• Current Donation Goals

richard

Chelsea Finances Thread

Recommended Posts

Jim   

Let's get something straight, Chelsea do not owe anyone any money, RA does. When he bought the club he also took on the debts.

If he gets bored in let's say 25 years time, he will sell the club and whoever takes over will inherit the most succesful team in Europe and England in the last 25 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tommy S   

I don't think we're ruining football. You didn't hear that said about Blackburn 10 years ago, and all we're doing is the same thing but on a larger scale. The perception of the premiership has changed abroad as well, with more top class foreign players wanting to play over here.

A lot has been said about Kenyon failing to deliver, and personally I don't like the slimy toad, but he wouldn't be where he is today if he wasn't good at his job.

Also I think his job will be made easier when (NB - when) we win a major trophy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Crowey   

Ahh now we have Townie, another new postee with an RA/PK axe to grind, and one who obviously spends too much time toying with his own "play thing". Thanks for the stunning contribution and insight into football finances.

Glad you found your way in to the INTELLIGENT forum mate, you're obviously in the wrong place, hope you found your way out.

For ANYONE who supports CFC and doesnt want RA at the club, where would we be if he hadn't come along?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm enjoying the way things are going at the moment- long may it continue. We all hope that RA stays for the long term, but even if he doesn't we are now in a position where we would be ok.

Jim is right (although I suspect that the debts will have been paid)- if Roman walks tomorrow we have a clean slate and whilst we would have to sell most of the players we would survive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
richard   

Trev, we might survive but if nobody else does, I.e. poorer clubs, what would be the point? There would probably be a super league maybe involving other Euro clubs or, a smaller league like the Scottish Premier.

How boring is the Scottish premier with either Rangers or Celtic winning most of the honours. Excuse me while I yawn with anticipated boredom. ;)

In one of the latest threads by Rachel, UEFA have foreseen this problem of financial debt plaguing clubs. They want to include a new rule whereby teams can have only a limited number of foreign players.

This would be great for the game and English players. It would also be a plus for the national team as there would be a better selection of players in top flight footie.

I think this could be a good way around the current imbalance in teams and will certainly aid poorer clubs to not pay out over their budget for players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Townie   
quote:Originally posted by Crowey

[br]Ahh now we have Townie, another new postee with an RA/PK axe to grind, and one who obviously spends too much time toying with his own "play thing". Thanks for the stunning contribution and insight into football finances.

Glad you found your way in to the INTELLIGENT forum mate, you're obviously in the wrong place, hope you found your way out.

For ANYONE who supports CFC and doesnt want RA at the club, where would we be if he hadn't come along?


id="quote">

id="quote">

So now, if an opinion doesn't agree with yours or anyone else on this forum it is wrong is it? It was clear in the first place, at least based on your posts, that the term 'Intelligent' was an ironic statement.

I am just concerned that if 'RA' suddenly disappears then the club will be left with players on fat contracts that the club cannot afford to meet. It's all well saying the debts are 'wiped out' but that does not take care of the on going costs of running the club.

That aside - you surely cannot be happy with the way Kenyon is going about his business?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
richard   

Let's make it quite clear what the issue *isn't* about here. I have said in my original post that the debate should NOT polarise around RA and CFC alone. It isn't to do with RA bashing or PK bashing or the fact that RA is a billionaire.

As a lifelong fan of CFC I'm delighted that we have money to spend and that we can develop the team.

The real issue here is to do with the *imbalance* there is in the divisions. It is all based on a club's financial ability to purchase top players which enable them to become top teams. When purchasing the amount of players we do from abroad, it simply means that home grown players are less likely to make into to top flight football.

As I've said in another thread, I like very much UEFA's idea of limiting the amount of foreign players a team can have in its squad. By doing this, it will give English players (and their European counterparts) a better chance to develop. In short, it will aid the poorer clubs as it will be more of a level playing field. The benefits to England's national side would be fantastic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:Originally posted by Townie

[That aside - you surely cannot be happy with the way Kenyon is going about his business?


id="quote">

id="quote">

Perhaps if you enumerated you grievances against RA & PK we could have an informed discussion. Blanket condemnation of the Chelsea hierarchy reflects poorly on you, not them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:Originally posted by richard

The real issue here is to do with the *imbalance* there is in the divisions.


id="quote">

id="quote">

We do nothing! Clubs should live within their own financial means, not try and hobble or crab at those that are successful. If a club cannot survive, it should fold. We tried to subsidize sick industries, industries with no future, and wasted billions. If clubs cannot attract fans, sponsorships, rich benefactors etc. and are not viable then they are owed nothing by the rest of football.

quote:Originally posted by richard

As I've said in another thread, I like very much UEFA's idea of limiting the amount of foreign players a team can have in its squad. By doing this, it will give English players (and their European counterparts) a better chance to develop. In short, it will aid the poorer clubs as it will be more of a level playing field. The benefits to England's national side would be fantastic.


id="quote">

id="quote">

You are obviously confused. All your *homegrown* players can be 'foreigners' such as: Huth, Forrsell, Di Cesare etc. The restriction is that they come from your youth system or those of others in your country. It would be *illegal* for any UEFA rule which forced clubs to discriminate against other EU residents for employment with them.

There would be no certainty of aid to England, and frankly, for me, it is Chelsea that I care about most. Given a choice: would I want England to win the World Cup or Chelsea to win the EPL, there is no contest; Chelsea wins every time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Richard, "I like very much UEFA's idea of limiting the amount of foreign players a team can have in its squad. By doing this, it will give English players (and their European counterparts) a better chance to develop." We had a virtual closed shop to foreign players for decades and did we have a stronger team as a result? I always remember in these arguments the words of a certain little italian who said that when he was a young player at Napoli he had Maradona playing in his position. It motivated him to try harder and to learn from them, can you honestly not see that players like JT, Lamps etc haven't learned alot from the high quality imports we have had? I understand that for every Henry there are 10 or more Bogarde's lurking in clubs and thats not good but where would our national side be without these influences? Do you believe that Cantona, Zola and Henry have not benefitted our game? Maybe you would prefer a system like france where experienced players are limited per team, forcing teams to use more young players and hence create the next generation?

Its evolution, the fittest (and gifted) survive and the rest die out. It has driven up standards and given new benchmarks to young players, leading to better players coming through, technically gifted and confortable on the ball. Even our centre backs have evolved to the Rio's of our game, not Terry Butcher (Although I was always a fan of his).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now