Yes, the argument has been said many times before but it has become ludicrous. Chelsea have managed to completely disrupt how football is run, turning it into a business rather than a sport. Over ?380 million have been spent on new players at Chelsea. How many of these have made an impact: ?30 million shevchenko, ?21 million SW phillips, ?20 million veron, ?130,000 a week ballack. I think any chelsea fan will tell you that this is one of the biggest wastes of money in football. SW Phillips hasn't played, shevchenko has gone from the king of the champions league to being the undisputed waste of space and ballack looks about as interested in the match hes playing in as one might look when watching a tree grow. The point is that some really talented players have all turned into failures in their new club. They all had good years of football ahead of them but their careers could be ruined, doomed to being paid to warm a bench. Not only this but the gap between the top two, chelsea and united, and the rest of the premiership is widening and the more money that is spent, the harder it will be for other clubs to catch up. And now what? - more clubs are being bought, the same will happen, players will become totally overvalued and disposable and more and more money will be spent on players. Football is now a business and its the sad truth that overated thugs are getting paid ridiculous amounts of money to play a sport.
So lets take all the transfer money that Chelsea spent out of the game - that would put man City a further 21 million in debt and still with SWP... and if they had sold him probably for a lesser amount. Either you want the money in the game or you don't There has always been the haves and have-nots, just because Chelsea put had the capital Outlay available, a business plan and the desire to compete at the highest level they are to blame for the state of the game entirely? Football has always been a business the difference is that it a global business not a local concern sponsored by the local bakery or butchers shop. The players have turned into failures isn't that the players fault not able to live up to the demands of the new game at ta new club - Or have the players been found out for what they were, above average players shining in an average side? As has been stated in here many times the game of football changed back in 1992 when the big 5 forced the creation of the premier league, to point to Chelsea for today's "issues" is way off mark, they stepped up to compete in today's game, they just happen to be the epitome of the club that every other non top 4 club wished had happened to them.
