[Brighton] Levi Colwill *Signed on Season-Long Loan 05/08/2022*

[Tyrone Biggums]

I don't think we really needed him, we just used him as leverage to get more out of Chelsea.

Tell Chelsea you really want him and has to be part of the deal.

Chelsea says oh but we really rate him so don't want to let him go.

Brighton says well deal might be off then



Chelsea says well how about we pay you even more for Cucu and you can have Colwill on loan.

Tony thinks sucked in and here's our bank details.

 

[WhingForPresident]

Is £20m a lot for a player with one good season in the championship? Perhaps. But the fee isn’t entirely driven by the fact that he’s a Chelsea player. It’s a factor of his performance, and mostly, his age. I’m sure Huddersfield would be demanding similar if they had owned him outright.

We signed Webster for £20m+ on the back of one good season in the Championship when he was 24...

 

[GT49er]

You are wrong about the ages of our players.

Ostigard was 20 when he joined Coventry on loan and 21 when he joined Stoke.
Molumby had 3 decent loan spells in the Championship starting at Millwall when he was 20. They wanted him on perm at the end of the season but we didn’t want to sell.
Longman was 20 when he first joined Hull and hadn’t long turned 21 when they signed him permanently.
Gyökeres was 22 when he went to Coventry, although he didn’t pull up any trees in that loan spell they saw enough to sign him permanently too. With plenty of hindsight he’s looking like a real steal for Coventry now.

Sure none of them may be as good as Levi Colwill in the long term but at the moment he hasn’t achieved much more than any of those players listed above. I certainly don’t see any reason for spending £20 million on him at the moment.

Hallelujah! A bit of reality and common sense!

 

[GT49er]

Is £20m a lot for a player with one good season in the championship? Perhaps. But the fee isn’t entirely driven by the fact that he’s a Chelsea player. It’s a factor of his performance, and mostly, his age. I’m sure Huddersfield would be demanding similar if they had owned him outright.

I'm sure Huddersfield would like it - as we would have liked, say, £5M for Molumby, Gyokeres, etc. Getting it is a different ball game though!

 

[Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo]

We signed Webster for £20m+ on the back of one good season in the Championship when he was 24...

It wasn’t just one good season, he’d had two decent seasons for Ipswich before he joined Bristol City and had clocked up nearly 100 games at that level.

 

[Bry Nylon]

What squad number will he get?

Can we give him 501?

 

[stss30]

Seems a bit of a strange one, but we clearly made the call that we’d prefer the extra cash for Cucu as opposed to a permanent deal for Colwill and this buyback nonsense. Think we might target a more specialised left wing back in addition before the window closes

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

A loan for Colwill means he'll be here as long as Cucu was...

No profit for us, but no loan fee to pay - so we got him "on a free".

I see no downside, and our transfer kitty can now be spent on 2-3 players rather than 3-4.

Really depends if he’s better than those he’s whose development he’s preventing, he might be, I don’t know. What I do know is Clarke has done well on loan and so has PvH.

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

What squad number will he get?

Can we give him 501?

Outstanding

 

[Guinness Boy]

Levi Colwill

Interested - yes. £20M so Chelsea can off-set that against the price they pay for Cucu? No.

Has any deal been confrmed yet? - NSC seems all over a £62M deal for Cucu, but can't see any confirmation anywhere (and please don't refer me to some Tw@tter account!)

The “some tw@ter account” belongs to ABC Spain which is their second largest general interest paper. It’s rather like having it in the Mail

Naylor also said the fee was well in excess of £52.5.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Springal]

We turned down £30M from Leeds for Ben White who had never kicked a ball in the Premier League !

 

[Swansman]

IMO he is only coming because Brighton might want to buy him. Not because he is going to have big impact this season (think he'll get limited game time) or some shady deal with Chelsea to develop their players.

Deal certainly includes some option to buy. But as people say, he has really only had one decent season on Championship level and before the clubs makes a decision to spend £20m or so on him, they want to see him in action. If he impresses, expect him to move permanently in January. If it's not working, expect him to move back to Chelsea in the winter so they can loan him to the Championship again.

 

[est.83]

I am Jon Snow but I would think that if he is to join on loan (without the option to buy at a certain price which I do not tend to believe will happen) he will play the "Haydon Roberts role" of being just the left-footed injurance on the bench.

 

[Kosh]

IMO he is only coming because Brighton might want to buy him. Not because he is going to have big impact this season (think he'll get limited game time) or some shady deal with Chelsea to develop their players.

Deal certainly includes some option to buy. But as people say, he has really only had one decent season on Championship level and before the clubs makes a decision to spend £20m or so on him, they want to see him in action. If he impresses, expect him to move permanently in January. If it's not working, expect him to move back to Chelsea in the winter so they can loan him to the Championship again.

You know, I actually agree with that.

Most unusual.

Delighted it’s a loan, as I’m not convinced he’s going to be top 10 material - that said, we might not be either. Ahem.

 

[Hugo Rune]

Levi Colwill

IMO he is only coming because Brighton might want to buy him. Not because he is going to have big impact this season (think he'll get limited game time) or some shady deal with Chelsea to develop their players.

Deal certainly includes some option to buy. But as people say, he has really only had one decent season on Championship level and before the clubs makes a decision to spend £20m or so on him, they want to see him in action. If he impresses, expect him to move permanently in January. If it's not working, expect him to move back to Chelsea in the winter so they can loan him to the Championship again.

I suspect the ‘buy-back’ is the issue.

Chelsea will not have budged on this. We don’t do them and Chelsea don’t sell top talent without one.

Last season, we pulled out of Livramento because of a buy-back. The effect, in reality, was that one of our rivals was strengthened; much more than we’d have anticipated I think. This can’t happen now with Colwill (remember, Palace we’re desperate to sign him).

As you say, we can now find out if Colwill will be as good a player in the Premier League as Livramento was. If so, I suspect we’ll swallow a buy-back, balls and all.

However, the big advantage for me is that we should be able to strike a good deal for a Grimaldo or Angelino now as we’ll be able to walk away if the fee is excessive knowing that Colwill provides some sort of safety net we’d not have had it the loan hadn’t gone through.

If he does go back to Chelsea having been outstanding for us this year (see Gallagher at Palace), I’ll be a little pissed off. Many many Palace fans thought they had a chance of signing Gallagher, they never did if he turned out being any good. I don’t want that happening here. They were used.

 

[Mancgull]

I suspect the ‘buy-back’ is the issue.

Chelsea will not have budged on this. We don’t do them and Chelsea don’t sell top talent without one.

Last season, we pulled out of Livramento because of a buy-back. The effect, in reality, was that one of our rivals was strengthened; much more than we’d have anticipated I think. This can’t happen now with Colwill (remember, Palace we’re desperate to sign him).

As you say, we can now find out if Colwill will be as good a player in the Premier League as Livramento was. If so, I suspect we’ll swallow a buy-back, balls and all.

However, the big advantage for me is that we should be able to strike a good deal for a Grimaldo or Angelino now as we’ll be able to walk away if the fee is excessive knowing that Colwill provides some sort of safety net we’d not have had it the loan hadn’t gone through.

If he does go back to Chelsea having been outstanding for us this year (see Gallagher at Palace), I’ll be a little pissed off. Many many Palace fans thought they had a chance of signing Gallagher, they never did if he turned out being any good. I don’t want that happening here. They were used.

Yes, I think this is probably the best short term answer to the issue.it gives us a year to find a proper replacement whereas without Colwill we could have been forced into a poor decision. Time and money to get the right one with a knowledge that contracts will have shortened by a year on potential targets.
Not ideal but £55m in the bank, a good replacement for the coming season and a year to find a permanent replacement.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

I suspect the ‘buy-back’ is the issue.

Chelsea will not have budged on this. We don’t do them and Chelsea don’t sell top talent without one.

Last season, we pulled out of Livramento because of a buy-back. The effect, in reality, was that one of our rivals was strengthened; much more than we’d have anticipated I think. This can’t happen now with Colwill (remember, Palace we’re desperate to sign him).

As you say, we can now find out if Colwill will be as good a player in the Premier League as Livramento was. If so, I suspect we’ll swallow a buy-back, balls and all.

However, the big advantage for me is that we should be able to strike a good deal for a Grimaldo or Angelino now as we’ll be able to walk away if the fee is excessive knowing that Colwill provides some sort of safety net we’d not have had it the loan hadn’t gone through.

If he does go back to Chelsea having been outstanding for us this year (see Gallagher at Palace), I’ll be a little pissed off. Many many Palace fans thought they had a chance of signing Gallagher, they never did if he turned out being any good. I don’t want that happening here. They were used.

The only thing I disagree with in your post is that we would buy in future with a buyback. If Colwill is the real deal then he will be valued as such like any other PL player. In that case Chelsea will want him back anyway. He wouldn’t be in our price bracket anyway but even if he were there would be little point in giving Chelsea a free option. That wouldn’t have changed.

 

[blockhseagull]

Depends how much he plays at the end of the day.

Certainly be behind Veltman/Dunk/Webster …. So will need an injury or poor form from someone to get a chance.

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

I suspect the ‘buy-back’ is the issue.

Chelsea will not have budged on this. We don’t do them and Chelsea don’t sell top talent without one.

Last season, we pulled out of Livramento because of a buy-back. The effect, in reality, was that one of our rivals was strengthened; much more than we’d have anticipated I think. This can’t happen now with Colwill (remember, Palace we’re desperate to sign him).

As you say, we can now find out if Colwill will be as good a player in the Premier League as Livramento was. If so, I suspect we’ll swallow a buy-back, balls and all.

However, the big advantage for me is that we should be able to strike a good deal for a Grimaldo or Angelino now as we’ll be able to walk away if the fee is excessive knowing that Colwill provides some sort of safety net we’d not have had it the loan hadn’t gone through.

If he does go back to Chelsea having been outstanding for us this year (see Gallagher at Palace), I’ll be a little pissed off. Many many Palace fans thought they had a chance of signing Gallagher, they never did if he turned out being any good. I don’t want that happening here. They were used.

I said it earlier and will say it again - this is a new Chelsea ownership, new board and new sporting director - "Chelsea don’t sell top talent without one" applies to the old regime and we don't know if it applies to the new one yet.

 

[taz]

Could be colwill didn't want to sign a permanent deal with us, and still has hope and ambition to play for Chelsea in the future