Factoring in both short and long term capabilites, which club is less equiped for success? They’re both well under expectations at the moment, but who is more likely to be good in a 2-5 year window?

  • ImVinnie@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    United!

    At least Chelsea’s owners are willing to spend money. Now granted it’s on shit players, but they are at least giving the manager the resources to win.

  • liquidreferee@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    United for sure. There clearly is and has been a toxic environment there for many years. Chelsea hasn’t been rainbows but they have a proven manager now that seems to be making change

  • moiLNova@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s like asking if shitting bcoz of diarrhea is better or incoming poo from another stomach disorder is worse.

    Chelsea’s arrogant owners (8 yr contracts & other bad decisions despite being given contrary advice), are leading the club to a future shit condition, one that ManU is already in and doesn’t show signs of improving.

    So, in essence, both of them will be shitting horrendously in the future. Thus OP’s question can be rephrased as “who would you rather be right now”?

    To which, the answer is clearly Chelsea.

  • Thorium19@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Chelsea look like they’re almost starting to work together, they’ve felt like they’re not sure if they can trust their decisions previously but now they’re doing so.

    United on the other hand, look like a bunch of mercenaries pulled together and being expected to play even though they’ve already been paid, instead of getting paid after the job is done.

  • Bobby_Shafto-@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    “Glaziers out 😭😭😭” Some of these idiots even compare them to Mike Ashley. They have spent 400,000,000+ in the last couple of years on players. Personally, I am hugely enjoying the downfall of both

  • MTG1972@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Chelsea has hope for this season man utd doesn’t have that that’s the diffrence

  • wolfey1991@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    United are in a worse spot , at least chelsea looks like they’ve got an owner that looks like he cares for the club even if he does spend like a drunken sailor

  • Locky_88@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    United are in a worse position. Because they have few young, hungry, talented players, showing potential. The players they have bought for at least 10 years are not the best or even close to what they need. Hopefully Hojlund comes good in the next few years, Garnacho is too arrogant, they seem to buy a lot of players that believe their work is done once they arrive at Old Trafford. Chelsea have a melting pot of talent, once Poch figures out his best 11, they’ll be a good team, with players hungry behind them fighting for position.