By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
chelski and everything thats wrong with football on 10:29 - Sep 1 by PlanetHonneywood
£34m for Luis!!!!!!!!!!!!
You thought footy had lost it when they managed to offload the lump, and for £50m! Only to then buy him back for a whopping sum!!
Does anyone else think buying David Luiz is very strange? The guy was at the centre of Brazil's calamitous 7-1 collapse against Germany in the World Cup.
Air hostess clique
1
chelski and everything thats wrong with football on 11:26 - Sep 1 with 3508 views
chelski and everything thats wrong with football on 11:26 - Sep 1 by Northernr
Oooooh no, let's come up with some weird and wonderful ways to get them some 'B Team' action instead.
Majority of their fans won't care if they make it or not or even know they existed at the club. Must be proud though to spend 24m on alonso, great bit of business that. Surely they have a left back capable in their ranks especially having spunked out on Rahman last season (who is now on loan surprise surprise).
We were an embarrassment in the transfer market but glad to see we have changed that, can't see Chelski doing the same.
0
chelski and everything thats wrong with football on 11:56 - Sep 1 with 3448 views
chelski and everything thats wrong with football on 09:52 - Sep 1 by westberksr
Chels54 just sounds like a offshoot hooligan element; you can see it getting all "Peoples Front of Judea" with 54Chels in opposition; too confusing for that bunch.
How's about 'Chelski Studio 54', Shirley? A nod to the groovy seventies when P*ki bashing was all the rage amongst the CFC hoardes and Osgood Wasgood.
Konk will appreciate the Legendary FFC fan (RIP) @ 1:26 here
'I'm 18 with a bullet.Got my finger on the trigger,I'm gonna pull it.."
Love,Peace and Fook Chelski!
More like 20StoneOfHoop now.
Let's face it I'm not getting any thinner.
Pass the cake and pies please.
0
chelski and everything thats wrong with football on 11:59 - Sep 1 with 3442 views
My eldest was at Chelsea for a few years in the mid/late noughties and it was an open secret inside the club/academy that a business plan was being put in place to sweep up as much talent as possible in order to 'nurture and develop' players whilst utilising the loan system as effectively a shop window.
As people say it was never about developing first team players but it was always more than just preventing others having them (well for free anyway).
It was a business model drawn up by Peter Kenyon and co. They 'invested' 25 million in the Cobham base, a lot of it on academy facilities, in preparation for having such high numbers at the club.
They're all rapey murdering drug dealers. If you make me president I'll build a big wall around Chelsea and make their meerkatweasle owner pay for it and make all those Z team players do the building work and I'll put Mourinho and Jeremy Vine inside it too for good measure.
A magnificent football club, the love of our lives, finding a way to finally have its day in the sun.
How much do all those players at Chelshite earn? In a lot of cases probably more than the other players at the club's they've been loaned to. Which is why all the big clubs can hoover up the talent. Maybe if there was a cap to what junior players could earn it'd level the playing field a bit. Make it about the football instead of the money, enable some lower league teams to keep some young talent and, in turn, earn a transfer fee.
TPFKA Stans_Left_Foot
0
chelski and everything thats wrong with football on 13:48 - Sep 1 with 3257 views
You could solve it all with one simple rule change: limit the no. of professional contracts you can have. Effectively force teams to work within, say, a 40 man roster.
That way, clubs would have to make difficult decisions. You couldn't stockpile young players on inflated salaries, without limiting your ability to purchase older players in your prime. The impact would be a much broader spread of "talent" across all the teams in the UK. There would be a waterfall effect right down the leagues.
This would have two further impacts: it would improve the competitiveness of all the leagues and it would reduce salaries. Both good things.
If you've no longer got City/Chelsea, etc, able to outbid QPR/Watford/etc for one of their 17yr olds, that 17 yr old has less leverage in any salary negotiation.
Finally, I also think it would help with England's international side as we'd have young players getting more game time, lower down the leagues, earlier in their career where they can learn "on the job" so to speak. Our 21yr olds would be much more experienced, we'd have been able to sort the wheat from the chaff and it would make England selection far more competitive.
I'm not really sure what the down size is of restricting the no. of professional, ie. "paid", contracts each club can offer.
At the minute we have a system that is ripe for expenditure, even when it's unnecessary from a football perspective, which favours those with capital. What's worse, this money can have be earnt outside the UK, is subject to hardly any proper security checks, and, therefore, means our football system is absolutely ideal for money laundering.
The football industry is far more bent than banking, in my opinion. But the majority of football fans, especially the young ones, eat it up due to very careful, clever, marketing.
"Isn't the Premier League brilliant, this league that is systemically worsening England's international side, weakening competition through the football pyramid, opening itself up to money laundering, making it more expensive to watch....oh, look you've sign Paul Pogba!" Amazing. Here's 48 hrs of rolling news coverage of his "tekkers"."
3
chelski and everything thats wrong with football on 13:53 - Sep 1 with 3235 views
chelski and everything thats wrong with football on 13:48 - Sep 1 by Hunterhoop
You could solve it all with one simple rule change: limit the no. of professional contracts you can have. Effectively force teams to work within, say, a 40 man roster.
That way, clubs would have to make difficult decisions. You couldn't stockpile young players on inflated salaries, without limiting your ability to purchase older players in your prime. The impact would be a much broader spread of "talent" across all the teams in the UK. There would be a waterfall effect right down the leagues.
This would have two further impacts: it would improve the competitiveness of all the leagues and it would reduce salaries. Both good things.
If you've no longer got City/Chelsea, etc, able to outbid QPR/Watford/etc for one of their 17yr olds, that 17 yr old has less leverage in any salary negotiation.
Finally, I also think it would help with England's international side as we'd have young players getting more game time, lower down the leagues, earlier in their career where they can learn "on the job" so to speak. Our 21yr olds would be much more experienced, we'd have been able to sort the wheat from the chaff and it would make England selection far more competitive.
I'm not really sure what the down size is of restricting the no. of professional, ie. "paid", contracts each club can offer.
At the minute we have a system that is ripe for expenditure, even when it's unnecessary from a football perspective, which favours those with capital. What's worse, this money can have be earnt outside the UK, is subject to hardly any proper security checks, and, therefore, means our football system is absolutely ideal for money laundering.
The football industry is far more bent than banking, in my opinion. But the majority of football fans, especially the young ones, eat it up due to very careful, clever, marketing.
"Isn't the Premier League brilliant, this league that is systemically worsening England's international side, weakening competition through the football pyramid, opening itself up to money laundering, making it more expensive to watch....oh, look you've sign Paul Pogba!" Amazing. Here's 48 hrs of rolling news coverage of his "tekkers"."
They won't ever anything constructive like that to help the England team.They will only bleat on about how our precious overplayed players need some time off over Christmas because the big 4 clubs have arranged a friendly in the Far East in order to widen their appeal.
How are young players supposed to develop into international players if they are twiddling their thumbs at Cobham waiting for this month's loan deal to be finalised?
And clubs go to the wall for less debts than certain premier league players earn in a day or two.The bubble will hopefully burst soon and we get back to relative normality,but I won't be holding my breath.
0
chelski and everything thats wrong with football on 18:42 - Sep 1 with 3069 views
chelski and everything thats wrong with football on 08:53 - Sep 1 by Northernr
Disgusting. Not a single intention of ever using one of them in their first team regularly. Simply there so they don't turn out to be brilliant for somebody else.
More of a clever FFP dodge to be fair.
Pay £1m for a talented South American youngster and offer them a 5 year deal on sensible wages. They're only 'costing" you £200k for FFP calculations. Then loan them out for 5 years and receive a modest loan fee from a friendly club - say for example a £500k loan fee.
That's £300k profit on your young loanee to claim against FFP. Times that by 35, and you've got an extra £10m to play with in your calculations...
0
chelski and everything thats wrong with football on 18:47 - Sep 1 with 3113 views
chelski and everything thats wrong with football on 11:23 - Sep 1 by TacticalR
Does anyone else think buying David Luiz is very strange? The guy was at the centre of Brazil's calamitous 7-1 collapse against Germany in the World Cup.
Great news Mr Abramovich, for just £34m of your English pounds, I've ensured David Luiz won't knock us out of Europe this year. Ah. I'm sorry you feel like that. Yes, of course my widow will pay for the bullet.
0
chelski and everything thats wrong with football on 19:22 - Sep 1 with 3090 views
chelski and everything thats wrong with football on 11:23 - Sep 1 by TacticalR
Does anyone else think buying David Luiz is very strange? The guy was at the centre of Brazil's calamitous 7-1 collapse against Germany in the World Cup.
I think the whole bloody thing is just mental. Sissoko 30million presumably based on 3 admittedly very good performances for France in the Euros instead of months of apparent disinterest playing in relegated Newcastles midfield. Robson-Kano having been released and nobody wanting him until one goal for Wales in the Euros and he gets a 2 year deal at a Premier League and just the general 20 to 30 million thrown around for players who've never really actually achieved anything or even played for particularly big teams.
'The agents Kia Joorabchian and Giuliano Bertolucci have worked closely with Roman Abramovich’s club for years. They have smoothed the arrivals of Willian — plucked from Tottenham Hotspur’s training ground — and Oscar, as well as the youngsters Kenedy, Wallace, Lucas Piazon and Matt Miazga. They have coaxed huge fees from PSG and Jiangsu Suning for David Luiz and Ramires respectively. The unsuccessful but relatively inexpensive loan signing of their client Alexandre Pato in January had offered the Brazil forward a route back into European football — he is now contracted to Villarreal — and felt almost like a favour. So, when Chelsea threatened to draw a blank, it is no surprise the same agents delivered a solution late on deadline day. It was needed.'
chelski and everything thats wrong with football on 07:12 - Sep 1 by Konk
In an ideal world, ALL footballers would be owned by Chelsea, with players leased out to other clubs on a match-by-match basis with Chelsea having a veto on which players could play in which games, and of course, none of them able to play against Chelsea. How else are players supposed to get experience when all the other clubs are reluctant to sign up talented young players? Won’t happen though, as the little tin pot clubs would block it through self-interest. And that’s why we’ll never win the World cup.
I’d go as far as to extend it to coaching staff, catering staff and supporters too. Everyone and everything in football should be owned by Chelsea. If we’re serious about winning the World cup in 2018, it’s the only way to do it.
"Your tone is quasi-facetious but you do not realise that Chelsea was the only club to survive the franchise wars..."
[Post edited 3 Sep 2016 5:41]
0
chelski and everything thats wrong with football on 06:01 - Sep 3 with 2654 views
chelski and everything thats wrong with football on 09:10 - Sep 1 by Konk
You cynical, cynical bas tard. Chelsea take their role as nurturers of young footballing talent very, very seriously and have only the best interests of the wider game at heart. Why else would they recruit and stockpile 5,000 young footballers at great personal expense if not to one day dream of seeing a team filled with all 5,000 home grown talents? As the only club that can be trusted to develop young players, I'm lobbying FIFA to force all players under the age of 42 to register with Chelsea with immediate effect.
I understand it's unpalatable to a blinkered, luddite minority, but I would like to see the FA and football league relegate the other 91 league clubs, with Chelsea sides then filling the 91 vacant positions and playing against each other in a new league of youthful excellence. The league would be rebranded as the Allstar Chelsea league of youthful vim and vigour. Promotion and relegation to/from the Conference would obviously be abandoned. Who wants to watch Bristol Rovers v Coventry when you could be watching Chelsea's 54th XI against their 57th XI? Every game a derby, every game full of young gun swagger. It'd be brilliant and we would then pi ss Qatar 2022 without even trying.
[Post edited 1 Sep 2016 9:14]
Konk, you got the name wrong.
I'd go with Chelsea United Nationwide Trainees Soccerschool
Never thought I'd use the word soccer on this site
ONE in five British workers are on loan to their current job from Chelsea FC, it has emerged.
More than six million people remain locked into contracts signed under Guus Hiddink, Carlo Ancelotti, Andre Villas-Boas, Roberto Di Matteo, Rafa Benitez, or Jose Mourinho over the last seven years while effectively working full-time for different employers.
A Chelsea source said: “David Luiz made the press, but 428,999 of the other 429,000 deals we did on deadline day were immediately loaned back to employers ranging from bulk waste collection to publishing houses.
“Apart from an increase in salary to around £30,000 a week, most people find that signing for Chelsea doesn’t interfere with their daily routine at all.”
The signings, made to forestall interest from rival clubs, typically have the bulk of their wages paid by Chelsea with employers from Subway to KPMG making up the remaining 0.0005 per cent.
Julian Cooke said: “It was a real surprise when I got a call from Antonio Conte on transfer deadline day telling me I unfortunately didn’t feature in his plans this season.
“In all honesty I hadn’t expected to make the starting 11, mostly because I’m an accountant living in Devon, but I reckon I could’ve done a job in the League Cup.”
[Post edited 3 Sep 2016 7:47]
0
chelski and everything thats wrong with football on 17:27 - Sep 3 with 2566 views
chelski and everything thats wrong with football on 12:13 - Sep 1 by 1BobbyHazell
My eldest was at Chelsea for a few years in the mid/late noughties and it was an open secret inside the club/academy that a business plan was being put in place to sweep up as much talent as possible in order to 'nurture and develop' players whilst utilising the loan system as effectively a shop window.
As people say it was never about developing first team players but it was always more than just preventing others having them (well for free anyway).
It was a business model drawn up by Peter Kenyon and co. They 'invested' 25 million in the Cobham base, a lot of it on academy facilities, in preparation for having such high numbers at the club.
Hooray for football.
That makes sense (if it works).
Chelsea is in a unique position in that it has been able to get round the B Team problem in England by treating other first teams in other leagues as B Teams.
On a related note Arsenal has been able to use its brand name to pass off awful players onto other unsuspecting clubs on the basis that as they have been through Wenger's academy. It's like a big bank using its reputation of respectability to pass off bad loans to other banks.
Air hostess clique
0
chelski and everything thats wrong with football on 23:10 - Sep 3 with 2496 views
chelski and everything thats wrong with football on 17:27 - Sep 3 by TacticalR
That makes sense (if it works).
Chelsea is in a unique position in that it has been able to get round the B Team problem in England by treating other first teams in other leagues as B Teams.
On a related note Arsenal has been able to use its brand name to pass off awful players onto other unsuspecting clubs on the basis that as they have been through Wenger's academy. It's like a big bank using its reputation of respectability to pass off bad loans to other banks.
Cuadrado going on a THREE-YEAR! loan has the balloon-squeaking sound of a loophole being stretched to buggery.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
