Signed a new deal until 2033. Boehly was getting concerned that Jackson could run down his contract with only 7 years left so he sensibly gave him the extension.
Nicholas Jackson
- Thread starter Amadaeus
- Start date
Just incase he explodes onto the scenes … in 6 years time.
These aren't even amortisation loopholes anymore are they? Genuinely, what is the logic?
“We weren’t trying to replace you in the last days of the transfer window, honest”.
That’s hilariously insane. Honestly, I picture some kind of Fear and Loathing style drug orgy in that Chelsea boardroom
"Should we give him a contract until 2034?"
"Nah that's too long"
"What about 2032?"
"Are you crazy? He could sign a pre-contract with Real Madrid in just 7 1/2 years!"
"2033?"
"Perfect. Let's do some coke."
"Nah that's too long"
"What about 2032?"
"Are you crazy? He could sign a pre-contract with Real Madrid in just 7 1/2 years!"
"2033?"
"Perfect. Let's do some coke."
In 2024 alone he scored 16 goals for us. That's really high standard for us in any measure in recent times. He is getting rewarded for his output. Well done jackson.
what are they doing?? Who's out there desperately trying to take Nicholas Jackson off your hands that you're locking him in for a decade?? I'm so fecking perplexed by this regime.This is a very very weird story today. I can't get my head around it at all. Their owner is completely nuts, or utterly stupid.
I'm sorry Nick Jackson
I am for real
Your wages are more amorticised
And your club has signed a trillion guys
I am for real
Your wages are more amorticised
And your club has signed a trillion guys
There actually are.
For instance Kepa had a year left in his initial 7 year deal. We don’t now if any of his residue un amortised sum was impaired but irrespective under the new rules we were able to extend his contract and extend the period over which any sum left to be amortised by up to another 5 year’s In this instance let’s say there was still £10 million left on the books his year extension reduced that sum by £5 million in 24/25 but left £5 million to deal written off in 25/26
Ironically I can’t read the rules any other way in both the case of Jackson and Palmer to have their annual sums to be adjusted back to 5 years
Both Jackson and Palmer clearly triggered clauses in their contracts and yes their annual combined amortisation numbers will have increased by roughly £3.54m but the fact in Kepas there is a decrease certainly is a factor
Last edited:
Started the season as he ended last season, 2 goals in 3 games. Looking good, as expected.
Not his best game yesterday. Excluding the missed chance late on, he didn’t really have the same influence on the ball as he can. Palace just did pretty well to stifle any sort of build up we tried.
On his new contract, why can’t we just give a wage increase without extending the length??
On his new contract, why can’t we just give a wage increase without extending the length??
Can't say I would have extended his contract length if it were up to me because the deal he signed last year still had PLENTY enough time left, but I definitely think he's done enough to warrant a slight pay raise. He initially signed for £65K/wk and had a good season, scoring 14 goals in the league and 17 overall. Surely that deserves a bump to say £90-100K a week?
I've said it on here multiple times but Jackson is seriously underrated on this forum and in general. Every once in a while he comes up with a memeworthy miss that gets ridiculed to no end, but overall he's still scoring a very decent amount of goals and his all-round play and chemistry with his team mates is quite good.
I honestly think he just needs a slight improvement on his finishing and offside awareness to become a top class striker. Of course there are zero guarantees he has what it takes to develop those parts in his game but even if he doesn't he'll still be a good player, just not an elite one.
I've said it on here multiple times but Jackson is seriously underrated on this forum and in general. Every once in a while he comes up with a memeworthy miss that gets ridiculed to no end, but overall he's still scoring a very decent amount of goals and his all-round play and chemistry with his team mates is quite good.
I honestly think he just needs a slight improvement on his finishing and offside awareness to become a top class striker. Of course there are zero guarantees he has what it takes to develop those parts in his game but even if he doesn't he'll still be a good player, just not an elite one.
The only reason I can think that a new contract was awarded must be linked to KPIs ( such as starts, goals etc) in the original agreement which let’s face it would most likely have been met
I suspect it’s more complicated because in your scenario there wouldn’t have been an extension which as daft as it might seem would mean the new contract ( which is what it would be) would see the amortisation period reduced to 4 more years
About a 20% chance of that, you can teach skills and practice a lot but if your brain thinks to slowly you can't really speed it up.. (maybe Jamie Vardy red bull trick might inject some spark)
But we created so many chances for him.. He missed 70% of them. A half decent striker and we would have been in the champions league. He has scored some goals but generally been a let down and I don't see him getting any better. One on ones he is awful!
Haaland and Lewandowski missed 65% of their 'big chances' as well, are they not half decent strikers because they also miss tons of easy chances? And no I am not saying Jackson is anywhere as good as those two but just pointing out even the absolute best of the best don't convert all their easy chances, far from it in fact.
Would also point out the chances don't create themselves. Jackson is not a poacher who stands around like a lamp post inside the box waiting for his team mates to make something happen for him, he plays a big part in the build up to get himself into those goalscoring positions to begin with. Replace Jackson with a better finisher who's not as good as Jackson at everything else and the team might end up creating way less chances overall, and thus score less goals even if the striker himself was more clinical.
In an ideal world we'd have a player with Jackson's overall qualities who's also much better at finishing but there are not many of those around the market...
I say this often, but it is the single biggest reason I'm in no rush to replace him with a 'better finisher' unless that other striker can demonstrate he can form part of the fluid chance creating process that Jackson has been/currently is. People shit on Jackson way too much for a player that provides a lot of quality in many facets of the game - Sterling's goal at the Etihad is a great example of Jackson's overall play and creativity being brilliant.
Obviously he needs to improve his finishing. That goes without saying. The hope is that over time he manages to keep finetuning his skillset, the things he's already good at, whilst developing in other areas. This is only his 3rd professional season, so naturally he still has a lot of developing to do.
He’s better than any of our forwards, and that’s a pretty sad indictment as Jackson’s a good player but not exactly Drogba or Hazard for Chelsea.
Yes, being a player with good movement or intangible but canny intuition to recognise where the ball will fall to have chances in the first place is a big part of being a forward. So is the abilty to quickly shift a ball to get a shot off, dribble to create your own chance, being blessed with pace or strength etc. These things add up to more shots over players who don't have them. It can better to be a worse finisher but with more of all that if the end result is more goals for you or your team.
Even hitting the 'keeper with a shot that someone else might have not have ended up taking can result in a goal too if your teammate knocks in the rebound. Or maybe the goalie saves your shot but you end up with a corner that results in a goal instead.
Think the jury is still out with Jackson as to exactly where he fits in all of that but it's not always so bad even if he is that guy. The offside goal he scored against City the other week was kind of the opposite, a lack of awareness or intuition.
We'll see out it all shakes out in the end.
Even the fact that he's a poor finisher isn't so established. Not many players consistently perform greatly under or over their xG stats during their career. Son from Spurs is crazily ahead, Nunez has shown to be a long way behind over 2 and a bit seasons so far with Liverpool. Jackson was ahead of his xG in his Villarreal days, he was finishing things off fine then behind a fair bit last season. Could well change back again this season for him.
What we can take from last season is that he was getting on the end of things a lot. He had one of the highest xG per 90 stats in the Premier League, and a lot of the players who did similar also underperformed with their finishing. Could have just been one of those years for him. Haaland, Salah and Calvert-Lewin were wasteful too. Nunez more established in that regard as it's 2 seasons in a row now and he was much worse than anyone else in that aspect last season.
Last edited:
So with Haaland or Lewandowski instead of Jackson we still wouldn't have won..
I beg to differ. :0)
I beg to differ. :0)
It's quite difficult to try argue with people who can't comprehend what they're reading. So I give up.
Another ludicrusly long contract
Yes, it's a long contract. His original one was until 2031, so it's not like there was a need to extend.
I read in the Athletic that the Palmer extension was built into his original contract, if he hit certain targets he'd get bump in wages and an extension or something along those lines.
One of the journalists in this video outright says the Palmer extension was an obligation written into his contract. My guess is Jackson is the same.
I'm sorry.
Nic Jackson?
Nic Jackson?
If players with long term contracts underperform and aren’t really “assets”, then won’t they create a problem in future if Clearlake want to sell their stake?
Having underperforming players on long contracts are a problem in a few different ways, of course.
Imagine if Martial or VDB had another 5 years on their contracts.
Statistically speaking, it's unlikely that all those players on long contracts will do well. The football history is full of world class players losing their way that I wouldn't even give that kind of contract to Haaland.
Statistically speaking, it's unlikely that all those players on long contracts will do well. The football history is full of world class players losing their way that I wouldn't even give that kind of contract to Haaland.