6 minutes ago, sonic90 said:

Agree with the level headedness and the all star games could work in principle that players don't really hate each other anymore and they could do it feasibly unlike before.
But Todd will learn that we have to manage fatigue and friendlies need to be used to create team tactics and chemistry and there is no time to waste playing in a temporary side like an all star team.

His suggestion of a multi team franchise to develop young players isn't really worth it as well, yes Red Bull is somewhat successful but look at City, their setup is pretty much worthless.
we are probably better of continuing as is and not doing too much new stuff to shake it up.

The city model isn't necessarily worthless. I'd imagine it's building a global fan base and I'd be surprised if they don't have a first team player whose played in one of those teams at some stage. 

On the all star game. It's just a bit of fun, play it in america, target it at kids, have some mad TikTok sh*t and skill challenges etc, maybe a 5 a side game between 10 fan selected players. The question is intensity. But one answer could be the PL rebranding the PL cup and doing the above, one in USA and one in Asia and the community shield at Wembley being the winners of each cup. No all star team per se, but the all star stuff in USA goes further than just the game.

This is what Boehly is driving at. Can the PL be smarter and more modern than this sh*t https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premier_League_Asia_Trophy

28 minutes ago, Valerie said:

Wait, what? 

Don't worry Val we would never stand for it!

Todd and his sporting director have been busy hoping that junior here comes through the academy like De Bruyne and Salah.

 

44 minutes ago, evissy said:

Scrap League Cup from Prem teams. You got some space for an All Star-game/weekend if you want it. Even if you don't play it LC could be scrapped. Absolutely no one would miss it. 

Why would I ever be interested in watching an All Star game over my own team in a cup competition? 

41 minutes ago, axman2526 said:

Just take the PL out of the league cup. Leave a Europa conference league place for the winners. Would make it worthwhile to the league sides, and give them a "major trophy" they have a chance to win.

It would ultimately hurt English football to have a team in the Championship or lower in a European competition, they would struggle to make it past the group stages. Also, I don't agree with rewarding teams for being sh*t. The biggest prizes in football should go to the best, if it doesn't, then you risk devaluing what it means to win trophies. 

21 minutes ago, bisright1 said:

The city model isn't necessarily worthless. I'd imagine it's building a global fan base and I'd be surprised if they don't have a first team player whose played in one of those teams at some stage. 

On the all star game. It's just a bit of fun, play it in america, target it at kids, have some mad TikTok sh*t and skill challenges etc, maybe a 5 a side game between 10 fan selected players. The question is intensity. But one answer could be the PL rebranding the PL cup and doing the above, one in USA and one in Asia and the community shield at Wembley being the winners of each cup. No all star team per se, but the all star stuff in USA goes further than just the game.

This is what Boehly is driving at. Can the PL be smarter and more modern than this sh*t https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premier_League_Asia_Trophy

I don't know about now but I'm pretty sure I read that only Lampard has played for a franchise club then City. Not worthless in terms of investment but he talks about RB owning multiple CL clubs and trading with each other, all good and well a mid level club doing it but Chelsea would need another club in a top league to benefit.

If the intensity was low and it is just a clown show with more step overs and elaborate skill moves as an exhibition for the american audience then maybe the clubs would agree to it if there was big money involved.

I get that people are territorial about the concept of an 'all-star game' but you also can't turn a blind at the situation of clubs in the lower leagues. A lot of experts predict that several of those clubs could go under in the next few years. Some kind of all-star game could be a good way to provide revenue to keep those clubs alive.

7 minutes ago, sonic90 said:

I don't know about now but I'm pretty sure I read that only Lampard has played for a franchise club then City. Not worthless in terms of investment but he talks about RB owning multiple CL clubs and trading with each other, all good and well a mid level club doing it but Chelsea would need another club in a top league to benefit.

If the intensity was low and it is just a clown show with more step overs and elaborate skill moves as an exhibition for the american audience then maybe the clubs would agree to it if there was big money involved.

Yeah people just aren't thinking about what he said.

He said the PL needs to think more like US sports in how they generate revenue, e.g. the all star game. He suggested a north vs south all star game, but the actual underlying idea is do something that generates eyeballs and revenue away from the 38 games. 

If intensity is the blocker, then let the other owners come up with other ideas and get round a table. But there is a clear issue that the PL is the biggest eyeballed league in the world and doesn't generate the biggest revenue. That's why he bought into chelsea because he sees opportunity. 

8 minutes ago, Frankie8Lampard said:

I get that people are territorial about the concept of an 'all-star game' but you also can't turn a blind at the situation of clubs in the lower leagues. A lot of experts predict that several of those clubs could go under in the next few years. Some kind of all-star game could be a good way to provide revenue to keep those clubs alive.

Just cut them in on the TV deal. 

20 minutes ago, Frankie8Lampard said:

I get that people are territorial about the concept of an 'all-star game' but you also can't turn a blind at the situation of clubs in the lower leagues. A lot of experts predict that several of those clubs could go under in the next few years. Some kind of all-star game could be a good way to provide revenue to keep those clubs alive.

The irony of this post is hilarious.

Do you think the faceless investment firms and our very own Clearlake Capital have the smaller clubs at heart when talking about a potential all star game?

Shifting to the all-star format and denying the smaller clubs the chance of money spinning league cup ties will push those struggling further towards the end of the line.

It would be incredibly damaging for those lower on the football pyramid.

Not that Boehly cares about that.

Edited September 14, 20223 yr by HazardousChoice

18 minutes ago, bisright1 said:

Yeah people just aren't thinking about what he said.

He said the PL needs to think more like US sports in how they generate revenue, e.g. the all star game. He suggested a north vs south all star game, but the actual underlying idea is do something that generates eyeballs and revenue away from the 38 games. 

If intensity is the blocker, then let the other owners come up with other ideas and get round a table. But there is a clear issue that the PL is the biggest eyeballed league in the world and doesn't generate the biggest revenue. That's why he bought into chelsea because he sees opportunity. 

 

Yeah I think you can take massive liberties when it comes to this, the US has giant stadiums and I doubt everyone who turns up is a football purist. A lot of people go for the occassion and atmosphere and what I know about your general non hardcore person watching the world cup etc. they actually find the game quite boring and switch off a lot. 90 minutes of pure football is also probably too much for the casuals so a lot of rotation and entertainment breaks could work very well.

I'm English, but even I think there's way too much paranoia about Americans investing in European football as if it's going to be the death of football in Europe or something. Boehly is thinking outside the box here. I don't understand the problem with brainstorming ideas like this. 

Roman, as a fan of the game not looking to make money, took occasional cup winners and top 3/4 challangers and made us one of the best clubs in the world.

I get the feeling most of our new owners will be happy to leverage that fame and make money just as the Glazers and Kronke have done and Gillet and Hicks were doing.

So long as the profits come in, I can see us becoming like Arsenal.

Change is tough.  For Chelsea fans and the league.  Any idea from SW6 is tainted right now, but time will tell. 

4 hours ago, axman2526 said:

Roman, as a fan of the game not looking to make money, took occasional cup winners and top 3/4 challangers and made us one of the best clubs in the world.

I get the feeling most of our new owners will be happy to leverage that fame and make money just as the Glazers and Kronke have done and Gillet and Hicks were doing.

So long as the profits come in, I can see us becoming like Arsenal.

It depends, it could go either way.

The only way EPL clubs can be sustainably and consistently both profitable and competitive is to have new sources of revenue, and that means a Super League, extended pre-season tours and foreign EPL rounds.

If Boehly and co want to increase the club's value then for a time at least, our goals would be aligned. The club needs to be winning and challenging for trophies in order to increase valuation. Profitability alone doesn't increase valuation.

Man so many media people and pundits are ripping Todd apart for his comments.

Richard Keys has even lambasted the government for allowing Todd to buy buy club and being the preferred bidder, saying he is making the club a laughing stock.

The only way I'd ever be ok with all star games or whatever is if they include cheerleaders and an entertaining half time show.

Why would I want to watch meaningless friendlies in the middle of a season?

12 hours ago, charierre said:

Just cut them in on the TV deal. 

If sluicing money towards struggling lower teams is the aim, giving them part of the TV money is probably a better idea than one or perhaps two all-star games. I may be thinking too much inside the box, but if domestic and continental club competitions and international matches remain organised the way they are, it's for some players even more matches. More strain on the body, more opportunities to get injured. It could be a nice idea, but a lot of the way football from grassroots upwards is organised would have to change.

I would be in favour of an "All Star Game" but only provided 100% of cash generated is cascaded down through the pyramid. There are going to be numerous clubs, who very soon won't even be able to turn the floodlights on or heat the dressing room and showers. This ONE-OFF game should replace the out of date, friendly, Community Shield. It must be at the start of the season and players picked to play, should only attend for training/tactics 48 hours before the kick off. In the US the teams are selected on votes, 33% Head Coaches, 33% Players and 33% fans

9 hours ago, axman2526 said:

Roman, as a fan of the game not looking to make money, took occasional cup winners and top 3/4 challangers and made us one of the best clubs in the world.

I get the feeling most of our new owners will be happy to leverage that fame and make money just as the Glazers and Kronke have done and Gillet and Hicks were doing.

So long as the profits come in, I can see us becoming like Arsenal.

They have literally just spent more than any other teams has in a single window, I have no idea how you came to this conclusion.

I think that we URGENTLY need to recruit and appoint the Sporting Director. This will hopefully release Todd from the day to day running of Chelsea and give him a chance to get back to the commercial money earning activities that drive Clearlake and its member companies forward. 

7 minutes ago, coombsie said:

I would be in favour of an "All Star Game" but only provided 100% of cash generated is cascaded down through the pyramid. There are going to be numerous clubs, who very soon won't even be able to turn the floodlights on or heat the dressing room and showers. This ONE-OFF game should replace the out of date, friendly, Community Shield. It must be at the start of the season and players picked to play, should only attend for training/tactics 48 hours before the kick off. In the US the teams are selected on votes, 33% Head Coaches, 33% Players and 33% fans

The Community Shield is traditionally a way of football giving to charities and other community projects. This would leave a shortfall in their revenues. If the aim is to filter money down to the lower leagues, the most obvious way is to cut them in with a percentage of the tv deals like it was before sky invented football and the Premier league got greedy.

20 hours ago, Scott Harris said:

Players playing together in international football is completely different, there is national pride involved. Why would players ever care about a North vs South game in England? I highly doubt Kevin De Bruyne, born in Ghent, Belgium is going to want to team up with club rivals to get one over the South of England. 

Maybe a fan thinks he could't/shouldn't play with a rival. Players are collagues wearing different shirs. His main problem is the time. If we could empty the schedule for players I think they would be up for it.

All Star-games are shows, not real games. Watch one and you get the idea. If it is the easiest way to raise money for the pyramide why wouldn’t you do it...They have these charitygames in England...with Usain Bolts and so. Why not with Prem players....anyway I am not a fan of a game with no intensity but for charity it is okay.

Boehly - “Ultimately I hope the Premier League takes a little bit of a lesson from American sports,” said Boehly in a New York conference. “And really starts to figure out, why don’t we do a tournament with the bottom four sports teams, why isn’t there an All-Star game?”

What a fn w**ker! You want to teach us a lesson? The sheer arrogance of the man. This after backing a coach with 250m then sacking him a few games in. He’s the one with the learning to do!

 

1 hour ago, evissy said:

Maybe a fan thinks he could't/shouldn't play with a rival. Players are collagues wearing different shirs. His main problem is the time. If we could empty the schedule for players I think they would be up for it.

All Star-games are shows, not real games. Watch one and you get the idea. If it is the easiest way to raise money for the pyramide why wouldn’t you do it...They have these charitygames in England...with Usain Bolts and so. Why not with Prem players....anyway I am not a fan of a game with no intensity but for charity it is okay.

You have answered your own question before you even asked it.

Seems some on here wont be satisfied with Boehly, just because he isn't Roman. Roman has gone now, and we have a new owner who wants to put his own stamp on things. All the talk around Boehly prior to the take over, and in that interview the other day is that he wants Chelsea to be competitive whilst enhancing the brand as much as they can, both of those things can only be good things for the football club.

He has also spent close to £300m in one window, which I think is a record for any club, not just English club. So the early indications are that he is still keen to pump money into the club to help us be competitive. Lets not also forget that towards the end of Roman's reign he wanted us to be more self sustainable and he wasn't as gung-ho as he was in the early days. Yes we still spent a bit but alot of that towards the end was generated from players that we sold. 

Relegation play-offs happen in a few of the leagues around Europe, so it is not as alien as a concept as some on here are making it out to be. The third promotion spot to the Premier League is literally determined by a play off tournament. Why can't the third relegation spot be determined in the same way?

On the North/South thing, I've seen a few on here saying that players won't want to line up with opposition players from rival teams. Apart from a select few that put stock on those rivalries, the majority of players do not care about rivalries these days. They're all chummy with eachother and alot of them socialise with eachother outside of football. In recent years we've seen United/ City, United/ Arsenal, Chelsea/ Arsenal players all swapping shirts. Doubt they'd bother doing that if they cared so much about the rivalry between the teams. 

Boehly is the new kid on the block, add to that the fact he made a big call on Tuchel (regardless of if people think it was right or wrong to sack him) and because of those things he's going to be under a bit of scrutiny. There's going to be alot of learning on the job for him for a year or two, but from what I've seen so far he's not given me any reason to doubt that the future of the club is in safe hands.