Potter got about 5 minutes in charge of a group of players signed by a completely different manager he's been done so dirty by the media and Chelsea fans unbelievable
@@matthewbanton7077 maybe you’re right. I’m an arsenal fan but Chelsea success in Europe sometimes makes me believe they are touch and go with arsenal. No idea how a neutral would see it
The answer is yes, Chelsea wasted most of that billion. For that amount, Abramovich would've laced that squad with world class marquee signings and have Chelsea competing for the treble this season.
Except that was never the actual intention. They signed a bunch of young high ceiling prospects on long term deals with the intent of not just being a one and done team, but one that could compete year after year. But that won't be for another year or two which was expected.
@@thetimeisrite football isn't as forgiving as American sports. We have relegation, and it's not beyond the realm of possibility that a squad full of inexperienced (albeit talented) kids could be fighting relegation. You can't just wing it, especially in the PL. The way I see it, Chelsea are failing to score goals. You could have the best defense in the league but that means nothing when you can't make basic attacking moves.
@@MrPwrt I wouldn't say they are winging it, and when you have the likes of Luton, Everton, and Burnley in the league, I think you wouldn't have to worry about Chelsea being relegated.
even as a Chelsea fan some signings were unnecessary and getting rid of all UCL winners to buy young players. also, some signings just don't make sense
The most logical lot? Now I want to hear the others. On one question, they say Chelsea is more attractive than Liverpool because the current generation players grew up watching Chelsea win more silverwares than Liverpool. Then on the very next question, they say Chelsea is bigger than City because City was playing Gillingham in the 90s??
Rory Jennings is the only one who hasn't lost the plot. Leaving aside City as financial cheaters, which nobody seems to care about (which is so dark, but a separate topic), they're not even close to the status of United, Liverpool, and Arsenal. Rory correctly identifies that Chelsea are a cut below because of way less history than those 3, and then City are like the upper echelon of a group with Spurs and Newcastle.
Absolutely correct. Arsenal, Liverpool and Man United are global clubs with global fanbases. They are up there with the Milans, Juventus, Real Madrid and Barcelona. Chelsea is popular with the players but not the fans so much. And City is a rung below them.
Love to see it, now that Arsenal are back in the top 4, the narrative changes again to silverware. When we were winning FA Cups, our league position was brought up, and all of a sudden finishing top 4 was incredible and Champions League football was the most important thing, when before, Wenger was slated for having that objective.
Prior to both sides being taken over, Chelsea had won only 11 trophies to Manchester City's 15. Manchester City had also won the FA Cup in 1904, this was before Chelsea had even been created. Just for context, Chelsea didn't win their first trophy until 1955, some 51 years after Manchester City had won their first trophy, and by that time, Manchester City had won 4. Chelsea have spent 89 years as a club in the English top flight, in comparison to Manchester City's 95. But by focusing on 1999, Manchester City's worst year of their over 130 year history, which as stated earlier was a club winning trophy's before Chelsea were even created, is a failed attempt at trying to denigrate the club. Whilst City were busy playing in the FA Cup final in 1981 against Tottenham, Chelsea were scrapping it out in the 2nd tier finishing 12th. A position that would later become familiar with the club, this despite spending close to 1 billion pounds in one season.
no one cares about either the london plastics or the manchester plastics, you both tinpot clubs funded by sugardaddies to have relevance. i cant comment on who is more tinpot, its a draw
Chelsea have been a top 6 club since 1994. Chelsea were winning domestic trophies and playing in Europe since the 90’s. So 30 years straight of success. Manchester City were a relegation battling club until 2009. They’ve had less than 15 years of success. Rory is spot on, that in 20 years, the discussion can be had, but right now, it’s not comparable in terms of who’s a bigger club. For context, only 25 years ago, in the 97/98 season, Chelsea finished in the top 4, whilst winning the league cup and the European Cup Winners Cup, having attracted players like Gus Poyet and having players in the squad like Gianfranco Zola and Gianluca Vialli. Manchester City in that same season were RELEGATED FROM THE CHAMPIONSHIP into league one and their star player was Paul Dickov with 9 goals for goodness sake. So in 1999 Manchester City were lower than a championship level club. Clearly incomparable at the moment. If City continue their success for another 15-20 years, (which they probably will) and Chelsea fall out of the picture of challenging for titles and silverware, then it can become a legitimate debate.
Prior to both sides being taken over, Chelsea had won only 11 trophies to Manchester City's 15. Manchester City had also won the FA Cup in 1904, this was before Chelsea had even been created. Just for context, Chelsea didn't win their first trophy until 1955, some 51 years after Manchester City had won their first trophy, and by that time, Manchester City had won 4. Chelsea have spent 89 years as a club in the English top flight, in comparison to Manchester City's 95. But by focusing on just a few of Manchester City's worst years of their over 130 year history, which as stated earlier was a trophy winning club before Chelsea were even created, is a failed attempt at trying to denigrate the club. Whilst City were busy playing in the FA Cup final in 1981 against Tottenham, Chelsea were scrapping it out in the 2nd tier finishing 12th. A position that would later become familiar with the club, this despite spending close to 1 billion pounds in one season. So as you can see, there is always a way to create and spin certain narratives in order to denigrate a club when certain facts are picked and chosen and other facts hidden, in order to fit a certain agenda.
There is no debate - Man. City are bigger. Hardly any history, yet still more than Chavski, and will pass your total honours count in December with a Club World Cup victory. It's not looking good...
@@Mikejames1080 you said everything I was about to say. By every metric City are historically a more significant side than Chelsea. Chelsea is the definition of a modern-day significant club - they were pretty good before Roman and have been mega since 2004. When you combine that with the fact they're based in the richest part of London and had tons of players from very passionate parts of the world like West Africa, their growth was turbo-charged. But pre-1990s, this wasn't even a debate
so history and grandeur comes into discussion as an extra point for Chelsea, when its Chelsea vs City, but it doesn't matter for Liverpool when we talk Liverpool vs Chelsea :)) ...good one Rory :D
He said within that argument that liverpool, utd and arsenal are all in a league of their own as the biggest clubs in england above both chelsea and city so what are you on about?
the difference is size of club and attractiveness. I'm sure if they were asked as to whether man city or Chelsea are the more attractive club for a player to join, everyone would say city. That isn't the same as the size of a club.
Been saying this for a while now, that isn’t a billion pound squad. Like if you look through the squad and really break it down without looking at the transfer fees it’s hard to figure out where the money went. They didn’t buy a single world class player and the notion that all these players will come good is nonsense, half of them, like Mudryk for example, weren’t lighting their own leagues up before the move to Chelsea. I’m not trying to make a joke at Chelsea’s expense, I genuinely think they’ll finish around mid table again this season. This is an absolutely bang average side.
Caicedo chose chelsea as he said he wanted to stay loyal to the agreement he has with them. Lavia probably joined for money. Chelsea have 2 bigger appeals being money and London. For playing time they would’ve chosen Liverpool. For history they would’ve chosen Liverpool. For European football they would’ve chosen Liverpools. For a better manager they would’ve chosen Liverpool. For a better chance of winning a trophy they would’ve chosen Liverpool
I don't even really have City stuff in my office I make videos in so that doesnt hold out lol - its not my fault City are better than everyone right now!
I feel a lot of the players have potential for decent resale values. They have bought chaotically…but at least a lot of the players are young / high potential. They didn’t find it hard to bring cash back in this summer did they?
Surprised Rory did not catch onto and hammer the point when Steven said: "Chelsea are very catchable". If that is not an admission I dont know what is. At this rate it would not take 20 years, but I agree with Rory that Chelsea is still barely the bigger club.
“Barely”nah mate Chelsea is significantly a bigger club it’s not only about trophy,the size of Chelsea is much more global and bigger than city ,city was a relegation club before 2009 I ain’t saying Chelsea’s comparable and they are leagues above like united ,Liverpool or arsenal but they are a lot bigger I mean city just won a treble and there’s really no fuss about that anymore
You’re agreeing with Stephen. Rory is acting like there’s a huge gap when it’s actually just a one trophy gap and City will likely even pass them this season.
Man City already has more trophies than Chelsea. They hold most of the PL records. They manage to do: treble, domestic treble, centurions, formidable and 3-peat in 6 years. And currently they are on course to do the 4-peat. Their player hold Premier League single-season scoring record. They created tons of already legendary moments like Aguero goal vs QPR, comeback against Villa, last seconds goal against Southampton that gave them Centurions status, Kompany goal vs Leicester etc. And they are the second most followed English club in social media (combine numbers of: Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, Twitter/X, TH-cam). Whether you like it or not, Man City created more history in the past decade than Chelsea in their whole existence.
You forgot the most important part. 99% of all that is built on cheating. Its worthless and a disgrace to any honest football fan. ManC creates history like Lance Armstrong did create history.
I am ASTOUNDED a Liverpool fan is educating Rory on his own team. He said so many things objectively wrong or just terrible and other fans had to apply context. Mental. Literally the worst supporter of their own team I have truly ever seen.
She was just staying in the fence mate, she said nothing special. The opinions were kind of a bunch of nothing that can’t really be disagreed nor agreed with
@@azcukfan8068 I mean does it matter? Ian Rush, a Liverpool legend, is not from Liverpool. He must be devasted and crying in a corner after seeing your comment right now.
Rory might have some wild takes but I think Chelsea doing it for longer than city means they are just slightly bigger but city will be way ahead of them in 10 years
City have already won more PL titles than Chelsea, and have been way more consistent that Chelsea. Keep in mind even with all the billions Chelsea had season under Mourinho etc where they finished in the 2nd half of the table, not to mention last season. They also finished outside of the top 4 various times since having all that money in the last few years, whilst City havent in many years
@@footballhipstertv Chelsea have been the most successful English club as far as trophies in that time period so what’s the point and I hate them it’s just a fact city will be bigger than them in a few years and never be bigger than the other 3 regardless of what they win it’s as simple as that the prem teams are lucky arsenal united and Liverpool exist that’s why they get all this money for the rights
In England, currently Manchester City won’t be as big as those other English clubs because obviously parents want you to grow up supporting the club they grew up supporting but outside of Europe now that other countries have access to things like Peacock, online livestreaming, cable TV, etc. to watch EPL football they are growing up to be Manchester City fans because of how beautiful it is to watch their style of football. When Manchester City came to Houston to play a friendly against Club America the stadium was almost full and it was way more blue than yellow which I found surprising because Club America is a Mexican league team and Houston is a city full of Mexican people.
I think if Chelsea just pushed the boat out for two ESTABLISHED, WORLD CLASS players, one being a goalkeeper such as Oblak, and the other being a striker like Victor Osimen, then even Bohely might be satisfied enough to go 12-18 months without signing any more players and finally letting this crazy project do its thing without constantly disrupting it with new players
I really think Chelsea have a lot of young quality players, I think Chelsea want to have a couple of good players in every position like the best teams do also whatever you want to say about Boehly you can’t fault him for the ambition he’s showing
@@man4437most. That's why the people who are paid to scout players advised the club to sign these guys. Unless you mean that we're supposed to judge these 21 year olds after 4 games...
8:47 Doesn't winning a cup guarantee you European football though? FA Cup - Europa League and Carabao Cup - Conference League? (all my football knowledge comes from Football Manager so I don't know if that's how it works IRL)
you can tell that Rory's heart is split between chelsea and arsenal, the way he made the point who are the biggest clubs! and let's face it, he is 100% correct! football did not start in 2011; some clubs are great for sometime while others were always there since the begining and still there today;
Sky sports have WASTED a channel by paying people like this with no knowledge on the game what so ever! Embarrassing TH-cam has basically taken over SkySports!
@@oliver_burch11 you become a big club with time, trophies and consistency. It's inevitable. Already there imo. Your feelings as a rival don't mean anything in this discussion. It's gonna happen if City carry on being successful
Rory's argument on big clubs would have been correct 4 or 5 seasons ago, but it's now out of date. The order NOW, is LFC and ManU out front in a league of their own, Arsenal floating in 3rd place a little lower and then Chelsea, ManCity, etc a few rungs lower; Chelsea weren't a big club before the money came in just like ManCity and now City only need to win 1 more champions league trophy to match them in European top flight while also having 3 more PL trophies than them; to argue that Chelsea are somehow out in front of City just because they got the oil money a few years earlier is ridiculous. and I'm an LFC fan so I'm fairly neutral in that debate.
Chelsea still have the edge as the bigger club, mainly because have won an extra CL. Having a more established history is of course a factor, yet it's having 2 CL's that is the biggest difference. After all, both have won a fair amount of league titles and FA Cups, which is why it's become a close call. That said, I can see City winning at least 1 or 2 CL's within the next few years, which is why I'm sure they'll surpass Chelsea in the near future.
In that case Chelsea was founded in 2003. City had more league titles and FA Cups than Chelsea before Abramoivch's takeover. Like mentioned in the video neither are Liverpool, Man United, or Arsenal in terms of stature but that's not to say that either can't catch them becasue all it takes is time with sustained success
@@matthewriley2178so wrong city before oil money nobody's not even making champions league city with oil money when sheik mansour took over won trophy's and improved. Arsenal under Wenger 2000s- around 2017 he got a invincible season with a prime team of Henry, veira, David seamen, dennis berkamp, Ashley Cole, willam galas. Manchester United under sir Alex 1990s-2013 less budget but kept getting better and better the season after under David moise with sir Alex squad flopped and finished 7th. Chelsea with roman abramovich built a squad that lasted a long time look at the 2012/13 Chelsea squad you had cech in goal, Ashley Cole LB, ivanovic RB, Terry and cahill CB midfield of lampard, jaun Mata, moses, malouda, obi mikel ect and attack of Fernando torres, Eden hazard, demba ba
Rory is 100% right about Chelsea being bigger than City, yeah if you're 20years old you know City as a huge club that constantly wins, but the rest of the world isn't only 20 year olds, 30-60 year olds will remember City in the championship playing Gillingham as Rory put it, you have to go way back to find people that remember Chelsea being bad. Yes City are the best club at this current moment but big clubs come with decades of History and City are only now writing theirs.
Well into their second decade of being at the very top of english football. If you're writing a book and you're half way through, do you tell someone 'I've just started writing it'
No you dont say ive just started writing it, but you also don't say that you're bigger than the club that has already written their books. Chelsea being a bigger club than City currently doesn't mean City is small, it quite literally just means one is bigger than the other@@neilgannon205
I am not a Chelsea fan but I can say there is no way you can truly evaluate at this point if Chelsea have spent the billion well. The age profile of the signings and length of contracts suggests that they were brought in with long term goals in mind. I say come back with this question in 2/3 years.
Yeah I absolutely agree with that… If they are on these long term contracts then give it a bit more time to judge rather than 5-6 weeks into a new season
if Chelsea keep all the new young signings they'll be good in 2-4 years.Thats their problem they set up a team to eventually be good, not be good NOW. Even then a lot of things have to happen along the way, when I seen Pochettino was coming as a Liverpool fan "yup another bad season for them" they need a manager who understands their team issues and understands what needs to be done. Its obvious they have the talent just not the right way of playing or anything to win games or even play as a team.
And how many of their signings will actually turn out good? Potential without someone to lead is not always that effective, and might even lead to less good players.
@@Fonetiker I completely agree that's what I meant when I said a lot of things have to happen within the time they get older and most of those things have to be good things. Because if not like you said they might not even turn out to be good if they dont do the right things and have the right people around them.
Actually think Rory was the most level headed he's ever been and then he totally lost me with the bigger club argument. Saying City have the same status as Blackburn.
Rory is right on that last point definitely. City are one of the best teams in world football but they need more time at this level to be up there with the top teams
What more though. You cant be a big club until you win the CL. We have done that. Also 3 in a row , a treble and potential for 4 in a row. Are liverpool still big as its been 40 years since they last dominated for a sustained period?
@@jackaroni7323any club would need money to be in a position where Man City is. If Man Utd didn’t have money, they would,probably have been relegated too. I’m assuming you’re a Chelsea fan, where would you be without Russian Oil money?
@@jackhewitt600there fan base is shocking, most of them are plastics or new fans, there’s obviously some real city fans from back in the day but the atmosphere is dead, no one thinks about city in a historical way, and in comparison to chelsea they both had big takeovers and similar situations but when chelsea were down bad they were still better and bigger than Man City
they cost £1bn because they're young and then everyone says 'It's not worked' after four weeks! Last summer was bad but this summer was really reasonable business.
The fact is though, that if you're spending £110 million on Caicedo, you want him to perform straightaway. That is A LOT of money to invest in a player who'll only come good in a year's time.
I think that looking at this team It will take about three seasons to grow into a title challenging team. It's certainly possible but not at the moment
City is a bigger club than Chelsea They literally breaking records after records, What Chelsea have done isn't smth that mind-blowing, Yeah i know about the 15 goal conceded season but City literally won the treble, centurion, domestic treble, that's a big club behaviour right there, if they win the league again this year they will be the first PL team to win 4 title in a row City is definitely a bigger club than Chelsea
Genuinely don't understand this Chelsea wasted 1B narrative. If Nkunku and Fofana are not injured, Chelsea prolly are much higher up the table and with a lot of players with so much growing room. Chelsea's new players haven't hit the ground running yes, Chelsea wasted the money no.
Rory is right though - City are a smaller team than Leeds and Forest - If success continues after another 10-20 years it will be reconsidered but for now he’s spot on
Liverpool & Man Utd head & shoulders above anyone Then comes a significant gap then Arsenal & Chelsea ( just bcuz their recent European success) then some gap & Man City comes. But I have to say than Chelsea isn’t that far from Man City.
What a joke! a team who changed a whole squad ( more that 11 player and a manager) is more interesting than a team who achieved all trophies that are available and improved it's squad.
A midfirld ofLavia enzo cicadio has no goal, low crestivity Low dribbling skills. It's to defensive for a top team that needs to score & win most game. Gravenburch, mac alister szoboszlai, is full of goals, creativity, dribbling skill. Under klopp 3 box to box with energy is our engine room again. It a upgrade on the original engine of hendo, gini, milner or hendo gini, Emre. Or hendo gini lallana. We also have bejcetic who is are dm but has skill to. Klopps only ever had 1 out & out dm. Its not a position he needs load of players for. Everyone should be able to cover the 6 role.
Rory simply dislikes the new owners. 🤦🏾♂️ as for everyone else they all don’t realize that this new owners came with their way of how they want to run their club. It’s their money don’t see how anyone should be bothered but them.
United fan - Chelsea is a much bigger club than city. People seem to forget 2000 - 2010. Ten years where Chelsea achieved incredible results and city didn't do anything
Can everyone just grow up and prioritise league position over silverware. Finishing 2nd is a bigger achievement than winning the league cup with the current competitiveness of the PL Get it for teams like West ham and Im still pushing for those in Europe not being able to compete in the league cup (or make it such that they have to field under 23 squads)
There is no way that Chelsea finish in the top 6 when they are in a league with Man City, Arsenal, Man United, Newcastle, Liverpool, Brighton, and Spurs
Whoever that Man City fan is got rattled by Rory, only because Rory talking straight facts. Man City may be a better team right now but it doesn’t make them a bigger club. Then trying to throw an insult at the end of Rory’s Haaland take was the cherry on top.
City founded before Chelsea, won the FA Cup 55 years before Chelsea had won anything, had won 15 trophies to Chelsea’s 11 before both takeovers. City spent more seasons in the top flight over their history and have bigger attendance records. In fact Chelsea haven’t had regularly bigger crowds than City for any decade other than the 50s. How are those for facts?
Remember all those videos/channels at the beginning of the season saying Poch has revolutionised and transformed Chelsea? Without a competitive ball being kicked? How's that turning out?
![ILLSLICK - Homies Feat. LILY [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/r6jGK7MumF0/mqdefault.jpg)
Rory’s the kind of guy to close the fridge with his hips
The type of guy to say 'Ooh dont mind if I do' when someone brings donuts into work
This isn't an insult to Rory, it's an insult to the ESTABLISHMENT
This is a JAFFN listener
I don't get it
He definitely safely disconnects his USB before removing it.
Rory is the kind of guy that would say “What’s the Damage” when the dinner bill turns up.
🤣
Haha quality
😭😭😭😭😭
Chelsea are just daddy’s wallet team. Not a real team.
Tbf that’s me. Great shout whenever the boss makes a mistake as well.
Rory runs up the stairs on all fours
😂
Who doesn't?
anyone who doesn't is living in the past. All fours is max efficiency. I'm gliding up stairs
@@tomhartland818yeah but are you on all fours going down
Rory the kind of guy to say 'I needed this' when hanging out with his friends
at least u tried
Funny thing about that Caicedo "childhood" picture, is that he's wearing a 2020/21 Chelsea shirt
He wanted to join utd before brighton 😂... valencia was his hero😂
I mean he's young so what's your point?
So what? I'm from South Africa and I wanted a Chelsea shirt since primary school but I could not afford it.
@@KreepKidtheir point is that Caicedo was wearing a 20/21 season chelsea shirt in his ‘childhood’ photo and he was born in 2001
@@Renoir. I mean no one even knew him at that time.
Potter got about 5 minutes in charge of a group of players signed by a completely different manager he's been done so dirty by the media and Chelsea fans unbelievable
Kinda sad what happened to him especially with how well he was doing in Brighton
Rory's always the most entertaining guest on saturday social.
Only second to Robbie
@@waseem_tajrobby's sometimes could be a bit annoying
@@waseem_tajrobbie is too bias
Not deliberated though
hes so funny man, its how he says his things with such conviction
This was a painful segment! Always a joy to be on with the gang. Love this show!
Why u getting ripped this much in the comments mate🤣
not watched kick off in months saw it last week. u fully off it?
City are nowhere near the likes of United, liverpool, Arsenal and chelsea in terms of club size 👍🏻
@@jonlamb6980 they're pretty close to Chelsea tbf, nowhere near Arsenal, and Liverpool and United are in a league of their own
@@matthewbanton7077 maybe you’re right. I’m an arsenal fan but Chelsea success in Europe sometimes makes me believe they are touch and go with arsenal. No idea how a neutral would see it
Rory Jennings talking about Chelsea I'm getting ready for some mental things being said
Here come the sheep with the 👍
Ong
Rory is the kind of guy to bring a golf club to a cricket match
Rory’s the kind of guy to remind the teacher that homework is due
The answer is yes, Chelsea wasted most of that billion. For that amount, Abramovich would've laced that squad with world class marquee signings and have Chelsea competing for the treble this season.
Roman would've signed Mbappe , Haaland with that Money 😂😂
@@elypsemusic8042 easily! Worst case scenario would've been Osimhen, which I would happily settle for 😂
Except that was never the actual intention. They signed a bunch of young high ceiling prospects on long term deals with the intent of not just being a one and done team, but one that could compete year after year. But that won't be for another year or two which was expected.
@@thetimeisrite football isn't as forgiving as American sports. We have relegation, and it's not beyond the realm of possibility that a squad full of inexperienced (albeit talented) kids could be fighting relegation. You can't just wing it, especially in the PL. The way I see it, Chelsea are failing to score goals. You could have the best defense in the league but that means nothing when you can't make basic attacking moves.
@@MrPwrt I wouldn't say they are winging it, and when you have the likes of Luton, Everton, and Burnley in the league, I think you wouldn't have to worry about Chelsea being relegated.
Look at doku playing … these are the type of talents we should get … wasted 1 billion
even as a Chelsea fan some signings were unnecessary and getting rid of all UCL winners to buy young players. also, some signings just don't make sense
Not gonna lie, these 3 were the most logical lot you guys got.
Rory’s hit and miss but really balanced here
The most logical lot? Now I want to hear the others.
On one question, they say Chelsea is more attractive than Liverpool because the current generation players grew up watching Chelsea win more silverwares than Liverpool. Then on the very next question, they say Chelsea is bigger than City because City was playing Gillingham in the 90s??
I hope you're being sarcastic...
Yeah guys. I’m not being sarcastic. But the others are so much worse 😂😂 it’s funny how most get to speak for Sky Sports haha
Rory Jennings is the only one who hasn't lost the plot. Leaving aside City as financial cheaters, which nobody seems to care about (which is so dark, but a separate topic), they're not even close to the status of United, Liverpool, and Arsenal. Rory correctly identifies that Chelsea are a cut below because of way less history than those 3, and then City are like the upper echelon of a group with Spurs and Newcastle.
Absolutely correct. Arsenal, Liverpool and Man United are global clubs with global fanbases. They are up there with the Milans, Juventus, Real Madrid and Barcelona. Chelsea is popular with the players but not the fans so much. And City is a rung below them.
Liverpool and United do have lots of glory hunting fans, correct.
Love to see it, now that Arsenal are back in the top 4, the narrative changes again to silverware. When we were winning FA Cups, our league position was brought up, and all of a sudden finishing top 4 was incredible and Champions League football was the most important thing, when before, Wenger was slated for having that objective.
Prior to both sides being taken over, Chelsea had won only 11 trophies to Manchester City's 15. Manchester City had also won the FA Cup in 1904, this was before Chelsea had even been created.
Just for context, Chelsea didn't win their first trophy until 1955, some 51 years after Manchester City had won their first trophy, and by that time, Manchester City had won 4.
Chelsea have spent 89 years as a club in the English top flight, in comparison to Manchester City's 95. But by focusing on 1999, Manchester City's worst year of their over 130 year history, which as stated earlier was a club winning trophy's before Chelsea were even created, is a failed attempt at trying to denigrate the club.
Whilst City were busy playing in the FA Cup final in 1981 against Tottenham, Chelsea were scrapping it out in the 2nd tier finishing 12th. A position that would later become familiar with the club, this despite spending close to 1 billion pounds in one season.
no one cares about either the london plastics or the manchester plastics, you both tinpot clubs funded by sugardaddies to have relevance. i cant comment on who is more tinpot, its a draw
When you typed this out did you genuinely think anyone would care?
I care. I rather appreciate the astutely detailed history lesson my man gave us for free. Big Up yourself man 🙌🏾
@@Miketrill_ng thanks for your positive feedback sir. I'm glad you could take something out of it!
Spot on lad 👍
Honestly couldn’t make up the shambles going on at Stamford Bridge. The owners are insane
Chelsea have been a top 6 club since 1994. Chelsea were winning domestic trophies and playing in Europe since the 90’s. So 30 years straight of success. Manchester City were a relegation battling club until 2009. They’ve had less than 15 years of success. Rory is spot on, that in 20 years, the discussion can be had, but right now, it’s not comparable in terms of who’s a bigger club.
For context, only 25 years ago, in the 97/98 season, Chelsea finished in the top 4, whilst winning the league cup and the European Cup Winners Cup, having attracted players like Gus Poyet and having players in the squad like Gianfranco Zola and Gianluca Vialli.
Manchester City in that same season were RELEGATED FROM THE CHAMPIONSHIP into league one and their star player was Paul Dickov with 9 goals for goodness sake. So in 1999 Manchester City were lower than a championship level club.
Clearly incomparable at the moment. If City continue their success for another 15-20 years, (which they probably will) and Chelsea fall out of the picture of challenging for titles and silverware, then it can become a legitimate debate.
Lmao. Both of yous a joke. But looking strictly at trophies, man city are better than chelsea.
Prior to both sides being taken over, Chelsea had won only 11 trophies to Manchester City's 15. Manchester City had also won the FA Cup in 1904, this was before Chelsea had even been created.
Just for context, Chelsea didn't win their first trophy until 1955, some 51 years after Manchester City had won their first trophy, and by that time, Manchester City had won 4.
Chelsea have spent 89 years as a club in the English top flight, in comparison to Manchester City's 95. But by focusing on just a few of Manchester City's worst years of their over 130 year history, which as stated earlier was a trophy winning club before Chelsea were even created, is a failed attempt at trying to denigrate the club.
Whilst City were busy playing in the FA Cup final in 1981 against Tottenham, Chelsea were scrapping it out in the 2nd tier finishing 12th. A position that would later become familiar with the club, this despite spending close to 1 billion pounds in one season.
So as you can see, there is always a way to create and spin certain narratives in order to denigrate a club when certain facts are picked and chosen and other facts hidden, in order to fit a certain agenda.
There is no debate - Man. City are bigger. Hardly any history, yet still more than Chavski, and will pass your total honours count in December with a Club World Cup victory. It's not looking good...
@@Mikejames1080 you said everything I was about to say. By every metric City are historically a more significant side than Chelsea.
Chelsea is the definition of a modern-day significant club - they were pretty good before Roman and have been mega since 2004. When you combine that with the fact they're based in the richest part of London and had tons of players from very passionate parts of the world like West Africa, their growth was turbo-charged. But pre-1990s, this wasn't even a debate
@@africancoastchelsea are massive
so history and grandeur comes into discussion as an extra point for Chelsea, when its Chelsea vs City, but it doesn't matter for Liverpool when we talk Liverpool vs Chelsea :)) ...good one Rory :D
He said within that argument that liverpool, utd and arsenal are all in a league of their own as the biggest clubs in england above both chelsea and city so what are you on about?
the difference is size of club and attractiveness. I'm sure if they were asked as to whether man city or Chelsea are the more attractive club for a player to join, everyone would say city. That isn't the same as the size of a club.
Rory’s the kind of guy to say “easy peasy lemon squeezy” after doing something easy
Been saying this for a while now, that isn’t a billion pound squad.
Like if you look through the squad and really break it down without looking at the transfer fees it’s hard to figure out where the money went. They didn’t buy a single world class player and the notion that all these players will come good is nonsense, half of them, like Mudryk for example, weren’t lighting their own leagues up before the move to Chelsea.
I’m not trying to make a joke at Chelsea’s expense, I genuinely think they’ll finish around mid table again this season. This is an absolutely bang average side.
Caicedo chose chelsea as he said he wanted to stay loyal to the agreement he has with them. Lavia probably joined for money. Chelsea have 2 bigger appeals being money and London. For playing time they would’ve chosen Liverpool. For history they would’ve chosen Liverpool. For European football they would’ve chosen Liverpools. For a better manager they would’ve chosen Liverpool. For a better chance of winning a trophy they would’ve chosen Liverpool
You’re forgetting something: if they didn’t want to be smelly scousers they wouldn’t have chosen Liverpool
@@AndyBlue297Proud to be smelly! 😁
The City fan has definitely got a City duvet, lampshade etc!
😂
Blokes a spac
@@Mikejames1080 u chat a lot of waffle
I don't even really have City stuff in my office I make videos in so that doesnt hold out lol - its not my fault City are better than everyone right now!
Good
Rory’s the guy you avoid seeing & bumping too much into it at the same hotel on holiday
In some countries, spending a billion £ on players can also be called Money laundering.
I feel a lot of the players have potential for decent resale values. They have bought chaotically…but at least a lot of the players are young / high potential. They didn’t find it hard to bring cash back in this summer did they?
Youth is not a guarantee for success, otherwise we would have millions of deserving ballon d'or
this steven guy absolutely HATES chelsea.😂
Don't think he hates Chelsea but he's sat next to Rory who says outrageous comments to get a reaction.
@acer908 yeah rory tends to rub people the wrong way 😅 , but you can see the genuine disgust when they asked him to comment on chelsea , he HATES us.
Loserpool
Surprised Rory did not catch onto and hammer the point when Steven said: "Chelsea are very catchable". If that is not an admission I dont know what is. At this rate it would not take 20 years, but I agree with Rory that Chelsea is still barely the bigger club.
“Barely”nah mate Chelsea is significantly a bigger club it’s not only about trophy,the size of Chelsea is much more global and bigger than city ,city was a relegation club before 2009 I ain’t saying Chelsea’s comparable and they are leagues above like united ,Liverpool or arsenal but they are a lot bigger I mean city just won a treble and there’s really no fuss about that anymore
You’re agreeing with Stephen. Rory is acting like there’s a huge gap when it’s actually just a one trophy gap and City will likely even pass them this season.
@@TP-pq9xx one trophy?😂 How?
@@justjerryblaq5173 Because City have one less trophy than Chelsea. It’s not complicated.
@@TP-pq9xx ok
Man City already has more trophies than Chelsea.
They hold most of the PL records.
They manage to do: treble, domestic treble, centurions, formidable and 3-peat in 6 years. And currently they are on course to do the 4-peat.
Their player hold Premier League single-season scoring record.
They created tons of already legendary moments like Aguero goal vs QPR, comeback against Villa, last seconds goal against Southampton that gave them Centurions status, Kompany goal vs Leicester etc.
And they are the second most followed English club in social media (combine numbers of: Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, Twitter/X, TH-cam).
Whether you like it or not, Man City created more history in the past decade than Chelsea in their whole existence.
You forgot the most important part. 99% of all that is built on cheating. Its worthless and a disgrace to any honest football fan. ManC creates history like Lance Armstrong did create history.
For the first question I said the exact same two weeks ago in the comments and got grilled by other Chelsea fans... 2hrs later we lost to Forest
that city fan isn't very likeable
I agree.
The way Rory changes his vote to false once it is highlighted Haaland and Foden are under 23 😅😂
I am ASTOUNDED a Liverpool fan is educating Rory on his own team. He said so many things objectively wrong or just terrible and other fans had to apply context. Mental. Literally the worst supporter of their own team I have truly ever seen.
Fake Liverpool fan lol not from Liverpool and probably not gone to a game before.
She was just staying in the fence mate, she said nothing special. The opinions were kind of a bunch of nothing that can’t really be disagreed nor agreed with
have you never seen ty?
@@azcukfan8068 I mean does it matter? Ian Rush, a Liverpool legend, is not from Liverpool. He must be devasted and crying in a corner after seeing your comment right now.
@azcukfan8068 lol! You are clueless! She is part of The Anfield Wrap. She has access to pretty much most things at the club.
Rory the kind of guy to brush his teeth before his dinner
Rory might have some wild takes but I think Chelsea doing it for longer than city means they are just slightly bigger but city will be way ahead of them in 10 years
City are already bigger
City have already won more PL titles than Chelsea, and have been way more consistent that Chelsea. Keep in mind even with all the billions Chelsea had season under Mourinho etc where they finished in the 2nd half of the table, not to mention last season. They also finished outside of the top 4 various times since having all that money in the last few years, whilst City havent in many years
@@footballhipstertv Chelsea have been the most successful English club as far as trophies in that time period so what’s the point and I hate them it’s just a fact city will be bigger than them in a few years and never be bigger than the other 3 regardless of what they win it’s as simple as that the prem teams are lucky arsenal united and Liverpool exist that’s why they get all this money for the rights
@@MKillip1994 Your time's up, old man. There's a new sheriff in town.
In England, currently Manchester City won’t be as big as those other English clubs because obviously parents want you to grow up supporting the club they grew up supporting but outside of Europe now that other countries have access to things like Peacock, online livestreaming, cable TV, etc. to watch EPL football they are growing up to be Manchester City fans because of how beautiful it is to watch their style of football. When Manchester City came to Houston to play a friendly against Club America the stadium was almost full and it was way more blue than yellow which I found surprising because Club America is a Mexican league team and Houston is a city full of Mexican people.
I think if Chelsea just pushed the boat out for two ESTABLISHED, WORLD CLASS players, one being a goalkeeper such as Oblak, and the other being a striker like Victor Osimen, then even Bohely might be satisfied enough to go 12-18 months without signing any more players and finally letting this crazy project do its thing without constantly disrupting it with new players
At least Chelsea is doing one thing right at this moment, entertaining the media.
How is this even a debate, they are in 14th with a bang average team after spending 1 billion. That’s the fact it has been a catastrophe.
Time will tell whether we've invested well, too early to judge
That last answer was a big stretch by Steven 😂
I really think Chelsea have a lot of young quality players, I think Chelsea want to have a couple of good players in every position like the best teams do also whatever you want to say about Boehly you can’t fault him for the ambition he’s showing
But you can fault him for paying so much for players who haven’t proven themselves at all
Young, sure, but quality? Maybe if you mean poor quality. Sure, they have time to improve, but how many of them shown a single sign of that potential?
If Chelsea want to have a couple of good players in every position, then how do you explain the players they've been buying over the last year?
@@man4437most. That's why the people who are paid to scout players advised the club to sign these guys.
Unless you mean that we're supposed to judge these 21 year olds after 4 games...
You kinda can fault him for the ambition he is showing though because if he spent nothing and kept the same squad you'd be better off 😂
Rory is the kind of guy to say "now a silly one" when taking a group photo.
SO TRUE WITHOUT ANY DOUBT😂
Rory, when you outmuscled Caicedo and Lavia from Liverpool, all of you were praising Boehly. Why are you saying they're a waste now??
The problem for Chelsea is that, if it doesn't click straight away, Todd Boehly will replace the entire squad again.
8:47 Doesn't winning a cup guarantee you European football though? FA Cup - Europa League and Carabao Cup - Conference League? (all my football knowledge comes from Football Manager so I don't know if that's how it works IRL)
Yes. It does.
This Steven guy really hates us, huh? Really starting to get on my nerves.
you can tell that Rory's heart is split between chelsea and arsenal, the way he made the point who are the biggest clubs! and let's face it, he is 100% correct! football did not start in 2011; some clubs are great for sometime while others were always there since the begining and still there today;
The last point on city that Rory had to give. Is the first and last time I’ll agree with him lol
Sky sports have WASTED a channel by paying people like this with no knowledge on the game what so ever!
Embarrassing TH-cam has basically taken over SkySports!
Chelsea spent a lot but I do believe they wanna get younger in every position even if they spent over 1B
£370million worth of talent injured. 🤕
What do you respect?
Bettinelli
James
Fofana
Badiashile
Chalobah
Lava
Caicedo
Chukwuemeka
Nkunku
Broja
madueke
Can't even deny Rory got under my skin at the end. Nonsense mate 😂
first things he’s said with truth. city will never be a big club and could never been compared to united arsenal and liverpool.
@@oliver_burch11 you become a big club with time, trophies and consistency. It's inevitable. Already there imo. Your feelings as a rival don't mean anything in this discussion. It's gonna happen if City carry on being successful
Question was who is the biggest club . In the present moment ? City . In overall history of football ? Chelsea .
@@EsteemedKompanythey’re a big club only in england tbh
@@EsteemedKompanyit's going to.... Not that it is right now that was the question so behave.
Whenever someone references Football Manager, it's so easy to tell they've never actually played Football Manager.
Childhood photo LMAO that Chelsea kit Caicedo is wearing is from a couple seasons ago
This never gets boring 💪👑🔥💯
Rory Jennings talking about football on Sky is like Roy Keane being a judge on the Bake Off
Rory's argument on big clubs would have been correct 4 or 5 seasons ago, but it's now out of date. The order NOW, is LFC and ManU out front in a league of their own, Arsenal floating in 3rd place a little lower and then Chelsea, ManCity, etc a few rungs lower; Chelsea weren't a big club before the money came in just like ManCity and now City only need to win 1 more champions league trophy to match them in European top flight while also having 3 more PL trophies than them; to argue that Chelsea are somehow out in front of City just because they got the oil money a few years earlier is ridiculous.
and I'm an LFC fan so I'm fairly neutral in that debate.
Yes as a chelsea fan yes they have wasted all the money
Upload the highlights already
what is this live stream?
Chelsea fan saying that you can only talk about Man City being a big club in 20 years
Chelsea still have the edge as the bigger club, mainly because have won an extra CL. Having a more established history is of course a factor, yet it's having 2 CL's that is the biggest difference. After all, both have won a fair amount of league titles and FA Cups, which is why it's become a close call. That said, I can see City winning at least 1 or 2 CL's within the next few years, which is why I'm sure they'll surpass Chelsea in the near future.
Man city have a much more established history than Chelsea, that's a fact
Well technically they scammed the system so it was an impressive window overall
Man City were founded in 2011 and they won their treble on Apple Pay.
In that case Chelsea was founded in 2003. City had more league titles and FA Cups than Chelsea before Abramoivch's takeover. Like mentioned in the video neither are Liverpool, Man United, or Arsenal in terms of stature but that's not to say that either can't catch them becasue all it takes is time with sustained success
@@matthewriley2178so wrong city before oil money nobody's not even making champions league city with oil money when sheik mansour took over won trophy's and improved. Arsenal under Wenger 2000s- around 2017 he got a invincible season with a prime team of Henry, veira, David seamen, dennis berkamp, Ashley Cole, willam galas. Manchester United under sir Alex 1990s-2013 less budget but kept getting better and better the season after under David moise with sir Alex squad flopped and finished 7th. Chelsea with roman abramovich built a squad that lasted a long time look at the 2012/13 Chelsea squad you had cech in goal, Ashley Cole LB, ivanovic RB, Terry and cahill CB midfield of lampard, jaun Mata, moses, malouda, obi mikel ect and attack of Fernando torres, Eden hazard, demba ba
The stupidity expressed online just gets worse and worse.
@@declangaming24learn English and eat vitamin. You've no idea what you barking
@@matthewriley2178 city doesn't have more overall trophies Manchester United, Liverpool, Chelsea combined have more trophies
Rory is 100% right about Chelsea being bigger than City, yeah if you're 20years old you know City as a huge club that constantly wins, but the rest of the world isn't only 20 year olds, 30-60 year olds will remember City in the championship playing Gillingham as Rory put it, you have to go way back to find people that remember Chelsea being bad. Yes City are the best club at this current moment but big clubs come with decades of History and City are only now writing theirs.
Well into their second decade of being at the very top of english football. If you're writing a book and you're half way through, do you tell someone 'I've just started writing it'
No you dont say ive just started writing it, but you also don't say that you're bigger than the club that has already written their books. Chelsea being a bigger club than City currently doesn't mean City is small, it quite literally just means one is bigger than the other@@neilgannon205
I am not a Chelsea fan but I can say there is no way you can truly evaluate at this point if Chelsea have spent the billion well. The age profile of the signings and length of contracts suggests that they were brought in with long term goals in mind. I say come back with this question in 2/3 years.
Yeah I absolutely agree with that… If they are on these long term contracts then give it a bit more time to judge rather than 5-6 weeks into a new season
We’ve squandered millions mate there’s no denying it
No long term plan there ,ye signed them on long contracts cuzco that's the only way ye could cheat the system
@@stevenosullivan187 how’s it cheating the system? Any team can do it…
True. And I’m excited to see them waste another billion this winter
if Chelsea keep all the new young signings they'll be good in 2-4 years.Thats their problem they set up a team to eventually be good, not be good NOW. Even then a lot of things have to happen along the way, when I seen Pochettino was coming as a Liverpool fan "yup another bad season for them" they need a manager who understands their team issues and understands what needs to be done. Its obvious they have the talent just not the right way of playing or anything to win games or even play as a team.
And how many of their signings will actually turn out good? Potential without someone to lead is not always that effective, and might even lead to less good players.
@@Fonetiker I completely agree that's what I meant when I said a lot of things have to happen within the time they get older and most of those things have to be good things. Because if not like you said they might not even turn out to be good if they dont do the right things and have the right people around them.
Actually think Rory was the most level headed he's ever been and then he totally lost me with the bigger club argument. Saying City have the same status as Blackburn.
It's too early but 1 billion is nothing to us, we will buy another 1 billion until we fix this club
Why is there a debate
Rory bringing up 1999 is no better than Spurs fans bringing up their league title in 1961
Rory is right on that last point definitely. City are one of the best teams in world football but they need more time at this level to be up there with the top teams
What more though. You cant be a big club until you win the CL. We have done that. Also 3 in a row , a treble and potential for 4 in a row. Are liverpool still big as its been 40 years since they last dominated for a sustained period?
@@jackhewitt600you have no history mate 😂 you’ve only been relevant for the past 10 years without the money you would be in the championship
@@jackaroni7323any club would need money to be in a position where Man City is. If Man Utd didn’t have money, they would,probably have been relegated too. I’m assuming you’re a Chelsea fan, where would you be without Russian Oil money?
@@jackhewitt600 You can't erase history, meanwhile y'all got none of that.
@@jackhewitt600there fan base is shocking, most of them are plastics or new fans, there’s obviously some real city fans from back in the day but the atmosphere is dead, no one thinks about city in a historical way, and in comparison to chelsea they both had big takeovers and similar situations but when chelsea were down bad they were still better and bigger than Man City
they cost £1bn because they're young and then everyone says 'It's not worked' after four weeks! Last summer was bad but this summer was really reasonable business.
The fact is though, that if you're spending £110 million on Caicedo, you want him to perform straightaway. That is A LOT of money to invest in a player who'll only come good in a year's time.
@@youngdolo8he has played 100min🤣 chill, give him atleast 3 full games too settle in the squad and play style, then start asking questions
4 weeks? Chelsea spent the bulk of the money last season
I think that looking at this team It will take about three seasons to grow into a title challenging team. It's certainly possible but not at the moment
@@Alex-di9kr tbh I don't see any team catching Man City anytime soon.
City is a bigger club than Chelsea
They literally breaking records after records, What Chelsea have done isn't smth that mind-blowing, Yeah i know about the 15 goal conceded season but City literally won the treble, centurion, domestic treble, that's a big club behaviour right there, if they win the league again this year they will be the first PL team to win 4 title in a row
City is definitely a bigger club than Chelsea
The Chelsea stray is crazy 😭😭 but they will be back
Chelsea thought they can play career mode
“Wherever we finish, it will be higher than 12th”
Remember those words
Genuinely don't understand this Chelsea wasted 1B narrative. If Nkunku and Fofana are not injured, Chelsea prolly are much higher up the table and with a lot of players with so much growing room. Chelsea's new players haven't hit the ground running yes, Chelsea wasted the money no.
Anything other than winning the title would still be underachieving and a waste of 1B
Rory is right though -
City are a smaller team than Leeds and Forest -
If success continues after another 10-20 years it will be reconsidered but for now he’s spot on
Rory really rattled that City fan, good to see :D
1B and not having good attacking players does not make sense!
Liverpool & Man Utd head & shoulders above anyone
Then comes a significant gap then Arsenal & Chelsea ( just bcuz their recent European success) then some gap & Man City comes.
But I have to say than Chelsea isn’t that far from Man City.
In 2023 Chelsea were in the Quarterfinals of the Champions League and they also beat Man City in there first ever UCL Final in 2021
What a joke! a team who changed a whole squad ( more that 11 player and a manager) is more interesting than a team who achieved all trophies that are available and improved it's squad.
A midfirld ofLavia enzo cicadio has no goal, low crestivity Low dribbling skills. It's to defensive for a top team that needs to score & win most game. Gravenburch, mac alister szoboszlai, is full of goals, creativity, dribbling skill. Under klopp 3 box to box with energy is our engine room again. It a upgrade on the original engine of hendo, gini, milner or hendo gini, Emre. Or hendo gini lallana. We also have bejcetic who is are dm but has skill to. Klopps only ever had 1 out & out dm. Its not a position he needs load of players for. Everyone should be able to cover the 6 role.
Chelsea dodged a bullet by not signing flop Haaland. Great work Chelsea.
Rory simply dislikes the new owners. 🤦🏾♂️ as for everyone else they all don’t realize that this new owners came with their way of how they want to run their club. It’s their money don’t see how anyone should be bothered but them.
United fan - Chelsea is a much bigger club than city. People seem to forget 2000 - 2010. Ten years where Chelsea achieved incredible results and city didn't do anything
Rory should not be allowed on these shows this is outrageous
Rory is the kinda guy, that stops me wanting to pay for a sky subscription.
Caicedo, Lavia and Palmer vs Haaland, Alvarez, Foden and Rico Lewis😂😂
Can everyone just grow up and prioritise league position over silverware. Finishing 2nd is a bigger achievement than winning the league cup with the current competitiveness of the PL
Get it for teams like West ham and Im still pushing for those in Europe not being able to compete in the league cup (or make it such that they have to field under 23 squads)
It's a marathon not a sprint
There is no way that Chelsea finish in the top 6 when they are in a league with Man City, Arsenal, Man United, Newcastle, Liverpool, Brighton, and Spurs
Whoever that Man City fan is got rattled by Rory, only because Rory talking straight facts. Man City may be a better team right now but it doesn’t make them a bigger club. Then trying to throw an insult at the end of Rory’s Haaland take was the cherry on top.
Literally said 0 facts, lmao.
City founded before Chelsea, won the FA Cup 55 years before Chelsea had won anything, had won 15 trophies to Chelsea’s 11 before both takeovers.
City spent more seasons in the top flight over their history and have bigger attendance records.
In fact Chelsea haven’t had regularly bigger crowds than City for any decade other than the 50s.
How are those for facts?
Remember all those videos/channels at the beginning of the season saying Poch has revolutionised and transformed Chelsea? Without a competitive ball being kicked? How's that turning out?
Rory taps the table and says let’s rock and roll when he wants to leave a restaurant.