Enzo Fernández | signs for Chelsea

Status
Not open for further replies.
ayushreddevil9 said:
Deep down we all want Utd to do what Chelsea are doing. Anyone saying otherwise is just lying.
Click to expand...

Not at all, no identity whatsoever with the way they have replced managers and players for years. Sure there are a few players I woul dhave liked us to sign btu we have already been doing a much watered down version of what they are doing and it hasnt worked.

I am surprised with some of the players choosing to go there as effectively throwing away the progression of there careers, feel Gusto is the latest one. That is a player I would have like dus to sign and that is a steal of a transfer fee I feel. But as promising as he is, he probably only plays when Reece James is injured if both are playing well....he starts at a lot of the other bi gclubs in Europe if ge performs, bad move for him
 
Bluelion7 said:
There are lots of ways. The fact that you can amortize the FFP hit of a players fee and wages over the life of their contract is the one that gets the most views lately.

That means Mudryk, with his fantastic looking price tags, might have an actual FFP number lower than Phil Jones does for you.

There were extra allowances given to FFP adherence available to all teams over this final 3 year cycle due to Covid.

We make a LOT more from player sales and loan fees than most PL teams, and that is actually more helpful than straight revenue. For perspective, the 10 yr number for Chelsea was 658m? The next closest was about half that, and United came in at 108.

There were special hardship allowances Chelsea qualified for due to the sanction periods (we haven’t even used those yet really).

And we came out of the sale completely debt free.

There are a lot of other factors, including the fact that a lot of the players listed as “Chelsea bought 17 new players!” Or on the overall spend figure are youth players that don’t count.

Also, the numbers being thrown about, as is often the case with United’s purchases, are the “If all incentives are met” … and not necessarily the real picture.

Hope that helps.
Click to expand...
Thanks that's really helpful.
 
jesperjaap said:
Not at all, no identity whatsoever with the way they have replced managers and players for years. Sure there are a few players I woul dhave liked us to sign btu we have already been doing a much watered down version of what they are doing and it hasnt worked.

I am surprised with some of the players choosing to go there as effectively throwing away the progression of there careers, feel Gusto is the latest one. That is a player I would have like dus to sign and that is a steal of a transfer fee I feel. But as promising as he is, he probably only plays when Reece James is injured if both are playing well....he starts at a lot of the other bi gclubs in Europe if ge performs, bad move for him
Click to expand...
Post sounds like sour grapes tbh. I'm pretty sure you will never pick having players like McTominay, Elanga or Maguire over getting best players in the market like Nkunku, Enzo etc. The identity or whatever bs we spout, at the end of the day they win trophies and we dont.

On top of that they are showing immense ambition in the transfer market when their season is in tatters. They surely must be doing something right in convincing these players with the project they have. They are not a nobody club like Monaco a few years ago when they went splashing cash in the market.

Utd on the other hand are having one of the better seasons, in contention for top4 and a couple trophies. What does our board do? Sit back on their fat arses doing nothing to atleast cement the current position we are in. The squad is threadbare and we already have to rely on trash backup mids when Eriksen is injured. Do you think we wont have furthur injuries? Did you not see how poor we were when Casemiro was suspended?

Its easy to take the moral high ground but the bottom line is, one club is trying its hardest to assemble a capable squad to compete and other is just hoping everything turns out fine until the summer(where we probably wont have a strategy just like last summer).
 
jesperjaap said:
Not at all, no identity whatsoever with the way they have replced managers and players for years. Sure there are a few players I woul dhave liked us to sign btu we have already been doing a much watered down version of what they are doing and it hasnt worked.

I am surprised with some of the players choosing to go there as effectively throwing away the progression of there careers, feel Gusto is the latest one. That is a player I would have like dus to sign and that is a steal of a transfer fee I feel. But as promising as he is, he probably only plays when Reece James is injured if both are playing well....he starts at a lot of the other bi gclubs in Europe if ge performs, bad move for him
Click to expand...
I think we will get the stability from next season onwards. Boehly actually wanted to back the manager who struggled to get fit players to start in games consecutively.

Yes he made the mistake in sacking tuchel but that's not because tuchel ability as coach but couldnt able to align with owner s ideas i assume.

Now he backed the struggled manager with the help of football upper management team that he put in last December. If Potter still struggled to get the tune out of new signings at the end of season then they will decide to take action.
 
Bluelion7 said:
They did not get a grace period of that nature, I assure you. If they did you would have seen MUCH more spending. A complete “grace period” would have allowed them to front load billions. They are not limited by anything other than FFP and would have hit football like a money hammer the way they did baseball.

We haven’t even gone into the Grace leeway percentage we qualified for due to the sanction period being listed as a hardship, and the terms of the sale.

As stated previously, one homegrown sale and we would actually be in profit this window…

FFP completely resets this Summer in terms of “rolling averages” And it doesn’t go immediately to 70% of revenue as widely reported, it goes to 90, then steps down to 70 over a period of three years I believe.

UEFA can challenge on the length of amortization if they want to. But as Simon Jordan pointed out they would probably lose if challenged back. They have no foothold to limit contracts, and thus are not trying to. They are trying to tell teams how much time an asset must depreciate over… which they don’t really have the right to do either.

But, all of that aside… you don’t know anything about Clearlake, or their mission as it relates to their sporting IPs.

To succeed in the same mission in Los Angeles meant losing an average of 500m a year in payroll, and paying more than most teams yearly transfers just in luxury taxes.


Eghbali came out and told you what they would keep spending to achieve.

But if you feel like they’ll just give up, run out of money, or not find creative ways to show revenue … feel free to believe that.
Click to expand...
We will see.

But it'll be a quiet summer for Chelsea for sure for reasons already stated.
 
Champ said:
We will see.

But it'll be a quiet summer for Chelsea for sure for reasons already stated.
Click to expand...

It will be a more quiet summer for sure but most of all that's going to be because the squad rebuild will already be reaching it's final stages.

If we can actually get Enzo right now, and with Nkunku and Gusto already coming in the summer how much do we really need at that point? I'd say any further incomings would depend on what happens with Havertz/Mount/Kovacic/Kante. If we keep most or all of them we're probably not going to see more than 1-2 signings at the very most but if there are some outgoings from that group they'll need to be replaced accordingly.
 
ayushreddevil9 said:
Deep down we all want Utd to do what Chelsea are doing. Anyone saying otherwise is just lying.
Click to expand...
Do you mean spending big? Or spending big like Chelsea does? Because I wouldn't want to follow their footsteps in terms of recruitment policy personally.
 
ayushreddevil9 said:
Deep down we all want Utd to do what Chelsea are doing. Anyone saying otherwise is just lying.
Click to expand...

I actually dont. I do not want our manager to have 30 + players. Generally, teams with a smaller tight knit group tend to do better.
We have a manager that does not rotate much, so why would I want United to go spend money for the sake of it?
 
harms said:
Do you mean spending big? Or spending big like Chelsea does? Because I wouldn't want to follow their footsteps in terms of recruitment policy personally.
Click to expand...
Yes spending in order to improve the squad the way they are doing. I just want us to back the manager until he gets his squad together.
 
romufc said:
I actually dont. I do not want our manager to have 30 + players. Generally, teams with a smaller tight knit group tend to do better.
We have a manager that does not rotate much, so why would I want United to go spend money for the sake of it?
Click to expand...
Maybe add some depth? Maybe not trying to rely on a non existent midfield if Casemiro isn't there?

And this 30+ players thing is overblown. They will probably have a firseale in the summer but if they dont then its definitely a problem.
 
Last edited:
He's a good player but I think people as usual are getting a bit over giddy. He's in vogue from the world cup but is he really £120m good?
 
Adam-Utd said:
He's a good player but I think people as usual are getting a bit over giddy. He's in vogue from the world cup but is he really £120m good?
Click to expand...
Nope but boehly wanted this deal he will pay whatever they wanted. But no player worth more than 50 mn unless its prime Messi or Ronaldo. It's the situation demanded and we are desperate to get players in this window. I still doubt this will go through.
 
ayushreddevil9 said:
Deep down we all want Utd to do what Chelsea are doing. Anyone saying otherwise is just lying.
Click to expand...

Not for me, a big part of football is feeling connected to the team you support.

An endless stream of expensive footballers coming into your club just makes it more and more like a business.

Moneyball FC

But I’m interested to see if Potter can somehow make it all work, but it’s interest not envy.
 
Not for me either. Galactico’s never worked and this is seeming a bit like that.
 
ayushreddevil9 said:
And this 30+ players thing is overblown. They will probably have a firseale in the summer but if they dont then its definitely a problem.
Click to expand...

Yep, definitely overblown. We have lots of players whose contracts are close to running out (1 year left in the summer) as well as a bunch of reasonably young HG players for whom there will be plenty of interest. There are a few problematic individuals who may be difficult to shift but right now I wouldn't consider it a huge problem in the bigger picture.

Of course it's true that selling players can be a bit more difficult than usual if we have already brought in replacements and every club know we want to (or even have to) get rid but even then all that depends on how much interest there is in the player. If there are more than one club bidding, chances are it won't affect the sale process even a little bit. Either way this problem is most of all a financial one, but purely from a footballing perspective it's definitely better to have brought in the replacements early and have them settle in when there's currently less pressure on the team to perform rather than wait till the summer and have them struggle to find their feet at the club early into next season.

Azpilicueta, Koulibaly, Jorginho, Zakaria, Loftus-Cheek, Gallagher, Pulisic, Ziyech, Aubameyang, Havertz

Of these 10 current first team players I'd be very surprised if more than four were still at the club come next season. A few of them will probably be difficult to sell so we'll have to keep some but most will go and most have already been replaced by new signings.
 
Bluelion7 said:
Discounting the obvious advantage of buying quality players BEFORE you desperately need them being a sound strategy…

How is Chelsea super revenue challenged? Statista (which is In line with most other years and sites I’ve found) has United’s revenue at 663 for 2022 and ours at 586. It’s not exactly a monstrous gap.

And that’s if things stay the same. Let’s say Chelsea signs profit sharing deals with Cable stations and streaming platforms that carry multiple sports, teams and other entertainment?

Clearlake specializes in creating alternate and new revenue streams as needed for brand increase. They can actually do what the City people only pretend to do.

Heck, I could create a cool looking mega neon Chelsea blue lion in Roblox adopt me as a “buy only” pet and probably top most shirts sponsor incomes in two months.

Clearlake isn’t the first to say the PL, for all its popularity, is on the dark ages in terms of monetization.

But here’s a key: many of the ways you would increase. That monetization would involve having to create deals with outside entities. But Clearlake doesn’t have to do that, because through other PE firms like Eldridge (Boehly) they own the platforms they would need to make the deals with.

Clearlake is the “Sport investing” group … not the totality of what all the people in Clearlake control. I think this gets confused.
Click to expand...
My comment was based on the continual losses endured and covered by Abramovich. According to the Deloitte Money league Chelseas revenues are £100m a year less than United whilst they make the biggest operating losses in the league by some distance (especially compared to their rivals). Chelsea have the highest amortisation bill of any club as of 21/22 and thats before this current spending spree.

But what you said is absolutely fair. If the new owners have unpublicised plans to find new, previously unexplored revenue sources theres every chance chelsea could turn their finances around.

I guess we’ll gave to watch it unfold. Happy to be wrong, but my opinion is that this ends in tears for Chelsea.
 
Last edited:
The utter panic trying to get this deal done and tie him to a 250 year contract before FIFA's regulations come into force in the summer.

What an utterly rancid club.
 
TheMagicFoolBus said:
Considering Benfica have to pay River, unless that's very heavily front-loaded I doubt that gets accepted.
Click to expand...

I know he's their player and Benfica can demand what they want here but insisting that a team should pay the entire 105m fee or even the majority of it up front seems absurd to me. If every selling club insisted on that no fecker would ever get sold.
 
Honestly, the Benfica chairman will be putting down a deposit on a new superyacht at this rate.

Ridiculous that Chelsea will be spending about £500m across two windows. He's a good player but no one is worth this.
 
WeePat said:
I know he's their player and Benfica can demand what they want here but insisting that a team should pay the entire 105m fee or even the majority of it up front seems absurd to me. If every selling club insisted on that no fecker would ever get sold.
Click to expand...

Yeah it's certainly not typical. Still feel like we brought this on ourselves to some extent by promising all the cash then trying to shoehorn in players instead...
 
TheMagicFoolBus said:
Considering Benfica have to pay River, unless that's very heavily front-loaded I doubt that gets accepted.
Click to expand...

It would probably be quite front-loaded, like for example €70M up front and then €10M every year for the next five years.

I don't see why they couldn't arrange it so River Plate get 25% of each installment instead of Benfica having to pay them off in one go (€30M). I doubt River Plate would think that's a bad deal for them because either way it would still guarantee them a sell-on fee more than double what they initially got for Enzo.
 
TheMagicFoolBus said:
Yeah it's certainly not typical. Still feel like we brought this on ourselves to some extent by promising all the cash then trying to shoehorn in players instead...
Click to expand...

Sounds like their stance has been 'release clause or feck off' from the beginning. Rejecting an offer like the one above because it isn't front loaded with the majority up front would just be wild to me. Totally respect they can do what they like as he's their player but yeah ..
 
redcucumber said:
What on earth has given you the impression that people don't want to add quality players to the squad? You're an odd one.
Click to expand...
Odd ones are those who are going on with all the virtue signaling here. If Utd was doing the same you all would be posting "cocks out" and flight trackers.

Anyways I don't want to derail the thread anymore as most of you didn't really get the point from the start.
 
ayushreddevil9 said:
Odd ones are those who are going on with all the virtue signaling here. If Utd was doing the same you all would be posting "cocks out" and flight trackers.

Anyways I don't want to derail the thread anymore as most of you didn't really get the point from the start.
Click to expand...
Why are you finding it impossible to grasp the fact that some people have different preferences with regards to the sort of squad building they want to see? It's really not that incomprehensible, and yet here you are.
 
ayushreddevil9 said:
Odd ones are those who are going on with all the virtue signaling here. If Utd was doing the same you all would be posting "cocks out" and flight trackers.

Anyways I don't want to derail the thread anymore as most of you didn't really get the point from the start.
Click to expand...

We’ve been stupid but we aren’t that stupid. What fan would celebrate us turning down. A player for £20m in the summer to try and buy him 6 months later into this brand new club for over £100m. The owner is lucky he owns Chelsea. If he did this at United it would be called out for the incompetence it is by the whole media world. We wouldn’t hear the last of it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.