Summer Transfer Misery and Recriminations.

[Kano]

That wouldn't make any sense for a team to spend £50m and allow a buy back clause. That's usually put in place by clubs selling younger players for relatively cheaper prices, on the off chance they develop into someone decent. For a 27 year old leaving under Maureen at the time, I doubt any clause existed at that sort of money too.

[Goonermerree]

Thank god that's over, now we can go back to moaning about Wenger - the incompetent fool!

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

That wouldn't make any sense for a team to spend £50m and allow a buy back clause. That's usually put in place by clubs selling younger players for relatively cheaper prices, on the off chance they develop into someone decent. For a 27 year old leaving under Maureen at the time, I doubt any clause existed at that sort of money too.

Makes perfect sense if Chelsea find themselves in a situation where they are short of defensive cover and can recruit someone who has played for the club previously.

[Kano]

Makes perfect sense if Chelsea find themselves in a situation where they are short of defensive cover and can recruit someone who has played for the club previously.

There are two parties involved in a transfer, the one paying £50m would probably hold a lot of negotiating power I'd presume. Maureen had big ideas of staying and building a legacy () so going back to 2014, why he, or the club would think they might ever need to buy back David Luiz and insert that into a £50m sale is beyond me. 27 year old players don't have buy back clauses because the value on their next sale would be lower anyway, as the price here shows, over 20% less than what he was sold for. And I can't think of a club that thinks of an injury crisis or lack of buying options two years in advance. Certainly not the Chavs. Conte was desperate, that's obvious given his comments about the market a week or so ago but a buyback clause? Doesn't make any sense.

[I am invisible]

In general the squad looks better than it has for a while and we have strengthened in areas we needed to which is positive. My issue is both the fact we didn't have the new players in time for the start of the season and as you say, that the ones we did, have struggled to get up to speed. The last two results have been acceptable but that first game calamity puts a completely different spin on the start of our campaign so far.

Wenger said the other day that he thought this would be his easiest window in ages, probably because he knew who he wanted to buy but after the Vardy thing, it seemed like a plan B wasn't in place. From the outside of course, that is an easy thing to say but when you look back at our last minute scrambles over the years and not having a new striker until yesterday, it adds up. The defender issue really should've been resolved a lot faster than it has been and maybe that first game could've been different.

I'm mostly content with the business we've done, I'd mark it as a 6.5/7 out of 10, around that mark. The biggest problem is making the most of the squad as usual. You want to hope things will be different (otherwise what's the point of watching every week) but Wenger's management of the squad is still the major concern. And of course our injury history. How long before that kicks in and decimates what looks like a decent squad, remains to be seen.

Yeah, reading between the lines, it looks a lot like we had a budget of something like £100m to play with - £35m went on Xhaka straightaway, and we obviously thought we were going to get Vardy for around £20m, leaving us about £35m for the CB and maybe £10m for randoms and project players... if that deal for Vardy had gone through then I would imagine that the deal for Mustafi would have then happened pretty quickly, and without too much haggling over price. As it was, I'm guessing that the Vardy snub threw our plans and budget into chaos, and triggered a lot of weeks of back-and-forth between various clubs, as we looked at other targets and tried to find the best balance of price between alternative strikers and CBs?

The Perez deal is inetersting in all this because it sounds like he was available all summer, and that we sounded him out early - again, just a guess, but I reckon we probably always had him in mind while we were looking at other targets, as a very similar player to Vardy and (more specifically) one who was available at more or less the same price: it allowed us to set a time limit of sorts for exploring other targets, and gave us the option of reverting back to our original plan and budget, if nothing else feasible had presented itself by that point. Not so much a Plan B, C or D, but maybe a Plan A.2 (if that makes sense)?

Like you, I'd probably give it an overall 7/10, which may yet swing a point either way depending on how Perez does. I genuinely feel that we've got a good, adaptable group here now, that can be quickly and easily shuffled in a lot of different ways to suit different gameplans. As you say though, it ultimately comes down to Wenger's management of the squad and his abaility to make the right selections at the right time...

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

There are two parties involved in a transfer, the one paying £50m would probably hold a lot of negotiating power I'd presume. Maureen had big ideas of staying and building a legacy () so going back to 2014, why he, or the club would think they might ever need to buy back David Luiz and insert that into a £50m sale is beyond me. 27 year old players don't have buy back clauses because the value on their next sale would be lower anyway, as the price here shows, over 20% less than what he was sold for. And I can't think of a club that thinks of an injury crisis or lack of buying options two years in advance. Certainly not the Chavs. Conte was desperate, that's obvious given his comments about the market a week or so ago but a buyback clause? Doesn't make any sense.

Again you seem to think Mourinho had any say in the terms under which David Luiz was sold to PSG, and ultimately no matter what is being spent it's ultimately the selling club that has the power when it comes to transfers. And the clause may have just given the club the right to speak to the player, the fact that he was sold back to Chelsea for less than what PSG paid is because he isn't very good and is 29.

[Bumble]

Again you seem to think Mourinho had any say in the terms under which David Luiz was sold to PSG, and ultimately no matter what is being spent it's ultimately the selling club that has the power when it comes to transfers. And the clause may have just given the club the right to speak to the player, the fact that he was sold back to Chelsea for less than what PSG paid is because he isn't very good and is 29.

no idea why Chelsea bought Luiz back he is like the polar opposite of what Italian defending is all about.

anyway it is sad the transfer window has ended as he reduces the number of topics we can moan and complain about.

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

They brought him back out of desperation

[Marc Overmars]

Pretty much. They spent all summer chasing a CB, when nothing worked out they turned to someone that probably wouldn't have been difficult to attract.

I just can't believe a player as shite as him has managed to accumulate 100m in transfer fees.

[Kano]

Again you seem to think Mourinho had any say in the terms under which David Luiz was sold to PSG, and ultimately no matter what is being spent it's ultimately the selling club that has the power when it comes to transfers. And the clause may have just given the club the right to speak to the player, the fact that he was sold back to Chelsea for less than what PSG paid is because he isn't very good and is 29.

Which is why I said Maureen or the club