04/17/24
July 18, 2005
Figo and Samuel to Inter?: Adriano to Real Madrid? SWP signs with Chelsea? Is the closed season finally getting interesting? Are we about to see a flurry of meaningful transfers in the next few weeks?
posted by Texan_lost_in_NY to soccer at 12:17 PM - 17 comments
"This carries on the Chelsea policy of investing in young, top English talent." And overpaying for it. I'd love to have SWP at Arsenal, but not for the kind of money City wanted.
posted by trox at 01:40 PM on July 18, 2005
"And overpaying for it" People are treating like Chelsea like an ATM. Need some money to service your debt? Think of a price for your star player, double it and Chelski will pay it. SWP has great potential but he's worth about £12mill at the moment. MCFC have doubled that and they're in business. What is Peter Kenyon being paid for? Anyone can get the best players if they're prepared to pay silly money. That doesn't make for great business, that makes Chelsea an easy mark.
posted by Pete at 01:59 PM on July 18, 2005
What is Peter Kenyon being paid for? Anyone can get the best players if they're prepared to pay silly money. That doesn't make for great business, that makes Chelsea an easy mark. Very good point and the residual effect is it unbalances the buyers market for everyone else. Citeh just took care of 1/3 of their debt by off-loading SWP. I think Chelsea's spending will at some point actually help other clubs. Any thoughts on that?
posted by Texan_lost_in_NY at 02:07 PM on July 18, 2005
Pete makes an excellent point. And I think it is kinda funny. Teams have already figured out how to compete with Chelsea as far as the pocketbook is concerned. Make them give their money to you in the form of inflated player prices and then go buy 3-4 players with the money you made. Brilliant. I am with trox. I'd like to have a player like SWP at Arsenal too, but not at that price. Arsene Wenger was right when he said "...there is a price for Chelsea and a price for everybody else, and that is why we have to wait until they make a decision. It is very frustrating, but it is a fact." It is going to suck not to have access to FSC when we move in a few months :(
posted by scully at 02:10 PM on July 18, 2005
Investing in young English talent? I thought that was what you did with your youth academy, scouting systems and coaching. I think the effect of money at the top makes Premier League clubs forget about development. To use a human resources metaphor, they are now just cashed up headhunting companies.
posted by owlhouse at 02:51 PM on July 18, 2005
Money aside, Chelsea are the only top tier EPL team who have a core group of English lads as part of their strategy. Arsenal, ManU, Liverpool all ignore this. ManU do have plenty of British players though I think this is more a result of a couple of unbelievably great years from their academy. Gunners and Reds might as well be based in France and Spain. Plus, other than SWP and perhaps Drogba, who have the Blues severely overpaid for?
posted by billsaysthis at 03:00 PM on July 18, 2005
billsaysthis: so? Unless their is a rule saying that teams must field homegrown players (like MLS), what should it matter? That comment was a subtle jab at Arsenal in an effort to provoke some sort of nationalism. I simply pointed out the irony of that comment coming from a team owned by someone who isn't British. And one who's wealth comes from suspect sources, no less.
posted by scully at 03:18 PM on July 18, 2005
terrapin, I have to ask, where in the hell are you moving that doesn't show FSC?
posted by Texan_lost_in_NY at 03:55 PM on July 18, 2005
Well, Texan, I sorta mispoke. They very well may have FSC in Vermont, but we won't be able to afford a luxury like cable once we move. At least not at first.
posted by scully at 05:45 PM on July 18, 2005
Well, I'm near NYC and I'll be glad to get a splitter, db booster and run my directv up to you:-)!
posted by Texan_lost_in_NY at 05:50 PM on July 18, 2005
How very generous. cheers ;)
posted by scully at 07:00 PM on July 18, 2005
Terrapin, I never said there's a rule, though UEFA is trying to get something along these lines put through, just that Chelsea in my eyes as generally avoided huge terrible purchases and Mourinho has made a point to keep a solid English core while other top squads make almost no effort at all to stay in touch with their locale and I think that's a reasonable way to run the team. Will it get the Blues all four trophies this year? Probably not but I expect they'll get closer than last season.
posted by billsaysthis at 11:46 PM on July 18, 2005
And I think Chelsea get all the local talent because no one else can bid with them. In the case of SWP, Arsenal wanted him too. But they couldn't compete with Chelsea's deep pockets. So Chelsea is able to sign him and, then after they have, make a snide comment about how they are signing the local lads. And they know that will stir the pot. Combine this with the other crap accusals they are throwing at Arsenal (supposed FA darling who get all the breaks, HA!) and it is seen as what it is. Another attempt to get a dig in. Yeah, I know, it is English football. But I think the playing of the nationality card is a dangerous path to go down.
posted by scully at 06:05 AM on July 19, 2005
This is why Chelsea's deep pockets upset so many people. Maybe me, more than some. "If [Michael Essien] must go, we want what you'd get for the best in his role. Chelsea were ready to pay Gerrard's asking price." That is the so-called reasoning for the record £32m they are asking. This sort of thing is not good for any sport, IMHO. Maybe I should hold up a sign at the Chelsea v. DC United match reading "Mourinho: You can have me for only £100,000"
posted by scully at 06:16 AM on July 19, 2005
How is 32MGBP a record? Figo cost more than that, and so did two other deals I saw mentioned when the Gerrard transfer was in the news. Still, let's offer Jose a package deal, the both of us for £250k! Blue is very flattering on me.
posted by billsaysthis at 10:48 AM on July 19, 2005
Not sure how that URL got bunged, but here is the quote and the link to the article which called it a "British" record, which I inadvertently left out... "Chelsea will step up their pursuit of Michael Essien on Tuesday despite being told they must pay a British record fee of £32m for the 22-year-old." mea culpa.
posted by scully at 11:55 AM on July 19, 2005
"This carries on the Chelsea policy of investing in young, top English talent." Wow. And yet another (if somewhat subtle) jab at Arsenal. Coming from a team owned by a Russian gazillionaire. Rich.