Chelsea 2022/2023 | THIS IS LAST YEARS THREAD YOU NUMPTIES

Status
Not open for further replies.
WeePat said:
Is he supposed to be a good DoF?
Click to expand...
Apparently so. I think most teams in Europe have been rumoured to be wanting him at some stage... Currently only an advisor to PSG. His eye for talent is his main strength. Bernardo Silva, Fabinho, Thomas Lemar all spotted by him while at Monaco.
 


Hiring Luis Campos would go a long way in doing that.
 
ZolaWasMagic said:
Apparently so. I think most teams in Europe have been rumoured to be wanting him at some stage... Currently only an advisor to PSG. His eye for talent is his main strength. Bernardo Silva, Fabinho, Thomas Lemar all spotted by him while at Monaco.
Click to expand...

Interesting. If they’re taking their time to find a DoF, I sure hope they make sure they find the right one.
 
Rnd898 said:


Hiring Luis Campos would go a long way in doing that.
Click to expand...


I’m not a fan of that vision. In fact I really hate it. It’s bad for football and I think that kind of ‘football network’ should be banned from the sport.
 
ZolaWasMagic said:
Apparently so. I think most teams in Europe have been rumoured to be wanting him at some stage... Currently only an advisor to PSG. His eye for talent is his main strength. Bernardo Silva, Fabinho, Thomas Lemar all spotted by him while at Monaco.
Click to expand...

He is also an advisor at Celta de Vigo.
 
WeePat said:
I’m not a fan of that vision. In fact I really hate it. It’s bad for football and I think that kind of ‘football network’ should be banned from the sport.
Click to expand...

Yeah can't say I'm a fan of any 'multi-club model' either. From a club owner's perspective it probably makes a lot of sense and I definitely understand why they'd look into doing it but from the perspective of a football fan it just seems soulless.

But at least that 'hiring the right people to find the best talents' bit seems promising. Like Ben Jacobs (seems to have close ties to Boehly) tweeted a couple of days ago already, Boehly is definitely planning to take a step back from any hands-on involvement in player recruitment as soon as he's hired people to take care of that stuff for him and now pretty much the same information has come straight from the horse's mouth.
 
Rnd898 said:
Yeah can't say I'm a fan of any 'multi-club model' either. From a club owner's perspective it probably makes a lot of sense and I definitely understand why they'd look into doing it but from the perspective of a football fan it just seems soulless.

But at least that 'hiring the right people to find the best talents' bit seems promising. Like Ben Jacobs (seems to have close ties to Boehly) tweeted a couple of days ago already, Boehly is definitely planning to take a step back from any hands-on involvement in player recruitment as soon as he's hired people to take care of that stuff for him and now pretty much the same information has come straight from the horse's mouth.
Click to expand...

Yeah the putting the right people in the right positions part is good, which was expected anyway. It's the sensible thing to do and it was just going to take some time to build the football structure back up. The multi-club football network stuff is rancid and we should have nothing to do with it.
 
WeePat said:
I’m not a fan of that vision. In fact I really hate it. It’s bad for football and I think that kind of ‘football network’ should be banned from the sport.
Click to expand...
It all feels like a legal human trafficking network. I don’t particularly like it. However what he said was not wrong. If we loan out a player then we don’t control game time or any sort of progression for the player. Redbull are clearly what he aspires to be like as a global brand. They have their hands everywhere in a whole host of sports.
 
Quite interesting. How do both red bull teams competent in the CL anyway?

Feeder club somewhere in Europe incoming, unless we think other confederation has a high enough standard to develop young players?
 
WeePat said:
Yeah the putting the right people in the right positions part is good, which was expected anyway. It's the sensible thing to do and it was just going to take some time to build the football structure back up. The multi-club football network stuff is rancid and we should have nothing to do with it.
Click to expand...

I had this initial reaction as well but the more I thought about it - if you took the best ownership group in the Premier League over the last decade (FSG) and they used the same principles in Holland, what happens? Well most likely whichever club they buy improves and the league becomes more competitive. It’s not like the club would be stripped of its resources or become a pure feeder club. These ownership groups would want relative success as well. Ultimately, does it really matter if your owner is FSG or another Sheikh.
 
I honestly don’t know if he’s talking about situations like the RB teams, or City having their own MLS, although if that sort of thing is continued to be allowed he absolutely would want to be a part.

It seems to me he wants something similar to a farm system in baseball, where you have more control over the level of coaching and development your players get.

Aren’t the Spanish sides already allowed to do this with their “B” teams?

If you had the money it would make sense to me. If you have a player with the talent of a Harvey Vale, blindly sending him off to Hull and hoping his development isn’t completely derailed isnt the best feeling the world.
 
UsualSuspect said:
I had this initial reaction as well but the more I thought about it - if you took the best ownership group in the Premier League over the last decade (FSG) and they used the same principles in Holland, what happens? Well most likely whichever club they buy improves and the league becomes more competitive. It’s not like the club would be stripped of its resources or become a pure feeder club. These ownership groups would want relative success as well. Ultimately, does it really matter if your owner is FSG or another Sheikh.
Click to expand...

I suppose it depends on which club in which league you buy. Look at the Austrian league with RB Salzburg, that's hardly become more competitive now.
 
It looks like they are shopping for a Portuguese team as one in their group. I think this is going to be a reality. They want control over the development of young players. They also want to buy up a lot more young talent and develop them.
 
UsualSuspect said:
I had this initial reaction as well but the more I thought about it - if you took the best ownership group in the Premier League over the last decade (FSG) and they used the same principles in Holland, what happens? Well most likely whichever club they buy improves and the league becomes more competitive. It’s not like the club would be stripped of its resources or become a pure feeder club. These ownership groups would want relative success as well. Ultimately, does it really matter if your owner is FSG or another Sheikh.
Click to expand...

I can’t get behind it. I just can't. I understand having a relationship with another club like we used to have with Vitesse where it's, in theory, a win win situation for both sides but even that didn't sit that well with me. Outright buying other clubs with the sole purpose of making them feeder clubs for Chelsea is vile to me. It's rancid and utterly soulless.
 
Always thought to myself it won't be long until a Club from one of the Elite clubs brought a Portuguese team. I say this as it will allow them to tap into South American/Brazilian talent much more easily.

Not sure I agree with this type of model, however we need to admit that Red Bull have already done this and City have something similar so they're not the first club to do this. Personally, I could see them going for a club like Santa Cruz or Maritimo.
 
Zaphod2319 said:
Man City have 10 clubs they are part owners in.

Click to expand...


Honestly I'm surprised they hadn't already looked into doing this in the past, maybe Abramovich wasn't keen, but for a club that buy and loan so many players I would have thought they'd look to find a network of feeder clubs to utilize.
 
WeePat said:
I can’t get behind it. I just can't. I understand having a relationship with another club like we used to have with Vitesse where it's, in theory, a win win situation for both sides but even that didn't sit that well with me. Outright buying other clubs with the sole purpose of making them feeder clubs for Chelsea is vile to me. It's rancid and utterly soulless.
Click to expand...

I'm fine with it in theory, not too concerned with it being soulless as that's the way the game has gone. Most clubs are feeder clubs for the top European teams in any case. If Chelsea actually bought Vitesse, they would want the team to stay and compete in the Eredevisie. There is arguably not a single player at Vitesse who would be of interest to Chelsea currently. If they produced such players in the next 5-7 years, then the mere fact that we are interested in their players means their squad is stronger and probably more competitive. So like you say, in theory - a win-win.
 
Dave Smith said:
Always thought to myself it won't be long until a Club from one of the Elite clubs brought a Portuguese team. I say this as it will allow them to tap into South American/Brazilian talent much more easily.

Not sure I agree with this type of model, however we need to admit that Red Bull have already done this and City have something similar so they're not the first club to do this. Personally, I could see them going for a club like Santa Cruz or Maritimo.
Click to expand...
This exactly. Other teams are already starting to do this, and with Brexit implications looming you can either be ahead of the curve, with the curve, … or left behind.

Sending your most promising talents to clubs you have no control over, where you have no input into how they are being coached, where you don’t get daily feedback on progress, where you don’t even know if they’ll play …. I’m sure it all seems ridiculous …

….especially to people who are used to have very detailed farm systems designed to cultivate every aspect of a player at 4 different team levels up to the main squad.

If other teams are doing proactive things to get away from this, then I would assume Clearlake would want something of the same.

Harvey Vale is a massive talent. We basically had to send him off to a low budget year long camp at Hull City and hope he’s not ruined.

And that’s a big point: when the parent club supports the feeder clubs directly, the the prospect players have access to the medical, nutritional, and training resources the parent club can provide. Not so under the current loan system.
 
UsualSuspect said:
I'm fine with it in theory, not too concerned with it being soulless as that's the way the game has gone. Most clubs are feeder clubs for the top European teams in any case. If Chelsea actually bought Vitesse, they would want the team to stay and compete in the Eredevisie. There is arguably not a single player at Vitesse who would be of interest to Chelsea currently. If they produced such players in the next 5-7 years, then the mere fact that we are interested in their players means their squad is stronger and probably more competitive. So like you say, in theory - a win-win.
Click to expand...

But what about the fans of that club, the city and the community the club belongs to. It's hijacking a club and it's history and making it a feeder club for a random rich club they have no connection to in a different country. It's the principle that just doesn't sit right with me. It might prove to be beneficial to both clubs on some level, but I would still oppose it on principle.
 
WeePat said:
But what about the fans of that club, the city and the community the club belongs to. It's hijacking a club and it's history and making it a feeder club for a random rich club they have no connection to in a different country. It's the principle that just doesn't sit right with me. It might prove to be beneficial to both clubs on some level, but I would still oppose it on principle.
Click to expand...
But that IS the clubs history now. Many or most of these clubs will never attract top talent and keep them for a career. Ajax is a major team, with a huge fanbase. They want to seriously compete in champions league, and sometimes do. BUT at this point they know 2 to 3 years is what they get with their best talents. And if the talents aren’t good enough to attract that interest they have probably had their place in the Ajax squad taken anyway. Is that incorrect?

Fanbases adapt to this. Going back to the baseball example: the Durham Bulls fans get excited to see the new talents coming through. It’s part of their identity.

Fans go into the season with the excitement of possibly being surprised by the next big thing in world football.

Is that worse than to get the same or poorer results with older, lower quality players that stay at the club an avg of 2 to 3 years longer?
 
Feeder clubs is an interesting name, kind of says it all. Prey for the predators.
 
Bluelion7 said:
But that IS the clubs history now. Many or most of these clubs will never attract top talent and keep them for a career. Ajax is a major team, with a huge fanbase. They want to seriously compete in champions league, and sometimes do. BUT at this point they know 2 to 3 years is what they get with their best talents. And if the talents aren’t good enough to attract that interest they have probably had their place in the Ajax squad taken anyway. Is that incorrect?

Fanbases adapt to this. Going back to the baseball example: the Durham Bulls fans get excited to see the new talents coming through. It’s part of their identity.

Fans go into the season with the excitement of possibly being surprised by the next big thing in world football.

Is that worse than to get the same or poorer results with older, lower quality players that stay at the club an avg of 2 to 3 years longer?
Click to expand...
hate this post
 
Bluelion7 said:
But that IS the clubs history now. Many or most of these clubs will never attract top talent and keep them for a career. Ajax is a major team, with a huge fanbase. They want to seriously compete in champions league, and sometimes do. BUT at this point they know 2 to 3 years is what they get with their best talents. And if the talents aren’t good enough to attract that interest they have probably had their place in the Ajax squad taken anyway. Is that incorrect?

Fanbases adapt to this. Going back to the baseball example: the Durham Bulls fans get excited to see the new talents coming through. It’s part of their identity.

Fans go into the season with the excitement of possibly being surprised by the next big thing in world football.

Is that worse than to get the same or poorer results with older, lower quality players that stay at the club an avg of 2 to 3 years longer?
Click to expand...

I think this is looking at things purely from an outcome perspective. You mention Durham Bulls, but they're a minor league team. I'm not too familiar with the baseball landscape but a quick cursory glance over their wiki page tells me Durham Bulls have been an affiliate team for an MLB club for nearly 100 years now (they've been in existence for 120 years) and they've bounced around being the farm team for different pro clubs over that period.

When you say their fans have adapted, do you mean the fans that supported the team in the 1930's? Because subsequent generations have known nothing else but being a farm team. That's not the same as hijacking a club in 2022 who have existed on their own for 100 years. You can't compare Durham Bulls fans, whose team have been an affiliate team for nearly 100 years, to the fans of a Portuguese club who have existed perfectly fine on their own, forged their own history through their own fights and battles. It's their club, their history and their community. They don't need Chelsea. They have never needed Chelsea.
 
Last edited:
Chelsea is/was in contact with Freund vom Salzburg. Seems if they want to copy the Red Bull system. One football philosophy over many clubs, develpoment in full controll, because there are spots available at any level of prefessional football.
 
Damn people are so greedy, have these twisted views, dont mind stepping on necks of others while being on top, turn table on them and that same bunch would be first to cry like bitches about unjustice.

In worst case, this should be allowed only if feeder club is created from the scratch, invested into to progress through leagues and its intention or purpose publicly known from day one, so the future fan base knows what that club is and how potential future looks like. This hijacking of already established club rich with history and its fan base, trading some gain for limiting their ceiling due double owners stuff is just dogshit and such networking should banned. Hell loans should be banned overall, Serie A teams abuse that shit to the bone.
 
Resch said:
Chelsea is/was in contact with Freund vom Salzburg. Seems if they want to copy the Red Bull system. One football philosophy over many clubs, develpoment in full controll, because there are spots available at any level of prefessional football.
Click to expand...
Yep.
 
They should look at Thomas Tuchel as he is now free of contract. Good record as a progressive manager and with a CL win also.
 
Bluelion7 said:
But that IS the clubs history now. Many or most of these clubs will never attract top talent and keep them for a career. Ajax is a major team, with a huge fanbase. They want to seriously compete in champions league, and sometimes do. BUT at this point they know 2 to 3 years is what they get with their best talents. And if the talents aren’t good enough to attract that interest they have probably had their place in the Ajax squad taken anyway. Is that incorrect?

Fanbases adapt to this. Going back to the baseball example: the Durham Bulls fans get excited to see the new talents coming through. It’s part of their identity.

Fans go into the season with the excitement of possibly being surprised by the next big thing in world football.

Is that worse than to get the same or poorer results with older, lower quality players that stay at the club an avg of 2 to 3 years longer?
Click to expand...

This post felt dirty. This concept of just overriding the history of a club (Every club in Europe has far more history than any franchise in American sports) and all the justifications for it...it just feels dirty.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.