• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Daniel Levy - Chairman

Chelsea have made the Champions league, twinned with no spending last year and moving on Hazard etc, surely that justifys this years spend.
 
I know people complain about Levy, but I just happened to look at David Golds twitter account, and the 3rd tweet down was him retweeting an Ann Summers video advert with some reality tv slapper peddling vibrators and lube.

I’m kind of glad our Dan doesn’t do that.

*caveat; unless the extra income bought Dybala.

(“Dildos for Dybalas” perhaps.

I digress).
 
Jon said:
I know people complain about Levy, but I just happened to look at David Golds twitter account, and the 3rd tweet down was him retweeting an Ann Summers video advert with some reality tv slapper peddling vibrators and lube.

I’m kind of glad our Dan doesn’t do that.

*caveat; unless the extra income bought Dybala.

(“Dildos for Dybalas” perhaps.

I digress).
Click to expand...
Are you sure you weren’t looking at Ann Summers twitter account and they retweeted a video of David Gold?
 
Grays_1890 said:
Chelsea have made the Champions league, twinned with no spending last year and moving on Hazard etc, surely that justifys this years spend.
Click to expand...
Pedro, Cahill and Willian off the wage bill too. I saw Mount and Abraham were nominated for young player of the year, interested to see how many games they get in comparison next season...
What is especially annoying is what their accounts and player farming model are transparent and likely within and designed for FFP, the punishment for signing under 18s really hasn’t had any impact at all, they’ve stopped a kid spending the extra pocket money he stole for a year (although let him pay for the toy he’d been borrowing before the ban) to let him go nuts in the toy shop with an extra years worth of pocket money the year after. Also as the kid is spoiled there was a cupboard full of locally made toys that usually wouldn’t see the light of day that he was forced to make use of during that period and they actually worked as effectively as some of the foreign imports he usually prefers. There’s also the question why other kids keep giving him money for toys that are either broken (Morata) or not far away from being available for free via the charity shop (Hazard)
 
MKSpur said:
Pedro, Cahill and Willian off the wage bill too. I saw Mount and Abraham were nominated for young player of the year, interested to see how many games they get in comparison next season...
What is especially annoying is what their accounts and player farming model are transparent and likely within and designed for FFP, the punishment for signing under 18s really hasn’t had any impact at all, they’ve stopped a kid spending the extra pocket money he stole for a year (although let him pay for the toy he’d been borrowing before the ban) to let him go nuts in the toy shop with an extra years worth of pocket money the year after. Also as the kid is spoiled there was a cupboard full of locally made toys that usually wouldn’t see the light of day that he was forced to make use of during that period and they actually worked as effectively as some of the foreign imports he usually prefers. There’s also the question why other kids keep giving him money for toys that are either broken (Morata) or not far away from being available for free via the charity shop (Hazard)
Click to expand...

those last two deals look really poor for the buying clubs now
Hazard hasn’t managed to get any consistency and Morata has shown he is pretty average at best (remember when we wanted him)
The ones that shock me are when people pay relatively big money for players who are worse like Bakayoko who I’m convinced will go for a lot more than he is worth... although I always wonder if there is a sweetener in those deals
 
Bedfordspurs said:
those last two deals look really poor for the buying clubs now
Hazard hasn’t managed to get any consistency and Morata has shown he is pretty average at best (remember when we wanted him)
The ones that shock me are when people pay relatively big money for players who are worse like Bakayoko who I’m convinced will go for a lot more than he is worth... although I always wonder if there is a sweetener in those deals
Click to expand...

I think there are players who are decent enough that clubs on the continent know they will get their best. Morata was highly rated, the way the prem churn and burn players you know other clubs are willing to see the player they signed, not the player after one season. Bakayoko is not a bad player
 
Grays_1890 said:
I think there are players who are decent enough that clubs on the continent know they will get their best. Morata was highly rated, the way the prem churn and burn players you know other clubs are willing to see the player they signed, not the player after one season. Bakayoko is not a bad player
Click to expand...
Their not great players though and the fee for Morata was a paper profit for a player that flopped quite badly
Similarly there is talk of bakayoko going for £30m... And yet the teams he went on loan too don’t want him so clearly he wasn’t a success
Their hyped up players who haven’t stepped up yet Chelsea command big fees for them
 
Bedfordspurs said:
those last two deals look really poor for the buying clubs now
Hazard hasn’t managed to get any consistency and Morata has shown he is pretty average at best (remember when we wanted him)
The ones that shock me are when people pay relatively big money for players who are worse like Bakayoko who I’m convinced will go for a lot more than he is worth... although I always wonder if there is a sweetener in those deals
Click to expand...
Makes me wonder whether these deals are oiled due to the parties involved?
 
ricky2tricky4city said:
Makes me wonder whether these deals are oiled due to the parties involved?
Click to expand...
There may be an element of keeping Chelsea on the good side as you know if you at a later point get a player they are interested in they know Chelsea are more thab willing to pay good money for said player.

Playing hardball all the time can instead make teams wary of doing business of any kind with you.
 
Bishop said:
There may be an element of keeping Chelsea on the good side as you know if you at a later point get a player they are interested in they know Chelsea are more thab willing to pay good money for said player.

Playing hardball all the time can instead make teams wary of doing business of any kind with you.
Click to expand...
I don’t agree with that
It’s the usual rhetoric but clubs actually do respect other clubs doing the right thing for them
 
Raziel said:
Chelsea are in "debt" of over 1.7B to RA before this latest "gift" ..

To compare "cheating" vs. reality (and not using Spurs)

https://twitter.com/x/status/1302855202089971713

Over last years, Pool would not have made a profit without player sales ..
Click to expand...
Player trading now is a genuine source of income
The issue is the balance of it
Chelsea look like loaning out Zapaocosta who cost them £24m and by the end of the lain he would have less than a year on his contact. Selling him then thkugh would be banked as a profit that season in trading even though they would make a loss
 
Bedfordspurs said:
Player trading now is a genuine source of income
The issue is the balance of it
Chelsea look like loaning out Zapaocosta who cost them £24m and by the end of the lain he would have less than a year on his contact. Selling him then thkugh would be banked as a profit that season in trading even though they would make a loss
Click to expand...

Chelsea buys huge bunches of players, including players they never intent to use, then loan them out (at one point they had 38 players on loan), then sell them as "income/profit" in future years.

They started this when FFP started to become a real thing, and it's how they have operated since bar the transfer ban period.
 
Raziel said:
Chelsea buys huge bunches of players, including players they never intent to use, then loan them out (at one point they had 38 players on loan), then sell them as "income/profit" in future years.

They started this when FFP started to become a real thing, and it's how they have operated since bar the transfer ban period.
Click to expand...

yep it’s a viable model for them
They have just signed Sarr on a free and I doubt he will play 10 games for them
Their also offering Batbrick a new contract and pay rise then loaning him out again. He will take the pay rise and go play elsewhere
 
Bedfordspurs said:
yep it’s a viable model for them
They have just signed Sarr on a free and I doubt he will play 10 games for them
Their also offering Batbrick a new contract and pay rise then loaning him out again. He will take the pay rise and go play elsewhere
Click to expand...

Viable if you didn't count the original "loan" from good old RA.

But yes, it's their current model
 
Bedfordspurs said:
Their not great players though and the fee for Morata was a paper profit for a player that flopped quite badly
Similarly there is talk of bakayoko going for £30m... And yet the teams he went on loan too don’t want him so clearly he wasn’t a success
Their hyped up players who haven’t stepped up yet Chelsea command big fees for them
Click to expand...
The fee for a flopped Morata seems too high, ditto for Hazard with just a year left. I’ll feel a little better if we get most of our cash back on Ndombele!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back