Jump to content

bisright1

Members
  • Content Count

    1,744
  • Donations

    £0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

bisright1 last won the day on January 16

bisright1 had the most liked content!

About bisright1

  • Rank
    First Team Regular

Recent Profile Visitors

3,568 profile views
  1. A stadium rebuild would have increased our match day revenue by at least £40m. Probably higher. That is the difference between Arsenal and Chelsea at the moment. Let's consider a third of that in isolation is profit, which isn't an unfair way of working it out. That means that per year, we would be at £13m extra in the coffers, over 20 years, £260m. In addition we should expect a stadium sponsorship deal to accompany the new stadium of roughly £200-250m over a 5 year period if we match what Arsenal did with the Emirates. At a conservative estimate we would expect £800m in today's money. But it would be higher because our stadium would be better, our club is bigger, etc. Over the course of 20 years, we would have gained about £1bn that we wouldn't have otherwise. Which broadly matches the estimates of how much the new stadium would cost. Add in the fact that eventually we are going to have to do something about the stadium, it is going to need renovating at some stage which will cost money. Even if it isn't a rebuild. Some people think the reason we shouldn't build a new stadium is because of the harm it will do us over the next 5 years. I think in terms of the significant damage it will cause us in 20 years if we don't build a new stadium.
  2. Shame we won't wear the fa cup shirt again. 3rd round only!
  3. People hated Yokohama at first. Fact is three are the company that wanted to stump up the cash. I'd rather we went with the company the gives us the most money than the company with the nicest logo.
  4. Our club has given every manager since RDM time. Jose was turfed out when it was clear he had poisoned the entire club and we were fighting a relegation battle. Conte was sacked when it was clear he didn't want to be there. He turned down an extension and spent the entire season moaning. Sarri quit. Our managers get time from the board. Our fans recently have been quicker to turn on the manager. Lampard will get time. Thankfully the fans will take longer to turn on him than any other manager.
  5. Against Arsenal the chap next to me complained when we took a corner short. We then scored from it. Next corner, we took it short. He complained again. Can't understand some fans.
  6. The only reason I don't agree with that is that I think we need 3 players to be regular goal scorers, it doesn't need to be a wide player necessarily though in that three. RLC (or a similar powerful goalscoring midfielder), Sancho, Tammy is how I would set up for goals. A tricky winger like cho or pulisic and a midfield of a final 3rd ball winner and a deep lying playmaker would satisfy me.
  7. Well if we had mane and salah either side of the striker, our midfield would be fine. But we don't.
  8. It's simple to me. When kante played last year with jorginho and kovacic we had Hazard, Alonso, and a striker who could score goals. We looked dire but we always found a way. Now we just have Tammy. We don't score goals because only Tammy scores goals. And he's not experienced enough to be the sole player scoring. Additionally Kante also wasn't doing the same job last year as this. Last year his role was closer to what Frank has mount (or last night kovacic) doing this year. Harassing the team in the final third, playing it off. It's an evolved version of what Kante has done for years in a counter attacking set up. Now I don't know what Kantes job is, he just seems to get the ball and run a bit or pass it ten yards, slowly. Frank doesn't need Kante in last year's role because Mount and Kovacic do it very well, so we either change the system to suit Kante (in my opinion a mistake) or we change the player. If we had a team with Sancho, Tammy and Loftus Cheek playing week in week out and scoring goals, we'd be challenging at the top (or at least pulling an 80+ point season). I'd be very comfortable with a midfield that had Mount, RLC and Jorginho. It wouldnt alter the system at all but it would leave a 28/29 year old who a top team would pay 100m for playing on our bench. Getting a player who can do whay RLC does (hello SMS) would improve our squad and team.
  9. Looks like his pace has returned. Promising signs from him. Didn't get the ball enough in the second half.
  10. Worst thing that happened to us is Luiz getting sent off. That meant arsenal could sit, absorb and counter, which a midfield of kante and jorginho can't play against. Mount and kovacic are doing the job that Sarri got Kante doing last year, arguably as effectively if not more. Lampard needed to take off kante at half time and bring on Barkley. He still hasn't realised yet kante is a problem when teams defend deep. Everything goes wide and is then crossed in, which is pointless when only one player in our team is capable of scoring from a cross in open play (and then he's not actually that great at it yet). I wonder why Alonso isn't given a shot more in these games as he can burst through but lampard isn't setting us up differently against poor teams (ironically the opposite problem of sarri who never set us up differently against top teams). Ultimately we are missing a midfielder who can break teams, bully teams and score with his head and feet. We have only one in our squad but he's been injured since May.
  11. I don't think Frank will drop him. Unfortunately. I constantly wonder why we were playing cabalerro in cup games. What's the point? He's a back up in case something goes wrong and probably won't be here next year. Give Cumming ago.
  12. I've consistently said we need to sign Sancho and I haven't rated willian for years. I am on the fence about Mount and if he was 28 years old and was known for playing a different role id probably want to sell him too.
  13. 1) I'm not singling kante out. This is the kante thread. 2) I don't want to find a player like him. So I don't care of we sell him and don't find someone like him. 3) I want to sign a replacement. Someone like SMS who we should be targeting. Also - lazio don't have the money to turn down 100m, when they drink coffee is irrelevant. 4) if our attack don't create anything, then yes it is at least partly his fault because he makes up our attack. He is one of our 5 offensive players. 5) kante isn't a bad player. He's world class. But for our team he's just not the right player.
  14. I've been quite consistent for months saying we should sell kante. Not my fault people think no one is saying it. If we can get 100m, we need to cash in. Kante does his job well. I just don't see why we are employing someone to do that job. He can't pass shoot or defend set pieces. The three most important things for me in a midfielder against the bottom half of the table. I agree mount is untouchable for Frank, but kante also plays every game under him without question. Personally my midfield would feature jorginho, mount and a RLC type player. SMS wouldn't cost 180m at all, he'd be a similar price to kante. Fact is, I'm right on Kante. When he plays the bottom half, we lose. That's why he's being pointed out more and more. In our current style, he's not worth having around. We could change the style, but I think that's less realistic than selling the player.
  15. I just think there's no need for kante in a game against a team that sits deep. We don't need a DM in those games but an AM. An extra player that the opposition has to worry about. Am extra player who can defend corners. And yes I would sell him for 100m because I think with that money we can get someone who can win us games against all 20 teams, not just 5. But at the moment we won get 60m for him so it's pointless. FL dropped barkley after an impressive win against Burnley. The first time we've dominated and score goals in ages. And we lost. That's the major talking point for me. Kante is untouchable, when he absolutely shouldn't be. The moment I saw the team sheet I knew we would be in trouble.

×
×
  • Create New...