem to have maybe 2 years left before age starts to affect them. Harry Kane looks a better bet, I have been impressed with him. Why do none of our youth strikers ever get a mention? Young Bamford looks the business to me, but only defenders of his age get a run. Any other suggestions for striker?

 

[Drogs]

No way.

I would be very happy with Costa, Remy and Bamford next season. For some reason, we seem to have no faith in Remy though.

 

[chelsea - over 100 years of history]

There's been a lot of talk regarding the young guy at Palermo. Falcao is a no go unless it's a loan with a massive reduction in wages. Looks pretty much finished as a top line striker to me plus age is against him.

Personally I'd probably go Costa, Remy and maybe Bamford. Bamford needs at least to be going to a premier league side on loan to continue his development.

I can't see Drogba being with us next year.

Kane is a good shout but not going to happen. Looks a real talent but Spurs won't sell and especially to us.

 

[Bodinki]

There's been a lot of talk regarding the young guy at Palermo. Falcao is a no go unless it's a loan with a massive reduction in wages. Looks pretty much finished as a top line striker to me plus age is against him.

Personally I'd probably go Costa, Remy and maybe Bamford. Bamford needs at least to be going to a premier league side on loan to continue his development.

I can't see Drogba being with us next year.

Kane is a good shout but not going to happen. Looks a real talent but Spurs won't sell and especially to us.

He is decent but like you say, Spurs will not sell to us, despite not being title rivals, they just like being dicks when it comes to signings. Though they bend over and spread their ass cheeks when Man United come a knocking.
Dont want a repeat of the Modric fiasco either.
I would be cool with Bamford as 3rd choice striker...but I highly doubt it will happen.

 

[SpursDisciple]

He is decent but like you say, Spurs will not sell to us, despite not being title rivals, they just like being dicks when it comes to signings. Though they bend over and spread their ass cheeks when Man United come a knocking.
Dont want a repeat of the Modric fiasco either.
I would be cool with Bamford as 3rd choice striker...but I highly doubt it will happen.

Really? We are just meanies who wont roll over for our betters. Do you think you behaved well over Willian, over Modric? Maybe we wont sell Kane to you because we want to keep him, given we've developed him from a young age. What selfish twats we are.

Berbatov and Carrick were a while ago. You want our players now and be prepared to offer world record bids.

 

[Bodinki]

Really? We are just meanies who wont roll over for our betters. Do you think you behaved well over Willian, over Modric? Maybe we wont sell Kane to you because we want to keep him, given we've developed him from a young age. What selfish twats we are.

Berbatov and Carrick were a while ago. You want our players now and be prepared to offer world record bids.

I am sure you have wanted to keep every decent player you have sold in the last decade. Unfortunately, they don't want to stay.
Willian was Roman's little revenge for Modric I am certain

 

[SpursDisciple]

I am sure you have wanted to keep every decent player you have sold in the last decade. Unfortunately, they don't want to stay.
Willian was Roman's little revenge for Modric I am certain

That's what happens when you have more money than sense. We were entitled to keep Modric, he was under contract. Why would Roman feel slighted - cause we don't roll over whenever you want.

 

[Bodinki]

That's what happens when you have more money than sense. We were entitled to keep Modric, he was under contract. Why would Roman feel slighted - cause we don't roll over whenever you want.

Men like that are used to getting what they want, when they don't, they get pissed off.
Not sure there is such a thing as a Non self entitled billionaire

 

[SpursDisciple]

Men like that are used to getting what they want, when they don't, they get pissed off.
Not sure there is such a thing as a Non self entitled billionaire

You seem to have an inappropriate smilie issue

 

[Bodinki]

You seem to have an inappropriate smilie issue

I dont think its a smilie, too me this: looks more like a kid with developmental issues throwing a tantrum.

 

[No Kane No Gain]

He is decent but like you say, Spurs will not sell to us, despite not being title rivals, they just like being dicks when it comes to signings. Though they bend over and spread their ass cheeks when Man United come a knocking.
Dont want a repeat of the Modric fiasco either.
I would be cool with Bamford as 3rd choice striker...but I highly doubt it will happen.

We only accepted the United Bale offer because they offered us £20mill more and would've taken Bale off our hands.

£18mill was pretty ridiculous for Carrick at the time and Berbatov was sold to them because he was tapped up so we got to call the shots on the fee. Same with Arnesen really and almost the same with Modric except we had him over a barrel with his contract.

There's very little chance of players going eitherway between the clubs, just like us with Arsenal, or City and United, or United and Liverpool. Pretty normal stuff really.

No way.

I would be very happy with Costa, Remy and Bamford next season. For some reason, we seem to have no faith in Remy though.

You guys seem happy to just get in a new set of back up strikers every 12-18 months and then not use them unless you have too. It's odd but you can afford it I suppose.

 

[chelsea - over 100 years of history]

We only accepted the United Bale offer because they offered us £20mill more and would've taken Bale off our hands.

£18mill was pretty ridiculous for Carrick at the time and Berbatov was sold to them because he was tapped up so we got to call the shots on the fee. Same with Arnesen really and almost the same with Modric except we had him over a barrel with his contract.

There's very little chance of players going eitherway between the clubs, just like us with Arsenal, or City and United, or United and Liverpool. Pretty normal stuff really.



You guys seem happy to just get in a new set of back up strikers every 12-18 months and then not use them unless you have too. It's odd but you can afford it I suppose.

To be fair, Eto'o and Drogba were frees and Ba and Remy cost about 20m combined, of which we got some back for Ba when we sold him. Seems a fairly decent system really as long as you have a decent striker banging them in. This year we do, last year not so much!

Bamford certainly looks a prospect but needs some P.L game time.

 

[JCC87]

If we win the league I think Remy might move on. Gets his medal and co go play 1st team football somewhere else. He's at that age where he should be really.

As for our striking options next year, have already stated I have a soft spot for Luciano Vietto of Villareall, very much an Aguero type striker and only 21. Mauro Icardi has been mooted but I'm not as big a fan of his and Paulo Dybala is going to cost too much (£30m) and has plenty of admirers.

Bamford will hopefully stay with Middlesborough next year in the Prem. Only other problem with that is Kalas and Omeruo have to come back as Boro wouldn't be able to loan more than one player from us.

 

[No Kane No Gain]

To be fair, Eto'o and Drogba were frees and Ba and Remy cost about 20m combined, of which we got some back for Ba when we sold him. Seems a fairly decent system really as long as you have a decent striker banging them in. This year we do, last year not so much!

Bamford certainly looks a prospect but needs some P.L game time.

They're still expensive backups though, aren't they. I don't know about Drogba's wages but Remy, Ba and Eto'o were all on a lot of money for backup players, that's why I was saying if you can afford it, it's a good system. As fans I'm sure we'd all prefer to see a youngster come through, or someone staying long enough for the fans actually to build up a relationship with but the club's perspective will be that it's good value for a more sure success.

A few friends that are Chelsea fans want Bamford brought in next season like many on here. I guess it depends which way Mourinho takes things next season but I do think he'd fit in well with the "usual" Mourinho system with less possession and quicker attacks. Karanka very much looks like a student of Mourinho at Boro and he's got them playing very similarly.

 

[chelsea - over 100 years of history]

They're still expensive backups though, aren't they. I don't know about Drogba's wages but Remy, Ba and Eto'o were all on a lot of money for backup players, that's why I was saying if you can afford it, it's a good system. As fans I'm sure we'd all prefer to see a youngster come through, or someone staying long enough for the fans actually to build up a relationship with but the club's perspective will be that it's good value for a more sure success.

A few friends that are Chelsea fans want Bamford brought in next season like many on here. I guess it depends which way Mourinho takes things next season but I do think he'd fit in well with the "usual" Mourinho system with less possession and quicker attacks. Karanka very much looks like a student of Mourinho at Boro and he's got them playing very similarly.

Not sure exactly what money everyone is on etc but at Spurs you have Adebayor and Soldardo as back ups at the moment. I know this is in part to the emergence of Kane but isn't it smart to have at least 3 recognised strikers in your squad? Wasn't long ago that United had RVP, Rooney, Welbeck and Hernandez.

I'd love another youngster to make it, but even if it's Bamford, he wasn't developed by us, he was developed at Forrest and the various clubs he's been sent on loan to.

 

[No Kane No Gain]

Not sure exactly what money everyone is on etc but at Spurs you have Adebayor and Soldardo as back ups at the moment. I know this is in part to the emergence of Kane but isn't it smart to have at least 3 recognised strikers in your squad? Wasn't long ago that United had RVP, Rooney, Welbeck and Hernandez.

I'd love another youngster to make it, but even if it's Bamford, he wasn't developed by us, he was developed at Forrest and the various clubs he's been sent on loan to.

Well yeah, Ade and Soldado weren't bought to be backups though. It's like arguing Torres or Shevchenko were backups, the deals they were signed on were not deals for backup players.

I'm not claiming others don't have expensive players on the bench too but I don't think that United example is right. For a start the wages are lower for Hernandez and Welbeck but they also were 4 competing for 2 starting positions. In Fergies last season(RVP's first) they accumulated 79 Premier League starts whereas last season Eto', Torres and Ba had 37 between them which shows the difference pretty conclusively.

Anyway, it wasn't a dig at Chelsea, I was just thinking aloud about the pattern that seems to be emerging. You'd only have to look at City to see a similar situation in terms of wages for backups but with much greater transfer fees involved. Arsenal aren't exactly small spenders either, I'm pretty sure I read that their wage bill is set to overtake yours this season. To look at their squad you'd have to question how that's possible, they must be paying a "living wage" equivalent for a footballer at the club starting at £60k a week.

As for 3 strikers, I guess it depends on formations and personnel. With one striker in the formation and assuming you don't have anyone injury-prone then 2 and a half is probably ideal, with the half being a player who can play upfront but also other positions. It's the way Bayern and Dortmund have it anyway. We kind of have the same with Harry Kane and if either of the other two idiots actually start scoring I think we'd see him used behind the striker or on the left more often.

 

[chelsea - over 100 years of history]

Well yeah, Ade and Soldado weren't bought to be backups though. It's like arguing Torres or Shevchenko were backups, the deals they were signed on were not deals for backup players.

I'm not claiming others don't have expensive players on the bench too but I don't think that United example is right. For a start the wages are lower for Hernandez and Welbeck but they also were 4 competing for 2 starting positions. In Fergies last season(RVP's first) they accumulated 79 Premier League starts whereas last season Eto', Torres and Ba had 37 between them which shows the difference pretty conclusively.

Anyway, it wasn't a dig at Chelsea, I was just thinking aloud about the pattern that seems to be emerging. You'd only have to look at City to see a similar situation in terms of wages for backups but with much greater transfer fees involved. Arsenal aren't exactly small spenders either, I'm pretty sure I read that their wage bill is set to overtake yours this season. To look at their squad you'd have to question how that's possible, they must be paying a "living wage" equivalent for a footballer at the club starting at £60k a week.

As for 3 strikers, I guess it depends on formations and personnel. With one striker in the formation and assuming you don't have anyone injury-prone then 2 and a half is probably ideal, with the half being a player who can play upfront but also other positions. It's the way Bayern and Dortmund have it anyway. We kind of have the same with Harry Kane and if either of the other two idiots actually start scoring I think we'd see him used behind the striker or on the left more often.

Agree with most of what you've said.

I think we rotate our squad players quite frequently because we struggle to keep fringe players happy as they don't get as many games as other clubs allow them. Hence why we buy a player like Salah or Moses, have him for a year of 2 and then move him on for someone else.

It's harder of course when you're in the C.L as opposed to Europa as it's harder to rest or rotate.

I quite like the model of a recognised number 9 with an older pro and a youngster as back up as both probably don't mind getting less minutes. Older player (say Drogba) gives you experience in the squad etc and the youngster can develop around top players.

 

[GazFormidable]

We aren't going to make another error with Falcao like we did with Torres. We'll see a new striker next season because Drogba and/or Remy will move on. I can't see us spending a lot though as Costa will be first choice.