[Brighton] Levi Colwill *Signed on Season-Long Loan 05/08/2022*

[Buffalo Seagull]

Buy back options as a concept should absolutely be banned.

They are anti-competitive and don't sufficiently take into account the wishes of the player

The player wouldn’t be forced into anything. If Colwill signs a 4 year contract with us, and Chelsea offer to buy him back after 2 years, Brighton would have to accept the offer, but there’s nothing stopping Colwill from rejecting their contract offer and sticking to his contract with us.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Buy back options as a concept should absolutely be banned.

They are anti-competitive and don't sufficiently take into account the wishes of the player

How do you know this isn't because of the wishes of the player, for instance that he simply doesn't want to leave Chelsea?

 

[bluenitsuj]

Is he a centre back only?

 

[Cheeky Monkey]

How do you know this isn't because of the wishes of the player, for instance that he simply doesn't want to leave Chelsea?

Get real, what player wouldn't want to leave a top six club to play for the Albion in our world famous blue and white stripes in front of a half empty East Stand?

 

[junior]

Can he play left back?

 

[The Fits]

He’s a centre back. He ‘might’ be able to play LB or even LWB but he is a classic ball playing CB.

 

[um bongo molongo]

I work with a Huddersfield town season ticket holder and he says he’s shitehouse.

(I actually do work with one and he says he’s very good)

 

[chaileyjem]

Can he play left back?

He can.

 

[chaileyjem]

Levi Colwill

He’s a centre back. He ‘might’ be able to play LB or even LWB but he is a classic ball playing CB.

He played left back for Hudds several times last season. (But mostly CB) and plays on the left side of a back three or a four - hence Albion interest.

 

[A1X]

The trouble with this side of the deal, Colwill may well be holding the cards. He is under contract to Chelsea, they can't actually force him to sign for Brighton. Loan / Buy back maybe all down to Colwill's demands rather than either club because Chelsea are keen to get the Cucu deal done, and Brighton are keen to have a replacement in straight away, but Colwill might not be so keen to move.

I doubt he will but I’d love him to say no just to see what happens.

Some of us just want to watch the world burn.

 

[GT49er]

I doubt he will but I’d love him to say no just to see what happens.

Some of us just want to watch the world burn.

I've no objection in principle to us trying to sign Colwill - he may or may not be good enough for what we want - that's not for me to know, but as always I'm happy to agree to what the recruitment squad recommend. What I would object to is us paying over the odds for a young player - with all sorts of caveats that Chelsea might want to impose - as a condition of Chelsea paying a price satisfactory to Tony Bloom for Cucurella.

 

[Hugo Rune]

Levi Colwill

I've no objection in principle to us trying to sign Colwill - he may or may not be good enough for what we want - that's not for me to know, but as always I'm happy to agree to what the recruitment squad recommend. What I would[/I object to us paying over the odds for a young player - with all sorts of caveats that Chelsea might want to impose - as a condition of Chelsea paying a price satisfactory to Tony Bloom for Cucurella.

I think you are right and I think that’s exactly why the Cucu deal has stalled.

We don’t do buy-backs or else we’d have signed the incredibly talented Livramento.

Tony is taking this to the wire to get exactly what he wants, no compromise. Chelsea are finding out exactly what the Lizard poker face is all about.

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

So yes ok, we're buying Colwill, who's about 4 years younger than Clarke and 2 younger than Van Hecke. He's got loads less league experience. And we're totally sure he's going to leap frog over them in the pecking order?

They would surely be within their rights to feel, that they've done their dues going through the academy process, out on loans, achieved recognition, done the hard yards, they should probably be getting a go ahead of some Chelsea lad who's not properly contracted to us anyway.

And I know **** happens in football, but what about the next youngster we want to send up to some northern ****hole with the promise of first team consideration the following season. They would also be within their rights not to agree to do those hard yards

Well he was also at a high end Championship club and arguably at a minimum was equal to PvH and Clarke.

Young players will generally do as they are told in terms of development, refusing loans will not endear them to their host club, and equally they will be stifling their own development.

But put a different way, do you seriously believe we’d spend £20m - £25m on a 5th choice CB?

 

[GT49er]

Well he was also at a high end Championship club and arguably at a minimum was equal to PvH and Clarke.

Young players will generally do as they are told in terms of development, refusing loans will not endear them to their host club, and equally they will be stifling their own development.

But put a different way, do you seriously believe we’d spend £20m - £25m on a 5th choice CB?

Didn't City more or less try this?

"£50M? You want £50M? OK, that'll be £30M plus McAtee on loan then?"

 

[The Fits]

...do you seriously believe we’d spend £20m - £25m on a 5th choice CB?

No, but I’m not sure Colwill will be 5th choice.

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

Well he was also at a high end Championship club and arguably at a minimum was equal to PvH and Clarke.

Young players will generally do as they are told in terms of development, refusing loans will not endear them to their host club, and equally they will be stifling their own development.

But put a different way, do you seriously believe we’d spend £20m - £25m on a 5th choice CB?

It would be worse than that. A 5th choice centre back with a buy back clause.

I don't know is the answer. But I have a hard time believing he'll be any higher than 4th choice immediately. In other words, with all players fit, I don't see him displacing, Veltman, Dunk, or Webster. And in that sense, I don't see where the benefit of this deal is. The player swaps one bench for another, we're short of a wing back with a good balance between attack and defence, but have a glut of centre backs. OK, so maybe we buy him, he waits his turn, he takes his chance, he's brilliant. Then Chelsea buy him back of course, and you could say we make a 20m profit. Well yes, but there's also the opportunity cost to consider, Haydon Roberts never gets a chance, Van Hecke etc, so we don't get to see if they could have done similar things.

Look, I'll welcome him to the club if we sign him, of course I will. My reticence is composed of two parts. 1) I think we need someone who can play as a genuine wing back or at least full back 2) I think it completely sends the wrong message to current and prospective academy players ... Sign for us, do your dues on loan, get the clubs player of the season, then we'll use a windfall to buy (or glorified loan) someone in your position, you were only ever a fall back option for us.

 

[GT49er]

Look, I'll welcome him to the club if we sign him, of course I will. My reticence is composed of two parts. 1) I think we need someone who can play as a genuine wing back or at least full back 2) I think it completely sends the wrong message to current and prospective academy players ... Sign for us, do your dues on loan, get the clubs player of the season, then we'll use a windfall to buy (or glorified loan) someone in your position, you were only ever a fall back option for us.

You could be talking about Cucurella 12 months ago there. That's exactly what we did, except for the "then we'll use a windfall to buy (or glorified loan) someone in your position" - which I hope we don't! (not if it's conditional on the deal for Cucu anyway).

 

[Hugo Rune]

It would be worse than that. A 5th choice centre back with a buy back clause.

I don't know is the answer. But I have a hard time believing he'll be any higher than 4th choice immediately. In other words, with all players fit, I don't see him displacing, Veltman, Dunk, or Webster. And in that sense, I don't see where the benefit of this deal is. The player swaps one bench for another, we're short of a wing back with a good balance between attack and defence, but have a glut of centre backs. OK, so maybe we buy him, he waits his turn, he takes his chance, he's brilliant. Then Chelsea buy him back of course, and you could say we make a 20m profit. Well yes, but there's also the opportunity cost to consider, Haydon Roberts never gets a chance, Van Hecke etc, so we don't get to see if they could have done similar things.

Look, I'll welcome him to the club if we sign him, of course I will. My reticence is composed of two parts. 1) I think we need someone who can play as a genuine wing back or at least full back 2) I think it completely sends the wrong message to current and prospective academy players ... Sign for us, do your dues on loan, get the clubs player of the season, then we'll use a windfall to buy (or glorified loan) someone in your position, you were only ever a fall back option for us.

I think you are underplaying Colwill a little.

In terms of attributes, he’d be quite clearly our fastest centre back with the best left foot out of our current group of defenders. He’d have 3 inches on Veltman and may well be a better aerial defender already.

With Webster’s injury and form record last season, it’s possible that we’d see an awful lot of Veltman-Dunk-Colwill. Yes, Levi will make a number of mistakes like Webster did in his first season (and is still doing when he is newly back from injury and not on form) but this guy WILL be better than Guéhi, and probably very soon.

But Cucu covered two positions. We’d need a left back also.

 

[Farehamseagull]

I think you are underplaying Colwill a little.

In terms of attributes, he’d be quite clearly our fastest centre back with the best left foot out of our current group of defenders. He’d have 3 inches on Veltman and may well be a better aerial defender already.

With Webster’s injury and form record last season, it’s possible that we’d see an awful lot of Veltman-Dunk-Colwill. Yes, Levi will make a number of mistakes like Webster did in his first season (and is still doing when he is newly back from injury and not on form) but this guy WILL be better than Guéhi, and probably very soon.

But Cucu covered two positions. We’d need a left back also.

I think we’d be more likely to see Webster, Dunk and Colwill at centre back and Veltman at RWB as he’s a better option there than Lamptey IMO.

Can then play March at LWB where I think he does a very good job anyway and it free’s up Trossard to play further forward then.

Horses for courses though as ever with GP and as you say, there will be injuries too. I hope we get the deal done, think he could be a very useful signing.

 

[chaileyjem]

I've no objection in principle to us trying to sign Colwill - he may or may not be good enough for what we want - that's not for me to know, but as always I'm happy to agree to what the recruitment squad recommend. What I would object to is us paying over the odds for a young player - with all sorts of caveats that Chelsea might want to impose - as a condition of Chelsea paying a price satisfactory to Tony Bloom for Cucurella.

You’re objecting or rather you think you might be objecting to a deal that isn’t yet in place , but even so - whatever it turns out to be - you’re convinced Chelsea might have us over a barrel. Because Bloom or rather Barber (who I suspect is leading things here) is doing 2 deals and will inexplicably drop the ball on the 2nd one.

Why ?