>City and United both spend hundreds of millions every season
>Chelsea spend within their means
Are we the good guys?
City and United both spend hundreds of millions every season
City and United also spend within their means.
Their means are just bigger than your means.
>City and United also spend within their means.
United Yes
City No
Under no circumstance ever are Chelsea the good guys.
t. rasheed
City average spend last 5 seasons: £86m
United average spend last 5 seasons: £79m
We are not so different, you and I
>Under no circumstance ever are Chelsea the good guys.
This is why I support them
this
this
look its an arab arsenal fans
but honestly chelsea were good guys against barca in 09 and 12
if they still had pull they'd have gone mad with signings but since no one wants to play for a team that literally finished midtable last season, it'll be tough.
I support Chelsea. Comparison to revenue uniteds spending is acceptable, City's is not.
>implying Chelsea or City will ever spend within their "means"
>implying Chelsea or City will ever not be petroclubs
Kante was the best possible player that they could have signed. I'd only have preferred Messi tbqh
Eternally glad that we dodged the Pogba bullet, Hamez is the superior player.
Kante and Batshuayi are both excellent signings and none of our big players have tried to leave the club.
All we need are some new defenders and we'll be title contenders again, this is still the same team that walked the league in 14/15, Mourinho just have a Godzilla level meltdown last season and completely fucked up the preseason, half the players came back overweight.
>Ar6nil
This desu
It's fun occasionally like in the last Chelsea - Spurs but I like Chelsea as Mordor FC.
What kind of Chelsea fan gives a shit about being the good guys?? If you're gonna bandwagon, please at least pretend you understand how to behave
Except that Chelsea make more money than Arselol the supposed """"""biggest club in London"""""
And that's without a dodgy Arab sponsorship deal like City have
Just remember that scum attracts scum.
I really do not understand why people are so eternally assblasted by Chelsea. City's scheme was WAY fucking worse, but they get like a fraction of the hate from other groups of supporters.
Evil doesn't discriminate, the darkness accepts all.
>Evil doesn't discriminate
Just don't come in our train carriage
Chelsea have always had a large following and had some of the most notorious hooligans back in the day.
Man City fans were like QPR fans before the money, they just kind of existed on the fringes and never offended anybody except for Utd fans.
There's massive double standards with the way people slag off Chelsea compared to every other oil money club which is hilarious because we actually had European pedigree before the money came in unlike all those other tin pot clubs
Because chelsea fans are unironically nazis
>unironically nazis
>Chelsea fans don't let a black man onto a crowded train
Massive media outrage and a witch hunt
>Liverpool fans murder 39 Italians
what a terrible tragedy!!
>Liverpool fans murder 39 Italians
Chelsea were the ones that got suffered from ban on English clubs in Europe
What part of England are you from?
Chelsea is for gays
why is the only counter argument insulting Arsenal? what have they got to do with this?
Yes, we are good guys
- Prevented Spurs to win the premiership
- Prevented Liverpool to win premiership
- Prevented Arsenal to win premiership
These three clubs are clubs with bad fans.
You know, when you put it that way. . .
>mfw it was Arsenes 1000th game
Who do you support then?
>Ar6nil
wtf I love even more Chelsea now
Nothing wrong with that
Posting some smug Eden
Liverslip BTFO
Totteshit BTFO
My personal favourite Eden moment was when he rekt that little shithead ballboy at Swansea
>mfw he would have potentially signed for Spurs had Chelsea not won the CL
>cucked them out of the greatest player they could ever have perhaps signed AND a CL place
That ballboy was such a little cunt.
be glad people care about chelsea. No one gives a shite about city or their fans. they're an afterthought
He was one of the directors sons. The oldest fucking ball boy in history
Hahaha, that's a great post friend! Well done! Really funny :P
Chelsea's gonna go full "we're building the stadium, no money" Arsenal mode.
Their means? Chelsea spend according to Roman's means. Which even tho he's not as rich as those arabian sheiks, he's still rich enough to give blank checks for chelsea managers.
Chelsea was basically Tottenham. Club that talked too loud and wanted to win everything, but in the end...nothing.
No, not even if Santa was Manager would they be the good guys.
>Implying Messi would ever join Chelsea.
Nah M8, Pep is in Manchester.
New stadiums should be paid for by the whole league so no team has to bear a huge burden like that.
This
I dislike them slightly less because of that list now.
HA, Funny.
Isn't that what you guys do? Why is it funny?
I doubt it, Arsenal in hindsight made a massive mistake building the emirates so early considering just how much money Premier League clubs can make through TV money alone now. I also feel like Abramovich would put his own money into the stadium because it will be part of his legacy that lasts for a lifetime, when you are worth nearly $10 billion there's no reason not to.
Are you saying they shouldn't have built it at all or just waited?
They should have waited but like I said, hindsight is a great thing. Spurs and Chelsea are going to have way better stadiums and it won't really hit them too hard, and in the end it never even elevated Arsenal to being a top tier club like Barcelona which was the plan for them.
Eh, I guess it hasn't elevated them. Their matchday is the best in Europe, their TV money is near the top because of the PL deals. Logically, their commercial revenue must be really bad. I wonder why it sucks so bad. Are they still pinned down to the commercial deals they needed to sign longterm so they could get the loans for the stadium? If they had a half decent commercial revenue they could be Bayern Munich easily.
>Buy players so you can't have them
>Send them to eternal loan hell
Honestly baffles me why players under 21 sign for Chelsea. Granted City aren't much better but at least they stick to killing overrated English player's careers so it's not too bad.
>Chelsea was basically Tottenham
Chelsea won FA cup in 1997 and 2000
Chelsea won cup winners cup in 1998
Super cup in 1998
League cup in 1998
All before Roman had even heard of Chelsea. Meanwhile spurs have won fuck all
Name one English players career Chelsea have ended from their academy? Scott Sinclair, josh mceachran, Patrick van aanholt, Fabio Borini, Daniel Sturridge, Romelu Lukaku? None would still get into the Chelsea team.
Was talking about City ruining English players.
My issue with Chelsea was how they throw money players so other teams can't have them then throw them straight on the loan list because they didn't actually need them. Marin, Romeu, Salah, Remy, the 3/4 random defenders they bought last season off the top of my head. Heck you can probably throw Lukaku on that list.
Ok sorry, I hate when people moan about Chelsea academy like we've wasted players when in reality none have been good enough.
>My issue with Chelsea was how they throw money players so other teams can't have them then throw them straight on the loan list because they didn't actually need them.
I understand your point, but a lot had to do with financial fair play and having lots of assets on the books. Financial it makes sense but its shit for football. The only player that has successfully come out of the loan system and into the first team is Thibaut Courtois .
>we
how exactly are you related to abramovich ?
These guys get it tbqh. The massive butthurt generated when Chelsea wins anything is what attracted me to bandwagon them.
Abramovich could build it with his spare change and add a penthouse to it. Giving the billionaire clubs financial aid building stadiums with be very strange
City's spending doesn't surpass what they make from sponsorships, prize money and tv money
It's as sustainable as United's
One of City's biggest fan groups is for gay supporters and they do tonnes of shit in the community
One of Chelsea's biggest fan groups is violent thugs who are also often racist
>$ity, chel$ea, manure
shitty plastic clubs
>arsenal, liverpool, tottenham
actual football clubs that can be supported
>Arsenal Spurs Liverpool
owned by yanks so they're fine
>Chelsea and City
owned by non-yanks so they're evil
literally your logic pal
Liverpool and Spurs are the only proper clubs you mentioned. Arsenal are a joke.
How exactly did you make that distinction?
5 times la 5 times
>City, Chelsea and United
Spend loads of money and win stuff
>Liverpool and Tottenham
Spend loads of money and don't win stuff
Makes one ponder
If Abramovich was so corrupt he would have paid who he needed to so Chelsea could have turned battersea powerplant into a stadium. What a stadium that would have been.
conte seems nice tho
Meh, it was never going to happen no matter how much money was offered, we have a housing crisis in London so Battersea is going to be turned into a trendy blend of apartments, shops, restaurants etc.
>being the good guys
>Costa in the side
bit of a sticky wicket there chaps
MF. We are such good guys, that we don't have any derby/rivals.
...
...
do you /really hate them mugs at chelsea/?
Chelsea were the good guys last season.
Everyone fealt sorry for them having to put up with Mourinho's shit and the way they ended the season was great:
This.
>chelshit plastics think they can ever be "good guys"
scum club, scum players, scum fans. nobody cares about because you didn't do shit last season and city has taken up the mantle of muh evil plastic sugar daddy club. a few more seasons of finishing 6th and ambramovich will leave along with all your bandwagoning fans
post more edens
some shit league one team
>nobody cares about you guys
and yet here you are having an autismo fit of rage over the thought of Chelsea
t. gays