Chelsea 2023/24 season thread.

the_cliff said:
They'll find buyers for Gallagher. Not so sure on Reece James, he's a fantastic player when fit but the money Chelsea will ask for won't be worth the risk to any team.

You do have to ask the question though. How will they continue to spend when they run out of academy products to sell ?
Click to expand...

They actually wouldn't need to if I understand the situation correctly. They need something like a 105 million profit this year to be compliant with regulations, but for next year, the 120 million loss from 3 years ago drops off, so they could afford another 120 million loss next year (although that also has to factor in amortization on the players they've signed already). That's why they need to sell before the end of June to finish this year profitably, and then come July they can start spending again. So they'll sell their homegrown players who are pure profit and sign new players whose transfer fees can be amortized over a longer time period. Good strategy if it works but if they continue signing duds they're up shit's creek in a few years.
 
SirBillNic said:
They actually wouldn't need to if I understand the situation correctly. They need something like a 105 million profit this year to be compliant with regulations, but for next year, the 120 million loss from 3 years ago drops off, so they could afford another 120 million loss next year (although that also has to factor in amortization on the players they've signed already). That's why they need to sell before the end of June to finish this year profitably, and then come July they can start spending again. So they'll sell their homegrown players who are pure profit and sign new players whose transfer fees can be amortized over a longer time period. Good strategy if it works but if they continue signing duds they're up shit's creek in a few years.
Click to expand...
Yeah that was my point. The problem is they'll get through that this season by selling Gallagher or James, soon their proven home grown players will run out and then can't make pure profit of any player. What happens if they sign duds this season and finish 8th next summer with no home grown talents left ?
Right now they have James, Colwill, Gallagher and Chalobah that are academy products they'd make a decent amount from. Once they're gone, they're going to have to start taking losses on their duds and they will quickly add up. They can get through this summer, they best hope it pays off next season.
 
the_cliff said:
Yeah that was my point. The problem is they'll get through that this season by selling Gallagher or James, soon their proven home grown players will run out and then can't make pure profit of any player. What happens if they sign duds this season and finish 8th next summer with no home grown talents left ?
Right now they have James, Colwill, Gallagher and Chalobah that are academy products they'd make a decent amount from. Once they're gone, they're going to have to start taking losses on their duds and they will quickly add up. They can get through this summer, they best hope it pays off next season.
Click to expand...

They'll probably have a large batch of youngsters that we don't know too much about that will fetch a decent fee. Even the likes of Gilchrist, Hall & Hutchinson.
 
SambaBoy said:
They'll probably have a large batch of youngsters that we don't know too much about that will fetch a decent fee. Even the likes of Gilchrist, Hall & Hutchinson.
Click to expand...

Their squad is so bloated with expensive imports on incredibly long contracts there’s zero chance of any more home grown players getting the exposure they need to raise a decent fee once they sell their last few established homegrown players.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Their squad is so bloated with expensive imports on incredibly long contracts there’s zero chance of any more home grown players getting the exposure they need to raise a decent fee once they sell their last few established homegrown players.
Click to expand...
They don't need to play for Chelsea to get "exposure". Look at Hutchinson doing really well at Ipswich or Maatsen doing really well at Dortmund.

There actually more likely to get exposure out on loan.
 
duffer said:
They don't need to play for Chelsea to get "exposure". Look at Hutchinson doing really well at Ipswich or Maatsen doing really well at Dortmund.

There actually more likely to get exposure out on loan.
Click to expand...

Sure but there’s no chance of earning the sort of fees you can get for top PL players like Gallagher, James or Mount for someone who’s looked decent in the Championship or Bundesliga.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Sure but there’s no chance of earning the sort of fees you can get for top PL players like Gallagher, James or Mount for someone who’s looked decent in the Championship or Bundesliga.
Click to expand...
I think we'd have got more for Gallagher right after his Palace loan than we would now!

And Mount wasn't some kid we sold, he played nearly 200 times for the club and we offered him an extension.
 
Last edited:
Pogue Mahone said:
Sure but there’s no chance of earning the sort of fees you can get for top PL players like Gallagher, James or Mount for someone who’s looked decent in the Championship or Bundesliga.
Click to expand...

Think the Maatsen fee will be about 30m. They rejected a 25m bid from Burnley last August so they'd be confident they can get more and he's done well in the Bundesliga by all accounts.
 
FootballHQ said:
Think the Maatsen fee will be about 30m. They rejected a 25m bid from Burnley last August so they'd be confident they can get more and he's done well in the Bundesliga by all accounts.
Click to expand...

Maatsen will almost certainly get done for the full release clause amount (£35M). He's shown some really good stuff for Dortmund and there's even been some reports of Bayern being after him if Alphonso Davies were to leave. He's still young and on a really low salary so that will help to attract lots of interest. Personally I'd like to keep him but oh well...
 
duffer said:
I think we'd have got more for Gallagher right after his Palace loan than we would now!

And Mount wasn't some kid we sold, he played nearly 200 times for the club and we offered him an extension.
Click to expand...
That's not true at all mate. You may not like him as a player but that's far from the truth.
 
Mb194dc said:
Prepared is the wrong word.

Forced is what they're looking for. Got to sell players who don't already have amortization to clear off.

Without Europe money we're totally fecked for ffp I think.
Click to expand...
At the time of Boehly going mad spending, there were loads saying that it was madness but many Chelsea fans thought it was great and there would be a plan. But clearly there isn’t. It’s coming back to bite. Same at Forest. New owners can’t simply chuck cash around. It has to be done right. I hope SJR is taking note
 
the_cliff said:
It's pretty crazy that they can just sell hotel buildings to another company owned by Boehly to reduce losses.
Click to expand...
There isn't one area it seems where Chelsea actually operates as a normal football club. It is just one loophole or scam after another.
 
golden_blunder said:
At the time of Boehly going mad spending, there were loads saying that it was madness but many Chelsea fans thought it was great and there would be a plan. But clearly there isn’t. It’s coming back to bite. Same at Forest. New owners can’t simply chuck cash around. It has to be done right. I hope SJR is taking note
Click to expand...

The plan was CL football with a young squad and a reduced wage bill for the medium term.

We look miles away from top 4 currently and we really need Europe revenue or trouble ultimately.

Selling the hotel probably eases things up a bit for ffp, assuming no rules broken doing it. I guess we'll have to lease it back so will add an expense every year now.

How it all ends... we'll see. The likes of Clearlake and the Glazers shouldn't be allowed to hold the majority control of any football club. They're not like franchises in the sports they know.
 
It's that balancing act for Chelsea now.

Let's say all of Kepa,Lukaku, Silva, Chalobah, Gallagher, Maatsen, Broja all leave.

Who replaces them? More 19/20 year olds with limited top level experience? They need 2-3 older heads imo in key areas but that will also inflate the wage bill without European income.

You'll still get injuries again next season so no good playing that card once we get to March/April.
 
FootballHQ said:
It's that balancing act for Chelsea now.

Let's say all of Kepa,Lukaku, Silva, Chalobah, Gallagher, Maatsen, Broja all leave.

Who replaces them?
Click to expand...

Only Silva and Gallagher have played significant minutes out of that lot. The rest won't need replacing at all.

If we have most of Lavia, Fofana, James, Carney and Nkunku back, that's more than enough to replace them.
 
the_cliff said:


They'll find buyers for Gallagher. Not so sure on Reece James, he's a fantastic player when fit but the money Chelsea will ask for won't be worth the risk to any team.

You do have to ask the question though. How will they continue to spend when they run out of academy products to sell ?
Click to expand...

Selling their captain and their vice-captain seems quite silly to me.
 
duffer said:
Only Silva and Gallagher have played significant minutes out of that lot. The rest won't need replacing at all.

If we have most of Lavia, Fofana, James, Carney and Nkunku back, that's more than enough to replace them.
Click to expand...

Lavia will come in for Gallagher yeah but that's still only three CMs so leaves you short with plenty of youth behind that.

Fofana's hardly played a game in two years so bit optimistic to think he can come straight back and lead the defence like Silva does at his best.

That's where the strategy is going wrong a bit...four CBs all in the same age range so they desperately need to get one in who's 27-29 just to lead and be vocal at times when you're under pressure.

However that's not ready a signing you can then flip in 2-3 years so we'll see if Clearlake tweak the strategy.
 
FootballHQ said:
Lavia will come in for Gallagher yeah but that's still only three CMs so leaves you short with plenty of youth behind that.

Fofana's hardly played a game in two years so bit optimistic to think he can come straight back and lead the defence like Silva does at his best.

That's where the strategy is going wrong a bit...four CBs all in the same age range so they desperately need to get one in who's 27-29 just to lead and be vocal at times when you're under pressure.

However that's not ready a signing you can then flip in 2-3 years so we'll see if Clearlake tweak the strategy.
Click to expand...

Sure Silva will take some replacing, I just don't agree that we need to replace the 7 players you listed.
 
FootballHQ said:
That's where the strategy is going wrong a bit...four CBs all in the same age range so they desperately need to get one in who's 27-29 just to lead and be vocal at times when you're under pressure.
Click to expand...

Disasi is 26.
 
Who is going to take a gamble on Reece James at the prices they will want?

He is potentially fantastic but he can’t string three games together. With regulations as tight as they are, I can’t see anyone sane going for that gamble…

…so Dalot will have competition for a few games next season then.
 
Maluco said:
Who is going to take a gamble on Reece James at the prices they will want?

He is potentially fantastic but he can’t string three games together. With regulations as tight as they are, I can’t see anyone sane going for that gamble…

…so Dalot will have competition for a few games next season then.
Click to expand...

Nobody. He's going nowhere.
 
He's under contract till 2028... So by then we'll know if he can actually play a decent number of games each season or not. No one will offer the asking price (£70M?) anyway until they're sure of that.
 
Maluco said:
He can’t stay fit though, surely if someone stumped up £50 million, they might take it, finances being as they are.
Click to expand...

He’s finally had surgery, so let’s at least see if that’s helped his problem before we declare him completely incapable of staying fit.
 
It would be genuinely great if he can get over it. It’s a pity what’s happening to his career
 
Wasted 6 months warming the bench at Forest. He would probably have been one of their best players had they bothered using him. Strasbourg were without a win in 9 games when Santos played his first game. A month later, 3 wins in 4 games and a young player of the month award.



 
You must log in or register to reply here.