Chelsea Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 2016

gosplan

grumpymunster wrote: »

Yes standard reply to standard anti Chelsea post glad you can see the pattern

Chelsea doesn't begin and end with Jose Mourinho. You should consider that a bit more.

I know it's easier to label everyone anti-Chelsea though.

Suits the siege/conspiracy notion a bit better. You also don't have to grapple with the issue that people may have rational issues with TSUO.

GavRedKing

tombliboo83 wrote: »

But will Jose want to stay if we can't give him our full backing in the transfer market? We needed a proven cf, dmf and CB. We procured none of the above. I know the players aren't necessarily on the market but the funds are available to turn any clubs head.

We did actively chase Stones and there was rumours of guys like Pogba, Varane and Griezmann.

Issue is, you're chasign some of the best talent around, rightfully so and we failed, but no club in Europe done exceptioanl business in signing a marquee player, maybe Bayern and Barca when they got Costa and Turan, rest of the transfers were pretty meh.

I could be wide of the mark but with a potential bill of 500m for a stadium build coming up maybe the club is penny pinching.

ronjo

GavRedKing wrote: »

We did actively chase Stones and there was rumours of guys like Pogba, Varane and Griezmann.

Issue is, you're chasign some of the best talent around, rightfully so and we failed, but no club in Europe done exceptioanl business in signing a marquee player, maybe Bayern and Barca when they got Costa and Turan, rest of the transfers were pretty meh.

I could be wide of the mark but with a potential bill of 500m for a stadium build coming up maybe the club is penny pinching.

If its true of 500m for a stadium then do you think Roman will put any of his own cash in??
You are obviously self sustaining and making money now but will it stretch that far while keeping you competitive in transfer market?

gosplan

tombliboo83 wrote: »

But will Jose want to stay if we can't give him our full backing in the transfer market? We needed a proven cf, dmf and CB. We procured none of the above. I know the players aren't necessarily on the market but the funds are available to turn any clubs head.

You only need a CB from that list tbh.

Costa and Matic will find firm again. Can't go replacing a world class player because of a poor 8 weeks.

Edited: I think a really tough CMF like Lampard/Ballack/Essien would be great for Chelsea now, just in terms of physically imposing themselves on the game. This is maybe what Jose's current team are lacking a bit. Pogba would be the perfect fit really.

grumpymunster

gosplan wrote: »

Chelsea doesn't begin and end with Jose Mourinho. You should consider that a bit more.

I know it's easier to label everyone anti-Chelsea though.

Suits the siege/conspiracy notion a bit better. You also don't have to grapple with the issue that people may have rational issues with TSUO.

You are so selective in what you remember / see. Jose is but a ship that passes in the night, an incredibly successful one but yet mearly a ship passing in the night. My favourite Chelsea manager is Rudi cool dude that.
I would be hard pushed to remember certain people posting when we are riding high yet post more than Chelsea fans when things are not going so well for us. By the same token I would also be hard pushed to remember a positive Chelsea post from certain posters so I feel my stance is quite well vindicated.
Of course it is an open forum and you are entitled to your views regardless of how biased they are. By the same token I have every right to continually point out this bias in a constructive manner of course

grumpymunster

ronjo wrote: »

If its true of 500m for a stadium then do you think Roman will put any of his own cash in??
You are obviously self sustaining and making money now but will it stretch that far while keeping you competitive in transfer market?

It is said that will be funded separately but £500m is a lot of money. If it is to impact on purchasing that's fine all Chelsea fans will suck it up as for the long term it's the way to go

Does not make any sense of some of our actions though. Why let Luis go until we have a replacement why loan Kalas to Boroand Christensen to Gladbach and replace him with Papy who I assume is nowhere as good as he cant even make a match day squad in a team with no defenders. There is a huge lack of joined up thinking this year from pretty much everyone at the Bridge which is so difficult to comprehend

GavRedKing

ronjo wrote: »

If its true of 500m for a stadium then do you think Roman will put any of his own cash in??
You are obviously self sustaining and making money now but will it stretch that far while keeping you competitive in transfer market?

Theres no other way around building the stadium other than having Roman plow his own money into it.

Long term, its the only way to remain competitive, 42k capacity stadium isnt big enough for a side competiting with rivals with 60k/70k stadiums.

I expect that if it does get the green light, we'll sell the naming rights and claw back some money that way.

The loan market provides us with an income of about 40m + from the players out on loan and we've got a decent core of 20 somethings at the club so the medium term (3-5yrs) we should be ok.

I'd have no problem taking in 2 or 3 seasons of medicore if it meant a new stadium was built, being a fan in the 90s meant getting excited by the odd cup run and decent league finish and those around here for the 70's and 80's will tell ya tales of further woe, so if we have to suffer a few years of that to get sorted I dont think anyone, of sane reasoning, would mind.

I would prefer if it was overseen by Jose and the fact the club has stood by hime so far means they'll hopefully continue to do so, its obviously a lot better if youre raking in the UCL cash to sustain the club but even if we done a Utd and avoided the Europa League I'd be appy enough next season, thats if we dont finish top 4 this year which is looking very likely after 10 games.

GavRedKing

gosplan wrote: »

You only need a CB from that list tbh.

Costa and Matic will find firm again. Can't go replacing a world class player because of a poor 8 weeks.

Edited: I think a really tough CMF like Lampard/Ballack/Essien would be great for Chelsea now, just in terms of physically imposing themselves on the game. This is maybe what Jose's current team are lacking a bit. Pogba would be the perfect fit really.

Pogab would be ideal, Pogba would also cost insane money and if Barca/PSG/Real want him in the summer they'll get him, probably for a fee close to what Real paid for Bale too, IMO.

GavRedKing

I nearly forgot we had Stoke tonight, bloody bank holiday throwing me off.

Stoke away is a big test, I dont think they'll rest too many players and Jose wont want to go out of the cup so early so I'm not entirely sure how we'll approach this one.

I reckon we might go

Begovic
Azp Zouma Cahill Rahman
Mikel Ramires
Willian Oscar Kenedy
Falcao

ronjo

GavRedKing wrote: »

Theres no other way around building the stadium other than having Roman plow his own money into it.

Long term, its the only way to remain competitive, 42k capacity stadium isnt big enough for a side competiting with rivals with 60k/70k stadiums.

I expect that if it does get the green light, we'll sell the naming rights and claw back some money that way.

The loan market provides us with an income of about 40m + from the players out on loan and we've got a decent core of 20 somethings at the club so the medium term (3-5yrs) we should be ok.

I'd have no problem taking in 2 or 3 seasons of medicore if it meant a new stadium was built, being a fan in the 90s meant getting excited by the odd cup run and decent league finish and those around here for the 70's and 80's will tell ya tales of further woe, so if we have to suffer a few years of that to get sorted I dont think anyone, of sane reasoning, would mind.

I would prefer if it was overseen by Jose and the fact the club has stood by hime so far means they'll hopefully continue to do so, its obviously a lot better if youre raking in the UCL cash to sustain the club but even if we done a Utd and avoided the Europa League I'd be appy enough next season, thats if we dont finish top 4 this year which is looking very likely after 10 games.

Is Mourihno the type to hang around if he is not given the funds to spend?

It does seem to me though that he will either blow out of Chelsea before Christmas or else stay a few years.

hots

Another loss and more panicking to be done but when you look back on it we were 2 inches away from 3 points with 10 men... not that the performance would have deserved it.

Matic should be given a bolloking for the red, for a supposedly world class player you're 100% to blame for even giving the ref a decision to make on a second yellow. Sure it wasn't aggressive or dangerous but your man didn't exactly dive either. Stupid.

The back line experiments need to stop. Baba-Cahill-Zouma-Azpi. Stop fcking around with it, let them learn to play together and change the style to suit it! When teams are sitting back or are doubling up on our creative players we need fullbacks who can join in too. Playing Zouma at right back is only marginally better than the chaos that was Ivan, it still offers nothing going forward. The extra height we have clearly isn't helping the set-pieces defensively as we can't clear our plates and offensively we may learn to do something else (we're even less threatening there than last year).

Through midfield they really just need a rocket up the rear. Not enough effort going in with Willian and Ramires as the exceptions (although he was back to his usual self at the w/e). Fabregas and Hazard are weighing the team down defensively, I don't think there is room for both of them on the pitch when the team is playing this poorly. RLC in for Fab every time for me.

Overall there are a lot of players that look far better in the team when we are playing well (sounds obvious), Costa really struggles to add to the build-up play and when we're not creating is easily shut-out, Hazard and Fab are in the same category.

Lukker-

I'm certain the club will remain competitive in the transfer market while the stadium is being built, Roman will want the club as strong as possible going into a new stadium.

I think we stuttered a bit in the transfer market this summer not because the money wasn't there but the board hesitated a bit. Money was there and the club thought they had an agreement that Stones could be got at 40 Mil. Everton reneged on that probably because Martinez put them in a bad situation with his comments and we left it too late. Not having a reliable alternative cost us.

GavRedKing

ronjo wrote: »

Is Mourihno the type to hang around if he is not given the funds to spend?

It does seem to me though that he will either blow out of Chelsea before Christmas or else stay a few years.

He seems to be in it for the long haul unless the club sake him.

Which, IMO, would be a huge mistake, theres no candidates readily available to replace him, which might save him for the next few months.

Theres no advantage to sacking him anyway, and it seems liek the club has learned from past mistakes that you cant just start sacking world class managers, eventually you run out of guys that will join you and you've to take a punt on an up and coming manager, like AVB, which didnt work out either.

Yuo goud no the advantages and pitfalls of having a guy in charge for 2 decades, more often than not if youre in charge that long, you've done something right and deserved your chance.

The club did seem to chase Joses targets its just they werent availabel or werent going to be sold at any cost and then we panicked and went after other targets that were probably identified by the scouts and were down Joses list of preferable players, guys like Rahman, Papy D, even Pedro, they all seemed to be the next option after someone else failed.

You'd assume the board, looking in, will realise theyve screwed up by either not backing Jose and plowing the money in or they did seriously try and nobody would budge.

If Jose is in charge next summer and I hope he is, it will say alot with how we approach the market in terms of buying and especially selling.

peteeeed

we need to take a leaf out of arsenals book and not sack our manager when times are bad , although maybe not leave it as long as they have

symbolic

GavRedKing wrote: »

I could be wide of the mark but with a potential bill of 500m for a stadium build coming up maybe the club is penny pinching.

Why would they be penny pinching if Roman is paying for the stadium?

gosplan

peteeeed wrote: »

we need to take a leaf out of arsenals book and not sack our manager when times are bad , although maybe not leave it as long as they have

Yup but also learn from their mistakes.

A 7/8 year plan is too long in football. The landscape changes too quickly.

Arsenal found that they're still financially disadvantaged compared to a couple of other clubs.

In another decade, you'd imagine that TV deals and corporate sponsorship will have continued to soar and that 20k match day fans might not make a big difference.

Roman should just build the thing and lease it to Chelsea for a good rate or something. He can just forgo his next yacht or something.

grumpymunster

GavRedKing wrote: »

I nearly forgot we had Stoke tonight, bloody bank holiday throwing me off.

Stoke away is a big test, I dont think they'll rest too many players and Jose wont want to go out of the cup so early so I'm not entirely sure how we'll approach this one.

I reckon we might go

Begovic
Azp Zouma Cahill Rahman
Mikel Ramires
Willian Oscar Kenedy
Falcao

Would throw RLC in there as well he is the type of player we need now but young players are just not trusted. I am sort of wondering what happened to the lesser spotted Traore over whom such a fuss was made

GavRedKing

symbolic wrote: »

Why would they be penny pinching if Roman is paying for the stadium?

Stadium build is written off against UEFA FFP so it wouldnt matter, well neither does the FFP rule matter it seems but I cant see the club allowing the profits we're making to be spent on 2 or 3 stars, it will probably need us to sell big before we buy big.

With the new stadium in play revenues increase, sponsorship and corporate sales increase so it would put us on a more even foothold with our big rivals although that snot likely to happen until very lat ein this decade the way things are going.

GavRedKing

grumpymunster wrote: »

Would throw RLC in there as well he is the type of player we need now but young players are just not trusted. I am sort of wondering what happened to the lesser spotted Traore over whom such a fuss was made

Well we could play RLC and Kenedy and Traore and the new GK but with the pressure on I reckon Jose will go with what he knows and somewhat trusts.

symbolic

GavRedKing wrote: »

Stadium build is written off against UEFA FFP so it wouldnt matter, well neither does the FFP rule matter it seems but I cant see the club allowing the profits we're making to be spent on 2 or 3 stars, it will probably need us to sell big before we buy big.

With the new stadium in play revenues increase, sponsorship and corporate sales increase so it would put us on a more even foothold with our big rivals although that snot likely to happen until very lat ein this decade the way things are going.

So in short is it 500m moving into the club from Roman to buy the stadium?

GavRedKing

symbolic wrote: »

So in short is it 500m moving into the club from Roman to buy the stadium?

In essence yes, the balance sheets will show an income of X for whatever the stadium costs that particular year and I cant imagine any company throwing money at a stadium before anything is final so we wont see any or much financial input from sponsors until its complete.

It doesnt effect the FFP books so its not factored into the the profit/loss for UEFA. £500m is a provisonal estimate and if its not a much higher figure at final cost I'd be shocked.

grumpymunster

GavRedKing wrote: »

Well we could play RLC and Kenedy and Traore and the new GK but with the pressure on I reckon Jose will go with what he knows and somewhat trusts.

Thing is Gav it is not working, Einstein had something to say about doing the same thing and expectant outcomes. This is a lower pressure match to shake it up because we need it right or somewhere close at least for Liverpool and Kiev home.

grumpymunster

GavRedKing wrote: »

In essence yes, the balance sheets will show an income of X for whatever the stadium costs that particular year and I cant imagine any company throwing money at a stadium before anything is final so we wont see any or much financial input from sponsors until its complete.

It doesnt effect the FFP books so its not factored into the the profit/loss for UEFA. £500m is a provisonal estimate and if its not a much higher figure at final cost I'd be shocked.

If we could get it done by the 2022 World Cup Qatar Airlines could throw a lot of money at it seen as Emirates and Ethiad have stadium naming rights already.

GavRedKing

grumpymunster wrote: »

Thing is Gav it is not working, Einstein had something to say about doing the same thing and expectant outcomes. This is a lower pressure match to shake it up because we need it right or somewhere close at least for Liverpool and Kiev home.

Oh I agree with ya 100%, I just put that team up as I reckon thats what we'll go with it, I'd make 7 or 8 changes myself as its a mickey mouse cup, nice to win but not hugely important.

I'd go with
Amelia
Azp Zouma Cahill Rahman
RLC Ramires
Traore Oscar Kenedy
Falcao

If it was my choice.

grumpymunster wrote: »

If we could get it done by the 2022 World Cup Qatar Airlines could throw a lot of money at it seen as Emirates and Ethiad have stadium naming rights already.

I think we're still aligned with Delta arent we? Stadium will probably be done by 2020 if we turn the first sod by end of the 2016/2017 season which is the expected start date anyway.

The Emirates and the Etihad naming fits and makes sense, we wouldnt have that luxury, the Qatar Airlines Arena? The Qatar? All kind of ****e being honest :pac:

As long as we get good money for the naming rights it wouldnt bother me a jot being honest, if we've got a big shirt sponsor by then we could ask them to chip in, theres already a Yokohama stadium but thats to do with the province and not the company.

GavRedKing

Just seen a seriously worrying stat, we've faced the 3rd most shots in the league, only Newcastle and Sunderland have had more shots against them, we've had 56 shots against us, Man city, the lowest amount, are on 25.

You cant give up shots like that and expect to be winning games, just look at the company we're keeping to see how poorly it reflects our situation.

symbolic

GavRedKing wrote: »

if we've got a big shirt sponsor by then we could ask them to chip in, .

Chip in on what?

I'd be very interested in a trip to this stadium. You'd imagine it's going to be fantastic.

GavRedKing

symbolic wrote: »

Chip in on what?

I'd be very interested in a trip to this stadium. You'd imagine it's going to be fantastic.

The building cost, which as I said, I dont think any company or sponsor would be willing to do, unless they were given naming rights.

It looks to be a break from the norm of building bowls but thats really down to our current site and its shape and size dictating the design.

I like the mock ups and pictures but it would have to be built before we can get a true definition of how it looks.

symbolic

GavRedKing wrote: »

The building cost, which as I said, I dont think any company or sponsor would be willing to do, unless they were given naming rights.

It looks to be a break from the norm of building bowls but thats really down to our current site and its shape and size dictating the design.

I like the mock ups and pictures but it would have to be built before we can get a true definition of how it looks.

I thought the mock up was really cool, kind of spilling into the space it had. Really liked it.

But I thought Roman was covering the building costs? What am I missing?

GavRedKing

symbolic wrote: »

I thought the mock up was really cool, kind of spilling into the space it had. Really liked it.

But I thought Roman was covering the building costs? What am I missing?

He is and would have to cover it.

I only suggested approaching sponsors as a way to take the edge off the initial cost.

When its done anyway the naming rights will more than likely be sold off so its kind of a moot point I was making.

symbolic

GavRedKing wrote: »

He is and would have to cover it.

I only suggested approaching sponsors as a way to take the edge off the initial cost.

When its done anyway the naming rights will more than likely be sold off so its kind of a moot point I was making.

Ah yeah I'd say your worrying about nothing. Roman will be fine with the costs

ronjo

GavRedKing wrote: »

He is and would have to cover it.

I only suggested approaching sponsors as a way to take the edge off the initial cost.

When its done anyway the naming rights will more than likely be sold off so its kind of a moot point I was making.

Whats the capacity going to be??

There will be some amount of super stadiums in London soon.

Wembley, Twickenham, Emirates, Olympic Stadium plus Chelseas and Spurs.

GavRedKing

symbolic wrote: »

Ah yeah I'd say your worrying about nothing. Roman will be fine with the costs

Sell a yacht, be grand. :P

ronjo wrote: »

Whats the capacity going to be??

There will be some amount of super stadiums in London soon.

Wembley, Twickenham, Emirates, Olympic Stadium plus Chelseas and Spurs.

Its meant to be 60k a stadium anyway from the mock ups. No planning permission has been lodged yet anyway but theres some major obstacles to overcome, including finding the space to accomdate nearly an extra 20k fans down the Kings Road and more importantly, getting them out of the stadium safely, it will require the curernt exits to be widened and also have more exits, over the rail lines to the north. The stadium will need to incorporate some tunnel for 2 rail lines, like the DART track that runs by the Aviva, its all entirely possible anyway its just if it gets the go ahead from all parties and local residents who will probably be opposed to the extra foot fall on match day.

ronjo

GavRedKing wrote: »

Sell a yacht, be grand. :P



Its meant to be 60k a stadium anyway from the mock ups. No planning permission has been lodged yet anyway but theres some major obstacles to overcome, including finding the space to accomdate nearly an extra 20k fans down the Kings Road and more importantly, getting them out of the stadium safely, it will require the curernt exits to be widened and also have more exits, over the rail lines to the north. The stadium will need to incorporate some tunnel for 2 rail lines, like the DART track that runs by the Aviva, its all entirely possible anyway its just if it gets the go ahead from all parties and local residents who will probably be opposed to the extra foot fall on match day.

So all you need is a few extra fans to fill it :pac:

Is it 100% certain that they will renovate or if the objections are just too much they might build a new one?

hots

A day to remember after the last couple of months.

GavRedKing

ronjo wrote: »

So all you need is a few extra fans to fill it :pac:

Is it 100% certain that they will renovate or if the objections are just too much they might build a new one?

We'll take a few of the younger ones that went to follow City recently. :pac:

The proposal is for a brand new stadium on the curent site, the estimate is for 3 years work but theres a proviso to play at Wembley for 4 years if its needed.

It would have been easier to just sell the current site and move but that just wasnt possible due to the naming rights of the club being owned by the CPO.

GavRedKing

Small advantage, we've 24hrs more rest than Liverpool for the big game this weekend, theyre playing Bournemouth at home tomorrow night.

GavRedKing

Zoumas 21 today too.

hots

GavRedKing wrote: »

Zoumas 21 today too.

He's been one of the only beacons of hope this year. He's making plenty of errors still (and he's no right-back), but I've seen nothing that makes me think he hasn't got the ability to be a full time CB next year.

GavRedKing

hots wrote: »

He's been one of the only beacons of hope this year. He's making plenty of errors still (and he's no right-back), but I've seen nothing that makes me think he hasn't got the ability to be a full time CB next year.

I taught JT would give him 1 year of excellent tutelage, how wrong was I?

We've got fine options on loan for CB but with us losing Ivan and JT in the summer we're going to have to bring back hopefully Kalas and Christensen and maybe get another CB in.

That would give us Cahill, Zouma, New CB, Kalas, Christensen, Rahman and Azp for the back line.

Aina and DaSilva as last resorts.

SureYWouldntYa

GavRedKing wrote: »

I taught JT would give him 1 year of excellent tutelage, how wrong was I?

We've got fine options on loan for CB but with us losing Ivan and JT in the summer we're going to have to bring back hopefully Kalas and Christensen and maybe get another CB in.

That would give us Cahill, Zouma, New CB, Kalas, Christensen, Rahman and Azp for the back line.

Aina and DaSilva as last resorts.

Seen today on WAGNH that Christensen is on a 2 year loan, so it might be a while before we see him

Lukker-

Congrats to Lamps on being awarded an OBE for services to football

hots

SureYWouldntYa wrote: »

Seen today on WAGNH that Christensen is on a 2 year loan, so it might be a while before we see him

He's been doing well and at a decent level, still holding out hope on that one.

grumpymunster

GavRedKing wrote: »

I taught JT would give him 1 year of excellent tutelage, how wrong was I?

We've got fine options on loan for CB but with us losing Ivan and JT in the summer we're going to have to bring back hopefully Kalas and Christensen and maybe get another CB in.

That would give us Cahill, Zouma, New CB, Kalas, Christensen, Rahman and Azp for the back line.

Aina and DaSilva as last resorts.

Yea listened to his interview on ChelseaTV said he was happy top play anywhere he was wanted (contrary to attention seeking headlines) and that he was learning a lot about RB play from Dave and
...................Ivan........... Noooooooooooooooo

hots

http://gfycat.com/GloomyWindyAfricanjacana

Piazon channeling his inner Lamps here with a late run into the box for Reading

grumpymunster

Lukker- wrote: »

Congrats to Lamps on being awarded an OBE for services to football

Nice that he wore a blue whistle to the event as well.

peteeeed

team v Stoke: Begovic; Zouma, Cahill, Terry (c), Baba; Ramires, Mikel; Willian, Oscar, Hazard; Diego Costa.

peteeeed

subs v Stoke: Amelia, Djilobodji, Azpilicueta, Loftus-Cheek, Traore, Kenedy, Remy.

GavRedKing

Was joping RLC and Kenedy would play.

SureYWouldntYa

GavRedKing wrote: »

Was joping RLC and Kenedy would play.

Jose could be 1/2 bad results away from the sack, he's going with the mostly tried and trusted (failed this season) to keep his job

kev1.3s

Is match in TV?