FOX’s live airing of Chelsea against Manchester United on February 5, 2012 delivered an average 0.8 rating with 1.377 million viewers, which was approximately 119,000 viewers more than the viewing figures for the Arsenal versus Manchester United match shown live on FOX on January 20, 2012. The audience for the Chelsea versus Man United match was 1.258 million.

Excluding Super Bowl programming on NBC, the Chelsea against Manchester United match was the top-rated broadcast event of that weekend among young viewers including men 18-34 and men 18-49. The top markets airing the game live were New York and Washington DC, which led all markets with a 1.6 rating, followed by Portland, Birmingham and Austin with a 1.5.

FOX also showed the game live on FOX Deportes. When the ratings for FOX and FOX Deportes are combined, the total viewing audience was 1.843 million, with a combined rating of 1.1.

According to a spokesperson for FOX Sports, there are no new plans to report currently regarding the chance of any additional Premier League matches being shown live, or on tape delay, on FOX for the remainder of the season. Eric Shanks, FOX Media Group co-President and co-COO, recently told the press that he expects there to be one more live match shown next season compared to this.

I’ve spent too much of my 25 years in the States trying to convince Americans that there’s more to England than the great city of London. However, it’s quite likely there’ll be 6 London-based teams in the EPL next season. I’m presuming QPR don’t get relegated — which is unlikely given their new signings — and West Ham gets promoted from the Championship.

So that London derbys don’t become commonplace, and to prevent the EPL from devolving into the Londinium League, we need to set a limit of 5 London teams. I propose a London conference within the EPL with the bottom placed team being automatically relegated. Nothing else changes, three clubs will go down: the two non-London lowest clubs will be relegated along the bottom London club.

For those of you wondering: what if Reading makes the Championship Playoffs and gets promoted? I checked the map — they’re close, but outside the London Boroughs.

Given the attraction of playing in London and the flow of football finances to this mega-market, I doubt London participation will fall below 5 teams. But if it does, it probably means the North West is once again overrepresented. If this reality prevails, it will be time to invoke the Lancashire Conference, with the new relegation rules applying to Lancastrians… and so on.

That oughta add some extra spice into those stale and fruitless end-of-season encounters by teams relishing comfort above the drop zone.

The Premier League is remarkably successful but that doesn’t mean the world’s greatest sports league can’t be improved by employing conferences when a region is overrepresented. What do you think? Stupid idea? Bring it!

Speaking of EPL geography…

While celebrating all things Scottish or Welsh is encouraged, English traditions are often swept under the rug by guilt-ridden wussies. In their desperation for inclusiveness and political correctness, they’re all too eager to substitute British for English.

Being a soccer stud that came Stateside on a scholarship, the last thing I want to do is align myself with these effete elites. Nevertheless, I do wonder if it’s time to rename EPL Talk to BPL Talk — not B as in the Barclays Premier League, but British Premier League.

Historically, Wales has been referred to as “England’s first colony,” and it now seems the English Premier League is colonizing Welsh football. Indeed, the best Welsh teams clamor for the glamor of the EPL.

Swansea City FC are reveling in mid-table in the world’s most popular sports league.

Cardiff City FC, currently in the Championship, are perennial challengers for promotion to the EPL. Indeed, this year they are poised for the playoffs, if not automatic promotion to the greener pastures of English football.

Imagine: Swansea and Cardiff in the EPL; Now that would be something to BPL Talk about. Just as Wales joining England through the Acts of Union provided the foundation for Britain, the union of English and Welsh teams could transform the English into the British Premier League, or are we riddled with Cymrophobia? (don’t bother to look it up. It’s a cool word, alright, but with an ugly meaning — antipathy towards the Welsh).

FOX delivered a 1.0 overnight rating for its February 5, 2002 live broadcast of Chelsea against Manchester United.

The rating is higher than the 0.9 that Arsenal against Manchester United generated, but lower than the 1.3 rating for the November 20, 2011 broadcast of Chelsea against Liverpool, which was shown on tape delay.

It’s good news to see that the rating for the 3-3 draw between Chelsea and Manchester United was greater than the Arsenal versus Manchester United match from January 20, 2012. Progress was made there, but based on the ratings data, it again points to the need for games to be shown live on FOX Soccer and shown on delay on the free-to-air network later in the day in order to maximize the most amount of viewers.

The rating is the percentage of television households tuned to a broadcast.

The much-hyped match between Chelsea and Manchester United is over, and it was definitely one of the best matches of the season. Six goals, plenty of talking points and an amazing comeback, this is a game that we won’t forget for quite some time.

For TV viewers in the United States, here are the highs and lows of FOX’s live coverage of the game on the free-to-air network.

Highs

1. FOX’s decision to continue giving us the Sky Sports audio commentary feed for matches. FOX deserves a thumbs up for giving us the treat of hearing Martin Tyler and Alan Smith instead of the international feed. The commentary is always the best available.
2. FOX for showing the game live on free-to-air network TV. Not every station showed it (more about that later), but hats off to FOX for showing it on national TV to an audience of 1-2 million.
3. Eric Wynalda. The opinionated pundit was straightforward, intelligent and listenable. He’s the best thing that FOX has going for it right now.
4. Dear Super Bowl, Top That. Rob Stone’s line immediately after the game ended seemed sincere, unrehearsed and in your face. I loved it.
5. Production quality. The on-screen graphics, camera angles and overall production value were well done and very professional.

Lows

1. Piers Morgan. I’m not a Piers Morgan hater, but he seems to like being antagonistic — whether it’s trying to bait people on Twitter, or saying stupid things like David De Gea is the worst goalkeeper in the Premier League (like he said on before the match kicked off on FOX today). When he makes silly comments, it hurts not only his credibility but also that of FOX.
2. Rob Stone. He’s only been on the job for a few weeks at FOX, but he’s already made a few flubs. The most noticeable one today was where, in the opening minute, he thought Gary Cahill was Tim Cahill. I would excuse him for that, but he’s made other flubs in previous weeks such as not knowing how to pronounce Norwich, and thinking that Robert Huth played for Sunderland instead of Stoke. At least Christian Miles wouldn’t have made those mistakes.
3. The 16 FOX stations that decided to show the game on tape delay instead of live.
4. Switching to the Tyler-Smith commentary one second before kick-off. You would think that FOX would have learned by now that we soccer fans like hearing the crowd noise and commentators a few minutes before kickoff. But FOX, as they always seem to do, ended up switching to the audio feed of Tyler-Smith one second before the ball was kicked. FOX, learn from ESPN.
5. Post-match highlights. Unless I missed it, the post-match coverage was rushed and too short. ESPN gives us post-match interviews and highlights from the game. FOX gave us Wynalda and Morgan talking.

The latest news from Stamford Bridge is that Chelsea is saying that the snow is no major problem, and that the match today will go ahead as planned at 11am ET/4pm GMT. FOX must be breathing a huge sigh of relief right now with it being the “Greatest live Premier League match in US television history,” after all.

Before we get to Chelsea against Manchester United, there is a big match on earlier today with Newcastle United at home against Aston Villa. Newcastle will see the return of Demba Ba to the team after his time with Senegal in the Africa Cup Of Nations. Demba Ba will start today, while new signing Papiss Cisse is on the bench. Aston Villa, meanwhile, will be buoyed by their inspired comeback mid-week against Queens Park Rangers. Kick-off is at 8:30am ET on FOX Soccer.

The conclusion of the match at St. James’s Park will lead us nicely into the pre-match discussion for Chelsea against Manchester United. If you live in the United States and your local FOX station is showing the game live, the coverage begins at 10:30am ET with analysis from Eric Wynalda and Piers Morgan. Manchester United needs a win to level with Manchester City, while Chelsea needs a win to gain some sort of respect for the club in the league this season. So far, Andre Villas-Boas has been very underwhelming whenever Chelsea has come up against Manchester United or Arsenal.

Chelsea team: Cech, Ivanovic, Cahill, Luiz, Bosingwa, Essien, Meireles, Malouda, Sturridge, Torres, Mata

Manchester United team: De Gea, Rafael, Evans, Ferdinand, Evra, Valencia, Carrick, Giggs, Young, Rooney, Welbeck

Meanwhile, on FOXSoccer.com, FOX Soccer writer Ives Galarcep writes about Soccer’s Quest to Convert New Followers, which I would reword as “FOX’s Quest to Convert New Soccer Followers.” The sentence in the article that immediately jumped out at me was this:

“As recently as the mid-90s, catching some soccer on your television [in the US] was a pipe dream.”

That’s simply not true. Premier League games have been shown live on US television since 1996.

Ives also adds:

“Sunday’s Chelsea-Manchester United match on FOX will serve as another rung in the ladder for a sport that had virtually no television presence in this country just two decades ago.”

Virtually is a poor choice of word, in my opinion. English football coverage has been shown on US television for more than two decades (since 1990, in fact).

To me, this smells like a bit of revisionist history on the part of FOX (or poor research by Galarcep). Just because English soccer was shown before FOX became involved, that doesn’t mean it didn’t exist.

One more thing. Galarcep’s article would have been a perfect opportunity to include a sidebar or a callout to let readers know that the Chelsea against Manchester United game isn’t being shown live on 16 FOX stations nationwide. But there’s not a word about that. It’s almost as if FOX doesn’t want people to know that some stations aren’t carrying it.

Before, during or after the match today, post your comments, questions, observations and rants or raves in the comments section below.

Sunday’s battle between Chelsea and Manchester United is being promoted in FOX TV commercials as the “Greatest live Premier League match in US television history.” Unfortunately the advertising may irk some soccer fans in the United States who will be unable to watch the game live because their local FOX station has decided to show infomercials, local shows or religious programming instead.

Just like the Arsenal-Manchester United game shown by FOX on January 22, several FOX stations in large markets have decided to show the game on delay. The 17 who won’t be showing the game live are:

• WITI (Milwaukee) — Shown on delay at 12:30pm local time,
• WBRC (Birmingham) — Shown on delay beginning at Noon,
• WGXA (Macon) — Shown on delay starting at Noon,
• KPTM (Omaha) – Broadcast begins at 11:30am local time,
• WXXV (Biloxi) — Shown on delay at 3pm local time,
• WICZ (Binghamton) — Shown on delay at 11:30am ET,
• WTRF (Wheeling) — Shown on delay at 2:30pm.
• WFXR (Roanoke) — Shown at Noon,
• KHMT (Billings) — Shown at 10am,
• WVNS (Bluefield) — Shown at 2:30pm,
• WZDX (Huntsville) — Shown at 11am,
• WVFX (Clarksburg) — Shown at 2pm,
• WTIC (Hartford) — Shown at Noon,
• KNDX (Minot) — Delayed until Noon local time,
• KEVN (Rapid City) – Delayed until 10am local time,
• KWKT (Waco) — Delayed until 10am local time.

Programming subject to change. Check local listings.

UPDATE: WSVN will show the game live on its D2 sister station.

“We hope our affiliates always take network programming, especially live offerings, in-pattern, but the decision rests with them and sometimes depends on local programming obligations,” said a FOX Sports spokesperson. “The good news is that fewer affiliates are delaying this week’s match than on Jan. 22, so we’re moving in the right direction. We feel pretty good that game will be live in over 90% of the country, and delays, wherever they occur, aren’t expected to negatively impact the audience.”

“FOX Sports is committed to EPL, UEFA and the World Cup down the road more so than any other network and will continue look for and find more opportunities to run significant matches on FOX,” added the FOX Sports spokesman. “We’re looking at the glass as better than 90% full, and that’s a big step forward, but we won’t be happy until the glass is filled to the top and we’re 100% live from coast to coast.”

I’m sorry, but it’s absolutely ridiculous that a game, touted as “the greatest live Premier League match in US television history,” won’t even be shown live in many major US cities.

It’s vitally important that you contact your local FOX station and either voice your outrage (if your station isn’t showing the game) or voice your support (if the station is carrying it). Contact your FOX station by Twitter, Facebook, phone, e-mail or via a web-form.

Here’s the contact information for 17 of the FOX stations nationwide. Note that this list is far from complete. If yours isn’t listed, please post the contact information in the comments section below and let me know whether the game is being shown live or not. I’ll update the spreadsheet as I get more information from you, the readers.

Two more important points about this game:

1) I believe that advertising this game as “the greatest live Premier League match in US television history” is misguided. Why does FOX believe it’s going to be the greatest? Based on what? The coverage, or the actual game itself? While I hope it’s an entertaining match, Chelsea currently sits in fourth place, 12 points behind Manchester City and Manchester United who are joint top. Chelsea’s Premier League title race has long been over. If it’s not the game that will be the “greatest live Premier League match,” maybe it’s the coverage? But we have little to base that on other than the inclusion of Rob Stone and Piers Morgan, who both have their attributes but none that would make this game the greatest.

It’s pure over-exaggerated hype. It’s not even close to being the greatest game unless it ends up being a firecracker of a match, which — given Chelsea’s current form — I extremely doubt.

2) It’s time to question whether FOX’s strategy of showing select Premier League games live on the free-to-air network is wise. The jury will be out until the ratings come in for Chelsea against Manchester United, but based on the data we’ve seen so far, the best strategy for FOX would be to show all Premier League 11am ET games live on FOX Soccer in the morning, and then show select Premier League Super Sunday matches on delay in the mid-to-late afternoon hours. The best rating FOX received so far this season was the tape delayed broadcast of Chelsea against Liverpool, which was shown at 2:30pm or 4pm (preceding or following a NFL broadcast, depending on each local market).

Showing Premier League games live on the free-to-air FOX network creates several issues: (1) Local FOX stations have other programming which takes priority, (2) the time of the live game isn’t conducive to the highest ratings possible for Premier League matches, and (3) it infuriates soccer fans who are unable to watch live games in their local markets.

I believe that it’s important that FOX handles you, their core soccer audience, with care. You are the viewers who have been watching Premier League games on FOX Soccer for more than a decade. You are the soccer fans who have helped FOX Soccer grow into what it is today. Without you, FOX Soccer would not exist. FOX is at an important crossroads in their history where they are looking to attract the mainstream audience, which is where the money is at. However, FOX risks upsetting its core audience, i.e. you.

At the end of the day, all we want is to be able to watch Premier League games live. Having them available on tape delay is simply not good enough. In fact, if anything, it creates a situation where tape delayed games will force soccer fans to find illegal means of watching the game live, which is something that none of us want. If I have a choice of seeing a game live on FOX Soccer or seeing it live on FOX, I would have to choose FOX Soccer even though I realize it means that the sport (and league) may not grow as quickly as I would like in this country. It’s vital that soccer fans are not at the mercy of their local FOX station. With FOX Soccer, we can guarantee that if they say they’re going to show the game live, it’ll be on.

Nevertheless, I believe it’s of massive importance that each of you who live in the United States contacts your local FOX station and either thanks them for showing Sunday’s game live, or issues a complaint if they’re not showing it live. There’s no excuse why these stations should be showing the game on delay. And it’s important that they know that there is a vocal soccer audience out there who demands the best possible live viewing experience. Anything else is unacceptable.

After a flying start to the 2011-12 Premier League campaign, Manchester City has struggled since the December 12th loss at Stamford Bridge to Chelsea. In that match, the bad luck that has dogged the Citizens reared its ugly head. With City leading 1-0 early in the match, a penalty shout was missed when David Silva appeared to be taken down inside the 18-yard box. Later in the match, Gaël Clichy was sent off, and Joleon Lescott was called for a handball.

Chelsea’s 2-1 victory was reminiscent of recent Blues wins against Manchester United. For all of Chelsea’s character and experience, it appeared that once again they had been the beneficiary of several controversial officiating decisions. However, Chelsea’s positive relationship with match officials in England is a recent development. After all, this is a club that was the victim of the single worst officiated game in recent memory, the 2009 UEFA Champions League semifinal 2nd leg against Barcelona. Prior to that Champions League semifinal, Chelsea often found itself to be on the wrong end of a number of decisions domestically or when facing Liverpool in European competition. The Blues also were faced with hostility from the press, opposing fans and elements within the game due to their fortune at having been the beneficiary of a big money takeover.

The discussion of Chelsea is not simply a digression from the topic of Manchester City circa 2011 as much as it is a focus on where the Citizens may be headed. Chelsea bore the brunt of resentment by both supporters of entrenched clubs and those who supported smaller sides in the 2003 to 2009 time period. This resentment ultimately led to a degree of skewed media coverage against the Blues and in several cases questionable officiating decisions. While some may question whether this actually happened, I see the narrative repeating itself in the form of Manchester City.

Victimization among football club supporters is a complex that develops slowly but in many cases for good reason. As an example, Leeds United fans, unruly as they tend to be, had good reason to believe their club was being unfairly targeted after the 1973 UEFA Cup and 1975 European Cup Finals, both of which saw the Whites defeated by dubious officiating decisions in major continental finals.

Jose Mourinho’s Chelsea took the victimization complex, which justifiably was permeating the Blues supporters’ base and club hierarchy, and channeled it into brilliance on the pitch. The Chelsea side under Mourinho’s leadership won six major domestic trophies in just three seasons.

Now, Roberto Mancini’s Manchester City team is feeling the pinch much like Chelsea did in the early Mourinho era. But does City have the character and will to respond in a similar fashion?

Chelsea pre-Mourinho had emerged as a top tier club. Despite some awful times in the 1980s, Glenn Hoddle revolutionized the way Chelsea played and the types of players they signed in the mid-1990s. Cup successes followed and while the Blues had not won the league in five decades, the club was more established than Manchester City was when Mancini took over in December 2009.

But following FA Cup success in 2011, and an unprecedented offensive outburst in the first few months of the 2011-12 season, it appeared City was now among England’s “elite.” Nonetheless the reality is nothing comes easily when trying to overturn an established order and City are not only outsiders, but unlikeable outsiders due to the heavy spending of the club’s Abu Dhabi based ownership group.

Despite media assumptions to the contrary, Manchester City does not have a particularly deep squad . Were the Citizens to have faced an injury crisis similar to Manchester United or Arsenal at any point this season, their title chances could simply have been written off, and Champions League qualification would likely be in doubt.

The departure of the Toure brothers (particularly the influential Yaya Toure) for the Cup of African Nations coincided with a dip in form, a controversial suspension to club captain Vincent Kompany, an injury to David Silva, another suspension to Mario Balotelli and elimination from both domestic cup competitions. Simply put, Manchester City has not been able to overcome most of the adversity they have faced since that loss to Chelsea. The title credentials of City’s starting XI are unquestionable. But the squad lacks depth, and to this point in the season a degree of resourceful character needed to win a title.

Carlos Tevez’s continued transfer saga hangs over the club at this time of remarkable adversity. Mancini’s side, bereft of proper squad depth to compete for the title, is further thrown into turmoil by the spectre of a player who last suited up for the club in September and is advised by one of the most disreputable men hovering around English football. Yet, when given the opportunity to cut the club’s losses, City rejected a generous swap with Liverpool for the under-performing Andy Carroll, a player that despite his recent poor form could really help the Citizens hold off United in the title race, by adding valuable depth and a target man on set pieces.

The challenge for Roberto Mancini with a depleted squad that cannot seem to get the breaks to go their way is to channel his inner Mourinho. The City manager has done a great deal of whining in the press the past several weeks. What he has not seemed to be able to accomplish yet is the mentality Chelsea had between 2004 and 2006. With the deck seemingly stacked against them time and again, Mourinho rallied his side to channel their anger and sense of injustice into winning football under adverse conditions. Chelsea’s manager constantly wound up the opposition, the media and his own team with tales of victimization and unfairness. However distasteful, it worked and Chelsea has remained since an immovable force in English football.

Mancini has proven as City manager to be tactically adept and at least a decent man manager. He has taken a squad with a bloated payroll and substantial ego who were clearly underachieving under Mark Hughes and delivered City’s first major trophy in 35 years as well as a top 3 finish. But overtaking Manchester United and the post Mourinho Chelsea are substantially more difficult than eclipsing Arsenal and Liverpool, as Mancini is now learning.

In context it is difficult to imagine another club captain of a top of the table side being sent off and suspended the way Kompany was for a questionable challenge in the FA Cup versus Manchester United. The Citizens dropped a controversial New Year’s Day decision to Sunderland on a clear offside goal in the fifth minute of stoppage time. Following a first leg Carling Cup semifinal loss largely due to injuries and suspension (David Silva was injured, Kompany suspended) penalty decisions and 50-50 calls all seemed to fall Liverpool’s way in the second leg at Anfield. Instead of rising above the adversity, Mancini’s Citizens simply melted in the euphoria of the Reds first Wembley trip in sixteen years.

The return of Kompany, the Toure brothers and Balotelli will no doubt help bolster City’s ranks and title hopes. But the key to winning the title for an outsider club as Chelsea proved is psychological belief and a will to overcome perceived injustices. To this point the Citizens have not proven they can replicate Chelsea’s model and until they do, winning the title may in fact be a bridge too far.

Liverpool and Chelsea are both planning summer tours to the United States to compete in preseason friendlies, which may include Liverpool playing AS Roma at Boston Red Sox’s Fenway Park baseball stadium, says The Boston Globe.

The newspaper reports that in addition to Liverpool possibly playing Roma at Fenway Park, that other preseason friendlies which may include Liverpool and/or Chelsea playing in Chicago (at either Comiskey Park or Wrigley Field) and at Yankee Stadium in New York. Toronto has also been rumored as a consideration.

Dates have not been set, according to the newspaper, but Liverpool has made reservations, in preparation for the tour, in the Boston area from June 20 through July 4.

Seeing Liverpool and Chelsea playing friendlies this summer in the United States will be a welcoming sign of the Premier League’s continued growth in the country as well as the economic boost that the English clubs receive after playing in front of sold-out crowds. However, don’t expect a lengthy tour by either Liverpool or Chelsea due to Euro 2012 (June 8 to July 1) and the Summer Olympic Games (July 27 to August 12).

With Liverpool owned by Fenway Sports Group, this undoubtedly was a major factor in seeing Liverpool return to the United States on tour. The last time Liverpool played in North America was in 2004 as part of the Champions Tour when they played Celtic and AS Roma. The last time Chelsea played in North America was the summer of 2009 when they completed a successful tour as part of the World Football Challenge.

The tour is expected to be announced shortly. But which cities would you like to see Chelsea and Liverpool play in?

On day three of cleaning out my garage, I found a pleasant surprise in a 1962 collection of 25 cards entitled “Football Clubs and Badges” from a company named Lamberts Of Norwich.

The cards were included in packets of tea from Lamberts. Each card features an English club with the club’s name, football kit, crest and kit colors, which are all beautifully designed. During the 1961-62 season, there were 22 clubs in the top flight. In the 61-62 season, Ipswich won the title, while Everton won it the season after.

The quality of the cards is exceptional. Click on the above image to get a larger view of the front of the cards to see the detail. It’s interesting to note how plain the Manchester United crest looks, how intricate the one is for Ipswich, the odd character emblazoned on the Nottingham Forest card (a forester, which is one of Nottingham Forest’s many nicknames), and the sad looking cockerel of Tottenham.

You’ll notice that there’s no Liverpool. The Reds were in the second division in the 61-62 season. And how about the surprise inclusion of Colchester United, who were in the Fourth Division at the time. Each of the cards contains a short history of the club, and the back of Colchester’s card mentions how their best season was in 1956-57 when they finished third. I can only presume that Colchester was included in the set of 25 cards because of its proximity to Norwich.

Eagle-eyed readers may notice that there are only 24 cards featured. The one that’s missing, which I do have, is the one for Luton Town.

See any other interesting observations about the cards? Share them in the comments section below.

So how was your holiday season? I’m betting it has been better than Andre Villas-Boas’s December despite Chelsea’s late win against Wolves on Monday.

Since the holidays have begun, a constant stream of events conspired to turn Chelsea from a team moving along in transition/future 3rd place finisher to a team that has (if you believe the rumors) a divided locker room, constant middling draws, uninspired play, an upset loss to Aston Villa, rampant booing, a manager who’s either staying put or getting fired soon and no realistic guarantee that the club will even place 4th in the table at the end of the year. The “transition while winning” plan is gone and since these things aren’t supposed to happen to big, gigantic clubs things are going to change and it’s probably going to get very real and scary. So what should happen now that Chelsea is under siege? It comes down to two very large factors, and how the club goes about handling these factors.

Factor #1: What are club owner Roman Abramovich’s real feelings towards Andre Villas-Boas?

No matter how much money is thrown around the club, you would have to think that if Roman decided to buyout AVB’s contract from Porto to get him to Chelsea he is pretty enamored with him. The subsequent firing of Carlo Ancelotti after winning the double and finishing second and hiring of a guy who’s 34 and has a Europa League championship is pretty much going all in with your choice. Villas-Boas brings with him an ideology of fast, pressing offense and a more attractive style of football that almost requires a faster, younger player. If this is the style that Roman wanted then in time there is a very good chance that AVB-helmed Chelsea teams in 2012, 13 and onward will win titles and be consistent.

Right now though Villas-Boas inherited a team that has had no major overhauls since the Jose Mourhino era and can’t fully execute the style of play that AVB was brought in for. It’s damned if you/damned if you don’t if Abramovich throws his vote of confidence to Villas Boas because with how the club is playing and the backstage drama they’ve conceded this season and probably will have a rocky start next season as well, maybe playing in the Europa League. Regardless, the worst move Abramovich could make is to sack AVB after only a few months. Gus Hiddink is not walking through the door, and realistically he shouldn’t because anyone short of Mourhino suddenly wanting another go-around isn’t a better choice than what Roman currently has in Villas-Boas. That being said, if Abramovich chooses Villas-Boas, then they have to deal with the other big factor:

Factor #2: Who’s in starting lineup for the 2012/2013 season?

It’s not about right now with the current squad. Right now, no matter who leaves and gets brought in, the team is going to most likely chug along and be very uneven. By picking Villas-Boas as the long term choice, you’re not only choosing his offense but you are also confirming that it’s Villas-Boas squad. This is where it gets interesting as if you believe the papers there is everything short of civil unrest in the locker room at the moment. In short, beloved players like Didier Drogba, Frank Lampard, John Terry and Nicholas Anelka who’ve won multiple titles are either getting shipped out, rumored to leave or embroiled in their own now legal issues. In order to overhaul the squad and bring the team into a new era Villas-Boas is going to have to sell off many of the fans favorite players, some of whom still have something left to contribute. Would anyone have expected to read rumors about Frank Lampard being sold in January a year ago?

To go all in with AVB should mean that you’re also giving him the right to choose who he wants for the team. Because of this it shouldn’t be shocking to see a Chelsea team in February that looks very different. This means signing players like Gary Cahill to eventually replace John Terry regardless of the fallout from his February trial, getting a creative midfielder to create opportunity and building around Daniel Sturridge rather than Fernando Torres up front.

As much as fans should appreciate the contributions of players like Lampard, Drogba, etc., you can’t ignore the fact that eventually they would leave. Villas-Boas’s hiring sped this up of course, but wasn’t that the point of hiring him? The only thing that’s really happening with Chelsea now is that the transition went from being smooth to very rocky in one month’s time. If there is a long term vision at Stamford Bridge then now is the time to speed it up and that is what Abramovich and the board should take into account while they decide the immediate and long term future of the club.