Ben Chilwell

[Ric Flair]

12 minutes ago, messerschmitt said:

Correct me if I'm wrong as I'm no where near as knowledgeable on those clubs models models such as RIc Flair but don't they bring youngsters through first to have a replacement. We didn't have any lined up when we sold Kante, Mahrez, weren't sure of a Maguire replacement and don't have one for Chilwell.

They don't always. The likes of Dortmund or Sevilla just go out and buy young players from good clubs lower down the pecking order, or they exploit the loan system from big clubs because they have a track record or being the best club for their players. 

 

You could argue we have Luke Thomas as the academy replacement, he's probably a year off that but we can't be sure either way. One things quite clear though, the club belive Thomas to be an even better prospect than Chilwell.

[Nicolo Barella]

9 minutes ago, Pliskin said:

We do. I do not agree with your sentiments, considering we have a fair few areas of concern in the squad. 

 

We need;

 

A new CB

A new LB

A new striker

A new right sided winger. 

 

This is to be able to cope with the demand of the league, cup competitions and Europe. Our depth is poor, And those out on loan need to be and will be moved on, regardless if we sign anyone. This is why we need to be better with negotiations, it's alright trying to hold out for the right price. But unfortunately as Maguire highlighted it was to our detriment, especially when we are scrambling around in the final weeks of the window trying to complete deals. Just like January, which was a farce in all honesty. I don't some people realise how bad this season could be if we aren't prepared, which I would argue at the moment we are not. We absolutely can't go into next season with just Vardy and Kalechi as the two main strikers, and Albrighton and Gray as out right sided attacking options. Failure to address these areas could result in a very, very dodgy situation next season, we certainly wont be competing for the top end of the table that is for sure. There is time left in the window, but I would have liked to at least have had a key player in by now settling in the squad. 

Realistically we only need to make 3 transfers. A new striker would be nice but nobody good is going to come and be 3rd choice in a team that almost always plays 1 up top, it's a surprise even Iheanacho has put up with it for as long as he has. And Iheanacho would certainly leave if we signed someone better than him. Worst case scenario, Perez can deputise ably there, he has performed ok there for Newcastle in the past.

[Hales]

😥 sad he is going. I would have liked another season to get Luke ready but that's not to be. He would be mad to turn down that pay rise and playing in the champions league. Let's hope we spend the money wisely 🤞

[messerschmitt]

5 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

They don't always. The likes of Dortmund or Sevilla just go out and buy young players from good clubs lower down the pecking order, or they exploit the loan system from big clubs because they have a track record or being the best club for their players. 

 

You could argue we have Luke Thomas as the academy replacement, he's probably a year off that but we can't be sure either way. One things quite clear though, the club belive Thomas to be an even better prospect than Chilwell.

Thanks for the info, I like the look of Thomas, my son was at school with him, I hope the new LB doesn't slow his development.

[Sly]

2 hours ago, Bert said:

£10m a year for the next 5 years. Not bad eh. 
 

Think we’ve been ripped off by Chelsea again. Sold Maguire for lots more, Chilwell younger, more potential.  

I agree with you.

[sdb]

2 minutes ago, Nicolo Barella said:

Realistically we only need to make 3 transfers. A new striker would be nice but nobody good is going to come and be 3rd choice in a team that almost always plays 1 up top, it's a surprise even Iheanacho has put up with it for as long as he has. And Iheanacho would certainly leave if we signed someone better than him. Worst case scenario, Perez can deputise ably there, he has performed ok there for Newcastle in the past.

Agreed. Will just be very frustrating is Eduoard goes to some mid table club and rips it up.

[Sly]

57 minutes ago, shen said:

When have Chelsea ripped us off? They paid over the odds for Kanté and Drinkwater and I'd say by today's standards £50m is really not a small amount for someone of Chilwell's quality. I'd argue his worth to us is less than £50m - especially when you compare him to Ricardo, who is a far better player IMO.

I disagree ..... Kante was worth far more than £32m in that market. 
 

Drinkwater was done, so they massively overpaid.

[Nicolo Barella]

1 minute ago, sdb said:

Agreed. Will just be very frustrating is Eduoard goes to some mid table club and rips it up.

Yeah. At the same time, talented young strikers seem to be one thing that are plentiful on the market right now. Doubt the situation will change in a year.

[Sly]

Ultimately, with our current status, we’ll finish from 4th to 13th most seasons. 

My long term concern is replacing Vardy. 
 

 

[sdb]

1 minute ago, Sly said:

I disagree ..... Kante was worth far more than £32m in that market. 
 

Drinkwater was done, so they massively overpaid.

Collectively they've paid about right for what they've got. £10m too much (30 in hindsight) for DD, but Kante was at least that much undervalued. Chilwell fee feels about right to me, if it ends up getting us approx £60m.

[Pliskin]

3 minutes ago, Nicolo Barella said:

Realistically we only need to make 3 transfers. A new striker would be nice but nobody good is going to come and be 3rd choice in a team that almost always plays 1 up top, it's a surprise even Iheanacho has put up with it for as long as he has. And Iheanacho would certainly leave if we signed someone better than him. Worst case scenario, Perez can deputise ably there, he has performed ok there for Newcastle in the past.

I'd take three. But our striker situation is perilous. Unfortunately we have to start thinking beyond Vardy, he isn't getting younger and he picks up an injury that puts him out then I would lose a lot of confidence. I know this could happen anyway, regardless of age, but Vardy does seem to be picking things up more frequently which is only natural as he ages. We can't have Kalechi and Perez as the only two options if this were the case i'd worry. Even Ollie Watkins would be enough. Given the fact our form was abysmal in the second half of last season, and we have an even tougher campaign ahead will be even more strenuous we really need more options in the squad. That't why i feel a minimum of four players would do. 

[lcfcbluearmy]

20 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

They don't always. The likes of Dortmund or Sevilla just go out and buy young players from good clubs lower down the pecking order, or they exploit the loan system from big clubs because they have a track record or being the best club for their players. 

 

You could argue we have Luke Thomas as the academy replacement, he's probably a year off that but we can't be sure either way. One things quite clear though, the club belive Thomas to be an even better prospect than Chilwell.

I’m interested have you heard something from the club to this effect? Or is it just from watching him?

 

I think Thomas is a very good prospect and potentially better than Chilwell but just wondering if you had heard something or it is just your oppinion?

[majaco]

19 minutes ago, Pliskin said:

We do. I do not agree with your sentiments, considering we have a fair few areas of concern in the squad. 

 

We need;

 

A new CB

A new LB

A new striker

A new right sided winger. 

 

This is to be able to cope with the demand of the league, cup competitions and Europe. Our depth is poor, And those out on loan need to be and will be moved on, regardless if we sign anyone. This is why we need to be better with negotiations, it's alright trying to hold out for the right price. But unfortunately as Maguire highlighted it was to our detriment, especially when we are scrambling around in the final weeks of the window trying to complete deals. Just like January, which was a farce in all honesty. I don't some people realise how bad this season could be if we aren't prepared, which I would argue at the moment we are not. We absolutely can't go into next season with just Vardy and Kalechi as the two main strikers, and Albrighton and Gray as out right sided attacking options. Failure to address these areas could result in a very, very dodgy situation next season, we certainly wont be competing for the top end of the table that is for sure. There is time left in the window, but I would have liked to at least have had a key player in by now settling in the squad. 

There are only 25 squad places.  My idea of 22 discounts James.  It includes Benkovic.  Fuchs, Morgan and Mendy look like they will all be in the squad.  What you say we need is one more player than what I said- you add a central striker.  We have 3 if you include Perez.

 

Unless we sell someone we will only be getting three.  As there are  no additions so far,  time will  become an issue.  We  might like more than three but need is part of the judgement of Rodgers and his staff.  They appear to have made a lot of decisions already.  It looks like they do not intend a mass influx of players.  They will also want to make to  squad unity- too many coming in would be,potentially disruptive.

[Costock_Fox]

Imagine thinking Kante for £30m was about par, wow.

[murphy]

36 minutes ago, Gevans_97 said:

Honestly how can anyone even begin to suggest that we have a lack of ambition? If you don’t like the ambition or the improvements that have been made over the last 10 years, I don’t know what to tell you. We’ve shown more ambition and have succeeded on that ambition than every club in the country bar a couple. “Lack of ambition”, jeez. 

 

I know it annoyed us all but you can see why Brendan kept on reminding us all how we couldn’t compete with the big 6 financially at the end of the season. How do some fans not understand this? 

I agree with your first point, you can't fault the ambition of the club, but the manager disappointed me during the run in, continually downplaying our chances and basically saying that we should be happy to break into the top six when we were actually fighting for top four having spent almost the entire season there.

 

I think he was trying to cushion the fall for himself but I think that it sent a poor message to the players.  I wanted to hear him say that we are going for it. 

[majaco]

9 minutes ago, Pliskin said:

I'd take three. But our striker situation is perilous. Unfortunately we have to start thinking beyond Vardy, he isn't getting younger and he picks up an injury that puts him out then I would lose a lot of confidence. I know this could happen anyway, regardless of age, but Vardy does seem to be picking things up more frequently which is only natural as he ages. We can't have Kalechi and Perez as the only two options if this were the case i'd worry. Even Ollie Watkins would be enough. Given the fact our form was abysmal in the second half of last season, and we have an even tougher campaign ahead will be even more strenuous we really need more options in the squad. That't why i feel a minimum of four players would do. 

You now agree we need 3?

[Sly]

1 minute ago, majaco said:

You now agree we need 3?

Surely George Hirst will be the 3rd?
 

We’ll buy a new striker then, only if Nacho is moved on?

 

Its not financially sensible for us to have 3 first team strikers in the squad, when we only play one of them. 

[Pliskin]

3 minutes ago, majaco said:

You now agree we need 3?

I said I’d settle for three. Ideally we need 6. But that won’t happen. So I’d want four as a minimum to feel confident, but even that is unlikely now. So if we get a new Left back, right sided attacking player and a striker I’d be mildly satisfied. 

[Gerard]

3 hours ago, Sly said:

Personally annoyed about this one. I feel like I did about the Kante transfer. Still think of Kante fondly though. 

 

Drinkwater / Maguire were at the peak. We sold both at the right time.
 

Mahrez deserved his transfer. 

I would have liked another 12 months from Chilwell. 

 

Right time to sell for a big offer IMO.

 

He had bags of potential as a 20yo but over the last couple of seasons with regular football surrounded by quality players he hasn't kicked on and you have to question now if he ever will? I think we're selling him just ahead of the curve before the market realises he's not a top class LB in the making but just a good solid PL player. 

 

24yo at the end of the year and there is a good chance this is the player he is and always will be. I love having players with potential but you can't be dining out on potential when you're on the brink of your mid 20's and had a few years at this level.

[katieakita]

Kante really did not want to.come here. Let's be honest we did want him here we wanted Cambiasso to stay another season and Inler, Mendy and Vertout were all wanted before him. The guy rolled up and got a get out clause for 4 or 5 times what we paid. Not sure he would have signed without it. Hindsight is a wonderful gift. Kante did Not just bring in a huge profit from Chelski he had a major part in bringing in the £100 million+ for winning the league and CL football. He also helped put us in a position that we sell on.Our terms but we are nowhere near paying 1St team players 190k a week very few have a business model like this so let Ben move and lets bring in a replacement.

[FatDave]

Just to clarify: “up front” doesn’t mean one lump sum. Up front simply means that component of a transfer fee distinct from clauses and additional payments.

 

Typically, a club will pay/receive the up front figure over the length of the contract signed by the moving player.

 

In this case, Chilwell has signed a five-year deal and Chelsea will pay the bulk of the fee over the same period.

 

The deal normally involves a 5-10% initial payment. Chelsea look to have paid £5 million now and will pay LCFC £8 million a year for the next 5 years, with some additional clauses for additional payments.

 

That’s just how most deals are constructed, although some fans start to foam at the mouth when it’s explained to them. Go back and read about how Liverpool fans reacted when it was confirmed that Suarez (and Countinho) were sold on similar terms......

[Ric Flair]

17 minutes ago, lcfcbluearmy said:

I’m interested have you heard something from the club to this effect? Or is it just from watching him?

 

I think Thomas is a very good prospect and potentially better than Chilwell but just wondering if you had heard something or it is just your oppinion?

That is what people have said from within the club, whether it's true I'm not sure but Rodgers clearly rates the lad.

[Kevin Russell]

Some really good posts on this thread. I think we are all slightly disappointed with the end of the season and the lack of transfer activity, but we still have a lot of reasons to be positive. We can’t compete with some of the largest clubs, but we’ve made huge strides in a short space of time, based on a sustainable business model and I think we need to trust in the owners.

 

Selling Chilwell on will be fantastic business and is a good move all round. He has a lot to prove, but when he plays at his best (admittedly this is not frequently enough at present) he is a top quality player.

 

If we get a good replacement and a couple of decent back up options at right wing and centre half - this will be a phenomenal window -  fingers crossed.

[Ric Flair]

1 minute ago, FatDave said:

Just to clarify: “up front” doesn’t mean one lump sum. Up front simply means that component of a transfer fee distinct from clauses and additional payments.

 

Typically, a club will pay/receive the up front figure over the length of the contract signed by the moving player.

 

In this case, Chilwell has signed a five-year deal and Chelsea will pay the bulk of the fee over the same period.

 

The deal normally involves a 5-10% initial payment. Chelsea look to have paid £5 million now and will pay LCFC £8 million a year for the next 5 years, with some additional clauses for additional payments.

 

That’s just how most deals are constructed, although some fans start to foam at the mouth when it’s explained to them. Go back and read about how Liverpool fans reacted when it was confirmed that Suarez (and Countinho) were sold on similar terms......

Although a lot of what you say is true, this deal contains further instalments which if it was a deal set out as you have suggested would be the same thing and therefore wouldn't be separate. 

 

The reason Maguire's deal took so long was we wanted ALL the fee up front, whether we got that in the end isn't certain but the media seemed to think so. John Percy is the most accurate journalist regarding us as he has said we are getting £50m for Chilwell + further instalments and add on's.

[Verumex]

8 minutes ago, FatDave said:

Just to clarify: “up front” doesn’t mean one lump sum. Up front simply means that component of a transfer fee distinct from clauses and additional payments.

 

Typically, a club will pay/receive the up front figure over the length of the contract signed by the moving player.

 

In this case, Chilwell has signed a five-year deal and Chelsea will pay the bulk of the fee over the same period.

 

The deal normally involves a 5-10% initial payment. Chelsea look to have paid £5 million now and will pay LCFC £8 million a year for the next 5 years, with some additional clauses for additional payments.

 

That’s just how most deals are constructed, although some fans start to foam at the mouth when it’s explained to them. Go back and read about how Liverpool fans reacted when it was confirmed that Suarez (and Countinho) were sold on similar terms......

And that would explain the loan the club took out last week.

They take out loans so that we have the full amount upfront, and they then pay the bank back whenever Chelsea pays each payment.