Chelsea 2022/2023 | THIS IS LAST YEARS THREAD YOU NUMPTIES

Status
Not open for further replies.

Rajiztar

Full Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2019
Messages
2,102
Supports
Chelsea
Aside from the fact that this is a pretty inane thing to say in any context, I'd encourage you to remember that we are guests on this forum. It really doesn't contribute to the discussion at all.
Okay sorry for that. Was annoyed by constant negative talks but understood i am guest here. Hands up and made mistake. Unconditional apology to everyone who offended by my post.
 

Zaphod2319

Full Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2020
Messages
4,207
Supports
Chelsea
It is also not believe that players accept super long contracts on low wages. There is no point in doing that.
It has been reported that all of the contracts in this window were low base salaries with performance bonuses built in. They structured them very much like they do baseball contracts. As all the people bought are young, it is still significantly more than they were getting with their selling clubs.
 

TheMagicFoolBus

Full Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2016
Messages
6,502
Location
Lisboa, Portugal
Supports
Chelsea
Okay sorry for that. Was annoyed by constant negative talks but understood i am guest here. Hands up and made mistake. Unconditional apology to everyone who offended by my post.
All good mate - I've doubled down and behaved badly on much worse takes on here! Always worth keeping in mind though and we all need reminders now and then :)
 

Maluco

Last Man Standing 3 champion 2019/20
Joined
Jan 4, 2014
Messages
5,765
If Potter is there next season:

Mudryk Nkunku Sterling
Chilwell Enzo Caicedo James
Badiashile Silva Fofana
Mendy/Kepa​
If we were to add a Kane and keep Sabitzer, I would still prefer our first eleven, after they have spent 600-700 million on a year. It’s spending, but it’s not efficient spending.

I don’t think there is anything to fear in that side under that manager.
 

TheMagicFoolBus

Full Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2016
Messages
6,502
Location
Lisboa, Portugal
Supports
Chelsea
It is also not believe that players accept super long contracts on low wages. There is no point in doing that.
This is why we targeted a specific profile of player - those who were still on their first professional contracts who have yet to make enough to retire on. By signing a long deal on (relatively) low wages they are guaranteed lifelong financial security - and the potential upside of signing shorter deals elsewhere is mitigated by the numerous performance bonuses.
 

Bluelion7

Full Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2021
Messages
1,192
Supports
Chelsea
Actually College Football is more popular that the NFL
This was actually never true. Some people perceived it to be true, because it was close in certain areas of the country.

But now it isn’t even close to being true and there is an interesting parallel to look at as to why when it comes to European football.

In creating near complete free agency with unchecked NIL funds (and yes, some of these high school kids are being paid more to join amateur colleges than many PL teams paid for their best player), and the whole portal saga every minute … the game is in actual jeopardy.

There were always kids getting paid in one way or the other, and they may not have cared nearly as much about the University as you the fan did, but now they aren’t even going through the pretenses.

A star player could play for a school one year, and then sign for their arch rival the next because the deals better.

The problem with this is that it is NOT the NFL. Without the pretenses and the emotional pageantry, it is just very, very average quality amateur football. It’s so watered down with schools it’s not even a proper farm league.

This is why the Superleague would have been a disaster: not because there aren’t ways the PL and Europe can be reformed to become better and more profitable, but because it sought to do so in a completely stupid way that would have ruined a large part of the draw that made people want to spend money in the first place.

First key; you NEED to k ow what you are.

One kid was like: “This a profession, it’s work for me”

Except he’s not good enough to play in the league, and that mass hallucinatory drama that we attach emotionally to some of the most significant years of our lives, is the only reason people are willing to give him A dollar, much less lots of them.

My check to my Alma Mater normally goes to a program for housing for underfunded students and to the Athletic department. It was specifically earmarked for upgrades to the physics department this year for the second part

Point being: there was a way to compensate the players more publicly, continue to compensate them not so openly, improve insurance, while continuing to grow and cash in on the thing people love.

When Roger Goodell announced in (2010?) that he was going to grow by a truly astronomical number in less than 15 years, he didn’t do it by completely changing the NFL.

He did it by understanding what he had, what worked, and how much leverage he truly brought to the table.

First step would be the FA understanding UEFA needs them more than they need UEFA, and they aren’t going to retard the growth of their product to mollify failing business models.
 

Bluelion7

Full Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2021
Messages
1,192
Supports
Chelsea
If Potter is there next season:

Mudryk Nkunku Sterling
Chilwell Enzo Caicedo James
Badiashile Silva Fofana
Mendy/Kepa​
Potter doesn’t play 3 at the back. There are conditions under which he rotates either the left or right back into a third deep player to actually get an additional player forward, but the base plan is definitely something closer to a 433 or 4231.

For next year?

My guess would be:

New Goalie

James Silva. Badiashile. Chilwell

Rice/Caicedo

Enzo. Mount

Nkunku. Mudryk

?

Nkunku and Mudryk both like to move around and rotate the sides from which they run in. If they play with two eights I could even see Nkunku in the middle of a 3 behind the striker, and Reece playing as the midfield partner of Enzo with Gusto outside.

The “?” Will probably be Havertz/Felix/ or an option from Summer.

The key will be the depth. We were good enough to win most games we played this year prior to the injuries hitting.

I would let Hall go on a proper loan, make a final decision on people like CHO, and RLC.

If they do play 3 at the back it will be to essentially give them the option of overloading the midfield area with Reece coming forward as a RCB, and and Gusto and Chilwell providing width.

Now though, if Reece goes down we have Gusto and one extra year with the kid from the academy they really like. We have Cucurella and Chilwell outside, and may keep Maatsen home for a year to work with Potter. If Fofana, Silva or Badiashile goes down we have Colwill and Chalobah playing his correct position.

SO much different from this year.

I hope they get the Visa issues sorted with Santos. I don’t think he needs a loan otherwise.

Carney is going to be better than people realize .

Mount is actually my big question mark in a lot of this. There isn’t a huge demand for 10’s without creativity, or wingers that don’t dribble at people or provide width. He’s a good player, but they have to decide how/if to use him.

Anyway, after Summer especially I expect this to be one of the most dangerous teams in the world, at last on paper. I’m excited.
 

WeePat

Full Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2015
Messages
17,187
Supports
Chelsea

Reece James por favor
RLC, CHO and Gallagher probably.

James and Mount are secure. Chalobah is too, as a rotational option. Hall is promising and Potter appears to believe in him.It remains to be seen what happens with Colwill, though it is said he is on the verge of signing a new contract.
 

Rnd898

Full Member
Joined
May 7, 2022
Messages
897
Supports
Chelsea
Was saying in another thread, perfect chance to put feelers out especially with Gusto in.
Did you even read the article?

It name checks basically everyone else except James because he's not going anywhere. You're free to keep dreaming of course but it won't do you any good.
 

WeePat

Full Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2015
Messages
17,187
Supports
Chelsea
Was saying in another thread, perfect chance to put feelers out especially with Gusto in.
Would be a waste of time. He signed a new 6 year contract a few months ago and is one of the candidates to be the next club captain. Also he’s Reece fecking James.
 

Zaphod2319

Full Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2020
Messages
4,207
Supports
Chelsea
It is sounding like the paperwork for a work permit will be complete. Probably this with James, Chilwell, and Sterling off the bench.

 

1905

Full Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2014
Messages
363
Supports
Chelsea
You think Madueke will immediately play?
Will be interesting if he starts later. Sterling has been out injured for a while and has only just come back to training. Ziyech, Potter says he'll be in the squad but who knows where his head is at.

Those are the options for RW so maybe he could get a start.
 

King Kendrick

Full Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2013
Messages
868
Location
Hayastan
This was actually never true. Some people perceived it to be true, because it was close in certain areas of the country.

But now it isn’t even close to being true and there is an interesting parallel to look at as to why when it comes to European football.

In creating near complete free agency with unchecked NIL funds (and yes, some of these high school kids are being paid more to join amateur colleges than many PL teams paid for their best player), and the whole portal saga every minute … the game is in actual jeopardy.

There were always kids getting paid in one way or the other, and they may not have cared nearly as much about the University as you the fan did, but now they aren’t even going through the pretenses.

A star player could play for a school one year, and then sign for their arch rival the next because the deals better.

The problem with this is that it is NOT the NFL. Without the pretenses and the emotional pageantry, it is just very, very average quality amateur football. It’s so watered down with schools it’s not even a proper farm league.

This is why the Superleague would have been a disaster: not because there aren’t ways the PL and Europe can be reformed to become better and more profitable, but because it sought to do so in a completely stupid way that would have ruined a large part of the draw that made people want to spend money in the first place.

First key; you NEED to k ow what you are.

One kid was like: “This a profession, it’s work for me”

Except he’s not good enough to play in the league, and that mass hallucinatory drama that we attach emotionally to some of the most significant years of our lives, is the only reason people are willing to give him A dollar, much less lots of them.

My check to my Alma Mater normally goes to a program for housing for underfunded students and to the Athletic department. It was specifically earmarked for upgrades to the physics department this year for the second part

Point being: there was a way to compensate the players more publicly, continue to compensate them not so openly, improve insurance, while continuing to grow and cash in on the thing people love.

When Roger Goodell announced in (2010?) that he was going to grow by a truly astronomical number in less than 15 years, he didn’t do it by completely changing the NFL.

He did it by understanding what he had, what worked, and how much leverage he truly brought to the table.

First step would be the FA understanding UEFA needs them more than they need UEFA, and they aren’t going to retard the growth of their product to mollify failing business models.
Where did you go out of curiosity?
 

Bluelion7

Full Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2021
Messages
1,192
Supports
Chelsea
These numbers are massively off-base. Not even remotely close to reality.

You should really check the confidence of your opinions about any topic related to the finances of sports, Chelsea or otherwise.
The numbers you are looking at are just for players, on the first team. My numbers are related to their total capitalized spend including all the levels of their farm system “as of” which is what I wrote in previous posts, and wrote “just” by mistake.

Also, if I say they are “losing” 500 million a year… they are making profit, as a team, of around 540, they end up with a net loss of between. 7 and 30, each year, but that is JUST as it relates to the roster. They are also engaged in the massive spending to create the “plan” that is outside the spending counted in that “roster” equation.

My numbers are still correct. It took money on a scale other baseball teams have never attempted to build what they did, especially in Central and South America.

The explanation of the spend is still related to the 7 year first phase. I dont care about his uninformed opinions anymore then. I was trying to be helpful while typing with one hand on a cellphone.

Perhaps if he wants accuracy he could go back to earthier in this thread, around July, when I said Chelsea’s sound would be between 550 and 600 million between the 2 windows and everyone mocked me then as well.

I told you in the uh would re set the base of the expectation with a low bid of things went South back at the end of December.

Then I said we would wait til the end of the window for the Enzo move because it would require knowing where we stood in terms of being able to trigger the clause safely.

That’s what happened.

I also said we would have to go there prepared to really trigger the clause, or it would be pointless. We brought in a “Factor” to work out the arraignment of paying the clause up front and let Be fix’s know we could if we had to.

Literally almost everything I’ve told people would happen …. has.

If people want to nitpick about it then I just won’t bother anymore
 

Powderfinger

Full Member
Joined
Oct 27, 2015
Messages
2,196
Supports
Arsenal
The numbers you are looking at are just for players, on the first team. My numbers are related to their total capitalized spend including all the levels of their farm system “as of” which is what I wrote in previous posts, and wrote “just” by mistake.

Also, if I say they are “losing” 500 million a year… they are making profit, as a team, of around 540, they end up with a net loss of between. 7 and 30, each year, but that is JUST as it relates to the roster. They are also engaged in the massive spending to create the “plan” that is outside the spending counted in that “roster” equation.

My numbers are still correct. It took money on a scale other baseball teams have never attempted to build what they did, especially in Central and South America.

The explanation of the spend is still related to the 7 year first phase. I dont care about his uninformed opinions anymore then. I was trying to be helpful while typing with one hand on a cellphone.

Perhaps if he wants accuracy he could go back to earthier in this thread, around July, when I said Chelsea’s sound would be between 550 and 600 million between the 2 windows and everyone mocked me then as well.

I told you in the uh would re set the base of the expectation with a low bid of things went South back at the end of December.

Then I said we would wait til the end of the window for the Enzo move because it would require knowing where we stood in terms of being able to trigger the clause safely.

That’s what happened.

I also said we would have to go there prepared to really trigger the clause, or it would be pointless. We brought in a “Factor” to work out the arraignment of paying the clause up front and let Be fix’s know we could if we had to.

Literally almost everything I’ve told people would happen …. has.

If people want to nitpick about it then I just won’t bother anymore
Nobody is nitpicking, you are just full of shit and got called out.

Kind of like the time you claimed Jerry Jones spent a billion dollars on a Jumbotron.
 

Rocksy

Full Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2016
Messages
1,347
Supports
Blackburn Rovers
This is some proper scouse maths on a level not seen since the signing of Andy Caroll, bravo. You’re up by £46m, winner.
All this I keep reading about “they’re on lower money for ages, so it’s all good”. If they’re shite, you’ve still got to pay them for ages. If they’re good for more than a season, they’ll want a new contract on mega wages for the remaining 6 years.
 

roonster09

Hercule Poirot of the scouting world
Scout
Joined
May 10, 2009
Messages
36,518
Nobody is nitpicking, you are just full of shit and got called out.

Kind of like the time you claimed Jerry Jones spent a billion dollars on a Jumbotron.
So usual posts then, pulling numbers out of nowhere and not backing it up.
 

UnrelatedPsuedo

I pity the poor fool who stinks like I do!
Joined
Apr 15, 2015
Messages
10,047
Location
Blitztown
It has been reported that all of the contracts in this window were low base salaries with performance bonuses built in. They structured them very much like they do baseball contracts. As all the people bought are young, it is still significantly more than they were getting with their selling clubs.
Giving a player £95k a week for 8 years is not a low contract.

I must be missing something. If you buy a player for £100m and he flops, he’s unsellable. If he has 5 years left on a contact he can sit on a beach and earn £25m.

How do the numbers ever make sense for another club to buy them for a decent fee.

Chelsea will need to get rid of the wages. That will massively dilute the players value.
 

roonster09

Hercule Poirot of the scouting world
Scout
Joined
May 10, 2009
Messages
36,518
It has been reported that all of the contracts in this window were low base salaries with performance bonuses built in. They structured them very much like they do baseball contracts. As all the people bought are young, it is still significantly more than they were getting with their selling clubs.
Most contracts in football are structured with bonuses and most of them are low base salaries, very few have bonuses tied to goals and assist (they are minor part), most of them are related to appearance fee, image rights, loyalty bonus. They end up getting most of it anyways.

All this PR gimmicks is laughable and people lap it up.
 

UsualSuspect

Full Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2013
Messages
443
Supports
Chelsea
Giving a player £95k a week for 8 years is not a low contract.

I must be missing something. If you buy a player for £100m and he flops, he’s unsellable. If he has 5 years left on a contact he can sit on a beach and earn £25m.

How do the numbers ever make sense for another club to buy them for a decent fee.

Chelsea will need to get rid of the wages. That will massively dilute the players value.
Antony is paid 50% more for a slightly lower transfer fee.

Mudryk's fee was 88m - 62m fixed. If he flops in the next 2 years he wouldn't be hitting many of his add ons. Less depreciation (16m) his book value will be 46m. His wage at 95k is not difficult to market and would be lower if Chelsea miss out on CL.

If Chelsea sold him for 40m which is not crazy for a talented 24 year old who struggled in PL (feck look at what Gordon went for), they would record a loss of 6m. This is easily offset by any sale of a youth asset or one of the undervalued recent signings (Santos, Diatro Fofana, Cassedei etc).

Most contracts in football are structured with bonuses and most of them are low base salaries, very few have bonuses tied to goals and assist (they are minor part), most of them are related to appearance fee, image rights, loyalty bonus. They end up getting most of it anyways.

All this PR gimmicks is laughable and people lap it up.
The contracts handed out by the new ownership are more incentivised than ever before. Correct on all of the above however there are additional bonuses for related to fitness/availability, greater percentages for performance (individual and team) related bonuses. Kante, for example, wouldn't be earning anywhere near what he earns now because he's only available for 30% of games. That's why negotiations hadn't gone well until recently for his contract extension.
 

roonster09

Hercule Poirot of the scouting world
Scout
Joined
May 10, 2009
Messages
36,518
The contracts handed out by the new ownership are more incentivised than ever before. Correct on all of the above however there are additional bonuses for related to fitness/availability, greater percentages for performance (individual and team) related bonuses. Kante, for example, wouldn't be earning anywhere near what he earns now because he's only available for 30% of games. That's why negotiations hadn't gone well until recently for his contract extension.
Kante isn't earning 290K per week when he is injured, he won't be earning the match bonus. This is nothing new, only thing new is your new ownership loves PR and have done it well.

Amazing how all Chelsea fans all of a sudden confirm that the players earn 95K per week, lets see what your total wage bill says when the FY report is published, Liverpool tried this gimmick, worse part it people lap it up. Once the FY report shows the total wages, no one cares about it.
 

UsualSuspect

Full Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2013
Messages
443
Supports
Chelsea
Kante isn't earning 290K per week when he is injured, he won't be earning the match bonus. This is nothing new, only thing new is your new ownership loves PR and have done it well.

Amazing how all Chelsea fans all of a sudden confirm that the players earn 95K per week, lets see what your total wage bill says when the FY report is published, Liverpool tried this gimmick, worse part it people lap it up. Once the FY report shows the total wages, no one cares about it.
On Kante, sure, that's obvious. However he'd be earning even less now.

You can call it PR gimmick based on zero evidence as much as you like, but the fact is the model is different from what came before at the club and total wage bill is being lowered - and is expected to be lowered further over the next 2 seasons. It was stated as a particular area of focus during the club takeover to be more in-line with what Man City were doing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.