| FabriziOmari 09:14 - Feb 27 with 4506 views | Chris_ITFC |
|  |
| |  |
| FabriziOmari on 13:22 - Feb 27 with 675 views | Chris_ITFC |
| FabriziOmari on 12:40 - Feb 27 by itfcjoe |
Chelsea have sold academy players for the best part of £300m over the last decade so there is plenty of precedent they extract value from them! |
Key part: "without first team experience at Chelsea."
I'm not talking about the likes of Mount, Abraham, Loftus-Cheek, Tomori, Guehi, Hudson-Odoi etc - albeit, even some of them were sold poorly.
If you look at highly-rated youngsters who didn't ever make the grade, they end up leaving after loans at the end of their contract - Clarke-Salter, Musonda, Baker, Brown, Piazon, Solanke.
And now we have the Boely factor. Hudson-Odoi and Ampadu are good examples of quality leaving the building for relatively low fees due to desperation for FPP HG funds.
P.S. Compare Chelsea’s outgoing fees for lesser-known academy products to City to see the difference. [Post edited 27 Feb 2024 13:34]
| |
| |
| FabriziOmari on 13:28 - Feb 27 with 652 views | itfcsuth |
| FabriziOmari on 09:18 - Feb 27 by BiGDonnie |
Said to a few colleagues recently that I think he'll end up going abroad to a top club. He's destined for the very top. |
I like him, he's a really talented boy.
To say he is destined for the very top is probably getting ahead of yourself a little bit though.
He's in a rich vein of form, but still lots of development in him. |  | | |
| FabriziOmari on 14:14 - Feb 27 with 587 views | RichardWright |
| FabriziOmari on 09:47 - Feb 27 by Chris_ITFC |
You'd think so, but there isn't really a great deal of precedent for Chelsea extracting value from their crop of youngsters. In fact, a lot end up leaving for free, if you look at the loan army without first team experience at Chelsea.
As great as he's been here, I don't see him forcing his way into the mix with all of Chelsea's attackers. He'll be 21 early into next season. I would expect Chelsea to cash-in, probably to a more attractive club for Omari than us, but he only has a year on his contract, so £10m+ seems excessive.
I totally agree with you on the PL development point - a track record like that can be HUGE in attracting the best available youngsters each year. |
I would say one thing Chelsea have been historically great at is selling players for good fees. That is one of the only things that seems to remain now from the Abramovich era with sales of a lot of deadwood being very impressive last summer.
Yes, they have lost some talent for free but that's almost unavoidable when you've been as successful as them (until recently) and produce that amount of talent. The only way we keep Omari is getting promoted and having him on loan again next season in my opinion.
I don't believe Chelsea will be under anywhere near as much pressure as most people suggest - they have a guaranteed £35m coming in from Hall, Maatsen has a buyout clause of around £35m and reports suggest Dortmund could very well be interested after his fast start to life there, they have Broja who will fetch a good pure profit fee, and players like Lukaku who will be a bigger priority to shift.
Recent academy sales include:
Loftus-Cheek £14m
Abraham £34m
Guehi £18m
Hall £35m obligation to buy this summer
Tomori £24m
Ampadu £7m
Gilmour £9m
Kalas £8m [Post edited 27 Feb 2024 14:16]
|  | | |
| FabriziOmari on 14:38 - Feb 27 with 565 views | HighgateBlue |
| FabriziOmari on 12:33 - Feb 27 by DanTheMan |
There'll be an algorithm that determines the rating on a per-position basis I would imagine (e.g. tackles for defenders worth more than a tackle for a striker).
Once all the raw data gets fed through it, out pops a value and then the best ones per position get into a team of the week.
And yes, whilst they do get stick from some quarters, these statistics do have their uses. Admittedly more the raw statistics than the specific Opta algorithms, although things will have changed since I was in the industry. |
That's all very modern in terms of reliance on stats, but pretty archaic in terms of only treating each person as pickable in one fixed 'position', and trying to shoehorn players from different systems into a fixed mould.
It seems odd, for example, that where two lone frontmen who each have an incredible game, they get picked as a two man attack in the team of the week, whereas when a wideman plays in a system that let him drift inside and out at will, he still has to compete for one right wing (or left wing) slot, and doesn't get picked as a more central attacking midfielder even if he has a much better game than those who are anointed as official attacking midfielders.
(I do love that so much more data is available now, don't get me wrong.) |  | | |
| FabriziOmari on 14:50 - Feb 27 with 552 views | itfcsuth |
| FabriziOmari on 14:14 - Feb 27 by RichardWright |
I would say one thing Chelsea have been historically great at is selling players for good fees. That is one of the only things that seems to remain now from the Abramovich era with sales of a lot of deadwood being very impressive last summer.
Yes, they have lost some talent for free but that's almost unavoidable when you've been as successful as them (until recently) and produce that amount of talent. The only way we keep Omari is getting promoted and having him on loan again next season in my opinion.
I don't believe Chelsea will be under anywhere near as much pressure as most people suggest - they have a guaranteed £35m coming in from Hall, Maatsen has a buyout clause of around £35m and reports suggest Dortmund could very well be interested after his fast start to life there, they have Broja who will fetch a good pure profit fee, and players like Lukaku who will be a bigger priority to shift.
Recent academy sales include:
Loftus-Cheek £14m
Abraham £34m
Guehi £18m
Hall £35m obligation to buy this summer
Tomori £24m
Ampadu £7m
Gilmour £9m
Kalas £8m [Post edited 27 Feb 2024 14:16]
|
Mason Mount can top that list for £50m. | | | |
| FabriziOmari on 14:58 - Feb 27 with 543 views | DanTheMan |
| FabriziOmari on 14:38 - Feb 27 by HighgateBlue |
That's all very modern in terms of reliance on stats, but pretty archaic in terms of only treating each person as pickable in one fixed 'position', and trying to shoehorn players from different systems into a fixed mould.
It seems odd, for example, that where two lone frontmen who each have an incredible game, they get picked as a two man attack in the team of the week, whereas when a wideman plays in a system that let him drift inside and out at will, he still has to compete for one right wing (or left wing) slot, and doesn't get picked as a more central attacking midfielder even if he has a much better game than those who are anointed as official attacking midfielders.
(I do love that so much more data is available now, don't get me wrong.) |
That is certainly true, and for all I know that sort of thing is available, my insight is nearly a decade out of date at this point. However, that sort of thing would not be publicly available so we'd be unlikely to see it on WhoScored. All the expensive Opta stuff you pay a lot of money for, although not much in terms of football clubs expenses. Used to make me laugh how little clubs were willing to spend on software given that the returns could be 100x if it helped find a good player. There was still a lot of scepticism from the old guard at that time though, think things have moved on a bit. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
