In today's football are clubs too quick to change players?

[Bootle Buck]

As an arl @rse who was used to watching Liverpool teams stay pretty much steady during the 70's and 80's (apart from the odd tweaking), are clubs too quick in disassembling teams. It seems like sometimes there are too many changes made pre-season that players and teams take forever to gel. Whereas, teams that seem to make fewer changes like Man Utd and Milan last year, seem to be successful playing as a unit. I think Chelsea were affected by Sheva and Ballack's arrival and @rsenal's loss of Viera, Bergkamp, Pires over the last two seasons has hurt them. Is it too easy any more to just continously throw money at new players in the hope they will bring you success? Or is it wiser to try and develop the team and players you have and make it stronger?

[Guest Anders Honoré]

lest we for forget, Chelsea had a huge overhaul when abramovich came in - did them a world of good.

[Paul B]

The answer to the original question is, undoubtedly, yes.

[Bootle Buck]

lest we for forget, Chelsea had a huge overhaul when abramovich came in - did them a world of good.

 

I realize that but I can't see anyone spending as much as Abramovich did. He spent enough in his first season to buy a trophy. However, his continuation to buy big name players and chop and change somewhat hurt them last season.