UEFA Blasts Chelsea, Why not Real? (1 Viewer)

Primo

Juventus FC - Philippines
Dec 20, 2002
1,436
#1
First of all, if I manage to get the attention of some moderators here as to where my thread should be, forgive me. I do not know where it would be suitable to place this thread so do move it if it would be appropriate.

*ANd if you do decide to move it. Please PM me as to where it would be relocated, thanks!

Anyway, according to an article i read at soccerage.com, UEFA chief executive Gerhard Aigner blasts Chelsea FC, and Roman Abrahimovic in particular, for buying its way to power. He seems to be vexed by the way Abrahimovic has overturned the status of Chelsea from a common enlgish football club, to a UEFA Champions League major candidate. HE emphasized specially the way RA (Roman Abrahimovic) has bought all these world class players in an instant and formed a "almost" new team. Aigner was concerned with what would happen to youngsters who would be victimized to situations like the one at Chelsea. The development of these players would be in dire threat and would almost guarantee that their chance of development would be overshadowed by the arrival of these established stars.

My point is, why would Aigner be upset over this? This situation is nothing but a replica of what Real Madrid is doing. They are bringing in established quality players, with almost no intention of trying to develop these players further, but only to guarantee the club success. Personally, I do no like it (the system). But it is a way of making the club directors happy, as long as the club coffers will permit. Simply, Real signed almost 5 world star players over several years. RA on the other hand, brought in 5 or more in one summer.

So why is Aigner so upset? Why wont he blast Real Madrid?
 

mikhail

Senior Member
Jan 24, 2003
9,575
#2
The thing about Real is that they have decided to bring in one huge name per season, while filling ouot the reast of the team with youth products. That's their philosophy, and it's actually an admirable one. Guys like Raul and Portillo are in the team after going through Real's youth system, and I think they've a number of young defenders too.

Chelsea on the other hand, have given no such assurances that they'll reign in their spending. Sure, they brought in young Englishmen like Glen Johnson (who looks very, very promising), Wayne Bridge and Joe Cole (who they immediately tried to loan out to Moscow!), but there's no garuantee that guys like Robert Huth, a promising young centre-half, won't be pushed out next year by another 5 or 6 signings. Read into it what you will, but I think that the two clubs' ethos are clearly differant, despite the big transfer philosophys.
 
Sep 28, 2002
13,975
#3
well, real does buy established stars once a year but i'm not sure about their youth policy. ok, raul (which is not a godd example IMO), portillo, casillas. who else? and the stars they are buying. they are not young, where as chelsea buys young guns, like duff, mutu, cole and bridge. what i mean is that you are exaggerating real's youth policy, it is nos as effective as let's say ajax's. so i don't think that things that real are doing is worth such admiration.
 
Jul 12, 2002
5,666
#4
++ [ originally posted by Fliakis ] ++
well, real does buy established stars once a year but i'm not sure about their youth policy. ok, raul (which is not a godd example IMO), portillo, casillas. who else?
Guti.
 

denco

Superior Being
Jul 12, 2002
4,679
#5
How can anyone argue that what Chelsea are doing is vulgar and how can you compare it to Real Madrid as it is rightly pointed out Real do actually have a youth policy and whether its the best in the world its irrelevant, they have produced Raul, Cassillas, Rio Bravo, Pavon, Guti, Miniambres and some who probably have gone to other clubs like Alfonso while Chelsea from no where with no history at all just want to buy both the premiership and Cl
Real still have afoundation and would be funded by any bank because its Real Madrid but what would happen to Chelsea if Roman leaves one way or the other

And as for the players you mentioned how long do you think they would be there for and I don't care what anyone says Real madrid never spent over £100m in one season looking for instant success

Maybe if Cheslea do beat us in Cl then you would change your tone as now it seems everyone is now a Milan hater cos they did their duty and won Cl
 
Sep 28, 2002
13,975
#6
++ [ originally posted by Rickenbacker2 ] ++


Guti.
ok, guti. but real is known not because of their youth development. and real buys only fifa footballers f the year where as chelsea bought young talents (duff, mutu) and veron who's career in man u wasn't all that successful. i'm not saying anything about crespo cause it's mystery to why they bought him after all. (like buffon, vds and carini in your case)
 
Sep 28, 2002
13,975
#7
++ [ originally posted by denco ] ++
How can anyone argue that what Chelsea are doing is vulgar and how can you compare it to Real Madrid as it is rightly pointed out Real do actually have a youth policy and whether its the best in the world its irrelevant, they have produced Raul, Cassillas, Rio Bravo, Pavon, Guti, Miniambres and some who probably have gone to other clubs like Alfonso while Chelsea from no where with no history at all just want to buy both the premiership and Cl
Real still have afoundation and would be funded by any bank because its Real Madrid but what would happen to Chelsea if Roman leaves one way or the other

And as for the players you mentioned how long do you think they would be there for and I don't care what anyone says Real madrid never spent over £100m in one season looking for instant success

Maybe if Cheslea do beat us in Cl then you would change your tone as now it seems everyone is now a Milan hater cos they did their duty and won Cl
or maybe you support a different club in london?

edit:
my bad, you support real madrid.
 
Jul 12, 2002
5,666
#8
++ [ originally posted by Fliakis ] ++
ok, guti. but real is known not because of their youth development. and real buys only fifa footballers f the year where as chelsea bought young talents (duff, mutu) and veron who's career in man u wasn't all that successful. i'm not saying anything about crespo cause it's mystery to why they bought him after all. (like buffon, vds and carini in your case)
Indeed. It would have seemed that Mutu, Hasselbaink, and Gudjohnson formed a great striker corps, not ot mention the various youngsters that have been subsequently loaned out...
 

Layce Erayce

Senior Member
Aug 11, 2002
9,116
#9
gerard aigner should be ****ed in the ass for not giving chelsea enough time or waiting to see or comprehend chelsea's long term plans. they very well might want to capitulate on early trophies and a subsequent rocketing in power, name, respect and recognition which might very well help abramovic to actually reap profits from his investment much like how real make money with ronaldo shirts and man u make merchandise money in the far east.

he must be really scared of chelsea and abramovic.
 

denco

Superior Being
Jul 12, 2002
4,679
#10
++ [ originally posted by Fliakis ] ++


or maybe you support a different club in london?

edit:
my bad, you support real madrid.
I actually do like Chelsea, it has nothing to do with that but you keep mentioning buying young players like Bridge, Cole and Duff and all that but what about the Davids, Emerson, they bid for but were rejected, Vieri or the Makelele they got, the veron they got, Mutu

Yes they are interesting buys but teams like Manchester United and Real madrid are steeped in history, they have a power base, same with Juventus, Liverpool, Milan and Inter

But chelsea are a fad, within 3 years or so ppl will forget about them especially if Roman gets bored

If they win the championship or Cl , then ity would be all good but what happens if they do not, would the likes of Jimmy, gallas, Cole, Petit, Duff and so many others like playing a bit part

I mean Blackburn more or less bought the title and within 3 or 4 years they were relegated cos they had no history of success and unfortunately thier benefactor died

I don't mind a team strenghtening their squad but to completely buy an entire team is completely different
Good luck to them but if every club was like that what exactly would happen to youngsters trying to break into teams
 

Layce Erayce

Senior Member
Aug 11, 2002
9,116
#11
the youngsters would be non-existent. either that or a formality.

the good youngsters would come from the traditional breeding teams...perugia, atalanta, ajax and the like.
 

denco

Superior Being
Jul 12, 2002
4,679
#12
++ [ originally posted by [LAC] ] ++
the youngsters would be non-existent. either that or a formality.

the good youngsters would come from the traditional breeding teams...perugia, atalanta, ajax and the like.
But you are forgetting that Perugia, Ajax, atalanta now have rich benefactors so no need for breeding anyone just go out and buy and try to compete with the Real Madrids of this world
 

Hydde

Duke NUKEM
Mar 6, 2003
36,777
#13
Denco,,,there is no secret that you have a little affair for real madrid.

IMO , both teams do the same thing. Of course, Chelsea have gone too far...and like you said,,,,they could have a big problem if abravomich get bored. Chelsea is like his new toy. BUt who knows?, maybe he will do a foundation in the team that will long.
All depends on abramovich personal desires.

Wel, real madrid do the same,,but at least they have a good "youth product" factory. Chelsea dont.
Abramovich can do a lot for chelsea form now on,,,not only buying players like crazy,,,but spending money in all the other things that can help the club, thinking in the future
 

Layce Erayce

Senior Member
Aug 11, 2002
9,116
#14
denco: there are teams who thrive on breeding youth. my list may be outdated(i often find myself as such regarding football these days) but the point still stands no?

and hydde dont be like mr aigner. dont assume that chelsea will not get a youth team unless u have evidence. read my previous post and i provide a likely scenario regarding chelsea's future.
 

Hydde

Duke NUKEM
Mar 6, 2003
36,777
#15
++ [ originally posted by [LAC] ] ++

and hydde dont be like mr aigner. dont assume that chelsea will not get a youth team unless u have evidence. read my previous post and i provide a likely scenario regarding chelsea's future.
NO dude, im not like mr Aigner, because im not against chelsea´s policy.

That Aigner, have nothing to do, i mean,,,thats is chelsea´s problem,,,i dont see why he is upset. If chelsea want to buy all the players in the world...let them be.... is their money and tha can do all what they wan with it.

.
 

denco

Superior Being
Jul 12, 2002
4,679
#16
Well Hyde you didnt say I have a little affair with Real Madrid cos I would have been very worried but that is not the point

Fiorentina, Roma, Lazio and athletico Madrid have tried to compete with the big boys and look where its got them, Fiorentina have gone down the drain and lazio and Roma are in deep financial trouble
 

denco

Superior Being
Jul 12, 2002
4,679
#18
++ [ originally posted by [LAC] ] ++
denco: there are teams who thrive on breeding youth. my list may be outdated(i often find myself as such regarding football these days) but the point still stands no?

and hydde dont be like mr aigner. dont assume that chelsea will not get a youth team unless u have evidence. read my previous post and i provide a likely scenario regarding chelsea's future.
I don't think your list is outdated, I was creating a scenario where the clubs you mentioned all have very rich benefactors. In such a case what would happen to youth policy if everyone is rich enough to buy ready made players like Cheslea have just done
 

Hydde

Duke NUKEM
Mar 6, 2003
36,777
#19
They will not destroy the youth product itself...but definitely the young players will never have a chance to play. And thats the truth. If abramovich continues buying world class, or almost world class strikers and mids,,, the young ones will never have a chance, and thats inevitable in that policy.

Look at real Madrid,, that raul bravo...he will hardly have a secured first team spot in real madrid,,,even in 10 years...and he is very promising.

OK you can say about raul and casillas...but we must remember that in the time raul was emerging...real madrid didnt had that policy,,or at least, not right now. There was a different president...and although real madrid was a great team. What i want to point,, is for example, if raul was a 20 years old player NOW,,,and there were players like ronaldo and lets say....Mutu in the front of real madrid.....you think that they will let him play??

Maybe we would never had known the raul that we know today.
 
Sep 28, 2002
13,975
#20
++ [ originally posted by denco ] ++
Well Hyde you didnt say I have a little affair with Real Madrid cos I would have been very worried but that is not the point

Fiorentina, Roma, Lazio and athletico Madrid have tried to compete with the big boys and look where its got them, Fiorentina have gone down the drain and lazio and Roma are in deep financial trouble
well, i think chelsea has a better financial background than all of those put together. yes, is roman is bored, they are screwed. on the other hand, they can sell cause players are still young. real madrid may be in trouble cause their stars are ageing and in couple of years they'll only have raul beckham and ronaldo in their 30s. with portillo, guti and casillas from that OUTSTANDING youth system. that should keep them away from relegation
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)