Harsh!That is really unacceptable. Groveling apology in the post I assume.
Harsh!That is really unacceptable. Groveling apology in the post I assume.
Nonsense. He's already demonstrated that he's far better than DJ Locadia. Still not something Chelsea should spend zillions on though.To be honest, Victor Gyokeres going to Chelsea for absolutely huge amounts of cash would be absolutely hilarious because we all know he'd turn into Jurgen Locadia almost overnight.
Do you attend all the training sessions then?These things happen. Judging solely on his brief appearances for the first team, you can see why he was let go. If he wasn’t tearing up trees in training either, again, you can see why the club let him go.
Every single club has players who slip through the cracks, it’s just inevitable.
We are well in credit with our transfer business. Good luck to him.
No, I don’t. And I never said I did. Re-read the post!Do you attend all the training sessions then?
if so how did you get that gig?
And while we talk about letting a player slip out of our hands, lets not forget that Chelsea had Salah, Lukaku and de Bruyne on their books at a young age, who played 26 games for Chelsea between them and then were loaned out for two years each before being moved on. They sold them for a combined £50m, so probably seemed good business at the time, although eventually they spent it all buying Lukaku back for £97m and another 26 appearances.To be honest, Victor Gyokeres going to Chelsea for absolutely huge amounts of cash would be absolutely hilarious because we all know he'd turn into Jurgen Locadia almost overnight.
It's probably come up in this thread numerous times already - but do we get a % if he's sold?
Worth remembering Potter preferred Neal Maupay.To be honest, Victor Gyokeres going to Chelsea for huge amounts of cash would be absolutely hilarious because we all know he'd turn into Jurgen Locadia almost overnight.
Because at the time Maupay was a much better striker, and far more experienced than the young inexperienced and still developing Gyokeres?Worth remembering Potter preferred Neal Maupay.
Far more experienced; clearly not a much better striker. Never really given a chance in the first team. Potter was brilliant but always had a weakness in putting the ball in the back of the net.Because at the time Maupay was a much better striker, and far more experienced than the young inexperienced and still developing Gyokeres?
Maupay scored more goals in the Championship than Gyokeres. Both similar play off making sidesFar more experienced; clearly not a much better striker. Never really given a chance in the first team. Potter was brilliant but always had a weakness in putting the ball in the back of the net.
He was THEN. Maybe not now, but then he was. A top scorer in the Championship against a gawky youth not pulling up trees or scoring a lot in PL2? - no comparison!Far more experienced; clearly not a much better striker. Never really given a chance in the first team. Potter was brilliant but always had a weakness in putting the ball in the back of the net.
What I find interesting/amusing is that Chelsea seem to be spending MASSIVE money on players with almost no track record.Speculative, crazy figures
Chelsea told €85m offer 'not enough' for Viktor Gyokeres as Sporting hold out for €100m for prolific striker | Goal.com UK
Chelsea's offer of €85m (£73m/$92m) is 'not enough' to sign Viktor Gyokeres as Sporting want €100m (£86m/$109m).www.goal.com
The figures for the other players make Nicky Jackson look like a relative snip, but even he is rather dubious, given he only scored 12 league goals in the 22-23 season, virtually all against lower-half clubs (plus 1 in almost 400 minutes in the Vauxhall Conference League).What I find interesting/amusing is that Chelsea seem to be spending MASSIVE money on players with almost no track record.
That's ~£550m on players who are essentially unproven at the top level for more than a fleeting period. Gyökeres is having a fantastic season, but at the top level he's played 17 games. SEVENTEEN. To be even considering an £90-£100m move before he's even seen out a season? Madness. No wonder clubs rub their hands when Chelsea pick up the phone.
- Caicedo was excellent for us, but £115m for a player with less that 50 top flight appearances
- £60m for Lavia with <30 apps for relegated Southampton
- £105m for Fernandez ~70 apps over River and Benfica
- £75m for Fofana after ~35 PL games with relegated Leicester
- £90m for Mudryk ~50 apps for Shakhtar
- £35m for Jackson with 35 apps for Villareal
- 65m for Cucurella for <90 apps between us and Getafe
It's probably come up in this thread numerous times already - but do we get a % if he's sold?
We would have got a sell-on from Coventry to Lisbon.. not now obviouslyI believe so.