Let the manager worry about that; I'm sure he had a purpose for why he chose him out of nowhere. On the RW, we wanted a speedy and good leftfooted winger with good pass vision; Madueke is good, but his shooting and passing ability are lacking. Palmer is someone I never expected Man City would contemplate selling; he is one of their top players and would have been an ideal Mahrez replacement; he was already breaking into Man City IX and has made a significant impact this season. And as for the price, well, he's British, so what do you expect?
Facts 101: Cole Palmer is playing a couple of minutes/games, but he wasn't thing close to breaking Man City XI, If he was and with Mahrez gone, why would City sanction a sale for a player that's isn't pushing for a move away from the club ? Palmer playing is mostly just due Guardiola's heavy rotation policy that keeps almost all his players fit for almost the entire season, but he sure isn't good prospect. is Romeo Lavia British too ? because Chelsea paid more for Lavia, Chelsea is just being milked but time will tell. Romeo Lavia is more of an upgraded version of Romeo Lavia, and he's British, too but cost way less than worth Chelsea paid for Lavia, while Caceido cost twice as much as Tottenham paid for James Maddison who is also British.
Palmer to Chelsea is completed and he cost only 5.0 - Someone to put on a watch-list. Trofo will not be happy with this transfer i bet
Happy about it? Actually, I am happy about it, it is now clear to me that Boehly will not stop from buying everything that is willing to come to Chelsea and sooner he gets you guys bankrupt, sooner you can start to rebuild. Just remember all those players have 7-9 year contracts to avoid FFP and that will hit hard in years to come.
Fun fact I have seen this morning ,Spurs with Poch in 5 years spent less than Chelsea in this transfer window. Did not check it but sounds plausible
Yeah, every rival fan envies the way Chelsea and Todd Boehly do business, which is why Liverpool and Manchester United fans are protesting for a new owner. He's a businessman who discovered a loophole in FFP rules and decided to use it to his advantage to get the team set for the next 5- 8 years, bringing in the best under-21 talents from all over Europe and placing them on life contracts (7- 8 years), it's a huge gamble, but these players' salaries depend on team performance
Fun fact> Spur spending less than Aston villa is the reason they are trophyless in the last two decades. Money gives you trophies and history ask Mancity and PSG.
Transer by itself is really strange. Palmer leaves City because he wants first team football and comes to Chelsea where there is even more competion on that spot.
Fati to Brighton on loan is a good transfer, and something Chelsea should have done to navigate Nkunku injury. Not buying another player that is good but not good enough to actually carry the team.
Bringing in a prone to injury Fati to replace an injured Nkunku? What is the point of that? He is a highly gifted player, but his injury record is even worse, and that is the only reason Barcelona is allowing him to leave since he is nothing more than a liability to the club, and no serious club wants him either. We already have enough challenges to deal with.
Ansu Fati is prone to injury ? You really just don't get it and you make most of these sides of your stories on just hunch and hearsay not actual knowledge about this situation, When did Ansu Fati become injury prone ? I guess you'd say Kante and Reece James are also prone to injury players now. FYI Barcelona did not let Ansu Fati leave, it's basically just a loan until the end of the season, there is not even an option to buy included in the deal, and that's a move to enable them register a couple other needed players in different positions.
And Tottenham being trophyless isn't because they're are not spending enough and you're also completely wrong about Tottenham spending less than Aston Villa, in the last decade Aston Villa have only spent 30 million Euros or more on just 6 players, and Diaby for 55m is their most expensive transfer over that span, while the numbers for Tottenham are is over 16+ players, and 50m or more for over 6 players.
And no actually envies the so called loophole you all Chelsea fans think Todd Boehly have found, if you think it is a wise and strategic plan to sign a lot of young players to 7-9 contract because you're supposedly building a dynasty, I beg to differ, what happens if a large amount of them turns out to be a one season wonder or didn't turn out to be good signings eventually ? You have to keep paying them whether or not they're getting playing time, obviously.
!
