Mykhailo Mudryk / signs 8.5yr deal at Chelsea
- Thread starter cesc's_mullet
- Start date
- Status
Why are his wages not added to the 100m fee and reported exorbitant by the media?
The biggest problem is that you spend your money like headless chicken, on average players in positions you don’t really need.
For once, almost all our signings have been success, (appart from Antony for now) and we are on the up.
On the break, absolutely.
Against a team parking the bus, he'll have to learn. He's not special laterally or with his delivery, but he just turned 22, so has time to improve the latter.
It would be loans with obligations to take for free !
There is enough laughing material without it, they didn't bother
I truly believe Boehly is a very smart guy to have made it to where he is. I also think for a really smart guy, he's acting like he's quite the knob. We've seen this before with Woodward - it's not new to us. Musk with Twitter is another example.
It’s cheating the system. Amazed it’s allowed - in fact I didn’t think it was.
How is it cheating the system?
You’re giving 8 year deals to get around FFP.
It's to comply with FFP, not to get around it.
Right. And I’m fairly sure when it was designed they weren’t envisioning a club being crazy enough to give out 8 year deals.
8 year deals? What? Why not say we're giving out 10 year deals if you're going to be dishonest about the facts to make your point seem more valid.
The whole reason for the long contracts is to meet the FFP requirements.
Cheating the system would be dodgy sponsorship deals or undocumented payments to players.
Not really familiar with his game
You seem to know a lot about cheating which makes sense for a Chelsea fan.
I know a lot about everything sunshine.
Oh I’m very sorry. Not 8 years - it’s 7.5 year deals. How silly of me to be so dishonest.
All this being said, this player might be absolute shite. Looks good on Youtube.
Is he better than Antony?
Isn't the point of it long term sustainability? So for 8 years they will have the player under contract and can afford the fee - as it's not just paid up front and gambling they make it back in a big jump in revenue?
This is just an argument about breaking the rules vs the spirit of the rules. Its a tax argument.
If clubs start doing this more then they will just have to make some rules about how many years a transfer can be amortised over.
What I'm more amazed by is that players are accepting 8 year deals unless there are a slew of get out clauses inserted. Imagine you buy the next Messi and have him on an 8 year contract at 100k/week. You could keep him on that salary for the entire 8 years. (obviously until he downs tools after 2 and starts playing like Bebe)
The thing with the 8 year deals is that the club is only prolonging the agony of ffp compliance by 3-4 years and banking on the fact that:
1) their spending in the future will reduce
2) their revenues in the future will increase at a rapid pace
This is fine if the strategy is to spend a couple of seasons transfer budget in the current season and go dry after that. Given Chelsea's squad, that doesn't look like its happening. They need at least 4-5 more players to get them ticking. Their players are worth bonkers in the transfer market (half the purchase value at most) plus Lukaku will also be back next year to add to their misery.On the other hand, revenues will drop without Europe/champions league as well. Their best bet at Europe right now is going gung-ho on the champions league but that's like trying to mortgaging your house to buy a lottery ticket.
Also, imagine giving 8 year deals to Lukaku or another Bogarde.
The amortisation has nothing to do with the payment structure though? It might be an 8 year deal (7.5…) on the FFP books but they could still be paying over 3 years. And what they’re doing certainly isn’t sustainable - it’s all on the credit card - they’re approaching their entire yearly revenue committed in the last 5 months on transfer fees alone. It’s batshit bonkers. It’s a huge gamble - but they know in 2 years time when the 70% revenue FFP comes in they won’t be able to compete with their revenues against the big boys so they’re trying to spend as much as possible now on as many of the wonderkids FM23 youth scout has identified. The big problem they have is this will hugely scupper their spending in the future - especially if they don’t even get into Europe this year - and you’re going to be stuck with the FM23 wonderkids in FM27 with feck all to spend. How many reach their potential? Let alone all fit together into the profile of a team. You can’t even rely on one of them being sold on for huge profits because they’re spending so much on them. Spending all your money for the next five years in one year is moronic because you only have data points as of year one - and we know in football data changes constantly and today’s hot prospect is useless tomorrow.
The flip side is that if they are rubbish, you are stuck with a rubbish player for 8 years on a stupidly high salary, and no one will buy them because of the salary, and you will either keep them like Maguire, AWB, etc. or try to force them to take a pay cut like Barca did with Pique, or try to force them out like Messi and FDJ.
I would like to see FFP scrapped in its current format, and just put a squad salary cap in place, so Chelsea can't have 20 international strikers on their books, and City can't do sponsorship deals with their owner's businesses.
For all the criticisms here, United are reasonably well run in this perspective. For other clubs, this will come home to roost...
He's not as good at keeping the ball, but he's faster in a straight line and will take on his man more. But he'll probably have games where his dribbling isn't quite good enough.
I'd probably sign Antony because it's so hard to find good right-sided wingers, though Mudryk has the stronger upper body, so is the better prospect overall. That strength that Rashford now has and Bale had is really huge for wingers making an impact getting into the box.
I've only seen Mudryk like 5 or 6 times, so don't take this as gospel. If he was left-footed, I think he'd be worth the fee. Probably isn't at RW, though.
Wonder if Sterling will move at some point. I could see him going to Italy.
£100 million for someone from Ukraine? He must be at least the next Shevchenko (the good version).
I believe the contract length determines the amortisation which has to to stay within certain parameters over a rolling three year period. So, for example
4 year contract = €25m per year
8 year contract = €12.5m per year
If you multiply that difference across the huge numbers of players they’re buying on long contracts, you can see how they’re managing comply with FFP.
Whether or not that’s a good idea is very much up for debate.
To be fair that’s where Man City shine not Chelsea.
I don't know but I have a feeling Chelsea won't be selling their deadwood for huge money now that Abramovic is gone. But we'll see. Maybe they are that good at it.
What will even be their forward line?
Mudryk - Nkunku - Sterling?
Mudryk - Nkunku - Sterling?
I'm not sure I'd call it cheating because it's not a very smart thing to do. If they sign these players on big contracts and they flop, they're stuck with these players.
Koulibaly's a good example - if they decided to get rid this summer there's 3 more years on his contract. They'll have trouble offloading these players without heavily subsidising the deal.
Literally just depends on whether the player pans out or not. Chelsea have a bucketload of expensive attackers that underwhelmed or completely flopped so I totally get the scepticism in this thread.
I don’t even think Potter knows at this point
While I agree with you, you also seem to completely disregard the fact that they'll surely sell a bunch of players and generate some decent return to balance the books to an extent.
It's also not about selling for profit. It's about selling to offset purchases.
Yep, if he becomes a world beater then the fee won’t matter. My only worry back when I thought he was Arsenal bound (so… 24 hours ago) is that he’s not that young. He’s slightly older than both Saka and Martinelli and I’m not sure he displaces either of them from the our starting lineup right now. When paying €100m for potential, I’d prefer a wonderkid like Neymar. At 22, he’s 6 years older and 50% more expensive than Endrick… but pretty much just as unproven.
I’m also interested to see how it plays into negotiations with players in the future. You nabbed the highly rated Omari Hutchinson off us at the start of last Summer. He’s had a couple of sub appearances with you, which is an opportunity we never gave him. But ionder if he wold have joined if he knew how many attackers you were going to stockpile. Will future prospects like him think twice before signing for Chelsea?
Anyway, I’ve got to say, you’re signing a ton of talented young players. If they start to gel it will become a formidable team.
It pretty difficult to sell out of form players on long term contracts with high wages. Take Sterling as an example. Which club is going to pay Chelsea a substantial transfer fee for a 28 year old on over £300k per week?
- Status