Enzo Fernández | signs for Chelsea

  • Based on the club's statement regarding Mason Greenwood, the site's current policy will continue until further clarity about the player's future is known.

    So to reiterate, all discussions about Mason Greenwood remain off limits.
Status
Not open for further replies.

IFC 1905

Full Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2014
Messages
2,489
Location
Buenos Aires, ARG
I don't doubt his talent in general but that's an entire clip of a player making passes with absolutely zero pressure from the other side.

I know, but he still gave the two assists.


His IQ is inmense. His positioning, he can dictate the tempo, keep posession, play first touch, organize the attack, the defense. He's very, very complete.

I would kill to have him at United honestly. Imagine him getting the ball in games like Arsenal or Palace where either Bruno and Eriksen could do anything to stop our rivals from attacking.
 

Rnd898

Full Member
Joined
May 7, 2022
Messages
431
Supports
Chelsea

Here's a handy explainer.
Yeah was just about to post the same thing.

There's a difference in paying Benfica 120M€ after agreeing a transfer fee for that amount than there is paying Benfica 120M€ using the buy-out clause. The former spreads out the costs for the duration of the contract no matter the actual payment schedule and the latter would require club paying the full sum first to the player himself who then activates the clause and essentially joins as a 'free agent' with no amortisation costs and the full fee is accounted for the same financial year.

I'm pretty sure Benfica would accept it if we offered them the full 120M€ in one go because to them it makes feck all difference whether it's done by agreeing a transfer fee or if it's done by officially triggering the clause but for the buying club the difference is huge. They may well get 120M for Enzo whether it's now or in the summer but they're never going to get anyone to trigger that clause because there's not a club on earth who can afford a 120M€ one-off FFP hit without breaking the rules. For Benfica it seems to be the payment schedule that matters the most, not how the actual technicalities are done.
 

TheMagicFoolBus

Full Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2016
Messages
5,256
Location
Lisboa, Portugal
Supports
Chelsea
Fair enough - so what exactly is the delay then? and why have Chelsea tried to pay more than required if it's spread out anyway?

It's all beyond me
Chelsea haven't exceeded the value of the clause in actual cash yet - the package offered officially was €95m plus Ziyech plus loans for Andrey Santos and David Fofana.

Putting aside the ludicrous valuation of Ziyech there and the ridiculous overestimation of how much Benfica would value developing Chelsea's youngsters for us, this royally pissed off Rui Costa et al because Chelsea had indicated very overtly that we were willing to match the value of the clause in cash. There's been a weird misunderstanding in public about what the actual sticking points are - Benfica would accept €120m even if it's paid in 3 installments but Chelsea haven't actually offered that yet.
 

2 man midfield

Last Man Standing finalist 2021/22
Joined
Sep 4, 2012
Messages
40,999
Location
?
How much have Chelsea spent since the summer? 500m? And they don’t show any signs of slowing down :lol:
 

WeePat

Full Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2015
Messages
12,394
Supports
Chelsea
Chelsea haven't exceeded the value of the clause in actual cash yet - the package offered officially was €95m plus Ziyech plus loans for Andrey Santos and David Fofana.

Putting aside the ludicrous valuation of Ziyech there and the ridiculous overestimation of how much Benfica would value developing Chelsea's youngsters for us, this royally pissed off Rui Costa et al because Chelsea had indicated very overtly that we were willing to match the value of the clause in cash. There's been a weird misunderstanding in public about what the actual sticking points are - Benfica would accept €120m even if it's paid in 3 installments but Chelsea haven't actually offered that yet.
I never understood why that was seen as an insulting offer. Ziyech isn’t overvalued at around €25m. If anything he’s undervalued at that price. Getting very talented kids like Santos and Fofana loan for 2 years as well Ziyech permanently on top of €95m? That’s an incredible offer and better than just €120m straight up cash and they were stupid for knocking that back.
 

TheMagicFoolBus

Full Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2016
Messages
5,256
Location
Lisboa, Portugal
Supports
Chelsea
I never understood why that was seen as an insulting offer. Ziyech isn’t overvalued at around €25m. If anything he’s undervalued at that price. Getting very talented kids like Santos and Fofana loan for 2 years as well Ziyech permanently on top of €95m? That’s an incredible offer and better than just €120m straight up cash and they were stupid for knocking that back.
They can't afford to pay Ziyech ~€6m per year is the main thing. If a club were coming in who could afford his wage comfortably €25m isn't ludicrous but in this situation it was.

And the issue with the loanees is it's in direct opposition to the way Benfica do business and stay afloat - they can't afford to be wasting minutes on other club's players when their whole business model depends on buying a bunch of youngsters from South America and weeding out the best ones.
 

Rnd898

Full Member
Joined
May 7, 2022
Messages
431
Supports
Chelsea
Fair enough - so what exactly is the delay then? and why have Chelsea tried to pay more than required if it's spread out anyway?

It's all beyond me
The problem is Chelsea don't actually want to pay 120M€, let alone more than that to compensate for the payment schedule. I'm pretty sure even the structure mentioned by @TheMagicFoolBus involving player exchanges is not true. At least according to Fabrizio Romano our offer never actually went past 85M€ in the previous round of negotiations.

If what Fabrizio was saying is true, the talks breaking down had nothing to do with the payment terms but the actual size of the offer instead. Apparently we're still not willing to pay the full 120M€ so if Benfica still insists on that the move is simply not going to happen.
 

TheMagicFoolBus

Full Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2016
Messages
5,256
Location
Lisboa, Portugal
Supports
Chelsea
The problem is Chelsea don't actually want to pay 120M€, let alone more than that to compensate for the payment schedule. I'm pretty sure even the structure mentioned by @TheMagicFoolBus involving player exchanges is not true. At least according to Fabrizio Romano our offer never actually went past 85M€ in the previous round of negotiations.

If what Fabrizio was saying is true, the talks breaking down had nothing to do with the payment terms but the actual size of the offer instead. Apparently we're still not willing to pay the full 120M€ so if Benfica still insists on that the move is simply not going to happen.
Romano was mostly right about the cash part. It was supplemented by players on our end, to the point where Chelsea valued the package at the value of the clause. Benfica obviously disagreed and were (rightly) put off by Chelsea trying to pull off a bait and switch.
 

WeePat

Full Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2015
Messages
12,394
Supports
Chelsea
They can't afford to pay Ziyech ~€6m per year is the main thing. If a club were coming in who could afford his wage comfortably €25m isn't ludicrous but in this situation it was.

And the issue with the loanees is it's in direct opposition to the way Benfica do business and stay afloat - they can't afford to be wasting minutes on other club's players when their whole business model depends on buying a bunch of youngsters from South America and weeding out the best ones.
Fair enough. Still felt like a more than a fair enough offer even if I can understand why in Benfica’s specific situation it may not have been as appealing as it would be a club with a more normal ethos.
 

TheMagicFoolBus

Full Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2016
Messages
5,256
Location
Lisboa, Portugal
Supports
Chelsea
Fair enough. Still felt like a more than a fair enough offer even if I can understand why in Benfica’s specific situation it may not have been as appealing as it would be a club with a more normal ethos.
It's also that they felt it was sprung on them at the last moment out of the blue - they'd started to draft potential targets and budget the funds, then all of a sudden the full amount of cash we'd more or less committed wasn't there.
 

Zaphod2319

Full Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2020
Messages
3,707
Supports
Chelsea
Now that UEFA is changing the rules to 5 years for FFP calculations starting this summer, I changed my mind, Enzo and Gusto get finished this window.
 

Dancfc

Full Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2016
Messages
6,727
Supports
Chelsea
Genuine question. Does this type of spending frenzy leave you with any kind of bad taste in your mouth? I'm asking because I don't like it when United spends like crazy.
No especially given how mad it's making opposition fans and the MSM.

I actually had empathy 10-20 years ago because I remember how jealous I was when similar happened to the likes of Blackburn and Milan but after the sheer amount of people wishing us out of business 10 months ago (something I would never wish on any club, not just because of fans losing a big part of their life but also because of how badly it will affect people whose livelihoods will suddenly go up the shitter without matchday trade or club employees who live hand to mouth) the more outrage the better.
 

Infra-red

Full Member
Joined
May 4, 2010
Messages
12,161
Location
left wing
Now that UEFA is changing the rules to 5 years for FFP calculations starting this summer, I changed my mind, Enzo and Gusto get finished this window.
That looks likely. Along with the FFP changes coming this summer, I expect the Chelsea owners will also be mindful of the fact that both United and Liverpool may soon be in the hands of owners who are substantially wealthier than they are, potentially leaving them to contend with at least four clubs with deeper pockets than their own. It is rational for Boehly et al to get as many transfers done in advance of that as they can.
 

ThierryHenry14

Full Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2015
Messages
3,156
Supports
Arsenal
both United and Liverpool may soon be in the hands of owners who are substantially wealthier than they are
Saudi bought Newcastle already. So Man Utd and Liverpool are fighting each other to sell themselves to Qatar/QSI?
 

Infra-red

Full Member
Joined
May 4, 2010
Messages
12,161
Location
left wing
Saudi bought Newcastle already. So Man Utd and Liverpool are fighting each other to sell themselves to Qatar/QSI?
I'm not sure that FSG or the Glazers will care much where the money comes from - highest bid probably wins.

In terms of prospective buyers, we don't have enough information to go off. I'm hoping that United at least won't fall into the hands of a nation state, but if you're the current owners of Chelsea (or indeed Arsenal), you cannot help but be slightly concerned that you may soon be up against not two but four clubs backed by sovereign wealth funds, all within your own domestic league.
 

KjaAnd

Full Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2012
Messages
531
Location
Betwixt and between
No especially given how mad it's making opposition fans and the MSM.

I actually had empathy 10-20 years ago because I remember how jealous I was when similar happened to the likes of Blackburn and Milan but after the sheer amount of people wishing us out of business 10 months ago (something I would never wish on any club, not just because of fans losing a big part of their life but also because of how badly it will affect people whose livelihoods will suddenly go up the shitter without matchday trade or club employees who live hand to mouth) the more outrage the better.
I guess that's one way to look at things. Do you think the hard feelings towards Chelsea from rival fans could have something to do with the sentiment among many that Chelsea have bought their way to succes - and in the proces initiated the crazy influx of money into football?
 

footballbite

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Aug 25, 2022
Messages
221
Now that UEFA is changing the rules to 5 years for FFP calculations starting this summer, I changed my mind, Enzo and Gusto get finished this window.
I hope not. Enzo would have to be an imbecile to sign up to Chelsea for such a long time.
 

Infra-red

Full Member
Joined
May 4, 2010
Messages
12,161
Location
left wing
I hope not. Enzo would have to be an imbecile to sign up to Chelsea for such a long time.
On the other hand, you have a certainty of income for six/seven plus years - no matter how badly you play, or how injured you get, Chelsea will be tied in to that deal and you will get your money. It's not an unattractive prospect in an industry where the 'next big thing' can quickly become yesterday's news (just look at Havertz).
 

ThierryHenry14

Full Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2015
Messages
3,156
Supports
Arsenal
I'm not sure that FSG or the Glazers will care much where the money comes from - highest bid probably wins.

In terms of prospective buyers, we don't have enough information to go off. I'm hoping that United at least won't fall into the hands of a nation state, but if you're the current owners of Chelsea (or indeed Arsenal), you cannot help but be slightly concerned that you may soon be up against not two but four clubs backed by sovereign wealth funds, all within your own domestic league.
Man Utd, City and Chelsea had way more resource than other teams in EPL for the past 10 or even 20 years already. Add another QSI backed team or Newcastle made no difference to the rest of the clubs.
 
X
Status
Not open for further replies.