⚽ Football Transfers Speculation, Odds and Predictions

[shogun47]

But hey this is Chelsea and don't get too weird about it because we've also seen absurd transfers from Mudryk before so why feel weird when they dare to pay a high price for Cole Palmer
He is indeed still one of the pretty good young players for Manchester City especially when he became the winner in the European Super Cup which made his name a little glimpsed.
The deal happened very quickly and it seems that Chelsea did not want to waste time in the remaining time they have at this time especially since the transfer season will be closed in a few days so that even this big offer was immediately agreed by Chelsea.

Chelsea are known for their hugh spending on young players who ate yet to deliver in their perspective clubs. Spending £45million on Cole Palmer is a ridiculous price for a young player who's still developing and gaining experience in football. I guessed Todd Boehly knows what he needs and he's ready to function good moves for the blues, he's ultimate aim is to strengthened the squad, make Stamford Bridge a home for streak winnings and lifting of significant titles, all this doesn't come by a twinkle of an eye, energy should be settled and mapping out crucial plans should be executed.

We get it, Chelsea is like the Hugh Hefner of football. They spend a lot of money on young players like it's a VIP party. But who can really blame them? Spending £45 million on Cole Palmer seems crazy to me, but I'm sure Todd Boehly thinks it's a great idea. He wants Stamford Bridge to be full of wins and prizes

On the other hand, let's be real. You can't just give the team money and expect them to get along. Don't you remember how bad it hurt to lose to West Ham? This shows that spending money doesn't mean you'll win, at least not right away. I have to say, though, that it's very unfair of us to criticize Boehly's plan while some of us salivate over Brighton's loan deal with Barcelona for Ansu Fati. No, they aren't the same, but I think you understand what I mean

Lol, if I had a merit to give you would have received one for your Hugh Hefner analogy!

I definitely think you are correct that more ingredients are need than just money. While I sometimes think that there is only so much a coach can do when the team sucks, I do believe that Chelsea or PSG with the money they invested or are still willing to invest, would be way better than they have been with Guardiola sitting on their bench. I really believe that. He has this little extra to keep his players pumping at full efficiency and maximum effort. It's a very rare thing that one of his teams ever fell apart during a game. And I think he has a much better understanding of how to build a squad compared to most of the other coaches. Would you agree or do you think Chelsea and PSG would have been all the same with Guardiola coaching them (all else equal)?

[Ayers]

Fenerbahce are once again in the midst of a busy transfer window. Fenerbahce are likely to sign Alfredo Morelos, former teammate of Ryan Kent from Rangers. Fenerbahce, in need of a striker in case Michy Batshuayi leaves, are planning to replace Batshuayi with Morelos. The player arrived in Istanbul yesterday to speed up transfer talks. In case of his possible transfer to Fenerbahce, I don't think there is anyone who doesn't think like me that he and his former teammate Ryan Kent will be a good fit together. Apart from the transfer of these two players, Crespo is also expected to leave the team. Fenerbahçe, who will not pay Morelos a fee, plans to buy a number "6" player with the fee money from both Crespo and Batshuayi. This is likely to be Arsenal's Thomas Partey.

Fenerbahce is definitely very busy in the transfer market. They are definitely trying to bring in good changes in the squad. But if the changes are going to be good or not, we will find out later.

Alfredo Morelos has shown decent performance in recent times. But I don’t know if replacing Batshuayi with him is going to be a good idea or not. I am pretty skeptical about this decision.

I am actually really interested to see how much money they are going to spend on Thomas Partey. He is already 30 years old. I believe he has been approached by a few clubs already. But I heard that he was not sure if he was going to move out from Arsenal or not. That’s what I have heard but I could definitely be wrong.

[Lordhermes]

But hey this is Chelsea and don't get too weird about it because we've also seen absurd transfers from Mudryk before so why feel weird when they dare to pay a high price for Cole Palmer
He is indeed still one of the pretty good young players for Manchester City especially when he became the winner in the European Super Cup which made his name a little glimpsed.
The deal happened very quickly and it seems that Chelsea did not want to waste time in the remaining time they have at this time especially since the transfer season will be closed in a few days so that even this big offer was immediately agreed by Chelsea.

Chelsea are known for their hugh spending on young players who ate yet to deliver in their perspective clubs. Spending £45million on Cole Palmer is a ridiculous price for a young player who's still developing and gaining experience in football. I guessed Todd Boehly knows what he needs and he's ready to function good moves for the blues, he's ultimate aim is to strengthened the squad, make Stamford Bridge a home for streak winnings and lifting of significant titles, all this doesn't come by a twinkle of an eye, energy should be settled and mapping out crucial plans should be executed.

We get it, Chelsea is like the Hugh Hefner of football. They spend a lot of money on young players like it's a VIP party. But who can really blame them? Spending £45 million on Cole Palmer seems crazy to me, but I'm sure Todd Boehly thinks it's a great idea. He wants Stamford Bridge to be full of wins and prizes

On the other hand, let's be real. You can't just give the team money and expect them to get along. Don't you remember how bad it hurt to lose to West Ham? This shows that spending money doesn't mean you'll win, at least not right away. I have to say, though, that it's very unfair of us to criticize Boehly's plan while some of us salivate over Brighton's loan deal with Barcelona for Ansu Fati. No, they aren't the same, but I think you understand what I mean

Lol, if I had a merit to give you would have received one for your Hugh Hefner analogy!

I definitely think you are correct that more ingredients are need than just money. While I sometimes think that there is only so much a coach can do when the team sucks, I do believe that Chelsea or PSG with the money they invested or are still willing to invest, would be way better than they have been with Guardiola sitting on their bench. I really believe that. He has this little extra to keep his players pumping at full efficiency and maximum effort. It's a very rare thing that one of his teams ever fell apart during a game. And I think he has a much better understanding of how to build a squad compared to most of the other coaches. Would you agree or do you think Chelsea and PSG would have been all the same with Guardiola coaching them (all else equal)?

My happiness is that you all are seeing how Europe clubs are spending huge amount of money on players that are yet to play in a tough Europe competition none won any. Yet the media are quite and are okey by it. But if the Saudi Arabia pro league bought with same amount the Media will criticize them. Chelsea will end of not using them, wasted investment.

[nara1892]

According to Mail, Al-Ittihad are preparing an offer worth £118m for Mohamed Salah.

But I don't see a way to convince Liverpool for now. Because they are still determined not to let him go in this transfer window. It hasn't been a long time since they signed a contract extension with him. Probably they just want to keep him at least for one season. When there is one year on his contract then Liverpool can start leaning towards selling him rather than releasing him for free. I guess that Al-Ittihad would continue to improve their offer until the transfer window closes in Saudi Arabia (which is on September 20).  

Well right, so far I see Al Ittihad is still insistent on being able to get approval from Liverpool regarding Mohammad Salah, although on the other hand Liverpool itself has stated several times that it will not sell the player. As we know Mohammad Salah is one of the important players for Liverpool and he is one of the perfections that Klopp has in every match, you could say he is the spearhead that Liverpool has like Kane at Tottenham. No Mohammad Salah means it will be a problem for Liverpool's front line, therefore as you said not long ago Mohammad Salah has extended his contract there. True, I also heard that Al Ittihad is ready to pour money around 100 million + 50 million euros just to be able to bring in the Egyptian striker, honestly this is a very fantastic amount, and if Klopp approves his departure then that means Mohammad Salah will become the most expensive player in the history of Saudi Arabia.

Most clubs don't want their players to leave as free agents, because obviously it's a big loss for them, but I can't think that Liverpool have turned down this fantastic amount. Apart from that as I mentioned above that Mohammad Salah is an important player there so Klopp will not act rashly in selling him, and as you said maybe Liverpool will sell him when the player is nearing the end of his contract, because obviously in that position they will take advantage of any opportunity to minimize so that the player does not leave as a free agent.

[Unsoldier]

45 million for Cole Palmer is just basically "we have so much money that we wouldn't even discuss anything under 20 and would rather keep the player and lose him after his contract is over" level. Cole Palmer doesn't worth 45 million, nowhere near that level, the inflation in football is seriously getting insane. We are going to start talking about just 50 million and up soon, nothing lower than that. This is hurting all the other nations who can't spend this much, it just doesn't make sense. I feel like he would worth somewhere around 20-25 million range, I would sort of understand 30 million but I can't really understand the situation being 45 million, maybe more than 50 with bonuses, that's WAAAAY too much.

Palmer is a talented guy, but he's only 21 years old. He's only played three games in the EPL for the main squad (and he's made 16 other substitute appearances). Palmer hasn't even played 500 minutes in the EPL. Why Chelsea bought Palmer for €45 million is a mystery to me. Tottenham bought Maddison and Liverpool bought Mac Allister for the same money this summer.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

Salah is going nowhere, it’s too late to find suitable replacements. No team will let their star player(s) leave this late in the transfer window. I think this Saudi Salah bid is a PR stunt. They have no intention of making a serious move.


This move might have legs though ———>

@FabrizioRomano
Understand Liverpool have confirmed to Bayern they’ve official bid ready to be submitted for Ryan Gravenberch 🚨🔴 #LFC

Clubs in contact since Monday, formal process will start once Bayern will give green light as they need replacement.

Gravenberch wants Liverpool move.
https://x.com/fabrizioromano/status/1697196155841507503

[tiCeR]

45 million for Cole Palmer is just basically "we have so much money that we wouldn't even discuss anything under 20 and would rather keep the player and lose him after his contract is over" level. Cole Palmer doesn't worth 45 million, nowhere near that level, the inflation in football is seriously getting insane. We are going to start talking about just 50 million and up soon, nothing lower than that. This is hurting all the other nations who can't spend this much, it just doesn't make sense. I feel like he would worth somewhere around 20-25 million range, I would sort of understand 30 million but I can't really understand the situation being 45 million, maybe more than 50 with bonuses, that's WAAAAY too much.

Palmer is a talented guy, but he's only 21 years old. He's only played three games in the EPL for the main squad (and he's made 16 other substitute appearances). Palmer hasn't even played 500 minutes in the EPL. Why Chelsea bought Palmer for €45 million is a mystery to me. Tottenham bought Maddison and Liverpool bought Mac Allister for the same money this summer.

Woah, up until I have read your post here I didn't look into the details and whether Palmer is really worth the money, but this is quite surprising. We have seen similar super deals when very young talents were extremely expensive, but usually they had some sort of achievements to present. It reminds me of Renato Sanchez who cost €35m when he was bought by Bayern Munich when he was 19 years old. But the reason back then was that he played a strong European championship, which then kind of makes sense because several clubs had their eyes on him.

But €45 million seems like a lot to me given that he played less than 500 minutes in the Premier League. This is at best another coin toss by Chelsea, but who cares when they have the money and everyone is happy. I am sure Palmer is still surprised by the salary he is now getting.

[rdluffy]

Source

The other day I posted here about Coutinho (ex-Barcelona) and now Aston Villa. He was supposedly going to Qatari soccer, but it seems the deal is not done yet.
His new destination seems to be Betis (Spain), with a loan with an option to buy.
The amount would be the 20 million euros that Aston Villa had paid Barcelona
Source

In my opinion, even if he earns less (he probably will), it's a great deal for the player, he might be able to play better in an average team in Spain than in the Premier league
Betis could also take advantage of the player who has a lot of experience but have no place in his current team
It seems like a good deal for both

[Juggy777]

45 million for Cole Palmer is just basically "we have so much money that we wouldn't even discuss anything under 20 and would rather keep the player and lose him after his contract is over" level. Cole Palmer doesn't worth 45 million, nowhere near that level, the inflation in football is seriously getting insane. We are going to start talking about just 50 million and up soon, nothing lower than that. This is hurting all the other nations who can't spend this much, it just doesn't make sense. I feel like he would worth somewhere around 20-25 million range, I would sort of understand 30 million but I can't really understand the situation being 45 million, maybe more than 50 with bonuses, that's WAAAAY too much.

Palmer is a talented guy, but he's only 21 years old. He's only played three games in the EPL for the main squad (and he's made 16 other substitute appearances). Palmer hasn't even played 500 minutes in the EPL. Why Chelsea bought Palmer for €45 million is a mystery to me. Tottenham bought Maddison and Liverpool bought Mac Allister for the same money this summer.

Woah, up until I have read your post here I didn't look into the details and whether Palmer is really worth the money, but this is quite surprising. We have seen similar super deals when very young talents were extremely expensive, but usually they had some sort of achievements to present. It reminds me of Renato Sanchez who cost €35m when he was bought by Bayern Munich when he was 19 years old. But the reason back then was that he played a strong European championship, which then kind of makes sense because several clubs had their eyes on him.

But €45 million seems like a lot to me given that he played less than 500 minutes in the Premier League. This is at best another coin toss by Chelsea, but who cares when they have the money and everyone is happy. I am sure Palmer is still surprised by the salary he is now getting.

@tiCer Chelsea is playing an extremely dangerous game and if it works for them then they’ll easily get solid ROI for their transfer policy however the chances of it failing are pretty high. Furthermore Manchester City must be laughing at this transfer because no one would have paid so much for him and this is a pretty good deal from their perspective.

[Razmirraz]

HE WERE GO!

Ansu Fati can now realize his dream of playing in the Premier League, Brighton moved quickly in the hunt for Ansu Fati, Brighton movement was successful in overtaking Tottenham who were also interested in Ansu Fati. Brighton has given Barcelona and Ansu Fati more certainty than Tottenham, Fati loan deal has been approved by both teams until June 2024. The agreement that occurred did not include a permanent purchase option clause and most of the salary was covered by Brighton. Barcelona still believes in Ansu Fati abilities so they don't let him go permanently, Barcelona really hope that after Ansu Fati finishes his loan period with Brighton he can increase his ability to become Barcelona future project.

Previously, Barcelona had also released Lenglet to Aston Villa, Barcelona's strategy of releasing players worked perfectly, after this Barcelona might bring in Joao Felix to strengthen the front line.

[len01]

Well right, so far I see Al Ittihad is still insistent on being able to get approval from Liverpool regarding Mohammad Salah, although on the other hand Liverpool itself has stated several times that it will not sell the player. As we know Mohammad Salah is one of the important players for Liverpool and he is one of the perfections that Klopp has in every match, you could say he is the spearhead that Liverpool has like Kane at Tottenham. No Mohammad Salah means it will be a problem for Liverpool's front line, therefore as you said not long ago Mohammad Salah has extended his contract there. True, I also heard that Al Ittihad is ready to pour money around 100 million + 50 million euros just to be able to bring in the Egyptian striker, honestly this is a very fantastic amount, and if Klopp approves his departure then that means Mohammad Salah will become the most expensive player in the history of Saudi Arabia.

-snip

Liverpool are a little confused about whether to let go of an important player who is currently being offered a very high fee and I have a prediction that Liverpool will eventually let go of Mohamed Salah to move to Al Ittihad. TBH, I actually feel a little regretful if Liverpool really let Salah go because this player has had an important performance for Liverpool in the history of joining this team, always making a good contribution. so if Liverpool releases Mohamed Salah this team will have to appear strong without key players.

[naira]

Liverpool are a little confused about whether to let go of an important player who is currently being offered a very high fee and I have a prediction that Liverpool will eventually let go of Mohamed Salah to move to Al Ittihad. TBH, I actually feel a little regretful if Liverpool really let Salah go because this player has had an important performance for Liverpool in the history of joining this team, always making a good contribution. so if Liverpool releases Mohamed Salah this team will have to appear strong without key players.

If Liverpool releases Mo Salah to Al Ittihad, it will clearly be a big loss and will also make Liverpool's attack line dull. Without Mo Salah it is not the right decision, Mo Salah still has a role that cannot be replaced. Liverpool is currently honing Nunez abilities. However, Nunez was still able to move freely because Mo Salah opened up wide space in the opponent's defense. Releasing Mo Salah would be the same as bringing Liverpool's performance down. Again asking Mo Salah himself, is he really after money rather than his career, which is currently clearly better in Europe? Apart from that, not only Mo Salah's career, his reputation is also still more productive than other strikers.

[Docnaster]

45 million for Cole Palmer is just basically "we have so much money that we wouldn't even discuss anything under 20 and would rather keep the player and lose him after his contract is over" level. Cole Palmer doesn't worth 45 million, nowhere near that level, the inflation in football is seriously getting insane. We are going to start talking about just 50 million and up soon, nothing lower than that. This is hurting all the other nations who can't spend this much, it just doesn't make sense. I feel like he would worth somewhere around 20-25 million range, I would sort of understand 30 million but I can't really understand the situation being 45 million, maybe more than 50 with bonuses, that's WAAAAY too much.

Palmer is a talented guy, but he's only 21 years old. He's only played three games in the EPL for the main squad (and he's made 16 other substitute appearances). Palmer hasn't even played 500 minutes in the EPL. Why Chelsea bought Palmer for €45 million is a mystery to me. Tottenham bought Maddison and Liverpool bought Mac Allister for the same money this summer.

Cole Palmer's 45 million pounds transfer deal I think was too outrageous for a player of his status but considering his potentials, he could end up to become one of the best players in the English Premier League thereby making his transfer fee a bargain to Chelsea.
We've seen young players of his age leave their boyhood clubs and goes on to become great player and we've also seen young talents like him who ends up as flops to their team and I think the young Englishman will have a spell at Chelsea

[tiCeR]

Woah, up until I have read your post here I didn't look into the details and whether Palmer is really worth the money, but this is quite surprising. We have seen similar super deals when very young talents were extremely expensive, but usually they had some sort of achievements to present. It reminds me of Renato Sanchez who cost €35m when he was bought by Bayern Munich when he was 19 years old. But the reason back then was that he played a strong European championship, which then kind of makes sense because several clubs had their eyes on him.

But €45 million seems like a lot to me given that he played less than 500 minutes in the Premier League. This is at best another coin toss by Chelsea, but who cares when they have the money and everyone is happy. I am sure Palmer is still surprised by the salary he is now getting.

@tiCer Chelsea is playing an extremely dangerous game and if it works for them then they’ll easily get solid ROI for their transfer policy however the chances of it failing are pretty high. Furthermore Manchester City must be laughing at this transfer because no one would have paid so much for him and this is a pretty good deal from their perspective.

That is true if you look at the Palmer transfer as a singe event on their balance sheet. If it's a hit, there could be an ROI indeed. But Chelsea's policy is more like paying a too high price for 15 players, 2 of them make it and can even increase their value, and Chelsea goes home with a massive minus in the books.

You can always say that for one transfer giving it a shot could work out, but no matter how you twist and turn it, this transfer policy is doomed to fail ROI-wise. Or maybe Todd Boehly and his investment group has a strategy that is not obvious to me, but I wonder what that could be.

When clubs from Saudi Arabia do this, it's obvious that it has to do with green washing. But when an investment group like Boehly's does it, I have no idea how they could reap any financial benefits from it ever.

[Queentoshi]

Cole Palmer's 45 million pounds transfer deal I think was too outrageous for a player of his status but considering his potentials, he could end up to become one of the best players in the English Premier League thereby making his transfer fee a bargain to Chelsea.
We've seen young players of his age leave their boyhood clubs and goes on to become great player and we've also seen young talents like him who ends up as flops to their team and I think the young Englishman will have a spell at Chelsea

Chelsea tried to sign Arsenal's Emile Smith Rowe, but Arsenal refused because they consider them a direct rival, maybe it why they have now turned their focus to Cole Palmer from Manchester city who is not a regular starter for the club and only an option for the manager of the club when Bernando Silva does not play well. Cole Palmer will not also be a regular player in Chelsea, he will share the position with other players, and there will be not champions league football for him with Chelsea, so that may discourage the deal from happening. But so far it looks like the deal is going to happen, maybe we will know in a few days' time.

[fuguebtc]

Am wondering why most strikers at the age of 32 would be hanging their boots when they still have alot to offer in terms of experience that the younger players can get a thing or two...

And for a skillful player like him, Saudi Arabia wouldn't be a bad idea just to make bank $$$ then call it a day...whatever is going on could be a decision made out of duress and don't believe he wanted this! If this is true, enjoy your retirement sir.

But are there any interests from Saudi Arabia clubs? It is hard to pin down what's going on in players mind also. Some players just don't like to move to Saudi Arabia and rather just choose to stay in European leagues so if there isn't any offers then player might choose to retire. It must be a really tough decision but he made it in the end. Wished could see him back at form like he used to in Chelsea days but guess we won't be seeing that now.

Arab clubs are also not insisting on Eden Hazard despite being a free transfer player but the way he doesn't like moving to Arabia so he decides to hang up his shoes.
Eden Hazard's youth has passed and he was the brightest when he was at Chelsea but his decision to move to Real Madrid made a complete change in addition to his long injury, maybe he was frustrated all this time? This is just my thought.  

I am pretty certain that he is retiring because his body has gone through a lot. And he also understands that he is probably going to get injured more and more if he continues to play.  Of course, if he wanted money, he would have moved to the Saudi league or the MLS. But he really wanted to care about his health. That’s why he decided to retire in my opinion.

I don’t know about the Saudi Arabia clubs, but I am pretty sure that he was approached by MLS. He was also approached by Ligue-1 clubs as far as I know. But he was sure that he wanted to retire. Considering his health, I will say that he made the right decision.

[Avirunes]

Cole Palmer's 45 million pounds transfer deal I think was too outrageous for a player of his status but considering his potentials, he could end up to become one of the best players in the English Premier League thereby making his transfer fee a bargain to Chelsea.
We've seen young players of his age leave their boyhood clubs and goes on to become great player and we've also seen young talents like him who ends up as flops to their team and I think the young Englishman will have a spell at Chelsea

Chelsea tried to sign Arsenal's Emile Smith Rowe, but Arsenal refused because they consider them a direct rival, maybe it why they have now turned their focus to Cole Palmer from Manchester city who is not a regular starter for the club and only an option for the manager of the club when Bernando Silva does not play well. Cole Palmer will not also be a regular player in Chelsea, he will share the position with other players, and there will be not champions league football for him with Chelsea, so that may discourage the deal from happening. But so far it looks like the deal is going to happen, maybe we will know in a few days' time.

Smith-Rowe is a talented player so I really had doubts from the beginning that Arsenal will sell him to their rival Chelsea. Also I am sure Arteta has plans for him. He can prove to be crucial for us later in the season. As for Palmer, I also have doubt on this one as earlier Guardiola has said that he is not in the market so I am sure there as well. City are not the type of team to be swayed away with big bids because it is not about money for them unlike other clubs.

[rendravolt]

Manchester City have reached an agreement with Chelsea for the transfer of Cole Palmer for a fee of £40 million plus add ons of £5 million. I don't understand what Manchester City was thinking by agreeing to the bid made by Chelsea for such a talented young player and we know that oftentimes Cole Palmer can be the key to victory when needed in an important game. What is clear is that Chelsea have now secured his services for quite a long time and Pochettino is certainly happy with the increase in depth in Chelsea's squad for this season. Cole Palmer will soon undergo a medical test in the near future and is just waiting for an official announcement from Chelsea.

Source: https://twitter.com/FabrizioRomano/status/1696936739481289016

If the transfer does happen, I'd say Chelsea made a good transfer because Palmer is 21 years old and a talented Englishman in the midfield. It is unlikely that he will be in the squad at Manchester City. Still, he could remain a good substitute for Manchester City, which plays in several tournaments at the same time. I wonder how he will perform if he goes to Chelsea.

Of course Chelsea are very satisfied with getting Cole Palmer but sometimes when a player chooses Chelsea as his new club it can be bad for his career development because we know that even though Chelsea have spent so many players they are still having trouble winning matches this season. Cole Palmer seems to want to gamble by choosing Chelsea and he doesn't want to stay at Manchester City just by being a reserve player. I'm also curious about how he will perform at Chelsea but what is clear is that Pochettino has to see the results when he trains with other Chelsea players before deciding on his place as a starter.

[Sim_card]

Would you agree or do you think Chelsea and PSG would have been all the same with Guardiola coaching them (all else equal)?

No they wouldn't be the same with their present form. Having money is another thing and how to spend and manage your money is another thing differently.
Gaurdiola is an expereience coach that knows what he needs,we have seen how he has converted Man city into a great club and the strongest presently because he has the skill and knowledge of doing that. PSG is a rich club also with Chelsea but the lack the quality of a good coach. Buying the right players at the right time is what matters alot. Chelsea will be doing better and might have even won EPL if it was Gaurdiola that was their coach,same with PSG. Behind every successful club there must be a great coach and not money. Though.money can turn things around but that is when there is a good manager to make it happen.

[QueenVera]

Would you agree or do you think Chelsea and PSG would have been all the same with Guardiola coaching them (all else equal)?

No they wouldn't be the same with their present form. Having money is another thing and how to spend and manage your money is another thing differently.
Gaurdiola is an expereience coach that knows what he needs,we have seen how he has converted Man city into a great club and the strongest presently because he has the skill and knowledge of doing that. PSG is a rich club also with Chelsea but the lack the quality of a good coach. Buying the right players at the right time is what matters alot. Chelsea will be doing better and might have even won EPL if it was Gaurdiola that was their coach,same with PSG. Behind every successful club there must be a great coach and not money. Though.money can turn things around but that is when there is a good manager to make it happen.

I think Chelsea or PSG would had been better with a coach like Pep Guardiola because he's a kind of coach that could transform any team into one of the best within a short period of time if given the right backings, he's proved it over the years and even with his current team Manchester City who are currently the strongest team in EPL and current Champions League holders, there are some coaches you'll backup with funds and support but they'll end up recruiting the wrong players that doesn't suit their system but Pep knows how to recruit players that suits his style and pattern of football and transform them into quality stars, he's highly experienced in building a team that could challenge any other top clubs across Europe and that's what makes him very outstanding.
 Both Chelsea and PSG are clubs with rich owner and are financially stable of giving Pep the right backings he needs imagine if it was Pep that coached PSG when they had, Messi, Neymar, Mbappé, Sergio Ramos and other top class players in their team, surely they would had won the champions league or even played in the finals.