Chelsea Rumours

20 May 2025 09:14:23
It is being reported that Liverpool, Arsenal, Man Utd, PSG and West Ham all want NKunku this summer with the bidding likely to give Chelsea a healthy profit on their investment.

20 May 2025 09:36:41
Strange, when he signed he was the player that I was most excited about seeing play for Chelsea. Obviously his injury didn’t help but now I guess it’s probably best for all concerned that we part ways.

I’m hoping he might be part of any Sesko trade.

20 May 2025 09:53:28
You think we will Recoup more than £52m? I think it'll be a £35m deal maximum for him + some add ons.

20 May 2025 10:26:22
you all described Moises as a 'donkey' before even seeing him play for us so I can't really take any of your posts serious mate.

20 May 2025 11:29:20
I often look at other club sites and the posters to my mind generally over value the transfer worth of there players.

The price a player is sold for will depend on a lot of things but one of them will be how many clubs want that player and how desperate they are.

20 May 2025 12:09:03
Strange all those clubs and probably many more want Nkunku yet we don't, probably says it all really and to boot, we will probably lose money on him.

20 May 2025 12:39:08
Lots of clubs wanted KDB and Salah and we didn’t. Sometimes these things just don’t work out.

14 May 2025 20:15:02
Decision made on Maresca. He will remain as Head Coach next season whether we qualify for the champions league or not. At least that stops any conjecture and we move forward.

15 May 2025 07:33:30
RBD, maybe the owners have come to conclusion that constant change isn’t always a good change.

I’m sure a review will take place, quite rightly questions will be asked and I’m sure improvements on lots of levels demanded.

Fingers crossed the owners look at themselves and their contributions to this season and there relationship with the Chelsea fans. They in my opinion should be doing a lot better. Particularly on communication. Bring back CTV and move the away supporters out of The Shed.

15 May 2025 09:26:25
Tom

Love your post particularly about the CTV and away fans in the shed.

Not sure the owners will look at themselves, they would have to agree on something first. also TB will still be counting his profit from his company's ECL ticket sales.

Not sure a review will take place as again some people want the coachbto stay, others want him gone, there is even talk about him going to his mate CR at Roma.

15 May 2025 09:55:17
Bill, it would also appear that the valuation they gave our ladies team has now been validated by the 10% share sale for £20m.

15 May 2025 10:02:28
think as much as iv disliked him as a coach he has to go 1 more year, go give him a keeper a top cb to cover to replace/ cover fofana and an elite striker trust me when i say adding santos and estevao into that group of signings wel be a different animal and should go 1 better next year id keep petrovic as number 1.

15 May 2025 10:25:04
Poch, in my opinion, you make some very valid points.

15 May 2025 12:37:16
Thank God, another severance package on his 5 year deal would have been frustrating.

04 May 2025 22:04:40
Two quick rumours from fellow ST holders. Newcastle have asked about Sterling, he has made it very clear that he wants to stay in London and if needs be he will just stay and not play for Chelsea.
Also, TB is selling up and moving on.

05 May 2025 10:01:46
Tom

Unless the ST holders are Clearlake, I would ignore them.

06 May 2025 11:13:56
He will want to play next season and try get back in to the England set up for the World Cup.

06 May 2025 11:46:31
Aero, he has no chance of getting back in the England squad and his performances for the gooners haven’t improved his chances.

I’m sure Chelsea just want him off there books and I can only see it being another loan, maybe for Eze at Palace or part of a hammers rebuild. Whoever it is, it will mean we have to pay a significant part of his wages.

08 May 2025 14:31:26
I said it at the time that buying Sterling was a terrible mistake; he wanted to move back to London so we were a convenient get-out. Take the financial hit and let him rot in the under 23s.

08 May 2025 15:16:29
Jimbo, while that idea maybe tempting I doubt is what the club will do. I think he will end up at the happy hammers on loan with them paying about 1/ 3 of his wages.

08 May 2025 17:32:08
Given his loan spell at Arsenal who is going to pay him £100K a week? Put him up for sale let his agent find him a club if not let him play with the kids: its worth the money to take a stand.

08 May 2025 19:53:20
Jimbo, I don’t understand us trying to “take a stand? ”

As I see it and if the above rumour is true the only thing we can hope for is a subsidised loan to a London club.

09 May 2025 18:04:05
If he wants a London club, let's send him to Leyton Orient.

22 Apr 2025 09:11:10
The silence from the authorities about any potential Mudryk ban is all very strange. I can't imagine what the interested parties must be discussing. I was told ages ago that the results of the "B" sample are known to the player, CFC and the league.

Guilty or not guilty surely it's also in everyone's interest for the Man City investigation/ verdict to be made known before the end of the season.

22 Apr 2025 13:16:30
Tom

With regards to Mudryk, I can only assume he has been found guilty and the discussions are around a deal on how long the suspension will be.

Regarding Mancity, they will string it out til next season when maybe a points deduction won't affect them like it will this season.

23 Apr 2025 09:50:27
Tom

It seems MM has taken a polygraph and has passed it.

23 Apr 2025 10:39:08
Yep, Jeremy Kyle organised it for him!

23 Apr 2025 13:11:55
Bet that was dramatic.

09 Apr 2025 11:35:18
I'm not sure how a gooner would know but one has just told me that we have reached agreement with Delaps representatives and subject to the clubs agreeing a fee and the medical he will be joining us to play in the WCC.

I'm not a massive fan but he does offer something different up front.

09 Apr 2025 13:21:32
He may have seen it from a few media reports Tom however they say we are the front runners and nothing is certain.

I suppose it wond hinder Jackson's development however it won't really help us where we need an experienced ST.

09 Apr 2025 13:46:15
Although he is a gooner he is related to someone very senior at the happy hammers. I have a feeling that’s the place he got the information from.

09 Apr 2025 19:05:16
12 EPL goals so far, at a poor Ipswich team, is nothing to be sniffed at. I think this would be a Maresca signing, sang his praises earlier in the season, and I suppose it'll split the room as to whether that's a good thing or not. At the muted clause it offers good value for money, but how much better does he make this squad?

09 Apr 2025 19:16:07
J

Out of the 12xl goals, how many were penalties?

09 Apr 2025 20:55:17
Looks like 2 in 2025
One against us and fulham.

09 Apr 2025 23:30:03
I rate Delap and can easily see a partnership with Jackson working well but I expect a few teams will be in for him.

10 Apr 2025 07:16:24
Bill, many a Chelsea fan defended Palmer for that last season.

10 Apr 2025 11:11:12
True J but if we get a ST, we need them to weigh in with goals from open play, CP will continue to be our penalty taker next season.

10 Apr 2025 12:04:02
If he is still at the club.

10 Apr 2025 14:21:03
What would you sell him for Tom?

10 Apr 2025 15:44:36
Bill, I wouldn’t sell him but if a silly offer is made for him, say around £150m I think the club will take it.

10 Apr 2025 15:52:39
10 goals in open play, not too bad in a poor Ipswich team.

10 Apr 2025 17:12:19
Tom

If they sell CP, then the owners and SD's are done, it will be like Everton where they won't be able to attend matches at the Bridge.

J, you are right 10 goals in open play is not bad and indeed, who knows if any ST we bring in will be any good, if LeicesterMaresca stays and does not want the player, he won't play anyway.

10 Apr 2025 17:52:25
Bill, I’m resolved to being attached to any player for about the last five or six years.

10 Apr 2025 18:26:52
Tom

There is a trend these days where fans won't put up with owners not doing the best for their club, Liverpool, Everton, Man U and in the not to distant past, Newcastle. Even you have moaned to the club re ticket issues.

Protests have already stated at our club albeit on a small scale so far however, if CP is sold in the summer, as I say the ownership and SD's are done.

10 Apr 2025 19:35:12
Bill, some fans will never be satisfied. The owners will never make all fans happy. I can’t moan about the amount they have invested. Like all fans I might have spent it differently with different priorities but other fans would almost certainly have a different view to mine.

If for some reason the club gets an offer for CP that’s exceptional it will surely have to consider it. The fans will moan but no more than when we sold Greaves, Ossie and Hazard. All owners know that loyal supporters will always come back. Generally speaking a football fans support is unconditional.

I was happy with the way the club eventually dealt with my complaint. I will not be happy if the club take away concessions but that’s for another day.

11 Apr 2025 05:40:59
Apparently lots of teams want Delap a player I’m not convinced about and I assume some clubs will have already spoken to his agent. Plus City have a buyback clause. Sounds like a beauty parade to me.

Putting aside Osimhen and Isak, I think we should consider Sesko.

14 Apr 2025 12:12:44
Delap would be such a typical signing of this regime.

Signed by Joe Shields for City's academy? Check!
Didn't actually play under Maresca, but he'll claim he knows him from the City academy? Check!
Release clause? Check!
Young, unproven potential? Check!
Less than 30 career goals? Check!

And that's not even considering that his playstyle is the complete antithesis of the insipid, possession heavy, risk averse football Maresca preaches.

15 Apr 2025 08:10:04
Should be perfect then for next season under Maresca’s management.

26 Mar 2025 10:52:32
If the latest rumour from so called "senior Chelsea sources" is to be believed there will be NO stand by stand redevelopment of SB.

So, that one choice of the table. We now have in my opinion three options left.

1) Do nothing.
2) Redevelop/ build new stadium on current SB site.
3) Move to a new site.

Obviously the first option is unlikely.

26 Mar 2025 14:43:12
The best thing is to move to another site Tom.

26 Mar 2025 16:28:11
Just move to another site. Further west if earl's court is too expensive and not feasible. Call us the west london blues lol.

31 Mar 2025 10:02:24
We missed out on Battersea, missing out on Earl’s Court would be monumental opportunity missed, wing so close to the bridge we could have a stadium to rival the best in the world and the sale of Stamford bridge and land around would go to paying for it, the revenue for home games and obviously shows / NFL would go along way, maybe hoesitmg future euros / champions league finals,

31 Mar 2025 10:53:34
Matt I totally agree.

31 Mar 2025 16:32:37
I think RA was the under bidder on Battersea and I can’t remember the reason why he didn’t press home the clubs initial interest in Earls Court.

Whatever the reason I now think it could be very problematic to acquire and get permission for a football stadium at EC. may well be wrong but I think that ship sailed a long time ago.

31 Mar 2025 17:58:34
Reading various news items Tom, there is still a window of opportunity to move on EC but that would mean the owners actually making a decision that suits both parties.

I think with RA, was the government poking it's nose into him, particularly the nasty Labour clown that is Chris Bryant.

31 Mar 2025 18:20:20
Bill, I do seem to remember that RA did have problems with I think his residence/ citizenship but I’m not sure if that wasn’t some time after the EC site initially became available.

There may well be a small chance of resurrecting a football stadium plan but I now have my doubts it will happen. The present owners seem a long way down the road on developing the site. Of course this could be a ploy to gain a premium price for the site.

The Chris Bryant issues were more about him using parliamentary privilege to constantly name RA. I’m not sure it had anything to do with a stadium rebuild.

01 Apr 2025 08:59:40
Tom

There is no way in he'll that the slimey Chris Bryant only mentioned RA in the corrupt Commons, I'm sure there was pressure behind the scenes as well.

I'm curious why you think the owners are well down the road to developing the site when no decision has been made and TB himself has said moving away is still an option.

01 Apr 2025 09:43:47
Bill, Chris Bryant only made his derogatory comments in the House of Commons because of parliamentary privilege. If he had made the comments in public he would have most likely been sued.

My historic belief was that the current owners would do a stand by stand redevelopment. That option now appears to be off the table. I think a new stadium rebuild on the current SB would prove to be very costly and also means moving away from SB fro approx five years. Any EC development will also be costly and remember plans for a housing development with NO football stadium has already been submitted by the current owners/ developers. In my opinion buying land for any EC would cost a substantial premium.

Of course we now await the report that is supposedly due this summer from the director charged with the responsibility of looking at all the options. I assume he will also make recommendations in that report.

Again, this is only me guessing but I think the club will move out of the area and closer to the M25. This will then bring about protracted discussions with the CPO. It should also be reservations the CPO cannot develop the current SB site and it can only be used for the playing of football/ sports. Yes it owns the CFC name as well. So, another guess would be that the CPO will find itself between a rock and a hard place.

I stress again this is only me guessing. The report in the summer will make interesting reading.

01 Apr 2025 10:27:12
Roman had a very good opportunity to aquire Earls Court long before his sanctions and issues but the CPO pretty much blocked it. That was the monumental missed opportunity. Ken Bates meant well when he assigned the freehold to the CPO but sadly that backfired. The new owners are determined to rebuild Stamford Bridge or move away and I believe it will be the former and not because of any disagreement between the owners but because of the almost impossible task of aquiring Earls Court.

01 Apr 2025 10:56:26
Anna, I was involved in the meting and vote about the CPO. It was very volatile.

Romans case wasn’t helped when it bacame obvious to a lot of CPO members that a third party have bought a significant amount of CPO memberships pre the vote. The assumption from many was that it had been orchestrated by RA to meet his own ends.

I actually voted with RA. If I remember correctly the CPO chairman recommended that the members voted for the RA proposal. After the result of the vote he was forced to resign.

To say it as a bit of a farce would be an understatement. Unfortunately in my opinion within the CPO there is a continued mistrust of football owners.

01 Apr 2025 11:33:14
Tom

I would also add that within the fan base, there is a mistrust with the CPO and that it has held the club back for far too long.

Tom, what exactly would happen to the Bridge if TB and co decided to move out of the area and say called themselves Chelsea USA, for example?

01 Apr 2025 11:36:01
I too remember it well Tom and that vote against Roman was the day the dream of moving away from Stamford Bridge ended. That was the monumental day in our history. If the CPO had backed Roman that day we would have that shiny big stadium right now. I always felt Roman lost enthusiasm for a new stadium after the CPO turned against him.

01 Apr 2025 11:47:17
Bill and Anna, it would be easy to blame the CPO but Roman didn’t do his cause any good pre that vote. It made it look to a majority of CPO’s that there was something going on in the background.

I think Roman losing so called enthusiasm for a stadium redevelopment was about the same time as his citizenship/ uk business issues. That was a few years after the Battersea and EC proposal.

As far as I am aware there would be no issues with the current owners renaming the club subject to Premiership/ FA approval. What would happen to Stamford Bridge if a move away did happen would be interesting. I am 100% convinced that the CPO could NOT finance the safety upkeep of the site. That is another reason why I think the CPO could find itself in a difficult position if the owners decided to move away from the bridge.

01 Apr 2025 12:41:18
Tom

If qw moved away against the CPO's 'wishes' and renamed ourselves, could the CPO sell the land and pocket the money,

01 Apr 2025 14:47:39
I can’t exactly remember the articles of the CPO but I very much doubt it. As far as I remember it can only ensure that football is played on the site it has no power to develop the SB site for any other purpose. Also, I’m not sure if it’s allowed to make a profit.

The last time I looked there were about 13k CPO’s. Putting aside how many of those shares may be owned by proxy, I would guess that the majority would only consider staying on the SB site.

I personally have very little attachment to SB and would be happy to see us move away. I would very much like us to keep the name CFC so I guess I want the CPO to agree with any new development proposal.

01 Apr 2025 15:14:23
Another question if you don't mind Tom.

If thexland is only for a football club, if we moved away to a new stadium againt the CPO's wishes, would the site remain derelict, I ask this as it is in the heart of London and I'm sure nobody in the area would like unused land around them.

01 Apr 2025 16:19:47
Bill, as I’ve said before I can’t remember all the “articles” of the CPO but I assume that the CPO could let another club play football on the site. If it wasn’t used for football very quickly my guess is the ground would quickly fall into disrepair. The upkeep and safety of the site could be left in the hands of the CPO and in my opinion they could NEVER afford that as a continuous expense. As I have said the cards are not all held by the CPO.

01 Apr 2025 19:39:26
Thank you Tom.

02 Apr 2025 16:11:27
I hope we don't move, I love SB, I would knock down the shed and hotels and build a much bigger shed end to match the height of the east and west, that could get 50,000/ 55,000 capacity, put the away fans in the top corner of the east and just upgrad the rest of the stands. sounds easy enough x.

02 Apr 2025 17:34:35
Was better with a dog track and no away supporters in the shed end. 😁.

05 Apr 2025 12:56:38
Tom, I have always said that rebuilding a new stadium at SB was not feasible; the cost would be astronomical. Also, I doubt whether we would get planning permission. So, if the CPO blocked a move away “doing nothing “ is an option. I think the proposed Football Regular might have powers to veto owners changing a club’s name.

05 Apr 2025 13:04:30
Steve, increasingly the capacity to 50/ 55 K will still cost a lot of money. There would be no point in revenue terms. If you are going to spend money on stadium development it needs to be fit for the 21st century and have potential for hosting events.