GWT: Champions League Final Build-Up and GDT

[luiginb]

Kante>Makelele?

I don't really think they're comparable players. I really don't remember Makelele running forward with the ball as much as Kante does, because he was playing on teams where he had to be the last line of defense in midfield, sort of like Jorginho is for Chelsea. Makelele was better defensively but a bit of a non factor going forward, he wasn't as fast and it wasn't his job.

 

[AB13]

I don't really think they're comparable players. I really don't remember Makelele running forward with the ball as much as Kante does, because he was playing on teams where he had to be the last line of defense in midfield, sort of like Jorginho is for Chelsea. Makelele was better defensively but a bit of a non factor going forward, he wasn't as fast and it wasn't his job.

Both Kante and Makelele aren’t decisive going forwards, but they were strong defensive midfielders, so in that way they are similar. Kante is more versatile and more suited to pressing high, so therefore I prefer him. Maybe he’s slightly better on the ball but the difference isn’t huge.

 

[Evilo]

Kante>Makelele?

I would agree with that statement.

 

[Evilo]

Over the last decade, the two finalists are the teams that spent the most money.

Barca 3rd, Juve 4th and United 5th.

 

[Blender]

Someone correctly replied with net spend, and one team is a massive outlier to the others...

 

[YNWA14]

Net spend when you're funding it by buying all young players up from around the world that you can sell at a premium later isn't a viable strategy for most clubs (though I didn't look at the link so I can't say if that is factored into Chelsea's income).

 

[Blender]

Net spend when you're funding it by buying all young players up from around the world that you can sell at a premium later isn't a viable strategy for most clubs (though I didn't look at the link so I can't say if that is factored into Chelsea's income).

I'm sure it is included in their revenue because it is revenue when they sell and loan players.

We're discussing the value of the squad on the field though, and Chelsea has sold a ton of players over the last decade as well as bought a ton. Manchester City mainly just pour money down the drain as an outlier to everyone else below them. When discussing spending, there is Manchester City, then there is everyone else.

 

[AB13]

Chelsea are much worse than City when it comes to spending. They built their foundation as a rich club on way heavier spending and are therefore worse. They spent 40% of all English transfer market spendings between 2003-2007 which is what gave them the opportunity to sell players. Way more extreme than anything City have ever done. What Chelsea and City do now is extreme relative to their size as a club but it is not the biggest issue, the largest issue is how they built strong foundations. This is also why net spend is irrelevant in this case.

 

[YNWA14]

I'm sure it is included in their revenue because it is revenue when they sell and loan players.

We're discussing the value of the squad on the field though, and Chelsea has sold a ton of players over the last decade as well as bought a ton. Manchester City mainly just pour money down the drain as an outlier to everyone else below them. When discussing spending, there is Manchester City, then there is everyone else.

Sure but again, I think their net spend is a bit artificially reduced by their method of buying/selling. They buy/sell players like assets that they never intend to actually use and where they got that money is just as bad as City's spending without caring. Chelsea's net spend is more about optics; they have never had to really hurt their first team to dip into the transfer market (say like selling Suarez for Liverpool). All you have to do is look at the player movements included in those charts to see it. I think first team net spend over the decade would provide a more clear picture in this case for example.

 

[Power Man]

Still depressed because I really wanted to see Mahrez win it

But I’m happy for Mendy and Zyiech tbh, especially Mendy sonce he didn’t have a job in 2015, what a story

 

[Power Man]

 

[S E P H]

Lets give Chelsea a lot of credit here, they won the Cup and that's with them playing a man down with Werner missing like three glorious chances in the first half alone. I am no Messi fan, but even as a free kick specialist he would've scored those chances easily if given the same opportunity. I don't buy the opinion that Evilo has in terms of the easiest route. However, we also have to be honest with ourselves and confirm in the post-game analysis that Man City lost it last night more than Chelsea won it. I don't think the Blood Money FC fans should consider that a negative though, you outmatched probably the most overrated manager in existence with someone who was looking like a fraud himself.

I do want to mention that I consider it to be absolutely shambolic that Rüdiger got to play yesterday and injury KdB with his face shield. Terrible from UEFA.

 

[Duchene2MacKinnon]

Still depressed because I really wanted to see Mahrez win it

But I’m happy for Mendy and Zyiech tbh, especially Mendy sonce he didn’t have a job in 2015, what a story

Rudiger is a thug tbh

 

[Power Man]

Correction

The 1st African GK ton win the CL was Bruce Grobelaar

 

[Power Man]

Rudiger is a thug tbh

Yeah seeing KDB like that was scary tbh

 

[AB13]

Yeah seeing KDB like that was scary tbh

Rüdiger would have a suspension for a blindside hit in the NHL.

 

[Power Man]

Rüdiger would have a suspension for a blindside hit in the NHL.

Definitely
Could be worse, what happened to Tavares recently was really scary

 

[Evilo]

Correction

The 1st African GK ton win the CL was Bruce Grobelaar

And Mendy is really not much of a Senegalese...
Born in France and his mother is not even from Senegal.
Heck his cousin is playing for France.

 

[Blender]

Sure but again, I think their net spend is a bit artificially reduced by their method of buying/selling. They buy/sell players like assets that they never intend to actually use and where they got that money is just as bad as City's spending without caring. Chelsea's net spend is more about optics; they have never had to really hurt their first team to dip into the transfer market (say like selling Suarez for Liverpool). All you have to do is look at the player movements included in those charts to see it. I think first team net spend over the decade would provide a more clear picture in this case for example.

You can criticize their transfer approach from a pure footballing sense, but I don't see how it's in anyway a negative against their overall model. The business like approach implemented by Marina Granovskaia is exactly why they haven't had to hurt their first team to make a transfer, because every year they pay for most of their transfers with other business. If anything, other wealthy clubs should be looking at Chelsea and imitating this model, especially the clubs that are in severe debt. I recognize and can accept arguments from a footballing perspective, that buying tons of youth players for a loan/development army so you can make money over time is a bad model, but it's been a hugely successful financial model that is directly the cause of their current first team. Without that revenue, they wouldn't have spent anywhere close to what they have over the last 10 years, because until 2020 with the pandemic Abramovich had not put much into the club. He spent huge early on to build Chelsea into a top club, and most importantly spent a fortune behind the scenes, but they have been operating within their means for the last ~10 years or so.

 

[Power Man]

And Mendy is really not much of a Senegalese...
Born in France and his mother is not even from Senegal.
Heck his cousin is playing for France.

But he is playing for Senegal right? His mom is from Senegal and his father from Guinee Bisseau

Bruce Grobelaar was born and raised in Zimbabwe and played for Zimbabwe but his DNA reads Dutch

Benzema is 100% Algerian but was born and raised in France, is French and plays for France
I don’t consider him or ZZ as Algerians having won the CL tbh even if their parents are from Algeria

It would be like saying Mbappe isn’t really French because his dad is from Cameroon and his mother from Algeria

 

[Evilo]

How can he be Algerian when he was bor in France and learnt his football in France? Lol.
A guy's nationality is where he was born that seems simple enough.

Mendy is born in France and only his father is Senegalese. He's just as Guinean.

 

[Evilo]

The only reason he's "Senegalese" is because Senegal was the first to call him up.

 

[hatterson]

IIRC he played for Guinea-Bissau at the youth level to honor his father but switched to Senegal because Senegal offered him the #1 keeper at AFCON role. He was born and raised in France though and attended French football academies his entire life.

 

[S E P H]

And Mendy is really not much of a Senegalese...
Born in France and his mother is not even from Senegal.
Heck his cousin is playing for France.

You just love to continue colonialism don't you?

 

[YNWA14]

You can criticize their transfer approach from a pure footballing sense, but I don't see how it's in anyway a negative against their overall model. The business like approach implemented by Marina Granovskaia is exactly why they haven't had to hurt their first team to make a transfer, because every year they pay for most of their transfers with other business. If anything, other wealthy clubs should be looking at Chelsea and imitating this model, especially the clubs that are in severe debt. I recognize and can accept arguments from a footballing perspective, that buying tons of youth players for a loan/development army so you can make money over time is a bad model, but it's been a hugely successful financial model that is directly the cause of their current first team. Without that revenue, they wouldn't have spent anywhere close to what they have over the last 10 years, because until 2020 with the pandemic Abramovich had not put much into the club. He spent huge early on to build Chelsea into a top club, and most importantly spent a fortune behind the scenes, but they have been operating within their means for the last ~10 years or so.

Operating within their means that were obtained by spending lavishly, and the only real reason those means were created was because of FFP. If it didn't exist they probably just spend whatever they wanted to. City just operate as though FFP doesn't exist, and they don't get punished for it so. I don't see them as different really. But the team with the most CLs over the last decade did not have the top spend so that's something.