Chelsea banter 5

03 Sep 2026 10:22:16
{Ed's Note - Ed001 has posted a new video entitled entitled, C U Next Time - Transfer Window Edition}

03 Sep 2026 07:39:15
{Ed's Note - thefutureisoldgold3 has posted a new article entitled, Wolves Ratings at West Ham: Defence Below Standard

02 Sep 2026 21:40:40
MONACO HAD €55M. THEY CHOSE TO GAMBLE. CHELSEA HAD A REASON TO DO THE SAME — BUT DIDN'T.

What Monaco did with Camara is difficult to defend, not only as football business, but as a matter of principle.

Chelsea had agreed a €55m deal with Monaco.

Camara had completed his medical. His contract had been agreed. The paperwork was virtually finished. Everything was moving towards completion.

Then Everton came back for Folarin Balogun.

Monaco decided they preferred the possibility of selling Balogun instead.

That decision, by itself, is understandable. Circumstances change. Clubs are entitled to reconsider their options.

But Monaco then made the extraordinary decision to abandon the virtually completed €55m Camara deal to pursue the alternative.

They apparently wouldn't even agree to an extension deal sheet.

In business terms, Monaco looked at a deal worth €55m that was almost sitting in the bank and said:

"Let's cancel this and see if we can get something better. "

Then the other deal collapsed.

€55m became €0.

That is some deadline-day accounting.

But there is another side to this story that deserves attention.

Chelsea had just experienced exactly the kind of situation that can test a club's principles.

Manchester City had agreed a huge deal for Enzo Fernández.

Chelsea could have looked at the chaos surrounding the Camara situation and said:

"Fine. If agreements can suddenly become meaningless on deadline day, why should ours? "

They had reasons to be difficult.

They had every reason to be frustrated.

They could have tried to reopen the conversation, changed their position or used the circumstances to their advantage.

They didn't.

Chelsea honoured their agreement with Manchester City.

And that is the part I find interesting.

Chelsea did exactly what Monaco should have done.

They recognised that an agreement is worth something, especially when circumstances become difficult.

It is easy to honour your word when everything is going perfectly.

The real test comes when something better appears on the table.

Monaco had a €55m agreement and a new possibility.

Chelsea had an agreement with City and plenty of reasons to be tempted by the chaos around them.

One chose to gamble.

The other chose to honour its word.

Football is obviously a business. But business without trust becomes very difficult very quickly.

You can negotiate hard. You can change your plans before an agreement is reached. You can decide not to sell a player.

But once you have taken another party all the way through the process, there is something to be said for keeping your word.

Chelsea deserve credit for that.

Not because they had no reason to reconsider.

They had reasons. They simply chose integrity over convenience.

03 Sep 2026 10:09:33
AI summary of what happened? Anyway, I agree with it.

03 Sep 2026 10:09:54
Nice post. In my opinion, just about spot on.

03 Sep 2026 20:39:08
Using AI to write posts on a football blog for you - honestly, what's the point.

03 Sep 2026 21:43:07
I personally couldn't care less if AI helped generate a post. To my mind, it clarified the events and that is fine with me.

It's not an exam, it's just a bit of fun and banter.

04 Sep 2026 17:19:04
Between humans, Tom.

02 Sep 2026 21:37:01
At the start of this window I guessed/hoped we would raise over £400m in player sales. With the Maresca money and loan fees, I was hoping that we get over £450m in player/manager fees.

I wouldn't have a clue how to find out how we now stand in the net spend table over the last five seasons. Anyone got any ideas or answers?

03 Sep 2026 08:22:22
Tom, according to one site, our net spend in the last 5 years is just over £600 million. Man U, Arsenal and Spurs have a higher net spend, and Liverpool's is about £40 million less than ours.

03 Sep 2026 10:12:18
Thanks Jimbo, I would have thought after the last window we would be lower in the net spend table.

03 Sep 2026 12:47:24
Tom, figures vary from different sources, but it is comparative of where we are compared to other clubs.

02 Sep 2026 18:55:20
Nizaar Kinsella reporting that Chelsea spent £328m on improving the squad and made £519m worth of players sales (with loan fees) which is a global world record.

That's a net profit of £120m while retaining the sixth most valuable squad in the world.

The club hint at reinvestment in transfer windows to come having had a window that improves their financial picture whilst engineering a better squad for Xabi Alonso.

Many of the loan fees are undisclosed but known to be sizeable in some cases.

Quite astonishing figures and revolving doors and once again putting the "blown billions" theory in the proverbial bin.

Well done Blue. co.

02 Sep 2026 21:32:09
Unfortunately, Greeny, a couple of injuries and we'll have Jordan Henderson starting games of football.

02 Sep 2026 22:00:10
Very interesting Kaz that both you and our old friend Standard both call me Greeny? I think you have been found out but in all honesty it doesn't matter as it is just a name and all that counts is the wonderful banter on this page thanks to our ED's. Peace bro.

03 Sep 2026 11:31:28
K, do we know if the Maresca fee is included in the £519m.

It would appear we have now slipped to 6th in the nett spend table over the last ten years. I'm not sure if that is a good or bad thing. Even the spuds have a net spend figure bigger than ours over that period.

03 Sep 2026 18:08:20
Not sure, Tom, but either way, remarkable amounts of profit made, and it makes me laugh how some pundits, and indeed punters, like to use words like "blown billions" when, in fact, it is actually a case of turning a profit on many, if not most, of the purchases.

02 Sep 2026 11:51:48
What a sorry circus. Chelsea fuming at Monaco, Everton and Monaco both fuming at Balogun, presumably (Everton have Barry as their only striker now!). Liverpool apparently stuck their oar in, calling Monaco when the original Balogun deal fell through on the medical to say they'd buy Camara in 2027 if Monaco didn't sell to Chelsea now.

I wonder if we'll go back in Jan or if that's shutters for Camara? He looks like a player that would click in our midfield – seems to have a full picture of the pitch and a Canon of a shot.

I'd certainly Leica player like that. (Sorry, just using up all the puns I woke up with in my head this morning.)

On another note, Fofana's two planes is one of the funniest transfer-window shenanigans since Odemwingie.

02 Sep 2026 15:02:59
I hope we would try again in January, EdW, as I also think he would be excellent for our midfield and in an Alonso system. But Monaco may well want to keep him the whole season and have Liverpool bidding against us for him then.

One can but hope, though, that Monaco may have some sense of guilt, not just about what they did to us but to the player, and that there could be a chance of getting him then.

02 Sep 2026 07:59:28
What a mini saga the Camara and Balogun deals ended up being, with Monaco ending up with egg on their face.

In Fernandez, yes we've lost a starter and haven't replaced him with a genuine starter. But, we signed him for £100m and has he, at any point in his time with us, actually looked like a £100m midfielder? I think he's looked good, but not that good. City left it to the last minute in the hope of getting money off, threatening to walk away from the deal, whilst we stood firm. In the end they had to pay a British record fee and we couldn't turn that down.

I do feel like people are sleeping on Barco and how good he can be, he now has until at least January to get his mins up and show what he can do. I'm also not as low on James in midfield as some are, especially as we haven't seen much / any of him alongside Caicedo this season, in this system.

02 Sep 2026 10:47:55
J, I always enjoy your posts and thanks for them. Losing Fernandez without replacing him with quality was the problem. He, together with Cucurella and Joao Pedro, were surely our top 3 players last year, and two have left, and both could tackle and defend - even if EF, not very pacey, read the game quite well - and provide quite a few critical goals and assists. I had hoped we would get a replacement who could perhaps particularly offer defensive awareness and tackling strength. Camara's stats and physicality v impressive in these respects - and a bit of a Kante feel to him perhaps - and would have been hugely helpful, particularly as neither Rogers nor Palmer offer much defensively, and we need a very solid double pivot behind them to win the ball and keep some possession.

Kone very strong too in midfield. Either would have strengthened our strength in depth in the CM position, offering a lot both in defense and transition to our potent front three.

But yes, I did think Barco v Luton demonstrated a bit of what we need in this respect, though perhaps not quite the tackling strength, and he was dispossessed a couple of times. He may well be our best bet to fill in if one or other of Lavia or Caicedo not fit. James a better bet than Gusto. Yes, and possibility of planning to get in a reinforcement in January.

02 Sep 2026 11:04:51
Cucurella was definitely one of our better players, but where would he play in this system? I don't see him as either a WB or wide CB in a three. If Palestra plays LWB, there's an argument that he's an upgrade in this system over Cucurella. Some would argue that, as a WB, Pep Chavarria is an upgrade too.

Same with Fernandez, from a CM point of view he's at his best in a three. His lack of mobility is highlighted when playing the double pivot. He was at his best for us in a more advanced, inside left role, from which he picked up the important goals.

In that regard, you could almost consider Rogers as a replacement - personally I'd take that, especially as Rogers cost less than Fernandez.

We've upgraded at GK, CB, WB, AM, and Joao Pedro's ST support cast is much better. Yes, we need to find a top tier CM to partner Caicedo in the double pivot, but that shouldn't take the shine off a very positive window, at least not too much. We were never going to be the finished article after one window.

02 Sep 2026 11:40:19
You make some very good points, J, and I much look forward to seeing Palestra in the EPL as a wing back.

Do you/we know when he is likely to be fit?

One question to you is, who beyond Lavia and Caicedo - not sure when he will be fit, and we know Lavia's injury history, and Henderson not fit either - apart from Barco and James among our squad, who would you have play in that double pivot if, say, James has a recurrence of injury problems too? Would there be a CB who could do this if needs be in an emergency? If so, which one? Josh? Or...?

02 Sep 2026 12:08:26
Hato would probably be my first choice if I didn't want to bring a youth team option. One thing I don't want to see again is Gusto there.

02 Sep 2026 12:44:06
Would agree on all counts.

02 Sep 2026 07:07:51
If some fans or posters choose to lay the blame for the Camara deal not happening at the door of our owners, that’s up to them, but from what I’m reading the fault is Monaco’s. The fact that the deal they were relying on to help them out financially and stopped the Camara deal happening also didn’t go through is, I guess, funny but didn’t help us.



Out of all this, I feel more sorry for the player who seems to be an innocent bystander. I would like to think it would have been a good move for the lad’s career. Of course it might have been good for us as well.

02 Sep 2026 07:39:15
{Ed's Note - Ed001 has posted a new article entitled, Matchday 2 - Quick Round Up

02 Sep 2026 00:29:57
A mate tells me that 21 players have left us in this window. Not all would have been for a fee but still that number seems remarkable.

02 Sep 2026 03:14:29
I am sure our balance sheet will look pretty good at the end of this window, Tom. Perhaps a British record in terms of how much was brought in in a single transfer window, and our owners will be pleased with that. And we did bring in some good players and ship out most we needed to, though more loans of some of the weaker ones than the sales we might have preferred.

But our midfield lacks depth, v concerning.

Why oh why did we take such a last minute risk over the absolutely crucial business of bringing in a replacement for Fernandez... leaving it to last minute in the day to try to do so. Obviously Monaco behaved appallingly - and Camara (a wonderful midfielder) must be gutted, as I feel at this disaster - but we left ourselves open to this mess by leaving no time at all to find an alternative other than cancelling our sale of EF to City.



To do really well now, Lavia and Caicedo have both to be fit for us all season. A big ask given Caicedo breaking down v Brighton and Lavia's injury record. Henderson may see more action than expected or we'd have wanted. Barco played much more and looked pretty good versus Luton at least. Essugo loaned, of course, and Santos sold. Looks like we'll see more of either Gusto or James in midfield? Help!

Still I will still hope Alonso can get us a 4th to 6th finish this season. Higher if L and C fit for most of it perhaps... and if we can, we must surely try to line up a quality midfield reinforcement for January.

City fans and those of other clubs will be laughing at what happened to us tonight.

02 Sep 2026 06:17:49
JBS, It's not through lack of effort that we haven't signed at least one more midfield player. We now have to go with what we have. Barco and others will now get more mins than they probably expected. It's up to them to step up to the plate.



I personally don't worry about other clubs laughing at us. City fans should be happy that we stuck with the agreement to sell them Fernandez when we apparently could have pulled the plug.

02 Sep 2026 09:04:52
Well, City should be glad that we honoured our deal, Tom, but I will admit that the side which now has the two Enzos I possibly wish least well than any other this season now!

02 Sep 2026 09:43:18
Sorry, Tom. Might not have been a lack of effort, but it seems like very poor planning. Even if we had signed Camara, it would have been done whilst scrambling around last second. The club were aware Enzo was going to leave 1 way or another and had plenty of time.

02 Sep 2026 14:49:24
Kaz, the EF saga was a risky game, and, posting from my head rather than my heart, I am not convinced the club actually believed they could get over £120m for Fernandez from City. If we had signed a replacement, I think City would have lowballed any offer, knowing we probably needed to sell.
Clubs/owners, players, and probably managers have all changed their minds at the last minute when it comes to transfers.

I do think Monaco acted unprofessionally. If the deal was subject to another deal not going through, why not make that clear and sign the deal sheet anyway on a "just in case" basis.
I truly feel sorry for Camara. He has been the innocent party in this sorry saga.

02 Sep 2026 18:07:11
Again tho Tom, Id rather have taken 90m for Enzo and had a player in... What happens on the pitch is always my only concern with the club, and we are in a less than ideal position till at least January.

02 Sep 2026 19:15:28
Kaz, I understand that position, and I can empathise with it, but the club has a duty to all its shareholders to maximise its earnings potential. Maybe there is an argument that short term financial loss could be a good thing for long term gain and winning trophies.



In this case, I truly think the club believed it had the bases covered. They got let down, these things happen. I hope lessons have been learned.

02 Sep 2026 21:14:49
Valentin Barco last season:

9 assists - 1st for Strasbourg

69 chances created - 1st for Strasbourg

23 big chances created - 1st for Strasbourg

1, 800 accurate passes - 1st for Strasbourg

177 ball recoveries - 1st for Strasbourg

21 completed through-balls in Ligue 1 - 1st in the league and at least 12 more than any other player.

JBS, When one door closes another one opens matey, try not to be too downbeat.

02 Sep 2026 21:44:42
If the club took 90m for Enzo, you would have been the first on here slatting the owners for wanting 120m and getting 90m.

Can't win.

03 Sep 2026 10:15:21
Finchy, spot on mate.