All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?
That's understandable given the wages Blackman is on and the length of his contract. Wilder is probably thinking I can pick up an equivalent keeper for half of his wages.
Yes, but can he? Moore is good enough for us but you should have two good keepers with a bit of experience, not just one.
That depends on how well we've sorted ourselves out, because I've got a feeling Henderson is going to be a revelation.
No I got that, I was being tentative but I mean- isn't it better to have a keeper that might get us promoted in 1 season than Blackman who might keep us where we are now for the next 3 or 4?
on the money!
The sh*t's really going to hit the fan when/if Blackman signs for the Dirties....
Because Blackman will get far more playing time at Leeds than at Chelsea.
It is absolutely the case that he will get game-time, as he did with us last season. But international keepers have to be mentally tough and full of confidence; there must be a danger that the message it builds up inside his head is that he is nowhere near good enough even to be a Premier League club's number 3, and that he is not as reliable as Caballero or Green. That thought is enough to knock any goalie's confidence.
Again, I accept all of that, but he still is along way away from being involved in Premier League football. I am having a go at the likes of Chelsea, really, in contrast with the way Pickford has been able to progress. Perhaps I need to move into the 'Unpopular opinions thread'!
Yes I also think you have misjudged the situation buddy. Chelsea basically run a nursery for footballers, and a player cannot grow if he doesn't play. Green is happy to pick up a last wage without playing, and eventually, Blackman will either make it with them, or he will be sold for big money, to more than pay for his development.
I don't doubt that it is good for Chelsea, but I really do not like it. I assume that their academy gets a crop of top kids every year, but how many have made it to the top in recent years? I can see that for the best 18-20 year-olds, a spell on loan gives them experience of grown-up football; but by 23/24, the best should be playing at the top, rather than being a cash-cow for already wealthy clubs. It is not good for English football, and it is not good for the individuals, in my opinion. Perhaps I just don't like Chelsea...
Agreed. And that is what I am instinctively suspicious of - taking small children into their system as a means of making money.
All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?
