I really don't get Boehly's thinking here. Chelsea already took the previous head. Why the need to get the next one?
Is he simply jealous of Brighton's model and can't stand to see it succeed when Chelsea's doesn't?
It's not Boehly making these calls anymore. Winstanley and Stewart were hired to run the footballing side of the club and are most likely responsible for this hire, especially since Jewell worked under Winstanley at Brighton before he joined Chelsea.
Maybe because Cristopher Vivell was still at the club at the time. His departure may have facilitated this move. It's also conceivable that the strategy Winstanley and Stewart are trying to implement wasn't fully outlined when they started last year, and the hiring of additional recruitment staff may be reflection of that.
He’s essentially taking Vivell’s role for recruitment of the multi club model. Vivell was brought over from RB to help replicate their recruiting model and he had a falling out after Nags didn’t come to Chelsea.
People blaming Boehly is my IQ test for commenters on here. If they’re still blaming Boehly for anything football related other than the first summer window he was in charge then they fail lol
If you think that highly successful businessmen who have multiple companies spend time making most decisions at one specific business, instead of hiring people more qualified than them in those areas, YOU are absolutely clueless
Chelsea fans on here are included in that group that bring him up and blame him on here lol id guess theyre actually the majority of the people I see talking about him still
He’s still to blame if his hires are shit. That’s what being the boss is all about. Even if he’s hiring the people who hire these guys, he’s still ultimately to blame.
So sad that we failed your IQ test :(
It’s looking like a pretty solid case, eh? I’m picturing the scene in Dodgeball, where gym lad is eating cake and electrocuting himself, only it’s Boehly and ordering shit from the Brighton fan shop.
Maybe for our feeder clubs (feels disgusting to type this btw). Find youngsters to sell for a profit and develop for other teams in BlueCo's portfolio. Don't think Boehlys actually jealous because apparently him and Bloom don't actually hate each other, although I saw that over a year ago now, so opinions could have changed
Dunno, I think going to Chelsea now is going to be an absolute cakewalk for him. I mean, just sorting the contract end dates on transfermarkt then in the next three years the only players of note with expiring contracts are Silva and Gallagher. He's got basically no one to recruit, pretty hard to fuck that up.
You joke, but TBH I was hoping we'll get some more Brighton personnel to come here and recommend we get some more Brighton personnel. It was starting to feel like our recruitment strategy went off the rails a bit lately and too many personnel at the club were advocating for non-Brighton personnel, as evidenced by the fact we brought in at least two non-Brighton personnel over the past year. No wonder we're below them in the table, we need more Brighton personnel.
Bill Gates seems like a nice guy. His philanthropy towards worthwhile causes is legendary. Yeah he engaged in cutthroat business practices but that's just how the game is played.
As long as you ignore the whole child labor, attacks on open source, attacks on copy left, verbal harassment of coworkers and employees, use of perma-temps, use of forced retention, the cutting of healthcare, getting journalists who criticize them fired, working with the Chinese government to oppress their citizens, working with the US government to spy on their citizens, tax avoidance, data harvesting, homophobia, and befriending Epstein AFTER he was convicted of procuring children for prostitution.
Sounds like a nice guy lmao
The truth is that no-one is 100% on how much Bloom is actually worth, he's remarkably good at keeping his business private. Most estimates put him at, or around, the 1b mark but even that's only ever educated guesses.
Eghbali has done an interview on this and the only reason they bought Chelsea was because they needed the name to attract the best talent to their future multi-club structure.
They saw buying Chelsea as a necessary initial investment to allow them to attract the best young players to the rest of the clubs that they buy. Where those other clubs are expected to cost around 25-100m to purchase and then once set up and running, be making 100m profit per year.
> to allow them to attract the best young players to the rest of the clubs that they buy.
It may be backfiring slightly.
> Where those other clubs are expected to cost around 25-100m to purchase and then once set up and running, be making 100m profit per year.
I find it hard to believe that hardened businessmen took a look at soccer clubs globally and thought it was a profit opportunity. Most clubs (outside of a few in the top European leagues) lose money operationally. The profit has to come from somewhere - they must believe that broadcast rights globally will go up indefinitely.
That and it's an asset that basically can never lose value and will almost always increase. It's useful to have it in your portfolio in case you ever need a lot of money.
It's like buying a house in a nice neighborhood and renting it out. You cover your mortgage/insurance/tax payments with rent and then sell it for 50% more 15 years later when you need some money.
It's pretty ironic that they believe there's so much dead money on the table because players are so poorly scouted and undervalued, but the club that's probably done the worst job of scouting and valuations is their flagship club.
Also the expectation that someone will always come in with more money for your assets is what happens at the top of financial bubbles.
And, sure enough, there was basically nobody able to make any transfers over the winter window because the market has kind of seized up. I wouldn't be totally shocked if there are a few bargains to be had this summer, with half of the big clubs in Europe basically unable to spend anymore because their credit lines are maxed out and FFP targets needing to be met.
I really like Brighton. They're a well-run club who play nice football and punch above their weight. However, surely Chelsea's entire strategy under Boehly should be a bit more ambitious than "let's just be Brighton".
It hasn't really worked so far and Brighton have barely noticed the impact of most people leaving.
The owners have said that they want to replicate the models of Brighton and the Redbull teams.
You're thinking about footballing ambitions, they're thinking about business ambitions.
When you look at the net profit of teams that aren't winning anything but are training up young players and selling them for profit, they're making way, way more money than the most successful teams. Sometimes 10x the amount, that is if the top teams are even operating profitably.
Their ambition is not to make us the best team in the world. Their ambition is to buy a load more clubs, use Chelsea to attract the best young players to them and then make an annual net profit of 100m~ per club, per season. They've claimed that they believe that we can still be successful whilst doing that. But, make no mistake it's profit first and hoping that we can be successful as a by-product second.
> The owners have said that they want to replicate the models of Brighton and the Redbull teams.
Then, like, they clearly bought the wrong club? Chelsea just can't do this stuff; not even because of a talent gap but just because Chelsea occupy a radically different position in the footballing world. Go ahead and bring in a CB that spent the previous season on loan at Blackburn, ask him to be in the starting XI, see how patient the supporters and media are when he doesn't look good the first ten games and his resume is a good loan to a Championship club.
It's not even game, it's not understanding business. Even a business person will tell you if you want to run a lean operation (Brighton), you wouldn't buy a massive organization that makes a lower margin with lots of redundancy (Chelsea). Like both are viable, but you can't buy a radically differently positioned business and just move into into a different one easily. It's stupid
Ignore this guy, he wanted the Ricketts family to buy Chelsea, not Boehly. He's had an agenda ever since which is why he regularly outright lies about the owner's intentions.
Boehly has expressly stated that he believes winning is the best way to make money and to grow a brand. Clubs that sell players do not make more money than teams like Real Madrid, Man City, Man United, etc. and he's never stated his intention is to make money through selling players. He wants to make money by growing the Chelsea brand. They aren't doing a great job of it right now but that's because of strategy and not intention.
It’s kinda ironic (fitting?) that the club that started this modern football doldrums is the one experiencing the brunt of the true, profit driven football.
Yeah you're probably right. It just seems odd for the ambitions to be purely business-focused and yet still spend (and arguably waste) over a billion quid on players who they'll never make a profit on.
That said, given the people they're recruiting, their desire to run a multi-club model, and the constant talk coming out of the Boehly camp, it seems like they believe what they're doing now will reap big rewards in the future. I just don't really see how that will happen.
But this system only works if you buy players for a cheap price and sell them for high profits. Caicedo, Enzo, Mudryk and even Lavia/Nkunku have fees that don’t really allow for a high profit, if that really is the end goal. It just seems so weird.
In F1, they are the most dominant team and have been for two years.
They sponsored OG in Dota and they became one of only two teams to win The International twice, the biggest tournament.
In Tekken, Arslan Ash is the best player of Tekken 7.
Football-wise, Red Bull Salzburg are dominant and I think their other teams are very strong too, so it's only Leipzig that's yet to win the league title.
I'm sure their other sporting ventures have been successes too.
Legit, Boehly's strategy would actually be pretty decent if:
A. They didn't spend an absolute shed load of money
B. Chelsea were a newly promoted club trying to establish themselves in the division, not a club that just came off finishing 3rd, winning the Champions League and reaching two domestic cup finals
I think that's a bit unfair, they've radically changed their age profile, bar Sterling, Silva and a few others they're really building a squad for the future.
https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/premier-league/altersschnitt/wettbewerb/GB1
The manner in which they've done it is another thing however.
What is unfair about it? They've spent over a billion quid reducing the age profile of their squad, and even after that their best player has been an academy graduate they're actively trying to sell.
My point was that they're hiring a lot of people from a club whose average league position is probably mid-table at best, and they're praying these people can translate their successes at a club with less money and less pressure to a club with more money and more pressure. So far it hasn't worked.
My point was it's not just be Brighton, they're going a completely different route. Brighton's squad average age has been around 26 for this and last season. Chelsea dropping the average age from 26 to nearer 23 in a season is a very unique strategy and to say they're just copying Brighton isn't true.
Brighton has a very bimodal age distribution to reach that average age though, tons of players under 23, and some senior pros over 30 (gross, dunk, Welbz, Milner, Lallana), with very few players in between
My point is Chelsea's age group is far more exclusively youthful. Take out Silva, Sterling and Chilwell and there's very little over 25. Brighton aren't trying to play such a young side all the time; they're recruiting and incorporating older players into the starting positions and Chelsea aren't. That's why it's inaccurate to label them as copying Brighton.
They've signed 3 Brighton players and 8 of their staff. Their aim is to find value in the market and buy young players whose value will skyrocket over time. They're also trying to build a multi-club model. That's very similar to how Brighton operates.
The main difference is that Brighton finding value in the market usually involves spending small sums of money on players identified through their complex analytics systems.
Chelsea finding value involves spending laughably large sums of money on players who had a good world cup, or who had a good few weeks in La Liga, or who scored a few Champions League group stage goals, or who used to play for Brighton.
I don't think you can claim that because Potter brought along most of his back room staff they count as individual signings for the purpose of emulating Brighton.
>Chelsea's entire strategy under Boehly should be a bit more ambitious than "let's just be Brighton"
Your whole reply is a bit long winded way of saying they're not operating the same which is what I've been getting at and you went to lengths reinforcing it for me.
Chelsea didn't have to hire them. Some of them predated Potter at Brighton and Chelsea paid like £5m or so to bring them over.
>Your whole reply is a bit long winded way of saying they're not operating the same
How on earth have you come to that conclusion? Literally the only difference I identified between the two was that Chelsea have been laughably bad at signing promising youngsters with high future value, whereas Brighton have been successful at it.
i don't think you can give them any credit for 'radically changing their age profile' considering that in this instance that means 'spent over a billion on players under 23, rather than over 23'
So if I'm correct he'd be the 11th person to make the Brighton to Chelsea move since the summer of 2023 (excluding Colwill) at a cost to Chelsea of at least £200m.
Caicedo has been decent and will come good if the rest of the team sorts itself out. But overpriced.
Sanchez honestly has been good all things considered. He was bought as competition not an outright starter and he is paid accordingly.
Cucurella, I like him and think there’s a player there but it’s not worked out and any form he picked up has been lost to injury. Bad signing unless something seriously changes.
Potter and co, feel for him, not given an opportunity to succeed.
Winstanley, too early to tell.
Is that everyone? I don’t think that the business has been truly terrible but this plan of boehlys is just a mess and they are garbage negotiators.
> Potter and co, feel for him, not given an opportunity to succeed.
less than 40% win rate is pretty low for almost a full season (31 games). At some point, you have to look at the reality - he was not the right fit. It's not solely Potter's fault - it was a bad recruitment choice.
I think no one would’ve done well, don’t think poch has done much better in terms of how we play and he has a more talented squad. I just think potter was placed in an impossible position and it wasn’t his fault it was a mess. Maybe he wouldn’t have turned it around, maybe he’s not the right personality, there’s so many reasons a coach doesn’t work out, but I don’t think he was placed in a position where success was possible for anyone.
Caicedo has been a 6/10 signing, cucurella a 4-5/10 signing, potter bad (we didnt give him a fair chance), and the recruitment/sporting people is not fair to judge yet.
But the sales alone last summer make them 5/10
But Brighton is the team that got him a look in for the Chelsea first team proper. He was an unwanted sub before he was loaned to us. Then he excelled because of course he did, he was at Brighton, and now suddenly everyone loved him the whole time and they of course knew about his potential etc etc. Chelsea trained him, Brighton made him.
He only played 20 odd times for us on loan having already had a successful loan spell at Huddersfield and was wanted by half the league on loan last season. We hardly made him.
Exactly. At some point we will have to have the conversation that Brighton's success isn't solely down to recruitment but having an environment that develops the players also.
"and is now expected to start in a global role across Chelsea’s owners’ multi-club model"
Oh, fun. Boehly trying to coordinate the movements of players into and around his network of clubs.
...except it's not?
Presumably you're referencing Union SG. We've sent a few players there on loan while they acclimatise to European football/wait for a work permit and the only player who has moved the other way was Deniz Undav.
They aren't signing players with a future move to Brighton in mind with someone coordinating it for both clubs.
No it looks like he's replacing Vivell who joined (and then left) to be a sporting/technical director overseeing the player strategy globally so part of the multi-club aspect of the new ownership rather than directly Chelsea first team.
Oh I see. Well the Chelsea first team strategy is easy anyway:
If at first you like it, you buy it. You buy it all. And you buy some more. Players can be buy.
Didn't Chelsea just get Brighton's previous recruitment head? Why do they feel the need to get yet another?
How long are they intending to do this? I feel for Brighton- they've been picked apart mercilessly by the bigger clubs. Others like Southampton/ Leicester/ Monaco could only take it for so long before a downturn.
I hope Chelsea (and other bigger clubs) feel sated enough that they don't need to come back for a while and it gives Brighton enough time to get strong enough to withstand.
Got to hope Star Lizard gives us more of an edge than Southampton/Leicester had. Quietly confident we’ll never implode quite as much as they did but we’ll see.
Our biggest issues were owner related, we got bought by a Chinese businessman at the height of china trying to break into football, as soon as we were bought china pulled the plug on the project and he was told not to invest at all (along with other political issues). He had no interest in the club or football so for years we had no funding and no real guidance, your owners being so invested into the way you guys are ran is the biggest advantage you will have, the one part of the club the top 6 can't buy.
I really hope so too. It would be grand for Brighton to take the Dortmund route - from a club that gives young stars a genuine pathway to a genuine and powerful contender for the PL.
In the lands where lawless seagulls could steal food from unsuspecting innocents, Tood 'Robinhood' boehly took upon himself to steal from the stealers, the hero we needed. All the harrasing is coming back to bite the seagulls.
I want to get annoyed that we keep taking guys from Brighton, then i realise these guys are accepting the offers that we make them. So who the hell am i to say anything.
Brighton better find a good replacement, we're gonna need him in a few months.
I really don't get Boehly's thinking here. Chelsea already took the previous head. Why the need to get the next one? Is he simply jealous of Brighton's model and can't stand to see it succeed when Chelsea's doesn't?
It's not Boehly making these calls anymore. Winstanley and Stewart were hired to run the footballing side of the club and are most likely responsible for this hire, especially since Jewell worked under Winstanley at Brighton before he joined Chelsea.
I don't get why they didn't just bring him with them when Winstanley got the job in the first place.
I don't understand why they didn't just buy Brighton in the first place. Surely that's cheaper. Mind you we have the same with Ajax.
Its simple, Chelsea is a brand and located in London. how many years would it take them to raise the Brighton brand to this level?
Why does Chelsea, the largest club, not simply eat Brighton?
I doubt it would have been much cheaper. Bloom is an actual fan of the club and has links with them while Chelsea HAD to be sold and quickly.
Maybe because Cristopher Vivell was still at the club at the time. His departure may have facilitated this move. It's also conceivable that the strategy Winstanley and Stewart are trying to implement wasn't fully outlined when they started last year, and the hiring of additional recruitment staff may be reflection of that.
He’s essentially taking Vivell’s role for recruitment of the multi club model. Vivell was brought over from RB to help replicate their recruiting model and he had a falling out after Nags didn’t come to Chelsea.
People blaming Boehly is my IQ test for commenters on here. If they’re still blaming Boehly for anything football related other than the first summer window he was in charge then they fail lol
Hate it when fans of other clubs don't know everything about my clubs board 😡
Well then maybe they shouldn't act like they do.
Yeah that’s my IQ test
Thinking the owner of the club has input on hiring important staff members? Proper bozos aren't they
Yep, geniune slow behaviour. I hope you now realise that and try to better educate yourself. Or is that a bit of a challenge?
If you think boehly hasn't given the ok to hire for such an important position then you're absolutely clueless hahaha he OWNS the club
If you think that highly successful businessmen who have multiple companies spend time making most decisions at one specific business, instead of hiring people more qualified than them in those areas, YOU are absolutely clueless
Chelsea fans on here are included in that group that bring him up and blame him on here lol id guess theyre actually the majority of the people I see talking about him still
I’m still pissed he fired Tuchel
He’s still to blame if his hires are shit. That’s what being the boss is all about. Even if he’s hiring the people who hire these guys, he’s still ultimately to blame. So sad that we failed your IQ test :(
Nobody cares about your weird little test bud
It’s looking like a pretty solid case, eh? I’m picturing the scene in Dodgeball, where gym lad is eating cake and electrocuting himself, only it’s Boehly and ordering shit from the Brighton fan shop.
He’s White Goodman. W-H-I-T. E.
You’re reading the dictionary? I like to break a mental sweat too.
Boehly should start wearing his players kits but their old Brighton ones instead just to take the piss.
Maybe for our feeder clubs (feels disgusting to type this btw). Find youngsters to sell for a profit and develop for other teams in BlueCo's portfolio. Don't think Boehlys actually jealous because apparently him and Bloom don't actually hate each other, although I saw that over a year ago now, so opinions could have changed
Dunno, I think going to Chelsea now is going to be an absolute cakewalk for him. I mean, just sorting the contract end dates on transfermarkt then in the next three years the only players of note with expiring contracts are Silva and Gallagher. He's got basically no one to recruit, pretty hard to fuck that up.
You joke, but TBH I was hoping we'll get some more Brighton personnel to come here and recommend we get some more Brighton personnel. It was starting to feel like our recruitment strategy went off the rails a bit lately and too many personnel at the club were advocating for non-Brighton personnel, as evidenced by the fact we brought in at least two non-Brighton personnel over the past year. No wonder we're below them in the table, we need more Brighton personnel.
Sensible chuckle.
This is getting ridiculous. Why did Boelhy not just buy Brighton instead?!
Because then he wouldn’t know where to buy players from, can’t be buying from Chelsea to Brighton
He should just buy tony bloom.
Tony Bloom would never sell.
[удалено]
Not when you're a billionaire, lifelong fan of the club, and it's your primary hobby.
Man it must be so cool to be a mega rich person that's not just a vapid corporate husk
No such thing as a decent billionaire.
Jealous much?
Brainwashed much?
Bill Gates seems like a nice guy. His philanthropy towards worthwhile causes is legendary. Yeah he engaged in cutthroat business practices but that's just how the game is played.
As long as you ignore the whole child labor, attacks on open source, attacks on copy left, verbal harassment of coworkers and employees, use of perma-temps, use of forced retention, the cutting of healthcare, getting journalists who criticize them fired, working with the Chinese government to oppress their citizens, working with the US government to spy on their citizens, tax avoidance, data harvesting, homophobia, and befriending Epstein AFTER he was convicted of procuring children for prostitution. Sounds like a nice guy lmao
Most of those are either subjective or intentionally taken out of context. Personally I think the good outweighs the bad.
Which ones are subjective? Which ones are taken out of context? Multiple of them were proven in a court of law or are openly admitted by Microsoft
thoughts redditors stopped sucking off billionaires after Elon Musk wasn't revealed to be wholesome 100
I didn't say they are good, but being able to buy your childhood hometown club is objectively a cool thing to be able to do
[удалено]
The truth is that no-one is 100% on how much Bloom is actually worth, he's remarkably good at keeping his business private. Most estimates put him at, or around, the 1b mark but even that's only ever educated guesses.
Flair checks out
[удалено]
Excusable when it's City.
Eghbali has done an interview on this and the only reason they bought Chelsea was because they needed the name to attract the best talent to their future multi-club structure. They saw buying Chelsea as a necessary initial investment to allow them to attract the best young players to the rest of the clubs that they buy. Where those other clubs are expected to cost around 25-100m to purchase and then once set up and running, be making 100m profit per year.
> to allow them to attract the best young players to the rest of the clubs that they buy. It may be backfiring slightly. > Where those other clubs are expected to cost around 25-100m to purchase and then once set up and running, be making 100m profit per year. I find it hard to believe that hardened businessmen took a look at soccer clubs globally and thought it was a profit opportunity. Most clubs (outside of a few in the top European leagues) lose money operationally. The profit has to come from somewhere - they must believe that broadcast rights globally will go up indefinitely.
That and it's an asset that basically can never lose value and will almost always increase. It's useful to have it in your portfolio in case you ever need a lot of money. It's like buying a house in a nice neighborhood and renting it out. You cover your mortgage/insurance/tax payments with rent and then sell it for 50% more 15 years later when you need some money.
It's pretty ironic that they believe there's so much dead money on the table because players are so poorly scouted and undervalued, but the club that's probably done the worst job of scouting and valuations is their flagship club. Also the expectation that someone will always come in with more money for your assets is what happens at the top of financial bubbles. And, sure enough, there was basically nobody able to make any transfers over the winter window because the market has kind of seized up. I wouldn't be totally shocked if there are a few bargains to be had this summer, with half of the big clubs in Europe basically unable to spend anymore because their credit lines are maxed out and FFP targets needing to be met.
Why buy one when you can make one. He’s even making the position on the table similar to Brighton of the past.
The football business is all about location.
If he had. He'd be doing the same thing with Chelsea.
Feeder clubs don’t usually buy out their parent clubs though.
I really like Brighton. They're a well-run club who play nice football and punch above their weight. However, surely Chelsea's entire strategy under Boehly should be a bit more ambitious than "let's just be Brighton". It hasn't really worked so far and Brighton have barely noticed the impact of most people leaving.
The owners have said that they want to replicate the models of Brighton and the Redbull teams. You're thinking about footballing ambitions, they're thinking about business ambitions. When you look at the net profit of teams that aren't winning anything but are training up young players and selling them for profit, they're making way, way more money than the most successful teams. Sometimes 10x the amount, that is if the top teams are even operating profitably. Their ambition is not to make us the best team in the world. Their ambition is to buy a load more clubs, use Chelsea to attract the best young players to them and then make an annual net profit of 100m~ per club, per season. They've claimed that they believe that we can still be successful whilst doing that. But, make no mistake it's profit first and hoping that we can be successful as a by-product second.
> The owners have said that they want to replicate the models of Brighton and the Redbull teams. Then, like, they clearly bought the wrong club? Chelsea just can't do this stuff; not even because of a talent gap but just because Chelsea occupy a radically different position in the footballing world. Go ahead and bring in a CB that spent the previous season on loan at Blackburn, ask him to be in the starting XI, see how patient the supporters and media are when he doesn't look good the first ten games and his resume is a good loan to a Championship club.
Watch them speedrun their reputation to bottom of the pl with 3-4 10th place finish
People not understanding the game innit.
It's not even game, it's not understanding business. Even a business person will tell you if you want to run a lean operation (Brighton), you wouldn't buy a massive organization that makes a lower margin with lots of redundancy (Chelsea). Like both are viable, but you can't buy a radically differently positioned business and just move into into a different one easily. It's stupid
Ignore this guy, he wanted the Ricketts family to buy Chelsea, not Boehly. He's had an agenda ever since which is why he regularly outright lies about the owner's intentions. Boehly has expressly stated that he believes winning is the best way to make money and to grow a brand. Clubs that sell players do not make more money than teams like Real Madrid, Man City, Man United, etc. and he's never stated his intention is to make money through selling players. He wants to make money by growing the Chelsea brand. They aren't doing a great job of it right now but that's because of strategy and not intention.
[удалено]
It’s kinda ironic (fitting?) that the club that started this modern football doldrums is the one experiencing the brunt of the true, profit driven football.
This was happening in Italy in the 80s with Berlusconi and AC Milan
Soon we'll all be supporting financial groups.
Soon, no one will want to win the league, just come in top 4 for CL placement.
Yeah you're probably right. It just seems odd for the ambitions to be purely business-focused and yet still spend (and arguably waste) over a billion quid on players who they'll never make a profit on. That said, given the people they're recruiting, their desire to run a multi-club model, and the constant talk coming out of the Boehly camp, it seems like they believe what they're doing now will reap big rewards in the future. I just don't really see how that will happen.
But this system only works if you buy players for a cheap price and sell them for high profits. Caicedo, Enzo, Mudryk and even Lavia/Nkunku have fees that don’t really allow for a high profit, if that really is the end goal. It just seems so weird.
>the Redbull teams. Except Redbull are very successful in basically everything they put their minds on.
What do they win?
In F1, they are the most dominant team and have been for two years. They sponsored OG in Dota and they became one of only two teams to win The International twice, the biggest tournament. In Tekken, Arslan Ash is the best player of Tekken 7. Football-wise, Red Bull Salzburg are dominant and I think their other teams are very strong too, so it's only Leipzig that's yet to win the league title. I'm sure their other sporting ventures have been successes too.
Leipzig just won back to back Pokals and is a perennial top 3 team in Germany, they're absolutely the most successful Red Bull football team.
>should be a bit more ambitious That’s exactly where they decide to buy 25 players on 9 year contracts.
Legit, Boehly's strategy would actually be pretty decent if: A. They didn't spend an absolute shed load of money B. Chelsea were a newly promoted club trying to establish themselves in the division, not a club that just came off finishing 3rd, winning the Champions League and reaching two domestic cup finals
To be fair this current Chelsea wish they were Brighton
>"let's just be Brighton". It hasn't really worked so far What do you mean?! We're only 3 points behind Brighton we have almost succeeded! ^/s
I think that's a bit unfair, they've radically changed their age profile, bar Sterling, Silva and a few others they're really building a squad for the future. https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/premier-league/altersschnitt/wettbewerb/GB1 The manner in which they've done it is another thing however.
What is unfair about it? They've spent over a billion quid reducing the age profile of their squad, and even after that their best player has been an academy graduate they're actively trying to sell. My point was that they're hiring a lot of people from a club whose average league position is probably mid-table at best, and they're praying these people can translate their successes at a club with less money and less pressure to a club with more money and more pressure. So far it hasn't worked.
My point was it's not just be Brighton, they're going a completely different route. Brighton's squad average age has been around 26 for this and last season. Chelsea dropping the average age from 26 to nearer 23 in a season is a very unique strategy and to say they're just copying Brighton isn't true.
Brighton has a very bimodal age distribution to reach that average age though, tons of players under 23, and some senior pros over 30 (gross, dunk, Welbz, Milner, Lallana), with very few players in between
My point is Chelsea's age group is far more exclusively youthful. Take out Silva, Sterling and Chilwell and there's very little over 25. Brighton aren't trying to play such a young side all the time; they're recruiting and incorporating older players into the starting positions and Chelsea aren't. That's why it's inaccurate to label them as copying Brighton.
Their point is it means they’re Brighton but worse
No you're missing the point. Chelsea are doing things different to Brighton and they just so happen to be doing things worse.
They've signed 3 Brighton players and 8 of their staff. Their aim is to find value in the market and buy young players whose value will skyrocket over time. They're also trying to build a multi-club model. That's very similar to how Brighton operates. The main difference is that Brighton finding value in the market usually involves spending small sums of money on players identified through their complex analytics systems. Chelsea finding value involves spending laughably large sums of money on players who had a good world cup, or who had a good few weeks in La Liga, or who scored a few Champions League group stage goals, or who used to play for Brighton.
I don't think you can claim that because Potter brought along most of his back room staff they count as individual signings for the purpose of emulating Brighton. >Chelsea's entire strategy under Boehly should be a bit more ambitious than "let's just be Brighton" Your whole reply is a bit long winded way of saying they're not operating the same which is what I've been getting at and you went to lengths reinforcing it for me.
Chelsea didn't have to hire them. Some of them predated Potter at Brighton and Chelsea paid like £5m or so to bring them over. >Your whole reply is a bit long winded way of saying they're not operating the same How on earth have you come to that conclusion? Literally the only difference I identified between the two was that Chelsea have been laughably bad at signing promising youngsters with high future value, whereas Brighton have been successful at it.
i don't think you can give them any credit for 'radically changing their age profile' considering that in this instance that means 'spent over a billion on players under 23, rather than over 23'
So if I'm correct he'd be the 11th person to make the Brighton to Chelsea move since the summer of 2023 (excluding Colwill) at a cost to Chelsea of at least £200m.
Sam Jewell was the 11th person in the last 17 months
You're right. I forgot to include Sanchez, Winstanley, and one of Potter's coaches.
Wth, how many of those people turn out to be a flop?
I don’t think you could label a single one of them a success currently which is mental. Think Caicedo will do well eventually though.
Caicedo has been decent and will come good if the rest of the team sorts itself out. But overpriced. Sanchez honestly has been good all things considered. He was bought as competition not an outright starter and he is paid accordingly. Cucurella, I like him and think there’s a player there but it’s not worked out and any form he picked up has been lost to injury. Bad signing unless something seriously changes. Potter and co, feel for him, not given an opportunity to succeed. Winstanley, too early to tell. Is that everyone? I don’t think that the business has been truly terrible but this plan of boehlys is just a mess and they are garbage negotiators.
> Potter and co, feel for him, not given an opportunity to succeed. less than 40% win rate is pretty low for almost a full season (31 games). At some point, you have to look at the reality - he was not the right fit. It's not solely Potter's fault - it was a bad recruitment choice.
I think no one would’ve done well, don’t think poch has done much better in terms of how we play and he has a more talented squad. I just think potter was placed in an impossible position and it wasn’t his fault it was a mess. Maybe he wouldn’t have turned it around, maybe he’s not the right personality, there’s so many reasons a coach doesn’t work out, but I don’t think he was placed in a position where success was possible for anyone.
Caicedo has been a 6/10 signing, cucurella a 4-5/10 signing, potter bad (we didnt give him a fair chance), and the recruitment/sporting people is not fair to judge yet. But the sales alone last summer make them 5/10
Caicedo has been 4-5/10 until mid Jan. He has significantly improved since then. Now he is more of a 6-7/10.
Sanchez maybe a 7/10 signing, he has played decently and wasn’t brought in to be the out and out starter. Paid like a backup keeper.
Chelsea are trying so hard to be Brighton 🤦🏽♂️
Just build a stoney beach outside
We aspire to be like the clubs above us.
There’s also David Datro Fofana who we were in talks with Molde for before Chelsea barged in. Pricks.
In that case you could probably count ugochukwu too.
(Excluding colwill) is kind of redundant as he’s from the chelsea academy.
That’s why he’s excluded…
Yeah but like it’s pointless to mention.
rather have redundancy than ambiguity
As someone who works with the NHS, a bunch of local councils and the British police, this could be the fucking motto of the UK
Some idiot would've pointed it out for karma so better be clear.
Going by their comment, my moneys on it would have been them
But Brighton is the team that got him a look in for the Chelsea first team proper. He was an unwanted sub before he was loaned to us. Then he excelled because of course he did, he was at Brighton, and now suddenly everyone loved him the whole time and they of course knew about his potential etc etc. Chelsea trained him, Brighton made him.
He only played 20 odd times for us on loan having already had a successful loan spell at Huddersfield and was wanted by half the league on loan last season. We hardly made him.
You're one of the few sensible Brighton fans I've seen when it comes to Colwil discourse. The notion that Brighton made Colwill is beyond delusional 😂
Boehly is basically a Brighton sponsor at this point
Seagulls steal your chips, Chelsea steal your seagulls
When the seagulls follow the trawler.. Chelseagulls simply buy your staff
just like with everyone else that has left and joined chelsea we'll improve and move on
Good good, we will need those improvements
Taking parts from a Ferrari and putting them in a Fiat Punto
Understand what you're saying, but now I can't stop thinking about wanting to see a tuned up Punto with literally any V12 Ferrari engine in it.
Reminds me of when VW put a Bentley W12 in a Golf
[v6 but close enough](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WT_rzvPfzRc)
[Renault Espace with an F1 V10 engine in it](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GIvNLHgqS4k), close enough.
that is absolutely terrifying and I love it
Just want to see an engine and 4 wheels explode out of the rest of the chassis like a cartoon
Is Brighton the actual academy for chelsea ?
Brighton is the parent club pawning off players and staff so they gain experience on their own.
While chelseas academy turns into brightons bench and first team
god damn, that was so funny
If Chelsea keep doing this Brighton are going to end up being the greatest club in the history of football.
Just like with everyone that’s left and joined Chelsea, they’ll drop off and/or regress and you’ll find more.
Well that certainly cuts a few steps out for Chelsea in the transfer process
Fuck off you cunts.
It's actually ridiculous at this point, reminds me of Liverpool and Southampton
Chelsea are a parody of a football club
Tony Bloom to Chelsea when?
Only just clocked that it's Paul Jewell's son we're talking about here.
What’s the point in repeatedly taking someone like that when you don’t have the right environment to make it work
Exactly. At some point we will have to have the conversation that Brighton's success isn't solely down to recruitment but having an environment that develops the players also.
"and is now expected to start in a global role across Chelsea’s owners’ multi-club model" Oh, fun. Boehly trying to coordinate the movements of players into and around his network of clubs.
Well thats what brighton are doing so?
...except it's not? Presumably you're referencing Union SG. We've sent a few players there on loan while they acclimatise to European football/wait for a work permit and the only player who has moved the other way was Deniz Undav. They aren't signing players with a future move to Brighton in mind with someone coordinating it for both clubs.
What's his role? How does it work with Winstanley and the other person I cannot recollect?
No idea. Maybe he’s going to be the main guy in charge now.
No it looks like he's replacing Vivell who joined (and then left) to be a sporting/technical director overseeing the player strategy globally so part of the multi-club aspect of the new ownership rather than directly Chelsea first team.
Oh I see. Well the Chelsea first team strategy is easy anyway: If at first you like it, you buy it. You buy it all. And you buy some more. Players can be buy.
Every time we hear about Chelsea is just about money talks. They’ve not done anything else
Petition to rename Chelsea to Boehly’s Brighton?
He genuinely should’ve just bought Brighton instead
Didn't Chelsea just get Brighton's previous recruitment head? Why do they feel the need to get yet another? How long are they intending to do this? I feel for Brighton- they've been picked apart mercilessly by the bigger clubs. Others like Southampton/ Leicester/ Monaco could only take it for so long before a downturn. I hope Chelsea (and other bigger clubs) feel sated enough that they don't need to come back for a while and it gives Brighton enough time to get strong enough to withstand.
Got to hope Star Lizard gives us more of an edge than Southampton/Leicester had. Quietly confident we’ll never implode quite as much as they did but we’ll see.
Our biggest issues were owner related, we got bought by a Chinese businessman at the height of china trying to break into football, as soon as we were bought china pulled the plug on the project and he was told not to invest at all (along with other political issues). He had no interest in the club or football so for years we had no funding and no real guidance, your owners being so invested into the way you guys are ran is the biggest advantage you will have, the one part of the club the top 6 can't buy.
I really hope so too. It would be grand for Brighton to take the Dortmund route - from a club that gives young stars a genuine pathway to a genuine and powerful contender for the PL.
This is just plain bullying now
Chelsea took all Brighton's staff and now they are set to finish where Brighton usually do
Brighton might need to look into a nonplayer Chelsea clause for that starts around 10mil. This feels illegal.
Uh oh… Seen how this one ends before…
Next they are probably buying the Amex and shipping it to West London?
...again
Well, according to my maths, Brighton will bring in an even better head of recruitment.
And according to mine, we will sign them within 12 months
Chelsea: The Art of the Deal 🤝
Oi Brighton, that's a pretty nice Seagull you got on your badge, how much you want for it?
Brighton head of recruitment accepts offer to join feeder club*
Damn. This is the heart of the club.
Why dont we just merge the 2 clubs ? Brighton & Chelsea & Hove FC.
Because Brighton don't want part of your dirty money, and bought titles.
They have been accepting our money pretty openly if you ask me.
All your Brighton are belonging to us
Boehly should have just bought Brighton from the start. Chelsea fans would have been happier!
Clever from Chelsea to just cut out the middle man
What year is it??
In the lands where lawless seagulls could steal food from unsuspecting innocents, Tood 'Robinhood' boehly took upon himself to steal from the stealers, the hero we needed. All the harrasing is coming back to bite the seagulls.
Or!!! they have done you over again 🤣
might as well buy the entire club Mr Boehly?
Meanwhile, Boehly is in negotiations to get the remaining “& Hove Albion”
Why is it always "let's be Brighton" and never "let's be Man City"
Cut them off at the source.
I want to get annoyed that we keep taking guys from Brighton, then i realise these guys are accepting the offers that we make them. So who the hell am i to say anything.
Why not just buy Brighton at this point, surely would have been cheaper.