Chelsea 2020/21 - General discussion
- Thread starter duffer
- Start date
Alright lads don’t push your luck.
People will keep laughing at Tuchel's "haircut" but not at his ability as football manager. The new hot German manager. Klopp's yesterday's papers.
PSG have fallen twice this season. Utter failure for the Qatari-backed clowns.
PSG have fallen twice this season. Utter failure for the Qatari-backed clowns.
Roman has been staying out of the spotlight the last two years, he is looking old.
Lampard thamks also 
For what? Being a shit manager
For what? Being a shit manager
Don’t think there’s any chance the likes of Mount or James are Chelsea players now without Frank.They’d be playing for random midtable clubs right now most likely.Lampard thamks also
For what? Being a shit manager
Fair enough.
GET THE feck IN LADS. I'M SO SO HAPPY!!
Just saw a crazy stat for Kovacic. He's won 4 CL by playing a grand total of 17mins.....
chelsea have a pattern of changing managers and winning trophies pretty often. I expect tuchel to be gone in 1-3 years then some other manager will come and win something
That's 21 CL titles per 90, but these stats are always a bit inflated for subs.
What is the most won by a single individual? 5 or 6? He could potentially match it without playing even 45 mins of football at that rate.
Has to feel a bit weird doesn't it, still counts, but it can't quite feel the same as you know playing a lot of the actual games.
Fantastic achievement. It still feels utterly surreal waking up this morning and watching back all the footage from last night.
For the Chelsea fans in here, Belle Silva's instagram story has the best video of their post match celebrations late into the night. It'll disappear in a few hours so do watch it below:
https://www.instagram.com/stories/bellesilva/2584725472304524762/
https://www.instagram.com/stories/bellesilva/2584725472304524762/
The Mail have us wanting Lukaku back and already contacting his people, a midfielder and CB wanted to. Club also open to using CHO in a Sancho deal
6 by Paco Gento.
CL era, Cristiano has 5.
It's just hit me we've won the Champions League final with 3 academy players on the pitch playing crucial roles. This was completely unthinkable before 2018.
I hope Tuchel and the club has seen the benefit to using the academy. At worst they won't quite make it, which is OK there'll be others coming through the pipeline. At best, you can have stars in the making. It allows the club to spend big on key players.
I hope Tuchel and the club has seen the benefit to using the academy. At worst they won't quite make it, which is OK there'll be others coming through the pipeline. At best, you can have stars in the making. It allows the club to spend big on key players.
Thanks for sharing that. A very good read. (Well, 'good' is not really the right word, but I can't really think of a more appropriate one.)
How many did Maldini win ?
Mendy seems like a nice person.
With his story, from unemployed to cl winner you can bet he learnt a lot about how to be humble and overcome adversity. Very few players like him had the experience of other side of the world.
The big different between Lampard and Tuchel is Tuchel free Kante, the most important Chelsea player on the field, he basically cover everywhere in the middle.
Just seen our defensive record in the cl this season.
Only 4 goals conceded (2 being worldies from the Porto chap and benzema)
We were only behind in a match for 5 mins all tournament 4 mins vs krasnador 1 min vs Porto (which doesn't really count as we were still leading the tie)
Pretty insane.
Only 4 goals conceded (2 being worldies from the Porto chap and benzema)
We were only behind in a match for 5 mins all tournament 4 mins vs krasnador 1 min vs Porto (which doesn't really count as we were still leading the tie)
Pretty insane.
Defence wins titles ;-)
It all seems a bit flukey for a team to win the Champions league without being even close to winning their domestic league. Might be just me though.
Bit strange to be flukey and dominant in every single match since the group stages. And that largely applies domestically as well, profligacy from the front line being the leading cause of any domestic failures.
Watch Chelsea get a proper striker and show what they are made of these days. Roman is efficient and ruthless.
Last edited by a moderator:
Giroud and Abraham leaving gives us Werner and Havertz as our only two options so it seems we have to sign at least one striker, but who will it be?
I can't see it being Haaland or Kane, it might be, i just don't think it's likely. Outside of that i wouldn't be bothered about Lukaku, he'd be ok but not much of an improvement on Tammy or Giroud for nearly £80m.
Other than that you're looking at taking a punt on an up and coming striker.
I won't be surprised if you go all out for Haaland to be honest. He would fit quite well in your system, I guess. We have seen Lukaku play for us, so I do not see him tearing it up in the prem.
It'd be nice but we'd be talking at least £120m plus £20-30m for Raoila plus £10m signing on and £300k a week salary...
Total transfer of around £233m over 5 years. There would be a decent residual value to him at the end but that's a huge outlay
Tell you what, ourselves and Liverpool should be pretty damn frustrated at Roman rediscovering his love of football. Given his wealth, you just know he's made a few billion in the past few years just from existing, and why not pump it back into his toys. New yachts, helicopters and of course football players.
In the end, other clubs cannot compete with Chelse and City when the owners choose to spend. Imagine if Chelsea do purchase a top level striker, that'll mean in the past couple of windows they'll have added (all Euros from transfermrkt)
Ziyech (40m)
Werner (53m)
Havertz (80m)
Pulisic (64m)
+ Top level striker (80m or so at least)
Just in the forward positions. Before that Kovacic and Jorginho to midfield, and of course a hefty fee for Chilwell.
For all our dreaming of a big summer - THAT is the kind of spending that only the sugar-daddy clubs can make real.
And it shoudl really scare us, Pool, Arsenal and Spurs imo.
In the end, other clubs cannot compete with Chelse and City when the owners choose to spend. Imagine if Chelsea do purchase a top level striker, that'll mean in the past couple of windows they'll have added (all Euros from transfermrkt)
Ziyech (40m)
Werner (53m)
Havertz (80m)
Pulisic (64m)
+ Top level striker (80m or so at least)
Just in the forward positions. Before that Kovacic and Jorginho to midfield, and of course a hefty fee for Chilwell.
For all our dreaming of a big summer - THAT is the kind of spending that only the sugar-daddy clubs can make real.
And it shoudl really scare us, Pool, Arsenal and Spurs imo.
Interesting quote
"Chelsea have become the first team to win all three of Europe’s major club competitions twice following our maiden Champions League triumph in 2012 and victories in the Europa League in 2013 and 2019 and Cup Winners’ Cup in 1971 and 1998."
"Chelsea have become the first team to win all three of Europe’s major club competitions twice following our maiden Champions League triumph in 2012 and victories in the Europa League in 2013 and 2019 and Cup Winners’ Cup in 1971 and 1998."
A very, very misinformed post. And I see so many people make similar comments here.
These are values from the same website you quoted. (with price-inflation ignored and assuming the website you quoted is perfectly correct)
-----
Do you know what is the net Chelsea expenditure on player transfers in the last 10 years?
From 2011/12 to 2020/21, Chelsea have spent 492m net on player transfers.
Do you know how much we have spent in the same period?
A whopping 861m! That's almost 42% more money than the 'sugar-daddy' club has spent in the last decade.
The whole floating idea of 'benevolent Chelsea's sugar-daddy" is hogwash.
I haven't done the calculations, but Liverpool's owners and most definitely, City's owners have spent more than Roman Abramovich in the last decade.
(p.s. calculation may be off by a few million here and there)
edit: may be not Liverpool.
Last edited:
Roman has said for at least 5 years that Chelsea must become self sufficient. Luckily Mariana has some kind of magic selling players for over the market price or at least all of it.... for most players.
Roman has turned his money to building the academy and the grounds around Chelsea.
Firstly, this seems to somehow ignore that Roman 'lent' Chelsea over a billion pounds. It's cute how folks are buying the PR spin, you probably also believe that United are able to make signings no one else can dream of.
The whole point of my post was that if Roman cares to get excited again, other teams can't compete.
Chelsea under Abramovich have had great success. That is undeniable. And impressive. But it would not have been possible and will not continue to be possible without Roman reaching into his own personal piggy bank to fund signings. Chelsea kind of faded for a bit there because he demanded they become self-sufficient. Then, after that little transfer ban, he spent an absurd amount again. And lo and behold, those players won him the CL.
United have spent badly, I have no idea why people can't hold that in their head, and also hold the other thought that United spent United's money, and are constrained by things like revenue. So are Liverpool, Spurs, Arsenal and so forth.
If Haaland becomes available and Roman wants him, he can buy him. If Chelsea's cash is at $100m, but Haaland is $150m, Roman will enable the extra spend. Ditto City on Kane, Grealish or whomever.
If Roman just had a decent ETF he will have increased his wealth by literally billions in the past 2 years. My post was simply highlightin the fact that if he wants to pump that into one of his hobbies, we're all in trouble.
To the comment of becoming self-sufficient - in the last 5 years cumulatively Chelsea have lost $50m. That includes the incredibel player sales in that time. Most enterprises couldn't lose $50m acrosss htat time period and still exist.
The whole point of my post was that if Roman cares to get excited again, other teams can't compete.
Chelsea under Abramovich have had great success. That is undeniable. And impressive. But it would not have been possible and will not continue to be possible without Roman reaching into his own personal piggy bank to fund signings. Chelsea kind of faded for a bit there because he demanded they become self-sufficient. Then, after that little transfer ban, he spent an absurd amount again. And lo and behold, those players won him the CL.
United have spent badly, I have no idea why people can't hold that in their head, and also hold the other thought that United spent United's money, and are constrained by things like revenue. So are Liverpool, Spurs, Arsenal and so forth.
If Haaland becomes available and Roman wants him, he can buy him. If Chelsea's cash is at $100m, but Haaland is $150m, Roman will enable the extra spend. Ditto City on Kane, Grealish or whomever.
If Roman just had a decent ETF he will have increased his wealth by literally billions in the past 2 years. My post was simply highlightin the fact that if he wants to pump that into one of his hobbies, we're all in trouble.
To the comment of becoming self-sufficient - in the last 5 years cumulatively Chelsea have lost $50m. That includes the incredibel player sales in that time. Most enterprises couldn't lose $50m acrosss htat time period and still exist.