Jump to content

nufcnick

Member
  • Posts

    1,606
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by nufcnick

  1. 7 minutes ago, timeEd32 said:

     

    He's not, that's why it's a loan to buy. Though it's actually fair to question whether it helps them in June since in theory that should be a July 1 purchase. 

    They wrote it against this years books, go back and have a look and they will lose massively on Lukaku

  2. 33 minutes ago, timeEd32 said:

     

    Hall, Maatsen and Lukaku's release clause could get them there. Then there's James, Chalobah, and Broja. There's definitely a possibility they can do this while holding Gallagher.

    Hall was against last years P&S for Chelsea

  3. 4 hours ago, madras said:

    They have plenty of players to sell off who others will willingly take off their hands. They'll be able to comply due to a firesale but could well leave them weaker on the pitch.

     

     

     

    Don’t count on that, most of the players they can sell would be sold at a loss so would have an even greater impact to FFP and P&S rules, if it’s true that they have to raise over £100m to comply with P&S they don’t have that many homegrown players left to make that sum, apparently spurs pulled out of the £60m Connor Gallagher deal in January because they think they will get him for under £50m in June when Chelsea are desperate, that only leaves sicknote Reese James with any true value. 

  4. 3 minutes ago, Displayname said:

    Played far to much imo. Not going to say its because of that, but it wouldnt surprise me.

    This, wasn’t miggy sent home from international’s last year because of muscle fatigue, it wouldn’t surprise me if it comes out later this week that he’s out for the season. 

  5. 7 minutes ago, dcmk said:

    We have lost 4 games this calendar year.

     

    Liverpool.

    Man City

    Arsenal

    And today away to Chelsea.

     

    It's hardly relegation form, man.

     

     

    We won 1 game at home in 2 days short of 3 months 

  6. Think it might be time to look elsewhere in the summer, the guy just doesn’t seem to learn, going from an excellent performance against wolves and using the break away well , to going back to, being as open as Katie Price’s legs on a Friday night, Chelsea have struggled all season against teams that play like we did against wolves, yet we open up and have our belly’s tickled. 

  7. 1 minute ago, Dokko said:

    So £300m turnover allows us to spend £5m a week on wages and transfer fees, every season, without any further deals and before player trading. 

     

    How's that not a positive? Say half goes on wages and the other on transfers is £127m a year on fees (Inc agents) and an avg £100kpw on a 25man squad. 

    Good luck keeping your best players and being competitive only paying an average of £100k a week on players 

  8. 4 minutes ago, Stifler said:

    With our current wage budget, and our current income, over a 3 year period we can spend £384,612,000 on players.

    That would obviously be amortised, but would then mean it would accounted for in our revenue to spend ratio.

     

    What I don’t get is that if you are only allowed to spend 70% up to 85% on your transfers and wages, assuming your none playing costs are below the 15%-30% ratio, overall you’ll end up with a massive surplus of cash that you could never spend.

    It will be on a season by season basis, a team wouldn’t be able to carry over what it didn’t spend the season before 

  9. 6 minutes ago, Keegans Export said:

    I'd read somewhere that it was going to be 70% for clubs in CL and 85% for the rest

    That won’t work and no one would ever want to qualify for Europe or challenge for a cup(unless you were given a 3 year grace period), as you would instantly need to cut your bills from 85% to 70%, whilst needing a bigger squad to play in Europe, ie a £300m turnover allows a spend of £255m which overnight would become an allowable spend of £210m, £45m would be a catastrophic cut to any teams spending. 

  10. This is why I'm certain we will move stadiums, we generate about £25-30m per season in fan attendances but less than a 1/4 of that is from our 57 corporate Boxes, a new stadium would give us not only at least 3x the corporate boxes but also the extra fan revenue, you could more than double what we make to £70m+

  11. 2 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

    I think they have similar rules in Spain already.

     

    It pretty much guarantees that Real Madrid will win the league more often than not. They have by far the biggest wage cap. They are #1 by a distance.

     

    It's shit and reinforces dominant club positions.

    This ^^^ any new rules are always going to be more beneficial to the status quo, it will be interesting to see if they align with UEFA’s punishments for breaching the rules as most are financial based. 

  12. 3 minutes ago, The Prophet said:

     

    UEFA aren’t starting at 70% so I wouldn’t expect the PL to, I’m guessing they will both start at 90% meaning our cap would be £270m this year 

  13. 2 minutes ago, SUPERTOON said:

    Watch us be the 1 😂

    Not a chance, currently more likely to be Chelsea, as it fucks them with their stupid contracts and they will be well over 80% wages and transfers to turnover 

×
×
  • Create New...