- Thread starter
- #321
Country: England
There’s no pure profit here, he’s not a Chelsea academy player.Doesn't it also mean Chelsea can book this transfer as pure profit? Why does everyone in the league seem so hellbent on helping out Chelsea?
There’s no pure profit here, he’s not a Chelsea academy player.Doesn't it also mean Chelsea can book this transfer as pure profit? Why does everyone in the league seem so hellbent on helping out Chelsea?
No, as he wasn't an academy player who didn't cost a transfer fee.Doesn't it also mean Chelsea can book this transfer as pure profit? Why does everyone in the league seem so hellbent on helping out Chelsea?
I think it's more that Chelsea are an attractive option for clubs to do business with. They have lots of players available to sell and don't push for a ton of money up front.Doesn't it also mean Chelsea can book this transfer as pure profit? Why does everyone in the league seem so hellbent on helping out Chelsea?
I'm here.There’s no pure profit here, he’s not a Chelsea academy player.
That’s pretty significant. Wonder if they knew this was coming and that was part of the price?
Yes, I think LW challenger/rotation and RW back up, plus some cup games. No way do we pay £52m for a RW back up. Also he’s not listed as left or right footed, but both. I’m sure that’s the appeal to Arteta.I’m really intrigued by his role and usage. I expect Saka to play every minute of every game in every competition because that’s all that Micky knows, so my theory is that Madueke is a LW option.
Oh god. Are you still just clapping like a seal for club decision? Are you Arteta’s yank cousin or something?He had four managers within 18 months and was changing in the hallways for Chelsea home games. Any concerns about dust ups with managers is more down to club dysfunction than his attitude. He loves the game and the consensus seems to be that he's a budding star. He believed in himself and came here where he won't have an established role so to speak whereas Chelsea seem to be turning things around and he started 27 PL games for them. He could've easily stayed there with guaranteed starts.
I have a feeling he's going to be a fan favorite for us.
Oh god. Are you still just clapping like a seal for club decision? Are you Arteta’s yank cousin or something?
You haven’t formed an original thought since the Bush administration, and I’m not referring to Jr either. Your whole gimmick is to go against the grain on every subject. I bet you think Wilford should’ve started over Henry back in 02.Gonna be so funny when he's playing exceptionally well in a few months and everyone changes their tune on him, I'll be here waiting though.
Just wait until I start pointing out the unconcious bias towards MaduekeYou haven’t formed an original thought since the Bush administration, and I’m not referring to Jr either. Your whole gimmick is to go against the grain on every subject. I bet you think Wilford should’ve started over Henry back in 02.
You don’t like Madueke. I know the type of footballers you rate and Madueke is not one of them.
I think there is a bigger chance of this happening than most people would admit. As long as we sign a Rodrygo/Eze type on the left I don’t really mind this transfer. Unlike Havertz he’s actually got the attributes necessary to make it.Gonna be so funny when he's playing exceptionally well in a few months and everyone changes their tune on him, I'll be here waiting though.
| Team | P | W | D | L | Goals | GD | Pts | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
Arsenal
W
W
W
W
W
L
|
38 | 26 | 7 | 5 | 71:27 | +44 | 85 | |
| 2 |
Manchester City
L
D
W
W
D
W
|
38 | 23 | 9 | 6 | 77:35 | +42 | 78 | |
| 3 |
Manchester United
W
W
D
W
W
W
|
38 | 20 | 11 | 7 | 69:50 | +19 | 71 | |
| 4 |
Aston Villa
W
W
D
L
L
W
|
38 | 19 | 8 | 11 | 56:49 | +7 | 65 | |
| 5 |
Liverpool
D
L
D
L
W
W
|
38 | 17 | 9 | 12 | 63:53 | +10 | 60 | |
| 6 |
Bournemouth
D
D
W
W
D
W
|
38 | 13 | 18 | 7 | 58:54 | +4 | 57 | |
| 7 |
Sunderland
W
W
D
D
L
L
|
38 | 14 | 12 | 12 | 42:48 | -6 | 54 | |
| 8 |
Brighton
L
L
W
L
W
D
|
38 | 14 | 11 | 13 | 52:46 | +6 | 53 | |
| 9 |
Brentford
D
D
L
W
L
D
|
38 | 14 | 11 | 13 | 55:52 | +3 | 53 | |
| 10 |
Chelsea
L
W
D
L
L
L
|
38 | 14 | 10 | 14 | 58:52 | +6 | 52 | |
| 11 |
Fulham
W
D
L
L
W
D
|
38 | 15 | 7 | 16 | 47:51 | -4 | 52 | |
| 12 |
Newcastle
L
W
D
W
L
L
|
38 | 14 | 7 | 17 | 53:55 | -2 | 49 | |
| 13 |
Everton
L
L
D
D
L
L
|
38 | 13 | 10 | 15 | 47:50 | -3 | 49 | |
| 14 |
Leeds
L
W
D
W
D
W
|
38 | 11 | 14 | 13 | 49:56 | -7 | 47 | |
| 15 |
Crystal Palace
L
D
L
D
L
L
|
38 | 11 | 12 | 15 | 41:51 | -10 | 45 | |
| 16 |
Nottingham Forest
D
L
D
W
W
W
|
38 | 11 | 11 | 16 | 48:51 | -3 | 44 | |
| 17 |
Tottenham
W
L
D
W
W
D
|
38 | 10 | 11 | 17 | 48:57 | -9 | 41 | |
| 18 |
West Ham
W
L
L
L
W
D
|
38 | 10 | 9 | 19 | 46:65 | -19 | 39 | |
| 19 |
Burnley
D
L
D
L
L
L
|
38 | 4 | 10 | 24 | 38:75 | -37 | 22 | |
| 20 |
Wolves
D
D
L
D
L
L
|
38 | 3 | 11 | 24 | 27:68 | -41 | 20 |