I never wanted him back, and most of the Chelsea fanbase didn't either.
The club most certainly did though :)
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Nathan Ake
- Thread starter jaiguruKun
- Start date
I never wanted him back, and most of the Chelsea fanbase didn't either.
The club most certainly did though :)
crazyg
Well-Known Member
That's what we all say when the player doesn't arrive at the club. It doesn't matter who you support - the coping mechanism kicks in. We're all the same.I never wanted him back, and most of the Chelsea fanbase didn't either.
The club most certainly did though :)
;-)
That's what we all say when the player doesn't arrive at the club. It doesn't matter who you support - the coping mechanism kicks in. We're all the same.
;-)
That's what I've been saying about De Ligt, "Koulibaly is better anyway" haha.
But I've been pretty consistent on Ake from the moment we were linked with him.
stablemcfc
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 25 Oct 2014
- Messages
- 1,016
Happy with that.
Didn’t make any sense to sell. Our other outgoings you can see the logic (Sterling/Jesus contracts, and Zinchenko assuming we get a natural LB we can improve squad strength).
Losing Ake would have just meant the hunt for a like for like player to do a role that he was already doing great.
Didn’t make any sense to sell. Our other outgoings you can see the logic (Sterling/Jesus contracts, and Zinchenko assuming we get a natural LB we can improve squad strength).
Losing Ake would have just meant the hunt for a like for like player to do a role that he was already doing great.
sheepskin_tearaway
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 10 Dec 2017
- Messages
- 684
Good news this. I’m all for the club’s policy of not wanting to keep players who want to leave if and only if the buying club meet our price (which, let’s face it is always reasonable and fair- we don’t hold players and clubs to ransom like the bin dippers, and £45 mill for a player we bought for £40 mill and has demonstrably improved int the interim is on the low side if anything).
Not sure about this, that fee was ridiculous and we'll never get anything close to it again.
He is 4th choice for a reason and we could've used that fee to bring in a real top CB. The question mark here is of course if a top CB would come without a guaranteed starting place but seeing how often we rotate I'm sure we could've convinced someone.
Anyway, he is still a good squad player but I feel Chelsea was giving us a way to upgrade.
Clearly the fee wasn't ridiculous if it didn't even meet the basic valuation.
You think if he has a good season and wants to move next year nobody will pay 40m+ for him with 2 years of left on his contract at that point? He'll still be club trained for chelsea, and Silva may retire and koulibaly will be 32?
And if he doesnt have a significant role and wants out, you think the likes of Newcastle won't pay a significant fee for him if he is available and looking for guaranteed minutes?
Gray
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 30 May 2004
- Messages
- 25,546
- Team supported
- ABU & The Bus Wreckers
Told you.Ake prominent in the arrival for training video, I think he is staying.
It'sBlue93:20
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 4 Jun 2022
- Messages
- 1,208
- Team supported
- Manchester City
Looks like Pep played a part in keeping Ake - Fab said they talked
abu13
Well-Known Member
Really happy he is staying, with Zinch off then maybe he will get some additional game time at left back?
SWP's back
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 89,065
You also told us you were told that Pep prefers Zinchenko to Cucurella so I may take whatever you say with a wee pinch of salt.I’m told City had asked for 55m and Chelsea’s valuation of him was significantly lower. Ake and City both content this saga is now over.