X number of games is the usual one, right?
Boehly is going to ruin Chelsea (hopefully)
- Thread starter UnitedSofa
- Start date
X number of games is the usual one, right?
When I read about this deal i didn't see any conditions, it was mentioned as good as done deal as it was obligation.
Anyways this won't matter, if club wants to make some money, they will always make it easily as there will be lot of buyers for potential players.
As duffer says it wasn't public but the rumours were a very low bar - something like 5-10 appearances in all competitions
to be honest, I don’t think celebrating Chinese new year is bad I’ll just take any chance to laugh
Nothing that can’t be fixed with another £1 billion
They are hilariously shit. It is still so funny 
Imagine being this bad after spending £1bn.
Surely they would have to sell some players first, literally everyone in the squad has a 10 year contract so it won’t be easy to do.
Burn everything thing down.
Must be a massive concern, for us I always felt an ownership change would help (jury still out on that as early days) but for you guys it feels like a mess and its new ownership so that aspect isnt going to change.
How is it even possible? Genuinely, with that amount of spending, surely any club has to go forwards? Even a little?
Perhaps the difference is the starting level. The Glazers have effectively run us terribly for a decade and a half, so INEOS can hardly do worse. Abramovich had Chelsea as a leading force, winning trophies and in the Champions League most years. They have much further to fall.
l have mentally checked out. We’re 2 years in and all I’ve seen from this ownership is chaos, unprecedented chaotic spending with little to no plan on how to make it work. My expectations for the remainder of this season and the future in general is on the floor. Doesn’t matter if they throw £100m at Osimhen. I expect failure.
those investors he somehow convinced this was a great idea must be livid now
like where is the pay-off coming from here? It makes so little sense at the moment
like where is the pay-off coming from here? It makes so little sense at the moment
Oh don’t worry, we understand that pain quite well.
I’d be surprised if Osimhen fancied the move if I’m honest.
Come on Todd, pull the trigger and go for Jesse March. You know you want to
And this is why the idea of solving problems by spending is such a fallacy. Chelsea have basically bought a new squad over the last 12-18 months; not a new team, a new squad. Basically, they actually took the "sell everyone, start from scratch" approach that you ovmdten see people begging for around here after a run of bad results. And what it's shown is that if you don't have a clear strategy and don't integrate these players gradually, it actually makes you worse, nit better.
If he's as big a mercenary as the rest of them have been, he'll be signing that 50 year contract.
As people are asking how can you spend £1bn and be this shit? Easy, you buy mercenaries for huge monies. That's how. We said as much and were told to quieten down. I guess some people need to learn the long, hard, way round.
It's not bad to celebrate it but I'd have thought you'd celebrate it by having it as a theme in the match day programme or something.
I think the problem is that they bought an entirely new team. So much spending so quickly is probably impossible to get right.
Chelsea might have a good team in a year or two but I can't imagine any way Boehly makes a profit on all this. It's incredible they were so confident that they knew better that they spent that much money.
In late May/early June I'd try lowballing them with an offer for Palmer that's well below his current valuation but a profit on the 42m they spent on him. He is a Wythenshawe lad after all and his family are Reds. Plus he'd be the perfect solution to our RW problem.
Even in my football manager heyday as a bored 14 year old I didn't go as mad as Chelsea have. It's fun to see it all fall apart so predictably.
Let's go for it, they owe us one for Mount. Does he have an anti-United clause though, like that madrid dude.
Good question. The clause in Diaz's contract was so widely publicised, I'm not sure if that was just a one-off or if it's become the norm with most of City's sales since then.
I wouldn’t be.
I don't think it's a norm I velieve Guardiola is on record stating City won't stop players from leaving to even to their rivals if they wish so because Big Clubs should be confident in their own ability or something to that effect .
Ara you missing the irony or am I missing your sarcasm?
We've spent over 1.5 billion since SAF (almost 400m of that for EtH alone) and been terrible ourselves.
At least Chelsea will be paying less in wages and have a significant resale value.
What you’ve got to remember is some of these players they signed have false values. Caicedo, Enzo, Mudryk in particular are worth absolutely nowhere near the amount paid for them. Caicedo did have a strong year with Brighton in the prem but generally all three players have little/no experience playing at the highest level and all three have underwhelmed massively.
They basically ripped apart and sold a team of players who had won the CL, finished 3rd/4th and got to two cup finals and signed all these young and unproven players and given them all 6-8 year contracts. I know the poster above mentioned resale value but what resale value? A resale value of a quarter of the paid price.
I don’t think it’s said enough about how this whole thing they’ve done is possibly one of the most dumbest things ever seen/witnessed in football. There’ll be documentaries on this in 30 years time. It was an absolutely stupid method to take at rebuilding a club. A club that didn’t even need rebuilding.
I love how much Boehly hates Chelsea.
Do Chelsea fans have a particularly popular forum? Would love to see some meltdowns 
It'd be hilarious if Boehly washes his hands after the initial "shock and awe campaign", and leave it to the locals to pick up the pieces. Very American.
Meh, no fun in keep wallowing in your own misery. I feel enough disappointment and negativity from us in the last 10 years. Always more fun to laugh at someone else’s expense.
Chelsea remind me of the old times where I play football manager. I’d use to increase my transfer budget in the editor, spend hours selling almost half the team and buying an entire new team but when the season starts I’ll just quit the game without saving when I lose the first few games.
Im just waiting for Boehly to rip off the mask and show himself as Ed Woodward.
Last edited:
https://www.theshedend.com/topic/32425-todd-boehly-chelsea-agree-sale/page/435/#commentsDo Chelsea fans have a particularly popular forum? Would love to see some meltdowns
Enjoy
Yeah, but at least our owners/top brass embrace their trust fund baby status and don't come in with pretensions of "disrupting the sport" "take a bit of a lesson of American sports".
The schadenfreude is absolutely delicious. And I don't think that so many of their players have the resale value you think they have.
I was listening to the Ben Foster podcast at the weekend and he was talking about how giving all these players such long contracts is so stupid because it means that some of these players will essentially just mentally check out now as they know that they're secure for the next seven to eight years.
Even though they aren't on particularly high wages they will really struggle to get rid of some of the players that don't make it.
Let's take Mudryk for example. He's on 100k a week until 2031. Who is going to offer him anywhere close to that sort of money?
Even though they aren't on particularly high wages they will really struggle to get rid of some of the players that don't make it.
Let's take Mudryk for example. He's on 100k a week until 2031. Who is going to offer him anywhere close to that sort of money?
Well said and hilarious when you think about it. The idea that spending £100m+ on players at 21 or 22 and they're going to turn into £150m players is laughable. There just isn't the market for that first of all, unless they go to select few other clubs like Chelsea. Secondly, spending £100 million on them is their peak value. If they're big hits, you're probably not going to sell them until they're 28 or 29, at which point they no longer have the same resale value. If they're perfectly average, then you probably get £50-60m max. If they're shite, then you get either nothing or miniscule return on your investment.
Very nice of them to be this shit and make our shit season a bit cheerful. Let's hope they find a way to get relegated.