Chelsea Thread

Roman knows Pep is everything he wants in a manager whether Pep will take on this project n risk his legacy is another thing. Matteo failed in the league and doesnt have the confidence winning the cup didnt change that only for the fans. Mc liesh won a cup w/ brummies ,Kenny too ! League position is more telling and they failed in those aspects.

Matteo allowed senior players to dictate the cause and Roman knows it .Players gave AVB a hard time n Matteo gave them free reign. This project looks to be failing by the minute looks like a RM/MCity project I would bring in Moye to bring stability to put senoir players in place.
 
obviously, i prefer di matteo because he just won the champions league and he has great skills and experiences on communicating with players which is so massive for the managers(Avb is good at tactical but arrogant to make decisions such as to place old players on the bench)only doubt cast on him is if he able to make some great spending....
about pep,i dont really like him because i wonder that the prosperity he has achieved was base on a system he has involved for many years and his spending record is awful considering ibra,Chygrynskiy ,Hleb...
And i dont want chelsea become a trial place for him to prove that he could win champions overseas and as we know that chelsea's player unable to play "beautiful football"as well as brace at this monment :P
 
Last edited:
gerd said:
People judge and they don't know their facts.
Hazard is not a winger, De Bruyne is not a winger.
Hazard is an attacking midfielder (central) who can play as WF.
De Bruyne is an attacking midfielder (central) who can play SMF and who played as LMF for Genk because Genk did not have a LMF. In the play-offs of the Jupiler League the Genk coach put Buffel as LMF, Vanden Borre as RMF and finally De Bruyne as AMF and he was absolutely outrstanding.
Both DE Bruyne and Hazard can play in the same position, but De Bruyne will be loaned to another club. Hazard is versatile enough to play (just like Mata and Lampard). I don't really see the problem unless you are frustrated that he did not join Arsenal.

This said, Hazard will face a very tough first season. All eyes will be on him and he'll have to deliver immediately. I'm not sure if he is as good as most people think he is. Some people compare him with Cr Ronaldo. I hope i'm wrong but i think Hazard will never be as good as Cr Ronaldo.
Click to expand...


okay gerd....Ive been following Hazard for long enough to know that he can play centraly... But MOST of his career and youth footballing career he was out wide... MATA is chelsea number 10 and NOBODY will take hes CENTRAL spot next year... I can olmost garantee that Hazard and de bruyne will play wide next season... plus I dont think De bruyne hes talented enough and technical enough( AT THE MOMENT) to play centrally in the prem and for Chelsea.

Im just stating the fact he joined a club that have no real manager...and that REALLY doesnt suit Hazard style
 
De Bruyne will be loaned out unless he will can impress during the American tour.
Personally, i think De Bruyne will become better than Hazard (although less spectacular).
I would play Mata as a winger in a 4-3-3.
 
Someone on Redcafe just crunched the numbers - assuming the Hulk move goes through at £38m, Chelsea will have spent more in the last 18 months than the total transfer fees of the entire Manchester United 25 man squad.

And, obviously, in 18 months will have spent more than the total squads of every other team in the league bar City.

Cripes.
 
So what?

I'm pretty sure Man Utd spended more the last years than the entire Belgian league in the same amount of time...At the time Larsson played for Celtic he cost more than the entire Anderlecht squad that played against Celtic.
This is story of the statistics freak who drowns in a river that is on average meter deep...
With stats you can proof everything you want.

It's strange you never react when i say that the big teams like Man Utd, Arsenal, Juve, Liverpool, Bayern and others created the sugar daddy clubs because they made a glass ceiling that is nearly impossible to break for outside clubs. The only way to break through it is by finding a sugar daddy.
I agree with you that is an unhelathy situation, but in a way Chelsea, Man City, PSG, Malaga and Anzhi are not to blame. The essence of sports is fair competition. Those traditional big clubs killed fair competition. What you get instead is unfair competition, but it is short sighted to blame those "new rich" clubs.
 
Spurs managed it and have been unfortunate that Man City and Chelsea have wrestled that away from them, Newcastle have also managed it and their current side without the big spenders would be in that so called top group.
 
gerd said:
So what?

I'm pretty sure Man Utd spended more the last years than the entire Belgian league in the same amount of time...At the time Larsson played for Celtic he cost more than the entire Anderlecht squad that played against Celtic.
This is story of the statistics freak who drowns in a river that is on average meter deep...
With stats you can proof everything you want.

It's strange you never react when i say that the big teams like Man Utd, Arsenal, Juve, Liverpool, Bayern and others created the sugar daddy clubs because they made a glass ceiling that is nearly impossible to break for outside clubs. The only way to break through it is by finding a sugar daddy.
I agree with you that is an unhelathy situation, but in a way Chelsea, Man City, PSG, Malaga and Anzhi are not to blame. The essence of sports is fair competition. Those traditional big clubs killed fair competition. What you get instead is unfair competition, but it is short sighted to blame those "new rich" clubs.
Click to expand...

Gerd, why do you have to keep mentioning the Belgian league every time money in the Premier League is brought up? We're talking about money flow in one league. That has nothing to do with comparing to other leagues. If we keep talking like that, then it's endless. Man Utd spent more than entire Belgian League, Anderlecht spent more than entire Togolese League, etc. It's about global appeal. The premier league built it's way to global appeal while you guys didn't for example.

But anyway, United did depend on youngsters back in the 90's and they did win. Chelsea and City didn't. They're killing the premier league going way over the top every time. This money isn't even normally high, this is way too crazy and out of order.

And yea I am a United fan. And I'm all for salary caps.
 
Lami said:
Gerd, why do you have to keep mentioning the Belgian league every time money in the Premier League is brought up? We're talking about money flow in one league. That has nothing to do with comparing to other leagues. If we keep talking like that, then it's endless. Man Utd spent more than entire Belgian League, Anderlecht spent more than entire Togolese League, etc. It's about global appeal. The premier league built it's way to global appeal while you guys didn't for example.

But anyway, United did depend on youngsters back in the 90's and they did win. Chelsea and City didn't. They're killing the premier league going way over the top every time. This money isn't even normally high, this is way too crazy and out of order.

And yea I am a United fan. And I'm all for salary caps.
Click to expand...

You have money, you do anything. It is as simple as that.
 
Salary caps limits but doesnt stop. The go around to that in a legalizing matter is paying high excessive compensation , that pushes the limit. Big clubs will still get their players only smaller clubs will be hurting more. If you want a change that make the playing field then a drafting of picks lol. Harzard will be playing for QPR .
 
528984_275513512546020_581521774_n.jpg
 
gerd said:
So what?

I'm pretty sure Man Utd spended more the last years than the entire Belgian league in the same amount of time...At the time Larsson played for Celtic he cost more than the entire Anderlecht squad that played against Celtic.
This is story of the statistics freak who drowns in a river that is on average meter deep...
With stats you can proof everything you want.
Click to expand...

That just doesn't make any sense. The Belgian league is in competition with itself, the English league is too. That's the whole point of leagues. I bet teams in the Belgian first division spend more than then entirety of the Belgian 3rd division. It doesn't matter because they'r enot in direct competition with each other.

Chelsea are in direct competition with United, Arsenal, Liverpool, Newcastle, Tottenham and so forth. They are in a sporting league together, and exist to play each other.

Therefore if one or two teams have the kind of resources to spend literally 10x other teams, I just don't see it as enticing.

You cite United over and over again, but United have NEVER been at a similar disproportionate spend to the rest of the league. No team has ever come close to what City and Chelsea are doing, in terms of distorting things.

Anyway, as Mehtab says - with money you do what you want.
 
The fact that i cite United is because i mainly have this discussion with you, one could say the same thing about Arsenal, Liverpool, Juventus, Barcelona, Madrid.

The Belgian competition is not a competition with itself. If Belgian (or Dutch, or Danish or whatever) would have the money of the English clubs then players like Kompany, Vermaelen, Hazard, Courtois, Fellaini, Witsel would still be playing in Belgium and maybe Belgium teams could attract players like Hulk or Cr Ronaldo.

And don't start about the appeal of these clubs, i don't think Lombaerts, Dani and Criscito joined Zenith for it's appeal, neither did Eto'o joined Anzhi.

And the fact that it's all about money: that is my point.

Let's stop this discussion, i will not convince you and certainly not the people who think i'm specifically after Man Utd. Man Utd are certainly not worse than most other big clubs, in fact they are a bad example since they had their successes with a bunch of homegrown players.
 
I don't know why we need Dembele when we have Hulk and Torres in forward. Hopefully he goes to Arsenal or Man Utd because he won't be getting playing time in Chelsea.
 
Still think it's a great bit of business.

Thought that when I saw Aguero go to City. Two absolutely class young players that are moving up in the football world.

He's going to tear it up. Then move to Spain in 3 years or so.
 
He's not as good as Aguero yet Ryan, that was actually worth every penny at the time of the purchase

Its actually official now that Eden is on 170K, I mean that's just not realistic salery unless your Real or Barca along with the the super rich for a player who will still needs to develop to become the full article.(PSG, Malaga, City, Chelsea, Anzhi)
 
He will face a very tough first season.
As for the people who doubt Dembele, at the moment he is better than Hazard.
 
Who do you think the next Chelsea striker would be?

I would hope for Sturridge first then Torres. He is young fast and have a good shoot on him. We need him to play as a striker because there he can be greedy. But it all depends on Torres Euro 2012 performance.
 
Falcao is a much better player than Hulk, the difference between Ramadel Falcao and Hulk is same as Denis Bergkamp and Peter Van Vossen. Someone else says that Falcao is like Batistuta, and that is totally 100% correct. He's a player of immense natural ability and can create goals out of nothing, he is very good on for crossing to and can also beat a man by the dribbling or shoot and score from distance. If he goes to the Premier League he will be the best striker in that league. Hulk is a somewhat good player, but he doesnt have the finesse of Falcao, the Brazilian is good and might score goals, but he wont create as many chances as the Colombian.
 
CBG said:
Falcao is a much better player than Hulk, the difference between Ramadel Falcao and Hulk is same as Denis Bergkamp and Peter Van Vossen. Someone else says that Falcao is like Batistuta, and that is totally 100% correct. He's a player of immense natural ability and can create goals out of nothing, he is very good on for crossing to and can also beat a man by the dribbling or shoot and score from distance. If he goes to the Premier League he will be the best striker in that league. Hulk is a somewhat good player, but he doesnt have the finesse of Falcao, the Brazilian is good and might score goals, but he wont create as many chances as the Colombian.
Click to expand...

Even if he left Atletico, he will be going to Barca or City.
 
Mehtab, judging players is clearly not your strongest point. Falcao is the best natural goal scorer i've seen in years.
 
gerd said:
Mehtab, judging players is clearly not your strongest point. Falcao is the best natural goal scorer i've seen in years.
Click to expand...

I'm not telling he is a bad player. I'm just saying he is not good for Chelsea for 50 million pounds. He will have the famous Chelsea striker disease and media wars.
 
I thought he might struggle at Atleti because of the pricetag and step up from the Portuguese league but he got better and better as the year went on.

Falcao would be a magnificent signing and he's used to playing as the main striker in a front three.
 
John Terry on trial today, it found guilty of racially abusing Anton Ferdinand the most punishment he faces is a £2.5k fine, do we think this is enough for such a high profile case or should he be made an example of? Suarez got a 8 game ban, so perhaps FIFA will add their own punishment on the end of it, however it's funny to see how differently the FA reacted when it was an English player involved and not a foreign star.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom