₦airaland Forum

190theclown:


where black people come de

The surrounding areas...Leamington Spa, Warwick, Coventry, Brum, banbury

I dey go rugby once in a while, and the place just white anyhow

nateevs:
I was surprised at that move to be honest. Yann Mvila to Sunderland?
That's a fella who knows what to do with a football and can run with the ball at the same time.
Right now, Chelsea requires TWO players (Ramires and Mikel) to accomplish that same task.

Attitude problems will sometimes do that to your career.

Dude was once feted as the next big thing and reportedly courted by some of the bigger names in Europe only 2 years ago.

Now he's the lynchpin of a truly dire side

nateevs:
To be fair there are not many strikers. My earlier post was actually ONLY in reply to the Nihilist's one. This hardly reflects my position on what should happen regarding the striking department.

If you are asking me what we should do. I say keep Diego, get a cab to pick up Falcao and move Remy to No 2 striker. Then make Traore No 3 and let's see what he can do. Bring Bamford back from loan and encourage him with a few minutes. You cannot expect the best from Remy when all the times he should have been playing, JM was trying to revive Falcao's dead career. So let's see what Remy can do.

With midfield, this is where I will spend a few quid in the market. I will stick with my recommendations in the Summer. I would have sold Ramires for £20m, Mikel for £10m and Oscar for . . I don't know . . £25m? and I would have spent the money + added cash on Koke and Witsel and Mcarthy . Now this is what I still wish to do in terms of in-comings, except we cannot ever get that much money for those out-going fellas again. So I do not know if that factor influences my decisions.

I will keep Pasalic, RLC and Baker in midfield as junior players and give them minutes when we can. This settles for a midfield of Koke, Witsel, Matic, Mcarthy, Fabregas, Pasalic, RLC, Baker and we are covered. Everyone else stays. I consider Hazard, Pedro and Willian a part of the forward line.

I will re-tune the tactical set-up and move the ball through midfield with particular focus of transforming the team to a pass-oriented team rather than one that runs with the ball for too long. Our defensive cover in midfield is solid and fullbacks can still be Azpi and Rahman (deputised by Ake). And I believe we can still be very formidable.

I don't believe I have weakend the team in any area. Instead, I have strengthen and also provided for longevity.

But then again, I am not a manger. This is just my view and very much open to criticism.

I'm a big fan of your general thought process, and even though I tend to disagree with your recent opinions, It is still patently obvious that your statements are the logical conclusions of a rational approach to the whatever the subject matter is.

That being said, it's pretty obvious that the issue of youth will crop up again, and I will disagree with you...again

My main sticking point has always been your seeming preference to play youth for youth's sake. Bringing back Bamford and playing Traore more represents a shot in the dark, an uninformed gamble, an equivalent of turning up and hoping for a slice of goodluck.

I say this because one would expect that the basis of fast tracking a youth into the first team should be a recent history of performing to an acceptable level at a comparative level of competition...under a comparative amount of pressure. Neither of those boys actually have that. And quite honestly, there is nothing to suggest(at least to me)that they will ever be good enough

I also note that with your proposed acquisitions in midfield will push the likes of RLC and Pasalic further down the pecking order. Is this an indication that you are actually (maybe unconsciously) willing to eschew youth integration in the part of the pitch you believe needs the most reinforcement?

nateevs:
One would think so. However, I am in siddon look mode. Because unfortunately, the calibre of the striker the team requires (one capable of displacing Diego) is probably not available in January.

That said, without starting up another round of arguments, I wuold rather see us being linked with midfielders FIRST before attackers.


@Lacer.

Do you know the terms of Pasalic's loan move? Is it a year?

I quite like the look of Yann Mvila. He has been a lighthouse of sorts in the sea of sewage on Wearside.

I also really really really like Wijnaldum as a central midfielder\B2B\10. I really like that dude

raumdeuter:
Pogba not a bad choice.

Is Lukaku the elite striker you seek? He might be good as an EPL striker but I dont know if he is ready to spearhead Chelsea in Europe unless you don shelve European ambitions for now

I dont think a lot of people were happy with Lukaku's departure.

The boy has now scored over a hundred career goals...and is still only 22. Over half of those goals were scored in England over the last 4 years.

I for one was livid that we let the boy go . That boy is destined for greatness. It's a shame, it's not with us...

raumdeuter:
^ Who are the calibers of strikers in Europe that Chelsea should look to buy realistically and can displace Costa?

And your midfield of Matic-Fabregas-Willian Hazard--Oscar who should be dropped and who are the realistic likely replacements

Just give me Pogbizzle and dare I say it?

Lukaku

Mourinholic:
We are in for Chicarito and Alcacer?? Oh Jesus pls...My 2 of my fav CFs .......
Chica,Alcacer,Traore....Perfecto

We'll probably end up with Charlie Austin...who for the record I believe can offer more that Chicharito though...

But just how bad is Remy though? One would imagine that any half-decent striker would have seized the opportunity to depose Diego Costa and make the Number 9 spot his own...

Also the board should think long and hard about who they sign in January

If number 1 isn't good enough, and number 2 isn't good enough, a player like Hernandez who has been a professional number 3 for much his career in Europe should not even be in the reckoning at all.

Oraguntans vs Baboons?

Did I accidentally stumble on to the set of Planet of the Apes?

Why is there a simian civil war going on here? I don't know, but I'd like to place a bet please...

AbuMikey:
Well, one thing I've observed, Ibime likes to LORD over everyone here, which is not good at all, Man is too Proud!

Coogar Jigsawkillah Mikuz.... Please make it a tag team battle

190theclown:
No sir, im at Rugby

Ahh black people dey rugby?

The only ones I ever saw there were at the prisons at Onley

"A comity of baboons will always gather where they are acknowledged" - Ibime

Damn so Airmark is the baboon master? Chief baboon of Nairaland? Is that what you're trying to say?

"What you see about footy climbing up skyscraper, I will tell you while sleeping" -Airmark

Damn so Ibime has eyes but cannot see? Are you saying Inime is a 'visionless number 10' like Oscar?

Airmark and Ibime!

See shots scattered all over the place.

Nothing like 'redacted' here. Una must rack that rack.


The only caveat is that the battle should be in the rap section. We fans should not really be fighting each other....on our thread

Coogar Mikuz Jigsawkillah please set up a battle in your domain. 300 bars if possible

AdeLaNa1:
Nah! Nihilist don already accuse me say i dey try find trouble dis afternoon. Make i just keep quiet for now if i wan wake up tomorrow morning

Me?

Never!

You na my man any day any time...

You just wan use style troll...because you surely know what we're talking about.

raumdeuter:
There is an option of buying Sergio Ramos, an accomplished defender or giving Smalling the chance. Buy Sergio ramos you get 90% for say 2 seasons and he drops from there, Smalling rots on the bench and losses it completely or goes to another team develop and he is worth 100M

Or stick with Smalling he gives 75% this season and gradually increase to 90 possibly 95% for the next 10yrs and you dont have to worry about buying an elite defender again

But smalling is not an academy player either

AdeLaNa1:
Ok. Ok. No need to start getting orgasms coz of a simple post.

You've noticed how your fellow fans have been sensible and actually paying attention to discussion.
Do that or bounce lad...

U couldn't be more wrong. A first team consists of the "Starting 11 and its substitutes".
And against West Brom, we had Lingard in the starting 11. And we had Bosthwick and Perreira(thought he was still injured) in the subs.
That makes it three academy players in our first team as at 3 days ago.

Surely it is patently obvious that we are discussing the first 11 here. The context of the conversation should have given that away by now.

kindly list the number of academy products in Chelsea's first team.

If I was to indulge in the same kind of pendantry you've been displaying here, I'll be mentioning the likes of Amelia, Ola Aina, RLC, Bertrand Traore etc who've all been on the bench in recent weeks.

Like I said earlier, if you dont understand the convo, don't but in.

Raumdeuter de!!!

Ojuyobo will come and scatter this place again as always...

coogar:
LVG loves mcnair....
when he comes back from injury, he would get 10+ games. he's a bloody good defender!

We will both be alive come May, insha Allah...

AdeLaNa1:
And we've played them more in the league cup. Besides, the season is just 11 games old. There's still plenry of time for them to get enough game time.

We cant just field them every time I n every match. Especially wen City and Arsenal are still ahead of us.

How many of the other regular Top 4 teams have given their academy products game time this season like United??

If you don't understand the argument, please stay on the sideline and don't get involved.

It was already agreed by all parties since last week that are at the top or close to the top at offering chances to youth.

The question I asked was "how many academy products are currently in manyoo's first team?". The answer is 1.

coogar:
this season only just started. how many league games did mcnair, wilson & blackett start last season?

None of those boys will get up to 10 league starts this season, that is guaranteed

AdeLaNa1:
Errm McNair, Perreira(injured), Wilson, and dat RB that played vs West Brom. And they dont play quite as often bcoz United cant keep playing them in the EPL while we are trying to catch up wit Arsenal and City.

Mcnair, Wilson and Cameron Bothwick have both come in as subs in 1 EPL game each. Perreira hasn't even played a league game this season.


None of them are in the 1st team

United ve always given academy players playing opportunities more than Chelsea if thats wat u're driving at

That is not what I'm driving at.

Ibime:
Wickham is far from useless.

I'm sure you know about the Cameron Jerome effect.

It is the same Drogba effect that saw Chelsea winning record 95 points total in 04/05 even though he only scored 10 league goals.

Ninja, strong and mobile hold up play is super effective for Counterattacking football even if the forward is not scoring.

His job is simply to win the long ball and hold the ball up as long as it takes for Bolasie, Zaha and Puncheon to join the attack. It's a deadly phucking weapon.

Depends on how you look at it.

Wickham was so useless up front, that he was moved to the flank to play as a winger for Sunderland. That was where he found some form for them. Unless maybe he was a holding up play winger

I jest

coogar:
we finished 7th.....
we actually died but a new-improved woodward bought us back to life.

Fixed

AdeLaNa1:
Even tho i couuld care less abt wat happens to Chelsea, u made a point here.

United almost fell into this trap after Scholes, Ferdinand, Vidic, Giggs all aged and retired. But somehow we survived.

Minus Lingard...what academy produced player sits in your first team?

One fears that even Lingaard is only being used to teach Depay a lesson

when they signed is irrelevant....
perhaps that was why chelsea never hovered below the top 4 back then. the situation is quite different today. all those players have aged and they are creaking.

Which players have aged?
Hazard is the oldest on that list and he is just 25

coogar:
you have to give them a chance.
united would never have known about lingard, mcnair, blackett, etc if we didn't put them to the acid test to see how weighty they are. that is the point nateevs is trying to make.....

lol and Blackett and Mcnair were subsequently seen to be lacking in the required quality.

So much so that a midfielder is moonlighting at centreback for manyoo now.

Blackett especially was a different type of shyte entirely

Ibime:
Aiite, you're correct.

However it's nothing to do with talent.

Bamford is more Crespo than Drogba. You don't need to be super fast or super strong to be a good striker. However Palace's tactical system demands you are one or the other, preferrably both.

Bamford has above average strength and slightly above average pace. His strength is in poaching and combination play.

That's just the tactics, never mind the politics of favouring your own assets over other clubs assets.

Wickham should tell us how many goals he scored at Championship level so we can compare them adequately.

That's exactly the point!

Wickham has been practically useless in the 3-4 years he has spent so far in the EPL...yet Bamford can't displace him at Palace.

Would a manager cut his nose to spite his face? Would a manager leave Bamford on the bench if he was a better talent? Read Pardew's statement again....even when the team were struggling to score, Bamford was still not an option.

Says a lot bro

coogar:
buying anyone is a huge gamble as well. sometimes some big money buys don't work out. with every big risk comes a huge reward.

chelsea need to start investing in youth players or else they would become ac milan after pirlo, seedorf, gattuso, etc all got old & left.

Chelsea are not NOT investing in youth

Hazard was 21 when he signed. Oscar was 21 as well. Courtois was 19. Zouma is 19 now. Azpi was 22 when he signed. Rahman is 21.

The youth we're talking about here is academy produced. My opinion is that we haven't produced any youth yet of sufficient quality to warrant a persistent place in the first team. The question is should we field the substandard products just for the sake of ideals?

.

nateevs:
Okay. You tell me one player, 17/18 years old right now, in the world, that you know, for absolute certainty, will make it to the top level.
Then I will show you a selfie of me and Obama in my garden.

Did you even know Didier was not serious footballer at 20?

Ok now you understand where I'm coming from.

We now both agree that using youth is a huge gamble...

I'm sure you can see where I'm going to go with this...

Is there any one our current youth today that justifies the gamble?

nateevs:
And just like Lacer this is an argument on the other end of the spectrum. May I suggest to you, the hundreds of possibilities in between?

Nobody defines this as an 'either or' situation except you fellas. There is nothing to suggest that barring this capitulation Chelsea had, if in place of Falcao, Bamford is chosen instead and given a few games, that we will lose the league to City.

There is nothing to suggest that if in place of Mikel, Lewis Baker or Nathan Ake is given those few minutes of closing up shop after 60 mins during a cruising 4-0 lead over AFC Bournemouth, that we will lose the league to City.

Absolutely nothing suggests this! Plus not wil we be in it to compete, we will still be favourites to win it. So from where does this "Either or" thing come? It only resides in the minds of those who have somehow confused eternal injection of unearned income for a club's geniune football investment.

Not even Roman the billionaire believes this lie. Or how do we explain his endeavour in spending of millions to develop, in this age, one of the best academies in the world? You think he wants to sit, watch a bunch of kids run around and pleasure himself to ecstasy while at it? Absolutely NOT! It is because he genuinely believes in the "hundreds of possibilities" in between those two extremes.

There is no idealism in this suggestion. If anything, it is one aimed at ensuring the sustainability of the club long after Roman gets bored with this 5hit and leaves.

So you guys should wake up! Well. . Unless ofcourse Roman is just another idealist!

This is why I asked the question, what level of talent do we 'integrate'?

None of the players you mentioned are prodigies. Should Bamford be entitled to a spot on the Bench when he is clearly not good enough just because he is a youth product?

Should he be given chances to play when there is nothing to suggest that he would improve to the required level?

Senderos and Djourou. Frimpong. Fran Merida. Bendtner. Szcezny. Hoyte. Lupoli. Pennant.

Is it until we have a litany of failed youth experiments and 9 years of barrenness that some of us will be satisfied?

I see nothing to suggest that RLC will ever be a player of the required calibre. Ditto Ake, Bamford, Baker etc.

Should we just start and continue to play them

Ibime:
How many games has Connor Wickham played this season? - 4 - and not all starts.

How many games has Dwight Gayle played? - 6

Marouane Chamhakh? - 0

Glenn Murray - Sold

Tip for your fantasy team - Bakary Sakho is their no 9 if you missed it.

Besides a counterattacking team needs 2 things - a fast no 9 or a hold-up play specialist like Wickham to hold the ball till wingers join him.

Bamfords main strength is neither of these things.

Negro please...

Wickham is their 1st choice striker who has now been injured.

Sako came in at 10 when Bolasie's father died.

Gayle got the red card at Westham and has always been 3rd choice.

"We've really missed Connor, we've lost him since we beat Chelsea, and I think his presence through the middle has been a factor in us not getting more points than we've got,' said Pardew just before the Liverpool game.

Anyway, back to Bamford. If as you say, Bamford is not quick, and he's not strong, then what is it he's good for?

Look at what Pardew said about Bamford.

"I spoke to him when he first came to the football club. I said: 'You have to understand that although Middlesbrough is a high level, coming into the Premier League with this team is an even higher level. So you're going to have to work hard at it.'

"Like all young players, they sometimes have to add something to their game to get over that final hurdle. We're a good side – we've proved that. OK, our last results in the last three haven't been what we wanted but the performance level has been there, apart from the Man City game. It's a tough team for him to get in to."


Note that Bamford is being referred to as a 'young player'

Wickham and Bamford are both 22.

nateevs:
But with your own logic, you fail to realise that someone is actually bank-rolling it to the tune of £1bn. And that the logic by itself is unsustainable without the injection of some major funds and the rather extraterrestial benevolence emanating from the young Russian.

How would you define this 'commercialization to stay relevant' if Roman did not wipe off over £700m of debt? Do you think you will be here telling me I don't know the impact of commericials on success?

Mate you cannot tell me about the financial side of the game. Thousands of arguments have happened here between Coogar, Myself and Ibime over the years about the commercial side of the game.

I think you don't really understand the position we are in. You guys have either forgotten or were not aware enough to understand the impact at the time of occurence. We should be eternally grateful to Roman.

Let me tell you how financials work in real life and not in the Chelsea bubble. Conside a Chelsea that hardly makes profits and then we have £700m worth of debt hanging over our heads and we need to service that debt, do you know how much we have to pay annually at only 4% of interest? Ibime will tell you. He's the CIMA guy.

You will be the one offering to drive the 'inexperienced kids' to Stamford Bridge and then returning home to your TV, screaming at it, wondering why the kids have not made it yet.

So when I tell you that your POV is only propped up by our fortunate stance, BELIEVE IT!

I'm not exactly sure what the point of this statement is.

FFP was established because some clubs are quite happy to operate on a deficit as long as they win silverware.

If not for Roman's wealth, we would not be competing for and winning the title. We would obviously be free to develop youth outside the the 'Chelsea bubble' as you put it.

We are in an 'either or' situation that you are refusing to acknowledge.

Idealism says "develop youth whilst City keep buying everybody and hope that Solanke can compete with Aguero and Baker with Debruyne"

Reality says " Nateevs please wake up"

coogar:
you are making nateevs' point!

wenger's "over reliance" is the problem not his reliance. wenger didn't get the right-mix of youth players and the ready made players - that's one of the reasons why he's failed.

Which then begs the question....what is the 'right mix'?

One youth player? two? four? eleven?

And at what level of talent? Average? Prodigy? If the youth are not that good, does the manager play them regardless in the hope that they develop, at the expense of ready made talent, and the risk of his job?

Ibime:
A little insight is needed here. . .

1st, Bertrand never failed as a left back at Chelsea. . . . all his left-back performances were solid 7/10. . . . it was as left-midfield that some ninjas got frustrated with him.

2nd, Bamford is "not failing to shine at Palace". It is a bad loan. Palace team is set up for rapid counterattack. Their no 9 must be fast to fit into their tactical system. It is no fault of Bamford, he is just not a tactical fit for Palace.

Nobody said Bertrand failed. The question was did he do enough to warrant a first team spot? It's not it was Jose that refused to make him the first choice LB. Ancelotti and De Matteo also didn't rate him high enough. Neither did Benitez.

That's 4 managers bro.

The Bamford excuse is just an excuse. Their current 9 is Connor Wickham. He definitely isnt a pacy player. Last year it was Glenn Murray no pace there either. The year before it was Marouane Chamakh. By now you get the picture.
Going by FIFA stats, Bamford is faster than most of those strikers. Dwight gayle is even faster than all of them but is also bench fodder. Its NOT pace that is keeping Bamford on the bench bro. It's talent..or more to the point, a lack of it.