And what is the picture on the left from?
The pic on the right is not from a game. It was taken from one of our training sessions there. 38.000 turned up just for the first session.
So...Are Chelsea the Biggest Club in The World Yet?
- Thread starter Mockney
- Start date
Like it or not, Chelsea are a big club and recognised over the world but they simply don't have the following or support that clubs like Man United, Liverpool, Real Madrid or Barcelona do.
Your training session allegedly.
Fair enough. I saw some stuff on Chelsea TV and the stadium (whilst not full by any means) had a few thousand there at least, that pic makes it look like no fecker turned up!
You have many more overseas supporters. I would not argue otherwise anyway to be honest!
38,000 people turned up for a Liverpool training session though, that's mental. What are the attendances like for their local teams matches?
The pic on the right is not from a game. It was taken from one of our training sessions there. 38.000 turned up just for the first session.
Liverpool win the 'more people at pre-season training session' cup then.
Where was your Pre-Season last year?...Is this the first one not in America for about 5 years? (not that we can talk much of late)...Does that mean you've cracked the States triumphantly and are now reaching further afield?
Yes. Asia this year. Antarctica next year.
It was never a realistic target.
They know they'll at least get a draw.
Liverpool should start playing their home games there then.
Because of the world cup we didn't have one per se, the year before we went to the US and before that to Asia.
The same guy (Liverpool fan) who tweeted about nobody being there for Chelsea's tour later estimated 15k showed up for the training session.
5000-6000 usually, but derbies and rivalries can easily reach five figures, filling stadia.
It just goes to show what a complete spastic Peter Kenyon was and still is!
To become amongst the top clubs in the world takes decades and decades at the top and a huge fanbase all around the world, which also takes time to develop. To try and do it all in the space of about 7-8 years was an absolutely ridiculous task, doomed to failure.
Chelsea have done well in that period - not as well as they'd have liked, obviously, United and Fergie have seen to that - but they've won a few Leagues and got far in the CL. However, they haven't won the CL, and are still nowhere near the level of clubs like Real Madrid, Barcelona and United, who have worldwide fanbases and decades of success to boast of.
Clubs like Chelsea and City who were bordering on nothing clubs before they got rich owners will probably never be considered amongst the biggest clubs in the world, whole thing is manufactured and, there's no other word for it, plastic.
Chelsea have done well in that period - not as well as they'd have liked, obviously, United and Fergie have seen to that - but they've won a few Leagues and got far in the CL. However, they haven't won the CL, and are still nowhere near the level of clubs like Real Madrid, Barcelona and United, who have worldwide fanbases and decades of success to boast of.
Clubs like Chelsea and City who were bordering on nothing clubs before they got rich owners will probably never be considered amongst the biggest clubs in the world, whole thing is manufactured and, there's no other word for it, plastic.
So if Chelsea win at least (for example) 10 Premier Leagues and 5 Champions Leagues, they will then become a top club?
Yeah, but that will take them decades, which is how long it takes to become a top club. 7-8 years just isn't long enough.
Fair enough. I think they are a top club already, having played at the very top for some time now. I have no reason to justify this though, so, yeah.
They've missed their chance. It'll be even harder for them now, what with the 'Hamstring Rich British Clubs' rules...oh, I mean the 'Financial Fair Play' rules.
European success is the key to building a global brand.
Lancashire 8-0 London, in terms of European Cup wins, probably explains why the worldwide fanbases of United & Liverpool are miles ahead of anyone else in England.
I'm not sure that's the main issue. IMO it's success that spans generations. I'd say Chelsea has a decent chunk of the global fan-base amongst kids but United and Liverpool are supported by their parents and grandparents too.
I don't think your average Indonesian school-kid much cares about how many European cups Liverpool won back in the day but if his old man supports the club he'll be willing to do the same, even though half his class wear Chelsea strips to school every morning.
As much as hate it, the foreign ownership and the 'plastic' nature of their success isn't even relevant as to why they aren't looked at as one of the mega clubs of football.
Truth is it takes decades of success and adulation to be loved the way United and Liverpool are. When you look at Chelsea's global fanbase, most of it is a very young bunch that has cropped up in the last 5-7 years whereas that of Chelsea and United is not only far bigger due to their history of immense success (over the decades) but has been there across generations.
Truth is it takes decades of success and adulation to be loved the way United and Liverpool are. When you look at Chelsea's global fanbase, most of it is a very young bunch that has cropped up in the last 5-7 years whereas that of Chelsea and United is not only far bigger due to their history of immense success (over the decades) but has been there across generations.
I wouldn't disagree with any of that. But in order for Chelsea to build on what fanbase they have abroad, European success is vital. Because if they don't, the fickle fans will look elsewhere for their 'glamour club'.
I don't think it is even that.
I think your average Indonesian kid watches football and soon enough picks up on the fact that clubs like Liverpool and United are storied clubs with strong legacies. Not necessarily because they've been told outright, but simply by picking it up in the implications of the way commentators et al talk about them.
It's that feeling that attracts them to it. Even if they don't know why, they can still tell from the people talking about the game that these are special clubs. Chelsea don't get that respect and reverence yet. And won't for at least a decade or two.
Me, I was a sorry kid who wasn't even that into football who was having a sick day when a game came on and I thought, 'why not?'. Fowler scored a brace, John Barnes played lovely and McManaman was a joy to watch. Then at half time, there was a spot on Robbie Fowler, what being a boyhood red meant to him, what the club meant, etc. and I was sold. I wasn't really that into football aside from internationals before that.
That's a lot more than I thought would have, tbh.
Too bad Liverpool don't play in Malaysia. You'd have definitely picked up a few domestic titles over the last two decades and your support would get even bigger.
Chelsea will never be as big as United & Liverpool!!!
Same goes for Man City, reputation is built on history & success not how big your bank balance is!
Same goes for Man City, reputation is built on history & success not how big your bank balance is!
United and Liverpool have that history and always will have, built by men such as Shankly, Busby etc. In a few decades Chelsea will be looked at as the club built by a shady russian who sacked managers for fun.
I still don't understand how teams like Chelsea and City are going to be able to sign top players once FFP is enforced. Chelsea will never come close to bein the biggest club if they can only spend profits.
I guess it's a good thing that the financial fair play rules don't say a club can only spend profits then.
That one night in Istanbul was worth copious amounts of domestic titles in terms of swelling our worldwide fanbase.
For Chelsea to have had any chance of realising Kenyon's dream, they had to win in Moscow, Abramovich's "home" Final. Instead, Terry slipped, Terry cried and then the stadium roof p*ssed on Kenyon's bulb like skull as he went up the steps to collect his "runner up" medallion.
Then they had another chance to join us in Rome a year later, only for a combination of a stunning injury time strike and the most hilarious referreeing I have ever seen leaving their chances of Cosmic domination in tatters - apparently, it was a disgwace.......
There's no doubt that Chelsea are a "big" club already, they attract quality players, and were even an attractive club in the 60's with some damn good players and some Cup successes.
World renown status is something that has to be earned and achieved over time, not just with success, but with substance and style and should certainly not be blabbed about in an "x" year plan, as Kenyon and Garry Cock have done publicly.
Then they had another chance to join us in Rome a year later, only for a combination of a stunning injury time strike and the most hilarious referreeing I have ever seen leaving their chances of Cosmic domination in tatters - apparently, it was a disgwace.......
There's no doubt that Chelsea are a "big" club already, they attract quality players, and were even an attractive club in the 60's with some damn good players and some Cup successes.
World renown status is something that has to be earned and achieved over time, not just with success, but with substance and style and should certainly not be blabbed about in an "x" year plan, as Kenyon and Garry Cock have done publicly.
So, how do we think it went?
Kenyon left Chelsea in 2009! If he'd stayed we'd be number 1 for sure.
Madrid, United, Barca, Bayern, Juventus, Liverpool and Arsenal still in front. Unlucky.
They do have a CL that Arsenal don't, I'd say they are comparable.
Arsenal and Chelsea are nowhere near comparable.
Winning a Champions League makes you 'successful'. Being the biggest club is more than just success. You can't buy history.
For all that Chelsea win, it's not going to change the fact that the seeds were planted by a rich guy and they went from 4th-5th place to competing for the title over night due to a lot of money.
Manchester City are the same.
I would say the original big clubs of football will remain the only big clubs, as long as they maintain their success.
Aye. Any success these noveau riche teams like City, Chelsea and Paris have will be tainted in my opinion. City and Paris basically have unlimited money to spend, it's a ridiculous state of affairs. How can anyone compete against that?
Is Milan's success tainted? If it's not than I see no reason why Chelsea's should be.