24-25 EPL Off and Running

[Allan McMurray]

About to close week #2 up today. My biggest take...what a complete and diabolical mess Everton are right now. Their current ownership ran that club into the ground.

I think this is the year their bubble burst and they open their brand new stadium up for the 25-26 season in the Championship.

Leicester may be relegated before they know it....they have an Everton/Forest type point deduction on the horizon for their spending in the few years leading up to their relegation year. Ipswich I don't think will have the vigor and fight that Luton did last year and capture the common American fan. I think Palace may get dragged down into the muck to, but not relegated, I don't think they've spent too much and have lost a few and could lose Geuhi. Overall I think the bottom is gonna be similiar to last season with more than just 3 in relegation contention and that the point totals are gonna be low. Meaning 35 points could be the new 40 point standard.

I don't really care about the top, but I'm hoping for Aston Villa to do well because they're not a big 4.

I'm just glad Saturday and Sunday mornings are back

 

[Fk_Pitt]

About to close week #2 up today. My biggest take...what a complete and diabolical mess Everton are right now. Their current ownership ran that club into the ground.

I think this is the year their bubble burst and they open their brand new stadium up for the 25-26 season in the Championship.

Leicester may be relegated before they know it....they have an Everton/Forest type point deduction on the horizon for their spending in the few years leading up to their relegation year. Ipswich I don't think will have the vigor and fight that Luton did last year and capture the common American fan. I think Palace may get dragged down into the muck to, but not relegated, I don't think they've spent too much and have lost a few and could lose Geuhi. Overall I think the bottom is gonna be similiar to last season with more than just 3 in relegation contention and that the point totals are gonna be low. Meaning 35 points could be the new 40 point standard.

I don't really care about the top, but I'm hoping for Aston Villa to do well because they're not a big 4.

I'm just glad Saturday and Sunday mornings are back

This wolves chelsea match is incredible. 2-2 at the half. Great goals on both sides. Chelsea is a turnover machine that leads to counter after counter by wolves. And wolves has some really good talent. I really like this new forward from wolves (Strand Larson). I noticed him in the first two minutes and then he scored a really good one in the 45+6 minute.

 

[Allan McMurray]

Lotsa goals. On any other day against most EPL teams, Wolves wins that going away. Chelsea was just that much better.

However, not that it means much in the end, the 2nd Chelsea goal shoulda been reviewed and ruled out. The ball sure looked like it was still moving when Sanchez played it during the restart.

 

[brdst11]

About to close week #2 up today. My biggest take...what a complete and diabolical mess Everton are right now. Their current ownership ran that club into the ground.

I think this is the year their bubble burst and they open their brand new stadium up for the 25-26 season in the Championship.

Leicester may be relegated before they know it....they have an Everton/Forest type point deduction on the horizon for their spending in the few years leading up to their relegation year. Ipswich I don't think will have the vigor and fight that Luton did last year and capture the common American fan. I think Palace may get dragged down into the muck to, but not relegated, I don't think they've spent too much and have lost a few and could lose Geuhi. Overall I think the bottom is gonna be similiar to last season with more than just 3 in relegation contention and that the point totals are gonna be low. Meaning 35 points could be the new 40 point standard.

I don't really care about the top, but I'm hoping for Aston Villa to do well because they're not a big 4.

I'm just glad Saturday and Sunday mornings are back

The EPL does a great job of making people care about teams just circling the drain

 

[Allan McMurray]

The EPL does a great job of making people care about teams just circling the drain

In seasons of a close title race and a close relegation race, I prefer watching the relegation games. You can tell how much it means to the fans the day they secure their spot in the top flight for the next season.

 

[pitt90seven]

About to close week #2 up today. My biggest take...what a complete and diabolical mess Everton are right now. Their current ownership ran that club into the ground.

I think this is the year their bubble burst and they open their brand new stadium up for the 25-26 season in the Championship.

Leicester may be relegated before they know it....they have an Everton/Forest type point deduction on the horizon for their spending in the few years leading up to their relegation year. Ipswich I don't think will have the vigor and fight that Luton did last year and capture the common American fan. I think Palace may get dragged down into the muck to, but not relegated, I don't think they've spent too much and have lost a few and could lose Geuhi. Overall I think the bottom is gonna be similiar to last season with more than just 3 in relegation contention and that the point totals are gonna be low. Meaning 35 points could be the new 40 point standard.

I don't really care about the top, but I'm hoping for Aston Villa to do well because they're not a big 4.

I'm just glad Saturday and Sunday mornings are back

crystal palace - aka: Finish in 12th Place FC.

 

[Allan McMurray]

everton is a ****ing dumpster fire. I can see Tim Howard tossing something on the set.

 

[mike412]

Chelsea has 50 players on the first team books. 50! How the big teams continue to evade the FFP rules while Nottingham Forest, Everton and Leicester get punished.

 

[Fk_Pitt]

Chelsea has 50 players on the first team books. 50! How the big teams continue to evade the FFP rules while Nottingham Forest, Everton and Leicester get punished.

If there are rules found to being broken, they will get punished. Afterall Barcelona wasn’t punished when many were sure they would and that’s maybe because they didn’t break any rules or they figured out a way to subvert FFP. But no violations have been cited for them and none cited for Chelsea. What has frustrated rival fans is that Chelsea has done things creatively that are not against the rules in order to balance the books, but in fans eyes should be. Like selling hotels for example. But hey, Barcelona sold tv rights and came out ok so…

What fans should be upset about are the teams you mentioned getting point deductions for 1-2 violations, and a club owned by a country like Man City having 150 actual cited violations and they are still allowed to rack up titles while their high priced attorneys keep things tied up.

Oh, and yeah it frustrating having 27 actual players in our first team and having rivals complain that the number is 50…when that number was a preseason number inflated by academy players and young players that went out on loan. Loaning players isn’t against FFP. In fact it helps balance the books.

 

[Allan McMurray]

Nothing screams lame money grab like putting Liverpool-ManU on Peacock

 

[pitt90seven]

Nothing screams lame money grab like putting Liverpool-ManU on Peacock

manu sucks though. no one wants to see that mess.

 

[Fk_Pitt]

Oh, and yeah it frustrating having 27 actual players in our first team and having rivals complain that the number is 50…when that number was a preseason number inflated by academy players and young players that went out on loan. Loaning players isn’t against FFP. In fact it helps balance the books.

Not that anyone cares about my Chelsea and that’s fine, I understand. But here’s an example of FFP…

Punditry- “Chelsea continued to buy players. How is this possible…they spend, spend, spend…”

Fact nugget: chelsea spent 208 million this window and sold 189million.

Now, I’m no fan of Todd Boehly ownership and his Sporting Directors until I see this project actually do something positive. And there is rumor of a transfer ban coming that stems from a violation that happened under Abromovich’s era. So maybe these are the players we will be stuck with for a while. Heck, we are stuck with them for a while anyway because their contracts are so long, which is another way chelsea stayed compliant…long contracts on lower wages.

 

[brdst11]

Not that anyone cares about my Chelsea and that’s fine, I understand. But here’s an example of FFP…

Punditry- “Chelsea continued to buy players. How is this possible…they spend, spend, spend…”

Fact nugget: chelsea spent 208 million this window and sold 189million.

Now, I’m no fan of Todd Boehly ownership and his Sporting Directors until I see this project actually do something positive. And there is rumor of a transfer ban coming that stems from a violation that happened under Abromovich’s era. So maybe these are the players we will be stuck with for a while. Heck, we are stuck with them for a while anyway because their contracts are so long, which is another way chelsea stayed compliant…long contracts on lower wages.

I think the thing with Chelsea is that what they're doing is more confusing than anything else. They spent a bunch of money on bad deals previously, creating a mess of a team, and now they seem to be doubling down on that strategy.

I don't follow them closely, so maybe it makes sense to those who do.

 

[Fk_Pitt]

I think the thing with Chelsea is that what they're doing is more confusing than anything else. They spent a bunch of money on bad deals previously, creating a mess of a team, and now they seem to be doubling down on that strategy.

I don't follow them closely, so maybe it makes sense to those who do.

Oh no, you’re not wrong. It doesn’t make sense. Lol. At least the sporting part of it doesn’t. They’ve bought some real stinkers.

 

[Allan McMurray]

International breaks are dumb. They're even dumber 3 weeks into the season. That is all, carry on.

 

[Fk_Pitt]

International breaks are dumb. They're even dumber 3 weeks into the season. That is all, carry on.

I loathe international breaks. But at least during this one, we have Pitt vs Cincy at noon on Saturday. There will still be a void in the early AM with no soccer to watch but 12pm kickoff isn’t too bad. And week 1 of the NFL season helps on Sunday.

 

[pitt90seven]

International breaks are dumb. They're even dumber 3 weeks into the season. That is all, carry on.

it really is. considering most of europe starts at pretty much the same time.

what's worse is the years of euro or WC - the best players literally have no break. if you were on the french or spanish teams, you had two weeks off and then were back with your club. these are the stars that the sport is marketing. they're going to be exhausted and more likely to get injured during their club season.

africon takes the cake, though - their best players are trying to get european contracts. but they actively disrupt those leagues. stupid. if i'm an african player in europe, i'm skipping africon every time.

@Fk_Pitt - i read drogba talk about it once. something to the effect that every africon took him another week or two to get back in league shape after the tournament ended. pretty sure it was a neil barnett interview.

 

[Allan McMurray]

AFCON is wild. It really tears at a player. Alot of these guys are so proud and loyal to their native land and love playing for country, but also need to make a living at the club level.

Soccer might be the only sport that player really don't get any kind of sustained break between seasons.

 

[Fk_Pitt]

it really is. considering most of europe starts at pretty much the same time.

what's worse is the years of euro or WC - the best players literally have no break. if you were on the french or spanish teams, you had two weeks off and then were back with your club. these are the stars that the sport is marketing. they're going to be exhausted and more likely to get injured during their club season.

africon takes the cake, though - their best players are trying to get european contracts. but they actively disrupt those leagues. stupid. if i'm an african player in europe, i'm skipping africon every time.

@Fk_Pitt - i read drogba talk about it once. something to the effect that every africon took him another week or two to get back in league shape after the tournament ended. pretty sure it was a neil barnett interview.

I really miss Neil Spy on the radio. I don’t know if Sirius pushed him out or if he moved on. But more of him and less of Tom Rennie is preferable.

 

[Fk_Pitt]

AFCON is wild. It really tears at a player. Alot of these guys are so proud and loyal to their native land and love playing for country, but also need to make a living at the club level.

Soccer might be the only sport that player really don't get any kind of sustained break between seasons.

Bernardo Silva had some harsh words today on the state of world football. The players don’t get time off. We’ve known that but we forget that not only do they have that constant wear on their bodies, but they also get no time with their families. Hard to feel for them when they make the money they do, but they are human.

As a fan it’s great though. We essentially have soccer year round…and we complain when there’s an international break for a week. Lol.

 

[pitt90seven]

I really miss Neil Spy on the radio. I don’t know if Sirius pushed him out or if he moved on. But more of him and less of Tom Rennie is preferable.

yeah that was a funny one. he's definitely nearing retirement so maybe he wanted to take a break. neil had great stories. i loved him talking about hazard put absolutely no extra time into his craft.

i like tom, though.

Bernardo Silva had some harsh words today on the state of world football. The players don’t get time off. We’ve known that but we forget that not only do they have that constant wear on their bodies, but they also get no time with their families. Hard to feel for them when they make the money they do, but they are human.

As a fan it’s great though. We essentially have soccer year round…and we complain when there’s an international break for a week. Lol.

de bruyne said something the last couple of days as well. sure they make good money but they're also human. and it's better for the game to have top players available and as close to 100% as possible. maybe go the german route and have an extended winter break (not that the english would ever go for it).

 

[Fk_Pitt]

yeah that was a funny one. he's definitely nearing retirement so maybe he wanted to take a break. neil had great stories. i loved him talking about hazard put absolutely no extra time into his craft.

i like tom, though.



de bruyne said something the last couple of days as well. sure they make good money but they're also human. and it's better for the game to have top players available and as close to 100% as possible. maybe go the german route and have an extended winter break (not that the english would ever go for it).

Perfect example. The Club World Cup. It’s great for the fans. And it’s great for FIFA. But not for the players.

 

[mike412]

Oh no, you’re not wrong. It doesn’t make sense. Lol. At least the sporting part of it doesn’t. They’ve bought some real stinkers.

There was a story online (maybe the Athletic) analyzing what Chelsea has been doing as far as player personnel now that Boehle and his partner own the team. It was not very flattering.

One thing it mentioned was signing players to overly-long contracts to reduce the current season wage bills. While a common practice in baseball and football, it hasn’t been common in soccer. One reason is that you can’t just cut the player and not have to pay anymore, as is true in football. (Baseball? Aren’t the Mets still paying Bobby Bonilla?)

Another thing it mentioned was buying too many players at one position, which clearly has been a problem for Chelsea. Quite an high number of “stinkers” as you call them. Buying in bulk instead of having quality analysis of how a player fits into the system and style of the team.

And, it mentioned the sale of Conor Gallagher. That sale surprised me, and apparently the main reason for it was that he came up through the academy and therefore the sale proceeds were considered 100% profit in meeting the Fair Play rules. (If you sell a player you paid a transfer fee for, only the profit, if any, counts.) But, according to the story, it has been very unpopular with supporters in large part because he did come up through the academy, bled Chelsea blue and was very popular with supporters.

I actually think their strategy in 2023-24 has been better in that at least they are targeting younger players. Still, the failure rate has been high, but if you hit on enough Palmers then likely all will be forgiven.

By the way, the procedure they used to comply with the fair play guidelines is very different than what Barca did. Barca sold off assets to third parties in what certainly at face value were arms-length transactions. Chelsea, on the other hand, sold two hotels to a related entity in what clearly were not arms-length transactions. It is more akin to what Man City has been doing in making contracts between itself and other entities owned by the same government that owns it. They can make the fees received by City as high as they want to meet the guidelines because the money is simply going out one pocket and into another. Chelsea similarly set the sale price high enough to get them under the threshold.

The article also indicated that there now appear to be fissures in Boehle’s relationship with his partner, who apparently isn’t happy with the on pitch or off pitch results. On the other hand, some estimate that if they sold the team today they would clear a $1 Billion to $2 Billion profit, which certainly reduces the stress level.

We may never know the exact number, but this article estimated that after the sale of Sterling, Chelsea still have 47 players registered on the books. That does not include youth players under 21, who do not need to be registered. It does include players out on loan, which I think it indicated could be as high as 20. So, that would leave 27 on the current roster. Barca has 22 registered, but 5 of those are out with long term injuries (Christensen’s injury was the only reason they could register Olmo) so they only have 17 available in any match. Like with Chelsea, the youth league players don’t have to be registered, which is why they have 4 or 5 suited up for every match. I don’t know if 27 is high or not, but 17 obviously is low.

 

[Fk_Pitt]

There was a story online (maybe the Athletic) analyzing what Chelsea has been doing as far as player personnel now that Boehle and his partner own the team. It was not very flattering.

One thing it mentioned was signing players to overly-long contracts to reduce the current season wage bills. While a common practice in baseball and football, it hasn’t been common in soccer. One reason is that you can’t just cut the player and not have to pay anymore, as is true in football.

Another thing it mentioned was buying too many players at one position, which clearly has been a problem for Chelsea. Quite an high number of “stinkers” as you call them. Buying in bulk instead of having quality malts is of how a player fits into the style of the team.

And, it mentioned the sale of Conor Gallagher. That sale surprised me, and apparently the main reason for it was that he came up through the academy and therefore the sale proceeds were considered 100% profit in meeting the Fair Play rules. But, according to the story, it has been very unpopular with supporters in large part because he did come up through the academy, bled Chelsea blue and was very popular with supporters.

I actually think their strategy in 2023-24 has been better in that at least they are targeting younger players. Still, the failure rate has been high, but if you hit on a few Palmers then likely all will be forgiven.

By the way, the procedure they used to comply with the fair play guidelines is very different than what Barca did. Barca sold off assets to third parties in what certainly at face value were arms-length transactions. Chelsea, on the other hand, sold two hotels to a related entity in what clearly were not arms-length transactions. It is more akin to what Man City has been doing in making contracts between itself and other entities owned by the same government that owns it. They can make the fees received by City as high as they want to meet the guidelines because the money is simply going out one pocket and into another. Chelsea similarly set the sale price high enough to get them under the threshold.

The article also indicated that there now appear to be fissures in Boehle’s relationship with his partner, who apparently isn’t happy with the on pitch or off pitch results. On the other hand, some estimate that if they sold the team today they would clear a $1 Billion to $2 Billion profit, which certainly reduces the stress level.

Believe me Mike, you are 90% correct with everything you said. I know it all too well. Because Im a fan, I follow it and live it every day. This ownership is either going to pay off and show the world that the model can work…or they are going to be more likely playing in the English Championship than playing for a European Championship again in my lifetime.

And the Gallagher thing? No one wanted to see him go. None of us. And they say it was a sporting decision due to the managers system but that’s hogwash. We all know that he was pure profit who had to be sold in order to approach FFP compliance. He was a midfielder and expendable, when we are already loaded there and still have a likely superstar tucked away at Strasbourg and a teenage phenom in Ecuador who is first team ready. It will be interesting how we sell Enzo Fernandez and not take such a massive loss. Also interested in the teenager on Brazil’s first team they call Messinho. But I think he will be a winger.

 

[mike412]

So, the BBC reported today that the fissures between Boehly and his co-owners of Chelsea have reached the point where each group is trying to buy out the other. The Landmark group reportedly owns 61.1% to 38.9% owned by Boehly and his partners, so they would seem to have the edge but both groups have more than enough wealth to buy out the other. The prize, of course, is the eventual sale of 100% for Billions of profit. Apparently, each group can block the sale of the other’s partial interest to third parties, which will force one to sell to the other. Or result in a court fight which I would guess will cost close to $1 Billion in attorney fees.

In the apparently unending confusion over how many senior players Chelsea have registered, the BBC reports that some of the problem between the owners stems from the fact that Boehly had as high as 42 registered but now that has been cut to 36 by summer transfer sales. You would think that number would be an easy one to check, but every story seems to have a different number. Gary Neville said they have 49; the BBC has 36, down from a high of 42; the Athletic says 47. Does the EPL even know?

Don’t the owners know that they can solve all of their problems by hiring Ted Lasso?

 

[Fk_Pitt]

So, the BBC reported today that the fissures between Boehly and his co-owners of Chelsea have reached the point where each group is trying to buy out the other. The Landmark group reportedly owns 61.1% to 38.9% owned by Boehly and his partners, so they would seem to have the edge but both groups have more than enough wealth to buy out the other. The prize, of course, is the eventual sale of 100% for Billions of profit. Apparently, each group can block the sale of the other’s partial interest to third parties, which will force one to sell to the other. Or result in a court fight which I would guess will cost close to $1 Billion in attorney fees.

In the apparently unending confusion over how many senior players Chelsea have registered, the BBC reports that some of the problem between the owners stems from the fact that Boehly had as high as 42 registered but now that has been cut to 36 by summer transfer sales. You would think that number would be an easy one to check, but every story seems to have a different number. Gary Neville said they have 49; the BBC has 36, down from a high of 42; the Athletic says 47. Does the EPL even know?

Don’t the owners know that they can solve all of their problems by hiring Ted Lasso?

Why does it matter to you how many players they have? You’re not a fan. They can have 100 first teamers if they want as long as they are on loan, the books are balanced, and that appears to be the case. Is the transfer window closed in every country now?Because they are around 30 players right now while carrying a 4th goalkeeper, 2 young players, and Ben Chillwell who they were trying to move on from. For me it’s bothersome because I’m a fan and it’s tough to build a team that way. In the summer, the changing room wasn’t big enough and players were changing in the hallways. With no track record of success with this ownership group, it’s always going to agitate us fans because the plan looks like shit from the outside. But rival fans and the BBC will faux outrage because they are simply opposition who didn’t like the previous regime and don’t respect the new American regime.

Boehly has different ideas on squad building. He thinks what works for his Dodgers will work for Chelsea.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

Boehly has different ideas on squad building. He thinks what works for his Dodgers will work for Chelsea.

Well what works for the Dodgers is premier acquisition and development of young players and spending as much money as is necessary to buy the best players to fill any holes you might have, and some holes that don't even exist. And that will work anywhere.

The problem for him is that acquiring young talent isn't the same in soccer as it is in baseball.