Premier League thread

[Chelsea Legend 11 4,062]

It's no holier than thou talking. it's simple basic math with basic odds analysis. a league where you have more than 2 teams running for the title is obviously harder to win. A league that divides money more fairly have better 'weaker' sides that lead top teams to drop more points. why do you think EPL often has champions with much less points except for the odd outstanding champion here and there?

Did I say the best? no, just the strongest and hardest. that's easily proved by numbers and has nothing to do with opinion.

The opinion came from the idea that 3 titles out of 10 is massive under-achievement. I think that's crazy and even a bit spoiled

Not arguing that, just the use of the phrase "this isn't... FM,Fifa... whatever" is so condescending.

[Chelsea Legend 11 4,062]

I agree with what you're saying but sport isn't business. You can't expect a fixed return on investment, spending £1bn doesn't mean a club needs to win x amount of trophies to justify the expenditure. Looking at money spent and coming to a conclusion from that; that a team has under or overachieved, can be very misleading. Money spent doesn't mean money well spent - I think we can all agree that the likes of Chelsea, Man City, PSG and AS Monaco have at times spent very poorly. A team with fewer resources but a stronger transfer strategy would outperform a team with bottomless pockets being wasted on Fernando Torres or Roque Santa Cruz.

Also you have to consider that Chelsea and friends would all have had to pay way over the odds for players as selling clubs know and exploit the well endowed transfer budgets of the noveau rich. For exampe, Man City, if I remember right, were being held to ransom by AC Milan for Kaka but they eventually let him go to Real for a substantially lower fee.

This isn't a debate I'm going to engage in, I know this... But to make the SUGGESTION that Chelsea have underachieved a bit isn't unfounded.

[The Skipper 20,593]

In comparison to other teams that have blown the money, we've done very well actually. Wouldn't say we've underachieved at all.

[EBH 283]

This isn't a debate I'm going to engage in, I know this... But to make the SUGGESTION that Chelsea have underachieved a bit isn't unfounded.

I would say that Chelsea failed more in the transfer market than on the pitch. There wasn't enough money, or it wasn't being used properly in the years between Mourinho leaving and Villas-Boas being appointed. The squad needed some improvements to compete with that amazing Man United team and instead the only notable additions were Malouda, Anelka, and Bosingwa. The three definitely had their moments but weren't consistently performing. Also some key players left and weren't replaced, such as Makelele.

Those four-five years saw a slowly ageing and declining team getting beaten by an insanely strong United team. That was when money was really needed.

[Viper22 2,418]

Never like this sort of "holier than thou" talk. Anything that starts with "This isn't..." is so belittling. Its not hard to imagine that a team that has spent as much as Chelsea have under achieved a bit.

So in your opinion everyone but Man Utd have underachieved in the PL era then? Because Chelsea, Man City, Liverpool and Arsenal have spent a fair bit and haven't won anywhere near as much. Since our cash injection in 2004 we have won 3 titles, Man United have won 5 and Man City have won 2. I'm happy with a title every 3 years tbh. Also, we haven't focused only on the PL in the last 10 years, we have won 10 other trophies. So we've been competing on many fronts every year.

Also, as much as you want that moral high ground over the league strength debate, i'm afraid it's just a fact. None of the other top league in Europe offer the competitiveness of the Premier League. Liverpool, Arsenal, Chelsea, Spurs, Man Utd, Man City and even Everton are all better than the 3rd/4th best teams in most other divisions. How many of those would Schalke, Monaco, Lyon, Bayer Leverkusen, Marsielle, Inter, Sporting Lisbon, Napoli, Valencia, Sevilla or AC Milan beat? It isn't belitting other leagues to say they're not as competitive, it's just stating the fact that they aren't. It's not fault of the clubs in most cases, but the organisations running the leagues. For instance that horrific stat that 80-90% of the TV money for La Liga goes straight to the 2 big clubs, how are any other clubs meant to do anything? Just shows how good Atletico's achievement was this year.

[Starman60 1,343]

Ok, I've looked at our fixture list and we have two tough periods during the season, with the last 6 games being especially challenging. But then, having said that, we have to play each team twice, so what does it matter when we play them. To win the league we have to beat them all, and to me, whether we beat them on the first day of the season or the last day is inconsequential. Lets take each game as it comes, win them then move on to the next game.......Simples And if we win them all we win the league !!! There now, that was easy wasn't it ??????????

[Laylabelle 9,351]

Always Liverpool a few before the end

[CHOULO19 24,332]

I imagine Jose would be fuming about this fixture list. I bet he'd have A LOT to say about it during the season.

[Tomo 21,733]

Im glad our last game is at home. Although the main thing is getting your hands on the trophy i would much rather we lifted it at home should we win it.

[The Skipper 20,593]

The fixture list honestly isn't that bad... Sure, couple of tough periods but this is the PL.

[Blue Armour 4,278]

Meh...chance for more delightful "guard of honor" moments

[Duppy Conqueror 1,494]

The Burnley fixture will favour them as they can have longer to game plan against us( when us having the same time,won't be as advantagous to us) and opening weekend their players and fans will be fresh and not have had the wind beat out of the sails yet.

We shouldn't be fully on the same page,firing on all cylinders early on in the season,but we should still have too much class for them.

I only look at fixtures with things like not wanting a long distance night time game because of work in the morning and european away games taking enough of those slots on the calender.not really bothered by the level of competition..easy is for pussies.

[DavidEU 2,023]

So the TV fixtures have been announced today. This is the opening weekend:

Saturday

Manchester United vs Swansea 1245

Arsenal vs Crystal Palace 1730

Sunday

Liverpool vs Southampton 1330

Newcastle vs Man City 1600

Monday

Burnley vs Chelsea 2000

[Jase 43,479]

Have turned this thread into about Premier League. So, anything and everything that is related to Chelsea in the league goes in here.

And speaking of that, the fixtures for live broadcasts on Sky Sports and BT Sports have been released. Here's our games:

http://www.premierleague.com/en-gb/news/news/2014-15/jul/opening-live-uk-television-fixtures-for-2014-2015-season-released.html

18th August Monday - Burnley (A) 8pm [sky Sports]

30th August Saturday - Everton (A) 5.30pm [sky Sports]

21st September Sunday - Man City (A) 4pm [sky Sports]

2nd October Sunday - Arsenal (H) 2.05pm [sky Sports]

26th October Sunday - Man United (A) 4pm [sky Sports]

8th November Saturday - Liverpool (A) 12.45pm [bT Sports]

29th November Saturday - Sunderland (A) 5.30pm [sky Sports]

The timings are all based on UK time.

[Strike 7,217]

Monday night

[Special Juan 27,425]

8pm on a Monday night........

:clap:

Well done you fucking arseholes.

[The Chels 2,502]

8pm on a Monday night........

:clap:

Well done you fucking arseholes.

MNF can be a pain but it's nothing new.

[Special Juan 27,425]

Cannot for the life of me believe the hard on the papers and news outlets have about Man United. I'm talking jazzed up banners and glory pictures of them on every internet page, mug shots of Van Gaal with the headline "United ready to rule again"

Fuck off you pack of tossers, I really hate United with a fucking passion, and the media even more.