5 minutes ago, bisright1 said:

Well have fun with the next 10 years as that will continue to be someone with no football experience. 

Same as at most clubs at this level.

Boehly have already given Tuchel the role of sporting director pretty much. Very competent move that may I add.

I wonder if the new owners will end up hiring a director of football. Liverpool have one I think, and apparently we are big fans of their model.

7 minutes ago, Sindre said:

Boehly have already given Tuchel the role of sporting director pretty much. Very competent move that may I add.

No he hasnt

5 minutes ago, axman2526 said:

I wonder if the new owners will end up hiring a director of football. Liverpool have one I think, and apparently we are big fans of their model.

Honestly i think they'd be mad not to keep cech unless ofc there's more to all this and they're all just romans goons regardless of who they are etc

Also a thing to think about if you're boehly is do you want romans people potentially snooping at what the Americans are doing? probably not!

Hopefully we dont do a united and sign the whole shop but it will be interesting to see what happens next, Marina is a billionaire, I'm sure she will be fine lol

10 minutes ago, axman2526 said:

I wonder if the new owners will end up hiring a director of football. Liverpool have one I think, and apparently we are big fans of their model.

Without a doubt. Cech is not qualified for that role and it shouldn't automatically be given to him because of sentimental value. 

It very much looks like from the outside in that Boehly and Clearlake are very unsatisfied/displeased with Marina's contract management and transfer handling the past several years, which correlated to the substantial financial losses on our books. 

Think her and Buck are the first of many to leave the club. 

Edited June 21, 20224 yr by Sconnie Blue

League finishes since Marina Granovskaia became chief executive in 2014:

13/14- 3rd*

14/15- 1st*

15/16- 10th*

16/17- 1st*

17/18- 5th

18/19- 3rd

19/20-4th

20/21- 4th

21/22- 3rd 

53 minutes ago, RIP Mourinho said:

You can keep peddaling this opinion that no one had heard of Pulisic, but that's on you. He absolutely was one of the best youngsters in Europe.

No one has suggested that Pulisic was unknown. That must be your psychosis talking.

He was known as the 16 year old American prospect that looked promising when he broke through, had massive hype back home but struggled massively in the senior game and was receiving constant criticism and articles asking what went wrong for him before we signed him.

It's just baffling how you could claim he was the best young player in Europe.  It's such a laughable claim to begin with but then when you take into account he was being benched by 2 much more talented and in Sancho's case a year younger teenagers it's just hilarious.

I do like how you've already climbed down to "one of the best youngsters in Europe now"  long way to go to get to were Pulisic was when we signed him.

When we signed Pulisic he was pretty much in an identical position to were CHO is now.

Looked promising as a 16 year old, didn't kick on, had some injuries, failed to establish himself in the team and doesn't generally perform when he does play.

1 hour ago, RIP Mourinho said:

Suppose we should have gone into the season with no new wingers after it was evident we were losing Hazard. Moan we don't plan for the future, moan when we do plan for the future. Moan we don't pay enough to get players, moan when we pay what clubs want to get our number one transfer target. 

Pulisic was a case of bad scouting and even worse negotiation.  We absolutely needed a young talented Winger.  Not a bench warmer that made Willian look prolific.

It's another in a long list of cases of Marina and her team of scouts identify the wrong players, and paying ridiculous fees for them.  Arguably the worst case.

9 minutes ago, SFL82 said:

League finishes since Marina Granovskaia became chief executive in 2014:

13/14- 3rd*

14/15- 1st*

15/16- 10th*

16/17- 1st*

17/18- 5th

18/19- 3rd

19/20-4th

20/21- 4th

21/22- 3rd 

Speaks for itself.

It's genuinely embarrassing how her stans will openly talk about how poor our recruitment and squad building has been during Marina's tenure and then twist themselves into knots to try to argue that as the person in charge she's done a good job and isn't responsible.

 

Edited June 21, 20224 yr by HazardousChoice

13 minutes ago, Sconnie Blue said:

Without a doubt. Cech is not qualified for that role and it shouldn't automatically be given to him because of sentimental value. 

It very much looks like from the outside in that Boehly and Clearlake are very unsatisfied/displeased with Marina's contract management and transfer handling the past several years, which correlated to the substantial financial losses on our books. 

Think her and Buck are the first of many to leave the club. 

Hmmm I personally think cech is perfect for that type of role tbh and its not about sentiment, However it really depends on how 'the todd' wants to set it up, looks like a clear out and if hes involved in buying players directly then we may not even need one as todd is on the board and also wants to be involved in all of it.

dof job is to be the link between the manager and the board but if 'the todd' wants to be all over all of it like brad pitt in money ball then it may well become a redundant position and I for one welcome it, At least we can blame the owners because they will be having a direct effect on the first teams etc

Confirmed we are after a sporting director. 

🗣 @Matt_Law_DT: “Chelsea will eventually appoint a Sporting Director. It will be very difficult to get anybody in for this window. Todd Boehly probably feels that, along with Tuchel & some supporting staff, they can get through this transfer window.”

🎧 https://t.co/i2XV4vpu4J pic.twitter.com/InZUffdWT5

— London Is Blue Podcast ⭐️⭐️ (@LondonBluePod) June 21, 2022

31 minutes ago, HazardousChoice said:

Speaks for itself.

It's genuinely embarrassing how her stans will openly talk about how poor our recruitment and squad building has been during Marina's tenure and then twist themselves into knots to try to argue that as the person in charge she's done a good job and isn't responsible.

 

top 4 almost every year and two league titles. Not to mention 2 major European trophies. Honestly, what more do you expect? This is the same time Klopp and Pep entered the league too. 

Posting memes too, you really are 15 years old aren't you?

40 minutes ago, HazardousChoice said:

No one has suggested that Pulisic was unknown. That must be your psychosis talking.

He was known as the 16 year old American prospect that looked promising when he broke through, had massive hype back home but struggled massively in the senior game and was receiving constant criticism and articles asking what went wrong for him before we signed him.

It's just baffling how you could claim he was the best young player in Europe.  It's such a laughable claim to begin with but then when you take into account he was being benched by 2 much more talented and in Sancho's case a year younger teenagers it's just hilarious.

I do like how you've already climbed down to "one of the best youngsters in Europe now"  long way to go to get to were Pulisic was when we signed him.

When we signed Pulisic he was pretty much in an identical position to were CHO is now.

Looked promising as a 16 year old, didn't kick on, had some injuries, failed to establish himself in the team and doesn't generally perform when he does play.

Pulisic was a case of bad scouting and even worse negotiation.  We absolutely needed a young talented Winger.  Not a bench warmer that made Willian look prolific.

It's another in a long list of cases of Marina and her team of scouts identify the wrong players, and paying ridiculous fees for them.  Arguably the worst case.

When Pulisic was ripping the league up under Lamps there was no complaints on here or anywhere. It's no shock that a player that is constantly injured has struggled to pick up form since. If anything, Scott McLachlan did a good job profiling him as the potential Hazard replacement as he so comfortably looked under Lamps in that first season. 9 league goals in 25 apps in a team so unbalanced. He's been much better than Sancho since arriving, this is why scouts are in jobs and not HazardourChoice, the 15 year old arm chair glory supporter that expects Chelsea to win the CL and league title every season.

30 minutes ago, RIP Mourinho said:

top 4 almost every year and two league titles. Not to mention 2 major European trophies. Honestly, what more do you expect? This is the same time Klopp and Pep entered the league too. 

Posting memes too, you really are 15 years old aren't you?

Just put the him on ignore, just another twatter user unable to accept his incredible knowledge of everything being questioned.

28 minutes ago, RIP Mourinho said:

When Pulisic was ripping the league up under Lamps there was no complaints on here or anywhere. It's no shock that a player that is constantly injured has struggled to pick up form since. If anything, Scott McLachlan did a good job profiling him as the potential Hazard replacement as he so comfortably looked under Lamps in that first season. 9 league goals in 25 apps in a team so unbalanced. He's been much better than Sancho since arriving, this is why scouts are in jobs and not HazardourChoice, the 15 year old arm chair glory supporter that expects Chelsea to win the CL and league title every season.

The first season in which Pulisic was absolutely awful pre lockdown? Having scored in 3 of our 29 games prior to lockdown all 3 coming within a 2 week period and having just 2 assists.

Imagine claiming a player looked a decent signing based on his 1 month purple patch in the most unusual period in football history and disregarding how poor he's looked during the rest of his 7 year club career in normal conditions 

Your standards are abysmally low but even for you "Scott Mclachlan did a good job profiling Pulisic as a Hazard replacement" is absolutely hilarious 😂 

The last sentence is simply your mental illness and imagination talking. Best left ignored.

Edited June 21, 20224 yr by HazardousChoice

1 hour ago, bisright1 said:

No he hasnt

Tuchel have already made the decision to let Lukaku go back to Italy. This according to The Telegraph. Granovskaia wanted to keep him but Tuchel's opinion trumped hers and in my opinion that's probably why she's heading for a quick exit here.

They also report that Tuchel have been given a lot more power and that Marina's role was drastically reduced right away. We will look to hire an actual sporting director at a later time but as of right now Boehly wants to deliver everything Tuchel would like.

So a very promising start from Boehly in my opinion. I predicted Marina would be one of the first out the door when he came in and that obviously did happen.

 

Edited June 21, 20224 yr by Sindre

Not wanting to get into the details of her role (and certainly do not condone these mental health-related remarks) but Scott does not deserve credit for this at all - if anybody should go, it should be him. Too many duds signed and/or huge £££ spent for a club of our size (I don't think Pulisic is a dud but he's not cut out for this level, IMO). Definitely need a DoF so it's good Law is saying that we're looking at one to hire 

From the article (take with a pinch of salt):

• Cech’s interview gives an idea of what him and Marina were hoping, trying to keep Lukaku & make it work. Boehly came in and told Tuchel it’s his call and they will do what Tuchel wants”

• Todd Boehly & Thomas Tuchel decided that sorting out the Romelu Lukaku situation early in the window was the priority over incoming transfer business

Might suggest they're looking to protect their finances vs Tuchel who wants to move on quickly to targets who will actually be effective (which would also make sense because there was an article last year about wanting to stick with Kepa before Mendy was signed). I'm glad Boehly seems to be strongly backing Tuchel because there's nobody else we can get to who'd be better

1 hour ago, Sconnie Blue said:

Confirmed we are after a sporting director. 

🗣 @Matt_Law_DT: “Chelsea will eventually appoint a Sporting Director. It will be very difficult to get anybody in for this window. Todd Boehly probably feels that, along with Tuchel & some supporting staff, they can get through this transfer window.”

🎧 https://t.co/i2XV4vpu4J pic.twitter.com/InZUffdWT5

— London Is Blue Podcast ⭐️⭐️ (@LondonBluePod) June 21, 2022

Yeah makes sense. Best to hold off on any expensive signings until we have someone who knows what they are doing.

33 minutes ago, axman2526 said:

Yeah makes sense. Best to hold off on any expensive signings until we have someone who knows what they are doing.

Boehly is fully involved with buying players and then theyre bringing in someone to take up the role at a later date

Boehly will probably then take a backseat and direct it all, Wonder how much time and what not tod can have over here, I assume he has an endless visa like the rest of the world apart from the Russians?! Although he probably will have to split his time etc

Edited June 21, 20224 yr by Kantesmini

1 hour ago, HazardousChoice said:

The first season in which Pulisic was absolutely awful pre lockdown? Having scored in 3 of our 29 games prior to lockdown all 3 coming within a 2 week period and having just 2 assists.

Imagine claiming a player looked a decent signing based on his 1 month purple patch in the most unusual period in football history and disregarding how poor he's looked during the rest of his 7 year club career in normal conditions 

Your standards are abysmally low but even for you "Scott Mclachlan did a good job profiling Pulisic as a Hazard replacement" is absolutely hilarious 😂 

The last sentence is simply your mental illness and imagination talking. Best left ignored.

Liverpool just spent £85m based on a players purple patch in a shocking league, not seen you moaning about that anywhere, or is that a good signing because a woman didn’t negotiate it? Please go back to your football twitter account and leave this forum for actual fans, not someone that started watching chelsea on tv after we started winning things. 

Wishing Marina the best of luck. Thank you for telling Roman to keep King Didier Drogba 

20 minutes ago, RIP Mourinho said:

Liverpool just spent £85m based on a players purple patch in a shocking league, not seen you moaning about that anywhere, or is that a good signing because a woman didn’t negotiate it? Please go back to your football twitter account and leave this forum for actual fans, not someone that started watching chelsea on tv after we started winning things. 

Why would anyone complain about their rivals make a signing?

Come on mate use your brain cell for once.

And given the concerning number of comments about how you want to talk to 15 year olds and help them with their school work you probably should be getting some treatment rather than using any form of forum or online communication unsupervised.

It's really weird how this guy can't go one post without emphasising how Marina is a woman or talking about kids.  Really f**king weird.

Edited June 21, 20224 yr by HazardousChoice

13 hours ago, Valerie said:

Whenever someone says a bench player can't be any good because he's not a regular starter, I'm reminded of Kova.

The point still stands Modric and Kroos were the better players and would have been better than Kovacic.

Like Iniesta and Xavi were better than Fabregas.

Just because a bench warmer is OK doesn't mean we should get him.

Edited June 21, 20224 yr by Whiskyjack

13 hours ago, dkw said:

Do you have evidence to support this? I think your completely wrong on both parts and have no idea how you could think that.

This is a pointless argument, you don't have evidence that she doesn't either.  I'll have to agree to disagree with you.  Marina having this power from being the most stable authoritative figure at the club as coaches move on at an almost yearly basis tells me she has that power at the club.  You don't have to believe me.

6 hours ago, Whiskyjack said:

The point still stands Modric and Kroos were the better players and would have been better than Kovacic.

Like Iniesta and Xavi were better than Fabregas.

Just because a bench warmer is OK doesn't mean we should get him.

My point was the opposite: just because a player is on the bench, doesn't mean we should automatically assume he "isn't good enough for Chelsea".

Edited June 22, 20224 yr by Valerie

55 minutes ago, Valerie said:

My point was the opposite: just because a player is on the bench, doesn't mean we should automatically assume he "isn't good enough for Chelsea".

Inter got arguably the best player in the world in 2010 from reals bench in the form of snjieder. Bayern Munich picked up robben who was benched and he was ridiculous for them. They were happy to let makalele go to us as well. It has happened where the bench has hidden gems