Transfer Rumour Thread Season 2021/22

[Monty13 2,229]

2 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

…probably not for long!

Haha true, still definitely another pull, even if he only gets 6 games. I’m not sure he’s a nailed on starter every week for us come end of the window.

[Branston Pickle 3,638]

It’s an interesting one - there’d presumably be a pull for him to go back to Rangers and play under Gerrard….but career wise and bringing his game on more, you’d think it would be much better playing in the PL than what is ultimately Championship-standard football other than the odd game. 

Edited June 26, 2021 by Branston Pickle

[Alex Moss 2,165]

48 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

If he is career minded, he will opt for us and playing in the highest quality league possible.  However you look at the SPL, the standard of football is way lower.  If he is not career minded he will opt for the SPL.

I don’t think by going to Rangers means he’s not career minded, Lakey. There’s many other factors that will weigh in with the fact that he’d be playing men’s football week in week out for a big club in that division. Lots of talented youngsters take loans in lesser or lower divisions, and some even go as low as Ipswich on rare occasions. He seems like he’s got his head screwed on to me, and with my yellow and green glasses I see him choosing us, but taking them off then I can see the draw of playing senior football for the club he loves - it would be foolish to discount them (not saying you are).

[cornish sam 947]

3 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

It’s an interesting one - there’d presumably be a pull for him to go back to Rangers and play under Gerrard….but career wise you’d think it would be much better playing in the PL than what is ultimately Championship-standard football other than the odd game. 

I think that it's a bit one eyed of us to say this, career wise he would be going to play in front of 60000 each week in a pressure cooker environment, it's perfect preparation for playing week in week out for Chelsea. In a way the quality of opponent is far less important, if Chelsea have faith in his ability it's his mentality that needs to be proven and hardened

[Newtopia 517]

1 hour ago, lake district canary said:

If he is career minded, he will opt for us and playing in the highest quality league possible.  However you look at the SPL, the standard of football is way lower.  If he is not career minded he will opt for the SPL.

Being Scottish and winning trophies must be attractive to him.  From a development perspective I would assume a tough premiership season would toughen him up more than steam rollering your way through games.  Equally winning bling is pretty attractive, and why most people play.

[Indy 3,286]

I can’t believe people are questioning Rangers being a worse career choice than here, what planet are they on! Yes Scottish football is certainly not at the level of the EPL, but rangers have 50,000 when allowed back, will be challenging for the title and will be playing Champions League football! I think Gilmour might fancy chance winning trophies instead of fighting for survival!

 

[Alex Moss 2,165]

1 minute ago, Newtopia said:

Being Scottish and winning trophies must be attractive to him.  From a development perspective I would assume a tough premiership season would toughen him up more than steam rollering your way through games.  Equally winning bling is pretty attractive, and why most people play.

The more I think about it, the more I can see him thinking this is my big chance to win a league trophy and medal with the club I support. That I would imagine will almost certainly be one of his footballing bucket list dreams ticked off, so Ranger’s will be a massive draw, make no mistake. I think we’ve got a real battle on our hands for his signature now, I really do.

[Branston Pickle 3,638]

18 minutes ago, cornish sam said:

I think that it's a bit one eyed of us to say this, career wise he would be going to play in front of 60000 each week in a pressure cooker environment, it's perfect preparation for playing week in week out for Chelsea. In a way the quality of opponent is far less important, if Chelsea have faith in his ability it's his mentality that needs to be proven and hardened

He wouldn’t be, though - the only pressure cooker environment there is when Rangers play Celtic, the rest is pretty crap and I say that as someone who’s been to several games up there over the years. 
I suppose he goes where he goes - I’m not that bothered where it is tbh but for me the right move is stay at Chelsea or play elsewhere in the PL. Scotland is a backward step.

Edited June 26, 2021 by Branston Pickle

[TheGoogler 324]

46 minutes ago, Alex Moss said:

The more I think about it, the more I can see him thinking this is my big chance to win a league trophy and medal with the club I support. That I would imagine will almost certainly be one of his footballing bucket list dreams ticked off, so Ranger’s will be a massive draw, make no mistake. I think we’ve got a real battle on our hands for his signature now, I really do.

Spot on.

But if he does choose Rangers, he chooses Rangers. It's not a big deal.

[markdmhoward 74]

2 hours ago, chicken said:

All the reports say that our interest in him cooled, not the other way around. That happened almost straight after we signed Rashica. As I asked before, which hasn't been answered, who would go to make space for him?

In those positions we have Rashica, Cantwell, Dowell, Hernandez, Placheta and Martin. As we play a 4-2-3-1 I suppose we also need to consider that both Rupp and McLean have been used in the No.10 role as well. I have left out Sinani as the suggestion is another loan for him this season.

Would we be keeping all of those players AND adding Berghuis AND still be claiming at looking for a striker that can also play wide?

No idea dude if I'm honest! I'm just going off what I was told from someone in the know

[Nuff Said 5,092]

Everyone is talking like it’s Gilmour’s choice where he goes. He’ll get to express a preference I’m sure but at the end of the day what Tuchel wants will be what counts.

[cambridgeshire canary 6,680]

So any juciy new infomation leaking out of the grapevine today?

[chicken 2,605]

The Rangers Vs Norwich debate is odd.

Rangers offer a larger support, champions league football and titles in both the league and the cup. They also represent a bigger risk IMHO. In that if he doesn't succeed and have a good season then it will have a greater impact than if he struggles to have a good season with us.

There are pro's and cons and it will be down to Chelsea to decide which offer is best or whether more than one is acceptable and give him the choice.

If he is given the choice and chooses Rangers, you can hardly blame the lad. Just one of those things, we wouldn't want someone who's heart isn't in it anyway.

[Yella Army 57]

For Chelsea the biggest factor is the football and formations that the team he is loaned out to play as well as the quality of opposition they face.

 

Norwich I believe can offer all of this. Prem football, the right 'double six position and like to play it on the floor.

 

Rangers however will only offer a handful of tough fixtures, direct football and quality and I don't know about their formations etc.. 

 

Do Chelsea prefer the lad playing in the same league and position playing wise and on flat top quality football pitches. Or would they like him to chop it up on terrible football pitches against very below par midfielders and defenders of opposing sides. 

[dylanisabaddog 4,876]

12 hours ago, Yella Army said:

For Chelsea the biggest factor is the football and formations that the team he is loaned out to play as well as the quality of opposition they face.

 

Norwich I believe can offer all of this. Prem football, the right 'double six position and like to play it on the floor.

 

Rangers however will only offer a handful of tough fixtures, direct football and quality and I don't know about their formations etc.. 

 

Do Chelsea prefer the lad playing in the same league and position playing wise and on flat top quality football pitches. Or would they like him to chop it up on terrible football pitches against very below par midfielders and defenders of opposing sides. 

And Chelsea would need to get him back up to Premier League fitness levels on his return. Add that to everything above and I'd be amazed if Chelsea let him anywhere near Scotland. 

I watched a little Scottish football last season. It's a bit like Everton and Leeds playing against Championship sides every week. 

[cambridgeshire canary 6,680]

3 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

And Chelsea would need to get him back up to Premier League fitness levels on his return. Add that to everything above and I'd be amazed if Chelsea let him anywhere near Scotland. 

I watched a little Scottish football last season. It's a bit like Everton and Leeds playing against Championship sides every week. 

You really think Aberdeen and Dundee would survive in the championship?

[lake district canary 4,531]

15 hours ago, Nuff Said said:

Everyone is talking like it’s Gilmour’s choice where he goes. He’ll get to express a preference I’m sure but at the end of the day what Tuchel wants will be what counts.

In that case, he'll come to us.

[Ken Hairy 3,760]

37 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

And Chelsea would need to get him back up to Premier League fitness levels on his return. Add that to everything above and I'd be amazed if Chelsea let him anywhere near Scotland. 

I watched a little Scottish football last season. It's a bit like Everton and Leeds playing against Championship sides every week. 

Agreed, I'm amazed there's people on this post suggesting him going to Rangers is a step up from us because of 4 games v Celtic, and what is likely to be a couple of Champions League qualifiers, as opposed to a whole season of Premier league football. 

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557]

16 hours ago, Nuff Said said:

Everyone is talking like it’s Gilmour’s choice where he goes. He’ll get to express a preference I’m sure but at the end of the day what Tuchel wants will be what counts.

Tuchel won't be hugely involved in the decision, Chelsea have such a high turnover of managers they don't usually involve their current one too heavily in the decision making around youth players. Chelsea were the first club to employ loan managers (as they have a whole army of loan players every season) and the decision where Gilmour goes will be down to them.

I can see pluses and minuses for Chelsea for both Rangers and Norwich. It may come down to player preference as well as Chelsea obviously can't send Gilmour to a club he doesn't want to go to. Worth noting that Gilmour is a Rangers fan, so that might play into his thinking in some ways.

 

[Indy 3,286]

Can I just remind people again, Gilmour has only played in 11 senior games, he’s not had much experience other than youth level and I’m not sure we should be looking to see Gilmour as our loan option as I don’t think he’d be playing every week! I’d rather we get Skipp back with a full championship season under his belt, if we can

I know he’s talked about as a great prospect but do we really want to take a chance on loaning a very inexperienced 20 year old for a relegation fight in such a key area?

For me I think he’ll get more game time at Rangers than he will here.

Edited June 27, 2021 by Indy

[Badger 2,405]

14 minutes ago, Indy said:

Can I just remind people again, Gilmour has only played in 11 senior games, he’s not had much experience other than youth level and I’m not sure we should be looking to see Gilmour as our loan option as I don’t think he’d be playing every week! I’d rather we get Skipp back with a full championship season under his belt, if we can

I know he’s talked about as a great prospect but do we really want to take a chance on loaning a very inexperienced 20 year old for a relegation fight in such a key area?

For me I think he’ll get more game time at Rangers than he will here.

I tend to agree with Indy on this matter. I am sure that he is very talented with huge potential and will no doubt have some very good games next season. However, he has not played much senior football and to suddenly come in and be consistently good is a big ask. Our own youngsters did pretty well last time in the PL, but had had a full seasons experience of senior football before making the jump (as will Skipp).

On balance, I would like us to get him but won't be devastated if we don't.

[Captain Obvious 1]

I don't think Rangers are the pragmatic option for him. Yes, he'll get to play in the Champions League but how many games? And against what standard of opponent? Most teams in the Champions League are not Barcelona - they'll be playing in the qualifying stages, mostly against teams from leagues not much better or worse than Scotland. There's no guarantee they'll even make it to the group stages. Then in the league most weeks, he'll be playing against Championship-level opposition at best.

At least with us, he'll be playing a higher standard of opponent week-in week-out, and whilst he won't be playing in the Champions League, he'll get 10-12 games against Champions League group stage-level (and better) opposition.

[Yella Army 57]

46 minutes ago, Indy said:

Can I just remind people again, Gilmour has only played in 11 senior games, he’s not had much experience other than youth level and I’m not sure we should be looking to see Gilmour as our loan option as I don’t think he’d be playing every week! I’d rather we get Skipp back with a full championship season under his belt, if we can

I know he’s talked about as a great prospect but do we really want to take a chance on loaning a very inexperienced 20 year old for a relegation fight in such a key area?

For me I think he’ll get more game time at Rangers than he will here.

Have you seen this lad play? Before his terrible injury 2 seasons ago he came onto the scene and completely ran the show vs man city and Liverpool. 

He has then come back from injury and had limited time in the side but played very well when given the chance. He has then been thrown into the Euros with Scotland and albeit only one game, he was MOTM against England which is full of some of the best premier league players. This lad has on the several occasions he has played, been really bloody good against the very best teams in the world. 

 

I am shocked Chelsea are considering a loan move for him because he could comfortably play alongside Kante in their midfield next season. So to think that this lad could potentially play for Norwich on loan next year is an unbelievable prospect and would enhance our chances of survival considerably. 

My guess is that Webber and Farke have worked on this one for several months and put the work in on the negotiations with Chelsea well in advance. In fact I think we could well already have this one agreed in principle and we are simply awaiting for tues/weds next week to have him at Colney for a quick medical and him sign the dotted line and do his media pictures/video for the reveal of him signing a 1 season long loan deal.

 

Fingers crossed 🙂

[Alex Moss 2,165]

18 hours ago, Nuff Said said:

Everyone is talking like it’s Gilmour’s choice where he goes. He’ll get to express a preference I’m sure but at the end of the day what Tuchel wants will be what counts.

Probably because it will be Gilmour’s decision where he wants to go at the end of the day? Chelsea can’t force him to go anywhere. And looking at it without yellow and green specs, I think Rangers will be a far more enticing proposition for the player himself, rather than ourselves for all those good reasons already provided.

[Alex Moss 2,165]

2 hours ago, Ken Hairy said:

Agreed, I'm amazed there's people on this post suggesting him going to Rangers is a step up from us because of 4 games v Celtic, and what is likely to be a couple of Champions League qualifiers, as opposed to a whole season of Premier league football. 

As far as I can see, there isn’t anybody on this thread suggesting that it will be a step up just on the basis he will get to play Celtic. There are a multitude of reasons already stated why Rangers will be a big draw for him over Norwich, and that is why there’s a very real chance he will choose them. We can keep playing the offer of Premier League football til we’re blue in the face, but realistically, from his point of view, that’s all we’re likely offering him.

[Alex Moss 2,165]

1 hour ago, Indy said:

Can I just remind people again, Gilmour has only played in 11 senior games, he’s not had much experience other than youth level and I’m not sure we should be looking to see Gilmour as our loan option as I don’t think he’d be playing every week! I’d rather we get Skipp back with a full championship season under his belt, if we can

I know he’s talked about as a great prospect but do we really want to take a chance on loaning a very inexperienced 20 year old for a relegation fight in such a key area?

For me I think he’ll get more game time at Rangers than he will here.

He may only have had 11 senior games, but the fact he won man of the match against Liverpool and England suggests he’s no accident. In fact, imagine what this kid will be like if he plays 38 games for us next season? Even better I would imagine. If we could get him over the line then that would be another position filled that is not of relegation standard.

[Branston Pickle 3,638]

7 minutes ago, Alex Moss said:

He may only have had 11 senior games, but the fact he won man of the match against Liverpool and England suggests he’s no accident. In fact, imagine what this kid will be like if he plays 38 games for us next season? Even better I would imagine. If we could get him over the line then that would be another position filled that is not of relegation standard.

I thought Hanley was motm v England? I guess it depends what you read!  He was certainly in the ‘team of the round’.

Not to hark on about it, but I was under the impression Gilmour was a certainty from that itk person? I don’t see anything having changed, I’m pretty sure any interest from Rangers would not be new in the mix, but it is what it is - we’ll see next week.

Edited June 27, 2021 by Branston Pickle

[Alex Moss 2,165]

5 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

I thought Hanley won motm v England? I guess it depends what you read.

Not to hark on about it, but I was under the impression Gilmour was a certainty from that itk person? I don’t see anything having changed, I’m pretty sure interest from Rangers would not be new in the mix.

Rangers were rumoured on the ‘rumour sites’ but I’m inclined to take their interest far more seriously if the Pink’un lads are now reporting it, which they are.

Edit - can’t comment on the ‘ITK person’ as have not seen that mentioned. It was the Pink’un that suggested Gilmour was nearly done but that’s not what they’re saying now.

Edited June 27, 2021 by Alex Moss

[Branston Pickle 3,638]

I obviously saw a different report - motm is often different in different publications but perhaps Gilmour got the “official” one?  Odd then that he didn’t even make team of the round when Hanley did.

Re Rangers interest, it could just be akin to Leeds and Gunn, which didn’t actually amount to anything much.  I think the pinkun reported that, too. Obviously it could also be more/real this time 

Edited June 27, 2021 by Branston Pickle

[Alex Moss 2,165]

Just now, Branston Pickle said:

I obviously saw a different report - motm is often different but perhaps Gilmour got the “official” one?  Odd then that he didn’t even make team of the round. 

The official one is the only one that counts though, I didn’t think ‘team of the round’ is necessarily made up of just MOTM’s anyway so not that odd?