January transfer window

5live

WallyGUFC wrote: »

When have Chelsea ever thought about the long-term though?

They dont need to.

They could triple their squad and then triple their wages and their sugardaddy will pick up the bill. Similar to what Man city have done these last 4 -5 years

ronjo

Agueroooo wrote: »

Every team and I mean every team needs a Mata.

Why dont we all buy him??

Every team chips in about 2 million each and whoever is playing against Chelsea gets him that week !

GLaDOS

Great player, though his best position is where Rooney plays and also Kagawa's best position. He'll definitely improve the team, no doubt, but it's a case of more plaster to cover the cracks that are the central midfield.

Talib Fiasco

ronjo wrote: »

Why dont we all buy him??

Every team chips in about 2 million each and whoever is playing against Chelsea gets him that week !

Meh some teams have David Silva :cool:

Agueroooo

At this rate it looks like most deals will go down to the wire.

Jim better bring a spare pair of jocks into studio next Friday.

elefant

Talib Fiasco wrote: »

Meh some teams have David Silva :cool:

Once upon a time a team had both

Skylinehead

Talib Fiasco wrote: »

Meh some teams have David Silva :cool:

Mata's better though. Silva can be great for 6 months and then disappear for the other 6, Mata consistently keeps his level.

Talib Fiasco

When on form nobody plays Silva's position better than him...he's been incredible this year...Mata has barely played this year...Mata is great but Silva on his day is better

MagicMarker

Skylinehead wrote: »

This keeps getting mentioned, but I don't see the logic. Sure it might help him for 6 months, but then from next year you've basically given your best player to a rival. Doesn't make much sense to me long-term.

Utd will strengthen in the summer regardless so next season makes no difference to Chelsea.

Chelsea can sell him now for 40 mil or they can sell him in the Summer for 20 mil.

Skylinehead

Talib Fiasco wrote: »

When on form nobody plays Silva's position better than him...he's been incredible this year...Mata has barely played this year...Mata is great but Silva on his day is better

Well there's the problem...he's not on form for large portions of the season. Mata doesn't drop in performance much if at all.

MagicMarker wrote: »

Utd will strengthen in the summer regardless so next season makes no difference to Chelsea.

Chelsea can sell him now for 40 mil or they can sell him in the Summer for 20 mil.

Why would he lose half of his value in 6 months?

EuropeanSon

Talib Fiasco wrote: »

When on form nobody plays Silva's position better than him...he's been incredible this year...Mata has barely played this year...Mata is great but Silva on his day is better

This is nonsense. "My player is better than your player". Both are excellent at a similar position, Mata more consistently so. Saying one or the other is better "on his day" is attempting to split hairs.

Skylinehead

EuropeanSon wrote: »

This is nonsense. "My player is better than your player". Both are excellent at a similar position, Mata more consistently so. Saying one or the other is better "on his day" is attempting to split hairs.

Yep, this is the crux of it. Silva has never had a full season of being consistently brilliant, unlike Mata. Or Ozil for that matter.

ronjo

Talib Fiasco wrote: »

Meh some teams have David Silva :cool:

Eh, I wasnt really serious with that suggestion.

Talib Fiasco

I'd take an on form Silva for half a season over Mata or Ozil any day...Ozil hasn't been playing incredibly either in recent weeks.

Skylinehead

Talib Fiasco wrote: »

I'd take an on form Silva for half a season over Mata or Ozil any day...Ozil hasn't been playing incredibly either in recent weeks.

Yeah right, it's not like Silva is much (or any IMO) better than Mata when they're both on form anyway. I think I'd take the full season player of equal ability. Ozil is still adapting to the league, just look at the 11/12 season for pure perfection from him. Still to come

Marty McFly

MagicMarker wrote: »

Utd will strengthen in the summer regardless so next season makes no difference to Chelsea.

Chelsea can sell him now for 40 mil or they can sell him in the Summer for 20 mil.

What Why would 20 million drop off his valuation?

I can't see it happening but if Chelsea do sell Mata to United it has to be one of the dumbest transfers ever. But considering they toyed with Arsenal and eventually wouldn't let Ba go to Arsenal on loan as a back up never mind the a player the quality Mata has I just can't see them doing it.

Marty McFly

Talib Fiasco wrote: »

I'd take an on form Silva for half a season over Mata or Ozil any day...Ozil hasn't been playing incredibly either in recent weeks.

Jasus, ridiculous post and statement.

Rayne Wooney

Marty McFly wrote: »

What Why would 20 million drop off his valuation?

I can't see it happening but if Chelsea do sell Mata to United it has to be one of the dumbest transfers ever. But considering they toyed with Arsenal and eventually wouldn't let Ba go to Arsenal on loan as a back up never mind the a player the quality Mata has I just can't see them doing it.

He's only played 14 games in the last 6 months and probably won't get much in the next 4 of he stays.

An unwanted player who plays maybe ~25games in 10 months won't bring in 40m, 20m sounds right.

stiffler123

Skylinehead wrote: »

Well there's the problem...he's not on form for large portions of the season. Mata doesn't drop in performance much if at all.

I don't get this at all. He is consistantly fantastic. He puts players through on goal usually at least twice per game. Man City have skyrocketed up the table since he came back from injury. He also has more than twice as many caps for Spain.

They are both phenomenal though. Any team would be lucky to have either of them.

Skylinehead

stiffler123 wrote: »

I don't get this at all. He is consistantly fantastic. He puts players through on goal usually at least twice per game. Man City have skyrocketed up the table since he came back from injury. He also has more than twice as many caps for Spain.

They are both phenomenal though. Any team would be lucky to have either of them.

Well he went quiet for the second half of your title winning season, and didn't really do that much last year on the whole. Hardly "consistently fantastic". Still a great player, don't get me wrong, but he tends to flit in and out a few months at a time.

hufpc8w3adnk65

United bid 40 million according too Sky

maximoose

"in the region" of £35M according to BBC

Getting legs now.

United deny making an official offer, but an initial bid has been tabled through intermediaries acting on behalf of the Premier League champions.
Mata did not train with Chelsea's first team on Wednesday.

On Tuesday, Chelsea insisted that Mata, who has been voted the club's player of the year two seasons in a row, was not for sale.
But the Spaniard has been substituted in nine of his 13 Premier League appearances for the Blues this season, prompting speculation other clubs could bid for him in the January transfer window.

The initial offer is likely to be rejected with Chelsea holding out for as much money as possible with more than a week to go until the transfer window closes.
But it is known that United are prepared to pay a premium for top players on David Moyes's list of targets if it means securing them now rather than waiting until the summer.

stiffler123

Skylinehead wrote: »

Well he went quiet for the second half of your title winning season, and didn't really do that much last year on the whole. Hardly "consistently fantastic". Still a great player, don't get me wrong, but he tends to flit in and out a few months at a time.

He was double marked for some games in the title winning season and wasn't as effective. He didn't go quiet for 19 games though as you suggest.

Also, last season he came second for most successful passes in the the final third(more than Mata). He is clearly more fancied in the Spain setup also.

Skylinehead

stiffler123 wrote: »

He was double marked for some games in the title winning season and wasn't as effective. He didn't go quiet for 19 games though as you suggest.

Well he had a few good games IIRC but nothing like his first half.

Also, last season he came second for most successful passes in the the final third(more than Mata). He is clearly more fancied in the Spain setup also.

That's a bit of a nothing stat isn't it? Last season real stats-wise (goals/assists) he was nowhere near Mata, who I actually thought was the best player in the league ahead of Van Persie and Bale.

TheNap

David Silva is the best player in the history of football ever . That is all

Agueroooo

safe to say that the PL is gone the way of the Italian league and marquee transfers between clubs/rivals will be the norm now ?

Ormus

Skylinehead wrote: »

Ozil didn't answer our problems, we were still absolutely right to get him. Same applies for Mata.

I don't think it's quite the same situation. Even though Ozil wasn't a position Arsenal particularly needed to strengthen, he fitted seamlessly into the Arsenal team and formation.

The same can't be said of Mata. In order to accommodate him when full strength, they would need to either abandon wingers and put Rooney on the right of an interchanging 3 behind RvP, or else drop Rooney altogether and play Mata off RvP.

The only other option would be to play Mata on the wing, a la Kagawa.

Skylinehead

Ormus wrote: »

I don't think it's quite the same situation. Even though Ozil wasn't a position Arsenal particularly needed to strengthen, he fitted seamlessly into the Arsenal team and formation.

The same can't be said of Mata. In order to accommodate him when full strength, they would need to either abandon wingers and put Rooney on the right of an interchanging 3 behind RvP, or else drop Rooney altogether and play Mata off RvP.

The only other option would be to play Mata on the wing, a la Kagawa.

It's not the same situation, but there's the same need to sign him. United's current system isn't going to work without top class wingers so either do that or buy Mata and change the system.

Dickerty

Mata bid accepted, £37M according to BBC...

ronjo

Ormus wrote: »

I don't think it's quite the same situation. Even though Ozil wasn't a position Arsenal particularly needed to strengthen, he fitted seamlessly into the Arsenal team and formation.

The same can't be said of Mata. In order to accommodate him when full strength, they would need to either abandon wingers and put Rooney on the right of an interchanging 3 behind RvP, or else drop Rooney altogether and play Mata off RvP.

The only other option would be to play Mata on the wing, a la Kagawa.

If Moyes isnt able to field a team that inlcudes Rooney, Van Persie and Mata then he shouldnt be in the job imo.

death1234567

Agueroooo wrote: »

safe to say that the PL is gone the way of the Italian league and marquee transfers between clubs/rivals will be the norm now ?

I doubt it. This transfer just happens to suit both teams.

Oat23

Selling Mata for that price and getting Salah for under €20m would be great business. I want Salah to go to Liverpool, though.

Ormus

ronjo wrote: »

If Moyes isnt able to field a team that inlcudes Rooney, Van Persie and Mata then he shouldnt be in the job imo.

History tells us football is not always that simple. It's easy to fit players into a team but if they're not in their favourite system they often struggle.

Very few teams these days find room for two out and out strikers and a midfielder as attacking as Mata.

ronjo

Ormus wrote: »

History tells us football is not always that simple. It's easy to fit players into a team but if they're not in their favourite system they often struggle.

Very few teams these days find room for two out and out strikers and a midfielder as attacking as Mata.

Have United not always had 3 very attacking players in their lineups??
Rooney always puts in decent shift too.

Liam O

Ormus wrote: »

I don't think it's quite the same situation. Even though Ozil wasn't a position Arsenal particularly needed to strengthen, he fitted seamlessly into the Arsenal team and formation.

The same can't be said of Mata. In order to accommodate him when full strength, they would need to either abandon wingers and put Rooney on the right of an interchanging 3 behind RvP, or else drop Rooney altogether and play Mata off RvP.

The only other option would be to play Mata on the wing, a la Kagawa.

Or a la David Silva and Nasri. Seems to work for City. My preferred team would be Mata, Rooney and Kagawa behind RVP moving around with a new LB and Rafael overlapping. It's not difficult to see the potential system, most major teams are using it now...

Agueroooo

"@chelseafc: Agreement reached with FC Basel for the transfer of Mohamed Salah. http://t.co/PwpJRF3agP #CFC"

COYVB

Agueroooo wrote: »

"@chelseafc: Agreement reached with FC Basel for the transfer of Mohamed Salah. http://t.co/PwpJRF3agP #CFC"

Makes sense... sell top class attacking midfielder to man utd because he doesn't fit into the team or style apparently, then go and buy another one

JPA

Agueroooo wrote: »

"@chelseafc: Agreement reached with FC Basel for the transfer of Mohamed Salah. http://t.co/PwpJRF3agP #CFC"

Poor Liverpool, pretty much signed and Chelsea wade in.

cson

I know they're getting £37m for Mata which'll see them come out pretty much all square but I ****ing despise the way Chelsea do business. Such a classless outfit.

Kess73

cson wrote: »

I know they're getting £37m for Mata which'll see them come out pretty much all square but I ****ing despise the way Chelsea do business. Such a classless outfit.

What exactly is classless about their recent business? Or rather what is so different in how they went about it to what other clubs in the league have done in the past?

GavRedKing

cson wrote: »

I know they're getting £37m for Mata which'll see them come out pretty much all square but I ****ing despise the way Chelsea do business. Such a classless outfit.

:pac:

Ya snooze, ya lose.

We've made about 14 million profit on Mata and used it on Salah, grerat economics if ya ask me.

Agueroooo

Kess73 wrote: »

What exactly is classless about their recent business? Or rather what is so different in how they went about it to what other clubs in the league have done in the past?

I wouldn't say classless but stock piling talent is in no way good for the game as a whole.

Its adding another layer of stagnation and many good talented players will never reach their ceiling, or even World class potential.

think about it:If the sugar daddy owners where around 10/15yrs ago and talents like Ronaldo, Messi etc in starting off got 'stock piled' by one of these clubs then there is a risk they would have not cut their teeth properly, and may never have made it.

Max_Charger

GavRedKing wrote: »

:pac:

Ya snooze, ya lose.

We've made about 14 million profit on Mata and used it on Salah, grerat economics if ya ask me.

Taken yesterday from Chelsea thread:

GavRedKing wrote: »

Salah would be a waste. Hed just take matas position on the bench.

Marty McFly

GavRedKing wrote: »

:pac:

Ya snooze, ya lose.

We've made about 14 million profit on Mata and used it on Salah, grerat economics if ya ask me.

Yea because Chelsea are all about great economics :pac:.


Step forward Matic .

GavRedKing

Max_Charger wrote: »

Taken yesterday from Chelsea thread:

The deal itself makes sense, in terms of what he'll cost us in the long term and the fact its being offset by the sale off KDB and Mata.

GavRedKing

Marty McFly wrote: »

Yea because Chelsea are all about great economics :pac:.


Step forward Matic .

His buy out clause was a lot more than what we paid for him?

Plus, Benfica insisted on him going as part of the Luiz deal and hes become a better player then we could have turned him into with loans and the odd sub appearance.

Mikeyt086

cson wrote: »

I know they're getting £37m for Mata which'll see them come out pretty much all square but I ****ing despise the way Chelsea do business. Such a classless outfit.

Yeah, Liverpool called shotgun on Salah, I mean you could argue that Liverpool weren't in sight of the player when they called it, but it's still a dick move by Chelsea. And they never gets the pints in when it's their round either!

Kess73

Agueroooo wrote: »

I wouldn't say classless but stock piling talent is in no way good for the game as a whole.

Its adding another layer of stagnation and many good talented players will never reach their ceiling, or even World class potential.

think about it:If the sugar daddy owners where around 10/15yrs ago and talents like Ronaldo, Messi etc in starting off got 'stock piled' by one of these clubs then there is a risk they would have not cut their teeth properly, and may never have made it.

I do agree with the highlighted line, but it is not something unique to Chelsea and not even something that is unique to the modern game (by modern I mean the past two or so decades).

Bayern do it, PSG do it, hell even clubs like Ajax do it to a lesser degree. Go back twenty or thirty years and we had the club we both support doing it.

I don't like the practise, but given that I know I would not be complaining if was being done by my club, I really cannot complain when other clubs do it.

Agueroooo

Chelsea selling Mata to Utd is akin to Ferguson selling Cantona to Liverpool in Jan'93.

would Ferguson have sold the previous season POTY to a suffering rival?

HE WOULD IN HIS FÚCK.

Agueroooo

Kess73 wrote: »

I do agree with the highlighted line, but it is not something unique to Chelsea and not even something that is unique to the modern game (by modern I mean the past two or so decades).

Bayern do it, PSG do it, hell even clubs like Ajax do it to a lesser degree. Go back twenty or thirty years and we had the club we both support doing it.

I don't like the practise, but given that I know I would not be complaining if was being done by my club, I really cannot complain when other clubs do it.

It was always a practice by big clubs, but no where near the levels of what has occurred since the billionaire big spenders came to town.

this is a new phenomenon.