Chelsea are navigating a turbulent era at present, with the future of two of the most fundamental aspects of the club – the owners and the stadium – still uncertain.
The Blues have long had aspirations to either redevelop Stamford Bridge or move to a new stadium.
In the Roman Arbamovich era, designers came up with the ‘Cathedral of Football’ and Battersea power station stadium proposals. Both evocative designs were eventually shelved.
Now, with Chelsea under new management, the future of Stamford Bridge is up in the air once again.
The vision for the stadium is one of several bones of contention between the two most powerful men at the club, Todd Boehly and Behdad Eghbali.
Boehly’s masterplan is to move to a new stadium, potentially at the Earl’s Court site that the club have had in the crosshairs for so long.
Eghbali meanwhile would prefer Chelsea to remain at their spiritual home in SW6, albeit with a major revamp worth billions of pounds.
One thing that the two powerbrokers do agree on is that Chelsea need to massively increase revenue to satisfy the Premier League and UEFA’s PSR enforcers, who are breathing down their necks.
Commercial income is a key focus area for Chelsea and the owners expect the madcap player trading model to pay dividends at some point further down the line too.
One revenue stream that was expected to be an easy win was the expanded Club World Cup in the United States, which Chelsea will compete in next summer.
The tournament has hit a number of obstacles and analysts and commentators are not confident that FIFA can deliver on its eye-watering prize money promises.
However, FIFA themselves are still bullish.
FIFA release statement on Club World Cup progress
FIFA now have a handful of sponsors for the 32-team Club World Cup, which they hope will be a new revenue panacea for clubs and one that will revolutionise the existing hierarchy of club football.
By far the biggest missing piece of the jigsaw at present is a TV deal, with media rights typically providing the vast majority of prize money for participating team.
FIFA had hoped to get around £4bn from a TV deal. The only offer it has received so far, from tech giants Apple, was worth £750m.
However, in a statement to The Times this week, world football’s governing body said that those who are determined to see the tournament fail will be disappointed.
“Fifa is confident that the strength and interest in the tournament is high,” the communique read.
“The vested interests of others afraid of its success means that they are trying to actively undermine it by dropping to the disappointing level of challenging whether the winner of a domestic league structure should rightfully qualify or not.”
With former Chelsea stars giving their verdicts, why is the Club World Cup so controversial?
For participating clubs – especially those from outside Europe – the Club World Cup could potentially be a game-changer.
John Terry has backed the Club World Cup, as has Didier Drogba, with the Ivory Coast legend saying that Africa teams stand to gain massively from the tournament.
However, concerns regarding player welfare, the financial distribution system, and the clubs allowed to take part have prompted scepticism among the Club World Cup’s detractors.
FIFA face accusations of letting Lionel Messi into the tournament via the back door by awarding his Inter Miami side a spot for winning the MLS Supporters’ Shield, for example.
This week, a Costa Rican team has suggested FIFA has violated its own rule by allowing to Mexican clubs under the same ownership umbrella to take part.
Most significantly of all, FIFPro – the official representative body for professional footballers – has challenged FIFA on the basis of player welfare and what they perceive to be a bloated match calendar.
Receive a digest of our best Chelsea content each week direct to your mailbox
