Chelsea ruined EPL?
-
Look at big clubs like Manu and Arsenal
Manu got really big through use of their own produced players, During the time.. SAF had nothing to lose because he knew that whether he stayed or relegate Manu. He would be sacked
So he gambled on Beckham, Scholes and etc and they turned out to be superstars and thus he was in control
Now, As those big names are old and being replaced. It would be very dangerous to field a very young and unproven squad because there is a chance of not qualifying for the CL.
Furthurmore, With the money Chelsea is spending, Manu fans and other fans feel the need to win the EPL thus a season with a unproven squad may see them finish somewhere below Chelsea and a huge gap thus making fans unhappy.
I feel it's not that SAF don't give the youngsters chance to shine, It's Chelsea who are forcing the unproven players out of contention thus clubs have to spend big to match Chelsea.
Then, I feel that a limit on the number of foreigners (EUs alike) to be limited so that more English stars can shine like Beckham, Scholes, Gerrard, Owen and etc.. -
chelsea doesn't represent money, clubs like RM and Barca has been buying from so long ago.
-
all the crap coming from fergie again... someone tell him his mind games dun work....
-
the class of 94' comes very rarely. so all the blame cant be put on fergie
-
if the roles are reversed, saf wouldn't be whining...unproven players shouldn't start somewhere indeed, perhaps the lower divisions. if you flood uninteresting names at the top rung, who would still be keen to watch the games....even then i've long cancelled my monthly subscription to the sports channels.
-
rumour is that some american billionaire is eyeing villa, hopefully we can see another chelsea......
-
frankly a billionaire isnt enough to make villa or any club another chelsea.Originally posted by countdracula:rumour is that some american billionaire is eyeing villa, hopefully we can see another chelsea......
pompey are a good example.
there are plenty of billionaires worldwide. RA is in the top 10!!! -
I want to say YESYESYESYESYESYESYESYESYESYESYESYESYESYESYESYESYESYESYESYESYESYESYESYESYESYESYESYESYESYESYESYESYESYESYESYESYES
but it isn't that right isn't it? -
RA is different cos he use chelsea to wash black $$$... others should be quite giam unless they hold strong passion of the club...Originally posted by countdracula:rumour is that some american billionaire is eyeing villa, hopefully we can see another chelsea...... -
loads of dosh to buy SWP in order that another team cannot get him..
and a few others too
oh well.. maybe a little?
i'm actually looking at arsenal.. if that very young team matures together and stays together, they're going to be scary -
True. money is only part of the story but without money also cannot.Originally posted by dragg:frankly a billionaire isnt enough to make villa or any club another chelsea.
pompey are a good example.
there are plenty of billionaires worldwide. RA is in the top 10!!! -
tats y he say ruin epl only....Originally posted by stellazio:chelsea doesn't represent money, clubs like RM and Barca has been buying from so long ago. -
thaksin also billionaire (thanks to the people of SG), but i think he knows monies can be better spent elsewhere than to feed his ego of owning a football club that's bleeding.Originally posted by dragg:frankly a billionaire isnt enough to make villa or any club another chelsea.
pompey are a good example.
there are plenty of billionaires worldwide. RA is in the top 10!!!
Agree with the other comment tt RA's monies is ?able. he can spent it all he wants becos he knows tt it's not really `hard earned' and may be repatriated if Puke-tin goes and someone else will want to dig his skeleton. -
The transfer market doesn't just involve Chelsea alone. Sure they can make the big offers, but the selling clubs have to bite and most importantly the players have to want to go. Many players like Shaun Wright-Philips let their egos get ahead of them and deluded themselves into thinking that despite the wealth of talent Chelsea already got, they'll still be able to muscle their way into the first team. The disillusionment and disappointment sets in almost immediately as they arrive only to find themselves sitting on the bench watching from the sidelines.
Thierry Henry is much smarter than that. He'd rather be a king in a small pond rather than a mere white dwarf in a constellation of stars at clubs like Chelsea and Real Madrid. -
arsenal a small pond?Originally posted by dakkon_blackblade:The transfer market doesn't just involve Chelsea alone. Sure they can make the big offers, but the selling clubs have to bite and most importantly the players have to want to go. Many players like Shaun Wright-Philips let their egos get ahead of them and deluded themselves into thinking that despite the wealth of talent Chelsea already got, they'll still be able to muscle their way into the first team. The disillusionment and disappointment sets in almost immediately as they arrive only to find themselves sitting on the bench watching from the sidelines.
Thierry Henry is much smarter than that. He'd rather be a king in a small pond rather than a mere white dwarf in a constellation of stars at clubs like Chelsea and Real Madrid. -
I won't say Chelsea ruined EPL.
They managed to set a new standard with their signings and made themselves no1 public enemy.
I would say Chelsea ruined the transfer market.
Yes, it takes one player to bite, but when you dangle a pay pocket of $100,000 more per week, and you offer $10m more than the next competitors.
You are destroying the transfer market.
Transfer market used to be the most intriguing. But with chelsea, it is no longer fun or enjoyable. -
$-wise : absolutelyOriginally posted by BrUtUs:arsenal a small pond?
medal-wise: bigger pond
manager-wise: same-sized pond
ego-wise: -ditto- -
i dont see anything wrong with that.
u dont expect every team to use home grown young talents as main team, while buying better players can give better results.
So when they can afford, they just buy from other countries, as long as they think it's worth the money.
This whole soccer industry is one commercial thing. From the point of view of this commercial industry, winning results = reputation = more fans = more money from tickets and merchandise.
Giving more chance to those local young players may end up losing more matches, if they dont "shine" like they are expected to. But those expensive foreign talents, they worth their price most of the time, secure better results. -
Hmmm... i do find most of the expensive foreign talents flop in EPL most of the time....Originally posted by mochou:i dont see anything wrong with that.
u dont expect every team to use home grown young talents as main team, while buying better players can give better results.
So when they can afford, they just buy from other countries, as long as they think it's worth the money.
This whole soccer industry is one commercial thing. From the point of view of this commercial industry, winning results = reputation = more fans = more money from tickets and merchandise.
Giving more chance to those local young players may end up losing more matches, if they dont "shine" like they are expected to. But those expensive foreign talents, they worth their price most of the time, secure better results. -
all these flops will blame the EPL for being too physical.
-
long before chelsea, real madrid and many italian clubs were already buying at exorbitant prices.Originally posted by iceFatboy:I won't say Chelsea ruined EPL.
They managed to set a new standard with their signings and made themselves no1 public enemy.
I would say Chelsea ruined the transfer market.
Yes, it takes one player to bite, but when you dangle a pay pocket of $100,000 more per week, and you offer $10m more than the next competitors.
You are destroying the transfer market.
Transfer market used to be the most intriguing. But with chelsea, it is no longer fun or enjoyable. -
Man Utd got into their predicament because of two things:
1. they failed to dispose of Alex Ferguson (or at least, marginalise him to boardroom staff)
2. The shareholders allowed Glazer to buy out the club.
Chelski basically was a win-win situation: they were in debt and a Russian sugar daddy came calling...match-made in heaven. -
oh.. latest news... Arsenal is trying to gouge them for Ashley Cole
-
Arsenal is trying to piss Cole off since he is so ungrateful and want to air the diirty linen...Originally posted by the Bear:oh.. latest news... Arsenal is trying to gouge them for Ashley Cole -
cos all singaporeans know is EPL EPL EPL, they dunno anything elseOriginally posted by stellazio:chelsea doesn't represent money, clubs like RM and Barca has been buying from so long ago.