Probably a bit of tax-free hard cash in hand, nudge nudge wink wink don't involve the taxman or the dole office :)Double like on the Garry Cook bit.
What were Everton saying/asking for in their emails (if you can share?)?. God I imagine they’re kicking themselves.
They were being asked to sign non-disclosure agreements, as a condition of ADUG undertaking due diligence. They were stalling and making alternative suggestions. It was made clear to them by Amanda Staveley that these things were non-negotiable and she was getting increasingly impatient with them. I remember seeing an email where she said something like "What do these people not understand? They either do it our way or not at all. They are so unprofessional".Double like on the Garry Cook bit.
What were Everton saying/asking for in their emails (if you can share?)?. God I imagine they’re kicking themselves.
No matter how much money you have, it's no guarantee of signing the best playersbut his wealth is the reason we could outspend everyone if spending was unrestricted, this is hypothetically speaking of course. I don't think it's a good idea to allow that.
Chelsea were extremely dominant for a while until we came alongNo matter how much money you have, it's no guarantee of signing the best players
We tried signing Kaka and failed
When spending was unrestricted, Chelsea tried buying everyone with some success but they weren't dominating everything
Rags had won 4 of the last 5 titles when we won our first.Chelsea were extremely dominant for a while until we came along
![]()
Chelsea dominate trophy count in Abramovich era
Frank Lampard takes charge of Chelsea looking to continue their dominant trophy record under Roman Abramovich’s ownership.www.independent.ie
Chelsea were extremely dominant for a while until we came along
![]()
Chelsea dominate trophy count in Abramovich era
Frank Lampard takes charge of Chelsea looking to continue their dominant trophy record under Roman Abramovich’s ownership.www.independent.ie
Chelsea couldn't compete financially with us and now we are dominant. If City didn't get money there is no reason to think Chelsea wouldn't have been getting our players and continuing the domination.
Chelsea won more than United in that timeframe, for a period of time they were utterly dominant, in Mourinho(spit) first spell. Roman went a bit do-lally for a while then. Chelsea is his toy.Rags had won 4 of the last 5 titles when we won our first.
They won 3.Chelsea won more than United in that timeframe, for a period of time they were utterly dominant, in Mourinho(spit) first spell. Roman went a bit do-lally for a while then. Chelsea is his toy.
it says it right there - Chelsea won more trophies than anyone. It's in an article with a graph. I don't know how much more I can do for you fellaUnited were more successful than Chelsea during that period. Chelsea won back to back titles but United followed it up with three in a row + a CL.
since 2003-04 season when Abramovich started spending they've won 16They won 3.
since 2003-04 season when Abramovich started spending they've won 16
including 3 European titles.
they've won more in the time of the money than they had in their entire history up to that point.
When we were taken over, Chelsea had won 2 titles and a few domestic cups. The rags had won 2 in a row and a champions league and were about to add their third title in a row. When we won our first title, the rags had 4 of the last 5 and Chelsea had 3 in 9 years. Even now after years of the rags being shit, they've still won as many leagues as Chelsea since RA took over (as have we if we win this season). If it wasn't for us, the rags would have two more titles and would be on course to win another.since 2003-04 season when Abramovich started spending they've won 16
including 3 European titles.
I reckon Chelsea would have been the club to get our players and would have dominated without our investment, although you can't legislate for Abramovich going mental either.When we were taken over, Chelsea had won 2 titles and a few domestic cups. The rags had won 2 in a row and a champions league and were about to add their third title in a row. When we won our first title, the rags had 4 of the last 5 and Chelsea had 3 in 9 years. Even now after years of the rags being shit, they've still won as many leagues as Chelsea since RA took over (as have we if we win this season). If it wasn't for us, the rags would have two more titles and would be on course to win another.
Doubt it. Only players we've beaten them to were Robinho and Stones. Rags lost out on as many.I reckon Chelsea would have been the club to get our players and would have dominated without our investment
you find it very difficult to get off the oh but look at the rags type arguments don't youhow many more trophies had the rags won than us before fergie turned up and spent a fortune?
it says it right there - Chelsea won more trophies than anyone. It's in an article with a graph. I don't know how much more I can do for you fella
you're missing my point. Had we not got the investment - i reckon a lot of the players we ended up with would have ended up at Chelsea because they had the money to outbid the rags etcDoubt it. Only players we've beaten them to were Robinho and Stones. Rags lost out on as many.
from 2003 to 2010 - when we won our first trophy - they won 8 domestic titles. they interrupted a 2 team league at the time really and upset the apple cart in a big way. There was an awful amount of vitriol towards them and the money too.That graph is from the takeover in 2003 until 2019.
You were talking about from the 2003 takeover until we came along and started spending.