[Archived] Chelsea's Success

[BrianPotter]

With the resources available to them and the amount of money that they have spent I don't think they've done anything to get over excited about.

Two PL titles is a good acheivement don't get me wrong, but they've not done a lot else really, and considering they have a bottomless pit of cash (and have been spending it) I think that dominance in europe has got to be what they're judged on as well.

Also, its my view that a contribution to their winning the PL is the fact there aren't any other exceptional sides in the PL at present. Maybe if United and Arsenal were what they were a few years back then Chelsea would no find it so comfortable.

[pleasure]

With the resources available to them and the amount of money that they have spent I don't think they've done anything to get over excited about.

Two PL titles is a good acheivement don't get me wrong, but they've not done a lot else really, and considering they have a bottomless pit of cash (and have been spending it) I think that dominance in europe has got to be what they're judged on as well.

Also, its my view that a contribution to their winning the PL is the fact there aren't any other exceptional sides in the PL at present. Maybe if United and Arsenal were what they were a few years back then Chelsea would no find it so comfortable.

401604[/snapback]

agree. the title race will be a lot closer next year.

bundles of cash helps, but you still need to buy the right players, be a great man manager, rotation etc....

it brings its own problems- pressure from media, fans and the players that arent getting picked.

you cannot buy success, particularly in europe. look at inter milan and the millions they've spent (in search of an iluusve scudetto) and barca- 1 european cup in their history!

[Rover4ever]

However Chelsea have had 2 seasons where practically nothing has gone wrong for them in terms of bad luck or injury. How many consecutive games has Lampard played?

401563[/snapback]

On the other hand Man Utd and Arsenal have been incredibly unlucky with injuries. I would really like to see Chelsea play a few games without Terry, Lampard, Makalele and Gallas, which is pretty much what Manure and Arsenal had to face this season and last.

As much as i hate Arsenal and Man Utd, i respect them to a certain extent.

On the other hand i have no respect for Chelsea not because of their success, but because of their manager. I liked them under Ranieri and i wont hate them under someone like Jol or Benitez. But Mourinho and his claims that Barcelona are not better than Chelsea or that they deserve to win each and every game make me hate them

[ihtd]

It could be closer next year depending on who Chelski buy.

Jose has said he wants a defender, a midfielder and a striker. Now we know he doesn't always buy the biggest names for the positions he wants filling but just think about it, if he buys Nesta, Joaquin and Adriano or Shevchenko do you really think its going to be closer next season. I think not. Money is no object to Roman as his fortune has increasd over the last year due to the increase in the cost of oil.

Then again it also depends on who Manure and Liverpool sign, if they sign well they both stand a chance to challenge for the title.

[Billy Castell]

It is easy to waste a sh_tload of money if you have it. Just look at Woy Hodgson during his spell here.

[joey_big_nose]

I'm not sure I agree with that, I think that Hughes has been very positive for our image.  Once we were able to get away from the robust style of play that was needed to ensure our surival last year (largely a legacy of the end of the Souness era), he has done well for us by coming across as being knowledgable and level-headed.  As long as he doesn't start to disappear up his own backside, he will hopefully continue to do so.

401548[/snapback]

Well my point is that he can be very abrasive to reporters and the media (not saying they don't deserve it!), and gets worked up in a Fergie-esque fashion on the touchline.

Obviously it's good to see the passion and all that, and I wouldn't want him to change it. But mark my words, three years down the line he will be stubbornly refusing to attribute any blame about anything to any of his own players, bemoaning refereeing decisions etc etc.

But it seems to happen to every manager after a while I suppose. Wenger used to be the epitomy of the gentleman coach, now just seeing his evil wrinkly face makes me want to blow up my TV. Sort of the same thing (although scratch the gentleman bit) with big Sam.

[SIMON GARNERS 194]

I certainly DONT want Chelsea coming to Ewood needing a point to secure the bloody title!.......our need is greater than there's regarding a need for points in our own quest for Uefa cup football and the retaining of our top players like Bellamy for next season.

Call me selfish but 5 years on and I still find the mental images of 10,000+ Citeh fans on our pitch celebrating very galling to say the least.......I personally dont want a repeat with the Kings Rd rentboys thank you!!!

So there you go,I'm praying for a Chelsea win this weekend and to see Fergusons nose glow green instead of the usual purple.

As for 'buying the title',well,if that accusation was good enough for us ..............................

Edited April 24, 2006 by SIMON GARNERS 194

[Ronin]

So there you go,I'm praying for a Chelsea win this weekend and to see Fergusons nose glow green instead of the usual purple.

401845[/snapback]

I'd second that. Have them win the title against Man U, then for them to field a reserve side against us . . . . please

[Jan]

RESERVE team- have you SEEN their reserves????

I'd be happy if they put out their under-10s. Maybe some of them would actually be shorter than Dickov too- an added bonus!

[Florida Rover]

I thought you might find Arjen Robben modelling the new kit a bit amusing.

pic

[ABBEY]

EVERY team tries to buy sucess its as simple as that their all proffesional...we BOUGHT players who won us the league and the worthy cup......just like non league teams who play players wages and swap players for however or whatever.

for the record i hate the big head scummy manager at chelsea

[jim mk2]

For those who cannot stand Chelsea or their manager there is a brilliant piece by Michael Henderson in the Daily Telegraph today. This paragraph on Kenyon, Abramovich and Mourinho stands out.

...... for all his talk of world domination the former sportswear salesman from Stalybridge is little more than a highly-paid errand-boy, sent on missions by a mysterious, easily bored Russian, for the benefit of a manager who labours under the misapprehension that he is Count Bismarck, and the Premiership represents a map of Europe in 1870......

Read and enjoy.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/main.jhtm...28/sfnhen28.xml

[ihateburnley]

I think that people look at the purchases of Alan Shearer and Chris Sutton and lazily suggest that we bought the title;

Tim Flowers - £2m Southampton

Shay Given - youth

Henning Berg - £1.75m Lillestrom

Colin Hendry - £700k Man City

Alan Wright - £400k Blackpool

Andy Morrison - £500k Plymouth

Ian Pearce - £300k Chelsea

Graeme Le Saux - £700k Chelsea

Tim Sherwood - £500k Norwich

Stuart Ripley - £1.3m Boro

David Batty - £2.75m Leeds

Jason Wilcox - youth

Mark Atkins - £45k Scunthorpe

Robbie Slater - £300k Lens

Paul Warhurst - £2.75m Sheff Wed

James Beattie - youth

Alan Shearer - £3.6m Southampton

Chris Sutton - £5m Norwich

Kevin Gallacher - £1.5m Coventry

By my reckoning, that's just over £24m on 19 players over about three seasons. You can see that not only are there few groundbreaking transfer fees being paid, we are not exactly signing superstars. No £30m purchases of players in the twilights of their careers, and no £6m purchases of youngsters who have only played a handful of games. Good, solid, British backbone to the squad - aswell as a British manager to boot. Bear in mind also that we sold David May in the summer for £1.5m to United. So we basically paid £24m to win the league - about £1.26m per player on average. And don't forget this is basically the entirety of our squad - I'm sure I've missed a couple but nobody that played a vital role over the course of the season.

Liverpool had Stan Collymore (8.5m), Mark Kennedy (1.5m), John Scales (3.5m!), Phil Babb (3.6m), Julian Dicks (1.5m), Ruddock (2.5m), Clough (2.75m)

Utd had Andy Cole (6m), Kanchelskis (650k), Hughes (1.8m), Cantona (1.2m), McClair (850k), Pallister (2.5m), Ince (1m), Parker (2m)

Arsenal had Wright (2.5m), Kiwomya (1.5m), Hartson (2.5m), Helder (2.3m), Bergkamp (7.5m!!!), Platt (4.75m)

Chelsea had Dave Rocastle (1.25m), Peacock (1.25m), Stein (1.5m), Furlong (2.3m)

I may be slightly out with some of the timings/transfer fees here, but the fact of the matter is that we were simply paying pretty much the going rate, not grossly overspending on foreign superstars.

[philipl]

Great rant by Henderson and he is right to talk about tradition. I think I am correct that at the moment Chelsea still rank below the Rovers in terms of honours won.

However, Kenyon's boast/aim is in terms of biggest brand in football, not best trophy cabinet.

On that basis, Chelsea's progress is far more impressive than I would have expected. They are already well up the top ten in the world by income and their "supporter" base at 5 million is an extraordinary achievement in such a short period of time.

The nintendo club for the nintendo generation. Both the Mancs and Chelski will probably overtake Real Madrid in 2007/8.

[Fife Rover]

It is a strange coincidence that Henderson should write that article this week.

Just two days ago, I woke early and lay in my bed idly mulling over in my mind all the recent slurs cast upon my beloved Rovers and the arrogant impression given by the media and the TV football fans that the "big clubs" are Chelsea, Man.U., Arsenal, Liverpool, etc,etc. I got to thinking who REALLY are the true aristocracy of English football, and my findings are as follows.

For me the true aristocrats of football are the founder members of the game, without them there would be no game for us or any one else. This means that the above mentioned "big clubs" are in reality "Johnny come lateley" pretenders to the aristocracy. The real aristocrats of football are the clubs that played the game and set the rules and standards way back in the mid-19th century, and the 12 clubs that actually brought the Football League into existence in 1888. In alphebetical order these are:

Accrington Stanley

Aston Villa

Blackburn Rovers

Burnley

Bolton Wanderers

Derby County

Everton

Notts County

Preston North End

Stoke City

West Bromich Albion

Wolverhampton Wanderers

Not one of the "big clubs" or indeed any club at all from the south of England. Nor any of the other "pretenders" such as Newcastle, Leeds, Birmingham, Spurs, etc.

The 12 clubs named above are the real aristocrats of English football, even though some of them have run into hard times and some are still experiencing these, they have ALL got a proud history to look back on and at different times each of these clubs has achieved something that brought them the respect of the entire footballing fraternity.

Yes, each one of these clubs can look the rest of the football world straight in the eye and be very proud of their achievments and history. Poor they may be but they are the TRUE ARISTOCRATS of football, and always will be. Is there any one of those 12 that anybody can truthfully say is not truly a Big Club. Chelsea who??

Edited November 28, 2006 by Fife Rover

[ihateburnley]

It is a strange coincidence that Henderson should write that article this week.

Just two days ago, I woke early and lay in my bed idly mulling over in my mind all the recent slurs cast upon my beloved Rovers and the arrogant impression given by the media and the TV football fans that the "big clubs" are Chelsea, Man.U., Arsenal, Liverpool, etc,etc. I got to thinking who REALLY are the true aristocracy of English football, and my findings are as follows.

For me the true aristocrats of football are the founder members of the game, without them there would be no game for us or any one else. This means that the above mentioned "big clubs" are in reality "Johnny come lateley" pretenders to the aristocracy. The real aristocrats of football are the clubs that played the game and set the rules and standards way back in the mid-19th century, and the 12 clubs that actually brought the Football League into existence in 1888. In alphebetical order these are:

Accrington Stanley

Aston Villa

Blackburn Rovers

Burnley

Bolton Wanderers

Derby County

Everton

Notts County

Preston North End

Stoke City

West Bromich Albion

Wolverhampton Wanderers

Not one of the "big clubs" or indeed any club at all from the south of England. Nor any of the other "pretenders" such as Newcastle, Leeds, Birmingham, Spurs, etc.

The 12 clubs named above are the real aristocrats of English football, even though some of them have run into hard times and some are still experiencing these, they have ALL got a proud history to look back on and at different times each of these clubs has achieved something that brought them the respect of the entire footballing fraternity.

Yes, each one of these clubs can look the rest of the football world straight in the eye and be very proud of their achievments and history. Poor they may be but they are the TRUE ARISTOCRATS of football, and always will be. Chelsea who??

Lovely stuff Fife, but unfortunately it means bugger all 120 years on. I think we'd all be kidding ourselves if we started pretending that Stoke City and Notts County have had more of an impact than Manchester United.

[Fife Rover]

Lovely stuff Fife, but unfortunately it means bugger all 120 years on. I think we'd all be kidding ourselves if we started pretending that Stoke City and Notts County have had more of an impact than Manchester United.

I am not saying that Man.U., Liverpool, Arsenal etc have not been great in recent times. What I am saying is that the 12 clubs I listed as founder members of the Football League have also achieved great things in the past and each of them at some time has done something that made the football world respect them for their achievements, and nothing should be allowed to detract from that.

I can't pretend to go into what each and every one has done, but here are a couple of local examples:

PNE:..... In season 1888-89 they won the league championship by going the whole season without losing a single match, and in the same season they won the FA Cup without having a single goal scored against them in the entire competition. League and cup double at a time when that was all there was. There was no other competition they could enter.

Blackburn Rovers...... besides having won the FA Cup 6 times (which has only in recent years been bettered)

they also won the Cup 3 years in succession thus earning the right to keep it for all time. No other club has equaled that as yet. They very generously handed it back to the FA after keeping it for the 3rd year in order to save the FA the expense of buying a new trophy.

Yes IHB, all these clubs have achieved something at various times that have earned them the respect of the footballing world, and nobody can take that away from them. They have ALL earned the right to respect from the the media and the public, but do they get it? I leave the answer to you.

Edited November 28, 2006 by Fife Rover

[thenodrog]

Rather predictably and despite having spent more filthly lucre than Midas, Cresus and the rest of the Prem combined, the little Portugese ponce is blaming their recent poor form on injuries! Well, welcome to the real world Maureen and long may it continue!

[Bazzanotsogreat]

Rather predictably and despite having spent more filthly lucre than Midas, Cresus and the rest of the Prem combined, the little Portugese ponce is blaming their recent poor form on injuries! Well, welcome to the real world Maureen and long may it continue!

To my mind they only have 2 definate First XI players out in Cech & Terry, and then 2 players that rotate in robben and cole. If you spend 700 million on players and cant cope with a few injuries there is something wrong somewhere