Jump to content
Join Talk Chelsea and join in with the discussions! Click Here

The Board


 Share
Followers 4

Recommended Posts

Matt Law also says: “Cech’s interview gives an idea of what him and Marina were hoping, trying to keep Lukaku and make it work. Boehly came in and told Tuchel it’s his call and they will do what Tuchel wants”. Tuchel and Boehly might have been ready to give Lukaku another chance for a year depending on his attitude, but Lukaku was so determined to go that letting him leave was the only option. The alternative was felt to be an absolutely toxic situation where Lukaku would likely not be getting into the squad anymore, such would be his behavior.

 

Edited by Blues Forever
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I'm not sure of there's a thread elsewhere or maybe a couple of disparate ones about certain members of the board/club hierarchy but I thought now would be a good time to post a thread giving them som

Guys we've done it, we've officially had the most successful transfer window not only in Chelsea's history but in the world of football. Called out for a Striker--Costa--32 mil. Called out for a CM--C

Quite seriously, do the people who hate him and are happy to see him leave know why they are happy? Just to take a step back and take an overview of his role and time at the club: When he was pro

Posted Images

1 hour ago, Blues Forever said:

 

Some people are going to absolutely melt down if there aren't players brought in. My opinion is that it is better not to buy anyone if the result is just more Kepa/Lukaku/Bakayoko/Drinkwater type signings. 

Obviously it isn't ideal, as we do have a lot of holes. However, I am now at the stage where I really cannot be doing with anymore pony signings and would just rather go with youth players if good options aren't possible.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Tuchel has done good as a manager in short term but I'm still not sure about his recruitment. 

We started bad with Luakaku, I am holding my breath to what comes next. 

I still say Lampard was good at spoting talent, not good as a coach. 

Make him our SD, 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Blues Forever said:

Timestamp 08:18. Matt Law confirms Marina was in fact in charge of transfers at Chelsea: "She ran the club. She decided on contracts. She decided on transfers. Every football aspect needed her sign-off."

@OhForAGreavsie

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Fernando said:

Tuchel has done good as a manager in short term but I'm still not sure about his recruitment. 

We started bad with Luakaku, I am holding my breath to what comes next. 

I still say Lampard was good at spoting talent, not good as a coach. 

Make him our SD, 

What makes you think Lukaku was a Tuchel choice? I had assumed from the beginning that he wasn't.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, King Kante said:

Some people are going to absolutely melt down if there aren't players brought in. My opinion is that it is better not to buy anyone if the result is just more Kepa/Lukaku/Bakayoko/Drinkwater type signings. 

Obviously it isn't ideal, as we do have a lot of holes. However, I am now at the stage where I really cannot be doing with anymore pony signings and would just rather go with youth players if good options aren't possible.

In my opinion Tuchel and Boehly should be making a list of players for each of the positions they feel need to be resolved. If the top one or two aren't available this summer, then move on to a different position.

If it ends up where only 2 or 3 are available instead of 5 or 6 then get those and keep our powder dry for January or next summer.

Personally, I feel we'll get Sterling and at least one centre back in. I would like us to do something in the wing back roles too but like above, unless they're top targets then I don't want us simply buying for the sake.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, King Kante said:

Some people are going to absolutely melt down if there aren't players brought in. My opinion is that it is better not to buy anyone if the result is just more Kepa/Lukaku/Bakayoko/Drinkwater type signings. 

Obviously it isn't ideal, as we do have a lot of holes. However, I am now at the stage where I really cannot be doing with anymore pony signings and would just rather go with youth players if good options aren't possible.

Similar opinion, but we absolutely need a good CB or 2.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not everything will go smoothly, but I'm genuinely looking forward to the next chapter in our club. It's clear that there are a lot of things that could be done far more efficiently at the club and still keep us challenging for trophies, and I'm confident that Boehly, in time, will put things in place to make that happen.

I like the idea of the manager being backed not just with resources, but with time and patience. I believe that of all the managers we've had during Roman's era at the club, Tuchel is probably the one that you'd want coming into this position. He's already built a rapport and bond with the fans (even more incredible considering he replaced Lamps), and won some trophies to prove his credibility as a coach. The last few months have also really shown the man, taking the club on his back and representing us through such trying times. He never bitched and moaned, he didn't bail out on the situation. 

This whole situation kind of feels like a reward to him for what he had to put up with last season. He has to make it work, it's pointless giving him the opportunity to build something if he proves incapable of doing so. But I have a feeling the whole situation will refresh him this summer and he'll get things back ticking again.

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Blues Forever said:

 

Personally, I hope we go down the Milan sort of route and get an ex-player in this role: 

Top picks

Drogba

Cech

JT is unfortunately discounted due to the PR storm he would create. 

Outsiders: 

Ballack (probably not here long enough)

Paulo (apprantly absolutely delightful to work with and has good people skills) 

SFL (if he gives up management; cannot see it; difficult if TT is here also) 

Maka

Wise (not sure if he would be liked enough/isn't too tarred by the Newcastle fiasco)

Are the type of people I would like to see in this role. People who love/have a strong affinity to the club, where players of top standing and will give their all to the role. 

This I think will work better if we are giving the manager a lot of autonomy as they don't need to prove themselves so much. 

Edited by King Kante
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, King Kante said:

Personally, I hope we go down the Milan sort of route and get an ex-player in this role: 

Drogba

Cech

JT is unfortunately discounted due to the PR storm he would create. 

Outsiders: 

Ballack (probably not here long enough)

Paulo (apprantly absolutely delightful to work with and has good people skills) 

SFL (if he gives up management; cannot see it) 

Maka

Are the type of people I would like to see in this role. People who love/have a strong affinity to the club, where players of top standing and will give their all to the role. 

I think if we were going to do this then the obvious candidate becomes Cech given he already has some board experience and from what I understand, some aspects of his role entail what a sporting director would usually do.

My understanding with the likes of Werner and Havertz was that Cech and Lampard did a very good job selling the club passionately, which shouldn't be a charade to them. It's essentially 'their' club.

Whether you can rely on an ex player to fulfil such an important role with limited or no experience I think could be a bit of a risk. However you are right I think a number of clubs on the continent excel in maximising legends of the club is administrative and/or representative capacities. The likes of Bayern and Ajax have always done this well.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Optimism level: 0

Despite what many people said, Chelsea success in past 20 years had everything to do with people who were running the club.

New owners got zero experience with football, and he comes from American sports background. In USA you might run a franchise like Knicks, who gets poor results and still makes cash. The future of this club is probably the present day United and Arsenal: 0 pressure for results, as long as financial situation is great.

Chelsea was a club that demanded results. Not different how Real Madrid, Barcelona or Bayern operate. Now the clubs is going in a different position. They are basically giving Tuchel the mission to take the club out of this difficult situation.

Look at Liverpool: they finally got the right manager in Klopp. After Klopp, Liverpool will go back to their former mediocrity. A successful club is not a one which the success relies on the manager, it's a club that can find success no matter who the coach is.  

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

If Boehly really expects milking money from fans based on poor results season after season, he did his maths wrong.  He simply came to Premier League too late and in the wrong club. It crossed my mind that he will be getting average players and be looking for average results, but how will he get his invested money back? These American owners of sport franchise are used to being awarded for failure. When I looked at Knicks revenue charts I was astonished: The worse results the bigger revenue. I guess they rely on matchday experience/ income. 

New York Knicks rewards failure.

Man Utd rewards failure. (They could go without CL for decades and have mediocre players and their revenue wouldn't significantly drop. Yet they care for CL and are getting Ten Hag).

Arsenal rewards failure. (They are without CL for quite sometime and have youngsters. Their revenue is still high, they make profit but after some time their young guns are threatening to leave leaving them no option but to invest and get that CL back).

Liverpool rewards failure. Just like United they could go without Cl for decades and have average players or youth and yet their fans that never walk alone would invest in that club enough for them to make a profit.

As much as some say we will be run like United, Arsenal or Liverpool before Klopp, that is simply not possible. We just don't have fanbase  as these clubs do. They have supporters from 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s, from all around the world who invest in club. They have big stadiums and massive match day income. 

We don't have large fanbase that has been with us in decades. We don't have big stadium. If they stop investing and try to run us as midtable cash cow they may have stadium full but their bank account will be almost empty with tendency of getting emptier year by year.

 

 

Edited by laura90
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, laura90 said:

If Boehly really expects milking money from fans based on poor results season after season, he did his maths wrong.  He simply came to Premier League too late and in the wrong club. It crossed my mind that he will be getting average players and be looking for average results, but how will he get his invested money back? These American owners of sport franchise are used to being awarded for failure. When I looked at Knicks revenue charts I was astonished: The worse results the bigger revenue. I guess they rely on matchday experience/ income. 

New York Knicks rewards failure.

Man Utd rewards failure. (They could go without CL for decades and have mediocre players and their revenue wouldn't significantly drop. Yet they care for CL and are getting Ten Hag).

Arsenal rewards failure. (They are without CL for quite sometime and have youngsters. Their revenue is still high, they make profit but after some time their young guns are threatening to leave leaving them no option but to invest and get that CL back).

Liverpool rewards failure. Just like United they could go without Cl for decades and have average players or youth and yet their fans that never walk alone would invest in that club enough for them to make a profit.

As much as some say we will be run like United, Arsenal or Liverpool before Klopp, that is simply not possible. We just don't have fanbase  as these clubs do. They have supporters from 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s, from all around the world who invest in club. They have big stadiums and massive match day income. 

We don't have large fanbase that has been with us in decades. We don't have big stadium. If they stop investing and try to run us as midtable cash cow they may have stadium full but their bank account will be almost empty with tendency of getting emptier year by year.

 

 

This is purely wrong. If anything you should look at the transfer thread where some one was mentioning how a small team like leeds can ask 70 million for a player. 

Money that is generated by TV is what is bringing interest from overseas. And it will just continue to grow. 

So there is value in buying a pl club. I do believe as well that 20 years from now the value of the club will be much more then what was paid. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, laura90 said:

If Boehly really expects milking money from fans based on poor results season after season, he did his maths wrong.  He simply came to Premier League too late and in the wrong club. It crossed my mind that he will be getting average players and be looking for average results, but how will he get his invested money back? These American owners of sport franchise are used to being awarded for failure. When I looked at Knicks revenue charts I was astonished: The worse results the bigger revenue. I guess they rely on matchday experience/ income. 

New York Knicks rewards failure.

Man Utd rewards failure. (They could go without CL for decades and have mediocre players and their revenue wouldn't significantly drop. Yet they care for CL and are getting Ten Hag).

Arsenal rewards failure. (They are without CL for quite sometime and have youngsters. Their revenue is still high, they make profit but after some time their young guns are threatening to leave leaving them no option but to invest and get that CL back).

Liverpool rewards failure. Just like United they could go without Cl for decades and have average players or youth and yet their fans that never walk alone would invest in that club enough for them to make a profit.

As much as some say we will be run like United, Arsenal or Liverpool before Klopp, that is simply not possible. We just don't have fanbase  as these clubs do. They have supporters from 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s, from all around the world who invest in club. They have big stadiums and massive match day income. 

We don't have large fanbase that has been with us in decades. We don't have big stadium. If they stop investing and try to run us as midtable cash cow they may have stadium full but their bank account will be almost empty with tendency of getting emptier year by year.

 

 

I would say our fan base is bigger than. Arsenal's.. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...