Our medical team have been pretty amazing for as long as I can remember. No team is going to completely avoid injuries, but we've been extremely fortunate with how low the numbers have been and how quickly most players have returned to fitness.
Chelsea 2016/17 - Very Content
- Thread starter duffer
- Start date
How outstanding was Luiz today though? One of his best ever games. Completely carried our backline.
He was good, but I don't think he should have been on the pitch. I really don't like seeing a player limping when we have good cover at CB available.
How much of that is helped by no European Commitments though?
It's a long running thing, including all the time when we were getting to the late stages of the CL every year.
Oh, thats different then
It must be nice as you pretty much know what youre going to get, that helps the manager out in a huge way for planning for future matches in mind.
Yeah, its been a massive lift for us over the years. That was one of the things that terrified me about the Eva Carneiro thing (aside from my disgust at a hard working member of our staff being treated like that), that anything that threatened to disrupt our medical team could have had a huge effect on something that has worked extremely well for a very long time.Oh, thats different then
It must be nice as you pretty much know what youre going to get, that helps the manager out in a huge way for planning for future matches in mind.
Yep he was very good.
I dont like Sideshow Bobs antics that much, but how Cahill is a Captain ahead of him always confuses me.
Great game today.
Great game today.
We had the same in LvG's first season and we were absolutely battered by injuries. I don't think it's that relevant.
Managers training regime and medical team are the big thing.
Just look at the improvement under Mourinho, and he's known for a less harsh training regime than many managers.
11 points clear at the top of the league, 12 wins in a row at home.
28 points needed in the last 12 games to make sure. 2.3 points per game.
You guys are a fecking machine. Reminds me of Mourinho's side in 2004-05, so consistent. See you in the race next year!
I'm really excited to see who the starting wingbacks will be come next season. Moses & Alonso are good players don't get me wrong but we need a serious improvement in those positions if we're going to contend for the Champions League again.
I'm fine with them in most circumstances in the Premier League but we definitely need more options in the wing back positions when we play the top sides and in Europe. The formation causes the smaller sides so many problems that Alonso and Moses don't even need to be top class in order to be dangerous.
Really, I hope we go to Monaco with a shed load of cash and buy about 3 of their players. Assuming we keep hold of Hazard, Courtois, and Costa we'll need about 3-4 additions to challenge for everything next season.
Get Semedo and Rodriguez and we will take the wee on on the league regardless of how many hundreds of millions city and United spend.
We've really got to up our game to challenge these guys next season, in Hazard they have a world level player and in Pedro and Costa they also have top draw attackers.
I thought you still own Cuadrado? Or have you sold him. I think he sometimes plays as a wingback for Juve, so he could slot right in at Chelsea.
He's got that ridiculous 3 year loan with an option to buy I think.
You spent £118m yourself this summer, compared to Manchester United's £145m, and City's £165m. Hardly hundreds of millions ahead.
nowhere near one of his best ever games.
Looked a bit tired at times (maybe something to do with injury)
Didnt run around at the back with the energy he normally has. A few around me at match were a bit concerned.
But at least he has stopped the silly positioning where he used to end up in another postcode.
Just an ok game from him today...doing just enough of what was required
net spend?
You can recall players from loan, no?He's got that ridiculous 3 year loan with an option to buy I think.
£28m worth for Chelsea, barely anything for City it seems. About £50m for Manchester United, but that's only if you count the January window as being the same. Either way, with calculation of net spend it still puts Chelsea's spending at £90m, which hardly justifies the condescending tone of the original post.
Edit: I did forget the Oscar January fee.
Chelsea recouped £90m from sales mostly Oscar and Salah and some dudes. United recouped about £40m while they spent about £150.
Net they spend less than £30m while we spent over £110m
Apparently commentator said he's having problems with his knees. We probably should just rest him.
Oscar was a total anomaly, anyway, who was also sold in January, and had no bearing on their summer spending - which is my point. That they still spent relatively close to City/United.
Not going to happen in this case. Conte has been a huge admirer of Cuadrado for years and was one of the reasons he quit Juve after they refused to spend on him if I remember correctly. He even praised him last summer and said he really wanted to coach him at Chelsea. It was Cuadrado's desire to return to Juve where he's very comfortable.
He'd be playing a similar role as Moses is I would imagine. Not sure he'd make much difference for us playing there.
The commentator noted that this was the first time since the Aguero horror tackle that he played without the knee strapping. I think he's getting fitter.
What a stupid post....the fact is they got a lot of dosh for Oscar regardless.....the net spend was something around just 20m
Anomaly or not, we did net spend 4 times more than them.
Though personally I find it funny that it's coming from a Chelsea fan because in the last decade I believe they've outspent us by quite a bit. In any case it doesn't really matter so long as both teams are spending what they can afford. It's just silly buggers between supporters.
So what if we net-spent £110m, if we can do it again this summer.
Here is a table over last 5 years...not sure if this season is included. Might surprise you with a certain other London team up there
http://www.transferleague.co.uk/pre...tables/premier-league-table-last-five-seasons
likey you rightly said...it doesnt matter anymore as long as its within their budgets ...not forgetting FFP.
Chelsea dont rely on Abramovich so much anymore
I carefully said "the last decade" during which you have indeed outspent us. And the difference in the last 5 years is primarily made up because of this season. Basically Ferguson underspent and we're now playing catch-up a bit.
Personally I don't care how Chelsea or City get their money to spend. I don't see why others care so much either. Football has changed and some people can't move on with the times and accept it. Because suddenly business that were undervalued changed hands and owners pumped some money into them and teams that were not competitive previously now are. So What?
What I care about is us being able to spend enough to be competitive and we clearly are. I actually enjoy this new league with more money and a top 6 instead of the old top 4.
and i put a 5 year table up as its more recent with FFP a player nowadays....my point is that in net spend the difference isnt that great and even Arsenal are there.
That table says nothing. Chelsea sold the players they signed 6-8 years back, so obviously the net spend will be in their favor.
More than 5 years back they signed players like Mata, Lukaku, De Bruyne, Luiz, Ramires and few others whom they sold in the last 5 years.
thats how net spend works though...... buy one year, sell another. So the table does say something.
Plus there are loan fees and sales of much lesser known players, youth products etc.
Its their business model and it works for them which makes them so much less reliant on Abramovich cash than before....so yet again, the table says everything
But if you really insist going back 10 years instead of 5 like the other poster above because you reckon it will give a truer reflection with the players you mentioned being bought in 5-10 year window ago then lets have a look shall we.
Now my maths aint great and I am sure some statto's on here will pick holes but in the last decade Man Utd net spend has been 461m whilst Chelseas has been 296m. Utd gross spend is just higher as well.
Am sure other clubs like City, Arsenal etc will have big figures as well..
But as the other poster stated.....who cares, as long as the money is being spent within the rules of those years.
What it does do is dampen the myth about Chelsea being totally reliant on Abramovich and financially have turned into a very well run club albeit needing his money in the 1st place to succeed in that. Nothing wrong with that though, even huge clubs like Utd need investors to come in and re-organise the finances.
So a well run club financially, coupled with top players, signs of youth products and loans starting to work and a driven manager such as Conte means things are looking very good for them in the near and long term future.
Are Chelsea fans contented? I would say very with the above, the new stadium, big sponsorship deals, possible huge investment from the Chinese, and the performances on the pitch. Considering most were just hopeful of a top 4 finish and possibly a cup at the beginning of the season, then they must be very contented
Last edited:
Problem with using just 5 years is Mata cost 0 but sold for 37 Million, similarly Lukaku cost 0 and sold for 28 Million. Same for all players whom they signed 5 years back but sold in this 5 year period.
Title race is done. No idea why some people thought we had a chance a few weeks back. Chelsea have been brilliant this season. Did not expect this much of an improvement from Conte this quickly.
Their "improvement" under Conte is perceived as being much greater than it actually is. Last season was an anomaly, many abnormal non-footballing factors (player mutiny) led to their 10th place finish. You can't literally give credit to Conte for improving them from 10th to 1st. It is not as if they are a team like Bournemouth or West Ham or whatever. Chelsea's normal level isn't mid table, even if they finished in mid table once. They won the title two seasons ago FFS and many of their players are seasoned winners. He hasn't gone in and built a new team. So what he has done is to make Chelsea play at their normal level after a one season blip. He has not taken a mid table team to being top of the league. Let's not over rate his achievement.
By the way, despite being top, they have CLEAR weaknesses when it comes to their defending and finishing. Their lack of height makes them vulnerable to long balls and they are very weak at dealing with crosses on Moses' flank (he is not even a bloody defender FFS). And their finishing was appalling against Swansea, chance after chance missed, 70% possession and only a handful of shots?? Looked like exactly the kind of game LVG would get criticized for. Apart from his goal Costa did totally nothing, and that is the same kind of thing Zlatan gets criticized for. Yet I don't hear any UTD fans claiming "Costa is holding Chelsea back" like they do Zlatan. Let's not apply double standards - Chelsea aren't THAT amazing and Conte is a very good manager but not the unicorn-like tactical mastermind that some of you guys think he is.
I was pointing more to next summer where city and united will outspend everyone by nearly 100m (city need a new defense and United seem to be on their own galactico project).
I doubt Chelsea will/can spend that much. Any upgrades will be likely be funded by sales.