Jump to content

More transfer rumours


midds

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, The Prophet said:


Always good to get a lad from Itaquaquecetuba in. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Keegans Export said:

I think he means why did Chelsea have to offer him that much when they signed him from Leipzig 

At first I thought if you sign a striker for 50m, you going to have to give him 200k+ per week. 
 

But I doubt Nunes earns that. 
 

Chelsea’s wage structure is a lot higher than most. CHO is on 120k I believe. Kante 325k. So Werner being somewhere in the middle makes sense. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaries in football are so dysfunctional. Take players like Pulisic or Werner, really they should be taking a step down to get their career going again, but their wages mean that only the super rich can afford them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s sort of a tactic to make it hard to compete though isn’t it? Pulisic/Werner/Martial etc could all relaunch their career at someone like us, Villa etc but the wages just make it very dangerous. It’s the whole reason Everton have burnt through money to look worse than before.

Link to post
Share on other sites

At what point — if at all — does that FFP kick in and it bites Chelsea / Man United in the ass? How can they afford to pay 200- 300 K a week to bit players? They’ve got the five subs now, which I suppose helps.

 

Answering my own question: they’ve create the rules (ffp, 5 subs) to consolidate their position. If the league starts to inconvenience them in the least, they’ll blow the whole thing up and f*ck off to the esl. Barcelona has already committed themselves. 15% of their future La Liga television rights is 15% of nothing. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, gazza ladra said:

At what point — if at all — does that FFP kick in and it bites Chelsea / Man United in the ass? How can they afford to pay 200- 300 K a week to bit players? They’ve got the five subs now, which I suppose helps.

 

Answering my own question: they’ve create the rules (ffp, 5 subs) to consolidate their position. If the league starts to inconvenience them in the least, they’ll blow the whole thing up and f*ck off to the esl. Barcelona has already committed themselves. 15% of their future La Liga television rights is 15% of nothing. 

 

25% :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, gazza ladra said:

At what point — if at all — does that FFP kick in and it bites Chelsea / Man United in the ass? How can they afford to pay 200- 300 K a week to bit players? They’ve got the five subs now, which I suppose helps.

 

Answering my own question: they’ve create the rules (ffp, 5 subs) to consolidate their position. If the league starts to inconvenience them in the least, they’ll blow the whole thing up and f*ck off to the esl. Barcelona has already committed themselves. 15% of their future La Liga television rights is 15% of nothing. 


Im suprised that you think this will have come as a shock to the hedge fund that provided them the funds. I’d imagine that there are break clauses and all sorts written into the deal. In fact it probably, if anything, has done more to kill off their ESL dreams. If they suddenly crash out of La Liga I’d imagine that they’d owe a significant amount of money to the hedge fund that’s given em the dosh for the rights.

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, gazza ladra said:

At what point — if at all — does that FFP kick in and it bites Chelsea / Man United in the ass? How can they afford to pay 200- 300 K a week to bit players? They’ve got the five subs now, which I suppose helps.

 

Answering my own question: they’ve create the rules (ffp, 5 subs) to consolidate their position. If the league starts to inconvenience them in the least, they’ll blow the whole thing up and f*ck off to the esl. Barcelona has already committed themselves. 15% of their future La Liga television rights is 15% of nothing. 


 

In the case of Manchester United they have huge revenues. The Glaziers have taken around a billion during their time there.

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Rafalove said:


 

In the case of Manchester United they have huge revenues. The Glaziers have taken around a billion during their time there.

 

Whilst not quite at Man Utd level, Chelsea also have massive commercial revenue. That's something we will slowly start to build to, but it will take time. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, sushimonster85 said:

 

Whilst not quite at Man Utd level, Chelsea also have massive commercial revenue. That's something we will slowly start to build to, but it will take time. 

 

Yeah Chelsea aren't actually that far behind Man U, £530m vs £650m turnover in the last season pre covid, whereas we're starting miles behind at about £150m.

Link to post
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Kimbo said:

Salaries in football are so dysfunctional. Take players like Pulisic or Werner, really they should be taking a step down to get their career going again, but their wages mean that only the super rich can afford them.

 

It's not just Chelsea though, it's even clubs like us. We were run by the tightest owner in the history of football, but he still ended up paying PL wages to Championship players like Ritchie, Gayle, Clark etc, now we have to subsidise their wages to get shot of them, because genuine championship clubs can't afford them.

 

It does make our more cautious approach more understandable seeing as we aren't going to be allowed to spend our way to the top because we aren't Chelsea.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, leffe186 said:

Rumour is that Spurs are after Zaniolo, and if that doesn’t work out then they’ll be in the race for Paqueta.

I couldn't understand Roma wanting rid of him but if they've got Dybala for nowt, manage to get Wijnaldum for cheap and manage to sell Zaniolo for big money I reckon they'd consider that good business.

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Papavasiliou said:

I couldn't understand Roma wanting rid of him but if they've got Dybala for nowt, manage to get Wijnaldum for cheap and manage to sell Zaniolo for big money I reckon they'd consider that good business.

Two cruciate ligament ruptures have fucked Zaniolo’s career (compared to what it should be like!)- can’t see him moving for big money tbh. 

 

 

Edited by Manxst

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Manxst said:

Two cruciate ligament ruptures have fucked Zaniolo’s career (compared to what it should be like!)- can’t see him moving for big money tbh. 

 

 

 

I wouldn't say that. He's come back looking like a completely different player.

 

He's bulked up massively, adapted his game and been playing really well the past season. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Papavasiliou said:

I wouldn't say that. He's come back looking like a completely different player.

 

He's bulked up massively, adapted his game and been playing really well the past season. 

Has he? Haven’t seen him personally so I’ll take your word. Just knew the injuries crippled him for a while and he’s lacking any form of pace as a result

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Manxst said:

Has he? Haven’t seen him personally so I’ll take your word. Just knew the injuries crippled him for a while and he’s lacking any form of pace as a result

Mebbies "Massively bulked up" was a bit of an exaggeration but he looks a lot less flimsy now and doesn't go flying when defenders look at him.

 

Got enough movement and awareness to negate the lost pace too. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good article in i newspaper today—unnamed ITK—describing strategy and why differ from golf investment and from Man City/Chelksi strategies. Nothing that we haven’t discussed/speculated on here: basically constraints of FFP and slow build approach. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...