Seems odd to do it on such a modest feebonkers.
The thing is that if wages continue to rise so that in 4 years (of a 7 year contract) Fofana seems underpaid at 200k per week, the player isn't going to just meekly accept that- he's going to demand an increase. It's a nice idea in theory but once again Toddy should really have wondered why no other clubs have thought to do this before.Chelsea have been trading off higher wages for longer contracts, its clearly a Boehly strategy. They gave Fofana a long contract on 200k per week, which is a huge number for a defender. James also recently signed a long deal for very big money for a defensive player.
Pros and cons to this strategy. You gain a lot more control of the player and if wages continue to rise steeply these numbers may not look so high in 3-4 years. On the other hand, if the player doesn't work out it becomes very hard to get rid as nobody wants to pay the wages and there is really no guarantee that we will continue to see wages continue to rise on the same trajectory, especially given slowdowns in the growth of TV revenue even in the PL.
He's made of MDF, seems to constantly get injured.What? Didn’t they just bought Fofana and the former Napoli lad from Senegal in this summer window? Are Chelsea stockpiling players so that no else could buy them
Good point. If Fofana plays well, he'll get another contract after year 3 or something. If he doesn't work out due to poor play or constant injuries, he'll keep making 200k per week and it will be tricky to shift him.The thing is that if wages continue to rise so that in 4 years (of a 7 year contract) Fofana seems underpaid at 200k per week, the player isn't going to just meekly accept that- he's going to demand an increase. It's a nice idea in theory but once again Toddy should really have wondered why no other clubs have thought to do this before.
They still gave 300k per week to Koulibaly and over 300k pw to Sterling. Imagine Aubamayang is on the same.Chelsea have been trading off higher wages for longer contracts, its clearly a Boehly strategy. They gave Fofana a long contract on 200k per week, which is a huge number for a defender. James also recently signed a long deal for very big money for a defensive player.
Pros and cons to this strategy. You gain a lot more control of the player and if wages continue to rise steeply these numbers may not look so high in 3-4 years. On the other hand, if the player doesn't work out it becomes very hard to get rid as nobody wants to pay the wages and there is really no guarantee that we will continue to see wages continue to rise on the same trajectory, especially given slowdowns in the growth of TV revenue even in the PL.
because they're spreading the money across 7.5 years.How does their spending not break FFP? Serious question. They don't generate this much revenue and i don't recall them selling any players for good money?
Yeah they did but they lost Rüdiger and Christensen. Silva is old and Azpi is over the hill.What? Didn’t they just bought Fofana and the former Napoli lad from Senegal in this summer window? Are Chelsea stockpiling players so that no else could buy them
It already is the norm... for Chelsea. It gets them around the immediate problem of FFP, but potentially creates a lot of difficulty further down the road.I had to do a double take when I saw the 7.5 year contract! I've never heard of one that long before, surely that's not going to become the norm is it?
everyone is moaning at bohely but he’s at least structured benoit’s wages so that they’re heavily incentivised and the only way he gets the full 450k per week is if he doesn’t concede any home runs.