Mason Burstow - on loan to Bolton from Hull (p53)

cafcfan1990 said:

Addick Addict said:

se9addick said:

CAFCBourne said:

SELR_addicks said:

1.6m in this day and age for a young talented forward is a joke. 

Rationalising the fee because of performances now removes the whole point of why Chelsea bought him. They bought him for the potential, not what hes offering now. 

If it's true that there were multiple clubs circling around Burstow, why did we sell him the first chance we got? 

Waiting until summer boosts his goal tally. Makes other clubs take notice and starts a bidding war for the whole of summer. 

It was a joke last night we've had em right over

Hopefully we base our transfer valuations on slightly more evidence than “last night”. 

Getting £1.6M from the European champions for a promising young striker is very poor business, that doesn’t change because he was part of a bad team performance last night. 

It's not getting £1.6m though is it? It's £1.6m plus add ons depending on how well he does. And if Burstow were to be valued on what he's achieved to date then (two goals in League 1) then he wouldn't be worth anything like that. Your argument is all based on "what if" scenarios -  "What if" he scored 

Yes. It's 1.6mil until the add ons kick in. Do you know what they are?

I don't but I believe that they were "standard". By that I took it to mean PL debut, reaching a certain number of appearances, making England debut etc etc. I would also assume that one of the add ons would be a sell on clause in the region of 20%. Burstow won't be worth appreciably more until such time as he is proven. That would be the same had he stayed with us. Difference is that we have some money now.

Cafc43v3r said:

The other way of looking at it is if we had signed him 2 weeks ago from Forest Green on the back of 2 goals for 1.6 million who would you say had who's pants down?

"We" only feel done over because it's a drop in the ocean for Chelsea.  If we had sold him to Burnley people wouldn't feel so hard done by. 

Depends on why you feel “hard done by”. I only feel annoyed because TS said we wouldn’t have to sell our best youngsters and that we would only sell Burstow for a substantial amount. It has the feeling that we were pretty quick to accept the first offer. 

cafcfan1990 said:

Cafc43v3r said:

The other way of looking at it is if we had signed him 2 weeks ago from Forest Green on the back of 2 goals for 1.6 million who would you say had who's pants down?

"We" only feel done over because it's a drop in the ocean for Chelsea.  If we had sold him to Burnley people wouldn't feel so hard done by. 

Depends on why you feel “hard done by”. I only feel annoyed because TS said we wouldn’t have to sell our best youngsters and that we would only sell Burstow for a substantial amount. It has the feeling that we were pretty quick to accept the first offer. 

Roland got a ton of abuse for selling Grant for a similar fee. A player who was out of contract in 6 months time. 

But Grant had scored 24 goals in his previous 47 games for us and Crawley. If we waited another year to sell Burstow we would be in the same position if he hadn't signed another contract in the interim as Grant refused to. And Burstow might not have been as prolific as Grant either.

The other aspect about all of this is this. Certain coaches at Charlton have suggested that he is a very good prospect. And that is what he is. No one can honestly say that he is a certainty to even start for us when everyone is fit. Yet, based on his transfer fee, he's worth five times Aneke and three times Stockley given what we paid for them and they are very much proven at this level.

Addick Addict said:

cafcfan1990 said:

Cafc43v3r said:

The other way of looking at it is if we had signed him 2 weeks ago from Forest Green on the back of 2 goals for 1.6 million who would you say had who's pants down?

"We" only feel done over because it's a drop in the ocean for Chelsea.  If we had sold him to Burnley people wouldn't feel so hard done by. 

Depends on why you feel “hard done by”. I only feel annoyed because TS said we wouldn’t have to sell our best youngsters and that we would only sell Burstow for a substantial amount. It has the feeling that we were pretty quick to accept the first offer. 

Roland got a ton of abuse for selling Grant for a similar fee. A player who was out of contract in 6 months time. 

But Grant had scored 24 goals in his previous 47 games for us and Crawley. If we waited another year to sell Burstow we would be in the same position if he hadn't signed another contract in the interim as Grant refused to. And Burstow might not have been as prolific as Grant either.

The other aspect about all of this is this. Certain coaches at Charlton have suggested that he is a very good prospect. And that is what he is. No one can honestly say that he is a certainty to even start for us when everyone is fit. Yet, based on his transfer fee, he's worth five times Aneke and three times Stockley given what we paid for them and they are very much proven at this level.

And how many before that? Burstow is scoring goals at 18, Grant wasn't. I accept Grant has different attributes and was stuck on the wing at times too. 

I stand by the point I was making. If Roland had authorised this sale he would be getting a lot more criticism than Sandgaard. To be honest, it's all irrelevant now, it's happened, the season is over either way and hopefully we get a few quid to have a real go next season. 

Cafc43v3r said:

cafcfan1990 said:

Addick Addict said:

cafcfan1990 said:

Cafc43v3r said:

The other way of looking at it is if we had signed him 2 weeks ago from Forest Green on the back of 2 goals for 1.6 million who would you say had who's pants down?

"We" only feel done over because it's a drop in the ocean for Chelsea.  If we had sold him to Burnley people wouldn't feel so hard done by. 

Depends on why you feel “hard done by”. I only feel annoyed because TS said we wouldn’t have to sell our best youngsters and that we would only sell Burstow for a substantial amount. It has the feeling that we were pretty quick to accept the first offer. 

Roland got a ton of abuse for selling Grant for a similar fee. A player who was out of contract in 6 months time. 

But Grant had scored 24 goals in his previous 47 games for us and Crawley. If we waited another year to sell Burstow we would be in the same position if he hadn't signed another contract in the interim as Grant refused to. And Burstow might not have been as prolific as Grant either.

The other aspect about all of this is this. Certain coaches at Charlton have suggested that he is a very good prospect. And that is what he is. No one can honestly say that he is a certainty to even start for us when everyone is fit. Yet, based on his transfer fee, he's worth five times Aneke and three times Stockley given what we paid for them and they are very much proven at this level.

And how many before that? Burstow is scoring goals at 18, Grant wasn't. I accept Grant has different attributes and was stuck on the wing at times too. 

I stand by the point I was making. If Roland had authorised this sale he would be getting a lot more criticism than Sandgaard. To be honest, it's all irrelevant now, it's happened, the season is over either way and hopefully we get a few quid to have a real go next season. 

The real issue with Grant wasn't the fee.  There was probably only a window of a month or so where we could have offered KAG a contract he would have signed. 

We sold him right at the end of the window and didn't sign a suitable replacement.  It could have seriously damaged our chances of promotion.  None of the money went back into the squad.  (Well it went some way to off setting the £10 million loss, but oh well).

Selling Burstow hasn't weakened us, certainly hasn't changed what divison we will be in next season.  If it paid for Aneke and Fraser, well that's life. 

I agree, but many others didn’t and Roland was crucified for it. 

I wasn't surprised by the reaction to Mason Burstow the other night as the good judges on here predicted that Conor and Mason would struggle as the ball wouldn't stick up front. There's a reason we need Aneke or Stockley as the number 9, as was demonstrated by Chuks 30 odd minutes at Bolton.
I'm still gutted the transfer took place, as the kid I saw score against Birmingham last season on You tube in youth football was excellent and his being in the right place in the area to score goals for Cafc in League 1.
Needs to spent time in the Gym as not strong enough for men's football. 

Will he be a Premier player, let alone a Chelsea 1st team ?  Just my opinion but no chance for Chelsea  unless they get relegated ( I could die happy !) and so early in his senior career to tell what standard he will reach but Chelsea decided to take a punt for their football farm and business of having 50 odd players out on loan for several years.

Kap10 said:

Airman Brown said:

jimmymelrose said:

Athletico Charlton said:

Chris_from_Sidcup said:

"Manchester City have joined West Ham and Brentford in showing an interest in Sheffield Wednesday's 16-year-old English forward Bailey Cadamarteri"

What a shock, another young striker ready to be poached by a PL club. Yes that is old Everton striker Danny's son.

When small/new PL clubs like Brighton and Brentford are building models on player farming you know you have a growing problem on your hands.  Football really is eating itself.

Brentford who closed their academy to save money now trying to make other teams academies unviable by mopping up 16 year olds.  Brighton who relied on the help of other small teams to even exist are doing the same. 

When 60-70 non PL clubs decide to pack up their academies over the next 5-10 years it will be interesting to see what a great success EPPP has been for the long term future of the game.

Out of interest, do other fans dislike Brentford for this?
Although I normally want newly promoted clubs to stay up, perhaps I should want them to fail, so that others don't follow their model.

No one cares about Brentford.

Who?

I heard some team has a ground bigger than my shed now. Not been yet to see for myself 

Fortune 82nd Minute said:

The lad has got a natural ability to finish and that is priceless. I for one would be absolutely delighted if we could get him back on loan again next year. 

Not seen it so far. 2 headed goals in the league. And the league is where it counts, not Papa John's trophy against lower league opposition or premership u21's 

So far Purrington is our 3rd best goalscorer in the league, and I reckon Burstow will be hard pushed to get much more.

DagenhamAddick said:

From what I've seen Mason has been a bit of a late developer. When I used to watch him at Cray Wanderers/Junior Reds there were a couple of lads that were stronger, faster and more explosive than him. Tyrese Omotoye (Norwich but on loan at Carlisle) and David Omalubu (Crystal Palace U23) but now I would say that Mason is marginally ahead of them both. I can get why Chelsea would take a speculative punt on him for sure. 

Will never forget your mate Amis telling Tyrese he would be better staying with him at JR and helping win the Selkent League than going to a professional football club.

addick1956 said:

Airman Brown said:

SteveKielyCambridge said:

Airman Brown said:

I don’t support the owner, I support Charlton, and I’d say he’s done some good things and some daft ones.I’m currently pretty sceptical he will get us out of this division in the next two years, but things can change. So can opinions.

This paragraph is the key bit that I don't really get and I am honestly not having a go at your perspective which is very reasonable and certainly far more informed than me, but I really do not understand what is meant by this: how is it in the owner's gift to get us out of this division?

I see a lot of people posting similar analysis and I just do not understand what is meant in practical terms.

In theory, he could spend significantly more than anyone else in the division, which would not guarantee promotion but would certainly improve the odds, so is that what you mean? I do think he will continue to spend at a rate around the top club in the division, which should give us a chance.

He has stabilised the club so that I don't get the feeling that the players are worried about being paid week on week, and the two managers he has appointed will either work or not, but they don't seem to totally unreasonable choices.

So I feel I must be missing something obvious. What more is reasonably in his gift to do?

Not “in his gift” perhaps but if the club is well run and makes sensible decisions in transfer windows that will go a long way to getting us out of the division, as it has four times before. No disrespect to the smaller clubs, but how on earth are we in the bottom half of this table with our resources relative to, for example, Accrington Stanley? Only because bad decisions have been made, and recruitment is at the heart of it. It’s not just about how much you spend but how well you spend it. Duchatelet spent/wasted lots of money but he employed idiots to oversee it.

TS is far more hands on with the football side than any previous Charlton owner, including inserting his own son into the structure. I doubt that is a good thing but we’ll see.

Even Michael Gliksten got Charlton out of this division (twice) and like it or not the managers who did it were his appointments.

With Michael Gliksten the managers alternated on  a monthly  basis it seemed. I also remember Michael Gliksten seriously considered moving CAFC to Milton Keynes in the 60's. 

That was just Rodney Stone trying to lever the council, over a market if I recall. Nothing of substance.

Clem_Snide said:

Not disputing how he played as I didn't watch the game. He has been poor for the last couple of games.

Just don't get people getting on his back because he got a big move.

I don’t agree with it, but I get it. 

Airman Brown said:

Wasn’t a big thing. I didn’t even notice it. If you can’t put up with any negative comments best not to go to football.

Maybe but she is a relative (maybe mum?) of Mason so hardly a surprise she would be a) at a game to watch her son and b) be upset at nob heads bawling out an 18yr old boy.

Sorry but no way Mason is cruising/so rich he has lost interest or any of the other crap talked about him.  He is a good lad who needs to grow into his body and is a poacher.  He was never going to do well upfront with Leko; it just isn't a suitable partnership. That's not his fault.