Toggle sidebar

2023-2024 EPL Season

  • Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
Paulie Gualtieri said:
He didn't want to leave mid-season. Last summer he was open to it, but the club didn't find a replacement.
Click to expand...
Feel like I remember reading that they were open to him leaving without a replacement lined up

Separate note, it blows my mind that there is a very vocal - and I don’t think it’s a small minority - of chelsea fans who will die on a hill supporting Cucurella.

Why. What is wrong with these people.
 
Peen said:
Feel like I remember reading that they were open to him leaving without a replacement lined up

Separate note, it blows my mind that there is a very vocal - and I don’t think it’s a small minority - of chelsea fans who will die on a hill supporting Cucurella.

Why. What is wrong with these people.
Click to expand...
They just love his hair.
 
Michael Edwards return to LFC is official. He turned down Chelsea and United to come back.



 
Chimaera said:
2nd club. There's some interesting options in France and Italy that I would expect them to take a look at.
Click to expand...
Yeah I remember they flirted around with a couple but never pulled the trigger. But multiclub isn’t really regulated so it’s the way forward. Glad to see it’s a priority.
 
there's a lot of tangible benefits. I know they've had some complaints with how players get playing time. Might be an option for developing managers there... could likely grow revenues
 
Not regulating multi-club ownership and the PL is doing away with FSR in favor of some bullshit about percentage of revenue. World football is just bending over for big clubs and they’re not even hiding it anymore.

Really pathetic.

You already see Strasbourg supporters mourning the death of their club, and nothing will stop the rich from desiccating anyone outside the top tier and you have a super league, without having to go through the trouble of actually having one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JPBolts
Jersey Fresh said:
Not regulating multi-club ownership and the PL is doing away with FSR in favor of some bullshit about percentage of revenue. World football is just bending over for big clubs and they’re not even hiding it anymore.

Really pathetic.

You already see Strasbourg supporters mourning the death of their club, and nothing will stop the rich from desiccating anyone outside the top tier and you have a super league, without having to go through the trouble of actually having one.
Click to expand...
Yeah it sucks, but (for all the reasons you are stating) it’s a disadvantage NOT to do it at this stage.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JPBolts
I think there are certainly negatives of multi-club ownership and being down the chain, it can be a problem. I do think there's degrees of that. Girona likely aren't where they are without City. They're going to get raided (though that's not unheard of for teams that overperform) but there have been some plusses.

I think FSG would likely seek to use it as a place to get players playing time. Stash some others for work permits. Try out some tactics. Build revenues there, but more through development of players and moving them on.

I think it makes sense for Liverpool as their academy is really starting to produce players. They have a glut of guys who need time (not as bad as the loan army from Chelsea past), combined with attempting to try and find value in the market. It's hard to do that if you can't play guys and give them time to develop in the system you're looking to play. They want players who are in the 21-25 range and a lot of those players just need time.
 
Chimaera said:
I think there are certainly negatives of multi-club ownership and being down the chain, it can be a problem. I do think there's degrees of that. Girona likely aren't where they are without City. They're going to get raided (though that's not unheard of for teams that overperform) but there have been some plusses.

I think FSG would likely seek to use it as a place to get players playing time. Stash some others for work permits. Try out some tactics. Build revenues there, but more through development of players and moving them on.

I think it makes sense for Liverpool as their academy is really starting to produce players. They have a glut of guys who need time (not as bad as the loan army from Chelsea past), combined with attempting to try and find value in the market. It's hard to do that if you can't play guys and give them time to develop in the system you're looking to play. They want players who are in the 21-25 range and a lot of those players just need time.
Click to expand...
There's definitely "good" ways to own multiple clubs, but there's also a ton of potential abuse like we've seen with Red Bull or with City.

To me the good version of it doesn't outweigh the negatives on the sport from the bad version of it so it should be banned. Or at least there should be a "no player loans or transfers" rule between linked clubs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JPBolts, Peen, Jersey Fresh and 1 other person
Football lack of regulation and finance model made it a prime target for multiple club ownership. I hate it, back in the day, they were called feeder clubs with loan agreements but now it has fully evolved into full club ownership. I fully expect all top 6 clubs to have such model in a not so distant future.
 
hatterson said:
There's definitely "good" ways to own multiple clubs, but there's also a ton of potential abuse like we've seen with Red Bull or with City.

To me the good version of it doesn't outweigh the negatives on the sport from the bad version of it so it should be banned. Or at least there should be a "no player loans or transfers" rule between linked clubs.
Click to expand...
Yea, the current system in which clubs with their own histories and fan bases become quasi-farm teams is truly rotten. I have no issue with clubs developing relationships in which one club becomes a frequent loan destination for the other (relationships which often develop organically based on good track records with loanees - that's currently where Chelsea are with Huddersfield). But joint ownership structures which produce entrenched hierarchies between clubs (and leagues) within them? Yuck.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrokenFace, gary69 and Spring in Fialta
It's going to be interesting for FSG. They have a certain way they want to do things. Edwards has a certain player type he wants. I could see a world where that translates beyond just what we have seen in other places with funky financial implications. I would be interested to see how it could work if say, they got a similar manager in place at both locations, worked to develop talent with certain characteristics they're looking for in players, and played similarly tactically. Share plans, development and analysis. They've been able to do it on a small scale with the youth teams of Liverpool. What would it look like if they say, got a French team to play tactically like they play (however that's going to evolve post Klopp) and used the system to give players time for development and experience? I understand the complaint of would they really be focused on winning there, or would it just be a way to improve Liverpool? I think there's a way to do both. FSG wants to win, and winning wherever they buy is also part of making money.
 
Chimaera said:
It's going to be interesting for FSG. They have a certain way they want to do things. Edwards has a certain player type he wants. I could see a world where that translates beyond just what we have seen in other places with funky financial implications. I would be interested to see how it could work if say, they got a similar manager in place at both locations, worked to develop talent with certain characteristics they're looking for in players, and played similarly tactically. Share plans, development and analysis. They've been able to do it on a small scale with the youth teams of Liverpool. What would it look like if they say, got a French team to play tactically like they play (however that's going to evolve post Klopp) and used the system to give players time for development and experience? I understand the complaint of would they really be focused on winning there, or would it just be a way to improve Liverpool? I think there's a way to do both. FSG wants to win, and winning wherever they buy is also part of making money.
Click to expand...
There’s absolutely no world where the intent is both winning and development. These would subservient clubs to the main branch. That’s pure wishful thinking -“yeah those guys do it wrong, but we’re better than that.”
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spring in Fialta and Wee Baby Seamus
It's wrong on so many levels, but it's probably a difficult thing to regulate.

Wonder if ENIC will do it eventually too. I know they owned stakes in other clubs until about 20 years ago.

Edit: Just found a belgian article from 2021 of them being interested in Standard Liege.
 
Last edited:
On March 12, 2023, Chelsea had 37 points from 27 matches.

On March 12, 2024, Chelsea have 39 points from 27 matches.

2022-23 Chelsea proceeded to take only 7 points from their final 11 matches, finishing on 44. They only had one win after March 12 - away at Bournemouth.

I am hopeful that will not be the case. Our run-in is not terrible, and we are absolutely a better side than we were last year.

In order:
Burnley (H)
Man U (H)
Sheffield (A)
Everton (H)
Brighton (A)
Villa (A)
West Ham (H)
Forest (A)
Bournemouth (H)

Still to be scheduled:
Tottenham (H)
Arsenal (A)

With the exception of the Arsenal away game, every one of those is definitely winnable. I am hopeful about building some momentum to close out the season. There have been false dawns, and I'm sure there will be more over the course of the last two months of the season, but I think we close out alright.

I'll call it now. Emmanuel Adebayor is, as yet, the only player to ever get hat tricks home and away against the same opponent in the same season (classically, Derby 07-08. if there's a bad stat, it's always them). Nico Jackson matches this against Spurs. IT'S GONNA HAPPEN.
 
Wee Baby Seamus said:
Yea, the current system in which clubs with their own histories and fan bases become quasi-farm teams is truly rotten. I have no issue with clubs developing relationships in which one club becomes a frequent loan destination for the other (relationships which often develop organically based on good track records with loanees - that's currently where Chelsea are with Huddersfield). But joint ownership structures which produce entrenched hierarchies between clubs (and leagues) within them? Yuck.
Click to expand...

It's f***ing disgusting and anyone who tries to justify the model of flat-out owning other clubs is a chump. There's no other way around it.

Savant said:
Yeah it sucks, but (for all the reasons you are stating) it’s a disadvantage NOT to do it at this stage.
Click to expand...

Please never cry about reffing again if you're justifying this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wee Baby Seamus
Paulie Gualtieri said:
It's wrong on so many levels, but it's probably a difficult thing to regulate.

Wonder if ENIC will do it eventually too. I know they owned stakes in other clubs until about 20 years ago.
Click to expand...

They are talking with Djurgardens about a "working relationship", but nothing I've read mentioned outright ownership
 
If UEFA want to make things difficult for multi-club ownership, easiest thing to do is to limit the amount of transfers between the same clubs. Like only one transfer season, including loan transfers.
 
Paulie Gualtieri said:
If UEFA want to make things difficult for multi-club ownership, easiest thing to do is to limit the amount of transfers between the same clubs. Like only one transfer season, including loan transfers.
Click to expand...
there are several really easy and fair ways to do it, but nothing will happen
 
I have no issue agreeing that it's more than a bit problematic. I also note that there are a lot of lower level clubs that do need the influx of money, talent, and support that could come from a relationship.

It's sad, but there's only so many dollars to go around, especially as they're increasingly gobbled up further up the pyramids. I'm all for the local clubs keeping identities, but I do see the tangible benefit for Liverpool. It's not perfect, but as a fan of baseball and the farm system process, I don't have as many issues with developing players for the top team either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom