John Terry [Merged]

[fulhamroad22]

Re: Chelsea reject Terry offer [Merged]

Allegedly we are offering him £150,000 a year, so to bring him level with Lampard, so that surely covers recognition and respect? We have put in an offer for Ribery and plan on signing Sneidjer with the change, so that covers ambition. We will be in the running for the title this year, and, I think this season the trophy will be going South purely because United are much weaker than last season and Liverpool haven't improved, where as if you believe the papers we will have improved hugely, so that covers opportunities for silverware.

We are offering him massive amounts of money, though not the monster wage being offered by City, so that is the only reason I can imagine he'd want to go.

I mean City will have success but, in all respect, they are building up that success. It's not like with Chelsea where we had a Champions League and cup winning squad before the money (and the money turned us into a title winning team within two seasons). This is a job where nearly the whole club with have to be overhauled, and I can't see that happening quickly. Also, the new players will have to learn how to work as a team- this is the problem Chelsea had in 2003/04 (the first season of our buyout) where there were so many new players, it was hard to get them to work together.

So, it's my belief that Terry would either be benched, sold or retired by the time City are in Chelsea's position, and that's why I believe there is only one reason why Terry would leave the club at this point in time.

Some fair points i think, and its good to not have the usual fighting tripe that comes on here... However i dont think you can make direct comparisons to what happened when you were taken over. Despite similarities, there are a ton of factors that are different, plus this is sport. Sport being completely un-predictable. We dont know how well people will gel.. It could take days not years, we dont know about injurys to us or other teams, we dont know about signings (yet).....

I just think that in terms of Terry, maybe you can get 'one club' depression.... Same club every day for 15 years, not knowing whether you could test yourself somewhere else.... Think about Gareth Barry, its exactly why we got him.

Being at this part of the development is the most exciting part... I bet you, your best title was your first...

Like i say, you have alot of good points and maybe right, but there is alot more to consider... Its not just about the money...

Of course, I expect Terry to consider the offer because it means extra security for his family and a place in an exciting project, but this would be at the expense of legend status at Chelsea. I don't claim to have any insider knowledge or anything like that, so I have no idea how the man thinks. It's all speculation at the moment, though hopefully, by the time he arrives at Cobham we'll get some answers.

...and yes, the first title is the best. I've supported Chelsea since I was five years old (1994-95 season), personally convinced by Matthew Harding (before he died) that Chelsea were 'the best club'. It genuinely brought a tear to my eye to see John Terry lift the Premier League title in 2004/05. That will be a magical feeling for you, who may be too young to remember City's over triumphs.

 

[only1paulsimpson]

Re: Chelsea reject Terry offer [Merged]

I mean City will have success but, in all respect, they are building up that success. It's not like with Chelsea where we had a Champions League and cup winning squad before the money (and the money turned us into a title winning team within two seasons).

Anyone else tired of hearing this Chelsea myth that they had no money before Abramovich came in? The bankrolling of Chelsea's success started before the Russian embezzler showed his freaky little face.

It should be easy to remember who started buying your Champs League place and trophies - you've got a stand named after the bloke!

^^^^^^this^^^^^^^^

 

[fulhamroad22]

Re: Chelsea reject Terry offer [Merged]

I mean City will have success but, in all respect, they are building up that success. It's not like with Chelsea where we had a Champions League and cup winning squad before the money (and the money turned us into a title winning team within two seasons).

Anyone else tired of hearing this Chelsea myth that they had no money before Abramovich came in? The bankrolling of Chelsea's success started before the Russian embezzler showed his freaky little face.

It should be easy to remember who started buying your Champs League place and trophies - you've got a stand named after the bloke!

Sorry, if this is a double post, but no, Matthew Harding saved the club from going into administration and prevented the club from being sold. He didn't pump money into the club to buy players. He basically helped us to survive, Ken Bates, the shrewd businessman he is, managed the money quite well (despite being in debt), and that allowed us to buy players like Gullit, Vialli etc.

I'd like to see a top flight team that hasn't had investment at the level which Harding pumped into the club.

I refuse to believe we bought success in the 90s', but will happily admit we did in the mid 2000s'.

 

[Rammy Blue]

Re: Chelsea reject Terry offer [Merged]

Allegedly we are offering him £150,000 a year, so to bring him level with Lampard, so that surely covers recognition and respect? We have put in an offer for Ribery and plan on signing Sneidjer with the change, so that covers ambition. We will be in the running for the title this year, and, I think this season the trophy will be going South purely because United are much weaker than last season and Liverpool haven't improved, where as if you believe the papers we will have improved hugely, so that covers opportunities for silverware.

We are offering him massive amounts of money, though not the monster wage being offered by City, so that is the only reason I can imagine he'd want to go.

I mean City will have success but, in all respect, they are building up that success. It's not like with Chelsea where we had a Champions League and cup winning squad before the money (and the money turned us into a title winning team within two seasons). This is a job where nearly the whole club with have to be overhauled, and I can't see that happening quickly. Also, the new players will have to learn how to work as a team- this is the problem Chelsea had in 2003/04 (the first season of our buyout) where there were so many new players, it was hard to get them to work together.

So, it's my belief that Terry would either be benched, sold or retired by the time City are in Chelsea's position, and that's why I believe there is only one reason why Terry would leave the club at this point in time.

allegedly being the operative word.

it all really depends on whether Roman would prefer to cash in so that Ancelotti can rebuild properly as it was quite clear before the end of the season that you have to balance the books this summer.

That is a long term plan- to break even. But judging by our transfer plan, I wouldn't say so at all. Chairman Bruce "Cowboy" Buck stated that there would be two plays out and three or four including a 'marquee' signing would come in. I think the intention was more to strengthen our squad, and remember winning the league or Champions League would bring in a lot of revenue to help us break even.

People are forgetting that we are still owned by a mega-rich oligarch (and we can outspend pretty much anyone apart from City and Real), the long term plan is to basically not rely on investment so much. I reckon this will happen to City when a team is built, also. However, the team need to strengthen and they have said as much when speaking to the press.

Another quote was that new players will be funded by players that were sold- I'd imagine we still have some left over as our sales have bought us Sturridge, Turnbull and Zhirkov. The last part of the quote is, if a special player is available, Roman will pay for it.

apologies if i have missed it but who exactly have you sold to generate revenue? - think you have more chance of plaitting fog than getting 12 mil for Deco and Carvalho.

spent approx 23 mil on Zhirkov and Sturridge.

it wouldn't surprise me if Roman had promised Ancelotti a decent signing out of his own pocket in order for him to agree to be your manager but either Pato or Ribery are going to cost approx 50mil or more and i can't see you balancing the books without unloading someone of decent money.

in which case i would think that Chelsea privately may feel that 35mil for JT is too much to turn down for a declining asset.

imo of course.

 

[fulhamroad22]

Re: Chelsea reject Terry offer [Merged]

Allegedly we are offering him £150,000 a year, so to bring him level with Lampard, so that surely covers recognition and respect? We have put in an offer for Ribery and plan on signing Sneidjer with the change, so that covers ambition. We will be in the running for the title this year, and, I think this season the trophy will be going South purely because United are much weaker than last season and Liverpool haven't improved, where as if you believe the papers we will have improved hugely, so that covers opportunities for silverware.

We are offering him massive amounts of money, though not the monster wage being offered by City, so that is the only reason I can imagine he'd want to go.

I mean City will have success but, in all respect, they are building up that success. It's not like with Chelsea where we had a Champions League and cup winning squad before the money (and the money turned us into a title winning team within two seasons). This is a job where nearly the whole club with have to be overhauled, and I can't see that happening quickly. Also, the new players will have to learn how to work as a team- this is the problem Chelsea had in 2003/04 (the first season of our buyout) where there were so many new players, it was hard to get them to work together.

So, it's my belief that Terry would either be benched, sold or retired by the time City are in Chelsea's position, and that's why I believe there is only one reason why Terry would leave the club at this point in time.

allegedly being the operative word.

it all really depends on whether Roman would prefer to cash in so that Ancelotti can rebuild properly as it was quite clear before the end of the season that you have to balance the books this summer.

That is a long term plan- to break even. But judging by our transfer plan, I wouldn't say so at all. Chairman Bruce "Cowboy" Buck stated that there would be two plays out and three or four including a 'marquee' signing would come in. I think the intention was more to strengthen our squad, and remember winning the league or Champions League would bring in a lot of revenue to help us break even.

People are forgetting that we are still owned by a mega-rich oligarch (and we can outspend pretty much anyone apart from City and Real), the long term plan is to basically not rely on investment so much. I reckon this will happen to City when a team is built, also. However, the team need to strengthen and they have said as much when speaking to the press.

Another quote was that new players will be funded by players that were sold- I'd imagine we still have some left over as our sales have bought us Sturridge, Turnbull and Zhirkov. The last part of the quote is, if a special player is available, Roman will pay for it.

apologies if i have missed it but who exactly have you sold to generate revenue? - think you have more chance of plaitting fog than getting 12 mil for Deco and Carvalho.

spent approx 23 mil on Zhirkov and Sturridge.

it wouldn't surprise me if Roman had promised Ancelotti a decent signing out of his own pocket in order for him to agree to be your manager but either Pato or Ribery are going to cost approx 50mil or more and i can't see you balancing the books without unloading someone of decent money.

in which case i would think that Chelsea privately may feel that 35mil for JT is too much to turn down for a declining asset.

imo of course.

SWP, Bridge, Cudicini, Ben Haim, Sidwell. I'd imagine Shevchenko, Pizarro, Deco and Carvalho will also leave. I'd imagine these players would cover the costs of Zhirkov, Sturridge and Turnbull.

I can see the point of selling JT, but he has such a huge influence on the club that I think it would be foolish to let him go. We can source that kind of money from Abramovic anyway should we get ourselves into trouble or a big name player comes along.

 

[only1paulsimpson]

Re: Chelsea reject Terry offer [Merged]

fulham rd you bring some intersting points on here,
but have you ever thought that terry is willing to sacrifice his legendry status at chelsea for a new exciting challenge at city???
as hughes has said many times, it appeals to players to be part of changing something and gaining achievments and transforming a club.
very rarely will there be a player who spends his entire career at 1 club.
and for terry to have alledgedly text bridge to "get me out of here" says to me theres more to this transfer
and the developments will be interesting.not forgetting that chelsea is just a job to terry at the end of the day,chelsea fans say its running thruogh his blood,but if for 1 dont assume that terry thinks that is the case.

 

[Johnny_on]

Re: Chelsea reject Terry offer [Merged]

Of course, I expect Terry to consider the offer because it means extra security for his family and a place in an exciting project, but this would be at the expense of legend status at Chelsea. I don't claim to have any insider knowledge or anything like that, so I have no idea how the man thinks. It's all speculation at the moment, though hopefully, by the time he arrives at Cobham we'll get some answers.

...and yes, the first title is the best. I've supported Chelsea since I was five years old (1994-95 season), personally convinced by Matthew Harding (before he died) that Chelsea were 'the best club'. It genuinely brought a tear to my eye to see John Terry lift the Premier League title in 2004/05. That will be a magical feeling for you, who may be too young to remember City's over triumphs.

Well we'll see i guess sometime today or tomorrow what he's up to, but either way after yesterday's nonsense (on this board) good to have a level headed fan on.... Good luck for this season... Hopefully we'll put up more of a fight against your boys...

PS.. I'd be crying if we won the Carling cup i'm that desperate to see our boys win something :-)

 

[Rammy Blue]

Re: Chelsea reject Terry offer [Merged]

SWP, Bridge, Cudicini, Ben Haim, Sidwell. I'd imagine Shevchenko, Pizarro, Deco and Carvalho will also leave. I'd imagine these players would cover the costs of Zhirkov, Sturridge and Turnbull.

I can see the point of selling JT, but he has such a huge influence on the club that I think it would be foolish to let him go. We can source that kind of money from Abramovic anyway should we get ourselves into trouble or a big name player comes along.

they were all sold last year, shevchenko you would have to pay someone to take him, pizarro was given away - leads us back to deco and carvalho who between them will be lucky to bring in 6/8 mil.

the balancing of the books statement was made in relation to dealings this summer and not taking into account sales over last couple of years....me thinks you are grabbing at straws.

 

[fulhamroad22]

Re: Chelsea reject Terry offer [Merged]

fulham rd you bring some intersting points on here,
but have you ever thought that terry is willing to sacrifice his legendry status at chelsea for a new exciting challenge at city???
as hughes has said many times, it appeals to players to be part of changing something and gaining achievments and transforming a club.
very rarely will there be a player who spends his entire career at 1 club.
and for terry to have alledgedly text bridge to "get me out of here" says to me theres more to this transfer
and the developments will be interesting.not forgetting that chelsea is just a job to terry at the end of the day,chelsea fans say its running thruogh his blood,but if for 1 dont assume that terry thinks that is the case.

Well, publicly, he has had the stance that he is Chelsea through and through and was proud to be a one club player. If it was me, I'd be interested in a project at City, of course, though I probably wouldn't unsettle the family and leave my beloved Chelsea behind to move North. My feelings would be I'm on £150,000 a week and have everything I want, is the extra £50,000 or so worth it?

Obviously, I don't know how the man thinks and I think we are all buying into speculation here. I agree it is an exciting project though, and that will test his publicly stated loyalty to Chelsea.

 

[skiddypants]

I rather have Alex and Bosingwa...Than Terry.

















hey ho here we go, camp leg flick backwards and exits the room.