Sometimes wonder how different the world would be if we’d signed both Ozil and Suarez in 2013. Would’ve absolutely walked the league that year, signed Sanchez in the summer, never looked back.
Sigh. Remember being dead against it at the time, I guess I had stronger principles back then.
booked to see Hertha vs Bayern in a couple weeks as I’m going back to Berlin before it becomes potentially infinitely way more difficult after January. Looking forward to Herr Klinsmann rolling over for his boys.
Don’t know if this will be of interest to anyone but i’m a bit of a gimp and spend hours looking at league tables and the like. Been trying to do some writing recently - a decade retrospective and that. Did a touch of spreadsheet wankering beforehand and it sort of changed my mind quite a bit (sort of felt like City pissed the decade, tbh, but not the case).
There are probably mistakes in it. The lower you go the more of a minefield it becomes, especially when you’re dealing with discontinued competitions, etc. Obviously all competitions aren’t equal either (did top tier only at domestic levels), but coming up with a weighted metric was fucking impossible because people are always biased bellends.
Thought it was interesting that:
Chelsea have won more trophies than anyone despite a constant churn of coaches.
Arsenal have continued to dominate the women’s game despite huge investment elsewhere.
That Chelsea and City have had such differing fortunes at youth level despite similar setups.
(Hope you’re all well. Could do without replies from smarmy sorts and joke accounts, tbh).
I do wonder in relation to the youth setups of Chelsea & City whether the objectives of the setup are different or maybe have been different before the transfer ban.
reckon both teams looked at the Spanish cantera model (Real Madrid make bank on theirs and dominate the transfer market in Spain at least by selling players always with nice buyback clauses in case they come good) and sought to emulate that for whatever reason? Chelsea clearly didn’t give a toss about promoting youth before this season. City less so, but I’d have expected better results from both given the quality of both of their operations.
basically there’s very little downside to having a massive youth set up to the club, especially, if in Chelsea’s case, if you want to launder money and increase the club’s value. downside for the players whose careers you’re stunting I guess, but still.