Ben Chilwell

[Bob Weasel Fox]

If he wants to go then get rid 

 

£50 million does seem a bit light

 

i hope the add ons push it well past £60-65 million ish or it’s disappointing 

[Sunbury Fox]

Just now, Sharpe's Fox said:

To let him go for John Stones money is ridiculous. We could have held out for £10 million more AT LEAST.

It feels like the so called big clubs can get players for less than we can simply because the players concerned are desperate to join them and effectively force through a move.

[The whole world smiles]

3 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Is it either clubs interest to overstate the fee?  Chelsea don’t want to appear to be overpaying and we don’t want to be seen to have a huge wedge in our pockets when it comes to buying targets 

 

it could be that both clubs have agreed for the lowest amount to be publicised at this stage 

 

 

Excellent point that hasn't thought of that. 

[Ric Flair]

Got a feeling its all going to go horribly wrong for Chilwell. Yes he'll at least double his salary but with that injury he's trying to overcome and the fact he's just as likely to do something brilliant as he is nutmeg himself and gift the opposition a goal, I think he'll bomb massively. I hope he does well as we are selling a player we have brought through our academy for £50m + which is bonkers. 

 

All the best Ben

[st albans fox]

3 minutes ago, Kopfkino said:

 

Such desperate clutching. You could make exactly the same argument about Maguire's fee but that wasn't understated. And funnily enough people in the game will know the fee whether its in The Telegraph or not. 

Fees are publicised in different ways - some are with the add ons, some without 
 

we realised last summer that the kudos of getting a huge fee soon evaporated as clubs tried to have our pants down as a consequence and we missed out on targets as a result. 

or alternatively we’re short of money !!

 

Edited 21 August 2020 by st albans fox

[UniFox21]

Just now, Ric Flair said:

Got a feeling its all going to go horribly wrong for Chilwell. Yes he'll at least double his salary but with that injury he's trying to overcome and the fact he's just as likely to do something brilliant as he is nutmeg himself and gift the opposition a goal, I think he'll bomb massively. I hope he does well as we are selling a player we have brought through our academy for £50m + which is bonkers. 

 

All the best Ben

The injury is the big thing for me. Heel injuries can be those recurring buggers, that obviously you're always using. Wouldn't be shocked to see it hit him a few times.

[murphy]

3 minutes ago, Heymister2015 said:

He can’t defend and hasn’t improved since breaking into the team! £50m is more than good enough

 

I thought that he started the season really well, improving on previous season, but his form dropped as the season progressed.

 

Sad to see an academy graduate go but he is the most replaceable of our coveted assets.  

[Dahnsouff]

Even the fans on the Shed End are guessing that they leaked the initial 80m to make the final amount more palatable.

[UHDrive]

12 minutes ago, Mawuli said:

How exactly are we like Southampton, we sell one first team player every season. ONE, do people actually think we are in a position right now to keep our players and sign new ones? That's not happening until we are an established top 6 team, really I don't get what's so hard to understand about this

We cant become an established team without squad progression, it doesnt work that way and if we did it your way we'd never become an established top 6 team without signing more qaulity players and strengthening the first team.

[ealingfox]

Surprised we didn't hold out for more than 50m, hope the add-ons are good. I note it says an initial 50m, clutching but that might mean 50m cash upfront with the other 40m in the 2nd instalment? 

[Desabafar]

it's 50 +10. some depends on winning prem, some champions league, some apps

[Harry96]

Good riddance. Can’t help but feel he’ll be good for Chelsea especially in their system. 

 

[Beechey]

Just now, Desabafar said:

it's 50 +10. some depends on winning prem, some champions league, some apps

Percy says it’s instalments, not add ons.

[Lambert09]

Its going to sound bitter but honestly, Alonso is probably better than chillwell and they have the same weakness. 

[honeybradger]

13 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

The club believe Thomas to be an even better prospect than Chilwell, that's some belief. Anyway, Tagliafico is 27 not 30. He could still be first choice in 4-5 years and then whats the issue? Don't forget if we were signing a standout 21/22 year old replacement, if they then performed how we would want them to do then they too would then likely be off for a huge fee in 2-3 years and we go again. If this helps us improve then thats the main thing, oh and also don't forget.. Chilwell wants this move and keeping him would be just as much of a gamble.

There's a difference between being a prospect and actually achieving that promise. Ill be honest i actually wanted us to sell chilwell to fund tagliafico with the idea that thomas can learn from him and take over as from what ive seen tagliafico is the complete, experienced version of thomas, but there's also a genuine risk, as with all young players, that thomas doesnt develop into a good enough player and imo we needed enough from the chilwell sale to fund tagliafico and a potential replacement for him in 3 years which 50 mil just doesnt cover. Also tagliafico is 28 at the end of the week so he really only has 3 seasons left as a starter, cant think of many fullbacks that have played at a high level past 31-32.

Edited 21 August 2020 by honeybradger

[Beechey]

Just now, Lambert09 said:

Its going to sound bitter but honestly, Alonso is probably better than chillwell and they have the same weakness. 

Nah Chilwell is faster, better at carrying the ball, and hasn’t killed anyone.

[UniFox21]

2 minutes ago, Beechey said:

Percy says it’s instalments, not add ons.

That's the thing I'm most interested in. What are the installments is a question I'd like to know

[turkish14]

11 minutes ago, Brooksy said:

 

That was the 15th, today’s the 21st

[surrifox]

3 minutes ago, Desabafar said:

it's 50 +10. some depends on winning prem, some champions league, some apps

FFS - we’d better hope they bin off Lampard soonish then  and get a proper manager in 

[Leicester_Loyal]

13 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Is it either clubs interest to overstate the fee?  Chelsea don’t want to appear to be overpaying and we don’t want to be seen to have a huge wedge in our pockets when it comes to buying targets 

 

it could be that both clubs have agreed for the lowest amount to be publicised at this stage

Very clever, you could get the job when Rudkin retires.

[Chelve84]

1 hour ago, moore_94 said:

If the fee has managed to drop £30m because we missed out on Champions League we are a joke

I got slated last week when I said the club has no money. The club has accepted 30 million less. Hope that tells the story of where we are as a football club currently. 

 

Edited 21 August 2020 by Chelve84

[teblin]

I’d assume this time we have some players lined up and this cash will help get the deals through the door.

[Shane]

Wasn’t Ake 40m? 50m for an England international seems a bit low

[Ian Nacho]

I don’t care what the fee is, it forces us to pull our finger out and sign some players I’m happy. 

[Dahnsouff]

1 minute ago, Chelve84 said:

I got slated last week when I said the club has no money on twitter rumour thread. The club has accepted 30 million less. Hope that tells the story of where we are as a football club currently. 

 

But without evidence it just sounds like a conspiracy theory