[SOLD] Nathaniel Chalobah

We saw the best of him in 20102-13

Never the same after the almost 2 years of injuries, I suspect he has been and will nurse a weakness through the rest of his career

I do find his and Hughes situations a little strange... both looked over the moon at promotion... both claimed to be happy... both offered good new contracts... both turned down for at best sideways moves... something happened over the summer

 

You mean the guy who "Mr Watford" Troy Deeney said would be the supposed next captain of the club after him turns out to be a not particularly good character? What a surprise!

 

The situation with Chalobah and Hughes was just very odd. Neither have bettered themselves. Hughes signing a shorter contract at a struggling club and Chalobah walked away from a 5 year deal to drop down a division for only a TWO year contract.

There has to be more to this which we’re not privy to, but hopefully more of the background detail will surface further down the line.

 

It sounds to me like the relationship had completely broken down between club and players during contract negotiations. It maybe that both Hughes and Cholabah weren’t confident about the prospect of staying in the PL, which would then potentially leave them on championship wages on a long contract. Given we brought in a new midfield they were always going to be in a position of having to take the best offer available (which in both cases may well be lower than they originally thought - when they rejected our offer)

 

That doesn’t really tally with making Hughes one of the clubs highest earners, though.

 

I think that's unlikely. You don't offer a player a contract of 5 years as one of the highest earners (in Hughes' case) and tell him he wont get much game time. I can tell myself Hughes just did an idiotic thing with his career, but to see Hughes AND Chalobah do it, is just very strange. Both have had injuries, so to walk away from a Premier League club and the security of a long contract, for 3 and 2 year deals respectfully, is just a bit crazy.

 

If I was going to guess I’d say the manager turnover and the supposed negative element that has been present throughout the squad for a few seasons was a large contributing factor. Players like Capoue and likely players like Peyrera probably moaned all the time and didn’t really want to be there, it probably created quite a negative atmosphere alongside the fact the players never know when the next manager will come in.

 

That doesn't answer it for me. Capoue and Pereyra (if they were bad influences) are long gone. The atmosphere in the dressing room has never been better, hence the promotion and unity of the team after that. Managerial turnover? Palace/Fulham are no better than Watford. Both are hire/fire clubs, but don't get the publicity for it as Watford do. The players all seem to really like Xisco.

Players generally fall into two categories. Mercenaries or career motivated. Neither Hughes or Chalobah have moved to further their career or bank balance. It's like the driving force was to get away from Watford at any cost.......and this is what I'd like to know......why did they want out so badly.

 

From memory we got Chalobah for £5m from Chelsea and the media thought it was a steal. That looked true in the early weeks under Silva but subsequently not so much. However he did a good job last season in helping us back up, so good luck to him.

 

Good to see his mystery illness cleared up in time for him to drop down a league.
Wage thief.

 

It doesn't answer the question for Chalobah but we know that unless he was lying, Will Hughes was very happy at the thought of staying when interviewed at the end of last season. So I can't see it being anything else than the offer that was put on the table simply wasn't to his liking. And while the club can let it be known the headline salary they offered was very good, maybe the way the deal was structured otherwise simply made it unviable for the player?

 

I agree with most of this, although maybe it’s easy to underestimate how much toll these injuries take on a player. And I don’t think Chalobah is the billy-big-balls mercenary that Welbeck can be.

What I would say is that Chalobah is an extremely talented midfielder, and if the appalling snake gets the best out of him, then I will be happy for Nate, but sad for Watford. He came here on a permanent deal a few years ago, saying goodbye to horrible Chelski, excited about the opportunity he had before him at a club where he felt wanted, and had shone on loan. And I know that he’s suffered a lot of criticism from people here, so there’s no surprise that a lot of you are saying good riddance now.

But whatever his mental weaknesses may be, he’s still got bags of talent, as we saw last season, and could still be an important player for someone. Marco Silva is repulsive, but clever enough. He’ll probably get the best out of him before he gets sacked or suddenly decides he is too good to manage Fulham.

I don’t remember Chalobah being much of an idiot with any ranting. And social media is mostly toxic and dangerous anyway. Reading this forum, and making the occasional contribution, is the only form of SM I do these days (unless dysfunctional WhatsApp groups with family and old friends count).

Anyway I wish him the very best. Seems like a good lad to me, and I met him briefly when he was injured. He was humble and likeable. I will keep an eye on his remaining career and cry bittersweet tears when he does well. And I will curse him if he ever scores one of his rare but special goals against us.

 

It was just a guess, based on my experience working for two different companies, one obsessed with having a positive culture, the other that allowed negative people to cling on for years and poison everyone else around them. It’s incredible the impact a few bad apples can have. We had a core of negative players that outlasted several managers, which I do not believe would’ve ended up in a great atmosphere.

With regards to manager turnover, I agree that’s football, but equally Palace had Woy for what, five seasons? Also Fulham had Parker through half a relegation season, an entire promotion season which he only clinched via the playoffs, and then an entire relegation season. Do you believe Gino would’ve given Parker either season?

I think the whole relegation season with four people in charge, reappointing QSF, sacking Pearson with two games to go… that was farcical even for us. It doesn’t necessarily matter what happened after, shenanigans like that could’ve easily been enough for certain players to form the opinion that we’re a madhouse and they’re better off out of it.

 

We don't know if the contract offer was time-bound, I assume it was. Once they had refused the offers, perhaps the club retracted them while going off and buying alternatives to avoid being saddled with more midfielders than they need. Perhaps they both gambled that a bigger club would come in but then took the only offers they had... all guesswork of course.

 

I get what you're saying with the "mad house", but (for me) it seems we've turned a bit of a corner. Look at the type of player we've signed. We seem to be heading in a more positive direction. The argument over contract (as far as I'm concerned) goes out of the window, as both players have signed shorter term deals. Chalobah was offered a 5-year deal on Prem wages, so he goes for a 2-year deal at a Champ club! Likewise Hughes. He was offered a 5-year deal at around £70k per week. No way are Palace topping that, and he's gone for a 3-year deal. So whatever the terms at Watford were, they MUST surely be on worse contracts at their new clubs, as these are much shorter deals.

 

I remember there was genuine talk at the time amongst some Chelsea fans that they’d let the better player go for £5m and bought an inferior one in Bakayoko for £40m.

 

Pure airy speculation.

These are the choices of millionaires. It’s all a lot more convivial and ordinary. Both were running down contracts and decided to go elsewhere. For more money, more game time, on agent advice, whatever. These are all mini gambles. The club didn’t want them leaving for free, preferred to get £10m for the pair of them after deciding that they didn’t need to be central to our plans for this year.

None of it needs any great speculation about the club’s internal politics. You are looking at it from a fan’s narrative. Simply not the same to be on the inside while being paid £40k a week. I’ve been in jobs where organisations have been in crisis. Not fun, but barely affected me as I was happy with my lot. In fact it presented opportunities.

They rolled the dice to go simply because that’s what these well off young men preferred.

 

This could be true, however, Hughes now has a 3-year deal at Palace and Chalobah has a 2-year deal at Fulham. How could these possibly be better choices than 5-year deals at Watford? I really don't think it's anything to do with money or contracts. I think there's more to it and this is what I'd like to find out.

 

No relegation clause for Hughes, huge promotion bonus for Chalobah. Big signing on fee for both.

 

The only other element is they maybe over-estimated their value on the market, but as LBH explains they’ve not done badly and a shorter contract means you get to negotiate the next sooner with more signing on fees etc.

 

We can only go on what has been reported in the media about what was offered. A 5-year deal was offered to Hughes, making him one of the highest earners at the club (around £70k per week). Chalobah was offered a 5-year deal on similar terms as before. Those deals have to be better than what they eventually signed at their new clubs.

More money? Highly unlikely given the length of contract. More game time? Possibly in the case of Chalobah (but he's now at a lower level), but not Hughes. He would certainly have been a starter.

Let's turn it around. A player is offered a 5-year contract at a Premier League club or a 2-year contract at a Championship club.......which do you pick? On the surface it seems a ludicrous decision to pick the 2-year deal, and yet that is exactly what occurred.

 

Probably has a lot to do with the player bonus dispute from the cup final season.

 

Thanks Chabs and goodbye, can we now draw a line under him and close the thread.

 

A shorter deal is only appealing if you are a younger player on a distinct upward curve. Someone like Sarr or Richarlison when we first got him. Someone like Chalobah, with his injury record, is crazy to turn away a 5-year deal. Another injury and he's done. It's a huge risk.

 

They were probably right.

Bakayoko was awful for them.

 

Because the 5 year deals weren't on offer any more? If you offer someone a contract/job you would give them a deadline to accept so you can make alternate arrangements. You can't leave it open-ended. Why assume there is something sinister going on?

 

Personally I don’t anything broad happened - I just think Hughes got himself into a tangle between himself, his agent, the club and stories of ‘bigger’ clubs like Newcastle wanting him. Made a couple of bad decisions either by himself or motivated by his agent and it’s angered the club who had put a big contract in front of him.

And I think Chalobah just didn’t want to stay. His negative comments about fans at the end of the season when he should have been ecstatic we’re quite telling for me. With not much to go on, I suspect he feels he hasn’t had much luck at Watford with injuries etc and also had concerns about game time as a result. I also wouldn’t bet that his contract offer may have reflected that to an extent. I really do believe Chalobah probably just wanted a fresh start - Fulham look pretty likely to come back up so I doubt he’s overly bothered about being in the Championship this year. Silva is obviously a draw for him too.

I don’t think relegation clauses or anything like that have anything to do with it. I don’t believe you get players like Sissoko and Rose happy to sign up to it and have players like those leaving angered by it.

I think in a perfect world the club would have wanted to keep them both - but I think it’s just circumstances rather than any deeper lying issues behind the scenes.

 

I don’t get this outlook - what was he supposed to do? Stay in bed and say ‘Look I’d love to move but I’ve got the sniffles’.

Yes it’s debatable that he was ill. But lying about it is just as much down to the club as the player. If he was causing an issue and refusing to come in, the club could have just said he’s not available for selection or he remains sidelined.

 

A shame the club and Chalobah couldn't come to an agreement, he'd of been a useful addition to the match day squad.

Hope he does well at Fulham.

 

Perhaps Chalobah and Hughes just aren't very bright and their egos painted themselves into a corner?

Perhaps they just wanted shorter contracts with more money.

Perhaps the conspiracy theorists on here are clutching at straws.

They're gone, we go again.

 

How do you know? He could be on higher wages that would compensate that. Means he earns it quicker.

He’s a multi-millionaire already. Maybe he prefers the freedom, but he will have his motivations. It’s unlikely to be irrational, which is your conclusion from only partial information.

 

If you think the girls Ugly, no matter what benefits you get with her, when enough’s enough you have to look elsewhere, I think it’s a case of the club got ugly for them and that both had had enough!

 

I think you have to apply a little bit of common-sense here. A 2-year deal at a Championship club will not provide more money to him than a 5-year deal at a Premier League club.