24 minutes ago, timetowaste said:

Says more about our fans than him to be honest. The amount of toxicity at the minute is a joke it's no wonder the players prefer playing away from home, with fans like ours who needs rivals.

Its embarrassing isnt it, I always knew our "fans" would lose there minds once we werent the richest club because of Roman, but I never thought it would be as pathetic as this.

24 minutes ago, dkw said:

Do we, name them.

https://www.premierleague.com/clubs/4/Chelsea/squad?se=719

 

Not sure how accurate or up to date this is. It will surely be stripped back before the season starts or the window closes.

2 minutes ago, WhiteWall said:

https://www.premierleague.com/clubs/4/Chelsea/squad?se=719

 

Not sure how accurate or up to date this is. It will surely be stripped back before the season starts or the window closes.

Half of them are academy players, its basically the full squad submitted including under 21`s etc. 

23 minutes ago, dkw said:

Its embarrassing isnt it, I always knew our "fans" would lose there minds once we werent the richest club because of Roman, but I never thought it would be as pathetic as this.

Fans like @Zeta who say they won't watch an illegal stream anymore or match going fans who have seen heart ripped out of the club who turned up when we were under sanctions. If you don't go to Chelsea or don't know anyone who does I'm sorry but an online forum is not the place to make judgements on how Chelsea fans feel. 

The modern football fan talks the talk but doesn't walk the walk if you want the epitome of a Chelsea fan look no further than Cathy who has missed something like 2 Chelsea games iin 40 years and I mean every game pre season friendlies, Simod Cup games in front of 3,000 she's in the States at the moment they are the sort of people who count not an internet fan who can't accept that Chelsea aren't dominating football.

I always work under the criteria that a fan is someone who follows a club. But the truest fans of all, actually go to games, this makes them supporters, as in they do physically support the club. I myself have been a fan for 55 years. Due to circumstances and finances, i have only been to one game, and also once done the stadium tour. I would have loved to be in the position to see most games live, but it simply has never been an option for me.

So to my thinking, the hierarchy is supporters first, fans second.

1 hour ago, timetowaste said:

Says more about our fans than him to be honest. The amount of toxicity at the minute is a joke it's no wonder the players prefer playing away from home, with fans like ours who needs rivals.

It remains to be seen how Maresca works out but surely one could understand fan frustration if he fails after the two years we've endured? In many ways he's a mirror-image of the first major decision these owners made (sacking Tuchel, appointing Potter on a hefty contract) and if he also proceeds to fail like Potter did then neither the owners or directors have any excuse in my opinion.

I have some hope it will work out for us this season but its clear we are going to have to improve a whole lot in a short amount of time for that to happen. If we continue to look as we've done in pre-season then we are going to be in for a rough time in a couple of weeks and we'll likely lose our opening two games v City and Wolves. And then the pressure is on right away, that's just the nature of the game.

2 hours ago, dkw said:

Do we, name them.

That could be a Christmas party game...I can name 30...I can name 34...name them!

17 hours ago, Zeta said:

I've never felt this uninterested in a new season. These owners have totally ruined supporting the club for me. I'll watch us get humiliated by City on the opening day, but that might be it.

You are a season behind me I was in this position from the beginning of last season. I no longer go out of my way to watch our matches if it’s not on Sky or TNT sports which I have.

I usually try to find a stream for 3pm kick offs but not anymore.

23 hours ago, g3.7 said:

Remember these guys came in and said of a club that had just won the champions league and the world club Cup "Chelsea were not well run on the football or business side". 

We've hired a coach who may or may not be good, but like lamps, he is a relative novice. What's for sure is that the decisions taken by those above him will make his job harder rather than easier. 

 

 

These are the parts that stick out for me too. It is the message they convey to fans, the media and presumably to investors too. The same issues from the worst of Abramovich's ownership - incoherent recruitment, no shared vision with managers, disengagement with the academy - are all valid criticisms of Clearlake's ownership, except without any success to offset it.

In truth Maresca is dealing with the same lack of support that ultimately beset many managers under Abramovich, except he hasn't even finished pre-season yet. 

Despite the wishy-washy startup speak it seems to me the owners ultimately want the manager to focus solely on coaching and to leave the off-the-field stuff to them. Some irony, then, that the first manager they sacked is the one manager in football who craves exactly that.

Edited August 8, 20241 yr by SydneyChelsea

2 hours ago, dkw said:

Its embarrassing isnt it, I always knew our "fans" would lose there minds once we werent the richest club because of Roman, but I never thought it would be as pathetic as this.

In truth this toxicity has always been there. Grant, Scolari, Villas-Boas come to mind but none so much as what happened in 2012-13 and during Sarri, where toxic attitudes towards managers and the ownership were in full display.

16 hours ago, gurru991 said:

I realize that doing pre-season is a money maker but with so many games & so much travel I don't think it helps a  manager bring in a new system.

especially with the level of opposition too. 

Why the f**k are we playing Real Madrid and Man City when we're dog sh*t and learning a new system. We need to build a bit of confidence, not just chase a ball for 90 minutes. 

3 hours ago, bluehaze said:

Fans like @Zeta who say they won't watch an illegal stream anymore or match going fans who have seen heart ripped out of the club who turned up when we were under sanctions. If you don't go to Chelsea or don't know anyone who does I'm sorry but an online forum is not the place to make judgements on how Chelsea fans feel. 

The modern football fan talks the talk but doesn't walk the walk if you want the epitome of a Chelsea fan look no further than Cathy who has missed something like 2 Chelsea games iin 40 years and I mean every game pre season friendlies, Simod Cup games in front of 3,000 she's in the States at the moment they are the sort of people who count not an internet fan who can't accept that Chelsea aren't dominating football.

Fair play to Cathy and others like her. I've come across her and follow her on Twitter and she is certainly a "super-fan". Can only imagine how much she has spent following CFC over the years - would probably buy us a decent stiker!

But as much as I admire her and supporters like her, I find it almost a little bit sad as much as it is commendable. You have to think that they have very little else going on in their life and that following their team IS their life. The majority of us have busy lives outside of CFC which means we can't attend anything like the number of games the likes of Cathy has, but it  doesn't make others any less a supporter. We all still hurt just as much with every defeat and poor performance.

 

26 minutes ago, Nibs said:

Fair play to Cathy and others like her. I've come across her and follow her on Twitter and she is certainly a "super-fan". Can only imagine how much she has spent following CFC over the years - would probably buy us a decent stiker!

But as much as I admire her and supporters like her, I find it almost a little bit sad as much as it is commendable. You have to think that they have very little else going on in their life and that following their team IS their life. The majority of us have busy lives outside of CFC which means we can't attend anything like the number of games the likes of Cathy has, but it  doesn't make others any less a supporter. We all still hurt just as much with every defeat and poor performance.

 

Why would you feel sorry for her you don't know her, she's married to a bloke called Bob a well known Chelsea fan as well she has a steady job I don't know if she has any kids is respected by all Chelsea fans who know her and beyond I hope that puts your mind at rest. Define supporter, fan, follower it doesn't make you a better person to go to Chelsea regularly  but it does make you a better fan if you spend your money in a cost of living crisis following whatever team you support rather then sniping from the sidelines especially someone like @Zeta who started supporting Chelsea in his mid 20's and although he will deny it said he would have no problem betting against Chelsea and has done it several times.

4 hours ago, dkw said:

Half of them are academy players, its basically the full squad submitted including under 21`s etc. 

They're all generational talents apparently. Lol

5 hours ago, timetowaste said:

Says more about our fans than him to be honest. The amount of toxicity at the minute is a joke it's no wonder the players prefer playing away from home, with fans like ours who needs rivals.

It's kinda understandable though. Majority of our fanbase have only seen the successful era of Chelsea and anything less is a failure. I understand it's not entirely the fault of the players and it is something that Clownlake should have anticipated if they failed to challenge for the title. Things just seem worse because not only did they just fail, they failed spectacularly. And the fans are reacting with as much vigour and venom as that of their failure. It's just basic human nature... you'll always have more toxic fans than reasonable ones if we continue on this path of destruction year on year.

I just take solace in the fact that ManU fans are going to get more toxic than us when ETH takes them down the drain again this year (hopefully). 😄

26 minutes ago, bluehaze said:

Why would you feel sorry for her you don't know her, she's married to a bloke called Bob a well known Chelsea fan as well she has a steady job I don't know if she has any kids is respected by all Chelsea fans who know her and beyond I hope that puts your mind at rest. Define supporter, fan, follower it doesn't make you a better person to go to Chelsea regularly  but it does make you a better fan if you spend your money in a cost of living crisis following whatever team you support rather then sniping from the sidelines especially someone like @Zeta who started supporting Chelsea in his mid 20's and although he will deny it said he would have no problem betting against Chelsea and has done it several times.

Didn't need my mind putting at rest thanks!

We're all different. Many of us, like myself, went to games regularly in our teens / early 20's. Would juggle playing football on Saturdays with watching CFC, then knocked playing Saturday's on the head and just played for a Sunday team so I could follow CFC more. Then marriage, mortgages, kids, work all get in the way, so you attend when you can. Still carried on attending when I could, but for me, I found attending games less and less enjoyable, 'cos of the lack of atmosphere and all seater stadiums, despite more success on the pitch.

I do applaud ALL supporters who follow their teams home and away through thick and thin and I know a couple of Norwich fans who go to all of their matches but they are both single guys with no kids and not a lot else going on in their life so it helps fill the void. I get what you're saying about those who NEVER attend games and who snipe at everything and don't know how anyone could bet against CFC - not something I could ever do.

 

3 hours ago, SydneyChelsea said:

Some irony, then, that the first manager they sacked is the one manager in football who craves exactly that.

And the funny thing is they used him not wanting to be collaborative as the reason for the sack, yet we have seen anything but a collaborative approach with how they have gone about player recruitment and retention with all other managers subsequently. 

Potter's squad was over spilling from dressing room to corridors of players he never requested.

Poch had instructions on who to play and who was going to be sold against his wishes. Probably a factor in his exit.

Now the new man, the epitome of a yes man and a liar in a position he couldn't have fathomed is making all the noises to support all they have done and are wanting in terms of players acquisition and sales because, it wasn't the case and you are a true manager that knows what he is doing, you would find someone from the backline to drop to accommodate Chalobah on your pre-season tour. If you can come out and say he is worse than the dross you took you are a liar. But it gets worse, blame the ex manager for the fact that you can't set up a defensive line.

I've not said anything since he was employed but over the past few weeks I can see the type of man he is and I've been pushed to the edge to express how I'm now feeling. 

I'm a tantrum or dramatic fan according to some because I call bull for what it is. Oh well, let's just stay silent as we watch our Chelsea slide into being their Chelsea. Maybe an efficiently run team in time, but now and always focussed on the bottom line and extracting any and all financial value for shareholders in future for years to come.

2 hours ago, bluehaze said:

rather then sniping from the sidelines especially someone like @Zeta who started supporting Chelsea in his mid 20's and although he will deny it said he would have no problem betting against Chelsea and has done it several times.

What he does, is not and shouldn't be your business. Are you the fan police now? As long as he's expressing himself on a forum and not going to stadium to boo Chelsea players and managers, he is ok. Stay in your lane rather than sniping at what he does. If he sees his team offers him a way to put some Lizzies in his pocket, fair enough. Some won't cross that line. I get really emotionally invested and have tried to hedge my emotions every now and then in big games by betting against Chelsea. Not for financial reasons, I reiterate just an emotional hedge for if the game goes against us. I never want them to lose so I win my bet, but I'm strategic with my emotions.

The way I see it, Maresca shouldn't pay the price for the mismanagement of the club for the last few years. Everyone, in their own way, is right to feel however they want to feel about what’s going on at the moment. Whether you go to every game, never been to a game, or go here and there, of course you have a right to an opinion. You have a right to voice that opinion. 

However, I think criticism of Maresca needs to be contextualised and any early season 'toxicity' should be very clearly directed at the board and above if it is going to take place. Any that is aimed at the manager is only going to let them off the hook. If it gets to that point, the players, manager, media and the owners themselves need to be in no doubt over who people are pissed off at. I think it would be unreasonable to expect Maresca to hit the ground running and I think that would be the general consensus if we hadn't had the few years that we have. 

Sure, if anything transpires that you have a direct issue with Maresca about, do what you want. But its pointless to redirect frustrations at him when its only going to give the board an out and another opportunity to bring in the next failure. 

I see lot's of frustration from the fans but no "sack Enzo" poll yet

6 minutes ago, alvarezCFC said:

I see lot's of frustration from the fans but no "sack Enzo" poll yet

Our friend and colleague @POCH OUT is only four keystrokes away from something similar.

1 hour ago, Niall1905 said:

The way I see it, Maresca shouldn't pay the price for the mismanagement of the club for the last few years. Everyone, in their own way, is right to feel however they want to feel about what’s going on at the moment. Whether you go to every game, never been to a game, or go here and there, of course you have a right to an opinion. You have a right to voice that opinion. 

However, I think criticism of Maresca needs to be contextualised and any early season 'toxicity' should be very clearly directed at the board and above if it is going to take place. Any that is aimed at the manager is only going to let them off the hook. If it gets to that point, the players, manager, media and the owners themselves need to be in no doubt over who people are pissed off at. I think it would be unreasonable to expect Maresca to hit the ground running and I think that would be the general consensus if we hadn't had the few years that we have. 

Sure, if anything transpires that you have a direct issue with Maresca about, do what you want. But its pointless to redirect frustrations at him when its only going to give the board an out and another opportunity to bring in the next failure. 

Agreed. Maresca should be given some time and patience. Under Poch we got off to a slow start last season, even after a promising pre-season. I also agree that the transfer dealings at the board level deserve some scrutiny. The danger is that any protests or anger from the crowd, even if directed at the board, could also adversely affect the team and therefore Maresca's chances.

9 hours ago, WhiteWall said:

https://www.premierleague.com/clubs/4/Chelsea/squad?se=719

 

Not sure how accurate or up to date this is. It will surely be stripped back before the season starts or the window closes.

I don't really know where to put this comment but seeing this has reminded me of the international loans limit. 

We are allowed 6 I believe as it was recently reduced. I also believe those under 21 have to be club trained too for it not to count towards the 6 which is why we had to cancel Moreira's loan before we could send out Santos. 

We have already taken up 2 spots with Santos and this Argentina CB we signed that's staying at Boca. We still have the likes of Kepa, Lukaku, Casesdi, Angelo, Washington, Guiu, Soloina, Moreira, Lesley, Petrovic, Wiley, the Belgium GK who's name I forgot and Kellyman. Not forgetting you also have the other academy lads like Anjorn, Geroge,  Humpreys, Vale, Tauriaine, etc to go. If I've forgotten anyone I apologise. 

From that list alone, 4 spots are most likely gone already in Santos, Argentina CB guy, Soloina and the Belgium GK guy. No one is for Lukaku or Kepa so there's most likely another 2 gone which takes us up to 6. 

The problem here is some of these highly rated expensive signings are gonna have to put in a shift in the championship which isn't ideal and below their level if they really are as good as expected. 

9 hours ago, dkw said:

Half of them are academy players, its basically the full squad submitted including under 21`s etc. 

Men's Profiles | Team | Official Site | Chelsea Football Club (chelseafc.com)

This is more accurate.

Not many players that will be included in the under 21's here. 

Goalkeepers = Sanchez, Jorgenssen, Bettinelli and maybe Beach for backup.

That means we need to get rid of Kepa, Petrovic and Bergstrom.

Defenders = Disasi, Cucurella, Tosin, Badiashile, Colwill, Chilwell, James, Gusto, Fofana, Humphreys, Anselmino (just signed, not added to the club website yet)

We're (stupidly) looking to sell Chalobah. Acheampong will probably stick around with the youth team. Wiley, loan? maybe.

Midfielders = Enzo, Ugochukwu, Chukwuemeka, Dewsbury-Hall, Caicedo, Veiga, Lavia, Palmer.

Need to sell Anjorin. Casadei and Kellyman sent out on loan.

Wingers = Sterling, Mudryk, Madueke, George, Nkunku (not sure where he will play yet)

Angelo, probably a loan. 

Strikers = Jackson, Omorodion, Guiu.

Lukaku (desperately) needs to be sold. Looking to sell Broja and Fofana. Washington, loan.

I've managed to get the squad down to 31 players and there are players not included on the club website like Moreira, Matos, Burstow and Slonina.

 

I think that is 48 players in total, and 17 need to be sold or loaned out in a month..........it's messy, very messy.

 

17 minutes ago, Remodez said:

I don't really know where to put this comment but seeing this has reminded me of the international loans limit. 

We are allowed 6 I believe as it was recently reduced. I also believe those under 21 have to be club trained too for it not to count towards the 6 which is why we had to cancel Moreira's loan before we could send out Santos. 

We have already taken up 2 spots with Santos and this Argentina CB we signed that's staying at Boca. We still have the likes of Kepa, Lukaku, Casesdi, Angelo, Washington, Guiu, Soloina, Moreira, Lesley, Petrovic, Wiley, the Belgium GK who's name I forgot and Kellyman. Not forgetting you also have the other academy lads like Anjorn, Geroge,  Humpreys, Vale, Tauriaine, etc to go. If I've forgotten anyone I apologise. 

From that list alone, 4 spots are most likely gone already in Santos, Argentina CB guy, Soloina and the Belgium GK guy. No one is for Lukaku or Kepa so there's most likely another 2 gone which takes us up to 6. 

The problem here is some of these highly rated expensive signings are gonna have to put in a shift in the championship which isn't ideal and below their level if they really are as good as expected. 

I read FIFA's rule changes and if players are under 21, or club trained, then they are exempt. So I believe that means a number of our potential loanees would not count towards the 6. That being said there are also maximums between 2 clubs to consider. We can only loan 3 out to Strasbourg I think.

So assuming my interpretation is correct, then so far only Petrovic would count towards the 6. Santos is 20 and would still be exempt. Moreira was recalled because of the max 3 in one club I suspect.

The loan caps will still be a challenge, and this will only increase in the years ahead.