What's new

Reece James

I mean the first line is literally Rosenior saying they had knocks.
Click to expand...
Hm, always small knocks like this crop up in games not considered to be important, a common theme since Clear Lake took over. If this was a last 16 game of the Champions League, I would bet if Neto and James had "knocks" they would both still be playing.

 
If we were resting players i don't see why we'd rest James and Neto over the likes of Fofana who is constantly injured.
Click to expand...
Quite. A conspiracy theorist is ploughing a lonely furrow.

 
I think that the fact that we've not seen a settled lineup with our best players on it makes people think that there's something going on other than 'slight knocks' every other game.

 
I think that the fact that we've not seen a settled lineup with our best players on it makes people think that there's something going on other than 'slight knocks' every other game.
Click to expand...
Most of us have figured it out now, the head coach doesn't have the final say on who plays. That day when Palmer was angry about being subbed off when we were chasing a game confirmed it without a shadow of doubt for me.

 
Most of us have figured it out now, the head coach doesn't have the final say on who plays. That day when Palmer was angry about being subbed off when we were chasing a game confirmed it without a shadow of doubt for me.
Click to expand...
What I don't understand is why this constant rotation? Except in midfield where Caicedo and Enzo play every game, great that Rosenior has managed to sneak in Santos, what's to gain with it? And, if the powers above are responsible, what economic gain is in it for them?

 
What I don't understand is why this constant rotation? Except in midfield where Caicedo and Enzo play every game, great that Rosenior has managed to sneak in Santos, what's to gain with it? And, if the powers above are responsible, what economic gain is in it for them?
Click to expand...
It's all about player value. If certain players don't play, their value decreases which makes it tougher to make a profit on them. Let's use Garnacho as an example. He can have 3 West Ham like performances in a row but still get game time, because outright dropping him drops his value.

 
I'm noticing a fun pattern now where everything negative is now the fault of Egbhali. Whereas before it was always Maresca

I'm here for it though. Hate that prick 😂

 
It's all about player value. If certain players don't play, their value decreases which makes it tougher to make a profit on them. Let's use Garnacho as an example. He can have 3 West Ham like performances in a row but still get game time, because outright dropping him drops his value.
Click to expand...
Yep, it’s all about protecting their investments.

With our struggles on the left side Tyrique George should have got more opportunities but academy players are classed as pure profit so there’s no hunger to play them under this regime.

 
I'm noticing a fun pattern now where everything negative is now the fault of Egbhali. Whereas before it was always Maresca

I'm here for it though. Hate that prick 😂
Click to expand...
I think that many started pointing at Egbahli and BlueCo, Clearlake before Maresca was sacked. I hate the whole board, not just Egbahli, to be honest.

 
It's all about player value. If certain players don't play, their value decreases which makes it tougher to make a profit on them. Let's use Garnacho as an example. He can have 3 West Ham like performances in a row but still get game time, because outright dropping him drops his value.
Click to expand...
This would make sense if they didn't keep sticking players into a bomb squad thus disproving the logic.

 
This would make sense if they didn't keep sticking players into a bomb squad thus disproving the logic.
Click to expand...
It's a desperation tactic. When they can't get anymore value out of a player, they try and sell them, when that doesn't work, they take the player out of the team and put them in the bomb squad to try and get the player to force a move. Sterling is a perfect example of this. They couldn't sell him so tried to force him out by saying you're never going to train with the first team or play with the first team again.

 
I think that many started pointing at Egbahli and BlueCo, Clearlake before Maresca was sacked. I hate the whole board, not just Egbahli, to be honest.
Click to expand...
I think Todd Boehly’s heart is in the right place compared to the other members of the board.

He’s a bit scattergun in his approach and his chat but at least he had sporting ambition.

Problem is he’s not a majority shareholder (around 13% apparently) so he’s outnumbered.

It’s Eghbail and his 61% majority stake and his non sporting ambitions that are the main issue at Chelsea.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
It's a desperation tactic. When they can't get anymore value out of a player, they try and sell them, when that doesn't work, they take the player out of the team and put them in the bomb squad to try and get the player to force a move. Sterling is a perfect example of this. They couldn't sell him so tried to force him out by saying you're never going to train with the first team or play with the first team again.
Click to expand...
In Sterlings example his value would have plummeted even further if we'd played him.

There were pundits genuinely saying Tottenham should sign him. Forgetting that he's been sh*t for years and thinking he's just been "treated badly"

 
Sterling was on around £325k a week apparently, that’s why they wanted him out.

The fact he was playing rubbish was just a coincidence to make it look like footballing reasons.

Back to Reece,

My worry is that the board would sell him at the right price, getting upwards of a £60m pure profit offer would be too tempting for them IMO.

Let’s face it, the boards untouchable poster boy is Enzo not Reece.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sterling was on around £325k a week apparently, that’s why they wanted him out.

The fact he was playing rubbish was just a coincidence to make it look like footballing reasons.

Back to Reece,

My worry is that the board would sell him at the right price, getting upwards of a £60m pure profit offer would be too tempting for them IMO.

Let’s face it, the boards untouchable poster boy is Enzo not Reece.
Click to expand...
In the summer Reece has 2 years left on his contract. BlueCo have made their position clear on players with 2 years left. Sign up or ship out.

Now Sterling is gone Reece may be our highest earner. That salary is way above the salary cap. Will they break that rule to keep him?

 
Sterling was on around £325k a week apparently, that’s why they wanted him out.

The fact he was playing rubbish was just a coincidence to make it look like footballing reasons.

Back to Reece,

My worry is that the board would sell him at the right price, getting upwards of a £60m pure profit offer would be too tempting for them IMO.

Let’s face it, the boards untouchable poster boy is Enzo not Reece.
Click to expand...
I think it's more likely we sell Enzo this summer than Reece.

 
I think it's more likely we sell Enzo this summer than Reece.
Click to expand...
I hope that would be the case but Enzo’s book value is still high so that limits any potential buyers.

You never know though.

 
2 years left on his contract, what happens if Reece says ill see the 2 years out? Cant see him stuck in a bomb squad, the fans will revolt and i dont think the other players will stand firm it

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top