Falcao and Hulk

Game of Thrones has begun :farao: :king:

Blue wrote:
Lukaku= Kalou 2.0

How ridiculous is that mate?? I can understand you do not like his style of play but you are severely under-rating his talent. He will be immense for us and I'm sure he will prove most doubters wrong. And the reason why I'm confident he will join is because I do not believe Villas-Boas will be stupid enough to ignore such a talent for the future.

Blue wrote:

theaguia wrote:lukaku is way to expensive for a plyer on his last year, imo ozil was 15mil and he was class. lukaku has still alot to prove i wouldnt pay more then 15 mil for him even though #he is great

Good point!

He should stay at Belgium for another year, then he should pick which club he wants to play for next year.

FilipeFerreira wrote:Ozil was 15 mil because he only had 12 months left on his contract.. if he had 4 years he woulda cost alot more. I'd pay 15-20 for lukaku but chelsea isn't a good destination for him.

Same thing with Lukaku, he will be a free agent in 12 months.

Why should he stay at Belgium? That club isn't helping him progress and it's better to move now. Plus do you think that club will allow him to be a free agent and leave for nothing? He'll definitely be sold this summer and if not next winter.

And recently Hulk's agent came out and said Hulk will not leave for even 62m pounds. That proves that we will not get him for less than 50m as some were speculating.

hulk is a lost cause
falcao is more realistic, if you guys saw he had to adjust against argentina and ended up playing as a playmaking striker and he did well so im not agaisnt signing falcao. I do hope we get lukaku but anderlech is screwing us over

theaguia wrote:hulk is a lost cause
falcao is more realistic, if you guys saw he had to adjust against argentina and ended up playing as a playmaking striker and he did well so im not agaisnt signing falcao. I do hope we get lukaku but anderlech is screwing us over

How are anderlech screwing us over?

english_jewel wrote:

How ridiculous is that mate?? I can understand you do not like his style of play but you are severely under-rating his talent. He will be immense for us and I'm sure he will prove most doubters wrong. And the reason why I'm confident he will join is because I do not believe Villas-Boas will be stupid enough to ignore such a talent for the future.



Why should he stay at Belgium? That club isn't helping him progress and it's better to move now. Plus do you think that club will allow him to be a free agent and leave for nothing? He'll definitely be sold this summer and if not next winter.

And recently Hulk's agent came out and said Hulk will not leave for even 62m pounds. That proves that we will not get him for less than 50m as some were speculating.

The Kalou 2.0 comment was a bit harsh, because Kalou has been very good for us. I believe if Lukaku arrives then it is reasonable to worry about his development. He will not get a lot of playing time because of the players ahead of him. The more time he spends on the bench the less he develops, that is the case with most young players. Unlike kalou he is not versatile, so you can only line him up as CF which mean even less opportunities, with Kalou he played all over the field so more opportunities came for him. Also remember that Torres is 27, and the perception is he will play at high level for another 4-5 years if he comes good for Chelsea. If Torres never lives up to the expectation from the start, then i am sure we will buy another striker in the near future. So lets say Torres does come good for Chelsea and becomes our main CF for next 4-5 years and lets also say Lukaku develops on schedule. Then the question becomes will Lukaku stay at Chelsea for the next 4-5 years on the bench? I seriously doubt he would stay until Torres declines. Look at Sturridge we face a similar dilemma, if we don't start him now then there is no doubt he would leave. Lukaku will get impatient which is natural imo for young players.

Back to Kalou, if Kalou didn't join us at a young age then he might have been a better player by now, we hindered his development and young players need to play a lot to develop their confidence. So the Kalou 2.0 comment was basically my perception that Lukaku might fail similar way to Kalou with his development.

For Chelsea and Lukaku i seriously think it is a bad move from both sides if he join Chelsea.

english_jewel wrote:

theaguia wrote:hulk is a lost cause
falcao is more realistic, if you guys saw he had to adjust against argentina and ended up playing as a playmaking striker and he did well so im not agaisnt signing falcao. I do hope we get lukaku but anderlech is screwing us over

How are anderlech screwing us over?

they want 23 mil for him! imo thats to much for an unprven albeit talented player, he is on his last year and he is not british.

Blue wrote:

english_jewel wrote:

How ridiculous is that mate?? I can understand you do not like his style of play but you are severely under-rating his talent. He will be immense for us and I'm sure he will prove most doubters wrong. And the reason why I'm confident he will join is because I do not believe Villas-Boas will be stupid enough to ignore such a talent for the future.



Why should he stay at Belgium? That club isn't helping him progress and it's better to move now. Plus do you think that club will allow him to be a free agent and leave for nothing? He'll definitely be sold this summer and if not next winter.

And recently Hulk's agent came out and said Hulk will not leave for even 62m pounds. That proves that we will not get him for less than 50m as some were speculating.

The Kalou 2.0 comment was a bit harsh, because Kalou has been very good for us. I believe if Lukaku arrives then it is reasonable to worry about his development. He will not get a lot of playing time because of the players ahead of him. The more time he spends on the bench the less he develops, that is the case with most young players. Unlike kalou he is not versatile, so you can only line him up as CF which mean even less opportunities, with Kalou he played all over the field so more opportunities came for him. Also remember that Torres is 27, and the perception is he will play at high level for another 4-5 years if he comes good for Chelsea. If Torres never lives up to the expectation from the start, then i am sure we will buy another striker in the near future. So lets say Torres does come good for Chelsea and becomes our main CF for next 4-5 years and lets also say Lukaku develops on schedule. Then the question becomes will Lukaku stay at Chelsea for the next 4-5 years on the bench? I seriously doubt he would stay until Torres declines. Look at Sturridge we face a similar dilemma, if we don't start him now then there is no doubt he would leave. Lukaku will get impatient which is natural imo for young players.

Back to Kalou, if Kalou didn't join us at a young age then he might have been a better player by now, we hindered his development and young players need to play a lot to develop their confidence. So the Kalou 2.0 comment was basically my perception that Lukaku might fail similar way to Kalou with his development.

For Chelsea and Lukaku i seriously think it is a bad move from both sides if he join Chelsea.

Well yes you do have a point about Torres being in the way of Lukaku's future development. Personally I think it's too easy to say that and with injuries and all Lukaku will get a chance.

Blue wrote:The Kalou 2.0 comment was a bit harsh, because Kalou has been very good for us. I believe if Lukaku arrives then it is reasonable to worry about his development. He will not get a lot of playing time because of the players ahead of him. The more time he spends on the bench the less he develops, that is the case with most young players. Unlike kalou he is not versatile, so you can only line him up as CF which mean even less opportunities, with Kalou he played all over the field so more opportunities came for him. Also remember that Torres is 27, and the perception is he will play at high level for another 4-5 years if he comes good for Chelsea. If Torres never lives up to the expectation from the start, then i am sure we will buy another striker in the near future. So lets say Torres does come good for Chelsea and becomes our main CF for next 4-5 years and lets also say Lukaku develops on schedule. Then the question becomes will Lukaku stay at Chelsea for the next 4-5 years on the bench? I seriously doubt he would stay until Torres declines. Look at Sturridge we face a similar dilemma, if we don't start him now then there is no doubt he would leave. Lukaku will get impatient which is natural imo for young players.

Back to Kalou, if Kalou didn't join us at a young age then he might have been a better player by now, we hindered his development and young players need to play a lot to develop their confidence. So the Kalou 2.0 comment was basically my perception that Lukaku might fail similar way to Kalou with his development.

For Chelsea and Lukaku i seriously think it is a bad move from both sides if he join Chelsea.

You have some pretty good and valid points there... so rep+

But first of all Kalou hasn't been very good for us, he has been just good but he could have done a hell lot better. If Lukaku comes in I'm pretty sure that he will be loaned to some club for one season. The only player who is standing on his way is Torres, because by next season or two Drogba will probably have to accept a bench role or he would go back to Marseille. I highly doubt that we would buy a replacement for Torres within this season, because we already have Sturridge who is already pretty close to Torres's current form, probably better than his current form. The reason that we went to CL finals and semi finals is because we had a strong bench more than anything else. We had a player who could directly replace a first team member without losing team chemistry or the team strength. If we had a player like Ballack we could have easily won the PL last season when Lampard was injured. We need to get that ability back. BTW Lukaku would get playing time tbh. We would most probably play one CF and two Wingforwards eh? Torres/Sturridge and then its Lukaku(in about 2 years). Sturridge would most probably play a wider role as well so that he would get more chances and i think no one would disagree with me if i say that Torres is pretty injury prone.

Lukaku should not stay on the bench till Torres leaves... his aim should be to de-bench Torres... thats how players develop. He should thrive to be better than him.

Kalou might have been better, might have been the same, might have been worse. He gets quite a lot of knowledge about the game at Chelsea with better coaching staff, better players around him. He can learn easily. The only problem is lack of game time. But tbh Kalou did get quite a lot of game time.

I honestly dont want us to pay Lukaku that much. Otherwise I wouldn't really mind this deal.