Chelsea Rumours

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.

15 Feb 2025 10:55:15
Rumours that we are looking to sell Jackson hopefully not truw, think he would be really good playing wide with a top nos 9 in the middle

Certain players should be untouchable regarding sales Palmer Cacaido clearly two best players.

I would put Jackson Colwill Cucarella Lavia when fit in the next group.

If a first 11 player is sold for big money should be Enzo.

15 Feb 2025 11:54:19
Seymns, I have long held the view that our current owners are running CFC as a business and that is fine.

My guess is every player at CFC has a price. I’ve said I no longer feel an attachment towards my club and that includes, sadly, the players.

15 Feb 2025 12:21:36
Tom B same with me, I actually think i lost the close attatchment during the Roman years although we were succesful so many players came in, guess that has always been the case maybe it's an age thing.

Felt the closest to the team during the Dixon Speedie Nevin team guess it's a time of life thing football's importance lessens when wife and kids come along

Obviously still want us to do well.

15 Feb 2025 12:40:08
Howcis it fine Tom, first and foremost CFC is a football club, the business should follow.

If they think they are running a business, my God they are hopeless at that as well, no FOS losing circa £40mil this season and every fan knows ww need a much larger stadium, again losing money each season.

I would like to know why in gods name our so called beloved CST and CPO thought they were the best people to take our club forward because at the moment, they are very poor owners to day the least, u would put them on par with the Glazers.

15 Feb 2025 13:08:13
Bill, in my opinion they bought the club as an investment. They will run it as a business and if that means their core product is buying and selling players there is little we can do about it.

The stadium debate has been done to death and is hardly the fault of our present owners alone.

I have nothing to compare them with they have spent huge amounts of money, so I guess that proves some sort of desire for success. I guess I see them more like the spuds owners but on steroids.

15 Feb 2025 13:11:22
Bill I think they are better owners than the Glazers maybe they are deluded as to to how easy it was going to be naive but they have put money into the team albeit spent badly. Would rather have them in charge than Oldham Jim at Man Utd.

It was always going to be tough to follow Roman obviously we won the CL with Tuchel but towards the end of the Roman years we were in decline.

15 Feb 2025 13:13:32
Seymns, I think I started feeling detached when the Bates v Harding debate got out of control. The successful years under Roman were brilliant but when that regime started selling players that had come through the academy and who I thought we be the new foundation of our club it dawned on me that nothing has really changed from the days of selling Greaves to rescue the club or Ossie and Wilkins.

It’s the club I love so unfortunately I have to put up with some of the people associated with it.

15 Feb 2025 13:24:49
TomB the Bates harding era was strange who knows what would have happened if Harding hadn't been killed,

My detatchment partly happened as I moved out of London and I don't get to the Bridge hardly at all these days.

15 Feb 2025 13:31:33
Tom

I agree that we all love the club which is why we are so passionate about ownership, SD's, coaches and players both academy and bought.

I also agree with you on the Bates, Harding issue.

The present ownership, like Roman are losing money hand over fist so I'm not quite sure how they will get their investment back never mind making a profit which I know private equity like to do for their investors.

15 Feb 2025 14:31:15
Bill, from what I have read there is an opinion that says our club was seriously undervalued when it was sold to our current owners. There is also a theouabout potential sports revenue schemes going through the roof in seasons to come.

The reported losses we very likely turn to profit as the clubs recruitment ambitions change over the next few seasons.

15 Feb 2025 14:41:23
the owners will sell any player theyl profit from make no mistake about it and i would sell jackson he's not good enough like the majority of our squad.

15 Feb 2025 15:11:22
Any chance on selling our SD's and Maresca?

15 Feb 2025 16:16:35
Seymns and Bill, I knew Mathew Harding reasonably well and he wasn’t the nicest person in the world and on the other side we had Bates who was maybe one of the most difficult people in the world. It was always a recipe for disaster.

Just as a very small footnote the widow and family of MH played an important part in the transformation of CFC and that for me should never be forgotten.!

15 Feb 2025 18:44:07
Regardless of there goal, whether it's building a winning side or a successful money making business, they're doing appallingly. We lost out on £40m this season with no fos sponsor and I can't think of a single player other than palmer who would definitely sell for more than we paid for them. Enzo, caicedo, neto, mudryk, fofana and more would almost certainly net us a loss. Doesn't mean they're bad players but there value is much lower than what it was.

15 Feb 2025 19:20:03
The maths of the FOS sponsor is interesting. As I’ve said before and I am only guessing a one season deal even at £40 may not be as beneficial to a long term deal. Obviously the term of any deal will be subject to us potentially qualifying for the CL and our participation in the WCC.

16 Feb 2025 10:15:22
Come on Tom really. There has been zero benefit to not having a sponsor this year no matter how it's spun. If we get a multi year sponsor next year, it won't be 'we'll done' it'll be why didny we get a short term sponsor?

16 Feb 2025 10:24:49
Tom

We will definitely participate in the WCC, for how long that's another question.

Regarding qualifying for the CL, forget it, we are 6th and sliding fast.

16 Feb 2025 13:33:33
I am not “spinning” anything. I have made it clear several times that mathematically there could be a financial case for not agreeing to a long term FOS deal. i have also made it very clear that I am guessing.

I have no idea if a short term FOS deal was available without including the WCC but I am happy to except any information on that subject. My guess is that adding the WCC to a long term deal and a potential campaign in next season’s Champions League would offer one hell of a lot of money. Of course there is also a risk attached to such a commercial decision.

16 Feb 2025 15:54:44
As Greavesy used to say: “ It’s a funny old game”. Every PL club will have to pay£1 million to the PL for their legal costs and cock-up with APT rules and Everton and Forest each paid £2 million to try and get themselves relegated. Football was the peoples game because no matter how poor you were you could play and it was affordable to watch for working people. Those days are gone but look at Germany where the fans have a majority shares in their clubs. A season ticket for Bayern Munich can be bought for £104 ( obviously long waiting lists) The president of Bayern, Uli Hoeness commented about Bayern’s refusal to increase ticket prices said: “ we do not think fans are like cows, who you can milk”.

16 Feb 2025 16:26:34
Jimbo, I had no idea that is the ST price at BM. What brilliant value and what a heart warming comment from there president.

A West Ham supporter mate was telling me the other week that when the owners of the happy hammers put forward the case for moving to the Olympic stadium was an increase in stadium capacity would bring down the price of seats and ST’s. Apparently the reverse has happened.

Moooooo.

16 Feb 2025 20:41:46
I’m on not an account but a brief look at the BM accounts would suggest they have about £100m more revenue than the gooners, £150m more than the spuds and about £200m more than us.

They also have about fifteen players being paid more than €200k per week.

The strange thing is even if we increased our revenue to the BM levels I couldn’t see us bringing down our ST prices.

16 Feb 2025 23:00:37
Can I ask why Colwill? I think he’s been a massive disappointment. He’s good on the ball but his defending is awful. He’s so weak!

I do agree that Jackson would make a quality left winger as he still has so much to his game. We missed a trick not singing Jhon Duran he’s going to be a brilliant striker. So complete for a youngster and he’s a great target man something we desperately lack right now.

03 Mar 2025 21:41:13
Imo I have long known tomb as a hypocrite. When you state the obvious, he downplays it only to turn around and admit it later. I had long time ago said that the boely and Co are only interested in the business aspects of the club and not on the pitch success as roman did. But came in heavily on their defence against it.

Now he's telling us that he had long seen that the new owners are this and that.
Saw some reports that the fans on ground, not tombs, were on some protests against how the club is headed in wrong direction since boely and Co. We will constantly be on the case else we are becoming a shadow of the club we were. Some claim to be more Chelsea than the rest but are just delusional.

04 Mar 2025 08:18:40
Tussle, can I suggest that you spend less time worrying about my opinions and posts and more time supporting the club.

I didn’t attend the Southampton game so I no personal knowledge of the protest you mentioned but I am told it was a bit of a damp squib.

I would have also thought that the club being successful would have been good news for the owners business investment.

06 Feb 2025 11:18:13
A mate has just told me the Chelsea and Mudryk have received verbal notification that the "B" sample has returned negative. He there will be no announcement from the club until they receive written notification.

I personally think my mate has picked up an old rumour but hey ho!

06 Feb 2025 16:50:59
It would be wonderful if this rumour was true if only especially for the player himself. But it would a pretty rare example of a B sample being negative I think.

06 Feb 2025 18:31:39
The B sample is seldom different. Also, the results of the B sample are usually known within a week of the A sample. The Mudryck story simply disappeared.

06 Feb 2025 18:33:13
JBS, spot on and hence my doubts about it being true. I’m not sure if there is a thing as “marginal” in a drugs test but I think that is the more likely situation.

06 Feb 2025 18:33:28
"Mudryk’s B Sample is expected back in January and, if positive, the Ukrainian could face a four-year ban"

Well January is over and still no news. Very strange.

06 Feb 2025 21:48:11
This rumour apparently started few days ago on twitter / X and wasn’t by a journalist, someone just starting rumours, more so for MM I hope he gets back playing soon.

07 Feb 2025 16:52:40
Strange that Mudryk is still in the Conference squad. I suppose there could be a rule that makes it pointless to take him out.

10 Feb 2025 14:46:25
The odd normal half reliable sources have also picked this up, no idea if it is true.

But it is undeniably strange that it is taking so long, I did read an article that if is B sample was negative and the A sample was positive due to cross contamination in the testing this would open a huge can of worms and invalidate previous tests no idea if this is true

Apparently B samples that are negative are in the 3-5% range

Also strange that the story has gone so quiet.

03 Feb 2025 15:24:14
Is Felix likely to be sold or loaned to AC Milan? Is Disasi likely now to stay at the Bridge?

03 Feb 2025 15:45:23
Loan with no buy option for Felix.

03 Feb 2025 16:52:22
While i liked felix, every man and his dog knew it wasn't going to work. A favour for his agent, I suspect.

03 Feb 2025 16:53:06
So with Felix and Veiga going to Italy on straight loans, if they do well, come the end of the season it will be 'they want to stay in Italy and play for us but we can't afford to buy them, how about another loan'.

Before we know it we have more littke Lukaku's running across Italy.

We never learn with Italian clubs, we are their charity organisation.

03 Feb 2025 17:09:43
The reports I’m reading on Felix seem to be so different. One is saying straight loan with full wages paid plus €6.5m loan fee. I would be happy with that.

03 Feb 2025 18:13:59
And another loan next year Tom?

03 Feb 2025 19:28:47
Talksport reporting 5 million loan fee for Felix but Milan paying his wages. I enjoyed watching him and wonder if we really gave him a chance. Suppose if he does well at Milan we will just sell him or indeed loan him out again.

03 Feb 2025 20:17:54
Unfortunately I don't think there's a way back for felix. There wasn't a spot for him 6 months ago and there won't be one 6 months from now. Great player on his day and I hope he reaches atleast half what his potential was.

03 Feb 2025 23:18:20
I think it depends what happens to Palmer. If a ridiculous offer comes in for CP, Felix would be a reasonable replacement.

04 Feb 2025 15:24:30
Bill, they’re paying £5m as a loan fee for 6 months so if they want a loan for the whole season next year it’s £10m. Easy money and would count as a profit for the year in the accounts as his amortisation fee is around £7-8m I believe.

With Veiga Chelsea only paid £12m for him and are getting £4m as a loan fee. Any Italian club could afford to buy him at the end of the season easily, but I’m sure the club would love to keep farming him out on loan if that’s the fee they’ll get for just 6 months given the massive profit.

04 Feb 2025 18:18:36
fuser, good point and good economics.