EXPLAINED: Chelsea’s transfer plan & how it could succeed | The Football Reporters | ESPN FC
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 15 сен 2024
- ESPN FC's Mark Ogden, James Olley and Rob Dawson join forces on The Football Reporters to discuss the theory behind Chelsea's transfer policy after another summer of controversial spending from Enzo Maresca's side.
Article link:
Subscribe to ESPN UK: bit.ly/1oGUzVA
Follow ESPN UK across multiple platforms:
/ espnuk
/ espnuk
www.espn.co.uk/
![Eminem - Fuel (Shady Edition) feat. Westside Boogie & GRIP [Official Audio]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/k1OquBida9s/mqdefault.jpg)
I am surprised anyone is bothered to try and understand what Chelsea is doing.
I thought the fashionable trend was coming on line and shout"They spent a billion pounds!"
What 😂 how about they’ve given players 6,7,8&9 year contracts how about they signed Two players for 100 million that are absolutely useless, I think you’re oversimplifying things a bit, don’t you?
@@englishjona6458 Not really. I would very much like to hear pundits mention this.
@@englishjona6458not the first time in history big money transfers failed to hit the ground running
Like they say in this video
Transfers in itself is a gamble
@englishjona6458 Moises for the last 5 games last season showed he has quality, Enzo though I'm not sure about
Or Chelsea has spend more under Clearlake than the entirety of Everton's history
James olly top class jounalist tbh
* Olley
Nope. Absolutely useless. If he was good he wouldn’t been seen dead near the ESPN logo. Embarrassing bunch.
*WARNING*: Long finance rant below...
Chelsea is a classic 10-year asset management play... The clues are there that the Premier League clubs will push for rules/a system that allows clubs to value individual players without having to sell that player to prove a value.
It's likely that a true 'NAV' (net asset value) of a club's squad will emerge that replaces PSR and allows clubs to prove their liquidity/NAV by demonstrating each player's value minus amortised liabilities, without needing to sell the player to prove the value.
The NAV figure is important because the value increase of a player can quickly be multiples of their amortised liability... Cole Palmer is what now? £100m-£125m? So he's only a £6m per year liability on Chelsea's books but his value increase is 10x the £6m annual amortised liability.
Lastly, any NAV rule would also have to limit player registrations, otherwise a model like Chelsea would continue to acquire promising players for £20m-£40m... It might sound counterintuitive, but buying multiple £20m-£40m players actually reduces the risk, because most they might need to write off is £20m-£40m but, like Palmer, a £40m outlay could triple to £120m.
Sorry for the rant but it's my line of work.
But that NAV figure would likely need to change at the drop of a hat due to a thousand other situations, injuries to other players at 100 other clubs that would inflate the worth , or indeed the opposite where one might value an asset, say a toney at 100m but circumstances meant clubs wouldn't even pay 30m a few months later. Essentially rises and drops like fantasy football
Good, salient points.
I think the problem that Chelsea is going to face is that there are only very few teams who can afford that 100+ million transfer fee. That and the fact that the 80 million they'd look to make wont offset the losses from other huge transfers they made for players based upon potential.
Very Interesting information actually, thank you for sharing your wisdom
@@MarquisdeSuavethe academy players would go along way to offsetting those losses
Don’t be sorry , thank you for explaining !
Im not a chelsea fan but I think this is going to be very successful model and whithin 5 yrs most of the clubs will start following.. It just need lil tweaks
Thank you. Outliers are often seen as odd when starting off but soon when things start popping off people will criticize that 1 billion was spent without looking at what was recouped in an effort to take on the swiss army knife approach.
Agree 100%.
Lets face it, who ever rated what the Angels did with Moneyball? Crazy right? But analytics in baseball won the day, why not for football?
The fact that Chelsea forced the fa and UEFA to change the rules that Chelsea were exploiting shows that those guys know how to get the best out of their predicaments since they study the system. I can't claim to know what they are seeing to make these decisions but I bet they know what they are doing.
A grown up discussion thanks
Can’t believe ESPN put out some actual journalism. Would be cool to see them keep it up
Interesting video. Makes a change from usual "chelsea spend alot" that comes from media
The Chelsea champions league point is lame. Their win was unlikely and an anomaly. On top of that, both Rudiger and Christiansen were gone at the takeover through no fault of Clearlake so their defense, which is how they won the CL was decimated. Mendy then completely lost the ability to be a GK for some reason. Kante could not stay healthy. James and Chillwell haven't been able to play even a 4th of a season. The owners had to make changes quickly to recoup any money on majority of the players they had and have don't really good selling business in that sense. You can question some of the recruitment but the rebuild was a necessity.
They are not 🚫 good enough 😢👎🏾🙄
a fourth of a season is like 1.5 games :)
100% Correct
@@PazLeBon it's 9.5 games..
@@PazLeBon are u dumb?
People are soooooo quick to forget the transfer ban that predated Clearlake coming in and hamstringed the makeup of the team
Nah, we had youth team players being integrated to negate that transfer ban. We really should've been set for a number of years.
The bigger issue is Chelsea spending more money than they can earn. Chelsea now are in the conference league. They will need to sell before they can buy quick enough under current PSR rules
Mark really doesn't like Chelsea 😂
I was just like “stop talking bro, you got no objectivity in your opinions”
Mark really doesn't like anything 😂
Ogden is such a hack. Not even hiding it 😂
Just because these owners have a different approach to managing a football club doesn't mean they don't know what they're doing, it was always supposed to be a three to four year project with a complete restructuring of the club I believe they're on the right track only time will tell
Good point. “I don’t understand Clearlake’s strategy so they must have no idea what they’re doing” something something pot something black kettle
Excellent balanced and informative content. Well done ESPN!!!
Truth is we were the most improved team last season. As long as we continue to improve and stay at the top consistently. Then I dont see how the project is not working.
Improving upon? Chelsea are in the conference league
@@SkywalkerXxXimproving upon a 12th place finish. 12th to 6th is a pretty sizable jump…
Ogden is a joke at this point, the open bias against Chelsea is pathetic. Hoping that actual journalists like James get more screen time moving forward.
Ogden is an embarassment
Yes Chelsea had one very very bad season since the new ownership then last year managed to archive European football yes Its not UCL or UEL but its still something, now this season is the Deal Breaker if Chelsea manages to reach Top 4 means the plan is moving in the right direction.
for 11 players
Liverpool seem to do okay with their squad building and spend pennies in comparison to us
Liverpool are the 4th richest club in world football. Most successful club in English football. Liverpool have far more fans, far more earning capacity. Don't compare Chelsea to Liverpool
They are not rebuilding. But rather transitioning.
Rebuilding at Chelsea is from top to bottom. Big difference.
Mark Ogden is bottom tier journalism on display
As a Chelsea fan, I'm never going to complain about the owners spending money to buy players. Spend away. They will hit big on some of them. More Cole Palmers. I think Caciedo's great too. Buy some additional CB's next please.
Virtually every ex-player I have heard has said they would take a a 7 or 9 year deal all day long.
Interesting analysis. I'm going nuts with all these moves but I really appreciate your outlook on this. Thanks for not just going with the "they spent a billion pounds" bs.
The one we need an explanation for is why buy so much in the same position ? And why treat players like that in isolation. Also why maresca saying people wont play which closes the door. So if there are alot of injuries these players wont give 100 to the team
Not the same position they buy players for the “Swiss army knife approach” players that can play in multiple positions like for instance Joao Felix can play false 9, attacking midfielder and left wing. Sancho can play as a 10 , left wing, right wing like that
@@Newsome6277thank you for having some sense cos sometimes I’m baffled at the narrative that people create about Chelsea without applying much critical thought
@@Newsome6277 so in theory you need less players not more
@@PazLeBon Not really, if you have multiple players that can play multiple positions it gives them more chances at playing rather than being perpetually stuck on the bench, so more rotation, especially with such a huge roster and the possibility of injured players in the first 11, and it allows for players on the field to change position mid-game if needed, so more tactical options depending on the occasion. Only time will tell if it will work, it is only a matter of the coach and team being able to pull it off and how effective this will be.
@@laser__unicorn thats why we have a bench tho and usually with play anywhere players is that they are not the best in any of those positions
And if players want to go to Brighton for example as you say. Yes they are on a lower amount per week, who is paying the last 5-6 years of their contracts to end them though if they want to move?
So you think teams buy contract from each other instead of negotiating personal terms?
They are committed to paying Palmer £45 million and Mudryk £40 million no matter what. The credit rating agencies regard long-term contracts as debt. They have seen companies go bust signing too many long-term contracts. The market changes. If Mudryk fails at Chelsea will anyone in the PL take on his contract?
@@harrybartok palmer is on £80k a week and Mudryk is on £100k which is a lot less than most of their rivals
@@harrybartokso take Lewis hall for example he had just signed a new contract with Chelsea and he transferred to Newcastle for 35 million and he negotiated a contract with them. Then look at the Sancho contract with Manchester United signing a contract for 325k a week compared to Mudryk who is 100k a week which players salary is more likely to be paid by a buying club nobody’s going to pay the wages they are paying Sancho which is the main reason why Utd are losing so many players to free transfers
This guy clearly doesn’t understand how transfers work lol, so if a club want to sign Enzo for 65m say, you think they have to pay an extra 40m to pay off his contract? Are you dumb? 😂 only the club could request more money as he has more years left on the contract, doesn’t mean the club will nor does the buying club have to pay that, go back to baseball bud football clearly ain’t for you
you guys all need pop filters for the mics
love this type of show!!!! keep it hoing
Ogden is a hack, lets be honest about this
Why do people say that Mudryk is a bust? That's exactly what they said about Havertz and look what he is doing at Arsenal now. He would have been much better off at Arsenal under Arteta.
Love yr discussions boys, look forward to new episodes
I find it funny that he's so fixated on these long contracts. They've told you the salaries these players are on. You think they'll have trouble selling with players on average 60k a week?
I tell u today and i told you before and I will tell you again.. Enzo is a yes man to the owners... Owners gave him the list of which players they wanted to go before he signed the contract.. if not, he wouldnt have left Chalobah from Pre-Season, Sell Conor, say Sterling is not the kind of winger he want but Mudryk is his kind..Enzo just wanna add to his CV. its not gonna work out well with Chelsea... that I know for sure
Even better than a yes man - he has got an attitude & can be used to hang out the dirty laundry
I am very grateful for this insightful explanation.
It looks, from the outside, like they have no idea, lots of money and a unbalanced side.
Now I know differently, thanks.
Is it just me or was that intro weird and awkward
Media being wilfully ignorant is sO annoying , please refer back to the conditions on the sale of the club , Roman made sure the owners would invest a significant amount of money into the club and that's what the new owners are doing ffs. Everyone's attitude will change once chelsea start turning out good results and the players are valued more than what they were paid for as the yet to reach their prime. The owners came with a new strategy to meet the conditions of the sale of the club and working within the existing rules to maximize the value they get in the transfer market. And now EPL and UEFA are moving the goal posts and changing the financial rules because they were the only ones smart enough to gain the system with the existing rules. WHY IS THERE NO CONVERSATION ABOUT THE RULES CHANGING ON THE WIM OF THE CORRUPT ????!!!! Sports media 'journalists' have no backbone or integrity, won't talk about city's 115 charges but will talk to death about Chelsea, wake up clown world.
the flaw is already showing. most clubs wont be able to afford them silly prices are are already cutting back a lot.
Not surprised they didn't mentions why Todd was the acting Sporting Director. People claim everyone was sacked when in reality sections of the staff were replaced whilst they wanted key members to stay - the likes of Marina Granovskaia and Petr Cech, however they left far earlier than what the new ownership wanted as in Petr's own words seeing them going in a different direction and didn't want to impose so he left before everything would completely change. Without a doubt most positions were due for a change like any ownership may implement.
If one of the two remained the pressure upon Tuchel would not have happened when the new owners needed his input. Clearlake and Todd never wanted to be acting SD but with their desired appointment(s) on gardening leave or working under different clubs they couldn't be appointed with the team needing signings with 2 free transfers leaving the club in Christensen and Rudiger, alongside an offboard striker in Lukaku who did not want to cooperate with the club.
Tuchel needed signings and input in a new environment with very little help, so the experienced signings never succeeded (Sterling, Koulibaly, Audbameyang) all under a differing direction for Tuchel.
Chelsea's plan might be brilliant but they have been absolutely awful in implementing it
Comparing Moneyball to Chelsea is comical. The Oakland A's had to change the way they did things to compete vs big money teams. Chelsea is that big money team
The way he compared it to Moneyball made sense, though. He was just saying that the Chelsea model is very different from most other clubs, just like the A's moneyball model was very diffferent. He wasn't saying the specifics of the models had anything in common. Edit : and then later they mention it again as supposedly Chelsea feels extremely strongly about choosing players based on data analytics which is a huge part of the moneyball model.
@Asshat237 moneyball is not just about choosing player based on data analytics. It's about using data to find players who outperform metrics which other clubs are not looking at, and therefore undervalued by the market and can be bought on cheap transfer fees.. look at 30m for RM reject Odegaard, 25m for Chelsea reject Kovacic etc. Or as the movie puts it.. "an island of misfit toys".
Breaking records to sign players like Enzo and Caicedo that everybody wants on huge transfer fees are clearly not it.... Heck. Arsenal getting Sterling on 7m loan package from Chelsea deal IS more moneyball than any signing Todd Boelhy has made...😂
@@Asshat237 i don't know ?
@@findingaetherfor every Fernandez, mudryk, caicedo you have a Renato veiga, Malo gusto, palmer and madueke etc. What about sancho? Is he not a classic “moneyball” signing. Felix? Anyone can cherry pick individual examples to prove a point but it’s about the overall picture
@Graziak5 you talk like Todd Boelhy had a big picture lol.
Out of all the transfers you listed... I can safely say only Palmer can be see as a moneyball signing since everyone said it was overpaid at that time but is now seen as a steal It means that he is underrated by people. Nobody is batting an eyelid on the amount of money spent on the transfer of the likes of Malo Gusto or Madueke who both cost around 30m and seems like fair value for players of their talents atm? Nobody in the right mind saying. "Wow 30m for a second choice winger/right back... what a steal!"
A 25m Kovacic waltzing past the 250m Chelsea midfield to score the 2nd goal in their recent game against Man City sums up what a clownshow the whole thing is I am not sure why you are trying to whiteknight these people?
17 seconds in and you’ve already deliberately twisted two facts. Despicable click bate half baked journalist.
1. No mention of income
2. Tried to make it sound like 38 of of our 40 new signings have left
Just pathetic.
This they inherited a cl winning squad has to change.
Lets go over the 11
Mendy/kepa, shorter deals or overperforming
Chillwell and james, fitness and short contracts
Rudinger, azpi, silva, alonso, christensen out of contract or short contract
Kante/jorginho/kovacic all on short contracts and aging (kante was the best player in the world during that cl run, and played less then 30% of the minutes his last 3! Years as chelsea)
Mount, pulsic, havertz short contracts
Ziyecj/lukaku the coach didnt want to work with
Werner misses goals
Americans do not understand the British or Europeans. In the USA sacking someone is easy. In their sports most players and fans do not think of people ad "home-grown" as there is none. If a player in the NFL gets Traded most fans forget about it in a few weeks. In England Sterling gets booed by Liverpool still.
The USA is also so big that the rivalry of British and European teams as local to them can be a 6 hour drive.
Who wouldnt be a yesman to someone who invested a billion
What happens with Reece James, he's on 260K a week, how long before that becomes a problem?
What a huge suprise to listen to enlightened and well considered perspectives on ESPN. I am so sick of the nonsense that usually passes for insight here, and in general about Clearlake. I throw up everytime I hear the the term 'scattergun'. Just jump on the bandwagen of reactionary hatred of CFC is surely the norm.
I feel like a lot of context around the previous ownership group is being ignored in all of this
anyone can have a plan. whether it makes sense is another question... and whether it works is another question as well.
Buying young players isnt a plan. A plan is a detailed proposal to achieve a goal. Buying young players doesnt achieve an performance goals and its certainly not detailed. They dont have any plan to build a team that can win.
U mean u can't see the plan...just because you can't see it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
@@User677-56 doesnt mean it does either tho, or certainly that it isnt very flawed. the way i can see it work is if they start a 'rent a player" model :)
These guys have been successful in the past. Good chance they will be again....eventually @@PazLeBon
They are buying young but for a reason. They have a goal of reducing the wage bill which buying young allows you to do plus you get a young squad to grow together. Regarding talent ID, when buying young you get some amazing talent like Palmer, while also missing on players like Mudryk but they have a plan and have achieved it. Now they have to prove it on the pitch now
Their only plan is to make and keep as many pound notes as possible
I love people bantering that they have no strategy, we talking about a football club worth 3 billion. Ofcourse they have a strategy, just becuase you don't see it or get it right now doesn't mean its not there
Why doesn't everybody agree to one version of FFP ? If EUFA have a set of rules why doesn't the FA endorse them and make everyone comply letting different leagues have different rules is stupid as per Leicesters appeal being successful
The guy in the black shirt…don’t bother putting him on the show again. Mr Negativo.
He's right tho
Mudryk was 60 million rising to 80 with add ons that definitely haven’t been triggered, and his wage is around 70-90k, that’s not difficult to offload
You aren’t getting more than 30 for him now
@@esiriokoro7976 his book value will be around 42-43 million by the end of the season, then 34 million by the end of next, that wouldn’t be an unrealistic price for him when he’s 24yrs old
A lot of assumptions, if the player is a bust (Mudryk) Who's going to buy him. What a S**t show!!!
There are clubs in Saudi waiting to wave wads of cash at anything thats marketable. Lot of assumptions, yes, but those assumptions arent all drawn from the rear end.
Yes u are saying these players are cheap wages, over 8 years. But u are forgetting that these players are totally unknown, so we're is the gain . If I was a Chelsea fan I would quit 😢
Win win for Chelsea long contracts and low wages if the players flop another premier league will pick the player up because the wages are low or if not he will join the loan army and Chelsea will still recoup a fee .
We may not have players on bug wages but we are breaking records for the money we are paying for players to come to the team. N lets not forget the way they have treated our home grown players, its been disgraceful
Crashing the whole squad isn’t my idea of progress. Keep Loftus-Cheek, Hudson-Odoe & Covacic across midfield would have provided some continuity for the new management. Covacic still proved he’s a better midfielder than any of the current squad first game of the season. Need to settle down now and keep those who they consider for the future to build a group of 25-30 year olds and a backbone of more experienced players rather than yet more 20-25s and younger. Definitely don’t need Osimhen. Someone older for the main striker is necessary.
First of all learn how to spell Kovacic properly will you? Secondly the 3 players you mentioned were injured more than half the season every year they played, kovacic played more minutes but was never a consistent starter, city payed like 35m for a 28 year old who hadn’t had much impact at Chelsea in the years he played, so tell me, have you any idea what you’re talking about or just spouting nonsense in the hope of a few likes? Lol
And maybe I’m wrong about the likes because you don’t have a single one 🤡
What are likes? Couldn’t care less. I’ve been supporting Chelsea (for what its worth) longer than Todd Boehly & Behdad Eghbali (spelt correctly according to the internet) have been alive. I will have my opinion and you can have yours too. Hudson-Odoi (spelt correctly this time) was good for Nottingham Forest v us at end of last season. I suspect Loftus-Cheek would have held his own if he’d joined an English club. Good day.
Mark Ogden should be the manager of Manchester Utd seeing he just bashes other club instead of fair journalism and he will probably do a better job than Mr not harry potter
Sterling = David Justice
Yep that's smart business.
Winstanley & Stewart are incompetent. Poor deployment of cash. Enzo and Caceido are not worth the price tag. Sack them both and find sporting directors with some pedigree.
How are Chelsea able to spend so much money and Newcastle dont seem able to spend any because they are worried about breaking financial fair play rules.
Because Chelsea have a bigger fan base and they earn more than Newcastle.
They earn almost 3 times the revenue and make back half of what they spend in the transfer market. How much have Newcastle made in player sales since the takeover?
It's less than Chelsea have made in this one window.
You can’t expect to Chan 15/20 players every Every window, err that’s what it’s done tho and there are rules against it, so not only have they spent all that money and damaged their own club and brand they’ve also banned themselves 😂🤷🏽♂️
You guys don't know any other thing to talk about ? I am fed up with always talking negative about Chelsea. Everyone already knew about it. If Sterling is not from England no one will talk about him.
not even as one of the players with most titles in the prem? would be strange not to talk about him
Why not they told how much they got from sale😂..i understand there agenda and plan ..but they bought 1.2billion.and got 800 million from sale
That's not bad
@@lordbeerus6182 minus 400m isnt bad?
More BS and waffling namaste can't expect anything more of ESPN
I think that Chelsea think theses players are now investments that will get sold for more in the future. Other teams will probably just wait till they're desperate to get rid of these players. If these players aren't playing then they're not keeping their value.
Who are you talking about? "These players" There's hardly any left that aren't in the first team squad.
@@InvaderZim742 So recently Chelsea have been doing recruitment invest whereby they've now got 30+ potential first team competitors.
and much has united spent?
You need to work out the net spend. It’s ok saying how much they spent, but 38 players sold…….whats that working out to be ?
I think they’re $20 million or so in net spend this summer. That was before they sold the kid to Saudi though.
@@EveryOtherWeekendRVAmight be double that , but it’s still low. When people look at the spend and why can they get away with it, thinking chelsea have found a clever way around it, it’s simply buying and selling, is how they are doing it. Straight forward
There's no plan
Chelsea are paying arsenal to play Raheem Sterling? 13:51
They're still paying half his wages
Didn’t know tucker Carlson was a sports journalist now
You have to be talking to the yanks
ESPN trying to make sense😂 of
Haha Chelsea sold their hotels to there own company
Iam a chelsea fan,and a few years down the line,and r still in the dark,they need pedigree, not just young future stars,at the moment we aint challenging for top 4,let alone wining the league, all l have seen is rip the club up,have Americans won in football ,no they aint,so why do they think ,they know better,obviously they don't,we aint baseball team, so sort it out.
Boehly's PR team out in full force.
If we had sign oshimen i would agree. Rn i cant see any actual grand master plan n they not thinking clearly
The only thing regarding Sterling is Maresca lied to him and that will have the rest of the changing room pissed off. If he can lie to Sterling, what stops him lying to me?
They are taking an American sports version of the locker-room. Few people know they are safe. And the final roster decision is often by the GM(Sporting Director) accounting for cost.
What lie did he tell Sterling?
@@hillcountryblue7515 told him he was in his plans (until those above him did not want that).
@@albertbrammer9263 when exactly did he directly tell Sterling that he was in his plans?
I think anyone who has seen sterling play in a Chelsea kit and if familiar with that Chelsea model knew that Sterling was first on the chopping block due to his wages and massive underperformance. I think Enzo had a look at him in preseason, felt he wasn’t for him and moved on.
Would love a link to Enzo telling Sterling he’s in his plans.
Looooool Chelsea paying Arsenal to play Sterling 😂🤣😂🤣
So the billion pound 'blast phase' failed & so the next phase is selling all assets &signing cheaper players on 7-9 year contracts.
Selling Gallagher only covers the losses of signings like Sterling
Do you know what net spend is?
he doesn't 😂😂😂😂@mariocfc2308
@@mariocfc2308 Do you know what throwing money down the toilet is?
24/25: £-34.16m
23/24: £-157.14m
22/23: £-473.6m
Now they're selling assets to cover those losses & can't afford an elite striker
@@interstellarbeatteller9306 😂
Mr Ogden thinks he is a billionaire now. Relax bro you and your mom is for the street . Learn how to analyze things properly like the other two guys in the podcast
I dont know he brought a British guy to this place
Clearlake paid a premium for Chelsea because they were recent Champions League winners and one of Europe's elite clubs. They have destroyed the cub's value and turned it into a mid-table club. It is no longer worth £4.25 billion. The Saudis bought Newcastle for £300 million, Everton are valued at £600 million. That is what mid-table teams are worth. Without trophies, clubs don't get lucrative sponsorship deals and CL revenue. Chelsea don't look like a top-four team. Felix and Sancho are flakey. Someone like Poch who has played with and coached the best, knows what a good player looks like. they also understand psychology. Moneyball was mostly hype.
This ownership will age like milk 💯💯🔥🔥
James Olly collecting them checks from Egbahli & Clownlake like a good puppet spewing PR!
What do you really want? I think it's fair to have another take rather than all the speculations and negative stuff on here. Not like this is positive but it's something else.
Mouth piece for Clownlake. Pure fan brainwashing
Bwhahahahahahahahahahahahah.
And what if Chelsea gets a 20-25 point deduction because of all the Roman's dirty back-door dealings, bribe money, and secret offshore payments when he acquires players like Hazard, Eto, and Willian? It's not only City that could get relegated this year. Chelsea may go down with them
Clueless clueless Chelsea
Time will tell
Most improved team last season.
Facts@@mariocfc2308
Defending Clearlake’s strategy and chalking it up to there being a method to the madness is moronic. It’s just madness for a method to get conference league at best
Yes random youtube commenter definitely knows better
@@generaldanethis ownership is pants stop proppin it
@@manriquebrian this same ownership took The Dodgers to being one of the biggest names in Baseball over 10 years after taking them over, I trust their business acumen more than random RUclips commenters
@@generaldane let's see if this wasn't just a funky geopolitical buy that ended up on their laps....
@@generaldane nothing more than a business opportunity that got to them because of geopolitical shenanigans. These lot only care about making money. We'll see how We'll look back at this ownership aging like milk
If only all these assumptions came true, I would make gold out of sand and nuclear fusion in my toilet.
Bring Roman Back.
Out Clown Fake.
Todd Boehly and Clear Lake are fucking clueless.
Stupidity what do you mean they clearly dmt know what they Are doing.. do you know what u are talking about..Bias😂
Difficult for your brain to comprehend 😂
There's some sort of money laundering going on at chelsea
and theres no way the media will get in on it as the sports media are illiterate when it comes to finance matters, even when theres smoke in front of them. and those who sniff around will be met with pushback. whats going on there is absurd, and why the owners suddenly took an interest in chelsea, how they are paying for all this; i.e. who's money is involved, which banks, who is loaning money to who, how the owners make or lose money etc. are all questions not being asked or answered.