test

Welcome to Talk Chelsea

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

strong centreback

Members
  • Content count

    266
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About strong centreback

  • Rank
    Youth Team
  • Birthday 12/04/1983

Profile Information

  • Gender Male
  • Location Berkshire
  • Fan Since 1990
  • First Match Chelsea v Man Utd, 10 March 1991
  • Memory FA Cup Final 1997
  1. Stamford Bridge

    Not allowed to use artificial turf I think, shouldn't be an issue with a new build, plenty of ways to sort drainage when your starting a fresh dig deep enough and put in artificial drainage aids to help with that issue, since we started using the weed lamps to help the pitch it's been much much better.
  2. Stamford Bridge

    I think you will find they will lower and turn the pitch a degree or 5, the whole stadium as is would be flattened, the only part worth saving is the west and even then id reclad it if that were the case.
  3. Stamford Bridge

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2012-05-15/champions-league-win-may-determine-samsung-s-backing-of-chelsea Hwang also said his company has turned down opportunities for naming rights to various stadiums, including Chelseas Stamford Bridge. The Blues have failed to sell naming rights for several years and want to find a sponsor as part of proposals to move to a new stadium. The club said May 4 that it was bidding to acquire the Battersea Power Station site in London. Our experience is that even though we put the Samsung name on that, no media mentions Samsung but just the stadium name, so that was the actual reason, said Hwang. Samsung rejected chance to sponsor stadium, common sense says they would of been offered the chance.
  4. Stamford Bridge

    Chelsea are hardly likely to turn round and say you know what its been 5 years we have said twice that we will announce a sponsor in the coming months but it was actually rubbish and we have failed to find anyone willing to sponsor us for the amount we want on our current stadium, that would never happen and thats the only time youd have proof that thats the case, the most simple answer is usually the right one nobody wants to pay the going rate for a ground name on a established stadia, the closet thing you would have to proof is when the bridge is rebuilt and some american/asian business has their companys name plastered all over the place.
  5. Stamford Bridge

    2009 - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/chelsea/6510291/Chelsea-to-sell-Stamford-Bridge-naming-rights-to-compete-with-elite-clubs.html 2011- http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2058862/Chelsea-close-Stamford-Bridge-naming-rights-deal.html the club have seemed very keen to build a new ground, not just redevelop shed/mh ends to get to 60k, so logically to me it seems they want a new stadia part of that has been mooted as to be as they could sell the naming rights to offset some of the cost of the build. To me it seems pretty clear that the club have failed to sell the naming rights to the bridge it was even a rumoured part reason behind gourlay being moved on, just as dave whelan failed to sell his and mike ashley failed to sell his the logical pattern it seems is old stadia and would explain the 6 years looking yet no deal for us even though we are one of the top 5 clubs in world football over the last decade or so and could of offered said company the opportunity to be first in line on a new stadia.
  6. Stamford Bridge

    Thats not the point though, it may be new for the bulk of it but crucially it has always been called stamford bridge, the club didnt change their mind as gourlay 3 years after starting the search gave updates on how it was going, it was reported that sponsors were not interested in sponsoring an old (as in not brand new) stadium for the kind of money we were looking for, ask dave whelan and mike ashley how it is going in finding a sponsor for an existing stadium. Id imagine that the training ground name will be bundled in with the ground name for £20m+ a season for 10 years, which should be achievable on a new stadia.
  7. Stamford Bridge

    surely in regards to sponsors rejecting the naming, the proof is in the pudding, 6 years on from first looking and nothing.
  8. Stamford Bridge

    Not age of ground, the fact it has already had a name for the last 100 odd years lol, sponsors are not stupid they know full well that if stamford bridge was renamed or had something added to the front of stamford bridge it would still only be known as stamford bridge, a new stadia with new history a blank slate even if built on top of the old site would sell like hot cakes as it would only be known as the new name. Its like trying to rename chewbacca as nigel nobody would call him nigel he would still be called chewbacca to 90% of people.
  9. Stamford Bridge

    fulham broadway is the obvious one id assume unless the club fancy building a stadium specific station a bit further up to easy congestion.
  10. Stamford Bridge

    thats niave to think it wont happen, new ground name will be sold, otherwise why not just redevelop the shed end and if possibile add a tier to mh? for a complete rebuild the stadia name will be sold to the highest bidder, they have been trying for years to sell the bridges name but had no buyers due to it being an old stadia with a new stadia you will have a bidding war, especially as roman will build the most state of the art stadia in the country.
  11. Stamford Bridge

    Its a not a share bought to profit from once again look into what it is and why its there as you obviously dont have a clue, any fan buying one in the hope they can flog it back to the club at a profit to me isnt a fan, if you buy one do it for the right reasons even if it is an outdated idea, you would of been lynched 20 years ago for insinuating a buy for profit motive.
  12. would love it if we done the treble this year

  13. The Mourinho Thread

    Its tactical and their are reasons for doing so, look at what club has the best record against the top 6, ends justifies the means.
  14. The Mourinho Thread

    do you play sports? play for 2 hours on a tuesday night then play 90 minutes saturday evening at a high level also against a team who hasnt played in a week, the mental aspect plays its part in why as you put it we were at our best in last few minutes of first half, thats called holding onto what you have got for 5 minutes till you get to regroup at half time and the rhythm is disrupted, its character and what wins you titles, when you come back out after a ten minute break when you are already knackered your legs feel like lead and your sluggish, again why near the end of the second we looked abit better again, mental strength kicks in you know you only have 5 minutes left you push yourself abit harder, you dont push yourself early on in the second half when your tired and burn out by the hour marker, you absorb the pressure and you conserve energy, its a marathon not a race.
  15. The Mourinho Thread

    What a load of bollocks that is, your body is more likely to be tired for the second half after putting in 45 minutes when you are already not 100% hence the lack of intensity in the second half all due to the 120 minutes in the liverpool game, coupled with city having a week off amplifing it even more. Mentally they were strong, otherwise we couldnt of got a draw whilst sustaining that amount of pressure for long periods.