Wesley Fofana - He is no more - finished - forgotten.

[Phenom]

1 hour ago, SheppyFox said:

Yeah, the denial is unreal. Too weak to face the coming pain. Fingers in ears screaming lalala.

[Gerard]

I'm of the opinion that we should sell any player who is worth £60m+, we're not keeping them long term anyway.

 

This is all dependent on being savvy in the transfer market of course, our first port of call should be buying a young top class player in the mould of a Fofana, Maddison, etc. Players at clubs below us in the pecking order that have these players and who the very elite clubs may have looked at but not taken the plunge on.

 

You'll get failures like Soumare so far who have the pedigree but not lived up to expectation and I'm fine with that as he was the right profile and you won't get it right every time. It's the proven older mediocrity that pisses me off like Vestergaard, Perez, etc. Players who have been okay in this league for years, are a certain age and little scope for improvement. 

[Ted Maul]

55 minutes ago, coolhandfox said:

Money next year would be better, we free up a lot of dead wood contact wise and a big fee for Fofana would give us a war chest to rebuild with. 

That's probably the club's plan. Retain and consolidate this year (we still have a first 11 to challenge for Europe), major business next summer. 

[mozartfox]

1 hour ago, Jabfox said:

£60m, bunch of fvcking jokers 😂

Agreed - they paid 100m for Lukaku and that turned out splendidly. Let’s milk them.

[mozartfox]

59 minutes ago, Wymsey said:

Where's the source/s that he wants to go?

Romano I think?

[Jabfox]

5 minutes ago, mozartfox said:

Agreed - they paid 100m for Lukaku and that turned out splendidly. Let’s milk them.

100% agree 

[mozartfox]

1 hour ago, chapero82 said:

So 2023 was the agreement and Wes is being impatient..

 

 

The last sentence makes sense. Why give some one a new 5 year contract without a proviso that there is a minimum contract term which 

to be honored by the Player (and his leech of an Agent).  We would have been mad not to cover that point.

Edited 4 August 2022 by mozartfox

[lcfc_forever]

31 minutes ago, turlo said:

That's a safe guess from Romano and mostly probably true that he would want the move. However, it only becomes an issue for the club if he really tries to force the move. He may want the move but has accepted he'll be here for another season and hopefully that's the case.

Fully agree

[reynard]

He may well want the move and it may well happen but i do think it will be on our terms right now. If we sell him we have to replace him and that needs to be taken into account, ie the cost of it, plus the resale % to his former club.

I don't think 85 million would be enough. I think we should say 100 million or go away and see if they are prepared to match that figure.  Also would need to be all upfront and a sell on % back to us too. He'll play for a bigger club than Chelsea eventually.

[st albans fox]

8 minutes ago, mozartfox said:

The last sentence makes sense. Why give some one a new 5 year contract without a proviso that there is a minimum contract term which 

to be honored by the Player (and his leech of an Agent).  We would have been mad not to cover that point.

If we put in a clause like that then his agent would be asking for one in return - and I know we don’t like clauses in contracts we’re tied to 

[CrispinLA in Texas]

He going have agreat decade to any team, 80m is peanuts to the money clubs, 120m minimum now.....

[lcfcdamo]

2 hours ago, ARM1968 said:

Even at £85 million we aren’t doing great out of this. Best part of £40 million to buy the guy, 15% on profit back to former club, 85% of profit to us, inflated prices for any replacement. Only £100 million plus makes any sense. 

If its not more than the maguire money its absolutely crazy has to be over 90 million 

[lcfcdamo]

60 million has got to be some sort of joke like we are going to take anything like that 100 million or go away

[frany104]

58 minutes ago, Gerard said:

I'm of the opinion that we should sell any player who is worth £60m+, we're not keeping them long term anyway.

 

This is all dependent on being savvy in the transfer market of course, our first port of call should be buying a young top class player in the mould of a Fofana, Maddison, etc. Players at clubs below us in the pecking order that have these players and who the very elite clubs may have looked at but not taken the plunge on.

 

You'll get failures like Soumare so far who have the pedigree but not lived up to expectation and I'm fine with that as he was the right profile and you won't get it right every time. It's the proven older mediocrity that pisses me off like Vestergaard, Perez, etc. Players who have been okay in this league for years, are a certain age and little scope for improvement. 

Agreed, we have to go back to the model of buying young hungry players and improving them ready to sell on at huge profits. We’ve got to replicate the Dortmund model. 
 

We’ve gone away from that model and some of the dross we’ve bought in has been shocking and the main reason we’re in this mess. 
 

 

[An Sionnach]

Now they have Cucurella I don't think they will push this but wait and see how he performs this season. You don't spend that sort of money until you can be pretty confident you are getting value for money. They have spent a fortune on misfiring forwards lately so I expect them to be careful. If Fofana stays fit, gets a solid 7-8 out of 10 most matches and gets his first full cap , £80 to 90 million is in the ball park.

[StanSP]

We say he's not for sale

Chelsea make a derisory offer 

Fofana 'wants the move' (I don't believe anyone knows what he wants) but I think he's professional enough on the pitch to still play for the club and not proverbially throw his toys out the pram. 

 

Wouldnt surprise me if there was that 'gentleman's agreement' that if you sign a new contract now, and a club comes in for you with the right price in 2023 then we can consider selling you. 

 

We hold the cards here. Chelsea can offer whatever they want but if its below the value WE set for him, we'll just keep running round in circles. 

 

The only disruption that could potentially happen is if Fofana does kick up a fuss with Rodgers or the club and starts not turning up for training etc. I can't see him doing that. 

 

I do wonder what amount would be enough to turn our heads though. Yes he's not for sale, but we'll be having the same conversations next summer - what's the right price to let him go? 

[Ric Flair]

Promising him we'd listen to fair offers next summer onwards is stupidity at its finest. We have a huge amount of players out of contract next summer and will have to be the rebuild thst we assumed would heavily start this summer. To lose another of our best players at that time either by being pressured to sell cheaply than we'd like because we're played or even for a big fee, knowing we'll then be absolutely hammered on transfer fees for the large amount of incomings.

 

The sensible play is to goad Chelsea in to a huge fee this summer with Colwill as part of it. Line up the right winger we want and execute the deals. We can then afford to let some of our fringe players go on loan or permanently at fees lower than we'd have liked, knowing we now have the flexibility to start the clear out a year earlier.

 

Any further additions or contract renewals for Soyuncu and highly unlikely Tielemans are easier to do in this environment than right now.

 

So to confirm - sell Fofana this summer. £70m + Colwill 

[An Sionnach]

Problem is why would Colwill come here? We could always bribe him with another inflated contract and that would help us not at all. It has to be straight cash offer but I think Chelsea will wait.

[Essington blue]

Makes no sense at all to sell now when in a years time you will have every club with that kind of money fighting for him.

   I’m quite sure if fofana has a list of dream clubs he’d want to play for that there will be a few in front of the name chelsea & his advisors should be reminding him of that.

[Ric Flair]

3 minutes ago, An Sionnach said:

Problem is why would Colwill come here? We could always bribe him with another inflated contract and that would help us not at all. It has to be straight cash offer but I think Chelsea will wait.

Because he'll walk in to the starting line up of a top 8 club who in the last 7 years have won trophies, played in Europe multiple times, pay the most in wages outside the big 6, have the best training facilities in the world. 

 

He's made it very very clear he's not going to remain at Chelsea unless they play him regularly, he joins a host of Chelsea academy players that firmly believe their best move is to leave ASAP and then forge a career elsewhere.

[Bert]

4 minutes ago, An Sionnach said:

Problem is why would Colwill come here? We could always bribe him with another inflated contract and that would help us not at all. It has to be straight cash offer but I think Chelsea will wait.

The other thing about Colwill is they’re prepared to let him leave to try and sign someone a year older. If he was all that he’d be playing for them, especially with their need for a centre back. 

[An Sionnach]

Just now, Ric Flair said:

Because he'll walk in to the starting line up of a top 8 club who in the last 7 years have won trophies, played in Europe multiple times, pay the most in wages outside the big 6, have the best training facilities in the world. 

 

He's made it very very clear he's not going to remain at Chelsea unless they play him regularly, he joins a host of Chelsea academy players that firmly believe their best move is to leave ASAP and then forge a career elsewhere.

Rodgers would not risk a 19 y.o. rookie especially with a new goalkeeper. He is not Fofana and anyway its the here and now with LCFC not the history that he would be concerned with.

[Spudulike]

Chelsea would be right to exercise caution if they are going to be prepared to spend the sort of sum we expect. Let's face it, we rate him very, very highly but he's still somewhat unproven in the Premier League. Last season was a right-off but this is the one that will show the world how good he really is. If he has a bad, or even average season, we'll be slapping our own faces for not taking the money. It's all a high stakes gamble. 

[moore_94]

17 minutes ago, An Sionnach said:

Problem is why would Colwill come here? We could always bribe him with another inflated contract and that would help us not at all. It has to be straight cash offer but I think Chelsea will wait.

Because he wants to be somewhere where he has a good chance of playing regularly like he would with us rather than stay at Chelsea where he is going to end up being about 6th choice?

[coolhandfox]

28 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

Promising him we'd listen to fair offers next summer onwards is stupidity at its finest. We have a huge amount of players out of contract next summer and will have to be the rebuild thst we assumed would heavily start this summer. To lose another of our best players at that time either by being pressured to sell cheaply than we'd like because we're played or even for a big fee, knowing we'll then be absolutely hammered on transfer fees for the large amount of incomings.

 

The sensible play is to goad Chelsea in to a huge fee this summer with Colwill as part of it. Line up the right winger we want and execute the deals. We can then afford to let some of our fringe players go on loan or permanently at fees lower than we'd have liked, knowing we now have the flexibility to start the clear out a year earlier.

 

Any further additions or contract renewals for Soyuncu and highly unlikely Tielemans are easier to do in this environment than right now.

 

So to confirm - sell Fofana this summer. £70m + Colwill 

Could still happen, but Chelsea would have to dig very deep. 

 

No matter what we have said, there will be a magic number.