Chelsea 2022/2023 - The new era

  • The day many of you wished for has finally come - Match Day Score Predictions are no longer restricted to just 5 goals... *

    * The timing of this change is purely coincidental and has nothing to do with any perception of underperformance by any team in recent matches or fan pessimism, justified or otherwise, for future matches. (Probably).

ZolaWasMagic

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jul 14, 2018
Messages
2,239
Supports
Chelsea
The big difference is that the Dodgers have the highest revenues in MLB (or second to the Yankees, it’s not totally clear) and every baseball team is almost certainly insanely profitable.

It’s a lot easier to outspend your rivals when you have the most money to spend AND you’re making big profits anyway.

Chelsea have fourth highest revenues in PL and lose money. Maybe still worthwhile to invest big into the club in anticipation of driving future growth in asset value (I assume this is his current thinking). But it’s a very different scenario than the Dodgers, which are more like a very profitable Real Madrid in terms of their position within their league.
There was an article about Boehly having close ties with the entertainment industry, and would likely attract better sponsorship than previous. How true that is, I have no idea. Although the new sleeve sponsor is worth an additional 10m a yr
 

ZolaWasMagic

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jul 14, 2018
Messages
2,239
Supports
Chelsea
I think we announced 4 or 5 players on the same day one time. That was a mental summer.
It was indeed. I remember everytime i checked teletext, I expected to see something about a new signing, or a bid agreed.

summer after was 9 singings too. Drog, Carvalho, Ferreira, Tiago, Robben, Cech, Jarosik, Alex, Kezman
 

amolbhatia50k

Sneaky bum time - Vaccination status: dozed off
Joined
Nov 8, 2002
Messages
86,615
Location
india
He looked a quality player whenever I saw him last season. Chelsea doing some strong business this summer.
 

Bluelion7

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Aug 27, 2021
Messages
315
Supports
Chelsea
There was an article about Boehly having close ties with the entertainment industry, and would likely attract better sponsorship than previous. How true that is, I have no idea. Although the new sleeve sponsor is worth an additional 10m a yr
He literally owned the tv stations. And the Dodgers don’t spend within their means. When I cited them spending 102 million on a 31 year old right handed pitcher … that was right after recording revenue losses in the neighborhood of 300 million.

Boehly doesn’t look at making money the same way traditional teams do. When you see a guy make 22 mil a year posting YouTube vids and you’re like “what is going on???” , then you don’t understand the modern economy. Boehly is a “Meta” sports owner. He wants to own the whole experience, he wants revenue streams related to online content, he’ll create a tv channel just related to the team. And then THAT meta brand will be the gateway to other brands and associations that create interconnected chains of revenue streams.

He also represents people who, frankly, just want bragging rights and to have a great football team. Wyss may not care if Chelsea make money. If they win and provide a good image for his venture capital firm, great! Just like F1 and Horse racing that IS where sport is headed: if you have to ask the price you shouldn’t be buying.
 
Last edited:

Rajiztar

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Nov 10, 2019
Messages
1,469
Supports
Chelsea
It was indeed. I remember everytime i checked teletext, I expected to see something about a new signing, or a bid agreed.

summer after was 9 singings too. Drog, Carvalho, Ferreira, Tiago, Robben, Cech, Jarosik, Alex, Kezman
This window has nothing to do with roman s first summer. We after all signed three players like for like for first team by doing so trying to improve first team quality.

Lukaku->sterling
Alonso->cucurella
Rudiger->koulibaly
Barkley->Gallagher
Kenedy->Broja
And chukwuemeka the 18 yr old kid.

It's nothing like or no where near roman s first season. Not even close.
 

Mb194dc

Full Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2015
Messages
3,505
Supports
Chelsea
Looks crazy money, he's quite young I guess. Let's hope it works out better than AWB anyway!

The difference with the Roman era, is that despite this initial spending, Clearlake are in it to make money. Far less room for mistakes to be plastered over.

So hopefully the transfers work out, or we'll end up like Utd... But less profitable.
 

Noodle

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Oct 24, 2019
Messages
321
Supports
Chelsea
Sterling £47.5m
Koulibaly £33m
Cucurella £55m
Slonina £13m
Carney £15m
Hutchinson £Unknown

That’s a huge window already and we’re still looking at £70m+ for Fofana. We know the actual cash isn’t an issue with the investment from the takeover but I’d be interested to see how close it’s going to push us to FFP limits. I know we were running slightly within it up to 20/21 but with 21/22 factored in it may change. It may be that this is our statement summer and then things settle into smaller windows similar to how Liverpool operate. In any case I’m sure Boehly is on it.

Get Edwards in as Director of Football, Boehly can then step back and think big picture on the stadium and commercial side
 

cyberman

Full Member
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
27,888
He literally owned the tv stations. And the Dodgers don’t spend within their means. When I cited them spending 102 million on a 31 year old right handed pitcher … that was right after recording revenue losses in the neighborhood of 300 million.

Boehly doesn’t look at making money the same way traditional teams do. When you see a guy make 22 mil a year posting YouTube vids and you’re like “what is going on???” , then you don’t understand the modern economy. Boehly is a “Meta” sports owner. He wants to own the whole experience, he wants revenue streams related to online content, he’ll create a tv channel just related to the team. And then THAT meta brand will be the gateway to other brands and associations that create interconnected chains of revenue streams.

He also represents people who, frankly, just want bragging rights and to have a great football team. Wyss may not care if Chelsea make money. If they win and provide a good image for his venture capital firm, great! Just like F1 and Horse racing that IS where sport is headed: if you have to ask the price you shouldn’t be buying.
This reads as hopes and dreams to be honest
 

Noodle

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Oct 24, 2019
Messages
321
Supports
Chelsea
Looks crazy money, he's quite young I guess. Let's hope it works out better than AWB anyway!

The difference with the Roman era, is that despite this initial spending, Clearlake are in it to make money. Far less room for mistakes to be plastered over.

So hopefully the transfers work out, or we'll end up like Utd... But less profitable.
True but I think to make money back they need to increase the revenue the club makes and they do that by making us successful on the pitch, improving our commercial and stadium revenue and then riding the PL gravy train.

No reason why all PL clubs won’t double in value of ten years regardless
 

BerryBerryShrew

Full Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2021
Messages
456
Certainly a statement Summer under new ownership. Investing while you're still in a decent position too.
The problem with investing heavily is that improvements must be made in terms of league position in order to justify it. They are on course to spend £300m (with very little coming in through player sales to offset it) yet at best they will still finish third this year. Like Arsenal under Arteta, they are spending a lot and not getting a whole lot of value.
 

RedSky

Shepherd’s Delight
Scout
Joined
Jul 27, 2006
Messages
70,391
Location
Hereford FC (Soccermanager)
The problem with investing heavily is that improvements must be made in terms of league position in order to justify it. They are on course to spend £300m (with very little coming in through player sales to offset it) yet at best they will still finish third this year. Like Arsenal under Arteta, they are spending a lot and not getting a whole lot of value.
I think the majority of Chelsea fans would be pretty satisfied if they can finish 3rd again. Just look at how horrendous our form has been since Sir Alex retired, when huge changes occur at a club keeping the status quo is vital otherwise you can fall off a cliff. I was curious to see what would happen with Chelsea this Summer as I wondered if their investing would be less under new ownership but so far it's been more of the same.
 

Rajiztar

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Nov 10, 2019
Messages
1,469
Supports
Chelsea
The problem with investing heavily is that improvements must be made in terms of league position in order to justify it. They are on course to spend £300m (with very little coming in through player sales to offset it) yet at best they will still finish third this year. Like Arsenal under Arteta, they are spending a lot and not getting a whole lot of value.
We will fight for title mate. Going for quadruple. :)
 

Devil_forever

You're only young once, you can be immature f'ever
Joined
Apr 28, 2007
Messages
10,417
Location
Head of the naval division of lolibfascon
The problem with investing heavily is that improvements must be made in terms of league position in order to justify it. They are on course to spend £300m (with very little coming in through player sales to offset it) yet at best they will still finish third this year. Like Arsenal under Arteta, they are spending a lot and not getting a whole lot of value.
I mean they’re only after Fofana and maybe Auba after this, they won’t be spending 300m.
 

SirReginald

Full Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2019
Messages
1,057
Supports
Chelsea
The problem with investing heavily is that improvements must be made in terms of league position in order to justify it. They are on course to spend £300m (with very little coming in through player sales to offset it) yet at best they will still finish third this year. Like Arsenal under Arteta, they are spending a lot and not getting a whole lot of value.
This is under normal circumstances but Chelsea’s situation is not a normal circumstance. New owner and a few key players left. I’m sure Todd is smart enough to understand that this season will league consolidation and a big focus on reform and restructure from inside. We are probably 3-5 years out from challenging city and pool and that’s with the club making good decisions.
 

Cascarino

Miasmic
Joined
Jul 17, 2014
Messages
5,724
Location
Wales
Supports
Swansea
So not a good window for me. They're signing good players but not players that they need. For example, it looks like they are going to spunk huge money on Fofana. Is he (after a leg break) really a surer bet than Colwill? He certainly isn't a better bet than Guehi and they could surely get him back from Palace for a lot less than the £70m-£100m that Leicester are demanding
He absolutely is. I love Guehi, I’ve championed him for years but Fofana is a better player, he’s outstanding. It’s a steep price if the reported figures end up being what he goes for, but considering his age and talent it’s probably worth it to Chelsea considering their needs
 

Powderfinger

Full Member
Joined
Oct 27, 2015
Messages
1,580
Supports
Arsenal
If Boehly is willing to just throw money around, I can see the logic behind buying FDJ this window rather than waiting until next summer once Kante/Jorginho have their contracts expire. A lot of excellent midfielders have needed a season or close to adapt to the speed and lack of time in the PL - Rodri, Partey, Jorginho, Gundogan, and Kovacic all didn't really hit stride until their second year, even Fabinho needed a bedding in period. There's a good argument for letting FDJ integrate slowly this year as a way to set him up for next year.

Chelsea fans will no doubt dislike this part, but I also just don't think Gallagher has a future under Tuchel in a two man midfield. To me he just doesn't have the positional discipline or technical level to play CM for a team that wants to dominate possession and needs a lot of tactical nous out of the players in that position.
 

Orc

Pretended to be a United fan for two years
Joined
Dec 17, 2012
Messages
5,060
Supports
Chelsea
If Boehly is willing to just throw money around, I can see the logic behind buying FDJ this window rather than waiting until next summer once Kante/Jorginho have their contracts expire. A lot of excellent midfielders have needed a season or close to adapt to the speed and lack of time in the PL - Rodri, Partey, Jorginho, Gundogan, and Kovacic all didn't really hit stride until their second year, even Fabinho needed a bedding in period. There's a good argument for letting FDJ integrate slowly this year as a way to set him up for next year.

Chelsea fans will no doubt dislike this part, but I also just don't think Gallagher has a future under Tuchel in a two man midfield. To me he just doesn't have the positional discipline or technical level to play CM for a team that wants to dominate possession and needs a lot of tactical nous out of the players in that position.
I don’t think Gallagher will be competing for a spot in CM, but rather with Mount as a more advanced midfielder.
 

Powderfinger

Full Member
Joined
Oct 27, 2015
Messages
1,580
Supports
Arsenal
I don’t think Gallagher will be competing for a spot in CM, but rather with Mount as a more advanced midfielder.
Ah OK, that sounds like the better use of his skill set to me.
 

Bluelion7

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Aug 27, 2021
Messages
315
Supports
Chelsea
Looks crazy money, he's quite young I guess. Let's hope it works out better than AWB anyway!

The difference with the Roman era, is that despite this initial spending, Clearlake are in it to make money. Far less room for mistakes to be plastered over.

So hopefully the transfers work out, or we'll end up like Utd... But less profitable.
I’m curious why you think Clearlake paid nearly 4 billion for a football club they know they have to build a new stadium for … to start making money right away?

No. Boehly himself tried explaining the different view he takes on sports teams, how it was a long term investment that’s part of a much bigger picture.

His other teams are super successful, but the team itself often run at a net loss on paper.

It is complicated to get into. The important thing to get is that it is NOT a situation like the Glazers where they are monitoring ticket sales and income streams and hoping to get a cash cow by bleeding an existing brand.

It’s not sportswashing like the Saudis, but it’s also not totally dissimilar.
 

BigDycheEnergy

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jun 11, 2022
Messages
58
I don't know this Cucurella fella, but I do know that at least 101 dalmatians in Manchester are safe now.
 

Powderfinger

Full Member
Joined
Oct 27, 2015
Messages
1,580
Supports
Arsenal
I’m curious why you think Clearlake paid nearly 4 billion for a football club they know they have to build a new stadium for … to start making money right away?

No. Boehly himself tried explaining the different view he takes on sports teams, how it was a long term investment that’s part of a much bigger picture.

His other teams are super successful, but the team itself often run at a net loss on paper.

It is complicated to get into. The important thing to get is that it is NOT a situation like the Glazers where they are monitoring ticket sales and income streams and hoping to get a cash cow by bleeding an existing brand.

It’s not sportswashing like the Saudis, but it’s also not totally dissimilar.
This is not true.

I'm sure Boehly does have a longer term vision of driving increased up the value of Chelsea FC as an asset. Many people (especially Americans) think big football clubs are worth more than their current value and many owners also have become de facto real estate developers, seeing stadiums as lynchpins of larger commercial developments. But there are definitely limits to the amount of money somebody like that is going to want to lose. And football clubs are really different than American sports teams in that regard. American sports are set up so that its almost impossible for the teams to lose money, even when they spending a lot like the Dodgers. A club like Chelsea, on the other hand, loses money most years.
 

Gazza

Full Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2000
Messages
31,248
Sadly for me as a Chelsea fan, that's very wrong.
TBF, the last little lot brought you 2 Champions League and 3 (4?) league titles, whereas this summer's intake hasn't proven anything yet.
 

WeePat

Full Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2015
Messages
10,029
Supports
Chelsea
Boehly sure loves sorting out deals over a meal.