An Unwanted Record

Is that all football league clubs or just P.L??

Good stat though.

Interestingly we've won as many trophies post Roman as United so stability verses carnage not quite so clear cut; especially considering Arsenal.

 

Aye, but in that same period you've spent over half a billion quid net, versus around £125 million for Utd and less than zero for Arsenal. And even then Utd have the better trophy haul - I'd much rather have two more league titles than an EL and a couple of FA Cups.

Also Utd and Arsenal have never finished sixth, and Utd have been in the hunt for the last seven league titles right up to the last day of the season, whereas Chelsea have only been really in the hunt for two of them, spending the last three years as also rans.

Not forgetting you had stability under Mourinho, who won five trophies in three seasons, and since then Chelsea have won only one league title and six trophies vs four and eight for Utd. So in once the carnage started you have definitely fallen away, and if anything gotten further away from the title the worse the carnage has gotten.

Stability is still better imo, provided you have at least some money to back it up. Arsenal are more an example of how stability without money can cause short term problems, and that can lead to long term stagnation with the best players leaving.

 

I agree mostly, just lazy journo / fans / pundits seem to think that changing managers regularly is a bad thing when clubs like Chelsea, Madrid, Bayern etc have been doing it for years and still winning stuff. Impossible to say if we would have done better had we had one manager for the whole time but the debate is there to be had. Fact remains that the Fergie / United situation is a once in a blue moon thing and it'll be interesting to see how many managers you have in the next 26 years.

 

All leagues from Prem to Div 2

 

Swarbs - also re the money Chelsea spent, a lot was to play catch up in the first place though the point is taken generally.

We certainly did better domestically and abroad than city in the same time frame.

 

Not that much of it was catch up as you weren't all that far behind in 2003, what with players like Lampard, Terry, Guðjohnsen, Desailly, Hasselbaink etc already in place. The first hundred and fifty million spent by Ranieri was enough to catch up with the other clubs at the time. The next hundred by Mourinho was enough to blast you past everyone else.

Since then you've spent another half a billion gross, much of which went on unnecessary players like Shev, Torres, Malouda etc, and much of the rest of which went on players the new managers wanted to bring in who weren't much better than what you already had. If you'd stuck with one manager for the duration then you probably wouldn't have had to spend so much.

Not sure City is a valid comparison, as they actually did have to spend a lot of money just to catch up, and in terms of overall squad depth they are arguably still catching up with us. They had pretty much no experience of Europe prior to their money, whereas Chelsea had been in Europe for a good few years before Roman, and whilst you guys got Mourinho as a manager they got Mancini who is a decent manager, but not a great manager.

 

FFS it had to be a miserable scouser to be so pedantic. Of course you are right.

But my point remains. No one will want such an "achievement". To do it means you would not have been able to go through to the knock out phases of the CL in the first place: not something you would want to do as a CL winner. Once you have been dumped into it you should try to win it of course. A cup for also rans....

I wished we had won the Europa instead of the league by such a large margin...so bitter...

 

Wish we'd have won anything

 

It's a unique accomplishment but not one that Chelsea should be overly proud of. The only reason Chelsea could win it was by being the worst defending champions of all time and therefore entering the Europa League.

But once in that competition, fair enough for winning it. If you're in a competition you should always try your best to win it imo and that's what annoyed me when Utd didn't take it completely seriously. Any trophy is better than no trophy, just ask Arsenal! But the hype of holding both European titles is a little over the top and misplaced.

 

No Dave. My mate hates Rafa with a passion. He doesn't pick up as much early transfer news from united as from Everton and Liverpool because the latter two are the teams he covers. He might get his dream of reporting on united with Moyes getting the job, as they get on extremely well with each other.

 

a losers trophy. if Newcastle or Spurs had won it it would have been different because they entered the competiton right at the start. The chavs were only in it because they were DUMPED from the champions league. You are right. The competition's integrity is being compromised by having CL losers in it...

 

I suspect had you won it last year in a season you won sod all, your attitude may be a little different. It's people like you that lead people to think it is a poor comp. Just watch the reaction of the Benfica fans and players last night and see how well regarded this comp is, especially in mainland europe.

Cant stand ****ing glory hunters who think the only comps worth winning are the premier league and C.L. United fans like you have frankly had it too good for too long and need bringing down a peg or two.

All semi finalists were C.L 'losers'. Without them, the competition would be degraded further as the quility of teams in the later stages would be far lower.

 

Yeah the Benfica players were gutted, obviously meant a lot to them and after what happened in the league to them too I do feel a bit sorry for them. The Europa is still a strong competition and a credible trophy and I'd have celebrated Utd winning it rather than dismissing the quality of the competition. However, I think it's wrong that CL teams get another chance in Europa but that's not Chelsea's fault. And I also feel that this double European champion thing isn't something Chelsea should be overly boasting about. By all means enjoy the success but consider that while you set a record for being the first team to hold both European trophies, you also hold the record for the worst defence of the CL trophy.

 

We can't all get easy groups like United

 

Same goes for the League Cup

 

Conspiracy alert!

 

Good post.

 

Jose Mourinho won the UEFA Cup and Champions League in consecutive years with Porto back in 2003 and 2004. The only difference was he managed to achieve the feat 'the right way round' and I guess also the scheduling of the finals meant that by the time Porto won the Champions League in 2004, Benitez's Valencia had taken the UEFA Cup off Porto's hands.

 

That is the paradox. To have that unique record, a winning club must do badly (coming 3rd) in the group stages and be the worst CL winners ever in the history of the competition.

 

Meh it isnt really

Porto did it recently, cant say many people remember it or give much of a ****.

it sort of like winning the league cup and the FA Cup in consecutive seasons. Its good but nothing to write home about.

Now had it been the CL twic them you would have something to shout about.

Congrats anyway.