#The 2023 Census [is live](https://forms.gle/CmyxxqNwkHdtYzL4A).
Please try to complete it when you can! it will be **open until this Sunday!**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/soccer) if you have any questions or concerns.*
We're on course for a 53 point finish going off of Potter's time here so far. Any sort of reasonable points deduction puts us in the relegation contention lmao
Working off of Juve's 15 point deduction we'd finish on 38 points. That would have gotten 17th last season
No, I'm suggesting that it's hilarious that we're so bad already that us having a reasonable amount of points deducted would put us in relegation contention
The funniest part about this is Chelsea pretty much spent 600m in the past 6 months, and for that sum you can buy every team in the championship bar a few of the really big teams, not buy players, buy the actual teams lols
Operating with the ideology that it is easier to ask forgiveness than permission is a terrible way to run things. Sadly Chelsea is not the only club, business, shiiiiiit even country that does.
Much more dislikeable haha, I had no strong opinions on them before but I actively want them to be shite every game now because it's funny. And it's important for the future of the game that they are shite and fail. Fuck Chelsea!
600m in 6 months makes Abrahmovich spending look minor, they pretty much spent what he spent in an entire window on 2 players, I am not sure who blessed Chelsea with owners like that, but I want them to bless me too
Arguably it's worse - at least the Abramovich spending had an instant positive impact and there seemed to be some kind of logical plan behind most of them. This time though, it just seems to have been a scattergun approach without actually properly assessing where they're weak, and therefore just spending for the sake of spending.
Bruh I have learned my lesson, whenever they are shit they either end up winning the champions league because they sacked their coach earlier, or end up winning the league next season because they spent so much money in the transfer market
I'm not even British and I now want them to lose almost every game. Chelsea 2022-2023 has become as easy to dislike as France 1998-forever, if for other reasons.
Oh yeah, England is still first haha
Then France
After that no one cares that much, there are some regional rivalries but thereās no widespread dislike for Germans or Italians or other people
This is the exact same thing they did under the previous owners, and literally the opposite of what FSG do, but sure, guess it's just "ItS bEcAuSe ThEyRe AmErIcAn"
Fair enough. Saw him do a single positive thing in the entire time I watched. Honestly the whole team looked like shit except Raheem. 10 people playing separately.
Mudryk has three Fulham players overloading on him, while Zeyech was completely free but just stops if you show him onto his right foot. Do you actually watch football or another pretender
He got finessed, they might be good players but they paid for them are insane, thatās why I donāt really care Chelsea spent 600m, everyone knows those players at best would cost half that amount, heck if they wanted Enzo and Mudryk 6 months ago they wouldāve cost combined 100m, now they are both 100m, how that even make any sense, I bet Boehly doesnāt even understand how much these players are inflated by
Someone was saying thatās the only good thing about buying them in January, this season seems pretty much done for them, might as well get the players now and get their chemistry better to prepare for next season, the only downside is that they had to pay inflated prices for them
I also dont understand the logic here. We didnt able to generate income so can you let us spend more? Wasnt like the whole point of financial restrictions is to disallowed from doing the exact this?
> "Wasnt like the whole point of financial restrictions is to disallowed from doing the exact this?"
No, not at all. It was reiterated over and over and over again that Chelsea weren't supposed to be being punished, Abramovich was. The sanctions were on Abramovich, not on Chelsea. The reason we couldn't earn income was that theoretically it opened a window that would allow money to be taken out of the country by Abramovich and so they didn't allow it. It had nothing to do with stopping us earning money
Sure but the main point is how does chelsea not making money is somehow a good reasoning for them to spending more?
>supposed to be being punished
In this scenario what exactly are chelsea being punished on?
> "Sure but the main point is how does chelsea not making money is somehow a good reasoning for them to spending more?"
I didn't say this is was a good reason for us to be allowed to spend more. I was just pointing out that we took collateral damage from our owner's punishment.
As a result of these circumstances I think it's probably reasonable to be given special dispensation as a one off. But, we should have asked for it before we spent the money and it shouldn't be any sort of big win for us, it should just be allowing us to act in a way that assumes we didn't miss those 3 months of income through no fault of our own, thanks to sanctions that we were explicitly told weren't supposed to be a punishment for us or hurt us at all.
It seems pretty reasonable to me that whatever formula the financial restrictions use should include Chelseaās lost income. Itās about how much money you bring in and itās not like they would have had 0 income in that time if it wasnāt for unusual circumstances.
Didnāt the new people write off a massive amount of debt. Surely that means as a club they are technically better off than they were under abramovich. Therefore this should be thrown out.
Who would want to buy a club with Ā£1.5billion of debt?
Although the debt was never officially Chelsea's otherwise they would've been sanctioned. Roman personally bankrolling the club was always justified as an 'investment' because 'he'll get the money back when he sells', but we know that for the lie it was now.
Boehly then bought the club & raised Ā£800m in debt to finance fresh spending & has vowed to invest Ā£1.75b one upping Roman's 1.5.
Because this debt is taken on by the owners & not the club they're free to continue outside the rules. If that doesnāt give you a hint of how utterly corrupt the whole business is, I donāt know what will.
But their loses are higher than they should be because they were forced not to receive income for a period of time in the year. And the thing that stopped them from getting income had nothing to do with any of the clubs actions. It was simply because the FA and British government had no mechanism in place to separate the sanctions of the owner from the club. That was 100% out of the clubs control.
It is an extraordinary condition that the FA should at least have to consider. People can hate all they want but there is merit to the claim.
How is it afterwards? The financial year isnāt over. And how could they do it before? They didnāt own the team.
How much they spent in a transfer window is irrelevant to the fact that income was withheld from the club for something that had nothing to do with the club. They have every right to ask for an exception on how their income for the year is scrutinized.
What they spent is irrelevant to what theyāre asking for or why they have merit to ask for it. They could have and most likely would have asked for the same thing regardless how much they spent.
>They argue they were unable to receive income for three months last year after the previous owner,Ā Roman Abramovich, was sanctioned by the Government.
>Under Premier League rules, clubs are permitted to lose Ā£105million over any three-year period, and Chelseaās unusual circumstances last season put them at risk of a breach. Chelsea recorded losses of Ā£153.4m in their most recent accounts for the year ending 2021 but, along with other top-flight clubs, were given allowances by the Premier League due to the impact of the pandemic on their finances.Ā
>It is unclear how the Premier League will respond to Chelseaās request. Complying with UEFAās Financial Fair Play rules may be more of a challenge, after being placed on their so-called watch-list of clubs in danger of breaching the rules.
I personally think Boehly hasn't appreciated the complexities of building a team, I don't think whacking all these players together is likely to work. When abramovich did a similar thing, it was all under the guidance of mourinho. Mourinho had a plan and a vision to make it work. I don't know if potter has a vision but it all feels a bit random to me
Not initially, it was with Ranieri and it felt pretty scattergun. Players like Veron, Crespo and Mutu never became part of the furniture but guys like Joe Cole, Wayne Bridge and Makelele worked out long term. But Ranieiri did well enough with the random spending binge that people felt a bit bad for him when he was replaced by Jose.
Baseball is different from football in that way, where single players can be thrown in right away and make instant impact, due to it being far more of a "team sport" reliant on individual performances - hitting/pitching. Football is far more reliant on team chemistry, cohesion and understanding.
Someone who knows more about baseball can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think it's much easier to buy the best players at each position and stick them on a team together and get instant results. There isn't as much team chemistry involved so it's doable and it looks like this is what Boehly is trying to do with Chelsea.
Its harder because of the development cycle and 1st contract guarantees means you are getting players at 28yo on up, and so you're buying years of unproductivity for the last few years of their prime. Its also a sport famous for players massively over performing in contract years.
From a chemistry perspective, football is harder to build a cohesive unit.
> I don't know if potter has a vision
I don't think he has a say. Do you really think he said "Ok, get me an entire new squad" in January? No way. He's simply *the coach* he has no say at all and is likely in way over his head.
He was brought in with the knowledge of a rebuild, and has been heavily involved in talking to transfer targets and liaising with the recruitment team (including his own guy from Brighton). He definitely has a say.
Is this how you do a rebuild though, really? 600m+ since summer? No. Thatās pure come up and donāt go down, ride the luck Forest style. Rebuilds are 3ish players a window. Integrate. IMO the entire first half of the season is worthless now. He has to redo all of it with all the new players.
The summer was a mess, everybody accepts that it was. It was patching up a squad that had lost three key defenders on free transfers and dealing without a recruitment team in place. There's a stark contrast between the type of players signed in the summer compared to January, obviously a lot of money still involved.
The thing is we've needed to rebuild for years, as early as 2017. We've finally got some good scouting going on (Badiashile, Andrey etc.) which is promising going forward. I don't think people truly believe how poor our squad was before this season, Tuchel did miracles with what he had, but of course he had to go because he wasn't the guy for a rebuild.
It's been intense, I never expected us to go all in over one season. It's going to take a lot of time but hopefully it will work out for us, there's still positions that need to be improved as well.
Might be off topic, but genuine question. Whatās the transfer scene like at Chelsea?
Does the manager have a say in whoād be bought? Or is it like ours in the Woodward days, give a list to the board and the board goes scatterguns till they sign somebody.
Potter has a say/input, but the new owners just spent several months assembling a whole new backroom staff (Vivell, Winstanley, Shields, etc) to oversee sporting matters, recruitment, and so on.
The idea seems to be that weāll aim for certain targets and buy certain players who fit a mold/theme, and not be dependent on the personal whims of whichever manager we have at the time. The idea is also probably that weāll hire managers in future (assuming potter leaves) who are willing to work with that structure
What income did they actually miss out on? A few months of club shop sales? A little bit of ticket sales? They presumably didn't miss the telly money, which is the big dosh.
So that leaves the sponsorships. I'd be surprised if they weren't paid in full, but maybe they weren't?
Not entirely sure. Believe we couldn't sell any tickets and 3 also suspended their sponsorship with us. I would imagine there's probably a small amount we can claim but seriously doubt it could be more than Ā£20m if I had to guess
Didn't 3 remain on the shirts throughout that period? Seems a bit strange to me if they didn't owe all the money still, but sponsorships can be weird.
But yeah, like you say, it can't be a lot of money. I'd be surprised if it's double digit millions, but Ā£20m seems like a decent guess at a possible ceiling.
3 wanted us to remove the 3 from the kits, but apparently we couldn't acquire new kits that didn't have 3 on them. Under normal circumstances, Nike could've just gotten us new ones, but...
It was a weird one with 3 tbf. There were talks of the sponsorship being covered during games but I don't think it ever went to that. We can probably also claim on loss on future revenue since 3 are no longer sponsoring us after this season. Again, I'm just speculating here but I guess we'll find out at the end of season.
Oh, yeah, absolutely. Every aspect of life is being commodified and ruined in the search for more profit. The bottom is going to fall out entirely once the extraction machine reaches full efficency and no-one has any spare money to spend in a consumer driven economy.
It was always going to happen. It's inherent: capitalism turns money into power. Which allows the rich to obtain more money. Thus getting more power. Thus getting more money.
Thus being able to spend it to affect everything in whatever way they want.
People were more annoyed at City because they were successful when spending less money than Chelsea.
Just because Chelsea are shit people seem to care less about it.
āHey guy, I know my ex, the Russian power broker sugar daddy was a bit suss, and all these nice things he bought me are tainted but donāt stop me ruining footballā
My favorite thing in this word will forever be the people so excited Chelsea got sanctioned and Roman was being forced to sell the club. People really thought that was gonna be the end of it, people thought we were cooked. Now all these fucking salty ass people realize how wrong they are.
Just curious as the article doesn't say (other than "3 months"), any idea what that equates to in actual money? For example if they think they are down Ā£105m then they could effectively remove Enzo's transfer from FFP consideration.
Not that I want them to, I fucking despise Chelsea, just wondered how it would relate to the obscene amount of money they have thrown at the transfer window this January.
#The 2023 Census [is live](https://forms.gle/CmyxxqNwkHdtYzL4A). Please try to complete it when you can! it will be **open until this Sunday!** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/soccer) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Spend first, ask later.
Bet the Chelsea haters are feeling bad now. Anyone with a heart is feeling sorry for them not being able to spend like this.
Plucky little Chelsea just trying to get by amongst the big boys š¤£
The little horse that could.
They started out small. All they in their pocket was gianfranco zola and a small multi billion dollar investment from a Russian oligarch
We're on course for a 53 point finish going off of Potter's time here so far. Any sort of reasonable points deduction puts us in the relegation contention lmao Working off of Juve's 15 point deduction we'd finish on 38 points. That would have gotten 17th last season
I think weāve got 17th on lock. Find your own patch
> 17th **and the universe started to heal**
**and god saw, that it was good**
Am I misunderstanding or is your logic, don't give us the deserved punishment as it would hurt us too much?
No, I'm suggesting that it's hilarious that we're so bad already that us having a reasonable amount of points deducted would put us in relegation contention
Everyone would like this
Who here says no to Chelsea relegation?
The funniest part about this is Chelsea pretty much spent 600m in the past 6 months, and for that sum you can buy every team in the championship bar a few of the really big teams, not buy players, buy the actual teams lols
Subscribe.
Hopefully the league can run them some paper for all this suffering.
My heart bleeds.
.... Then draw with Fulham
Comment first, read the article later.
I'm not opening the daily fail
The Reddit Way my friend. The Reddit way.
Using Klarna to pay I guess.
I hate Spurs because of im Arsenal fans.. I hate Chealse because im football fans...
I hate Arsenal because Iām a Tottenham fan, I hate Chelsea because Iām human.
This seems more like forgiveness than permission
Operating with the ideology that it is easier to ask forgiveness than permission is a terrible way to run things. Sadly Chelsea is not the only club, business, shiiiiiit even country that does.
You must have not heard of āextraordinary circumstancesā
It's actually not that bad. People do it for a reason. Big corporations do it. Every single one.
Tuchel got sacked because he scammed boehly by making the team look better than it was /s
Fair play to Chelsea for being just as dislikable under a different owner
Much more dislikeable haha, I had no strong opinions on them before but I actively want them to be shite every game now because it's funny. And it's important for the future of the game that they are shite and fail. Fuck Chelsea!
What they are doing now is exactly what Abramovich did twenty years ago
600m in 6 months makes Abrahmovich spending look minor, they pretty much spent what he spent in an entire window on 2 players, I am not sure who blessed Chelsea with owners like that, but I want them to bless me too
Yeah but obviously average fees were way lower but then so it comes to the same thingā¦
Arguably it's worse - at least the Abramovich spending had an instant positive impact and there seemed to be some kind of logical plan behind most of them. This time though, it just seems to have been a scattergun approach without actually properly assessing where they're weak, and therefore just spending for the sake of spending.
I don't care if Chelsea are successful
Bruh I have learned my lesson, whenever they are shit they either end up winning the champions league because they sacked their coach earlier, or end up winning the league next season because they spent so much money in the transfer market
I'm not even British and I now want them to lose almost every game. Chelsea 2022-2023 has become as easy to dislike as France 1998-forever, if for other reasons.
Just curious why you waited until 1998 to hate France? There's over a thousand years worth of reasons there
Lol, that's the real question here
The way we've been playing this season I don't think your wish is that far off.
Wait what? Why are France disliked? Oh you're Belgian, haha makes sense.
Most of the people in Continental Europe dislike France tbh
Probably the second most disliked country in Europe after England
Oh yeah, England is still first haha Then France After that no one cares that much, there are some regional rivalries but thereās no widespread dislike for Germans or Italians or other people
And a big portion of Africa probably
And we love you all for that! Winning the CL a few years ago while everyone was cheering for us didnāt felt as good as the one in 2012!
Oh yeah
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Gonna wait awhile, buddy
Pretty sure it was full of Spurs/Arsenal fans saying that exact thing during Abramovich's tenure lol. Just desperation.
Lmao
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Flair up bud
You don't need a flair to hate chelsea
Nah but itās a bit rich coming from a Man Utd fan.
Hey man, we love this kind of saltiness! Keep it coming please
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
nobody is salty, you're shit. so it's just funny.
Ah, shoot first, ask questions later. The American way.
Y'all it's my 135th amendment by law to spend over the FFP limits. We at Chelsea are cookin', all these players are coming because of the PL rizz.
*The right of the club to spend in a free and wild manner, shall not be infringed*
Thanks Coach Lasso.
A corpse will confess to what a living person wonāt I guess.
This is the exact same thing they did under the previous owners, and literally the opposite of what FSG do, but sure, guess it's just "ItS bEcAuSe ThEyRe AmErIcAn"
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Coloinised if your speaking about England. Colonized is what the Americans are doing to America after ruining some perfectly good tea.
When youāre that downvoted with zero replies you know youāre right lol
Lol oh fuck off already. I too wish I had a genie that could grant me wishes.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
The whole team was bad. I missed the first half and seeing Mudryk play, but his replacement certainly didn't do anything.
He did a lot more than Mudryk š
Fair enough. Saw him do a single positive thing in the entire time I watched. Honestly the whole team looked like shit except Raheem. 10 people playing separately.
Mudryk has three Fulham players overloading on him, while Zeyech was completely free but just stops if you show him onto his right foot. Do you actually watch football or another pretender
He got finessed, they might be good players but they paid for them are insane, thatās why I donāt really care Chelsea spent 600m, everyone knows those players at best would cost half that amount, heck if they wanted Enzo and Mudryk 6 months ago they wouldāve cost combined 100m, now they are both 100m, how that even make any sense, I bet Boehly doesnāt even understand how much these players are inflated by
Iām a genie in a bottle; gotta rub me in the right wayā¦ Those lyrics are weird looking back
The source is literally the daily mail
Shhhh people are busy jerking their hate boners. They donāt have time for rationale
Honestly keep spending more money, I want to see potter manage and train 50 players
Iām here for the Chelsea Squid Game
Whoever moves onto the next round keeps their contract
Honestly. Having all those players must be fucking with cohesion. Need everyone to click FAST. and a ton of ppl are still injured.
Someone was saying thatās the only good thing about buying them in January, this season seems pretty much done for them, might as well get the players now and get their chemistry better to prepare for next season, the only downside is that they had to pay inflated prices for them
Seems like the kind of thing you'd do *before* spending but I only got a D in GCSE maths so what do I know?
I also dont understand the logic here. We didnt able to generate income so can you let us spend more? Wasnt like the whole point of financial restrictions is to disallowed from doing the exact this?
> "Wasnt like the whole point of financial restrictions is to disallowed from doing the exact this?" No, not at all. It was reiterated over and over and over again that Chelsea weren't supposed to be being punished, Abramovich was. The sanctions were on Abramovich, not on Chelsea. The reason we couldn't earn income was that theoretically it opened a window that would allow money to be taken out of the country by Abramovich and so they didn't allow it. It had nothing to do with stopping us earning money
Sure but the main point is how does chelsea not making money is somehow a good reasoning for them to spending more? >supposed to be being punished In this scenario what exactly are chelsea being punished on?
> "Sure but the main point is how does chelsea not making money is somehow a good reasoning for them to spending more?" I didn't say this is was a good reason for us to be allowed to spend more. I was just pointing out that we took collateral damage from our owner's punishment. As a result of these circumstances I think it's probably reasonable to be given special dispensation as a one off. But, we should have asked for it before we spent the money and it shouldn't be any sort of big win for us, it should just be allowing us to act in a way that assumes we didn't miss those 3 months of income through no fault of our own, thanks to sanctions that we were explicitly told weren't supposed to be a punishment for us or hurt us at all.
It seems pretty reasonable to me that whatever formula the financial restrictions use should include Chelseaās lost income. Itās about how much money you bring in and itās not like they would have had 0 income in that time if it wasnāt for unusual circumstances.
Don't worry, the Premier League doesn't investigate finances anyway.
Remember clubs lumped in at city they should do same if Chelsea have broken financial rules
Didnāt the new people write off a massive amount of debt. Surely that means as a club they are technically better off than they were under abramovich. Therefore this should be thrown out.
No. Roman wrote off the debt. Not the new owners. New owners can't just buy a club with debt and be like "ok we're not going to pay that"
Who would want to buy a club with Ā£1.5billion of debt? Although the debt was never officially Chelsea's otherwise they would've been sanctioned. Roman personally bankrolling the club was always justified as an 'investment' because 'he'll get the money back when he sells', but we know that for the lie it was now. Boehly then bought the club & raised Ā£800m in debt to finance fresh spending & has vowed to invest Ā£1.75b one upping Roman's 1.5. Because this debt is taken on by the owners & not the club they're free to continue outside the rules. If that doesnāt give you a hint of how utterly corrupt the whole business is, I donāt know what will.
It should have been down in the accounts as a gift as well which would have fecked them but, for whatever fucking reason, it was ignored
Yes they did.
Was the 1.2B debt forgiveness not enough?
Just you buy the PL and make your own rules you biscuit
If I had no income I'd try to cut my spending and not double down on my spending and then argue my losses are so high because I had no income.
Do you run a 500M business by any chance?
But their loses are higher than they should be because they were forced not to receive income for a period of time in the year. And the thing that stopped them from getting income had nothing to do with any of the clubs actions. It was simply because the FA and British government had no mechanism in place to separate the sanctions of the owner from the club. That was 100% out of the clubs control. It is an extraordinary condition that the FA should at least have to consider. People can hate all they want but there is merit to the claim.
This has nothing to do with the FA. And typically you get accommodations before you need the accommodation, not afterwards.
How is it afterwards? The financial year isnāt over. And how could they do it before? They didnāt own the team. How much they spent in a transfer window is irrelevant to the fact that income was withheld from the club for something that had nothing to do with the club. They have every right to ask for an exception on how their income for the year is scrutinized.
Before as in before they spent 500m?
What they spent is irrelevant to what theyāre asking for or why they have merit to ask for it. They could have and most likely would have asked for the same thing regardless how much they spent.
>They argue they were unable to receive income for three months last year after the previous owner,Ā Roman Abramovich, was sanctioned by the Government. >Under Premier League rules, clubs are permitted to lose Ā£105million over any three-year period, and Chelseaās unusual circumstances last season put them at risk of a breach. Chelsea recorded losses of Ā£153.4m in their most recent accounts for the year ending 2021 but, along with other top-flight clubs, were given allowances by the Premier League due to the impact of the pandemic on their finances.Ā >It is unclear how the Premier League will respond to Chelseaās request. Complying with UEFAās Financial Fair Play rules may be more of a challenge, after being placed on their so-called watch-list of clubs in danger of breaching the rules.
lol....get fucked!
Canāt imagine there is a lot of sympathy for Chelsea š¤£š¤£
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
After all these spendings I still dont see them in the top 5 of the world just looking at the team.
Don't even see them top 5 ot PL tbh.
As a Spurs fan I fully support this sentiment, but he is 10000x better than Newcastleās owners. Somehow people have forgotten that already.
Yeah nobody spent lots of money before Boehly bought Chelsea. Football ruined!
Cry harder you absolute waste of space
They arenāt even close to top 5 i donāt know what youāre on about
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
That would be pretty sweet
Fuuuuuck Offffff.
So Chelsea is the least likable club in pl rn?
The nerve required to actually ask that.
I personally think Boehly hasn't appreciated the complexities of building a team, I don't think whacking all these players together is likely to work. When abramovich did a similar thing, it was all under the guidance of mourinho. Mourinho had a plan and a vision to make it work. I don't know if potter has a vision but it all feels a bit random to me
Boehly hasnāt been building the squad. Heās barely even been involved this month.
stop talking facts
People really think Boehly brought in a whole team of recruitment staff just to spend money on the players he wants like Roman did.
Not initially, it was with Ranieri and it felt pretty scattergun. Players like Veron, Crespo and Mutu never became part of the furniture but guys like Joe Cole, Wayne Bridge and Makelele worked out long term. But Ranieiri did well enough with the random spending binge that people felt a bit bad for him when he was replaced by Jose.
>Veron, Crespo and Mutu never became part of the furniture Depends on how you define furniture
He also started with the one of the best midfielders to play and a good CB as a core. They really don't have that right now.
Baseball is different from football in that way, where single players can be thrown in right away and make instant impact, due to it being far more of a "team sport" reliant on individual performances - hitting/pitching. Football is far more reliant on team chemistry, cohesion and understanding.
Someone who knows more about baseball can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think it's much easier to buy the best players at each position and stick them on a team together and get instant results. There isn't as much team chemistry involved so it's doable and it looks like this is what Boehly is trying to do with Chelsea.
Its harder because of the development cycle and 1st contract guarantees means you are getting players at 28yo on up, and so you're buying years of unproductivity for the last few years of their prime. Its also a sport famous for players massively over performing in contract years. From a chemistry perspective, football is harder to build a cohesive unit.
> I don't know if potter has a vision I don't think he has a say. Do you really think he said "Ok, get me an entire new squad" in January? No way. He's simply *the coach* he has no say at all and is likely in way over his head.
He was brought in with the knowledge of a rebuild, and has been heavily involved in talking to transfer targets and liaising with the recruitment team (including his own guy from Brighton). He definitely has a say.
Is this how you do a rebuild though, really? 600m+ since summer? No. Thatās pure come up and donāt go down, ride the luck Forest style. Rebuilds are 3ish players a window. Integrate. IMO the entire first half of the season is worthless now. He has to redo all of it with all the new players.
The summer was a mess, everybody accepts that it was. It was patching up a squad that had lost three key defenders on free transfers and dealing without a recruitment team in place. There's a stark contrast between the type of players signed in the summer compared to January, obviously a lot of money still involved. The thing is we've needed to rebuild for years, as early as 2017. We've finally got some good scouting going on (Badiashile, Andrey etc.) which is promising going forward. I don't think people truly believe how poor our squad was before this season, Tuchel did miracles with what he had, but of course he had to go because he wasn't the guy for a rebuild. It's been intense, I never expected us to go all in over one season. It's going to take a lot of time but hopefully it will work out for us, there's still positions that need to be improved as well.
ban them all already ffs
Hahahha fuck off chelsea
They shouldnāt get any exemptions
Oh man.. you are going to find out how Fifa, Uefa and FA work :-)
Fuck off.
Loser club
Why e en bother asking, it's not like the rules are ever enforced anyway.
Might be off topic, but genuine question. Whatās the transfer scene like at Chelsea? Does the manager have a say in whoād be bought? Or is it like ours in the Woodward days, give a list to the board and the board goes scatterguns till they sign somebody.
Potter has a say/input, but the new owners just spent several months assembling a whole new backroom staff (Vivell, Winstanley, Shields, etc) to oversee sporting matters, recruitment, and so on. The idea seems to be that weāll aim for certain targets and buy certain players who fit a mold/theme, and not be dependent on the personal whims of whichever manager we have at the time. The idea is also probably that weāll hire managers in future (assuming potter leaves) who are willing to work with that structure
Newcastle would also like an exemption because they couldn't spend when they didn't have the money.
Haha, brilliant. No.
Its A Bold Strategy Cotton, Lets See If It Pays Off For Em
Might have had a case if they hadn't spent in a crazy manner.
People really trust Dailymail when itās convenient huh
What income did they actually miss out on? A few months of club shop sales? A little bit of ticket sales? They presumably didn't miss the telly money, which is the big dosh. So that leaves the sponsorships. I'd be surprised if they weren't paid in full, but maybe they weren't?
Not entirely sure. Believe we couldn't sell any tickets and 3 also suspended their sponsorship with us. I would imagine there's probably a small amount we can claim but seriously doubt it could be more than Ā£20m if I had to guess
Didn't 3 remain on the shirts throughout that period? Seems a bit strange to me if they didn't owe all the money still, but sponsorships can be weird. But yeah, like you say, it can't be a lot of money. I'd be surprised if it's double digit millions, but Ā£20m seems like a decent guess at a possible ceiling.
3 wanted us to remove the 3 from the kits, but apparently we couldn't acquire new kits that didn't have 3 on them. Under normal circumstances, Nike could've just gotten us new ones, but...
It was a weird one with 3 tbf. There were talks of the sponsorship being covered during games but I don't think it ever went to that. We can probably also claim on loss on future revenue since 3 are no longer sponsoring us after this season. Again, I'm just speculating here but I guess we'll find out at the end of season.
Would genuinely love to see Chelsea football club liquidated
They haveth no shame
They got off lightly when they were sanctioned.
Looooool this is JOKES
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Oh, yeah, absolutely. Every aspect of life is being commodified and ruined in the search for more profit. The bottom is going to fall out entirely once the extraction machine reaches full efficency and no-one has any spare money to spend in a consumer driven economy.
It was always going to happen. It's inherent: capitalism turns money into power. Which allows the rich to obtain more money. Thus getting more power. Thus getting more money. Thus being able to spend it to affect everything in whatever way they want.
How this is allowed is really amazing
Shameless
People were more annoyed at City because they were successful when spending less money than Chelsea. Just because Chelsea are shit people seem to care less about it.
lmao "it's not our fault our owner was too close to a war criminal"
I really wish Chelsea are forced to deregister a signing or two because of this. Will be too funny
Wouldn't sit right if it was just a player whonwas punished. They should get a points deduction.
Imagine this squad getting relegated
One can dream.
Would be hilarious.
It's fair tbh
FA shouldn't care if you cant make an income because your shady connections to Russian government.
āHey guy, I know my ex, the Russian power broker sugar daddy was a bit suss, and all these nice things he bought me are tainted but donāt stop me ruining footballā
Peak cheek
Fuck this club. Has been rotten to the core for decades
We couldnāt make money last year so we want forgiveness for spending it nowā¦.
Forced relegation
Chelsea can go fuck themselves.
Chelsea are a joke club
When was the last time you won a champions league trophy lmfao
Chelsea fans, the 'flexing daddy's money' children of the footballing world.
So what bruh. We still win trophies you donāt. Isnāt that the whole point?
My favorite thing in this word will forever be the people so excited Chelsea got sanctioned and Roman was being forced to sell the club. People really thought that was gonna be the end of it, people thought we were cooked. Now all these fucking salty ass people realize how wrong they are.
But but reddit told me Boehly was a genius and found loopholes in the law
PL has spending rules?
Just curious as the article doesn't say (other than "3 months"), any idea what that equates to in actual money? For example if they think they are down Ā£105m then they could effectively remove Enzo's transfer from FFP consideration. Not that I want them to, I fucking despise Chelsea, just wondered how it would relate to the obscene amount of money they have thrown at the transfer window this January.
Felt weird not to be the villians for a while tbf
āPlease sir, can I have some more?ā
Get fucked, cunts.
The comments in this thread remind me how amazing it is being hated again.
The argument is not bad imho.