No player goes to any club for their history. Big clubs win big trophies and we've done plenty of that with Roman and the 10 years or so before Roman. Also without us the prem would still be only United and Arsenal winning it every year how excitingOriginally Posted by redwah
Dunstersaur I love you, never change.
Would be funny watching the forwards of today go up against Chopper, Many red cards and broken bones
We are so pedestrian.
In our 2 games against decent teams this year in the EPL (Liverpool and City) we have been thoroughly outclassed.
Ben Foster has been rad back at Watford as well.
I will agree with Stanny that Barkley has been quite good though.
I had him on my get sold list b4 pre season but he has worked hard even spent time watching Napoli videos to learn how Sarri wants his midfielders to play
Stanny the funny thing here is your insecurity is on display for all to see
It is also indicative of Chelsea fans and their insecurity
I dont need to be convinced that Man U Liverpool Bayern Milan Real Barca etc are big clubs regardless of how well they are currently going
Nor does anyone else
It is just accepted as reality
Chelsea on the other hand are trying to convince us that they belong
The fact that you need to try to convince anyone clearly shows that you dont belong at that level
You have bought your way to the table no more no less
Same as your argument on Hazard being a modern great when he clearly isnt
PS You are in the Europa League also
FFS
Sit down shut up etc
Was waiting for you to pipe up. Really brightens up my day. Keep it up
Course it would brighten your day up
Calling you out on being plain wrong isnt an issue
Hazard
Hoffman
Chelsea
etc etc
Only fans underrate Hazard, Former players, coaches, and pundits all rate him right up there
Keep telling yourself that
When he oplaying in the UCL ??
oops
Derby managed to score 4 goals to Chelsea’s 1 today.
I ****ing hate the mancs...seriously hate them as all Liverpool supporters do but I can acknowledge the fact that they have become probably the biggest football club in the world over the last 15-20years through results, board level management and marketing...real and Barca have probably caught up through ronaldo and Messi but facts are facts. The fact that they are ****ing it all up post fergy is a source of joy is another point which we all can enjoy. But Chelsea, Man city, PSG will always be regarded as money clubs....bought by some uber rich person as a play thing. Yes they may win titles and the odd champions league but their reputations will always be associated with their owners.
How else does one win things without spending money? Were the teams who got money supposed to just let the teams who were already winning things keep winning unopposed?
Plague, how much money did that plucky team of legends from Leicester spend to with the EPL? And where do that massive club from Chelsea finish that season?
I will admit Chelsea are in the better European competition tho.
Leicester still spent money to win things doesnt matter how much or how little. United spend big but are on a downward spiral. Its about how and who you spend the money on and then you need the right people in place to take advantage of it. United and Arsenal had this in the 90s and 200s, Liverpool in the 80s and now Chelsea and City in the 2000s
Hah. Please continue.
United are on a downward spiral because their management and manager are idiots and cant get their shit together...which i pretty much said.
You are missing the whole point of the argument...of course you need to spend money to get to to top and win trophies...the point is some clubs are big through history and what they have achieved and how they have gone about building their reputation...others have been bought by billionaires and are trying to convince everyone that they are big.
Whilst I agree with the "everyone spends money" bit, it's all relative to the club. Leicester didn't go out and purchase left and centre to do what they did. They built from the ground up and didn't just appear with an open cheque book. Chelsea were there abouts but where they are today is testament to the Abramovich and the money he is willing to spend.
Chelsea haven't had the amount of players out on loan they have for the last decade because they bought smartly. They bought and bought and bought. Old managers have left new managers with massive amounts of talent that are unsustainable on a clubs books, so they have shifted them on for a few years. When they haven't developed, they've sold them and replaced them with more players to loan out and see what becomes of them. You don't do that without the money Chelsea have available to them.
Is it their fault? No, absolutely not. Fair play to them. It's just that the everyone else spends money tag, does not wash with the majority of football fans.
We bough lots of young players to loan and sell them to make a profit. I dont agree with it but it works
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote