coogar:

a brand is as big as the people interested in it. it's the viewers that determine the value, not the pomposity of the brand owners.

the truth is in the box below......

www.nairaland.com/attachments/1743420_image_jpeg9f360c5ab7736510df54c882e9dbf188


chelsea vs leicester game has more views than the el-clasico.

So you are saying the Chelsea brand is bigger than the Madrid brand.SMH.

coogar:

so you are comparing shyte leagues like la liga & bundesliga to the premier league in terms of global audience? do you know how many homes in the world watch premier league games? do you know how many countries watch the premier league?

you have been shafted!



that's immaterial - chevrolet could have pulled out if they wanted to. why didn't they?

Are u saying a team like Real current UCL holders boasting the world's most expensive player and the world's best player with a history that makes any other team in Europe look ordinary and lets not forget shirt sales and stadium size do not have a bigger brand.

coogar:

man utd!
and chelsea should be matching that value. you are in the capital, mourinho factor, hazard + cesc + costa are also star players. i think £25m is way too cheap for the chelsea brand.

Consider the fact that Bayern, Real and Barcelona all earn around that range who all have bigger brands and more star players earn around the same range
BTW the guy who okayed the Chevrolet deal got fired
http://www.forbes.com/sites/michelinemaynard/2012/07/31/the-key-management-lesson-in-gms-man-u-deal/

coogar:

you should be at par with united(£51m) a year or even more with the star players in your squad. christ, who's your director?

a whole chelsea fc left to struggle with scraps like liverpool, spurs & west brom? this isn't good enough at all. when will you ever break even with these useless deals?

Pls tell me the no of teams who earn significantly more for shirt sponsors excluding naming rights for stadia (arsenal)

coogar:

you are the one dribbling backwards!
i already said your old timers would bring the club to ruins if they don't forget the tradition nonsense....chelsea need a bigger ground to be a big club. we are tired of them in that fulham broadway area.

they have gotten bigger than that area which is mostly a residential area. they ought to move & find a place where a bigger capacity stadium would generate more revenue - your old timers are clogging the wheels of progress of that club.


look around you - arsenal(60,000) newcastle(52,000), united(76,000), liverpool are almost through with moving to a bigger stadium. city got lucky with etihad - they converted a commonwealth stadium into a football ground. maybe when all your revenue are eaten by player wages & you go bankrupt - una eyes go clear.

There is nothing the board can do if the CPO don't allow Chelsea move aside changing the name of the club

coogar:

what are you talking about? i stay few blocks away from stamford bridge. the earlier you get rid of those your old timers, the better for you. tradition stalls development.

spurs fought for that olympic stadium. they are in north london. had west ham not used godfathers in the government to dash them handouts, spurs could have won the bid.

i also remember arsenal using the wembley stadium at some point in the 90s - money is the name of the game, not some tradition. roman had the money, what's he got to lose to put in a bid that would blow the other yeye clubs outta the water?

It shows u do not understand d issues
Firstly Stamford bridge is owned by the CPO (Chelsea Pitch Owners) which is a group of fans who bought Chelsea in the last century due to real estate sharks when Chelsea had financial issues. There is also an agreement with both the fans and the club that Chelsea must play all competitive first team home games at the bridge or cease to be called Chelsea.
Secondly Abramhovich tried to buy Stamford bridge of them but they rejected him outrightly so that Chelsea could move.

coogar:

what are you talking about? i stay few blocks away from stamford bridge. the earlier you get rid of those your old timers, the better for you. tradition stalls development.

spurs fought for that olympic stadium. they are in north london. had west ham not used godfathers in the government to dash them handouts, spurs could have won the bid.

i also remember arsenal using the wembley stadium at some point in the 90s - money is the name of the game, not some tradition. roman had the money, what's he got to lose to put in a bid that would blow the other yeye clubs outta the water?

It shows u do not understand d issues
Firstly Stamford bridge is owned by the CPO (Chelsea Pitch Owners) which is a group of fans who bought Chelsea in the last century due to real estate sharks when Chelsea had financial issues. There is also an agreement with both the fans and the club that Chelsea must play all competitive first team home games at the bridge or cease to be called Chelsea.
Secondly Abramhovich tried to buy Stamford bridge of them but they rejected him outrightly so that Chelsea could move

coogar:

this is true!



terry & cahill are better than these lots....



blind is better than matic. fellaini is a "number 10", he's not a good midfielder. dembele is slightly better than matic!



very true!



cech, terry, oscar, hazard, fabregas, costa, etcetera are world class players.



surely! when he won his first CL in 95, mourinho was still studying physics by okeke.



it depends on how quickly falcao adapts & how soon our injured players get back to form. winning the league is a stretch but top 4 is a certainty!



we rule the roost. show us your trophies! under roman, united have won more league titles than you*: lots.

the count is 5-3

Some really amazing trolling and I can't believe u r serious

coogar:

why can't you people build a bigger stadium? you let west ham(an east london club) claim the olympic stadium they cannot possibly fill every matchday when you could have easily shoved them aside.

that stadium would have spiked your revenue by about 80% at least. more fans = more cash at the gates. the more revenue you make, the more wages you can afford under FFP. there's no PDP things here - what roman did in the past was financial dopïng!

I doubt u understand the Chelsea stadium issue with your comment. because u would know London is extremely divided with arsenal and spurs in the north west ham in the east. and the fact that u can't infringe on another club's turf plus the fact that most Chelsea season ticket holders resisiting to move away from Stamford bridge which is counterproductive to expand
Also FFP is bleeped up

Katsumoto:

We all know the differences between an anchor and a box-to-box MF. Box-to-box is an upgarde on an anchor because the box-to-box can defend as well as attack. If you could buy a car would you buy one without air-conditioning or one with air-conditioning? Both will get you from Lagos to Ibadan but only one will give you comfort in 30 degrees heat.

Why was it Vieira who replaced Deschamps in the French squad and not Makelele? Makelele got into the French squad before Vieira but it was Vieira who replaced Deschamps, became captain, and had over 30 more caps than makelele despite being 3 years younger and making his debut 2 years after Makelele? Simply because a box-to-box MF is better than an anchor. Almost all box-to-box MFs are starters for club and country - Gerrard, Vidal, Toure, Vieira, Keane, Davids, Matthaus, Pogba. Davids played with Zidane, arguably the greatest of his generation; why was Davids not asked by his coaches at Juvey to just sit in front of the back four in an ultra-defensive league? Keane played with Scholes; why was there a need for Keane to move forward. Yet Makelele played with lampard and still refused to move beyond the center circle.

Yes we were shown footage of Makelele in Nantes; now show us footage of Makalele advancing in Celta Vigo, Madrid or Chelsea.

a box to box player is not superior to an anchor but they complement each other especially in a 3man midfield with another cm but in a 2man midfield like Keane and scholes the deeper player also aids in attacks (man city)

raumdeuter:

So we should forget that the Galacticos Zidane, Figo, Ronaldo Carlos were getting old (All over 30yrs) yet it was Makelele that made them not to win when he left

They were winning before he came, So he couldnt have been the reason they won an additional one. The only CL final they won sef, he was subbed out

so u r basically saying there won't have been a difference if he had stayed considering they didn't win ANY TROPHY FOR THREE CONSECUTIVE YEARS
also de liam was in his late 20s there was Owen and Beckham and callbacks at thirty can still be elite and there was Raul, casillas

raumdeuter:

Madrid was already winning before makelele won 2 in 3 yrs, So claiming Makelele was the reason they won is false.

They won only once in 3yrs of Makelele. Thats the fact

so how many times did they win after he left or should we forget that they struggled to get into the semifinals post-makelele.
Besides makelele staying at Madrid could not guarantee CL titles (even messi or Ronaldo cannot guarantee CL titles) but understating the difference is wrong

raumdeuter:

Why did he win just 1 CL with the same Madrid galacticos in 3 seasons.

Seriously it is just like saying ronaldo de liam and Ibra weren't the best in their positions because of the lack of a CL title
Also Madrid did not even win a trophy for the next three years after his departure with all the stars they had at that time
lastly count the no of teams that won the CL in the modern era more than once in 3yrs

raumdeuter:

With the part in bracket you are excused.

How many yrs did Makelele spend in Madrid and how many CL titles did he win there and in his entire career

do u judge a player solely by his CL titles? but can u tell me that makelele that Madrid were the same after he left or he did not aid in chelsearly dominating the epl 2004-2006

coogar:

that's not even the point - ask dayo to find one article on the internet where redondo, matthaus, ardilles, rijkaard, cocu, etc were described as defensive midfielders before 2003.

they claim there have been other players doing the makelele role before makelele - they should provide evidence where these other players were described as defensive midfielders. any article written before 2003 would be a good evidence.

in the absence of none, they just gotta admit they are clueless about football.

this is what makelele's teammates in madrid said about his departure.

zidane:
Why put another layer of gold paint on the Bentley when you are losing the entire engine?

fernando hierro:
I think Claude has this kind of gift – he's been the best player in the team for years but people just don't notice him, don't notice what he does. But you ask anyone at Real Madrid during the years we were talking about and they will tell you he was the best player at Real. We all knew, the players all knew he was the most important. The loss of Makélelé was the beginning of the end for Los Galacticos… You can see that it was also the beginning of a new dawn for Chelsea. He was the base, the key and I think he is the same to Chelsea now.

but let's blame the english media according to dayokanu. english journalists put those words in hierro's mouth.

true

I personally think you guys are understating makelele talent as a DM because to me he was the best of his era (I have limited football knowledge b4 the 2000s) and he leaving Madrid aided in the manner in which the galacticos faltered
Also him not playing for France does not necessarily mean he was not good just that he did not possibly suit his manager tactics (eg ibra and yaya at barca)

hensben: pogba and vidal are doing their job and pirlo has come of age, thats the reason if matic is there, they wouldnt labour much cos he is still young, remember this word 'box to box' i hope you know what it means and its been use in two formations. which are; 3-5-3 and 4-2-3-1 or 4-5-1. unlike roy keane who played in 4-4-2 formation(old skool formation).Btw, how did you come to that conclusion that when you have such players you are guaranteed trophy ,last time i check, madrid won bayern 4 goals to nil in ucl last season and no khedira in the match but martinez was playing for bayern that day.

I never said such players guarantee trophies but also remember pep broke the schweinsteiger -Martinez treble winning pivot. but the fact is those players help. and if 442 is old sschool what are Atletico doing

hensben: hahaha now i see why you argue this, is sergio bosquet strong physically but he is a DMF, in football today, you doesnt need a roy keane pattern of 'rugby-DMF', rather, a good passer/distributor of the ball from deep(i.e, a DMF of today football requires more technics,discipline and reading of the game, makelele started this, he was small in size but opponet hardly displace him.)....oga football don evolve.

I think u misunderstand the difference between a DM(makelele,Keane) and a regista(pirlo, Gerrard) Pirlo defensively is rubbish and he is immobile and what helps him in juve systems are the engines and defensive prowess of pogba and Vidal. a player like busquet may not be huge but he is strong defensively and combines that with technique. and bro till now most teams that win trophies and dominate usually have those "brutes" eg toure(man city) khedira(Madrid) martinez(Bayern) bender(Dortmund) makelele (the 1st galaticos) etc

coogar:

i can name 5 players better than terry in the premier league.

•kompany
•vlaar
•koscielny
•jaglieka
•rojo

matic's own is easier....

•blind
•ramsey
•dembele
•cattermole
•gerrard

matic is the best DM in the epl or have you forgotten what he did to yaya toure when yaya was destroying every, midfield he came across.
and none of the above combine his athleticism with vision, technique, prowess in the air, defensive ability, and reading of the game if he is not worldclass then no cm/dm in prem aside yaya is even good enough to be called average

coogar:

•de gea > courtouis
•blind > terry
•matic > carrick
•cesc > mata
•falcao > costa + remy + drogba

this has to be a massive joke

I really do not grasp how man u fans come here and say de gea is better than courtios when he won't make our bench and boast about a typical jack of all trades master of none player like rojo who struggled to get a work permit and a defence that made afobe look world class and deceive themselves that they still have midfield capable of winning the league I'm pretty much speechless