[Football] Chelsea - what a bunch of tubes

Tony Towner's Fridge · Sep 4, 2024

From the BBC Football Gossip page today:

Chelsea are open to sending England left-back Ben Chilwell, 27, on loan to Turkey, although they are yet to receive any offers. (Telegraph - subscription required)

Made me laugh, chortle etc

I have of course made myself available for selection by Real Madrid; although I am yet to receive an offer of employment.

Chelsea really are a bunch of tubes aren't they?

TNBA

TTF

Greg Bobkin · Sep 4, 2024

LamieRobertson · Sep 4, 2024

Did anyone (apart from a Chelsea supporter and Nigeria) think any differently?

Stato · Sep 4, 2024

I couldn't comment, here are Todd and the boys on the OGWT:

kevo · Sep 4, 2024

What I don't understand about Chelsea is they are getting rid of decent players and replacing them with ones that are apparent upgrades, but to a certain extent unknown quantities who might take time to settle and gel into a team. Why don't they just try and work with what they have?

Weststander · Sep 4, 2024

kevo said:
What I don't understand about Chelsea is they are getting rid of decent players and replacing them with ones that are apparent upgrades, but to a certain extent unknown quantities who might take time to settle and gel into a team. Why don't they just try and work with what they have?

They’re buying win-trophy sure bets in the eyes of the club. Getting rid of flops such as Chilwell (he’s been rubbish for ages) and the occasional home grown player such as Gallagher to help meet PSR.

In short, tunnel vision for the PL and CL as soon as possible.

Change at Barnham · Sep 5, 2024

From The Telegraph:

The Premier League have approved Chelsea’s £76.5 million sale of two hotels to a sister company that helped the club comply with profitability and sustainability rules.

Hamilton · Sep 5, 2024

Change at Barnham said:
From The Telegraph:

The Premier League have approved Chelsea’s £76.5 million sale of two hotels to a sister company that helped the club comply with profitability and sustainability rules.

I assume that was because they agreed with the valuation of the sale. Just saying.

Personally I hope they crash and burn.

gazingdown · Sep 5, 2024

Presumably, the football club could buy the “sister” company (lets say for a nominal amount) and thus now own their hotel again.

Then sell the hotel again to a different sister company.

Wash and repeat.

Makes a mockery of PL rules if they can get away with it….

Lady Whistledown · Sep 5, 2024

I suppose if the PL had banned the sale of the hotels, they would have to loan them to Marriott or something.

Mancgull · Sep 5, 2024

Surely this blatant ‘marketing’ of players to potential buyers with no consultation with the player themselves will be a red flag to players that they want to purchase. Ie Chelsea are likely to be bad for your career development.
They have blatantly tried to get rid of Stirling and Chilwell this summer. Next summer they will have many more that are surplus to requirements who they will struggle to offload due to high wages. Mudryk comes to mind.

Withdean South Stand · Sep 5, 2024

In terms of the sale of the hotels, I presume that means they now can no longer consider them assets and any revenues generated from them can not count towards future PSR compliance? I would hope that this is very much a pound today rather than two pounds kind of behaviour and have actually caused themselves a problem in the longer term. Sadly, I suspect it might not be the case but I am hopeful!

Harry Wilson's tackle · Sep 5, 2024

Mancgull said:
Surely this blatant ‘marketing’ of players to potential buyers with no consultation with the player themselves will be a red flag to players that they want to purchase. Ie Chelsea are likely to be bad for your career development.
They have blatantly tried to get rid of Stirling and Chilwell this summer. Next summer they will have many more that are surplus to requirements who they will struggle to offload due to high wages. Mudryk comes to mind.

Interesting point. Clearly at Chelsea all players are commodities, with the new head coach dispatching the Unwanted into outer darkness.

Players go there for the chance of trophies and for the money.

The quality of some of the players there is apparent.

But if you are playing at a club with no soul, where you will be quickly dropped at the whim of the head coach - from the squad and pushed into leaving - this must surely knock 10% off your ability to function at the highest level.

I guess the Chelsea ownership think this approach will reap rewards.

One suspects that supporters of every other club have failure of Chelsea second only to success for their own club in their hierarchy of their football aspirations. AKA f*** 'em.

kevo · Sep 5, 2024

Withdean South Stand said:
In terms of the sale of the hotels, I presume that means they now can no longer consider them assets and any revenues generated from them can not count towards future PSR compliance? I would hope that this is very much a pound today rather than two pounds kind of behaviour and have actually caused themselves a problem in the longer term. Sadly, I suspect it might not be the case but I am hopeful!

Also in the grand scheme of things £76m isn't actually that much (a Mudryck?).

papajaff · Sep 5, 2024

Ben Chilwell is a decent player, it's just that Chelsea manage to coach the good out of players.

And players will always want to join them because they leave as multi-millionaires.

Twat of a club.

Milano · Sep 5, 2024

One thing this and the Leicester PSR joke have shown up is that the EPL PSR/FFP rules are full of holes. It's not like the EPL are skint, so why on earth don't they pay the money to the same lawyers the clubs will use when developing these rules to make them fit for purpose?

Surely they don't want loop holes for the 'too big to fail' clubs to exploit do they................................

AZ Gull · Sep 5, 2024

Milano said:
One thing this and the Leicester PSR joke have shown up is that the EPL PSR/FFP rules are full of holes. It's not like the EPL are skint, so why on earth don't they pay the money to the same lawyers the clubs will use when developing these rules to make them fit for purpose?

Surely they don't want loop holes for the 'too big to fail' clubs to exploit do they................................

For the Chelsea hotel "loop-hole" to be closed, at least 14 of the PL clubs would need to vote for it. Up to now they haven't.

There is nothing the "Premier League" can do if their member clubs don't vote for change.

Bakero · Sep 5, 2024

I read earlier that Chelsea have left Cole Palmer and a few other big names out of their European squad.

zefarelly · Sep 5, 2024

kevo said:
What I don't understand about Chelsea is they are getting rid of decent players and replacing them with ones that are apparent upgrades, but to a certain extent unknown quantities who might take time to settle and gel into a team. Why don't they just try and work with what they have?

If they'd kept Frank Lapard and all the kids he was playing they'd be better off now.

THey really are a chocolate fireguard in disguise.

pigmanovich · Sep 5, 2024

Bakero said:
I read earlier that Chelsea have left Cole Palmer and a few other big names out of their European squad.

They get to revise it in January, don't they? So he'll just miss the group games, which he might not mind given there are also two international breaks between now and then.

Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[Football] Chelsea - what a bunch of tubes

Well-known member

Silver Seagull

Not awoke

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Harry Wilson's Tackle

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

@SeagullsAcademy @seagullsacademy.bsky.social

Languidly clinical

Well-known member

Good Old Sausage by the Sea

Share this page