The on topic thread

[Magma]

Making the game cheap enough to get 80k is a smart idea.

Better atmosphere + would almost make as much as charging twice the amount and only getting 50-60k

if only clubs could work that out regularly instead of leaving the best fans at home/in the pub

 

[jd2010]

if only clubs could work that out regularly instead of leaving the best fans at home/in the pub

Unfortunately our new home ground won't be big enough to continue that. 61k and they'll still be able to charge whatever which isn't right. Wish we just made it 75k and cheapened the top deck for families

 

[moomba]

Cheap seats deserves praise. Whatever the reason for it.

I'd rather Spurs werent allowed to use Wembley at all. But they are and if they get 70k plus through the gates each week thats fantastic.

 

[kangaspurs]

I wonder if there will be a cap on the money that Spurs can earn from those games though. Will they just pay a fee to lease the stadium for a year or will they also have to turn over a certain percentage of their gate receipts so that they don't earn more than what they would have if they were still at WHL or the new stadium.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Cheap seats deserves praise. Whatever the reason for it.

I'd rather Spurs werent allowed to use Wembley at all. But they are and if they get 70k plus through the gates each week thats fantastic.

It wasn't our first choice. Wanted to rent Boleyn for a season but was demolished, wanted to share the Olympic for a season but the committee who decides were being leaned on by Brady and the pr0n bros to not let us and then explored MK Dons but decided not to after fan backlash (given how despicable MK are)... So Wembley it is, Arse should let us ground share to return the favour but they're campaigners

 

[Bojan KantKick]

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Gerrard. Lost a title.

 

[Sub_Zero]

Gerrard. Lost a title.

This. lol how can you even compare the 2

 

[Art Vandelay_]

 

[Bojan KantKick]

!!!!!

 

[chef]

Yep. We have the best and most talented academy around atm so we need to be integrating these guy into the senior squad. It's slowly happening, but it's not an easy thing to do for the big clubs.

Christensen should be the next one to do it. Traore and Baker may join him.

 

[Cruyff14]

!!!!!

Why are you surprised?

 

[jd2010]

!!!!!

tbh i thought it was a typo made by this guy

 

[Established1870]

Yep. We have the best and most talented academy around atm so we need to be integrating these guy into the senior squad. It's slowly happening, but it's not an easy thing to do for the big clubs.

Really? PSG, Barcelona, Real Madrid, Atletico Madrid, Bayern, Dortmund, Monaco, Lyon, Schalke and AC Milan all have loads of youth players in and around their squads right now. Athletic Bilbao can only have players from the Basque Country, which is the size of SA (if not smaller), and they made a European final not long ago and have never been relegated from La Liga.

Seems more an English thing then a big club thing.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Yep. We have the best and most talented academy around atm so we need to be integrating these guy into the senior squad. It's slowly happening, but it's not an easy thing to do for the big clubs.

Christensen should be the next one to do it. Traore and Baker may join him.

I saw your little clip in regards to big clubs v smaller clubs. Nonsense of course, plenty of big clubs have a youth focus. It's just a cop out to explain your rorting of the youth system. It staggers me why 10-16yo kids join Chelsea (amongst a few other clubs), they'll never play for the club. It's rather sad.

Edit: Est 1870 beat me to it.

 

[jd2010]

Really? PSG, Barcelona, Real Madrid, Atletico Madrid, Bayern, Dortmund, Monaco, Lyon, Schalke and AC Milan all have loads of youth players in and around their squads right now. Athletic Bilbao can only have players from the Basque Country, which is the size of SA (if not smaller), and they made a European final not long ago and have never been relegated from La Liga.

Seems more an English thing then a big club thing.

How many academy players are in the first team squads of those in bold?

Just wanting to compare to what we've got currently.

 

[chef]

Really? PSG, Barcelona, Real Madrid, Atletico Madrid, Bayern, Dortmund, Monaco, Lyon, Schalke and AC Milan all have loads of youth players in and around their squads right now. Athletic Bilbao can only have players from the Basque Country, which is the size of SA (if not smaller), and they made a European final not long ago and have never been relegated from La Liga.

Seems more an English thing then a big club thing.

Yeah, i was thinking from an EPL perspective.

 

[chef]

I saw your little clip in regards to big clubs v smaller clubs. Nonsense of course, plenty of big clubs have a youth focus. It's just a cop out to explain your rorting of the youth system. It staggers me why 10-16yo kids join Chelsea (amongst a few other clubs), they'll never play for the club. It's rather sad.

Edit: Est 1870 beat me to it.

Wasnt aimed as a 'clip' so sorry if it offended you mate

Not sure what the rorting is about

TBH the only one out of our academy that we missed is Bertrand, cant think of any others that have slipped through our fingers. This current group though has more potential than ive ever seen and if we dont get 3 or 4 decent Chelsea players out of it we have failed as a club.

 

[chef]

How many academy players are in the first team squads of those in bold?

Just wanting to compare to what we've got currently.

How many academy guys are playing for United, Arsenal, City, Pool and you guys?

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Wasnt aimed as a 'clip' so sorry if it offended you mate

Not sure what the rorting is about

TBH the only one out of our academy that we missed is Bertrand, cant think of any others that have slipped through our fingers. This current group though has more potential than ive ever seen and if we dont get 3 or 4 decent Chelsea players out of it we have failed as a club.

It's just a shame that you've got enough loanees to fill a small nation and none of them will ever play for the club, their sole purpose is to be "fattened up" on loan to generate a selling fee. If they're not good enough for the club most others give them a chance to prove themselves (in the first team) or release them.

Imo, your youth academy doesn't have "playing first team football for Chelsea" as its number one and sole aim, money is a key consideration and that's sad given it's a club with a endless pit of money. It seems like some of these kids are mislead about their prospects at the club.

 

[SM]

It's just a shame that you've got enough loanees to fill a small nation and none of them will ever play for the club, their sole purpose is to be "fattened up" on loan to generate a selling fee. If they're not good enough for the club most others give them a chance to prove themselves (in the first team) or release them.

Imo, your youth academy doesn't have "playing first team football for Chelsea" as its number one and sole aim, money is a key consideration and that's sad given it's a club with a endless pit of money. It seems like some of these kids are mislead about their prospects at the club.

We've had this discussion several times before - in fact I think it was a big topic on the podcast last season possibly - but surely as a kid you'd love to join Chelsea because they have such a good record of churning out good players whether they go on to play at Chelsea or secure the player a move to a good club. Bamford seems to just about be the only one who has been shafted, and that's been by the clubs taking him on loan, not Chelsea.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

We've had this discussion several times before - in fact I think it was a big topic on the podcast last season possibly - but surely as a kid you'd love to join Chelsea because they have such a good record of churning out good players whether they go on to play at Chelsea or secure the player a move to a good club. Bamford seems to just about be the only one who has been shafted, and that's been by the clubs taking him on loan, not Chelsea.

If they're up front with them at the beginning about this then no issues, if they sign with this being conveyed to them that's their choice. Then the club isn't really at fault as players make their own choices. Just don't think that'd be the case 100% of the time.

 

[SM]

If they're up front with them at the beginning about this then no issues, if they sign with this being conveyed to them that's their choice. Then the club isn't really at fault as players make their own choices. Just don't think that'd be the case 100% of the time.

Are they not up front when players sign?

 

[jd2010]

How many academy guys are playing for United, Arsenal, City, Pool and you guys?

Not sure about the rest.

But for us in our squad of 25 its; Rose (signed I know but spent years in the youth sides), Carter-Vickers, Winks, Onomah & Kane. 3 of the 5 pretty key members of the squad

 

[chef]

It's just a shame that you've got enough loanees to fill a small nation and none of them will ever play for the club, their sole purpose is to be "fattened up" on loan to generate a selling fee. If they're not good enough for the club most others give them a chance to prove themselves (in the first team) or release them.

Imo, your youth academy doesn't have "playing first team football for Chelsea" as its number one and sole aim, money is a key consideration and that's sad given it's a club with a endless pit of money. It seems like some of these kids are mislead about their prospects at the club.

If they are good enough they'll play, if not they'll be sold for a profit. Its not a bad thing.

Christensen is good enough and he'll play next season and save us 20-30m that we would have had to spend.

Bertrand is the only one i can think of that we missed, Mou wasnt a fan.

Of the other 'former' loanees Courtois and Moses are playing a big part this season. Zouma, Ake, Chalobah and RLC are waiting in the wings. Im happy we are filling our squad with youf players, just need them to start grabbing starting spots.