If we finish top 8, I will bite my tongue despite the poor season I will recognise the improvement and point to that as the minimum yard stick for progression. Klopp and Arteta finished 8th in their first season yes its way below our acceptable standard under Roman but those days are gone.

However, there must be a change in the approach to recruitment. Experienced players must be chosen, why don't we follow the way the women's team is run. Why isn't Pochettino listened to when it matters. The board wanted experienced superstars like Ronaldo, Neymar, Felix (lesser so) in all cases the coach said no so they listened to them. Yet they won't bring in a handful of lesser elite names for experience to fill out the squad? Despite the coach who is the expert being the one asking for this?

Where is the logic, the vision, the consistency? Nothing makes sense with this ownership. After 2 seasons of failure they must get this summer right. Firstly decide to stick or twist with Pochettino. If you stick give him the experienced players he needs to compete. What does it say about us that he could consistently get top 4 with Spurs but he can't do it with us? 

If we get in someone else, bring in a coach who is better than Pochettino I mean a big name someone who demands respect and their portfolio shows they get the results. Buy into their philosophy, supply them with the tools they need to succeed and let them do their job with less interference. How we can go from having Tuchel so involved in recruitment to having Potter and Pochettino having practically no say still boggles my mind. You want to give the guy you didn't hire (Tuchel) the tools to play his way but not the coaches you specifically hired (Potter & Poch). Make it make sense.....

Cant imagine we would be any worse off if the club had gotten a 2 year transfer ban rather this Boehly takeover. I think we would actually be better off.

Massive holes in the squad still, and it will be interesting to see if we have the funds to fill them. 

Loads of reports that we are in trouble financially, so could get worse before it gets better. 

Maybe see Lukaku back in the squad next season, no chance we get an Osimhen. 

So disillusioned with it now. Club has been run into the ground. The structure in place at the teams above us just seems to be better, and more cohesive. Not even talking about City and Liverpool, I think Spurs,  Villa and Newcastle, have better structures in place, and United could get their act together pretty quickly.

Every year we miss out on Champions League football, our position to spend and attract the best players shrinks, and we look at least 2 seasons off a top 4 finish as it stands.

This is what happens when arrogance trumps humility and common sense.

Until they understand US sports structure is not the same as PL football we will continue to fail.

 

They deal with stuff differently in other European countries than the English do.

I mean Aj*x ripped their own stadium in protest to what was going on then. 

Imagine Strasbourg fans protesting because they don't want to turn into Chelsea. lol 😄

19 hours ago, LongtimerLurker said:

The board wanted experienced superstars like Ronaldo, Neymar, Felix (lesser so) in all cases the coach said no so they listened to them. Yet they won't bring in a handful of lesser elite names for experience to fill out the squad? 

Whilst those superstars do not align with the recruitment model they want, it is a sure way to make huge financial gains which lets face it is their overarching objective. So though they were happy to concede to the coach's view, it didn't mean they didn't consider it as solid way of making some quick returns. It's not about the football for these clowns. 

Well something is clear, they gambled with the young signings, paying far too much for the vast majority of them, not to mention the speed of the overhaul was stupid too. Got lucky with Palmer and Petrovic…. But ultimately they have failed. Turned us into a mid table team is no time at all. Frankly, gambling our future, and failed. They know it, we know it. It’s a complete shambles.

On 30/03/2024 at 18:40, Boyne said:

A good turn-out for the Chelsea Supporters Trust meeting. Will post later about was discussed.

WATP.

 

Apologies for the delay in posting the following. If I think of anything else will post.

I attended the Chelsea Supporters Trust (CST) Special General Meeting (SGM) after the game against Burnley Here's a note of the meeting.

The meeting started with Chris Isitt the Chair of the Chelsea Pitch Owners (CPO) giving an update on the sales of CPO shares and re-development of the ground. As for the latter, nothing to report except that it appears that the club board have gone back to square one regarding the redevelopment. The CPO board has had no recent correspondence from the club about the redevelopment. As for shares, 26,000 shares have been sold to 15,000 people over the years. A share costs £100 plus a £10 administration fee. The sale of shares has fluctuated over the years since the CPO was set-up e.g. there was a lot of sales when the club was sold to Boehly etc. There has been a campaign to sell CPO shares at the women's games at both the Bridge and Kingsmeadow. For a signed share the cost is £160. The CPO is allowed a few times a season to have shares presented prior to games and with players present.

As for the main part of the meeting i.e. recent work done by the CST and it's dealings with the club board. Afterwards the meeting was opened up to the floor for questions. The CST board representatives mentioned recent sleep-out and food banks to raise monies for local charities. Also mentioned was the re-introduction of the Chelsea Disabled Supporters Association (CDSA). The CDSA had gone into abeyance due to the passing of the former chair. The board commented on the switching of games at short notice and the impact on fanes especially when it comes to incurring additional costs. The move of the kick-off for the match away to Sheffield United has been moved twice. The increased cost of tickets is of concern to fans and the CST board and it sparked a few questions from the floors. There have been a few rumours about how much season tickets will be increased by. It was hoped that there will not be repeat of what happened when those who bought season tickets to watch the women’s team this season did not know about a price increase until they renewed. On the subject of prices there were a couple of questions from the floor about tiered prices which would be dependent upon where your seat is in the ground either because they would have to move to cheaper seats or stop going. Not a way to treat supporters. There was an opinion voiced that the crowds are becoming more corporate and members are finding it more difficult to buy tickets.

The CST board mentioned the recent correspondence between the CST and the club and the response it has received among fans and the media. Some of you will have heard or read the recent comments by Simon Jordan. The CST board pointed out that they accept that they cannot represent the wishes or views of all fans but working with other supporters groups and also those of other teams hope to reflect the opinions of the majority. The CST board pointed out that it is not their intention to antagonise the board but rather have a good relationship with them and meet more often. It was pointed out that the Spurs board had met with Spurs fans and it’s hoped that the Chelsea board can do the same.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/maneetahuja/2024/04/01/meet-the-billionaire-bond-trader-behind-chelsea-fc-springsteens-songbook-and-the-la-dodgers/

1 hour ago, El regreso said:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/maneetahuja/2024/04/01/meet-the-billionaire-bond-trader-behind-chelsea-fc-springsteens-songbook-and-the-la-dodgers/

There's a lot to digest there, but the last sentence in the whole article beginning " love him or loathe him "says it all .

Thanks for posting 

Not including injured players how many of our current starting 11 get into any of these sides? How many of these former players start for us?

There's a certain calibre of player ans what these owners need to understand is seeing footballers purely through their age as an asset is detrimental to our clubs success. 

They need to understand when a world class player who is affordable, physically fit and also suits your style of player you go for them.

I think we need a proper sporting director along with some additional technical directors and hire ups who are experienced at elite clubs and can effectively bring clearlakes misguided vision to life. Most importantly though the blending of experienced professionals and talented youngsters.

 

Edited April 1, 20242 yr by LongtimerLurker

 

Shame he didn't mention the age-profile. If I was deep in the project or in line with the sporting director -team, I would have mentioned that 5 times. Maybe he isn't in line with them. If so, heads will fall. 

Responds to Forbes directly but sends a proxy to respond to the fanbase.

Edited April 2, 20242 yr by Sconnie Blue

On 01/04/2024 at 17:02, SimonH said:

Well something is clear, they gambled with the young signings, paying far too much for the vast majority of them, not to mention the speed of the overhaul was stupid too. Got lucky with Palmer and Petrovic…. But ultimately they have failed. Turned us into a mid table team is no time at all. Frankly, gambling our future, and failed. They know it, we know it. It’s a complete shambles.

The speed of the overhaul kinda match their plan. The idea is to get rid most of the high earner and replace them with cheap potential player.

Losing mount made 0 sense and now we are not renewing Gallagher, this is almost the unheard of with any big team but that is the plan. 

In perfect world, they want to get rid all of them but in reality you can't otherwise relegation will be on the table and that will be catastrophic. 

Edited April 3, 20242 yr by Bob stark

3 hours ago, Bob stark said:

The speed of the overhaul kinda match their plan. The idea is to get rid most of the high earner and replace them with cheap potential player.

Losing mount made 0 sense and now we are not renewing Gallagher, this is almost the unheard of with any big team but that is the plan. 

In perfect world, they want to get rid all of them but in reality you can't otherwise relegation will be on the table and that will be catastrophic. 

Even if the plan works for them, the result will still be the death of the relationship between the fans and the team/club.

How can anyone develop and maintain a connection and enduring support when the players are deemed to be such short term commodities. 

I have been a fan for 52 years and players come and go, so do managers, and hey I'm on my fourth set of owners. But the players were still here long enough to build reputations and to form part of the culture.

Constantly pruning the squad to maximise profit, regardless of FFP, will just erode that tribal passion and connection, surely. Palmer and Gusto have breakout seasons and pfff, they're sold for double profit. It's great for the balance sheet but will surely breed apathy within the fanbase towards to overall construct of the team. They become just commodities and we are just the customers that they want.

1 hour ago, WhiteWall said:

Even if the plan works for them, the result will still be the death of the relationship between the fans and the team/club.

How can anyone develop and maintain a connection and enduring support when the players are deemed to be such short term commodities. 

I have been a fan for 52 years and players come and go, so do managers, and hey I'm on my fourth set of owners. But the players were still here long enough to build reputations and to form part of the culture.

Constantly pruning the squad to maximise profit, regardless of FFP, will just erode that tribal passion and connection, surely. Palmer and Gusto have breakout seasons and pfff, they're sold for double profit. It's great for the balance sheet but will surely breed apathy within the fanbase towards to overall construct of the team. They become just commodities and we are just the customers that they want.

I don't think it is about chasing profit but it was quite clear the plan is to cut down cost especially salary.

In the end of the day football is a business especially now we are being owned a by an investment company. 

The entire exercise from the UK govt was to make Russia look bad. Given the performance of Roman vs Clearlake they've achieved anything but. They're making a martyr of Roman.

2 hours ago, Gonoir Beniashile said:

The entire exercise from the UK govt was to make Russia look bad. Given the performance of Roman vs Clearlake they've achieved anything but. They're making a martyr of Roman.

To our fanbase, for which they have no care whatsoever. All the other fan bases, as well as none football fans, love what they did either for destroying our club (other club fans) or taking a stand against another rich Russian (none football fans).

A proxy way for them to attack Putin, without attacking Putin because they dont have the balls to go after Putin and Russia directly.

Bemoan the tyrants actions, but don't release the billions of pounds from the Chelsea sale Roman wanted to aid the Ukraine victims of war, nor send our military to help the Ukraine.

Not that I am saying that Canadian Gov have any balls either, far more concerned with Carbon taxes to put money in their pockets for the yearly pay increase than sending over the forces to drive Russia out.

Quote

Profit & Sustainability Rules Change/'Luxury Tax'

Premier League clubs are considering abolishing points deductions and introducing a 'luxury tax', Mail Sport can reveal.

The hefty points-deduction punishments for Everton and Nottingham Forest - coupled with a quiet January transfer window as clubs did not dare overspend and risk sanction - have left many officials to deem the league's Profit and Sustainability Rules (PSR) not fit for purpose.

There are also grave fears are that, under its current guise, PSR will see the Premier League fall from its lucrative position as the world's best league because it will no longer be able to afford the best players on the best salaries.

Radical reform has been discussed among the clubs and an entirely new system could be voted in at the end of the season meeting in June. As many as 17 of the 20 clubs are thought to be leaning towards significant change. Fourteen clubs need to be in agreement to get a rule change through.

Some feel that the eventual six-point penalty dished out to Everton and the four handed to Forest were draconian and not reflective of why PSR was brought in

They believe that should clubs wish to 'have a go' and have the money to do so, they should not face a punishment that could plunge them into the Championship.

A 'luxury tax' has been considered, where those clubs who overspend will have a financial punishment which would increase the more they splash the cash. But clubs can choose to press on regardless if they wish.

The monies collected, which could run into the tens of millions, would then be redistributed to those Premier League who complied with the rules. It has been discussed that some of the fines could even go into an 'emergency fund' to assist EFL clubs in financial danger.

Currently, such a tax features in America's Major League Baseball and National Basketball Association, and relates to the amount spent on the salaries of the playing squad.

America's other two main sporting leagues, the NFL and National Hockey League, meanwhile, have 'hard' salary caps which clubs are not allowed to exceed.

While some clubs want the tax to remove the threat of points deductions entirely, Premier League insiders are adamant that any proposal would still include an element of 'sporting sanction' and that it would be aimed more at providing additional flexibility and a buffer zone. 

UEFA’s new rule - which limits spending on player and coach wages, transfers and agent fees to 70 per cent of club revenue is also viewed favourably by some. 

A system of 'anchoring' has also been discussed. It is a form of salary cap where the amount any club can spend is directly related to the wage bill spent by the bottom club. So if Sheffield United, for example, finish bottom with an annual wage bill of £50m, every club would have a set multiple of that figure to spend for the following season. Again, if a club breaks that cap, they pay the fine.

There are other financial points up for debate at the end of season meeting. A 'growing number' - according to a source - want to change financial rules so that only spend on players (buying and salaries) and coaching staff is taken into account over the three-year reporting period. 

Currently, only money spent on new stadia, infrastructure, youth development and community projects is exempt from being calculated as part of the £105m clubs are permitted to lose over three seasons. But those pushing for only players and staff to be included believe that it would free up clubs to invest in the likes of content, digital and marketing to grow their global fanbases.

And in another shock development, a vote to reverse the February ruling on related-party transactions - deals within multi-club networks or with sponsors who have the same owners as a club - could also be on the cards.

In February, an amendment to these rules was approved by the narrowest of margins. With seven votes needed to block a proposal, there were 12 in favour, two abstentions and six against. But some feel that the change, and the knock-on impact it has on ownership of other clubs overseas, is harmful with one, thought to be Manchester City, considering legal action.

The option to send a young prospect to gain experience overseas at a club in their network, which would then increase their market value, is thought to be attractive to many.

The situation is complex. Traditionally the 'Big Six' both Manchester clubs, Arsenal, Tottenham, Liverpool and Chelsea, have tended to vote together. However, it is understood that there has been a 'seismic shift' in relationships, with Saudi-owned Newcastle now included in a 'Big Seven'.

Some feel that a rules to encourage investment would result in a more competitive league which would increase interest levels and safeguard against the future.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-13271249/Premier-League-eyeing-ABOLISHING-points-deductions-introducing-NBA-style-luxury-tax-fears-stars-leave-rules-restrict-pay-Everton-Nottingham-Forest-lost-points.html?ico=authors_pagination_desktop

1 hour ago, Sconnie Blue said:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-13271249/Premier-League-eyeing-ABOLISHING-points-deductions-introducing-NBA-style-luxury-tax-fears-stars-leave-rules-restrict-pay-Everton-Nottingham-Forest-lost-points.html?ico=authors_pagination_desktop

I'm not surprised to see this turn of events. There was barely any activity in the Premier League last transfer window and that will worry the league. If the financial rules are in place to stop clubs going bankrupt I cannot see how any of the punishments work that well. The fines and points deductions only give a hefty push over the edge to clubs that are already in financial trouble. The luxury tax will just cost clubs more if they overspend, leading to further debt. I would think that the best option for a punishment is a transfer ban. For example, taking Everton or Forest. Ban them from bringing in any new players until they are compliant over 1-2 year reporting. They could still sell players during that time but it would at least force them to stop spending their way out of trouble. If we were found non-compliant I would prefer that as a punishment. 

5 hours ago, Sconnie Blue said:

PSR will see the Premier League fall from its lucrative position as the world's best league because it will no longer be able to afford the best players on the best salaries.

We help to inflate the world market and dwarf other leagues expenses even when we add their total expense and yet have the gall to complain when only one transfer window of one season has been hampered. 

I actually like it. Let sanity return to the transfer market. Either introduce a salary cap to go with the current  transfer spend pattern or apply PSR to the letter with stiffer point deductions. 

There is no hope for this squad they've assembled. It's not just a case of young players who need time and experience. The vast majority of them simply are bad players and not ever going to be good enough for the top level. 

The coach/manager must have the WORD on transfers. So far Todd don't want this.