TheReligion
Abusive
The most boring saga has finally concluded!
The most boring saga has finally concluded!
We're venturing into the unknown a bit here so it's hard to tell. There's every indication Boehly and his group will be nothing like the Glazers, so you won't find many Chelsea fans concerned about them being parasite leeches. We'll see though. The hope is that club continues to grow, and since it's no longer Abramovich's plaything, the need to grow the club's revenues, redevelop the stadium etc will be areas of huge focus and effort. It's optimistic times for me at least.I look forward to Chelsea being run as a "sustainable" business and thusly their inevitable slide down the table, though we've had near 20 years of seeing what that life is like under the Glazer's. Are the Chelsea fans happy/optimistic about this or do you see an equivalent and inevitable reduction in status without the oil money funding the megasignings you've been making on the regular (including Havertz, Werner etc)?
Speaking on behalf of all Chelsea fans, we're happy the takeover has happened given the situation and happy with who bought it, given the options.I look forward to Chelsea being run as a "sustainable" business and thusly their inevitable slide down the table, though we've had near 20 years of seeing what that life is like under the Glazer's. Are the Chelsea fans happy/optimistic about this or do you see an equivalent and inevitable reduction in status without the oil money funding the megasignings you've been making on the regular (including Havertz, Werner etc)?
Once Klopp leaves Liverpool, we will all see that the club is not being ran as good as it seems.Speaking on behalf of all Chelsea fans, we're happy the takeover has happened given the situation and happy with who bought it, given the options.
I also don't see a reduction in status as inevitable. Liverpool have shown with good decisions at high levels you don't need a sugar daddy to compete.
.
The owners had the sense to not only pick Klopp but also back him fully. Maybe (hopefully) they'll fall off but its just as likely that Man City replace Pep with a clown and they fall off.Once Klopp leaves Liverpool, we will all see that the club is not being ran as good as it seems.
Klopp has them competing at the highest level, the owners are not the reason they are competing without a sugar daddy, not to me toon they have only been competing for the top trophies for 4 years.
We're apparently spending £200 this summer.@duffer I suppose even before Abramovich came you were winning things and were regular top four contenders. He just pushed you to an ultra elite level. I think a reduction in status is inevitable without spending £100m on players every summer though.
Most of it will be spent on getting replacements for the players leaving though right?We're apparently spending £200 this summer.
It's not just about the figures though. It's about not spending 73 mil on Kepa, 98 mil on Lukaku or 35 mil on drinkwater.
These guys also don't really need to splash the cash so to speak every window to the same extent Abramovich did. They're taking over a very different club to the one Abramovich found in 2003.We're apparently spending £200 this summer.
It's not just about the figures though. It's about not spending 73 mil on Kepa, 98 mil on Lukaku or 35 mil on drinkwater.
If the owners aren't prepared to lose money long term we'll probably end up like Arsenal and Utd...I look forward to Chelsea being run as a "sustainable" business and thusly their inevitable slide down the table, though we've had near 20 years of seeing what that life is like under the Glazer's. Are the Chelsea fans happy/optimistic about this or do you see an equivalent and inevitable reduction in status without the oil money funding the megasignings you've been making on the regular (including Havertz, Werner etc)?
It isn't just as likely though, because City won 2 PL titles before Pep, Liverpool won none of the big two trophies before Klopp and he has only won 1 of each in his 6 year tenure anyway. City have unlimited resources to spend even when Pep leaves, it's far more likely Liverpool struggle without Klopp than City without Pep.The owners had the sense to not only pick Klopp but also back him fully. Maybe (hopefully) they'll fall off but its just as likely that Man City replace Pep with a clown and they fall off.
...I look forward to Chelsea being run as a "sustainable" business and thusly their inevitable slide down the table, though we've had near 20 years of seeing what that life is like under the Glazer's. Are the Chelsea fans happy/optimistic about this or do you see an equivalent and inevitable reduction in status without the oil money funding the megasignings you've been making on the regular (including Havertz, Werner etc)?
...Once Klopp leaves Liverpool, we will all see that the club is not being ran as good as it seems.
Klopp has them competing at the highest level, the owners are not the reason they are competing without a sugar daddy, not to mention they have only been competing for the top trophies for 4 years.
Replacing players is generally the point of transfers, yes!Most of it will be spent on getting replacements for the players leaving though right?
Completely agree. This is the reality we are in now.If the owners aren't prepared to lose money long term we'll probably end up like Arsenal and Utd...
We can live in hope it's possible to be financially sustainable and win trophies.
In the City, PSG and now probably Newcastle era those two objectives are likely incompatible.
Have they taken on debt to fund the purchase (i.e. similar to United)?If the owners aren't prepared to lose money long term we'll probably end up like Arsenal and Utd...
We can live in hope it's possible to be financially sustainable and win trophies.
In the City, PSG and now probably Newcastle era those two objectives are likely incompatible.
We spend money initially.No doubt about it. Which way we will spend determine our immediate success. Liverpool way or United way. Both teams spent well but one towards success another struck with some bad buys.I look forward to Chelsea being run as a "sustainable" business and thusly their inevitable slide down the table, though we've had near 20 years of seeing what that life is like under the Glazer's. Are the Chelsea fans happy/optimistic about this or do you see an equivalent and inevitable reduction in status without the oil money funding the megasignings you've been making on the regular (including Havertz, Werner etc)?
If the options are United/Spurs or City, then it obviously won't be City.I'll be really interested to see what happens with Chelsea. The original 'run at a consistent loss' megaclub. Will the new owners continue that? For me, the one guaranteed thing in today's European football market: the oil clubs will operate at a loss, so to compete you need to either do football operations better, or get lucky.
People talking about LFC being the bastion of sensibility, but imo they're only able to be that bastion because Barca bankrupted themselves trying to keep up with the oil spending. Coutinho was basically 3/4 seasons worth of solid profit LFC was able to reinvest. Of course Klopp is also a genius, so there's that.
Imo CFC will either become like United or Tottenham - operate within its means but not be near City in terms of squad quality - or continue to be sugar daddy, but with a different name supplying the funds.
You would think so, yes. Ultimately I see us being stronger next season with the right recruitment.Most of it will be spent on getting replacements for the players leaving though right?
I agree mostly with this.I'll be really interested to see what happens with Chelsea. The original 'run at a consistent loss' megaclub. Will the new owners continue that? For me, the one guaranteed thing in today's European football market: the oil clubs will operate at a loss, so to compete you need to either do football operations better, or get lucky.
People talking about LFC being the bastion of sensibility, but imo they're only able to be that bastion because Barca bankrupted themselves trying to keep up with the oil spending. Coutinho was basically 3/4 seasons worth of solid profit LFC was able to reinvest. Of course Klopp is also a genius, so there's that.
Imo CFC will either become like United or Tottenham - operate within its means but not be near City in terms of squad quality - or continue to be sugar daddy, but with a different name supplying the funds.
I think all or most of us accept this. That’s why we’ve been hearing so much about how our new owner will be trying to adopt the “Liverpool model.” We have to identify and scout up and coming players who may not be the sexiest or most famous names and sign them before they cost £80m or something. Sensible signings for the most part with the rare splash out on someone super expensive.I agree mostly with this.
I think what some Chelsea fans won’t realise (and its understandable as some will not have known Chelsea pre Roman) is they’ve been incredibly fortunate to have an owner who has essentially allowed the club to run itself into debt. Debt which he has absorbed himself.
When you look at their recruitment over the years they’ve made some absolute howlers. Whilst other clubs would have to stick with that player for longer than they’d like, or try and get them into form, Chelsea have been able to loan them out and forget about it AND go out and spend big again to replace them. Everyone else would be stuck trying to sell them or wait until more money was put together to afford a replacement.
I think a few will have a surprise as they will have to start getting their recruitment better, much like United, as they won’t have the luxury of simply discarding errors, taking the hit and going out and dropping mega money again.
I doubt seriously Boehly is going to hand over player selection to the manager or board without his team being the major drivers. You only need to look at the model he has done at the Dodgers. He is a minority owner there, but this was his contribution to the consortium. If they follow that model, he believes in developing academy players, then going after proven free agents, then purchasing players that are on contracts. He has a team that studies players using software and then people scouting.I think all or most of us accept this. That’s why we’ve been hearing so much about how our new owner will be trying to adopt the “Liverpool model.” We have to identify and scout up and coming players who may not be the sexiest or most famous names and sign them before they cost £80m or something. Sensible signings for the most part with the rare splash out on someone super expensive.
And most importantly, we have to let the manager lead when it comes to transfers. No more owner or board signings. Thankfully Boehly doesn’t know a thing about individual players so I can’t see him pushing the club to sign anyone above the manager’s head.
200 quid? Insane, I knew things wouldn't be the same post-Roman but that's some serious penny pinching.We're apparently spending £200 this summer.
As an American myself, yes.Are Chelsea fans now pro-American?
From Chelski to Mega Chelsea with Bacon and Cheese sponsored by Coors LightAs an American myself, yes.
But seriously, I’m optimistic about this American owner in particular. Mainly because he and members of the consortium that are taking over have shown here in the States that they’re willing to go big with the LA Dodgers. They know what it takes to create a “super team.”
Los Chelsea ehWhen we got bought by a Russian, idiots gave us a Polish nickname.
Now we are owned by someone from the USA, do we get a Canadian or Mexican nickname?