Saw some speculation on the BBC site I didn't quite agree with regarding fans' opinions of Winstanley and Stewart, our two long-standing sporting directors. I thought it may be worth throwing a poll together to see what from the most reputable/popular/disreputable Chelsea forum on the internet thinks.

This is an overall evaluation: how well do you think Winstanley and Stewart have done since they started at Chelsea in November 2022 and February 2023 respectively?

See here for a list of all outgoing and incoming transfers.

Not every signing has been terrible, but given the money spent, their performance overall has been woeful.

Good signings: Caicedo, Palmer, Estaveo

That's it. I can't think of anyone else.

There's a few who I think are a lot better than we've seen so far because of Maresca, like Hato, he was one of the most promising young LBs and he played him a few games at CB and then binned him. But 90%+ are garbage.

Without any visibility of their objectives, it's hard to say ... they got huge contract extensions so they are obviously doing exactly what the owners want and doing it very well ... so in that sense their execution is on point.

Against any normal and sensible footballing objectives though, it's a train wreck. Question is, how would they be doing if they had objectives that made any sense for a club that prioritised football success ? I'm not sure either of them has any CV history to suggest they'd be any good at that.

Anyway, bottom line I'm going with Poor rather than Utter f**king sh*te LOL

To be honest I don't think they're that much worse than what we had before Boehly came in

I still remember the transfer window after winning the league where we spent 200m+ on Bakayoko, Drinkwater, Morata, Zappacosta, Emerson and Ross Barkley

Truth is our recruitment has been a shambles ever since Emenalo left

Edited January 1Jan 1 by Drogba1

“Performance” suggests that some effort was put in. When did that happen?

56 minutes ago, Sexyfootball said:

Without any visibility of their objectives, it's hard to say ... they got huge contract extensions so they are obviously doing exactly what the owners want and doing it very well ... so in that sense their execution is on point.

Against any normal and sensible footballing objectives though, it's a train wreck. Question is, how would they be doing if they had objectives that made any sense for a club that prioritised football success ? I'm not sure either of them has any CV history to suggest they'd be any good at that.

Anyway, bottom line I'm going with Poor rather than Utter f**king sh*te LOL

I agree with this and would add that when players are sold, disposed of, ushered out with a bag over their heads. Their buy and sell performance will likely come home to roost and we could move them from poor to the rather aptly titled utter f**king sh*te category.

Utter disgrace

Some good signings, alot of really poor signings.

Is it the SD's or owners that have put the wage cap and age restrictions on?

Hard to know who to blame for what. Eghbali seems to be very involved, is he the one driving all this?

Osimhen, Olise, Hujsen, Neves, Cherki, Barcola, Ekitike, Woltemade, Hincapie, Wirtz, Bellingham, Doue, Donnarumma, Pacho, Kvaraskhelia, Pacho, Alvarez, Guler, Garcia, Gravenberch, Mastantuono, Tonali, Isak.

All those players are or were 25 under and have moved to other clubs in the time frame that these sporting directors have been in charge.

So when the whole model is suppose to buying the best young talent in the world, it doesnt seem to be quite hitting the brief, if it was then another 4/5 of these players would be in the squad.

1 hour ago, Drogba1 said:

To be honest I don't think they're that much worse than what we had before Boehly came in

I still remember the transfer window after winning the league where we spent 200m+ on Bakayoko, Drinkwater, Morata, Zappacosta, Emerson and Ross Barkley

Truth is our recruitment has been a shambles ever since Emenalo left

We need another Emenalo. People didn't like him back in the day for whatever reason.

20 minutes ago, Frankie8Lampard said:

We need another Emenalo. People didn't like him back in the day for whatever reason.

I think there were genuine reasons but he did far more good than bad. He made our academy a force and established the loan army which kept the club afloat during the Roman years.

23 minutes ago, Frankie8Lampard said:

We need another Emenalo. People didn't like him back in the day for whatever reason.

I think people blamed him for the Mourinho sacking for some reason

2 minutes ago, Sconnie Blue said:

I think there were genuine reasons but he did far more good than bad. He made our academy a force and established the loan army which kept the club afloat during the Roman years.

I never hated Emenalo, but I always hated that he was sat behind the manager watching like a hawk. I always got the impression that he was trying to influence how the manager managed the squad.

4 minutes ago, Drogba1 said:

I think people blamed him for the Mourinho sacking for some reason

Yes that was the start of all the classless behaviour when we've sacked people ... using all the "the individual" nonsense in that interview rather than his name. That was petty, un-necessary and frankly insulting to someone who at the time had a good claim to be our greatest ever manager.

20 minutes ago, Drogba1 said:

I think people blamed him for the Mourinho sacking for some reason

They blamed him for that disaster 2015/16 window which led to Mourinho’s sacking.

43 minutes ago, big blue said:

Some good signings, alot of really poor signings.

Is it the SD's or owners that have put the wage cap and age restrictions on?

Hard to know who to blame for what. Eghbali seems to be very involved, is he the one driving all this?

Osimhen, Olise, Hujsen, Neves, Cherki, Barcola, Ekitike, Woltemade, Hincapie, Wirtz, Bellingham, Doue, Donnarumma, Pacho, Kvaraskhelia, Pacho, Alvarez, Guler, Garcia, Gravenberch, Mastantuono, Tonali, Isak.

All those players are or were 25 under and have moved to other clubs in the time frame that these sporting directors have been in charge.

So when the whole model is suppose to buying the best young talent in the world, it doesnt seem to be quite hitting the brief, if it was then another 4/5 of these players would be in the squad.

Olise and Huijsen would have been here if not for competitor interest. Likely Raphinha, Barcola, Doue, Hakimi as well. I think the only real miss there is Ekitike.

Estevao, Palmer, Caicedo, Lavia, Santos are all great buys imo (playing time/injuries aside). I think Penders, Essugo and Hato will turn out good as well. And I really don't mind Neto, Gusto, and Joao Pedro. Still some gaping holes though.

1 minute ago, venom2011 said:

Olise and Huijsen would have been here if not for competitor interest. Likely Raphinha, Barcola, Doue, Hakimi as well. I think the only real miss there is Ekitike.

Estevao, Palmer, Caicedo, Lavia, Santos are all great buys imo (playing time/injuries aside). I think Penders, Essugo and Hato will turn out good as well. And I really don't mind Neto, Gusto, and Joao Pedro. Still some gaping holes though.

Olise would have been here if they didn't piss off Crystal Palace to the point where they threatened to report us if we followed through with our attempts to sign him.

Palmer, Caicedo and Estevao are great buys and the only ones we can confidently say are great. The others are either sh*t, crippled, too soon to know for sure, or mid. They have signed about 50 players, it's absurd that they have only signed 3 that we can confidently say are good. Even then, Palmer was a last minute stab in the dark once in a generation type of signing and Caicedo cost us an obscene amount of money.

2 hours ago, venom2011 said:

Olise and Huijsen would have been here if not for competitor interest. Likely Raphinha, Barcola, Doue, Hakimi as well. I think the only real miss there is Ekitike.

Estevao, Palmer, Caicedo, Lavia, Santos are all great buys imo (playing time/injuries aside). I think Penders, Essugo and Hato will turn out good as well. And I really don't mind Neto, Gusto, and Joao Pedro. Still some gaping holes though.

They didnt buy Santos.

Essugo is back up squad player.

Hato has good potential.

Penders not even been in a Chelsea kit yet.

Point is, when you brief that this project is about buying the worlds best young talent, you then spend hundreds of millions, only to miss out on so many top young players, and the team you are left with looks as far away from a title, as the one you inherited, surely that has be a massive failure?

2 minutes ago, big blue said:

They didnt buy Santos.

Santos was bought in the first winter window under BlueCo - same one as Mudryk, Fernandez, Gusto, Badiashile and Madueke.

3 hours ago, Frankie8Lampard said:

We need another Emenalo. People didn't like him back in the day for whatever reason.

With Emanalo, it was very low risk/high reward strategy, the only issue with that, was we didnt get the prime of salah and de bruyne, due to mourinho having a win now at all costs mentality. Some longer term thinking in 2014-2016 and we wouldve won probably another 10 trophies.

What we have now is high risk/low reward when we signing raw players with potential for a premium like Mudryk and Gittens, if they dont succeed we either wait 4/5 years for them to peak, by which time the footballimg world will no dkubt have moved on, or we have to get creative to get themout the door within a couple of seasons.

2 minutes ago, Sexyfootball said:

Santos was bought in the first winter window under BlueCo - same one as Mudryk, Fernandez, Gusto, Badiashile and Madueke.

Santos bought by boehly in the 1st summer window with Chukwuemeka.

3 minutes ago, big blue said:

Santos bought by boehly in the 1st summer window with Chukwuemeka.

Young Brazilian midfielder Santos joins Chelsea

Dated 07 Jan 23

3 minutes ago, big blue said:

Santos bought by boehly in the 1st summer window with Chukwuemeka.

Just checked tbat and your right he signed in January. So they can have credit for that one.

30 minutes ago, big blue said:

They didnt buy Santos.

Essugo is back up squad player.

Hato has good potential.

Penders not even been in a Chelsea kit yet.

Point is, when you brief that this project is about buying the worlds best young talent, you then spend hundreds of millions, only to miss out on so many top young players, and the team you are left with looks as far away from a title, as the one you inherited, surely that has be a massive failure?

Their current status is irrelevant. They are good buys based on their quality, potential and cost. Also, that supposed brief is not accurate and I'm saying that as someone without any loyalty to the ownership group. You cannot sign the very best young talents with the wage structure we have. You're also competing against the biggest clubs in the world as all squads swing towards younger demos. The model greatly intrigued me because of the potential to compete without having the revenue streams of Man Utd, Liverpool etc. But whether they could build a Brighton 2.0 that could challenge for top honours was the big question.

I'd also argue this team is a fair bit closer to the title than the one they inherited. We have 4 players who are world class - I'd actually argue 5 if Lavia could stay fit - and a couple who could join them with the right development and some luck. The 2022 squad was dire.

Edited January 1Jan 1 by venom2011