Chelsea before the money...

[Rozay]

Roman came along and changed everything and they started competing at a high level as we all know. However, when I look back at them before the money, I find them a curious case, largely due to lack of memory of the facts (I was young and can remember the football, but not the context).

Ultimately, what seems odd to me on reflection is that they had the likes of Desailly, Zola, Vialli, Weah, Gullit, Lebeouf and others play for them when they were relative nobodies. I’m not sure what their finances were like, but they were not title contenders at all I remember that much, yet they had World Cup winners, Balloon winners etc, and not just when they were like 35 and finished either. United were the top dogs and Leeds, Arsenal, Newcastle and co were in and around us - but we never got players of that calibre.

 

[Rado_N]

They were kind of like Spurs if I remember correctly, kind of there near the upper levels but never really challenging.

Roman took them to the next level but it wasn’t like City where they were elevated from irrelevance.

 

[Maluco]

It’s crazy to think after all the trophies and money that their team was probably better from 96 - 2000 than it is today.

Petrescu, Lebeouf, Desailly, Le Saux, Di Matteo, Poyet, Zola, Vialli, Casiraghi etc...

It must have been a great time to be a Chelsea fan seeing those names at the club, even if their best days were behind them in some cases.

 

[Rozay]

They were kind of like Spurs if I remember correctly, kind of there near the upper levels but never really challenging.

Roman took them to the next level but it wasn’t like City where they were elevated from irrelevance.

Yea that’s similar to how I remember, but my curiosity was more the money side of things. The big money wasn’t in the PL at that stage, and from what I know, they had no business attracting the players they did in those days. It would be like Wolves or Everton signing Ronaldo instead of Juventus (not exactly, I know!), or them signing Villa instead of Atletico at least. And that’s without even considering that those guys are minted now.

 

[caid]

They were on the verge of bankruptcy when Roman bought them weren't they? Beating Liverpool and qualifying for the champions league on last day basically saved them.
They were a decent team but stacked in some areas and kind of lacking in others and the managers were pretty uninspiring. They usually did well in the fa cup. Vaguely remember them playing Barcelona in the champions league and it being a pretty great match, 5-4 or something silly.

 

[Adam-Utd]

Living in Chelsea has always been a positive thing for people.

 

[FootballHQ]

They were actually a very decent team from mid 90s. Shite in the early 90s and 80s when they got relegated in play off v Boro.

Anyway from 1995 they had Glenn Hoddle as player manager than Gullit took over as player manager and attracted Leboeuf, Di Matteo, Vialli, Mark Hughes, Dan Petrescu, Tore Andre Flo, Zola of course, Deschamps, Desailly etc. Some still very good players, others coming to the end of their careers but still good professionalism.

Ultimately they were a bit like Arsenal in last years of Wenger, good in cup competitions but flattered to decieve challenging for the league.

From 96-97 season up to Abramovich takeover they finished 6th, 4th, 3rd,, 5th, 6th, 6th and then 4th so good range of consistancy. They also won two FA cups, a cup winners cup and a league cup in that period. Also made champions league quarters in 2000 when they nearly defeated Barcelona.

To me it's wrong when people just think they were a mid table team miles off success like Man. City were when they were taken over. Or even Newcastle when they finally get rid of Ashley.

They were good, just needed that extra step. I actually think the signing of Mourinho was most important in first year as the time he was exactly the manager they needed to give them ruthless mentality.

 

[FootballHQ]

They were on the verge of bankruptcy when Roman bought them weren't they? Beating Liverpool and qualifying for the champions league on last day basically saved them.
They were a decent team but stacked in some areas and kind of lacking in others and the managers were pretty uninspiring. They usually did well in the fa cup. Vaguely remember them playing Barcelona in the champions league and it being a pretty great match, 5-4 or something silly.

Yes they overspent a fair bit like Leeds and would've had to sell major players like Lampard and Terry if they hadn't made CL in 2003. Also had that Chelsea village behind one of the stands which they could've cashed in on.

Who knows if Abramovich would've still gone for them if they were in europa, I'd still say the overall package of them being London premier league club available to buy would've been a yes.

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

I remember them being pretty good in the mid 90s.

 

[GifLord]

Even before Roman took over they spent tons of money on players. They had numerous players on high wages

 

[Gary_Walsh_Nou_Camp_Hell]

Yea that’s similar to how I remember, but my curiosity was more the money side of things. The big money wasn’t in the PL at that stage, and from what I know, they had no business attracting the players they did in those days. It would be like Wolves or Everton signing Ronaldo instead of Juventus (not exactly, I know!), or them signing Villa instead of Atletico at least. And that’s without even considering that those guys are minted now.

Chelsea did splash some money in wages for those big names.

It was the combination of money and the impact Cantona had on the league, shortly followed by the likes of Klinsmann and Bergkamp.

It was exciting and all clubs dashed to sign continental talent. it started to become a realistic destination for players. Chelsea got some big names, but it has to be said that the likes of Gullet, Viali, Weah had seen their better days.

Lots of clubs did similar things at this time. Middlesbrough bought Ravanelli, Juninho, Emerson. Newcastle had Ginola, Asprilla.

It was happening across the league and with Chelsea's location, a bit of money and not too far off challeging they could attract some bigger names

It was many years later before Serie A could no longer be the main draw for the world's best players

 

[Tarrou]

they were quite easy to like back then, played some decent stuff, had some nice players, but never really threatened for the league

 

[Rozay]

All I remember was despite being better than the rest, United ‘couldn’t compete for the best international stars’. I mean, Desailly was still in his 20s at Chelsea I believe, had already won a CL elsewhere, Serie A, and won the World Cup while there. Like, what the feck was he doing at Chelsea? He was brilliant for them too I remember, to me, one of the best centre halves we’ve had in this league.

On another note, I still rate Dan Petrescu as the best ever PL right back. Scored some great goals from that position too.

 

[Chairman Steve]

I remember them being a retirement home of once good players, like the club‘s scouting procedure in the early 2000s was watching Serie A season review videos from the 90s and picking out the best players from there.

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

Chelsea did splash some money in wages for those big names.

It was the combination of money and the impact Cantona had on the league, shortly followed by the likes of Klinsmann and Bergkamp.

It was exciting and all clubs dashed to sign continental talent. it started to become a realistic destination for players. Chelsea got some big names, but it has to be said that the likes of Gullet, Viali, Weah had seen their better days.

Lots of clubs did similar things at this time. Middlesbrough bought Ravanelli, Juninho, Emerson. Newcastle had Ginola, Asprilla.

It was happening across the league and with Chelsea's location, a bit of money and not too far off challeging they could attract some bigger names

It was many years later before Serie A could no longer be the main draw for the world's best players

Those were fun times in the Premier League.

 

[Mockney]

They were kind of like Spurs if I remember correctly,

Except they won stuff.

 

[2mufc0]

They had a pretty strong team at one point, Zola was brilliant, Poyet and Hasselbaink were firing in rockets

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

They also had Dennis Wise for a long time.

 

[Snow]

Some comparisons with Spurs but I'm not sure about that. From the start of the PL until like 2005 Spurs were a midtable club that barely saw European football. The seasons before Roman Chelsea spent quite a bit of money, had some high profile managers and they won several cups. Ranieri finished 4th and their squad looked something like this

Cudicini

Melchiot-Gallas-Desailly-Le Saux (Terry and Babayaro rotating)

Gronkjær-Petit-Lampard-Zola (Zenden, Stanic, Morris backup)

Hasselbaink-Guðjohnsen

Pretty good team that and I'd fancy them to beat our current side.

 

[SalfordRed18]

Cup team weren't they?

 

[SalfordRed18]

Some comparisons with Spurs but I'm not sure about that. From the start of the PL until like 2005 Spurs were a midtable club that barely saw European football. The seasons before Roman Chelsea spent quite a bit of money, had some high profile managers and they won several cups. Ranieri finished 4th and their squad looked something like this

Cudicini

Melchiot-Gallas-Desailly-Le Saux (Terry and Babayaro rotating)

Gronkjær-Petit-Lampard-Zola (Zenden, Stanic, Morris backup)

Hasselbaink-Guðjohnsen

Pretty good team that and I'd fancy them to beat our current side.

That's actually a very solid side.

 

[Sylar]

We need more discussion on Winston bogarde

I remember Chelsea always beating United in the league and that run where they always won at old Trafford it seemed.
And people like Gavin peacock scoring winners

Zola was so much fun to watch though. London definitely appealed to foreigners coming over and Chelsea is a nice place

 

[Irwin99]

I remember them being a bit like Spurs and Everton now in that they were a big(ish) club that just kind of was always there in the upper half of the league, always dangerous on their day but who could never really kick on.

We never seemed to have a good record against them in the 90s. A lot of draws and defeats I remember. Beat them in the FA Cup Final though

 

[Snow]

We need more discussion on Winston bogarde

I remember Chelsea always beating United in the league and that run where they always won at old Trafford it seemed.
And people like Gavin peacock scoring winners

Zola was so much fun to watch though. London definitely appealed to foreigners coming over and Chelsea is a nice place

Gullit brought in some big names on the end of their careers (B. Laudrup, Deschamps, Vialli) but he also wasted some money (Sutton and Casiraghi were flops, Bogarde on big wages and sat out his contract not Gullit's signing but DoF).

 

[Rozay]

Some comparisons with Spurs but I'm not sure about that. From the start of the PL until like 2005 Spurs were a midtable club that barely saw European football. The seasons before Roman Chelsea spent quite a bit of money, had some high profile managers and they won several cups. Ranieri finished 4th and their squad looked something like this

Cudicini

Melchiot-Gallas-Desailly-Le Saux (Terry and Babayaro rotating)

Gronkjær-Petit-Lampard-Zola (Zenden, Stanic, Morris backup)

Hasselbaink-Guðjohnsen

Pretty good team that and I'd fancy them to beat our current side.

I think the comparison is with the current Spurs, not Spurs of back then.

 

[Sylar]

Gullit brought in some big names on the end of their careers (B. Laudrup, Deschamps, Vialli) but he also wasted some money (Sutton and Casiraghi were flops, Bogarde on big wages and sat out his contract).

Bogarde is such a funny story but I can't blame him at all. He was honest and got what he came for

 

[Rado_N]

Except they won stuff.

They didn’t have a cheese room in their stadium though so, yea, burn.

 

[Prometheus]

It's true. We were the best even then.

 

[Snow]

I think the comparison is with the current Spurs, not Spurs of back then.

Needs to be more specific. Poch's Spurs were better than pre-Roman Chelsea. Redknapp's Spurs maybe around the same level but they never cracked the top 4 or won a trophy. 6 trophies for Chelsea in 4 seasons right before Roman is no joke.

 

[Snow]

Bogarde is such a funny story but I can't blame him at all. He was honest and got what he came for

Yeah. He couldn't believe how much they were paying him (Gullit actually had nothing to with him) but he honored his contract like a pro, just was never played.

 

[padr81]

Roman came along and changed everything and they started competing at a high level as we all know. However, when I look back at them before the money, I find them a curious case, largely due to lack of memory of the facts (I was young and can remember the football, but not the context).

Ultimately, what seems odd to me on reflection is that they had the likes of Desailly, Zola, Vialli, Weah, Gullit, Lebeouf and others play for them when they were relative nobodies. I’m not sure what their finances were like, but they were not title contenders at all I remember that much, yet they had World Cup winners, Balloon winners etc, and not just when they were like 35 and finished either. United were the top dogs and Leeds, Arsenal, Newcastle and co were in and around us - but we never got players of that calibre.

Neither did Chelsea.

Gullit was 33 when he joined.
Weah was 34...
Desailly was 30...
Vialli 32...
Zola was 30...

People don't realize Chelsea signed those guys when they were past their prime and on the way down cept Lebeouf who wasn't as good as the options at the big clubs and Zola who was still magical.

 

[Rozay]

Yeah. He couldn't believe how much they were paying him (Gullit actually had nothing to with him) but he honored his contract like a pro, just was never played.

I recall how much of a fuss was and still is made about his £50k p/w - which is no money at all these days.

 

[Rozay]

Neither did Chelsea.

Gullit was 33 when he joined.
Weah was 34...
Desailly was 30...
Vialli 32...
Zola was 30...

People don't realize Chelsea signed those guys when they were past their prime and on the way down cept Lebeouf who wasn't as good as the options at the big clubs and Zola who was still magical.

Desailly, Gullit and Zola were still amongst the very best in the league. I know they were not at career highs, but they had a lot left to offer.

 

[FootballHQ]

Yea that’s similar to how I remember, but my curiosity was more the money side of things. The big money wasn’t in the PL at that stage, and from what I know, they had no business attracting the players they did in those days. It would be like Wolves or Everton signing Ronaldo instead of Juventus (not exactly, I know!), or them signing Villa instead of Atletico at least. And that’s without even considering that those guys are minted now.

Sorry only seen your post otherwise would've replied in my main post. Think the signing of Ruud Gullit really changed perceptions. Bit like Arsenal signing Dennis Bergkamp the same year. In mid 90s most English cities outside of London were real dumps before the regeneration we've seen in last 20 years.

I stand to be corrected by Chelsea fans on here but Matthew Harding also pumped lots of money in to them before he died in 1996.

To a lesser extent Boro tried to copy it getting in Ravanelli, Juninho and Emerson but less successful.

 

[padr81]

Desailly, Gullit and Zola were still amongst the very best in the league. I know they were not at career highs, but they had a lot left to offer.

They were good players but they were at Chelsea because they weren't wanted by bigger clubs (with no disrespect to Chelsea). Gullit was seen as finished and came in to play sweeper under Glenn Hoddle, and was eventually moved to midfield because it wasn't working out. He was great for the rest of his first season but quickly deteriorated if I remember rightly and it was seen very much as second wind type thing. Desailly was still very good and Zola was indeed magical. People imagine it was prime this and prime that but sadly they were good but no longer great players when they arrived at Chelsea.

 

[FootballHQ]

I recall how much of a fuss was and still is made about his £50k p/w - which is no money at all these days.

It was at the time. Remember Roy Keane signing a 52k a week deal in 1999 which made him highest paid player in England for a period and massive outcry in the press and radio.

Now you see average squad players comfortably earning that.

 

[FootballHQ]

They were good players but they were at Chelsea because they weren't wanted by bigger clubs (with no disrespect to Chelsea). Gullit was seen as finished and came in to play sweeper under Glenn Hoddle, and was eventually moved to midfield because it wasn't working out. He was great for the rest of his first season but quickly deteriorated if I remember rightly and it was seen very much as second wind type thing. Desailly was still very good and Zola was indeed magical. People imagine it was prime this and prime that but sadly they were good but no longer great players when they arrived at Chelsea.

It was mix and match. Le Saux had just won the league at Blackburn and Chelsea re-signed him. Poyet was a very decent Lampard like midfielder for Zaragoza but IIRC had two seperate ACLs in his first two seasons. Hasselbaink was very good pick up but they also signed past their best players like Deschamps who couldn't get the pace of the league at that age.

I agree they were more likeable in those days but that's true of any nearly side until they actually starting winning titles and CL....

 

[Morpheus 7]

Cup team weren't they?

They won the cup winners cup and FA cup, had some good attacking players in the 90's. Zola was class, bogey team for United. Always remember there ground looking like a building site for ages. There fans were always vile.

 

[GifLord]

Keane settles for £50,000 a week

from 1999

The deal puts in the shade the estimated £40,000 a week paid to the current top earners, Alan Shearer and Duncan Ferguson of Newcastle United and Chelsea's Marcel Desailly and Didier Deschamps. It is more than twice what United stars such as David Beckham earn.

 

[Needham]

They were kind of like Spurs if I remember correctly, kind of there near the upper levels but never really challenging.

Roman took them to the next level but it wasn’t like City where they were elevated from irrelevance.

They were only like this by the late 90s. Before then you'd have found the word Chelsea next to the phrase 'bang average' in a dictionary of idioms. It would be no surprise to see Chelsea flirting with relegation and their most memorable contribution to 80s football was a sensational riot following a play off defeat against Middlesbrough. I recall Forest beating them 7 nil and no one batting an eyelid. They had a minor semi glory period around the turn of the 70s that coincided with all that Kings Road bullshit otherwise they would have been Bolton Wanderers. Pure beneficiaries of geography.