Enzo Fernández | signs for Chelsea

Status
Not open for further replies.
WeePat said:
I have a gut feeling we’ll just end up triggering the release clause closer to the deadline.
Click to expand...
Anyone else (we could realistically get) I'd be horrified at the prospect of doing so but for this lad it would be worth it.

I'm not usually one for kicking myself when I see players at rival clubs even ones we could have got (Aguero was probably the last one) but he'll be a massive exception.
 
I don’t think they trigger the release clause in one lump sum.

BUT their mistake was in letting people know that. It should have been a threat they would actually follow up on, and if Benfica genuinely believed they were losing him either way, they might have agreed to a higher fee in structure to offset money going to River.

Once they let the word go around that they were only interested in structured solutions … this deal was done.

Why they won’t do the lump sum? FFP and drawing TOO much attention is one reason. But that they could probably still get around. The bigger problem is that this group uses structure and terms regularly as a negotiating tool, and you would forever be weakening that if you caved on this point.

I believe if you go back about two weeks I said on this thread it would essentially be a big game of “chicken” with Benfica as to whether Chelsea could get their terms. But Chelsea went and told them ahead of time they were willing to swerve. Did not agree with that move.
 
Judas said:
Surely at this point it’s about time to leave the Ralf shite long long in the past?
Click to expand...
Especially since it’s uninformed and pointless. There were PL clubs that did try to buy Enzo. OUR current scouting head tried to buy him for Brighton. Enzo had not capped for Argentina at all at that point and there were major visa issues.

This is why teams like Chelsea want a multi club system with teams in countries like Portugal… to bypass said issue.
 
Red in STL said:
What advantage does that bring?
Click to expand...
You buy younger players from places like South America and give them a platform inside your system to develop and get past things like visa issues.

Brighton couldn’t buy him. But if Chelsea owned, say, Braga, they could have outbid Benfica for him at … 20 and he would be playing essentially for them already.

Bypass this cottage industry of buying and marking up that teams like Benfica live on.
 
Bluelion7 said:
You buy younger players from places like South America and give them a platform inside your system to develop and get past things like visa issues.

Brighton couldn’t buy him. But if Chelsea owned, say, Braga, they could have outbid Benfica for him at … 20 and he would be playing essentially for them already.

Bypass this cottage industry of buying and marking up that teams like Benfica live on.
Click to expand...
And basically destroy football because you have more money than another club
 
Bluelion7 said:
You buy younger players from places like South America and give them a platform inside your system to develop and get past things like visa issues.

Brighton couldn’t buy him. But if Chelsea owned, say, Braga, they could have outbid Benfica for him at … 20 and he would be playing essentially for them already.

Bypass this cottage industry of buying and marking up that teams like Benfica live on.
Click to expand...

Players like Enzo have zero interest in playing for clubs like Braga.

The reality of the multi club model as it has been used by others, most notably City, is not at all like you are envisioning. It’s not like players are moving from Troyes and Girona to City all the time.
 
Powderfinger said:
Players like Enzo have zero interest in playing for clubs like Braga.

The reality of the multi club model as it has been used by others, most notably City, is not at all like you are envisioning. It’s not like players are moving from Troyes and Girona to City all the time.
Click to expand...
United had a similar type set up with Royal Antwerp, not ownership but a partnership
 
Powderfinger said:
Players like Enzo have zero interest in playing for clubs like Braga.

The reality of the multi club model as it has been used by others, most notably City, is not at all like you are envisioning. It’s not like players are moving from Troyes and Girona to City all the time.
Click to expand...

Edit: to start, Enzo wasn’t even starting for River until fairly recently. He would have been thrilled at a big money offer from a team owned by a football power. He wasn’t “Enzo the WC star” then.

That is just a matter of investment and scope for the imagination. What if you made Braga the wealthiest and best team in Portugal? What if Benfica was forced to bid higher and higher against more competitors for their talent and their margins dropped?

And the players playing there knew they were essentially playing for a chance at the parent club, and you paid much better wages than Benfica, and they could earn trophies and CL game experience while developing? City’s model is …. Ok, but it is limited.

Right now we will have to send Andrey Santos out on loan as punishment for buying him early. Because even though there were people in Brazil who said he could be one of their best midfielders ever, he couldn’t meet the “extraordinary talent” threshold needed to bypass the visa issue.

What if we wanted to buy players even earlier? Do we just cede co trial of our investments and “hope” they develop well?

They ARE buying a team in Portugal, and they ARE buying a team in France. They may still buy a team in South America, and really up the ante on control of the talent pipeline.
 
WeePat said:
Right, won't bother getting my hopes up then. Thanks mate.
Click to expand...

Yeah they're not quite rag status - probably tier 2. From reading the article though there's nothing really of substance.

The only thing that gives me pause is if we've baulked at the asking price for Caicedo and just decided there's no point in trying to save on cost at the position (which would be smart and Enzo is a better fit for us anyway) - but again the article is basically just waffle.
 
TheMagicFoolBus said:
Yeah they're not quite rag status - probably tier 2. From reading the article though there's nothing really of substance.

The only thing that gives me pause is if we've baulked at the asking price for Caicedo and just decided there's no point in trying to save on cost at the position (which would be smart and Enzo is a better fit for us anyway) - but again the article is basically just waffle.
Click to expand...

Yeah I mean, my position is if you're convinced Enzo the right guy that will transform the midfield, then pay whatever to get him. No point in settling for 2nd or 3rd choice targets to save 10-15m. I'm seeing links to Bissouma, Kessie, Alvarez etc which is just maddening.
 
WeePat said:
Yeah I mean, my position is if you're convinced Enzo the right guy that will transform the midfield, then pay whatever to get him. No point in settling for 2nd or 3rd choice targets to save 10-15m. I'm seeing links to Bissouma, Kessie, Alvarez etc which is just maddening.
Click to expand...

Yeah this historically is what's gotten us up shit creek without a paddle. Bissouma is especially awful for me; I'll be incredibly mad if we bail Spurs out by buying him.
 
They are just going to point to the release clause, all up front. I don't see it happening.
 
WeePat said:
Yeah I mean, my position is if you're convinced Enzo the right guy that will transform the midfield, then pay whatever to get him. No point in settling for 2nd or 3rd choice targets to save 10-15m. I'm seeing links to Bissouma, Kessie, Alvarez etc which is just maddening.
Click to expand...
The issue is unless Benfica cave and allow you to spread the cost over 7/8 years, you'll have to pay it in 1 lump sum which is an instant FFP hit.

With the tighter FFP rules, release clauses are going to be very difficult to use in the future. Paying a few quid extra was a smart offer but I think they're banking on more clubs paying instantly come the summer.
 
Adam-Utd said:
The issue is unless Benfica cave and allow you to spread the cost over 7/8 years, you'll have to pay it in 1 lump sum which is an instant FFP hit.

With the tighter FFP rules, release clauses are going to be very difficult to use in the future. Paying a few quid extra was a smart offer but I think they're banking on more clubs paying instantly come the summer.
Click to expand...
Benfica can keep the player as no club will pay that in one lump sum. No club other than EPL clubs will entertain 120m either.
 
ThierryHenry14 said:
Benfica can keep the player as no club will pay that in one lump sum. No club other than EPL clubs will entertain 120m either.
Click to expand...
Other EPL clubs might in the summer though, and they get the money in 1 lump sum rather than spread out - that's the point.

Benfica either get to keep the player for longer or get better terms on their offer.

The risk is obviously his form falls off or he gets injured. I think they'll sell this summer personally.
 
So, the only way this was going to be quick was if Benfica was willing to work with us on a payment schedule.

IF they decide to trigger the release clause(that’s the only option), then Chelsea was always going to need to spend what they needed to spend and see exactly what they were working with before pulling the trigger.

So in essence: If it was going to be structured in a way to make Benfica happy enough to take a payment plan it would happen asap.

If the release clause were the route we had to go it would be all the way to the end.

Will they be able to fit it in cleanly? Would it just be a financial penalty for doing it? With the window nearly done they can look at everything and decide if it’s feasible. There is no issue with having the money, just an issue of making it work.
 
Powderfinger said:
I don't doubt his talent in general but that's an entire clip of a player making passes with absolutely zero pressure from the other side.
Click to expand...

It has been true in every single one of his highlight reels I've seen :lol:

People justify it as his positioning ability but meh. I will say though that watching him in game is just night and day to the highlight reel. Knows exactly when to speed things up and slow things down.
 
Shakesey said:
:eek: He would be ideal for us... The missing link... Imagine him releasing our forwards...

Get. Him. Eric!
Click to expand...
He'd probably be my ideal summer signing. Granted I'm watching less of other leagues than I used to but in terms of talent he seems to have the lot. Good passer, good engine, good feet.
 
Adam-Utd said:
If you could, you would have already. I don't think with FFP it would actually be possible to spend that much in 1 lump sum. You'd end up with zero breathing room for any other players.

The offer you gave sounded pretty fair, but I guess Benfica are banking on summers in the offer being in cash.
Click to expand...


I don’t think the payment structure (lump sum v installments) affects FFP (or whatever the new ‘FFP’ is called). It is more about how the ‘asset’ is amortized/depreciated, as an expense, from the balance sheet to the profit and loss accounts. It seems that transfer fees are amortized evenly over the length of the player's employment contract. So the length of a players contract does impact FFP.

Lump sum payments would be harder to stump up up front, and many (non-oil) clubs find it easier to finance a transfer from ongoing cash flow instead of one large upfront amount.
 
Last edited:
ThierryHenry14 said:
Benfica can keep the player as no club will pay that in one lump sum. No club other than EPL clubs will entertain 120m either.
Click to expand...
Well, that’s why we would wait til the end… to determine if the lump sum would put us afoul, and if so how far afoul, and what, if any, the penalties would be.

They absolutely can come out of pocket 120m in one lump if they decide they’re allowed to. The money itself isn’t the issue.

Coming off an extreme hardship period… which from my understanding is what the sanction period and forced change of ownership put us in…. Would leave single term FFP issued resulting in primarily financial fines.

So, if you feel strongly enough about getting the player you are willing to stump the fee at once AND pay a fine … then maybe it’s worth it. As long as I’m paying a fine… I’d consider getting Caicedo at the same time though, or Kone.
 
I do hope Chelsea get him because if FDJ is available in the summer we don't want to be fighting with Chelsea for his signature the way they are throwing money around. FDJ would be perfect for our system.
 
Adam-Utd said:
Other EPL clubs might in the summer though, and they get the money in 1 lump sum rather than spread out - that's the point.

Benfica either get to keep the player for longer or get better terms on their offer.

The risk is obviously his form falls off or he gets injured. I think they'll sell this summer personally.
Click to expand...
I highly doubt it. Spurs and Arsenal don't have the resource. Liverpool has eye on Bellingham. City seems to focus on getting talent from South America for lower fee. Man Utd is in ownership transition. Chelsea has no competition. No chance Benfica can get a better offer in summer, unless somehow they can sell this player to PSG.
 
ThierryHenry14 said:
I highly doubt it. Spurs and Arsenal don't have the resource. Liverpool has eye on Bellingham. City seems to focus on getting talent from South America for lower fee. Man Utd is in ownership transition. Chelsea has no competition. No chance Benfica can get a better offer in summer, unless somehow they can sell this player to PSG.
Click to expand...

Real Madrid, Liverpool, and City are all going to make huge midfield investments this summer. They can't all sign Bellingham.
 
Powderfinger said:
I don't doubt his talent in general but that's an entire clip of a player making passes with absolutely zero pressure from the other side.
Click to expand...
:lol: agreed. I don't think people were saying:

"Yeah, he's good, but how's he going to perform when he comes up against santa clara?"
 
Powderfinger said:
Real Madrid, Liverpool, and City are all going to make huge midfield investments this summer. They can't all sign Bellingham.
Click to expand...
Real Madrid stopped spending crazy money on players for a long time unless it is the right player like Mbappe. Zero chance for him to go to Real Madrid. Liverpool is looking for outside investement/change of ownership at the moment as well. I believe it is a buyer's market for Enzo and Chelsea has no competition even in summer.
 
Adam-Utd said:
The issue is unless Benfica cave and allow you to spread the cost over 7/8 years, you'll have to pay it in 1 lump sum which is an instant FFP hit.

With the tighter FFP rules, release clauses are going to be very difficult to use in the future. Paying a few quid extra was a smart offer but I think they're banking on more clubs paying instantly come the summer.
Click to expand...

This is not correct. The issue with paying the release clause is a potential problem with cash flow and an increased tax burden. For FFP and accounting purposes, the payment schedule and structures are irrelevant as they are amortised over the length of the contract without distinction.

EDIT: What you are thinking about are Spanish buyout clauses which are different - in those situations the way it works is the player pays the club to terminate their contract early, effectively making themselves a free agent. Obviously the new club actually pays the fee, but for accounting purposes this is considered a payment to the player so the entire FFP hit falls within the first year.
 
Last edited:
ThierryHenry14 said:
Real Madrid stopped spending crazy money on players for a long time unless it is the right player like Mbappe. Zero chance for him to go to Real Madrid. Liverpool is looking for outside investement/change of ownership at the moment as well. I believe it is a buyer's market for Enzo and Chelsea has no competition even in summer.
Click to expand...

What are you talking about? They spent 100m on Tchouameni last summer and its the worst kept secret in football that they are actively going after Bellingham for next summer.
 
Powderfinger said:
What are you talking about? They spent 100m on Tchouameni last summer and its the worst kept secret in football that they are actively going after Bellingham for next summer.
Click to expand...
May be they thought those 2 are the "right" players, but no sign any other clubs rate Enzo this much for 120m. Anyway we shall see. I think Benfica overplayed his card here.
 
Maurice Setters Training said:
I don’t think the payment structure (lump sum v installments) affects FFP (or whatever the new ‘FFP’ is called). It is more about how the ‘asset’ is amortized/depreciated, as an expense, from the balance sheet to the profit and loss accounts. It seems that transfer fees are amortized evenly over the length of the player's employment contract. So the length of a players contract does impact FFP.

Lump sum payments would be harder to stump up up front, and many (non-oil) clubs find it easier to finance a transfer from ongoing cash flow instead of one large upfront amount.
Click to expand...
TheMagicFoolBus said:
This is not correct. The issue with paying the release clause is a potential problem with cash flow and an increased tax burden. For FFP and accounting purposes, the payment schedule and structures are irrelevant as they are amortised over the length of the contract without distinction.

EDIT: What you are thinking about are Spanish buyout clauses which are different - in those situations the way it works is the player pays the club to terminate their contract early, effectively making themselves a free agent. Obviously the new club actually pays the fee, but for accounting purposes this is considered a payment to the player so the entire FFP hit falls within the first year.
Click to expand...
It could be wrong, but I read the whole reason Chelsea are doing this instead of just paying the clause is for those exact reasons.

https://tribuna.com/en/news/chelsea...ez-buyout-clause-explained-its-not-about-the/
 
Adam-Utd said:
The issue is unless Benfica cave and allow you to spread the cost over 7/8 years, you'll have to pay it in 1 lump sum which is an instant FFP hit.

With the tighter FFP rules, release clauses are going to be very difficult to use in the future. Paying a few quid extra was a smart offer but I think they're banking on more clubs paying instantly come the summer.
Click to expand...

Chelsea were trying to pay it over 3 instalments not 7-8 years. You might be confusing how Benfica would receive the money with how Chelsea spread the costs to balance the books once the player has been signed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.