I was thinking the other day how weird it is that if you look at the 5 teams classed as our rivals in the PL, 4/5 of them have one of their star players being a former Chelsea player. City have De Bruyne, Liverpool have Salah, United have Lukaku and Arsenal have Cech, although Cech is the odd one out in that list since he at least had his prime with us before leaving. The others never reached their primes at Chelsea unfortunately, which makes me think we aren’t approaching getting these guys in the right way.
The problem for us with Lukaku, De Bruyne and Salah was that when they were at Chelsea, they were too raw and inconsistent to play regularly at the level that we play at, competing at a high level for League titles. They were good players with high potential, but they needed to be playing regularly to improve their game and gain consistency. Had we played them, we would have risked dropping out of the CL places which we couldn’t do because that cost, not just financially but also to a club’s status as a whole, is too great. We couldn’t loan them out either since we’d already loaned them out and they still weren’t at the required level for us.
So we were almost backed into a corner and forced to sell them since they didn’t have the patience to wait a little longer at Chelsea. And then of course, they took a step down in level to a Europa/mid table level side who could afford to give their raw, inconsistent selves regular game time and they developed into the world class players they are today and were then signed by our rivals for big money.
So is there any point in buying these guys as young as we do? They always end up needing a lot of time and experience before they’ll be ready to play for us, but the problem is it takes too long at chelsea for them to reach that level and they always end up wanting to leave before they do. Now I understand we make money off this, but it just isn’t worth it. I’m sure Liverpool, for example, are a lot happier than we are currently about Salah. I don’t think any money we made off him makes up for the fact he is tearing it up now at Anfield. Instead of buying potentially world class 25 year olds when they are 20 and losing them before they reach their potential, why not just wait for nature to take its course and for the mid table/Europa level sides to produce and nurture these young talents? Then when they are ready to play consistently at the top level, why can’t Chelsea be the club who spends big money to buy these guys?
The way it is now, we end up being the big losers since we don’t get the big transfer fee OR the players. We’re just the idiots who screwed up and let the top class player go for nothing who everyone can laugh at.
Do we sign top players too young?
posted on 16/2/18
I genuinely don't think you can have it both ways.
——————————————————————
True. But there must be a balance, where you have a mixture of quality signings and promoting young players from the academy. The club and the board are desperate to integrate few young players into the first team. Therefore the next management appointment will be pivotal to make it possible.
posted on 16/2/18
I'd suggest Chelsea didn't sign those players too early, but too late.
By the time you signed them, all 3 were playing at top flight clubs and made their European débuts.
They were aready too good to be at the academy, but not yet at a point where they could be first team regulars, so before too long they were all loaned out.
It's much easier to get a player to accept a buyback clause if he's actually spent time at the club and had time to develop a sense of loyalty.
I would imagine it would be easier to get someone like Hudson-Odoi to accept a buyback clause on a transfer, because playing for Chelsea has probably been his dream since he was a boy.
posted on 16/2/18
comment by Erik (U21750)
posted 1 hour, 56 minutes ago
BK, why wasn’t De Bruyne given a chance then? Or do you think he left too early and wasn’t patient enough?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mourinho didn't recognise his talent / wasn't willing to assimilate him into the squad over bigger money signings.
posted on 16/2/18
Good point it’s only, although I dunno how possible it is to find these guys earlier
Bk, I remember we started the season with De Bruyne in the team and he got dropped and never recovered his place. You could argue Mourinho could given him more chances, but why would Mourinho start with him initially if he only wanted to use senior players? Surely he must have decided that De Bruyne wasn’t ready to start regularly in the PL for us based on the appearances he did make for us and what he saw in training.
posted on 16/2/18
And he was obviously wrong wasn't he. I'm not a fan of how we treated Lukaku and Salah but can also accept that with us they were at a stage when maybe they weren't ready - not having that argument for KDB. He'd just come off a great loan at Werder Bremen, starting and playing well for Belgium, was one of our best players in pre season..
posted on 16/2/18
comment by Erik (U21750)
posted 25 minutes ago
Good point it’s only, although I dunno how possible it is to find these guys earlier
----------------------------------------------------------------------
At youngers ages perhaps you just need to do more to nurture your own talent.
If you sign someone aged 18 who's already made his début and impressed in the Champions League, you'll normally have given him a 5-year contract.
He'll understand that he might not be starting for a couple of seasons and will have to earn his place. He'll benefit from training every day with some of the world's best.
You can't just fob him off to West Brom and expect him to be grateful enough to agree a buyback clause.
posted on 16/2/18
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 8 hours, 29 minutes ago
comment by Pride of the North (U6803)
posted 21 seconds ago
You buy up all the young talent knowing you'll sell on 99% of them for profit. Roman isn't interested in developing young players for the first team
----------------------------------------------------------------------
so hazard, ampadu, christensen are not young?
I guess same could be used against utd. Rashford now on the fringes and no other youth players.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Rashford is the only United player who has featured in every game he's been fit for this season.
Angel Gomes, Scott McTominay and Axel Tuanzebe have all featured this season, McTominay in particular.
And Jose has made another Academy graduate Jesse Lingard, a first team regular and key player.
In short, your post is nonsense.
posted on 16/2/18
comment by Erik (U21750)
posted 8 hours, 5 minutes ago
I’m not wahl
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ah I know you mate good to see you
posted on 17/2/18
comment by Kunta Kinte Kante Conte (U1641)
posted 19 hours, 41 minutes ago
And he was obviously wrong wasn't he. I'm not a fan of how we treated Lukaku and Salah but can also accept that with us they were at a stage when maybe they weren't ready - not having that argument for KDB. He'd just come off a great loan at Werder Bremen, starting and playing well for Belgium, was one of our best players in pre season..
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But if he was wrong, why did De Bruyne go to Wolfsburg for only 15m or so? Why didn’t Man City bid 50m then and there if he was ready? He needed to develop a little, he could have featured more at Chelsea maybe, but he wasn’t ready to be a regular at that stage. He would have been a sub at best I think.
posted on 17/2/18
comment by kneerash-23 Cara Gold (U6876)
posted 16 hours, 58 minutes ago
comment by Erik (U21750)
posted 8 hours, 5 minutes ago
I’m not wahl
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ah I know you mate good to see you
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not him.