Winning isn’t going to cover up the cracks, no matter how much they’ll try. … I sincerely think this sentence is unfortunate. It is precisely in achieving results that a company strategy is proven right or wrong. It is not constructive to immediately declare that regardless of the results the methodology used is still a loser. I appreciate your articles very much and have been following them for a long time, but I think this is too exasperated. Only if the results are not good, will we be able to discuss negatively both the sports directors and the ownership. I think that Maresca, a person of great character, wanted to get rid of those players who were ruining the dressing room. I am convinced and I hope I am not wrong that this will be good for the team. I also think it is exaggerated to have read that our victory on Monday was a lucky victory. It was a very difficult match, very well prepared by Potter and therefore difficult to read, especially after going behind due to our mistake and certainly not due to West Ham’s merits. I feel I am closer to the choices made to date, because I am curious to see where they lead. I leave the strategies of how to govern a company to those who know how to do it, as in the case of the current owners.
The timing of these stories about Todd and the ticketing probably aren't a coincidence...and another example of what I say here, they think we're fools.
Another first class article from you. You seem to have a way of removing the noise isn’t getting down to the facts. You’re 100% right that people forget that all these footballers are human beings and whilst they get paid well, must have a short career and they have the same external issues that we all do with wives, girlfriends, family, kids, et cetera to deal with. These external elements affect them in their job environment just as it suits does ass. The way some of them have been treated is no different to you or I having a bad boss treat us badly and the knock on effect it has on our thinking, behaviours and actions. I like you have gradually steered away from being positive about the new ownership and I am a lot more negative than I was 2/3 years ago.
I also think there's a bit of a cultural divide in the players' understanding of their roles in the sporting machine between global football and what we have here in American sports.
The one noticeable difference that I've spotted is that here in the US, ownership holds the majority of the power over the future and career of a player, unless ownerships cedes some of that control with contractual clauses that give the player some control over their career.
Not to get extremely detailed on the intricacies of US sports and how the system functions, but players are largely commodities and can be traded when ownership sees fit. The difference is that players in NFL, NBA, NHL, MLB accept that as a way of life and understand that they have little control over where they play unless it's written into their contract that they can decline certain trades.
For a player in the US to force their way out of a team that has no desire to move them, they have to go to extreme lengths to get out to the point where they're basically risking their entire reputation as a sportsman. A good example of this is the current Jimmy Butler/Miami Heat situation. Butler wants out of Miami. Miami doesn't want to trade Butler. So over the past few months, Butler has basically "quit" on the team, refused to do things they asked, received multiple fines, and they finally had enough of him and traded him.
You rarely see that happen in football because the players have all the control. A player wants out? He just tells his agent to contact the press, contact clubs, start drumming up interest before handing in a transfer request, and then the player is usually sold. You rarely see that happen in US sports. It happens more often now than it used to, but at the end of the day, if the ownership doesn't want to move a player, they can always say no.
I find it interesting that the thought is that as the basic wages paid to players is realistic and heavily incentivised not only will they earn more with success but if they want to leave it will be easier to move them on. Hence the longer contracts. Which is why we want to get rid of the longer staying players on high wages - Sterling Chilwell Chalobah(?) etc. And probably why we are signing mostly younger lads.
I think what they are doing is making me cynical. As I have said before I think now the club has just become a portfolio of players to buy, sell and loan. They also don’t understand what you need to put into place to make a successful football team. They don’t treat the players, fans etc like human beings or with respect. So many players want out. I am almost expecting that if we don’t finish in the top five and to comply with FFP they will sell Palmer. Just another commodity to move on.
Whichever way you look at it ... its not a good look and it will start to make recruitment more difficult as players start to realised that if you do go to Chelsea you'll be treated as no more than a commodity to be disposed of as certain people see fit.
You may be told you'll get a chance at the first team .. they always need someone to carry the players kit bags.
Great article. People do certainly forget that these players and indeed human beings. I still can’t believe how we’ve treated Chalobah and how he’ll probably end up going in the summer. Whether he’s rated or not, it doesn’t justify the treatment of him. Just mental. I find it very telling with what kind of ownership we’re under now.
Such a good comprehensive article - any chance you can email it to Todd😉
Winning isn’t going to cover up the cracks, no matter how much they’ll try. … I sincerely think this sentence is unfortunate. It is precisely in achieving results that a company strategy is proven right or wrong. It is not constructive to immediately declare that regardless of the results the methodology used is still a loser. I appreciate your articles very much and have been following them for a long time, but I think this is too exasperated. Only if the results are not good, will we be able to discuss negatively both the sports directors and the ownership. I think that Maresca, a person of great character, wanted to get rid of those players who were ruining the dressing room. I am convinced and I hope I am not wrong that this will be good for the team. I also think it is exaggerated to have read that our victory on Monday was a lucky victory. It was a very difficult match, very well prepared by Potter and therefore difficult to read, especially after going behind due to our mistake and certainly not due to West Ham’s merits. I feel I am closer to the choices made to date, because I am curious to see where they lead. I leave the strategies of how to govern a company to those who know how to do it, as in the case of the current owners.
The timing of these stories about Todd and the ticketing probably aren't a coincidence...and another example of what I say here, they think we're fools.
Another first class article from you. You seem to have a way of removing the noise isn’t getting down to the facts. You’re 100% right that people forget that all these footballers are human beings and whilst they get paid well, must have a short career and they have the same external issues that we all do with wives, girlfriends, family, kids, et cetera to deal with. These external elements affect them in their job environment just as it suits does ass. The way some of them have been treated is no different to you or I having a bad boss treat us badly and the knock on effect it has on our thinking, behaviours and actions. I like you have gradually steered away from being positive about the new ownership and I am a lot more negative than I was 2/3 years ago.
I also think there's a bit of a cultural divide in the players' understanding of their roles in the sporting machine between global football and what we have here in American sports.
The one noticeable difference that I've spotted is that here in the US, ownership holds the majority of the power over the future and career of a player, unless ownerships cedes some of that control with contractual clauses that give the player some control over their career.
Not to get extremely detailed on the intricacies of US sports and how the system functions, but players are largely commodities and can be traded when ownership sees fit. The difference is that players in NFL, NBA, NHL, MLB accept that as a way of life and understand that they have little control over where they play unless it's written into their contract that they can decline certain trades.
For a player in the US to force their way out of a team that has no desire to move them, they have to go to extreme lengths to get out to the point where they're basically risking their entire reputation as a sportsman. A good example of this is the current Jimmy Butler/Miami Heat situation. Butler wants out of Miami. Miami doesn't want to trade Butler. So over the past few months, Butler has basically "quit" on the team, refused to do things they asked, received multiple fines, and they finally had enough of him and traded him.
You rarely see that happen in football because the players have all the control. A player wants out? He just tells his agent to contact the press, contact clubs, start drumming up interest before handing in a transfer request, and then the player is usually sold. You rarely see that happen in US sports. It happens more often now than it used to, but at the end of the day, if the ownership doesn't want to move a player, they can always say no.
I find it interesting that the thought is that as the basic wages paid to players is realistic and heavily incentivised not only will they earn more with success but if they want to leave it will be easier to move them on. Hence the longer contracts. Which is why we want to get rid of the longer staying players on high wages - Sterling Chilwell Chalobah(?) etc. And probably why we are signing mostly younger lads.
I think what they are doing is making me cynical. As I have said before I think now the club has just become a portfolio of players to buy, sell and loan. They also don’t understand what you need to put into place to make a successful football team. They don’t treat the players, fans etc like human beings or with respect. So many players want out. I am almost expecting that if we don’t finish in the top five and to comply with FFP they will sell Palmer. Just another commodity to move on.
Nothing Classy about how we are operating and dealing with players. No wonder Felix felt that way & Nkunku will no doubt follow the same path.
Whichever way you look at it ... its not a good look and it will start to make recruitment more difficult as players start to realised that if you do go to Chelsea you'll be treated as no more than a commodity to be disposed of as certain people see fit.
You may be told you'll get a chance at the first team .. they always need someone to carry the players kit bags.
Great article. People do certainly forget that these players and indeed human beings. I still can’t believe how we’ve treated Chalobah and how he’ll probably end up going in the summer. Whether he’s rated or not, it doesn’t justify the treatment of him. Just mental. I find it very telling with what kind of ownership we’re under now.