Three reasons why Chelsea should not sign John Stones

Published 4 Comments

Football News

Chelsea have had a £20 million bid for 21-year-old John Stones rejected by Everton, according to Sky Sports.

The former Barnsley defender, who joined the Toffees in 2013 for a fee around £3m, impressed everyone with some solid performances last season.

Naturally a centre back, but also capable of playing at right back, the youngster has drawn attention from some of the top clubs in the country. The likes of Chelsea, Manchester United, and Manchester City, are all said to be interested.


Who do you think is favorite to become Super Bowl Champions next season? Join the debate by becoming a GMS writer HERE:

Chelsea are currently leading the race for the four-time capped English youngster, with them being the only club to launch an official bid.

With departure of Sylvain Distin, it looks like Stones is all set to become a regular under Roberto Martinez. Stones, is a fantastic young player, but is he what Chelsea need now?

Here is why I think Chelsea should not sign Stones:


Chelsea had a £20m bid rejected, and are set to return with an improved offer of £26m. Everton are said to be holding out for a fee in excess of £30m.

Stones is a good, solid defender with a potential to become a really good one. He is pretty much unproven in Europe, and signing him would be a big gamble.

Cheaper Alternatives

At almost half the price Chelsea are willing to pay for Stones, here is a small list of more cheaper options:

  • Shkodran Mustafi (Valencia) - £14m
  • Tin Jedvaj (Bayer Leverkusen) - £5.25m
  • Jores Okore (Aston Villa) - £5m                                                                                                  

 (All values are taken from

Growth of own players

Rather than spending any money, Chelsea can look into their own youth squad for potential replacement for John Terry.

Tomas Kalas, Andreas Christensen, and Nathan Ake, are just a few youngster patiently waiting for their chance. Signing Stones will push them further down the pecking order.

I am not saying Stones would be a bad signing. Given the circumstances, Stones would be more of a luxury buy than a necessity.

Do YOU want to write for GiveMeSport? Get started today by signing-up and submitting an article HERE:

Premier League

Article Comments

Read more

Report author of article

Please let us know if you believe this article is in violation of our editorial policy, please only report articles for one of the following reasons.

Report author


This article has been written by a member of the GiveMeSport Writing Academy and does not represent the views of or SportsNewMedia. The views and opinions expressed are solely that of the author credited at the top of this article. and SportsNewMedia do not take any responsibility for the content of its contributors.

Want more content like this?

Like our GiveMeSport Facebook Page and you will get this directly to you.

Already Subscribed to Facebook, don't ask me again

Follow GiveMeSport on Twitter and you will get this directly to you.

Already Following, don't ask me again

Like our GiveMeSport Page and you will get this directly to you.

Already Subscribed to G+, don't ask me again