Let them cook.
Yeah, just spread it out over a longer period like when you want to reduce your car finance payments. Apparently, he's on 65k a week so that would make it easier to shift him if he does need to be sold as the buyer wouldn't have to pay much in wages. It's actually a good way to lower wages but it doesn't account for when a player needs to be sold and there isn't a buyer. The loan rules are changing which will strangle Chelsea.What mad sh*t is this?
Every time Chelsea do something nowadays I immediately assume it's some dodgy way of circumventing the PSR rules, no doubt there'll be some along those lines for this extension. I bet he's on a lesser wage per week over a longer period that will be guaranteed to be paid regardless of whether he stays at the club or something crazy like that.
They are probably trying the NFL contract model where they can front load or back load the money in order to create more salary cap space (in this case PSR/FFP).
That can't just be they transplanted a US pro sport model here, though it probably certainly could colour their strategy. Someone mentioned in one of those threads they see a lot of untapped commercial potential in football so they must be gambling on something : Superleague, TV rights, new markets ?
A 22 year old striker managing 17 goals in his first season in England when he's being paid a relative pittance is a pretty significant underpay. We had plenty of issues last year; Jackson improved significantly as the year went on and personally I'm glad we didn't waste money on Toney or Osimhen.
Just give it 5 months.
Toney's overrating is bizarre; so much of his value is disproportionately in penalties. Osimhen of course has played at a higher level but is constantly injured and is worth nowhere close to his salary. Of the three Jackson is comfortably the best option given age, injury history, and salary.
The problem is that £65k over nine years is over £30 million total. I would assume that whoever wants to buy him next will need to match that, so if they want to offer a 5 year contract, it would have to be £115k per week.
I don't think footballers or agents think that way. They will focus on annual salary when it comes to deciding on a move, not on total wages over the entirety of the contract.
The thing is, if he somehow explodes into a top striker (and there are some signs there) he’s then in a good position (and justifiably so) to renegotiate for a higher salary.
Jackson is comfortably not a team's main goalscorer. He's at his best playing a support role
For me, that's the main reason it's a bad idea from the club's perspective as well. If you're immediately just set for your whole career right out of the gate, it has to have an effect on your motivation levels for all but the most driven, professional players.
I mean if there was a £7 million shortfall on what I’d signed at Chelsea, I would want to see that £7 million.
So much PSR budget to play with and you spend it like thisTrying to find logic in, and make sense of, Clearlake stuff is a full time job at this point
We don't need him to be the team's main goalscorer since we have plenty of goals from Palmer at the 10.
Right - so you think he might be so terrible as a 28/29 year old that he couldn't get a 4 year deal paying 34k per week? That's the break-even point we're talking about here.
Or a few hours. If they had a quality striker to day they would have won. Jackson could have had a hattrick.
That's what happened last year, and where did you guys finish?
You shouldn't have paid him 5x Jackson's salary or even matched his Napoli one. Just, you know, don't offer a third of what he makez in guaranteed money
But that not the point. He’s signed that at Chelsea so he should be paid at least £30 million from now until the expiration of whatever contract he signs at the new club. Let’s say he moves onto a new club next season and is only guaranteed £20 million over four years. Then gets injured and either can’t play or isn’t worth much, he’s lost out on £10 million. I would assume that the main benefit of signing these long term contracts for the players is that they’re guaranteed money.
It's outside the realm of possibility that he might improve this year despite the fact that he clearly improved from the first half to the second half of his first season?
I guess we'll see about Jackson. This is his second season ever in that kind of role
I understand what you're saying but that's not how agents and footballers will look at it.
Mate not all of us are lucky enough to get Mbappe on a free!
Toney is overrated but you know what you're going to get from game to game and he's more consistent. Osimhen commands a high salary but he's worth every penny as he's one of the best in Europe. Jackson misses 100 chances a game and contributed to costing you this game today.
More consistently worse than the guy we have isn't a great selling point.
I mean they're selling to a saudi club, that's good business.
