22 Dec 2015 01:20:17
It's almost a certainty that we will lose Stones in July, at this time Chelsea need a c/back, we desperatly need a new keeper, so would take 40m, plus their 2nd string keeper for stones, very good keeper, proven at stoke, plus I guess he would rather be playing than keeping the bench warm. Surley, this is a win win for everyone.

1.) 22 Dec 2015
22 Dec 2015 06:54:28
Not sure how that is win win?

2.) 22 Dec 2015
22 Dec 2015 07:48:55
I like the idea myself, probably could push the cash a bit upwards though but would love him as our new keeper, can't see it happening though, we all know he will still be our keeper next year, God help us if he is.

3.) 22 Dec 2015
22 Dec 2015 08:22:00
I don't really understand why we would sell Stones after this year, he is the future of Everton next captain and England captain! We said no this year, why say yes next summer, also if he has a good Euros the big European clubs will be after him and £40 sounds low if David Luiz made £50k and he's a poor defender!
Sorry guys stop selling the crown jewels!

4.) 22 Dec 2015
22 Dec 2015 10:29:39
wakka I know its hard to take in but our max wage is 75k, Chelsea would pay him 200k, money talks, its tough I know but that's the way it is, unless we get a billionaire next year Stones will be gone by the start of the next season, we can cry all we want about loyalty and does he need the extra money but that's the world we live in.

5.) 22 Dec 2015
22 Dec 2015 10:45:46
if it is the case then Murf we should hold out until after the Euros and get as much as poss, I believe the likes of Barca, Bayern and Real will join the queue!

6.) 22 Dec 2015
22 Dec 2015 11:28:12
I agree Wakka, its crap the way it works out for smaller clubs like us but we have no control over this as the money is just ridiculous now, I would love him to get snapped up by the super clubs like Barcelona and RM as you couldn't ever hold that against any player, would hate it if he went to Chelski though but don't think that will happen niw, probably Utd bound.

7.) 22 Dec 2015
22 Dec 2015 11:48:28
To put things in perspective I have just had a couple of young Chelsea footballers in looking at £100k cars just shows the difference and they are not first team players!

8.) 22 Dec 2015
22 Dec 2015 20:08:00
So we're now a small club? When did that happen?

9.) 22 Dec 2015
22 Dec 2015 21:55:52
woburn if you are referring to my comment then smaller club and small club have two entirely different meanings.

10.) 22 Dec 2015
22 Dec 2015 23:01:56
We have a bad stadium, bad fans, bad manager, no trophies in over 20 years, no money and are not going to win anything anytime soon and with the lack of investment from the board and no new stadium, things are only going to get worse. Definition of a small club.

11.) 23 Dec 2015
23 Dec 2015 00:25:08
That is not the definition of a small club. Go to the away games then tell me we have bad fans. Yes we haven't won anything in 20 years, yet we still get 30,000 plus crowds. I'm old enough to remember when Chelsea were an average club, and United got relegated, and do know what, their support went missing. They are were they are due to individuals pumping millions into them, no other reason. Supporters are transient these days and so only follow clubs that are challenging or winning cups. You only have to look at City to see that. We have a fan base that follows the club through thick and thin, and from a city that has two premiership clubs that is no mean achievement. And unless you have a crystal ball my friend, you have no idea how things are going to go. Just look at Leicester.

12.) 23 Dec 2015
23 Dec 2015 00:57:10
In financial we are a small club you can talk past trophys and prestige but in were in a similar position as Liverpool with Suarez both had ambition to leave with big teams interested it's natural in foitball.