Chelsea Rumours Member Posts
Standard's Profile
Current Avatar:
Standard's Posts and Other Poster's Replies To Standard's Posts
To Standard's last 5 rumours posts
To Standard's last 5 banter posts
To Standard's last 5 rumour replies
To Standard's last 5 banter replies
Standard's rumours posts with other poster's replies to Standard's rumours posts
15 Nov 2025 15:47:00
New sponsor Oracle to be announced. One year deal, and for significantly less than what chelsea were expecting.
This entire debacle has been embarrassing. Egbalis first words once the takeover happened was 'this club was not terribly well managed on the football side, sporting side or promotional side'.
Many on here having been saying for a couple years now (lol) that it was somehow a good thing that we hadn't got a new sponsor, as we'd be making way more money by holding firm and waiting. Just want to see if those posters can eat there words as I said many times the beginning of this new regime will be a case study in failure on how to takeover a club. I don't suppose they will though.
anyway, not all bad, but glad this debacle is finally coming to an end.
1.) 15 Nov 2025 19:43:12
Welcome back. Always good to have different views on this site.
2.) 15 Nov 2025 22:38:35
I don’t always have the best things to say about the current ownership, but, in this case, a big issue with the club not getting what they viewed as good / expected value from sponsorship has been the ongoing investigation - with companies reluctant to go big until that’s resolved. I’m sure the current regime would have hoped that it would have been resolved by now, but they can’t wait forever.
That investigation is down to problems with / mistakes by the previous ownership, which the current lot could have brushed under the carpet. In the long term they did the right thing, highlighting it at the earliest opportunity.
Is this whole debacle embarrassing? Yes, it absolutely is. Is it the current ownerships fault? No, the blame sits with RA and his ownership.
3.) 16 Nov 2025 03:32:50
J, we have all had reason to be critical of the current owners.
Like all fans to a certain extent we are guessing about our respective club’s commercial negotiations.
If it is true that potential sponsors have been reluctant to enter into a long term sponsorship deal because of a potential club sanction then I guess your assertion holds water.
The fact that our current owners self reported the issue and have co-operated fully with the relevant regulatory bodies made me personally believed we would receive a fine and maybe a one window transfer ban at the most. I suppose there is little upside to a sponsor making a longer than one year deal without knowing the outcome of the investigation.
I seem to remember we recently got a very substantial long term shirt sleeve sponsorship deal and I guess last season we did have a sponsor for about our last fifteen games.
4.) 16 Nov 2025 06:47:54
I think it’ll be the club deciding on the deal till the end of the season, rather than a long-term one right now.
Just as an example, the sponsorship companies are saying, we’ll give you £40m per season, because of the outstanding charges, otherwise we’d give you £60m. You wouldn’t want to sign a 4-6 year deal, knowing those charges should be resolved with the first of those years. Get the £40m this season, pay the fine during that period, then get a better long-term deal after that.
Additionally, get top four this season and we’re repositioning ourselves as regulars in the UCL, rather than being back in as a one off. That won’t hurt either.
5.) 16 Nov 2025 08:05:05
J, you are using the same mathematical logic that I was using for last season.
I except your point about any potential punishment effecting negotiations. This was an issue that I had personally dismissed because I believed any sanction would be relatively minor.
6.) 16 Nov 2025 08:47:56
Charges, it's not stopping Man city obtaining sponsorships, this is red herring, let's stop making excuses for our incompetent ownership and commercial dept.
7.) 16 Nov 2025 09:36:43
Who owns Man City and who is their sponsor?
8.) 16 Nov 2025 10:25:08
J we have multi billionaire owners who are brilliant business people yet they have no clue on moving us forward whether it's to do with sponsorships ir the so called Bridge development.
9.) 16 Nov 2025 10:38:54
J, very good point.
Bill, we understandably don’t know the facts, so we are all left guessing but to accuse the owners of “incompetence” on this issue seems harsh to me.
When I look back upon my time as a supporter I have always found a topic that I could criticise all our past owners for. Some of that criticism is and was probably unfair but my guess is all supporters of virtually every club are the same. Can I just add, I did have some criticisms of RA as well.
10.) 16 Nov 2025 11:23:44
Bill, The SB development or move to another location will probably cost about £2bn, I would rather they got it right than wrong and on that I’m sure we can agree. I have been critical of our owners for poor communication either directly or via the FAB and this is an area, in my opinion, where they have over promised and under delivered.
They were due to make an internal report public before the start of the season. There may well be good reasons why this hasn’t happened but a very short press release would have updated all the fans.
11.) 16 Nov 2025 11:38:44
Tom
That is the ussue, we don't know what's hoing on because us fans get told absolutely nothing.
Thats one thing about this ownership, they live in their ivory tower, doing nothing, saying nothing.
They just seem to like owners of a large nursery company.
12.) 16 Nov 2025 14:05:22
Bill, I assume our owners are worse than some and better than others when it comes to fan communication.
I personally would bring back CTV and the old monthly Q&A that used to a good opportunity for us fans to ask questions.
13.) 16 Nov 2025 16:41:56
I think some of you are over optimistic about the potential sanctions. There are two seperate investigations one by the FA and the other by the PL. We would be lucky to get away with a financial sanction; there is a real possibility of a points deduction.
14.) 16 Nov 2025 16:56:01
I agree Tom but this crowd would never let it happen, like the Glaziers, they are in it for the money and prestige, they could not care less about the fan base, they have made that quite clear with their total lack of communication.
15.) 16 Nov 2025 17:34:32
Bill, I’ve lost count of the amount of times I have said we are a business. I have also said many times there is very little wrong with our club being run as a business. I see no comparison, so far, between our owners and the Utd owners.
Over the years we have had many different owners. The Mears family didn’t say anything and the Bates - Harding partnership ended up being a war of words against each other. I can’t remember Roman saying much directly to anyone but his Chairman Bruce Buck was iften good for a self promoting quote.
My point is silence from owners seems like a common theme at our club and probably the vast majority of other clubs.
16.) 17 Nov 2025 09:27:35
Tom
As you are probably aware I agree with you about being run as a business albeit a badly run business losing huge amounts of money due yo no FOS for goodness knows how long now and having no plans for extra revenue with a larger stadium, all the owners can do is keep putting ticket prices up to help mediate the problem if losing money.
17.) 17 Nov 2025 12:28:51
Bill, I would only be guessing again but just maybe the threat of a club sanction has been the major problem in stopping us getting a FOS sponsor.
I’m not a fan of the “blame” society we live in and without knowing the facts on this particular issue maybe we should defer our judgement.
The SB development was always going to take ages but I will continue to be critical but only about poor communication.
I can’t say I’m an expert on our gross revenues over the last five years and I’m not sure how they compare to our peers. Obviously a larger ground with extra capacity would be good but does that come with huge debt? I assume these are the sort of issues our previous owner and present owner have to consider as well as the potential loss in revenue if we move to a temporary home. I think I will just leave it to them (not going to happen in my lifetime) it gives me a headache!
11 Sep 2024 11:55:55
Datro fofana on loan for Athens. 20m buy option.
He had a good spell at Burnley, but I'm not surprised we struggled to find a better loan for him.
1.) 12 Sep 2024 10:32:51
Nope, another deal that's off. Christ, we really are a mess.
2.) 12 Sep 2024 11:54:02
Why is the deal not going through a reflection of CFC and require the comment “we are a mess? ”
I have no idea why an agreement couldn’t be reached so therefore I can’t say if any side is to blame but it’s hardly unusual that clubs can’t agree on a transfer or loan deal.
Every club must have loads of transfers deals that fell through because an agreement couldn’t be reached, they must all be “a mess. ” All very sad.
{Ed002's Note - AEK are responsible for it falling through.}
3.) 12 Sep 2024 11:59:35
Ed, brilliant mate thanks.
4.) 12 Sep 2024 12:31:00
He is trolling again Tom.
5.) 12 Sep 2024 12:48:12
It’s just non stop criticism of the owners without knowing any facts.
Be critical when it’s deserved.
6.) 12 Sep 2024 22:23:27
Thanks for that info Ed.
And we're a mess because we have copious players we're unable to find clubs for. We still have chilwell, Washington, fofana, kellyman
and chukwuemeka and casadaei at the club, none who will see the pitch.
I personally think that's a fair criticism, as I've said before we simply have too many players.
7.) 12 Sep 2024 22:56:16
Your criticism was about a player not getting a loan with an option to buy. You jumped to a conclusion because you believed it worked for your continuous narrative against the owners.
Your very pointed criticism on this particular issue was wide of the mark and now you bring up a different topic to try and justify it.
As I posted “be critical when it’s deserved. ”.
8.) 13 Sep 2024 11:49:17
I see he has secured a loan now. I think the bigger question regarding DDF is whether he is a better player and therefore more useful to Chelsea than Guiu?
Personally I would have said yes.
9.) 13 Sep 2024 12:15:03
I can’t say I’ve seen a lot of Fofana or Guiu but if had to choose, I would go for Guiu.
How amazing our owners must be to find a club for Fofana on agreeable terms. ?.
10.) 13 Sep 2024 12:32:46
Tom lad it had nothing to do about an option. It was the fact that another deal fell through.
Looks like we were swift to get him another loan, but I think even the club will be dissapointed to not sell him on for a profit this year after a decent loan spell at Burnley. Though, as I said, I believe it's complete naivety to believe we can flip these players after a year for a profit. A belief that maybe true depending on your outlook. We have copious players we have been unable to find a move for.
11.) 13 Sep 2024 15:44:25
You said in reference to the failed loan of Fofana “Christ, WE really are a mess. ” Your comment had zero to do with any other player but you couldn’t wait to have a dig at the owners. That is just a plain fact.
As I understand it we have sold, loaned or released 41 players so far in this window. Of course it would have been good to sell or loan a few more but 41 seems an above average number to me but then again I’m not a transfer expert.
Anyone can “hunt” out a reason to be critical. I guess the reverse must be true.
12.) 13 Sep 2024 22:15:29
Mate, getting really tired of you telling other posters what they're thinking and the reason behind there posts. You have no idea what my reasoning was and if you want to make up a reason, go for it. It's getting very tiresome though.
It is literally very obvious by reading the reasoning behind we are a mess and that is because the players we've been unable to offload or have paid to offload.
And further, part of my post was actually edited out. So again, please stop assuming you know other people's reasonings and get off your high horse.
13.) 14 Sep 2024 02:54:21
Maybe stop coming on here and talking rubbish then. The eds have said numerous times that it wasn't chelsea that was the issue.
Re Gallagher "he didn't want to sign a contract"
Fofana "it was Athens issue"
You come on here like a petulant child as soon as you here some bad news. Then change your mind in what you actually said.
Re calling caicedo a "donkey" so in my eyes your the one getting tiresome.
14.) 14 Sep 2024 06:28:41
No problem jsfinchy. If you don't want to have a discussion with people that disagree with you, interesting choice to go onto a forum discussing a football club. In the real world people disagree, you should maybe get better at talking to those who disagree.
And to reiterate my point as you clearly misunderstood, I'm criticising chelsea buying 100's of players and struggling to offload them. It's completely irrelevant whether it's an issue with us or the other party. We wouldn't be having issues offloading players if we had a clear and concise plan in place.
15.) 14 Sep 2024 06:58:27
I wouldn’t have a clue what you are thinking and response was clearly about and only what was writing your post.
I repeat. Supposedly Chelsea have sold, loaned or released 41 players in the last window. Yes it would have nice to find playing homes for just a few more but there is another window in a few months and I’m sure some more transfer business will be completed.
16.) 15 Sep 2024 07:28:29
Which is a big feat tom so well done to them for them sales/ loans.
However, if we didn't buy so many players in the first place, we could have spent more energy building cohesion and chasing targets who improve the team.
17.) 15 Sep 2024 08:36:58
I’ve lost count of the times I have said to many signings done to quickly but generally I think our old squad looked tired or maybe to comfortable.
18.) 15 Sep 2024 10:49:07
You are correct Tom. The old squad needed a refresh and with the sanctions it was also a very difficult time. Yes, too many signings in too few windows but that will now slow down. Players will come and go and these owners are not shy to spend their money and I fully expect 2 more windows of activity. They are winners and highly motivated by success and won't stop until we return to the top table.
19.) 16 Sep 2024 09:23:56
WSOTS, I think the signings might well slow down but I still think we will be selling a few with the likes of Noni, Disasi, Chilly, Sterling and maybe Mudryk all likely to be sold or loaned over the next two windows in my opinion.
20.) 18 Sep 2024 07:48:34
FFS Standard, " buying 100's of players " as per your quote on here, get real mate, the club and the people they have employed are much more aware than you or i could ever wish to be!
27 Aug 2024 14:28:37
Chelsea making a move for Toney! If osimhen is demanding wages too excessive toney will be an excellent option! Him and Jackson can compete and after Jackson's performance against wolves, toney will have to be at his best.
Hope this one happens!
1.) 27 Aug 2024 16:02:49
Perhaps Saudi Arabia is a more probable destination.
Is there any truth to Calwert Lewin rumours? Wouldn't be a bad back up striker although I like Guiu for that role too.
2.) 27 Aug 2024 18:51:29
Toney would be way down my list of CF options. Mind you there is a gap between Osimhen and the rest in my opinion.
3.) 27 Aug 2024 22:50:49
I’d be happy enough with Toney within the wage structure - if we have to buy someone! I’m still a fan of Jackson, but I think Toney has a good all round game.
4.) 28 Aug 2024 02:01:51
Not sure Toneys wage demands are any less than Osimhens.
5.) 28 Aug 2024 16:57:39
Tom, Toney wouldn’t even be on my list. His numbers aren’t that good particularly if you strip away penalties. His first touch is poor; he is not an 18 yard box striker he goes deep and would clutter up our midfield. He has averaged 1.3 headed goals a season over the last 4 years. If Oshimen is out of reach stick with what we have and look again next summer.
6.) 28 Aug 2024 17:43:28
Jimbo, I agree. Plus It’s early stages but Guiu loooks ok to me.
7.) 28 Aug 2024 20:55:55
400k a week is on offer for Toney in Saudi. He can have a lot of fun gambling with that kind of money.
26 Aug 2024 23:39:27
Hey Ed around last week you said there would be plenty of departures and about one a day. Since then, it looks like a couple have been agreed but nothing concrete. Now, it looks Iike broja has fell through.
Are we still confident in selling over 10 players before the window shuts?
{Ed002's Note - Players will continue to depart.}
1.) 27 Aug 2024 13:13:37
Three players out the door already today . Kepa, Anjorin and Lukaku.
2.) 28 Aug 2024 09:28:30
And Gallagher gone too of course.
22 May 2024 09:31:09
Again, seeing many links to tuchel. Surely not true.
I've calmed down a bit, but still massively dissapointed. They have to get this appointment bang on.
1.) 22 May 2024 13:00:25
Young manager they said.
Ruben Amorim --- the club must have met with him?
Hansi Flick --- nope
Vincent Kompany --- nope
Kieran McKenna – yes, but I hope he stays with the tractor boys
Jose Mourinho – Turkey
Julian Nagelsmann ---- His contract with the German team expires after the Euros
Michel Sanchez – meh
Thomas Tuchel – yes, but I cannot see it
Roberto de Zerbi -- nope
Massimiliano Allegri --- has been lurning English for years, but nope
Carlo Ancelotti -- extended his contract with Real Madrid to June 2026.
2.) 22 May 2024 13:21:25
Pretty sure nagelsmann extended his contract with Germany celery.
3.) 22 May 2024 14:07:46
I wonder if the Amorim flight to the UK was linked to Chelsea - the club were very quick to deny it at the time.
Another name in the frame could be Porto boss Sergio Conceicao.
I would like Flick, but that's because I think he has the experience.
I'm also disappointed that they chose not to continue with Poch, I was looking forward to a summer of stability while other big clubs chopped and changed, now I feel we're a bit back to square one.
4.) 22 May 2024 14:15:41
How does TT fit into the remit of a young progressive coach? Plus he plays the most boring football ever.
Mind you hecdid great things at Bayern, never finished so low in their league, marvelous achievement from TT.
5.) 22 May 2024 14:45:02
Same Standard i've just about managed to calm myself down, lol.
Standard's banter posts with other poster's replies to Standard's banter posts
08 Nov 2025 20:34:36
Hello from poland. Hope everyone's doing well. 3 and a half years in, how would everyone rate the project thus far? Owners have had time to build there club, sort out the rebuild so think its a good time to assess.
1.) 08 Nov 2025 21:11:13
Owners have been brilliant. Manager doing ok and we have a team for the future. Happy days! For sum!
2.) 09 Nov 2025 18:14:51
brilliant is definitely not the word i would use. willing to accept they are learning albeit very slowly after some terrible early decisions. still seems to be a lack of clarity over where the club wants to be and what the plan is.
other things like the FOS deal and the comings and goings at management level, the endless directors we seem to employ could be pointed at.
still remains to be seen how they do but so far . very confused is how i would sum it all up.
3.) 09 Nov 2025 19:43:07
The BP lacking “clarity” is hard for us fans to criticise, as far as I know us fans he never been privy to the “so called plan. ” The owners could well be very happy with the way things are working out.
I agree about the early mistakes and those mistakes were acknowledged and I personally think rectified.
As a fan I’m never going to agree with every signing we have made but generally I’m ok. As we’ve seen over many years, spending lots of money is no guarantee of success.
I also can’t be critical off the owners about the SD’s because I have no idea what job they have been asked to do.
I think the owners have done what they promised to do. Some mistakes along the way is a common theme at virtually every major football club.
The FOS saga has now moved to a complete mystery to me. I was convinced that the media had got it right with there sponsorship reports.
20 May 2025 09:55:58
Anyone keeping an eye on the rumours? We're allegedly planning on a large sell out of our players. The transfer fees I've been seeing all seem to be less than the fee we paid for them though. Big losses at that for some. Anyone seen the same?
1.) 20 May 2025 11:22:04
Nope. I think we will be selling players for appropriate fees, if not the club will look for loans.
2.) 21 May 2025 08:46:55
Us fans have no idea about football finaces, PSR, FFP or the like and can only guess at player values. The great and much missed ED02 used to tell us not to worry about such things and that the owners new exactly what they were doing and we should listen to that advice. let's enjoy the beautiful game.
3.) 21 May 2025 09:23:32
Except Greenaway, the way we play is not a beautiful game, more like boring.
4.) 21 May 2025 10:07:04
It must be me but I’m “generally” ok with the way we have played this season and if one of the alternatives was the first half against Utd then god help us.
Fans usually value players on how they rate them. I wouldn’t sell Caicedo for anything less than £250m but any club can have Disasi for £35m.
I will talking to an old mate and retired chartered accountant who was trying explain the principles of “book profit” and how what can look like a loss on selling a player can actually go into the accounts as a profit. Totally lost me!
5.) 21 May 2025 11:14:00
We are fine on the eye Tom when everyone is fit. Lavia helps us move the ball through the lines that be quicker and he makes a difference but generally speaking modern day football across the board in both the premier league and across europe is pretty boring, you have teams like us who actually want to win matches and play football and then teams who just pack the defence and rely on a quick counter to nick a point or 3! money and the fear of defeat are playing a big factor and amongst our merry band of travellers (home and away) the majority are considering stopping their sky and bt subscriptions!
6.) 21 May 2025 11:39:26
RBD, I agree that ALL European club football is all much of a muchness.
The only plus for our league is there are almost no guarantees of a result. With a few exceptions most teams can get a result.
I also agree about Lavia being a match changing player. I would love us to stick with a 433 formation with Fernandez, Lavia and Caicedo as our midfield.
16 May 2025 19:11:32
Are we the only club that constantly fields 2 goalkeepers in our 9 subs. Really irks me. why not put walsh in place of bettenelli? I know our squad is barebones (somehow, despite the investment) but come on. What is the point of 2 keepers on the bench.
Other than that, not too sure on tosin starting over chalobah but hopefully we play well.
1.) 16 May 2025 21:11:29
Squad scandalous thin in almost every position except GK. Attacking options in particular v thin in must win United clash.
2.) 17 May 2025 10:54:56
I don't get it either, Standard. How many times has the goalkeeper needed replacing twice in the same match?
3.) 17 May 2025 19:49:22
Only once in my memory when Big Pete and Cudicini got injured and John Terry ended up as keeper.
16 May 2025 14:47:30
I'm very nervous about the game tonight. We've never had a good record against United. I'm guessing 2-1 to them or 1-1.
1.) 16 May 2025 15:13:04
4-0?.
2.) 16 May 2025 15:57:32
Tom
You sre drinking early before the game tonight lol.
3.) 16 May 2025 19:09:01
I always go to a game in a positive mood but over the years I have grown accustomed to coming away disappointed.
4.) 16 May 2025 21:13:12
So little attacking options off the bench. Obviously a must win tonight or I think Villa will probably get 5th.
12 May 2025 20:01:33
Enough has been said about the result. We lost to a good team, and one that has been sensibly constructed. I'm more concerned that after the amount we've invested and spent, Jackson's sending off leaves us without a striker for the two penultimate games of the season. Unacceptable squad planning.
1.) 13 May 2025 11:40:09
Agreed Standard.
20 May 2025 14:53:40
Rpd once again, that didn't happen. But whatever. Farewell all. Thanks eds for the effort over the years.
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.
15 May 2025 12:37:16
Thank God, another severance package on his 5 year deal would have been frustrating.
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.
15 Mar 2025 12:23:29
I agree with that jimbo. It was a silly signing like 80% of the signings.
19 May 2025 09:56:34
I wouldn't either bill if it was only a 2 year deal entirely designed to get profit on me the next summer. The disrespect showed to connor was insane.
19 May 2025 09:55:49
Precisely the issue tom. For 3 years now our recruitment has been poor and this is why after spending 1.3 billion pounds we are further away from the top of the epl than we were before the investment.
17 May 2025 17:12:44
Tom, amortisation is irrelevant regarding overall profit. If poch just meant next year will be a green year rather than a red, that's fair. But if he meant overall club profit like the post suggested, no chance.
17 May 2025 08:51:20
Poch, how on earth would the club be in profit after another window of spending 150m?
16 May 2025 14:46:09
Another season with no UCL will definitely affect us getting in players we would like. But it is what it is. I'd also keep chalobah, Colwil and Tosin and sell the rest. I don't know who we can bring in honestly but I guess Guehi would be alright. Not stoked about the fee, never shoukd have left in the first place.
I've been pretty dissapointed with Neto honestly. I'm not a fan of bringing in players who are no better than the ones we have but I will reserve judgement. He's not been terrible like Cucurella and caicedo were early on, but he hasn't impressed. If he improves anything like cucurella and caicedo though we will have a player on our hands.