NEW YORK WHOLESALE

We've all been told, time and again, how strong it is.

The most powerful dressing room in the country.

Too powerful for Luiz Felipe Scolari. The players who did for Andre Villas-Boas.

Indeed, the very men who, in the aftermath of Villas-Boas' exit, were blamed directly by Roman Abramovich for being responsible for the Portuguese manager's failure.

But the men who turned Roberto Di Matteo's vision into Champions League-winning reality, who delivered Abramovich his Holy Grail.

And while the click is ticking on the longevity of the men who have made Chelsea into the force they are, nobody in the Stamford Bridge hierarchy plans to call "Time" on them yet.

Of course, there will be some changes.

Didier Drogba, Jose Bosingwa and Salomon Kalou have been released and there is no certainty yet whether Florent Malouda and Paolo Ferreira will be back to see out their Chelsea contracts.

Then, of course, there is the court case hanging over the biggest voice of all, skipper John Terry. The findings of District Judge Howard Riddle after the Chelsea captain formally enters his "Not guilty" plea on July 9 will have huge repercussions.

For now, though, Terry remains part of the fabric of Chelsea - even if it seems nobody actually knows who "the manager" will be next season.

And while we were led to believe that Abramovich's anger at the players was so great that wholesale change had become a necessity this summer, it does seem the owner has had a partial change of heart.

What Abramovich actually thinks, of course, is always a guess, given his reluctance to say anything in public.

But chief executive Ron Gourlay rarely says anything which does not have the official stamp of approval and asked to discuss the power of the dressing room, he gave a clear insight into the thinking of the club.

Gourlay said: "From my experience in the role this idea of the players having too much power has all been blown out of proportion.

"There has always been big players in the dressing room since Roman bought the club.

"Big players have big views but it has never been out of control at any time.

"We're all in it together and that's where we sit with these things. It's not about player power. We asked everybody that everyone has to step up to the bar and work together. That's exactly what they've done."

The truth may be different, of course. Scolari explicitly blamed Drogba, Michael Ballack and Petr Cech for his exit - strangely enough, he excused himself from responsibility - but Gourlay insisted: "That's why we have big players.

"We have many, many captains in our team and players at international level, strong personalities, but used properly they're very good at ensuring we go out on the field in the right frame of mind and for our young players' development."

Young players like Nathaniel Chalobah and Lucas Piazon are set to be introduced into the first team frame next season, while it does appear as if it might be a make or break campaign, too, for Josh McEachran, who barely got a kick during his four months on loan at Swansea.

Gourlay added: "Chalobah and one or two of the guys, we have to get a programme through which they can play. There's no point in them sitting on the bench every week."

A promise for the future, for a conveyor belt of talent. Then again, at Chelsea in particular, we have heard it all before.

When it matters, understandably, short-term expediency tends to be put in front of long-term benefits. It is only if Abramovich is not going to fund the club's debts for ever that they will have to truly make Cobham a nursery.

In the meantime, it seems the loudest voices in football will be allowed to keep shouting. When they can point to the biggest pot in the game, that doesn't seem too hard a call to make.

The antis are growing in number and force, demanding the club says "No".

For many, unless Chelsea is at Stamford Bridge, it will not be Chelsea.

In reality, though, that is just not going to happen.

The sheer logistical problems that would need to be overcome - let alone the staggering costs - mean a move is essential.

But making public their interest in the potentially available site at Battersea Power Station, with plans for a 60,000-capacity home announced on the eve of the FA Cup Final, Chelsea knew what they were doing.

The local Hammersmith and Fulham Council seem to be doing everything they can to stymie any possible chance of Chelsea finding a home in the borough, which is why the Blues have listened to the blandishments of neighbouring Wandsworth, where the Thames itself is the natural and political boundary.

Suddenly, though, Hammersmoth seem to be changing their tune.

You sense that, if Chelsea had a choice, they would prefer to build on Earl's Court rather than at Battersea, although there is no doubting they wish the south bank option to remain open when the list of remaining contenders is announced.

Chief executive Ron Gourlay said: "We need a 22 acre site and there is not one other than Battersea, Earls Court or Stamford Bridge.

"But it will be challenging. We have even looked at a rebuild here at Stamford Bridge but it just doesn't seem viable. Moving away from the stadium is a major step but to keep the club moving forward is a challenge in itself.

"With Battersea there is a bidding process at this time. Hopefully in the next couple of weeks we will get some feedback because we are still working and looking at the Bridge to see if there is anything we can do here.

"It's no secret that mine and the board's preferred stadium is Stamford Bridge and to get the capacity we need to get economically viable plans and major planning applications passed.

"That's why we decided on a three mile parameter for a move. Battersea is within that. Earls Court and of course Stamford Bridge.

"We don't want to lose opportunities if they are there. We need a bigger stadium and we have to work out how to do it.

"I'm sure Hammersmith and Fulham want Chelsea to stay here. But it can only be done if it's economically viable and presently we haven't come up with that model."