Are we content to be Chelsea's feeder club?

[jayfox26]

On 01/09/2017 at 16:18, Bob Weasel Fox said:

You see that's where I disagree we should be fighting tooth and nail to hang on to our best players

 

we aren't even talking big fees. Our entire midfield engine of the title winning team sold for £30 plus million each when average full backs are being sold for £50 million? 

We couldn't do anything about Kante due to the release clause and selling Drinky was a good deal all round  as 

 

A. He wanted to leave 

B. We have a replacement who could turn out to be as good if not better than Drinky for half the price (when the deal finally gets done). 

 

I get what you're saying but its risky hanging onto players who dont want to be here. Its not about the club lacking ambition its about the greed and lack of commitment from modern day football players unfortunately. Or others less cynical may say it's about the personal ambitions  of the modern day footballer. 

[Foxxed]

47 minutes ago, Bob Weasel Fox said:

What's overly dramatic about it @Foxxed ?  

Just wondering ? 

 

We've sold two players. One wanted to leave and spoke to pretty much every top club. The other wasn't getting in our starting lineup. We're hardly pumping out players to their peek and shuffling them off to Chelsea. We had two really good players. They both wanted to leave. Chelsea wanted two really good players. They bought them. I'm not sure this fits the definition of a feeder club. If anything we were the feeder club for the manchester united youth team who couldn't quite get in the united squad. But no one is saying that. Because it'd be ridiculous. But it's slightly less ridiculous than saying selling two players to the same club makes us a feeder club for that club. I'm had a tiring day, Bob, and it's also somehow left me buzzing and so I apologise for the random essay!

[Bob Weasel Fox]

4 minutes ago, jayfox26 said:

We couldn't do anything about Kante due to the release clause and selling Drinky was a good deal all round  as 

 

A. He wanted to leave 

B. We have a replacement who could turn out to be as good if not better than Drinky for half the price (when the deal finally gets done). 

 

I get what you're saying but its risky hanging onto players who dont want to be here. Its not about the club lacking ambition its about the greed and lack of commitment from modern day football players unfortunately. Or others less cynical may say it's about the personal ambitions  of the modern day footballer. 

Solid answer, cheers and yes get what you are saying generally 

[Bob Weasel Fox]

3 minutes ago, Foxxed said:

We've sold two players. One wanted to leave and spoke to pretty much every top club. The other wasn't getting in our starting lineup. We're hardly pumping out players to their peek and shuffling them off to Chelsea. We had two really good players. They both wanted to leave. Chelsea wanted two really good players. They bought them. I'm not sure this fits the definition of a feeder club. If anything we were the feeder club for the manchester united youth team who couldn't quite get in the united squad. But no one is saying that. Because it'd be ridiculous. But it's slightly less ridiculous than saying selling two players to the same club makes us a feeder club for that club. I'm had a tiring day, Bob, and it's also somehow left me buzzing and so I apologise for the random essay!

Fair play bud

 

i have provoked discussion about the matter and that is what I was really trying to stir up 

 

I am fed up with selling our better players but that said as long as we are moving forwards in the right direction and we don't continue to sell our best players to Chelsea (or insert any other top 3/4 club) then I'm not too fussed 

 

it's more about our ambition as a club than anything else

[Foxxed]

Just now, Bob Weasel Fox said:

Fair play bud

 

i have provoked discussion about the matter and that is what I was really trying to stir up 

 

I am fed up with selling our better players but that said as long as we are moving forwards in the right direction and we don't continue to sell our best players to Chelsea (or insert any other top 3/4 club) then I'm not too fussed 

 

it's more about our ambition as a club than anything else

If Gray and Chilwell improves significantly and then we go and sell them to Chelsea then I will agree we're becoming a feeder club. But for that to happen we'd have to have some kind of tacit agreement between the clubs which the players are in on. I just don't see it. I just see two players being sold for different reasons. But after selling two players, if Chelsea came sniffing again, Rudkin would have to say "Want another? Well, maybe. Look, the most we'll do is sell you Ulloa. How much? 200 million. Minimum. For a half season loan."

[Foxxed]

8 minutes ago, Bob Weasel Fox said:

it's more about our ambition as a club than anything else

One was definitely leaving and had a release clause. The other wasn't getting into our squad, had poor form and wanted to leave. Maybe we could have kept Drinky but assuming we're getting Silva our ambitions seem higher to me: Silva may be a better play maker from what I've heard from the frantic typing on the Silva thread which I obviously take to be solid gold just as everyone was right about Hernadaadaezedwhateverhewascalled.

[vanity]

If, when we do act as a feeder, we immediately sign a superior player to the one we sold, like we did with Silva, eh. I'd be pretty ok with that.

 

But certainly I agree we don't want to be a feeder club. And so long as we are smart going forward with our contracting, we will minimize the likelihood of that occurring. We lost Kante bc we had the threat of the buyout, so we took the higher Chelsea offer, knowing if we didn't, we'd simply receive less money. But now we are playing a bit of hard ball, not just moving players who whinge, and structuring contracts in more advantageous ways (I hope anyhow).

[Albert]

No we're not a feeder club but we have good players that have proven themselves at the highest levels so the big teams will obviously target them. They offer big wages which attracts the players and offer transfers fees that the majority of payment is upfront rather than spread over time with add ons etc which is attractive for the club. 

Majority of players that go there know it won't be for the long term but are guaranteed to cash in and that's why I was so disappointed that Drinky made the switch! Good luck to him though. He's been an integral part of our rise & success 

[norwichfox]

9 hours ago, Bob Weasel Fox said:

What's over the top? It's provoking discussion is it not?

 

over the top? Really? Seriously? Take a look at all the threads ever on FT 

 

most have ott comments all the time, this thread has provoked reaction so from my point of view it's worked. Hook line and sinker  

nice cast......

[StriderHiryu]

No one wants to be a selling club, but it's part of modern football. We've taken Sporting Lisbon's top goalscorer and captain over the course of two seasons and in return Chelsea have taken two of our best players in the last two. Barcelona lost Neymar and Monaco lost Mbappe. Liverpool held onto Coutinho, but he clearly wanted to go to Barcelona. With the money in today's game it's very hard to keep hold of anyone for a long time.

 

You would like to think that players would be content to earn crazy money and play for a good club like us, but they all have ambitions of their own and precious few will have started out supporting our club before they got here. Personally I don't begrudge Drinkwater, Mahrez and whoever goes next if they want to leave because they will go down in history for their contributions to LCFC.

 

We don't want to keep selling our best players to Chelsea, or anyone else for that matter but to truly escape doing that we'd have to be a consistent top 4 club. That would take several years to do if it's even possible and many of our players whilst loving the title win probably think it's a once in a lifetime event.

 

If we could finish top 6 or 7 this season and get into Europe, it would be a good start. If we can consistently get into the Europa League it will be the next stage of evolution of our club and make it a bit easier to get new players and retain old ones.

[Bob Weasel Fox]

2 hours ago, norwichfox said:

nice cast......

 exactly  

[Guest Col city fan]

2 hours ago, StriderHiryu said:

No one wants to be a selling club, but it's part of modern football. We've taken Sporting Lisbon's top goalscorer and captain over the course of two seasons and in return Chelsea have taken two of our best players in the last two. Barcelona lost Neymar and Monaco lost Mbappe. Liverpool held onto Coutinho, but he clearly wanted to go to Barcelona. With the money in today's game it's very hard to keep hold of anyone for a long time.

 

You would like to think that players would be content to earn crazy money and play for a good club like us, but they all have ambitions of their own and precious few will have started out supporting our club before they got here. Personally I don't begrudge Drinkwater, Mahrez and whoever goes next if they want to leave because they will go down in history for their contributions to LCFC.

 

We don't want to keep selling our best players to Chelsea, or anyone else for that matter but to truly escape doing that we'd have to be a consistent top 4 club. That would take several years to do if it's even possible and many of our players whilst loving the title win probably think it's a once in a lifetime event.

 

If we could finish top 6 or 7 this season and get into Europe, it would be a good start. If we can consistently get into the Europa League it will be the next stage of evolution of our club and make it a bit easier to get new players and retain old ones.

What an excellent post. Sums it all up for me.

Of course we don't want to sell our best players but sometimes we may have to for all parties concerned. 

It's always been this way in football.

[matty98]

Even if we were a 'feeder club' that would mean we were producing players good enough to play for top teams consistently which means we must be doing well ourselves.

[Lovejoy]

Club spends 10 years in the football league and then fans can't hack the fact Chelsea want their best players. People living in a bubble.

[Bob Weasel Fox]

10 hours ago, Lovejoy said:

Club spends 10 years in the football league and then fans can't hack the fact Chelsea want their best players. People living in a bubble.

You still selling antiques bud?