Either move on or wait for a Peter Odemwingie moment
Chelsea 2022/2023 | THIS IS LAST YEARS THREAD YOU NUMPTIES
- Thread starter duffer
- Start date
- Status
Someone said Jacobs has been close to Boehly and is now super reliable for Chelsea.
Brilliant tweet in that case. So, Leicester will just hold for no less than 80 million now.
Imagine leaking that? "Go on, reject it. We'll bid higher."
It might make us look like complete amateurs but I'd rather spend £60m on Tomori than £80+ on Fofana who hardly played last season.
£80 million on a young player who played just 7 League matches last season because of a broken leg is a mad gamble.
Fofana has a MUCH higher ceiling than Tomori.
I’m not sure that is true.
Fofana had a great season with Leicester in 20-21 but it’s not like he has long been seen as some kind of massive talent. He didn’t play in any France youth international teams for example, until a few appearances after getting to Leicester.
That’s not to say he won’t be a great CB. But he has never been a player that blew away observers with his raw talent or was marked by everybody as going to the top. Tomori just had an excellent season of his own and was a crucial cog for a team that won Serie A. I don’t see much reason to believe his ceiling is any lower.
While that was a freak injury from a terrible tackle, he has also been pretty injury prone overall in his career, with multiple injuries in both 20-21 and 19-20. I would be worried about that.
Damn Leicester City are laughing all the way to the bank along with Brighton. Two players who have had one good season in the premier league, Fofana and Cucurella going for £80+ million and £62 million respectively. Much respect to them.
At this rate it looks like Todd Boehly will outspend Newcastle in the next 10 years.
At this rate it looks like Todd Boehly will outspend Newcastle in the next 10 years.
If Chelsea get FDJ their midfield will be so far ahead of ours it won't even be funny.
All I hear about Fofana is the caf constantly raving about him
No, you are wrong with all due respect. Many American owners don’t view sports as a profit mechanism at all. Jerry Jones spent more on his Jumbotron (1 billion) than most entire teams were worth at the time.
The Golden State Warriors work in the luxury tax and at nearly every season to keep that group together. Their owner just likes showing up at the big parties with bragging rights. He loves it.
It depends on the ownership. Todd Boehly told you what he wanted in his statement about the team. He has a tendency to hide his mission statements in his addresses. And he said Chelsea would be the biggest team in London, in the biggest and best League in the world, and would be one of the best teams and brands in world football. He will do what he needs to and spend what he needs to to reach that goal. Clearlake will likely take out another 900 million loan from itself for development as the project moves forward in the coming years, and I would expect Boehly to be predatorily active in future windows empowering his executives, just like he is right now. He will also spend gargantuan sums in the areas of running a team not heavily regulated like the players: medical staff, scouting structure, analytic teams, general support staff, facilities.
He has zero need to show immediate profit, and if he needs to finance the financers Like City does to deal with FFP, then he will. The sports teams get Clearlake in the door and sportswash their tech endeavors. They are a private equity group and don’t answer to anyone.
Yes, other owners do real estate investment. But that’s simplistic, and doesn’t cover “Meta ownership”. Boehly creates the tv channels for his teams, his groups own just about everything, down to the company that produces the salt that goes on the pretzels. But most of their money is still made in the tech field, NOT from from sports ownership.
Kroenke has the ability to do this as well, resource-wise, but he has always been seen as a combo of cheap and stupid. The way he approached spending to get his football team into the LA market, and the way he spent t to get the Rams a title … along with the determined investmentArsenal are starting to show … leads me to believe there could be a change there. Boehly sees LA and London as his turf. Kroenke sees it as his and has his nose out of joint. It could lead to an epic arms race.
Boehly is also the Lakers owner as well. 25% for now, but that could change in the future.
You of course don’t have to believe me. Just don’t be surprised, or ask “how can they do this?” each year. Individually Boehly is listed as being worth less than Ambramovich. But the Capital group that Boehly controls is MUCH wealthier. And Boehly, frankly, may prove even smarter. Setting up an academy like Chelsea’s and not having first refusal buyback clauses built into the sales of people like Declan Rice was preposterous. More often than not we were hurt by the luxury, big name “Roman signings” like Shevchenko, hobble knee Torres, Lukaku, et al. Half this window would be easily sorted if we could have just called back Tomori and Rice, then added from there.
We will see. Raine group is one of the better and more expensive “think tank” evaluation groups on earth. Roman charged them with finding the owner most likely to have the capability, means, and desire to really grow every aspect of the club, and they chose Boehly and Clearlake, absolute titans in the sports world. People are acting like they are scratch off winners who play a lot of FIFA.
Chelsea’s three CBs - 100 years old combined 
With all due respect as well, your post is full of factual inaccuracies and misunderstandings of the finances of sports teams.
Just as one example, the jumbotron at the new Cowboys stadium was estimated to cost $40m, not $1 billion. That you thought the latter number was even remotely in the realm of possibility raises a lot of questions.
Todd Boehly is one guy in an investment group that have been very successful with the Dodgers on and off the field. But they largely did things that other big baseball teams were already doing, especially monetizing their own local TV network and simply taking advantage of being in one of the biggest and richest markets via driving stadium revenue. The Yankees, Red Sox, Cubs, etc do largely the same things, and did them before Boehly's group took over. It's not some special "meta ownership," it's just smart businessmen driving revenues in big markets in a sport that allows individual teams to negotiate their own local TV deals (unlike football). The Dodgers had terrible ownership for a long time, there was a lot of potential to simply do what other teams were already doing in the second biggest/richest market in the US, and they came in and did that. On the baseball side, they've also run the club very well but that has very little to do with Todd Boehly specifically.
The group that bought Chelsea is a fairly standard consortium of rich individuals plus private equity. The goal above everything else is to make money. Todd Boehly might be enjoying owning the team as the chairman, but he's not trying to lose money in the long run and his partners certainly wouldn't be in the consortium if they thought it was going to lose money. If they're spending a lot of money this summer, its with the calculation that investing in the success of the on-field product will ultimately drive revenues and asset value enough in the future to make it a profitable investment. They might be a bit more aggressive about it right now, but this is the same calculation made by tons of owners like the Kroenkes spending lots of money right now, Joe Lewis and Daniel Levy injecting cash into Spurs this summer, West Ham spending over 100m the last two summers, etc. There's nothing particularly special about it, really.
In the end, there are three kinds of owners:
1. Rich guys who like owning sports teams but also want to make money. They may be better or worse and Boehly definitely could be one of the better ones. You can do pretty badly here, like the Glazers, and Boehly certainly isn't that.
2. Rich guys who like owning sports team and don't really care if they lose money because they have so much of it. This is Roman.
3. States who own sports teams and really really don't care if they lose money. This is City and Newcastle and PSG.
At the end of the day, Boehly may end up being a really good owner but in the long run he's never going to spend as much money as somebody who simply doesn't care if he loses money (Roman) or, even more so, a state for whom the money is completely a drop in the bucket and is playing a much bigger game in terms of sportswashing and geopolitics than simple football.
Last edited:
Chelsea’s three CBs - 100 years old combined
Older than our back 4 last night.
Be criminal if Chelsea don’t sign a goalscorer in the next few weeks.
Gallagher must be disappointed he didn’t get any minutes today
Gallagher must be disappointed he didn’t get any minutes today
Must have heard me. He’s got a minute
Didn't see the match but heard Silva got MOTM. What a signing he's been for them.
Incredible really. Giving hope to the old farts out there!
One of the most boring Chelsea teams I've seen in years that was. They've spent about 500 million on that squad and that's not including lukaku
You didn’t miss anything. Silva was very good though and pretty much stopped everything good that Everton did.
A draw would have been a fair result but the game itself was awful. Chelsea really need a CF and looked very similar to last season. Plenty of control but quite predictable and toothless in the final third.
Good result against one of our bogey teams. Our attack looked poor, hopefully things change as the season wears on. Still need a goalscoring striker, cheeky bid for Mitrovic perhaps?
Didn't like seeing Thiago Silva clutching his hamstring and then limping towards the end.
Didn't like seeing Thiago Silva clutching his hamstring and then limping towards the end.
Would be a good signing!
Rather give Broja a chance than buy another CF.
Kante and Jorginho, 2 very good players, but as a pair it means very one dimensional and slow football, Kovacic always gives them extra impetus but is inconsistent.
Tuchel might be a bet for first 'big' manager to lose his job this year.
Thought Koulibaly looked fine albeit got cramp. Still need a striker. Its not even up for debate now.
Might be nothing but thought the absences of Werner, CHO, Alonso perhaps indicates moves in the offing. Alonso of course we know he is off
Might be nothing but thought the absences of Werner, CHO, Alonso perhaps indicates moves in the offing. Alonso of course we know he is off
I don't know why Tuchel thinks it's a good idea to play Havertz on the left. He's wasted out there.
Kovacic isn't inconsistent.
He's ass wherever you play him.
Chelsea are terrible to watch.
We've far too many players, that is for sure.
Just need CB, not for ridiculous price. Ampadu should also get a chance.
I think Sterling looked good but will be wasted as a focal point of the attack. Havertz still looks like a square peg in a round hole.
Strange Tuchel can’t still find the balance in his attack.
Strange Tuchel can’t still find the balance in his attack.
That was his chance, shoved out on the left wing and did nothing of note. Honestly no idea why the brought him on to play him there, just not to his strengths at all.
How did they play? Missed the game
Havertz and Mount were nowhere to be found today.
Started time wasting when the clock hit 55 minutes.
This new era is just as dull as the old one.
- Status