What's an extra 350m anyway. That'll get you a Sacho, Pogba, Antony and Maguire anyway so it's hardly something to go bonkers about.We've only ever spent more than €200.0m twice and never exceeded €250.0m.
You are not making a well reasoned argument in the slightest.
Enzo Fernández | signs for Chelsea
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
- Status
Sancho and Antony*
Sterling 325k.And you have 18 year old Carney Chukwuemeka on 100k per week.
Some weird wages you got going on
Doesn't have to, but they will budge a bit for sure. You can't have multiple players in the team unhappy over wages.
We could go tit for tat on bad signings.
You've bought a load of shit yourselves in the last 5 years.
Or it could get you 5 Casemiros.
Are you new to football ? Players have all the power. In 2 years time if Mudryk is getting 200k from Barcelona do you think he will just sit quietly and take 100k because he signed a contract ?
Or a fancy Rolex.
Crazy summer and winter windows from Chelsea. That won’t be the end of it, fully expect them to go for caicedo and maybe even Osimhen in the summer.
Insert Nigel Farage “who’s laughing now” meme with Boehlys face transposed.
Insert Nigel Farage “who’s laughing now” meme with Boehlys face transposed.
I think the Chukwumeka one is interesting given the age and experience.
We have Garnacho who is 18 and are currently looking to bump his current deal up to a fraction of that.
Chelsea have the second highest wage bill in the league from memory so the suggestion they pay significantly less wages than others is simply false.
At first I thought “good for them” but it must actually piss their fans off. A revolving door of world class talent without ever winning a CL (in 99.99% of their living memories). What’s the point in making 120 mil on transfers this season if they don’t have anything to show for it?
Theyre top level footballers, not IKEA employees. All they need to do in order to get a raise when they do well is sending politically correct 'i dont feel appreciated' messages on twitter, go on a strike of 'not ready to play' and the club will start shitting itself. Most of the time it ends up in the player's favour.
How attached can you be to a player who played 17 games for your club (or whatever it was)
It’s like us losing Malacia for a huge amount of money. Oh well
You are talking about total amount spent, I’m talking amount per player which is the better metric because it normalises the amount (by taking quantity of players into account).
You are not making a well reasoned argument in the slightest.
They replaced their entire defence and attack and signed a great midfielder. They spent amounts you would expect for the players. If the players work out then they wont have to spend big for 3-4 seasons which will average out this huge initial investment.
Erm no they didn’t
Wow. Incredible signings from Chelsea. Cant say I'm not jealous. And I thought Abramovic leaving would be the end of them.
Good point, I’m sure they don’t get as attached to their players like we do.
Still, the fans don’t get that money. It’d be like us getting 200 mil for Martinez off Madrid this window and then doing nothing with it.
How is this normalised? They didn’t start with the squad at 0!
I don’t even on know what this is. 700m? I’d like to think they bought a whole new team
The likes of CHO earns £120k per and RLC earns £150k, the notion that they don't pay nearly as much in wages as United is hogwash.
They're right up there with City in terms of wage bills
You can't say what they're doing is normal when they're spending 600m in one season and buying in 18 players. I honestly can't take your argument seriously. There's nothing normal about it. As pointed out numerous times. I think you're just entrenched in your opinion for whatever reason and obviously they will continue to spend big, thinking otherwise is just naïve.
Like we did with Ronaldo to Madrid in 2009
They distorted the market in 2003 when Roman came and they’re doing it again, Chelsea seem to have gone under the radar in the City years but frankly owners aside they have been worse. 600m in 6 months is crazy crazy stuff.
They were always heavily heavily incentivised to spend the money now because the rules on amortisation dont change until the summer. So this will be the last 8 year contract they dish out. But now they pay effectively £13m a year for Enzo instead of £21m a year had they signed him in the summer.
This kind of spending is the new norm. Really underlines the need to get our sale done as soon as possible because we need to hit the ground running with big funds available in the summer or risk being left behind.
We should be all over Caicedo specifically as he, Fernandez and Bellingham are the biggest mid talents in the world and one of them has gone already.
We should be all over Caicedo specifically as he, Fernandez and Bellingham are the biggest mid talents in the world and one of them has gone already.
I don't get where all this loophole talk is coming from too. If it's a loophole then I'm a banana. Loopholes are supposed to be ingenious ways of circumventing the rules. FFP follows general accounting principles and the transfer free is amortised over the length of the contract. Everyone knows this and crucially everyone also knows that signing players to 7+ year deals is risky as feck which is why no other teams are doing it.
Don’t forget what they paid for Chilwell, Kepa, Havertz. Will surely be the most expensively assembled first XI in history.
We did it with lukaku and routinely have done for years.
Last edited:
What this also does is that just like for United now everytime they will sign someone the selling club would know that Chelsea will pay the price and so that would increase future spends.
Wrong message
Must have forgotten he was given an 8 year contract my bad.
How much money was part of takeover, a billion? So 400 million left to spend. Honestly did not expect them to spend so much so soon. It’s super risky.
Surely after this money is gone they will be run similarly to us and Liverpool. The investment partners will want to make profits. It’s not going to be like the Abramovich years at all.
They really were well protected by the government with the takeover. Shame they didn’t offer us the same protection in 2005
Surely after this money is gone they will be run similarly to us and Liverpool. The investment partners will want to make profits. It’s not going to be like the Abramovich years at all.
They really were well protected by the government with the takeover. Shame they didn’t offer us the same protection in 2005
So well protected that I was banned from buying a chicken balti pie at half time.
Yah I’m not sure what people are on about tonight trying to normalise this nonsense
I didn’t say it was normal. Nobody buys 18 players every transfer window. This is a rebuild. They wanted to replace players after a new owner came in and they did that. Forest bought 22+ players and it’s not normal for them either. Once they build the squad they will revert back to spending ‘normally’.
The first £1.5 billion squad. Wow.
Because they had a genuine outside chance of pulling a Porto 2004 in the UCL if they kept him. Still could but it will be a lot lot harder now
The amortisation is very much normal. Spending £600m in a year is certainly not.
see this article from 10 years ago.
https://weaintgotnohistory.sbnation...lsea-fc-ffp-and-amortization-of-transfer-fees
- Status