Chelsea owners and board

[Bison]

9 minutes ago, paulw66 said:

Does anyone watch French football?

I wouldn't watch a Ligue 1 game, whoever is playing. 

I watched a couple of games a month when BT/TNT had the rights. Mainly to have on in the background when the kids have gone to sleep. It's a good league for promising and developing players to be fair, it's just not marketed and managed well.

The TV deal mess they've gotten themselves into is going to set them back several years.

[thevelourfog]

There will be firesales come January and next summer. BlueCo might see it as an opportunity.

[chrisb]

3 hours ago, paulw66 said:

Does anyone watch French football?

French people at a guess.

 I don’t watch any other countries football, I just can’t seem to get interested it.

[chara]

Some interesting and well thought out posts on various topics this morning (for me),

A less influence on the running of the club opinion but I am really P'd off at Todd and Co for providing the Media so many opportunities to sneer, laugh and mis- report, by default and omission as often as not,,with some glee...the events at Chelsea,,,no other club gets the same treatment...invariably the approach is one to emphasis any negative connotations regarding events and no effort to mention any positive factors.

Way back in the dark ages Chelsea was considered a club to make fun of, but not nastily, now it is cruel vindictive attacks

Much has been voiced on here regarding Todd and Co... across a wide spectrum and most of it correct ..disagreement usually is in the degree and shows a healthy cross section of opinions and view points.

FFS.... as in any situation..don't give the opposition,,part of which The Media represents... room to use any weakness to their advantage,,,end of bad tempered OG rant.

[Lump Of Celery]

Seems there are polar opposite opinions on the way the rhese lot have gone about their ownership. My opinions -

The fact they have spent so much and invested in Strasbourg etc makes me think there probably is some semblance of a plan in place. And that is probably a longish term plan than a quick buck. Equally some elements of the stockpiling players seems scattergun and ill thought out given the loan rules in place, as does the change in tack from ourchasing high wage players early on, when they perhaps didn't have this plan in place.

that's has come at 2 costs to fans. 1) it seems costs have increased for the match going fan, they scrimped on the cancelling the away day coaches, charge to live stream a friendly etc. 2) it is financed by selling off academy players that some of us have an emotional attachment to.

I personally would prefer there was some more balance between these 2 points and making unnecessary signings that we don't need right now

Their treatment of some of the people that genuinely care about Chelsea I find abhorrent. Some of that may be reading between the lines but academy players have been exiled, Tuchel was instantly dismissed, Emma Hayes, Neil Bath and various others have all left - IMO because they had similar feelings in some cases, despite what is briefed to the media. On top of that the business side seems to be lacking despite being their supposed strength, no sponsor for the second year running is a bit embarrassing.

Tbh I think the owners come across as crass American business men with no concept of what it means to be an English football fan, and for that reason I will probably never warm to them. Of course I'm hoping they get it right.

[east lower]

33 minutes ago, Lump Of Celery said:

Seems there are polar opposite opinions on the way the rhese lot have gone about their ownership. My opinions -

The fact they have spent so much and invested in Strasbourg etc makes me think there probably is some semblance of a plan in place. And that is probably a longish term plan than a quick buck. Equally some elements of the stockpiling players seems scattergun and ill thought out given the loan rules in place, as does the change in tack from ourchasing high wage players early on, when they perhaps didn't have this plan in place.

that's has come at 2 costs to fans. 1) it seems costs have increased for the match going fan, they scrimped on the cancelling the away day coaches, charge to live stream a friendly etc. 2) it is financed by selling off academy players that some of us have an emotional attachment to.

I personally would prefer there was some more balance between these 2 points and making unnecessary signings that we don't need right now

Their treatment of some of the people that genuinely care about Chelsea I find abhorrent. Some of that may be reading between the lines but academy players have been exiled, Tuchel was instantly dismissed, Emma Hayes, Neil Bath and various others have all left - IMO because they had similar feelings in some cases, despite what is briefed to the media. On top of that the business side seems to be lacking despite being their supposed strength, no sponsor for the second year running is a bit embarrassing.

Tbh I think the owners come across as crass American business men with no concept of what it means to be an English football fan, and for that reason I will probably never warm to them. Of course I'm hoping they get it right.

Very well put.

All the people exiting say one clear thing,  a business/football club in turmoil and one they no longer wanted to be a part of.

Think on that for a while, those who keep backing the owner's and their cronies.

On the last sentence: No chance, they're way too invested now. Plus, their arrogance won't allow that to occur.

Only way out for us now, is a new buyer emerging.

[chara]

Back to my much belaboured point....THEY still have not realised how different the fan etc dynamic is,,

Denver Broncos play today,,after weeks of daily news updates and features on the Training Schedule....only real individual personal emphasis has been on QB's,,,trot in "another" player occasionally but none of the countless player quotes our media spend all year gloating/fawning over,,,THERE JUST IS NOT THE SAME DYNAMIC,,,if a "Franchise" is struggling it can and does relocate,,,,,change name to show location and let the BUSINESS continue,

The Colorado Rapids play the club Chelsea beat on tour this weekend,,, slight coverage on local news,,to my surprise but barely a couple of minutes,,,then switch to long coverage of.....GIRLS HIGH SCHOOL VOLLEYBALL!!!!!

If that doesn't illustrate where our BUSINESS owners come from then I don't know how else to put it.

Edited August 18 by chara

[Original 21]

20 hours ago, Lump Of Celery said:

Tbh I think the owners come across as crass American business men with no concept of what it means to be an English football fan, and for that reason I will probably never warm to them. Of course I'm hoping they get it right.

It doesn’t help that they seem to think the fans are a) an inconvenience b) a cash cow. That they’ve been heavy handed in their treatment of managers and players. Brought in a bunch of employees behind the scenes who don’t seem accountable to anyone. A bewildering and questionable transfer policy. Poor results and no improvement on the pitch despite spending a fortune. Nothing happening with the ground. Inability to fix glaring issues within the squad, such as not buying a centre forward after several years, and insisting that Sanchez plays in goal. 

These people are in desperate need of a PR win with the fans. Instead they are selling Chalobah and Gallagher who love the club, have a connection with the fans, are decent squad players, and replacing them with inferior alternatives. 

Bland on the pitch and a disaster behind the scenes. What’s not to like? 

[Bert19]

1 hour ago, Original 21 said:

It doesn’t help that they seem to think the fans are a) an inconvenience b) a cash cow. That they’ve been heavy handed in their treatment of managers and players. Brought in a bunch of employees behind the scenes who don’t seem accountable to anyone. A bewildering and questionable transfer policy. Poor results and no improvement on the pitch despite spending a fortune. Nothing happening with the ground. Inability to fix glaring issues within the squad, such as not buying a centre forward after several years, and insisting that Sanchez plays in goal. 

These people are in desperate need of a PR win with the fans. Instead they are selling Chalobah and Gallagher who love the club, have a connection with the fans, are decent squad players, and replacing them with inferior alternatives. 

Bland on the pitch and a disaster behind the scenes. What’s not to like? 

Well said, agree with all of the above.  Their attitude towards the fanbase and their arrogance has been pretty astounding. Especially as they've managed to be the opposite of the Midas touch. 

You can bet your bottom dollar that they'll be "shocked and disappointed" if we struggle again this season and the match-going crowd turn on them. 

Last season Poch took a lot of the heat, the season before it was somewhat directed at players that had overstayed their welcomes - this year it'll all be at them and they won't like or know what to do about it. 

 

 

[east lower]

9 minutes ago, Bert19 said:

 

You can bet your bottom dollar that they'll be "shocked and disappointed" if we struggle again this season and the match-going crowd turn on them. 

If results aren't what will be expected, it won't take long. Chants for Conor Gallagher when the Argentinian had made a number of errors, streaming out with 10 minutes to go. Relative silence at the end of the game, a few boos - not a fan of booing generally. 

Very few stayed behind to recognise the effort of the team. 

I think you are correct, the owner's will be the target this season if things don't go well. What does well look like? Top 4, maybe. I think we're a way off that currently, unless the glaring difficiencies are dealt with.

Ground yesterday had a touristy feel to it, that might have actually helped the owner's. Next Sunday at Wolves might be interesting, I'll report back as to what is seen and heard from there.

[Sciatika]

In the Maresca presser the other day, a "journalist" wanted to know how he would handle the crowd turning on the team (I paraphrase) as if this was the norm for Chelsea fans.

[Blue Moon]

2 hours ago, east lower said:

Ground yesterday had a touristy feel to it, that might have actually helped the owner's. 

Certainly did - most of my neighbours in the Shed were back for another year of torture, but on the tube there were a number of Americans wearing their new shirts and scarves, all excited and asking damn’ fool questions (“why is the team called Chelsea when Stamford Bridge is in Fulham?”).

[Sleeping Dave]

On 15/08/2024 at 13:11, paulw66 said:

There was an article I read the other day saying when Roman left, the average wage was 200k a week. This is now down to 60k.

Most of the players (after the initial summer) are on long, incentive based contracts, with a lower base all the time we're not in the CL

Hang on now Paul, are you claiming our average wage in the first team is £60k/week? 

 

[paulw66]

12 minutes ago, Sleeping Dave said:

Hang on now Paul, are you claiming our average wage in the first team is £60k/week? 

 

sorry, maybe not 60k, it might have been 80k but from what I understand barring the initial summer (of which only Sterling remains) all of the subsequent signings are on lower base salaries with incentives based on team performance. the biggest one being CL qualification. 

Certainly none of them are on the absurd wages we saw given to Sterling, and previously to the likes of Lukaku and Havertz

Edit

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2024/08/13/cole-palmer-chelsea-two-year-contract-extension/

I, of course, cannot verify if this is all true without seeing the confidential details of the playing contracts. 

Edited August 19 by paulw66

[Holymoly]

On 15/08/2024 at 12:11, paulw66 said:

There was an article I read the other day saying when Roman left, the average wage was 200k a week. This is now down to 60k.

Most of the players (after the initial summer) are on long, incentive based contracts, with a lower base all the time we're not in the CL

The board will be rubbing their hands at our lack of achievement then.

[paulw66]

4 minutes ago, Holymoly said:

The board will be rubbing their hands at our lack of achievement then.

I assume this is tongue in cheek. I have always been an advocate for incentive based contracts. makes perfect sense to reward players when targets are met. 

[Sleeping Dave]

3 hours ago, paulw66 said:

sorry, maybe not 60k, it might have been 80k but from what I understand barring the initial summer (of which only Sterling remains) all of the subsequent signings are on lower base salaries with incentives based on team performance. the biggest one being CL qualification. 

Certainly none of them are on the absurd wages we saw given to Sterling, and previously to the likes of Lukaku and Havertz

Edit

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2024/08/13/cole-palmer-chelsea-two-year-contract-extension/

I, of course, cannot verify if this is all true without seeing the confidential details of the playing contracts. 

Not claiming this to be 100% acurate, but it certainly seems more accurate than £60k/week. 

https://www.spotrac.com/epl/chelsea-fc/cap/_/year/2024

That we are doing everything we can to lower the average salary is clear. What that results in is equally clear. I'd wager, after counting the salaries of the players not stated yet, that we are somewhere around £90-100k/week on average. 

Edited August 19 by Sleeping Dave

[Holymoly]

Copied over from Reddit by user u/ChrisCohenTV.

Interesting take, not without some truth. Oh, and he didn't get downvoted for posting this.

 

"Modern day Chelsea fans don't know how to support a team when they lose.

It's so tiring hearing Chelsea fans complaining that they want Abramovich back. He isn't coming back. He was sanctioned. That era is over.

Everyone criticises the new owners and says they're ruining the club, but imagine if we'd got the Glazers or Hicks and Gillette. We've got owners who have spent BILLIONS on new players and the club in general.

I remember when we signed Lavia and Caceido and Enzo and everyone was going bananas saying we were buying all the best players and it wasn't fair.

They are trying to buy a group of elite, young players who will go on to dominate for the next decade. Yes there have been missteps but the main issue in my mind is that managers brought in aren't given enough time. But that'd down to the fans boo'ing managers and the team constantly when we don't win. The atmosphere sours and then the owners hands are forced to get rid of them. That then brings a new manager with new ideas and players that were brought in for that style of play are then surplus to requirements and we have a bloated squad with other clubs not wanting to pay market value.

I've been around since the Stein and Furlong days. I've seen this club lose a LOT. I can't remember a single time the team was boo'ed off the pitch during the 90s. If anything, fans sung louder and cheered harder when things weren't going to plan to show how much they were behind the players and the club.

We've been spoiled over the last decade with incredible players and world class managers but it was always going to get to a point where those players retired/left and a rebuild was needed, Abramovich or not. I also remember many a time fans would bitch about the Abramovich sacking policy. But please.. it's so boring hearing chelsea fans bitch and moan about... what? Buying really fucking exciting young players? 😂

This will get dowvoted to oblivion and that's just the way this sub is. But I do wish we could just stop shitting on every single one of our players/managers/owners when things don't quite go to plan. The media gets a lot wrong but the one thing they say a lot which is 100% accurate is that chelsea fans are impatient and used to winning. That's got another name you know... entitlement.

Support the team and the team will grow. Shit on it and well.... you get the last 3 years."

Edited August 20 by Holymoly

[thevelourfog]

1 hour ago, Holymoly said:

 Support the team and the team will grow. Shit on it and well.... you get the last 3 years."

It's a pretty stupid take all in, but the last line goes beyond even stupid. The last few years has absolutely nothing to do with how the team is supported. 40k happy clappers in the ground at every game would have made absolutely no difference to the terrible decisions made by the owners, and it's bizarre fan one-upping to suggest otherwise.

Blaming supporters, the people who are this club and have devoted their time, energy, emotion and money into it, for the decisions these owners make is pathetic.

[east lower]

https://news.sky.com/story/money-blog-news-latest-consumer-skynews-13040934
 

Well at least we are not the club with the most expensive shirt for fans to buy - By a penny. 2nd in the league table for that anyway.

At least if you get one now, you’ll get one without a front of shirt sponsor (again).

Wonderful job.

Edited August 20 by east lower

[east lower]

3 hours ago, Holymoly said:

Copied over from Reddit by user u/ChrisCohenTV.

Interesting take, not without some truth. Oh, and he didn't get downvoted for posting this.

 

"Modern day Chelsea fans don't know how to support a team when they lose.

It's so tiring hearing Chelsea fans complaining that they want Abramovich back. He isn't coming back. He was sanctioned. That era is over.

Everyone criticises the new owners and says they're ruining the club, but imagine if we'd got the Glazers or Hicks and Gillette. We've got owners who have spent BILLIONS on new players and the club in general.

I remember when we signed Lavia and Caceido and Enzo and everyone was going bananas saying we were buying all the best players and it wasn't fair.

They are trying to buy a group of elite, young players who will go on to dominate for the next decade. Yes there have been missteps but the main issue in my mind is that managers brought in aren't given enough time. But that'd down to the fans boo'ing managers and the team constantly when we don't win. The atmosphere sours and then the owners hands are forced to get rid of them. That then brings a new manager with new ideas and players that were brought in for that style of play are then surplus to requirements and we have a bloated squad with other clubs not wanting to pay market value.

I've been around since the Stein and Furlong days. I've seen this club lose a LOT. I can't remember a single time the team was boo'ed off the pitch during the 90s. If anything, fans sung louder and cheered harder when things weren't going to plan to show how much they were behind the players and the club.

We've been spoiled over the last decade with incredible players and world class managers but it was always going to get to a point where those players retired/left and a rebuild was needed, Abramovich or not. I also remember many a time fans would bitch about the Abramovich sacking policy. But please.. it's so boring hearing chelsea fans bitch and moan about... what? Buying really fucking exciting young players? 😂

This will get dowvoted to oblivion and that's just the way this sub is. But I do wish we could just stop shitting on every single one of our players/managers/owners when things don't quite go to plan. The media gets a lot wrong but the one thing they say a lot which is 100% accurate is that chelsea fans are impatient and used to winning. That's got another name you know... entitlement.

Support the team and the team will grow. Shit on it and well.... you get the last 3 years."

Take a look through the comments, it certainly sparked a reaction.

[east lower]

2 hours ago, thevelourfog said:

It's a pretty stupid take all in, but the last line goes beyond even stupid. The last few years has absolutely nothing to do with how the team is supported. 40k happy clappers in the ground at every game would have made absolutely no difference to the terrible decisions made by the owners, and it's bizarre fan one-upping to suggest otherwise.

Blaming supporters, the people who are this club and have devoted their time, energy, emotion and money into it, for the decisions these owners make is pathetic.

The person who penned that piece - Chris Cohen, I believe has been on the payroll at the club. I don’t know if he still is, but I’ve seen him around the corporate entrances a few times, so maybe still is.

Does/did some clever comedy voiceovers using animal videos. Quite funny in fact. But that dialogue is a disgrace. Drill down into some of the ‘“why’s” and just walk around the ground pre-match these days and you’ll see why the atmosphere suffers at home. Go to most aways and he’d see a different story, most of the time.

The must attend a football match at any cost tourists are also starting to increase in numbers at aways last season - fans following the profit first mantra being promoted by the owners perhaps?

[RDCW]

2 hours ago, thevelourfog said:

It's a pretty stupid take all in, but the last line goes beyond even stupid. The last few years has absolutely nothing to do with how the team is supported. 40k happy clappers in the ground at every game would have made absolutely no difference to the terrible decisions made by the owners, and it's bizarre fan one-upping to suggest otherwise.

Blaming supporters, the people who are this club and have devoted their time, energy, emotion and money into it, for the decisions these owners make is pathetic.

I'm between two stools on this one. He has definitely overstated the role of the fans in the success of the team and is too forgiving of the unnecessary mistakes of the ownership. He is right about the commitment to investment and, sadly, about the entitlement of the fan base (and I speak as a season ticket holder of 28 years' standing). I think that the fans of successful clubs are entitled and intolerant. It is also the case that culturally English fans of the 21st century are less vocal and less enthusiastic than their European equivalents When you see the unconditional support offered by French, German, Scandinavian and Baltic fans it is somewhat humbling. We as a Chelsea fanbase have always had a reputation for boo-boys, though, going right back to the late seventies.

Edited August 20 by RDCW

[CarefreeMuratcan]

41 minutes ago, east lower said:

https://news.sky.com/story/money-blog-news-latest-consumer-skynews-13040934
 

Well at least we are not the club with the most expensive shirt for fans to buy - By a penny. 2nd in the league table for that anyway.

At least if you get one now, you’ll get one without a front of shirt sponsor (again).

Wonderful job.

I only got last year's because of the novelty of a sponsor-less shirt, that'll do me for decades.

[east lower]

3 minutes ago, CarefreeMuratcan said:

I only got last year's because of the novelty of a sponsor-less shirt, that'll do me for decades.

At the price of them, absolutely. And that’s before you start adding badges, names etc.

Least we’ve still got white socks as part of the first kit.