I just can't take Chelsea seriously

super_furry

Especially when they come out with rubbish like this - http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-13355391,00.html Probably the worst idea since Ken Bates tried to get electric fencing installed at Stamford Bridge.

LegacyUser

Won't this mean they can not get youth because of the new ruling where they have to live within 50 miles of the ground or something stupid like that???? Can anyone tell me about thsi ruling...I forget it...

The Muppet

cheesedude wrote:

Won't this mean they can not get youth because of the new ruling where they have to live within 50 miles of the ground or something stupid like that???? Can anyone tell me about thsi ruling...I forget it...

They have to live within an hours travel from the ground to be eligable to sign on schoolboy forms. These guys will be older 16+.

It's just another reality TV show. it might be intyeresting to watch. I can't see them finding anyone to worry Terry and Co.

eyerer

"The player will only be paid several hundred pounds a week"

hardly seems worth it

johnor

Be a classic get everyone voting for the irish lad

PHB

That won't happen, it'll be everyone but Chelsea fans voting for the ****e kids hoping they have to hand a contract to a terrible kid

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Töpher

Didn't Aston Villa start this a few months ago?

sleepwalker

just seems like a publicity stunt to get their "brand name" growing :rolleyes:

no way in hell will they find a future first team player like this

WhiteWashMan

sleepwalker wrote:

no way in hell will they find a future first team player like this

why do you say that?

the ruling about the hours drive is for under 16s only i think, and chelsea have already got a huge contingent of young players from around our area.

it seems to just be a way of getting talent to come to them rather than going out and finding new talent.

persoanlly i think its a good idea.

The Clown Man

I think its a great idea to increase publicity and popularity and hence increase club revenue.

Clever guy that Kenyon.

Now as a supporter since the early 90's I'll probably be a little miffed at the "Sunshine Supporters" that are and will develop but it is good for the club and so I'll keep my objections to myself. Soon Man Utd will be the club of yesterday and Chelsea will be the club that every neutral loves. If we can get to that point, with our already great finances, we will then be in a position few teams in Europe have ever seen. A ridiculously profitable club will always be on top. Money talks as I think we've all seen by now.

Fair play I'd say. And I'll watch it!

CorkMan

Crazy idea, it's not like they'll find the next Ronaldinho or Ronaldo through this, and even if they did, they'd want to join a real club, and not a showbiz club.

KdjaCL

The Clown Man wrote:

Soon Man Utd will be the club of yesterday and Chelsea will be the club that every neutral loves.

But that means playing attractive attacking football, not really gonna happen anytime soon.


kdjac

elbow316

KdjaC wrote:

But that means playing attractive attacking football, not really gonna happen anytime soon.


kdjac

...plus I love the fact that Chelski's title win has been brushed under the carpet, with the cup final between the two biggest teams in the country...and Liverpool winning the CL to put Chelski's title win in the shade

Gileadi

KdjaC wrote:

But that means playing attractive attacking football, not really gonna happen anytime soon.


kdjac

robben and duff mustnt play attractive attacking football then,i must be mistaken

The Clown Man

Yeah. Which Chelsea have you been watching?

Chelsea have played marvelous attacking football. Apart from the first 9 games. Where they only scored 8. After that we were rarely scoring less than 3 goals a game.

And how did your idea of Man Utds lovely attacking football do for them?

Goals Scored / Goals conceded:
Arsenal: 87 / 36
Chelsea: 72 / 15
Man Utd: 58 / 26
Everton: 45 / 46
Liverpool: 52 / 26

jesus_thats_gre

I am cringing at the thought but it is a brilliant way of increasing the profile of the club..



As for:

But that means playing attractive attacking football, not really gonna happen anytime soon.

Jealousy is a terrible terrible thing. Get a grip of yourself before making bull**** statements like this..

The only way you could argue that United were more entertaining this year is if you were talking from the perspective of non United supporters, i.e. watching them loose and contemplating their demise..

growler

elbow316 wrote:

...plus I love the fact that Chelski's title win has been brushed under the carpet, with the cup final between the two biggest teams in the country...and Liverpool winning the CL to put Chelski's title win in the shade

I didn't even notice that Cup final thing you mentioned, between the former biggest clubs in the PL was it ?

Liverpool winning the CL hasn't put Chelsea's premiership victory in the shade at all, at least not for me.

and this find a star programme is a nice piece of marketing, helps raise the profile of the club and will attract more new supporters. Doubt they are expecting to find the next Ronaldo, but it will be a good insight into the training and slection process used by top clubs

PHB

UNited, for all their faults this year, never once once once played defensive football.
Chelsea play defensive football, they score a ****load of goals, but that isn't offensive football, its counter-attack football at perfection.

I alawys got the impression that the reason United did so well is because they played like a Real Madrid or Barca, all out attack all the time.

p.s. Kenyon will suck in two years time

case n basket

It can be hard to take the Buccaneers or the Cossacks seriously at times, they blur the line between football club and circus.

DC

How will they make the program interesting for viewers? What kind of challenges could they have? Other than taking free kicks, etc?

Like, who can clean the most boots in an hour? Who can make the tastiest prawn sandwiches for Ambramovich?

Bannor

The Clown Man wrote:

If we can get to that point, with our already great finances, we will then be in a position few teams in Europe have ever seen. A ridiculously profitable club will always be on top.

The club itself isn't the least bit profitable - they're pissing away money in ridiculous wages for players every week. The thing is that they can afford to do so now but that is not necessarily always going to be the case.

WhiteWashMan

oh my, there really is a terrible amount of begrudgery and jealousy out there against chelsea.

why is it when a club other than [insert your own club here] does something, then people always want to jump on some self defensive bandwagon?
utd never played defensively? so what? perhaps they should have, they might have won something this year...

The Rooster

United played very defensively against AC Milan. If they had really had a go, I reckon they would have beaten them. I also thought they started quite defensive against Arsenal in the Cup Final - before realising that was the wrong tactic as they were easily the superior team.

As for Chelsea's future finances, there is no doubt they will be left with a huge wage bill problem if Roman ever leaves (e.g. Liverpool have a £10m liaiblity hanging over their heads because they have a player they dont want or need (HK) on a £65k a week contract for another 3 years - just multiply that by X for Chelsea).

But I think far more important than that is to know how Roman is currently funding the club. For example if he puts in £50m this summer to finance player acqusitions, will he give the money to the club as a loan or as additional share captial? If its the former he'll be looking for that money back from Chelsea when he leaves - if its the latter he'll be restricted to whatever he sells the shares for, i.e. Chelsea wont owe him anything. I havent heard how he's been financing the club so far.

jesus_thats_gre

WhiteWashMan wrote:

oh my, there really is a terrible amount of begrudgery and jealousy out there against chelsea.

why is it when a club other than [insert your own club here] does something, then people always want to jump on some self defensive bandwagon?
utd never played defensively? so what? perhaps they should have, they might have won something this year...

For once, I agree completely with you. United supporters hate Chelsea and Arsenal. Why, because they are better than them and actually look like they could threathen the dominance that United have had.. The best one yet though is accusing them of not playing good football.. Its hilarious.

They used to hate Liverpool but we are not seen as a threat anymore, justifiably so too

The Clown Man

Bannor wrote:

The club itself isn't the least bit profitable - they're pissing away money in ridiculous wages for players every week. The thing is that they can afford to do so now but that is not necessarily always going to be the case.

Agreed.

But in 3 years time when they hold huge popularity in asia/america/everywhere else, they will start turning Man Utd style profits. And after an extended spell at the top Roman will get his money back. And Chelsea will have gone from being a top quarter mid finances team to the richest and most successful club of the decade.

At least thats what Kenyon wants. And Roman will have his fun and probably still make money on it. He's only a young f'lah after all...

PHB

Because WWM nobody was begruding against Chelsea's style of play, saying they aren't as impressive.


What everybody said, and said it quite clearly if you read the post, was that Man Utd gained a ****load of Asian fans because of attacking football, and while Chelsea might have the results, they will not gain as many fans because of their style.

johnor

What a difference a year makes, chelsea win two cups and suddenly they are the best team in the world, wait till other teams want to beat the best next season. Chelsea were always viewed as a good cup team, play well when it suited them..I look forward to next season and can honestly say i dont chelsea will have it as easy.

Mitch Connor

I don't see the big deal - this is how united went about signing Dong, chelsea are just involving TV too.

Jivin Turkey

PHB wrote:

What everybody said, and said it quite clearly if you read the post, was that Man Utd gained a ****load of Asian fans because of attacking football, and while Chelsea might have the results, they will not gain as many fans because of their style.

No it wasnt, it was due to marketing and brand promotion. Do you really think that the Asian fans watched a tonne of games and said "hey this team is really attacking, less follow them"? I dont see Newcastle with too many Asian fans, and they were an incredibly attacking side during the 90s.

And as regards Chelseas counterattacking style? United best team in the nineties was a team that was lethal at counter attacking, it was their best strength. God I used to loathe the sound of the commentator "And in typical fashion United have just gone up the other end and scored."

Chelsea might be losing a lot of money now, but it is Kenyons plan to have the club as a self sufficient company by 2009 or 2010 I think. He has demonstrated enough business skills already for me not to doubt him.

PHB

First off Kenyon wasn't the mastermind behind United becoming a world force, although he played a large part.

No it wasnt, it was due to marketing and brand promotion. Do you really think that the Asian fans watched a tonne of games and said "hey this team is really attacking, less follow them"? I dont see Newcastle with too many Asian fans, and they were an incredibly attacking side during the 90s.

No, thats cause Newcastle sucked Nah, but they were never on top.
It was a combination of winning and attacking football, also superstars such as Beckham, p.s. which Chelsea don't have.
Who are the next biggest supported team? Real Madrid, uber attacking.

p.s. Counter-Attacking being a great part of your game and counter-attack being the majority of where the goals come from is different, as one just states ability, while the other shows a style of player that is based on counter-attack, i.e. defending and quick breaking

Jivin Turkey

PHB wrote:

First off Kenyon wasn't the mastermind behind United becoming a world force, although he played a large part.

No one said he was. I just said he knows what he is doing.

PHB wrote:

No, thats cause Newcastle sucked Nah, but they were never on top.
It was a combination of winning and attacking football, also superstars such as Beckham, p.s. which Chelsea don't have.
Who are the next biggest supported team? Real Madrid, uber attacking.

Exactly it wasnt Newcastle because they were not on top and they didnt have the superstars and image. Its got nothing to do with the type of football played.

As for Real Madrid, again its because of their image/superstars/success. Its not because of the type of football the play.

As for superstars that Chelsea dont have? Who did United have? Beckham? Thats about it. Chelsea have Terry, Lampard, and Robben. And Cech is on his way to becoming one of the best in the world. A lot of stars there, and I didnt even mention Duff.

PHB wrote:

p.s. Counter-Attacking being a great part of your game and counter-attack being the majority of where the goals come from is different, as one just states ability, while the other shows a style of player that is based on counter-attack, i.e. defending and quick breaking

The I wouldnt say the majority of goals come from counter attacking. Most of Lampards goals were long-rangers out of nothing. A few weeks ago they were accused of playing long balls to Drogba.

Just because players like Duff and Robben can expose people on the counter does not mean that that is what their entire game is based around. Most of their play is pretty intricate creating space for their runners from midfield.

Ping Chow Chi

PHB wrote:

What everybody said, and said it quite clearly if you read the post, was that Man Utd gained a ****load of Asian fans because of attacking football, and while

ManU won a load of glory hunters because they won games, and they had a certain pin up poster boy playing for them, I am sure chels will do the same if they carry on winning stuff, simple as.

WhiteWashMan

FWIW.......

they stole the idea from us

http://www.spurs.co.uk/article.asp?hlid=282262