36 minutes ago, axman2526 said:

They won't allow such banners in the Bridge. If one did sneak in they would quickly get it removed.

Biggest problem is we remain divided. Too many of our fans either are not willing to see, or have seen and are being blindly stubborn not to admit they are wrong, about this ownership.

Not to dig anyone out but we still have posts after posts about how more signings, a different manager, different SDs would see us become a title contender.

It's just nonsense. A clubs direction comes from the top down.

I think that is a bit unfair because most of them say that we’re a few positions away from competing but most always add that they don’t trust the board and SDs to make the correct decision. The way they treated us this January window has been very clarifying and will open up a few more eyes. We needed a striker, at the very least, and they went on to buy a 19 yo midfielder for the future (3-4 years time?). They’re just taking care of their business, which is making money from buying and selling young players, disregarding the footballing side of things and the fans. But what has turned me on them is the way they treat our fan base, those that want to go week in week out, home and away, fans like me that would be willing to spend weekends following the Chelsea team but are now struggling to get tickets while you see many tourists even at the away games.

Clubs fault we’ve only got 1 striker. I dont count Guiu, he’s only a kid.

In 2005 we had Drogba, Gudjohnson, Kezman.

in 2009 we had Drogba, Anelka and Shevchenko.

in 2011 we had Drogba, Anelka and Torres.

In 2013 we had Torres, Ba and Eto. 

In 2015 we had Drogba, Costa and Remy.

In 2017 we had Costa, Remy and Bats.

In 2020 we had Giroud, Tammy and Bats.

In 2025 we have Jackson. 

We knew Jackson alone wouldn’t be enough last summer, but the incompetent board did nothing about it. I mean what do you expect.

Yes, we’ll never win anything with Maresca, he’s a championship level manager. I still think Nkunku along with Palmer are our 2 best attacking players. Instead of playing average Madueke on the right he could have played Palmer on the right and Nkunku through the middle. Palmer made his impact last year playing on the right. Doesnt Salah and didnt Messi also play out there? But Maresca doesnt have the vision or innovative enough to get the 2 best players playing on the pitch at the same time. 
 

For now were stuck with an incompetent board who know nothing about football and a C level manager, both are too stubborn to change. 

Edited February 15, 20251 yr by Vialli96

9 minutes ago, RMH said:

I think that is a bit unfair because most of them say that we’re a few positions away from competing but most always add that they don’t trust the board and SDs to make the correct decision. The way they treated us this January window has been very clarifying and will open up a few more eyes. We needed a striker, at the very least, and they went on to buy a 19 yo midfielder for the future (3-4 years time?). They’re just taking care of their business, which is making money from buying and selling young players, disregarding the footballing side of things and the fans. But what has turned me on them is the way they treat our fan base, those that want to go week in week out, home and away, fans like me that would be willing to spend weekends following the Chelsea team but are now struggling to get tickets while you see many tourists even at the away games.

Sometimes you have to be cruel to be kind, and risk ruffling a few feathers in the mean time.

Is too simplistic to look at it being just a fee signings.

How many players have we signed in these 2 and a half years? How much money spent? Yet we still need a few more to compete even for top 4?

Is that Marescas fault? Was it Poches or Potters? Did they between them sign all these players?

And how many exactly is a few? Let's call a spade and spade here and investigate this point without bias.

How many of this squad make a team competiting for a title?

 

Any of the GKs? Not a chance. None of them are good enough to even be number 2.

So we need a top level goalkeeper, and a capable number 2.

How about the defence? Reece James? If he could stay fit sure, but he cannot so you cannot count him.

I personally don't think Cucurella and Gusto are good enough for a title contender but let's be generous and say they make it. None of our centerbacks do, they are mid table fodder. 

So two new CBS needed, then keep a couple of what we have as back ups.

Midfield Caicedo yes everyone else no chance. For Lavia see James. So we need a partner for Caicedo, a top one, Santos back and a good 4th option to allow Caicedo and the other signing to rest at times. 

Thar 6 signings so far.

Then we get to the forwars. Cole Palmer. That it.

A quality 9, a very good back up to the 9, Jackson or Guiu as 3rd choice, a new left winger, a proper 10 so Cole can move to the right, then you can have your pick of Estevao, Paez, Sancho etc as back ups.

That's 10 signings imo. That is not a few.

3 minutes ago, axman2526 said:

Sometimes you have to be cruel to be kind, and risk ruffling a few feathers in the mean time.

Is too simplistic to look at it being just a fee signings.

How many players have we signed in these 2 and a half years? How much money spent? Yet we still need a few more to compete even for top 4?

Is that Marescas fault? Was it Poches or Potters? Did they between them sign all these players?

And how many exactly is a few? Let's call a spade and spade here and investigate this point without bias.

How many of this squad make a team competiting for a title?

 

Any of the GKs? Not a chance. None of them are good enough to even be number 2.

So we need a top level goalkeeper, and a capable number 2.

How about the defence? Reece James? If he could stay fit sure, but he cannot so you cannot count him.

I personally don't think Cucurella and Gusto are good enough for a title contender but let's be generous and say they make it. None of our centerbacks do, they are mid table fodder. 

So two new CBS needed, then keep a couple of what we have as back ups.

Midfield Caicedo yes everyone else no chance. For Lavia see James. So we need a partner for Caicedo, a top one, Santos back and a good 4th option to allow Caicedo and the other signing to rest at times. 

Thar 6 signings so far.

Then we get to the forwars. Cole Palmer. That it.

A quality 9, a very good back up to the 9, Jackson or Guiu as 3rd choice, a new left winger, a proper 10 so Cole can move to the right, then you can have your pick of Estevao, Paez, Sancho etc as back ups.

That's 10 signings imo. That is not a few.

Don’t get me wrong, I agree with you (see other threads where I’ve said so and listed the players), but I’m just saying that it’s fair to think that we just need a few players but don’t trust the owners to make the correct signings of experience and where we need them. That’s what some are saying, still don’t trust the owners.

54 minutes ago, RMH said:

Don’t get me wrong, I agree with you (see other threads where I’ve said so and listed the players), but I’m just saying that it’s fair to think that we just need a few players but don’t trust the owners to make the correct signings of experience and where we need them. That’s what some are saying, still don’t trust the owners.

Fair enough mate.

 

How many players do you think we need to sign to be a title contender then? Don't have to give me names, just tell me the positions we need to bring in starting, title contender quality in.

2 minutes ago, axman2526 said:

Fair enough mate.

 

How many players do you think we need to sign to be a title contender then? Don't have to give me names, just tell me the positions we need to bring in starting, title contender quality in.

In my case, at the moment, I think we need one GK, two CBs, a LB to rotate with Cucurella, possibly a RB to rotate with Gusto (counting on James playing 50% of the games), a defensive midfielder and other more attacking midfielder to send Enzo to the bench, two wingers of quality (right and left) and a CF. All preferably in their mid 20s to have an experienced team combined with the youngsters. Overall, I agree with your take that we need 10 players to have a comfortable title contender. However, a GK, midfielder and CF are the minimum to compete for top 4 and Cups. 

29 minutes ago, RMH said:

In my case, at the moment, I think we need one GK, two CBs, a LB to rotate with Cucurella, possibly a RB to rotate with Gusto (counting on James playing 50% of the games), a defensive midfielder and other more attacking midfielder to send Enzo to the bench, two wingers of quality (right and left) and a CF. All preferably in their mid 20s to have an experienced team combined with the youngsters. Overall, I agree with your take that we need 10 players to have a comfortable title contender. However, a GK, midfielder and CF are the minimum to compete for top 4 and Cups. 

Yeah I can agree with that. 

Not the model though, and as you said cannot expect them to do this.

6 hours ago, Sconnie Blue said:

@SydneyChelsea @terraloon

Is there any possibility, or hope I’d rather say, that this continuous deterioration would cause Clearlake investors to pull their money which forces them to sell majority to Boehly?  

The only possible way is that Boehly finds a bigger fish than Clearlake. You'd need someone willing to pay ~USD$2bn based on current estimates.

As @OriginalS pointed out, venture capital is just a pyramid scheme. All Boehly would be doing is looking for a different vulture.

As bad as these owners have been, it is nothing compared to what will come when they sell to the next investor, tasked with bleeding more money from this dry stone. Look at Man United and Ratcliffe.

 

33 minutes ago, SydneyChelsea said:

The only possible way is that Boehly finds a bigger fish than Clearlake. You'd need someone willing to pay ~USD$2bn based on current estimates.

As @OriginalS pointed out, venture capital is just a pyramid scheme. All Boehly would be doing is looking for a different vulture.

As bad as these owners have been, it is nothing compared to what will come when they sell to the next investor, tasked with bleeding more money from this dry stone. Look at Man United and Ratcliffe.

 

Would need to be someone from the middle east. Any other north American investor would, as you said, just be more of the same.

I am hearing that, apparently, a protest is being organized against BlueCo for Tuesday February 25th, 6PM outside of the Bovril gate, ahead of the Southampton game.

Hope it is true and gets a large turnout.

4 minutes ago, axman2526 said:

I am hearing that, apparently, a protest is being organized against BlueCo for Tuesday February 25th, 6PM outside of the Bovril gate, ahead of the Southampton game.

Hope it is true and gets a large turnout.

 

PROTEST IS ON !

25th February at 6pm outside the Bovril Gate entrance before the Southampton game..

(Youness)

Below V

              V

Edited February 16, 20251 yr by The Rising Sun

 

https://youtu.be/j2fISh_oObw?feature=sharedhttps://youtu.be/j2fISh_oObw?feature=shared

 

Edited February 16, 20251 yr by The Rising Sun
Info

We know the owners aren't going anywhere because of fan protests. BUT they and everyone else need to know the strength of our feelings over how they absolutely ruined our club. They need to abandon the plan which is absolutely the wrong plan for Chelsea. It's ok for a Brighton, where, with no disrespect, there is no pressure to be a regular top 4 club, competing for titles and cups every single season. 

We cannot meekly accept what we've got now just in case the alternative might be worse..

We cannot meekly accept it because the owners won't care about our protests. 

They need to understand that although they bought our club, every Chelsea fan regards it as OUR club.

Come on you BLUES !. 

 

On 15/02/2025 at 12:48, RMH said:

 But what has turned me on them is the way they treat our fan base, those that want to go week in week out, home and away, fans like me that would be willing to spend weekends following the Chelsea team but are now struggling to get tickets while you see many tourists even at the away games.

You are right not to trust them.  They do not care about the traditional fan base.  They care about the new fan base and tourists that can afford and are willing to pay the top prices. They are capitalists. Vultures. They see the future in a Euro Soccer League. They want the guaranteed revenues of being in that ESL. They want to grow the financial dominance of the club - I don't believe that they see great revenues in buying/selling players - they want to grow the overall financial package. Our current owners are not going anywhere and when/if they do sell it will be to an equally dubious American or Arabian ownership.  They will sell for a big profit when they sell.

 Apologies in advance for offending anyone on here but they are cut from the same cloth as the right wing scum (Trump & Afrikaner Musk) that have taken over 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue recently. Theres no protesting with these people. They have a plan and us the supporters, our voices, opinions and issues are irrelevant to their end goal. They may give it / us lip service along the way but don’t be looking for owners that want to compete, Clearfake want only to invest and yield high returns as with all their portfolios assets. 

Changing topic slightly, I think the owners have got the strategy wrong in terms of buying players - they are buying them too young and raw. Under Roman, we bought players that were 21-24 who were just on the cusp of establishing themselves as quality players - I.e someone else did their develop and we bought them just entering their peak. 
 

We have track record of developing players, elite clubs are generally poor at developing players because of the pressure. 
 

 

Just a clarification. If you think that our owners are in it for revenue, you are wrong. They are utimately not interested in the operational revenue of the club (i.e they are not skimming off transfer profit or money from the sale of club assets) but in increasing the overall wealth of the club. Ultimately, they want to sell the club they bought for ~4bn for around ~10bn in a few years time.

Inflated purchases add to the book value of the club. For example when Mudryk was acquired he was an instant $65m asset; on paper, the club's value went up by $65m when he was signed. That's $65m more for Boehly/Clearlake to borrow against from their financiers and $65m they can claim to their paper wealth, to invest on other things. He is probably worthless now but on paper, he still has an FFP value that has added to the 'wealth value' of the club.

The problem with this approach (apart from it being an immoral pyramid scheme) is that footballing success is only tangentially related to wealth creation and growth. It is the fastest and most sure-fire way to achieve growth, but as Man United have shown under the Glazers it is not the only way and commercial "reform" (i.e bleeding the club and fans) is also effective. They don't need to be successful on the pitch to achieve their aims if they can increase revenue from fans and broadcasting.

15 hours ago, General said:

 Apologies in advance for offending anyone on here but they are cut from the same cloth as the right wing scum (Trump & Afrikaner Musk) that have taken over 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue recently. Theres no protesting with these people. They have a plan and us the supporters, our voices, opinions and issues are irrelevant to their end goal. They may give it / us lip service along the way but don’t be looking for owners that want to compete, Clearfake want only to invest and yield high returns as with all their portfolios assets. 

Well, bit of a ridiculous comparison, as Trump was ‘voted’ in, by a large majority. We had no vote, the vote was for Roman, but our left wing government said no. 

Putin even said himself if Trump had been president during that period, the war could have been avoided and Roman may have never been sanctioned in the first place. 

48 minutes ago, Term_X said:

Well, bit of a ridiculous comparison, as Trump was ‘voted’ in, by a large majority. We had no vote, the vote was for Roman, but our left wing government said no. 

Putin even said himself if Trump had been president during that period, the war could have been avoided and Roman may have never been sanctioned in the first place. 

Absolutely spot on, it was a labour MP who first put forward the idea to sanction Roman, he has since been cleared BUT there is no chance in hell this LEFT WING government will allow Roman anywhere near this country let alone Stamford Bridge 

22 hours ago, The Rising Sun said:

We know the owners aren't going anywhere because of fan protests. BUT they and everyone else need to know the strength of our feelings over how they absolutely ruined our club. They need to abandon the plan which is absolutely the wrong plan for Chelsea. It's ok for a Brighton, where, with no disrespect, there is no pressure to be a regular top 4 club, competing for titles and cups every single season. 

We cannot meekly accept what we've got now just in case the alternative might be worse..

We cannot meekly accept it because the owners won't care about our protests. 

They need to understand that although they bought our club, every Chelsea fan regards it as OUR club.

Come on you BLUES !. 

 

BRIGHTON HAVE NEVER WON ANYTHING 

 

Makes a good point. 

Clearlake are all PR, and if they can't control the narrative (IE things aren't as good as it seems given the massive fan protest/outrage) then they might panic.