Dortmund didn’t keep the best. It is all speculation. We will not know if or how it works out for several years. It is definitely a completely different approach from the past twenty years.
Boehly is going to ruin Chelsea (hopefully)
- Thread starter UnitedSofa
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik and Imran are here to talk about a frustrating 2 points dropped at Crystal Palace. They then discuss the regeneration of Old Trafford. Finally, Nik is joined by special guest Michael Statham from the Football Oranje podcast - who gives us a more in depth look at our EL opposition FC Twente, and then runs through the (many) Dutch connections currently at United.
Dortmund didn’t keep the best. It is all speculation. We will not know if or how it works out for several years. It is definitely a completely different approach from the past twenty years.
Guehi and Tomori were sold under Marina though so we can't know how Clearlake would have dealt with them. Although I would say I wish we resigned Marc over Disasi.
Badiashille however I think is getting a bit of a harsh press, very low bar admittedly but he came in January last season and had a genuine shout to be player of the season, I want to see what him in a well coached defensive structure again before writing him off (for all Potter's faults we we're the third best defense in the league during his spell).
Sold Mason Mount though - a true generational talent .
As opposed to doing the noble thing and letting him leave for free a year later? Still logical business.
I just read the last page of the thread and made a sweeping generalisation of millions of people. What else were you expecting
My mind just goes back to the fans at Stamford bridge singing about wanting Abramovic back and it makes me laugh.
Which player has developed over the last 2 years? Players like Estevao is one example out of 20 they have signed.
Also, when they sign youngsters like Brazil, generally they do sign a year later.. Alvarez was signed 6 months before he joined, Endrick with Real Madrid the same.
So those are difference cases to the Lesley Ugochukwu, Washington, Diego Moreira, Angelo, Casedei, Santos, Madueke, Chukwuemeka, Solina and others.
Well yeah, private equity owners are in it to sell us for a profit, that's their motivation.
Abramovich was in it to win trophies.
The only difference between Clearlake and the likes of the glazers is the debt is on BlueCo, not the club directly.
They've borrowed $1bn ish from BOA, JPM et al.
Well Cole Palmer would be an obvious response. Madueke too. And Petrovic. Others they have signed are still quite a bit younger and are at a different stage of their development, so it remains to be seen with them. Casadei had a very successful spell on loan at Leicester.
I appreciate the SA signings don’t usually come immediately, but the fact that it’s a common strategy doesn’t mean they haven’t done the right thing too. Where are our alternatives? Who are the young SA talent that we have developing in SA before joining us in a year or two? We don’t have any, and they do. It is a good thing.
Bosses fired Tuchel for their managerial convenience. They don't want to depend on Tuchel to lead the team. So it was time to fire Tuchel. Their approach depends on team management and having a coach to lead the team.
It is clear that they are not willing to rely on Tuchel alone to deliver on their investments. What they want is a management team that knows the finer points of it and a good coach to work with them.
Whether this approach succeeds remains to be seen. Significantly, the Roman approach was the opposite.
It is clear that they are not willing to rely on Tuchel alone to deliver on their investments. What they want is a management team that knows the finer points of it and a good coach to work with them.
Whether this approach succeeds remains to be seen. Significantly, the Roman approach was the opposite.
Last edited:
I would add Gusto and Jackson to that number but the point is that for a variety of reasons many of the players signed haven’t played for the first team be it injuries, development or whatever.
Angelo played a whole season in the French top division, Santos went there in January and won consecutive young player of the month awards, Madueke has definitely improved and he showed the second half of last season, Chukwuemeka has been hampered by injuries, so unfair to expect much there, yet he still showed flashes of his talent, Ugochukwu's season was also hampered by injuries. Slonina spent a good year on loan in Belgium. Casadei had an ok loan spell at Leicester. Moreira spent a year developing in the academy.
Each player you listed had some level of growth. I'm not sure what you were expecting. None of them have been at Chelsea more than 12 months, except Chukwuemeka, and if not for injuries, he'd have been a regular first team player for 2 years, and Madueke, who showed very good growth last season.
I’m not sure why that is a point at all though. The ‘whatever reason’ is obviously extremely relevant, and the answers to this point all lay in there.
The way they operate absolutely baffles me.
I mean its clear not all of them can be first team regulars at Chelsea?
This is me mentioning names without speaking about the first team players who are quite young in Caceido, Enzo, Lavia, Nkunku, Mudryk, Palmer,
Are any of those actually ever going to break in at Chelsea?
Some will, some won't. I'm sure they'd all like to make it at Chelsea but realistically that isn't possible, we know this, but they all have a chance. Those that don't, will hopefully land on their feet at a good level somewhere. You a take a punt on them, and like with every other punt in the history of football, some will work out and some won't. If Angelo goes back to Strasbourg on loan and shows a medium of level of development, it might not be enough to get him in the Chelsea first team, but it might be enough for him to secure a move mid-level EL club and that's a good outcome for him and for Chelsea. Same goes with the rest of them.
I get that, most people take a punt of a couple but Chelsea are taking punts on numerous players, considering over the last few years, Chelsea's academy started looking strong too, what message would that send to those coming through the ranks?
It seems that the academy is not to produce for first team, rather for FFP in order to get other talents from across the world?
Colwill got a strict not for sale stance put on his head alongside a new deal.
Rightly or wrongly I think the policy for the academy players and the 'youth signings' are the same, the elite ones go nowhere and the good but not great ones have a price.
Colwil, James were the ones to break before Boehly, its the new ones coming through now, how many will even get a chance in the first team?
We seen Maatsen, Hall both sold.
I'd prefer to rely on the academy for good prospects more than these cheap punts, but essentially the same applies to the academy. The diamonds will be kept, as evidenced by Tyrique George - the latest Cobham gem to show unreal potential - being given a long contract.
I've always made it clear watching an academy player make it big at Chelsea means more than some wonderkid from the other side of the world making it big at Chelsea, but yes some will be end up being sacrificed to satisfy FFP/PSR rules. My hope is the spending will slow down after the initial crazy spending spree, so the future crop of Cobham gems won't have to be sacrificed the way the current crop has been.
Colwill made his debut for Chelsea more than a year after the takeover.
Alfie Gilchrist made 17 appearances for us last season.
He could start a breakaway league with all the players he bought.
Thats fine, then you will see that normally its 17 and increase season after.
Lets see if he gets even 7 next season.
It sounds like this is something you want to happen so you can come back and say ‘see, told you so’
My guess is Gilchrist will go on loan next season. He’s been linked with Fabregas’ Como, which could be a really nice move for him.
No you don't. It's not a normal thing at all.
No team has a youth player break into the first XI as a regular every season. Not, Chelsea, not Man United, not Man City, not Arsenal.
If you get a a youth team player into the first XI every 2 years, you are doing fantastically well.
Our young players are always given a chance. James is the one who takes chances and gets the best deals. Academy players alone are not enough to become one of the best teams. Some academy players leave for immediate opportunity. Can't stop them.
Our bosses decides what is best for club to become a great institution and they choose that path and go accordingly. No one can say that this is the best way.Just have to wait and see.
Our bosses decides what is best for club to become a great institution and they choose that path and go accordingly. No one can say that this is the best way.Just have to wait and see.
I mean if you are saying Alfie has broken through, you expect him to make at least 17 apps next season.
I mean most teams when a youth player "breaks" through, will see an increase in number of appearances, I didn't say new one every season.
So what I am saying is, lets see how many appearances Alfie gets next season.
I'm saying Gilchrist got a really good chance last season, just like Colwill did. That's 2 academy products making their Chelsea debuts last season and getting a genuine chance (more than those two made debuts but they didn't really play much) under the "Boehly" regime.
If they don't both don't make it, it doesn't mean they didn't get a chance. If only one makes it it's a very good outcome.
Yeah breaking through should mean they become regulars to some degree.
Not sure if that’s the argument but there is a difference between breaking through and just being given a debut etc.
I don’t think Chelsea are terrible at giving opportunities. They are just poor at managing the transition and long term planning/integration.
Gilchrist is very average, very unlikely to make it at Chelsea.
Like me complaining you didn't give Paddy McNnair more game time.
But I was not saying omg omg we gave Paddy McNair game time, he was used because there was no option.
But to say that he is broken through means he is a important player in the team.
BlueLion seems quite knowledgeable about Clearlake and how it operates / will operate. Usually it's full of praise pre season, and then they seem to disappear for a while when the season starts and the reality sets in for another season.
Looking through the last couple of pages, it seems the online fans still very much back the ownership and how they go about things. Not very much scathing going on from Chelsea fans there?
Thoughts on this?
Last edited:
My thoughts are "damn, he's been here for nearly 4 years and can't embed a Tweet".
Also, being linked with a few Leicester players was always going to happen. Can't see that one happening though.
In all seriousness, how do you these days? I'm pretty shit with Twitter / X to be honest.
In all seriousness, how do you these days? I'm pretty shit with Twitter / X to be honest.
Just copy the link to the Tweet into the "Insert media" function, and then manually replace "X" with "Twitter".
Omari Hutchinson going to Ipswich? Lasted 49 minutes.
In all seriousness, how do you these days? I'm pretty shit with Twitter / X to be honest.
It is a faff to be fair!
I don't think the Chelsea fans on the caf are a wide enough representation of the fanbase to be honest, but you also have to consider the context in which conversations about the ownership are being had here. There's lots of oppo fan criticism/mocking of Boehly & co, sometimes based on inaccurate information, so naturally you'll see a bit of push back against that, but in a setting where there's no need to constantly correct people or provide context, Chelsea fans appear to be far more critical of the ownership, at least in the circles I move in.
Last edited:
Yeah, your probably right. It's probably the old 'I can make fun of my wife, but don't you make fun of her' type thing. I just let them make fun of my wife anyway, she's scarier than me!